Uncategorized

Week 6 Analytics MVP: Special Teamer headlines a rough week

Missouri v Texas A&M
Photo by Tim Warner/Getty Images

There wasn’t much on the bright side for the Tigers this week

As one would expect from a 41-10 drubbing at the hands of No. 15 Texas A&M, the now No. 21 Missouri Tigers didn’t have a lot to show for analytically from Week 6. In fact, the entire team was under the 30th percentile in VAT on offense and defense from top to bottom.

Defensively, the Tigers accumulated a mere seven pressures. Seven pressures is lower than any amount of pressures the Tigers got in a game last season, and it’s actually the second time the Tigers have done it as they picked up seven against Murray State. It is the lowest amount in a game since week six of 2022 when the Tigers picked up six pressures in a 24-17 loss to Florida.

To add on, the Tigers allowed 18 completions on 20 targets as a defense — with two other incompletions being throwaways — and an NFL QBR allowed of 118.8. The Tigers also missed seven tackles in a game that had plenty of tackling opportunities, considering the Aggies dominated possession of the ball from start to finish.

Offensively, it was a pretty rough outing for this team as only one player had above a grade of 70 from PFF and that was Luther Burden III. Brady Cook had his lowest adjusted completion percentage in a game since the Georgia game last season, an excusable offense considering the grandeur of that opponent.

This weeks edition of analytics MVPs will feature an unusual side of the football garnering love, as there was one man that had a truly reputable performance. Let’s take a look:

Luke Bauer | Punter

Bauer picked up the most punts in a single game this season with five, and made the most of his opportunity with his best performance since the opener against Murray State. Bauer had 228 yards punting at 45.6 yards per punt, downing one punt inside the 20 and only picking up one touchback.


Bauer was in the 94th percentile of hangtime which is why he was 22nd percentile in return rate, as he gave good time for the Tigers coverage team. Bauer’s numbers are encouraging, but I am intrigued to see how he does in the pressure of a closer game where flipping the field is even more important.

Unfortunately, there’s a lack of tape on punters so I can’t even get tape on what I thought was Bauer’s best punt. However, it was a punt that gave the Aggies bad field position as they started their drive from the 10-yard-line.

The famous saying in football is that there’s three phases of the game, and unfortunately for the Tigers they got a standout performance from the phase of the game that shows up the least. However, if the Tigers can get a full team performance going forward, Bauer can be a great asset to a team that needs to bounce back

Legend

Punters

Return Rate: The rate that a punters punts are returned by the opposition
Inside 20: The rate that a punters punts are downed inside the 20-yard-line
Hangtime: The amount of time a punters punts spend in the air
Dead Balls: The amount of balls that aren’t touched by the returner.

read more

Mizzou Hoops Player Preview: Annor Boateng

Arkansas PBS

The top-30 talent and headliner of a ballyhooed recruiting class might find the best route to minutes is wreaking havoc on defense and in the open floor.

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 the team has plenty more video and analysis on every player that can be found on https://rockm.plus.


The Player

When Annor Boateng committed to Missouri, it was easy to frame the decision as a pivot point in coach Dennis Gates’ tenure.

The Tigers pulled off a cross-border incursion to pluck a top-50 prospect from Arkansas when Hogs’ program looked healthy. On the court, Boateng was wrapping a stretch where his streaky jumper found a measure of relative calm. Back then, it was easy to imagine Boateng’s senior campaign at Little Rock Central as one of resolution – a state title for his squad and resolving lingering questions about his skill set.

Well, one of those came to pass.

For Boateng, though, his shooting stroke reverted to flakiness, and his handle still needed tightening. His ceiling as a freshman might hinge on how much progress he has made since arriving this summer, but MU’s roster refurbishing might have blunted the pressure for him to deliver quick returns.

For starters, Tamar Bates stuck around. Caleb Grill received a medical redshirt. And the Tigers pulled Jacob Crews from the transfer portal. Across nine seasons, that trio has connected on 35.5 percent of catch-and-shoot 3s – a blend of experience and shooting that serves as a buffer if Boateng’s stroke isn’t dialed in early.

As you’ll see, Boateng assaults the rim in ways that optimally align with MU’s scheme — and don’t involve him attacking a gap against a set defense off the bounce. So, success might be a matter of Boateng translating what he already does well.

The Numbers


Arkansas PBS

Assessing Boateng’s most recent sample of play demanded a concession.

When he suited up for Central, Boateng was part of a six-man rotation featuring only one proper interior option in C.J. Washington, a 6-foot-8 forward. As a result, Boateng, who stands 6-foot-6, slid down the positional ladder to play as a four-man. Spacing the floor in four-out sets wasn’t a significant compromise, but the more consequential adaptation saw Boateng draw defensive assignments that kept him around the mid-post and elbows.

Those tradeoffs didn’t dent Boateng’s productivity. (He still repeated as Arkansas’ Gatorade Player of the Year.) But on film, Boateng doesn’t always conform to our traditional idea of a wing.

Boateng’s best source of on-ball opportunities came in transition, usually via a grab-and-go or by creating a live-ball turnover. As the clips illustrate, Boateng’s a terror if there’s open hardwood in front of him, but it’s worth watching how he maneuvers with a bit of congestion.

Boateng’s blend of size and strength made a defender’s attempt to stop the ball futile. His handle and wiggle were also good enough to attack slivers of space and pry them open when a defense tried to build a wall. Boateng’s finishing package hinted at some diversity, particularly footwork that helped him reach the rim with his stronger right hand.

Boateng’s efforts weren’t flawless, though.

He averaged 0.923 points per possession when leading the break, and it’s not hard to identify the source of drag: turnovers. Boateng gave the ball away 36.8 percent when leading the break. And almost half of those giveaways came from a loose handle, making it easy for defenders to get a paw on the ball and strip it out.

Now the good news: Boateng’s turnover rate drops to 10.2 percent in transition situations where he’s running the floor. Those touches were also worth 1.220 points, the efficiency you want to see from a player who makes a large part of their living on the break.

Once Central initiated a set, Boateng ceded much of the responsibility for advantage creation to Luke Moore and Daniel Culberson. Yet the Tigers spent the early part of last season jetting around the country playing in showcase tournaments, where opponents sometimes defaulted to zone to take Central out of rhythm. In that situation, Boateng excelled as a cutter flashing into pockets of space or darting along the baseline for lobs.

So, Boateng can be potent in transition and as a cutter — two traits vital for a wing in Gates’ system. But does he shoot it well enough to maintain optimal spacing?

Well…

Last July and August, Boateng’s performance on the 3SSB circuit and some elite prospect camps offered hints that stability wasn’t far away. However, those results were fleeting. As a senior at Central, Boateng made just 28.2 percent of his catch-and-shoot 3s, including 14 of 52 hoisted up from spot-up situations. And that performance improved from the 25.2 percent mark Boateng produced as a junior.

Watching Boateng shoot the ball creates a frustrating dissonance. His mechanics look great, but the results don’t match up. It’s enough to make you look up wonky material on the biomechanics behind shooting to see if you can diagnose what goes awry, which creates more frustration because — at first glance — there’s nothing glaringly broken about Boateng’s jumper.

To add another wrinkle, Boateng showed some intriguing proficiency when attempting 3s off the dribble, particularly the one-dribble variety out of high pick-and-rolls. But then you look at the whole picture, and Boateng’s 3-pointing shooting off the bounce (25.4%) closely mirrors his results off the catch.

Still, Boateng wouldn’t be the first highly-rated wing needing time to calibrate their stroke. Over the past five years, wings rated in the top 50 of 247’s composite index typically knocked down 31 percent of 3s taken off the catch. Their volume of attempts (1.5 per game) was also modest enough that it didn’t exert much sway in how opponents crafted game plans.

Or think of it this way: Boateng shooting 35 percent from 3-point range on three attempts per game would qualify as an outlier performance. Again, MU’s inventory of proven shooters is enough that Boateng won’t face overwhelming pressure to deliver that kind of performance.

When Boateng catches, rips through, and gets going in a straight line, he can wreak havoc, averaging 1.30 points on possessions where he reaches the rim. There’s also some clean-up work when Boateng tries playing downhill from spot-up situations. He turned the ball over 26.6% of the time using his right hand.

Boateng might drag his pivot foot or extend his off arm in early-clock settings. However, there are possessions where his first step doesn’t create separation, forcing Boateng to reset and go again. It’s the secondary attack where he might initiate contact to get his shoulders past a defender, or the ball gets away from his body.

Boateng’s application of defensive tools might be the handiwork that earns him more playing time.

In almost every setting we’ve seen him, he’s been a reliable off-ball defender who does rote work like closing down shooters. Last season, they only knocked down 27.1 percent of 3-point looks when Boateng put a hand in their faces.

As noted earlier, Boateng’s role at Central meant he spent more time matched against frontline players. A downstream result is the limited volume of on-ball possessions against perimeter threats, but he held his own in our sample of touches. For example, he only allowed 0.389 points when handling a player in isolation.

Boateng also excelled at taking away the right hand from drivers. And in some of the snippets, you’ll notice he’s in situations where big men attempt to bully him on drives from the elbow.

In June, we tried to rationally forecast how many minutes each of MU’s freshmen should expect to see. In Boateng’s case, the median allotment is roughly 14 minutes each night. That might seem modest for a recruit of his caliber, but that dosage makes sense under modern approaches to roster building.

We’ve already alluded to the presence of Bates, Grill and Crews creating veteran congestion on the wing, but alternate routes are also hard to find. Boateng received sporadic chances to work as a secondary creator with the Arkansas Hawks, but those evaporated out of necessity with Central. So, it’s hard to foresee Boateng stealing time at combo guard.

If we take Boateng’s skill set at face value, it might be best suited for small-ball configurations where Boateng’s length and physicality might make life hell in traps and he can backfill some rebounding. Offensively, he might have more opportunities to get in the open floor and assault the rim. And if his jumper has progressed to the point where he’s a replacement-level spacer, Gates could increase the dosage of PT.

The Role


Arkansas PBS

Come November, Annor Boateng will have a spot in the nightly rotation. Three things will determine where he lands in the rotation:

  1. The shooting mentioned above
  2. How well the other wings in Mizzou’s deep bench are playing
  3. His health; Boateng was sidelined for stretches with a lingering leg injury this summer

Reviewing similarly rated freshman wings over recent years tells us that the average minutes played mark is between 40% and 45% — or between 16 and 18 minutes per contest. For Boateng, we feel that may be a little aggressive, based on the three considerations above.

Mizzou has many bodies vying for time at the off-ball perimeter positions, including Crews, Bates, Grill, and Marcus Allen. If you stretch the positional alignment slightly, you add players like Aidan Shaw, Mark Mitchell and Trent Pierce to the equation. The house is indeed crowded.

We’re willing to bet on Annor’s exceptional abilities in the open court and on defense to carve out a solid role. We see him getting around 30% of minutes — 12 minutes per night — with the potential for more if his offensive game has advanced. A projected usage rate of 18% would fall directly in line with prior examples of freshman wings of his star profile.

Much of Boateng’s success in the point column will be tied to how well Mizzou performs as a team and how fast they can play. Should the expectations be met, Boateng could see a respectable 4-5 points per night.


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.

read more
Mizzou Hoops Player Preview: Annor Boateng

Mizzou Hoops Player Preview: Annor Boateng

Arkansas PBS The top-30 talent and headliner of a ballyhooed recruiting class might find the best route to minutes is wreaking havoc on defense and in the open floor. Over the weeks leading up to the season, this series will dive deep into the players we see making a...

read more

Is UMass a get-right game for Mizzou?

Brady Cook with a ball bouncing off his helmet
Nothing went right for Mizzou against Texas A&M. Does it matter if it all goes right this week? | (CAL TOBIAS/ROCK M NATION)

The Tigers are looking to rebound after a disgusting performance last week. Will doing it against this opponent matter?

As a brilliant poet from a bygone era once wrote:

“I get knocked down, but I get up again. You are never gonna keep me down. I get knocked down, but I get up again. You are never gonna keep me down. I get knocked down, but I get up again. You are never gonna keep me down. I get knocked down, but I get up again. You are never gonna gonna keep me down.” — Chumbawumba (1997)

Coming off arguably the worst performance of the Eli Drinkwitz era, the Mizzou football Tigers are in desperate need of a vibe shift, a mojo rejuvenation, a momentum reboot, or any kind of movement in a positive direction. Mizzou needs, in college football parlance, a get-right game. Unfortunately for the Tigers, this week’s opponent may not provide the prerequisites for the type of proper demon-exorcising get-right game that can help put them back on the right track.

Brady Cook looking down dejectedly
Missouri quarterback Brady Cook (12) takes out his mouthguard after getting sacked for a loss of six yards in the second quarter of a game against Texas A&M on Saturday, October 5, 2024, at Kyle Field in College Station, Texas. (CAL TOBIAS/ROCK M NATION)

The anatomy of “getting right”

It’s a tale as old as time: a ranked Power 4 opponent loses a difficult or disappointing game and rebounds the next week by taking out their frustrations on an undermanned team, winning handily and in convincing fashion. Commonly known as a “get-right game,” this type of performance allow a team to ostensibly fix, or “get-right,” the issues that plagued them in their loss the week prior. These games also allow the rebounding team to vent their frustrations from a potentially season-altering loss on some poor sap of a squad that has little chance of competing in the game.

After experiencing the brutal beat down last week in the form of a 41-10 loss to Texas A&M, the Mizzou football team is stewing in their feels, ripe for a get-right game. Sadly, this week’s match up against UMASS won’t give them the satisfaction they want and need.

To qualify as a get-right game, a few requirements must be met:

1) Disappointing loss the previous week.

2) Noticeable deficiencies that need to be corrected.

3) Undermanned FBS opponent.

The Tigers check the first two boxes with giant capital CHECK marks. The third requirement, however, doesn’t quite meet the standard. To call the UMASS Minutemen an undermanned opponent is an insult to all the bad, uncompetitive G5 teams around the country. Playing an FCS opponent can’t count as a get-right game because the disparity in talent and resources is so vast that satisfaction can’t be achieved, no matter how bad the final score looks. The UMASS program, while technically FBS in name, is not in practice

Massachusetts v Northern Illinois
Photo by Geoff Stellfox/Getty Images
UMASS is bad.

Moribund Minutemen

Inexplicably, UMASS made the (terrible) decision to join the FBS ranks in 2012. This followed several years of success at the FCS level, including eight playoff births in 30 years. In a stretch from 1998-2008, the Minutemen went a combined 92-56, including 43-19 under current head coach Don Brown in his first stint in Amherst. Strangely, UMASS leadership got a wild hair to move the program up a level in 2012 and in the subsequent 13 years, the Minutemen have gone 25-117. In Don Brown’s sequel stint beginning in 2022, UMASS is 5-25.

There is bad and then there is UMASS bad. So far this season, the Minutemen are 1-5, with losses to:

  • Eastern Michigan (28-14)
  • Toledo (38-23)
  • Buffalo (34-3)
  • Miami OH (23-20)
  • Northern Illinois (34-20)

Their lone win was against an FCS team in 2-3 Central Connecticut State (35-31). That’s a CCSU Blue Devil team that went 3-8 last year. No matter how bad the Tigers beat the Minutemen this week, the sheer disparity in talent and resources, as well as the moribundity of the UMASS program, will render the entire performance moot (see Mizzou vs. Delaware State, 2016).

The Tigers clearly have many problems that need solved, issues to be fixed and bad vibes to be vacuumed following the shellacking by the Aggies last week:

  • Passing game efficiency
  • Running game efficiency
  • Gaping holes in the defensive line
  • Porous coverage in the secondary
  • A partridge in a pear tree

Sadly, none of these problems can be counted as solved, even if the team shows improvement on Saturday. If Brady Cook goes 23-25 for 325 yards and four touchdowns? UMASS’s secondary is bad. If the running game averages 8 yards per carry? UMASS’s run defense is even worse. If the Tigers hold the Minutemen to 3 yards per carry? UMASS already averages that much per carry against worse competition. Hold UMASS to 200 passing yards? That’s what they average against worse competition.

No matter how it’s sliced, a Tiger win, whether it be by 20, 30, or 50 points, will not rinse the taste of orange juice and toothpaste from the mouths of the players, coaches and fans. The only thing that can replace that bad taste is a win over a competitive program. Unfortunately, the Tigers won’t get an opportunity to do that for another week. So, instead, we will all have to sit in this pit of poop for a while longer, hoping we can at least see some long touchdown passes and a third down stop or two on defense. For as the bard sang:

I get knocked down (we’ll be singing)
But I get up again (pissing the night away)
You are never gonna keep me down (when we’re winning)

read more
Is UMass a get-right game for Mizzou?

Is UMass a get-right game for Mizzou?

Nothing went right for Mizzou against Texas A&M. Does it matter if it all goes right this week? | (CAL TOBIAS/ROCK M NATION) The Tigers are looking to rebound after a disgusting performance last week. Will doing it against this opponent matter? As a brilliant poet...

read more

Massachusetts Minutemen Preview

Massachusetts v Northern Illinois
Photo by Geoff Stellfox/Getty Images

This isn’t even important enough to be a “get right” game. Sigh.

Here is the preview I did in June.

UMass is so bad…

/points mic to crowd

Crowd: “HOW BAD ARE THEY”

…UMass is so bad that Missouri could play the exact way they played against Texas A&M and still win by 10.

UMass is currently 121st in SP+. They’ve lost to teams ranked 110th, 82nd, 114th, 107, and 92nd. They beat Central Connecticut – currently ranked 261st out of all 764 college football teams – by 4 points at home.

Our friends, the Buffalo Bulls, currently rank 128th are sitting at 3-2, with an upset victory over a ranked Northern Illinois squad. So, not only is UMass bad, but they can’t even find victories at the same level as a team that is extremely close in quality.

Yes, this game is on the road which means Eli Drinkwitz is not allowed to win it. But this might be an exception to that rule.

When Missouri Has the Ball

Missouri’s Offense vs. Massachusetts’ Defense

There are quite a few former-FBS transfers littered on this roster so, in theory, the talent is there. But they are still mostly not good. The 108th overall ranking means its the best unit of the UMass program, and their 22nd ranking in pass defense is, obviously, Top 25 good. But having the best pass defense on the planet doesn’t mean jack squat if teams don’t pass on you…which is the case. Teams are running at an unprecedented rate against UMass, whether it’s standard downs (66.5% of the plays are runs) or passing downs (40.4% of the plays are runs), some of the highest run rates in the country! Which makes sense, since the Minutemen defense ranks 88th against the run, 104th in runs that go at least four yards, 118th in stopping runs at or behind the line of scrimmage, while giving up at least 9 yards per successful rush. The keys to this game are simple:

Run The Dang Ball


Missouri running back Nate Noel (8) evades Texas A&M defensive back Dalton Brooks (25) for a gain in the first quarter of a game on Saturday, October 5, 2024, at Kyle Field in College Station, Texas. (CAL TOBIAS/ROCK M NATION)

Please! It’s what Mizzou is best at! It provides the best opportunity for explosive plays, features two guys who are equally skilled (in different ways), and doesn’t rely on Brady Cook crawling out of his own head to make the correct read and an accurate throw. Plus UMass is bad at defending the run. Shoot for a 50% success rate on the ground.

Connect on a Pass That Travels More than 20 Yards Through the Air


Missouri wide receiver Luther Burden III (3) celebrates a reception for a gain in the first quarter of a game against Texas A&M on Saturday, October 5, 2024, at Kyle Field in College Station, Texas. (CAL TOBIAS/ROCK M NATION)

Just to prove that you can still do that.

Finish Your Dang Drives


Missouri wide receiver Luther Burden III (3) celebrates scoring a touchdown which was later called back in the first quarter of a game against Texas A&M on Saturday, October 5, 2024, at Kyle Field in College Station, Texas. (CAL TOBIAS/ROCK M NATION)

UMass is allowing 4.14 points per scoring opportunity, which currently ranks 72nd. Please, Mizzou, in the name of everything sacred about this sport and this institution of higher learning, please create at least 8 scoring opportunities and finish with more than 5 points per opportunity. Just to show that you still care about looking cool and good while playing football.

When Massachusetts Has the Ball

Missouri’s Defense vs. Massachusetts’ Offense

UMass has almost a 100% transfer-filled starting lineup. And, no, they’re not good. 115th in offense, in fact! They’re not efficient, they’re not explosive, they have one of the worst 3-and-out rates in the country, the third-worst starting field position in the country, and only average 3.29 points per scoring opportunity.

But they are +1 in turnover margin! So they do have something!

Let them be bad


Missouri defensive tackle Kristian Williams (5) and Missouri wide receiver Theo Wease Jr. (1) walk out on the field before a game against Texas A&M on Saturday, October 5, 2024, at Kyle Field in College Station, Texas.(CAL TOBIAS/ROCK M NATION)

I really can’t find anything here to be concerned about. Yeah, they’re in the middle of the pack in connecting on deep passes but how much does that matter when you can’t effective run, block, stay out of obvious passing situations, or maintain a passing completion percentage over 58%? If the Missouri defense just plays straight man defense they should be able to hold UMass to 14, let alone of they show any semblance of creativity.

I will guarantee that UMass will score but if the talent gap means anything then that should be it. This should be a game where younger defenders can get in there and show the coaching staff some live action quality.

Conclusion

Don’t lose this one. We have to blow up the program and sell it for parts if this ends up being a loss.

read more
Massachusetts Minutemen Preview

Massachusetts Minutemen Preview

Photo by Geoff Stellfox/Getty Images This isn’t even important enough to be a “get right” game. Sigh. Here is the preview I did in June. UMass is so bad... /points mic to crowd Crowd: “HOW BAD ARE THEY” ...UMass is so bad that Missouri could play the exact way they...

read more

Join Our Mizzou Sports Newsletter