1. Last year, we watched Juwan Howard walk into a team constructed to play a certain way--high pick and roll with a ball dominant guard on offense, and man to man, jump the three point line and force mid-range jumpers and post-ups on defense. While there were some early changes (more post-ups on offense, drop coverage by the 5 off of pick and roll action on defense), and some mid-season adjustments (more doubling or helping on post defense after getting torched by some 5s, more reliance on a forward (Wagner) to create his own shot on offense), for the most part, he left that construct alone, which was the smart thing to do given the familiarity of the overwhelming bulk of his new team with what had been implemented and the skill sets involved. Now, though, half of his roster is new, and without Zavier Simpson and his wonderous ability to shred defenses in pick and roll action and his ability to pressure opposing point guards on defense, it is unclear whether the same system will work as well. This may be where we find out Juwan's philosophies and whether he can blend his new and old personnel into a fit for these philosophies.
2. So what will work best with this team? The answer, to me, won't be clear until we see Mike Smith and what he can/will be at the high major level. If he's at least an average-level Big Ten point guard on offense, we're still going to see a significant, if not extreme, dose of screen/roll, as Smith is built for that and has run it a lot. It will be defended differently than we've seen--Smith is a much better distance shooter than X off the dribble, and a significant downgrade as a set-up guy and finisher near the basket (to be fair, virtually any replacement would be), so teams are going to go "over" screens (fight through to prevent shots and dare him to beat them off penetration) rather then "under" (around the screens giving up perimeter shots to prevent penetration)--but the action, when we screen/roll, will start the same, and the other players will react off of it. Even in that circumstance, we will likely run more side screen and off ball actions for Franz Wagner, Isaiah Livers, Eli Brooks and Chaundee Brown than we have for wings in the past and/or play through Hunter Dickinson in the post to utilize his elite vision and passing ability for a big. If Smith isn't a Big Ten-level starter, I can't see running a ton of high pick and roll, and the offense is likely to look very different.
3. Smith's productivity will, in my view, also be a key determinant to the role Austin Davis can play. Austin is a great screener and finisher off of ball screen action. He's not a very good post up guy (too small, too little explosion, no passing ability (he had 2, count them, 2 assists last season), he's not a perimeter threat at all, and he has real defensive limitations, but as a finsher, he absolutely gets it done. If we're running an offense which puts him in position to finish, he can be a solid contributor, particularly as a back-up big. If we're not running that kind of offense, his value diminishes significantly.
4. Ironically, the better Smith is on offense, and the more we want to play him and preserve the outline of what we've run, the more we are likely to have to alter some of what we have done on defense. To be fair to Mike, he has spent 4 years on a horrendous Columbia team where he was literally a guy who could not come out of the gane if Columbia was to have any chance to remain competitive, so tight defense on his part was optional to not highly recommended; that said, he's a small, not especially thick guard walking into guarding guys several steps above what he's seen at the college level in terms of size and quickness. From a physical and mindset perspective, that's going to be a load for him, and we're going to have to help him/hide him against teams which have point guards who can exploit him. In addition, our 5 position is likely to be downgraded defensively--for all the grief Jon Teske took last season, he was clearly our best help defender and shot blocker, and I'm not sure I see an even average Big Ten defender among our options at the 5, at least at Dickinson's current stage of development. We'll be fine against teams which feature wing scoring; if it's Smith at point guard we'll be in scramble mode some against others. Of course, if Brooks plays point, we'll be much better defensively...and be in ore of a struggle mode offensively. It would be ideal if we can play a fair amount of Smith and Brooks together (using Brown as a sixth man who can substitute in for 4, if not all 5 guys), where Eli can guard certain point guards--that's not going to be a full time thing, but if we can get 20 minutes a game out of that lineup, I think that's likely to be our highest and best usage lineup.
5. Although Juwan has shown a willingness, and even a desire to play big, I wouldn't be surprised to see some small ball lineups. Many, including me, have speculated about the possibility of Brandon Johns at the 5 in such a lineup, but I can even see going really small and spot playing Smith, Brooks, Brown, Wagner and Livers (with Livers playing the 5, as he did on occasion for JB), especially against certain match-ups. Obviously, that line-up could struggle defensively and on the glass, particularly against big, physical teams like Illinois, Rutgers, etc., but man, that would be a team which would be really tough to guard. If Brandon, for whatever reason, is not an option at the 5, this could well be a fallback.
6. We are going to go from one of the oldest teams in college basketball this year to one of the youngest nst year, with at least 10 freshmen and sophomores on the roster. This is going to sound strnage to many who have ripped him as a player, but Adrien Nunez is going to be invaluable on that team, even if he never plays a consequential minute. On a team that young, you need guys who can provide upperclass leadership and instruction from guys who have spent multiple years in the system. Unless one of our seniors decides to take this year's non-counting status against eligibility and come back, which I very much doubt will occur, he only 3 candidates for this are Franz, who will likely be in the NBA, Brandon, who is simply not a vocal leader type, and Adrien, who by all accounts, is a leader. He's not the best player on the planet, but he loves Michigan and his teammates, wants his degree, and is willing to take whatever role will help "the team, the team, the team." While you cant have a whole team of guys Adrien Nunez, Austin Davis, or Blake McLimans, having one or two such guys to transition younger players and continue your culture is a very good thing. IMO, Adrien should be applauded, not be someone folks wonder about pushing out the door to get higher ranked players.
7. I don't mind our OOC schedule, and I don't think it will hurt us come tournament selection time. Normally I would--playing one top 100 team (and not a top 50 team at that) in the pre-season is usually frowned upon big-time by the selection and seeding committee. This is not normal--everybody is going to play a much smaller portion of its schedule against OOC opponents than normal, and travel and health restrictions are going to put a damper on some elite non-conference games. In those circumstances, the committee is going to weight initial conference power estimates from sites like kenpom and Barttorvik more heavily, and mid/low majors are going to find their paths to at-large bids even more blocked than usual. Try to avoid complete creampuffs (our OOC does that), win games and play well in the conference--that's going to be the model for most power 5 teams this season. Would I like to see a great non-conference game on the schedule, such as a match-up against an ACC team like Virginia in the Big 10/ACC Challenge? Sure. Is it necessary? Not so much.
8. Depth and positional flexibility are going to be really important this season. There are going to be situations when kids test positive and have to sit out for a while without necessarily infecting multiple teammates or staff and/or administrative personnel so as to force rescheduling or cancellation. I think we're more set up for such a situation than we have been in previous years.
9. 8 days left until the scheduled opener against a pretty good Bowling Green team which is a pre-season MAC favorite. I can't wait.
2. So what will work best with this team? The answer, to me, won't be clear until we see Mike Smith and what he can/will be at the high major level. If he's at least an average-level Big Ten point guard on offense, we're still going to see a significant, if not extreme, dose of screen/roll, as Smith is built for that and has run it a lot. It will be defended differently than we've seen--Smith is a much better distance shooter than X off the dribble, and a significant downgrade as a set-up guy and finisher near the basket (to be fair, virtually any replacement would be), so teams are going to go "over" screens (fight through to prevent shots and dare him to beat them off penetration) rather then "under" (around the screens giving up perimeter shots to prevent penetration)--but the action, when we screen/roll, will start the same, and the other players will react off of it. Even in that circumstance, we will likely run more side screen and off ball actions for Franz Wagner, Isaiah Livers, Eli Brooks and Chaundee Brown than we have for wings in the past and/or play through Hunter Dickinson in the post to utilize his elite vision and passing ability for a big. If Smith isn't a Big Ten-level starter, I can't see running a ton of high pick and roll, and the offense is likely to look very different.
3. Smith's productivity will, in my view, also be a key determinant to the role Austin Davis can play. Austin is a great screener and finisher off of ball screen action. He's not a very good post up guy (too small, too little explosion, no passing ability (he had 2, count them, 2 assists last season), he's not a perimeter threat at all, and he has real defensive limitations, but as a finsher, he absolutely gets it done. If we're running an offense which puts him in position to finish, he can be a solid contributor, particularly as a back-up big. If we're not running that kind of offense, his value diminishes significantly.
4. Ironically, the better Smith is on offense, and the more we want to play him and preserve the outline of what we've run, the more we are likely to have to alter some of what we have done on defense. To be fair to Mike, he has spent 4 years on a horrendous Columbia team where he was literally a guy who could not come out of the gane if Columbia was to have any chance to remain competitive, so tight defense on his part was optional to not highly recommended; that said, he's a small, not especially thick guard walking into guarding guys several steps above what he's seen at the college level in terms of size and quickness. From a physical and mindset perspective, that's going to be a load for him, and we're going to have to help him/hide him against teams which have point guards who can exploit him. In addition, our 5 position is likely to be downgraded defensively--for all the grief Jon Teske took last season, he was clearly our best help defender and shot blocker, and I'm not sure I see an even average Big Ten defender among our options at the 5, at least at Dickinson's current stage of development. We'll be fine against teams which feature wing scoring; if it's Smith at point guard we'll be in scramble mode some against others. Of course, if Brooks plays point, we'll be much better defensively...and be in ore of a struggle mode offensively. It would be ideal if we can play a fair amount of Smith and Brooks together (using Brown as a sixth man who can substitute in for 4, if not all 5 guys), where Eli can guard certain point guards--that's not going to be a full time thing, but if we can get 20 minutes a game out of that lineup, I think that's likely to be our highest and best usage lineup.
5. Although Juwan has shown a willingness, and even a desire to play big, I wouldn't be surprised to see some small ball lineups. Many, including me, have speculated about the possibility of Brandon Johns at the 5 in such a lineup, but I can even see going really small and spot playing Smith, Brooks, Brown, Wagner and Livers (with Livers playing the 5, as he did on occasion for JB), especially against certain match-ups. Obviously, that line-up could struggle defensively and on the glass, particularly against big, physical teams like Illinois, Rutgers, etc., but man, that would be a team which would be really tough to guard. If Brandon, for whatever reason, is not an option at the 5, this could well be a fallback.
6. We are going to go from one of the oldest teams in college basketball this year to one of the youngest nst year, with at least 10 freshmen and sophomores on the roster. This is going to sound strnage to many who have ripped him as a player, but Adrien Nunez is going to be invaluable on that team, even if he never plays a consequential minute. On a team that young, you need guys who can provide upperclass leadership and instruction from guys who have spent multiple years in the system. Unless one of our seniors decides to take this year's non-counting status against eligibility and come back, which I very much doubt will occur, he only 3 candidates for this are Franz, who will likely be in the NBA, Brandon, who is simply not a vocal leader type, and Adrien, who by all accounts, is a leader. He's not the best player on the planet, but he loves Michigan and his teammates, wants his degree, and is willing to take whatever role will help "the team, the team, the team." While you cant have a whole team of guys Adrien Nunez, Austin Davis, or Blake McLimans, having one or two such guys to transition younger players and continue your culture is a very good thing. IMO, Adrien should be applauded, not be someone folks wonder about pushing out the door to get higher ranked players.
7. I don't mind our OOC schedule, and I don't think it will hurt us come tournament selection time. Normally I would--playing one top 100 team (and not a top 50 team at that) in the pre-season is usually frowned upon big-time by the selection and seeding committee. This is not normal--everybody is going to play a much smaller portion of its schedule against OOC opponents than normal, and travel and health restrictions are going to put a damper on some elite non-conference games. In those circumstances, the committee is going to weight initial conference power estimates from sites like kenpom and Barttorvik more heavily, and mid/low majors are going to find their paths to at-large bids even more blocked than usual. Try to avoid complete creampuffs (our OOC does that), win games and play well in the conference--that's going to be the model for most power 5 teams this season. Would I like to see a great non-conference game on the schedule, such as a match-up against an ACC team like Virginia in the Big 10/ACC Challenge? Sure. Is it necessary? Not so much.
8. Depth and positional flexibility are going to be really important this season. There are going to be situations when kids test positive and have to sit out for a while without necessarily infecting multiple teammates or staff and/or administrative personnel so as to force rescheduling or cancellation. I think we're more set up for such a situation than we have been in previous years.
9. 8 days left until the scheduled opener against a pretty good Bowling Green team which is a pre-season MAC favorite. I can't wait.
