blank

Lineup Performance: Missouri vs. Jacksonville State

After some outings, the root-cause analysis for the result is straightforward. Other times, though, tracing the source of a result – good or bad – isn’t feasible and the byproduct of a collective effort.

Missouri’s 83-72 win over Jacksonville State on Tuesday night was the latter, where the Tigers tussled with the Gamecocks before a 13-0 run gave them separation.

You likely know how JSU lingered, too: hammering Mizzou on the glass. Coach Ray Harper’s squad snatched 16 of its misses and converted them into 19 points, including eight on putbacks. And mind you, Jax State entered the game hovering around the Division-I median for offensive rebound percentage.

That bludgeoning frames the substitution pattern for the night, too.

blank

Out of the chute, MU fared well at turning the Gamecocks over, creating four live-ball takeaways in the opening five minutes. Yet they only cashed them in for a measly two points. Meanwhile, the Tigers suffered breakdowns at the point of attack and tagging rollers.

The rebounding issues didn’t emerge until midway through the first half. Yet they’re easy to explain: a big-little switch early in a possession left a smaller guard boxing out a frontcourt player. The issue escalated, however, once MU rolled out zone looks late in the first half. It also cropped up again when the Tigers tried the same tactic over the final nine minutes of the second half.

Still, I counted at least 10 rebounds where a Tiger was beaten for a box-out position, got out-jumped by a smaller player, or didn’t pursue a 50-50 ball. Four of those instances involved Tamar Bates, too. 

The second half also saw a similar slip in defensive focus that doesn’t trace back to a single lineup or two. MU failed to contain dribblers in the press, setting up open 3s on hit-ahead passes. There were late closeouts. Open stances created angles for rim attacks. And biting on shot fakes. 

Ultimately, coach Dennis Gates’ decision to mix up zone looks over the final 9:12 stifled Jax State’s flow, and the Tigers corralled enough misses to start firing passes to teammates leaking out. Toss in a trio of Jacob Crews 3-balls, and the Tigers pulled away. 

Unsurprisingly, leaving the game until late gave that final lineup sway when we look at combinations.

blank

For roughly 29 minutes, JSU beat the Tigers by six. Right before Gates inserted the decisive lineup, the Gamecocks took a 63-59 lead on a 3-point play on a secondary break after Crews had a layup swatted at the rim. 

As Sam Snelling noted in Study Hall, the Tigers rarely bogged down on offense. Mark Mitchell got to his preferred spots. Trent Pierce drilled 3s and drew fouls on the break. Jacob Crews dialed in from deep. 

MU prevailed because it finally started showing bland competency: force guarded shots and secure the rebound. Over the final 5:46, Jax State went 2 of 10 from the floor and only corralled one of eight misses. Simultaneously, the Tigers popped off a 13-0 run. 

blank

Whether a Tiger was on the floor during that surge colors their standing in position performance. Let’s see the plus-minus numbers for the five Tigers with that run omitted:

  • PG – Anthony Robinson: -8
  • CG – Tamar Bates: -2
  • Wing – Jacob Crews: -1
  • Hybrid – Trent Pierce: -5
  • Post – Mark Mitchell: -1

It would be farcical to critique Mitchell’s efforts. The Duke transfer put up 18 points, six rebounds, and six assists in 34 minutes. More importantly, Mitchell, who finished with a 22.42 game score, made his dent in the same actions and spots as Kobe Brown once did. He also flashed some savvy decision-making as a ball-mover. 

Pierce put together another noteworthy outing for reasons other than his shooting. For example, he snatched three offensive rebounds, including one off a missed free-throw that allowed MU to reset and find Crews for a 3-pointer to keep its run going. His length on the wing also proved helpful when MU employed zone looks.

And for all of Crews’ struggles, his shooting stroke delivered nine points during MU’s decisive run. 

Conversely, Bates’ plus-minus benefits from being on the floor while his teammates thrived. The junior pressed too much offensively, and his work on the defensive end wasn’t up to par. I also feel a bit for Tony Perkins, who got off to a solid start at both ends but watched as Gates rode with one lineup down the stretch. And poor Josh Gray, whose plus-minus is at odds with his sound 6.21 game score. 

MU finds itself on a 10-game win streak, but it’s fair to wonder if the results mask a potential vulnerability: inconsistent focus.

It produced a myriad of defensive breakdowns against Eastern Washington. There was slipshod ball handling versus Lindenwood and Cal. And defensive rebounding has steadily eroded since December arrived. 

Predictive metrics don’t have eyes. Algorithms only value possessions, and their verdict so far is that MU has – by and large – met expectations. For example, the Tigers have moved up a whopping three spots to No. 49 in KenPom since the season started, and they’re beating forecasted margins by 4.9 points per game. Similarly, resume-based metrics place the Tigers firmly in the early bubble conversation. 

Viewed through agnostic lenses, MU has performed precisely as it should. Still, it’s hard for a human to discount the visual evidence we’ve digested.

Without a doubt, MU upgraded its roster and possesses the flexibility last year’s group sorely lacked. That depth has allowed MU to withstand Caleb Grill’s absence, including an upset in the Border War. However, the SEC’s dominant performance during non-conference play has it shaping up as arguably the nation’s deepest league in two decades, where almost every outing might have Quad-1 value. 

It’s also the kind of crucible where the heat is so intense that any modest crack can shatter hope. Put another way, what looks like resiliency one night can be foreboding. We’ll see which one applies to MU soon enough. 

Leave a Reply

Back To Top