Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: News And Other Updates Leading Up To Pats-Giants

On Chris-Allen-lessness

Some of this has been covered in the comments to LVS's post, but here are my thoughts on the Chris Allen suspension.

First, the precise cause of the suspension is still fairly mysterious.  If you listen to Tom Izzo's comments on the topic, he sounds downright chipper, several times stressing how pleased he's been with Allen's performance on the court in recent games.  Joe Rexrode transcribed quite a bit of the give and take (major props for the LOST smoke monster analogy, BTW).  Here's the opening:

    On the reason for the suspension:
    "Just not being a good teammate. There’s some guys that don’t understand that your team is the most valuable thing you have. You have a responsibility and an obligation to your team. He’s not demonstrating that to me or my staff, and so I told him to take the day off, which he did. But I’m telling him he’s taking a game off, and we’ll go down there and try to compete without him."

    This is a basketball issue?
    "Yeah, it’s a basketball issue."

Later, Izzo attributes the suspension to "an accumulation of things."  It doesn't sound like academic issues were a big part of this.  The portion Rexrode has on his blog ends like this:

    Is this surprising because he’s bought in the court, on defense?
    "Yeah it is, but still, when you’re starting to talk about these things as a junior, that’s concerning, too. I mean we had the Morrises of the world and by the end of their sophomore year, you know, they’re ready to move on. We’ve got a couple guys that are in their junior year and still immature. And my job is to make sure that they either get mature -– you know, I know this will sound trite and stupid. Probably 50 percent is for my team, none is for the program, none if for me, and the other 50 percent is probably for him. And I swear to you, that is the truth."

It would be tough to do a Venn diagram analysis here.  The suspension is the result of "basketball issues," but apparently not on-the-court basketball issues.

Star-divide

Anyway, the next question is what this means for Friday (and potentially beyond--Izzo hasn't decided whether Allen would travel separately to Indianapolis if MSU wins the first game).  Allen's absence probably moves the needle a nudge toward wanting to play Minnesota rather than Penn State--but not beyond the 50% mark.

Allen's shooting and ball-handling skills are valuable against Penn State's zone looks.  In the two games against the Nittany Lions, Allen combined for 19 points on 5-11 three-point shooting, 4 assists, and zero turnovers.  And he provides a good defensive option against Talor Battle.

Of course, Minnesota also plays some zone.  That's almost a relief, though, given that they can also play an aggressive, turnover-inducing man-to-man defense (although they haven't been doing much of that of late).  In the two games against the Gophers. Allen went for 19 points on 5-14 three-point shooting, 8 assists, and 2 turnovers.  And he'd be useful on defense against Lawrence Westbrook, too.

So I guess scrap my initial judgment: Allen's absence will be a distinct disadvantage on both ends of the court against both potential opponents in MSU's Big Ten Tournament opener.

While he hasn't been scoring in bunches over the last few games, Allen has arguably been MSU's most consistent perimeter players in terms of avoiding mistakes over the second half of conference play.  He's posted either one or zero turnovers in 9 of the last 10 games, and he's been the most reliable perimeter defender.

The suspension substantially reduces the margin for error for the remaining guards.  Kalin Lucas probably has to now spend more time as the primary defender on Battle or Westbrook, in addition to trying to regain his scoring touch (just 36 points over the last 4 games).  Durrell Summers will play 30+ minutes and becomes the sole athletic wing option.  Korie Lucious needs to knock down 3-pointers against the zone.  (Disconcerting stat: If you exclude Allen's .431 three-point shooting, MSU shot only .279 from beyond the arc in conference play.)  Either Austin Thornton or Isaiah Dahlman will see double-digit minutes; they simply need to make smart decisions with the ball and knock down any wide open shots that come their way.

Based on Izzo's tone today and the precedents with Lucas (back after one missed practice) and Lucious (back after one missed games) earlier this season, I'd expect to see Allen at Conseco on Saturday.  But that'll hinge, of course, on winning Friday night.  Chris Allen would be fourth on my list of players I wouldn't want to go into the tournament without right now (behind Lucas, Morgan, and Green).   Apparently, this team won't be doing anything the easy way this season.

Linking Laconically is overwhelmed with the amount of link-worthy material that pops up in March

Comment 7 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Izzo the culprit?

KJ - with Izzo’s comments about Turner after the upset in East Lansing, do you think he might be the guy who kept ET from gaining unanimous POY honors from the coaches? Most OSU fans think it was Crean but I’m curious as to your thoughts? I’m a big Izzo fan but if he voted someone other than ET, I call shenanigans. Keep up the great work around here.

by Chris 11W on Mar 9, 2010 9:56 PM CST reply actions  

I heard someone suggest Thad Matta.

That apparently it’s protocol to not vote for your own player? I don’t know if that theory carries any weight or not.

by intrpdtrvlr on Mar 9, 2010 10:08 PM CST up reply actions  

That's definitely the case for some awards

Witness the furor over Tebow not being unanimous preseason SEC POY in football – they said he got 10 votes, one short of unanimous (because Meyer wasn’t allowed to vote for his player).

But usually if that is the case, if all the rest go to that player it’s considered unanimous. So it probably was someone else. And anyone who did vote for someone else simply voted wrong.

by SpartanDan on Mar 9, 2010 10:30 PM CST up reply actions  

I really have no idea

I don’t see Izzo voting against someone out of vindictiveness, though. If he didn’t vote for Turner, I’d have to believe it was because he truly thought Hummel was just as important to Purdue as Turner is to OSU.

Crean would make sense, I suppose, in that Turner only scored a combined 18 points in 2 games vs. IU.

Fight for The Only Colors: Green and White!

by KJ@theonlycolors on Mar 10, 2010 6:31 AM CST up reply actions  

Good point

ET only had 18 combined points although the first matchup was his first game back from injury. He did, however, rack up 2 quick 1st half fouls in the second matchup limiting him to 21 minutes so maybe you are right, he simply didn’t impress Crean enough head-to-head. Still, unless Crean doesn’t have the internet or can’t read box scores, I don’t know how he doesn’t vote for Turner. Whatever. Was just curious if you thought Izzo was a possibility.

by Chris 11W on Mar 10, 2010 7:08 PM CST up reply actions  

Dahlman

wouldn’t mind seeing his PT increase Friday.

by TMadison25 on Mar 10, 2010 5:28 AM CST 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