UM Hoops.com

Previously: Stu Douglass (B-), Zack Novak (B), Laval Lucas-Perry (C), Manny Harris (A), DeShawn Sims (A)

Zack Gibson continues to leave Michigan fans scratching their head and longing for more. He manages to display just enough of his potential every couple games to make you realize that he could play at this level. The problem is that those flashes of potential are nothing more than a tease.  At 6-foot-10 he has enough ability to be a valuable asset in the Beilein offense but he just can’t turn his skill set into consistent production.

In a year that was defined by improvement across the board, Zack Gibson managed to take a step backwards. Zack regressed in almost every statistical category: minutes per game (13.9 to 12.1), offensive rating (106.2 to 97.3), eFG% (52.4 to 51.2), free throw percentage (72.2 to 50.0), points per game (5.4 to 3.9), and rebounds per game (2.8 to 2.2). The most frustrating part of Zack’s regression is the fact that, with Ekpe Udoh’s departure, there was ample opportunity for him to step up and become a contributor.

As we are all too aware, Michigan desperately needed size inside last year. With a 6-foot-8 starting center and a 6-foot-4 starting power forward there was plenty of minutes available for a 6-foot-10 big man. Zack didn’t necessarily seize the moment, he played more than 15 minutes in only 6 games last year (Duke #1, UConn, Northwestern (OT), Illinois, and UCLA). This was partly because he never played alongside DeShawn Sims but mostly because he didn’t produce when he was on the court.

Zack’s first problem was that he couldn’t stay on the floor without picking up silly fouls. He averaged 4.9 fouls per 40 minutes, the highest mark on the team with only CJ Lee and Dave Merritt breaking the 4 fouls per 40 minutes barrier. A high number makes sense for Lee, the team’s most aggressive defender, and Merritt, who almost always was facing a more athletic guard. Gibson just couldn’t seem to avoid cheap fouls.

When Zack was in the game he tried his best to make himself noticed. He used more of his possessions (20.2%) than anyone on the team beside Manny, DeShawn, and Laval. However, Gibson’s 97.1 offensive rating was the third lowest on the team, only ahead of Anthony Wright and Dave Merritt. For those unfamiliar with tempo free stats, ideally you want the players with the highest offensive rating to be the ones using the most possessions. Gibson’s statistics are just the opposite, he was near the bottom in terms of efficiency and the top in terms of usage.

Anyone that watched Zack play would guess that he didn’t shoot the ball well from long range last year. His 23% three point shooting percentage was absolutely dreadful. After shooting under 30% in each of his two years in the Maize & Blue, it’s hard to encourage Zack to launch anymore up from behind the arc.

There are a couple positives to point out on Zack’s statistical profile. He actually shot a very high percentage on 2 point field goal attempts, his 56.5 2pfg% was the best on the team. This is all the more reason that Zack needs to start shooting more shots from inside rather than outside. Zack also did a great job blocking shots while he was in the game, his 7% block percentage was more than double DeShawn’s 2.9%.

Shining Moments

• vs. Illinois – 10 points on 4 of 5 (1-1 3pt) shooting, 1 assist, and a block
  There is no doubt that this was Zack’s best performance of the year. Gibson iced the win when he blew past Tisdale and finished with a slam with 4 minutes to play (the biggest snub of the plays of the year poll). Zack scored 8 of his 10 points in the second half and was the difference between Michigan winning and losing. This Illinois game is often overlooked but it turned out to be one of Michigan’s more important wins of the year.
• at UConn — 7 points on 3-6 shooting (1-3 3pt), 4 rebounds, 1 assist, 1 block
  After this game I commented on how impressed I was with Zack’s effort against UConn’s bigs. The numbers aren’t overwhelming but Zack played hard and gave Michigan productive minutes. A back-up big man doesn’t need to provide scoring, they need to not hurt the team and try to provide a boost with some energy. Michigan obviously lost this game, but it was still one of their more impressive performances of the year.
• NCAA Tournament
  -Clemson – 10 minutes, 2 points, 4 rebounds, and a block
  -Oklahoma – 14 minutes, 5 points (2-4 fg), 3 rebounds, 1 steal, 1 block
  Another two games that weren’t the most impressive on paper but two that convinced me that Zack might be starting to turn the corner. Clemson and Oklahoma were both tough inside but Zack battled against the likes of Blake Griffin and Trevor Booker in a way that we have only seen occasionally. He scrapped and hustled and gave Michigan a lift in two games where DeShawn Sims was invisible at times.

Final Grade: D+

Overall it was a disappointing year for Zack. He had all the opportunity in the world to take on a bigger role but he just didn’t step up. Will he turn the corner before his senior year? Perhaps the competition in the frontcourt with Cronin, Morgan, and McLimans will help push him along but I’m having a hard time seeing it. Despite Zack’s solid play in Kansas City, at some point you have to stop saying that a fifth year senior has potential and start to admit that he is what he is.

Previously: Stu Douglass (B-), Zack Novak (B), Laval Lucas-Perry (C), Manny Harris (A)

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.

Previously: Stu Douglass (B-), Zack Novak (B), Laval Lucas-Perry (C)

The Good

• Scoring
  Manny uses a lot of possessions, 31.8%, but he is still surprisingly efficient with a rating of 106.9. This is a vast improvement from last year when he posted an offensive rating of only 94.8. Only Manny Harris and Evan Turner used more than 28% of their teams’ possessions and their ratings were very close. Manny isn’t a shooter either, he’s just a scorer. He knows how to get to the line, he draws the most fouls per 40 minutes in the conference, and he just knows how to score.
• Rebounding
  Manny Harris become a force on the glass this year. It was clear that we were going to struggle on the glass without Ekpe, and Manny stepped up and increased his rebounded average by over 2 and a half boards per game. I would say without hesitation that he is the best rebounder on the team and he should only get better with his sheer athletic ability.
• Creating
  This is another area where Manny made huge progress in his sophomore campaign. Last year he was a scorer and nothing more. This year he learned how valuable he can be when he distributes the ball. Averaging almost two more assists per game (2.7 to 4.4) and doubling his assist to turnover ratio (0.7 to 1.4) it became clear that Manny has the ability to set up his teammates. It is one thing to score the ball but it’s another to make the team better even when your shot isn’t falling.

The Bad

• Shot Selection
  There are still times when Manny leaves fans scratching their heads. He is plagued by mini bouts of frustration that lead to poor decision making. His shot has improved dramatically since his high school days but when he shoots pull-up threes out of the flow of the offense it’s enough to make me scream. Learning what is a good shot, when to pass, or when to drive is a process and I have no doubt that Manny will continue to improve in this aspect but this is definitely the next step. Of course it also must be mentioned that some of Michigan’s biggest wins came because those threes were falling.
• Ball Handling
  The turnovers are still frustrating. Manny has the ball in his hands extensively so some turnovers are to be expected but there is definitely room for improvement. His dribbling is still a bit high and if he wants to be an NBA two-guard he’s going to have to continue to improve here.
• Mid-Range
  When Manny drives the lane it’s essentially an all or nothing proposition — he’s going to take it all the way to the hole or kick it out. Developing a pull-up jumper would prevent defenses from packing the lane and cheating on the defensive side of the ball. This is never going to be Manny’s bread and butter but the threat of the pull-up jumper will go a long ways toward keeping defenses honest.

The Future

Manny improved in essentially every statistical category on the board between his freshman and sophomore years. It might be unfair to expect the same but with his ability it’s hard to expect anything less. With a little more depth I wouldn’t be surprised to see his scoring average drop a bit but he needs to continue to improve with his shooting, efficiency, and ball handling.

Manny’s role should remain about the same. I think the move to the wing did him good and that is definitely his natural college position. Adding more shooters and a point guard to the roster should help alleviate some of the pressure put on Harris as well.

Big Ten Player of the Year is certainly not out of the question for next season if Manny continues to improve. I also want to see him get a triple double, the closest he has come is 26-10-8.

Shining Moments

• Clemson - 23 points, 7 rebounds, 6 assists, 7 of 15 (3-6 3pt) shooting
  There were no season highs or anything that remarkable statistically but this was a night when Manny brought his ‘A’ game. When the three ball is falling Manny is almost impossible to guard and that was the case in Kansas City. Manny carried Michigan through the first half while the rest of the team looked a bit shell shocked before finishing the game down the stretch. Of course the biggest play of the game was Manny’s driving layup that essentially iced the game.
• Purdue – 27 points, 8-15 (3-5 3pt) shooting, 8 rebounds, 4 assists
  He may not have even been the player of the game but this was as motivated and focused as I have seen Manny play throughout his career. Manny hit some huge three pointers in this one and got a little bit of revenge after his ejection in the first match-up with Purdue. It was tough to settle on two “shining moments” for Manny so I also put together an honorable mention list as well.
• Honorable Mention: Penn State (28-6-7), at Northwestern (25 pts in 2nd half & OT), Oakland (13 assists, 1 turnover), Northeastern (26-10-8), Duke

Final Grade: A

There is no one more deserving of an ‘A’ than Manny. He was first team All-Big Ten and will likely be named the team MVP at tonight’s banquet. And while the season was not without a few black eyes, including the Iowa debacle, the Purdue ejection, a frustrating performance at Penn State, and a couple other no-shows. I think the only acceptable grade for Manny is an A when you consider that he led Michigan in minutes, points, rebounds (tied), assists, and steals this year.

Previously: Stu Douglass (B-), Zack Novak (B)

The Good

• Three Point Shooting
  Laval teased us with his shooting stroke in the non-conference season — he came out blazing hot which caused Michigan fans to start drooling. Laval clearly can shoot the ball, despite his slump he shot 34.4%, the same percentage as Zack Novak and only worse than the departed point guards. Those who have seen him in practice claim that he is every bit the shooter we saw in December and I think we will see a very good three point shooter down the road.
• Penetration
  After appearing to be almost strictly a three point shooter early on, Laval started to show the ability to get in the lane. It seems like he can get there but he really struggles with what to do in the lane. If he gets fouled that’s good but he didn’t seem to be much of a finisher, nor did he seem to be much of a passer. The ability to get in the lane in itself is valuable for this team because no one else besides Manny Harris ever seemed to penetrate.
• Getting to the Line
  Laval posted a free throw rate (FTA/FGA) of 43.7% which was good for second best on the team. Considering there were only fourteen teams in the country that got to the free throw line less than Michigan this year, getting to the stripe should probably be encouraged. Using KenPom numbers (explained here) Laval drew 4 fouls per game, this would have been a respectable top 20 in the conference had Laval played enough minutes this year.

The Bad

• Confidence
  There is no denying that Laval came into a tough situation. He was thrown into the fire and expected to be the third scorer. Things came easy early on when he was playing against teams like North Carolina Central and Florida Gulf Coast but the Big Ten season was another animal. The sudden change put a dagger in Laval’s confidence which eventually forced Beilein to cut his losses and go with Stu almost exclusively down the stretch.
• Defense
  I was disappointed in Laval’s defense this year. In hindsight it was probably a foolish prediction but I expected Laval to be a good defender after reading about his strength as well as the fact that he played football. It didn’t really turn out that way. Laval consistently struggled on the defensive end of the court in conference play and I think this is one of the biggest reasons that Stu passed him on the depth chart.
• Learning the Offense
  By the end of the year it became clear that Laval just didn’t have the same understanding of the offense as some of the other guards. When there were open cutters he typically hesitated to make the pass and either didn’t make it or made it too late. Laval played huge minutes in the first half of the Michigan State game and I think that played a huge factor in Michigan’s inability to score. Different kids understand the offense at different speeds so I’m sure this is something that he will continue to work with Beilein on. The bottom line is that I don’t want Laval playing the “point guard” if he isn’t comfortable passing the ball in the flow of the offense.

The Future

I think Stu Douglass is a better candidate to get some minutes at the point guard next year because of his understanding of the system but I wouldn’t be shocked if Laval got a shot. This summer it will be important for Laval to continue to get comfortable as well as work on his defense and ball handling. Hitting a wide open jumper is one thing but doing it while not affecting the flow of the offense is another.

The beauty here is that this was only Laval’s freshman year because he won his appeal with the NCAA. I would feel a lot less comfortable with his role in the program if he had sophomore eligibility rather than freshman eligibility this year. The way this year played out was probably frustrating for Laval but I think it definitely will help him understand what he needs to get done this off-season.

Shining Moments

• vs. Oakland — 16 minutes, 14 points, 4-6 3pt
  Laval’s debut came with an unfair amount of expectations. Tim McCormick and yours truly had been hyping Laval’s addition to the lineup since long before the season even began. Laval didn’t do much to dampen the enthusiasm, he came out on fire and put on a show for the pro-Michigan crowd at the Palace. It was one of the best offensive performances of the year from Michigan and LLP spearheaded it with his early three point bombs.
• at Minnesota — 21 minutes, 19 points, 6-7 shooting (3-4 3pt)
  This was one of the most heroic and unexpected performances of the entire year. Despite making only 6 shots in the last 8 games, Laval stepped up with the season on the line. Laval not only found his stroke but he also found it at the best time. Michigan appeared to be dead in the water facing a double digit deficit on the road but a few three point shots from LLP and Michigan was back in business. In many ways the Minnesota game was a microcosm of the entire season and it certainly put a nice bookend of Laval’s freshman season.

Grading

Final Grade: C. Laval had to deal with unfair expectations from day 1 and his season is definitely a bit disappointing. After averaging 12.7 points in his first six games, Laval averaged only 4.6 points in his final twenty. If you take out his 19 point performance against Minnesota that number falls well under 4 points per game.

Still, Laval was instrumental in two of Michigan’s season saving comebacks (at Indiana & Minnesota) and showed enough of his potential to not be discouraged. His stroke is pure but after they started missing, his confidence plummeted and eventually started affecting the rest of his game. I am confident that he comes around next year but his final grade has to represent a mostly disappointing season.

Previously: Stu Douglass (B-)

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.