“I have situations where I’ve second-guessed a coach on the air and I try not to even consider what the coaches’ feelings will be about it. There are times in dealing with coaches and players you have a relationship with and dealing with comments you get off the record. That’s where you hope your best judgment comes in. I worked with Manny Harris of Michigan two summers ago. I have not worked with or been around a better kid. Last year, he was involved in an elbowing incident and I was pretty hard on him. I could have sat there and said, ‘Great kid, let’s dismiss it,’ but I didn’t. I said what I thought and I had a lot of critical comments from Michigan fans. But I didn’t know any other way to handle it. I worked with Manny again this summer and we joked about it. Adults don’t handle that situation better than he handled it. I wish I had the poise that kid has.

It obviously speaks worlds about Manny Harris’ maturity and personality. I’m all for speaking your mind on air and I have no doubt that is what Bilas did but that doesn’t change my mind that he was wrong about the play. Bilas also gave Harris and Evan Turner some praise in his ESPN column for posting triple doubles.

Other Notes

• Per StatSheet, Michigan has the 3rd youngest team in the Big Ten (by average class year per minute played). Iowa and Indiana are the only younger teams while Ohio State is the oldest.
• Mike Rothstein chatted with Gary Grant about Manny Harris and his triple double.
• Bringing two canned goods to the game Friday gets you in the door for one dollar.
• John Gasaway is the voice of reason, saying that we shouldn’t fret over early season ugly wins.
• Northwestern faces Butler tonight (8 pm BTN) in what could have been a huge statement game for the Cats, instead it will more likely be a demonstration of how they can cope with out Coble.  The Geeks have a preview.
• Programming Note: Posting has been a little light this week and I apologize. Should have plenty throughout the end of the week including an early Old Spice preview as well as the necessary Houston Baptist preview.

Villanova by the Numbers has been investigating the effect that moving the three point line back a foot had on last year’s college basketball season. Nova by the Numbers focused on how Luke Winn’s predictions from a little over a year ago look in retrospect. Winn’s hypothesis was that the biggest winners from the move would be teams that don’t rely on the three point shot or defend the three point line well. The losers would be perimeter oriented teams that shoot a lot of threes and teams that make a low percentage of their three point shots in general.

The hypothesis makes so much sense that it almost seems rudimentary. Judging by Michigan’s 2007-2008 statistics, they should have been negatively affected by the move (and that’s probably an understatement). The 2007-2008 Michigan team was one of the worst in the country at making (31.2%) and defending (38.1%) three point shots yet they still shot 40.7% of their field goal attempts from behind the arc.

So how did Michigan deal with the move? They shot even more three point shots at a slightly higher percentage. (They also made a dramatic improvement in three point defense — their opponents shot 31.1% compared to 38.1% in 2008.)

Michigan kept on chucking and somehow found success, going from 10 to 21 wins in only a season.  The three point shot is obviously a staple of the Beilein offense.  Therefore it’s not surprising that Michigan was more reliant on the three point shot than any other NCAA tournament team.

Top 10 3FGA/FGA for NCAA Tournament Teams (National Rank to the left, NCAA seed in brackets)

  7 Michigan[10] (B10)               47.9
 11 Arizona St.[6] (P10)             45.3
 13 Butler[9] (Horz)                 45.2
 15 Portland St.[13] (BSky)          44.8
 26 Oklahoma St.[8] (B12)            41.3
 29 Chattanooga[16] (SC)             41.2
 38 Akron[13] (MAC)                  40.0
 40 Mississippi St.[13] (SEC)        39.7
 54 Utah[5] (MWC)                    38.4
 58 American[14] (Pat)               38.1

That list is an eye opener. There are very few high major teams in that group, only Arizona St., Oklahoma St., and Mississippi St, and none of the top ten made it passed the second round.

This clearly isn’t a strategy that is replicated often with success at the high major level. Of those four high major teams, Michigan’s 33.4% three point shooting percentage was the worst among the group by a pretty significant margin. It’s clear that perimeter oriented teams were adversely affected by the three point move.

Nova By the Numbers points out that three of the ten interior oriented offenses that Winn identified before the season ended up in the Final Four (UNC, UConn, and Michigan State). Perimeter oriented offenses didn’t perform so well but I’m not sure John Beilein is too concerned as his tournament success is well documented. Despite the success of interior oriented teams, John Beilein’s teams still perform better against their seed than any other college coach.

Michigan’s three point shooting numbers are even more shocking when you realize that Manny Harris and DeShawn Sims combined to take 64% of Michigan’s 2 point field goals. Stu Douglass (80.3%) and Zack Novak (77.8%) took the highest percentage of their shots from long range on the team with more than 3 out of every 4 field goal attempts coming from behind the arc. Seven players on the Michigan roster took 65% or more of their field goal attempts from three point range. Only Jevohn Shepherd, Zack Gibson, DeShawn Sims, and Manny Harris took more than half of their shots inside the arc.

I’ve mentioned high variance strategies in the past (explained here) and there is no doubt that relying on the three point shot qualifies as a high variance strategy. To most in the college basketball world, three point shooting is typically thought of as an underdog  strategy marred with desperation. The common thought is that truly great teams will pound the ball inside rather than shoot away.  However, John Beilein’s best teams actually appear to shoot more three point shots than his teams that struggle.

 Michigan      2009 21-14 (7)      47.9
 Michigan      2008 10-22 (42)     40.7
 West Virginia 2007 27-9  (5)      49.0
 West Virginia 2006 22-11 (2)      51.4
 West Virginia 2005 24-11 (7)      45.9
 West Virginia 2004 17-14 (25)     40.1
 West Virginia 2003 14-15          37.6

John Beilein coached teams play their best when they favor a strategy that is generally frowned upon in the basketball world. The numbers tell the whole story last year: Michigan succeeded by shooting a lot of threes (7th) even while making a low percentage (195th).

The question is what happens going forward — does Michigan continue to shoot so many three point shots or do they revert toward a more traditional style of play. Looking at John Beilein’s history, it is hard to imagine Michigan relying on the three ball any less than they did this year.

The first place potential change would come from would be the incoming freshmen class. Of the four scholarship players and two walk-ons, three players would be described as shooters first and foremost (Vogrich, McLimans, and Bartelstein). Jordan Morgan gives Michigan a big guy that they were lacking last year, but after knee surgery his impact is questionable. Eso Akunne is without a position, but he possesses a well rounded versatile game.

The one guy who has to potential to redefine the offense is Darius Morris. Darius has the ability to create for himself and others in a way that none of the point guards on last year’s roster could. If Darius can provide a threat to drive and score it would go a long ways toward making Michigan’s offense multi-dimensional and giving Michigan three guys who are a threat to score inside the arc rather than just two.

However, relying on a freshman point guard to reshape an offense is probably too much to ask for. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Michigan shoot over 50% of their shots from long range next year but they need to improve their shooting percentage. When you shoot more three point shots than just about every other high major team in the country, you’re going to want to rank higher than 195th in percentage made.

The three point shooting issue is one that has confronted Beilein teams for years and there is no firm answer about what is right and what is wrong. For example, the three point shot was the reason Michigan trailed by 20 points versus Indiana at Assembly Hall (3-18 first half) but it was also what enabled the comeback (7-17 second half). The success that Michigan had last year despite not shooting a very high percentage says one of two things: the strategy really works or Michigan got very lucky.

The topics for discussion on this subject are endless, so let’s hear your thoughts in the comments and then maybe we can revisit this subject in a couple weeks with some follow up.

The nominees are sorted in chronological order and you can vote at the bottom of the post.

Stu Douglass Three Pointer versus UCLA

DeShawn Sims Backdoor Dunk versus UCLA

DeShawn Sims Buzzer Beater versus Savannah State

Zack Novak Back-to-Back Threes versus Duke

Manny Harris ‘Airplane Dunk’ versus Duke

CJ Lee and Laval Lucas-Perry Save Michigan Down the Stretch at Assembly Hall

Stu Douglass Steal and Over the Head Pass versus Purdue

Laval Lucas-Perry Three Point Barrage at Minnesota

DeShawn Sims Scores First Seven Baskets vs. Iowa

Manny Harris “And One” versus Clemson

Vote

The Good

• Scoring
  DeShawn showed us that he really is the scorer that he was recruited to be. His freshman year was wrecked by family tragedy and his sophomore year saw him live almost exclusively on the perimeter. This year he was forced to the paint — more so  by necessity than choice. Luckily, DeShawn was up to the challenge. He attempted 60 less three pointers this year, but managed to lead the Big Ten in field goals made while making 224 of his 444 attempts (50.5%, 53.3 eFG%).
• Rebounding
  Because he was forced to play down low, it was crucial that Sims attack the glass. Sims averaged 6.8 rpg (5th in conference) and was tied with Manny Harris for the leading rebounder on the team. He struggled at times in conference play on the glass and his average steadily declined but that was mostly a product of dealing with better rebounding teams in the Big Ten.
• Improvement
  Peedi improved in just about every facet of the game. This should be expected I suppose but as we saw under Tommy Amaker, improvement should never be taken for granted. Even beyond the numbers, Sims looks more confident within the offense and he continues to find his niche.

The Bad

• Consistency
  Sims eliminated the Georgetown-esque 1 point performances that we saw in his sophomore year but he still struggled to bring a consistent effort night in and night out. Part of the problem is that his play was so spectacular at times  that you wonder why he wasn’t able to do it every time out.
• Drifting
  All too often Sims would drift to the perimeter instead of focusing his offense in the interior. It is critical that Sims plays inside out. He has to start inside where he can build his confidence before he starts launching longer jumpers.

Shining Moments

• vs. Duke – 28 points (10-16 shooting), 12 rebounds, 3 assists, 1 steal
  The Duke game was the defining moment of Michigan’s season and DeShawn Sims was the star. DeShawn scored the ball inside and out while controlling the glass despite being a non-factor in the first Duke/Michigan match-up that took place only a couple weeks earlier.
• vs. Purdue - 29 points (13-16 shooting), 5 rebounds
  Another glimpse of just how dominant DeShawn can be. He took the ball right at JaJuan Johnson, who was eventually forced to the bench with foul trouble, and scored inside all night long. This one was an absolute must-win for Michigan’s tournament chances and DeShawn came to play.
• vs. Iowa – 27 points (12-16 shooting), 2 rebounds, 3 steals
  DeShawn Sims single handily punched Michigan’s NCAA tournament ticket. Michigan went to Sims early and often and just sat back and watched as he made his first eight shots from the field and simply couldn’t be stopped.

The Future

DeShawn has played a dramatically different role in each of his three seasons at Michigan. His freshman year he was a seldom used back-up power forward. His sophomore year he played the “four” in Beilein’s offense which saw him floating around on the perimeter and launching three point shots. And finally, this year he played the “five” where he was almost exclusively an interior player.

The question is where does he go next year? There is a much larger stable of interior players next year but I’m not sure any of them have the ability to score in the post the way DeShawn does. I think we will most likely see a mix of DeShawn at the four and five. Against bigger lineups we will see him play the four along side someone like Ben Cronin while against smaller lineups we will see him down low in hopes that he can exploit a mis-match.

Final Grade: A

DeShawn deserves nothing but an ‘A’. Politics may have forced him off of the All-conference first team, but statistically he had a spectacular season. He was a top five scorer and rebounder and posted an effective field goal percentage of 53.3%. Not to mention the fact that he did all of this while playing down low in arguably the most physical conference in the nation at only 6-foot-8.

Did he have some disappointing performances? Definitely, but over the course of a season, who doesn’t? The improvement that he made in between each of his three years at Michigan has been remarkable. If he can make similar strides before his senior year we should be expecting another special year.

Manny Harris took down his second MVP award (guess he was deserving of the ‘A’ I gave him on his report card) and DeShawn Sims won most improved player. Good luck finding anyone to argue with the leadership award being given to CJ Lee and David Merritt. Frankly, there isn’t much to argue over with any of the winners.

According to the Michigan basketball twitter page, every player on the team also received a “special watch” in honor of making the NCAA tournament. They are tweeting live from the event so it’s worth a follow.

Here is the full list of award winners:

The Good

• Shooting
  Zack can definitely shoot the three and he hit enough big shots this year to prove it. Zack shot the ball well at the beginning of the year and then hit a wall through the middle of January. The Big Ten season clearly wore him down but he bounced back well down the stretch. Zack loves the corner three and when he’s open he’s a good bet to knock it down. I don’t think he is quite as good at creating a good look for himself as someone like Stu Douglass but he did shoot a higher percentage than Stu.
• Hustle Plays
  It’s hard to quantify something like this but there is no denying that Zack has a nose for the basketball. It seemed like Zack was always the first one to a 50-50 ball or would manage to tip out a rebound despite giving up half a foot to the opponent. These hustle plays are the reason that Zack led the team in minutes per game during conference play (13th in the conference, 2nd highest average for a freshman) and continues to see the floor despite match-up problems.
• Mental Toughness
  This is a bit hard to distinguish from the hustle plays but Zack was tough. He had the attitude that he wasn’t going to take crap from anyone and he was going to leave it all on the floor. He begged to go back in the game after Alex Legion bloodied him and he was a key cog in both of Michigan’s miracle comebacks. Not to mention the fact that most 6-foot-4 freshmen don’t play 30+ minutes per game in the most physical conference in the country at the power forward spot. Zack has the attitude that the coaching staff loves and I have no doubt that he will become a leader on this team.

The Bad

• Versatility
  Similar to Stu Douglass, Zack needs to add a few more elements to his game. Right now on the offensive end he isn’t much more than a spot up shooter. Zack showed flashes of a little bit of mid-range game here and there but it really isn’t in his repertoire. He doesn’t need to be Manny Harris but if he can do just a little more he will be much more dangerous.
• Physical Ability
  It’s hard to point to negatives on the production side when you look at Zack. He basically did about everything that you could expect. The bottom line is that his ceiling is limited by his height and athleticism. If he was a little taller, faster, or quicker you would have a completely different player. Instead he is stuck at 6-foot-5 — hopefully with some work in the S&C program he can continue to improve athletically.
• Position
  Zack can probably play the 2, 3, or 4 on this team but he probably isn’t a good fit for any of them. The mantra goes: you are what you can guard. Right now I’m not sure Zack can guard any of those positions that well. He’s too short to guard the four and probably too slow to guard the two or three. This is going to be the biggest problem for Zack going forward — where does he play?

Shining Moments

• vs. Duke – 14 points, 26 minutes, 4-7 3pt FG
  This was Zack’s coming out party with four three point makes on the biggest stage. The most important shots were the back-to-back threes that turned a three point deficit into a lead that Michigan would never relinquish. DeShawn Sims and Manny Harris carried the team that day but Zack Novak gave them the lift that pushed them over the top.
• vs. Minnesota – 36 minutes, 18 points, 6 rebounds, 6-10 3pt fg, and 2 assists
  Michigan was in a familiar position, their backs were up against the wall and Minnesota was headed to Ann Arbor. A loss would have ended likely Michigan’s NCAA tournament chances and Minnesota was no slouch. Zack came to play and knocked down a season high six three point shots for a game high 18 points in a smooth Michigan win.

The Future

Where does Zack play down the line? I would assume that he will get some minutes backing up Manny next year at the three, 5-10 minutes per game. I would also assume that he still plays some four, especially against smaller teams, maybe 15 minutes per game. There is also the chance that Zack could play the two-guard where he played for the first half of last year. Essentially his versatility in terms of position is his greatest strength as well as his greatest weakness.

Zack seems unlikely to play 30+ minutes per game next year but I just have a hard time picturing the coaches keeping him off the floor. I don’t care what influx of talent Beilein brings in, it will be hard to knock Zack out of the starting line up and at least the rotation. It seems like there is always a spot for hustle, heart, and shooting in the John Beilein system.

Final Grade

Some people were a little surprised that I only gave Stu a B- but I think when everything plays out it will make sense. I don’t want to be accused of grade inflation and while I mentioned expectations in the first post but it’s more or less a comprehensive measure and expectations are just one part.

Final Grade: B. Even though he didn’t produce in the scoring column every night I don’t think this team wins nearly as many games without him in the lineup. Zack essentially was expected to be a spot contributor at best and by the end of the year you couldn’t pull him off the court.

The Numbers:

The Good:

• Passing
  Stu is vastly underrated as a passer. From the first time I saw him play in the Michigan jersey I was impressed with how confident he was with the ball, especially passing it. I also think that Stu is the best player on the team at feeding the post. The numbers back Stu up as a good, not great passer. His assist to turnover ratio was 1.7 to 1, 16th in the Big Ten, but his assist numbers weren’t quite so high with 2.1 assists per game but that translates out to 4 assists per 40 minutes, the same as Grady and Lee, and his assist percentage of 19.3% is also in the same ballpark as Michigan’s point guards. Stu definitely has room to grow in this regard but he definitely displayed the ability to pass the ball.
• Three Point Shooting
  The percentage isn’t necessarily gaudy at 33.5% but it’s not bad either. In the “hot” games he turned everyone into believers with his quick and pure stroke. The shot looks good all the time and I wouldn’t be surprised to see a big jump in Stu’s shooting percentage next year.
• Defense
  If I wrote this mid-way through the season I probably would have listed defense as a weakness. Stu improved by leaps and bounds on the defensive end of the court over the course of the year. He still has a long ways to go as an on-the-ball defender but he is one of the best in terms of fighting through screens and playing defense off the ball.

The Bad:

• Consistency
  Stu showed flashes of brilliance shooting the ball but really struggled with consistency. A lot of this has to do with being a freshman and being asked to do a lot from the get-go, as well as his role changing pretty dramatically a couple times throughout the season. Stu had 10 games without a three pointer, 10 with only one, and 15 with two or more.  This is a little bit too inconsistent in my book, if Stu could cut down on the 0-5, 1-7, 1-5 type games he could be very solid.
• Versatility
  Stu made two baskets and four free throws in the ten games where he didn’t record a three point field goal. He needs to develop at least one more key cog to his game whether it is a mid-range jump shot or the ability to drive the lane and maybe get to the lane. Adding another dimension to his game has to be the number one priority for Stu because when the three point shot wasn’t falling last year, Stu was very ineffective.
• Decision Making
  Stu clearly has ability to pass and shoot but he still needs to learn what is a good shot and what is a good pass. The alley-oops, three point shots from 6 feet behind the line, and bounce passes between three people need to stop. I give him a break because he is a freshman but if Beilein’s facial expressions say anything about how he really feels, you can bet that he let’s Stu know what’s a good decision.

The Future:

Point guard. There are a growing number of options at the two-guard on this roster and if Stu wants to keep playing big minutes he’s going to need to play the point. He’s not going to be a full time point guard but he needs to be able to play the position for 10-15 minutes per game. I think you definitely still want to play him at the two because that allows him to come off screens and get good looks from three point range. However Laval Lucas-Perry, Zack Novak, and Matt Vogrich will all be vying for playing time at the two-guard so being able to play two positions would be a great way for Stu to differentiate himself from the pack.

Grade: I’ve been struggling with figuring out a means to “grade” players in these report cards. I have basically two sides: grading versus expectation versus some kind of all-encompassing grade of production.

There were essentially zero expectations for Stu headed into the year. He was supposed to be a shooter but likely a ways off from being a contributor — after all he was just a 2-star recruit when he committed to Michigan. Stu also hit some huge shots this year, UConn and UCLA stand out, and his confidence continued to grow over the course of the year. Stu slipped out of the starting lineup in January but I really think that he started to believe that he belonged as the year progressed.

B-. Stu showed that he has the ability to fit into this team and showed flashes of great play but the lack of consistency and versatility are holding him back.

The only word that comes to mind when trying to explain the last decade of Michigan basketball is agony. There was a good mix of flat out awful seasons mixed with those where we came just so close. I think Michigan basketball of late can be summed up neatly with the words of Heywood Broun:

The tragedy of life is not that a man loses, but that he almost wins.

The entire athletic department has been in a bit of a tailspin recently. Rich Rodriguez and John Beilein’s debut seasons at Michigan did not go well by anyone’s count. Beilein went 10-22 and Rodriguez 3-9 and both seasons were called some of “the worst ever” by fans and media alike. Throw in a losing streak to Ohio State, a win for Michigan State at Michigan Stadium, and the end of a bowl streak that many figured would go on forever and you are left with a frustrated fan base.

No current students have even experienced a November win over Ohio State. These angered fans have needed something to grasp but every one of them would have told you that there is no way that the basketball team would be the one to provide it.

The basketball team was expected to struggle again. Ekpe Udoh had transferred and the incoming class consisted of a bunch of guys who were overlooked by recruiting services and frankly other high-major programs. Optimistic fans thought that a .500 season would be possible thanks to John Beilein’s coaching ability in itself but anything more would be a long shot at best.

These fourteen kids had a different idea. Somehow a roster that looked like it belonged at the Island of Misfit Toys turned themselves into an NCAA tournament team. They overachieved in every sense of the word and finally gave Michigan fans something to cheer about — Michigan basketball is relevant again.

The first glimmer of hope came back at Madison Square Garden when Michigan managed to knock off UCLA — DeShawn Sims’ dunk off a backdoor pass from Anthony Wright is definitely one of the top 5 moments of the year. Most people, myself included, thought that the upset was more likely a sign of what was to come down the road. But Michigan parlayed that win into something to hang their hat on — from that day on they believed in the system and themselves.

The home win over Duke was Bill Martin’s watershed moment and it was definitely one of Michigan’s best performances of the year. Talk of a realistic shot at the NCAA tournament was thrown around, but the heartbreak of the last 11 years caused many Michigan fans to be reluctant to count their chickens before they hatched.

The Duke win was monumental but in the end I am more in awe of the way this team stuck together in the toughest of times. The pair of 20-point comeback overtime wins against Savannah State and Indiana really stand out to me. No team is going to play their best every night out over the course of a 30+ game season but good teams figure out a way to win. This team also responded with their best performances when their backs were against the wall.

The final shining moment of the regular season to me was the road win against Minnesota. It is so hard to win on the road against good teams in the Big Ten and Michigan has been absolutely terrible on the road for years. But with their season on the line and facing a double digit deficit in the second half Michigan came together and left Minneapolis with a victory.

The common denominator in every one of Michigan’s big wins was heart and toughness, something that Daniel Horton recently said was missing on Michigan teams of the past that just missed the NCAA tournament. Beilein constantly stresses team chemistry and its importance is clear when you watch the way this team plays and the way he coaches. Talent can only get you so far, when you’re down double digits on the road with 17,000 fans pitted against you, the only thing that can hold you together is team chemistry and heart.

Michigan fans aren’t stupid, they noticed this team’s heart over the course of the year. This team is almost impossible not to like. There are no police reports, academic issues, or embarrassing stories to worry about. Instead there are stories about Anthony Wright giving a young fan tickets to the Big Ten tournament, a pair of walk-ons who have become team captains and the root of Michigan’s resurgence, and a pair of kids in Detroit who managed to hold off outside pressure (more than most would probably believe) and attend the University of Michigan.

The few thousand Michigan fans that made it to Kansas City last weekend realized just how magical this season had been. The pair of games in Kansas City were the reward for everyone involved in the program from top to bottom: coaches, players, managers, administrators, and of course the fans. As a fan there was no way that I could miss Michigan running out of the tunnel in the NCAA tournament. The emotions at Crisler Arena on Selection Sunday and in Kansas City on Thursday were more than just the joy of victory — it was pride, relief, and happiness but mostly a validation of the suffering of the last decade.

This definitely isn’t the final goal but there is no doubt that this season was a successful one — when was the last time that you could say that about a Michigan basketball season? This year is a statement and a building block for a program that is headed in the right direction.

The loss of CJ Lee, Dave Merritt, and Jevohn Shepherd will hurt but this team returns a vast majority of its scoring and rebounding. The near future looks exciting; Michigan returns most of their contributors and brings in a few quality recruits. It is no doubt just as important for recruiting — John Beilein can go into a 17 year olds living room and show him film from last year’s NCAA tournament win — no more “leaps of faith” are necessary.

There is no denying the fact that this program is in great hands and that finally, Michigan fans have something to cheer about.

Looking at the four factors the biggest difference won’t be surprising to anyone that watched the game: free throws. Oklahoma got to the line and Michigan did not. There were only four team fouls called on Oklahoma in the first 19 minutes and 56 seconds of the second half compared to 17 called on Michigan. It seemed like every 50-50 call went Oklahoma’s way but you just have to play the game. Michigan did an admirable job on the offensive glass despite Oklahoma’s size advantage. But in the end Michigan turned the ball over a little too much and just didn’t make quite enough shots from three point range. There was a stretch at the start of the second half when Michigan just couldn’t buy a three point basket. Oklahoma didn’t shoot a very high percentage from long range but they made just enough big three pointers to keep Michigan at arms length.

There is no denying that Michigan went down fighting despite being physically overmatched. They battled in the first half and even when Oklahoma started to pull away in the second half they never quit. The late run spear headed by CJ Lee was symbolic of the team’s never die attitude this whole season. There were many times that fans and media wrote this team off, claiming they had no shot at the NCAA tournament, but they always proved them wrong.

I’m not going to go through a whole “player bullets” but I wanted to mention a couple people.

• Anthony Wright played the best game of his life and it was great to see. Hopefully he can build off this in the off season.
• Zack Gibson also strung together a couple very solid games down the stretch, bringing more hustle than we have seen before.
• The freshmen just couldn’t find their range today, if just one of the three were hitting their shots it would have been huge. Stu and Zack had great years but they just couldn’t find their stroke, 3 of 15 with 4 turnovers combined.
• CJ, Dave, and Jevohn went out fighting and it will be sad to see them go. Those kids certainly are lacking in talent but their heart is what carried this team down the stretch.
• Also, Mark Snyder is reporting that Manny and DeShawn plan to stay.

The countdown until November begins. I’ll have plenty more of the next couple days including some more reaction on the season.

Basics:
Who: Michigan (21-13) vs. Oklahoma (28-5)
Where: Sprint Center, Kansas City, MO
When: Saturday, March 21st, 5:50 PM EST
TV: CBS
Spread: Oklahoma by 6.5
Preview: Stat Sheet, U-M KenPom Profile, Oklahoma KenPom Profile
Radio: MGoBlue

Michigan’s reward for beating Clemson is a date with the best player in the country, Blake Griffin. The 6-foot-10 physical specimen averages 22.1 points and 14.3 rebounds per game. I’m sure if you have tuned into ESPN at all this year you are familiar with Blake and how he can dominate a game while at the same time fascinating fans with his breathtaking dunks. Frankly, I don’t see any way that Michigan can hold Blake under 20 and 20. They key is stopping everyone else.

So who else is there? Oklahoma is not a particularly deep team, here are their main contributors:

• Austin Johnson: The 6-foot-3 point guard has lots of length and averages 8.4 ppg, 3.9 apg, and 2.9 rpg while knocking down 34% of his triples.
• Willie Warren: The 6-foot-4 freshman was a McDonalds All American and there is no doubt that he can play. Warren averages 14.7 points, 3.1 assists, and 2.2 rebounds per game. Warren has a great combination of strength and athleticism and he also hits three point shots at near 38% clip.
• Tony Crocker: Crocker is the 6-foot-6 wing man for Sooners who for some reason always wears long sleeves. Crocker averages 9.4 points and 3.3 rebounds per game.
• Taylor Griffin: The elder Griffin is a very similar player to his little brother except he is about 3 inches shorter. Taylor will be a tough match-up for Michigan at the four and I would expect that he has a pretty decent day as well.
• Bench: Juan Pattillo, Cade Davis, and Omar Leary make up the Oklahoma bench and none of them are necessarily impact players off the bench. Pattillo is probably the best and he is a wing forward who averages 7 points per game.

The first key for Michigan is to stop Willie Warren and the rest of the Oklahoma backcourt. If Warren and Griffin are clicking it’s going to be a long night but if Michigan can shut down the Oklahoma backcourt like they did against Clemson then they have a shot.

Oklahoma lost four of their last six games before the NCAA tournament after the 25-1 start so they aren’t unbeatable. The question is what those teams (Texas, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma St.) did to earn the victory. Blake was limited by a concussion against Texas and Kansas so the key games to focus on are Missouri and Oklahoma St.

Missouri beat the Sooners with turnovers. Oklahoma turned the ball over on 32.4% of their possessions and that was enough for a 9 point Missouri win despite Oklahoma rebounding 50% of their misses. Oklahoma State also got outrebounded but managed a one point home win.

The common denominator in these two losses was poor three point shooting by Oklahoma. The Sooners shot 4 of 18 and 3 of 19 from three point range in their two late season losses. If they aren’t hitting their three point shots they are a beatable team. On the season they shoot about 35.6% from long range, which is a shade over the national average, but they appear to be wildly inconsistent.

Oklahoma’s Strengths

• Two point shooting. Oklahoma shoots a ridiculous 56.2% inside the arc which is no doubt thanks to Blake Griffin. This high 2-point field goal percentage also gives then an eFG% of 55.2 which is 5th in the nation.
• Getting to the line. Oklahoma’s free throw rate (FTA/FGA) is 47.3% which ranks fifth nationally. This is mostly thanks to Blake Griffin but Willie Warren and Taylor Griffin also do a good job of getting to the stripe.
• Rebounding. This is clearly a strength but I would have thought their rebounding percentages would be higher. They rebound 36.5% of their own misses (52nd) and 68.4% of their opponents’ misses (122nd) — these numbers are certainly solid but as a team they don’t appear to be as good on the offensive glass as Clemson.

Oklahoma’s Weaknesses

• Turnovers. Oklahoma only forces turnovers on 17.8% of their opponents possessions (313th nationally) so Michigan should be able to hold onto the ball. They also turn the ball over on 19.5% of their own so maybe the 1-3-1 could frustrate them a little.
• Free throw shooting. Oklahoma shoots only 67.9% from the line and more importantly Griffin only shoots 59% at the stripe.
• Depth. Oklahoma’s bench plays only 20.8% of their minutes (331st)

Intangibles

• Conferences. Oklahoma played only game against a Big Ten school all year, an overtime win over Purdue. Michigan hasn’t faced the Big XII all year. I’m not sure how the two conferences will match-up but I know Michigan State handled Kansas and Oklahoma State.
• Coaching. The coaching match-up has to benefit Michigan. Jeff Capel is a very good coach but this is John Beilein’s bread and butter — the NCAA tournament.
• Rest. Michigan has been better all season long when they are playing on a lot of rest and the numbers are a bit scary the other way. I guess the good thing is that Oklahoma is playing on light rest as well.

Pomeroy and Vegas both like Oklahoma by about six points, but at least Pomeroy gives us a 27% chance. It is definitely not much but at this point all you can ask for is a chance. Beilein has been here before, taking on a 2 seed in second round. Back then it was Wake Forest and Chris Paul and West Virginia was outrebounded but they prevailed in a double overtime thriller.

Thoughts, predictions, and in-game discussion belong in the comments. Go Blue! Burn the ships, even if the story isn’t true.

Pre-Game Reading:

• Beilein’s Long-Range Plan Gives Michigan Quick Payoff
  NY Times on Michigan and the three point shot
• Court Vision with C.J. Lee: Unbelievable Experience, Challenges Still Lie Ahead
  CJ Lee blogs about his experience in Kansas City
• Boys’ basketball: Windward is Division V champion
  Congrats to Darius Morris on the state championship. Morris had a game high 25 points and Windward finished the season 29-6. I’ll have a big recruiting update next week. Video below…
• McLimans, the basketball player, gets Michigan’s attention
  Why not throw in another recruiting link
• Audio: Beilein, Michigan players talk Oklahoma ($)
  Peedi lets the people know how well Eric Puls simulates Blake Griffin in practice