Offense Next Year

[Marcus92]

I'm interested to see how much stronger Luke comes into next season.

He struggled with a shoulder injury during the 2014-15 season, and had surgery in the offseason. My guess is that limited his work in the weight room at least to some degree — likely focusing on rehabilitation and regaining range of motion more than building strength.

Hopefully, being able to focus his training makes a difference. Luke turns 22 this October. He's a more physically mature player than he was when he transferred. Even 5-10 more pounds of muscle could really help in establishing and holding position down low, both offensively and defensively.

[jsglow]

We were a dreadful rebounding team WITH Henry. Shudder to think how bad we'll be on the glass w/o him. We'll have to create turnovers at an alarming rate to pick up that slack.

Just don't get the staff's failure to address a glaring deficiency. Our opponents will be playing volleyball on the offensive glass.

We sign perhaps the best PG since DJ and you want to complain. Oh, and what happens if Hank returns? And of course Wojo hasn't considered any of this.

[Boone]

I don't know what rock you've been living under, but signs sure don't point to Hank returning.

[Jay Bee]

I'm interested to see how much stronger Luke comes into next season.

He struggled with a shoulder injury during the 2014-15 season, and had surgery in the offseason. My guess is that limited his work in the weight room at least to some degree — likely focusing on rehabilitation and regaining range of motion more than building strength.

Hopefully, being able to focus his training makes a difference. Luke turns 22 this October. He's a more physically mature player than he was when he transferred. Even 5-10 more pounds of muscle could really help in establishing and holding position down low, both offensively and defensively.

He's never been a good defensive rebounder. It's a huge challenge for him. Is he capable? Absolutely. If I'm the coaching staff, I'm pushing him in that area like no other.

[Goose]

Jay Bee

I agree completely. Luke has chance for breakout year and up to him.

[cheebs09]

I don't disagree that rebounding is a concern, but systems can be adjusted to focus on different things.  Remember when JFB was a soph and he scored most of his points on the Offensive glass.  But his senior year he was the get back guy.  Poor rebounding teams can make up for this by increasing turnovers they cause (MU was good at this),  decreasing their turnovers (MU was not good at this and a bigger concern than rebounding IMHO) and improving shooting percentage.  (Next years squad should have higher number.)

Some of you data geeks (and I mean that with respect) can run some numbers and show that if our rebounding does not improve, but we create same TO and decrease our TO and improve Shooting the net result is a positive.  But I am only the guy that sleeps floors around here so I could be wrong.  I really would like to see those numbers.

Any word if Savon Goodman is an option? He has a lot of baggage but a relationship with Stan Johnson. He seems like he could help us with rebounding.

[Stretchdeltsig]

We will shoot the lights out next season!  That spells wins!

[The Lens]

We've won before being horribly undersized.  I think we can do it again next season. 

I hope our last scholly is ANYONE of size.  Take any sort of project we can get our hands on.

[Marcus92]

I agree completely. Luke has chance for breakout year and up to him.

Hard to explain Luke's poor defensive rebounding percentage to date.

Watching him on the low block — either defending or trying to establish offensive position — it seems like Luke can be pushed around by bigger, stronger players. Improving his lower body strength and power could pay real dividends.

I'm encouraged by the fact that Luke improved both his offensive and defensive ratings this year, as well as his total rebounding percentage. Hopefully we see another jump in his performance next season.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

There are four main factors in a college basketball game. They are in order of importance: eFG%, TO%, OR%, and Free Throw Rate. We are likely to improve significantly in eFG%, greatly in TO%, and marginally in FTR. We will likely decline in OR%.

So we decline in the 3rd most important category but we improve in the 1st, 2nd, and possibly the 4th category. Why do people think we are going to get worse?

[bilsu]

There are four main factors in a college basketball game. They are in order of importance: eFG%, TO%, OR%, and Free Throw Rate. We are likely to improve significantly in eFG%, greatly in TO%, and marginally in FTR. We will likely decline in OR%.

So we decline in the 3rd most important category but we improve in the 1st, 2nd, and possibly the 4th category. Why do people think we are going to get worse?

I think what you listed is correct. However, I question whether we will improve significantly in eFG%. The defenses we faced last year had to focus on Henry. Now the defenses will focus on Haanif and he will find the going much tougher. Fischer will also find it harder without Henry.

[Dr. Blackheart]

There are four main factors in a college basketball game. They are in order of importance: eFG%, TO%, OR%, and Free Throw Rate. We are likely to improve significantly in eFG%, greatly in TO%, and marginally in FTR. We will likely decline in OR%.

So we decline in the 3rd most important category but we improve in the 1st, 2nd, and possibly the 4th category. Why do people think we are going to get worse?

MU's eFG% was the second best in the past 10 years?  Why do you think it will get better?  Especially with a smaller line up with Henry gone?  MU's TO rate got worse in conference as the year went on, where it was second worst overall to DePaul.  Why do you think it will get better with a freshman PG?  Especially when Traci and Haanif were about the same in and out of conference as year progressed with the turnovers.

Fact is, this team is still in flux, and there are a lot of questions about BE readiness.  As it is now, this team is two years away at least...with an All Big East player to replace...but more to come.  Respect the process, ai-na?

[brewcity77]

I do feel we'll be better next year. Mainly because the toughest acclamation is high school to freshman year. I am counting on improvement from Traci, Haanif, and Heldt, and feel Luke, Jajuan, Duane, and Rowsey give us options.

The vacated scholarship will be key. We do need a ready to play forward. Doesn't have to be a star, but someone that can contribute right away. Hopefully Wojo can find the right guy. Doesn't have to be a Shonn Miller level grad transfer, but even a freshman who can give meaningful minutes like Yakwe or Sima did for St John's this year would be huge.

[HoopsterBC]

I do feel we'll be better next year. Mainly because the toughest acclamation is high school to freshman year. I am counting on improvement from Traci, Haanif, and Heldt, and feel Luke, Jajuan, Duane, and Rowsey give us options.

The vacated scholarship will be key. We do need a ready to play forward. Doesn't have to be a star, but someone that can contribute right away. Hopefully Wojo can find the right guy. Doesn't have to be a Shonn Miller level grad transfer, but even a freshman who can give meaningful minutes like Yakwe or Sima did for St John's this year would be huge.

I think next years team will have 3 players that might need to improve enough to give the team something.  Right now I see 9 players getting time, so they need these 3, or at least 2 of them to step up:  Cohen, Anim and Ellenson, 3 small forwards that will have to play big.

[wadesworld]

We will actually be able to spread the floor and have multiple shooters on the floor at the same time next year for the first time in a long time.  Unfortunate that Hank wasn't an incoming freshman next year, as him combined with all the shooting on next year's team would be a joy to watch.

I'm looking for the stats but can't find them.  Was Hank really a great or even good offensive rebounder?  He was a great defensive rebounder, but his work on the offensive glass doesn't stick out to me.

Interested to see what the staff comes up with for next season.  Should be fun to see the strategies for covering up the height deficiencies we have.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

MU's eFG% was the second best in the past 10 years?  Why do you think it will get better?  Especially with a smaller line up with Henry gone?  MU's TO rate got worse in conference as the year went on, where it was second worst overall to DePaul.  Why do you think it will get better with a freshman PG?  Especially when Traci and Haanif were about the same in and out of conference as year progressed with the turnovers.

Fact is, this team is still in flux, and there are a lot of questions about BE readiness.  As it is now, this team is two years away at least...with an All Big East player to replace...but more to come.  Respect the process, ai-na?

Because we are retaining all of our shooters, adding three great shooters in Rowsey, Howard, and Hauser and while we are losing our best player, he was our most inefficient scorer. Our 2FG% (the source of our high eFG this season) might take a hit but I can't imagine that our 3P% won't improve significantly. Given 3P% great effect on eFG%....I'm confident it will raise next season.

We won't be playing a freshman PG. We will be playing a sophomore PG. We might have a freshman who plays PG some of the time. The strongest relationship between experience and improvement is with TO%. I fully expect TC and HC's TO% to be greatly reduced this next season.

Roster is still in flux. We need to add at least one more player. Maybe there will be a transfer. Maybe there won't be.

There is a process. It needs to be respected. Part of that process is players improving over the offseason. Everyone seems ready to discount that part of the process. I'm not sure this team will make the tournament next season. Add the right player and I am. But as the roster stands now, I am confident we are better than "two years away at least."

[oldwarrior81]

while Luke didn't roll up rebounds on the defensive end, his 100 offensive rebounds were the 4th best at MU in the past 30 years. 
Trailing only Robert Jackson (110 in 2003), Marcus Jackson (106 in 2005) and Ousmane Barro (103 in 2007).

[GOO]

If Wally comes back, I think he will get some minutes at the 4.  The offense next year will be pushing the ball up the court. He can fit into that model and also get a few boards.  The key for him will be to have a legitimate 3 point shot to pull the opposing 4 outside.

I know it is unknown if he is coming back or not, but I sure hope he does.  I see a place for him on the team.

[Herman Cain]

Because we are retaining all of our shooters, adding three great shooters in Rowsey, Howard, and Hauser and while we are losing our best player, he was our most inefficient scorer. Our 2FG% (the source of our high eFG this season) might take a hit but I can't imagine that our 3P% won't improve significantly. Given 3P% great effect on eFG%....I'm confident it will raise next season.

We won't be playing a freshman PG. We will be playing a sophomore PG. We might have a freshman who plays PG some of the time. The strongest relationship between experience and improvement is with TO%. I fully expect TC and HC's TO% to be greatly reduced this next season.

Roster is still in flux. We need to add at least one more player. Maybe there will be a transfer. Maybe there won't be.

There is a process. It needs to be respected. Part of that process is players improving over the offseason. Everyone seems ready to discount that part of the process. I'm not sure this team will make the tournament next season. Add the right player and I am. But as the roster stands now, I am confident we are better than "two years away at least."

I agree with your analysis.

[bilsu]

We will actually be able to spread the floor and have multiple shooters on the floor at the same time next year for the first time in a long time.  Unfortunate that Hank wasn't an incoming freshman next year, as him combined with all the shooting on next year's team would be a joy to watch.

I'm looking for the stats but can't find them.  Was Hank really a great or even good offensive rebounder?  He was a great defensive rebounder, but his work on the offensive glass doesn't stick out to me.

Interested to see what the staff comes up with for next season.  Should be fun to see the strategies for covering up the height deficiencies we have.

Henry got mostly defensive rebounds. However, there was a game he got three rebounds on offensive tips on the same possession, which got him to 10 rebounds for the game. Removing offensive tips, he might not of had more than 10 offensive rebounds. As far as being a great defensive rebounder all you have to do is watch the North Carolina center tonight sky for rebounds. He got his 400th rebound of the season against Syracuse. Henry who had 300+ rarely jumped for rebounds.

[wadesworld]

Henry got mostly defensive rebounds. However, there was a game he got three rebounds on offensive tips on the same possession, which got him to 10 rebounds for the game. Removing offensive tips, he might not of had more than 10 offensive rebounds. As far as being a great defensive rebounder all you have to do is watch the North Carolina center tonight sky for rebounds. He got his 400th rebound of the season against Syracuse. Henry who had 300+ rarely jumped for rebounds.

My point wasn't "How high did Henry get to get his rebounds."  Henry is unquestionably a great rebounder.  Arguing otherwise is absurd.  I just personally never felt like he got a ton of offensive rebounds (which are being discussed as 1 of the 4 most important aspects in college basketball here) and how hard that'll be to replace without him.  I always considered him an elite defensive rebounder, but don't remember him being any type of menace on the offensive glass.  Unfortunately, all the stats I can find only list total rebounds and don't separate offensive and defensive rebounds, so I don't know if the offensive rebounds simply never stood out or if he really did do a large majority of his rebounding on the defensive end.

[ATL MU Warrior]

My point wasn't "How high did Henry get to get his rebounds."  Henry is unquestionably a great rebounder.  Arguing otherwise is absurd.  I just personally never felt like he got a ton of offensive rebounds (which are being discussed as 1 of the 4 most important aspects in college basketball here) and how hard that'll be to replace without him.  I always considered him an elite defensive rebounder, but don't remember him being any type of menace on the offensive glass.  Unfortunately, all the stats I can find only list total rebounds and don't separate offensive and defensive rebounds, so I don't know if the offensive rebounds simply never stood out or if he really did do a large majority of his rebounding on the defensive end.

ORB - 71
DRB - 250
Total - 321

from ESPN.com

[wadesworld]

ORB - 71
DRB - 250
Total - 321

from ESPN.com

Thank you.  So over 2 OR/game.  So better than I remember.

[GGGG]

Henry got mostly defensive rebounds. However, there was a game he got three rebounds on offensive tips on the same possession, which got him to 10 rebounds for the game. Removing offensive tips, he might not of had more than 10 offensive rebounds. As far as being a great defensive rebounder all you have to do is watch the North Carolina center tonight sky for rebounds. He got his 400th rebound of the season against Syracuse. Henry who had 300+ rarely jumped for rebounds.

So since Henry didn't out rebound the best rebounder in the ACC since Tim Duncan, he's not very good.

Do I have that right?

[jaygall31]

Just pondering life without Henry and our offense next season. It may work. What made me most pleased was that we now see it can be WON playing villanovas way. 4 out 1 in....solid (not great) big man. Heres hoping our battles with all our guards bring out the best in them.
Intrigued by Rowsey....any chance he has any Archie in him? That would be fun.