Posted on

Michigan Football By the Numbers: Rutgers

We’ve been here before. This is year four of the Harbaugh Era, and the November feeling we are sharing is quite familiar.  Take a look at Michigan’s record through ten games under Jim Harbaugh: 8-2 (2015); 9-1 (2016); 8-2 (2017); 9-1 (2018).  After a quick review of the 42-7 victory over Rutgers, let’s look for other historical clues about what may be in store for the 2018 team.

What is S&P+
The original system was based on Success rate and equivalent Points per play. It was an attempt at an OPS-style measure for football, a look at both efficiency and explosiveness. As so many things do, however, it has grown more complicated.In its current state, S&P+ is based around the core concepts of the Five Factors of winning football: efficiency, explosiveness, field position, finishing drives, and turnovers.  Full Explanation 
TABLE: FIVE FACTORS

OFFENSE

The coaching staff chose to incorporate more passing plays and concepts into the game plan for Rutgers.  Michigan passed on 40.9% of plays in a 42-7 game.  That’s a tick above the 38.0% season average, and the highest passing ratio since the Big Ten opener versus Nebraska in Week 4.  Shea Patterson continued his improvement as he leads the evolution of the offense.  His performance (18/27, 260 yds, 3 TD, 0 INT) translated into a 63.0% Success Rate on pass plays, Michigan’s highest since Week 3 vs. SMU.  Michigan also averaged 9.6 yds per pass play, marking their third-highest passing YPP of the season.

From a Harbaugh era perspective, the 2018 offense most resembles the 2015 offense led by another QB transfer, Jake Rudock.  While Rudock finished with 7.2 yards/attempt, completed 64%, and averaged 237.7 yards/game, the 2015 team finished ranked 32nd overall in S&P+ offense and 8th in passing offense.  Through ten games in 2018, Patterson averages 7.6 yards/attempt, is completing 67%, and averages 206.5 yards/game.  Michigan’s offense is ranked 21st overall by S&P+, and the passing game is 7th.  While those numbers are remarkably similar, there is reason to expect a stronger finish than 2015 when turning your attention to the run game.  The running attack is also ranked 7th in S&P+ in 2018, compared to 43rd in 2015.  Michigan’s 215.4 yards/game (2015: 158.2) and 48.4% success rate (2015: 43.8%) are key differences, enabling Jim Harbaugh and staff to dictate the flow and tempo of the game.

DEFENSE

Rutgers matched Michigan’s rushing output of 193 yards on the day, and capitalized on numerous missed assignments to put their 80-yard touchdown run on the board.  As scary and as frustrating as that might make us at first glance, this is no time to panic for Wolverine fans.  On the long touchdown run, simultaneous mistakes were made by DE Chase Winovich, LB Devin Gil, and S Brad Hawkins.  Rather than worry about this anomaly, I choose to be grateful that this will be a very teachable moment for all three levels of Don Brown’s defense, and that it came in a low-risk game with time to make corrections.

For a historical comparison, we have to revisit Michigan’s 2016 defense that put EIGHT draft picks into the ensuing NFL draft.  Both the 2018 and the 2016 units ranked 2nd in S&P+ overall, and 1st versus the pass.  Success Rate allowed is almost exactly the same, 29.5% (S&P+ 1st) for the 2016 defense, and 29.3% (S&P+ 2nd) this year.  In terms of explosiveness, the 2018 squad (through 10 games) has actually improved over two years ago allowing an IsoPPP of 1.02 (S&P+ 12th) compared to 1.18 (23rd) in 2016.  The defense will remain the centerpiece of each game plan as Michigan looks to reverse the trend of November and December disappointments in the Harbaugh era.

S&P+ THROUGH WEEK 11

MICHIGAN S&P+
Overall: 24.9, 4th (down 1)
Offense: 35.7, 21st (up 3)
Defense: 11.6, 2nd (down 1)

REGULAR SEASON PROJECTIONS vs. RESULTS

@ Rutgers UM 42 RU 7
Pregame Midpoint S&P+: UM by 22.2, 10-0
Pregame Clint: UM by 45, 9-1
MICH Cumulative 2ndO Wins: 9.3

NEXT UP

vs. Indiana: Overall -1.2, 81st
M Offense 35.7, (21st) vs. O Defense 29.6 (75th), Midpoint: 32.65
M Defense 11.6 (2nd) vs. O Offense 27.6 (82nd), Midpoint: 19.6

PREGAME EDGE: Michigan
The midpoint of S&P+ ratings gives a 13.05 point edge to Michigan. Given the weather forecast, and Indiana’s penchant to keep it close before giving way at the end, I think that sounds about right.

GAME WEEK UPDATE: There will be some motivation to score early and often to allow seniors down the depth chart to get onto the field in their last Big House appearance. Despite all of the external noise, the same two critical factors remain: 1) Stay Healthy 2) Focus on the task at hand
Michigan 24 Indiana 10 (PRESEASON: Michigan 24 Indiana 14)

TL;DR SUMMARY

Under Jim Harbaugh, Michigan Football continually puts themselves into solid position through the first ten games of the season. This year, with an improved offense and a dominating defense, the Wolverines will be judged on how they finish their run for a Big Ten title, and a berth in the College Football Playoff.

Posted on

Nothing But ‘Net – Week #03 – 11/12/2018 – Ugly Wins Are Still Wins

The (#19) University of Michigan men’s basketball team played their first two regular season games last week, and they won both of them. On Tuesday (11/06/2018), they beat Norfolk State 63-44, then on Saturday (11/10/2018), they beat Holy Cross 56-37. Both games were in Crisler Arena. Michigan’s record is now 2-0.

Time for more Questions & Answers:

Q: Why were these “ugly wins”?

A: These were both opponents that Michigan should beat easily, and look good doing it. While they won both games by comfortable margins, they certainly didn’t look good doing it. The biggest problem is outside shooting, specifically, 3-point shooting. When the 3-pointers are falling, Michigan looks good. Everything else seems to fall into place: the inside game, rebounding, defense, everything. When the 3-pointers won’t go in, everything else seems to go wrong. So far, in an open practice, exhibition game, and two regular season games, no one on Michigan’s roster seems to be able to hit 3-pointers consistently.

Q: Wait. If everything else went wrong, how did Michigan hold Norfolk State to 44 points and Holy Cross to 37 points?

A: OK, you got me. In both games, the defense was fine. In fact, the defense was what kept Michigan in both of these games when the offense was flailing around. The 2nd half of the Holy Cross game was one of the better defensive efforts we’ve seen in a while. Michigan held Holy Cross to 13 points in the last 20 minutes, including a 7-minute stretch where Michigan held Holy Cross scoreless. It’s a good thing they did, since Holy Cross actually led the game (24-18) at halftime. Yes, you read that right: Michigan only scored 18 points in 20 minutes of basketball against Holy Cross. Ugh.

Q: How bad was the 3-point shooting?

A: Very bad. Michigan was 6-for-26 (23.1%) vs. Norfolk State, and 3-for-19 (15.8%) vs. Holy Cross. Most of these shots were good shots, wide open, out of the set offense. That’s the really frustrating part: Michigan is running their offense pretty well, moving the ball around, getting good open 3-pointers, and clanking them.

Q: What else went wrong?

A: Overall shooting was also pretty bad, pulled down by the really bad 3-point shooting. Michigan shot 36.7% (22-for-60) vs. Norfolk State, and 36.0% (18-for-50) vs. Holy Cross. Also, turnovers were a little high: 12 in the Norfolk State game, 9 in the Holy Cross game.

Q: Did Michigan do anything right?

A: Well, the defense was good, as mentioned above, and they did rebound fairly well. They out-rebounded Norfolk State 52-40 and Holy Cross 39-31. They also had 8 blocked shots vs. Norfolk State and 9 blocked shots vs. Holy Cross. Jon Teske had 4 and 5 for the week. Finally, they shot free throws well in the Holy Cross game (17-for-21 = 81.0%), although they were terrible shooting free throws in the Norfolk State game (13-for-29 = 44.8%).

Q: Who looked good?

A: Ignas Brazdeikis (12 and 19 points) and Charles Matthews (10 and 20 points) both hit double figures in both games. Teske (13 and 5 points) hit double figures in one game. Isaiah Livers had 10 rebounds in the Holy Cross game. Zavier Simpson ran the offense well, keeping the ball moving. He got the ball to the right players, they just bricked the shots. Eli Brooks is definitely the most improved player compared to last year.

Q: Who didn’t look very good?

A: I’m still waiting for Jordan Poole to wake up. He had 3 points in each game last week. I was counting on him to be one of the leading scorers in every game, on high volume shooting. So far, he’s 1-for-10 shooting, including 0-for-6 from 3-point range. Simpson also didn’t shoot well this week (1-for-4 and 0-for-3).

Q: What about the rest of the team?

A: Lots of players got in for a few minutes at the end of both games, but no one did anything noteworthy.

Q: What did we learn?

A: We learned that this is a young team, with lots of talent, but still (very) rough around the edges. We learned that Matthews and Iggy are the two “to-go” guys on the team offensively. We learned that this is not a very good shooting team, at least right now. We learned that the defense is way ahead of the offense at this point.

Q: What’s next?

A: Michigan has three games next week, all on the road. On Wednesday (11/14/2018, 6:30 p.m., FS1), they play at (#9) Villanova, as part of the Gavitt Tipoff Games (Big East/Big Ten Challenge). On Saturday (11/17/2018, 12:00 noon, ESPN3), they play against George Washington in the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall Of Fame Tip-Off Tournament in Uncasville, Connecticut. On Sunday (11/18/2018, TBA, ESPN/ESPN2), they play either Providence or South Carolina in the championship or consolation game of the tournament.

So, Villanova, again. The last time Michigan played Villanova was in San Antonio in April for the National Championship. Michigan led early, hung around for a while, then got buried under a pile of 3-pointers. Both teams are very different this season, with major departures from both rosters. This will be Michigan’s first big test, and the way they’ve played so far, I expect Villanova to beat them to a pulp.

George Washington is coming off a 15-18 season, with only 2 returning starters, and not much height. This is a game that Michigan should win, but they’ll need to play better than they have so far.

I’m not going to worry about Providence or South Carolina too much, since there’s no way to tell which one Michigan is going to play. Of the two, Providence is probably the better team.

That’s it for this week.

Go Blue!