There is no way that Simpson will be fighting for a pool of 8-12 minutes per game by the time Big Ten season rolls around. Barring injury, Simpson himself will play more than 8-12 minutes per game. That said, I think Poole will play some on a regular basis, though I think (again barring injury) that his minutes are likely to be in the freshman Spike 5-8 minutes per game mold. That year, Beilein did play 9 regularly (the starters plus LeVert, McGary (later Morgan), Albrecht and Horford (who was not ab emergency center, but part of the rotation), and he did so with starters who warranted playing more minutes than this yearâs starters will play.
1 Like
So I just went back to see minutes distributions for starting guards in conference play over the past couple years:
17: 65.2
16: 67.6
15: skipped because of injuries
14: 70.9
13: 71.7
12: 70.6
So basically, there has been 10-15 minutes of backup guard minutes to go around (although itâs interesting to see it trend down.
It trended down because we had no one to back up Rahk at the 2, other than the two point guards. Rahk was suppose to be the back up at the 2.
I see no benefit in using Simmons to rotate over to the SG and playing him along side of Simpson over using Poole as the backup SG. I think we will need Pooleâs size and scoring threat for spacing purposes.
Playing two point guards is only a benefit if one of them is a lethal 3 point shooter (Walton). I donât see that scenario with Simpson/Simmons.
4 Likes
yes, for the same reason, I am a little down on Simpson, if he cannot get his shots falling, Brooks is going to squeeze his minutes.
I donât agree. Louisville won it all in 2013 with 2 small guards (Smith and Siva, both 6â0"), one of whom (Smith) shot .343 from 3 for his college career and the other of whom (Siva) shot .291 from 3 for his career. MSU made the final game in 2008-09, starting 2 small PGs, Kalin Lucas, who was a good, but not deadeye 3 point shooter (career .377 from 3) and Travis Walton, who was a .315 career 3 point shooter with only 17 3s made in total. I can name other examples if youâd like. There are minuses to playing 2 smaller guards who arenât great shooters, but there are pluses as well.
Iâd also warrant that, making some inferences from Ohioâs team stats, that Simmons was creating virtually every look he got last year (the only other guy with 2 assists a game was the backup PG), and while our PGâs have generally been tasked with that, they also get some catch and shoot opportunities as well - especially if they play with another PG. Generally speaking, catch and shoot threes are easier than ones off the dribble, I think we can see Simmons improve in a different situation.
Also, FWIW, Waltonâs shooting his junior year was significantly worse than Simmons was - we shouldnât ignore the possibility of growth.
1 Like
I assume he was referring to Beileinâs offense, one which depends on outside shooting to create spacing.
Simmons was basically doing it all for Ohio, too, and he was out there 35+ minutes a game his last two seasons. Although it will be a step up in competition level for him, he will also have a better supporting cast, and will hopefully only be tasked with about 30-32 minutes a night at most. His overall numbers will likely be down, but his efficiency may be up.
It can be done, yes, but the two examples you cite also had much better inside games, on offense and defense, than we are likely to this year. Without two quality bigs out there most of the time, and with weak interior defense and no better than average rebounding, three point shooting from the guards becomes much more important. The guys we have in the regular rotation at the 1 and 2 this year will need to do better than 35% for us to have a really successful season.
Still on the 2 bigs thing eh? I guess big means tall to you. Because the 4 in modern basketball, and especially at Michigan is a wing position.
1 Like
What I think youâre overlooking is that weâll still have multiple 3 point shooters on the court even if our guards arenât great shooters because of the 3 point threat from the guys who will play at the 4 and 5 for us (Wagner, Robinson, Livers). You donât need 5 3 point shooters on the court to be successfulâwe won the Big Ten in '13-'14 bu three games (and had the #1 offense in the nation) with Morgan and Robinson out there. Iâm not advocating for long stretches with Simmons, Simpson and Matthews all on the court at once (or with any 2 plus Davis or Teske), but playing them together for minutes with, say Wagner, Robinson and Livers, or in a 3 guard rotation with Poole and 2 of the aforementioned wonât hurt our offense one iota IMO. I think that can, and will happen.
Yes those guards brought penetration and tough defense to the table which worked for Louisville. Louisville would bring consistent pressure almost all game with that combination of guards. But is that what JB is going to hang his hat on and can we survive bigger guard mismatches.
Yes that is what my post was referencing.
1 Like
Speaking of the 13-14 team, GRIII was a respectable three point shooter and one of the best cutters and finishers, then we had Stauskas and Levert, two big guards who can create for themselves and others. With these two, you can get away from many other things. We simply do not have such luxury this year.
I donât see much advantage of having Z and Simmons on the court together, the one without the ball is going to be less a threat. And we MAAR, Poole, Brooks who are all decent shooters with good enough handles.
1 Like
GR III shot .306 from 3 that year, and .324 the year before. I wouldnât call him a respectable 3 point shooterâindeed, I would guess we will not have a player in the rotation this year other than our back-up 5 who doesnât exceed that number. Simmons, himself, has been considerably better than that at the college level, and Simpson was a respectable 3 point shooter in high schoolâmuch better than MAAR was. And the whole point of playing Simmons and Simpson together is that they can both create for themselves and othersâSimmons was top 10 in the nation last year in assists, and Simpson can get in the lane and find cutters very well.
Weâll see what happens. I think youâre going to see stretches with both Simmons and Simpson on the court together, and that it will work. Maybe Iâll be wrong. Time will tell.
You conspicuously fail to mention that in Big Ten play in 13-14, we shot 40.5% as a team on threes, and we had our top 4 three point attempt guys all above 42%. That IS what you need, if you want to do that well running a small lineup. Having 3 or 4 important players at 35-36% will not cut itâŚsorry.
At Michigan it may be, but at a lot of other schools it is certainly not, for example, Kentucky, Arizona, Louisville, Michigan State. They start two bigs, a true center and a true power forward, while we start one big and a small forward/wing most years.
1 Like
Iâm not conspicuously failing to mention anythingâall I said is that you can play 2 guys on the court who arenât great 3 point shooters if you surround them with others who are. Was that inaccurate vis-a-vis the 2013-14 team? And if you think having 3 or 4 important players in the ranges youâre talking about will not cut it, then Iâd invite you to look at our '12-'13 team where we had exactly one guy (Stauskas) who made more than 20 3s and shot a really good 3 point percentage for the year from 3âŚand still had the number 1 offense in the country. Burke shot .384. Hardaway shot .374. Robinson shot.324. Are you somehow suggesting that having 3 or 4 guys shooting 35-36% is a disaster, but 3 guys shooting 37, 38 and 32 is fine?
Look, Iâm not suggesting that we have the talent on this team that we had in either '12-'13 or '13-'14âthat would be silly. I am suggesting though that the idea that Beileinâs offense will only work with 4 or 5 really good 3 point shooters on the court at once is belied by the numbers.
Weâll see what happens.
1 Like
In 2013/2014 conference play Robinson shot 22% and JMO shot 0% from 3. They were on the court together a lot that year but we did ok.