Each summer, I carve out time to study Missouri’s transfer additions in their previous stops. The viewing menu starts with games against teams that finished in KenPom’s top 100. From there, I use descriptive stats to identify five “median” performances — games that best approximate a player’s typical workload and production. Those viewings form the basis of the Swing Skill Series, which blends data and film to isolate one facet of a player’s game that could shape the scope of his impact once he puts on black and gold.
When useful, I also supplement those full-game viewings with a “median-volume” clip pool, isolating games where a player’s offensive possession count reflected his normal workload.
Seeing the duality of Bryson Tiller only requires a minute of your time and a replay of Kansas’ loss to Connecticut last season inside Allen Fieldhouse.
Early in the second half, the redshirt freshman fed an entry pass to Flory Bidunga on the left block and started slowly trotting to the weak side of the floor. After a couple of steps, he noticed Alex Karaban ball watching and curled toward the rim. Diving to the cup gave Bidunga an easy outlet from a hard double team.
What did Tiller do after the catch? Mash a dunk on Karaban’s head? Nope. The 6-foot-10, 240-pound big man leaned his torso back and gently released a jumper. “He babied that ball up there,” ESPN analyst Fran Fraschilla noted.
Yet it only took 28 seconds for the Atlanta native to make amends – and flash the traits that made him a five-star prospect coming out of Overtime Elite. On the ensuing trip, Tiller set an empty-side ball screen for Melvin Council Jr. and peeled back to the slot while Karaban was occupied in drop coverage. Council pitched the ball back, and you can see what Tiller did once it was in his hands.
It also changed the tenor of Fraschilla’s appraisal. “In the old days, you’d see a freshman like that and get excited,” Fraschilla said. “You’d say, I can’t wait until he’s a junior. Different college basketball than we have now.”
With Tiller, the question is not whether he can become a high-usage stretch five. What’s up in the air is whether he can play with enough force — and enough role discipline — for his abundant physical gifts to translate into steady production at Missouri.
Across two representative samples, Tiller’s offensive profile pointed in the same direction. The median-game pool comes from full-game tracking of typical overall performances, while the median-volume clip pool isolates games where his offensive possession count reflected his normal workload. He averaged 0.718 PPP in the former and 0.692 PPP in the latter, suggesting the inefficiency wasn’t sample noise Instead, it was concentrated in specific pockets: static spot-ups, sloppy entry passes to Bidunga and shaky ball security after offensive rebounds.
That same data also makes clear where Tiller’s best touches unfolded: baseline cuts, slipping screens, high-low plays in the lane and big-to-big passes from Bidunga. So, while the sample sizes aren’t huge, the math and film point in the same direction.
Calling Tiller a stretch five at this point is more a statement of aspiration than fact. It’s also clear the role wasn’t part of coach Bill Self’s plan for last season. Tiller only entered the starting lineup when Darryn Peterson was sidelined with a hamstring injury, offering him a chance to improve rebounding and rim protection.
The offensive fit wasn’t quite so clean. Bidunga remained the Jayhawks’ primary low-post option and best pick-and-roll partner. By default, that left Tiller as a spacing big – usually stashed in a corner – and prone to long spells where he was adrift. Any involvement came after his defender stunted to slow Council or tagged Bidunga rolling out of high pick-and-roll.
Yet defenders didn’t have to stress and scramble when recovering back to Tiller, who made only 27.5% of his catch-and-shoot attempts from beyond the arc. Closing out short and shading Tiller to his merely functional left-handed dribble was more than acceptable.
The damage wasn’t limited to the misses. Parking Tiller in the corner removed him from the dunker spot, kept him out of prime offensive rebounding position and turned his defender into a low-cost helper who could stunt at the ball without worrying much about the recovery.
That distinction matters because Tiller’s issue isn’t a lack of strength. It’s whether he’s involved in actions — and taking shots — that make that strength relevant at all. The solution is not simply moving him from one spot on the floor to another. It’s putting his defender in conflict: help on Kansas’ primary action, or keep track of Tiller around the rim.
What’s obvious on tape, though, is how contact-averse Tiller could be despite a strapping frame. It’s rare for him to bump or nudge a smaller defender, or attack the chest of a rim protector. Rather than play directly to the rim, Tiller favored extension finishes or settled for pull-ups in the middle of the lane. And while his dribble is functional, Tiller was also susceptible to help defenders raking the ball loose, particularly when picking it up and gathering to finish.
Even when Tiller did get chances to play at the five, often in small-ball lineups while Bidunga caught his breath, a tendency toward finesse endured.
Tiller’s effectiveness, for example, as a post-up option was narrowly concentrated to post-pins, especially if KU found him with a high-low play early in a possession. Typically, that meant Tiller beat the defense up the floor and received the ball before the shell was set.
That distinction matters. Tiller could punish position, but he wasn’t reliable at carving it out. It’s why the bottom falls away once Tiller confronts an anchored defender on the block. In our sample, he averaged just 0.800 PPP, which isn’t far off the 0.741 PPP mark he posted for the season. Calling up film snippets shows us a distinct trait: turning away from the rim.
Tiller rarely uses a power dribble to dislodge his man, and he rarely leverages defenders on the high side, taking away chances to drop step into open space. Instead, Tiller prefers to pivot toward the middle of the lane and access his right hand, often trying to square up for a jumper. It all makes the defender’s job easy. They can stay moored in place, sit on Tiller’s preferred shoulder and play vertically to contest.
That tension was most obvious when Tiller operated as a cutter. In the median-volume pool, those opportunities produced 1.438 PPP, his most efficient play type, and perhaps the cleanest window into a role that works for him.
Stationing Tiller in the dunker spot made him a handy tool in splintering zone looks, which opponents rolled out to deal with the side-to-side movement in KU’s half-court sets.
Even in five-out looks, moving Tiller from the corner to the dunker spot fundamentally altered his impact. He could function as a safety valve for drop-offs if his defender helped on a drive. He provided Bidunga with a dump-down option on short rolls. And if Bidunga drew a double team after rolling to a post-up, Tiller’s presence across the lane made for an easy passing read.
Thoughtful off-ball action could also gin up opportunities. Floppy action isn’t complex, but having Tiller set the initial down screen for a guard on the block created useful movement: either a post pin with no weak-side help, or a delayed slip to the rim once the defense reacted.
The lens gets foggier, however, when assessing Tiller’s rim pressure in two-man games. We covered those issues earlier this offseason, and Tiller’s season-long efficiency as a roller — which ranked in the 26th percentile nationally — traces back to the same inconsistent physicality explored here.
Yet the samples for this piece tell a more nuanced story. In the median-volume pool, Tiller averaged 1.143 points per possession when he rolled, slipped or popped after setting a ball screen. On film, many of those touches were moored to the same kinds of empty-side actions that frequently set Bidunga up for success.
His median-game reps also showed the assertiveness required to attack downhill out of pick-and-pops. There’s the clip of him attacking Karaban, but also a pair of snippets where Tiller goes at Cincinnati’s Moustapha Thiam. On the first possession, he takes a mid-range pull-up, but it’s balanced and comes after he deftly creates space. Later, though, Tiller seeks out just enough contact to knock Thiam off balance and get right to the glass.
Should MU get that version of Tiller next season, the ripple effect is easy to envision: a formidable tandem with Jason Crowe Jr. The incoming freshman’s shot creation could force defenses into more aggressive pick-and-roll coverages, creating the kind of gravity Tiller can exploit. If bigs hedge, a consistent and assertive version of Tiller can feast on slips and pops. Against more conservative coverages, such as drop, Crowe should have chances to hit Tiller on early pocket passes before the backline can load up.
That takes us back to a more salient – and obvious – question: What will be the shape of Tiller’s role in Columbia?
In montages shared on social media, Tiller appears focused on tightening his handle, progressing from cleaner transitions into his preferred mid-post finishes to reps as a primary handler in ball screens. There’s also evidence of Tiller trying to convert clean shooting mechanics into steadier returns.
Of course, we need to take those tightly edited glimpses with caution. If Tiller aspires to spend more time as a four and in the ‘boss’ role that benefited Kobe Brown and Mark Mitchell, the most important drills might be less glamorous: decision-making, shot selection and, yes, physicality when going to work in the mid-post, at the elbows and from the slot.
That also includes seemingly benign tasks as a connective piece within MU’s offense. To his credit, Tiller showed he could set quality screens, especially off the ball, to free up KU’s shooters off pindowns and skip passes. Unfortunately, Tiller wasn’t the most consistent passer, particularly when it came to finding Bidunga in high-low sets or post entry passes.
Is that clean-up work boring? Sure. But given the resources MU has invested in scaling up its frontcourt, it’s essential.
Would it be helpful if Tiller made major progress as a shooter? Absolutely. But the priority is finding a compromise between his ambitions, his current skill set and MU’s need to replace Mitchell as a four-man.
That process doesn’t start with reinvention. It begins with the same mundane but potent cuts, slips, seals and short rolls we’ve seen here – and with Tiller not just accepting contact, but reveling in it. Do that, and the evolution can come later.