SB Nation - Jarrett Sutton

Know Your Braggin' Rights Rival: Illinois

Bill C. — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:00:29 -0000

by STEPHEN HAAS - AP

Mike Davis is Illinois' best all-around player. (AP Photo/Stephen Haas)

There must be something wrong with me. I know Mizzou can win this game, and I know a win tomorrow night would give this season a significant bump in the right direction. But when I think of the Illinois game, two major thoughts come to mind:

We're probably going to lose. It's what we do in this game. (And as long as we keep winning the football game, I see this as a fair trade.)
As long as we show improvement, moving the ball relatively well on offense and showing that we've improved on the boards, I'm more or less okay with that.

Here's the problem: every time I've ever decided I've come to grips with a loss beforehand, we end up losing in the most annoying, grating way possible. AJ blocks a shot right to Brian Boddicker for an open 3 against Texas in 2004. Kansas makes two ridiculously stupid 25-foot 3-pointers to win at Hearnes in 2003. Keon Lawrence slips and dribbles the ball off his foot against Illinois in 2007. Et cetera. So now that I've officially accepted that we're probably going to lose this game ... I'm fired up about not losing this game.

Illinois 8-3

	UI	Opp
Points Per Minute	1.97	1.63
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.15	0.95
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.29	1.11
2-PT FG%	52.8%	47.1%
3-PT FG%	38.6%	27.9%
FT%	73.0%	70.8%
True Shooting %	57.3%	49.2%

	UI	Opp
Assists/Gm	17.5	11.5
Steals/Gm	6.1	6.1
Turnovers/Gm	11.7	14.3
Ball Control Index (Assists + Steals) / TO	2.01	1.24

	UI	Opp
Expected Offensive Rebounds	131	144
Offensive Rebounds	125	123
Difference	-6	-21

Ken Pomeroy Stats

UI Offense vs MU Defense Ranks
	UI Offense	MU Defense	Advantage
Efficiency	38	13	MU
Effective FG%	34	11	MU
Turnover %	22	2	MU
Off. Reb. %	122	268	Illini Big
FTA/FGA	321	185	MU Big
MU Offense vs UI Defense Ranks
	MU Offense	UI Defense	Advantage
Efficiency	58	101	MU
Effective FG%	48	73	MU
Turnover %	73	198	MU Big
Off. Reb. %	86	50	Illini
FTA/FGA	313	59	Illini Big

Where the Illini are best

In all, Illinois is a pretty damn efficient offensive team. They shoot well (57.3% true shooting), they don't turn the ball over much (outside of Demetri McCamey), their BCI hovers right at a lovely 2.0, and they are perfectly acceptable in the offensive rebounding category; they're only okay in the rebounds department considering their overall size (six guys 6'9 or taller), but they're still better than Mizzou by all means.

Where the Illini are weakest

First of all, they don't get to the line any better than Mizzou does -- this game could be decided by long jumpers and offensive rebound opportunities. Plus, while they're strong in terms of FG% defense, they don't force too many turnovers.

UI's Season to Date

@Illinois 96, SIU-Edwardsville 69 (W)
@Illinois 80, Northern Illinois 61 (W)
Las Vegas Invitational
@Illinois 94, Presbyterian 48 (W)
@Illinois 78, Wofford 64 (W)
Utah 60, Illinois 58 (in Las Vegas) (L)
Bradley 72, Illinois 68 (in Las Vegas) (L)
Illinois 76, @Clemson 74 (W)
@Illinois 84, Boise State 77 (W)
@Illinois 79, Vanderbilt 68 (W)
@Illinois 88, Western Michigan 53 (W)
@Georgia 70, Illinois 67 (L)

Looking at both Mizzou's and Illinois' results this year, one thing most certainly stands out: these are two young teams. Illinois pulls off an astounding comeback to win in Clemson ... right after losing to an iffy Bradley team and a downright bad Utah team. They pull away from Vanderbilt in a big win ... then lose to Georgia. They have been outstanding (5-0) at home this season, but away from Assembly Hall, things get relatively dicey (3-3). Sounds familiar, right? Mizzou's average win at home this season is by a margin of roughly eleventy-billion-point-one. Away from Mizzou Arena, they're capable of losing to Oral Roberts. This makes this game extremely tough to predict.

Illinois Player Stats

College Basketball

Player	*AdjGS/Gm**	GmSc/Min	Line
Mike Davis (6'9, 220, Jr.)	14.1	0.46	30.5 MPG, 12.5 PPG, 9.5 RPG, 1.2 APG
Demetri McCamey (6'3, 200, Jr.)	13.1	0.47	27.6 MPG, 14.2 PPG, 5.5 APG, 3.0 RPG, 1.6 SPG, 3.7 TOPG
Mike Tisdale (7'1, 235, Jr.)	11.8	0.50	23.4 MPG, 10.8 PPG, 5.5 RPG, 2.1 BPG
D.J. Richardson (6'2, 185, Fr.)	9.9	0.34	29.4 MPG, 10.8 PPG, 3.0 APG, 2.3 RPG
Brandon Paul (6'4, 195, Fr.)	8.3	0.37	22.3 MPG, 10.4 PPG, 2.6 RPG, 1.9 APG, 1.7 TOPG
Dominique Keller (6'7, 230, Sr.)	6.7	0.45	15.1 MPG, 7.0 PPG, 2.9 RPG
Bill Cole (6'9, 215, Jr.)	4.1	0.27	15.2 MPG, 3.5 PPG, 3.3 RPG
Tyler Griffey (6'9, 225, Fr.)	3.9	0.48	8.1 MPG, 3.5 PPG, 2.1 RPG
Jeff Jordan (6'1, 185, Jr.)	3.0	0.17	17.6 MPG, 2.3 PPG, 2.4 APG, 2.2 RPG
Richard Semrau (6'10, 245, Jr.)	2.8	0.44	6.2 MPG, 2.1 PPG, 2.0 RPG
Alex Legion (6'5, 200, Jr.)	1.5	0.15	10.4 MPG, 3.0 PPG
Stan Simpson (6'10, 230, Fr.)	0.6	0.19	12 minutes
Bubba Chisholm (5'11, 180, Sr.)	0.5	0.38	8 minutes

* AdjGS = a take-off of the Game Score metric (definition here) accepted by a lot of basketball stat nerds. It redistributes a team's points based not only on points scored, but also by giving credit for assists, rebounds (offensive & defensive), steals, blocks, turnovers and fouls. It is a stat intended to determine who had the biggest overall impact on the game itself, instead of just how many balls a player put through a basket.

Stats from the last two Mizzou-Illinois games:
Demetri McCamey: 28.0 MPG, 12.0 PPG (9-for-14 FG, 4-for-7 3PT), 3.0 APG, 3.0 TOPG
Mike Davis: 25.0 MPG, 9.5 PPG (8-for-13 FG), 5.0 RPG
Mike Tisdale: 13.0 MPG, 6.5 PPG (6-for-11 FG), 4.0 RPG

McCamey murdered Mizzou last year, with 18 first-half points (including, if I remember correctly, at least one bank-shot 3...always a tell-tale sign that you're about to get massacred), so he's clearly the player Mizzou fans fear the most. Knowing Mizzou's current strengths and weaknesses, however, Davis and Tisdale are almost as worrisome.
In all, Mizzou's best opportunity might come from the fact that two of UI's primary ball-handlers are freshmen. That lack of experience is offset a bit by McCamey and the fact that he has had a primary role in two Braggin' Rights games now, but he's a bit of a turnover machine himself. Even though Illinois has put together some solid turnover numbers, if Mizzou can avoid getting shot out of the building like they were last year, they might eventually be able to wear down the Illini backcourt. But that whole "avoid getting your doors blown off early" thing is a bit up in the air.
If Mizzou does derive a bit of an advantage in the backcourt, it is offset by Illinois' extreme depth advantage up front. I like that Davis is only 220 pounds, roughly the same as Laurence Bowers and Keith Ramsey, but Tisdale is a bit of a load, and they have a wealth of other tall guys -- Dominique Keller, Bill Cole, former Mizzou recruit Tyler Griffey, Richard Semrau -- to throw at Mizzou.

And just in case any Illinois fans end up reading this, here are Mizzou's own player stats as well.

Mizzou Player Stats

NCAA Basketball

Player	*AdjGS/Gm**	GmSc/Min	Line
Laurence Bowers (6'8, 205, So.)	13.3	0.67	19.8 MPG, 10.2 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 1.7 BPG, 1.5 APG, 1.3 SPG
Kim English (6'6, 200, So.)	12.4	0.56	22.1 MPG, 16.1 PPG, 3.1 RPG, 2.0 SPG, 1.4 APG, 2.1 TOPG
Zaire Taylor (6'4, 189, Sr.)	11.1	0.40	27.8 MPG, 9.0 PPG, 3.1 APG, 3.1 RPG, 2.8 SPG
Marcus Denmon (6'3, 185, So.)	9.2	0.46	20.1 MPG, 10.5 PPG, 3.9 RPG, 1.2 APG, 1.2 SPG
Keith Ramsey (6'9, 210, Sr.)	9.2	0.36	25.4 MPG, 5.9 PPG, 5.9 RPG, 2.1 SPG, 1.7 APG, 1.3 BPG, 1.7 TOPG
J.T. Tiller (6'3, 200, Sr.)	7.0	0.30	23.3 MPG, 9.6 PPG, 2.9 APG, 2.3 RPG, 1.1 SPG, 2.4 TOPG
Mike Dixon (6'1, 175, Fr.)	6.9	0.38	18.1 MPG, 8.2 PPG, 2.8 APG, 1.6 RPG
Justin Safford (6'8, 230, Jr.)	6.2	0.34	18.4 MPG, 7.6 PPG, 3.8 RPG, 1.2 APG, 1.5 TOPG
Miguel Paul (6'1, 172, So.)	4.4	0.31	14.0 MPG, 4.2 PPG, 2.6 APG
John Underwood (6'9, 208, Fr.)	1.9	0.30	6.3 MPG, 1.3 PPG, 2.8 RPG
Tyler Stone (6'7, 225, Fr.)	1.5	0.34	4.3 MPG, 1.7 PPG, 1.2 RPG
Steve Moore (6'9, 264, So.)	1.3	0.12	11.0 MPG, 1.6 PPG, 1.4 RPG
Jarrett Sutton (6'3, 190, Jr.)	0.6	0.16	4.0 MPG, 1.8 PPG

In some ways, Bowers and Mike Davis are similar players -- not prominent shooters (they score, but they don't take a boatload of shots), solid rebounders (Davis is better), solid passers (Bowers is better). Bowers is the ultimate box score filler, and as we'll see soon enough, the more prominent he is, the better Mizzou gets.
It really is neat watching this defense in action -- no single player dominates in the steals department, but just about everybody snags at least one a game.

Keys to the Game

Pace. The main difference between last season's Mizzou squad and this season's (thus far) is the ability to force their will on their opponent. In almost every game last year, Mizzou was able to force opponents into playing much faster than they wanted, and while we've seen the same type of spurts this season, the spurts don't last nearly as long. While Mizzou prefers a pace well over 70 possessions a game, Old Dominion was able to keep things at a 65-possession pace. Richmond? 60. Oral Roberts? 61. Unacceptable.

Illinois plays at a reasonably fast clip, averaging about 68 possessions per game. With two freshmen and a turnover-heavy star, Illinois might be vulnerable to a faster pace if Mizzou can force them into it. If not, Mizzou's best opportunity for winning goes by the wayside.
Laurence Bowers. He is the key to Mizzou's offensive flow. Ball movement has been alright this year, but with only one person consistently trying to generate shots (Kim English), there hasn't been a lot of purpose to the ball movement. Guys like Bowers and Zaire Taylor will shoot it if they're wide open, but they're not looking to score or create. That has to change if Mizzou has any chance. Taylor has an excuse (he's the point guard, not the shooting guard), but it's time for Bowers to show what his ceiling is. He's done well in the last two cupcake games, taking plenty of shots, but most of them are still in the "putbacks and wide open looks" vein. Let's find out if that's all he is, or if there's a natural, 15 PPG scorer beneath the surface. He's a skinny guy, but he's a good FT shooter, and I want to see him taking a few more not-completely-open shots and driving. Maybe he can do it, and maybe he can't, but I want to find out.
Justin Safford. Can't say it enough: against a reasonably decent rebounding team Saturday night (UAPB), Safford was more aggressive on the boards than I've ever seen him. It was a breath of fresh air, and even if he picks up a couple over-aggressive fouls, I want to see the same level of intensity against Illinois. He is, by default, the biggest player in Mizzou's rotation, the only main contributor over 220 pounds (barely), and if he turns into a solid 6-7 RPG guy (he's averaged only 2.8 RPG against the "real" opponents on Mizzou's schedule so far), Mizzou's overall rebounding trouble just took a step in the right direction.

Prediction

Never bet against a streak, right? This isn't a great Illinois team -- like Mizzou, they are pretty young and vulnerable to falling asleep for minutes at a time. They have a high upside and pretty low downside, and if Mizzou brings the attack to them early, they could run away with this game. But that hasn't happened since 1999. It feels like odds are still in favor of the "McCamey gets hot early, Mizzou has some shots rim in and out and goes into a shell, and they're playing from behind all night" scenario. So I'm chickening out and going with Illinois 75, Mizzou 67. Mizzou absolutely can win this game, but they need to prove it.

Study Hall: Mizzou vs UA-Pine Bluff

Bill C. — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:00:19 -0000

by L.G. Patterson - AP

4 days ago: Arkansas-Pine Bluff's Terrance Calvin, left, battles Missouri's Justin Safford, right, for a loose ball during the first half their NCAA college basketball game Saturday, Dec. 19, 2009, in Columbia, Mo. Missouri won the game 88-70. (AP Photo/L.G. Patterson)

View full size photo »

Congrats to UAPB for the late surge that allowed their "No losses by 20+" streak to continue. Joking aside, UAPB really does look like a pretty good SWAC team despite the record.

Mizzou 88, UAPB 70

College Basketball

	Mizzou	UAPB
Points Per Minute	2.20	1.75
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.19	0.94
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.24	1.15
2-PT FG%	45.1%	39.6%
3-PT FG%	40.0%	30.8%
FT%	81.9%	80.0%
True Shooting %	54.5%	48.6%

	Mizzou	UAPB
Assists	13	10
Steals	13	5
Turnovers	12	20
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	2.17	0.75

	Mizzou	UAPB
Expected Offensive Rebounds	15	15
Offensive Rebounds	18	17
Difference	+3	+2

Hey, hey! Rebounds!

Against cupcake opponents, you want to dominate on the glass, not just win the rebounding battle by one. But against a Golden Lions team that is subpar at just about everything but great at rebounding, I'll take a 1-board margin as a nice victory. Thanks to Keith Ramsey, Mizzou grabbed three more offensive caroms than expected.

Beyond that, I can't glean too much from this game. As we'll see in the per-player section, I was really happy with the aggressiveness I saw from Justin Safford, but Mizzou was missing a starter and gave up a couple of runs without some other starters on the court, so I'll just say I was happy with the rebounding and move on.

Player stats after the jump.

Player Stats

College Basketball

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
Kim English	15.5	0.62	25 Min, 18 Pts (6-for-14 FG, 3-for-5 3PT), 4 Reb, 3 Stl, 2 Ast, 3 TO
Keith Ramsey	15.5	0.57	27 Min, 10 Pts (4-for-6 FG), 5 Reb (5 Off), 3 Stl
Mike Dixon	15.1	0.63	24 Min, 13 Pts (5-for-9 FG, 1-for-4 3PT), 3 Reb, 3 Ast, 3 Stl
Laurence Bowers	12.7	0.70	18 Min, 12 Pts (4-for-7 FG), 6 Reb, 2 Blk
Zaire Taylor	8.8	0.33	27 Min, 9 Pts (3-for-4 FG), 2 Ast
Marcus Denmon	7.6	0.35	22 Min, 7 Pts (3-for-11 FG, 1-for-5 3PT), 9 Reb (3 Off), 4 Ast
Justin Safford	7.3	0.43	17 Min, 9 Pts (4-for-11 FG), 9 Reb
Miguel Paul	6.7	0.37	18 Min, 8 Pts (2-for-4 FG)
Steve Moore	1.4	0.11	13 Min, 2 Pts (0-for-1 FG), 2 Blk
Jarrett Sutton	-0.5	-0.16	3 Min, 0 Pts (0-for-1 FG)
John Underwood	-0.9	-0.31	3 Min
Tyler Stone	-2.8	-0.94	3 Min, 0 Pts (0-for-3 FG)

* AdjGS = a take-off of the Game Score metric (definition here) accepted by a lot of basketball stat nerds. It does the same thing my previous measure of choice did (it takes points, assists, rebounds (offensive & defensive), steals, blocks, turnovers and fouls into account to determine an individual's "score" for a given game), only the formula is more used and accepted. The "adjustment" in Adjusted Game Score is simply matching the total game scores to the total points scored in the game, thereby redistributing the game's points scored to those who had the biggest impact on the game itself, instead of just how many balls a player put through a basket.

Some people just know how to fill up the stat sheet. Laurence Bowers looked underwhelming for a good portion of the game, but when all was said and done, his per-minute rates were still quite healthy, and he had managed a 12-6 with two blocks.
The stats don't really do justice to how encouragingly hard Justin Safford was playing Saturday night. He was aggressive and threw his body around for rebounds (and it worked), and that's exactly what we're going to need from him Wednesday night.
Marcus Denmon & Mike Dixon: 12 rebounds
Keith Ramsey & Laurence Bowers: 11 rebounds

Ehh??
I can honestly say I don't remember eight misses from Denmon...thought he shot much better than that.

The Challenge

Once again we revisit the challenges I made for each player after the loss to Oral Roberts...

Zaire Taylor: Shots Per Minute

Versus UAPB: 0.15 ShPM

Zaire was not at all offensively aggressive against the Golden Lions, and while he can get away with that (Kimmeh getting hot helped) against UAPB, Mizzou needs him to take more shots against Illinois.

J.T. Tiller: Steals Per Minute

Versus UAPB: Unpaid Speeding Ticket.

Jesus Tyrannosaurus has had a nothing senior season so far. Wednesday would be a good time to change that.

Kim English: Defensive Rebounds Per Minute

Versus UAPB: 0.08 DRPM

His three steals make up for the lack of rebounding a bit, but this is something else that needs to improve quickly.

Justin Safford: Rebounds Per Minute

Versus UAPB: 0.41 RPM

Of course, maybe English and (on the defensive end) Ramsey just didn't grab many rebounds because Safford was grabbing them all? As a reminder, anything above 0.20 per minute is pretty decent...0.41 per minute is insanely good. We must see this version of Saffy more often.

Keith Ramsey: Free Throws Per Field Goal Attempt

Versus UAPB: 0.33 FT/FGA

Meh. I prefer 0.40 or above, but that only means he was off by about one free throw.

Laurence Bowers: Shots Per Minute

Versus UAPB: 0.39 ShPM

Yes. Bowers is a pro at finding open space for a pass when a guard is driving, and at rebounds/putbacks. He took a very high rate of shots mostly independent of offensive flow, but that's fine by me. If Taylor and Bowers are shooting more, I'm happy.

Marcus Denmon: Free Throws Per Field Goal Attempt

Versus UAPB: 0.00 FT/FGA

Marcus was settling for the jumper a bit too much on Saturday, especially since he missed a lot more than I remembered. His physicality did shine through, however, in the fact that he grabbed nine rebounds against a relatively big team. Gotta love seeing that.

Mike Dixon: Adjusted Game Score Per Minute

Versus UAPB: 0.63 AdjGS/Min

This kid is coming along very nicely. At his current rate of improvement, he could be a solution to at least a small chunk of our offensive problems. And hey, he grabbed three more defensive rebounds than Keith Ramsey!

Miguel Paul: Team Possessions Per Game

Versus UAPB: 74 Possessions

I still don't see Paul ever being a major, counted-upon contributor, and I think he was on the court for most of UAPB's end-of-first-half run, but he still deserves some credit for putting together some decent numbers and penetration.

Steve Moore: Shots Per Minute

Versus UAPB: 0.08 ShPM

I've got quite the love-hate relationship with Stevie right now. He travels for no reason, then he uncorks one of the greatest outlet passes I've ever seen. He swishes two sweet lefty free throws, then commits a stupid foul. He blocks two shots, but grabs only one rebound in 13 minutes. He is not nearly enough of a reliable contributor yet, but he's going to have plenty of chances to prove himself versus Illinois and Georgia.

Tyler Stone and John Underwood: Minutes

Versus UAPB: 6 combined minutes

Really wanted to see a LOT more out of these two, but Coach didn't put them in until the Jarrett Sutton shift with three minutes left. Boo to that. Neither did anything of interest, but...it was only three minutes!

Jarrett Sutton: Wins

Versus UAPB: 1 win!

He plays, we win. Simple as that.

Three Keys Revisited

From Friday's preview.

Show Up

Mizzou did...and then they didn't...but then they did again.

The Rims

Mizzou went up 33-7, and everything clicked--Mizzou's rims were friendly and UAPB's were not. And then UAPB went on a 22-7 run to end the first half; they suddenly couldn't miss and Mizzou grew cold. The point of my naming the rims as a key was that hot shooting early would put the game out of reach, and that's exactly what happened, but the cold streak almost made things interesting again.

Justin Safford

Pardon me while I pat myself on the back for this one. Saffy was the biggest source of energy for this team Saturday night, and if he plays that aggressive for the rest of the season, we just became a much better squad. But now he's got to prove that he can do that against major conference competition. Or else Mizzou is going to get completely wiped off the boards against both Illinois and Georgia.

Summary

The point of "The Challenge" was to try to gauge improvement during the cupcake games in advance of conference play. Wednesday night's game is neither a cupcake nor a conference game. I'm going into Wednesday night a) expecting to lose (that way, anything's a nice surprise) and b) hoping for continued improvement. If Mizzou looks no better in halfcourt sets, or if they're getting outrebounded by 15, then they're really no further along than they were a week or two ago. But if Zaire Taylor or Laurence Bowers (or maybe even Mike Dixon) are asserting themselves more offensively (or Kim English is bombing Illinois out of the arena), or if Justin Safford is crashing the boards hard and providing a bit of an answer in the rebounding category, then win or lose, things are advancing nicely. We'll see what happens. Either way, I saw plenty of things to be encouraged about (Safford, Dixon) and plenty of blah-it's-Saturday-night-against-a-cupcake-in-a-half-empty-arena doldrums.

KNOW THY ENEMY: Missouri Tigers

BracketCat — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 04:00:17 -0000

More photos » by L.G. Patterson - AP

Like Justin Safford, Missouri's tournament hopes have taken a few shots. (AP Photo/L.G. Patterson)

Browse more photos »

OK, it's time to get these started again. Admittedly, I faltered a bit due to work, but things are back under control for now. These will proceed largely as before, but with a few exceptions:

Instead of reformatting the player bios like I did before, which was majorly time-consuming and part of the reason these fell by the wayside for so long, I'm merely going to link to the appropriate page. I will add player stats to the tables, however.
Originally, these were season previews. Obviously, much of the non-conference season already has been played, so now they're more like conference season previews. Also, what I've seen of these teams has changed my predictions for the conference's outcome, so I reserve the right to alter my predicted orders of finish from what they previously were.
Instead of twice a week, these are running every day from now until New Year's Eve. Call it the Big 12 Days of Christmas Basketball, if you like.

So, hit the jump for the rundown on the defending conference tournament champion, Missouri. And for more, head over to the Unholy Alliance Auxiliary Headquarters (pending Big Ten absorption): Rock M Nation.

The Story So Far

The Tigers are 7-3, with dominating home victories over Tennessee-Martin, Texas-Pan American, Chattanooga, Oregon, Fairleigh Dickinson and Arkansas-Pine Bluff.

They also collected a nice neutral-court win against Old Dominion, who just knocked off Georgetown.

But close losses to Richmond, at Vanderbilt and at Oral Roberts probably will come back to haunt the Tigers in much the same way as K-State's three-game, non-conference losing streak last December hindered the Wildcats.

Current Missouri RPI: 179

The Coach

Mike Anderson
Fourth Season

72-38 (25-23) at Missouri (as of today)
161-79 (67-43) overall

Bio

The Departures

Starters

DeMarre Carroll (28 minutes per game | 16.6 points per game | 7.2 rebounds per game)
Matt Lawrence (20.8 minutes per game | 9.2 points per game | 2.2 rebounds per game)
Leo Lyons (23.3 minutes per game | 14.6 points per game | 6.1 rebounds per game)

The Veterans

		#3 Miguel Paul Sophomore Guard 6-1 \| 172 Winter Haven, Fla. Bio 14 minutes per game \| 4.2 points per game \| 0.9 rebound per game

		#4 J.T. Tiller Senior Guard 6-3 \| 200 Marietta, Ga. Bio 23.3 minutes per game \| 9.6 points per game \| 2.3 rebounds per game

		#11 Zaire Taylor Senior Guard 6-4 \| 189 Staten Island, N.Y. Bio 27.8 minutes per game \| 9 points per game \| 3.1 rebounds per game

		#12 Marcus Denmon Sophomore Guard 6-3 \| 185 Kansas City, Mo. Bio 20.1 minutes per game \| 10.5 points per game \| 3.9 rebounds per game

		#15 Keith Ramsey Senior Forward 6-9 \| 217 Murfreesboro, Tenn. Bio 25.4 minutes per game \| 5.9 points per game \| 5.9 rebounds per game

		#21 Laurence Bowers Sophomore Forward 6-8 \| 205 Memphis, Tenn. Bio 19.8 minutes per game \| 10.2 points per game \| 5.6 rebounds per game

		#23 Justin Safford Junior Forward 6-8 \| 230 Bloomington, Ill. Bio 18.4 minutes per game \| 7.6 points per game \| 3.8 rebounds per game

		#24 Kim English Sophomore Guard 6-6 \| 200 Baltimore, Md. Bio 22.1 minutes per game \| 16.1 points per game \| 3.1 rebounds per game

		#25 Jarrett Sutton Junior Guard 6-3 \| 190 Kansas City, Mo. Bio 4 minutes per game \| 1.8 points per game \| 0.2 rebound per game

		#32 Steve Moore Sophomore Center 6-9 \| 264 Kansas City, Mo. Bio 11 minutes per game \| 1.6 points per game \| 1.4 rebounds per game

The Newcomers

		#10 Michael Dixon Jr. Freshman Guard 6-1 \| 175 Kansas City, Mo. Bio 18.1 minutes per game \| 8.2 points per game \| 1.6 rebounds per game

		#33 Tyler Stone Freshman Forward 6-7 \| 225 Memphis, Tenn. Bio 4.3 minutes per game \| 1.7 points per game \| 1.2 rebounds per game

		#35 John Underwood Freshman Forward 6-9 \| 208 Phoenix, Ariz. Bio 5.3 minutes per game \| 1.3 points per game \| 2.8 rebounds per game

My thanks to the Missouri sports information department for the photos.

The Analysis

Missouri is, of course, a tricky team to nail down because of the style they play. Mike Anderson likes to throw waves of guards at you off the bench in a constant, full-pressure style they call "The Fastest 40 Minutes," which is what they had to change the name to when it became apparent UAB owned the rights to "40 Minutes of Hell."

Thus, no Missouri player averages more than 30 minutes per game and so far, eight different players have started for the Tigers. So, rather than talk in terms of 1-5, I'll break down the guards and the forwards as two large groups.

The three most prominent and experienced players in the Missouri backcourt are returning starters J.T. Tiller, Zaire Taylor and Kim English. Not coincidentally, they're logging the most minutes.

Tiller has been bothered by injuries and missed three games, which I imagine has contributed to the Tigers' struggles this season. Taylor, who made the game-winning shot against KU last year, has seen his scoring average dip now that more guards are contributing. But English has continued his steady play from last season and even picked his game up a bit.

Miguel Paul and Marcus Denmon both played quite a bit last year as freshmen, so they're quick off the bench in the rotation and each has started several games. But the biggest surprise of the guard group is Michael Dixon Jr., who is having more of an impact than I anticipated.

Jarrett Sutton is a career backup and doesn't play very much.

If this group has a weakness, it's that there doesn't appear to be a true replacement from sharpshooter Matt Lawrence, meaning that I'm not sure they have a guy who can knock down a contested 3-pointer. when they most need it.

That said, Missouri's problems start and end in the frontcourt. The loss of DeMarre Carroll and Leo Lyons cannot be overstated. Together with Lawrence, the departed trio accounted for more than 50 percent of the Tigers' points and rebounds during Missouri's Elite Eight season. And to date, no one has stepped up to replace them.

Hopes were high for sophomore Laurence Bowers, but he only has started three games. He is averaging more than 10 points per game, but seems to disappear when they need him most. More disconcerting is that he only averages five rebounds per. In fact, Missouri as a whole has been out-rebounded by all but one opponent. The Tigers don't really try to dominate the boards, and I think it's really going to cost them in Big 12 play.

Keith Ramsey and Justin Safford draw the most starts in the paint, but each is collecting even fewer statistics than Bowers. Sophomore center Steve Moore, and freshmen forwards Tyler Stone and John Underwood, are giving the Tigers even less. This is a serious weakness area that will be exposed against teams such as Kansas and Texas.

Projected Big 12 Starting Lineup


J.T. Tiller	Zaire Taylor	Kim English	Keith Ramsey	Justin Safford
1	2	3	4	5

Projected Top Big 12 Reserves


Miguel Paul	Michael Dixon Jr.	Marcus Denmon	Laurence Bowers	Steve Moore
1	2	3	4	5

The Final Verdict

I've already stated Missouri's problems above, so I won't rehash them here.

Suffice it to say that the Tigers already have several ugly losses on their resume. At home, they've been nearly unbeatable for the past year and a half, but I think their deficiencies will catch up to them.

Sure, they're probably the third- or fourth-best team in the North, but when every South team looks to have a chance to make the tournament, that equates to a basement finish. Missouri reminds me of K-State last season: One more recruiting class and a few post players away from being an NCAA team. In the meantime, I smell NIT.

Big 12 preseason prediction: 7th

My predicted finish: T-9th (with Iowa State)

Best-case scenario: 7th

Against K-State?: Loss in Manhattan, toss-up in Columbia

Previously on KNOW THY ENEMY...

Study Hall: Mizzou vs Fairleigh Dickinson

Bill C. — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:00:27 -0000

by L.G. Patterson - AP

11 days ago: Missouri head coach Mike Anderson, right, tries to quiet the crowd as he sits next to assistant coach Matt Zimmerman, left, after it was announced that today was Anderson's 50th birthday during the second half of a NCAA college basketball game against Fairleigh Dickinson Saturday, Dec. 12, 2009, in Columbia, Mo. Missouri won the game 87-36. (AP Photo/L.G. Patterson)

View full size photo »

So apparently my 90-48 prediction was a bit too pessimistic...

Mizzou 87, Fairleigh Dickinson 36

NCAA Basketball Stats

	Mizzou	FDU
Points Per Minute	2.18	0.90
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.18	0.49
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.23	0.64
2-PT FG%	47.7%	26.5%
3-PT FG%	44.4%	13.6%
FT%	75.0%	56.3%
True Shooting %	57.0%	28.6%

	Mizzou	FDU
Assists	23	7
Steals	18	7
Turnovers	14	26
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	2.93	0.54

	Mizzou	FDU
Expected Offensive Rebounds	14	17
Offensive Rebounds	15	15
Difference	+1	-2

Pretty much total domination.

Not really sure what to say about this one. Just about every category saw domination -- shooting, ball-handling, etc. And Mizzou even won the rebounding battle! Barely!

Rebounding.

We'll talk about this a bit in the player stats after the jump, but after an iffy first half of rebounding, Mizzou got its act together, dominating the second half, then getting a nice boost from Tyler Stone and John Underwood, who combined for 9 points and 11 rebounds in 19 minutes. This is still clearly the biggest concern the team has (followed closely by the halfcourt offense that ensues if Mizzou isn't forcing 26 turnovers). But it's probably not to read too much, good or bad, into what unfolds during a 50-point win.

Player stats after the jump.

Player Stats

NCAA Basketball Stats

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
Kim English	16.0	1.00	16 Min, 20 Pts (7-for-14 FG, 4-for-9 3PT), 4 Stl, 3 Reb, 2 Ast
Laurence Bowers	12.2	0.68	18 Min, 12 Pts (6-for-8 FG), 5 Reb (3 Off), 2 Ast
Zaire Taylor	10.8	0.60	18 Min, 7 Pts (2-for-6 FG), 7 Stl, 3 Reb, 2 Ast
Michael Dixon	9.8	0.49	20 Min, 10 Pts (4-for-7 FG, 2-for-3 3PT), 5 Ast, 3 Reb
Marcus Denmon	7.1	0.39	18 Min, 9 Pts (3-for-7 FG, 3-for-6 3PT), 2 Reb, 2 Ast
Justin Safford	6.6	0.37	18 Min, 4 Pts (2-for-3 FG), 4 Ast, 3 Reb, 2 Blk
Miguel Paul	6.2	0.41	15 Min, 7 Pts (3-for-5 FG), 2 Ast
Tyler Stone	5.7	0.63	9 Min, 6 Pts (3-for-4 FG), 4 Reb
J.T. Tiller	4.5	0.28	16 Min, 5 Pts (2-for-4 FG), 2 Reb
John Underwood	3.2	0.32	10 Min, 3 Pts (0-for-3 FG), 7 Reb (3 Off)
Keith Ramsey	2.6	0.13	20 Min, 2 Pts (0-for-3 FG), 6 Reb
Steve Moore	2.4	0.15	16 Min, 2 Pts (1-for-3 FG), 3 Blk, 2 Reb, 2 Stl
Jarrett Sutton	-2.7	-0.45	6 Min, 0 Pts (0-for-4 FG)

That's right, Zaire Taylor yoinked seven steals in 18 minutes. Not sure I've ever seen that.
Actually, instead of going too deep into the bullet points, let's revisit the player-by-player challenges that I issued during the Oral Roberts wrap-up.

The Challenge

As a reminder, I took a look at each Mizzou player and what I needed to see from them during these cupcake games to suggest that team improvement might be on the horizon during Big 12 play.

Zaire Taylor: Shots Per Minute

Versus FDU: 0.33 Shots Per Minute.

Not bad, especially considering he was a little hobbled. He was averaging only 0.22 per minute against "real" opponents, and while FDU certainly doesn't qualify as a real opponent, he still shot at a 50% higher frequency, which is good. Again, lacking one more natural scorer, we have to fill in the gaps with our two best scorers (not named Kim English), Taylor and Laurence Bowers. This was a good start. Somewhere in the 0.30-0.35 range for Taylor suggests that he is shooting more and still focusing primarily on distributing the ball.

J.T. Tiller: Steals Per Minute

Versus FDU 0.06 Steals Per Minute.

Eh. Jesus Tyrannosaurus pretty much took this game off, at least in terms of what shows up in the box score.

Kim English: Defensive Rebounds Per Minute

Versus FDU: 0.17 Defensive Rebounds Per Minute.

It's a start. I'm looking for anything over 0.15 from Kimmeh here, and he got that. He didn't pull down any offensive rebounds, but that's alright -- offensive boards aren't the major problem.

Justin Safford: Rebounds Per Minute

Versus FDU: 0.17 Rebounds Per Minute.

Eh. Not impressed, but it's also at least a slight improvement.

Keith Ramsey: Free Throws Per Field Goal Attempt

Versus FDU: 0.40 FT/FGA.

I want to see 0.40 minimum from Ramsey, so I guess this is a win.

Laurence Bowers: Shots Per Minute

Versus FDU: 0.44 ShPM

Yes! I want to see anything over 0.35 from Bowers, so this is clearly a win. Again, right now he only shoots on fast breaks and when left wide open. He's not much of a penetrator or anything, and it's pretty likely that his percentages will fall if/when he starts to take more shots, but Saturday he was dominant. As was everybody else, I guess.

Marcus Denmon: Free Throws Per Field Goal Attempt

Versus FDU: 0.00 FT/FGA.

Six of Marcus' seven shots were 3-pointers, and since he made three of them, that's not too bad. But he was pretty much a perimeter player only on Saturday, and I still want to see more driving from him.

Mike Dixon: Adjusted Game Score Per Minute

Versus FDU: 0.49 AdjGS/Min.

Miguel Paul had a pretty decent game on Saturday, but he was still outpaced by Dixon, whom I am liking more and more. He shot efficiently (10 points in 7 shots, 2-for-3 from 3-point land) but didn't shoot too much for a point guard (7 shots in 20 minutes), plus he grabbed three defensive rebounds and managed five assists in 20 minutes. Lovely.

Miguel Paul: Team Possessions Per Game

Versus FDU: 74 possessions.

I'm still tinkering to come up with an individual "possessions accounted for" measure, but for now the pace was super-fast, and that's what Mizzou wants. I still like Paul in an "8-10 minutes per game, gun the accelerator" kind of role.

Steve Moore: Shots Per Minute

Versus FDU: 0.19 ShPM.

Eh. Stevie had three blocks and two steals, which was quite nice, but he still only took three shots in 16 minutes, and perhaps more worrisome, he grabbed only two rebounds, and committed two turnovers and three fouls, meaning his positives were still pretty much canceled out. I'm curious how his playing time works out as the year progresses, as the two bigs behind him looked a lot better, albeit against a few more of the FDU scrubs.

Tyler Stone and John Underwood: Minutes

Versus FDU: 19 Minutes.

The Bad: Stone and Underwood combined for just 3-for-7 shooting, which isn't very good at all for post players. Plus, Underwood committed three fouls in just 10 minutes.

The Good: Stone went 3-for-4 and grabbed four boards in 9 minutes, while Underwood pulled down seven rebounds. I do wonder if either or both of them could be ready to play a role in Miguel Paul's late-half, "gun the accelerator" team. Not sure which one, however -- they both have strengths and weaknesses.

Jarrett Sutton: Wins

Versus FDU: 1 win.

Sutton played, and Mizzou won. Funny how that works out.

Three Keys Revisited

From Friday's preview.

Show Up

Mizzou did.

Meet the Challenges

A majority of the players did, which is nice.

Block Out

Mizzou eventually did.

Summary

Nobody got hurt, everybody played and contributed something, Mike Anderson had a nice 50th birthday...in all, I guess that's a pretty good Saturday night. The only way this game would have been memorable at all was if they managed to lose or play FDU far too tight, but it didn't happen, so we'll forget all about this game a few weeks from now.

Study Hall: Mizzou vs Oral Roberts

Bill C. — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 16:00:18 -0000

Photo via The Trib's Parker Eshelman

Two inarguable facts:

This team is not doing as well as last year's, and the Big 12 is a better conference overall.
Every goal for this season is still on the table.

In other words, a) there is still time to make plenty out of this season, and b) they better get to crackin' on that. Mizzou has seven remaining non-conference games -- five cupcakes (and no matter how down you might be on the team right now, you simply cannot think they will lose at home to Fairleigh Dickinson, UA-Pine Bluff, Austin Peay, UMKC, or Savannah State; it's not going to happen), one good opponent (Illinois), and one competent opponent (Georgia). As long as the home magic continues, they will lose only to Illinois, and they will enter conference play at 11-4 (or maybe 10-5) without improving much at all. But if they want to perform well in conference and make the NCAA Tournament, the improvement process has to start now. So at the end of this post, we'll talk about what we need to see from each player between now and the end of the Savannah State game on January 6.

But for now, we must go through last night's wreckage.

Oral Roberts 60, Missouri 59

NCAA Basketball Stats

	Mizzou	ORU
Points Per Minute	1.48	1.50
Points Per Possession (PPP)	0.97	0.98
Points Per Shot (PPS)	0.91	1.13
2-PT FG%	40.8%	53.8%
3-PT FG%	37.5%	21.4%
FT%	33.3%	75.0%
True Shooting %	44.5%	51.5%

	Mizzou	ORU
Assists	11	11
Steals	10	8
Turnovers	11	18
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	1.91	1.06

	Mizzou	ORU
Expected Offensive Rebounds	14	11
Offensive Rebounds	16	14
Difference	+2	+3

Four Factors

One popular piece of basketball data used throughout the blogosphere at this point is the concept of The Four Factors of Basketball Success: Shooting, Turnovers, Rebounding, and Free Throws. Rarely is this concept more clearly illustrated than in last night's game.

NCAA Basketball Stats

Turnovers aside, Mizzou shot worse, rebounded worse, and both got to the free throw line worse and shot free throws worse. I mean, you almost can't blame Marcus Denmon and Zaire Taylor for missing their free throws at the end -- there was probably rust involved! (Okay, you can still blame them for missing the freebies ... was just trying to emphasize a point.)

In all, the results of two of these four factors are pretty much assured from the start of the game -- turnovers will go in Mizzou's favor and rebounds will go in the opponent's favor. That leaves the game up to shooting and free throws ... and Mizzou is, to say the least, a work in progress in that regard.

Player stats after the jump.

Player Stats

NCAA Basketball Stats

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
Marcus Denmon	17.9	0.94	19 Min, 17 Pts (6-for-11 FG, 4-for-6 3PT), 3 Reb, 3 Stl
Keith Ramsey	12.8	0.44	29 Min, 4 Pts (2-for-5 FG), 9 Reb (6 Off), 3 Stl, 2 Ast
J.T. Tiller	8.5	0.29	29 MIn, 13 Pts (6-for-14 FG, 1-for-5 3PT), 2 Reb, 2 Ast
Laurence Bowers	7.8	0.46	17 Min, 6 Pts (3-for-7 FG), 4 Reb (3 Off), 2 Stl, 2 Blk
Justin Safford	7.3	0.27	27 Min, 10 Pts (5-for-10 FG), 2 Reb
Kim English	3.0	0.12	25 Min, 7 Pts (3-for-8 FG, 1-for-3 3PT)
Michael Dixon	2.6	0.24	11 Min, 2 Pts (1-for-4 FG), 3 Reb, 2 Ast
Steve Moore	0.0	0.00	6 Min, 0 Pts
Miguel Paul	-0.1	-0.03	5 Min, 0 Pts (0-for-1 FG)
Zaire Taylor	-3.0	-0.09	32 Min, 0 Pts (0-for-5 FG), 3 Reb, 2 Ast, 2 Blk

I want to rail on Zaire Taylor here -- he picked a really bad time to have the worst offensive game of his Mizzou career. Even with two blocks, he was worth -3 points last night; if he'd been worth just zero, Mizzou would have won. But he has been Mizzou's leader against "real" opponents this season, so this game was a bit of an aberration. Maybe he just really hates Tulsa or something.
Speaking of Taylor, even though he had a bad game, I think last night further emphasized a point we've been making all season: this team lacks a "natural" scorer. We've got two guys with potential in English and Denmon, but they're still growing into the role. The two most offensively skilled players (to me) are Taylor and Bowers ... and they combined for just 12 shots in 49 combined minutes (0.24 per minute). Kareem Rush types average about 0.50 shots per minute, while the DeMarre Carroll types average around 0.35-0.40.

Here are the Shots Per Minute stats for this team against "real" opponents (described below):

Kim English: 0.49
Michael Dixon: 0.44
Marcus Denmon: 0.38
J.T. Tiller: 0.36
Justin Safford: 0.33
Laurence Bowers: 0.31
Zaire Taylor: 0.22
Keith Ramsey: 0.11
Steve Moore: 0.11
Miguel Paul: 0.09

That distribution is all wrong to me. I don't even blame the guys at the top of the list -- when English is hot, he needs the ball; meanwhile, Dixon is playing the role of "catalyst," and while I would have a problem if his minutes doubled and he still shot that much, I have no problem with his role. Really, this team is leaning too much on J.T. Tiller and Justin Safford offensively, and that has to stop. ORU did a lovely job last night of making those two guys shoot, but better offensive flow will open up more shots for the guys who should be shooting (again, to me that's Taylor and Bowers). Of course, that also requires a change in those two players' mindsets, I think, and I'll get to that below.
Man oh man, if only Keith Ramsey had more offensive skill. He's solid on defense and good on the offensive glass, but I just get frightened anytime the ball's in his hands. He would be a perfect final piece of a good team, but on a team that needs offense (and more defensive rebounding), his skills are not maximized nearly as much.

Three Keys Revisited

From yesterday's preview. I was excited when I saw this post from Kimmeh on Twitter yesterday afternoon. Made me feel I had nailed the game's "keys" (that, or the team reads Rock M before heading to the gym).

Headed to the Arena Missouri at Oral Roberts. Keys: Tempo, REBOUNDING, Take care of the rock, make free throws and ATTACK the basket

Unfortunately, after seeing the game last night, I feel I nailed them a bit too much. And while I feel good about also suggesting that if ORU beat Mizzou, it would be because of Dominique Morrison, I still preferred to be wrong on that one.

Tempo

Here is potentially the most disturbing stat from last night's game: the game was played at a tempo of 61 possessions. Oral Roberts came in playing in the upper 60's, and as I've mentioned plenty of times before, Mizzou likes the game in the 70s or higher. With a team filled with mostly underclassmen, ORU was successfully able to turn this into a halfcourt, plodding game, and because of that, they were able to get away with using only seven scholarship players without wearing down. That should never happen. This illustrates very clearly the fact that Mizzou is not nearly as able to force their style upon opponents right now, and that simply has to change. We'll get into how below.

Rebounds

Actually, this wasn't as bad as I thought, not because of ORU's offensive rebounding (too high), but because Mizzou's offensive rebounding (thank you, Ramsey and Bowers) almost balanced it out. In terms of expected rebounds, Mizzou was only -1 for the game, and since ORU has solid size, that's not terrible. Really, this game came down a lot more to shooting and tempo than rebounding, which is different than what my eyes were telling me at times last night.

Laurence Bowers

SHOOT MORE, LAURENCE. But we'll get into that later.

Mizzou vs "Real" Opponents

Yesterday I debated whether or not to call ORU a "real" opponent or not. I was leaning toward counting them simply because it was a road game. And then they beat us ... which means they were real enough, I guess.

I figure these numbers will make the most sense by comparing them to last year's numbers from around the same time of the season. When Mizzou played Illinois last year, it was their fourth game against a "real" opponent. Therefore, we'll compare Mizzou's current stats to how things looked last year after games against Xavier, USC, Cal, and Illinois. The "real" schedule was of higher quality last year than it has been this year (Old Dominion, Xavier, Vandy, Oregon, ORU), so keep that in mind; plus, the small sample sizes here might not paint a truly accurate picture. But still, a comparison might be able to tell us something.

	2009-10		2008-09
	Mizzou	Opp.	Mizzou	Opp.
Points Per Minute	1.83	1.69	1.91	1.80
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.06	0.98	1.09	1.02
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.22	1.24	1.22	1.36
2-PT FG%	44.8%	46.0%	52.6%	46.7%
3-PT FG%	38.5%	29.7%	25.0%	43.2%
FT%	72.3%	77.6%	65.5%	63.9%
True Shooting %	53.3%	52.3%	N/A	N/A

	Mizzou	Opp.	Mizzou	Opp.
Assists/Gm	14.6	11.2	17.8	14.0
Steals/Gm	9.6	6.8	12.0	5.0
Turnovers/Gm	13.0	19.8	12.0	19.5
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	1.86	0.91	2.48	0.97

	Mizzou	Opp.	Mizzou	Opp.
Expected Offensive Rebounds	65	61	53	48
Offensive Rebounds	60	70	55	55
Difference	-5	+9	+2	+7

Taking into account weaker competition, it appears that Mizzou's defense is actually better, and their offense is worse. What I find interesting is the Points Per Possession figure: Mizzou was +0.07 at this point last year and is +0.08 this year. That suggests two things to me:

1) Mizzou isn't as far away from being a good team as we may think. The competition is worse, so you figure a +0.08 this year would have been about a +0.05 or +0.06 with last year's slate, but that's still not too far off. Yes, this is skewed by the Oregon win, but last year's numbers were skewed by the California win, so that more or less balances out. Mizzou isn't as good as last year, but I would suggest they still have time to do so.

2) Tempo is even more important than we might think. At 60 possessions per game, a +0.06 per possession advantage would mean about a 3-4 point victory. At 75 possessions, that's 4-5. We could have used that extra point or two last night. Like a football offense that runs the hurry-up all game to maximize their per-play advantage (think: OU and Mizzou from 2008), Mizzou must do a better job of pushing the tempo. They need all the possessions they can get, and opponents have been far too successful at slowing things down this year...which is odd, considering Mizzou's defense has been at least a hair better.
This team is much worse at 2-pointers, but better at 3's. Here are the 2-point percentages for Mizzou's forwards, once against against "real" teams only:

Justin Safford: 50.0% (14-for-28)
Keith Ramsey: 56.3% (9-for-16)
Laurence Bowers: 50.0% (15-for-30)
Steve Moore: 0.0% (0-for-2)

50.0% across the board. Now here are the 2-point %'s from last year's forwards (albeit against both "real" and "not real" teams):

DeMarre Carroll: 57.9%
Leo Lyons: 49.9%
Keith Ramsey: 67.5%
Justin Safford: 51.4%
Laurence Bowers: 58.7%

This shows us two things: 1) we miss DeMarre, and 2) we're not creating nearly as many easy opportunities, most likely because we're not pushing the pace as much.
One underrated explanation for our struggles: we're turning the ball over more. Not a lot more, but the kind of turnovers are more costly. Mizzou is averaging just one more turnover per game against "real" teams, but opponents are creating almost two more steals. Steals are worse than other turnovers because they are infinitely more likely to lead to easy baskets, so Mizzou is giving up basically two more possessions' worth of easy baskets each game; their opponents' FG%'s are still lower than last year, but they might be a lot lower if not for the turnovers.

The biggest increase in turnovers per minute in the backcourt have come from the following players: J.T. Tiller (from 0.08 TOPM last year to 0.10 this year), Miguel Paul (0.08 to 0.12) and Marcus Denmon (0.06 to 0.08). Zaire Taylor has held steady at 0.04 and Mike Dixon has managed a respectable (for a freshman point) 0.06. Laurence Bowers has also gone from 0.05 to 0.08, which hasn't helped matters. Tiller will probably get more under control as the season wears on, but I worry about Paul. He is by far Mizzou's best assists man (0.21 per minute), but if he can't be trusted to handle the ball without turning it over ... well, we don't keep him in there for his jumper.
Here's the most baffling finding from the above table: Mizzou really isn't much worse in terms of defensive rebounding. Again, we haven't faced as many good offensive teams, so those numbers are certainly worse than last year's, but not that much worse. Now, that doesn't change the fact that Mizzou isn't doing very well on the defensive glass. On a per-minute basis, Marcus Denmon is grabbing as many defensive rebounds per minute as Laurence Bowers (0.11) and almost as many as Keith Ramsey (0.13). Steve Moore leads the team at 0.14, but he has been literally no threat whatsoever on offense (doesn't take any shots, doesn't grab any offensive rebounds), but I guess if he can provide some decent block-outs, he'll still be worth some minutes. But he really needs to start offering something else with his game. Anything at all.

(One other area for improvement: last year, Matt Lawrence averaged 0.08 defensive rebounds per minute. This year, Kim English is averaging only 0.05. Hit the boards, Kimmeh.)

Where Mizzou has fallen off most, strangely enough, is on the offensive side of the ball, where even though Keith Ramsey and Laurence Bowers have done well on the offensive glass (0.10 and 0.16 offensive rebounds per minute, respectively), Mizzou has fallen off. The main culprit: Justin Safford (0.05). And, of course, Steve Moore (0.00).

And by the way, this whole rebound conversation once again points out how weird/unique Laurence Bowers is as a player. He's averaging almost 50% more offensive rebounds per minute (0.16) than defensive (0.11). You figure it out, because I can't.

Player Stats

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
Zaire Taylor	12.1	0.39	31.2 MPG, 9.2 PPG, 3.2 RPG, 3.2 APG, 2.8 SPG
Laurence Bowers	11.2	0.56	20.0 MPG, 7.8 PPG, 5.4 RPG, 1.4 BPG, 1.2 APG, 1.0 SPG
Marcus Denmon	9.2	0.49	18.6 MPG, 10.4 PPG, 2.6 RPG
Kim English	9.2	0.38	24.0 MPG, 13.2 PPG, 2.4 RPG, 1.2 SPG
Keith Ramsey	9.2	0.32	28.6 MPG, 4.6 PPG, 6.4 RPG, 1.6 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 1.2 APG
J.T. Tiller	8.7	0.33	26.4 MPG, 11.2 PPG, 3.4 APG, 2.2 RPG, 2.6 TOPG
Justin Safford	6.8	0.33	20.8 MPG, 8.2 PPG, 2.8 RPG
Michael Dixon	4.9	0.34	14.4 MPG, 6.8 PPG, 1.4 APG
Tyler Stone	1.6	1.06	1.5 MPG, 1 PPG
Miguel Paul	-0.1	-0.02	8.5 MPG, 0.5 PPG, 1.8 APG
Steve Moore	-0.3	-0.04	7.4 MPG, 0.0 PPG, 1.0 RPG
John Underwood	1 gm		2 Pts
Jarrett Sutton	1 gm		3 Pts

Plenty of blame to go around from last night, but I do think the ORU game pointed out one thing in particular: this team desperately needs Taylor and Bowers to step up. Every night. They both played well below their averages yesterday, and without them Mizzou couldn't even survive against a young, thin team.

Time for a Challenge

So I mentioned at the start of this long post (and seriously, this is much more than I thought I would have to write in discussing a game against Oral Roberts) that this team's goals are still all within reach. And we see from the "last year vs this year" table that the team really might not be far away from being decent. Last year's team was not much better at this point last season (remember, we didn't actually know this team was really good until late-January), and that's an encouraging sign, but if Mizzou really is going to take a step forward like they did last year, I have a challenge for every single player on the team, and I'm going to need to see signs of these things during the cupcake games to know that things might still be alright.

Zaire Taylor: Be. Aggressive. Be, be, aggressive.

For this team to improve, two players need to put the offense on their backs, and Taylor is one of them. This team has quite a few known quantities at this point -- J.T. Tiller is never going to be much of a perimeter threat, and teams know it; ORU intentionally left him open on the perimeter as much as possible, and it paid off. Kim English is a Clarence Gilbert-esque streak shooter who will carry the offense at times, but not nearly all the time. Keith Ramsey is a glue guy, a "putbacks and screens" guy who will never carry an offense. But Zaire Taylor still remains a mystery. He's shooting 50% from 3-point land (again, against "real" teams only), and he's a good penetrator, averaging more free throws per field goal attempt than anybody on the team. That's a good combination. But he's a point guard.

Right now, Tiller is too turnover prone to man the point, which means that Taylor is kind of in a catch-22 situation. If he shoots more, he might kill the offensive flow. However ... when there is no offensive flow, and when the other team has seemingly succeeded at making sure that a majority of the shots are coming from Tiller or Safford, that's when Taylor needs to pretend that there are five seconds left against Kansas and take over. One of the bigger differences between this year and last year is that it seems that mini-slumps last 50% longer because there is too much indecision on offense. Taylor is the key to fixing that, and he must step it up. Stat to watch: shots per minute.

J.T. Tiller: Keep at it.

It goes without saying that a deep foot bruise is about the worst thing possible for a defensive specialist to come back from, and as Dominique Morrison showed yesterday, JT's got a ways to go to get back to becoming the best defensive player in the Big 12. But we know he can do it, and honestly, if he just rounds into shape, then Mizzou a) forces more turnovers and b) gets more easy transition baskets. Stat to watch: steals per minute.

Kim English: Crash the boards.

At this point, Kimmeh is what he is on offense -- a streak shooter and our best long-distance threat. When he's hot, he will carry this team, but when he's not, he really needs to provide more value. That starts on the glass. This team needs some help -- two of its four main "big men" (Safford, Moore) are averaging fewer than 0.15 rebounds per minute, which is simply awful, and Mizzou needs #24 to get involved. It's obviously going to take a team effort to help on the glass, but at any given moment, Kimmeh is the third-tallest Mizzou player on the court, and he needs to help more than he has to date. Stat to watch: defensive rebounds per minute.

Justin Safford: Block out.

We know that Saffy has been a bit hobbled this year, and we know that he is a guard in a forward's body (remember, he's the one who had the extremely late growth spurt, taking him from 6'3 guard to 6'8 power forward), meaning he feels as or more comfortable on the perimeter as in the paint. And that's fine. But this team desperately needs more interior presence, and considering he's playing power forward for 21 minutes a night, then it's gotta be Safford. His game would work great if Mizzou had a big-time interior presence, but ... well, we don't have one. So Saffy's gotta adjust his game. Stat to watch: rebounds per minute, of any kind.

Keith Ramsey: Go up strong.

This could go for any of Mizzou's bigs, really, but I'm choosing Ramsey because he has the most potential. I've mentioned many times how scared I get when he has the ball in his hands. I want him to either shoot it (if he's within five feet of the basket) or pass it, and immediately. The "pass it immediately" bit won't really show up in the box score, but when he goes up to shoot (which is rarely), he has to get mean about it. No fadeaways. Search for contact. He is averaging 0.38 free throw attempts per field goal attempt, which is respectable (Bowers and Safford are averaging 0.19 and 0.15, respectively). But DeMarre Carroll averaged 0.43, and Leo Lyons averaged a whopping (and quite underrated) 0.69. Mizzou is one of the worst teams in the country at drawing fouls, and while that has something to do with how many 3-pointers we take, it also has something to do with bigs drawing fouls. I don't want to say Bowers and Safford are lost causes, but let's just say that I have a lot more hope for Ramsey getting to the line at this stage than them. Stat to watch: free throws per field goal attempt.

Laurence Bowers: More Leo.

I've compared Bowers' game to Leo Lyons' many times, but it's not a perfect comparison. Bowers is better and more active defensively (his blocked 3-pointer yesterday was one of the more sickeningly athletic plays you'll ever see -- not only because he blocked it, but because he came from about ten feet away and blocked it while it was basically still in the guy's hand ... dude's got quite a bit of Hakim Warrick in him), he's a better passer, and I think his jumper has a foot or two more range. And he's already twice the offensive rebounder that Leo was. But Lyons was also infinitely more offensive-minded and better at creating shots, and this team desperately needs that. Both Leo and DeMarre averaged 0.41 shots per minute, and while they were both bigger and more physical than Bowers, Laurence is simply too good a shooter to be averaging fewer shots per minute (0.31) than, among others, Justin Safford. I realize his percentages will likely fall with more shot attempts, but I'll be perfectly blunt: Laurence Bowers' ceiling and this team's ceiling are probably more directly correlated than any other player on this team. We have to figure out how good #21 is, and he has to become more aggressive offensively. Stat to watch: shots per minute.

Marcus Denmon: Become J.T. Tiller.

It's funny -- no matter how dismayed I get talking about this current team, I am not even 1% less optimistic about the program's future. And Denmon is a major reason why. He is almost as good a defender as J.T. Tiller was a sophomore, and he manages to defend well without fouling once a minute. He has the potential to be a big-time stopper one day, maybe as soon as next season. And his offensive game is already more advanced than Tiller's. He's a better shooter, at least, and I think he's got potential as a passer. And he's tough as nails, just like J.T. But I think what we're missing most from Denmon is penetration. Sure, he had a killer missed free throw yesterday, but he's still one of the better FT shooters on the team, and he simply doesn't get to the line as much as he could. Nobody on this team does, but like Taylor and Tiller, Denmon is decent with the ball in his hands and big enough to draw contact without breaking into two pieces. As I mentioned above with Ramsey, this team is terrible at getting to the line, and I think Denmon's tough enough to do something about it. Lower your head, risk a charge a couple times a game, dish out some punishment, and get to the freaking line. As opponents start to fear his three-pointer more and more (he's now making 43% of 3's on the season), he'll have an even better opportunity to pump-fake and drive. Do it. Stat to watch: free throws per field goal attempt.

Mike Dixon: Keep learning.

Needless to say, I have a lot more hope in Mike Dixon's ceiling than I do in Miguel Paul's, and while he's already stolen quite a few of Paul's minutes (in "real" games, he's played 72 minutes to Paul's 34), his goal needs to be to just keep improving and potentially stealing more of those minutes. Shoot better, drive better, pass better, etc. The future for Mizzou is extremely bright with Dixon potentially starting in the backcourt with Denmon next year, and the faster Dixon learns this year, the better this team becomes. Stat to watch: Adjusted Game Score per minute.

Miguel Paul: You know what? Move faster.

Paul has not controlled the ball well enough this year, but the more I think about it, the less I care. I see Paul's role on this team as simply the late-first-half punisher. Remember how Mike Anderson would send in the scrubs to run the opponent ragged over the last five minutes of the first half? Remember how good Paul sometimes was in that situation? His role will be to run the point in that period of time and simply go as fast as he can, as much as he can. Even if the other team is more successful this year at slowing the tempo down, it will still be hard to maintain that after 15-16 minutes of pressure, and I officially consider it Paul's job to speed up the tempo at the end of the first half. Right now, Mizzou is only averaging 69 possessions per game against "real" opponents. Last year, it was 72. Miguel Paul, your goal is to single-handedly bring that to at least 70. Stat to watch: team possessions per game.

Steve Moore: Dunk. Once a game.

I mentioned in my last Study Hall that I'm not sure Steve Moore brings anything to the table other than simply being big. As mentioned above, he's one of the better defensive rebounders on the team, and clearly Mizzou needs that. But he is a black hole on offense, and while I think he's overall pretty limited, I've decided that his goal should be one dunk attempt per game. Even if he misses it horribly, or even if he absolutely bowls over an entire team, committing three charges at once, I want this guy flying at the rim on offense at least once a game. He's our only true "big guy," and if he can't soften up the opponent for even a minute or two at a time, he doesn't need to be on the court. Stat to watch: shots per minute (since I don't have a "dunk attempts per minute" stat).

Tyler Stone and John Underwood: Impress in practice. And quickly.

Guys, there is playing time to be had if you get up to speed. Even if it is just 4-5 minutes per game on Miguel Paul's "end of first half run-and-gun" team, there are minutes to be earned if you continue to improve. I still have high hopes for Stone, but I think Underwood in particular could be useful as soon as conference play. He already looks like he has gained a bit of weight (at least a couple of pounds, right? I'm not making this up, right?), and even if he hasn't, if he can block out better than Safford or Bowers (or Moore), then there is a place for him on the court. This team has decent depth, but it could be great depth if one of these guys improves enough to find his way on the court in something other than a mop-up role. Do what you've got to do to get the coach's attention, guys, and do it as quickly as possible. We need help down low. Stat to watch: uhh, minutes per game?

Jarrett Sutton: Play more.

For some reason, Mizzou almost always wins when you play...haven't quite figured that out. (Okay, yes I have.) Stat to watch: wins? Whatever.

In all, this team still has plenty to believe in, and if they make a similar December-to-January leap as they did last year, look out. But right now their weaknesses are very obvious (and improvable). Let's see what they do for the rest of non-conference play, not only against Illinois and Georgia, but against the cupcakes too. We know better play is possible, but they need to start improving right this instant.

Study Hall: Mizzou vs Oregon

Bill C. — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 15:00:17 -0000

More photos » by L.G. Patterson - AP

19 days ago: Oregon's E.J. Singler, left, LeKendric Longmire (24) and Michael Dunigan (33) battle Missouri's Zaire Taylor, right, and Keith Ramsey, center, for a rebound during the first half of an NCAA college basketball game Saturday, Dec. 5, 2009, in Columbia, Mo. (AP Photo/L.G. Patterson)

Browse more photos »

Well, THAT was fun...

Mizzou 106, Oregon 69

NCAA Basketball Stats

	Mizzou	Ducks
Points Per Minute	2.65	1.73
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.35	0.88
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.66	0.96
2-PT FG%	65.7%	33.3%
3-PT FG%	48.3%	22.2%
FT%	72.0%	77.8%
True Shooting %	70.7%	41.1%

	Mizzou	Ducks
Assists	28	5
Steals	8	8
Turnovers	15	20
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	2.40	0.65

	Mizzou	Ducks
Expected Offensive Rebounds	10	19
Offensive Rebounds	9	24
Difference	-1	+5

Home games are fun.

I felt a blowout coming, but I chickened out and only predicted a 19-point win. I should have known better. I thought Oregon could win the rebounding battle, and if they were making their 3's, they might stay in the game a while. Well, they did rebound well, but they were terrible from behind the arc, and after dilly-dallying for a few minutes, Mizzou stomped on the throat, which is always fun to watch.

Three-pointers.

So...are three-pointers a strength for this team now? I'm so confused.

A near-perfect first half.

First half BCI: Mizzou 2.57, Oregon 0.42
First half FG%: Mizzou 60.0%, Oregon 24.2%
First half Points: Oregon 24, Kim English & Marcus Denmon 23

Eh?

Mizzou is a Top 20 team in Block %, but they are average at best in terms of rebounds. I guess Mizzou's good at jumping high but bad at positioning. Now, Oregon really is a strong rebounding team, and Mizzou improved their performance on the boards as compared to the Vandy game, but it's still clearly the single biggest issue this team faces moving forward.

Player stats after the jump.

Player Stats

NCAA Basketball Stats

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
Laurence Bowers	22.2	1.06	21 Min, 14 Pts (5-for-6 FG), 7 Reb, 5 Ast, 2 Stl
Zaire Taylor	20.2	0.88	23 Min, 16 Pts (6-for-10 FG, 4-for-5 3PT), 5 Reb, 4 Ast, 3 Stl
Marcus Denmon	13.9	0.63	22 Min, 17 Pts (6-for-13 FG, 4-for-10 3PT), 5 Reb
Kim English	11.2	0.53	21 Min, 14 Pts (6-for-12 FG, 2-for-5 3PT), 3 Ast
Justin Safford	9.9	0.50	20 Min, 9 Pts (3-for-4 FG, 2-for-2 3PT), 5 Reb, 2 Ast
Michael Dixon	9.3	0.46	20 Min, 10 Pts (3-for-7 FG), 3 Reb, 3 Ast
Keith Ramsey	4.9	0.20	24 Min, 7 Pts (2-for-3 FG), 4 Reb, 2 Ast, 3 TO
J.T. Tiller	4.7	0.36	13 Min, 10 Pts (3-for-4 FG), 3 TO
Jarrett Sutton	3.0	1.51	2 MIn, 3 Pts (1-for-1 FG, as always)
Tyler Stone	2.7	0.89	3 Min, 2 Pts (1-for-1 FG)
Miguel Paul	2.2	0.16	14 Min, 2 Pts (1-for-1 FG), 6 Ast, 4 TO
John Underwood	1.3	0.33	4 Min, 2 Pts (0-for-1 FG)
Steve Moore	0.9	0.07	13 Min, 0 Pts

Laurence Bowers: box score filler. When he stays out of foul trouble (i.e. when Mizzou plays teams without a talented, old-school 250-pounder at center), anyway. He's shooting 64% for the season, grabbing almost three offensive rebounds (six overall) per game, blocks almost two shots per game, has a 2-to-1 assist-to-turnover ratio (and BCI of 3.83)...I'm not sure I've ever seen a player like him. We just need to make sure he stays on the court.
By the way, Zaire Taylor is now shooting 59% from 3-point land. Just thought I'd mention that. As I mentioned before, he's never going to be a shoot-first guy, and we turned him into that, his percentages go down, but he has become a tremendously efficient shooter. We talk about how Mizzou needs one more pure scorer, but I'm curious how the offense develops with Bowers and Taylor both shaping up to be astoundingly efficient. Our "one more scorer" is probably one of these two, and I'm not sure what to think about that.
Then again, maybe that "one more scorer" is Marcus Denmon? As Long Duk Dong would say, I so confuse. When Mizzou looks good, they look so good that they mess with perspective.
So here's a question: how good is Steve Moore? He's got size that no other Mizzou player has, and that alone makes him more valuable than his stats suggest. He probably does good things for the overall team defense ... but how many good things? Because from a box score perspective, he's a blank slate. While we still have opportunities, I'd love to get Stone and/or Underwood (particularly Underwood) some PT with the first stringers just to see what happens, but I guess that's not going to happen.

Mizzou vs "Real" Opponents*

* "Real" opponents are BCS conference teams and solid mid-majors. So far, Mizzou's "real" opponents have been, according to me: Old Dominion, Richmond, Vanderbilt, and Oregon.

	Mizzou	Opp
Points Per Minute	1.92	1.74
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.08	0.98
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.31	1.27
2-PT FG%	46.1%	44.0%
3-PT FG%	38.8%	31.7%
FT%	73.5%	77.9%
True Shooting %	55.4%	52.5%

	Mizzou	Opp
Assists/Gm	15.5	11.3
Steals/Gm	9.5	6.5
Turnovers/Gm	13.5	20.3
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	1.85	0.88

	Mizzou	Opp
Expected Offensive Rebounds	51	50
Offensive Rebounds	44	56
Difference	-7	+6

Looking at just these four games, Mizzou is still looking alright from an offensive standpoint. The assists are nice (the Oregon game just balanced out the Vandy game in the end), and they're shooting alright. Really, the major question mark right now is in the rebounds department. Only Laurence Bowers (0.28) is averaging more than 0.20 rebounds per minute. For reference, DeMarre Carroll and Leo Lyons both averaged 0.26 last year. Keith Ramsey (0.20), Justin Safford (0.16) and Steve Moore (0.16) all need to pick up their games.

Player Stats

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
Zaire Taylor	15.8	0.51	31.0 MPG, 11.5 PPG (1.53 Pts Per Shot), 3.5 APG, 3.3 RPG, 3.5 SPG
Laurence Bowers	12.1	0.58	20.8 MPG, 8.3 PPG (1.38 PPS), 5.8 RPG, 1.5 APG, 1.3 BPG
Kim English	10.6	0.45	23.8 MPG, 14.8 PPG (1.16 PPS), 2.8 RPG, 1.3 SPG
J.T. Tiller	8.8	0.34	25.8 MPG, 10.8 PPG (1.30 PPS), 3.8 APG, 2.3 RPG, 2.8 TOPG
Keith Ramsey	8.3	0.29	28.5 MPG, 4.8 PPG (1.73 PPS), 5.8 RPG, 1.5 BPG, 1.3 SPG
Marcus Denmon	7.2	0.39	18.5 MPG, 8.8 PPG (1.46 PPS), 2.5 RPG
Justin Safford	6.7	0.35	19.3 MPG, 7.8 PPG (1.29 PPS), 3.0 RPG
Mike Dixon	5.4	0.36	15.3 MPG, 8.0 PPG (1.14 PPS), 1.5 APG
Jarrett Sutton	3.5	1.77	2.0 MPG
Tyler Stone	1.6	1.05	1.5 MPG
John Underwood	1.6	0.39	4.0 MPG, 2.0 PPG
Miguel Paul	-0.1	-0.01	9.7 MPG, 0.7 PPG, 2.0 APG
Steve Moore	-0.3	-0.04	7.8 MPG, 0.0 PPG, 1.3 RPG

More reference points: DeMarre Carroll averaged 17.3/game last year, and Leo Lyons 13.5. I've compared Bowers to Lyons numerous times, and the fact that Lyons '08-09 and Bowers '09-10 averaged/are averaging the same per-minute total (0.58) makes me feel better about that comparison. The only question for now is, who's picking up the slack for Carroll's absence? Right now the answer is, strangely enough, Zaire Taylor.

Summary

One batch of great play can make you forget how frustrated you were earlier in the week. Oregon's not very good beyond the rebounding thing, but Mizzou played wonderfully. If they play that well on Wednesday, they will blow a beyond-banged-up Oral Roberts team off the court.

Study Hall: Mizzou vs UT-Pan American

Bill C. — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:00:24 -0000

by L.G. Patterson - AP

about 1 month ago: Texas-Pan American's Nick Weiermiller, center, passes the ball as he drives past Missouri's Michael Dixon Jr., top, Zaire Taylor, left, and Keith Ramsey during the second half of the first round of a South Padre Island Invitational NCAA college basketball game Sunday, Nov. 22, 2009, in Columbia, Mo. Missouri won the game 100-44. (AP Photo/L.G. Patterson)

View full size photo »

In-depth statistical analysis suggests that Mizzou will win most of the games they play when they pull off a 44-2 first-half run. I know, it's ballsy to say that, but it's statistically true.

NCAA Basketball Stats

Mizzou 100, UT-Pan American 44

	Mizzou	UTPA
Points Per Minute	2.50	1.10
Points Per Possession (PPP)	1.33	0.59
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.43	0.85
2-PT FG%	57.4%	26.9%
3-PT FG%	56.5%	30.8%
FT%	58.3%	42.9%
True Shooting %	66.4%	37.8%

	Mizzou	UTPA
Assists	28	10
Steals	17	5
Turnovers	10	22
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	4.50	0.68

	Mizzou	UTPA
Expected Offensive Rebounds	11	14
Offensive Rebounds	9	5
Difference	-2	-9

Reactions:

This was one of those games that help the stats stay steady after a bad game. I mean, 56.5% from 3-point range? 4.50 to 0.68 in BCI? +7 Expected Rebound Margin? Yeah, fun stuff.
Not going to say much about this one, but I guess one area for improvement was offensive rebounding, where Mizzou responded to me saying they could be a very good offensive rebounding team by pulling down only nine. Not that it mattered, but hey, we're always looking for areas of improvement, right?
66.4% True Shooting %. Nice.

Player stats after the jump.

NCAA Basketball Stats

Player Stats

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
Kim English	23.6	1.03	23 Min, 25 Pts (9-for-12 FG, 5-for-6 3pt FG), 3 Ast, 3 Stl
Zaire Taylor	16.0	0.64	25 Min, 13 Pts (6-for-8), 3 Reb, 5 Ast, 3 Stl
Laurence Bowers	11.5	0.55	21 Min, 14 Pts (7-for-10), 5 Reb, 2 Ast
Keith Ramsey	9.0	0.45	20 Min, 4 Pts (2-for-3), 5 Reb, 5 Ast, 4 Stl, 2 Blk, 3 TO
Marcus Denmon	8.5	0.45	19 Min, 10 Pts (3-for-5), 3 Reb, 2 Stl
Michael Dixon	8.5	0.37	23 Min, 9 Pts (4-for-7), 7 Ast
Miguel Paul	6.0	0.28	21 Min, 5 Pts (2-for-7), 3 Reb, 6 Ast
Justin Safford	4.5	0.50	9 Min, 7 Pts (2-for-4), 5 Reb
John Underwood	4.0	0.29	14 Min, 1 Pt (0-for-2), 8 Reb, 2 Stl
Jarrett Sutton	3.7	0.74	5 Min, 6 Pts (2-for-4)
Steve Moore	2.0	0.15	13 Min, 4 Pts (2-for-5), 3 Reb
Tyler Stone	1.5	0.21

Welcome to 2009-10, Kimmeh! We've been wringing our hands a smidge about #24, and now he's averaging 15.5 PPG. Good times with small sample sizes. The thing about Kim English is, even when his shot is horribly cold, it still looks pretty coming out of his hands. I always think his shot is going in, and yesterday it did in droves.
Laurence Bowers with a simply effortless 14-5-2 while playing extremely passive basketball in the second half. I've always been in the front car of the Bowers Bandwagon, and even I'm starting to think he may be better than I thought.
Michael Dixon was forcing the issue far too much in the opening minutes, but once he relaxed, he was dominant. And even though we agree that Miguel Paul should probably never shoot, I still can't say enough about how effective our "line change" late in the first half could be when those two come in to run a tiring opponent off the court.
I think it's pretty clear that Marcus Denmon will be taking over J.T. Tiller's "lockdown defender" role next year when Tiller's gone. Really active, accurate hands on defense.
I'm torn about Steve Moore right now. There were 2-3 plays where he looked outstanding--his block and dive into the stands was lovely, and he showed a couple of really nice post moves. But the other 11-12 minutes he was into the game, he just sort of blended into the scenery. He's got about 50 pounds on John Underwood, and I'm sure he'll be the #4 big man after Ramsey-Safford-Bowers for most of this season, but I wonder how long he can fend off Underwood next year, when #35 puts on some weight. And this says nothing of the fact that we're losing one guy (Ramsey) and adding two (Kadeem Green, Tony Mitchell) next season.
From my limited exposure to Tyler Stone, I've got to say that I still really like his presence near the rim, but his range is quite small right now. Needs to work on that jumper.

Keys to the Game Revisited

From Yesterday's preview.

3-Point Shooting. Mizzou: 13-for-23 (56.5%) from 3-point range. UTPA: 8-for-26 (30.8%), 3-for-15 in the first half. The law of averages evened out as they always do, and suddenly Mizzou's overall shooting percentages don't look too bad.
Turnovers. I mentioned that if UTPA had any chance of hanging around, it was because of turnovers. To their credit, they only committed 22 turnovers, which really wasn't too bad. But they forced only 10. They needed about 25 more.
Justin Safford. Safford probably needs to put together some solid performances if he wants to keep his spot in the starting lineup. He responded to the adversity by ... traveling on the game's first possession and, two minutes later, committing another turnover that led to a breakaway dunk. I like Saffy, but he's pretty clearly the #3 big man right now. Again, it doesn't really matter who starts, it matters who plays the most minutes, but still ... Saffy's going to need to put together some good minutes in San Padre.

Summary

What can you say? It's never not fun watching a game like this. It was almost uncomfortable to watch after a while, as Mizzou really was able to do whatever it wanted late in the first half, but with the dunks, smiles, 3's, etc., it was a fun game. Tuesday opponent Chattanooga is not a wonderful team by any means, but they're probably better than the outmanned Broncs, so Mizzou will need to play well again. That said, I'm sure they will.

Study Hall: Mizzou-NW Missouri State

Bill C. — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:00:29 -0000

Guess it was good to get a bit more of a challenge before the season started. NW Missouri State's shooting kept them close for a while in the first half, and Mizzou's overall shooting kept them from winning by 40. Let's take a look. And yes, the "Start Bowers" movement will not stay quiet for very much longer.

Mizzou 83, NW Missouri State 60

Via The Trib's Nick King

	NW MO St.	Mizzou
Points Per Minute	1.50	2.08
Points Per Possession (PPP)	0.69	0.96
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.18	1.17
2-PT FG%	43.2%	42.6%
3-PT FG%	42.9%	23.5%
FT%	58.8%	65.8%
True Shooting %	51.3%	47.3%

	NW MO St.	Mizzou
Assists	10	9
Steals	4	12
Turnovers	32	18
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	0.44	1.17

	NW MO St.	Mizzou
Expected Offensive Rebounds	12	18
Offensive Rebounds	7	16
Difference	-5	-2

First, the good:

NW MO St. did make some early 3's, but there was little to complain about regarding the defense. Northwest did a solid job of breaking the press, but they would continuously make mistakes in the halfcourt. J.T. Tiller wasn't at his best, but that's fine--we know what he can do.
As we'll see below, Michael Dixon once again looked great, as did Laurence Bowers. Plus, as would be expected against lesser competition, Tiller and Zaire Taylor were able to penetrate at will, and they made some tough finishes.
With other teams being challenged considerably in exhibition games, it's nice to see that a stinker for Mizzou is "only" a 23-point win.

Now, the Red Flag Watch.

Shooting, shooting, shooting. At the end of last season, we mentioned that shooting would potentially be the biggest weakness for Mizzou in '09-'10. And not that we want to draw much from exhibition games, but let's just say that through 80 minutes of exhibition play, that has been initially reaffirmed. Mizzou went a combined 7-for-33 from 3-point range against Truman State and Northwest, and while a lot of those misses were from guys for whom much potential exists (Kimmeh went 3-for-10, Marcus Denmon went 1-for-5), it would have been nicely reassuring to see somebody getting hot there. Zaire Taylor went 1-for-1, and I really do like his stroke, but he's made it pretty clear that he's never going to be a steady, long-distance threat, and even if he could be a threat, he's a distributor first.

In all, Mizzou's got a roster full of guys who can penetrate and finish, but if they offer no consistent outside threat, defenses will bunch together inside and force them to shoot...and when Mizzou's cold, they could get really cold.
Rebounding. Northwest had the smallest team Mizzou will ever see, and taking expected rebounds into account, Mizzou only out-rebounded them by three. Ouch. Against a Truman State team that actually had some size, Mizzou was dominant on the boards, so really those two games cancel each other out, but still ... Mizzou allowed too many opportunities on the boards.
18 Turnovers? Really? Again, not a real concern here yet, but J.T. Tiller had four TO's against Northwest, and overall Mizzou had four players averaging at least 0.10 turnovers per minute, which is unacceptably high: Kim English (0.14), Justin Safford (0.12), J.T. Tiller (0.11), and Steve Moore (0.13). Last year, Leo Lyons led (I guess you'd say "led") the Tigers at 0.10 per minute. It's early in the season, and I'm sure they will shore that up, but ... they really need to shore that up.

Player stats after the jump.

Player Stats

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
Laurence Bowers	19.0	0.70	27 Min, 13 Pts, 9 Reb, 3 Blk, 2 TO
Marcus Denmon	14.8	0.70	21 Min, 13 Pts, 5 Reb, 2 TO
J.T. Tiller	11.2	0.51	22 Min, 12 Pts, 5 Ast, 2 Reb, 4 TO
Michael Dixon	9.8	0.75	13 Min, 7 Pts, 3 Reb
Zaire Taylor	8.1	0.32	25 Min, 7 Pts, 4 Reb, 2 TO
Kim English	5.6	0.37	15 Min, 11 Pts, 4 Reb, 2 TO
Keith Ramsey	5.1	0.24	21 Min, 3 Pts, 4 Reb, 2 Stl
Justin Safford	5.0	0.28	18 Min, 8 Pts, 4 Reb, 2 Stl, 3 TO
Miguel Paul	2.8	0.14	20 Min, 5 Pts, 4 Reb, 2 Stl
Steve Moore	1.4	0.13	11 Min, 4 Pts, 2 TO
Jarrett Sutton	-0.2	-0.16	1 Min
Tyler Stone	-1.9	-0.31	6 Min

Must tamp down the "Bowers Must Start" movement...must tamp down the "Bowers Must Start" movement...must tamp down the "Bowers Must Start" movement...
Nice game by Denmon, getting to the line consistently when his outside shot wasn't falling, but again, he won't get away with that against better teams.
Justin Safford really didn't have a game to remember (2-for-6 shooting, 3 turnovers), but his defense still made him a contributor.
Miguel Paul has done nothing to alleviate concerns about his shooting.

Keys to the Game Revisited

From Friday's preview.

Show Up. Mizzou did show up...somewhat. They looked confident and in control, even if they let Northwest hang around a bit too long in the first half. There was never the worry that we were watching a gigantic egg being laid.
Don't Foul. I was reaching for keys in Friday's preview, and predictably this was not much of a concern. Granted, it's nice to see Big 12 refs in mid-season form, calling FIFTY-TWO FOULS in an exhibition game. But only 20 of those were on Mizzou, so I can't say there's much to worry about here. Seriously, though, fifty-two. In an exhibition game.
Tyler Stone. Right after I posted the preview, I read a quote from Mike Anderson saying that the starters were going to get extra playing time to get them ready for Tuesday. Boo to that. John Underwood missed the game due to a death in the family, and Tyler Stone played only six minutes, so ... I whiffed terribly on my "key" player in both exhibition games (Denmon did next to nothing against Truman State). What can I say, I needed the exhibition season too.

Combined Exhibition Stats

	Opp.	Mizzou
Points Per Minute	1.16	2.24
Points Per Possession (PPP)	0.59	1.13
Points Per Shot (PPS)	1.24	1.00
2-PT FG%	37.7%	50.5%
3-PT FG%	28.1%	21.2%
FT%	57.1%	68.7%
True Shooting %	42.9%	51.6%

	Opp.	Mizzou
Assists/Gm	7.5	11.5
Steals/Gm	5.0	16.0
Turnovers/Gm	30.5	15.0
Ball Control Index (BCI) (Assists + Steals) / TO	0.41	1.83

	Opp.	Mizzou
Expected Offensive Rebounds	24	32
Offensive Rebounds	15	40
Difference	-9	+8

Thanks to the Truman game, there was nothing that was going to make these stats look anything less than impressive.

Player	AdjGS*	GmSc/Min	Line
Laurence Bowers	16.9	0.75	22.5 MPG, 13.5 PPG, 10.5 RPG, 2.5 BPG, 1.5 SPG
J.T. Tiller	10.1	0.53	19.0 MPG, 12.5 PPG, 3.0 APG, 2.0 TOPG
Zaire Taylor	9.3	0.41	22.5 MPG, 7.0 PPG, 3.0 RPG, 2.0 SPG
Keith Ramsey	8.6	0.47	1.5 MPG, 6.0 PPG, 4.5 RPG, 2.5 SPG, 1.5 APG
Michael Dixon	8.0	0.53	15.0 MPG, 8.5 PPG, 3.0 RPG, 1.5 SPG
Kim English	8.0	0.46	17.5 MPG, 10.5 PPG, 4.0 RPG, 3.0 APG, 2.0 SPG, 2.5 TOPG
Justin Safford	5.9	0.35	17.0 MPG, 9.0 PPG, 4.0 RPG, 2.0 TOPG
John Underwood	5.8	0.48	12.0 MPG, 4.0 PPG, 5.0 RPG
Marcus Denmon	5.8	0.31	19.0 MPG, 7.5 PPG, 3.5 RPG, 1.5 SPG
Tyler Stone	4.8	0.61	8.0 MPG, 3.5 PPG, 4.0 RPG
Miguel Paul	3.1	0.16	19.0 MPG, 4.0 PPG, 3.0 RPG, 2.5 SPG
Steve Moore	2.9	0.24	12.0 MPG, 3.0 PPG, 3.5 RPG, 1.5 TOPG
Jarrett Sutton	1.7	0.43	4.0 MPG, 2.5 PPG

Must tamp down the "Bowers Must Start" movement...must tamp down the "Bowers Must Start" movement...must tamp down the "Bowers Must Start" movement...

Summary

Thus far, my end-of-season proclamation that Mizzou would be more extreme in 2009-10 -- strengths getting stronger, weaknesses getting weaker -- seems potentially true. Mizzou has the potential to play some insanely good defense, even with the loss of Demarre Carroll. Meanwhile, as strange as it may sound, they may miss Matt Lawrence as much or more than Carroll or Leo Lyons when all is said and done, as shooting could be a major weakness this year.

Or, you know, not. We'll see what English, Denmon, etc., do when the lights are on for real. And we don't have to wait too much longer for those lights to come on.

Mizzou Basketball Preview (Part Three): The Backcourt

RPT — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 13:00:25 -0000

More photos » by Chris Carlson - AP

9 months ago: Missouri's Kim English (24) celebrates his team's win over Memphis in the closing moments of the second half of a men's NCAA college basketball tournament regional semifinal in Glendale, Ariz., Thursday, March 26, 2009. Missouri won 102-91. (AP Photo/Chris Carlson)

Browse more photos »

We interrupt our regularly scheduled football posting to remind you that, yes, in fact, Missouri basketball IS back. As part of our ongoing preview series this week, we now take a look at all of the members on Missouri's roster. Today, UribeAuction and I (RPT) share our thoughts on the backcourt.

Presumptive Starters

Senior J.T. Tiller

(6-3, 200)

Photo: Parker Eshelman / The Trib

2008-09: 8.4 PPG, 3.6 APG, 3.4 RPG, 1.8 SPG

2007-08: 6.8 PPG, 1.8 APG, 2.3 RPG, 0.8 SPG

2006-07: 4.2 PPG, 1.1 APG, 1.3 RPG, 0.7 SPG

UribeAuction: Obviously, any conversation surrounding Tiller will start and end with defense. If Gary Payton was "The Glove," then Tiller is that homemade mitten your grandmother gave you that makes you feel really uncomfortable when it's on you. He'll create points off turnovers and go off for 18+ points a handful of times this year, as usual.

RPT: One year ago, we wondered if he'd learn to harness his own speed and learn to play within himself. That question was answered pretty emphatically on defense and was on its way to being answered offensively during the NCAA Tournament. I wonder a little bit about what to think of Tiller now that he's being counted on offensively, rather than being part of the "just gravy" crowd. We'll see pretty quickly how that repaired wrist holds up. The guy remains an absolute force on defense, though, and should once again be in the conversation for Big 12 Defensive Player of the Year.

Senior Zaire Taylor
(6-4, 189)

Photo: Kyle Spradley / Columbia Missourian

2008-09: 6.7 PPG, 3.4 APG, 3.0 RPG, 1.4 SPG

UribeAuction: Taylor's one of those guys who may not show up on the stat sheet but still has a huge impact on the game. If he only scores five or six points, it doesn't mean he had a bad game-it just means he chose to distribute the ball amongst his teammates instead of taking shots. When he does take shots, though, he can be a good scorer-but he only seems to do that whenever the team needs it.

RPT: Is clutch measurable? (STOP GOOGLING, URIBE AND BILL. I WAS JUST JOKING. PUT AWAY YOUR CALCULATORS AND EXCEL SPREADSHEETS). Zaire was just so freakin' clutch last year that I have to begin to wonder if karma swings around and sack taps Mizzou this season on a last second shot from Taylor. He continues to be one of the more underappreciated defenders in the Big 12, but I really think we'll see the growth in his offensive game continue this year. Last year, it took ribbing from DeMarre Carroll and Matt Lawrence to force him to open up offensively. He did so in the Big 12 Tournament, and I get the impression he's ready to do so for a full season this year.

Sophomore Kim English
(6-6, 200)

Photo: Paul Sakuma / Associated Press

2008-09: 6.5 PPG, 1.1 APG, 1.6 RPG, 0.5 SPG

UribeAuction: When Kimmie's on, he can carry this team with his scoring. But, like any shooter, he's not always going to be feeling it from the outside. CMA might get on his case for taking some poor shots, but for Kimmie, the good hopefully will outweigh the bad. Plus, he's Kimmie. It's next to impossible to dislike the guy, whether he goes 2-10 or 7-10 from the floor.

RPT: Remember when Marcus Denmon was supposed to be Clarence Gilbert? Because I'm definitely getting those vibes from Kimmie now. Like we've discussed, he has a look this year like he's ready to put the ball up from ANYWHERE. I continue to love him spotting up, although I have mild concerns about his ability to blow by defenders on the drive and/or create his own shot.

The Bench

Sophomore Miguel Paul

(6-1, 172)

Photo: Daisuke Nakamura / Columbia Missourian

2008-09: 2.9 PPG, 1.5 APG, 0.9 RPG, 0.6 SPG

UribeAuction: I like what I've seen from Paul in the B&G game and Truman State exhibition. He looks far more confident handling the ball than he did last year and he (so far) hasn't taken as many ill-advised shots. If he can continue to drive to the hoop against real competition, I like Missouri's chances when he comes off the bench for Tiller.

RPT: I'll say this much - he doesn't look lost anymore, and considering how he looked at times last season, that's a huge compliment. He's got J.T. Tiller syndrome: he plays far faster in his mind than his body can physically handle. I know he's starting to get his fair share of love and I'm thrilled to see his development, but if the debate becomes Paul v. Dixon, give me Dixon.

Sophomore Marcus Denmon

(6-3, 185)

2008-09: 6.0 PPG, 1.4 APG, 2.2 RPG, 0.9 SPG

UribeAuction: I'm not sure what to make of Denmon in terms of scoring. I love his defense, but Denmon either can lay an egg offensively or go for double-digts without warning. He's working into that Zaire Taylor role, though-he's not a central part of the offense, but if you need him to score, he can.

RPT: I still feel burnt by Denmon from last year. I drank gallons and gallons of the MD kool-aid after the black and gold game last year, even floating out the possibility that he could lead the team in scoring if things broke right. I realize that he played most of the season hurt, but his struggles seemed just as much mental as physical. I get the feeling that once he has a hot-shooting 18-24 point game at some point, develops confidence and gets that taste of success, he'll REALLY take off. Here's to hoping that happens sooner rather than later, because he could be a dynamite sixth man.

Junior Jarrett Sutton

(6-3, 190)

Photo: Associated Press

2008-09: 1.9 PPG, 0.0 APG, 0.3 RPG, 0.2 SPG

UribeAuction: Even if it's only for a year, good for Sutton for getting a scholarship. It's always fun when he comes into games, because you know his teammates are going to try to get him the ball to get a rise out of the crowd.

RPT: Good for him, indeed. Now the band can stop crying for Sutton every two minutes. I love the "let's get the walk-on a wide open three!" meme as much as everyone else, but I wonder if Sutton will ever be more than that. As for his scholarship, congrats bud, but if both Tony Mitchell AND (by some long shot) Bradley Beal decide they want to be Tigers... Yeah, in that case, we're going to need to trade you this lovely fruit basket for that full ride. I love you Sutton, but, come on.

The Newcomer

Freshman Mike Dixon, Jr.

(6-1, 175)

Photo: Parker Eshelman / The Trib

UribeAuction: Like the Energizer Bunny, Dixon just keeps going and going and going and going. I can't recall him ever slowing down while on the court against Truman State. If CMA puts him in at the end of the first half against a tired team that just wants to get to the locker room, he'll put up six, eight, ten points in a heartbeat. Of the three freshmen, I've been the most impressed with Dixon-that's not a slight at the other two, more a statement on just how good I think Dixon has looked so far.

RPT: Mancrush engage. He plays faster than Tiller, and he rarely seems as out of control (five-foul first half in the Black and Gold game notwithstanding). Zaire calls him a "freak athlete," and if you've seen him run the floor, you know why. I don't know exactly what to expect from him this season, but I'm sure as hell expecting something.

Poll

Outside of the starters, which member of the backcourt contributes the most this season?

Marcus Denmon

61 votes

Miguel Paul

3 votes

Mike Dixon, Jr.

71 votes

Jarrett Sutton

3 votes

138 votes | Poll has closed

Mizzou Basketball Preview (Part One): You Never Know, Take Two

Bill C. — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:00:35 -0000

College football has always been and will always be my favorite sport. That's just the way it is. And even when Mizzou had heavy basketball expectations in the early part of the decade while, simultaneously, the football team was half-wretched, I couldn't really throw myself into basketball until football officially ended. This was never more so than a year ago. As Mizzou was trying to win their 30th football game in three seasons last November, Mizzou Basketball was pushing forward in anonymity. Maybe this team could be decent, maybe not. We didn't know for sure, and with football on the forefront, we didn't really care yet. And then last season happened.

You really do not ever know when something amazing will take place and suck you in, and while I'm sure we'd all love to be fans of a school that is perpetually in the national title hunt in both major sports (and minor ones too), it usually doesn't happen that way. What we witnessed last year was potentially the greatest set of personalities Mizzou Basketball has ever produced, winning more games than Mizzou has ever won. We saw DeMarre Carroll bawling on Senior Night, Leo Lyons maturing at the latest possible opportunity, J.T. Tiller scoring clutch points with an injured hand, Zaire Taylor becoming Mr. Coffee, Matt Lawrence becoming lovable GOOOOOOOOOSE, Marcus Denmon nailing a three-quarter court shot against Memphis (and creating great stories like this one), Laurence Bowers throwing down dunks from stupid angles, Justin Safford becoming a better Travon Bryant, Keith Ramsey swatting shots into the sixth row, MIguel Paul trying to get his brain to go as fast as his feet, Jared Sutton seemingly making 115% of his junk-time three-pointers ... and Kim English being Kim English.

The love even continued in the offseason, as English discovered Twitter and Tiller started showing up at every sporting event for every Mizzou squad.

Last season really was potentially the most emotionally rewarding Mizzou season I have witnessed in any sport, even when compared to the 2007 football season. When I realized that basketball season was starting soon, I just smiled. Not because I thought we would win another 31 games and go to another Elite Eight (though, knowing this group, it would be silly to completely count it out), but because I was simply happy to have these guys back in my life again. It's going to be fun.

With that said, I thought it appropriate to relive one of my favorite posts that I've ever written, my "You Never Know" post from the morning before the Sweet Sixteen game against Memphis. Let all the emotions come flooding back to you, and get as psyched for basketball season as I am.

I'm not going to lie. Four months ago, I was worried about this basketball program. And it really didn't even have that much to do with the team on the court. I was happy about the new blood, I thought a low seed in the NCAA Tournament was at least plausible enough to aim for it, and I still thought Mike Anderson really might be able to put together some winning records here.

That said, I was worried about the program as a whole, meaning fans, attendance, money generated, etc. There had been two entire four-year classes ('04-'07, '05-'08) that had come to the university and graduated without seeing their team go to the NCAA Tournament. That hadn't happened since well before I was born. The thought of having a great basketball program was something of a joke (I think we even made some of those jokes on RMN in a football podcast way back when). I mean, hell, look at how hard we were struggling to find great, encouraging things to say about the team not that long ago. Even if we snuck into the tourney as a 10-seed or something, would anybody notice? That's the basketball version of making the Independence Bowl. Would a connection still have been made?

Now look at us. Again, I'm not necessarily talking about the 30 wins, the Sweet Sixteen, and the Big 12 Tournament title, though that's been absolutely fantastic. I'm talking about more than that. In just four months (and really, it's been less than three), this university has grown to love its basketball team again.

Everything that happened to connect Mizzou Football to its fans in the last couple of years--the personalities (Daniel, 'Spoon, MotherRucker), the sick athletes (Maclin, Willy Mo), the wins (I don't know if you've heard this, but we won 30 games in three years), the forever-memorable moments (Sod Reesing, the Cotton Bowl, Maclin's kick returns, Coffman's nunchuk thrusts), the SI covers--has happened to Missouri basketball. Personality? This team has DeMarre's hair, and Leo's humor, and Goose's self-deprecation, and Zaire sticking out his tongue, and JT Tiller's lack of regard for human life. Wins? This team has more wins than any Mizzou squad has ever compiled. Moments? How about the win over Kansas? Kim English's free-throws against Marquette? Zaire's drive against Texas? Laurence Bowers' SportsCenter dunks? Goose's clutch 3's in the Big 12 tourney? JT Tiller's jump balls against Kansas? Is that enough for you? How about the win in Stillwater? The absolute destruction of team after team in Mizzou Arena? JYD's timely putbacks? Hell, they even had a (regional) SI cover as well.

How far have we come? Four months ago, Zaire Taylor was a decent defensive point guard who didn't shoot enough. Now he's Mr. Coffee. Always Be Closing. Four months ago, Laurence Bowers was a thin, anonymous freshman forward with some athletic ability. Now he's the Party Starter. Four months ago, Kim English was a lovable gymrat who talked a big game but had plenty to learn about how to play college basketball. Now he's put together possibly the most successful, most memorable postseason performance ever for a Mizzou freshman.

And it goes on. Four months ago, Matt Lawrence was a much-maligned three-point specialist who, for long stretches of time, couldn't even seem to specialize in three-pointers. He was given the nickname of Grey Goose, and not necessarily as a compliment. Now he's GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSE!! Four months ago, DeMarre Carroll was a scrappy player, fun to watch, but limited in size and shooting ability. Now he's JYD, a rangy, rugged all-conference forward in a conference full of great forwards.

Four months ago, JT Tiller was an intense, rather out-of-control guard who had brilliant stretches of defensive play among brainfarts and foul trouble. Now, he's not only Big 12 Defensive Player of the Year, but (listen up, Marquette fans) also a ballsy, clutch shooter (see: two FTs against Marquette with 90 seconds left, go-ahead jumper against KU with 50 seconds left).

And then there's Leo. Four months ago, Leo Lyons was an enigmatic, moody, rather schizophrenic player who could be amazing one moment and pouting on the bench for most of a game the next. Now, he's Good Leo, an enigmatic, moody, rather schizophrenic player who has been amazing for most of his only NCAA Tournament, who never turned his brain off after getting pushed and hacked for a good portion of the second half against Marquette, and who persevered in the form of a clutch 3-point play and three big-time free throws in the last minute. Against heavy odds, Leo will end up being remembered for his play down the stretch of his senior season* instead of the suspensions and frustrating tendencies of his first 3.5 seasons.

* And for Leo Lyons' Planet.

And possibly most importantly, four months ago, Mike Anderson was a likable coach who brought an entertaining brand of basketball to Columbia, but who hadn't shown many game-coaching chops, had briefly let bad characters take over his program, and was already having his name come up in the "I'm not saying he has to win this season, but he might not get more than four seasons if Mizzou doesn't start to improve" type of speculation. No one knew if his style would work in the Big 12, if his program would be able to attract the caliber of athletes it would take to succeed with his style, if he would be able to guide Mizzou to the NCAA Tourney, or if the fans would ever come back en masse to Mizzou Arena.

Now, he's the subject of the "Other teams want our coach because he's so great" type of speculation. If there's a cloud in the Mizzou sky right now, it's because of the lingering (and small) possibility that he still may be coaching elsewhere next year. But that cloud is slowly dissipating, and besides...next year is next year, and memories don't go away. Missouri is back, and it is because of Mike Anderson.

I mentioned yesterday that when Missouri faces a game they're supposed to lose, I start getting defiantly confident as game time approaches. But despite my own confidence, I realize that when Missouri and Memphis tip off at 8:37(ish) tonight, it very well might be the last time we see Leo Lyons, DeMarre Carroll, and Matt Lawrence in a Missouri uniform. Hell, I doubt it, but this could be the last time we see Mike Anderson roaming the Missouri sideline. A lot could change after tonight, but what won't is the simple fact that Missouri loves its basketball again, and watching and feeling this unexpected connection this team's players and coaches--every single one of them--has been one of the most rewarding experiences I've had as a fan.

Once again, I'm not going to lie. I look at these pictures, and as they say, it gets a little dusty in my house. It's hard to believe that something so simple (sports team wins games, fans rejoice) could end up being so emotionally, and unexpectedly, satisfying as this 2008-09 basketball season has been. Win or lose tonight, the impact has been made. You truly never know when seasons like this will come about (if they ever will, or if they ever will again), and while you live your life as a sports fan full of hope and faith (and lots of frustration), you have to hold closely the great moments that do happen, and there's just no question that I'll remember every moment of this season for a long, long time. To DeMarre Carroll, Leo Lyons, Matt Lawrence, Zaire Taylor, J.T. Tiller, Kim English, Laurence Bowers, Justin Safford, Keith Ramsey, Marcus Denmon, Miguel Paul, Steve Moore, Jarrett Sutton, and Michael Anderson Jr., I salute you.

(Or as Norman Dale would say, "I love you guys.")

But all that said, why don't we keep this train rolling for another few games?

		#3 Miguel Paul Sophomore Guard 6-1 \| 172 Winter Haven, Fla. Bio 14 minutes per game \| 4.2 points per game \| 0.9 rebound per game

		#4 J.T. Tiller Senior Guard 6-3 \| 200 Marietta, Ga. Bio 23.3 minutes per game \| 9.6 points per game \| 2.3 rebounds per game

		#11 Zaire Taylor Senior Guard 6-4 \| 189 Staten Island, N.Y. Bio 27.8 minutes per game \| 9 points per game \| 3.1 rebounds per game

		#12 Marcus Denmon Sophomore Guard 6-3 \| 185 Kansas City, Mo. Bio 20.1 minutes per game \| 10.5 points per game \| 3.9 rebounds per game

		#15 Keith Ramsey Senior Forward 6-9 \| 217 Murfreesboro, Tenn. Bio 25.4 minutes per game \| 5.9 points per game \| 5.9 rebounds per game

		#21 Laurence Bowers Sophomore Forward 6-8 \| 205 Memphis, Tenn. Bio 19.8 minutes per game \| 10.2 points per game \| 5.6 rebounds per game

		#23 Justin Safford Junior Forward 6-8 \| 230 Bloomington, Ill. Bio 18.4 minutes per game \| 7.6 points per game \| 3.8 rebounds per game

		#24 Kim English Sophomore Guard 6-6 \| 200 Baltimore, Md. Bio 22.1 minutes per game \| 16.1 points per game \| 3.1 rebounds per game

		#25 Jarrett Sutton Junior Guard 6-3 \| 190 Kansas City, Mo. Bio 4 minutes per game \| 1.8 points per game \| 0.2 rebound per game

		#32 Steve Moore Sophomore Center 6-9 \| 264 Kansas City, Mo. Bio 11 minutes per game \| 1.6 points per game \| 1.4 rebounds per game

SB Nation - Jarrett Sutton

Know Your Braggin' Rights Rival: Illinois

Illinois 8-3

Ken Pomeroy Stats

UI's Season to Date

Illinois Player Stats

Mizzou Player Stats

Keys to the Game

Prediction

Study Hall: Mizzou vs UA-Pine Bluff

Mizzou 88, UAPB 70

Player Stats

The Challenge

Three Keys Revisited

Summary

KNOW THY ENEMY: Missouri Tigers

The Story So Far

The Coach

The Departures

The Veterans

The Newcomers

The Analysis

Projected Big 12 Starting Lineup

Projected Top Big 12 Reserves

The Final Verdict

Previously on KNOW THY ENEMY...

Study Hall: Mizzou vs Fairleigh Dickinson

Mizzou 87, Fairleigh Dickinson 36

Player Stats

The Challenge

Three Keys Revisited

Summary

Study Hall: Mizzou vs Oral Roberts

Oral Roberts 60, Missouri 59

Player Stats

Three Keys Revisited

Mizzou vs "Real" Opponents

Player Stats

Time for a Challenge

Study Hall: Mizzou vs Oregon

Mizzou 106, Oregon 69

Player Stats

Mizzou vs "Real" Opponents*

Player Stats

Summary

Study Hall: Mizzou vs UT-Pan American

Mizzou 100, UT-Pan American 44

Player Stats

Keys to the Game Revisited

Summary

Study Hall: Mizzou-NW Missouri State

Mizzou 83, NW Missouri State 60

Player Stats

Keys to the Game Revisited

Combined Exhibition Stats

Summary

Mizzou Basketball Preview (Part Three): The Backcourt

Presumptive Starters

The Bench

The Newcomer

Mizzou Basketball Preview

Mizzou Basketball Preview Series

Outside of the starters, which member of the backcourt contributes the most this season?

Marcus Denmon

Miguel Paul

Mike Dixon, Jr.

Jarrett Sutton

Mizzou Basketball Preview (Part One): You Never Know, Take Two

Mizzou Basketball Preview

Mizzou Basketball Preview Series