Michigan State Box Score Observations

Opening Comments: This game was an opportunity lost. Losing to MSU on the road will not hurt our rankings very much, but we missed out on an opportunity for a signature win (think Texas and Michael Flowers).

Summarizing the game in a few words: Both teams shot poorly, but while UW was bricking threes, MSU was pressing hard inside causing UW to foul and MSU prevailed at the line.

Pace: The game was played at 60 possessions. We have been at 63 overall and 59 in our 3 conference games. MSU plays at 70.

Efficiency: Was it poor offense or poor defense? Poor UW offense, obviously (or good MSU defense).

MSU scored .90 PPP, which is great UW defense (or poor MSU offense – take your pick).

UW scored .78 PPP. Believe it or not, that would have beaten OSU and 5 of our non conference opponents. But, it is not good enough to beat MSU in their house.

Shooting: What a bizarre shooting day. MSU was bad and UW worse. The difference was shot distributions and quantity of free throws.

eFG%: Both teams stunk up the place. MSU was at 40% and UW an even worst 38%. Our opponents have been shooting at only 39% in the 3 conference games. UW for the year is at 53% and 50% in conference (including this brickfest).

3 pt shooting: MSU only took 4 deep shots and made two for 50%. UW launched 23 and only made 5 for 22%. Ugh. UW picked up 9 additional points outside the arc, but needed 19 shots to get those 9 points.

2pt shooting: MSU took 10 more shots inside the arc than UW, 38 to 28, and made 2 more baskets. So, UW hit 12 of 28 for 43% inside while MSU was 14 of 38 for 37%. MSU netted (pun intended) +4 inside. From the floor, UW outscored them by 5.

1pt shooting: Here lies the story of the game. MSU made a living at the line, at least in quantity. MSU shot 30 FTA and made 20 for 67%. Meanwhile, UW hit the same percentage (67%) but only took 12. The 18 free throws provided 12 extra points.

This demonstrates the relative efficiency of free throws. Even after hitting a pedestrian 67%, MSU gets 1.34 PPP.

Rebounding: MSU strength was offensive rebounding. That collided with UW’s strength, defensive rebounding. Who won?

UW Defensive end: There were 32 rebounding opportunities and UW got 21, leaving MSU 11, or 34%. That is close to the national average, way below MSU’s typically excellent 42%, which is #9 nationally. It is way above UW’s nation leading 25%. So, they split the difference. I call that a draw.

UW Offensive End: There were 36 rebounding opportunities and UW only got 6, or 17%. MSU clearly dominated their defensive glass, which is not a surprise.

Turnovers: I predicted UW would enjoy a 3-5 turnover advantage. That came true. MSU had 14, or 23% while UW had 10, or 17%. I think 4 of those happened with the first 6 possessions. Unfortunately, UW took those extra possessions and used them to clank three pointers.

From a personal standpoint, it would drive me nuts if I was an MSU fan watching them turn the ball over so much. Izzo tolerates this in the name of up tempo easy baskets. It ultimately works for them.

Fouls: UW had 21 fouls to MSU’s 15. That is reverse of our usual where our opponents have 20 and we have 16. But, those 6 extra fouls resulted in 28 additional free throws. MSU attacked the basket hard and UW fouled as a defense of last resort. That was a big part of the game and why MSU won.

Playing time: UW had 6 players in double digit minutes. Keaton Nankivil only played 15. Ryan Evans had 8. Leuer avoided serous foul trouble and played 36. JBO lead the way, per usual, with 38. Taylor played a starter-like 34.

Meanwhile, MSU played eight 10 or more minutes.

Notable Performances: Jon Leuer put up first team all conference-like numbers going 9-19, 3-6 from deep, 7 boards, and 21 points. Jon, long will the tales of your exploits be told around the campfires of my people, and we need some really big fires this time of year.

In my mind I match Jordan Taylor and Korie Lucious up. They were from the same class and one went to MSU, one to Wisconsin. In this game, Taylor got 34 minutes and Lucious 16. Taylor scored 7 on 2-6 shooting, 3-4 free throws, one rebound, and two TO’s. Lucious was did not score, took one shot, and grabbed 3 boards in limited playing time. He had one TO. Those of you who like assists will be happy to hear that Lucious had 3 and Taylor 2 (That is the first time since I have been doing these summaries that I have mentioned assists. I do not know how to feel about that).

In the other big match up, neither Hughes nor Lucas did anything to impress voters for the first team all conference point guard. Hughes scored 7 with his 13 shots and missed both FTA’s. He added 4 rebounds. Lucas was also 3-13 from the field but hit 4-4 free throws. He had 3 rebounds and 3 TO’s. I would call that a draw that both lost, if that is possible.

Grading Shetown’s Predictions

1. Lucas doesn't reach 13 points. I like Hughes and Taylor to rattle him into a bad game. . Hit, but the reverse was true as well.

2. Leuer scores more than 15. He's been in a funk lately and I think he breaks out for a big game against the small MSU frontline. Hit. Leuer had 21, which was fantastic in a grinder-like game this one turned out to be.

3. Badgers hold MSU to 50% or less inside the arc. MSU is the seventh best 2-point shooting team in the country, but Wisconsin is the 32nd best defending it. I think defense wins out on this one. Hit. MSU shot only 37%. But they did nearly equal damage to our offense allowing us only 43%.

Shetown’s Prediction: The Badgers make Izzo cry again, squeaking out a 69-62 in 65 possessions. Miss. 54-47 MSU in 60 possessions. You hit all three of your predictions yet we still lost the game. Go figure …

Closing Thoughts: MSU did to UW what we used to do to our opponents. UW bombed away from deep while they killed us at the line. The “we made more free throws than our opponents attempt” is dead and gone for the year. We need to make up 52. It could happen, but we need something systemic to change.

UW had +4 turnovers while MSU had +5 offensive rebounds. So, class, your assignment for this week is to write an essay expressing which is more valuable, an offensive rebound or a turnover.

All will be right with the world after a big UW win versus PU. Go Bucky!

Michigan State Pre-Game Analysis

Opening Thoughts: The Badgers easily handled Penn State, so their next opponent are the Crying Izzos of Michigan State. This won’t be an easy task for the Badgers, but I think they have a reasonable chance of pulling this one out. A nice little statistical tidbit about the UW offense is that as of Tuesday morning, Wisconsin is in the top 91 of all D-1 teams in all but 2 statistic categories tracked by Ken Pomeroy. The other two are free throw rate (106th) and offensive rebounding (217th). They also are no longer in the bottom 100 of free throw defense.


What the Expert Nerds Say:

Jeff Sagarin ranks Wisconsin #11 and MSU #20. He makes Michigan State a 1 or 2-point favorite.

Ken Pomeroy ranks Wisconsin #4 and MSU #19. He predicts a 67-66 Badger victory in 63 possessions and gives the Badgers a 55% chance of winning.


Michigan State Probable Rotation:
*G – 6’1” JR Kalin Lucas (16.1 PPG, 4.1 APG, 1.9 RPG, 1.2 SPG, 55.5% 2PT, 40% 3PT)
*G – 6’3” JR Chris Allen (10.5 PPG, 2.9 RPG, 2.3 APG, 38.1% 3PT)
*F – 6’8” SR Raymar Morgan (10.6 PPG, 5.5 RPG, 2.5 APG, 1.2 SPG, 52.7% 2PT)
*F – 6’6” SO Draymond Green (11.1 PPG, 7.9 RPG, 3.2 APG, 1.6 SPG, 63.7% 2PT)
*F – 6’8” SO Delvon Roe (7.5 PPG, 7.0 RPG, 1.3 BPG, 61.9% 2PT)
G – 6’4” JR Durrell Summers (11.4 PPG, 4.2 RPG, 50% 2PT, 90% FT)
G – 5’11” SO Korie Lucious (6.1 PPG, 4.1 APG)

5-8 Min per Game (11-14 games played)
F – 6’10” FR Garrick Sherman (2.6 PPG, 2.1 RPG)
F – 6’8” FR Derrick Nix (2.6 PPG, 2.6 RPG)
F – 6’5” SO Austin Thornton (1.5 PPG, 1.1 RPG)
F – 6’6” SR Isaiah Dahlman (2.1 PPG)


This season they have played at a pace of 71 possessions per game, similar to Gonzaga and Illinois. They play mostly man-to-man defense.

They lost Goran Suton, Travis Walton, Marquise Gray, and Idong Ibok. They return 68% of their minutes, 75% of their scoring, and 67% of their rebounding.


Key Players:

Kalin Lucas – Kalin Lucas is great double-threat point guard. He shoots 56% inside the arc, 40% outside the arc, and 78% from the line. He takes more than twice as many shots inside the arc than outside and takes about 4 free throws per 10 field goal attempts. He’s average at turning it over and a great assist man, all of this adding up for an offensive rating of 116.2.

Draymond Green and Delvon Roe– I grouped these two together because of their great similarities. Both take less than their fair share of shot usage (18.4 and 13.3%) and have great offensive ratings (124.0 and 113.7) due to outstanding 2-point shooting. Lastly, they are both ridiculously talented rebounders. Green grabs 10.2% on offense and 24.7% on defense. Roe grabs 14.1 on offense and 20.0 on defense. Their defensive numbers are in Butch and Krabbenhoft range and their offensive is better than Butch during his junior and senior seasons.


What Michigan State is really good at:

1. Shooting 2s. MSU is 7th in 2-point shooting percentage (56.1%).

2. Getting a hand in the face of shooters and altering shots. They give up 32.1% shooting behind the arc (103rd) and 43.9% inside (62nd).

3. Pump Faking. They are 8th in the nation at avoiding blocks, with a rate a bit less than 1 block for every 20 2-pointers they attempt.

4. Rebounding. Per usual, they are 8th in the nation at offensive rebounding, grabbing 42.1% of the opportunities, and 57th on defense, grabbing 70.6%.

5. Not sending opponents to the line. They are 70th in the nation, sending an opponent to the line 4 times for every 13 shot attempts.


What Michigan State is really bad at:

1. Forcing turnovers. They force a turnover just a hair less than one in five. That puts them at 223rd in the nation.


Relative efficiency:

When MSU has the ball: MSU has scored a great 1.15 PPP in their first 14 games, while UW has given up a great 0.92 in their first 14.

When UW has the ball: MSU gave up a good 0.94 in their first 14 games, while UW has scored a great 1.18 in their first 14.


Pace: MSU has played at 71 possessions per game so far in their first 12 games compared to UW’s 61 in their first 14 games.


My expectations:

1. Lucas doesn’t reach 13 points. I like Hughes and Taylor to rattle him into a bad game.

2. Leuer scores more than 15. He’s been in a funk lately and I think he breaks out for a big game against the small MSU frontline.

3. Badgers hold MSU to 50% or less inside the arc. MSU is the seventh best 2-point shooting team in the country, but Wisconsin is the 32nd best defending it. I think defense wins out on this one.


My Prediction: The Badgers make Izzo cry again, squeaking out a 69-62 in 65 possessions.