Three Up, Three Down: Hoops Edition
After three strong performances, particularly on the defensive end, the Wolverines came crashing down after a strong first half in East Lansing. A lackluster win over Nebraska actually resulted in Michigan dropping 10 spots on Kenpom while the NET rankings now place Michigan at 53.
THREE UP
Hunter Dickinson, good at the basketball. Single game +/- may be the most fraudulent metric in basketball, but Dickinson's +18 in 23 minutes of action certainly came with a heavy dose of truth syrup. I don't think it's exaggeration to say that Michigan may have lost by 20 points but for his efforts.
To put his recent play in context, during conference play Hunter is averaging 20.6 points, 7.6 rebounds. 2.8 assists and 1.9 blocks per game while shooting a tad under 60% from the floor and 31.3% from distance.
We're talking about a legit 7-footer with an assist rate of 20.2% and that's underselling his playmaking chops. The consistent skip passes he deals out that create the advantages that lead to assists aren't even captured by the metrics. He's not perfect, but he has been dominant and we've needed every bit of it.
A win is still a win. The win over Nebraska wasn't pretty by any means, but it keeps tournament hopes alive when the alternative was functionally a lost season. Teams win ugly games all the time during conference play (see MSU vs Maryland yesterday), so never apologize for a conference victory.
That said, the team's play this year hasn't provided much hope for improvement exclusive of the aforementioned three-game stretch. But, that win does keep us alive to fight for another day. While sustained improvement (namely defense) may not seem likely, it buys the coaching staff time to get this thing right. A win in either of the upcoming contests against Purdue in tandem with a home win over OSU likely puts the Wolverines on the right side of the bubble. This win gives Juwan Howard and staff that opportunity.
DeVante Jones, slowly coming along. Michigan's starting floor general isn't a star, but he's become an adequate offensive player after a rough start. 10.2 points and 4 assists per game with a 2.5/1 assist/turnover ratio during B10 play is solid play for an up-transfer.
Jones is the best ballscreen creator on the roster by a wide margin, as the Wolverines put up .99ppp on pick-and-roll possessions (including passes), which is good for 80th percentile nationally per Synergy. He's not a guy that can get a bucket in late-clock scenarios and has no pull-up game absent a ton of space, but he can get Michigan clean looks as both a scorer/playmaker when he has a ballscreen.
[AFTER THE JUMP, let's talk about the defense]
THREE DOWN
Blitzing the ballscreens. The Wolverine defense was torched by MSU exploiting that particular coverage. During 13 non-garbage time possessions, the Spartans scored 1.333ppp against the blitz. The more staggering number? MSU scored every possession in which Michigan blitzed against AJ Hoggard, conceding a whopping 2.33ppp.
Against MSU, the more effective approach was undoubtedly utilizing drop coverage and that was rather obvious. For context, the Spartan offense was held to .5ppp during 8 non-garbage time possessions against drop coverage.
The choice to continue with the blitz was baffling and one that certainly limited any chance Michigan had at stealing one on the road in a game that appeared very winnable from a personnel/matchup perspective.
The alternative, not so good. For the season, Michigan is giving up .946ppp on pull-up jumpers (includes both midrange + threes)............on 223 shot attempts, good for 4th percentile nationally. These possessions against Nebraska provide some visual analysis that contextualizes the data. We're far beyond the idea of this being random/regression forthcoming.
Michigan is forcing "bad shots" in theory, but the results don't match. What the bad shot theory doesn't convey is that it's difficult to cede 3-7 inches from your starting backcourt while adequately contesting pull-ups. As I've always said, "bad shots" are more about who rather than what.
Taking that into account, the blitz/drop coverage choice becomes a real dilemma for Juwan Howard. Going to a drop coverage scheme opens Michigan up to pull-up jumpers and isolation plays that have given the defense problems. The blitz approach tends to concede catch + shoot jumpers on skip passes and roll-man layups because our low-man rotation is not a big.
Personally, I prefer the drop coverage approach as that scheme is less likely to put Dickinson in foul trouble. However, I do think the best philosophy is deeper than that.
College coaches are generally married to a system/singular approach and don't budge from that. Whereas NBA coaches typically have a different approach to every game depending on matchup. I think the NBA approach is probably optimal for this Michigan team. Against MSU for example, drop coverage was clearly the answer as Hoggard/Walker are basically non-shooters. Against a team with guys that convert pull-ups at an adequate clip, the blitz approach may be more ideal.
The bench, in general. Terrance Williams, Brandon Johns, Kobe Bufkin and Frankie Collins are putting up 16 points a night on roughly 42 minutes per game as a unit in conference games. To be candid, that 16 point mark is a mirage. That average is weighed heavily by Williams' 22 point outburst against Nebraska in December and Johns going for 20 in the same game in the starting unit.
Exclusive of the aforementioned December game, the bench is around 10ppg as a unit. That simply won't cut it if Michigan is going to make a serious run for the tournament. We need one of the bench guys to be around 7-11 points for any given game and a total closer to 20 points. We're simply asking too much of the starters. We just need one reliable bench option.
February 2nd, 2022 at 3:15 PM ^
Not worried about NET rating as that should improve now that Michigan pretty much plays exclusively tournament caliber teams the rest of the season. The problem is...well actually winning those games.
February 2nd, 2022 at 7:20 PM ^
It's not that simple with NET anymore. It values margin of victory such that Michigan dropped pretty steeply after losing to MSU because it was by 16 points even though it was on the road at a top 20 team.
That said, I don't think the NET ranking matters nearly as much as the Quadrant wins.
And if M can get to 11-9 in conference (one win better than Torvik is projecting), that'll mean they'll end up with at least 5 Q1 wins which will be enough to get them in.
9 of their 11 games left are Q1 which is pretty crazy.
February 2nd, 2022 at 3:21 PM ^
I had some hope Frankie would be the one bench option given he's the only guy who can truly take it to the rack, but it's just not there yet. I think it has to be Johns. Just hit the corner 3 and stop missing those bunnies on decent post moves. Probably not gonna happen, but we've seen him flash before and maybe he can show some confidence for a stretch of games. I thought his defense late against Nebraska, with Diabate on the bench, showed enough effort to get out of the immediate doghouse.
Or, as TrueBlue suggested in the Nebraska game thread, move Johns back into the starting lineup. I'm not optimistic he'll look like he did in the tourney last year on a regular basis because he's just too mercurial, but we could use his presence defending opposing bigs. Then Diabate becomes your bench scorer.
February 2nd, 2022 at 3:38 PM ^
you cannot count on Frankie - he is a true freshmen point guard. See what Trey Burke, X, Walton and Darius Morris did as true freshmen. They just aren't ready. Like you suggested, it should be Johns. Matter of fact, it shouldn't be Johns because he should be starting!!! He has easily been the biggest disappointment this season and it is not even close. He should be starting and next to dominating.
February 2nd, 2022 at 3:51 PM ^
Johns is turrible
February 2nd, 2022 at 4:20 PM ^
Huh? Burke, Walton and Morris were all significant contributors as freshmen.
February 2nd, 2022 at 3:46 PM ^
You cannot start Johns. He is a blackhole on offense. He is good for 2 TOs, some badly missed shots every game, many ill-advised post moves, and being oddly gunshy a few times per game. He should just be the jolt of energy off the bench he was 2 years ago, getting O-rebounds and taking 1-2 open threes. Its clear he can't be a full contributor at this point.
February 2nd, 2022 at 3:48 PM ^
This doesn't even cover how bad he is on defense....when he is in there, he is usually responsible for some terrible rotations and missed assignments....its why he gets so few minutes...
February 2nd, 2022 at 4:10 PM ^
I agree with putting Johns back in the starting lineup. That way you have a bench player bringing some energy into the game ala Chaundee.
The minutes actually played don't have to change that much.
February 2nd, 2022 at 4:12 PM ^
Man, I really wanted Johns to have that breakout season but he misses so many shots at the rim. If he can keep his confidence up he's a great piece to have since he's a pretty good 3 point shooter, but that only seems to be there about 1 in 4 games or so.
February 2nd, 2022 at 3:28 PM ^
My theory was that they didn't move to drop coverage at the half against MSU because they had practiced it, and everything else--then--was going okay. They might have figured some shots would start to drop for them. What happened was that MSU got hot instead, really hot.
February 2nd, 2022 at 3:50 PM ^
This isn't it. Michigan ran some drop coverage in the first half. It's not hard to switch between the two as evidenced my M going 13 hedges and 8 drops mostly back and forth. These are basic principles that Michigan has repped thousands of times in practice, not to mention it was (IIRC) the base coverage last year.
It was baffling they didn't start with drop and shows poor scouting and planning, it was even more unconscionable that they didn't quickly move to drop exclusively given how much more effective it was (and how badly hedging was getting killed).
February 2nd, 2022 at 4:02 PM ^
I start out by conceding I really don't like drop coverage.
That out of the way, there seems a middle ground between blitzing the ballhandler and dropping, allowing (my opinion) one of the easiest shots in the game, the uncontested 13-14 footer.
Why not just get away from blitz or even hard-hedging, and moving to a softer hedge? When UM has done that (another concession, I haven't charted it) it seems like the defense has become more plausible.
February 2nd, 2022 at 5:20 PM ^
As you said, dropping isn't binary. It's a continuum. How far you drop matters and it's not like Michigan has Hunter sprinting back under the basket. The way they do it is about two steps back from the screen just enough so the ball handler can't go by you. It does give up pull up 18+ footers but not 13-14 footers, which is why it's not ideal against good shooting ball handlers but against guys like AJ Hoggard, it's great.
February 2nd, 2022 at 10:19 PM ^
To me, one or maybe two steps from the screener, but remaining active, is a soft hedge, not drop.
But maybe I am wrong. I am going to look back at the Minny game, where Hunter back pedaled from the ball carrier toward the basket and we were decimated.
I agree that blitzing MSU was a debacle. I get why that was the choice, because MSU turns it overs so routinely, but, yeah, it was also a disaster.
Maybe we just can't play the 1/5 screen.
February 2nd, 2022 at 11:30 PM ^
Ok, yeah, we agree. It's just semantics but yeah what Hunter needs to be doing and what he did on these 8 "drops" is back off a couple steps so that he's giving himself plenty of room to 1) be able to keep the ball handler in front of him while 2) being able to recover to the roller should the ball handler try to pass it over/around him but ideally staying in that passing lane.
It's definitely a lesser of two evils situation because Hunter isn't great at either. There are examples here where he gives up layups to Hoggard even when he drops. That's the one thing dropping is meant to enable your center to prevent. You give up the pull up and the pick and pop to protect the rim.
February 3rd, 2022 at 1:45 PM ^
Thanks, you are both helping me to understand this better. But--to my original point--didn't MSU HAVE a fair lot of turnovers in the first half? If the conversation at the half is something like: 'Hey, we're getting burned here and there but they are turning it over. We haven't shot threes well, but if we get going we can win this game. . ." maybe you stick to the program?
I agree that HD is not, for all his other talents, so great at this. A certain lack of athleticism has been more apparent this year, when he doesn't have such great players around him.
February 4th, 2022 at 2:17 AM ^
So you're saying that the plan was to mix coverages to confuse them and hope that led to turnovers and in that sense it was working? I don't recall how they generated the turnovers well enough to say, yeah, the mixing of coverages led to a lot of turnovers.
I don't suspect that was the case for many of them so I don't think Michigan could have reasonably expected that to be sustainable but I could be wrong. And there was enough data showing that hedging was clearly inferior to dropping, but it's possible. It's a plausible theory.
February 2nd, 2022 at 4:22 PM ^
Is it possible that the coverage is changing not based on a coach's call, but some look from the offensive set. Such that MSU had Michigan sufficiently scouted to get the coverage they wanted by starting off their sets a certain way.
Either that, or is there a situation where a player calls the coverage / has an option to play it a certain way
February 2nd, 2022 at 5:41 PM ^
Almost certainly not, and if that's the case, it's way too complex for college bball players that are only going to play with you for a year or two. Plus, if it's that easily exploitable, it's a bad strategy.
The extent of the complexity, and this is what even good HS coaches do, should be to play it depending on who is running the PnR (for each individual defender). Usually you're more willing to drop against a ball handler and/or a screener that doesn't shoot well.
So like in the case against MSU, the scouting report would reasonably have been hedge against #2 (Walker who is shooting over 50% from three) and drop against #11 (Hoggard who is shooting 27% on only 15 attempts, ie not a pull up guy). That obviously wasn't the case because they hedged against both of those guys, and Hoggard went right by Dickinson repeatedly, when there was no reason to blitz those screens.
And again, the defense has repped every possible way to defend a PnR thousands of times. Hard hedge, soft hedge, drop, go over the screen, under the screen, etc. So then prior to each game you'd put the #2 jersey on a scout team player and a #11 and work on ID'ing who to drop against and who to hedge.
I think Hunter might have had the option to hedge or drop depending on whether he thought he could successfully blitz the screen (unfortunately he almost never did) because the 13 to 8 mix seemed pretty random. Or the call was coming from Juwan. And maybe that was by design as a way to "surprise" them, but obviously was a bad plan whatever led them to blitzing 13 PnRs.
February 2nd, 2022 at 3:37 PM ^
Is this team fixable, or is it a lost cause that only recruiting/transfers can rectify? I know we lost some guys from last year's team, but it's pretty jarring going from a 1 seed and bringing in the #1 recruiting class (and being preseason top 10) to looking like a bubble team at best.
Also, I'd love to hear some deeper analysis if you have any about why things have been so bad. I get the basic points--ineffective guards/wings and horrendous shooting--but I'd be very interested in insight as to how we find ourselves here, again given how well we've recruited.
February 2nd, 2022 at 3:49 PM ^
The defense looks unfixable. This isn't about someone not rotating or switching. We are just flat out getting blown off the ball and have no chance of staying in front of the ballhandler on just about every play. Not sure how that changes in the final 5 weeks of the season
February 2nd, 2022 at 3:42 PM ^
Great stuff, Matt.
1. What is your current assessment of Hunter's NBA prospects? Sounds like you're pretty high on him, is he underrated?
2. I'd be shocked if college coaches were married to a given PnR approach. Well-coached HS teams practice both and change based on their personnel and that of the opponent.
Even in this MSU game you charted 13 hedges and 8 drops. So Michigan is doing both. And that begs the question: under what conditions were they running each one? Are the coaches determining this on a play by play basis? If so, that seems too complex and shows a lack of having a proper plan.
Hunter's lack of lateral quickness means he should almost exclusively be dropping, especially against Hoggard who is not a pull up threat. So baffling as to why they were blitzing those. Again, that's HS level scouting.
3. Those pull up stats are crazy. And while I do suspect there's some bad luck for it to be that bad, it's also a pretty good data point marking how much Michigan misses Wagner, Brown and Livers. For Eli to have to guard a 6'7 lottery pick on this team is a sad testament to the lack of wing defenders this team has.
February 2nd, 2022 at 4:28 PM ^
1) HD doesn't project well, if at all, as an NBA prospect. He's simply not agile enough to defend in the NBA and doesn't really project as a rim protector either. In the NBA, if you're not a 1st or 2nd option offensively, you need to be at least adequate defensively. For the most part, NBA players are born, not made.
2) For the most part, college coaches are absolutely system guys. They play that system year after year regardless of personnel. Obviously that can have subtle adjustments but Kentucky will always be a factory for elite bigs under Calipari, shooting was always Beilein's identity, etc. The NBA literally changes scheme shift by shift in most cases depending on personnel. You simply don't see that at the college level.
3) Bingo. Take away the surrounding NBA talent and things change drastically. Similar scenario for what happened to Houstan as a junior at Montverde surrounded by multiple lottery picks and what you saw from him as a senior to present day.
February 2nd, 2022 at 5:45 PM ^
I think you’re overstating things a bit on Dickinson’s nba chances. The pendulum has swung back a bit towards big men since 5 years ago when the Warriors were lighting up the league.
It’s clear now that the peak Warriors were a bit of an aberration and few other teams have the personnel to challenge big men in the same way. Meanwhile Jokic and Embiid are neck and neck in the MVP race.
The bar is still much higher for big men than it used to be but I’m watching Tony Bradley get big minutes on my Bulls and I think Dickinson could absolutely be as effective as him. If Luka Garza gets drafted in the 2nd round, so does Hunter imo.
But hey selfishly I hope you’re right so he does stick around
February 2nd, 2022 at 6:21 PM ^
But those guys are both good defenders. He never said anything about big men, he said something about defense and Hunter projects as a poor NBA defender.
February 2nd, 2022 at 6:40 PM ^
You think Luka Garza is a better defender than Dickinson?
Did Dickinson sleep with your wife or something?
February 2nd, 2022 at 11:14 PM ^
Ha, are you his brother?
Sorry, I didn't even read your whole post so you may have misunderstood. I just just saw comments about Jokic and Embiid and was like yeah they're both good defenders (and also good shooters and hence kind of absurd comps). And then just repeated what the professional scout said: that Hunter projects as a poor NBA defender.
I do think Hunter is a better post defender than Garza. But the NBA doesn't play a lot of post offense and hence doesn't put a ton of weight on post defense alone.
It's more about how you defend the pick and roll protect the rim from the help side and they're both substantially minus in that sense. But even Garza had a 5.2% block rate in college compared to Hunter's 3.5% so Garza was probably a bit better help side rim protector (although I didn't watch enough of him to say for sure - I have watched enough of Hunter to know he is not a rim protector).
Garza got drafted because he can shoot threes (was a bonkers 44% from three his final year of college) and is a better all around offensive player. Dickinson is an insanely good post player in college but again, I don't think the NBA cares as much about that because they don't want to keep a guy down low.
Hunter could squeeze into the second round. I really hope he does because it probably means he has a strong finish to the season. He can be a solid defensive player when the effort is there like yesterday.
February 3rd, 2022 at 1:43 AM ^
Well thanks for at least admitting you don't read my posts before replying. Explains a lot. Personally, I try to understand where someone else is coming from before disagreeing. I think it's common courtesy.
And I'm not related, but definitely a fan, and I think deservedly so. He's the best big man Michigan has had since maybe Juwan Howard himself. Your claims about his play are bizarre to me. Michigan had a top 10 offense and a top 5 defense in the country last year. If he was as bad as you say, surely he would've dragged down those figures.
We're obviously worse this year but we still have a Top 20 offense in the country built entirely around Dickinson. The defense is bad, but it hasn't been better without Hunter.
You are correct that Dickinson struggles with certain things like hedging the pick-and-roll and guarding in space, but dude, centers who can do those things very well are extremely rare.
If you think Garza was a better help side rim protector than Dickinson... My god that's such an awful take. Garza's block rate was 4.7% across all 4 years. Dickinson's career average is 4.6%. It fell off quite a bit vs. last year, but I suspect that has a lot to do with the decline in talent around him. Besides, using block rate as a catch-all for how good of a help-side defender you all is silly. Iowa was consistently an awful defensive team the last 4 years and Garza had a lot to do with that.
As for Garza vs. Dickinson offensively, Garza did hit 44% from 3 as a senior, but as a sophomore he was shooting 29%. Dickinson's actually the better free throw shooter which is statistically a better predictor of NBA 3-pt % than NCAA 3-pt %. If you compare Dickinson to Garza at the same age, Dickinson's better by a mile.
I don't think the NBA cares as much about that because they don't want to keep a guy down low.
Dude, how many NBA games do you watch? You think they're all playing 5-out all the time? 5-out lineups are definitely a thing, but they're not universal. Post scoring isn't as en vogue as it was in the 90's, but it's still a part of the game. And Dickinson isn't just a post scorer, he's proven to be an extremely capable roll man. He'll have to adapt his game quite a bit to play a meaningful role in the NBA and it'll certainly be an uphill battle, but he'll get a shot.
I'm a Bulls fan and they spent a 2nd round pick last year on a European fella named Marko Simonovic. When I watch Simonovic play, I don't see much that Dickinson shouldn't be able to do.
February 3rd, 2022 at 12:04 PM ^
I read your first paragraph and responded to it with a highly relevant comment. I don't need to comment on the entirety of posts.
You're talking yourself in circles here. If Hunter's decline in block rate is due to the drop in talent around him (which I agree with) then that low talent situation is comparable to what Garza had his entire career at Iowa.
And using Garza's career block rate isn't the right comp because he played more of a stretch four role alongside Tyler Cook his first two years and hence was defending away from the basket more. When he was the "center" and defended centers his junior and senior years, his block rates were 6% and 5.3% respectively.
Besides, I merely proposed that Garza may have been "a bit" better help side rim protector. The NBA does put a lot of weight into college block rates. Neither guy projects to be a good rim protector at the pro level (and I say that based on film), but Garza has him slightly in the metrics.
Also, you're making the wrong comparison year for Hunter who is a very old sophomore. Hunter, in fact, is less than two years older than Garza. Which means he's older now than Garza was in Garza's JUNIOR year (by a month). The NBA cares about age, not grade. Garza was hitting 36% of threes on high volume and blocking 6% of shots that year en route to being named first team all-american, Sporting News National POY and B1G POY.
I hope you're right, man. And I seem to be higher on him than Matt EM because I think he could squeak into the second round. I think he could be better at defense than he is if he was a bit more disciplined in his approach (fewer frustration fouls, less lunging and reaching). I would love to see him play with a more consistent motor and focus and get into the second round. He's an unbelievable college post player.
February 3rd, 2022 at 12:46 PM ^
Context is important. I don't think I'm talking myself in circles. Block rates aren't meaningless - I'm just saying that Garza's and Dickinson's are close enough where it's not telling.
Bottom line is if you watched Garza and Dickinson play and you think Garza is the better help side defender... My god man we are not watching the same game.
February 3rd, 2022 at 12:53 PM ^
Ha, "context is important" says the guy that lumps in Garza's seasons as a stretch four alongside Cook and ignores the players in question actual ages. Yes, I'm putting things in context for you.
February 3rd, 2022 at 10:14 PM ^
With or without Cook he was a trash help defender, no matter what his block rates say.
Your point about age is fair, but fine, Dickinson as a freshman was way better than Garza as a sophomore. Dickinson now vs. Garza as a junior is a bit more debatable. Garza carried higher usage but Dickinson is more efficient and a way better passer. Garza was putting up more 3-pt volume but Dickinson's the better free throw shooter. And as mentioned, Dickinson is easily a stronger defender. Production aside, Dickinson is just bigger. He has a full 2 extra inches in both height and wingspan - that's a meaningful difference that should make him a better NBA prospect on both ends.
February 4th, 2022 at 2:31 AM ^
Garza was a bad help defender no question about that. And Hunter is probably "a bit" worse.
I don't disagree with you that Hunter is a better post defender, as I said above. But I don't think the NBA cares much about that given his massive other defensive limitations. I could be wrong about that.
And I also don't think Garza is a very good comp because he projects as a possible stretch four. You can stick him on a corner shooter and potentially hide him against some teams and get his floor stretching ability on the offensive end.
With Hunter that's less of an option. Also we can't forget that Garza is a fringe NBA player that probably only a few teams would have drafted and probably won't stick for long. I hope Hunter has a couple teams willing to take a gamble on him too. I really hope he starts shooting the three 4-5 times a game and keeps hitting them in the high 30%s. I hope he keeps playing hard like he did against Nebraska. If he does those two things, he'll get drafted.
February 4th, 2022 at 5:05 AM ^
We fundamentally disagree if you think Dickinson is a worse help defender than Garza. Dickinson is longer and taller which makes him a better rim protector. He's also way better at moving his feet and positioning himself defensively from what I've seen. You apparently see something else and I can't prove you wrong with any metric, but it's bizarre to me that you came to that conclusion having watched the two of them play basketball. Go watch game tape from Michigan vs. Wisconsin last year when Michigan regularly switched the PnR against WIsconsin's stretch 5s and Dickinson held up pretty well. Never saw Garza do anything like that.
As for the shooting, again, Dickinson is a good FT shooter and has started to hit 3s over a small sample.
Anyways, it's basically a given that he'll get drafted at least in the 2nd round someday, assuming no unforeseen injury. He was already reportedly getting projected there last year before pulling out.
I hope he keeps playing hard like he did against Nebraska.
For fuck's sake man, he's playing hard in every game. He played just as hard against MSU, he just got winded because he was being asked to carry the offense on every possession and hedge the PnR for 34 minutes.
Do you think the fact that he only played 23 minutes against Nebraska had nothing to do with his effectiveness?
February 4th, 2022 at 12:52 PM ^
Fatigue wasn't the issue, at least not until late, against MSU because he had two incredibly bad, lazy plays just in the first four minutes when he simply ran up to the ball handler and reached in instead of trying to move his feet to keep the ball handler in front of him. I charted those plays in the diaries so I'm showing you what I'm seeing.
I think he watched that tape and got his ass chewed and was so embarrassed that he stepped it up against Nebraska. The NBA doesn't love guys that don't have it turned on all the time, especially in big games.
But I absolutely agree that he is better off playing 25-30 minutes a game so that fatigue doesn't get to be an issue later in games or during extended periods of exertion.
Your argument that Hunter is definitively a better rim protector simply because he is taller is so bad that it's embarrassing. His block rate is barely more than half of Garzas at the same age. Protecting the rim is about altering and blocking shots. Now sure that metric has to be contextualized by how many fouls he gives up to do it, opponent 2pt% and general ability to move feet onto penetrators such that you turn them back but dude height is a small part of it.
And FT shooting is a leading indicator but it's not a given that Hunter will be a great three point shooter. Like I said, I'd love to see him shoot 4-5 per game because I think he can keep hitting them at a decent clip and it opens up lanes for Jones.
February 4th, 2022 at 8:22 PM ^
I didn't say Hunter is a better rim protector simply because he's taller. It's just one of many factors. Frankly your reading comprehension is what's embarrassing.
Pointing to block rate alone isn't a great argument either. Dickinson alters a lot of shots that he doesn't quite block. The best help defenders in the league don't always have eye-popping block rates. Draymond Green is a good example here (before you twist my words again, I'm not saying HD is as good as Draymond).
I saw your diary post. Dickinson got owned on those two plays. He's not the first big to get beat off the dribble by a guard. He's had plenty of moments in the past where he has held contain. Your cherry-picking doesn't prove a trend. Do the same post for the Wisconsin game last year. Everybody has good and bad days. It has nothing to do with effort.
February 2nd, 2022 at 6:45 PM ^
Garza is a fringe nba player who was much better offensively than Dickinson and specifically shot the three much better.
jokic also is a much better offensive player and the greatest passing big of all time. These aren’t good comparisons for the current version of Dickinson.
February 2nd, 2022 at 7:21 PM ^
I'm not saying that Dickinson is comparable to Jokic. The implicit point I was making is that the revival of post scoring by guys like Jokic and Embiid (and it's not just them, could also point to Vucevic, Julius Randle, Towns, Ayton, etc. as guys doing damage out of the post), has caused the requisite defensive skillset to be an NBA center to revert to being more post-oriented once again.
Saying a player is good or bad at defense is like saying a player is good or bad at offense. Just as one player can be good at shooting from the perimeter but bad at finishing inside, players can be good at some areas of defense and bad at others.
Saying Dickinson projects as a bad NBA defender is a very broad statement. He's probably not going to be the best at guarding the pick-and-roll because of his limited athleticism, but his size and length should make him a very capable post defender, and guys with that skillset are becoming relevant once again now with the success that Jokic and Embiid are having.
Probably should've been more explicit about what I was saying. Anyways, I definitely think Dickinson is still more of a fringe NBA player vs. a slam dunk, but he's definitely going to have a shot.
In comparison to Garza, Garza didn't really become a reliable 3-pt shooter until his junior year. Dickinson is way ahead of where Garza was as a sophomore, and he's got a signficiant amount more length and size that should make him a better prospect.
I think Dickinson should easily be a 2nd round pick if he goes this year. Question is just whether that's good enough for him.
February 2nd, 2022 at 5:50 PM ^
Oh, for sure coaches stick to a "system" for the most part, but not a singular tactical way to defend pick and roll. A defensive system might be pack line, force baseline, etc. But you're repping a lot of different ways to defend pick and roll which get deployed differently against various opponents (screeners that prefer to pop vs roll, ball handlers that prefer to pull up vs drive, etc).
At least, we know that Juwan has been very flexible the last three years, primarily being a drop guy but deploying both, which makes the decision to blitz the majority of MSU PnRs all the more baffling.
Again, as you charted, he split the coverage 13 to 8. He's very much not married to a tactic. He'd be better off being more strictly a drop guy given Hunter's limitations effectively blitzing screens anyway. And the short guards don't really have an impact on PnR pull up since they're trailing and not contesting those pull ups anyway.
February 2nd, 2022 at 7:19 PM ^
But you expect him to play in the NBA, right? My guess is he's basically never a starter, but he stays in the league for a long long time (barring injury problems) as a backup C. There are still plenty of very big Cs on rosters even when they're plodding.
February 2nd, 2022 at 3:46 PM ^
"it buys the coaching staff time to get this thing right."
We've been saying this all year and it hasn't happened...they are what they are....not a good team...
February 2nd, 2022 at 6:36 PM ^
The coaching staff whiffed on the PNR coverage against Sparty. Then it nearly lost to winless NW, by playing its best player, leading scorer, and really, only threat on offense, only 23 minutes, even though he only had two fouls the whole game.
Not so sure it is the 'coaching staff' that is limited by the talent of its players, rather than the other way around. Individual players and the team always progressed throughout the season under Beilein. Not sure we can assume the same under this staff.
February 2nd, 2022 at 3:52 PM ^
In the offseason we all were dreaming of a twin towers lineup of Dickinson and Diabate...Is it time to go away from that? Would love to see the Hoop Lens data Brian always uses for both on the floor.
Are Barnes and Tschetter that far behind? Or is it a commitment to redshirting?
For the defending pick and roll thing, are they just defending it super well in practice because we cant run it well...leading the coaching staff to believe their defense is better than it is?
February 2nd, 2022 at 4:03 PM ^
This team has no 3pt shooter on it. They are awful when it comes to hitting 3s. Is Tschetter a sniper who could spot up and hit those shots? If he was I imagine he'd be playing....
February 2nd, 2022 at 4:32 PM ^
I mean yeah Tschetter was billed as basically just a shooter. 45% from 3 in HS, "Beilein type recruit", catch and shoot 4.
In Barnes's Hello post MattEM called him a swiss army knife, better shooting Charles Matthews
To be clear I am not saying these guys are going to come in and save the season. I'm saying, when you are constantly finding yourself in games where you are shooting sub 20% from 3, why not try to play a shooter in Tschetter? And when you can't defend the 1-4 at all, why not try Barnes?
Mostly I'm looking for any inside info on what's going on with these guys.
February 2nd, 2022 at 4:45 PM ^
Simple answer with Tschetter - the team is bad defensively as it is, Will would make that situation considerably worse.
Barnes - staff doesn't love his work ethic and that is reflected with the lack of playing time this season.
February 3rd, 2022 at 12:58 AM ^
Thanks for the share
I asked a few friends where Barnes was this year and his size would be in theory be helpful
February 2nd, 2022 at 4:39 PM ^
I think a lot of the optimism around this season was that Diabate would be a big time rim protector that would offset for losing Wagner, Brown, and Livers on the wing. That just doesn't seem to be the case to the eye test or the numbers. He is averaging 0.8 blocks a game and Michigan has gone from #1 in the Big Ten in 2pt defense and #7 in block rate to #13 in 2pt defense and #10 in block rate. The fact that they let the #197 offense in the country score 1.07 points per possession just shows that they can't defend. Unless Michigan makes some sort of miraculous improvement defensively, nothing else is going to matter. You can't just get torched game after game and expect to compete.
February 2nd, 2022 at 6:49 PM ^
Wing defenders aren't often in good position to be rim protectors because they're usually needing to stick to shooters. Your center is really the only guy that can be a serious rim protector because he's the most likely to be guarding a guy nearer the basket or that can't shoot well so he can be free to contest shots at the rim.
And Moussa's not there with his rotations or basic assignments to be close to where Franz or Brown or were as wing defenders. So they can't stick him on a guy like Bryce McGowans like Michigan could do with Franz. And then it falls to Eli who gives up 6 inches of height, probably 8-9 inches of reach in that matchup.
Comments