Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Josh Hamilton's Unique Public Statement On His Addiction

I love it when a plan comes together: Michigan State 53, Purdue 44

Normally, by the time a Michigan State basketball game gets to halftime, I wonder why I bothered spending an hour writing the game preview.  In most games, very little goes according to plan.

But this time, I have no choice but to say . . . "Naaailed it!"

Witness:

Game planning for Purdue has become an easier task for Tom Izzo.  He'll be able to devote more resources to compensating for the height mismatch Johnson has against the MSU big men and try to force the non-Johnson/Moore/Grant Boilermakers to beat us.

The MSU defenders did everything they could to keep JaJuan Johnson and E`Twaun Moore from getting into a rhythm, forcing them to take shots outside their normal comfort range.  Johnson and Moore combined to shoot just 7-27 from the field, Keaton Grant (7 points on 3 FGA) never exerted himself, and the Boilermaker role players couldn't fill the void.  Lewis Jackson, Kelsey Barlow, Patrick Bade, and John Hart combined for just one made field goal on 12 attempts--not to mention just one made free throw on 5 attempts, helping to negate Purdue's advantage in trips to the free throw line.

Purdue's best offense was Chris Kramer (11 points) on breakaways off turnovers.  But MSU also took advantage of Kramer's offensive impotence, forcing him into 5 turnovers of his own.

Robbie Hummel's absence certainly hurt Matt Painter's squad, as the Purdue offense lacked the continuity Hummel's ball-handling and shooting skills provide.  Nevertheless, holding the 21st most efficient offensive team in the country to fewer than 0.70 points per possession is a rare achievement.

Purdue's turnover creation numbers are down a tad this season, but you can expect them to exert even more energy trying to wreak havoc on the MSU offense in an attempt to compensate for not having Hummel in the lineup.

MSU turned the ball over 23 times in 64 possessions, for a whopping turnover percentage of 35.9%.  The Purdue defenders harassed the MSU guards for a full 40 minutes, holding Kalin Lucas, Chris Allen, Durrell Summers, and Korie Lucious to a combined 18 points on 22 FGA and forcing them into 15 of MSU's 23 turnovers (vs. just 5 assists).  Let's hope we don't see another set of guard that can swarm anything like Purdue's can the rest of this season.

Star-divide

The second goal on offense will be to take advantage of the mismatch that now runs in the other direction at the 4 spot, which will be manned for Purdue by either the inexperienced Bade or the undersized Kramer.  In the first MSU-Purdue game, Draymond Green, Raymar Morgan, and Delvon Roe combined to make just 3 of 23 shots from the field.  That shooting percentage needs to go up dramatically.

Mission accomplished.  Green, Morgan, and Derrick Nix combined for 35 points on 15-27 FG shooting.  MSU made a concerted effort to get the ball inside.  Some turnovers resulted, but for the most part the Spartan big men were able to take advantage of Purdue's lack of size/experience inside.  As bad as 53 points in 64 possessions looks like for a winning team, 53 points on 41 turnoverless possessions looks pretty good.  It was just a matter of getting the ball somewhere near the lane.

Hummel's absence also means Purdue will be playing without its best defensive rebounder.  Spartan dominance on the offensive glass will be a prerequisite to a victory.

There were 30 opportunities to grab rebounds off missed MSU shots in today's game.  A player in green came down with 16 of them.  Five different MSU players had at least 2 offensive rebounds, led by Morgan with 5.  The term "warriorlike" is only a slight exaggeration in terms of the effort the Spartans put forth on the glass today.  And that statement applies on both ends of the court; Purdue had just 6 offensive rebounds in 36 opportunities.  We'll forgive Draymond Green for citing the #unicornstat:

"We outrebounded them by 26! 26!"

Add it all up and you get this fairly bizarre looking bar graph:

 

The predicted positives outweighed the predicted negatives, but it took one heck of an effort to make that happen.

Player bullets:

  • When Raymar Morgan's career concludes at some time in the next 5 weeks and people spend a lot of time talking about how enigmatic he was during his 4 years on campus, remember this game.  Morgan almost single-handedly kept MSU in the game in the first half by hustling for rebounds and finding ways to score around the basket.  16 points on 9 FGA, 11 rebounds.  A senior performance by a senior player.
  • Draymond Green picked up 2 fouls early and was a nonfactor in the first half.  But he showed up in a major way in the second half, scoring all 8 of MSU's points over a 10-minute timespan that ended with the Spartans up by 6 with 80 seconds to go in the game.  I don't think there's another team in the country that would feed the ball to its 6'6" power forward against the 6'11" JaJuan Johnson on nearly every possession in crunch time.  12 points, 11 rebounds, 2 assists, and 2 steals for Day Day.
  • Kalin Lucas did not have it tonight: 8 points, 1 assist (very late), and 8 turnovers.  Lucas' one offensive weakness has always been that he doesn't pass the ball off much when he drives the lane.  Against most opponents, it's not a problem because Lucas is good enough to get all the way to the rim or find space for a mid-range jumper.  The Boilermakers took advantage of that tendency, though, closing in on Lucas when he got into the lane and forcing him into a bunch of bad passes.
  • Korie Lucious is in a bad, bad place mentally.  His jumpshot has gone completely missing (0-4).  He was flustered quite a bit by the Purdue ball pressure, but kept things together just enough (2 assists, 3 TOs) to give MSU a chance.
  • Chris Allen could not find space to get his jumpshot off all night, scoring just 2 points (both on free throws).  But give him credit for solid ball-handling (2 assists, 1 turnover) and tremendous hustle on loose balls (8 rebounds, 6 of them on defense).
  • Durrell Summers was pretty out of whack most of the night, but he was also the only Spartan to make a 3-pointer all game, knocking down two of them in the first 10 minutes of the second half to help maintain the lead MSU took shortly after halftime.  A performance to build on?  Doesn't sound like the ankle injury was anything serious.
  • To quote Con-T, "Despite the absurdity of the technical, the dominant big man on the floor has been Nix."  Derrick Nix came out strong against Johnson, scoring MSU's first basket and assisting on the second.  Nix finished the game with 7 points and 2 rebounds in 9 minutes, and helped set the tone in terms of playing aggressive defense to force Johnson outside his comfort zone.  (Izzo on the technical: "He played a lot of basketball at St. Cecilia Church (in Detroit) and that’s what they do there.  I told him that that gym holds about 11 people and there’s 15,000 here so understand the difference.")
  • Delvon Roe's minutes were limited tonight, perhaps due to the ongoing knee issue.  He made some key plays on defense, though, posting 2 blocks and a steal in 10 minutes.
  • Austin Thornton, Garrick Sherman, and Mike Kebler combined for 4 rebounds, 1 steal, 1 block, and zero turnovers in 10 minutes.  We'll take it.

One final stat: MSU had 4 blocked shots in this game.  Purdue had zero.  OK, one more stat: Morgan and Green together had just one fewer made 2-point basket than the entire Purdue team (12 vs. 13).

That's playing big in a big game.  The result is these up-to-the-minute Big Ten standings:

Standings Conference Overall
  W L GB PCT W L PCT
Ohio State 13 4 - .765 23 7 .767
Purdue 12 4 ½ .750 24 4 .857
Michigan State 12 4 ½ .750 22 7 .759
Wisconsin 11 5 .688 21 7 .750
Illinois 10 6 .625 18 11 .621
Minnesota 8 8 .500 17 11 .607
Northwestern 7 10 6 .412 18 11 .621
Michigan 6 10 .375 13 15 .464
Iowa 4 12 .250 10 19 .345
Indiana 3 13 .188 9 19 .321
Penn State 3 13 .188 11 17 .393


By the by, that's 15-3 on the road in two seasons of Big Ten play.  Not bad.

Next up: Two home games that still must be won if back-to-back Big Ten championship banners are to hang from the Breslin Center rafters.  The first is against a resurgent Penn State team that's won 3 of its last 4 games (Thursday at 7:00; ESPN).  Win that one and maybe another Friday night sleepover is in order before the regular season finale vs. Michigan on Sunday.

Comment 30 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Nix

I’m glad we won because now I can laugh at that play as one of my favorites of the season.

And, honestly, I’ll take the performance from Lucious. There was significant ball pressure but I didn’t find myself holding my breathe every time he ran the offense. He needs to find his shot, though. Where’s the fearless guy who would come off the bench to knock down threes?

by intrpdtrvlr on Feb 28, 2010 9:39 PM CST reply actions  

Absolute classic

That’s up there with Ibok trying to inbound after we made one against Kansas … but at least that didn’t earn a T.

by SpartanDan on Feb 28, 2010 9:48 PM CST up reply actions  

Hammer and Rails

Have Mercy!! Hammer and Rails essentially called the PU team gutless, weak and worthless. That must have been some serious disappointment for them to go so over the edge. On the other hand, The Geeks called Hummel’s value and gave an idea of what his absence would mean and, as usual, had the numbers to back it up. We need Illinois to gut one out in Columbus and then protect the house.

by Uncle Omar on Feb 28, 2010 9:57 PM CST reply actions  

Well, H&R is great.

But I definitely think that Travis went a little overboard on the post — though it’s understandable, given that Purdue fans essentially watched a national championship-caliber season go down the drain over the course of four days. That must be absolutely brutal.

by LVS on Feb 28, 2010 10:02 PM CST up reply actions  

It was harsh, but really...how can you deny it.

Rob wasn’t going to grab 26 rebounds tonight. Remember, this team out-rebounded (by one) the Spartans in East Lansing. They proved they could do it, and if they had even cut that margin in half, they would have won this game. Even with that pathetic excuse for a half-court offense.

by rcpratt on Feb 28, 2010 10:45 PM CST up reply actions  

It is harsh

to essentially call a team gutless when 1) they weren’t firing on all cylinders, 2) against a good team, 3) in the first full game without their best player, when they’re clearly still adjusting to his absence, and 4) they pretty well proved in the last game against Minnesota that they’re absolutely not gutless.

I think they had a bad night, but ultimately the impact of Hummel’s injury can’t be ignored.

by LVS on Feb 28, 2010 10:55 PM CST up reply actions  

I guess I wouldn't have used 'gutless'

But I do honestly believe that some (most) of the players gave up tonight. I’m sure they were frustrated, both with not having their best player and with their offensive difficulties, but that’s no excuse to give up.

by rcpratt on Feb 28, 2010 11:00 PM CST up reply actions  

Rebound margin is as much a function of shooting as actual rebounding.

In the first matchup, you never missed. And since defensive rebounds are easier to get (by about a two-to-one margin), you’re going to get a big chunk of the boards simply by virtue of the fact that we’re missing and you aren’t. Today, you missed a ton of shots, and while our shooting wasn’t a whole lot better some portion of our rebound-count advantage was due to the shooting difference.

In point of fact, we rebounded a higher percentage of our own misses than you did of yours at Breslin, by a pretty significant margin too. But we had so many more missed shots that by raw count you came out ahead. This time, the margin wasn’t so misleading – we got more than half of our own misses back, and you got one in six.

by SpartanDan on Feb 28, 2010 10:57 PM CST up reply actions  

I was just going to assume ...

… that he realized there’s no way you can hit +26 without at least winning the rebounding percentage margin too. Unless you miss a grand total of two shots and they get both boards.

by SpartanDan on Feb 28, 2010 11:31 PM CST up reply actions  

Yeah, Purdue obviously isn't as good of a rebounding team as MSU

Especially without Hummel. But there’s still no way you can make an excuse for a 26 rebound discrepancy. And allowing ~53% OR%…just absolutely no effort on the defensive boards. When your two biggest players (JJ and Bade) can’t grab rebounds over much smaller players…just…sigh.

by rcpratt on Feb 28, 2010 11:06 PM CST up reply actions  

Johnson too passive

I thought Johnson would step up more. In part Day Day did a great defensive job, particularly in denying him the ball, but nonetheless, I don’t understand why Purdue did not get him the ball more often, or why he was not more active offensively. In EL, he seemed dangerous everytime he touched the ball. Defensively, I thought he was better than he showed last night. Green schooled him several times…

by Anderlecht on Mar 1, 2010 8:21 AM CST up reply actions  

Johnson did his Sims impersonation

and fell in love with the J. Burned him.

by rook34 on Mar 1, 2010 10:46 AM CST up reply actions  

Weird, weird game

MSU posted, by far, it’s worst offensive number of the season: .83 points per possession. Far worse even than the butt-kicking at the Kohl Center (.91). And we bested Purdue by .14, the same margin as we had in relatively easy home wins versus Illinois and Northwestern. Purdue’s performance was an offensive disaster of epic proportions, especially in the second half. It almost seemed as if all the times this year MSU has had to face opponents playing out of their minds for who knows what reason (@UNC, @Wisconsin, @Illinois, first Purdue game, et al.) got repaid in one package. I’ll take it, but I have no idea what conclusions you can draw from this about either team.

by Con-T on Feb 28, 2010 11:07 PM CST reply actions  

On any given night, anything can happen in college basketball

I think that’s what we learned and that’s the attitude I’m going to keep throughout the NCAA Tournament.

by intrpdtrvlr on Mar 1, 2010 4:33 AM CST up reply actions  

What's the plan?

Can’t win at Mackey unless Hummel goes down?

Ever Grateful. Ever True.

by PurdueMatt on Mar 1, 2010 7:38 AM CST reply actions  

Please

Can’t win at Breslin unless Lucas has a bum ankle?

by Z.K. on Mar 1, 2010 7:57 AM CST up reply actions  

Wah wah

Can only win at Breslin once every 13 years?

by LVS on Mar 1, 2010 8:20 AM CST up reply actions  

Injuries suck, as both fanbases know. Hummel's is worse because he's out for the year.

You can’ only play against who is out there. I understand the frustration, but it’s not MSU’s fault Hummel wasn’t out there.

Think Illinois beats State if Lucas isn’t wearing a sweatsuit in that game? We’ll never know, but there’s no use complaining about it now.

by rook34 on Mar 1, 2010 10:45 AM CST up reply actions  

the transformation of Allen

Everyone is mentioning Green and Morgan for their efforts, and rightly so. But, props to Allen for a pretty darn good game, despite little offense. Great defense, 8 boards, no turnovers. I liked that he did not let his offensive woes take him out of the game, but was super active and aggressive on defense. Really did a job on Moore, too. Who would have predicted Allen turning into a mature gritty big ten player? To be sure, I was surprised MSU did not make more of an effort to get him some open looks from three point, as a couple three pointers would have really helped!

by Anderlecht on Mar 1, 2010 8:28 AM CST reply actions  

Well said

I’ve been a harsh critic of Allen especially his first two years, but he has simply stepped his game up like no one else on this team has, both offensively and defensively.

by TMadison25 on Mar 1, 2010 10:43 AM CST up reply actions  

I really have a hard time feeling good about this win

Mostly, it’s a function of the turnovers. We have still not found a way, lo these many years, to handle pressure on the perimeter. It is exceedingly frustrating. This was just about the ugliest win I’ve ever seen us have. With Hummel, I think they win comfortably in this game – their scoring droughts would probably not have occurred, they would have shot better, and they would have grabbed more rebounds. They might even have forced more turnovers, if that were possible. End result – a blowout win for them.

In essence, we backed into a share of the Big 10 title (assuming we win out) this year. I’m OK with that as I like hanging banners, and because we’ve had years where a team more deserving (see 2005) does not win a championship due to a team of destiny making a historic run in the conference. Basically, you take championships when they come and don’t appologize for them.

The way we have been playing we may still not get a share of the title. I can’t honestly say that, if we play the way we did today, we’re sure to get a W against U of M. They have not had the season they were hoping for but have played pretty competently overall. Congrats to the team (I guess) for gutting out a win in a tough environment when we did not play particularly well.

by TheCrestedHelm on Mar 1, 2010 9:17 AM CST reply actions  

I understand the angst about the turnovers.

But I think you’re overlooking how well MSU played on defense.

And I have a hard time with the phrase “backed into” when the title (if it happens) will be the result of MSU handing a loss to the front runner on their own home court.

Hummel’s injury is a major blow to Purdue’s NCAA Tournament prospects, but as far as the Big Ten title goes, it just evened the playing field.

Fight for The Only Colors: Green and White!

by KJ@theonlycolors on Mar 1, 2010 9:57 AM CST up reply actions  

I had to do a quick check

It looks like the .69 PPP Purdue put up yesterday is the second lowest total for a conference game this year (Iowa laid a .66 egg at Mackey themselves a short time ago). You can’t put that all on bad Purdue shooting, missing Hummel etc. Those clamoring for more defensive intensity have got to tip their hat to the Spartan effort yesterday, which is definitely something to feel good about. Now, if they could only put a game together where this defense coincides with a less than 20% TO rate game. . .

by Con-T on Mar 1, 2010 10:35 AM CST up reply actions  

I have been one of those who has been clamoring

I guess it wasn’t our fault that Hummel was hurt, but with him in there I think our D looks a lot worse. Granted, Purdue has some other very fine players, but as KJ has noted, he is the one cog that makes everything else go for them. Still, we did admirable work on the boards and on defense. I don’t mean to belittle the effort or the win. We played hard and did what we had to do. I guess the “backing into the title” thing was a little harsh. If we wind up tied in the standings we did enough to deserve a share.

My concern is about more than yesterday’s game. We only got one road win against a contender this year, and that was when the contender was at less than full strength, and we still didn’t really look competent doing it. It’s not our fault they weren’t at full strength, but it would have been nice to see us play a little better either in this game. I guess what I’m saying is that I’m still not convinced that this win is a sign that we’re tournament ready at this point.

We knew they were going to pressure the ball on the perimeter like crazy, but still looked like we were unprepared to handle it. It almost always looks like we’re unprepared for it. We start three junior guards with lots of big game experience. There’s just no excuse at this point for looking so out of sorts every time a team plays in-your-face D.

by TheCrestedHelm on Mar 1, 2010 11:47 AM CST up reply actions  

Adjustment by Izzo

Throughout the game vs Purdue at Breslin and for part of the first half yesterday, Johnson would get a ton of easy layups off the pick-n-roll. We repeatedly got burnt by it. Glad to see Izzo make the adjustment regarding how we handled picks/hedging. You have to imagine that was a big part of Purdue’s plan with Hummel being out to capitalize on it, considering how effective it was before. Once we adjusted, the guards seemed unable to create anything on their own.

by TMadison25 on Mar 1, 2010 11:01 AM CST reply actions  

I noticed that too

Johnson would set a high screen for Moore or Grant and Johnson’s man would pop out to double-team the ball-handler leaving Johnson free to roll to the basket. And often there was no help in the post to even attempt to challenge it. For some reason, it stopped working. Not sure what, if anything, Izzo did, but it was a positive development.

by Con-T on Mar 1, 2010 11:38 AM CST up reply actions  

They stopped hedging

giving Purdue an opportunity to shoot more perimeter shots, but taking away the free look to Johnson.

by TMadison25 on Mar 1, 2010 11:47 AM CST up reply actions  

I guess that underscores some of what they lost with Hummel out

Hummel could set up outside, which creates a pick your poison situation: either the guy in the 4 spot has to stay home to help on Johnson, leaving Hummel clear to shoot the three, or he goes outside with Hummel leaving no other bigs left to guard the lane.

by Con-T on Mar 1, 2010 12:07 PM CST up reply actions  

I was thinking the same thing

with Hummel in there, it really puts you in a dilemma. With him out, as long as your guards can stay out on their guards, your front court players can concentrate solely on denying the post.

by TheCrestedHelm on Mar 1, 2010 12:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A Michigan State basketball and football blog community

Managers

Petenewpic_small Pete Rossman

Spiritofd_small LVS

Contributors

Square_sun_small Steve Hendershot

Marvin_small SpartanDan

State_small Con-T

Adorno5_small intrpdtrvlr

Patrickhayes_small patrick_hayes

Keep-calm-carry-on_small HeckDorland