There’s something in the Wisconsin cheese which lowers a player’s turnover rate.
1 Like
Great summary/preview of MSU by Quinn in the Athletic today.
I have been extremely bullish on MSU’s upcoming season for a while. I love their incoming class and I thought they turned over the worst parts of their roster quickly and efficiently. Kithier was holding back their more playable 5s, Loyer had no business in the B1G, and Rocket never graduated past maddening.
But this article gives me some pause.
I agree with Quinn and the commenters that leaving not one but two scholarships unfilled would be shocking, especially for a guy who loves 12-man rotations. Yet according to Quinn it looks like MSU will roll with the 11 they’ve got. The roster is upgraded but it doesn’t yet have a long-term reliable resume, and without those two extra scholarships there’s no additional hope of a lottery ticket, particularly at the 5.
Marble and Hall haven’t had a ton of run. The freshmen are freshmen. Walker is an uptransfer. Sissoko was invisible. And Hoggard was really, really bad. Hoggard being one of only 11 scholarships is what really sticks out to me.
Sissoko doesn’t bother me because MSU needs to find some concoction at the 5 and there aren’t any freshman options and they are apparently getting shut out in the portal. It’s not some tragedy if he saps minutes from Marble or Bingham. At least they’re not going to Kithier anymore.
But Hoggard is going to play, possibly a lot. And increasingly I don’t see any way that’s viable for MSU.
Does he play at the 2 between Walker and…Brown? Or is he just the backup PG? What if Walker’s transition to the B1G doesn’t go so well? How much run is he getting instead of Akins?
For MSU’s sake, I thought he should have hit the portal. But then they would only have 10 scholarship players!
Quinn focuses more on Hauser and I think that’s sensible. He is a returning starter with the most offensive upside and last year was just a broken mess for him. But I am pretty fixated on Hoggard.
3 Likes
If they had gone out and gotten a real 5 I’d love everything they’ve done to improve the roster. I get where Quinn is coming from bc when you look at any single piece you’re like “well, he could be good but it’s hard to say what he is for sure”. But I think almost all of these guys have high level B1G starter upside and they only need a couple to hit that upside to be a top 25 team. That’s different than last year where the premise of the team was “Rocket will be great and everything will fall into place bc of that”.
That said, pretty clear there’s not much reason to expect they’ll be a top 5-10 team. Hard to like them better than teams w much better pieces returning.
1 Like
Yeah like I said I am high on them. Honestly Izzo made a really tricky rebuild look easy. I guess I just think of Hoggard as the last remnant of that mess that could unravel things again. Quinn thinks it’s the 5.
1 Like
Expecting Izzo to do the best thing with his rotations is usually a losing battle, but it’s not too hard to see Hoggard ending up very close to out of the rotation. I’d probably start by anticipating what I have below, but if Akins is good right away or Brown/Brooks deserve more minutes there’s positional flexibility to eliminate Hoggard’s 10 altogether.
Walker 25 Akins 15
Christie 20 Akins 10 Hoggard 10
Brown 20 Christie 10 Brooks 10
Hauser 20 Hall 20
Bingham 20 Sissoko 10 Marble 10
I’d personally do:
Walker 30 Akins 10
Christie 30 Akins 10
Brown 30 Brooks 10
Hauser 20 Hall 20
Bingham 25 Sissoko 15
That feels like a really strong team as long as Walker isn’t a total dud.
1 Like
At last, a catalyst for Gabe Brown to get minutes! Someone younger and more talented is available at his position.
(Sparty should be better than last year but still. Losing your only talented on-ball player and replacing him with an uptransfer. Upstransfer is a first-year player at PG in Izzo’s system. Other talented players are freshmen or Joey Hauser coming off a rough year. If they content in the conference that says more about the conference.)
They replace no point guard with two potential upgrades at point guard. They lost all their really inefficient guys that could have come back and taken minutes from Christie. They lost their really limited center who somehow remained an obstacle over more talented players. Their freshman class is really good and the opportunity for minutes is there.
The formula of plus playmaker (Walker or Akins or both) surrounded by plus catch and shoot guys (Christie, Brown, Hauser), with a defensive anchor at center (Bingham or Sissoko) is way more likely IMO to be successful than the: no playmaker + high usage inefficient guys (Watts and Langford) + one really good player who has to do everything (Henry) + revolving door at center headlines by Kithier. They won’t be as good as Michigan but I think they’ll be a top 25 team all season long.
3 Likes
You are clearly just angling for more SpartanHoops bylines. 
9 Likes
I bet they’ll be ranked save for a 2 week stretch somewhere late Jan/early Feb.
1 Like
I was trying to figure out where to share my thoughts on this after listening to the megapod about MSU while mowing the lawn. I’m conflicted about my thoughts on MSU and frankly Quinn’s thoughts on MSU from the pod…
The good…
- Any PG, let alone multiple legit options (Walker, Akins) would be a huge upgrade.
- I think stability at PG does open up more potential for the bigs, especially Hauser like Dylan said on the pod
- Gabe Brown has a clear path to meaningful playing time and I think that was overdue.
- Despite their total and utter dysfunction this past season, they did make the tournament and came a bounce or two from winning a couple key games that change the narrative a bit.
The bad…
- MSU enters the season asking a LOT of Walker, Akins, and Christie. I like all three players a lot for what they are, but that’s a huge up-transfer and two true freshmen. If those three guys are the key to the season and play under a demanding coach like Izzo…is that going to go well?
- MSU’s “veterans”, which are usually a key part of their system, are Brown, Hall, and Hauser. Three guys that have alternated time in the dog-house and having their role fluctuate wildly. Are any of them going to get the Langford/Henry treatment where they never come off the floor and act as a stabilizing force? What happens if Izzo decides to pull them to scream in their face…who takes their spot?
- The center position is still a huge wildcard.
- Hall and Hauser might be two of their key players…and they play the same position. I do not agree with Quinn’s logic that Hall can play the 3 or will be a big breakout candidate. I think he’s a great glue guy and should be a key player, but not a primary contributor.
- Walker is going to have to be good…and not just in a Mike Smith “pass it to the talented teammate” way because we aren’t sure who those guys are for MSU. Walker is going to have to be both facilitator and clutch scorer…or Akins is. Can it happen? Sure! But a year ago we were talking about the pitfalls of asking up-transfers to be key players.
I think MSU is going to really struggle early in the year and then Izzo will figure it out. I think they’re going to be better…I’m not sure their misfit parts will gel by the end of the year unless two of the Walker/Akins/Christie group really meet their lofty expectations.
MSU will be a really good case study for the “can true freshmen guards be a starting backcourt on a good team?” discussion we had a month ago, they might not have any other choice besides giving Akins and Christie big minutes.
To be fair, Michigan could very easily start two freshmen and an up-transfer next year.
1 Like
Alongside Hunter Dickinson.
2 Likes
But replacing two pros… Not saying the two teams are comparable really, just that that very much applies to U-M.
1 Like
I like some of MSU’s players and think they will be a top 25 team. I also think little chance they are a top 10 team.
What I can’t figure out is if that makes me a optimist or a pessimist about them. Such a wide range of opinions on them. I feel like they will bounce back a bit for several reasons (better shooters and having a PG being primary ones) but they clearly have questions that will prevent them from contending for a conference title.
Kinda how I view Purdue too if I’m being honest.
2 Likes
I feel like Purdue has a higher upside than MSU next season.
4 Likes
Purdue is like MSU in that they’ve got a lot of dudes that you’re not exactly sure how good they are…but compared to MSU, they’re all a year older and/or already showed they belong in the B1G. Everybody thinks Ivey will pop but they had 3 other freshmen show out too between Gillis, Newman, and Edey.
That said, I do suspect Trevion caps their ceiling. If he can’t protect the rim a lot better or become much more efficient making twos and/or making free throws, it’s hard to see how they become elite on either side of the ball. Maybe he lowers his usage and increases his AST rate and they run the offense through the high post?
That’s still prob good enough for top 16, maybe even top 8. Hard to see them as a true title contender though.
1 Like
Yep…but Michigan has Hunter Dickinson and Eli Brooks covering two of those spots. Sissoko and Brown aren’t quite the same safety net there. Likewise, Michigan has four guards to fill one spot next to Eli. MSU basically has Walker, Akins, Brown, and Hoggard and needs three of them to hit.
1 Like
Let’s call Christie/Houstan a wash. Similar roles, similar positions, similar rankings, similar need for them to lock down the three spot. (Maybe Houstan plays some 4, maybe Christie plays some 3…let’s call it even.)
At PG+SG, Michigan needs to find 80 minutes between five guys - Jones, Brooks, Collins, Jackson, and Bufkin. MSU needs 80 minutes from Walker, Akins, Hoggard, and Brown.
At PF I think you call it a wash - Hauser/Hall vs. Johns/Diabate/Williams. Both have some experience but inconsistency, both have some upside.
At C it isn’t a debate.