Michigan State's regular season was derailed by the seniors not stepping up enough, and generally suffering from disconnect from the ‘team’ at different points (1-2 of the seniors, or Jaden Akins were off seemingly every game of the season). This team began to ‘read its own press releases’ in the summer, and did not commit to the nitty-gritty of excellence quite enough.
While the metrics say that this team is a strong defensive team, the eye-test belies those numbers: the team struggles to defend at the point of attack too often, and the guards/wings get beat off-ball on simple back-cuts or on failures to properly trail and chase (how many times did the guards go under screens on good shooters?). The center position never got off the ground — if it seems like it has been years since Mady Sissoko looked like a future star in back-to-back games against Gonzaga and Kentucky ... you’re not far off.
Offensively, despite being comically limited in terms of post-scoring, this team refuses to play at a fast pace, which would benefit the team in myriad ways. It would give more chances for shooters to get into a rhythm against an open court (how many times has Xavier Booker gotten to shoot a delayed-break ‘trailer’ 3pt shot from the top of the arc?), allow the guards and wings to get into the paint at a higher clip before shot-blockers get into position, and likely force opposing teams to scale back the pressure they place on the offensive glass. This is a choice the team made, and it held back the offense all season.
Speaking of Xavier Booker, it is clear that he should have been playing 10-15 minutes per game all season, and should not have had a single ‘did not play – coach’s decision.’
Was he a raw prospect?
Yes.
Is it possible to lift weights and gain weight while also playing 10 minutes per game?
Yes.
The staff’s insistence on trying to squeeze more out of the returning three bigs simply did not pay off and -- given the mediocre defensive performance from those bigs -- giving Booker minutes would not have dramatically changed outcomes on the defensive end. Playing Booker is about spacing — his shooting threat draws a big-man away from the rim, or if he gets a small switched onto him, pulls that player away from helping on driving lanes. This is especially important in the half-court against a ‘set defense.’ Insisting on playing slow and refusing to play Booker makes very little sense. Fortunately, for whatever reason, the staff has begun to regularly play Booker, and the results have been encouraging.
The final aspect of the roster-management that has proved perplexing is the inability of the staff to figure out how to use Coen Carr. The uber-athlete makes ‘impact plays’ happen routinely on both ends — he has the third-highest ‘block percentage’ (percentage of opponent shots taken that he blocks in minutes he is on the court) and fourth-highest ‘steal percentage’ on the team — and his finishing ability both in terms of dunking the ball and showing a bit of touch in the paint is evident. In the open court, he is easy to understand — pass him the ball and let him dunk it. It is in the half-court that Izzo and Co. failed to develop any clear understanding of how best to use him.
This is perplexing: Carr, with a left-hand-only dribble, just needs to start near the elbow and he can generate a rim attempt or draw a foul. Despite his poor shooting from the free throw line, his ‘free-throw rate’ is staggeringly high at 76.2 percent — he gets fouled a lot!
With a player like Carr, in the half-court, the team should be running some patented Izzo-sets for him. Running the weave when he is playing on the wing allows him to straight-line-drive with power from the right wing to the elbow, and when he is playing the forward spot, the team should be placing him in the ‘dunker spot’ or giving him catches at the elbow (the entire ‘Horns’ series generates these kinds of touches, for example).
But Carr has looked like a sore thumb in the half-court because the coaching staff has not designed enough of the half-court offense around him when he has been on the court. It is ironic to say but designing the sets around Carr (and Booker) actually will generate better looks because the other players will know how to work the counters to those sets if the defense ‘takes Carr away.’ The problem has been the clunkiness of the half-court, and this has stemmed from the failure of the team to give the ‘squeaky wheel the grease’ — to mix metaphors.
When this team clicks, they are capable of playing with anyone — they are also likely capable of beating plenty of teams in the NCAA Tournament field.
Match-up with Mississippi State
While the Mississippi State 3pt% defense is seemingly elite, I am always skeptical of teams that concede a high volume of 3pt shots unless I see tracking data that indicates that those teams are 'closely contesting' all of those 3pt shots.
If that is the case, then the Bulldogs are one of the most unique teams in the history of college basketball. Forcing teams to take a ton of 3pt shots and then also being able to contest them to such a degree as to force them into misses would mark them as one of the greatest defensive teams of all-time.
In all likelihood, they force a ton of 3pt shots because when teams break their pressure defense, they do so with skip passes, or with dribble penetration that leads to open kick-outs on relocation movement. If you do the leg-work of looking at the data behind Mississippi State's record, you will see that almost their entire non-conference schedule was against weaker opponents who took and missed a ton of 3pt shots. In the second half of SEC play, teams started to hit more shots. Add to that the fact that the SEC is not a good 3pt shooting conference, (24th out of 32 total conferences in terms of 3pt%) and all of a sudden that mark looks far less impressive.
The four best 3pt shooting teams in the SEC were Kentucky, Auburn, LSU, and Alabama -- Mississippi State went 3-6 against those teams.
Mississippi State concedes a TON of 3-point shots (#303 in the nation), so the Spartans will need to take those shots and accept that they will not make every one of them — keep shooting.
Part of the reason they concede 3-point shots is because they play with plenty of pressure in the half-court, they trap, go for steals (#38 in the nation) and will give up openings for drives, passes, and shots if that pressure does not pay off. The Bulldogs want to speed teams up in the half-court (they play with defensive ‘pace’ #52 in the nation in terms of duration of defensive possessions). If the Spartans play without turnovers and attack the pressure looking to score (instead of over-passing), then this defense may very well crumble.
Offensively, the Bulldogs turn the ball over a ton, which should lead to Spartan transition opportunities. They crash the offensive glass, and they get to the free-throw line. This is NOT a good jump-shooting team outside of star freshman Josh Hubbard (5’10”, speedy, crafty, and an outstanding high-volume 3-point shooter).
The guys to watch on the offensive glass for the Bulldogs are Tolu Smith (senior stand-out and the other pillar of the Mississippi State offense), Jimmy Bell (St. Louis transfer who is a massive human), KeShawn Murphy (6’10” reserve forward), Cameron Matthews (6’7” senior forward), and DJ Jeffries (6’7” senior wing former Memphis player). The center position and forward position for the Spartans will need to do yeomen’s work to keep these guys off the glass, but, if they do, the Mississippi offense will become solely reliant on Hubbard’s wizardry and Smith’s post-ups.
AJ Hoggard and Jaden Akins will have crucial defensive rebounding roles and cannot flag or fail to keep Jeffries off the glass. Those two should both finish with at least four rebounds each.
I expect Walker to take on the matchup with the freshman Hubbard -- aided by Tre Holloman -- and attack that match-up with relish. But it might end up being Holloman who is the best match-up against Hubbard given his length and his ability to bother Hubbard’s shot a bit more — this is a match-up where Jeremy Fears would have played a critical defensive role.
The last five teams to beat the Bulldogs have each had at least four double-digit scorers, so this match-up sets up pretty nicely for a balanced Michigan State attack — every player needs to be shot-ready and aggressive.
Looking ahead to the rest of the bracket
A potential match-up with North Carolina actually sets-up quite nicely for the Spartans — they will be heavy underdogs, but match up well with UNC’s personnel. The Tar Heels have four ‘guys’ (RJ Davis, Armando Bacot, Harrison Ingram, and Cormac Ryan). In all but two of their losses, only three of those four were in double figures.
- RJ Davis – 40% from 3pt range on over seven attempts per game; playmaker, shot-taker, great free-throw shooter.
- Armando Bacot – big body, below the rim player; wants to stay in the paint, good paint defender.
- Harrison Ingram – 37% from 3pt range on over 4.5 attempts per game with another 5+ 2pt shots per game; athletic and great rebounder on both ends; good defender.
- Cormac Ryan – 34% from 3pt range on over five attempts per game.
The guys to target are Cormac Ryan and Harrison Ingram, especially if these two can be held in relative check (by Jaden Akins and Malik Hall, respectively). RJ Davis and Armando Bacot will have good games against the Spartans, but they can be made to work for their points.
If MSU can shut down one or more of their primary guys, then UNC becomes far easier to beat, and Michigan State has the defensive capacity to do exactly this. UNC’s bench guys are good players, but Hubert Davis does not play them many minutes, so UNC really relies on Ingram and Ryan to supplement the ever-steady duo of Davis and Bacot.
If the Spartans get past UNC, a potential match-up against Alabama would prove challenging, given their play-style, but also winnable given their play-style. Alabama plays an athletic and dynamic style with one of the fastest paces in the nation (#9 in overall tempo), Nate Oats’ style is predicated on taking only shots at the rim or 3pt shots. If they hit shots, speed teams up, and get a lead they can be incredibly difficult to play against.
Alternatively, their poor defense — they do not force turnovers, they give up a ton of offensive rebounds, and they hack constantly on defense (sending opponents to the line constantly) — means that teams that can control tempo and defend well against them, will almost certainly win the game.
On the other side of the bracket, expect Arizona, Baylor, or a peaking New Mexico team to be waiting—all three would be winnable match-ups. The Spartans played Arizona to a two-possession game, and match-up pretty comfortably against the talented Pac-12 team. The Spartans have beaten Baylor once (and again match-up well against), and New Mexico, while talented and experienced, is more-or-less a mirror image of Michigan State in terms of personnel — relying on their back-court and talented forward (JT Toppin) to do most of their damage.
Get past Mississippi State and UNC and the Final Four is within reach.
Overall thoughts on the bracket
UConn is my pick to win the title.
Exciting double-digit teams include the aforementioned New Mexico, Oregon, Samford, Western Kentucky, NC State, Drake, and South Dakota State.
My Final Four picks: UCONN, Houston, Tennessee, Michigan State.
If a team outside of the top-8 seeds is going to make it, Michigan State is a really exciting possibility given their experience, coaching, 3-point shooting, defense, and guard play.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Join the discussion on this article in our premium forums by clicking here.
You can also follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Threads, TikTok, and Instagram.
For video content, including our Red Cedar Radar podcast, find us on YouTube and consider subscribing.
