Neitzel, Sherman, Izzo, and Coffee Talk
Posted by kj on Sunday, July 20th, 2008
Drew Neitzel’s numbers in the Timberwolves’ final two summer league games:
- Saturday: 6 points on 3-9 shooting, zero assists, and 2 turnovers in 20 minutes of an 81-67 loss.
- Sunday: 14 points on 6-11 shooting, 3 assists, and 1 turnover in 18 minutes of a 111-91 win.
At least Neitzel finished with a strong showing. In a story that ran in Minneapolis a couple days ago, he spoke optimistically of his chances of getting a chance to compete in the fall for a roster spot with the Wolves. The comments from Minnesota management were of the not-dripping-with-enthusiasm variety, though:
Assistant general manager Rob Babcock, who saw Neitzel play in college, noted that Neitzel had good court sense, fundamentals and shooting ability. Babcock added, though, that his height is “a little bit of a weakness” and that Neitzel doesn’t possess “blinding quickness.”
That, coupled with a Telfair signing or another free-agent acquisition, could dampen Neitzel’s hope of landing in Minnesota. But by show of the depth chart, Neitzel could get an extended look in the fall.
“There’s certainly a chance,” Babcock said. “That’s why he’s here — to compete for that spot.”
2009 commit Garrick Sherman received rave reviews about his recent play at a tournament in Morgan Town, West Virginia:
Sherman fits into the mold Tom Izzo has developed for his high- and low-post players. Garrick has huge hands to go with his big, strong, wide frame. He is a throwback low post scorer with a variety of back-to-the-basket moves. When watching Garrick play, the obvious hits you first — he is a huge young man, but as you watch further you start to really appreciate the work he has put into his game to get him to a point where he may have been the best prospect at the tournament. No one will mistake him for a classical dancer, but his footwork is well practiced through repetition and he gets where he needs to go much faster than advertised. His motor is relentless and he has the ability to dominate his area rebounding, but what is most impressive is his ability to get those huge hands on rebounds outside his immediate area on the floor. . . .
The Grand Rapids Press ran a feature story on Izzo today. Not a lot of basketball-related content, but the story provides a few behind-the-scene glimpses at Izzo’s life. Interesting comments on Michigan:
Still, it irks Izzo — and plenty of Michigan State fans — that Spartan successes in athletics and academics aren’t fully illuminated because the media spotlight shines perpetually on the University of Michigan.
“Friends tell me (our) program is better-known out-of-state than it is in-state,” Izzo said. “It is so easy to hate them, but it’s draining. You can waste a lot of energy.”
This is consistent with my own sense of the MSU basketball program’s place in the universe of media coverage and sports fandom in this state: the program still doesn’t receive the attention the last dozen years of success would seem to merit. Maybe this is just a function of how much I care about Spartan basketball compared to everything else in the sports world, but here’s a real-live example:
In the last month the Detroit News has run just five articles about MSU basketball–two recruiting articles with material originating at Rivals.com and Scout.com, a short article on Neitzel playing in the NBA summer league, a piece by Terry Foster on Jason Richardson’s work in Saginaw, and an interview with Tom Crean that references Izzo. Not a substantive piece on the program’s current players to be found. I realize it’s the offseason, but the state’s other prominent sports teams get more than just token coverage during the offseason. As far as I can tell, there’s been only one original article published by the News related to the future of the team since the end of the last season; it ran just after MSU lost to Memphis (and is unavailable online now).
A quick check indicates the Free Press has actually run five MSU basketball-related articles about MSU in the last month, but four were about Neitzel. The fifth was about former MSU assistant Jim Boylan. So same basic deal–and less variety.
There are a few possible reasons MSU basketball doesn’t receive the same level of coverage/interest that other sports teams with similar track records get:
- Michigan has four professional sports franchises, three of whom have had a fair amount of success in recent years. Teams like North Carolina, Duke, Kentucky, and Kansas have a lot less competition from other sports teams in their state. And most states don’t have two big-time college athletic programs.
- Michigan State’s success in basketball, while now firmly established, still has a shorter track record than other elite college programs (Michigan football, UNC basketball, etc.).
- Sports fans in Michigan (even the majority of MSU fans, I’d guess) still lean pretty heavily toward football. Until the MSU football team becomes a perennial contender, I think the Michigan football mystique will continue to overshadow MSU’s athletic programs.
Nevertheless, Izzo has certainly raised the profile of Spartan basketball considerably since taking over in 1995. And, by the time he’s done, the program could have 20 years of national success under its belt, setting the stage for the program to rise to the level of Michigan football or UNC basketball in the eyes of the media and sports fans in the state.
Now to Coffee Talk: Ironically, another reason that the MSU basketball program hasn’t entered the state’s psyche the way Michigan football has is the lack of a clear, top-notch rival to create the level of excitement that Michigan-Ohio State does in football or UNC-Duke does in basketball. Michigan hasn’t fielded a contending men’s basketball team since the early years of the Izzo era. In terms of competing for conference- and national-level success, a half dozen other Big Ten teams have played more meaningful games against MSU on at least a semi-consistent basis over the last decade: Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio State, Purdue.
So here’s the question: Who do you consider to be MSU’s top basketball rival? Is it Michigan or somebody else? Stated differently: If you could guarantee that MSU would win both its games against one team in the conference next season, which team would it be?
Filed in coffee talk, links19 responses so far
19 Responses to “Neitzel, Sherman, Izzo, and Coffee Talk”
Markon 20 Jul 2008 at 8:34 pm 1I would have to pick Wisconsin as our biggest conference basketball rival. They have been the most consistent threat against us and I think they’ve had the most success against us in the past 8 years.
gdcon 20 Jul 2008 at 11:19 pm 2I have to agree with Mark. Other than Wiscy there isn’t another consistant threat in the Big 10 other than perhaps Purdue and they could possibly be a bigger threat in the long run.
Illinios wants to be but I just don’t see it happening with Weber at their helm. No need to mention the messes at Iowa (turning a corner?) and Indiana (go Coach Crean!).
Minny, NW, Penn State and UM just don’t seem to be at the same level as the rest.
Ohio State should be a powerhouse but with their new policy of one-and-done, I just don’t see it happening (by the way, I think that trend in college basketball needs to be addressed by the powers that be.)
mblemieuxon 21 Jul 2008 at 2:41 am 3It’s clearly Wisconsin for the reasons stated above, especially the fact that they seem to have our number. As much as I hate to say this, I think another reason the hoops program is not seen in the same light as Michigan’s football program is perhaps related to a lack of conference titles. It is possible that being in the hunt for the title down the stretch every year would result in more consistent media coverage. Personally, I favor the media bias theory, but I offer this as an alternative theory.
witless chumon 21 Jul 2008 at 7:51 am 4Is anyone going to say anything but the Badgers? The Grinch and company are always the most annoying Big 10 opponent.
Maybe we can start something up with ND, now that they’re good on the court.
kjon 21 Jul 2008 at 9:00 am 5OK. So I guess this wasn’t the greatest Coffee Talk question.
What are the odds MSU-Michigan becomes a great rivalry once/if Beilein builds a contender?
gmon 21 Jul 2008 at 10:03 am 6Fantastic post (sorry but it sometimes tough to read all of the statistics oriented ones). I completely agree with Wisconsin being our rival. I think that they will be as long as Izzo and Bo are a part of it. It’s not just that they’ve won so many close games against MSU in the recent past but the conflicting character of the teams.
I lived in Madison for two years after graduating and I really gained a respect for the school and their fanbase. Despite that, there may not be a team I dislike more in all of sports than Bo Ryan’s squad.
Also, in terms of being rivals with Michigan, I think there may be a divide between MSU’s football and basketball fanbases. While there certainly is some hatred carried over from the football season, I don’t think they’re proximity or history necessitates that UM become our main rival. It’s unlikely that both programs simultaneously compete at a high level in the next 15 years.
DMPon 21 Jul 2008 at 1:15 pm 7I think Wisconsin with Bo Ryan may have the best chance to become the rival right now, if only because of how much the coaches dislike each other. They are very similar people and yet there seems to be disdain in each direction. If that can be added to continued conference dominance (MSU has to end it’s drought, and Ryan has to make it past the Sweet 16, for F sakes), then it has the makings of a storied rivalry. Or maybe I just currently hate Wisconsin too much.
Spartalyticalon 21 Jul 2008 at 2:43 pm 8I’m inclined to say Wisconsin as well, but are they (the Bo Ryan era) really a rival when the track record has been so one-sided? I hate Wisconsin with all I’m able to muster, but they’ve had our number for a while now.
Kurton 21 Jul 2008 at 5:40 pm 9Oh, it’s Wisconsin, hands down. Just to shut the idiot cheeseheads I live around up! But seriously, the Badgers are consistently good and those wins mean something.
Kurton 21 Jul 2008 at 5:41 pm 10Oh, and your follow up: Beating Michigan just isn’t that fun. And losing to them once in awhile doesn’t really bother me either. Basically, the only reason for needing to beat them is to keep their fan base’s mouths shut. (I’m sure they feel the same about us in football.) They’re just not really much of a blip on the radar.
huberton 21 Jul 2008 at 9:34 pm 11The rival right now is Wisconsin hands down. Who else in the Big Ten would MSU fans celebrate a victory over on the court, the way they did two years ago? No one else is even close. At the same time, that is one reason the press coverage is what it is — Wisconsin is not a natural rival for MSU, and it is basically a one sport rivalry. A real rivalry with a revitalized Michigan would enormously benefit MSU, in terms of coverage, I think and has the potential to be as big in state as NC/Duke. Do I think Belein will bring it about? In a word, no. At least not in the next five years.
Dr Huxtableon 21 Jul 2008 at 10:14 pm 12I’d have to agree that at the moment it’s Wisconsin, but the team that I most want to beat every year is Indiana. With the addition of Crean, that rivalry should really pick up again in the future.
espn is running a countdown of the best hoops programs of the last 25 years. I think that MSU should probably finish a little higher than they did in the Beyond the Arc countdown.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/.....id=3481014
CPon 21 Jul 2008 at 10:54 pm 13In the Izzo era, Wisconsin is the closest thing MSU has to a true rival. Izzo says Michigan is our basketball arch-rival, but actions speak louder than words. Izzo, the players and fans have consistently treated Wisconsin with more energy and emotion than any other Big Ten program. When MSU plays Wisconsin, it has conference championship implications- not to mention the Final Four in 2000 (and they almost had a Final Four rematch in 2005.) I don’t see this changing anytime soon.
So far, Beilein has been a poor recruiter. Apparently, even Oakland has a better class than Michigan- http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.....1048/print How can we talk about Michigan basketball achieving greatness when mediocrity seems out of reach? Will they have double digit wins in the regular season this year? Will they make the NIT? Izzo will always like to stick it to the Wolverines as he was personally affected by their recruiting scandal, but Michigan is history and Wisconsin is now.
When will MSU and Wisconsin start to officially acknowledge their rivalry? It’s only good for the Big Ten and will give them more national coverage. Maybe when MSU wins more conference championships and Wisconsin stops being a dud in the tournament?
SpartanDanon 22 Jul 2008 at 2:08 am 14Maybe it’s just because I grew up in Minnesota (where the student section wears “Better Dead Than Red” T-shirts when Wisconsin comes to town), but chalk up another vote for Wisconsin as our biggest rival. The streak-ending game (though that was before my time in EL), the 2000 Final Four, the Banner Game, Alan Anderson’s perfect game, Neitzel’s shot, their buzzer-beater revenge two weeks later … so many of our most exciting and/or excruciating games have come against them that it can’t be anyone else. There isn’t enough history with OSU, Indiana was too hard to hate under Davis, NW and PSU have been absolute jokes for most of their recent existence, and nobody else has been consistently good enough.
Spartans Weblog » Izzo versus Big Ten opponentson 22 Jul 2008 at 8:58 am 15[...] the unanimous conclusion of this blog’s readers is that Wisconsin is our main rival. And I can’t argue with that conclusion. Chalk this [...]
witless chumon 22 Jul 2008 at 9:05 am 16“What are the odds MSU-Michigan becomes a great rivalry once/if Beilein builds a contender?”
High. If Beilein can get to decent, I think the rivalry will heat up again. The hate is still there for me, but you can’t get too excited about it when they’re bad as they were last year. Or as incompetent as they were in 2006, when the Mock Turtleneck might have had more talent on the floor than Izzo did.
Mark in DCon 23 Jul 2008 at 4:56 pm 17Wisconsin it is, although for a while Illinois looked pretty promising, but their recruiting and success has fallen off considerably after a great start to the Weber regime. I’d like to hate Ohio State just because I don’t like their tendency to rely on one-and-done players, but they have not been consistently good enough, which is the price you pay with one-and-dones. Plus, they’re Michigan’s rival – I think we can do better.
Purdue will have to sustain last year’s success before they enter the discussion. Indiana would be fun but I don’t see them being all that competitive for another couple of years at least – the cupboard is completely bare there. No one else has shown the ability to be good consistently (although Minny under Tubby could be a sleeper).
I really want to like Wisconsin and I respect what Bo Ryan has done, but find all of our close losses to them extremely frustrating. If we’d pulled one or two of the nailbiters out I’d hate them a lot less. You have to give it to Ryan though – if there’s a coach that can take his’n and beat your’n, or your’n and beat his’n, it’s him. He doesn’t rely on 5 star recruits, but manages to stay at the top of the league every year.
Nickon 24 Jul 2008 at 12:27 am 18As painful as some of MSU’s losses to Wisconsin have been, it helps a bit to reflect on the pain MSU has dealt Wisconsin fans. I have a few UW alum friends who still wince at the 2000 season when MSU dealt them 4 losses. Wisconsin reaches the Final Four that year for the first time in forever, and who is waiting for them but MSU. My UW friends say they knew from the opening tip that they were going lose…
And in 2007, when Wisconsin gets a #1 ranking for the first time in forever, their first game as #1 comes against MSU in the Breslin Center. Ahh…now that’s a rivalry–the pain goes both ways.
witless chumon 24 Jul 2008 at 10:42 am 19It does make me feel better to hear all that, Nick.