Robert Deutsch-USA TODAY Sports
Mizzou made a big splash in April landing Duke transfer, Mark Mitchell. The fourth Tiger from the Sunflower State will seek to deliver on his elite potential and give the Tigers something it missed a year ago.
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
The nice feature of the inception of the transfer portal is rekindling interest in recruits who seemed destined to end up elsewhere. A perfect example of that is Tamar Bates. So is Mark Mitchell. How fitting that two close friends, who started their careers at blue blood programs, have returned home to become teammates?
For those unaware, Mitchell, Tamar Bates, Aidan Shaw, and Caleb Grill are all Kansas products.
Calling Kansas City, Kansas home, Mitchell rose to prominence at Bishop Miege before spending his senior season in Wichita at Sunrise Christian Academy. On the grassroots circuit, Mitchell ran with KC Run GMC, where he was teammates with a one-and-done pick in Gradey Dick, a fact we won’t hold it against him.
As a top-15 talent in 247Sports’ composite index, Mitchell’s size, athleticism, and developing tool kit gave him his choice of programs to call home. While UCLA, Kansas and Missouri were among his nominal finalists, Duke long had the inside track during his initial recruitment, besting the Bruins at the finish line.
To the disappointment of many Mizzou folks, the Blue Devils seemingly offered him the best fit. Mitchell’s freshman season affirmed that case on the surface after he averaged 9.1 points and 4.5 rebounds per game as a consistent starter. That year, Mitchell spent more time as a traditional wing. He was used in various actions that let him flash his wares for NBA evaluators.
Circumstances shifted, however, as a sophomore.
Playing alongside future NBA pick Kyle Filipowski, Mitchell’s touches devolved more into a “derivative role.” Filipowski and Duke’s deep bench of guards was tasked with the playmaking roles that premier players covet. Mitchell performed ably, perhaps exceptionally, but in a role that saw him spend far less time with the ball in his hands. He once again was featured as a routine starter on his way to averaging 11.6 points and 6.0 rebounds per game on a Duke team that reached the Elite Eight.
Brad Penner-USA TODAY Sports
But something was missing. After all, why would THAT player leave a place like Duke?
We can’t be sure whether it was his tight-knit relationship with Bates, who saw his game flourish at Mizzou, or something more rational, like seeing Dennis Gates turn Kobe Brown into a bona fide star. We do know that while this relationship could be good for Mark, it could be even better for Mizzou.
The Numbers
Stats credited to Barttorvik.com
Mitchell’s documented history provides something of a two-for-one. Often, a transfer’s track record gives us a good idea about what to expect from them. Put another way, most transfers come to their new home as a high-floor, low-ceiling proposition. A safe bet, if you will. This is why it’s rare to land someone like Mitchell, who carries the potential of reaching another plateau while offering you a really high baseline. Allow me to explain further.
As we discussed at the outset, Mitchell’s role changed — or, at minimum, was adjusted — from his freshman year to his sophomore year in Durham. As a freshman, roughly 17% of his touches came in actions designed to put the ball in his hands, whether “letting him cook” off the bounce or designing post-up opportunities on the block. All in all, he managed a respectable 0.818 points per possession.
Last season, though, those opportunities were almost cut in half, making up just 10.4% of his offensive profile. And that was despite a moderate boost in efficiency (0.821 PPP), but I’ll get to that in a minute.
What Mitchell was asked to be was a good teammate. Duke’s offense put Filipowski, who slid down to the post, and freshman wing Jaren McCain front and center. That logic was sound given that McCain went No. 16 overall in the NBA draft, while “Flip” came off the board early in the second round. Yet it also meant Mitchell took on a supporting role.
What does that mean in practical terms?
Almost 60% of Mitchell’s offense came from running the floor in transition, cutting off the ball, cleaning up putback opportunities, and other miscellaneous tasks. He performed that work exceptionally well, posting efficiency marks in each area that grade rate well above average nationally.
But the clock on development ticks a little faster in Durham. It’s simply a matter of when the next ballyhooed recruiting class will take up a vet’s minutes. This time, the man coming for Mitchell’s role is Cooper Flagg.
Mark needed a new director if he wanted to be cast in a leading role. Enter Dennis Gates.
The arc of Kobe Brown’s career before his spectacular senior season is instructive. Kobe wasn’t altogether different than Mitchell. Both men offer a similar physique and athleticism profile. Mark might be more athletic and advanced defensively. Still, Kobe’s aptitude as a connector and facilitator was further along at this stage.
This is not a promise that Mitchell will be the next Brown. Yet the players will likely be cast in similar roles, so it’s helpful to use Kobe’s senior year as a template for what might be in store for Mitchell.
Kobe’s role in the Mizzou offense was anything but derivative. It was distributive. He was the focal point, an ideal fit for the organizing principles of Gates’ offense. From there, MU could get creative in how Brown was used. They could deploy him in ball screens as a handler and roller. He had leeway to attack mismatches in the mid-post and at the elbows. Most importantly, he operated as a playmaker to generate looks for teammates in MU’s modified Princeton-style offensive sets. He needed to be good at everything, and he was nearly perfect.
(Disclaimer: Any and all Kobe comparisons are illustrative in nature. The reader fully assumes the risk of any emotional harm sustained through said comparisons.)
Turning back to Mitchell, the evidence we have in hand that he’ll reprise the “Kobe Role” is limited. We only have 76 career possessions to evaluate his ability as an advantage creator. That’s not near enough to make any definitive pronouncements. We’re left reading tea leaves into the assumed role he’ll occupy and how his talents can translate.
This summer, we tried to glimpse how Mitchell could work executing some of Kobe’s old duties. Matt Harris provided a detailed breakdown of this topic, should you be interested in reading more. But for our purposes here, we’ll share some of his film.
Mitchell struggled a bit in designed post-up actions ran for him a year ago, though again, the sample size is limited.
He performed better when he was the secondary option on the block.
And finally, when he was asked to generate offense from the elbow, his touches were minimal. However, you can see the combination of size, speed and skill that Kobe Brown offered in a very similar — though much more extensive — role.
The final offensive aspect worth discussing is another Kobe Brown corollary: jump shooting.
Through two seasons at Duke, Mitchell connected on 30 of 94 (31.9%) attempts from beyond the arc. Over two seasons, he averaged a pedestrian 0.845 PPP on spot-up attempts throughout his career and an equally mediocre 0.948 PPP on jumpers taken off the catch.
Brown would empathize.
Coming off his junior season, Brown was only 49 of 205 (23.9%) for his career from long range. Then came a great leap. Brown made 45.5% of his 3-balls to lead Mizzou in accuracy. The two players both featured a slightly funky delivery, which will indeed be addressed in the offseason, the same as in 2022. However, much of Brown’s efficacy in his playmaking role can be owed to being an elite shot-maker with the jumper. While a similar level of improvement may be unrealistic in Mitchell, it would be welcomed. The third prong of the triple threat — shoot, dribble and pass! — is a vital one.
Perhaps improperly saved for last, Mark Mitchell has proven to be an elite defender through his first two seasons.
And he’s not simply cast in an “I can guard one type of player really well” role. He can muscle up with bigger players down low and possesses the lateral quickness and determination to erase any advantage perimeter players possess. His defensive capabilities will be vital in a scheme where switching is a given.
Although his ability to generate deflections didn’t manifest much in the steals or block department, the Mizzou coaching staff is undoubtedly excited over what he can do in a scheme more focused on creating them.
https://t.co/gfUDCKGGOz pic.twitter.com/AuKzxcmz5P
— Order On The Court ⚖️ (@DataMizzou) August 4, 2024
The Role
We don’t need many qualifiers and caveats when discussing Mitchell’s role — outside of reiterating he’s not a carbon copy of Brown. There may be questions about whether he shares the “Boss” role occupied by Kobe Brown with other players or is featured there exclusively.
What we can say with supreme confidence is that Mitchell is going to play and play a lot.
My offseason projections see him second on the team in minutes at 70.5% of minutes played — or roughly 28 minutes per game — which is second most on the team. I also anticipate a usage rate increase over his career 18.8% figure, or 20% a year ago. Kobe Brown’s number hovered in the 23-24% area for the duration of his senior campaign, and I’d expect Mark’s to come in just below that at 22%. Unless, of course, he proves to be Brown reincarnate. Should those figures manifest, seeing him develop into a 12-point to 14-point-per-night player is very reasonable.
Rob Kinnan-USA TODAY Sports
Having scoured the spreadsheets, I find it hard to find recent comps for a player of Mitchell’s lofty production and prospect status. However, doing the best I could, the most similar players to Mitchell saw no change to the minutes played, with slight increases in usage and efficiency. This profile fits very well with his projected data. And it would make for a superlative addition to any roster, but especially this one.
0 Comments