Big Need: Surveying Mizzou’s options for interior players left in the portal

Around 7:20 p.m. Friday, Austin Peay transfer Elijah Hutchins-Everett announced he had picked Seton Hall as his new home.

With that news, Mizzou passed a milestone: all of the publicly known targets for a vacancy in the post had come off the board. Admittedly, Hutchins-Everett wasn’t a focal point and probably not a secondary or tertiary one.

His decision didn’t elicit groans, unlike Jamarion Sharp’s relocating to Ole Miss to play for Chris Beard. And it certainly wasn’t close to the courtship that MU carried out in pursuit of Kadin Shedrick, who found Texas’ pitch too enticing to pass up. Yet Hutchins-Everett’s decision was another reminder that the Tigers’ search for a big man has come up empty as we approach May.

What does the market look like? Modest.

Theoretically, more players could enter the portal, but the time for peak inflows passed two weeks ago. Once the recruiting dead period lifted the second week of April, the match process unfolded quickly for players who might have been deemed backup plans.

This offseason, portal recruitments for in-demand post players typically played out over three weeks. But premium bigs can exert more control because, unlike floor spacers, there’s a relatively modest supply. So, if you’re MU, pursuing Shedrick meant accepting the possibility of a longer timeline. And that’s before you consider that the Virginia transfer entered the portal relatively late.

In other words, MU’s process was off schedule relative to everyone else. It meant that Shedrick set visits while other players fell off the board. Then he pushed those visits off another week. For some schools, such as Xavier, that wasn’t tenable. The Musketeers, for example, took a pledge from North Texas’ Abou Ousmane.

Not MU. The Tigers hung in. Now, they’re resuming their search at a point where Wichita State’s Kenny Pohto is among the better plug-and-play options out there.

So, now seems the appropriate moment to take stock and assess the transfer market’s remaining wares. For its part, MU reached out to West Virginia’s Jimmy Bell, and several staffers followed Arizona State’s Warren Washington on social media. That’s as much as we have to go on.

You won’t see three names: Michigan’s Hunter Dickinson, Oklahoma State’s Moussa Cisse, and Utah Valley’s Aziz Bandaogo.

Landing Dickinson could require up to seven figures in NIL compensation – a price too rich for MU’s blood. As for Cisse and Bandaogo, both could wind up being case studies if the NCAA enforces its stated crackdown on waivers for players who already used a transfer exemption. If so, both will be sitting out next season. It’s also why Bandaogo, the WAC’s Defensive Player of the Year, referenced mental health in a story from ESPN: the NCAA will potentially grant waivers in those situations.

Before we jump off, a couple of quick notes. The class listed for each player is what they’d be next season. You’ll also see Net in the table, which is a player’s individual net rating. Their impact on a team’s net rating is noted as on/off impact.

Now, let’s survey some potential options.

Update: Bell committed to Mississippi State on May 10 and canceled his official visit to Columbia.

Let’s start with a point of known contact.

Bell, who announced his exit from Morgantown on Friday, told The Portal Report that MU was among the initial wave of schools that contacted him. That’s it. Maybe it ends there. Perhaps there’s a follow-up Zoom meeting. We don’t know how seriously the staff considers the senior an option.

What he can do, though, is rebound. Bell led the Big 12 in offensive rebound percentage last season and was sixth for his effectiveness on the defensive glass. Had Bell kept that up while playing starter-level minutes, he might have averaged close to eight boards per game.

Bell’s also built sturdily enough to jostle and bump with SEC bigs. Last season, he only allowed 0.6 points per possession on post-ups, according to Synergy Sports tracking data.

If you need a bigger body to check in, lean on people, and maul them on the glass, Bell’s the guy for the gig. But after that? Well, the case gets a tad thin.

Bell needs to be a monster on the offensive glass to offset an astronomical turnover rate (24.9%) and a 0.4 assist-to-turnover ratio. Unfortunately, cashing in those second chances is also problematic. His putback attempts are worth just 0.975 PPP – almost 20 percent less than expected.

While Bell’s usage is modest, almost half his touches are post-ups, and he’s only average at converting them (0.816 PPP). If he doesn’t catch on the block, he’s lurking and waiting for a dump-off along the baseline. And Bob Huggins didn’t put him into the mixer as a connector or ball mover.

At the other end, guards excelled driving the ball against him in closeouts, and other bigs were adept at slipping to the rim when Bell played in pick-and-rolls. That unfolded in a system that applies immense pressure and extends the defensive. While it’s not a carbon copy of MU’s approach, it’s worth wondering whether Bell fits the Tigers’ parameters.

Putting out a feeler to Bell makes a certain sense, considering he could remedy a deficiency in Mizzou’s rotation. The question would be the scope of his role, assuming recruitment progresses. Would he be viewed as a starter? Or would Bell reprise what he did at West Virginia as a reserve or as personnel for a specific matchup?

We’ll have to wait and see what transpires.

Update: Washington committed to Texas Tech on May 12 after what appears to be his lone official visit.

For my money, Washington represents the best remaining option on the board. Leanly built and agile, the 7-footer moves smoothly all over the floor. He glides running from rim to rim, consistently makes tougher catches on the move, and he’s crafty on the block and in the mid-post.

Now, you’d like to see him be a little better at finishing plays around the cup, but 1.40 points per shot still ranks among the 78^th percentile nationally. But, crucially, Washington doesn’t rely heavily on post-ups to generate those chances. He only does it 2.6 times per game, per Synergy Sports, a volume comparable to Kobe Brown.

But what you should appreciate are the clips where Washington’s a connector. Arizona State did funnel some of its touches through him at the pinch post, and you can see several clips where the big man is hitting guards cutting out of split action. Washington is also at ease rolling to the rim or the block from dribble handoffs.

Film clips don’t give us context regarding how Washington operates on most defensive trips. Still, he grades out among the 85^th percentile in Division I. Synergy data hints that he’s mobile enough to close down spot-up shooters (29.0 FG%), tag rollers (0.600 PPP), and slide his feet when attacked in ISO situations. And as you can see in the compilation of highlights, Washington’s adept at playing positional defense, walling up, and turning away shots.

Washington did all this playing 27 minutes per game and on 18 percent usage on a team that finished 55^th in KenPom – two spots ahead of Mizzou. Bobby Hurley’s crew also ran at a similar tempo.

Before arriving in Tempe, Washington made prior stops at Oregon State and Nevada, and almost half of his outings have come against KenPom top-100 foes. So is he a high-floor, low-ceiling option? Yes. But his rebound and rim protection rates would have ranked among the best in the SEC last season, and even a tiny bit of film shows some schematic overlap.

Given the timing and supply of talent, MU might have caught a bit of a break when Washington entered the portal on Wednesday. Granted, Washington, who grew up near San Diego, might be a logical fit for certain programs coming off a Final Four run.

Update: Selebangue committed to Arizona State on May 1.

Ignore Selebangue’s size – for now.

Skimming his analytic profile turns up a pretty handy comparison to another player in the SEC: Texas A&M’s Henry Coleman. Only the Frenchman is far more productive on the backboards, especially on the defensive glass, where he snagged 23.5 percent of opponents’ misses.

Selabangue knows what he does well and sticks two it. When you rank in the 88^th percentile for rim finishing, you only need to attempt two spot-up jumpers all season. Yet he’s not dependent on post-ups, doing it less than three times per game, usually abusing a smaller defender on the left block after a switch and working toward a hook shot.

He’d get seven touches per game by making himself available for dump-offs, slipping and rolling, or simply outworking dudes on the glass.

That said, there’s no footage here of Selebangue linking actions together. His assist rate (7.1) is meager, and Gates probably would disapprove of a 0.82 assist-to-turnover rate. Defenses can also ignore Selebangue when he spaces out to the perimeter, knowing he’s not likely to loft up a jumper and roll defensive aid elsewhere on the floor.

Being a sawed-off center also comes with compromises defensively. For example, Selebangue allows 1.0 PPP when guarding post-ups. And his block percentage (1.6) is paltry enough to tell you he isn’t someone opponents should worry about lurking around the paint.

If Mizzou were in the market for someone to backstop Kobe Brown, Selebangue might be the man for the job. There’s just enough polish on his game to fit what MU aspires to do on the offensive end.

Yet Selebangue, who has been in the portal since March 21, sounds close to wrapping up his process.

Update: Tchewa committed to Georgia on May 1.

Imagine I asked you to describe your prototypical big to a sketch artist. Their etching would resemble Tchewa. Take one glimpse at the Cameroonian, and there’s no doubt he’s built for the rigors of the SEC.

The production also matches the scale. Only two players in the AAC, one of them Selebangue, were better at crashing the defensive glass last season. Tchewa was also one of the conference’s five-best rim finishers.

But what you have in your mind’s eye resembles a throwback, and so does Tchewa’s game.

Nearly 40 percent of his touches come on the block, and his nightly tally (4.5) is almost equal to what Mizzou produced (5.1) as a group. Now, MU does post up Kobe Brown and Noah Carter, but both are better passers playing off the post.

Let’s say you pared back Tchewa’s post-up volume. What else can he do? He ranks in the 26^th percentile nationally for efficiency as a cutter, per Synergy data. And he’s slightly below the Division-I average as a roller. That leaves putback as his next-best option.

Call up his clips, and you won’t see him serving as a connector or playing in actions fundamental to MU’s operating system. Facilitating isn’t something he does very often, while his turnover rate (21.1%) is another mark against him.

Sure, he’s physically imposing, but practically, he has the same drawbacks as Selabangue on the offensive end.

What’s also potentially problematic is Tchewa letting opponents shoot 55 percent around the rim. Coupled with a low block rate (1.0%), you might wonder if you’re adding the kind of backline presence that serves as deterrence.

Tchewa cuts an imposing figure and would be a factor on the glass. But again: Are you compromising too much stylistically to add a guy who looks impressive getting off the bus?

Update: Njie will indeed follow Micah Shrewsberry from State College to South Bend. He committed to Notre Dame on May 6.

Getting old and staying old is the new trend in the portal era, but there’s still proven value in roster continuity. It’s a lot like compounding interest: the product of time and patience. But with smart management and development, you can reap a heft dividend.

That’s Njie.

Micah Shrewsberry’s move to Notre Dame from Penn State resulted in Njie surveying his options. A former top-120 recruit, the Ohioan assembled a quietly competent freshman dossier, averaging 3.4 points and 3.5 rebounds for a tightly managed rotation that allotted him 14 minutes per game. With starter-level minutes and a slight uptick in usage, he’d measure up well against Selebangue and Tchewa. Meanwhile, his rebounding rate is on par with Washington’s board work.

As you’d expect, however, there’s room for improvement defensively. Njie filled in his frame, but he’s still sorting out how to defend on the low block, where he allowed 1.053 points per possession. That ranks in the 18^th percentile nationally, according to Synergy. Improving that aspect of his game is a linchpin because he’s comparable to Washington in almost every other area.

Offensively, there are some conceptual overlaps between MU and Penn State, especially when it comes to chunks of the playbook for five-out actions. The Nittany Lions spread four shooters around the arc and played off Jalen Pickett. Within that setting, Njie showed competence as a cutter and flashed potential as a roll man.

Njie’s taken an official visit to Notre Dame and is also reportedly considering Dayton, which is just a 20-minute from his hometown. There’s also the possibility he could stay in State College.

With some savvy development, MU could have a pair of sturdy but hyper-skilled post players on the roster for the next three to four years.