" title="Spartans Weblog">Spartans Weblog

National Rankings

MSU drops from #6 to #11 in both the AP and coaches’ polls. IU leapfrogs them, moving to 9/10. Wisconsin is up to #17 in both polls.

Frankly, I’m surprised MSU didn’t drop more than five spots given how ugly the Iowa loss was. The formula-driven rankings may be a better indication of where MSU stands in the national picture at this point.

Sagarin ratings: #18

Kenpom ratings: #19

BB State ratings ($): #15

RPI at StatSheet: #10 (only falling two spots after the Iowa loss; the RPI is a mystery to me)

Joe Lunardi has dropped the Spartans to a #4 seed in his weekly NCAA tournament projections. I’d say that’s about right. I think a #2 seed is the goal now to keep hope alive for playing at Ford Field. A #3 or #4 team is probably more realistic barring a sensational stretch run in conference play. Only four Big Ten teams are included in Lunardi’s field: MSU, IU, Wisconsin, Ohio State. Minnesota and Purdue are the best bets to join them as a fifth team from the conference.

The AFKATBTW on MSU’s Turnover Addiction

John Gasaway has a piece up at Basketball Prospectus examining who’s at fault for MSU’s recurring turnover problem. He notes Neitzel’s freakishly low turnover rate and he lets Morgan off the hook because he touches the ball so much. I’d tend to let Morgan off the hook, too, but for a different reason: He’s been so proficient in every other aspect of the game (scoring, rebounding, defending). He lays the blame on everyone else getting minutes for the Spartans, picking on Naymick in particular.

He ends with this sobering commentary:

When it comes to turnovers, Michigan State is a little like a troubled family member trying and promising to go straight. We want to believe it will happen but there’s a history here. Last year in Big Ten play, the Spartans committed a turnover on 26 percent of their possessions. That’s the highest number I’ve seen posted by any major-conference team in the past three seasons.

This year? After three Big Ten games the Spartans are committing turnovers on 28 percent of their trips. It’s early, but if Michigan State wants to keep the expectations for this team where they are, they need to change the turnover numbers for this team.

Unfortunately, we’ve entered a time warp. Gasaway is saying exactly the same thing about MSU that he was when the season began. Hopefully, another downturn in MSU’s turnover trendline is in the works . . . and it sticks this time.

Discussion Question: Why Does This Always Happen to Us?

I haven’t posted any real commentary on MSU’s struggles against Iowa–and the slow conference season start generally–mainly because . . . I haven’t seen any of the three conference games. But I do want to raise a longer-term question.

Tom Izzo, the MSU fan base, and most college commentators view MSU as an elite basketball program nationally. Yet MSU seems to experience these really horrific offensive showings much more frequently than other elite programs (Duke, UNC, UConn, Kentucky, Kansas, etc.). Scanning the last few seasons’ results, I find these clunkers in which MSU scored 50 points or fewer:

• Iowa 43 MSU 36 (2007-08)
• Illinois 57 MSU 50 (2006-07)
• Purdue 62 MSU 38 (2006-07)
• Wisconsin 52 MSU 50 (2006-07)
• Illinois 60 MSU 50 (2005-06)
• Iowa 53 MSU 48 (2005-06)

(In half these games, MSU scored exactly 50 points here; there are also a number of 51-52 point games I’ve left out.)

Now certainly a piece of this phenomenon relates to playing in a conference that (1) plays at a very slow pace and (2) places an emphasis on defense. But even at 60 possessions per game, a 50-point performance is only 0.83 points/possession–a very poor performance for a team with as much offensive talent as MSU has had in recent years.

I think there’s something larger at work. Tom Izzo runs one of the most complex offenses in college basketball. It relies heavily on set plays, rather than individual play making. This has two benefits:

1) MSU doesn’t take a lot of bad shots, resulting in higher shooting percentages.

2) When everything’s clicking, the MSU offense can be nearly unstoppable–talented players running precise plays that are impossible to defend.

It also has two downsides:

1) A higher number of turnovers as players often make bad decisions when forced out of the offensive sets.

2) When players aren’t playing well in the offensive set pieces, everything can fall apart because there’s not individual playmaking to fall back on.

Clearly, over the course of the Izzo era the benefits of Izzo’s offensive philosophy have outweighed the costs. But the continuing turnover problem and the occasional offensive catastrophes are becoming serious issues. If these problems persist, Izzo may need to rethink this philosophy a bit and give his players some additional freedom on offense.

The natural solution is the continued development of Kalin Lucas. He’s a more traditional, well-rounded point guard. He can, hopefully, keep things running more smoothly on offense. And he can penetrate to create shots for himself and his teammates when the offensive set pieces break down.