End of season player profiles: the starters
Last week, we presented the final individual and team statistical breakdowns, all nicely color-coded to illustrate each player’s contribution to the team. Today, we’ll take a look at end of season profiles of each player, the highlights of his season, his contributions, and what he can improve for next season.
Before we get started, let me explain some of the numbers. The stat line at the top of each player’s profile is taken straight from last week’s stats post. The darker the maize, the higher his ream rank in that category. The darker the blue, the lower his team rank. At the bottom of each profile are more advanced metrics, such as effective field goal percentage (eFG%) and true shooting percentage (TS%), with my own twist on them to adjust for minutes played in relation to the total available minutes. That way, a player like Eso Akunne who only took eight shots all season and made seven, and played just 3.5 percent of the available minutes, doesn’t blow away everyone else on the team.
The Starters
| Trey Burke | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GP-GS | Min | Avg Min |
FG-FGA | FG% | 3FG-3FGA | 3FG% | FT-FTA | FT% | OR | DR | Tot Reb |
Reb Avg |
A | TO | Blk | Stl | Pts | Avg Pts |
| 34-33 | 1227 | 36.1 | 177-409 | .433 | 57-164 | .348 | 93-125 | .744 | 22 | 96 | 118 | 3.5 | 156 | 94 | 13 | 31 | 504 | 14.8 |

Burke led the team with 14.8 points per game and will be crucial to Michigan's success if he returns next season
Nobody knew what to expect from the gaping hole that was the point guard position prior to the season, but by season’s end, it’s hard to picture what the team would have looked like without Trey Burke. The fabulous freshman who was plucked from behind enemy lines in Columbus, helped Michigan fans forget about Darius Morris and turned point guard into a position of strength.
He didn’t start the season opener against Ferris State and scored just three points in 18 minutes. But in his next four games, he scored 13, 14, 14, and 17 points, respectively while starting and playing 30-plus minutes each game.
On New Years Day, he racked up 27 points against Minnesota and two weeks later he scored 20 to lead Michigan to its third straight win over Michigan State. In February, he more or less shut down Ohio State’s Aaron Craft and scored 17 of his own to earn the win, and in the first game of the Big Ten Tournament, Burke lit up Minnesota once again, this time for a career high 30 points.
He was the floor general who played well beyond his freshman status. He played 89.2 percent of the possible minutes, averaging 36.1 minutes per game and it seemed to show in the final two games when he didn’t have legs against Ohio State and had trouble keeping up with the guards of Ohio University.
Burke is considering entering the NBA Draft but if he does return next season, Michigan will be poised to make a run for another Big Ten title.
Needs to improve: Turnovers. There’s really not much Burke wasn’t able to do as a true freshman. He played well beyond his years, hit clutch shots, led the team in scoring, and set the Michigan record for assists by a freshman. It’s nitpicking to suggest turnovers, but what else is there? He ranked tied for eighth in the Big Ten in assist-to-turnover ratio, but 10 Big Ten guards averaged fewer turnovers per game. If he can cut it down under two to the same level as Wisconsin’s Jordan Taylor or Northwestern’s Dave Sobolewski, he’ll be a sure Big Ten player of the year candidate.
eFG% – 44.8
TS% – 48.0
________________________________________________________________________________________
| Tim Hardaway Jr. | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GP-GS | Min | Avg Min |
FG-FGA | FG% | 3FG-3FGA | 3FG% | FT-FTA | FT% | OR | DR | Tot Reb |
Reb Avg |
A | TO | Blk | Stl | Pts | Avg Pts |
| 34-34 | 1162 | 34.2 | 167-400 | .418 | 53-187 | .283 | 101-151 | .715 | 26 | 104 | 130 | 3.8 | 73 | 66 | 11 | 16 | 495 | 14.6 |
Hardaway was the star of the team last year and had high expectations heading into his sophomore campaign. He began the season right where he left off, averaging 16.2 points per game and shooting 47.8 percent overall and 34.3 percent from three-point range through the first 13 games.
But once conference play began, his scoring average dropped nearly three points to 13.5 and his shooting dipped to 37.7 and 25 percent the rest of the way, respectively.
He had a 2-for-14 night against Minnesota, 2-for-13 against Iowa, and 1-for-10 against Michigan State. He had a six-game stretch in which he hit just 7-of-35 threes.
Despite his struggles, he was still able to get his points and seemed to come alive at season’s end. Against Illinois on March 1, he scored 25 points and pulled down 11 rebounds while hitting 6-of-7 shots, 4-of-4 threes, and 9-of-10 free throws. Against Minnesota in the first game of the Big Ten Tournament, he poured in 20.
He led the team in free throws made and attempted, averaging 4.4 attempts and three makes per game.
Needs to improve: Shot selection and consistency. The root of his shooting woes this season was shot selection as he often forced up off-balance jumpers late in the shot clock or early threes not within the offense. He was at his best when he was driving to the basket off the dribble, drawing fouls and creating plays. The return of Trey Burke would really help Hardaway’s consistency, as will more of an inside presence with Jon Horton coming off of injury and Mitch McGary joining the team. Hardaway shot 36.7 percent from three-point range as a freshman while taking 20 more threes, so he’s capable of hitting them. If he can get back to that level next year, he’ll be tough to stop.
eFG% – 40.9
TS% – 44.4
________________________________________________________________________________________
| Zack Novak | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GP-GS | Min | Avg Min |
FG-FGA | FG% | 3FG-3FGA | 3FG% | FT-FTA | FT% | OR | DR | Tot Reb |
Reb Avg |
A | TO | Blk | Stl | Pts | Avg Pts |
| 34-34 | 1145 | 33.7 | 110-231 | .476 | 52-127 | .409 | 42-49 | .857 | 42 | 112 | 154 | 4.5 | 61 | 33 | 3 | 26 | 314 | 9.2 |

Zack Novak was arguably the most consistent player on the team, ranking in the top three in nearly every stat category
Four years ago, Novak was a barely-recruited prospect and one of John Beilein’s first commits. As a senior this season, he was one of Michigan’s most important all-around players. He started every game, averaging the third-most minutes per game (33.7), ranked third on the team in scoring with 9.2 points per game, third in rebounding (4.5), third in overall shooting (47.6) percent, second in three-point shooting (40.9), and first in free throw shooting (85.7).
He scored a season-high 22 in Michigan’s Maui Invitational win over UCLA and also scored 17 and pulled in eight rebounds in a midseason loss at Arkansas. He made multiple threes in 14 games and hit at least one three in 26 of the 34 games. He also pulled down five or more rebounds 16 times.
However, he struggled in his final game, Michigan’s season-ending loss to Ohio, scoring just two points on 1-of-6 shooting. But throughout his career, Novak’s legacy was defined by more than just scoring. While he averaged 8.1 points per game throughout his four years, his main contributions don’t show up on the stat sheet. He played more minutes than any Michigan basketball player in history and his was the body often diving after loose balls and jumping in front of potential layups, drawing charges. Novak also became Michigan’s first academic all-american in 30 years and was just the second three-year captain in Michigan history.
Novak graduates in May with a business degree from the Stephen M. Ross School of Business. He won’t play in the NBA, but he has a bright future ahead and all the tools to succeed in life beyond basketball.
eFG% – 49.1
TS% – 51.4
________________________________________________________________________________________
| Stu Douglass | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GP-GS | Min | Avg Min |
FG-FGA | FG% | 3FG-3FGA | 3FG% | FT-FTA | FT% | OR | DR | Tot Reb |
Reb Avg |
A | TO | Blk | Stl | Pts | Avg Pts |
| 34-17 | 1037 | 30.5 | 91-224 | .406 | 48-142 | .338 | 26-31 | .839 | 7 | 80 | 87 | 2.6 | 78 | 34 | 4 | 26 | 256 | 7.5 |
Like Novak, Douglass was scarcely recruited coming out of high school but became one of Beilein’s first commits. All he did was go on to play in more games than any player in Michigan basketball history, never missing a game throughout his career.
This season, he averaged 7.5 points per game, good for fifth on the team, and 78 assists, which was second to Burke. His best game of the season was the opener against Ferris State when he scored 14 points on 3-of-7 shooting from three, grabbed five rebounds, and dished out four assists. He also scored in double figures six other times and scored the game-winning layup in Michigan’s January 17 win over Michigan State.
Through his first three years, Douglass was known as a good three-point shooter, but this season he developed an ability to get to the rim and create a shot off the dribble. Several times, he set up his defender and hit a turn around jumper, something that was hard to imagine in years prior. He also became one of Michigan’s best defenders on the perimeter.
He finished his career fourth all-time in threes attempted (603) and fifth in threes made (205). He started the season coming off the bench, but made his way into the starting lineup for the final 16 games.
He graduates in May with an economics degree and will likely pursue a basketball career overseas. Next season, his steadiness will be missed and Michigan will have to find a capable ball-handler to spell Burke at times.
eFG% – 38.7
TS% – 40.4
________________________________________________________________________________________
| Evan Smotrycz | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GP-GS | Min | Avg Min |
FG-FGA | FG% | 3FG-3FGA | 3FG% | FT-FTA | FT% | OR | DR | Tot Reb |
Reb Avg |
A | TO | Blk | Stl | Pts | Avg Pts |
| 34-18 | 716 | 21.1 | 89-185 | .481 | 40-92 | .435 | 45-58 | .776 | 45 | 120 | 165 | 4.9 | 30 | 46 | 11 | 27 | 263 | 7.7 |
Smotrycz was the type of big man that John Beilein loves: able to step outside and create a mismatch for a slower big guy, capable of knocking down threes or driving to the basket. This season, his minutes were down, but his offensive productivity increased from his freshman campaign.
He led the team in three-point percentage, hitting 40-of-92 attempts, was second in overall field goal percentage (48.1), led the team with 120 defensive rebounds, and was the team’s second-leading overall rebounder, averaging 4.9 per game.
He had a four-game stretch to end the non-conference portion of the schedule in which he scored 20, 16, 17, and 20, but scored in double figures just four times in the final 21 games. In one of those, his 17-points helped Michigan beat Penn State to clinch a share of the Big Ten title. In another, his 15 points helped keep Michigan in the NCAA Tournament game against Ohio. He hit 6-of-7 shots from the field and both three-pointers and also pulled in seven boards.
Smotrycz began the season in the starting lineup, but lost his starting job to Douglass for the final 16 games. He averaged 21.1 minutes a game and was efficient on the offensive end, but was often a liability on defense.
At season’s end, he announced he was transferring to a yet-to-be-named school. In hindsight, it explains some of the frustration with Smotrycz all season. His on-court demeanor and lack of effort at times were frustrating but his ability to knock down shots somewhat made up for it. Had he returned next season, his minutes may not have increased but if his offensive production remained the same, he would have been a crucial player to Michigan’s success.
eFG% – 30.7
TS% – 32.2
________________________________________________________________________________________
| Jordan Morgan | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GP-GS | Min | Avg Min |
FG-FGA | FG% | 3FG-3FGA | 3FG% | FT-FTA | FT% | OR | DR | Tot Reb |
Reb Avg |
A | TO | Blk | Stl | Pts | Avg Pts |
| 34-33 | 831 | 24.4 | 109-176 | .619 | 0-0 | .000 | 31-61 | .508 | 75 | 116 | 191 | 5.6 | 11 | 53 | 9 | 22 | 249 | 7.3 |
While Morgan’s scoring numbers were slightly down this season from his redshirt freshman year, he remained an important piece of the puzzle inside. Read: only pice of the puzzle inside. When fellow big man Jon Horford was lost for the season, Morgan’s inside presence became all the more important as the only guy big enough to defend opponents’ bigs.
He led Michigan and finished second in the Big Ten in shooting percentage (61.9) and led the team in offensive rebounds (75), total rebounds (191), and rebound average (5.6). His offensive rebound average (2.2) was good for sixth in the Big Ten.
Though his scoring average fell from 9.2 to 7.3 this season, he had a few great games offensively. His season high was 16, which he scored twice, against Iowa State on December 3 and Arkansas on January 21. He also had three double-digit rebounding nights, one of which was the highlight of his season when he recorded a double-double, grabbing 11 boards and scoring 11 points in helping Michigan defeat Ohio State. In that game, he virtually shut down Jared Sullinger.
Needs to improve: Playing like a big man. One of the most frustrating things to watch all season was Morgan grab an offensive rebound or get the ball under the basket, take a dribble, and get the ball stolen by a guard. If I had all the game tape to count, I bet it would tally at least a dozen times. He has the ability to score and once he has some help next season with Mitch McGrady and Jon Horford, should be able to excel as an upperclassman with a couple of years under his belt.
eFG% – 37.4
TS% – 36.7

















