There comes an inflection point in every player’s career, and it might arrive this season for the combo forward.

Over the weeks leading up to the season, this series will dive deep into the players we see making a push for time in the rotation for the 2024-2025 Missouri basketball squad. The pieces read like a birds-eye scouting report. They skew more toward the offensive end of the court for two reasons. First, a player’s offensive metrics are more reliable than defensive data and less team-dependent. Second, it’s considerably easier to describe a player’s qualities with more well-known offensive statistics. As always, we encourage interaction from our readers. Please drop us a comment or find me on Twitter @DataMizzou.

The film credits are given to Matt Harris. Matt has provided all of the film used in this series, and plenty more video and analysis on every player that can be found on https://rockm.plus.

The Player

Aidan Shaw now represents the most-tenured player on Missouri’s roster. The high-flying junior — known for his aerial theatrics — also represents a player at his make-or-break moment.

Shaw’s commitment to Mizzou transpired in September of 2021, and he is now the lone holdover from the Tigers’ prior coaching regime. But it wasn’t always that simple. The product of Blue Valley High School in Overland Park opened up his commitment after Cuonzo Martin’s time at Mizzou had come to a close. Dennis Gates quickly re-engaged and landed the services of the top-60 prospect that boasted offers from many high-level Division I programs.

Shaw’s career at Mizzou got off to a relatively promising start. Representing the lone freshman on a 25-win team, Shaw was eighth in the team in minutes played. He frequently found himself inserted in the season’s most significant moments. With his elite athleticism often on display, Shaw proved to be a vital role player in the season’s success.

Denny Medley-USA TODAY Sports

Entering his sophomore campaign, Shaw was called upon to fortify Mizzou’s defense and to increase his offensive punch. The results were mixed. Shaw certainly had his moments in an otherwise forgettable season. He scored in double digits three times during SEC play — all in close losses.

But there were long stretches of disengagement. For example, Shaw logged less than ten minutes on the court in four league contests despite Mizzou’s never-ending search for answers. That inconsistency brings us to what should represent a significant season in Shaw’s career at Mizzou.

Aidan has been a great ambassador for the program and is, by all accounts, a valued teammate. His performance this season will go a long way in determining how he is remembered for his play on the court.

The Numbers

Stats courtesy of Barttorvik.com.

If I told you Shaw has been highly efficient on offense while upping his minutes year over year, you might ask, “What’s the problem?”

After all, he brings a lengthy frame and elite leaping ability. Well, it’s what goes into the minutes that causes the hangup. Shaw’s usage rate of 11.5% — a slight dip from 11.7% as a frosh — is low. Incredibly low. Put another way, Shaw only finished one out of every 10 possessions for MU when he was on the floor.

A broader context also helps. According to my research, 504 players at high-major schools played at least 16 minutes per game, and Shaw’s usage ranked 498th. Put bluntly, Shaw was practically invisible when Mizzou had the ball.

True, when he got his chances he typically converted. Often, those opportunities came by cutting off the ball to offer an efficient — and high-flying — target for lobs. But other than that? Aidan was practically a non-participant.

In sum, Aidan logged 104 possessions used in Missouri’s offense, and 41 of those touches came from cuts. Most of those were lobs. Another 15 possessions were put-backs, and eight came from broken plays. That means almost two-thirds of Shaw’s offense saw him as the goal-line option. To his credit, he did those things very well and posted superlative efficiency numbers in each category.

That’s not always a bad thing, but Shaw was frustratingly absent most nights for a team searching for contributions in any given way.

Perhaps nowhere was it more glaring than his unwillingness to shoot the ball. In his first year, Aidan offered a glimpse of hope, converting 23 shots off the catch into 23 points. In his second year? He attempted all of two catch-and-shoot jumpers. A hesitancy to let it rip evolved into a full-on personal red light. Below is an exhaustive highlight of every shot he attempted off the catch in 2023-24.

In some ways, Aidan profiled as a true center. There’s the inability — or outright unwillingness — to hoist up open jumpers. There’s the elite rim finishing, including competent work as a roller out of ball screens. (You can see that in the clips below). At the other end, he’s a competent rebounder and rim protector.

It would be a welcome development if Shaw were willing to expand his game. He cannot create on the ball — most players his size do — but he has the opportunity to offer a much broader base. Whether it’s the desire to shoot open jumpers off the catch or to execute short rolls out of ball screens with a little push shot, there are a multitude of ways for him to become more involved. We’ve said he should look westward at Kansas’ KJ Adams as a template.

While this year’s roster projects to have more — and hopefully better — higher usage options, being able to offer more to the team on offense would prove valuable.

The reason for the insistence on becoming a viable offense player is simple: Shaw’s defense is worth playing. His frame and vertical pop are ideal for an up-tempo team. Shaw has proven to be a menace when providing teammates with defensive assistance. Whether he shoots over from a weakside help position or switches onto a different position, he does more than hold his own.

If there is an area to critique defensively, it may be his ability to defend players when left on an island. It’s not a weakness, necessarily. But rather an area for improvement.

The Role

While this preview may seem negative, it isn’t meant to be this way.

Shaw possesses all the tools to play — a lot. However, there comes a point where potential must translate into reliable production nightly. Last season, Shaw’s positional group was in a state of transition, and there was an opportunity for him to take firm hold of the job. That didn’t happen.

Mizzou’s roster has undergone a fairly significant makeover. If Aidan is seen as a true center, newcomers such as Josh Gray, Peyton Marshall and Trent Burns figure to compete for minutes there. If he’s seen more as a hybrid forward, Mark Mitchell, Marcus Allen and Jacob Crews will compete with Trent Pierce, who also seeks to reestablish himself. Mitchell and Allen both profile as flexible switch defenders in MU’s system.

It’s no longer enough for Aidan to garner spot duty by putting out fires on defense and occasionally chipping in on offense. Too many hungry mouths have accumulated to settle for a part-time player.

Denny Medley-Imagn Images

As it stands, I see Shaw in the mix with players like Pierce and Allen vying for a spot at the back end of Mizzou’s rotation. My projections have him at 12th in minutes due primarily to his hesitancy to up his offensive engagement.

However, should that mentality — and production change — Aidan can shoot well up the depth chart. His menacing defense and otherworldly rim-finishing are characteristics tailor-made for a team that figures to play at top speed for 40 minutes. He has to commit to doing things his top competitors will be willing to do. If he does, Aidan can genuinely deliver on the promise that he’s had since he first pledged to the Tigers three years ago.

PPP: Points Per Possession

Min %: This is simply the percentage of minutes played by a given player.

Usage %: A measure of personal possessions used while player is on the court. This includes making a shot, missing a shot coupled with a defensive rebound and a turnover.

eFG%: Same as traditional FG% with the added bonus of 3-point shots given 50% more weight to account for additional point.

OR%: The percentage of possible offensive rebounds a player gets.

DR%: The percentage of possible defensive rebounds a player gets.

AST%: Assists divided by field goals made by player’s teammates while on the court.

TO%: The percentage of personal possessions a player uses on turnovers.

FTR%: A rate which measures a player’s ability to get to the free throw line.

FT%: Free Throw shooting percentage.

2PT%: 2-point field goal percentage.

3PT% 3-point field goal percentage.

It’s time to make a statement.

As much as we all wanted to feel…something? anything?…after the UMass game, that matchup was never going to provide anything to the fan base, other than maybe a few highlights and an official win blessed by the NCAA.

But here’s the game that can give you something. Vindication. Hope. A chance to wash out the bad taste of A&M. A validation of those holding out to the thought that Missouri is a Playoff-caliber team that had one of the worst singular days in recent history.

But it requires beating an Auburn team that is much better than its record indicates and has not lost to Missouri since 1973.

Here’s the preview I did of Auburn back in June. Here’s the breakdown for this week:

When Missouri Has the Ball

So the bad news first: Auburn’s defense is excellent. Currently 25th in SP+, it’s almost as if they were designed specifically to eliminate Mizzou’s offense. Specifically, Mizzou is an efficiency-based offense that runs the ball and throws short, hoping for YAC to move the chains. And Auburn’s defense likes to stop the easy stuff, play tight coverage to keep completion percentages low, and create a lot of pressure to keep the quarterback on the move.

The last time Missouri played a defense ranked inside the SP+ Top 30, they were totally wiped out and held to 10 points. Let’s hope this time it goes better.

Be Efficient Through The Air

Photo by M. Anthony Nesmith/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images

Missouri will run the ball because that’s what they always do, but Auburn ranks 18th in yards per successful rush and 25th in opportunity rate allowed. So if the Good Guy Tigers can’t be their usual efficient selves on the ground then they’re going to have to do it through the air. If they can eclipse the season-long average of 38% success that Auburn currently has that would be great; let’s set the bar at 42% and see what happens.

Generate Explosive Plays

Eric Canha-Imagn Images

I cannot stress enough how perfectly bad this matchup is for Mizzou. Auburn plays to remove efficiency and allow explosives, and Kirby’s offenses this year only have efficiency and very little (or reliable) explosiveness. But it has to happen to have success against this defense! I’ll set the goal at seven (7) explosive plays…but it probably needs to be higher if the efficiency stuff isn’t working.

Finish Your Drives

Eric Canha-Imagn Images

Auburn doesn’t give up a ton of scoring opportunities and, when they do, they’re 26th in the country at limiting the damage. The Bad Guy Tigers have given up point totals of 21, 19, 24, 27, and 31 against FBS competition. However, in that same time span their offense has scored 14, 45, 14, 21, and 13. The point is, Mizzou doesn’t need much but they need to capitalize. 24 points sounds right! So, if Mizzou maintains Auburn’s average of 3.6 points give up per opportunity, then they need to generate 8 scoring opportunities.

When Auburn Has the Ball

Despite juggling quarterbacks Auburn’s offense is a lot better than you’d think it is. The problem, of course, is that it needs explosive plays to function properly and, much like 3-pointers in basketball, those are not always reliable. The ground game is the efficiency mechanism while the passing game gets the big plays and that is a recipe that can certainly work against a Mizzou defense that doesn’t generate a ton of pressure and is prone to getting lit up over the top.

Win On 3rd Down

Photo by M. Anthony Nesmith/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images

Again, you wouldn’t think of it when you hear stories of Auburn’s offensive ineptitude, but they’re really not that bad at moving the ball. The issues are three-fold: they aren’t very good on 3rd-down, they stink inside the red zone, and they tend to have a crippling turnover when they absolutely cannot afford to. And, with that in mind, let’s make sure that Auburn’s 3rd-down woes continue through this game. On the year Auburn’s offense has a 41.3% success rate while Missouri is allowing a 27.8% conversion rate; let’s aim to get that to under 38% for the game.

Limit the Scoring Damage

Photo by M. Anthony Nesmith/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images

Even if Missouri can’t force a turnover or stop them on 3rd-down, at least make sure that the points scored are minimal. Mizzou’s defense isn’t super great at this, allowing 4.38 points per scoring opportunity. But even with Auburn’s foibles inside the 20-yard line, they are still averaging 4.55 points per opportunity. Keep the trips short and the points low and hopefully they can keep Auburn to 3 scoring opportunities at around 4.5 points per opportunity.

Conclusion

This is going to be rough. Because of their record and the opponents they’ve lost to, outsiders are going to write this Auburn team off as having no chance at doing anything on the road against Missouri. But, again, even in their losses they had a 93% win expectancy against Arkansas and a 74% win expectancy against Oklahoma, meaning their adjusted record is (with some rounding) 4-2. You wouldn’t overlook a 4-2 team, right?

The common denominator in their losses was a key turnover that flipped the game on its head. And while Peyton Thorne and Hank Brown are not very good quarterbacks when it comes to ball security, they are still competent at running this offense. If the turnovers don’t occur then Mizzou’s defense will need to be much better at creating pressure and disrupting the pass than they have shown in the first six games. And, offensively, Luther and Theo and Mookie need to show an ability to reliably move the chains as an answer to a killer Auburn defensive front.

I don’t feel good about this one at all but, hey, at least its at home (which means Eli is allowed to win it). This is a chance for Drinkwitz and his Tigers to make a statement on how the rest of this year goes. Just win.

The Morning Commute for Wednesday, October 16th

Welcome to the Morning Commute

Today we’re talking about bulletin board material.

Motivating a football team to get “up” for a game is an artform as old as the game itself. Sometimes an upcoming opponent says something that is truly ignorant and riles your team up (anyone remember “old man football” by Sheldon Richardson before playing Georgia?), sometimes it’s an innocent comment that gets blown out of context, and sometimes stuff is just flat made up in the form of propaganda.

If you hadn’t seen/heard, Auburn Coach Hugh Freeze held his Monday media presser and tried to hand a compliment down to Mizzou’s Eliah Drinkwitz. However, it didn’t come out quite right, because when he complimented Drink for doing a great job of building the program, he said that Drink has done so despite having a “lesser roster in recruiting.”

I’m going to give Freeze the benefit of the doubt and believe he truly meant it as a platitude but just did so in a poorly-worded effort. Either way, you know that those words are plastered all over the football complex this week to light a fire under the Mizzou players’ feet. Not that they needed extra motivation knowing what is still within reach for this team, but that little turn of phrase was probably a welcome sight for the Mizzou coaches.

This kind of bulletin board material can give, as in this instance, and it can take away, as it worked against Mizzou just a couple weeks ago leading into the Texas A&M game. If you’ll recall, Brady Cook was asked about the crowd noise he anticipated dealing with at Kyle Field, and he gave an answer about how loud they make practice with crowd noise piped in over big speakers. He said he felt practice was louder than any game, and he clearly didn’t mean that as a slight of Texas A&M fans – he was just saying that they prepare in a way where they try to make it harder in practice than it is in the game.

But that didn’t stop pundits from taking his comments out of context and presenting it as if Brady had said practice is louder and tougher than it will be at A&M. That’s not what he said, and definitely was not what he’d meant. Lesson learned I’m sure about being very intentional about the words you use.

Talk about this subject always reminds me of an instance long ago with the master of disingenuous bulletin board material – Bob Stoops at Oklahoma.

In 2002 when Oklahoma played at Mizzou (this was Brad Smith’s redshirt freshman year), there was news surfacing from Norman that reporters down there had seen signs posted in the OU team facilities that had Mizzou players talking smack about how they were going to beat the Sooners that week.

We found out about it because the local Mizzou media asked our coaches and players about those remarks. Problem was, none of our guys said anything of the sort. This was in the early stages of Gary Pinkel’s tenure when we were very reserved in all comments to the media. It was completely fabricated by OU coaches/staffers as a way to motivate the Sooners in a game they were heavily favored in.

I get why coaches do that stuff, but it really pissed me off at the time because then our guys were blindsided by the questions from the media. But in the end, Mizzou got the last laugh as we nearly pulled off the upset in a classic game against #3 OU, before falling by a 31-24 final score.

To each, his own I guess.

Did you see how Oregon brilliantly manipulated the rule book at the end of their 32-31 win over Ohio State Saturday? The Ducks were clinging to that one-point lead, and Ohio State was driving for a game-winning field goal attempt as time was winding down.

The Buckeyes had the ball at the Oregon 43-yardline on a 3rd down snap with just :10 seconds left to play. OSU had a timeout left, so they could use the whole field and needed maybe 10-15 more yards to have a decent shot at a walk-off game-winner.

Prior to the 3rd down snap, Oregon called a timeout. When they came back , Oregon took the field with 12 players, and Dan Lanning has confirmed that it was done so intentionally. Ohio State snapped the ball and threw an incomplete pass because it’s hard to find someone open when you’ve got 12 defenders. More importantly, four precious seconds ticked off the clock, leaving just :06 seconds left.

Yes, Oregon got called for the 5-yard penalty, but that only moved the ball to the Oregon 38-yardline, which would have left a 55-yard field goal attempt by OSU. Oregon gambled that Buckeye Coach Ryan Day didn’t have the kicker to make that long of a kick, and they were right, because OSU ran one more play.

And if you saw how the game ended, it ended when OSU QB Will Howard scrambled and slid on the Oregon 26, but he did so with no time left, so they couldn’t use a timeout to set up the shorter field goal try.

Because a 12-man penalty is a live ball foul, Oregon knew that the 3rd down play that didn’t count would still burn some clock, and that stroke of genius worked to perfection since Howard couldn’t get down in time on the ensuing play. It was a big gamble and it’s not something we’ll likely see too often, but it sure worked this time.

I do wonder if the rules committee will look at this going forward and try to make this penalty a dead ball foul, because doing this the way Oregon did clearly manipulated the rule book. I commend Oregon for doing it, because they used the rules to their favor. I just wonder if it will be allowed in the future?

Here’s this week’s hilarious SEC Shorts video.

Yesterday at Rock M and Rock M+

• A football game was played in Amherst, Mass. this past Saturday, and the Tigers won easily. Nate Edwards has the analytical takeaway in his weekly BTBS installment.

It was cool to see some younger guys get in on the action and have this one comfortably put away early, but for the most part the W is the only real thing to take away from this game. Nothing done during the course of this game gave you any insight of foresight to predict how the rest of the year will go. So don’t sweat anything about this game.

As Nate writes, good job Tigers, way to take care of business. Now, we’ll see what this team really has under the hood this Saturday when the talent level is more even.

• Josh Matejka’s weekly Revue compares Mizzou’s game at UMass in the vein of streaming service filler.

I wish I had some more humorous or profound observations on what this game means in the context of Mizzou’s season or its story as a program… but that’s not the point of filler! It’s not to teach us anything or to explore any meaningful depth of life (or football). It’s there to fill a slot on the schedule. And that’s it. It’s not good, it’s not bad. But it is there.

He said what we were all thinking. We all watched the game because we had to, not because we were all that excited about it. Let’s hope these types of games are a thing of the past going forward.

• The men’s hoops opponent preview series by Sam Snelling continues with a look at the SEC newbie Oklahoma Sooners.

The Sooners only lost three players to graduation or expiring eligibility, but five others hit the transfer portal. And of those five, three were among the Sooners’ leading scorers. Losing that sort of production from players who have been in your program and developed could signal some NIL struggles.

Sounds like a bit of a rebuild situation for the Sooners. You hate to see that. But more than that, you love to see that.

• Tuesday’s morning commute gave updates on Mizzou’s football TV schedule, volleyball weekly awards and some men’s hoops predictions.

• It’s election season, so time to cast your vote in the weekly SBN Reacts poll that asks Tiger fans to chime in on their confidence with the rest of the season.

• Bookmark this page as your go-to spot for Homecoming Central on Rock M Nation. This is where all of the week’s stories, previews and analysis will be housed.

• Check out what was discussed at Tiger Talk right here.

• Over at Rock M+, we’re talking about Drink’s prospects with Auburn down the road, and on the hoops side there were posts about computer rankings and a new recruiting visit by a big-man prospect.

Rock M Radio: Before the Box Score reviews the UMass dub

Subscribe to Rock M Radio on Apple Podcasts. Or stream episodes through Megaphone or Spotify. Have a question for us? Leave a 5-star review with your question and that show just might answer it in an upcoming episode!

If you like Rock M Radio drop us a Review and be sure to subscribe on your preferred podcasting platform. Follow @RockMRadio on Twitter and if you heaven’t already head over to our YouTube channel and click that subscribe button!

• (** RockMNation has affiliate partnerships. These do not influence editorial content, though RockMNation may earn commissions for products purchased via affiliate links.**)