photo AnnArborGIFHeader_zps02670880.gif

Posts Tagged ‘Spike Albrecht’

Michigan basketball Italy trip review and translation

Monday, October 13th, 2014

Michigan bball Italy(UMHoops)

Michigan fans, I have some good news for you: college basketball season is just around the corner. Practice has started, John Beilein is back at work with the team, and football will soon be a distant memory.

As everyone knows, the Wolverines took one of their every-four-years off-season trips this summer to play some lower-tier teams in Italy, and the results were encouraging, with four 20-plus point wins, a healthy dose of balanced scoring (eight players averaged more than eight points per game), and strong freshmen play.

About that last point, as Michigan fans have become accustomed to, the Maize and Blue will largely be looking to replace the lost production of Nik Stauskas, Glenn Robinson III, Mitch McGary, Jordan Morgan, and Jon Horford with five freshmen and a sixth redshirt freshman. You’d be right to blame Beilein with continuous gripes of too much youth if not for his absurd record of turning these young (and often overlooked) Wolverines into high NBA Draft selections. Of those five departures, two were first-rounders, one was a second-rounder, another is off to play first division ball in Europe with Virtus Roma, and the last transferred to Florida. With this turnover comes new names and faces to follow, new games to drool over, and a bevy of prospects that are question marks waiting to become stars under Beilein’s tutelage.

Today, let’s take a trip back in time to analyze some tape of each projected rotation player in Italy and see how their style of play will translate this fall and what still needs to improve. Special thanks to UMHoops for the video.

#23 Caris LeVert – 6’7″, 200
Italy stats: 14.3 ppg, 6 rpg, 4.3 apg, 3 spg, 1.8 TOs, 50% FG, 40% 3pt., 64.3% FT, 4 starts

What he showed: After suffering a stress fracture in his foot over the summer, LeVert was thought to be iffy to even suit up in Italy. Instead, he looked completely healthy and ready to lead the team moving forward. The junior just turned 20 in August, but he certainly looked capable of being The Guy this season, even though his scoring numbers weren’t gaudy.

LeVert came to Ann Arbor two years ago as a late addition after John Groce left Ohio University for Illinois and was by most counts a frustrating, wiry, inconsistent human in jelly-in-basketball-player-mold. A year later, LeVert had easily become the second offensive option on a very talented squad. Now, he is fully expected to lead the team, and his play in Italy leaves few questions. His shot looks as smooth as ever, his passing is crisp, his off-the-ball and pick-and-roll play looks improved, and he can rebound and run with anyone. But what stood out most was his confidence.

In the past, LeVert would sometimes appear to be thinking two steps ahead of his feet and would carelessly turn it over or take an ill-advised shot, but now he is showing that he can take the ball, survey the defense, and take the smartest course of action with his long strides and terrific finishing ability. He is comfortable passing or shooting, he isn’t hesitating at all, and he can even be seen directing his comrades a couple times. By all means, expect an outstanding season from Caris.

Where he can improve: No basketball player is perfect, especially in college, but LeVert’s well-rounded game is hard to nitpick at. One area that I think he has the potential to be even better is his man-to-man defense. LeVert’s size (he grew an inch and gained plenty more weight this off-season) and length give him the prototypical shutdown defender mold, but he lacked aggressiveness at times on that end of the floor last year. His steal numbers are quite encouraging, and his free throw shooting shouldn’t be an issue.

#21 Zak Irvin 6’6″, 215
Italy stats: 20.8 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 1.3 apg, 1 spg, 2.3 TOs, 68.8% FG, 66.7% 3pt., 83.3% FT, 4 starts

What he showed: Shooting, shooting, and more shooting. Zak Irvin proved how big of a deep threat he is while shooting 42.5 percent from downtown as a freshman who did one thing. It’s pretty clear that his stroke didn’t take a summer break, and his outside shot should continue to make it easier for him to develop a dribble-drive game. In this video, we see some strong finishes, but Irvin really only takes it to the rack by himself a couple of times off two or three dribbles to his left. The majority of his two-pointers here are breakaway dunks and smooth backdoor cuts that won’t be as readily available against better competition. His rebounding numbers are also phenomenal.

Where he can improve: Coaches and players alike have been raving about Irvin’s game since the end of last season, and he has great potential, but his game still lacks LeVert-level diversification. Irvin’s shot is so good right now that I think he relies on it perhaps a bit too much. Look for him to continue to work on his handling and driving skills while using his outside shot to his advantage in creating inside for himself and others. Irvin, like everyone else on the team, needs to also be a little lighter on his feet defensively and use his athleticism and length to create havoc.

#10 Derrick Walton 6’0″, 185
Italy stats: 8.8 ppg, 3.3 apg, 4.5 rpg, 2.5 spg, 1.5 TOs, 44.8% FG, 27.3% 3pt., 50% FT, 4 starts

What he showed: If Caris LeVert is The Guy on this team and Zak Irvin is the dynamic sidekick, Derrick Walton needs to be the glue to hold everything together, and he looks the part to me. I love Walton’s creativity in the paint, his jump shot is worlds better from his high school days, and his acceleration and Trey Burkeian moves all point to No. 10 becoming the next great point guard out of Beilein’s factory. Walton’s high basketball IQ allowed him to learn the ins and outs of the offense rapidly as a freshman, and his grasp should only help the freshmen get up to speed that much sooner.

What he can improve: It’s tough to extrapolate too much from a few overseas blowouts, but Walton’s box scores seem to indicate that he may have spent some time away from the court this summer. His 10-2-9-14 scoring outputs point to a lack of consistency and his poor shooting certainly needs to improve, but I have no doubts that the small sample size and long off-season can take most of the blame here.

#34 Mark Donnal 6’9″, 240
Italy stats: 10.3 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 1.3 apg, .3 bpg, .3 TOs, 69.6% FG, 0% 3pt. (0-3), 81.8% FT, 4 starts

What he showed: Redshirt freshman Mark Donnal displays great movement throughout this clip, and his soft touch around the basket will be a welcome addition after Jordan Morgan sometimes struggled throughout his career in finishing the bunnies. Donnal needs to be able to run the floor in this offense, and he looked more than capable of doing that, beating his man down on a couple occasions and then out-smarting a defender for position as well. Donnal’s high field goal and free throw percentages are exactly what this team needs out of him: smart, solid play and finishing. If he does that, his job is done. Lastly, Donnal’s 14 offensive rebounds to 12 defensive is something exciting to keep an eye on.

What he can improve: What intrigued me most about Donnal as a prospect was his outside shooting. Obviously as a big man you want Donnal to be able to play inside, and he appears to be picking that up pretty well, but his outside shot in high school made me drool over the possibilities in Beilein’s offense. The pick-and-pop would be a terrific addition to this offense, but unfortunately it looks like Donnal is still progressing inside before he thinks too much about stepping out for the trey. His 0-for-3 line from downtown is discouraging for me, and I think he has the talent to do a lot better than one block every four games.

#3 Kameron Chatman 6’7″, 210
Italy stats: 9.5 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 2.5 apg, 2 spg, 1.3 TOs, 42.5% FG, 33.3% 3pt., 0.0% FT, 4 starts

What he showed: Chatman comes in this season as the most highly touted true freshman of the bunch, and his versatility should help contribute to Michigan’s excellent depth this season. Watching this video, I’m most impressed with Chatman’s vision and midrange game. For a big freshman, Chatman really zips off a few nice passes, and his confident stroke from just inside the deep line bring about memories of GRIII, Tim Hardaway Jr., and Trey Burke. Chatman’s role is just that, to be a role player who can score a few points, rebound well, defend, and provide value in different ways. He doesn’t need to fill up the stat sheet every night, but we should see a solid 6-9 points per game from the Oregon native. I feel like my keyboard is on replay, but Chatman also has great length and appears to have good, not great, athleticism.

What he can improve: Two things stick out right away in Chatman’s line after four games: low shooting percentages and zero attempted free throws. Chatman is most likely going to start from the beginning at the four spot for Beilein, meaning he’ll be going against guys his size on a regular basis. He is not going to be able to curtsy his way to easy one-dribble mid-rangers every night. Instead, Chatman needs to embrace aggressiveness, get to the hole a little more often, and either finish a layup or get fouled. His stroke looks very smooth right now, but he will need to up those shooting numbers a bit.

#32 Ricky Doyle 6’9″, 245
Italy stats: 11.5 ppg, 8 rpg, .3 apg, .3 bpg, 0 TOs, 74.1% FG, 60% FT

What he showed: Ricky Doyle was perhaps the biggest revelation of the Italy tour. In high school, Doyle played in a low-level league and was not active on the AAU circuit. Most of his development came from private lessons. Now in college, the book will be out soon that Doyle is a true big man in every sense of the word. Throughout his nearly three-minute long highlight video seen here, Doyle scored a number of strong buckets by finding open spots, running the floor well, and cleaning up misses, but the one thing that stood out to me was the number of times he put the ball on the floor – zero. Watch for yourself. Not once does Doyle put the rock to hardwood, even at the top of the key while waiting for the wings to complete their action. His field goal percentage is very impressive, and should stay pretty high this year considering the types of shots he’ll be taking, and his team-high eight rebounds per game are as encouraging a stat as any on this trip.

What he can improve: Doyle won’t be asked to do too much offensively this year other than finish off what Michigan’s skilled guards create for him, but some offensive versatility would be nice. He should be able to put the ball on the floor when going back-to-the-basket. Doyle’s free throw percentage is also a hair lower than what you’re comfortable with, and eventually he will work on his range. The Florida native will also want to improve his defensive footwork and mindset, as his 12 fouls were by far the most on the trip. With only him and Donnal really competing for minutes at the five, Doyle needs to be smart when it comes to foul trouble.

#12 Muhammad-Ali Abdur-Rahkman 6’4″, 175
Italy stats: 10 ppg, 2.5 apg, 3.3 rpg, 2.3 spg, 2.3 TOs, 47.8% FG, 20% 3pt., 64% FT

What he showed: Driving. If not for Doyle’s breakout performance, Muhammad-Ali Abdur-Rahkman’s (you can’t expect me to write that out every time) impressive four-game stretch would be making the most headlines from the newbies. Michigan basketball’s Twitter account routinely went nuts over MAAR’s driving and finishing ability, and you spot a few glimpses throughout this clip. Abdur-Rahkman was a late pickup this off-season from the Philadelphia area, and while many questioned the scholarship offer, he already looks well on his way to providing immense value as that threat to get to the hole every time. I love his quickness on the dribble and his ability to keep his head up at all times. What’s more is that Abdur-Rahkman didn’t do all his damage in one game. He reached double figures in scoring three of four games and had multiple steals and assists in all four games.

What he can improve: Shooting. Abdur-Rahkman will earn minutes on the wing this season with his driving ability alone, and he should get to the free throw line often, but he will need to make defenders respect his outside shot if he is to bring his game up to the next level. Abdur-Rahkman made just two of his 10 three-point attempts on the trip, and he isn’t shown taking anything from distance in this video. The knock on his game in high school was always that shot, and it looks like he has a ways to go.

#24 Aubrey Dawkins 6’6″, 190
Italy stats: 9.3 ppg, 2.8 rpg, .5 apg, .3 spg, .8 TOs, 63.6% FG, 62.5% 3pt., 80% FT

What he showed: Aubrey Dawkins, the son of former Duke great and current Stanford coach Johnny, is probably going to be just a shooter this season if he plays at all, and that’s fine – especially when he is draining nearly two-thirds of his deep attempts. His stroke is smooth and his prep year on the East Coast should serve him well in transitioning to the college game. Dawkins does also showcase a good handle and a few nice finishes in this cut-up, but I expect his game to be pretty similar to Zak Irvin’s of last year. The skinny native Californian is also reputed to be a terrific athlete, which will serve him well down the road and perhaps bring some Glenn Robinson III comparisons eventually.

What he can improve: Again, like Irvin, Dawkins will continue to work on his dribble-drive game so that defenders cannot simply stick to him in the corner and erase him from the picture. Dawkins will need to move around a lot to create open looks for himself while also improving on his ability to get to the rack and the free throw line (just five attempts in four games).

#2 Spike Albrecht 5’11″, 175
Italy stats: 5 ppg, 2.5 apg, 2 rpg, .8 spg, .8 TOs, 46.7% FG, 37.5% 3pt., 75% FT

What he showed: At 22 years old and in his junior season, Spike is pretty safely expected to be the ever-reliable backup point guard. He’s never going to be the biggest, strongest, or most athletic player on the court, but he is calm and collected with the ball in his hands and usually makes the right pass. I’d like to see him shoot a little bit more this season with his terrific numbers, but Albrecht can most definitely be counted on to dribble under the basket and somehow find that open guy on the opposite wing at least once a game. His cool approach to the game and quiet, relaxed demeanor should do well to keep the team playing their style.

What he can improve: There was one really nice behind-the-back, pull-up elbow jumper drained in this video that I’d love to see more from out of Spike, but other than perhaps increased aggressiveness, Albrecht has a very defined game and a somewhat defined ceiling.

# 5 D.J. Wilson 6’9″, 220
Italy stats: N/A

Unfortunately, D.J. Wilson broke his pinky just before the trip to Europe and was unable to take part in gameplay, so I will hold off scouting for now, but if you follow me on Twitter (@SamSedlecky), you’ll see that I have some very high hopes for this lanky Sacramento native.

2014-15 Michigan basketball projections

Wednesday, April 30th, 2014


This year’s Michigan basketball team finished just shy of a second straight Final Four, but they still turned many heads along the way. People were incredulous that such a young group of players could play so well after losing two non-senior guards to the first round of the NBA Draft — including the previous season’s Player of the Year — and a preseason All-America big man to a season-ending injury, and that always seemed to be one of the first things brought up in every Michigan broadcast.

You might want to get used to that talk.

The NBA’s April 27 deadline for early entries into the draft has come and gone, but unfortunately for Michigan fans, it was certainly not without lots of action in Ann Arbor.

With the big three heading to the NBA Michigan will once again have a very young team next season (Detroit Free Press)

With the big three heading to the NBA Michigan will once again have a very young team next season (Detroit Free Press)

On April 15, just a couple weeks after the Wolverines’ heartbreaking loss to Kentucky in the Elite Eight, sophomores Nik Stauskas and Glenn Robinson III announced together that they would forego their final two years of college eligibility to enter the draft. Both were widely expected to leave — Stauskas after a breakout campaign that saw him take home Big Ten Player of the Year honors and Robinson III after he had passed on a likely top-15 selection a year before — but the departures will nonetheless make “what if” a common musing once again come basketball season.

A week and a half later, fellow sophomore Mitch McGary also declared for the draft – but without a press conference and just two days before the deadline. McGary, who didn’t play a game for Michigan  since the new year, announced that he would leave college after testing positive for marijuana during the NCAA Tournament, which would have resulted in a one-year suspension levied by the NCAA.

Many had speculated that McGary was going back and forth on his NBA decision until the bitter end, but his confession of the failed test and the NCAA’s denial of Michigan’s appeal brought light to the situation, and a source has confirmed that McGary would have returned to Michigan next season if he was not facing a suspension.

Regardless, all three have commenced their professional careers, leaving Michigan to regroup yet again.

So what does that mean for the Wolverines?

Well, for one, coach John Beilein and his staff are developing players at an incredible rate. Stauskas will be a first-rounder, and at least one of Robinson III and McGary will likely be there as well. If we can assume that, Michigan will have had four — maybe five — first round selections in two years.

Now, the philosophy of next man up must continue.

Most probably didn’t think this would be possible, but next season Michigan will be younger and less experienced than ever before in the Beilein era. Caris LeVert, Spike Albrecht, and Max Bielfeldt are the only three players that have been in the program for two full seasons, and with the recent commitments of Aubrey Dawkins and Muhammad Ali Abdur-Rahkman, Michigan will have a whopping seven players with freshman eligibility. Zak Irvin, Derrick Walton, Jr., and a few walk-ons round out the roster with one year under their belts.

After butchering last season’s individual player predictions (but hey, I got the Big Ten record and the Elite Eight finish spot on), I think the time is ripe to look foolish again. So with that in mind, let’s take a wild guess at how the lineups will shape up, who will handle the scoring load, and how many games Michigan can pull out.

Mark Donnal has a huge task ahead of him in locking down Michigan's front court (Courtney Sacco, Ann Arbor News)

Mark Donnal has a huge task ahead of him in locking down Michigan’s front court (Courtney Sacco, Ann Arbor News)

The Bigs

Perhaps the biggest what if of next year would have been the “what if Michigan still had Mitch McGary, a potential big man All-American, along with a dynamic backcourt headlined by Caris LeVert, who is already garnering some All-American talk?” The same question could be asked of graduating senior Jordan Morgan and rising senior Jon Horford, who has transferred to Florida.

As my dad always says, though, if ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we’d all have a merry Christmas.

McGary is gone and Michigan’s only center candidate with any college game experience is Max Bielfeldt. Let that sink in a little.

The two freshmen vying for playing time will be Mark Donnal, who turned some heads in practice while redshirting last season, and Ricky Doyle, a true freshman from Florida whose high school competition was somewhat questionable.

Donnal seems to be the clear front-runner to start, and I am a huge fan of his game based off one live viewing of him in high school. Donnal possesses excellent range for a big man, which could make for a devastating combination in Beilein’s jack-happy offense, has solid length that should make him a serviceable rebounder and shot-blocker, and seems to be able to score from anywhere on the floor. Without raising too many eyebrows, I have to say that Donnal’s offensive game most closely reminds me of Doug McDermott and Adreian Payne as a junior and senior; obviously he will not score as much as McDermott did right off the bat, but Donnal’s versatility makes him a real threat.

Doyle would have been an excellent redshirt candidate this season but will likely be forced into some action with the limited depth. He is more of a back-to-the-basket type with a developing shot.

Bielfeldt has played spot minutes before and clearly has the upper hand when it comes to experience, but I don’t see great potential. He is a little short on size, talent, and athleticism; his range could score him a few minutes again, but I expect Donnal to get the lion’s share.

Minute Breakdown:
Donnal: 25 Doyle: 10 Bielfeldt: 5

The Wings

Caris LeVert is the de facto leader for Michigan next season (Andy Lyons, Getty Images)

Caris LeVert is the de facto leader for Michigan next season (Andy Lyons, Getty Images)

At the wing spots for Michigan, you will again find – surprise! – more youth.

Caris LeVert is obviously the one that everyone is talking about as the next potential NBA early entry after a breakout sophomore season, and as a junior this coming year, is a shoo-in to be a captain and a starter. He’s also likely to be the guy, at least to start the season, who would be Beilein’s choice to take it on the last possession. If LeVert sticks around Ann Arbor this summer to work on his game and packs on a few more pounds to his lanky frame, the All-America talk will not fade any time soon.

Zak Irvin will be the only other wing with experience, and after a year of some excellent spot-up shooting for a true freshman, he will be asked to develop into more than just a shooter in the upcoming offseason. The former Indiana Mr. Basketball has shown in the past that he can be a great scorer, and his length makes him a strong candidate to emerge as one of Michigan’s best on-ball defenders. He flashed some encouraging signs late in the season. If Irvin sticks around for Camp Sanderson, expect many headlines on a potential breakout for him as well.

LeVert and Irvin should both see 30-plus minutes per game at some combination of the two and three spots in the offense, and Irvin could slide to the four on occasion as well. If Irvin sticks mostly to the three, however, it will be two true freshmen, just like at the five, earning the vast majority of playing time at the four spot.

Those two freshmen are Kameron Chatman of Oregon and D.J. Wilson of California. Chatman measures in around 6’7″ and comes in as the highest-rated recruit of the class, while Wilson is listed around 6’8″ and recently jumped up in the ranks after a solid senior year. Both players have range out to the three-point line and length to spare. Chatman seems to be a little more perimeter- and offensive-oriented at this point, but Wilson looks to have better bounce and shot-blocking skills. I would expect both to earn a good chunk of playing time right off the bat in what will be one of the more interesting competitions to watch.

Rounding out the wing depth are the two late signees in Abdur-Rahkman and Dawkins. I admittedly have to watch much more video on each before formulating any sort of scouting report, but they both are garnering the “Trust in Beilein” philosophy for now. After seeing unheralded late signees like Spike Albrecht and Caris LeVert pan out pretty well so far, that seems to be a fair approach. Both come in in the 6’4″-to-6’5″ range with solid athleticism and were on track to be mid-majors until Beilein came calling. Abdur-Rahkman is generally viewed as more of a slasher who needs to work on his shot while Dawkins has been called more of a shooter who needs to work on his handles. With hard work, both will certainly be given the chance to develop into rotation players, but they will likely play sparingly next year.

Minute Breakdown:
4 Wilson: 20 Chatman: 15 Irvin: 5
3 Irvin: 25 Chatman: 5 LeVert: 5 MAAR/
: 5
2 LeVert: 30 MAAR/
: 5
Albrecht: 5

The Point Guards

At perhaps John Beilein’s most critical position, Michigan will luckily have two players with a combined three years of college experience. Though Spike Albrecht will only be a junior and Derrick Walton, Jr. a sophomore, they will be the gray beards directing traffic.

Albrecht is a steadying force and a pretty decent bet to be the only player from the 2012 recruiting class to finish out his college eligibility. He is the known commodity – a plus passer, a plus ball handler, and a plus shooter with middling size and athleticism.

Walton is a prime candidate to break out, and if previous sophomore seasons from Darius Morris and Trey Burke are any indication, too big of a breakout from Walton could have Michigan fans shaking in their boots again. The quiet floor general has plenty of quickness, a shot that continues to improve, and a strong ability to finish at the rack after struggling with that early last season. He has also shown poise with some excellent late-game free throw shooting, which is always a great attribute for a point guard. One of the bigger areas Walton can improve on this offseason will be on the defensive end, where he could develop into a nice thief.

Minute Breakdown:
Walton, Jr.: 30 Albrecht: 10

Starting Lineup and Team Predictions

Starting Lineup:
1 2 3 4 5
Walton, Jr. LeVert Irvin Chatman Donnal
Team predictions:
MVP Caris LeVert
Most Improved Player Zak Irvin
Freshman of the Year Mark Donnal
Newcomer of the Year D.J. Wilson
Top 3 Scorers (in order) LeVert, Walton, Irvin
Players Shooting 40%+ from 3 (in order) LeVert, Irvin, Walton, Wilson, Albrecht
Projected Record 25-11 (11-7)
Projected Finish Sweet Sixteen
Bold Prediction D.J. Wilson earns Big Ten All-Freshman Team honors

What do you think? Do you agree with these projections? If not, what changes would you make?

How Michigan’s points and bigs performed relative to expectations

Wednesday, April 23rd, 2014


On Monday, we took a look at how Michigan’s wings performed relative to the expectations that Sam set in his season preview series back in November. Nik Stauskas and Caris LeVert outperformed in most statistical categories (Stauskas for the second straight season), while Glenn Robinson III and Zak Irvin under performed. The latter, however, was tough to forecast as a true freshman and had some of his potential production eaten up by the emergence of LeVert.

Today, we take a look at the point guards and big men to see how Derick Walton Jr., Spike Albrecht, Jordan Morgan, Jon Horford, and Mitch McGary performed.

For a look back at Sam’s preseason team preview and player previews, here they are: the wings, the big men, the point guards. He made his predictions for each player’s points, rebounds, assists, steals, turnovers, and minutes. Later this week, Sam will take a very early look ahead at what the 2014-15 season could bring.

Derrick Walton Jr.
Points Rebounds Assists Steals Turnovers Minutes
Predicted 6.0 2.5 4.0 1.5 2.0 25.0
Actual 7.9 3.0 2.9 0.6 1.5 26.7
Difference +1.9 +0.5 -1.1 -0.9 -0.5 +1.7

Derrick Walton Jr.Recap: While Nik Stauskas had the challenge of replacing Trey Burke’s production, it was Walton that was tasked with replacing his command of the offense. The freshman from Detroit wasn’t expected to score at Burke’s rate, but needed to run the offense effectively, finding the open man and taking care of the ball.

In Sam’s preview, he wrote, “Walton is a very quick player with the ball in his hands who will be looking to create for others before looking to shoot himself. He will never be the same player that Trey Burke was in Ann Arbor, but Walton clearly has the potential to make a similar impact, and with the talent of this Michigan team, it should be felt instantly.”

And it was, as he finished with a 2:1 assists-to-turnover ratio while contributing just under eight points a game. He had a season-best 19 points to go along with six rebounds and four assists in Michigan’s win at Michigan State on Jan. 25. He also recorded a double-double with 13 points and 10 rebounds, in addition to six assists, in the win at Ohio State.

Future: Walton finished third on the team in assists behind Stauskas and Caris LeVert. With Stauskas gone, and LeVert stepping into his role of go-to guy, it will be up to Walton to make a big sophomore leap. He will still likely share time with Spike Albrecht, but will need to keep his assists-to-turnover ratio roughly the same and increase his scoring production by a few points. He proved  to be a capable three-point shooter this season. Now he needs to show he can create off the dribble like Burke did.

Spike Albrecht
Points Rebounds Assists Steals Turnovers Minutes
Predicted 3.5 1.2 1.5 0.5 0.8 10.0
Actual 3.3 1.1 2.0 0.5 0.4 14.7
Difference -0.2 -0.1 +0.5 0.0 -0.4 +4.7

SpikeRecap: Albrecht burst onto the scene in last year’s national championship game with 17 points, his first and only double-digit performance of the season. While no one is confusing him with Trey Burke, the performance eased at least some concern following Burke’s departure.

Sam wrote, “This year, expect a year of practice against Burke to pay dividends for Albrecht and a few more girls to flutter their eyebrows while walking by the boyish-faced Spike on the Diag. But most of all, expect to be happy with Albrecht’s contributions. Those contributions won’t be great, and oftentimes they will go unnoticed, but a back-up point guard who flies under the radar is usually a back-up point guard who is doing his job.”

Albrecht did just that, providing a steady hand in 15 minutes a game while splitting time with Walton. He turned the ball over just 16 times in 545 minutes — an average of once every 34 minutes of action — with a 4:1 assist-to-turnover ratio. He contributed 3.3 points per game and was usually good for one big three-pointer per night.

Future: Albrecht will continue to play an important role for John Beilein as a four-year guy who provides consistency while others leave early for the NBA. His role next season will be about the same as this season, sharing time with Walton, taking care of the ball late in games, and knocking down the occasional open three. He’s the perfect point guard option off the bench and will remain so.

Jordan Morgan
Points Rebounds Blocks Steals Turnovers Minutes
Predicted 3.5 3.0 0.2 0.5 0.8 10.0
Actual 6.4 5.0 0.4 0.4 0.9 20.1
Difference +2.9 +2.0 +0.2 -0.1 +0.1 +10.1
2012-13 Difference -3.9 -1.5   -0.5   -6.1

Jordan Morgan cutting net 3-8-14Recap: Perhaps the feel-good story of the season was the senior-year emergence of Jordan Morgan. He committed to Michigan in 2010 when the program was very different than it is now, stuck with the program despite losing his playing time to Mitch McGary last season, and became one of the most beloved players on the team by season’s end. A year ago, Sam held fairly high expectations for Morgan, but he performed below every one. This year, he over-performed.

In his preview, Sam wrote, “A couple seasons ago, Morgan’s own dad admitted that he was very surprised when Beilein called Morgan in the first place to express interest and ultimately offer him a scholarship. After all, Morgan’s future would be as an engineer. But Beilein did give him that chance, and Morgan has embraced his role in playing basketball for Michigan, no matter what it might be.

“This season, his last, might be Morgan’s most unspectacular in the scoring column, but his leadership and experience will undoubtedly be needed if Michigan is to make another run. Many fans will end up forgetting Morgan’s seemingly insignificant contributions, but Morgan himself will never forget his own journey.”

He was never a star, but Michigan fans most certainly won’t be forgetting his contributions any time soon. Just like the charge he drew late in last year’s Final Four win over Syracuse, Morgan saved Michigan’s season with a drawn charge in this year’s Sweet Sixteen win over Tennessee. Those are the kind of plays that don’t show up in the stat sheet, but are just as important.

Future: Morgan was the lone senior on this year’s team and got a fitting sendoff on Senior Night. He leaves Ann Arbor with an engineering degree, two Big Ten titles, and the program’s career and single-season field goal percentage records. Those are some great accomplishments for a big man out of Detroit that wasn’t highly recruited.

His departure leaves a gap both inside and in terms of leadership. If McGary opts to return next season Michigan will still be in good shape, but if he follows Stauskas and Robinson to the next level, Beilein will need some young guys to step up.

Jon Horford
Points Rebounds Blocks Steals Turnovers Minutes
Predicted 4.5 3.0 0.8 0.5 0.8 12.0
Actual 3.8 4.2 0.7 0.3 0.5 13.8
Difference -0.7 +1.2 -0.1 -0.2 -0.3 +1.8
2012-13 Difference -3.8 -2.3 -1.4 -0.3   -6.2

Jon HorfordRecap: Horford has battled the injury bug throughout his career at Michigan, but entered the 2013-14 season as healthy as could be. He was still battling Morgan and McGary for playing time, but as the season went on it became apparent that even with McGary sidelined with a back injury, it was Morgan who had earned the coaches’ trust and Horford was left coming off the bench. He proved a capable rebounder, averaging over four per game in less than 14 minutes, but struggled on the offensive end of the court.

In Sam’s preview, he wrote, “Over the course of two preseason games, Horford recorded four blocks and 21 rebounds, 17 of which came on defense. If he can continue to provide that kind of production while finishing wide open looks in the paint, Horford will see a nice uptick in minutes and could occasionally see the floor next to McGary – a potentially devastating look for opponents.”

Unfortunately, it didn’t work out that way as Horford scored in double figures just three times all season — all in a five game stretch at the start of Big Ten play — and had just one more double digit rebounding performance the rest of the way.

Future: Horford could have returned to provide leadership as a fifth-year senior next season and likely see more playing time as a result of Morgan’s graduation, but he announced his decision to transfer elsewhere for his final year of eligibility. This leaves a hole in the front court, depending on what McGary decides to do and means redshirt freshman-to-be Mark Donnal is in line for a big role next season.

Mitch McGary
Points Rebounds Blocks Steals Turnovers Minutes
Predicted 12.0 9.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 28.0
Actual 9.5 8.3 0.8 1.9 1.6 24.6
Difference -2.5 -1.2 -0.2 +0.4 -0.4 -3.4

McGaryRecap: Sam’s predictions for McGary were made with an asterisk because his status was unknown at the time, so any under- or over-performance should also be noted with an asterisk.

In his preview, Sam wrote, “Already this season, McGary has been deemed a preseason AP All-American, but he has one more physical hurdle to climb before fulfilling his vast potential – a lower back “condition” that has severely limited McGary’s practice time this fall and has many wondering when he’ll be back to full strength. Beilein maintains that Michigan is just being extremely cautious with McGary right now, and McGary himself is constantly wearing a smile as he says he feels “fine”, but any back injury for a guy of McGary’s size is worrisome.

“If the super sophomore is completely healthy by Michigan’s first big game, though, the Wolverines should be one of the most talented teams in the country and one of the few with exceptional players at every position. And of course, if McGary picks up where he left off, this condition will just be the latest bump on the rise to stardom.”

Ultimately, McGary played in just eight games, starting four, before he had back surgery and was shut down for the season. It’s impossible to tell how healthy he actually was in the games he played, but he certainly wasn’t 100 percent. Still, he averaged 9.5 points, 8.3 rebounds, and two steals per game.

Future: McGary is the one remaining piece of the puzzle that needs to be placed for next season. He hasn’t yet announced his decision of whether to return or to enter the NBA Draft. In one sense, it seems like an easy decision — will an NBA team want a player coming off back surgery who has really only had a dominant NCAA Tournament run that shows his potential? On the other hand, he’s old for his class and his NBA future is getting shorter the longer he waits. If his back is healthy enough for pre-draft workouts, he could work his way solidly into the first round.

A return to Michigan would immediately solidify Michigan’s front court, allowing McGary to play the five and Donnal the four with Zak Irvin and Caris LeVert as the wings and Derrick Walton Jr. handling the ball. That would be a lineup worthy of Big Ten title consideration. If he doesn’t return, however, there will be plenty of questions to be answered inside.

Check back at the end of the week for Sam’s look ahead to the 2014-15 season with some very early team and player predictions.

Drew’s Mailbag: McGary’s decision, 2014-15 preseason rankings

Tuesday, April 22nd, 2014

Today is the first installment of Drew’s Mailbag, which will run every two weeks throughout the offseason, answering any questions you may have regarding Michigan athletics. You can submit your questions to Drew on Twitter (@DrewCHallett) or via email ( 

What is your gut feeling about [Nik] Stauskas, [Glenn Robinson III], and [Mitch] McGary’s NBA decisions? – NMT21 (@NMT21)

Let’s start with the obvious: this question is dated. It was sent to me on April 9, 2014, one day before any reports had surfaced about whether any of Michigan’s players would declare for the 2014 NBA Draft. At the time, I discarded this as a question for my inaugural mailbag because I assumed all three of Stauskas, Robinson III, and McGary would have decided by now. However, although Stauskas and Robinson III have announced officially that they will enter the NBA Draft, McGary has yet to make his final decision. The deadline to declare is only five days away, so I think this is the perfect space to provide my thoughts on McGary’s decision.

First and foremost, this is McGary’s decision. He knows where his interests lie and has gathered all of the information he can from NBA executives and scouts. No one is more informed to make this decision than McGary. He certainly is more informed than me. With that said, I am going to address what I think are the pros and cons of McGary’s options and what I think he will decided by week’s end. What I will not do is tell McGary what he should decide. This is his decision. Not mine. I am in no place to criticize what McGary thinks is best for himself, his family, and his career.

If McGary chooses to follow Stauskas and Robinson III to the NBA, he has been projected as a late first-round or second-round pick. SI’s Chris Mannix is the most optimistic, projecting McGary to be selected with the 26th pick by the Miami Heat. Draft Express currently has McGary going with the last pick in the first round to the San Antonio Spurs. ESPN’s Chad Ford projects McGary as a late first-round pick, but does not include him in his latest top-30 Big Board or the next five in ($). And CBS Sports’ Matt Moore is the most pessimistic, penciling McGary to be selected with the eighth pick in the second round by the Detroit Pistons.

McGary is projected at the end of the first round by most experts (

McGary is projected to be drafted at the end of the first round by most experts (

The range of these projections is a concern for McGary. Whether a player is a first- or second-round pick has significant ramifications. First-round selections are guaranteed a contract. Second-round selections are not and can have their rights waived before ever signing a contract with the team that drafted them. There have been many second-round picks that did not make an NBA roster the season they were drafted. This is why many generally feel that players should return to school unless they are projected to be a solid first-round pick. Generally.

McGary is in a unique situation, though. After an incredible 2013 NCAA Tournament as a freshman, he was projected as a late lottery pick in last year’s draft. Nonetheless, he decided to return to Michigan. McGary then saw his draft stock drop his sophomore season not because of a decline in performance, but because of a lower-back injury that forced him to miss most of the year. There have been recent reports that McGary “is well on his way to being healthy.” If he can show NBA executives in workouts that he has returned to 2013 NCAA Tournament form, his stock would soar back into the first round. But, if not, red flags may be raised that cause McGary to fall into the dreaded second round.

Conversely, if McGary decides to return to Michigan for his junior season, he likely would be one of the best players in the Big Ten, if not the nation. It would provide McGary more time to show NBA executives and scouts that he once again can play at the level he did at the end of his freshman season than draft workouts would. McGary also would have the opportunity to prove to NBA management that he no longer has lower-back issues and can be a full-time starter for a college season. Plus, with the 2015 draft class expected to be weaker than this year’s stacked class, a strong junior season from McGary realistically could see him back in the lottery for the 2015 NBA Draft.

However, there certainly are risks to staying in school. The first is McGary reinjuring himself. The NBA is has become extremely wary of big men that are injury-prone. Another serious injury may indicate to the NBA that McGary is not a player that can endure a full 82-game season or a long NBA career. Another injury would cause McGary’s stock to plummet. The second risk is age. If McGary returns, he would be 23 years old before the 2015 NBA Draft. The NBA loves to draft potential. Unfortunately, NBA executives likely will think that a 23-year-old McGary has little of it left. This could hinder a rise in McGary’s draft stock even with a strong junior season.

And, of course, another season at Michigan is another season during which he does not earn an income for his talent on the hardwood. With how short professional basketball careers are relative to other occupations, McGary may not want to lose one of few valuable years to earn a seven-digit salary to play a sport he loves.

My gut feeling tells me that McGary will declare for the 2014 NBA Draft. Some may feel the opposite because McGary has delayed his decision this long and well after Stauskas and Robinson III made their decisions official. But John Beilein, Caris LeVert, and Spike Albrecht each recently made comments about next year’s team and forgot to include McGary. Plus, there are other things I have heard – nothing concrete – that indicate McGary might be leaving. Either way, as I said earlier, this is McGary’s decision. Michigan fans should respect his decision and support McGary whether he plays at Michigan or in the NBA next season.

Have both the [Michigan] football and basketball teams started the season unranked in the same year? – Will (@Goblue_1211)

Yes, there have been times when both Michigan football and basketball were unranked in the preseason during the same athletic year. It has happened 16 times since the Associated Press (AP) first released a preseason poll for both football and basketball in 1948-49. Fourteen of those times occurred from 1948-49 to 1969-1970 when the AP poll listed only 20 schools. But it has been a rare occurrence since Bo Schembechler made his mark on the Michigan football program.

From 1970-71 to 2007-08, it never happened. Only once during that span was Michigan football not ranked in the preseason AP poll (1985-86), but Michigan basketball was preseason No. 3 that year. Since Lloyd Carr’s retirement, it has happened twice: 2008-09 and 2010-11. However, Michigan basketball found its mojo in the second half of the 2010-11 season and has been listed in the preseason AP poll each year since then.

But let’s get to why this question was sent to me. Will sent this question when it became known that both Nik Stauskas and Glenn Robinson III would declare for the 2014 NBA Draft. At the time, there was – and still is – uncertainty if Mitch McGary also would leave Michigan for the NBA. Will seems to be concerned – and if not concerned, then at least curious – that neither Michigan football nor basketball will be ranked in next season’s preseason AP polls. Will’s concern is not unfounded.

With Irvin and LeVert back, it is unlikely that Michigan won't begin the 2014-15 season unranked (Bradley Leeb, USA Today Sports)

With Irvin and LeVert back, it is unlikely that Michigan will begin the 2014-15 season unranked even if McGary goes pro (Bradley Leeb, USA Today Sports)

It is very unlikely that Michigan football will be ranked in the preseason AP poll this upcoming season. The Wolverines finished the previous season with a 7-6 record and lost five of their final six games. Yes, there are some circumstances where the AP will rank a team in the preseason following such a year. But those circumstances do not apply to Michigan. The Wolverines have more questions than answers right now. How quickly will Michigan learn and execute new offensive coordinator Doug Nussmeier’s new schemes? Will Michigan’s young offensive line, which allowed the most tackles-for-loss in the nation in 2013, improve despite losing two NFL-caliber offensive tackles? Will Michigan finally have an effective running game? How will Michigan’s defense adapt to the transition from the 4-3 under to the 4-3 over? Can Michigan beat its first ranked opponent on the road under Brady Hoke? I could go on and on.

This is not to say that Michigan football is doomed for the 2014 season. Michigan certainly has the talent and pieces to put together a successful campaign. But Michigan needs to answer these questions on the gridiron first before the media begins to respect the Wolverines. Don’t believe me? None of CBS Sports’ Jerry Hinnen, Bleacher Report’s Brian Pedersen, USA Today’s Paul Myerberg, or SI’s Martin Rickman place Michigan in their Way-Too-Early Top-25 rankings for 2014. The only such list that does is ESPN’s Mark Schlabach, who ranks Michigan at No. 21. The most likely scenario is that Michigan will be sitting outside the top 25 in the preseason AP poll, likely between No. 30 and No. 35.

Nonetheless, I do not believe that the 2014-15 season will be the 17th time that both Michigan football and basketball begin their respective seasons unranked. I expect Michigan basketball to be listed in the preseason AP poll for the fourth consecutive year this upcoming season. I also expect this to happen even if McGary follows Stauskas and Robinson III to the NBA. Michigan has been one of the best programs in the nation the past three seasons, winning two Big Ten titles and appearing in two Elite Eights. It is rare for a program with these accomplishments to be unranked the following season, even if most of the core players have departed for the NBA.

Michigan returns plenty of talent, too. Caris LeVert was one of the most improved players in the Big Ten, if not the nation, last season and was named to the All-Big Ten second team. Although LeVert cannot be expected to make a similar leap next year like he did this past year, look for him to contend for the Big Ten’s Most Valuable Player honor. There is also Derrick Walton, Jr. and Zak Irvin – talented players who executed their roles perfectly as freshmen. Both will receive additional touches as sophomores with more of the offensive burden falling on them.

Given John Beilein’s track record for developing freshmen, both Walton, Jr. and Irvin have been listed by media outlets as players who will break out next season. Plus, there have been rave reviews about big man Mark Donnal in practice, and Michigan adds top-30 recruit in Kameron Chatman. There will be no deficiency of talent in Ann Arbor next season.

The media agrees, too. All of NBC Sports’ Rob Dauster, ESPN’s Eamonn Brennan, Bleacher Report’s C.J. Moore, USA Today’s Scott Gleeson, and SB Nation’s Mike Rutherford list Michigan in their Way-Too-Early Top-25 rankings for 2014-15. The range of where Michigan lands on these lists is wide. Some have Michigan in the top 10. Most have Michigan around No. 20. Where U-M is ranked on each depends on how many Wolverines the writer assumed were declaring for the NBA Draft. The only media outlet that did not place Michigan on such a list is CBS Sports. But this likely is just an outlier. If McGary declares for the NBA Draft, I would expect Michigan to be ranked between No. 20 and No. 25 in the preseason AP poll. If McGary returns, there is little doubt that the Wolverines would find themselves in the top 20 in the preseason.

If you have any questions related to Michigan athletics that you want answered in the next mailbag, please tweet them to @DrewCHallett on Twitter or email them to 

Inside the Numbers: Best offense of the KenPom era

Tuesday, April 8th, 2014

Michigan huddle vs UK(

In 2013, Michigan had the best offense in the nation. Trey Burke and Tim Hardaway, Jr. were the offensive engines, holding the two highest usage rates on the roster. Burke consumed a team-high 29 percent of U-M’s possessions, while Hardaway, Jr. used the second-most at a 22.3-percent rate. And neither wasted many possessions when they had the ball in their hands. They averaged a combined 33.1 points per game, accounting for 44 percent of Michigan’s points. Burke and Hardaway, Jr. were the main reasons why the Wolverines had the highest adjusted offensive efficiency in the country in 2013 (120.3).

It was no surprise then that Burke, the consensus national player of the year, and Hardaway, Jr., member of the coaches’ All-Big Ten first team, decided to forego their Michigan careers and declare for the 2013 NBA Draft. This left a huge void offensively for the Wolverines. How would Michigan overcome their departures offensively? Although Michigan had skilled, efficient players returning, none had before lifted the load the Burke and Hardaway, Jr. had just lifted. It was not preposterous to assume that their individual efficiency would suffer at the expense of a bigger workload. This is why most outside the Michigan locker room, myself included, expected the Wolverines to step back offensively in 2014.

Boy, were we wrong.

Despite the departures of Burke and Hardaway, Jr. and the lower-back injury that forced Mitch McGary to miss most of the season, Michigan led the nation in adjusted offensive efficiency for the second straight season. This is the third time that a school has achieved this feat two years in a row. The other two were Wake Forest (2004-05) and North Carolina (2008-09). However, unlike Michigan, the Demon Deacons and the Tar Heels did not lose their star players after the first year. Wake Forest had current NBA star Chris Paul for both years, and North Carolina kept their core nucleus of Tyler Hansbrough, Ty Lawson, Danny Green, Wayne Ellington, and Deon Thompson intact. Michigan did not have such a luxury and still did it anyway.

In addition to having the best adjusted offensive efficiency for the second straight season, Michigan actually increased its rating in 2014 without Burke, Hardaway, Jr., and McGary. In 2013, Michigan would be expected to score 120.3 points in a 100-possession game against an average NCAA D-1 college basketball team. In 2014, Michigan would be expected to score 124.1 points in such a game. Not only is this a significant improvement, no team has ever posted a better adjusted offensive efficiency in the KenPom era. Therefore, Michigan’s offense this season was the most efficient in the nation since at least 2002.

Top 10 Kenpom era offenses

The 2014 season featured three of the six most-efficient offenses of the past 12 seasons. In addition to Michigan, Duke and Creighton had historically impressive offenses. In fact, for most of the season, the Blue Devils and the Bluejays, not the Wolverines, were dueling for the designation as the nation’s most-efficient offense. However, Michigan made a giant push in the NCAA Tournament for the top spot. After a lackluster showing against Wofford in the Round of 64, the Wolverines scored 1.379, 1.213, and 1.265 points per possession against three top-50-caliber defenses. These offensive explosions propelled Michigan past both Duke and Creighton for the title as the most-efficient offense not only in 2014, but also in the KenPom era.

These offensive explosions were common throughout the entire season, not just in the NCAA Tournament. It did not matter whether the opponent had one of the nation’s best defenses or one of the worst. Most defenses that challenged Michigan’s potent offense limped away whimpering. Ten of Michigan’s opponents—Coppin State, Houston Baptist, Arizona, Holy Cross, Ohio State, Michigan State, Indiana, Texas, Tennessee, and Kentucky—had their worst defensive performance, in terms of efficiency, against the Wolverines. An additional four opponents—South Carolina State, Long Beach State, Penn State, and Illinois—had their second-worst defensive performance against Michigan. Therefore, 14 of U-M’s 27 different opponents this season had either their worst or second-worst defensive performance against Michigan. And Michigan State’s two worst defensive performances were at the hands of the Wolverines.

So how did Michigan pull this off without Burke, Hardaway, Jr., and McGary? Well, for starters, Michigan had absolutely no weak links on offense. All eight of Michigan’s major contributors—Nik Stauskas, Caris LeVert, Glenn Robinson III, Derrick Walton, Jr., Jordan Morgan, Zak Irvin, Jon Horford, and Spike Albrecht—had an individual offensive rating higher than 110.0. Therefore, all eight Michigan regulars averaged more than 1.10 points per individual possession, which is extremely efficient.

Off efficiency & Usage rate

But, most importantly, the key to Michigan maintaining this offensive success was that five of U-Ms six returners upped their offensive efficiency in 2014. LeVert and Stauskas had the most significant improvements because they increased both their usage rate and offensive rating, which is a difficult task. LeVert’s improvement is eye-popping. He was the least efficient Wolverine last season and had a minor role accordingly. This season? LeVert’s usage rate was the second-highest on the team, and he increased his offensive rating by 18.3 points. A legitimate argument can be made that LeVert’s sophomore season (21.4-percent usage rate, 111.7 offensive rating) was more productive than Hardaway, Jr.’s junior season (22.3-percent usage rate, 106.7 offensive rating). Either way, it is clear that LeVert filled the void left by Hardaway, Jr.

Stauskas’ improvement is just as impressive as LeVert’s even though Stauskas’ offensive rating increased by only 1.3 points. Stauskas had little room to increase his efficiency after recording an offensive rating of 122.8 as a freshman, which was the 36th-best in the nation in 2013. Yet Stauskas did this despite increasing his usage rate from 16.2 to 23.9 percent and becoming Michigan’s offensive star. Generally, a go-to player may struggle with his efficiency because he receives the most attention from defenses and must shoot bad shots in late-shot-clock situations. But Stauskas still upped his offensive efficiency anyway. While he was not the playmaker that Burke was, Stauskas mitigated the loss of the consensus national player of the year as well as any player can.

Three Wolverines improved their offensive efficiency while either maintaining their usage rate or using fewer possessions than last season: Morgan, Horford, and Albrecht. Morgan saw the largest spike in his offensive rating not only among these three Wolverines, but everyone on the team. His offensive rating jumped 18.8 points, just surpassing the 18.3-point spike LeVert’s offensive rating experienced. As a result, Morgan’s offensive rating of 128.2 was the highest on the team and the 26th-best in the country. This is what happens when a player makes a school-record 70 percent of his field-goal attempts.

The only returning major contributor that did not see his offensive efficiency increase was Robinson III. Not only did his offensive rating drop, it plummeted by 14.7 points. But this is unfair. Last season, Robinson III had an offensive rating of 128.4, which was the 10th-best in the nation. Similar to Stauskas, Robinson III had little to no room to improve his offensive efficiency. He pretty much hit the ceiling as a freshman. It is no surprise that his offensive rating dropped to a still very good 113.7 while increasing his usage rate by six percentage points. This is normal. Stauskas is the exception, not the rule. So, although Robinson III was not as consistent or efficient offensively as he was as a freshman, he still was very reliable offensively for a player handling over 20 percent of his team’s possessions.

So what does this all mean? It means that Michigan just had the best offense of the past 12 seasons despite losing two NBA first-round draft picks. It means that John Beilein and this Michigan program is more than just one or two players. It means that Beilein is recruiting skilled players that fit and are developing quickly perfectly in his offensive system, which no other school has been able to match for the past two seasons. And it means that you should not make the mistake of assuming that Michigan’s offense will take a step back next year, even if Michigan loses another player or two to the NBA.

Inside the Numbers: It sure is sweet

Tuesday, March 25th, 2014

Michigan huddle vs Texas(Dustin Johnson, UMHoops)

It sure is sweet.

On Saturday evening, No. 2-seed Michigan bombed No. 7-seed Texas, 79-65, with a school-record 14 three-pointers in an NCAA Tournament game to advance to the Sweet Sixteen. This is the second straight year and the 13th time in school history that Michigan will participate in the Sweet Sixteen. This also is the seventh time that Michigan has made the Sweet Sixteen when it did so the previous season.

The Wolverines will travel to Indianapolis this weekend, hoping they will be the lone school to survive the Midwest Regional. This will not be an easy challenge. In the Sweet Sixteen, the Wolverines will square off with the underrated No. 11-seed Tennessee Volunteers. With a victory, the Wolverines will play the winner of No. 4-seed Louisville and No. 8-seed Kentucky with a spot in the Final Four at stake.

John Beilein reached the 700-win milestone on Saturday and hopes to continue Michigan's Sweet Sixteen success on Friday (Tom Pennington, Getty Images)

John Beilein reached the 700-win milestone on Saturday and hopes to continue Michigan’s Sweet Sixteen success on Friday (Tom Pennington, Getty Images)

Michigan fans may be wondering what the Wolverines should expect from these three teams. “Inside the Numbers” will provide an in-depth scouting report for each of Tennessee, Louisville, and Kentucky and how Michigan can exploit those teams’ weaknesses tomorrow. Today, “Inside the Numbers” will focus on Michigan’s past performances in the Sweet Sixteen and why they should give fans a reason to be optimistic when the Wolverines and the Volunteers step on the hardwood on Friday night.

Before “Inside the Numbers” does so, a discrepancy needs to be clarified first. As aforementioned, this will be the 13th time that Michigan appears in the Sweet Sixteen. However, the University of Michigan’s Athletic Media Relations’ media guide lists a record for U-M in Sweet Sixteen games which suggests that the Wolverines already have played in the Sweet Sixteen 13 times before this season.

The confusion seems to stem from Michigan’s appearance in the 1948 NCAA Tournament. Prior to 1951, there were only eight teams in the NCAA Tournament, which means there was no “Sweet Sixteen.” After 1951, the NCAA Tournament expanded to 16 teams with the first round labeled as the “regional semifinals,” which now is nicknamed the “Sweet Sixteen.” Yet the media guide labels Michigan’s first game in the 1948 NCAA Tournament as a “regional semifinal” game. The result of this game seems to mistakenly have been added to Michigan’s listed record in the Sweet Sixteen. Therefore, the 1948 NCAA Tournament will not be discussed in this post.

With that discrepancy clarified, “Inside the Numbers” can finally reveal one reason why fans should be optimistic that the Wolverines will defeat the Tennessee Volunteers on Friday night. In its 12 games played in the Sweet Sixteen, Michigan has posted an 11-1 record. Yes, 11-1. This means that Michigan has a 91.7 win percentage in the Sweet Sixteen. Additionally, the Wolverines have won all five of their Sweet Sixteen contests since 1988.

Results of Michigan’s 12 Previous Sweet Sixteen Games









W, 84-80


North Carolina

L, 69-78



W, 98-71


North Carolina

W, 92-87


W. Kentucky

W, 80-79


Oklahoma St.

W, 75-72


Notre Dame

W, 77-68


George Wash.

W, 72-64


Notre Dame

W, 80-76



W, 78-71



W, 86-81



W, 87-85 (OT)

Michigan has experienced a tremendous amount of success in the Sweet Sixteen. Only one other NCAA D-1 college basketball team that has made a minimum of five Sweet Sixteen appearances has won a higher percentage of its Sweet Sixteen games than Michigan. That team is Temple, which is 7-0 in the Sweet Sixteen. When the minimum number of Sweet Sixteen appearances is raised to 10 games, a feat 31 schools have achieved, there is no team better than the Wolverines.

Highest Win Percentage in the Sweet Sixteen (Min. 10 Appearances)




Win Pct.




Win Pct.










North Carolina




Ohio St.








Michigan St.












Oklahoma St.
















Kansas St.












San Francisco



Among schools that have played in a minimum of 10 Sweet Sixteen games, Michigan is the only school to have won more than 90 percent of them. In fact, the Wolverines are the only such team to have won more than 80 percent of them. Even if Michigan lost to Tennessee on Friday, U-M’s win percentage in the Sweet Sixteen would drop only to 84.62 percent, which would still be high enough to be the best. Although other schools, such as North Carolina, Kentucky, Duke, and Kansas, and UCLA, have more Sweet Sixteen wins, no team has made the most of its Sweet Sixteen appearances than Michigan.

There are two trends that have been established in Michigan’s previous 12 Sweet Sixteen games of which fans should be aware. First, almost all of these Sweet Sixteen games have come down to the wire. Of the previous 12 games Michigan has played in the Sweet Sixteen, all but one of them were decided by single digits. Seven were decided by five points of fewer. The average margin of victory in these games is seven points. It would be fewer if not for Michigan’s 27-point win over Dayton in the 1965 Sweet Sixteen.

Trey Burke's three against Kansas last March kept Michigan's Sweet Sixteen success intact (Ronald Martinez, Getty Images)

Trey Burke’s three against Kansas last March kept Michigan’s Sweet Sixteen success intact (Ronald Martinez, Getty Images)

Michigan fans should not expect this to be any different on Friday evening. Generally, games at this stage of the NCAA Tournament pit two equal teams against one another. This definitely applies to the matchup between Michigan and Tennessee. The Volunteers may be only a No. 11 seed, but the computers and advanced statistics view Michigan and Tennessee as equals. So does Vegas, which has the Wolverines as only a 1.5-point favorite over the Vols. Michigan may have beaten Tennessee by 30 points in the first round of the 2011 NCAA Tournament, but do not expect a repeat result this week.

Second, as aforementioned, this is the seventh time that Michigan has appeared in the Sweet Sixteen one year after doing the same in the previous season. In the previous six such games, the Wolverines never lost. A repeat appearance in the Sweet Sixteen always has led to a victory for the Maize and Blue. There are lots of possible reasons for this: quality of team, quality of opponent, matchups, hot shooting, lucky bounces, etc.

Yet another potential explanation for this phenomenon is experience. When teams appear in the Sweet Sixteen for a second consecutive season, these teams likely have most of the roster intact from the previous season. These players have already dealt with nerves of playing in the Sweet Sixteen and have become accustomed to the high stakes of such a game. Six of Michigan’s eight key contributors participated in last season’s Sweet Sixteen showdown against Kansas—Nik Stauskas, Caris LeVert, Glenn Robinson III, Jordan Morgan, Jon Horford, and Spike Albrecht. It is unlikely that any of these six players will be fazed by the circumstances of Friday’s Sweet Sixteen contest. The same may not be able to be said about the Volunteers, none of whom have appeared in the Sweet Sixteen before.

The one caveat is that historical trends generally have little impact on upcoming games. All trends are broken or snapped at one point or another as teams and rosters change over time. Michigan’s 11-1 record in the Sweet Sixteen does not guarantee that the Wolverines will advance to the Elite Eight on Friday.

However, it is much more reassuring for Michigan fans to hear that their team has been extremely successful in the Sweet Sixteen rather than not. Michigan fans would be much more concerned about U-M’s prospects on Friday if they learned that their team had only a 1-5 record in Sweet Sixteen games. Why a 1-5 record specifically? Because that is Tennessee’s record in the Sweet Sixteen. It sure is sweet.

Hooked ‘em: Michigan 79 – Texas 65

Saturday, March 22nd, 2014

Morgan dunk vs Texas 3-22-14(Jonathan Daniel, Getty Images)

On Thursday night Michigan looked sloppy in defeating Wofford, but was able to advance to the Round of 32. On Saturday night, the Wolverines made sure to avoid sloppy play, turning the ball over just twice and committing just three fouls in the first half while racing out to a commanding lead. Despite a comeback attempt by Texas in the second half, Michigan’s lead was to much and the Wolverines advanced back to the Sweet Sixteen with a 79-65 win.

Like Thursday, Nik Stauskas got the scoring started with a three-pointer, but this time Texas scored the next six. But another Stauskas three ignited a 10-0 Michigan run until Cameron Ridley scored on a tip-in. Glenn Robinson III answered with a three, followed by yet another by Stauskas to open up a double-digit lead at 21-10 midway through the half.

But Michigan wasn’t done. Over the next three minutes the Wolverines outscored Texas 9-2 to open up a 30-12 lead. Texas outscored Michigan by five the rest of the half to head into the locker room down 13 at 43-30.

Glenn Robinson III hit big shots at key times to preserve the win (Morry Gash, AP)

Glenn Robinson III hit big shots at key times to preserve the win (Morry Gash, AP)

Derrick Walton Jr. started the second half with two threes sandwiched around a Jordan Morgan dunk, and when Stauskas converted a pair of free throws at the 16:02 mark Michigan was once again back up by 18. But Texas’ zone defense finally started to pay off as Michigan went cold, failing to score for the next four minutes and 22 seconds. Stauskas ended the drought and Michigan’s lead matched its halftime lead.

Texas answered with five straight to pull within eight with 9:56 to play, but Robinson III made a pair of free throws to move it back to 10. Two straight Longhorn baskets brought it down to six and suddenly Michigan’s once-comfortable lead was down to two possessions.

Robinson answered yet again with a jumper and then a three-pointer on back-to-back possessions. Texas made a pair of free throws to pull within nine, but Spike Albrecht nailed a three. Texas once again cut it to eight, but this time it was Caris LeVert with a big three to squelch any hopes of a Texas run and the Longhorns would never get it to single digits the rest of the way.

Michigan scored eight straight to pull ahead 76-60 and that was all she wrote.

For the game, Michigan shot 44.4 percent (53.6 percent in the first half) and 50 percent from three-point range. The Wolverines set a program NCAA Tournament record with 14 made threes. Texas shot 37.1 percent from the field and 4-of-11 from downtown. Michigan was out-rebounded 41-30, but turned the ball over just four times and converted nine Texas turnovers into 15 points.

Michigan got balanced scoring from its starters, led by Stauskas’ 17 on 4-of-12 shooting (4-of-9 three-point). He also added a career-high eight assists and no turnovers. Jordan Morgan recorded his second straight double-double with 15 points and 10 rebounds, while Robinson III and LeVert scored 14 apiece. Walton Jr. added eight.

Michigan advances to the Sweet Sixteen for the second year in a row and will play the winner of Sunday’s matchup between 11-seed Tennessee and 14-seed Mercer. The game will take place on Friday in Indianapolis.

Three Stars

***Jordan Morgan***
15 points (4-of-7 FG, 7-of-8 FT), 10 rebounds (five offensive), two assists, two steals, one turnover in 35 minutes

**Glenn Robinson III**
14 points (5-of-10 FG, 2-of-3 3PT, 2-of-2 FT), five rebounds (two offensive), one block, two steals, one turnover in 36 minutes

*Nik Stauskas*
17 points (4-of-12 FG, 4-of-9 3PT, 5-of-6 FT), two rebounds, eight assists, one block in 38 minutes

Quick Hitters

 The win was number 700 for John Beilein, making him the sixth active head coach to reach the milestone.

 Michigan is 12-2 this season when Stauskas, Robinson III, and LeVert all score in double figures.

 Jordan Morgan recorded his third double-double of the season and seventh of his career. He is the first player to record back-to-back double-doubles since Mitch McGary against VCU and Kansas in last year’s NCAA Tournament.

 Morgan passed Chris Webber for 15th place on Michigan’s career rebounding list.





Final Game Stats
01 Glenn Robinson III* 5-10 2-3 2-2 2 3 5 2 14 0 1 1 2 36
10 Derrick Walton Jr.* 3-7 2-4 0-0 1 0 1 2 8 2 0 0 0 29
11 Nik Stauskas* 4-12 4-9 5-6 0 2 2 1 17 8 0 1 0 38
52 Jordan Morgan* 4-7 0-0 7-8 5 5 10 3 15 2 1 0 1 35
23 Caris LeVert* 5-12 3-6 1-3 1 3 4 2 14 3 0 0 0 37
02 Spike Albrecht 1-2 1-2 2-2 1 2 3 0 5 1 0 0 1 11
15 Jon Horford 0-0 0-0 0-0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 5
21 Zak Irvin 2-4 2-4 0-0 0 0 0 0 6 0 1 0 0 9
Totals 24-54 14-28 17-21 11 19 30 12 79 16 4 2 5 200
Texas 23-62 4-11 15-16 21 20 41 16 65 14 9 3 3 200
Full Stats

A win is a win: Michigan 77 – Purdue 76, OT

Thursday, February 27th, 2014

UM celebration vs Purdue 2-26-14(Dustin Johnson, UMHoops)

Basketball, like most sports, is a game that can have wild outcomes from time-to-time. When trying to throw a nine-inch ball into an 18-inch rim from 20-some feet away, that is to be expected. Still, some guys are better at shooting that ball, and teams with those players generally prevail – but not always.

Michigan is a team this season that is incredibly skilled on offense, capable of dominating any team in the nation when the shots are falling. But when shots aren’t falling, weird things happen.

On Wednesday night, the Wolverines simply couldn’t throw that orange ball into the orange rim no matter how open their looks were. Purdue, their opponent, on the other hand, seemingly couldn’t miss – despite being a poor shooting team on average.

Coming into last evening’s clash at Mackey Arena in West Lafayette, Michigan led the Big Ten with a 47.9 percent shooting mark from the floor, while Purdue lagged a ways behind at 42.7 percent. The teams’ three-point shooting numbers – 39.4 percent for Michigan and 33.9 percent for Purdue – also heavily favored the visitors.

Jordan Morgan came up huge, especially in overtime, finishing with 13 points and nine boards (Dustin Johnson, UMHoops)

Jordan Morgan came up huge, especially in overtime, finishing with 13 points and nine boards (Dustin Johnson, UMHoops)

For the first half, however, things couldn’t have been more different. The Boilermakers, playing for pride and a potential NIT bid in a lost season, connected on their first three shots and ran out to a 19-point lead over Michigan just over 12 minutes into the first half on their way to making 52 percent of their field goals (13-of-25) and 45.5 percent of their threes (5-of-11). At the 7:43 mark of that first half, Purdue was more than tripling – TRIPLING – Michigan’s score.

The Wolverines, on the other hand, touting a roster with five regulars shooting better than 39 percent from deep, made just eight of their 27 shot attempts in the first half (29.6 percent) and a meager 2-of-10 threes (20 percent).

This wasn’t supposed to happen. After ousting Michigan State in a thrilling come-from-behind victory three days ago in Ann Arbor, Michigan was all but crowned conference champion with four games remaining over bottom-half Big Ten teams and a one-game lead over those Spartans. At some point, perhaps the Maize and Blue bought into the hype, or maybe Purdue was fed up with being walked all over.

Whatever it was, Purdue was cruising to victory. Near the end of a dominant first half, the Boilermakers took a brief stumble and allowed Michigan to cut the lead to single digits, but a couple of Wolverine mistakes and Boiler buckets later and the halftime lead was a still very large 13 points.

Then, inevitably, Michigan started clawing back into the game as we’ve seen so many times this year. Sure, the Wolverines’ poor opening play in some games has left all of us fans frustrated, but there is no denying the fight in this team.

As has been the case all season, Michigan’s deficit started shrinking – 11, nine, seven, then just four points with a whopping 12:44 left to play. Certainly, Purdue’s nominal lead would continue disappearing, all the way to zero, before the boys in Blue ran away with it.

But that didn’t happen either. In fact, Purdue never trailed Michigan for 40 minutes. Despite a continuous battle and even a couple of ties, Michigan never got over the hump and looked like they would fall victim to the trap game, giving Michigan State a glimmer of hope in the Big Ten title race.

Again, Michigan fought, earning a chance to win it with the final shot at the end of regulation. And despite Nik Stauskas’s clanger off the rim to end the second half, the Wolverines had to feel good about sending this game to overtime.

With A.J. Hammons out of the game on fouls and five more minutes of game time, Michigan had a golden opportunity to steal yet another road victory, and it looked like they would after grabbing their first lead of the night just 30 seconds into the extra period.

But Purdue wouldn’t go down easily either. Fueled by Ronnie and Terone Johnson and near-perfect free throw shooting, the Boilermakers proved resilient enough to grab the lead back with 31 seconds remaining, and seemed primed to close the game out when Kendall Stephens was sent to the line for a one-and-one opportunity with 13 seconds left. After 17 straight made free throws for Purdue, two more didn’t seem like a big deal, but Stephens missed, giving Michigan one last chance.

Glenn Robinson III somehow managed to get this winning shot to fall (Dustin Johnson, UMHoops)

Glenn Robinson III somehow managed to get this winning shot to fall at the buzzer (Dustin Johnson, UMHoops)

Caris LeVert, who struggled shooting the ball (4-of-12 FG), raced up the court, danced around for a second, and then huddled up with the rest of his team when John Beilein called a timeout with 2.9 seconds on the clock.

This was it. Michigan faced a one-point deficit with less than three seconds to go. Make a basket, and the game is won. Miss, and well, maybe missing was never an option.

Out of the timeout, LeVert inbounded on the side out-of-bounds line and threw a high rainbow to the far corner to a leaping Glenn Robinson III, whose 12 second half points had kept Michigan alive. Robinson, one of the best athletes in the country, leapt up high over Raphael Davis, came down with the ball, gave a quick head fake, took one dribble toward the basket, and threw up a shot off glass – all with his dad, former Purdue All-Everything forward and first overall NBA selection Glenn Robinson, watching. The ball, seemingly moving in slow motion, hit off the backboard, bounced a couple times off the side and front of the rim, then gently trickled through that 18-inch rim. The buzzer sounded, and the game was over.

On a night when Michigan’s two leading scorers combined for 29 points on a miserable 9-of-30 mark from the field, the Wolverines somehow got it done.

There’s a certain resilience about this team that is both refreshing and encouraging, but there’s also a certain tendency of falling behind that seems concerning.

But a win is still a win, and now only three games separate these Wolverines from an outright Big Ten championship and an almost certain top-three seed in the NCAA Tournament.

Glenn Robinson III said it best after the game: “It’s a great win for us. We competed hard and came out with the victory.”

At this point in the season, every win is great.

Three Stars:

***Terone Johnson***
22 points (7-of-14 FG, 4-of-8 3PT, 4-of-4 FT), four rebounds (one offensive), three assists, three turnovers in 41 minutes

**Glenn Robinson III**
17 points (7-of-11 FG, 0-of-1 3PT, 3-of-4 FT), eight rebounds (two offensive), three assists, one turnover in 39 minutes

*Ronnie Johnson*
21 points (9-of-15 FG, 1-of-3 3PT, 2-of-2 FT), seven assists, four rebounds, two steals, four turnovers in 41 minutes

Quick Hitters:

 Senior Terone Johnson continued to be a big pain for Michigan, going for his third career 20-point game against the Wolverines — something he has only accomplished seven other times in his career. But this time it was done through some terrific outside shooting while brother Ronnie did major damage in the paint. The guard duo combined to make an excellent 5-of-11 threes and all six of their free throws while leading five Boilermakers in double digits.

 Michigan’s ball movement was mostly effective tonight, and it shows with their outstanding 19 assists on 27 made buckets to just seven turnovers. Five Wolverines – LeVert, Stauskas, Spike Albrecht, Jordan Morgan, and Robinson III – recorded at least three assists a piece and only Stauskas and Derrick Walton, Jr. turned it over more than once. Still, Purdue managed to win the points off turnover battles, getting 13 to Michigan’s 11 points on 11 Purdue cough-ups.

Final Game Stats
01 Glenn Robinson III* 7-11 0-1 3-4 2 6 8 2 17 3 1 0 0 39
10 Derrick Walton Jr.* 2-6 2-6 2-4 2 2 4 0 8 1 2 0 1 24
11 Nik Stauskas* 5-18 0-4 5-7 1 1 2 2 15 3 2 0 0 41
52 Jordan Morgan* 6-8 0-0 1-3 3 6 9 3 13 3 0 1 2 33
23 Caris LeVert* 4-12 2-5 4-4 3 4 7 1 14 4 1 0 1 41
02 Spike Albrecht 1-5 0-3 0-0 0 0 0 2 2 4 1 0 2 21
15 Jon Horford 0-1 0-0 0-0 1 1 2 3 0 0 0 1 0 11
21 Zak Irvin 2-4 2-4 2-3 0 1 1 1 8 1 0 0 0 15
Totals 27-65 6-23 17-25 14 23 37 14 77 19 7 2 6 205
Purdue 26-63 7-24 17-18 14 25 39 17 76 15 11 4 3 205
Full Stats

Inside the Numbers: An offense on fire

Tuesday, February 4th, 2014

Michigan huddle vs Purdue(

Michigan suffered its first conference loss to the Indiana Hoosiers at Assembly Hall on Super Bowl Sunday. Assembly Hall has always been a “House of Horrors” for Michigan, as the Wolverines have won in Bloomington only once since 1995 and only twice since 1988. It was no different in 2014. Michigan struggled offensively. Its 52 points were the fewest it has scored this season, thanks in part to the contest having a very slow tempo at only 55 possessions. And Michigan’s 43.3 eFG%, which gives additional weight to three-pointers made because they are worth more points, was the lowest it has been in over two months. It was an ugly display by the Wolverines.

But do not let Sunday’s performance fool you. Michigan has been outstanding offensively this season, to the surprise of many I would presume. John Beilein-coached teams generally shine on the offensive end, but many wondered how the Wolverines would overcome the losses of consensus National Player of the Year Trey Burke as well as Tim Hardaway, Jr. to the NBA. Although Michigan had offensive firepower in Nik Stauskas, Glenn Robinson III, and Mitch McGary returning, no one expected this year’s offense to be better than last year’s offense.

Yet that is exactly what has happened. In 2013, Michigan’s adjusted offensive efficiency, which calculates what an offense would score in a 100-possession game against an average NCAA D-1 opponent, was 120.3—the best in the nation. In 2014, Michigan’s adjusted offensive efficiency is currently 121.4. While it may only be the third-highest adjusted offensive efficiency in the country this season, it is the ninth-best since the 2002 season.

Ten Most Efficient Offenses Since 2001-02



Adjusted Offensive Efficiency


2014 Duke



2014 Creighton



2005 Wake Forest



2012 Missouri



2011 Ohio State



2009 North Carolina



2005 North Carolina



2007 Florida



2014 Michigan



2012 Kentucky


Michigan’s offense showed flashes of this potential against non-conference opponents, but it was not until Big Ten play that it really found its groove. In U-M’s first eight conference games, the Wolverines exceeded 1.00 points per possession in each game and had an unadjusted offensive efficiency of 118.1—by far the best in the Big Ten. No Big Ten opponent could keep pace with the Wolverines as Michigan sprinted out to an 8-0 conference record for just the fourth time in program history.

Michigan’s unadjusted offensive efficiency against conference foes now is 115.8 after the blunder in Bloomington, but that still is the best in the Big Ten by a significant margin. Additionally, Michigan’s unadjusted offensive efficiency in conference play is tied for the fifth-best among all teams in the seven major conferences—AAC, ACC, Big 12, Big East, Big Ten, Pac-12, and SEC.

Best Conference-Only Offensive Efficiencies Among Seven Major Conferences



Unadjusted Offensive Efficiency



















Michigan has been an offensive juggernaut mainly because U-M has shot the lights out of the basketball. In their nine Big Ten games, the Wolverines’ eFG% is 58.3 percent. That is by far the best eFG% in the Big Ten—Minnesota is second with a 52.8 eFG%—and the highest in the Big Ten since 2004. The only major-conference team that can say that it has a better conference-only eFG% is Creighton at 58.7 percent in the Big East. And Creighton could not say that until Sunday because U-M’s eFG% was 60 percent prior to the Indiana game.

To understand why the Wolverines have been torching the twine at such an efficient rate, I charted all of Michigan’s shots from its past five games. I used the shot-chart data provided by CBS Sports’ online GameTracker. I could chart only U-M’s past five games because the GameTracker feature is available only for games involving a ranked team, which was not the case for U-M’s first four Big Ten contests. Nonetheless, the following shot chart paints a picture as to why Michigan has its highest eFG% this millennium.


Shot chart

First, Michigan has been one of the best teams in the nation around the rim. In their past five games, the Wolverines have made 66 percent of their shots taken in the paint and no more than 10 feet away from the basket. This percentage is boosted by the fact that U-M rarely misses shots right at the rim. The only field goal attempts considered “at the rim” are dunks, layups, and tip-ins, and the average NCAA D-1 team converts 60.9 percent of them, per Hoop-Math. Yet Michigan has far exceeded that average by making an astounding 79 percent of its shots at the rim this season and 74.3 percent of them in the past five contests.

Michigan’s success at the rim has been a team effort. The only U-M player that has not made at least 70 percent of his shots at the rim is Spike Albrecht, who converts an average 60 percent of them. Jon Horford and Robinson III have been the leaders of U-M’s excellence around the bucket. They have combined to make 79-of-84 shots at the rim this season for a near-perfect conversion rate of 94 percent. If one of those two catches the ball next to the hoop, it is almost an automatic two points for the Wolverines unless the opposing defense chooses to send them to the free-throw line. But, even if it is not Horford or Robinson III, Michigan has done a fantastic job of capitalizing on opportunities to make the easiest shots in basketball.

Glenn Robinson III is (Jamie Owens)

Glenn Robinson III excels at finishing around the rim, combining with Jon Horford to make 94 percent of shots around the rim this season (Jamie Owens)

Second, not only are the Wolverines excellent at the rim, they also are excellent from long distance, too. Michigan has made 39.8 percent of its three-pointers during the conference season, which leads the Big Ten. Everyone knows that Stauskas is one of the best three-point shooters in the nation, but he is far from Michigan’s only long-range weapon. The Wolverines have five players—Stauskas, Albrecht, Derrick Walton, Jr., Zak Irvin, and Caris LeVert—that have attempted at least 40 three-pointers this season and made at least 37 percent of them. With no less than three of these players on the court at all times, opposing defenses have struggled to extend out on all of U-M’s shooters.

In the past five games, Michigan has found its sweet spot from behind the three-point line on the wings. The Wolverines have converted 49.1 percent of three-pointers on the wings, while making 36.8 percent from the corners and only 23.1 percent from straight away. Michigan has not shied away from its sweet spots either. Of the 85 three-pointers U-M has attempted in the past five games, almost two-thirds of them have been shot from the wings. Michigan has had an extraordinary amount of success from these spots recently, and U-M should continue to run plays that place its three-point specialists on the wings.

Third, and most importantly, Michigan has made a concentrated effort to eliminate long two-point jumpers from its shot selection. Those are the worst shots in basketball mathematically, and it is not even close. Two-point shots at the rim are much better than long two-point jumpers because there is significant discrepancy in their conversion rates. Three-point shots are much better than long-two point jumpers, despite having similar conversion rates, because three-point shots are worth an additional point. If a team is going to shoot a shot that will be made no more than 40 percent of the time, that team might as well try to get three points out of it.

In their past five games, 63.1 percent of the Wolverines’ field-goal attempts have either been at the rim or a three-pointer. Therefore, in its past five games, 36.9 percent of Michigan’s shots have been two-point jumpers. While that rate exceeds the NCAA D-1 average of 29.3 percent, it does not necessarily mean that Michigan is settling for long two-point jumpers. Of U-M’s 93 two-point jumpers in its past five games, 34.4 percent have been attempted in the paint and 68.8 percent closer than 15 feet away from the hoop. But, if the Wolverines plan to continue to take two-point jumpers, they need to do an even better job of taking them closer to the hoop because they converted only 31 percent of them outside 15 feet in their past five contests.

It should be noted that Michigan has superb shooters. U-M would not have been able to achieve such a high eFG% without having this type of offensive talent on its roster. Credit must be given to Beilein for recruiting and developing players that not only finish around the rim, but also drain shots from beyond the arc. But even more credit should be given to Beilein and his staff for deploying an offensive strategy that leads to his team taking the most valuable shots in basketball: dunks, layups, tip-ins, and three-pointers. As a result, Michigan once again is one of the most explosive offensive teams in the nation and in prime position to shoot its way to its second Big Ten championship in three years.

Still rolling: Michigan 75 – Iowa 67

Wednesday, January 22nd, 2014

Stauskas 3 vs Iowa(

For the second time in five days Michigan took down a top-10 team, this time beating the Iowa Hawkeyes, 75-67. On Saturday, third-ranked Wisconsin was the victim of a red-hot Michigan squad, and tonight’s victory over Iowa gives the Wolverines a chance to seize control of the Big Ten at Michigan State this Saturday.

Despite struggling out of the gate and trailing by five points early, the Wolverines made a run just before the half and led by four at the break. The lead grew to as many as 11 several times before a furious late run brought Iowa back to within four.

In the end, Nik Stauskas was just too much for another Big Ten team, dropping 26 points to go along with five assists and rebounds.

Spike vs Iowa 1-22-14

Spike Albrecht filled in valiantly for Derrick Walton Jr., tallying seven points, seven assists, four steals and no turnovers (

Michigan had to overcome another key loss Wednesday when Derrick Walton sat out the entire second half with the flu. Walton missed a few practices during the week and played just three minutes in the first half before calling it quits.

Thankfully, Spike Albrecht stepped in nicely, dishing out seven assists compare to no turnovers. The scrappy sophomore also added four steals and seven points, knocking down key free throws to ice the game late.

Redshirt senior Jordan Morgan took care of the paint despite Horford’s struggles, with some help from Glenn Robinson III, who put in a nine-rebound effort. The two combined for 26 points and 16 rebounds.

The 67 points Michigan allowed were tied for the lowest Iowa has scored all season and 20 points below the Hawkeyes’ season average. Michigan also held its own on the glass against the Big Ten’s best rebounding team, pulling down 32 compared to Iowa’s 33.

John Beilein’s team has made a statement in the first third of the Big Ten season, winning three difficult road games and holding court in Ann Arbor. Michigan sits just a half game behind the 7-0 Spartans, but will get a chance to take sole possession of first place on Saturday in East Lansing.

If Spartan star Adreian Payne returns to action against Michigan this weekend, Jon Horford will need to be more effective than he was against a big Iowa team. In just eight minutes, Horford grabbed three rebounds and picked up two fouls.

Michigan is two thirds of the way through a three-game top-10 opponent stretch. The Wolverines and Spartans are the only teams with less than two losses in the Big Ten.

With a win in East Lansing on Saturday (7 p.m. EST on ESPN), Michigan would establish itself as the early front-runner in the conference. It won’t be easy, as the Spartans have pounded their in-state rivals at home the past two seasons.

Final Game Stats
01 Glenn Robinson III* 6-15 0-5 2-2 4 5 9 3 14 1 2 0 1 35
02 Spike Albrecht* 2-4 1-3 2-2 0 3 3 3 7 7 0 0 4 35
11 Nik Stauskas* 8-14 4-9 6-7 1 4 5 3 26 5 2 1 1 37
52 Jordan Morgan* 5-6 0-0 2-3 2 5 7 2 12 0 2 1 1 32
23 Caris LeVert* 2-9 0-3 1-2 1 1 2 2 5 1 3 0 2 34
10 Derrick Walton 0-1 0-0 0-0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3
15 Jon Horford 0-0 0-0 0-0 1 2 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 8
21 Zak Irvin 4-9 3-7 0-0 1 1 2 1 11 0 0 0 0 16
Totals 27-58 8-27 13-16 10 22 32 16 75 15 10 2 9 200
Iowa 25-53 2-10 15-21 10 23 33 17 67 14 14 2 6 200
Full Stats