Rock M Nation: All Posts by Matt WatkinsA Blog for Ol' Mizzouhttps://cdn.vox-cdn.com/community_logos/50319/rmn-fav.png2024-03-20T11:00:00-05:00https://www.rockmnation.com/authors/matt-watkins/rss2024-03-20T11:00:00-05:002024-03-20T11:00:00-05:00Mizzou Basketball Off-Season Roster Movement Tracker
<figure>
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: SEC Conference Tournament First Round-Missouri vs Georgia" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/32-qX1M21orfAor3L7Fm2DLzxdE=/0x682:2714x2491/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/73220710/usa_today_22770210.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Christopher Hanewinckel-USA TODAY Sports</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We’re taking stock of the start of the offseason with a comprehensive view of the current roster and tracking additions and departures as they come in.</p> <p id="sarTV7">The Mizzou Basketball Team’s season went sideways in a major fashion in 2023-2024. After a sterling 25-10 record in Dennis Gates’s first season, the program limped to an 8-24 finish in the second installment. Much like twelve months ago, there should be a fair degree of attrition and new faces arriving on campus over the summer. Within, we’ll keep tabs on the players coming, staying and those leaving. </p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="mizzou basketball roster count 3-20-2024" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/YVvqD0LrlrvdhpWFvWZoT7Ia7po=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25345865/Mizzou_Basketball_Roster_Count_3_20_2024.png">
</figure>
<h2 id="YudujL">Player Roles</h2>
<p id="oqD23g">We’ve organized the roster and the potential additions by position. These positions are not a hard and fast rule, but rather our best estimate based on the team’s style of play the first two seasons as well has historical data.</p>
<h2 id="xftoBK"><strong>Point Guard</strong></h2>
<h4 id="4Mxb1y"><strong>Departures</strong></h4>
<p id="QMwau5"><em>Nick Honor</em> — Nick Honor’s career came to a close in Nashville. The fifth-year senior proved to be a vital piece in Mizzou’s run to its first tournament victory in over a decade a year ago. His contributions should certain be recognized. Honor was a consistent floor spacer during his two years in Columbia and he added a steadying presence for a program who had long struggled in the turnover department. He was urged to do more in his second year in a Tiger uniform than what was probably fair to ask. </p>
<p id="57nQmT"><em>Sean East</em> — In many ways the converse of Nick Honor, Sean saved his best year for last. The 6’3” guard burst onto the scene in a major way and would’ve certainly landed a spot on the postseason All-SEC team but for his team’s record. East logged a load of minutes and proved to be Mizzou’s (only) offensive catalyst. He led the team in many categories including minutes played, usage rate and offensive rating. Though he was far more advanced offensively than defensively, there is a large chunk of production walking out the door with East.</p>
<h4 id="nWER3d"><strong>Candidates for Return</strong></h4>
<p id="2HVaG7">None</p>
<h4 id="mxXt9Z"><strong>Newcomers</strong></h4>
<p id="JrnQ1X">None</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="Syndication: The Tennessean" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/9e2jj7lN9WcbZ3qM4_xSGfqKB84=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25343188/usa_today_22768013.jpg">
<cite>Denny Simmons / The Tennessean / USA TODAY NETWORK</cite>
</figure>
<h2 id="04zHI5"><strong>Combo Guard</strong></h2>
<h4 id="i3ggDu"><strong>Departures</strong></h4>
<p id="9wSqPw">None</p>
<h4 id="GUNLU0"><strong>Candidates for Return</strong></h4>
<p id="FFCEKr"><em>Anthony Robinson — 3 years remaining — </em>Young Robinson saw a season that was uneven if anything. The rangy guard split duties on and off the ball but saw his profile skew more towards a complimentary piece in creation duties. That very well could change going forward and may be borne out of necessity, as you’ll notice above. Robinson proved to be an intriguing fit defensively, pestering opponents into repeated mistakes and turnovers. Offensively, his shot never came around to be a consistent part of his game. He has the makings of an exceptional ball player and is cut from the exact cloth you want from a guard in a Dennis Gates system.</p>
<h4 id="7oTDYI"><strong>Newcomers</strong></h4>
<p id="E0ppJA"><em>T.O. Barrett — 4 years remaining — </em>We wrote extensively about Barrett’s game <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjtzKLz0v6EAxVSkIkEHaVtBHkQFnoECBIQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rockmnation.com%2F2023%2F8%2F2%2F23778702%2Fmissouri-tigers-basketball-t-o-barrett-scouting-2024-commitment-dennis-gates&usg=AOvVaw3dsMBb6hZB9xQO3pqEyIXX&opi=89978449">last summer</a>, and for the most part, his profile remains the same. His prowess on the defensive end is where he could likely make an early impression. Projecting his impact on the offensive end is murkier. At Link Academy, he’s served as a depth piece behind the likes of Tre Johnson, Jasper Johnson, and Labaraon Philon. In EYBL Scholastic action, Barrett has averaged 4.3 points, 2.2 rebounds and 1.4 assists in 15 minutes of spot duty each night. Meanwhile, his shooting percentages will need to tick up. Like we said in June, some patience is necessary here. </p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="Syndication: The Tennessean" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/rdg58N2gIHyNibyW12ykEURhuak=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25343190/usa_today_22768048.jpg">
<cite>Denny Simmons / The Tennessean / USA TODAY NETWORK</cite>
</figure>
<h2 id="xGXSN2"><strong>Wing</strong></h2>
<h4 id="c3NRwe"><strong>Departures</strong></h4>
<p id="HHC6us"><em>Curt Lewis — 1 year remaining — </em>Lewis was the second player Mizzou added from Louisville, Kentucky, by way of John A. Logan College. After plucking Sean East from the same school, Mizzou went back to the well. Lewis never really found his stride in 23-24. He saw his minutes increase midway through the conference campaign when injuries had claimed Tonje and Grill — as well as East for two games — but saw that time completely dissipate over the last eight games where he appeared in just one contest, logging 5 minutes in total. We confirmed with sources on March 19 that Lewis would be entering the transfer portal.</p>
<h4 id="VisJ6n"><strong>Candidates for Return</strong></h4>
<p id="JjyMMY"><em>Tamar Bates — 1 year remaining — </em>Tamar Bates was second only to Sean East in breakout seasons. The 6’5” junior for Kansas was a revelation. A spate of injuries to both Caleb Grill and John Tonje thrust him into a bigger role in December and he never relinquished it. Bates finished the season second among all Tigers in usage rate and offensive efficiency and was third in minutes played. Bates’s form as an outside shooter held true, but he added a strong slashing component to his game that allowed him to contribute in multiple ways. A return of Bates would give Mizzou a much needed senior presence and boost of production. </p>
<p id="QgT1CU"><em>Caleb Grill — 1 year remaining contingent on medical redshirt —</em> Grill’s season was cut short after a wrist injury suffered in early December sidelined him for the meat of the Tigers’ non-conference season and all of the SEC slate. While we did catch a glimpse of Grill’s abilities, we never truly saw the player that Mizzou had hoped they landed. Grill’s outside shot struggled early on in the campaign — he previously was a 34% career shooter. He did offer arguably the best rebounding production on a team sorely in need of it and a hardnosed attitude on the Tigers’ perimeter defense. He will need to apply for a medical hardship waiver — a medical redshirt — in order to return for the 24-25 season. However, assuming his medical records check out, he has seemingly met the qualifications to do so.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Wichita State at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/EPID3rGWKkUdtlKBrIcBnlDa7mQ=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25232275/usa_today_22029033.jpg">
<cite>Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="auZx3e"><em>John Tonje — 1 year remaining contingent on medical redshirt — </em>Much like Caleb Grill, John Tonje’s time in Columbia can be described as a failure to launch. The talented wing from Omaha, Nebraska, saw just 6.1% of the minutes Mizzou played all season. After suffering a foot injury in the offseason, Tonje was never able to fully integrate and show his wares. I was bullish on Tonje’s ability to translate his game to the high major level, and still am. In order to do so, however, he too will need a medical redshirt. On the surface, he has met the necessary requirements to qualify.</p>
<h4 id="WmAfXq"><strong>Newcomers</strong></h4>
<p id="K1V40R"><em>Marcus Allen — 4 years remaining —</em> Allen returned to South Florida for a senior campaign that saw him lead Miami Norland to a Class 5A state title. That homecoming saw Allen slide down a positional spot to play as a four in the Vikings rotation, and he was certainly productive in putting up 18.5 points and 10.5 boards per game. Last July, Allen flashed an improving shooting stroke, particularly off the bounce and in some spot-up situations early in possessions. The question is where he gets slotted after arriving in Columbia. Does the staff see him as a true wing, in which case there’s a crowded house with Bates, Grill, and Boateng? Or is going to start out as four-man? Allen’s accustomed to playing off the ball as a cutter, crashing the glass, sprinting the wings in transition and spacing out. He’s also malleable as a defender.</p>
<p id="0nczgh"><em>Annor Boateng — 4 years remaining — </em>When Boateng reports to MU, it’ll be with plenty of accolades in tow. But it might be overstating it to call the Little Rock Central product a plug-and-play option. No doubt, Boateng is a force when playing on the break and attacking in straight lines. But his shooting stroke, which had scouts gushing in late summer and autumn, has regressed. Mechanically, it’s smooth, compact and quick. Yet it’s simply not consistent. The fix might be as simple as locking him in a practice gym with a manger. Meanwhile, his handle can still be a tad loose, making Boateng a bit turnover-prone in tight spaces. Those questions should temper short-term expectations, but Boateng’s build, intelligence and tenacity should allow him to take on defensive work quickly. We expect Boateng to receive a steady dose of floor time, but what that looks like might run counter to some expectations. Or maybe he crushes his first summer on campus to pave the way to a breakout. Either way, we’re stoked to see the result.</p>
<p id="Pz4YnC"><em>Jacob Crews — 1 year remaining</em> — Mizzou’s first addition in the spring portal season came via the transfer from the University of Tennessee-Martin on March 19th. While there is plenty to discuss about Crews, one thing is for certain: He shot the orange off the ball in 2024. The 6’8 wing knocked down 42% of his three point attempts at high volume. He does damage off the catch (1.200 PPS; elite) as well as off the dribble (1.370 PPS: elite.) How he translates defensively is an open-ended question. No matter, Mizzou liked what they saw and pounced early bringing him in for a visit and immediately securing a commitment. Crews spent his first two seasons at North Florida before transferring to Daytona State College where he was a NJCAA 2nd Team All-American. </p>
<h2 id="stP4qx"><strong>Combo Forward</strong></h2>
<h4 id="flkJjN"><strong>Departures</strong></h4>
<p id="bvYapw"><em>Noah Carter — </em>Carter’s final year in a Tiger uniform followed a similar script to Nick Honor. The Dubuque, Iowa, native was productive. However, his ability to move up the food chain, so to speak, did not translate well. Carter was fourth in the team in minutes and third in usage. He was asked early on to step into the very large shoes that Kobe Brown had left behind and the fit was never quite right. Carter struggled with his outside shot and with it came an inability to shake defenders loose for quality rim attempts. No matter, the senior made valuable contributions to the program including a double digit first half in the points column against Utah State to help secure Mizzou’s tournament victory a year back.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="Syndication: The Tennessean" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/KoW8oOBvLrJZofFUwd-XsZb7JjY=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25343192/usa_today_22768050.jpg">
<cite>Denny Simmons / The Tennessean / USA TODAY NETWORK</cite>
</figure>
<p id="UHqvDK"><em>Jesus Carralero Martin — 1 year remaining contingent on medical redshirt —</em> It was easy to see why Dennis Gates and staff saw a fit with Carralero in signing him last spring. The 6’7” forward offered a keen passing ability which Mizzou’s offensive format requires. The question was could a player who put up otherwise average numbers at a Big South institution translate to the SEC and offer the same, at minimum? The answer was mixed, and his playing time reflected that. Carralero logged 7 games of five or less minutes in league play, including five DNPs. In the other 11 games he averaged nearly 20 minutes per contest. He was a situational threat, and his numbers were uneven, at best. While his passing was indeed as advertised, his ability to make defenses pay who sagged off in passing lanes caused offensive troubles. Part of this was due to Mizzou’s struggles behind the arc. Carralero has an option for a medical redshirt due to a year missed at Campbell, should he and the team pursue it. We confirmed with sources on March 19 that Carralero Martin would be entering the transfer portal.</p>
<h4 id="2TFlF1"><strong>Candidates for Return</strong></h4>
<p id="gbRXQz"><em>Kaleb Brown — 1-2 years remaining</em> — Brown appeared in brief action early this season before being shutdown with a lower body injury. He has one year of guaranteed eligibility remaining and will have the option of applying for a medical redshirt after his standard eligibility expires — should he choose to do it.</p>
<h4 id="YbLfpm"><strong>Newcomers</strong></h4>
<h2 id="qizKvc"><strong>Stretch Forward</strong></h2>
<h4 id="8GtV2P"><em><strong>Departures</strong></em></h4>
<p id="XWDbTF"><em>Connor Vanover — </em>Vanover was yet another spring addition from the 2023 portal class that flashed moments but struggled with consistency. There were multiple times throughout the season when it appeared that Vanover had asserted himself as a valuable contributor in an area need, only to see a run of low minutes, low production games follow. Case in point, Vanover had arguably his best game of the season in the SEC Tournament against Georgia, logging 10 points, 7 boards and 3 blocks in a game where Mizzou controlled the paint. Yet the three games prior? Three DNPs. Vanover was a productive player when he was on the court. He simply wasn’t on the court enough to be the difference that was needed.</p>
<h4 id="bvip7J"><strong>Candidates for Return</strong></h4>
<p id="KS2koh"><em>Trent Pierce — </em>3 years remaining — It’s really hard to take stock of what we saw with Pierce in 2023-2024. Early on, Pierce was averaging about six minutes per contest which was fully inline with expectations. When conference play rolled around, that number plummeted. He averaged three minutes per contest over the first third of the slate before being sidelined with an illness that sat him eight consecutive games. He did return near the end of the season appearing in each of Mizzou’s final five games. However, that time missed disrupted his developmental time with the team. </p>
<p id="JzObqa"><em>Jordan Butler — 3 years remaining — </em>If there was a freshman who saw his time increase as the year wore on, it was Jordan Butler. Butler was averaging under five minutes a game early on. Over the last 16 games of the season he saw double digit minutes in 13. Part of this was due to necessity. Part of this was due to him being Mizzou’s most consistent interior option. Butler has a solid outside shot but never saw it fall. We saw flashes of rim deterrence and aggression offensively. His biggest need is in adding strength to compensate for the size disparity in marking SEC big men. He made definite strides and were readily observable. </p>
<h4 id="6WzBN7"><em><strong>Newcomers</strong></em></h4>
<p id="lBDldc"><em>Trent Burns — 4 years remaining —</em> In conversations with some national scouts, Burns is framed as long-term bet on development. We<a href="https://www.rockmnation.com/mizzou-basketball-recruiting/2023/10/1/23891691/missouri-tigers-basketball-recruiting-trent-burns-committment-2024-dennis-gates"> saw a little bit of him</a> during Peach Jam last July, when it was evident he needed to fill out a lean frame and hone a more consistent shooting stroke. Since then, it’s been hard for us to track his progress. Good Vision Academy’s games are hard to track down, and we hate inferring progress or stagnation off highlight clips. Ideally, this season would serve as a de facto redshirt campaign. </p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="Syndication: The Tennessean" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/8Rk5JDeG7aa4maxwYifGWDzZzcw=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25343194/usa_today_22768063.jpg">
<cite>Denny Simmons / The Tennessean / USA TODAY NETWORK</cite>
</figure>
<h2 id="CFG17y"><strong>Post Forward</strong></h2>
<h4 id="kSJGzz"><strong>Departures</strong></h4>
<p id="CTLvtg"><em>Mabor Majak — 1 year remaining — </em>If there is a better example of what Mizzou’s injury and DNP situation did to the rotations, I’ve yet to see it. Majak played a grand total of 21 minutes during the 22-23 season. He hit that total in an individual game this go around. From the end of January onward, Majak averaged nearly 12 minutes a contest before taking a no appearance in Nashville. Majak, much like Shaw, was a solid defender and helped Mizzou on the glass. However, his 8% usage rate once again caused issues on the offensive end. Majak entered the portal on March 19.</p>
<h4 id="35aRn4"><strong>Candidates for Return</strong></h4>
<p id="Jl7da2"><em>Aidan Shaw — 2 years remaining —</em> You may be asking why Aidan Shaw is slotted in this category. And frankly, I agree with you. I know WHY he’s slotted here, I just don’t know how it became this way. In a spot entirely reserved for paint-dwellers, Shaw stands as an outlier of sorts. Shaw attempted 68 field goals in 2023-2024, 54 of which were at the rim. He took just two three point attempts all year. His offense was almost entirely tied to cutting actions, offensive rebounds and operating as the screener in pick and rolls. Was it the best use of his skills? Hard to say. Was it a change from the year prior? Most certainly. On the plus side of the ledger Shaw did provide some semblance of rim protection in rotating from the weak side. He performed ably on the glass. His minutes rose in a ratio which you’d expect. But his possessions used rate (11.6%) was the exact same as a year back. It’s hard to have an efficient offense when your team is stretched thin as is and you’re including a player who just isn’t involved. No matter, there’s room left on the development road and his physical attributes are second to none. </p>
<h4 id="roW6zX"><strong>Newcomers</strong></h4>
<p id="Ek9cZY"><em>Peyton Marshall — 4 years remaining —</em> We saw Marshall <a href="https://www.rockmnation.com/2024/2/26/24081945/missouri-tigers-basketball-peyton-marshall-scouting-profile-recruiting-2024">up close in February</a> and came away heartened by his overall progress. The big man has trimmed up his frame and improved his stamina without sacrificing strength. And under the watchful eye and careful coordination of OTE’s coaches, he’s slowly getting the hang of passing reads in actions and from spots — the pinch post and top of the key — that are staples of Gates’ offense. The staff has also been transparent about what it needs from Marshall: physicality, toughness and rebounding. Assuming Marshall’s progress remains steady, it wouldn’t surprise us to see him play his way into a steady reserve role next season. </p>
<p id="zYeKCF"></p>
<p id="b2ChPp"></p>
<p id="LmemBg"></p>
<p id="OjXX2v"></p>
https://www.rockmnation.com/2024/3/20/24105166/mizzou-basketball-off-season-roster-movement-trackerMatt Watkins2024-02-15T11:00:00-06:002024-02-15T11:00:00-06:00The Verdict: Mizzou Hoops Roster Building Series Part IV — Charting the Path Forward
<figure>
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Florida at Missouri" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/KJ8-CuegarFba3JGYxQsGME7bBg=/0x1344:4125x4094/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/73141858/usa_today_22341584.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Jay Biggerstaff-USA TODAY Sports</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Part IV: A culmination of evidence has led to one question, and one question only: Can This Roster Strategy Work?</p> <p id="lOa57Z">This is Part IV of a four-part series. <a href="https://www.rockmnation.com/missouri-tigers-basketball/2024/1/25/24044585/the-verdict-mizzou-hoops-program-building-series-part-i-a-24-month-checkup"><strong>Part I</strong></a> — A 24-Month Check-Up. <a href="https://www.rockmnation.com/2024/2/1/24044592/the-verdict-mizzou-hoops-program-building-series-part-ii-a-history-lesson"><strong>Part II</strong></a> — A History Lesson.<a href="https://www.rockmnation.com/2024/2/8/24044593/the-verdict-mizzou-hoops-program-building-series-part-iii-a-volatile-industry"> Part III</a> — A Volatile Industry. This series will build off of each prior installment.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="v3xXZA">
<p id="ud4YR0">We’ve now reached our fourth and final installment of this series. A conclusion to the riddle that is roster-building in modern college basketball. Here we’re going to take a look at everything we’ve covered in concert. Can Mizzou’s model succeed in 2024 and beyond? Is it the best choice for Mizzou as a program? While we can’t promise to give definitive answers with so many uncertainties, the following represents our best efforts and may provide a jumping off point for future discussions.</p>
<h4 id="re8iPs">Quantifying the Unknown</h4>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Q9r3nJLvNQBgfdjLsi4N0xzlsK4=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25222765/e0baba01_1673_49c7_8e9d_5007a620a0f1_text.gif">
</figure>
<p id="2S03K9"><em>Moneyball </em>by Michael Lewis was released on bookshelves in 2003 and was later made into a movie starring one of Mizzou’s own, Brad Pitt. It is based on Billy Beane’s adoption of Bill James’s ideas many years prior — those dealing with modernizing statistical analysis in baseball. While the movie depiction skews more towards a heartwarming tale, the real story is how Beane revolutionized not just the Oakland Athletics, but the entire professional sports industry by uncovering untapped potential through a better grasp of what information actually matters in the sport. With college basketball now a market industry for talent, the lessons taught are crucial to understand.</p>
<p id="GA1oGP">The ability to optimize one’s roster is the name of the game. Put in different terms, who is getting the most bang for their buck? Player payments coming via Name, Image & Likeness “NIL,” are now the rule. Traditional recruiting — that is, the glitz and glamour of official visits, photo shoots, relationships between coaches and players, a promise of building a legacy, and so on — has taken a backseat to the cold realities of the business world. While those “old school,” stalwarts of recruiting still matter to some extent, talent acquisition has shifted abruptly into the types of NIL deals on the table and how a player’s talents will be used to further their career. And that is not all bad! But it is different.</p>
<p id="LMzKBR">For our purposes here, the primary problem is we do not know what the players are getting paid. A daunting obstacle in conducting any return-on-investment analysis! However, several pieces last fall contained confidential quotes from Division-I coaches that I want to bring your attention in order to shed light on this environment.</p>
<blockquote>
<p id="fyDTYg"><strong>A Coach in the Big East: </strong>“The ‘process’ begins (and almost ends) with the financial benefit of the school. If it was even part of the process, it was nearly last (or non-existent) pre-NIL. The money/NIL has no equivalent now in the process, and there is almost no way to overcome a substandard ‘offer.’</p>
<p id="z8oiqd"><strong>A Coach in the Big 12</strong>: “It requires you as a coach to have a feel and a connection to 1,000 different things. It’s also why staff sizes have increased in order to have antennas out at all times. It’s harder to keep good players but easier to get them at the same time. “Two years ago, a great recruiter was necessary. Now, you want a great negotiator who can get good players to come in under slot value and keep them. The best recruiter on your staff is who runs your collective.</p>
</blockquote>
<p id="UQVLGu">The full piece can be found <a href="https://www.on3.com/news/college-coaches-confidential-how-has-nil-changed-how-you-recruit-a-player/">here</a>.</p>
<p id="A4SK29">While these comments come from just two coaches in the business, their perspective permeates the landscape. Recruiting still matters. Players getting the NIL deal they require matters more. From an optimization standpoint, this actually makes things easier. No longer are teams able to stockpile rosters full of talent, as the players want their chance to shine and now have free reign to transfer — often with the promise of a nice payday to hasten the decision. No longer are we trying to quantify the best recruiting pitch or relationship, but instead, who is willing to offer the most cash. Money is easily counted. Feelings are not.</p>
<p id="43nsTr">The problem in performing this analysis is that we simply don’t have access to those payment figures. In professional sports, surplus value is the entire basis of the market — or with “slot value,” as a coach mentioned, which is the monetary value assigned to a professional draft slot. Surplus is simply measured by quantifying the amount of production received compared with the amount of money paid. Those with low salaries and high production are the kings of surplus value — the entire premise of Moneyball! But what if we don’t know how much the players are making? Can we even analyze this?</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="Syndication: The Knoxville News-Sentinel" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/xd972Ri08Ef5cTaOybuAYQAzDn0=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237523/usa_today_21181154.jpg">
<cite>Brianna Paciorka/News Sentinel / USA TODAY NETWORK</cite>
</figure>
<p id="4QPSVn">The answer is difficult. However, another <a href="https://www.on3.com/news/college-coaches-confidential-how-has-nil-changed-how-you-recruit-a-player/">piece </a>put together by Matt Norlander and Gary Parrish began to answer that question — anonymously of course. In a survey of over 100 Division 1 coaches, nearly two-thirds of respondents indicated that a transfer projected to be a starter on a high-major team would cost between $100,000 and $300,000. One particular coach responded:</p>
<blockquote><p id="iyEZNK">“I don’t think everybody is getting what they tell people they’re getting. That’s why I think it would be better if all of this had to be documented and made publicly available. That would stop a lot of the bullshit. But, yeah, the number is about $200,000. If my staff targets a good transfer, we know we better be able to tell him we can get him at least that — or we’re just wasting our time.”</p></blockquote>
<p id="ggLal4">Even the coaches at this level are reduced to guesswork and word of mouth. It took a survey of nearly a third of all coaches just to get an answer to a fairly straightforward question. It would take me — or any other similarly inclined individual with internet access — thirty seconds to see exactly what a projected starting pitcher was making in the 2024 MLB free agent market. Coaches and their financial backers can be bidding against ghosts.</p>
<p id="CccRpt">Despite the unknowns, several consensus opinions have come to the forefront. In yet another <a href="https://www.on3.com/news/college-coaches-confidential-how-does-the-nil-conversation-differ-between-a-high-school-and-a-portal-recruit/">anonymous poll</a>, coaches indicate that NIL matters more for transfer players than for high school recruits.</p>
<blockquote>
<p id="iXb65G"><strong>A Coach in the SEC: </strong>“Portal kids can draw more money as they are somewhat proven at this level. The higher ranked high school kids as well. But you can recruit a kid, his parents, his handler, and the AAU coach, but if someone else shows up with a bag in the 11th hour, it’s over. “The portal should be named ‘high major free agency.” Recruiting high school kids is still somewhat based on relationships. High-level portal kids are based on the money and the opportunity.”</p>
<p id="ASEs8U"><strong>A Coach in the Big 12</strong>: “In the transfer portal, recruiting is all about the NIL and immediate playing time. They’re not making a 40-year decision because they’re not going to build a legacy that the fans will remember. “A lot of the recruiting process is done through a third party. The good portal kids know where they’re going before they enter the portal. Well, unless you have a substantial NIL offer that trumps what everyone thought would come.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p id="LZBpAY">With the way portal recruiting is focused on NIL might, one might reason that programs would shy away if they were unable to compete. However, that’s not the case. In fact, the transfer portal and NIL have drastically shifted the player acquisition model in college basketball. The answer isn’t “let’s try another route.” It’s “we need a bigger bag.”</p>
<blockquote>
<p id="JgsFkQ"><strong>A Coach in the Big East</strong>: “High major schools are now reluctant to use their available allotment of potential scholarships for high school prospects because of the opportunity to sign portal kids. “High school players are now recruited to fill in the gaps for your roster. [Aside from the top 50 or so]</p>
<p id="4bqXuj"><strong>A Coach in the SEC</strong>: “We need guys that can produce right away; it’s tough to waste money on projects. High school kids still think they’re all making the NBA. Many kids in the portal have an idea of what their pro career is going to look like, and they might need to capitalize now. </p>
</blockquote>
<p id="dxsTwm">As we’ve seen in our previous edition, roster continuity is down, and roster experience is up. The pieces are falling into place. Programs value the “sure thing,” and those with the most resources end up getting the best of the lot. But the cost is high. Estimates for a simple five-man starting lineup acquired exclusively through the transfer portal could run in excess of $1,000,000. And that might not even be a truly competitive roster.</p>
<p id="Asx2KX">While we still don’t know exact figures, we did glean several key pieces of information. First, transfers are prevalent — and expensive. Second, high school recruiting — outside of one-and-done type talent — has taken a back seat to recruiting readymade transfer options. And third, coaches are adhering to a win-now strategy over longer term roster development. Many of these things are directly related to the rule changes we’ve discussed. The industry and rosters are both volatile.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="MLB: Houston Astros at Oakland Athletics" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/OOfHfJGt0lAKHTlM9CDzNGCfYcQ=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237575/usa_today_16835281.jpg">
<cite>D. Ross Cameron-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="rR3ECJ">But what if the true lesson of <em>Moneyball</em> isn’t just about optimizing the production value returned on money spent via savvy math? After all, within a decade every team in baseball — if not all professional sports — was keen to this thought process. We KNOW you have to get more production than the market rate you pay out! Rather, what if the lesson is about zigging while others zag. That is, finding a weak spot in the current structure of the game — a market inefficiency — and exploiting it? And what if that inefficiency is simply doing things the way they were done a decade ago? Does the math check out?</p>
<h3 id="54yo1M"><strong>Revisiting Prior Data</strong></h3>
<p id="UXcV9t">To truly analyze a team’s return on investment, we need more data than we’re able to get. But we do know that transfers are costly, even for standard starters at the SEC level. High school recruits are less costly — absent the player being an immediate impact, one-and-done type that can replicate a high dollar transfer option’s production. With that knowledge in hand, let’s revisit the data we’ve already established and consider the following graphic:</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/wkXXXSA2YS1XI3jCdkKQdS7W0SE=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25230300/Picture_9.png">
<cite>BPR data via Evan Miya</cite>
</figure>
<p id="vhwrt8">We’re very early in the Dennis Gates era of Mizzou basketball and have just one and half season’s worth of data, but Mizzou’s high school players haven’t made a major impact as freshmen. Yet when we look back to the Gates — and Charlton Young — era at Florida State, that production is not entirely dissimilar from the early 2010s recruiting classes. The freshmen minutes now are slightly lower, but the BPR falls somewhere between the early 2010s FSU freshmen and the later classes that elevated their program. The sophomore and junior data are understandably incomplete and impossible to compare at this early juncture. The senior data is impressive, but it consists solely of Kobe Brown.</p>
<p id="axWGe2">When we go down to the Mizzou transfer section, you’ll see that the median senior transfer plays 36% of minutes with a rounded off 2.4 BPR. The super seniors — fifth year players — have seen about a 10% increase in minutes with a very similar BPR. These numbers compare very similarly to the level of production Florida State received from upperclassmen Junior College transfers. They also lag well behind where Florida State’s developmental model had their 2010s high school recruits as upperclassmen.</p>
<p id="3DlS6D">While the portal is a very valuable asset, can you really use it for a foundation for your program? Mizzou’s first season under Dennis Gates suggested it was possible. Midway through the second season it appears we’re seeing the other side of the coin. But how do Mizzou’s results in their “portaling” efforts compare to the results the rest of the SEC has seen?</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/zHe06V3yTJL9vRTZeMHYqkHJ0l8=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25230326/Picture_10.png">
<cite>BPR data via Evan Miya</cite>
</figure>
<p id="ImgVnJ">I aggregated the data from every first-year transfer coming into the SEC during the 2022-2023 season. The above figure indicates the median result of 54 players. I then used that same analysis for every transfer that’s suited up for Mizzou. As you can see, on balance, Mizzou has outperformed the midpoint. Much of that is due to the first class and the explosion of D’Moi Hodge. In year 2, there was a hard regression towards the mean. To be sure there were extremely valuable transfers that came into the league but those were the exception — only 9 of 54 transfer saw 50% of minutes and landed north of a 2.5 BPR.</p>
<p id="hXxuns">What I really want you to consider is what a median SEC transfer really produced. It was less than virtually every type of player Florida State brought into their system from 2012-2020 aside from a select sample of freshmen in their first year. Now before you gear up in the replies — this isn’t an argument against taking transfers when necessary. What I am saying is this: as a basis for building a program, Florida State’s model of identifying and developing talent consistently beat the game on the macro-level compared with building through the portal based on recent SEC results. And it's supported by nearly a decade’s worth of data.</p>
<h3 id="UZSink"><strong>The Optimal Strategy at Mizzou</strong></h3>
<p id="3PMEv8">We know that transfers are prized and are paid — via NIL — at a higher level than those freshmen seen as multi-year players. We also know that while at Florida State, the Seminoles featuring Dennis Gates and Charlton Young consistently returned value that exceeded the median D-I transfer in SEC play. Could Mizzou have found it’s market inefficiency in the most conventional way possible?</p>
<p id="Ib2HWl">Well, that’s a bit more complicated now. To truly maximize the developmental approach, a team must actually keep their players year over year and not be in a constant state of rebuild with developmental freshmen and portal additions leading the way. And that retention plan is really difficult to achieve in 2024. But what if instead of pumping the big dollars on portal players a program instead turned those resources towards building and retaining their own roster? After all, a quick review of the top 10 minute-getters on Ken Pomeroy’s current top 10 rated teams reveals that 65 of 100 players were brought in via traditional high school recruiting methods.</p>
<p id="ZC8vTP">One could reasonably look at this data and conclude the best use of resources is to continue recruiting the prep circuit at a high level as Dennis Gates and staff have done through 22 months at Mizzou — and as they did for nearly a decade in Tallahassee. Instead of spending NIL resources on a starting lineup worth of players in the portal every spring, a larger portion of those resources could be used to pay their returning players in an inducement to stay in Columbia and improve their production. While it’s folly to believe that every player will return each season, reallocating portal funds to current players in an effort for them to stick around could yield something of great value — a core to build upon.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Missouri at Pittsburgh" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/dNnvDU_HNP4edlQonKS4gbz4nKE=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237567/usa_today_22037243.jpg">
<cite>Charles LeClaire-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="ARQYxT">Building said core takes a little time and patience. No matter the level of high school recruit brought in by this staff, the data indicates there’s a significant leap in production from a player’s freshman year to his sophomore, on average. But that time and patience will eventually pay off when the development and retention goals are hit. We know it has reaped big rewards for them individually and the top 10 teams currently are still benefitting greatly from their high school recruiting hauls.</p>
<p id="y5kXbl">In an ideal world, an incoming Mizzou class would feature 3-5 high school products and rate in the top 20 nationally. Gates and his staff have already shown the chops to pull off this part of the equation. In spending resources to keep those same players on campus you can reap the production that has proven it will come— unless they have legitimate NBA aspirations early in their career, of course. A great problem to have, no question.</p>
<p id="1i1Me4">The goal should be to keep the vast majority of freshmen for two years, as you’ll identify the players necessary for your program long-term while reaping the reward from the bounce in second-year production from all recruits along the way. The latter of which is a massively valuable asset to keep in house. If and when you lose a piece of the core, you are then able to supplement via the transfer portal for a player who can slot in the rotation, much like Florida State did with their junior college hauls. </p>
<p id="FIU4t5">When the opportunity presents itself, a true immediate impact player is the final piece to the puzzle. Whether they come via the transfer portal or as a freshman, you’re looking to add the high-level player that elevates your already solid core to elite status with the resources you’ve saved by not churning the roster annually each spring.</p>
<p id="RMtFd6">In fact, it’s the very process that at least one coach sees as the <a href="https://www.on3.com/news/college-coaches-confidential-how-has-nil-changed-how-you-recruit-a-player/">gold standard</a>.</p>
<blockquote><p id="X8OyOX"><strong>A Coach in the Big 12</strong>: “The process doesn’t really change until the NIL offer has been made. Especially if it’s a substantial offer by a non-traditional school. Once the bar has been set, then all bets are off. The easiest way to build a relationship is with a good NIL offer in place. Gold diggers exist for a reason and money talks. “In a dream scenario, you only sign a portal kid for every high school kid you lose. Successful programs have their foundation laid by high school recruiting and retention.”</p></blockquote>
<p id="EDWpA8">Three years ago, this plan may not have been as feasible. However, with the fifth-year player rule going away — we think — younger players will no longer be at the severe experience deficit that they are now. Because of this, underclassmen will have a greater opportunity to see early minutes which are vital for development. Consider the following graphic:</p>
<div id="RQZ9eH">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-dnt="true" align="center">
<p lang="en" dir="ltr">Here's the graphic I provided for this article on parity: It shows the breakdown of Top 200 players at <a href="https://t.co/cegyfz96ax">https://t.co/cegyfz96ax</a> by class. <br><br>Only 7% of the top 200 players are freshman, the lowest mark ever. Conversely, seniors are dominating the sport (extra Covid year helps). <a href="https://t.co/upUUsAge3h">https://t.co/upUUsAge3h</a> <a href="https://t.co/nvYSByz6wr">pic.twitter.com/nvYSByz6wr</a></p>— Evan Miyakawa (@EvanMiya) <a href="https://twitter.com/EvanMiya/status/1757447188828106962?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 13, 2024</a>
</blockquote>
<script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
</div>
<p id="pNm7m7">Prior to 2022 there was a fairly consistent relationship among spots occupied by non-freshmen. Since the fifth-year option was introduced, we’ve entered a state of experience overload. The result has been an influx of super seniors playing and taking opportunity away from every other class year. But when we break this down by 4th and 5th year seniors instead of collectively, the fourth-year players would occupy just 29% of the overall share and fifth-years would take 25%. Exactly a quarter of this year’s top 200 — and by extension, those further down the rankings— will no longer be in the game starting in the 2025-2026 season. The expectation then is that the distribution should look much more similar to the pre-Covid data.</p>
<p id="r9oFxq">Furthermore, Mizzou’s system — perhaps more than most — requires an accumulation of quality depth. That depth is best acquired through diligent core-building. Mizzou’s staff has the benefit of promising minutes to more players than most as they’re ideally playing 10 or 11 players a night. If those promises aren’t enough, this staff also has a lengthy list of players to point to where their four-step model paid off with NBA appearances — 17 players long, from my count.</p>
<p id="OL1EXg">While there’s no guarantee this strategy pays off, the data suggests it can work. Carrying it out is always the most important key.</p>
<h3 id="8uWwTi"><strong>Short Term Considerations</strong></h3>
<p id="RBGUkX">Bringing this back to names and faces, Mizzou’s program is in the infancy of implementing a sign and develop approach. Aidan Shaw could be the first rising junior of Dennis Gates’s high school recruiting labor. Anthony Robinson, Trent Pierce and Jordan Butler could be the first multi-player group to become sophomores — a year when the biggest gains typically manifest. Mizzou will have five freshmen ranked among the nation’s top 130 — per 247 Composite Index — joining the ranks in Annor Boateng, Marcus Allen, Trent Burns, Peyton Marshall and T.O. Barrett. Aaron Rowe — a top 20 recruit in the 2025 class — has already pledged a commitment. There are several upperclassmen who could return next year including Tamar Bates, Curt Lewis, Mabor Majak, Kaleb Brown and potentially Jesus Carralero-Martin and John Tonje — dependent on medical redshirt status.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Missouri at Alabama" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/EmI9ihT3L4o2uOX8S7BYBojUnxY=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237565/usa_today_22308626.jpg">
<cite>Gary Cosby Jr.-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="plajOD">No matter the final look, Mizzou will be much more skewed to an underclassmen core than in years prior. Should the three sophomores return, I would estimate that no less than half of the rotation is filled by either freshmen or sophomores in 2024-2025. </p>
<p id="XXx3G8">The brain trust here at RockM expects Mizzou to have three spots to fill via this spring’s transfer portal. The question there will be what type of transfer is Mizzou looking at — those with one year of eligibility or those to supplement sophomore and junior class core? After the lack of success in 2024, hitting on those openings is imperative for a smoother year three.</p>
<p id="9eZhJu">Should this truly be the plan, next season may fall short of the notion of an ideal season. Yet if there was a time to “trust the process,” we may have come that fork in the road. The benefit could very quickly be on the horizon.</p>
<h3 id="e3zNYU"><strong>Closing Thoughts</strong></h3>
<p id="TTvl5Q">My biggest takeaway is that Mizzou is in its infancy with the approach of leaning heavily on prep recruiting to build a roster. Even with savvy transfer additions, Mizzou’s “core,” will still be young a year from now. To truly maximize the talent they’ve been assembled, they need time in the team’s developmental system and experience with the college game.</p>
<p id="2f3isf">The evidence here shows that the path Mizzou has chosen could yield pretty significant gains. With it will also come short term pains. By implementing this strategy could Mizzou have finally found the model for consistency that’s been two decades in the making? They will be bucking many of the trends of modern basketball to find their answer, but the wager is being made on what this coaching staff has done best.</p>
<p id="iay51Y"></p>
<p id="5oZBRF"></p>
<p id="nZdvSl"></p>
https://www.rockmnation.com/2024/2/15/24044600/the-verdict-mizzou-hoops-roster-building-series-part-iv-charting-the-path-forwardMatt Watkins2024-02-08T11:00:00-06:002024-02-08T11:00:00-06:00The Verdict: Mizzou Hoops Program Building Series Part III — A Volatile Industry
<figure>
<img alt="News: Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Name, Image, and Likeness, and the Future of College Sports" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/cEsjheWSnBUDv75618TmFZ7dgjA=/0x252:4989x3578/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/73122616/usa_today_21666732.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Jack Gruber-USA TODAY</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Part III: A tumultuous three years have changed the College Basketball landscape by drastically altering the rules under every program must operate.</p> <p id="c87Qh2">This is Part III of a four-part series. <a href="https://www.rockmnation.com/missouri-tigers-basketball/2024/1/25/24044585/the-verdict-mizzou-hoops-program-building-series-part-i-a-24-month-checkup">Part I</a> a 24-Month Check-Up. <a href="https://www.rockmnation.com/2024/2/1/24044592/the-verdict-mizzou-hoops-program-building-series-part-ii-a-history-lesson">Part II</a> a History Lesson. This series will build off of each prior installment.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="9TO3Zi">
<p id="d1RAjm">With every strategical decision, one must weigh the positives and negatives of a chosen path, along with the probabilities that they may occur. College basketball in 2024 is no different.</p>
<p id="LmAnDY">In our first two installments we’ve delved deep into how Mizzou appears to be building their program with a thorough roster construction analysis. We’ve also analyzed the foundation of that method as it was implemented by Florida State. If we were dealing with the pre-COVID years, we might do well to stop. After all, we know the striking similarities between the programs and the success of that template.</p>
<p id="EI4NId">However, seismic changes have occurred in not just college basketball, but the college sports landscape in general since the late 2010s. With those changes have come an avalanche of consequences — some intended, some not. Each has a cumulative impact on the way we must look at roster building strategies.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Purdue at Florida State" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/aCCbKZ1RBYYovnJG5gWRkAvx61o=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237405/usa_today_19534569.jpg">
<cite>Melina Myers-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="pHMarq">In Part II, we stopped short of discussing why the Seminoles program has dropped off considerably from the late 2010s. This isn’t in an effort to deceive, but rather to give full treatment to a broad array of issues that could have impacted their program and certainly have impacted the game as a whole. </p>
<h4 id="kIVODP"><strong>Chaos is the Only Rule — A Hypothetical</strong></h4>
<p id="LG4qGy">You’ve decided against your better judgment to enter a casino. Blackjack, or “21,” is your game of choice. The rules as you know them are relatively simple. You play the dealer. Whomever gets closer to 21 without going over is the winner. For those unfamiliar with the game, casino gift shops routinely sell basic strategy cards!</p>
<p id="DNxdVu">Now, imagine this was the first time you’ve played in several years. After you sit down you realize the rules have changed. No longer must a dealer stop taking cards when they get to 17. Players can swap cards amongst themselves. The Dealer can throw away a card if they go over and draw again. How do you begin to use optimal strategy based on the “old rules,” of the game to maximize your chances of winning in such an environment? Simply put, you can’t. At least not until you study the long-term odds of each and every possible move. </p>
<p id="adYv5G">Welcome to college sports in 2024. </p>
<h4 id="ENA9H5">Transfer Portal</h4>
<p id="ItYIZN">In April of 2021, the NCAA approved a measure that would allow any player one “free transfer,” between institutions. What we now understand to be common was truly the beginning of a cataclysmic event in collegiate roster management.</p>
<p id="OSNCmw">Prior to this rule, players could freely transfer from one institution to another but were required to sit out a season of competition at their new school. In basketball, this typically meant players would use their redshirt season preserving their year of eligibility. There were exceptions to be sure — grad transfers could play immediately if their current school didn’t offer a graduate program of their choice and waivers for undergrads could be approved in limited circumstances. Prior to 2021, programs had a pretty firm understanding of who was going to comprise their roster not only this year, but for years into the future. The “sit-out,” rule proved to be a daunting obstacle.</p>
<p id="VcqGYJ">After the one-free-transfer rule was in place, the number of players leaving their institution boomed. In the early 2010s, a typical D-I basketball transfer class would see somewhere in the neighborhood of 200 individuals. During transfer season last spring, there were over 1,500 players in the newly appointed transfer portal. With this development came the inception of a new strategies. Players who had previously transferred were likely locked in for the duration at their new programs. Older transfers and immediate impact freshmen were still prized additions — if you could get them. Things were different, but there was some semblance of strategy that could be employed.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Texas at West Virginia" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/xy5qMJkPthX3lXO7YlY5OXBjJFk=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237409/usa_today_22285590.jpg">
<cite>Ben Queen-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="1YjdN9">In December of 2023, Raequan Battle — a West Virginia basketball player and former member of the Washington and Montana State teams — <a href="https://www.wboy.com/news/west-virginia/federal-judge-issues-temporary-restraining-order-against-the-ncaa/">sued the NCAA </a>for enforcing their “two-time” transfer sit-out rule. A federal judge in West Virginia granted a restraining order against the NCAA. In the wake of the ruling, the NCAA shelved their multiple transfer rule — pending final outcome of the case — which in effect has allowed EVERY transfer immediate eligibility. Until final ruling is made — or the NCAA adopts another rule — schools and players alike are in limbo. </p>
<p id="IejMcC">What we’re left with now is absolute uncertainty from a roster construction point of view. A player is completely free to leave a program as many times as he or she desires and for any reason until further guidance is established. Even if guidance is established, it’s entirely likely that another legal challenge will follow.</p>
<p id="KwteAF">For a program that is modeling itself after one that recruits primarily from the high school ranks and prides itself on development and retention, it will be swimming against the strong current of unfettered player movement.</p>
<h4 id="Jv1MYD"><strong>Name, Image & Likeness</strong></h4>
<p id="5eooJO">A mere three months after the NCAA adopted the free transfer rule in 2021, the double whammy of roster certainty dropped. It was at that point that players were allowed the right to be compensated for their name, image and likeness “NIL,” — and to that I say, amen. In my view, players being compensated — at minimum — for their marketing rights was far too long in the making.</p>
<p id="uevdVI">Yet as is often the case with anything NCAA, this new development with zero guardrails or oversight in practice. In the years following the rule change, a patchwork of state legislation cropped up allowing for varying rules regarding payment to players — <a href="https://mutigers.com/news/2023/7/7/general-mizzou-athletics-continues-nil-evolution.aspx">Missouri’s is one of the most aggressive</a>. </p>
<div id="UTUU0H">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-dnt="true" align="center">
<p lang="en" dir="ltr">The bill is signed. Missouri’s NIL law goes into effect Aug. 28. <a href="https://t.co/WnRWuYNMXV">pic.twitter.com/WnRWuYNMXV</a></p>— Dave Matter (@Dave_Matter) <a href="https://twitter.com/Dave_Matter/status/1691555039590883529?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 15, 2023</a>
</blockquote>
<script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
</div>
<p id="CBmVYZ">What was initially intended to be a way for players to profit from their likeness being used in advertising quickly became a way for donors — under the guise of NIL “collectives” — to pay players to play for their institution with minimal advertising and/or charitable work in return. In effect, the collectives now pay player salaries. Which isn’t a problem in of itself — it’s merely a roundabout way of doing what most believe is coming eventually.</p>
<p id="1mK54f">Yet, when you combine the complete lack of oversight on the operation of collectives, a feeble governing body, the incredible temptation for coaches to “tamper,” with talented players on other rosters AND no limits on transfer rules, you’re left with what is in effect a free agency period each offseason for every player. </p>
<p id="lztMUd">The NIL and transfer portal developments are nothing short of a jab to the body and uppercut to the jaw for programs trying to develop players over the long haul.</p>
<h4 id="5QfiAx"><strong>Fifth-Year Players</strong></h4>
<p id="7Po3NQ">As if two major changes weren’t enough, a third flew under the radar in changing the landscape of college athletics. Due to the COVID pandemic, the 2020-2021 season was played under less-than-ideal circumstances. The non-conference season was abbreviated. Arenas were typically less than half occupied — if at all. Players and coaching staffs were subjected to routine testing for the illness, and any positive test would bring down a suspension of all team activities including games. The NCAA Tournament was played in a “bubble,” in and around Indianapolis. It was truly a wild scene.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Alabama at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/sg7VgMOrspYgzN0tkMeB8ycjo0Q=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237469/usa_today_15537842.jpg">
<cite>Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="A0XsRw">Due to these complications and the desire to go forward with the season, the NCAA struck a bargain with the players. Should a player compete in this very unusual season, the 20-21 season would not count against their eligibility clock. In other words, anyone who participated in the unwieldy season would receive a fifth year of eligibility.</p>
<p id="FFNN82">And what an effect it did have. Over the subsequent seasons, the age of college basketball players steadily rose to the point it replicated the bar scene at a 10-year high school reunion. Mizzou itself exploited this rule. In the 23-24 season, the Tigers have seven players partaking in their fifth year of college basketball — two of which redshirted a year previously making them sixth year attendees.</p>
<p id="3Scbev">This rule appears set to phase out in short order. The freshmen during that odd, COVID season are now seniors. The 2024-2025 season should be the last one that should see any demonstrable effect from fifth-year players. That is, unless another rule change occurs. </p>
<h4 id="dnCIeO"><strong>Practical Effects on Roster Construction</strong></h4>
<p id="KtmU8e">What affect has this had on college basketball? Let’s take a look at several graphics. This first chart shows the median roster experience among D-I programs. This metric is taken from Ken Pomeroy and an explanation of the methodology can be found <a href="https://kenpom.com/blog/are-you-experienced/">here</a>. In semi-simple terms, “experience,” is measuring how many years of experience a roster has, weighted by minutes played. The more minutes the more experienced players play, the higher the rating.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/xRpAqGxQbENeaShTIP_TieHZOik=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25222560/Picture6.png">
<cite>Data via www.kenpom.com</cite>
</figure>
<p id="cZXqbg">For the better part of a decade, college basketball was cruising along at a consistent level. Once the fifth-year provision was ratified, the experience rate exploded. Teams of all levels smartly realized that a 23-year-old was likely going to be a more effective basketball player than a 19-year-old, all else being equal. When given the opportunity, teams would use their capabilities through NIL and the transfer portal to grab experienced players to supplement their rosters. The result was an abundance of upperclassmen driving the average experience level skyward.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Jackson State at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/HunxtfpWts7coGtrjbZKQvzGFlc=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25102472/usa_today_21937871.jpg">
<cite>Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="BIeTGh">Whether or not this was good for the sport is debatable, its impact is not. The minutes allocated to the development of freshmen and sophomores were swiftly scooped up by players who were good enough to succeed in the college game, but perhaps not enough to make the jump professionally — or those that were simply getting paid more to play in college.</p>
<p id="h44GF1">On the other side of the coin, teams exhibited less continuity from year to year for these same reasons. Once again referencing the esteemed Mr. Pomeroy, there’s a metric to track this! At its purest form, the continuity measurement simply seeks to quantify how much of a roster’s minutes are played by players who were contributing to that same team a year ago. Ergo, roster continuity. A more in-depth explanation can be found <a href="https://kenpom.com/blog/measuring-continuity/">here</a>. On to the graphs...</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/0ZrE6T3JCzdbi6TdqfXfv-h1qtI=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25222596/Picture7.png">
<cite>Data via www.kenpom.com</cite>
</figure>
<p id="saNudQ">Where experience has risen dramatically, continuity has fallen off a cliff. The same explanations for the experience changes are valid here. With newfound freedom to transfer at will — and NIL inducements for added incentive — players have moved from team to team seeking the highest bidder and their best immediate role. There were subtle signs of change coming as early as 2020 when graduate transfers were at the height of popularity, but the true change came post-COVID. </p>
<p id="4vdzRe">What we’re left with is something of an internal contradiction. Teams are more experienced than ever. Yet teams are less experienced <em><strong>together</strong></em> than ever. A true conundrum for a program attempting to build from within.</p>
<h4 id="pZUQmP"><strong>Scholarship Limits</strong></h4>
<p id="GeJwqa">The final “change,” I want to address is not so much a change in rule but a change in practice. By way of background, NCAA Division-I men’s hoops has a 13-scholarship limit. It is considered a “headcount,” scholarship. This simply means that a program may give no more than 13 individual full-ride scholarships to student athletes. Five years ago, this was cut and dried as a scholarship was the only — ahem, only <em>legal</em> — inducement that a school could offer.</p>
<p id="bESdGD">Well, that is no more. While teams still certainly have those same scholarships, NIL is a major consideration for the individuals receiving those scholarships. And an even bigger one for those not. In other words, there is no current restriction from schools — read: NIL collectives — from paying a player the cost of a full-ride scholarship, and more. In effect, this lengthens the scholarship limit as far as the collectives — and players — are willing to stretch it. If a program wants 20 scholarship-level athletes and has receptive audiences with those pulling the purse strings and the athletes who will participate under such a bulky roster, there’s no stopping them.</p>
<h4 id="8Tae31"><strong>Summation</strong></h4>
<p id="jKM2NK">The only constant is change. </p>
<p id="DXGXjQ">No truer words have been spoken. They ring especially true in roster construction in modern college basketball. The college sports industry has had multiple “once-a-century” changes dropped in its lap in short order. While these changes don’t necessarily make a model right or wrong, they need to be understood to fully analyze the path chosen. In the next installment of this series, we’re going to come full circle and use this information we’ve covered to analyze Mizzou’s apparent strategy. </p>
<p id="YcTlK6">Can it work?</p>
<p id="lIGqUJ"></p>
https://www.rockmnation.com/2024/2/8/24044593/the-verdict-mizzou-hoops-program-building-series-part-iii-a-volatile-industryMatt Watkins2024-02-01T11:00:00-06:002024-02-01T11:00:00-06:00The Verdict: Mizzou Hoops Program Building Series Part II — A History Lesson
<figure>
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Florida at Florida State" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/cxk-7eQkBjHJUvV4Uncrijchyp4=/0x0:3733x2489/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/73103841/usa_today_9742702.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Phil Sears-USA TODAY Sports</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Part II: A review of the late-2010s Florida State Seminoles run to prominence and the underlying characteristics of their rosters.</p> <p id="cXCxnt">If you missed our first installment of this series, you can find it here: <a href="https://www.rockmnation.com/missouri-tigers-basketball/2024/1/25/24044585/the-verdict-mizzou-hoops-program-building-series-part-i-a-24-month-checkup">Part I: A 24-Month Checkup on Mizzou’s Roster</a>. This series will build off of each prior installment.</p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="Pc1gmy">
<p id="dPHtg6">When Mizzou Athletic Direct Desiree Reed-Francois made the call to hire Dennis Gates in the Spring of 2022, the initial public reception was mixed. Gates was fresh off of two Horizon League regular season titles at Cleveland State. He resurrected a program that had hemorrhaged nearly an entire roster shortly before he took over. Gates quickly revamped the roster and found near term success. After two Horizon League coach of the year awards, Gates was on the radar of multiple high-major openings. </p>
<p id="OaR1nE">But many mid-major coaches experience success. Many more aren’t anointed as head coach of a high major program with just three years of head coaching experience at the young age of 42. Dennis Gates did great work in Cleveland, but there was something more at play here.</p>
<p id="iDkSVI">Reed-Francois told Mizzou supporters as much, in fact. She spoke at length about how Dennis Gates had long been on her radar dating back to her days at Virginia Tech. For at that time, she was well acquainted with Gates and his Florida State Seminoles as an Atlantic Coast Conference rival. His time as an assistant under future Hall of Fame coach, Leonard Hamilton, was undoubtedly a key bullet point on the resume. And for good reason. During the late 2010s, few programs matched the annual success as his teams did.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Missouri at Auburn" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/J7lsUMXPnLJXHbPtvaiUcOYTzPk=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25035426/usa_today_19997035.jpg">
<cite>Julie Bennett-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="6GSlhh">After tabbing the new Head Coach, only a matter of weeks passed before Gates brought in a premier assistant coach in Charlton “C.Y.” Young. Mizzou’s assistant coach salary pool was immediately expanded to allow the hire to happen. All indications were that these two hires weren’t a matter of happenstance. </p>
<p id="AX46Nf">If there were any doubts that Florida State’s “model” was being integrated in Columbia, they were taking on water fast. Dennis Gates was a member of Hamilton’s staff as an assistant beginning with the 2011-2012 season and concluding with the 2018-2019 team. Young was onboard in Tallahassee between 2013-2014 and the 2021-2022 seasons. A combined eleven seasons between the two coaches as members of Hamilton’s held sway with Desiree Reed-Francois.</p>
<p id="Qbtv1k">Gates will be the first to tell you that it’s not his goal to simply mirror Florida State’s program. He is his own man and with it come his own ideas on how best to win basketball games. Yet between the obvious links to the program and how we’re seeing Mizzou’s roster constructed — as discussed in Part 1 of this series — we’re being shown that if it’s not an exact replica, the foundation is woven from same fabric. Those 2:00 a.m. phone calls between mentor and protege` weren’t just about the weather.</p>
<h2 id="f0J6H7">The Master Plan — The Florida State Model</h2>
<p id="J6nyUI">If you’ve been around Mizzou hoops talk over the last 24 months, you’ve assuredly heard this term. A certain recruit might be described as a “Florida State,” type player. While it’s impossible to quantify the precise recipe, you don’t need to be the pitmaster to know brisket is on your plate.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Florida State at Miami (FL)" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/raV1q6lF67vErTi_GfkrL_BJXEE=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237336/usa_today_22316711.jpg">
<cite>Sam Navarro-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="W902ne">There are several guideposts that can inform this discussion. While the following analysis will largely focus on a subset of Hamilton’s tenure in Tallahassee, it bears noting that there was nearly entire decade of Leonard Hamilton Florida State basketball prior. For a man who could easily pass for 50, Hamilton has been doing this gig a long time. For our purposes here, we’re going to look primarily at the years that the two current Mizzou coaches were involved.</p>
<p id="GiJmA8">The first thing I come to during a thorough review of the Seminole’s program is roster depth. Not just depth, but quality depth. The Florida State model is predicated on defensive intensity. And much like Mike Anderson’s “Fastest 40,” that requires more than an average number of bodies to properly implement. The first five years Gates was on staff, Florida State’s average finish in bench minutes (out of ~350 programs) was 139th per Ken Pomeroy. Over the next six seasons that number exploded to 35th most. In a given year, among high major teams, Florida State easily rated top 10 in the country. The Seminoles played the guys they brought in. And they played all of them.</p>
<div id="U4czih"><div data-anthem-component="table:12213400"></div></div>
<p id="kfYVLy">The second principle is also relatively well known, and that’s disruptive length on defense. When the Seminole’s franchise was humming, they were brimming with long athletes who could get hands on basketballs. To cause max disruption you need max disruptors. During the six final years a current Mizzou coach was at Florida State, the Seminoles average height had a cumulative average that ranked fifth nationally. The signal of those physical attributes manifesting on the court come via defensive blocks and steals. </p>
<p id="4zIkL8">And manifest they did. The ‘Noles average finish in block rate nationally from 2017-2022 was 16th. Steal rate? 54th. Any time an opponent was set to play a Hamilton squad, they were in for an uncomfortable 40 minutes of basketball. Those attributes in concert drove a true defensive wagon late in the decade.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: NCAA Tournament-West Regional-Gonzaga vs Florida State" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/13iQ-e-dCymTRe3nC-snIMP6MEI=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237345/usa_today_12432568.jpg">
<cite>Robert Hanashiro-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="xqCtMq">While the first two keys have been bandied before, the third is truly the most important in my view. The Seminoles were elite at four very important things, all of which are interconnected. 1. Talent identification. 2. Talent acquisition. 3. Player development. 4. Player retention. </p>
<p id="QUWoI0">Florida State did bring in talent that would bounce for the NBA after one year — but that was the exception, not the rule. Maximizing production from their prep recruiting haul over the long term was truly their ticket to the big kids’ table in college basketball. We’ll fully explore this point a bit later. But first, we’ll lay the foundation for why this is a model one would even want to replicate.</p>
<h2 id="xXsO9a">Success of the Seminoles </h2>
<p id="RpCBIU">A model is only as good as the results it provides. And Florida State provides something of an interesting case study. The chart below reflects the years that both Dennis Gates and/or Charlton Young were seated aside Leonard Hamilton from 2012-2022.</p>
<div id="20ioNS"><div data-anthem-component="table:12213385"></div></div>
<p id="zycd1Y">Before this era started, Hamilton had coached nine years at Florida State. His first six seasons failed to return an NCAA Tournament bid. The selection criteria changed somewhat significantly since those days, so it bears noting that in three of his first six years the Noles were a top 40 outfit via Ken Pomeroy — that is to say, a tournament quality outfit. No matter, it wasn’t until year seven that the rubber met the road. Hamilton would go on to land four consecutive teams in the postseason gala, culminating with the 2012 team mentioned above — the first in our sample.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Wake Forest at Florida State" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/hWhgPxY-T5sbk4pArgmntMw3iGA=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237356/usa_today_8367558.jpg">
<cite>Phil Sears-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="c1jWaI">Through Dennis Gates’s first four seasons aside his mentor, things had plateaued to the naked eye. There were a few solid years, but no tournament invites after his first season in 2012. But something was percolating underneath the surface. With Young joining the ranks in 2013, the staff got busy — and hot — on the recruiting trail. And the program would soon take off. </p>
<p id="zKg5dA">By the time the last current Mizzou staffer left the Sunshine State, FSU had reeled off five straight tournaments, three top four seeds and three second weekend appearances. Arguably the strongest team of the bunch had their season cut short due to the COVID-19 pandemic after nabbing the ACC regular season title. That 2020 Noles team was projected as a 2 seed and was poised for a deep run.</p>
<p id="kPa2Ht">The program was humming. And this is how it was built.</p>
<h2 id="XAhG14">Laying an Elite Foundation</h2>
<p id="irUfO4">Turning to the real nuts and bolts of the history lesson, we’re going to take a look at just how well Florida State recruited during the time period in question.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/5nyWV24TGWUdFm3hcv8doq7P8Q4=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25232713/Picture_14.png">
<cite>Rankings via 247 Composite Index</cite>
</figure>
<p id="5JzAoU">This chart simply indicates the 1. recruiting class year, 2. prep recruit class rank, 3. number of commitments and the 4. individual rankings of the players from highest to lowest within the respective class. “Miscellaneous,” simply indicates non high school prospects. During this period, FSU established a median class size of five players with the prep recruits ranking 18th nationally. </p>
<p id="X05j9t">If you focus in on a more limited time frame, the pieces really begin to fall into place. The 2015-2019 classes were the cycles that really pushed Florida State from a competitive program to a much higher tier.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Nb6Xu5CTyhQTArpImZT8qJ4BXd4=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25232744/picture_16.png">
<cite>Rankings via 247 Composite Index</cite>
</figure>
<p id="0tT70n">These five classes proved to be the backbone of Florida State’s ascent into the VIP area of the college basketball universe. You’ll notice that they were all signed during years that Dennis Gates and Charlton Young were both on staff. The median class again was five players strong, but the median class ranking had jumped to 12th. The lone class outside of the top 20 was a one-man effort in 2018. That man was Devin Vassell whom Charlton Young personally plucked out of Suwanee, Georgia, and was drafted 11th overall after his sophomore season.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Florida State at Duke" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/9hf77YrsTE5GmhhKCRoeRdKuT0o=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237364/usa_today_14024303.jpg">
<cite>Rob Kinnan-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="pgxlsD">Florida State’s rise to prominence was built on these years and specifically these prep recruiting efforts. And if you refer back to part 1 of this series, you’ll see some staggering parallels with what Dennis Gates’s staff has accomplished in quick order here at Mizzou. The median rank of all 16 Florida State high school recruits from 2015 through 2019 was 85.5 per 247’s composite index. The median rank of each one of the 10 prep recruits Dennis Gates has brought into Columbia is 79.5. </p>
<h2 id="XbjzGz">Florida State Roster Development Patterns</h2>
<p id="OmMqIx">I promised nuts and bolts and more nuts and bolts you shall receive. The following graphic describes each and every one of the 16 Seminole recruits from 2015-2019 in terms of minutes percentage played — of 40 minutes — and their Bayesian Performance Rating “BPR,” by year. For ease, I’ve once again included a quick conversion graphic that helps quantify BPR.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/fOXihnCpvmldeeyceQOh357PW-8=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25217715/Picture2.png">
</figure>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/47lzL49pVrE52qqjYmUXNsCbmCI=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25217738/Picture1.png">
<cite>Credit to Evan Miya for BPR Data; Credit to 247 for Composite Index Recruit Ranking</cite>
<figcaption>*Christ Koumadje’s BPR Data was unavailable for three seasons.</figcaption>
</figure>
<p id="kLTpw6">Admittedly I’m throwing a lot your way, but it’s important to show the basis of the analysis. For ease, I’d like to focus on the bolded portion at the bottom of the graphic. We’ve already noted that the “median,” Seminole recruit rated 85th nationally. Now we can put a figure on how big of an impact they had — both in minutes played and production— each year they were in the program and how that changed as the players got more experienced.</p>
<p id="kNW1ij">Only four of these Seminole freshmen saw 20 minutes or more a game — and three of those were headed to the NBA after a single season. On balance, the average freshman saw less than 15 minutes a game. However, they performed at a very productive level with the average player landing among the top 500 of ALL Division-I players. These younger players often served as spots deeper on the team’s rotation and provided a valuable impact.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NBA: Draft" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/HqyLeLppUWWc_cB8Hc-tQBfgeRs=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237379/usa_today_10126570.jpg">
<cite>Brad Penner-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="Na1Twl">When those freshmen turned to sophomores — and 75% of them returned to do so — the minutes and production skyrocketed. At that point the average Seminole sophomore was averaging over 20 minutes a game and was pushing the top 150 player mark among their D-I peers. With just a little patience, Florida State would turn good freshmen into a difference-making sophomores. </p>
<p id="PLIUPf">After their sophomore campaigns the results began to plateau for various reasons. This is due in part to over half of the freshmen who were brought in as high school recruits departing the program prior to their junior seasons. But those seven remaining players still provided vital production. Five players proved to be key players as juniors. Four continued to make major impacts their senior season as well. Though the “core,” of players dwindled over time, the remaining upperclassmen provided the quality experience that every successful program needs.</p>
<p id="Ua4mdd">Another component of Florida State’s run was the smart use of the junior college market to supplement their roster with upperclassmen to fill roles. They did so quite effectively. It was rare that a player from the junior college ranks starred for the Seminoles. But what they did do is provide upperclassmen experience and quality depth in place of the departed two-year players. One might say that Florida State had found their version of the transfer portal before it even existed.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/9DW25NpNckdndctjYDKF7d5Vk1w=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25261883/picture_17.png">
<cite>BPR via Evan Miya; Rankings via 247 Composite Index</cite>
</figure>
<p id="pjw0Ng">While these players didn’t yield the top end results that Florida State’s freshmen did over time, they offered a high floor to plug in holes caused by departures from their high school classes. For a program that was intent on beating teams with depth, the importance can’t be overstated. Quality minutes off the bench are imperative.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: NCAA Tournament-West Regional-Michigan vs Florida State" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/VRdWJ89mFYFVXA4m-OH3Yb3Mn-M=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237388/usa_today_10732140.jpg">
<cite>Robert Hanashiro-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="jiVXta">Turning back to the high school talent Florida State accumulated, consider the following graphic — my last of this volume! — which shows how the tables turned with that 2015 recruiting class onward in terms of production compared to previous years.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/5i2c92K8dihWLLa_05_24k2GzNU=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25261903/picture_18.png">
<cite>Credit to Evan Miya for BPR; Rankings via 247 Composite Index</cite>
</figure>
<p id="GiKD03">It’s not exactly groundbreaking to discover that better recruiting leads to better results. But the mechanics are important. Even in the less-heralded 2012-2014 classes, those players became valuable pieces for the Seminoles program, it just took a year in the program. Similarly, the better rated class performed at a higher level sooner, but they also saw a big jump between their first and second years.</p>
<p id="twblxb">This is all to say that the Florida State “model,” requires some degree of patience despite lofty recruiting rankings. Playing a deep bench is great in theory but struggles surface when the back half of the rotation isn’t up to standards. That requires consistently effective recruiting, development and player retention. The Seminoles in the late 2010s excelled at all of those things. Now, Mizzou is relying on two key actors in that film to do the same thing in Columbia. If their first two full recruiting cycles are any indication, they’re well on their way.</p>
<p id="AOYcdt">Before we depart, it does bear noting that Florida State has seen a performance drop off in very recent years. The reasons for that are many. In our next installment, we will identify and discuss the pros and cons of this strategy in the ever-changing era of modern college basketball.</p>
<p id="flnRn3"></p>
https://www.rockmnation.com/2024/2/1/24044592/the-verdict-mizzou-hoops-program-building-series-part-ii-a-history-lessonMatt Watkins2024-01-25T11:00:00-06:002024-01-25T11:00:00-06:00The Verdict: Mizzou Hoops Program Building Series Part I — A 24 Month Checkup
<figure>
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Missouri at Kentucky" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/n9snaA_wGwKalnapmlFox66QN7k=/0x0:5227x3485/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/73084357/usa_today_22256899.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Jordan Prather-USA TODAY Sports</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Part I: A recap and analysis of the Mizzou Basketball Roster situation through the first two years of the Dennis Gates era</p> <p id="CtW1f2">Just before Christmas I made my annual pilgrimage to the Enterprise Center to take in the latest edition of Braggin’ Rights series. A week prior Mizzou had suffered a loss to Seton Hall on the west side of the Show-Me State. Two weeks prior, a competitive loss came in Lawrence. Approximately a month earlier, Mizzou dropped a shocker in the friendly confines to a winless Jackson State outfit. Needless to say, a season-changing result was on every Tigers’ Christmas list.</p>
<p id="ln3UyH">As I sat two rows off the court,<small><em> (editor’s note: subtle flex here, Watkins)</em></small> I witnessed a bludgeoning unfold instead. A game Illini outfit laid waste to the Tiger squad in every way possible. While many of my colleagues — and others clad in black and gold — headed for the mountains of the event’s former title sponsor, I was tethered to my seat. Staring blankly as Illinois raced up and down the court and unleashing an avalanche of buckets. My mind wandered to not just this season’s affairs, but the bigger picture. I could only ask myself...</p>
<p id="gI1fAT">“Where is this thing heading?’</p>
<p id="phyNqF">And here we are.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: South Carolina State at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/Y2t_XHWv_4d5O3mv3l3jBb1bO-c=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237281/usa_today_21955495.jpg">
<cite>Jay Biggerstaff-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="O54fun">Dennis Gates is in year number two of the hopeful recuperation of a program that has seen its fair share of success historically. After a riveting inaugural year in which Gates’s Tigers won 25 games, earned a double bye in the SEC league postseason tournament and won the program’s first NCAA game in over a decade, things have settled down considerably on the court. </p>
<p id="qkrRte">This isn’t an entirely unfamiliar phenomenon in recent Tiger history. In fact, after Norm Stewart’s tenure came to a close, six men have taken the reigns of the program. Four of them have turned in an NCAA tournament appearance in year number one. Yet the program has been plagued by a lack of consistency thereafter. Only two coaches — Quin Snyder and Mike Anderson — have appeared in three NCAA tournaments during their tenures here. Consistency has plagued this program and is at the top of the list for each new hire to fix. Building a program has eluded most coaches here. For Dennis Gates, the hard part starts now.</p>
<p id="hzi9d7">In this series, we’re going to take a look at how this Mizzou staff is situating itself strategically for the future to accomplish that goal. We’ll then look back on the historical performance of the model that by most outward appearances is being implemented here. We will certainly discuss the strengths and pitfalls of that strategy. And finally, the program’s path forward will be analyzed. Each issue will receive the full attention of an installment in this series. So bear with me, it’s not coming in 240 characters.</p>
<p id="dtDyOg">In part one, we’re going to focus on the roster movement of Mizzou’s team for the past 20+ months to fully understand what this coaching staff is attempting to build and how they’re going about doing it. </p>
<h4 id="mNKFz0"><strong>Ignore What’s Being Said — Watch What’s Being Done</strong></h4>
<p id="dWAnkc">Dennis Gates and his staff have been busy men their first two years on the job. Roster flux is now the norm in college basketball, but Mizzou has fallen on the extreme edge of that spectrum. By my count, <em>thirty-nine</em> players have appeared in a Tiger basketball game the last four seasons — excluding those players limited to blowout-only appearances. Gates is only responsible for half of those seasons, but that is simply an astonishing number. Only two of those 39 players have appeared in Mizzou games three of the last four seasons. Thank goodness for the Browns from Huntsville, Alabama!</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Mississippi at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/oCIh15NQ6_s-zhJrzqOcUCDQ3Oc=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24505420/usa_today_20144787.jpg">
<cite>Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="Nrz8GG">While it’s virtually impossible to build a roster in 2024 with freshmen who stay for four seasons, the turnover here is still marked. Severe roster churn has been the rule, not the exception, at 1 Champions Drive. The following charts reflect the Dennis Gates era team roster construction in showing the identity of the players, how they were acquired and what age they were in terms of eligibility during the given season.</p>
<div id="0UZVEw"><div data-anthem-component="table:12208501"></div></div>
<p id="mdBUdV">In Gates’s first season the directive was abundantly clear. Mizzou only returned three players in Kobe Brown, Kaleb Brown and Ronnie DeGray III. The rest of the squad needed to be built on the fly. As he showed at Cleveland State, the new coach was up to the task. Gates imported ten new faces. Aidan Shaw was released from his letter of intent and later repledged his commitment. Two new additions came from the Junior College ranks. Three came over from Gates’s former program at Cleveland State. The remaining four came from an assortment of Division-I programs. The overriding theme for the newcomers: They were brimming with collegiate experience.</p>
<p id="xHo7yR">Only two of thirteen Tigers were classified as underclassmen. The results paid immediate dividends with a successful debut season and Mizzou’s first March Madness win in ages. The top seven players in minutes played were all in their fourth or fifth year of college eligibility. However, a combination of graduation and losses of key performers — Isiaih Mosley and Kobe Brown turned to the professional ranks last spring with eligibility remaining — forced the need for a fairly comprehensive rebuild once again.</p>
<div id="MA0XSx"><div data-anthem-component="table:12208505"></div></div>
<p id="loF9OT">Dennis Gates and his staff responded by importing six upperclassmen transfers to bolster the roster. In a slight change from the year prior, he supplemented that group with three high school signees. In addition, Shaw returned to Mizzou giving the Tigers four underclassmen — doubling the figure from the year prior.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Georgia at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/XFj8MoL1BHXeDXTS4Uqu-NbWMc4=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237284/usa_today_22235278.jpg">
<cite>Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="ZZkS3o">While the results on the court to this point have been far less than desired, there may be some longer-term benefits. Should the freshmen class stay intact, it would be the first time in five Tiger off-seasons that three freshmen — who saw relevant time on the court — stuck around for a sophomore year at Mizzou. The thought is even more compelling when you consider all were ranked among the top 150 recruits nationally when they signed. </p>
<div id="Uz1cwR"><div data-anthem-component="table:12208508"></div></div>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="NQrrZH">
<p id="lZ69h1"><em>**Jesus Carralero-Martin and John Tonje are not included in this chart as they’ve played five seasons of college basketball. There has been some discussion about a potential sixth year(s) of eligibility, but the status — or desire — of acquiring the necessary medical redshirt(s) is unknown at this point.</em></p>
<p id="jEKsH5">Should everyone return that has eligibility remaining, Mizzou has an assortment of 13 individuals that stands in stark contrast to Gates’s first year. Curt Lewis and Mabor Majak represent the last of the fifth-year seniors currently rostered, and both have played sparingly this season. Kaleb Brown was lauded for his offseason progress but suffered a season-ending injury early on and has never figured heavily in the rotation his three seasons in Columbia. Aidan Shaw can return as a potential starter and probable member of Mizzou’s rotation. Tamar Bates has solidified his role as a probable starter for his senior campaign.</p>
<p id="hJecVt">The remainder of the roster — as currently constructed — is slated to be filled by youthful depth from the prep ranks. Mizzou’s freshmen class next year currently stands top 5 in 247’s composite ranking index. The sophomore class was ranked 27th by the same publication. Mizzou — if the spring portal season is kind — will have eight underclassmen they’re looking to build around. A near complete pivot from the 22-23 season. </p>
<p id="f61U0i">Additionally, the amount of offers the staff has handed out to high school prospects provides a glimpse into their thinking for years beyond next. Thanks to data accumulated by Rock M’s Matt Harris, we know that in the 2023 cycle Mizzou offered 30 players and landed three. In 2024, Mizzou offered 58 prospects and landed five — and was strongly in the mix for a sixth. Through two years, they’ve converted roughly 20-25% of offers into campus visits, and 8-10% of offers into commitments. While it’s still early, Mizzou has offered 47 prospects in 2025 and 18 already in 2026. </p>
<div id="f3wbHj">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-dnt="true" align="center">
<p lang="en" dir="ltr">Five of the nation's best ready to wear the Black & Gold<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MIZ?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MIZ</a> <a href="https://t.co/dSBxWmV2Ps">pic.twitter.com/dSBxWmV2Ps</a></p>— Mizzou Hoops (@MizzouHoops) <a href="https://twitter.com/MizzouHoops/status/1746959378777837797?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 15, 2024</a>
</blockquote>
<script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
</div>
<p id="q5QXSG">It bears noting that the transfer portal looms this spring — and while it giveth, it also taketh away. We fully expect the five freshmen to be on campus. The possibility any of the three rising sophomores entering the portal is present, though nothing specific is concerning at this point.</p>
<p id="r2gCRY">Considering the makeup of the upperclassmen slated to return, and the ever-present ability for players to transfer out, Mizzou will look to add approximately three transfers in the spring recruiting season. But even in doing so, Mizzou’s roster will be heavily backloaded with freshmen and sophomores who will serve as the program’s foundation next year and beyond — if all goes to plan.</p>
<h4 id="gp2mIr"><strong>Mizzou’s Roster Performance Through Two Seasons</strong></h4>
<p id="8XboBc">I will be leaning heavily on Evan Miya’s Bayesian Performance Rating (“BPR,”) here — and in future installments — so best to introduce it now. As a matter of background, BPR is simply the assessment of how much impact a player has while on the floor. It’s graded on a scale of 100 possessions and the individual BPR is how much better the team is with said player playing versus not. It’s a much more educated box plus/minus rating if you’re familiar with that. By way of example, a player with a 5.0 BPR rating would make his team five points better every 100 possessions than an average player would. The higher the BPR, the better the result!</p>
<p id="1S6XII">For more context, the full rankings can be <a href="https://evanmiya.com/">found here. </a>This chart can also provide a handy reference point for comparing a player’s national rank to a given BPR rating.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/xKmsWn8KPCB-1sIqU_V_wk0Ysy0=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25206876/Picture2.png">
<cite>Credit to Evan Miya for BPR</cite>
<figcaption>2023 BPR Reference</figcaption>
</figure>
<p id="rjhVqU">Turning to Mizzou’s roster the past two seasons, the following chart reflects each 1. Tiger player, 2. the year they entered the program, 3. their percentage of minutes played and BPR earned during a given season. Cells with a “-” indicate that the player did not or cannot earn data points under Dennis Gates during that season.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/QA2lTTSPdgHL8pThkbE8f31LHB0=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25206922/Picture3.png">
<cite>Credit to Evan Miya for BPR Data and Bart Torvik for Minutes Percentages</cite>
<figcaption>Note: Data Aggregated in early January 2024</figcaption>
</figure>
<p id="vBokQi">Admittedly, there’s a lot of information in this graphic. But I’m sharing it because I want to call your attention to something specific. At the bottom of each class year is the average and median of minutes played and BPR earned by players within that age group. </p>
<p id="Wl3sUq">Through two seasons, Mizzou has only seen four freshmen compete and those players are producing a modest median of 21.7% of minutes played and a 0.96 BPR. The “average freshman,” if you will. Furthermore, the marks under the sophomore and junior season categories are even less impressive. Tamar Bates represents the only non-senior to contribute both significant minutes and production.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: South Carolina at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/wD64gV0bMJmpZv178riewZY0FlM=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25237288/usa_today_19994734.jpg">
<cite>Jay Biggerstaff-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="hcnl1a">Through two seasons, Mizzou has been HEAVILY reliant upon fourth and fifth-year seniors to drive the team bus, and that they have. We know that structure is undergoing a fairly dramatic shift towards younger players. A season from now — no matter the transfers being brought in — it’s highly probable that 50%+ of their rotation will be made up of players in their first or second year.</p>
<p id="XEbEbY">The high school recruits Mizzou have signed aren’t your ordinary freshmen, but they’re not exactly the star-studded classes with multiple one-and-done prospects that programs like Duke and Kentucky have made fashionable. While next year’s freshmen figure to carry a share of the load, these are the types that will largely require development and retention to truly maximize their value. The transition is underway.</p>
<div id="g0sDbK"><div data-anthem-component="table:12209896"></div></div>
<p id="Xr1TvP">Whether or not a strategy predicated on signing quality freshmen and developing them over multiple years can work at Mizzou — or is the optimal strategy — is the exact question at the heart of this series. In the next installment, we’ll lay out the historical evidence of a program that appears to be the model for what’s transpiring in Columbia.</p>
<p id="GmC29C"></p>
https://www.rockmnation.com/missouri-tigers-basketball/2024/1/25/24044585/the-verdict-mizzou-hoops-program-building-series-part-i-a-24-month-checkupMatt Watkins2024-01-18T09:30:00-06:002024-01-18T09:30:00-06:00The Verdict: A Sidebar on Mizzou Basketball’s Double Crunch
<figure>
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Missouri at Alabama" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/4G8WaPsyheVM7ADd777Bcetvbc8=/0x127:3388x2386/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/73065348/usa_today_22309259.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Gary Cosby Jr.-USA TODAY Sports</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Mizzou’s roster depth issues are causing problems on two fronts, both of which have contributed to their 0-4 start in league play.</p> <p id="qRzSXW">Mizzou has started league play 0-4. And if you’ve watched all four contests, I wouldn’t blame you for thinking it was a single game played on repeat. Through the vast majority of all of their outings, the Mizzou Basketball Tigers have performed ably. When crunch time arrives? They morph into a team befitting of their record. The following is a sampling of data exhibiting the severity of the issue and one reason that appears to be directly causing it.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Missouri at Alabama" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/8GCtTSkQhZK_n_xZea2pl0eE5a4=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25231014/usa_today_22308623.jpg">
<cite>Gary Cosby Jr.-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<h4 id="tO2tyJ">Mizzou’s Crunch Time Issues</h4>
<p id="91pgdT">The following chart displays two things. In the first column you’ll find Mizzou’s scoring margin — how much they were winning or losing by — at the 8-minute mark of the second half. The second column displays the scoring margin for the remaining minutes of the contest starting at the 8-minute mark.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/xqgf7ZUcfv6YfF-DTu3Pg60NWts=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25232208/picture_11.png">
</figure>
<p id="b88Gno">The data here speaks for itself. Through 80% of each contest, Mizzou has been every bit the team they’ve needed to be. You ideally would want to have even better margins, but they’ve allowed themselves the chance to grab much needed wins. However, the last 20% has been a major hangup. While Alabama’s margin in the latter column was inflated by a torrid attack behind the ark, Mizzou is bleeding roughly a point per minute in the later stages of basketball games. Certainly not what you’re looking for in a rugged SEC.</p>
<h4 id="nA7DuV">Mizzou’s Minutes Crunch</h4>
<p id="q3D2cS">When the year began, the storyline was that Mizzou had acquired better depth compared to Dennis Gates’s first year in the program. And I believed that to be true. There were certainly questions about whether the top end performers could match that of year 1 — and I penned a lengthy piece on just that. But there was little doubt the depth of the roster would allow for more players to see the court and more intensity to be brought by those on it for just that reason. After all, we certainly remember last year’s defensive issues that could be explained — at least in part — by a rotation that often stopped after 6 or 7 players late in the season.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Wichita State at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/EPID3rGWKkUdtlKBrIcBnlDa7mQ=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25232275/usa_today_22029033.jpg">
<cite>Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="SbKasQ">Well, they’re right there again. With injuries to senior transfers Caleb Grill and John Tonje, Mizzou has lost two vital components to the death by depth approach. The following chart represents my preseason estimates on minute allocation. While this projection is never perfect, it’s often quite accurate — dependent on availability. The minute estimates are driven by historical data of the coaching staff’s player usage and the player allocations are driven by efficiency data — and history with the staff, where applicable. You’ll find the players ranked by those preseason forecasts with the estimate in the middle column. The “Min%” column is simply the actual percentage of minutes played — of all the player’s possible minutes — with the deviation column representing the difference in the two figures.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/pMu5qZPSkuXoOIlK-tGvfw3DlhU=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25232219/picture_12.png">
<cite>Projected data via Matt Watkins; SEC Minutes data from Bart Torvik</cite>
</figure>
<p id="EYZMAM">In sorting through an extended history of data at Cleveland State as well as <a href="https://www.tomahawknation.com/">Florida State</a> — where Dennis Gates cut his teeth on the Florida State model of relying heavily on roster depth — it was rare to ever see a player crack 80% of minutes. The theory is simple. Much like Mike Anderson’s Fastest 40 Minutes, Dennis Gates’s defensive theory is founded upon disruption. A disruptive defense is an active one. An active one requires max effort. Mizzou unsurprisingly rates top 15 in the percentage of defensive possessions they apply a press — per Synergy Sports. </p>
<p id="FWInog">Yet here we are with three players exceeding the rare threshold of 80% of minutes played. A cavernous slot appears in the form of John Tonje and Caleb Grill. The two players were projected to play 120%+ of the team’s 500% of minutes — or for the traditionally inclined, 48 of the team’s 200 minutes each outing. While their absence is felt in terms of production, it’s equally observed in terms of where the remaining minutes are allocated.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Missouri at Kentucky" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/NSaE3HVic1NqeK8YXP3-gQBPcAM=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25215695/usa_today_22255814.jpg">
<cite>Jordan Prather-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="x9StPY">While I’ll be the first to admit I undershot Sean East’s minutes — and mentioned it was a very real possibility in his player preview — the rest of the projections prior to Caleb Grill’s injury were largely solid. And then disaster struck. Already short Tonje’s minutes load, they were without a second top 5 player — and those minutes had to get sucked up. Tamar Bates has performed at a really high level in picking up the slack, but his minutes increase represents only a third of the lost minutes value of those two injured players.</p>
<p id="f5M5gn">Dennis Gates — at least through four games of league play — has decided to consolidate minutes amongst his most proven performers. And that has allowed Mizzou to remain competitive through large portions of games. Yet that provides a catch-22 situation. Do you continue to play the way you want early in games and pay the bill late? Or do you deviate by offering less than ideal substitutions earlier in games and run the risk of not being in a position to win when crunch time arrives? After all, Mizzou’s scoring punch since entering league play has been highly concentrated.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/86j0aPvxX54ofEkGj8dbIXo0S70=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25232263/picture_13.png">
</figure>
<p id="9GCg9n">Early on, it’s fairly clear that Gates has chosen the first track. Mizzou has four players averaging 70%+ of minutes, two just above 40% and one just above 20%. Quietly, the rotation has been trimmed to something more comparable to a short bench than the traditional 10-11 man rotation employed by his mentor — and apparently the marching orders for the 23-24 team. The minutes projection looks nothing close to reality. And it’s hard to argue with the thought process. Yet, the bill came due in each contest and Mizzou was delinquent in payment.</p>
<p id="8G27oM">There is no good answer for a team that was competing to win basketball games. Had the opposite track been chosen, it’s highly probable the scoring margins by game section would’ve been altered. We’re left only to question what effect the assembled depth would’ve had on the season. We only know the result of it’s absence.</p>
<p id="QGtbpg"></p>
<p id="1CE05t"></p>
https://www.rockmnation.com/2024/1/18/24041742/the-verdict-a-sidebar-on-mizzou-basketballs-double-crunchMatt Watkins2023-12-24T09:00:00-06:002023-12-24T09:00:00-06:00The Verdict: Braggin’ Rights Autopsy
<figure>
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Jimmy V Classic-Florida Atlantic at Illinois" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/3E_R7l-bUhoEibwfZQP4l2IYz1k=/0x0:3760x2507/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/72995401/usa_today_22047935.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Brad Penner-USA TODAY Sports</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Mizzou came to St. Louis looking for a performance to rejuvenate their campaign. They left with a landslide defeat.</p> <p id="zMke0e"><em>Welcome to The Verdict series. You may have become acquainted with these pieces in the past, and in efforts to improve them, we’ve made a few changes. Prior to each game receiving the full treatment, we’re going to release a series of pre-game keys to watch for in each matchup. After the results are in, we’ll return to those keys and analyze the performance with data and film. Credits for statistics to Ken Pomeroy, Synergy, Pivot Analysis and Matt Watkins. Film has been graciously provided by Matt Harris.</em></p>
<p id="9Ca09r"><em>Note: Pre-Game keys are in </em>standard font<em>.</em><em><strong> Postgame additions in bold and italics.</strong></em></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="IrkRWX">
<p id="vrRDkQ"><em><strong>If you thought I had left a lump of coal in your stocking after last week’s mid-season review, consider Friday’s result far more odious. A mostly lifeless Tiger squad was rolled over en route to a 97-73 Illini victory. The foes in orange appeared to have taken this one personally after last year’s drubbing. Terrence Shannon Jr., Coleman Hawkins and Quincey Guerrier paced the Illini with a combined 73 points, drawing even with Mizzou as a group. </strong></em></p>
<p id="uR4VJm"><em><strong>While Mizzou’s performances through the first 50 days of the season had given some level of concern, everything finally fell apart at once before a sellout crowd at the Enterprise Center. It was a demolition from start to finish. So as to not entirely ruin your holiday, we’re going to give Matt Harris — our resident video coordinator — the holiday off and spare your vision from reliving the matter.</strong></em></p>
<h3 id="Rll3Zw"><strong>Open Strong</strong></h3>
<p id="b3BbyN">As the introduction strongly focused on, Braggin’ Rights is a unique environment in college athletics. The arena is never <em>not</em> loud. Nail a three pointer? It’s loud. Don’t get back in transition. It’s loud. It’s always loud. Momentum has proven to be an important factor in these contests. </p>
<p id="ASo4xe">Mizzou getting off to a fast start is imperative. Over the last 15 Braggin’ Rights games played in St. Louis, the eventual winner <em><strong>never</strong></em> trailed at halftime. In one of those contests, the teams were even at the break. In the other fourteen, whoever won the first 20 minutes won the game. During that time the average margin at halftime has been 9.8 points. The eventual average margin at the games’ conclusion is 9.2. Needless to say, what happens early is a strong indicator of what’s to come.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Illinois at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/eH3RDLs0lvIU41Q5JMyhe-8pVmI=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25182265/usa_today_19673205.jpg">
<cite>Jeff Curry-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="TjMgc1">Mizzou has been plagued by inconsistency issues all season long. They saw a 9-point lead at Kansas get erased in favor of a 12-point deficit at half just minutes later. They led Memphis by 14 early only to see the lead evaporate and take a 15-point loss. The mounted a furious comeback against Minnesota, overcoming a 19-point deficit with 12 minutes to play.</p>
<p id="WD0ma2">Though Mizzou hasn’t yet been able to turn up the pressure in creating a stream of steals and open court conversions off of them, if ever there was a time to do so it’s shortly after tipoff Friday night. Whatever is needed to get the Tiger faithful on their feet early must be done. </p>
<p id="IoyWvg">Start strong. Stay strong. </p>
<p id="dxhEbz"><em><strong>The good news was that this key was on point. The bad news? Mizzou failed in every respect trying to achieve it. Noah Carter notched the first points of the contest after Mizzou secured the opening tip. The Tigers would never hold another lead. Dennis Gates’s squad trailed by 25 points at halftime. There was a time midway through the first stanza that a pair of Tamar Bates free throws cut the lead to 14-9. Mizzou proceeded to take three contested mid-range shots followed by missing three consecutive open attempts behind the arc. The outcome would never again be in question. Mizzou’s defense was anything but disruptive. The unit which has scuffled in generating thefts forced a mere 13.3% Illinois turnover rate. That figure represents the fourth lowest on the season for the Illini and the smallest in the Dennis Gates era. </strong></em></p>
<h3 id="8fDPfu"><strong>Get the Ball Screen Offense Humming</strong></h3>
<p id="21ZVQe">Through eleven contests, Sean East II has easily been Mizzou’s most productive offensive player. As Sean goes, so too go the Tigers. Over his last six contests, East is averaging 19.7 points per outing, compared with 14 points per game in his first five. Sean is the engine that drives Mizzou’s half-court offense.</p>
<p id="HB0uxN">Parsing his data a Synergy Sports, a universal truth is discovered: Mizzou’s reliance on Sean East is largely driven by his work in the pick and roll. On the season, Sean’s ball screen offense usage his risen to 42.4% which rates 94th percentile nationally. His scoring efficiency on those actions is 1.068 points per possession, which rates 89th percentile. East’s work in the ball screen game has been nothing short of phenomenal. Yet, if a nerd on the internet can tell you this, the opponent <em>assuredly </em>knows it, too. Our esteemed colleague Matt Harris went as far as publishing a far more in-depth piece just two weeks back on this exact topic: <a href="https://www.rockmnation.com/2023/12/9/23988194/missouri-tigers-basketball-analysis-sean-east-pick-and-rolls-dennis-gates-border-war-kansas">Mizzou Hoops: How Sean East uses pick-and-rolls unlock to unlock his potential - Rock M Nation</a></p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Missouri at Kansas" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/wnCs0qQR9ZWzy8vKnKwYxNVesbg=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25179489/usa_today_22130020.jpg">
<cite>Jay Biggerstaff-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="jbF1Sp">Several opponents have had the ability to slow East down in these actions. Whether it’s icing ball screens — situating the on-ball defender to force East to the sideline — or hard-hedging high ball screens — where it appears the defenders may switch, but only momentarily, allowing Sean’s defender to recover after he’s pushed horizontally — teams have thrown a lot of defensive coverages his way. And some have been successful in spurts.</p>
<p id="YxpMxE">When it’s not Sean piloting these actions, Mizzou relies on Nick Honor to step up and take the lead. For a more in-depth read on Honor’s offensive profile, see: <a href="https://www.rockmnation.com/2023/12/17/24001794/missouri-tigers-basketball-analysis-nick-honor-shot-selection-dennis-gates-seton-hall">Mizzou Hoops: Nick Honor’s shot selection hints at a rotation under strain - Rock M Nation</a>. Honor hasn’t been as dynamic but does offer the ever-present ability to punish defenders going under the screener or in instances of sloppy communication via the pull-up snipe.</p>
<p id="UdbXZk">Mizzou must have a counter to these looks, whether it’s slipping or popping the screener as Mizzou often does with Noah Carter. Or if it’s putting more faith in the 7’5” Connor Vanover to be an active rim roller and shooter, Sean’s partner in crime on these actions must be active and efficient. For if they aren’t, Illinois’ athletic — and efficient — defense will make quick work of the Tigers’ preferred form of half-court offense. And the Tigers have yet to get much traction out of their Point series this season that ripped the Illini to shreds last December.</p>
<ul>
<li id="1EEwNb">Mizzou PnR Ballhandler Offense: 16.3% Usage — 0.942 PPP</li>
<li id="sUYutQ">Illinois PnR Ballhandler Defense: 19.8% Usage — 0.602 PPP</li>
<li id="xsQlEo"><em><strong>Result: 16.5% Usage — 1.143 PPP</strong></em></li>
</ul>
<p id="VbaKMo"></p>
<ul>
<li id="JU9rmF">Mizzou PnR Derived* Offense: 31.3% Usage — 0.970 PPP</li>
<li id="kvdblc">Illinois PnR Derived Defense: 31.7% Usage — 0.690 PPP</li>
<li id="jWaLSs"><em><strong>Result: 31.8% Usage — 0.926 PPP</strong></em></li>
</ul>
<p id="TmjEs4"></p>
<ul>
<li id="F5s9Mv">Mizzou PnR Roller Offense: 5.0% Usage — 0.907 PPP</li>
<li id="ZrYB3z">Illinois PnR Roller Defense: 6.1% Usage — 1.180 PPP</li>
<li id="Pu8sG0"><em><strong>Result: 9.4% Usage — 0.875 PPP</strong></em></li>
</ul>
<p id="yAJEmm">*Includes offense produced on first passes from PnR sets.</p>
<p id="2Vwnyd"><em><strong>If there was a glimmer of sunshine in this game, it was that Sean East was able to put up a typical Sean East stat line. It wasn’t exceptional by any means, but 18 points on a 53% eFG while being at the top of the scout is solid work. Those numbers heavily influence the ballhandler results above. </strong></em></p>
<p id="NsGdqR"><em><strong>As for the bad news, Sean wasn’t able to take flight until the second half, much too late to have any impact on the outcome. Worse yet, his partners in crime in the old-fashioned pick and rolls didn’t provide the needed oomph to make the Illini defense pay. What’s more, when I was constructing these keys I was under the assumption that Mizzou had established a consistent, if not impressive attack from beyond the arc. Mizzou made only one attempt in the first half. The results are circular. If Mizzou’s not holding defenders by knocking down jump shots, the ball screens are less effective. If the ball screens are less effective, the spot up shooters won’t get the prime chances. This was a case of the former. Instead, Mizzou was forced into attempting 23 contested mid-range opportunities in their half-court offense. They attempted just 50 field goals in total in their half-court sets. </strong></em></p>
<h3 id="VEi7Qb"><strong>Play Your Best Game Inside</strong></h3>
<p id="Bq7EGh">Mizzou must recover from the bludgeoning that Seton Hall applied to the Tigers’ rim defense just five days ago. The Pirates were efficient in all manners in the paint, posting an absurd 18 of 22 in close range attempts. Not only must Mizzou recover, they must do it quickly. Illinois offers a similar — if not better — method of attacking opponents defenses that Seton Hall possessed.</p>
<p id="2c0a51">The Illini seek to score in myriad of ways, but all roads lead to the rack. Brad Underwood’s group will take jump shots. Terrence Shannon, Luke Goode and Southern Illinois transfer Marcus Domask won’t shy away. Shannon, in the midst of an All-American start to his season, leads the way, and you’d be well-advised not to sleep on Goode, as both are capable of raining down backbreakers from beyond the arc. Yet focusing on any shooting prowess of Illinois’ squad seemingly neglects the bigger concern.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Illinois at Tennessee" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/5qBLB9QhouyI2RUQeR-zYMWaURM=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25179816/usa_today_22072459.jpg">
<cite>Randy Sartin-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="l4S2IJ">Illinois is going to punish the paint. Though the actions they use vary, Mizzou’s interior defense must be prepared. The Illini will post Domask and Kofi Cockburn’s mini-me, Dain Dainja. Both have been elite in converting chances on the block. Illinois will apply pressure in transition, most typically with Shannon racing the court on-ball, but most of Illinois’ deep squad is comfortable as well. Dainja, Quincey Guerrier and Ty Rodgers have been the Illini’s most common cutters away from the ball, with Guerrier in particular a concern due to his size and athleticism. Perhaps of most concern, Underwood’s team rebounds 35.2% of their own misses. Dainja, Guerrier and the versatile Coleman Hawkins lead the way in that category. For a Tiger team that has struggled seemingly for years in cleaning forced misses, this presents a massive challenge. </p>
<p id="hWcoIp">What it all adds up to is Mizzou will be facing a squad that attempts only 46.6% of their shots via jumpers and 42.7% of their shots at the rim. Compare with a Mizzou team who themselves attempts jumpers 53.6% and rim chances 36.7%. The right guys from Illinois can make you pay if you leave them open, but the directive is clear. And Mizzou must be up to the task if they care to brag.</p>
<ul>
<li id="jt2zkq">Illinois Rim Offense: 42.7% Usage — 1.22 PPS</li>
<li id="rJq2YX">Mizzou Rim Defense: 39.6% Usage — 1.13 PPS</li>
<li id="us0Abs"><em><strong>Result: 23.1% Usage — 1.47 PPS</strong></em></li>
</ul>
<p id="tXRO2k"></p>
<ul>
<li id="UWegPf">Illinois Transition Offense: 18.1% Usage — 1.026 PPP</li>
<li id="OXolPn">Mizzou Transition Defense: 16.6% Usage — 0.952 PPP</li>
<li id="mx18xk"><em><strong>Result: 26.9% Usage — 1.375 PPP</strong></em></li>
</ul>
<p id="s1Jycl"></p>
<ul>
<li id="YYyarL">Illinois Post-Up Derived Offense: 9.7% Usage — 1.074 PPP</li>
<li id="iYi8Xr">Mizzou Post-Up Derived Defense: 5.2% Usage — 0.783 PPP</li>
<li id="FzgtFl"><em><strong>Result: 4.5% Usage — 0.000 PPP</strong></em></li>
</ul>
<p id="Iskesi"></p>
<ul>
<li id="hz7wfr">Illinois Offensive Rebound Putback Offense: 7.4% Usage — 1.274 PPP</li>
<li id="LgbVQd">Mizzou Offensive Rebound Putback Defense: 7.1% Usage — 1.270 PPP</li>
<li id="GlIfTO"><em><strong>Result: 7.9% Usage — 0.857 PPP</strong></em></li>
</ul>
<p id="S6RFaQ"></p>
<ul>
<li id="YWUHT0">Illinois Unguarded Catch & Shoot Offense: 54.3% of attempts — 1.17 PPS</li>
<li id="e8iQi5">Mizzou Unguarded Catch & Shoot Defense: 55.4% of attempts — 1.06 PPS</li>
<li id="HLCE4e"><em><strong>Result: 75% of attempts — 0.714 PPS</strong></em></li>
</ul>
<p id="7Zbdnb"><em><strong>Had you told me before the game that Mizzou would’ve posted the above figures, I probably would have said that Mizzou had a chance in the game. Well, except for one. Mizzou’s transition defense was simply non-existent. The Tigers allowed just two points in transition off of live ball turnovers yet managed to concede 31 additional points on the break. How is that possible? Well, it was a matter of neglect. Mizzou’s errant three-point shooting simply jumpstarted the Illini’s break. Mizzou defenders were consistently tardy in getting back, seemingly surprised that Illinois dare push off of Tigers’ misses. </strong></em></p>
<p id="1UWQwU"><em><strong>In the half-court, Mizzou was well schooled in what to take away. Mizzou consistently helped, dug and rotated to stop dribble penetration. Unfortunately, the Illini were not going to be denied as they hit dagger after dagger from outside. Mizzou’s defense was slow to adjust — perhaps understandably — and conceded 21 uncontested jumpers off the catch. Frankly, Mizzou was a bit fortunate that Illinois didn’t convert more — Marcus Domask is mostly to thank for that. The Tigers DID suppress Illinois at the rim, at least in volume. What they gave up in the process was equally as damaging.</strong></em></p>
https://www.rockmnation.com/2023/12/24/24013519/the-verdict-braggin-rights-autopsyMatt Watkins2023-12-22T11:00:00-06:002023-12-22T11:00:00-06:00The Verdict: Braggin’ Rights Pre-Game Keys
<figure>
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Illinois at Missouri" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/f4_J9IPZDa72tj_P7H4v6ecMJiw=/0x0:6153x4102/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/72990664/usa_today_19672734.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Jeff Curry-USA TODAY Sports</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Mizzou has one last chance to notch their marquee win of the non-conference schedule. What will the Tigers need to do to claim Braggin’ Rights?</p> <p id="zMke0e"><em>Welcome to The Verdict series. You may have become acquainted with these pieces in the past, and in efforts to improve them, we’ve made a few changes. Prior to each game receiving the full treatment, we’re going to release a series of pre-game keys to watch for in each matchup. After the results are in, we’ll return to those keys and analyze the performance with data and film. Credits for statistics to Ken Pomeroy, Synergy, Pivot Analysis and Matt Watkins. Film has been graciously provided by Matt Harris.</em></p>
<p id="9Ca09r"><em>Note: Pre-Game keys are in </em>standard font<em>. </em></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="IrkRWX">
<p id="vrRDkQ">Now THIS is a neutral site game I can get behind.</p>
<p id="c4Kq8W">For those who follow my musings across multiple platforms you’ll be unsurprised to know I’m generally opposed to college basketball’s obsession with playing games outside of home arenas. The reasons are extensive and won’t be shared here. But if there is one game that is made for a demilitarized zone, it’s Mizzou and Illinois hoops. </p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/66jMBOjnCI3_3c2a3u3AuceTf14=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25179425/1200x0.jpg">
<cite>The Alton Telegraph</cite>
</figure>
<p id="D2KEHQ">Since December of 1983, the Tigers and Fightin’ Illini have squared off every season at the equidistant outpost. In all but one of those years the game has taken place in St. Louis — an unfortunate exception being in 2020 due to Covid. Whether it was the old St. Louis Arena or the current Enterprise Center, these two teams will face off in the Gateway City for the 42nd time. They had met only 11 times on their respective campuses prior to the inception of the series. This history of this rivalry is rooted in neutral territory.</p>
<p id="Jhpz4Y">Mizzou has fared quite well in recent years, having won four of five contests with their foes from Champaign. The series stands at 33-20 in the Illini’s favor, 26-15 in St. Louis. From a Tigers’ perspective, the affair was pockmarked in the 2000s, with Mizzou losing 9 straight from 2000-2008. </p>
<p id="z9ebcP">Triple overtime thrillers. Popcorn falling from the stands. Mascots getting tackled on the court. The cheerleaders’ feats of strength. Javon Pickett. Kobe Brown. Kiwane Garris. Norm Stewart. Lou Henson. Bill Self. Marlo Finner. This series has something for everyone.</p>
<div id="HjaXxY"><div style="left: 0; width: 100%; height: 0; position: relative; padding-bottom: 56.25%;"><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/AdChUoMSAHc?rel=0" style="top: 0; left: 0; width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; border: 0;" allowfullscreen="" scrolling="no" allow="accelerometer; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share;"></iframe></div></div>
<p id="pIcadX">Without regard to the quality of the teams this is an event that’s circled on the sports calendar. Illini partisans decked out in garish hunter orange. Tiger faithful sporting a smattering of black and gold. A near-even split down the center court line. The joint is perpetually jumpin’ no matter who is running.</p>
<p id="kYKGEe">I-L-L...Z-O-U. If you know, you know.</p>
<p id="RjVaa1">Holiday cheer (and angst) brimming with every single possession. Braggin’ Rights has evolved into one of the more truly unique events in collegiate sports. A TRUE neutral site affair. And one I personally love. Friday will mark my 18th consecutive in attendance in St. Louis. While some outings are more enjoyable than others, it’s never a bad time. Even if the temperatures are solidly below zero!</p>
<p id="zXVXjB">Mizzou faces a stiff test this year, as is routine. The Tigers enter the contest 7-4 having lost their last two contests to Kansas and Seton Hall. Illinois enters 9-2 with recent wins against Rutgers and a suddenly quality Florida Atlantic program. The stage is set. Throw the records out the window. </p>
<p id="s8YrKi">It’s time to brag.</p>
<h3 id="Rll3Zw"><strong>Open Strong</strong></h3>
<p id="b3BbyN">As the introduction strongly focused on, Braggin’ Rights is a unique environment in college athletics. The arena is never <em>not</em> loud. Nail a three pointer? It’s loud. Don’t get back in transition. It’s loud. It’s always loud. Momentum has proven to be an important factor in these contests. </p>
<p id="ASo4xe">Mizzou getting off to a fast start is imperative. Over the last 15 Braggin’ Rights games played in St. Louis, the eventual winner <em><strong>never</strong></em> trailed at halftime. In one of those contests, the teams were even at the break. In the other fourteen, whoever won the first 20 minutes won the game. During that time the average margin at halftime has been 9.8 points. The eventual average margin at the games’ conclusion is 9.2. Needless to say, what happens early is a strong indicator of what’s to come.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Illinois at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/ljEGidMYxbTK3I1PQrQaBuI2xtU=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24318250/usa_today_19673199.jpg">
<cite>Jeff Curry-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="TjMgc1">Mizzou has been plagued by inconsistency issues all season long. They saw a 9-point lead at Kansas get erased in favor of a 12-point deficit at half just minutes later. They led Memphis by 14 early only to see the lead evaporate and take a 15-point loss. The mounted a furious comeback against Minnesota, overcoming a 19-point deficit with 12 minutes to play.</p>
<p id="WD0ma2">Though Mizzou hasn’t yet been able to turn up the pressure in creating a stream of steals and open court conversions off of them, if ever there was a time to do so it’s shortly after tipoff Friday night. Whatever is needed to get the Tiger faithful on their feet early must be done. </p>
<p id="IoyWvg">Start strong. Stay strong. </p>
<h3 id="8fDPfu"><strong>Get the Ball Screen Offense Humming</strong></h3>
<p id="21ZVQe">Through eleven contests, Sean East II has easily been Mizzou’s most productive offensive player. As Sean goes, so too go the Tigers. Over his last six contests, East is averaging 19.7 points per outing, compared with 14 points per game in his first five. Sean is the engine that drives Mizzou’s half-court offense.</p>
<p id="HB0uxN">Parsing his data a Synergy Sports, a universal truth is discovered: Mizzou’s reliance on Sean East is largely driven by his work in the pick and roll. On the season, Sean’s ball screen offense usage his risen to 42.4% which rates 94th percentile nationally. His scoring efficiency on those actions is 1.068 points per possession, which rates 89th percentile. East’s work in the ball screen game has been nothing short of phenomenal. Yet, if a nerd on the internet can tell you this, the opponent <em>assuredly </em>knows it, too. Our esteemed colleague Matt Harris went as far as publishing a far more in-depth piece just two weeks back on this exact topic: <a href="https://www.rockmnation.com/2023/12/9/23988194/missouri-tigers-basketball-analysis-sean-east-pick-and-rolls-dennis-gates-border-war-kansas">Mizzou Hoops: How Sean East uses pick-and-rolls unlock to unlock his potential - Rock M Nation</a></p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Missouri at Kansas" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/wnCs0qQR9ZWzy8vKnKwYxNVesbg=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25179489/usa_today_22130020.jpg">
<cite>Jay Biggerstaff-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="jbF1Sp">Several opponents have had the ability to slow East down in these actions. Whether it’s icing ball screens — situating the on-ball defender to force East to the sideline — or hard-hedging high ball screens — where it appears the defenders may switch, but only momentarily, allowing Sean’s defender to recover after he’s pushed horizontally — teams have thrown a lot of defensive coverages his way. And some have been successful in spurts.</p>
<p id="YxpMxE">When it’s not Sean piloting these actions, Mizzou relies on Nick Honor to step up and take the lead. For a more in-depth read on Honor’s offensive profile, see: <a href="https://www.rockmnation.com/2023/12/17/24001794/missouri-tigers-basketball-analysis-nick-honor-shot-selection-dennis-gates-seton-hall">Mizzou Hoops: Nick Honor’s shot selection hints at a rotation under strain - Rock M Nation</a>. Honor hasn’t been as dynamic but does offer the ever-present ability to punish defenders going under the screener or in instances of sloppy communication via the pull-up snipe.</p>
<p id="UdbXZk">Mizzou must have a counter to these looks, whether it’s slipping or popping the screener as Mizzou often does with Noah Carter. Or if it’s putting more faith in the 7’5” Connor Vanover to be an active rim roller and shooter, Sean’s partner in crime on these actions must be active and efficient. For if they aren’t, Illinois’ athletic — and efficient — defense will make quick work of the Tigers’ preferred form of half-court offense. And the Tigers have yet to get much traction out of their Point series this season that ripped the Illini to shreds last December.</p>
<ul>
<li id="1EEwNb">Mizzou PnR Ballhandler Offense: 16.3% Usage — 0.942 PPP</li>
<li id="sUYutQ">Illinois PnR Ballhandler Defense: 19.8% Usage — 0.602 PPP</li>
</ul>
<p id="Ex9fJm"></p>
<ul>
<li id="JU9rmF">Mizzou PnR Derived* Offense: 31.3% Usage — 0.970 PPP</li>
<li id="kvdblc">Illinois PnR Derived Defense: 31.7% Usage — 0.690 PPP</li>
</ul>
<p id="CXnIDH"></p>
<ul>
<li id="F5s9Mv">Mizzou PnR Roller Offense: 5.0% Usage — 0.907 PPP</li>
<li id="ZrYB3z">Illinois PnR Roller Defense: 6.1% Usage — 1.180 PPP</li>
</ul>
<p id="yAJEmm">*Includes offense produced on first passes from PnR sets.</p>
<h3 id="VEi7Qb"><strong>Play Your Best Game Inside</strong></h3>
<p id="Bq7EGh">Mizzou must recover from the bludgeoning that Seton Hall applied to the Tigers’ rim defense just five days ago. The Pirates were efficient in all manners in the paint, posting an absurd 18 of 22 in close range attempts. Not only must Mizzou recover, they must do it quickly. Illinois offers a similar — if not better — method of attacking opponents defenses that Seton Hall possessed.</p>
<p id="2c0a51">The Illini seek to score in myriad of ways, but all roads lead to the rack. Brad Underwood’s group will take jump shots. Terrence Shannon, Luke Goode and Southern Illinois transfer Marcus Domask won’t shy away. Shannon, in the midst of an All-American start to his season, leads the way, and you’d be well-advised not to sleep on Goode, as both are capable of raining down backbreakers from beyond the arc. Yet focusing on any shooting prowess of Illinois’ squad seemingly neglects the bigger concern.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Illinois at Tennessee" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/5qBLB9QhouyI2RUQeR-zYMWaURM=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25179816/usa_today_22072459.jpg">
<cite>Randy Sartin-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="l4S2IJ">Illinois is going to punish the paint. Though the actions they use vary, Mizzou’s interior defense must be prepared. The Illini will post Domask and Kofi Cockburn’s mini-me, Dain Dainja. Both have been elite in converting chances on the block. Illinois will apply pressure in transition, most typically with Shannon racing the court on-ball, but most of Illinois’ deep squad is comfortable as well. Dainja, Quincey Guerrier and Ty Rodgers have been the Illini’s most common cutters away from the ball, with Guerrier in particular a concern due to his size and athleticism. Perhaps of most concern, Underwood’s team rebounds 35.2% of their own misses. Dainja, Guerrier and the versatile Coleman Hawkins lead the way in that category. For a Tiger team that has struggled seemingly for years in cleaning forced misses, this presents a massive challenge. </p>
<p id="hWcoIp">What it all adds up to is Mizzou will be facing a squad that attempts only 46.6% of their shots via jumpers and 42.7% of their shots at the rim. Compare with a Mizzou team who themselves attempts jumpers 53.6% and rim chances 36.7%. The right guys from Illinois can make you pay if you leave them open, but the directive is clear. And Mizzou must be up to the task if they care to brag.</p>
<ul>
<li id="jt2zkq">Illinois Rim Offense: 42.7% Usage — 1.22 PPS</li>
<li id="rJq2YX">Mizzou Rim Defense: 39.6% Usage — 1.13 PPS</li>
</ul>
<p id="whQgD7"></p>
<ul>
<li id="YYyarL">Illinois Post-Up Derived Offense: 9.7% Usage — 1.074 PPP</li>
<li id="iYi8Xr">Mizzou Post-Up Derived Defense: 5.2% Usage — 0.783 PPP</li>
</ul>
<p id="JZqcHN"></p>
<ul>
<li id="hz7wfr">Illinois Offensive Rebound Putback Offense: 7.4% Usage — 1.274 PPP</li>
<li id="LgbVQd">Mizzou Offensive Rebound Putback Defense: 7.1% Usage — 1.270 PPP</li>
</ul>
<p id="yabBBh"></p>
<ul>
<li id="YWUHT0">Illinois Unguarded Catch & Shoot Offense: 54.3% of attempts — 1.17 PPS</li>
<li id="e8iQi5">Mizzou Unguarded Catch & Shoot Defense: 55.4% of attempts — 1.06 PPS</li>
</ul>
https://www.rockmnation.com/missouri-tigers-basketball/2023/12/22/24010272/the-verdict-braggin-rights-pre-game-keysMatt Watkins2023-12-20T08:00:00-06:002023-12-20T08:00:00-06:00The Verdict: An Identity Crisis
<figure>
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Seton Hall at Missouri" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/H3AdKsysAnKXjjltDb8hBzEUTDU=/0x1:3215x2144/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/72982081/usa_today_22128293.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>On Sunday afternoon the Mizzou Tigers wobbled across the third-of-the-way guidepost of the season. We’re left with as many questions as we have answers about their true identity.</p> <p id="zMke0e">On Sunday afternoon as I was watching the Mizzou Basketball team find itself down by 19 points — again — I had an epiphany of sorts. No, I didn’t turn the game off. No, I didn’t find another way to occupy my time.</p>
<p id="nK5jtB">Instead, I opted to scrap the individual game review for a bigger-picture piece. Mizzou, for all intents and purposes, had put together one of their worst showings in the early stages of the Dennis Gates era. Anyone who followed a year ago knew an outing like this was possible. Last year these games would prove to be outliers and typically came against teams well-suited to lay the hammer down to a team that wasn’t firing on all cylinders. That Mizzou squad had an unshakeable identity, for better (mostly) or worse.</p>
<p id="vbf9Dd">Sunday was not that. No, Seton Hall — a team situated 88th in Ken Pomeroy’s rankings entering the game — did whatever they wanted on offense for 40 full minutes. While Mizzou was able to cobble together an efficient outing offensively, it was simply a matter of “too little, too late.” </p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Seton Hall at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/6EYqL8jEsUClN6G3aDaAl7g1zbg=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25172525/usa_today_22128290.jpg">
<cite>Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="w2OgcL">While we could certainly talk about my pre-game keys, notably “Protect the Rim” — Mizzou was eviscerated with a 39.3% rim rate allowed and an astonishing 1.64 PPS conceded. We could also talk about “Don’t Killed on the Defensive Glass” — Mizzou allowed Seton Hall to rebound 46.2% of their rare misses. We could show you an hour-long stretch of clips detailing how Mizzou wasn’t up to the task in front of a sparse, but highly partisan crowd.</p>
<p id="2MSG3M">No, I didn’t think that was the best use of everyone’s time. Because my epiphany wasn’t about the details of this defensive quartering. It was about the bigger picture of trying to figure out who this team is trying to be. A third of the way through the season, I’m simply not sure where to begin. What better time to address a few issues that have had me perplexed?</p>
<p id="HAlzeI">A 7-4 record is not the end of the world, but there are significant concerns. In five games thus far, Mizzou has trailed by 15 or more points. They’ve managed to win two of these contests — Minnesota and South Carolina State. Mizzou had appeared to move past that unsightly stretch of ball during Thanksgiving week — where they dropped a contest to Jackson State and struggled for long portions in two other buy games — but Sunday showed that wasn’t entirely true. The Tigers’ season is teetering between a tournament-worthy campaign and one that will end under far dimmer lights. The questions are many, but the answers so far have been too few.</p>
<p id="spO7sK">Before I rattle off a list of grievances in true Festivus spirit, I do have several qualifiers to offer. First, Mizzou has been fighting various absences, be it Connor Vanover’s suspension or injury and the subsequent fallout with senior transfers Caleb Grill and John Tonje. Second, there was little doubt this was going to be a transition year before a slew of blue-chip recruits descended upon Columbia. It was just a matter of degree. Yet even considering those factors, there are things fully within the control of this year’s teams that have seemingly gone sideways. Below are a scatterbrained assortment of five.</p>
<h3 id="4hlAXg"><strong>The Pace is Gone</strong></h3>
<p id="HgKRHq">Mizzou’s adjusted tempo through eleven games this year is 67.6 possessions per game, which rates 255th nationally. The faster you go, the higher you rank. In terms of raw possessions, Mizzou is averaging 68.9 possessions per contest. Just a year ago, Mizzou’s full season adjusted tempo was 68.7 possessions per game but rated 105th. Through eleven games a season back, Mizzou was averaging 74.8 possessions per game. That’s a stark contrast to what we’re now seeing. All indicators have the Tigers skewing towards a half-court ballclub.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Seton Hall at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/meRXmT111ASowkAVagz1-UvTx3M=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25172528/usa_today_22128341.jpg">
<cite>Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="CKElkk">What’s more notable is that some of the key metrics that underpin an up-tempo club and Mizzou’s slippage year over year:</p>
<ul>
<li id="E0hdNr"> 22-23 Defensive Turnover Rate: 24.0% — 6th Best</li>
<li id="QOVv4h"> 22-23 Defensive Turnover Rate through 11 games: 26.6% — 5th Best</li>
<li id="Rgq75B"> 23-24 Defensive Turnover Rate: 21.0% — 45th Best</li>
</ul>
<p id="OEZiav"></p>
<ul>
<li id="80VVjK">22-23 Transition Offense: 22% Usage (98th %) — 1.100 PPP (80th %)</li>
<li id="8bQpAg">22-23 Transition Offense through 11 games: 26.4% — 1.157 PPP</li>
<li id="xmltRv">23-24 Transition Offense: 20.4% Usage (86th %) — 1.023 PPP (33rd %)</li>
</ul>
<p id="fC4vNx">The evidence is fairly straightforward; Mizzou isn’t generating the same frequency of defensive turnovers as we’ve become accustomed to. They’re consequently able to run less and when they do, they’ve been far less efficient. This isn’t a problem in of itself, namely if you’re a structured half-court team that prides itself in shot suppression and rebounding as well as grinding out offensive possessions on the other end. A brief look at the substitution patterns suggests they’re not content at settling into a half-court affair and DO want to juice the pace. But it’s simply not happening near the level it was a year ago nor the mark which it needs to reach.</p>
<h3 id="LuDYDf"><strong>Mizzou is Playing All of the Players</strong></h3>
<p id="fHbsbI">Mizzou’s aforementioned substitution patterns thus far have resulted in 35.8% of minutes delegated to non-starters. The minutes played by Mizzou’s bench ranks 78th most among D-I programs, 13th most among high-major programs. Dennis Gates has been very open about having a deep bench and utilizing every inch of it. For anyone who isn’t aware of Gates’ strong ties to the Florida State program and what that means, allow me to summarize — that’s exactly how the Seminoles operate. In the last 4 years Gates or his trusted consigliere Charlton Young sat on the FSU bench, the Seminoles rated top-35 each season in this metric.</p>
<p id="sPPcRF">In theory, I have absolutely no qualms about it. Rotating fresh bodies in and out of the lineup in an effort to wear opponents down is a viable strategy. Leonard Hamilton has proven it. Even Mike Anderson when he had the Mizzou program rolling did the same. The theory is sound. But it presupposes that the bench players you're utilizing are providing you a strategic advantage.</p>
<p id="MeFXNB">Depth is great if it’s providing a positive impact. Through 11 games, we’re not seeing those bellwether data points such as elite turnover rates forced and transition offense success manifesting in Mizzou’s favor. Yet, Mizzou is routinely dipping deep into the reserves as if they might. Thirteen Tigers have appeared in seven or more contests. Nine have appeared in every game they’ve dressed. </p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Seton Hall at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/bqgFSm7uSjf7Ej1hL7e3umAjPmc=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25172530/usa_today_22127631.jpg">
<cite>Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="kzx1lx">Although Sunday’s contest may have non-strategic explanations — rotating bodies may have been necessary to address glaring performance deficiencies — it is the freshest data point and certainly not an outlier. Mizzou played thirteen players against Seton Hall. Four players for a total of 127 minutes — out of 200. They played the remaining nine for 73 minutes. Six players played less than 10!</p>
<p id="oSDOxS">A disconnect arrives when I see Nick Honor and Sean East II playing 36 minutes apiece despite the length rotation. What has been consistent this year is those two carrying a heavy share of the load, seemingly contradicting the very essence of the depth-oriented approach. Between 2016 and 2022, Florida State had three players eclipse Honor’s minutes played average of 74.1%. They had none match or exceed Sean East’s 83.6%. </p>
<p id="a615lx">It’s hard to reconcile choosing to implement this strategy, but only in part. There is virtue to playing Honor and East the minutes they have appeared as we’ll see below. There is virtue to playing 13 players. But can you really play the torrid, fast-paced style when your two guards are at — or above — the realistic historical bounds in a similar system stylistically? Conversely, can you really optimize a more centralized concentration of minutes when you’re rolling through 13 men on a nightly basis? So far, Mizzou has tried to split the baby.</p>
<h3 id="sizaKK"><strong>Depth Performance</strong></h3>
<p id="7KqMlj">A big part of the theory of going deep in the bench to drive the pace is having your reserves perform at a level that justifies the trade-off. The table below reflects several key areas. The percentage of minutes played indicates the percentage of a 40-minute outing a player is on the court. Offensive usage is the percentage of possessions a player “uses” on offense, by virtue of shots and turnovers. Offensive rating measures the player’s impact — higher the better. On/Off defense is a perhaps overly simplified version of how much better the team is defensively with said player on the court — lower is better.</p>
<div id="lf8ruh"><div data-anthem-component="table:12189452"></div></div>
<p id="MoWTU6">The usage column here is particularly important to me. There are two immutable truths in basketball: 1. The total offensive usage of five players on the court will add up to 100%; and 2. The higher a player’s usage goes, the lower his efficiency will be — it’s not always linear, but the correlation is inverse. </p>
<p id="ov8Aso">Mizzou’s latest starting rotation consists of players whose current season usage are: 23.9%, 20.1%, 22.6%, 19.8% and 10.4%. Right off the bat, Mizzou is starting in an offensive usage hole as those numbers add up to only 96.8%. Someone is necessarily going to have to increase their usage above and beyond their season average. Mizzou’s top five players in minutes with Grill sidelined are the same as above. But reach down into the next tier of minute-getters and you’re finding where the problem gets even bigger: 19.5%, 16.4%, 15.3%. The picture remains similar the further down you go. Mizzou’s reserves aren’t providing the requisite offensive punch off the bench. The answer thus far has been playing Sean East 33 minutes a night — and Sean’s usage has also risen to nearly 28% over recent weeks. But how tenable is that long-term? Or when opponents can successfully take him away as Seton Hall did for stretches Sunday?</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Seton Hall at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/1pNVZ_nVlqZObNw86NydYARyek4=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25172532/usa_today_22128334.jpg">
<cite>Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="ySts2X">The composition of the roster makes the math difficult, especially when you consider the offensive rating of the individual along with the usage rate. When you inject the defensive aspect, it becomes nearly untenable. Aidan Shaw improves your team on the defensive end but induces considerable stress offensively with his minuscule 10.4% usage rate. The same could be said for freshman Jordan Butler. Conversely, Nick Honor is a valuable function of the team’s offense in providing offensive firepower behind the arc, yet he’s been exploited a bit defensively. </p>
<p id="SVAVBo">East’s introduction into the high usage scene has been a welcome development. Beyond Sean, however, Mizzou is perpetually in a possession crunch offensively. Players are being asked to stretch their boundaries — Sean in minutes and the remainder in usage. The Tigers’ defense has yet to prove that it’s able to win games itself and therefore justify a lineup centered around it. Mizzou’s math gauges are squarely in the red.</p>
<h3 id="SbNRRb"><strong>The Defensive Safety Blanket</strong></h3>
<p id="1hPpxB">If there’s one area Mizzou has assuredly improved upon over last year it’s in their defensive efficiency. Entering Sunday, Mizzou’s adjusted defensive rating was 99.5 (74th nationally.) A year ago it was 105.3 (180th nationally.) Put in layman’s terms, Mizzou was allowing 5.8 fewer points per 100 defensive possessions after adjusting for level of competition. A significant leap!</p>
<p id="4q1Duj">Furthermore, Mizzou had allowed less than 1.000 points per defensive possession five times. They only accomplished that feat nine times a season back. Their half-court defense points per possession allowed stood at a very impressive 0.819. Another big jump from the 0.878 PPP they allowed in 22-23. </p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Missouri at Pittsburgh" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/CJrewEfN76tabhNwR_BHr5V-s2s=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25172533/usa_today_21991066.jpg">
<cite>Charles LeClaire-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="Wd4Dcg">While Mizzou had seemingly recovered from an underwhelming Thanksgiving week, on Sunday the dam unleashed a torrent of made buckets. Seton Hall, a team sporting a season-long effective field goal percentage of 50% laid waste to the Tiger defense. The Pirates dented the Tigers for a 67.9% eFG, marking the worst performance during the Dennis Gates era. Shaheen Holloway’s team notched 18 made buckets in 22 attempts at the rim. Only one Pirate missed a point-blank shot. It was a nauseating defensive performance and the team sporting the gold threads was the pinata. </p>
<p id="GodmpI">Time will tell whether this proves to be an outlier or the expectation. Yet one thing we know: Mizzou is not the same offense they were a year ago. That Tigers flamethrower offense could go bucket for bucket with just about any squad in the country. Up until yesterday, you felt good about this year’s Mizzou being a defensive unit that could at least raise the floor and not require such offensive outings to compete. A welcome development that could’ve aided in relieving the offensive stress described above. That belief took a torpedo straight to the hull on Sunday afternoon.</p>
<h3 id="jnuYDb"><strong>Mizzou’s Shot Profile</strong></h3>
<p id="uvJX9g">One final area to hit on is the type of shots Mizzou is taking. Coming into the season the coaching staff was adamant that this would be a high-volume perimeter shooting team. Frankly, it made sense then and still does. Perhaps now more than ever.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Seton Hall at Missouri" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/xBLEtd_UVOS_Jg9OgVZPhNBAL-8=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25172536/usa_today_22127639.jpg">
<cite>Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="sVgbVS">Mizzou on the whole does rate top 40 in three-point attempt rate, with 45% of all field goals coming behind the arc. The Tigers have shot it well with a season make rate of 36.2%, 72nd nationally. What I find somewhat intriguing, however, is how those numbers have varied when playing the best competition on their schedule — a five game sample of Memphis, Minnesota, Pittsburgh, Kansas and Seton Hall.</p>
<ul>
<li id="apgfSE">Five Game Total: 39.5% attempt rate — 34.7% make rate</li>
<li id="I0rC9X">Remaining Six Game Total: 49.7% attempt rate— 37.6% make rate</li>
</ul>
<p id="kiriF2">In their most difficult games, Mizzou has shot the ball from behind the arc really well. In fact, in four of five games they’ve shot it exceptionally well. Yet, the five-game sample indicates an attempt rate of 39.5%, which would rate 125th nationally. The 34.7% accuracy rating leads to a quick calculation of 1.041 points per shot. Few teams wouldn’t consider that a rousing success. </p>
<p id="Ul034T">Comparatively in those five games, Mizzou has made 84-181 from inside the arc. That 46.4% make rate equates to 0.928 PPS. The equation would shift if Mizzou were able to get to the free throw line at a high rate, but through eleven contests they rate 292nd nationally in free throw attempt rate. The variety of two-point shots they’ve taken isn’t conducive to those trips to the line— Mizzou has tallied a 26-76 mark (34.2%) in the five-game sample on mid-range two-point attempts compared with a 58-105 (55.2%) mark at the rim. </p>
<p id="O0BXL1">Against better competition you’re inherently going to be presented with less shots you want. But the data — and my eye — are telling me that Mizzou is passing up a few too many of those chances by their own volition.</p>
<h3 id="RSGwa6"><strong>Closing</strong></h3>
<p id="KmTjOa">There’s seemingly a disconnect between what this team aspires to be and what they are in practice. Are they better with a deep rotation or does the roster construction call for a more condensed version? Can the bench be productive enough to justify the minutes required to play a true up-tempo brand of basketball? Is there a point when preparing the returning players overrides the more imminent issue of winning basketball in 23-24? </p>
<p id="lh2BRM">The choice to make changes reflecting these realities is not easy. You have four seniors who have been integral pieces in the revitalization of the program and four more seniors who transferred in. You also have numerous players who project to be a big part of your future. The decisions on how Mizzou approaches the next three months will impact not only this season but potentially future iterations as well. </p>
<p id="R7jJpo">Big decisions must be made. And that’s just part of the business.</p>
<p id="w050wR"></p>
<p id="AU4mkl"></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="6ddwqx">
<p id="eETn01">Statistics provided by Matt Watkins, Matt Harris, Synergy Sports, Ken Pomeroy and Pivot Analysis.</p>
<p id="Pnc5yY"></p>
<p id="wdoih5"></p>
<p id="OCIaax"></p>
https://www.rockmnation.com/2023/12/20/24006548/the-verdict-missouri-tigers-basketball-an-identity-crisisMatt Watkins2023-12-15T09:00:00-06:002023-12-15T09:00:00-06:00The Verdict: Seton Hall Pre-Game Data Scout
<figure>
<img alt="Syndication: Columbia Daily Tribune" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/ZdkZO6IQyzrsadGbI74DlYxf-YQ=/0x0:3624x2416/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/72966214/usa_today_22074309.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Abigail Landwehr/Tribune / USA TODAY NETWORK</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Mizzou will look to get back in the win column on Sunday. What are the most important areas to watch for in order for them to do so?</p> <p id="zMke0e"><em>Welcome to The Verdict series. You may have become acquainted with these pieces in the past, and in efforts to improve them, we’ve made a few changes. Prior to each game receiving the full treatment, we’re going to release a series of pre-game keys to watch for in each matchup. After the results are in, we’ll return to those keys and analyze the performance with data and film. Credits for statistics to Ken Pomeroy, Synergy, Pivot Analysis and Matt Watkins. Film has been graciously provided by Matt Harris.</em></p>
<p id="9Ca09r"><em>Note: Pre-Game keys are in </em>standard font<em>. </em><em><strong>Post-Game analysis and data are in</strong></em><strong> </strong><em><strong>bold and italics.</strong></em></p>
<hr class="p-entry-hr" id="IrkRWX">
<p id="JjapUA">On Sunday afternoon Mizzou Basketball will return to the court to face the Seton Hall Pirates in Kansas City. Mizzou will look to bounce back from a tough loss in Lawrence and will visit the fine metropolis of Kansas City in order to do so. </p>
<p id="x8wZ09">Sunday’s contest carries a fair amount of weight. Mizzou owns quality wins at Pittsburgh and Minnesota, and a perfectly adequate decision over Wichita State at home. But there’s no doubting the elephant in the room: the home loss to Jackson State. For Mizzou to be well-positioned entering conference play, Sunday’s game is a must. </p>
<p id="MhwQCc">And speaking of this non-conference slate, it has been something of an assortment of firsts:</p>
<ul>
<li id="8KEG8X">The first meeting with Pittsburgh since at least the 1949-50 season (first ever, I believe.)</li>
<li id="OQeNj4">The first meeting with Minnesota since 1960.</li>
<li id="hY6ZKJ">The first meeting with Seton Hall since 1992.</li>
<li id="f6Znkx">The first game in Kansas City since November 26, 2019.</li>
</ul>
<p id="nnU1Ap">Mizzou’s one and only meeting with Seton Hall came in the second round of the 1992 NCAA Tournament. After defeating 12th-seeded West Virginia, Mizzou fell to 4th-seeded Seton Hall 88-71 in the only matchup between the programs. And we thought last Saturday was about ending droughts!</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Rutgers at Seton Hall" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/9PbUJWGVmw-VNlC_8jTTf3zeLhc=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25161104/usa_today_22074567.jpg">
<cite>Wendell Cruz-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<p id="HOawnT">This year’s Seton Hall program is led by Shaheen Holloway — who you may recall guided 15th-seeded St. Peter’s to the Elite 8 just two years back. Holloway’s Pirates sport a 6-4 record on the young season and have yet to nab a win vs. a top 100 opponent. Both the Tigers and Pirates will be searching for that important win to boost the resume` of their second-year head coach.</p>
<p id="Y3ywUd">Let’s take a look at the matchup keys.</p>
<h3 id="bmByxE"><strong>Win the Open Court Battle</strong></h3>
<p id="xXBzBi">Mizzou and Seton Hall are something of a mirror image stylistically in terms of turnover creation and open-court scoring. Led by Al-Amir Dawes, Kadary Richmond and Isaiah Coleman, the Pirates boast a fairly prodigious attack in the open court. As the numbers below show, a major function of Seton Hall’s offense is attacking defenses before they can get set. Much like the Pirates, Mizzou also utilizes the transition game to boost their scoring output, though at times the sledding has been a little tougher than they’d like. While Mizzou chooses to bring pressure more often, both squads will seek to jumpstart their offense with defensive swipes. Whoever can pull off a win in this area will have a big step up in the eventual outcome.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Northeastern at Seton Hall" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/1Hbt7S_X3OsOHgpmFh7xa0rYcT8=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25161289/usa_today_21997090.jpg">
<cite>Vincent Carchietta-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<ul>
<li id="dos5nz">Mizzou Transition Offense: 20.4% Usage — 0.975 PPP</li>
<li id="yWoiFf">Seton Hall Transition Defense: 15.7% Usage — 1.083 PPP</li>
</ul>
<p id="V6D8m3"></p>
<ul>
<li id="rFl9cg">Seton Hall Transition Offense: 19.6% Usage — 1.110 PPP</li>
<li id="RQCSgL">Mizzou Transition Defense: 16.7% Usage — 0.918 PPP</li>
</ul>
<p id="05Xxpj"></p>
<ul>
<li id="nFPo3k">Mizzou Defensive Steal Rate: 13.2%</li>
<li id="ukcTYN">Seton Hall Offensive Steal Rate: 11.0%</li>
</ul>
<p id="bcWQns"></p>
<ul>
<li id="zA8wVj">Seton Hall Defensive Steal Rate: 12.2%</li>
<li id="dd1dxF">Mizzou Offensive Steal Rate: 9.2%</li>
</ul>
<h3 id="3ql6mj"><strong>Build a Wall Around the Restricted Arc</strong></h3>
<p id="zaRRlr">One of our keys last week was similar. For Sunday’s contest, this is absolutely paramount. Seton Hall’s entire offensive identity is predicated on scoring at close range. In the Year of our Lord, 2023, scoring at the rim is not exactly a foreign concept. Yet the Pirates take this to an entirely different level. We’ve already discussed the transition component of this attack. Seton Hall also seeks to attack the paint via ball screen actions helmed by Kadary Richmond. They also pound the offensive glass with Jaden Bediako — who rates 5th nationally in offensive rebound rate. Dre Davis, Richmond and Bediako also seek to impose their will on the block, leading a fairly potent post-up game. They’ll seek to pressure the interior in different ways as well, but these two (three) areas are what I’ll have my eye on specifically. And let it be known, “Don’t get killed on the glass” has made its first appearance of the year!</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt="NCAA Basketball: Rutgers at Seton Hall" data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/yKZ8MJU09GLilzF633JNw19HCGc=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25161293/usa_today_22074566.jpg">
<cite>Wendell Cruz-USA TODAY Sports</cite>
</figure>
<ul>
<li id="edz1Wo">Seton Hall Rim Offense: 48.5% Usage* — 1.16 PPS</li>
<li id="mfqhaz">Mizzou Rim Defense: 39.2% Usage — 1.09 PPS</li>
</ul>
<p id="UsWO97"></p>
<ul>
<li id="0WFu4J">Seton Hall PnR Ballhandler Offense: 11.4% Usage — 0.833 PPP</li>
<li id="V1CbzS">Mizzou PnR Ballhandler Defense: 11.1% Usage — 0.798 PPP</li>
</ul>
<p id="F90JxY"></p>
<ul>
<li id="PBQ1Px">Seton Hall Post-Up Offense: 8.2% Usage — 0.938 PPP</li>
<li id="P0JD42">Mizzou Post-Up Defense: 3.9% Usage — 0.710 PPP</li>
</ul>
<p id="cCcdAV"></p>
<ul>
<li id="HgIvP3">Seton Hall Offensive Rebound Put-Back Offense: 9.1% Usage** — 1.111 PPP</li>
<li id="QDwFb6">Mizzou Offensive Rebound Put-Back Defense: 7.1% Usage — 1.281 PPP</li>
</ul>
<p id="1Hd31f"></p>
<p id="v3uNLD">*For context, 48.5% is the third highest among high-major programs.</p>
<p id="bl1ddr">**15th Highest in D-I</p>
<h3 id="mHPzKs"><strong>Take (and Make) What the Defense Gives You</strong></h3>
<p id="ur04Yz">Last week a key for the Kansas affair was to excel in jump shooting. Mizzou didn’t perform poorly, but I do question whether their offensive strategy skewed too much away from taking those attempts. Once again, Mizzou will be facing a team that suppresses rim attempts in exchange for allowing jump shots — Seton Hall ranks top 40 in defensive rim rate allowed. Mizzou will still be without Caleb Grill, but sports THREE players shooting over 40% from behind the arc on the year: Sean East II, Tamar Bates and Nick Honor. Combined, those three players have hit 52-107 (48.5%) on their attempts this season. If you add in Noah Carter to round out Mizzou’s top four volume options, the group has made good on 66-151 (43.7%). Let them rain, I say.</p>
<figure class="e-image">
<img alt=" " data-mask-text="false" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/f9TA38KAngD-gBxr5TTPGUInV_M=/400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25130502/CAL_2198.jpg">
<cite>Missouri guard Tamar Bates motions to his teammate Jordan Butler as Butler enters a game against Wichita State on Sunday, Dec. 3, 2023, at Mizzou Arena. Missouri took the lead early and never trailed in the 82-72 win. (Cal Tobias/Rock M Nation)</cite>
</figure>
<p id="CPsAIk">No, Mizzou shouldn’t entirely neglect attacking the paint. In fact, the opposite. Mizzou should be advantageous in doing so. If the driving lane is open, pressure the rim. If it’s not, have the off-ball players be active, cutting or spotting up, and find them on dribble penetrations into the paint in lieu of forcing contested short-range attempts. Seton Hall is going to make life difficult in the trees. Mizzou would do well to attack it with intelligence. Mizzou will assuredly put Sean East in more pick and roll options to fuel the offense, which I fully endorse. But again, opportunities will most often present themselves a pass away from the ball.</p>
<ul>
<li id="q7hk3p">Mizzou PnR Derived Offense: 30.8% Usage — 0.962 PPP (Includes Passes)</li>
<li id="K2ps20">Seton Hall PnR Derived Defense: 26.4% Usage — 0.721 PPP </li>
</ul>
<p id="VIAgES"></p>
<ul>
<li id="s9r3kJ">Mizzou Spot-Up Offense: 25.9% Usage — 1.005 PPP</li>
<li id="zhpT6N">Seton Hall Spot-Up Defense: 28.7% Usage — 0.817 PPP</li>
</ul>
<p id="LR9U7b"></p>
<ul>
<li id="4YbUad">Mizzou Jumper Offense: 53.3% Usage — 1.01 PPS</li>
<li id="QDV5yZ">Seton Hall Jumper Defense: 54.1% Usage — 0.92 PPS</li>
</ul>
<p id="8Gvbdn"></p>
<ul>
<li id="3HyXhr">Mizzou Catch and Shoot Offense: 67.4% Usage — 1.01 PPS</li>
<li id="RWmdnC">Seton Hall Catch and Shoot Defense: 70.1% Usage — 1.05 PPS</li>
</ul>
<p id="CcIxnD"></p>
https://www.rockmnation.com/2023/12/15/24000422/the-verdict-missouri-tigers-basketball-seton-hall-pirates-pre-game-data-scoutMatt Watkins