Sometimes life gets in the way of my writing, and, in this case, at one of the worst possible times. A diversity of time commitments has kept me away from my keyboard for the purpose of dissecting the Final Four. But now, I’m here and ready to break down the two big matchups on Saturday.
I’ll be focusing primarily on matchups within the matchups, where each team might have an advantage or where a swing one way or the other could determine the outcome. In games between evenly-matched teams — and despite North Carolina sitting as a seven-point favorite, both Saturday games are within the margin of error — incremental differences are critical.
No. 2 Michigan State vs. No. 1 Connecticut (6:07 p.m. ET)
Where Michigan State can hurt Connecticut: On the offensive glass. Connecticut and North Carolina are the two teams closest to being “complete” in college basketball this season, but each has things it does not do all that well. UConn is just pretty good at defensive rebounding, something that is attributable to its willingness to seek blocks and leave the defensive glass open. The Spartans’ greatest strength is on the offensive glass where Goran Suton, Delvon Roe, Marquise Gray and a when-fit Raymar Morgan excel.
While UConn may not be superb on the defensive glass, most of those rebounds come off of interior looks. When the Huskies aren’t going for blocks, they are pretty dominant on the defensive glass. Missouri took a lot of jumpshots in Saturday’s Elite Eight matchup, and the Tigers recovered less than a quarter of their misses — that’s not a coincidence. MSU will have to continually pound it inside and live with the occasional Hasheem Thabeet block to get him away from the glass so the Roes and Grays can seek the ball and put it back.
Where Connecticut can hurt Michigan State: At the free-throw line. For a team that doesn’t get many steals, the Spartans sure foul a lot. The last team MSU played that drew fouls at nearly the rate of UConn was USC in the Second Round on Mar. 22. In that game, the Trojans got to the line 26 times and made 22. Connecticut is even better at getting to the line, though not as accurate as USC was that day once there (just 68 percent). Thabeet is a not-terrible 62 percent, considering the problems that most very big men have shooting free throws. Jeff Adrien is a 60 percent shooter, and he gets to the line at the third-highest rate on the team.
Kemba Walker is the X-factor here. He gets to the line a ton and makes 75 percent of his attempts there. He made 9-of-10 against Missouri in the Elite Eight as UConn’s 26 free-throw makes compensated for woeful shooting throughout most of the second half. Walker is a dazzling penetrator with the ability to finish and draw fouls, as Missouri found out.
Irresistble force against immovable object: On Connecticut’s offensive glass. If the Huskies are just OK on the defensive glass, they shine on the offensive glass. Stanley Robinson joins Thabeet and Adrien as standouts here, and UConn hurt both Texas A&M and Purdue on the offensive glass. Only nine teams in the country grab more of their misses than UConn.
On the other hand, only six teams in the country allow fewer offensive rebounds than Michigan State. You can add Draymond Green to the bevy of quality Spartans rebounders on this glass, but Kansas did do an effective job here in the Sweet 16. Cole Aldrich had five offensive rebounds by himself as Kansas recovered 44 percent of its misses. MSU’s defensive rebounding may, in fact, be slightly overrated, because hardly anyone in the Big Ten — besides the Spartans — make an effort to get offensive rebounds. Minnesota was the second-best offensive rebounding team in the Big Ten this season, and the Gophers ranked just 79th in the nation. Besides the Kansas game, though, MSU has held North Carolina, Minnesota (twice) and Kansas (the first time) to poor offensive-rebounding totals. This should be intriguing to watch.
In UConn’s last battle of strengths in the Missouri-Connecticut game, the Tigers turnover forcing won out over Connecticut’s turnover prevention. The usually sure-handed Huskies committed 17 turnovers and would probably have lost if the Tigers could have hit a few more shots. They made just 5-of-18 3-pointers (27.8) and 27-of-48 (46.6 percent) of 2-pointers. If either the Spartans or Huskies get a significant edge in this matchup of strengths, it could be a tide-turner.
Resistible force versus movable object: Connecticut’s turnover forcing versus Michigan State’s ball-possession. If there is one thing that MSU didn’t do very well for most of the year, it was take care of the ball, which is why a matchup with Louisville in the Elite Eight looked like a great one for the Cardinals. It also seemed strange why a team with an All-American-caliber point guard like Kalin Lucas and dependable senior in Travis Walton would have so much trouble holding on to the ball, but — especially in losses to North Carolina, Northwestern and Purdue — that trouble led to big upsets or blowout losses. Against Louisville, MSU didn’t protect the ball like North Carolina does, but the Spartans limited their turnovers to just 12 and dominated the game in nearly every other facet.
In Connecticut, Tom Izzo faces the polar opposite of Louisville. The Huskies have no interest in forcing turnovers. Why should they? With a defense that forces so many tough shots and grabs so many of the rebounds off those misses, there’s no reason to risk reaching in and picking up fouls. Against Missouri, Connecticut forced just six turnovers but held Mizzou to less than a point per possession (0.99) because of their field-goal defense, ability to clear the glass and keep the Tigers off the free-throw line.
Conclusion: How particular strengths and weaknesses matchup against each other is something we’ll be studying in the offseason. Does a good turnover-forcing team (like Missouri) usually force a lot of turnovers, even against a good turnover-preventing team (like Connecticut), or was that result just an aberration? When a good offensive-rebounding team plays a good defensive-rebounding team, who usually wins out? Also, in matchups of strengths versus weaknesses, which are truly bad matchups and which aren’t? Is the advantage of being good at preventing turnovers mitigated against teams that don’t force turnovers (like, say, North Carolina against Connecticut)? We’re in the process of studying questions like these and hope to have a few answers — or at least a lot of data — ready for next season.
As for this game, Michigan State is playing its best basketball at the perfect time. Tom Izzo has a special fire in his eye, and his team was as prepared to play Louisville as any team I’ve seen this year. The fact that he has a deep lineup of talented players doesn’t hurt. In Connecticut, the Spartans run up against a team with a lot more offensive weapons than Louisville and a defense that is just as good if very different. In MSU’s other games against the nation’s best field-goal defenses — UConn is second nationally — MSU defeated Illinois twice and had a split-decision with Purdue but score fewer than 0.96 points per possession in three of those four games. Neither of those teams possesses the ability to hit the offensive glass and get to the foul line like UConn can. Michigan State hasn’t faced a team as good as Connecticut all season, but MSU hasn’t played this well all season either. No prediction — should be a fantastic game, but likely without the aesthetic pleasure of the second national semifinal.
