Except early in the season Simpson lost the starting job for over a month to a much worse defender and Livers was coming off the bench behind a much worse defender because the team desperately needed offense. Shifting MAAR to a higher usage role helped solve this problem. Offense was a major concern last year and looks to be a bigger one next season. Defense was the team’s biggest strength and the team returns more players that contributed to that side of the floor while losing our best 3 shooters and 2 primary offensive options.
It’s so very early, but unless Teske becomes an offensive force, I’m might be happier if three of the 6-7 & 6-8 forwards played on the floor most of the time–of course, they would have to earn it over Teske–but it would be more fun in my opinion and more consistent with how the game is played today.
Just thinking about the Poole-Matthews-Iggy-Johns-Livers lineup has me excited. I very much doubt that lineup ever sees the floor but a man can dream.
I am also high on Johns. I think he could be the freshman that gets the most play, simply because of need at that position and his size and ability to hit the 3.
Teske (117.6) has the highest returning efficiency rating on the team, followed by Poole at 108. The rest of the roster has as much, if not more, to prove than Teske, who will probably be the 4th option.
A little bit misleading to use Teske’s offensive rating like that. You are taking Wagner, a player who you based your whole offense around and replacing him with a lower usage player who predominantly finishes around the rim.
Speaking of which, I should do Teske’s player preview
Like I said, he’ll be the 4th option probably. He played 30% of minutes. Poole played 29% and Livers 37%. There are a lot of minutes up for grabs at the 2, 4 and 5, so that’s the group he compares with in terms of stuff to prove amongst returning players…guys who were productive in spurts and need to step up their usage and consistency.
Come to think of it, everybody on the roster has question marks that need to be answered. Good to have a chip on the shoulder.
I guess what I was trying to say is that his offensive role could actually increase the pressure on Michigan’s less efficient players (i.e. Simpson, Matthews).
Teske will play more minutes, but I’d be surprised if he doesn’t use around 16 or 17% of possessions still while on the floor. Given that he’s replacing Moe, that leaves 8-9% of possessions to be gobbled up by someone.
Yes, I agree with all that. With respect to the big vs small lineups though, I think Teske’s quick feet mitigate the need for small lineups somewhat. The key, which you’ve hit on before, is that we need shot creation badly…people who can break down a defense and get guys like Teske the ball for easy finishes.
I am hoping to see a lot of different kinds of lineups. I am especially looking forward to experimenting withgoing small at 5 with Livers, perhaps. I think it might be fun to watch! However, I also appreciate the little things Teske does to help our offense function as a whole. As average/ below average Teske was at getting buckets around the rim he is very savy at helping his teammates get layups and dunks because he so good at anticipating drives and sealing defenders. He is also a very good passer. I can’t imagine Teske not playing 25 min a game. (I also think Teske has the ability to be a much better shooter/ finisher than we have seen so far.)
I think his range of minutes is pretty narrow. Hard to see him playing any more than 25 or 26 at his size and conditioning (big guys rarely play more than that) and also hard to see him playing less than 20 given the roster makeup.
Yeah, I get your point. My point was that we will want to use Teske as much as he is able to play without becoming ineffective or breaking down over the course of the season. I don’t think we will keep a fresh and ready to go Teske on the bench because there are better options at Center…
Agree with that too. All of those interesting scenarios though will play out for half of the game though whether it is Davis, Castleton or a 2 combo forward lineup.
And don’t forget, he is going to have 2 more inches of vertical this year.
This may be quibbling, but assuming Teske is JB’s preferred option at center, and given that he’ll have by far the most experience, I’d be surprised if he played 20 minutes a game for any reason other than foul trouble unless it’s an early blowout. I’d peg it more in the 25-29 range.
Just a few data points:
Jordan Morgan twice averaged 26 minutes in conference.
McGary’s minutes in the 2013 NCAA tourney - 25, 34, 35, 25, 36, 39.
Wagner averaged 28 minutes in conference even as a sophomore.
This still leaves 10-15 minutes with Teske off the floor (or more in case of foul trouble). Down the road, if playing Castleton or going small with Johns (or someone else) at the 5 is a preferable lineup either in general or due to match-ups, that’s a different story. but I don’t think Teske will be limited to 20 minutes based on fatigue.
Haha. It doesn’t sound like a lot but it might be noticeable if he added a couple of inches onto his already pretty low vertical.
Not sure if it is true but we seem to play so much faster now. Z, Poole and Livers seem to want to run, run, run…Not sure how that would affect Teske…
The bigger you are, the harder it becomes to play long minutes so I would guess that Teske could struggle with a heavy minute load (of course that remains to be seen). So I’m anticipating 25-26 minutes per game for him
CC could get 10+ minutes at the end of the season but before that my money is on Livers.
Sure, but the guards/wings are often playing 35-38 minutes in close, important games. McGary was a big guy and wasn’t in the greatest of shape. Haas averaged 26 minutes last year in conference, including 8 games in a row at 27 minutes or higher. An average of 25-26 minutes in conference seems like a good guess to me, with a few games below that due to foul trouble (or match-ups) and a bunch of games in the 26-29 range and a couple in the 30-32 range – again, assuming he’s JB’s undisputed preferred option.