Let's dive back in to more of your questions, starting with what makes for a successful coach.

Hi Ace,

Curious on your thoughts on what the most important aspects to being a great college coach are (e.g. 40% recruiting/roster management, 30% team management, 20% PR/face of program, 10% scheme/Xs-and-Os, etc), and how you'd grade Howard's first season along those lines, as well as a prognosis going forward.

Best,
Mike

I'll preface with this: there's a lot more than one way to be a highly successful college coach. Recruiting at a high level can cover for shortcomings as a strategist. A strong player development program can make up for recruiting lesser talent than your peers. John Beilein and Larry Brown have (officially) made the same number of Final Fours. Same goes for Bill Self and Jay Wright. These coaches aren't similar in on- or off-court approach but they've fit at their respective schools, which is arguably the most important factor.

If I had to break it down into categories, they'd be: fit with school/administration, recruiting/image, roster management, player development, scheme, and game management. While an elite college coach doesn't have to be great at every one of these factors, they usually check off most of the boxes.

It's early yet to be able to judge Juwan Howard on some of these. A quick stab at grades:

Fit with school/administration: A. I'm assuming the readers of this post are familiar with Juwan Howard, former All-American at Michigan, basketball lifer, and universally regarded good dude. It's hard to overstate how fortunate the program was that such a tight fit was available despite the late timing of John Beilein's departure.

Recruiting/image: A. Howard is the face of the program, his first recruiting class ranks fourth in the country, and he could still add a second five-star to that group. This moves up to an A+ if Josh Christopher commits—it'd be difficult to imagine a better start after Howard had to hit the ground running with a 2020 class that needed more commits than usual.

Roster management: Incomplete. We'll learn more about Howard's ability to juggle a roster this offseason. He appears prepared for unexpected attrition with Michigan's pursuit of multiple grad transfer point guards even though the team is full for the moment after scratching Austin Davis and Adrien Nunez off the potential attrition list.

Beilein learned the hard way that great programs lose players at a steady rate to both the NBA and programs where even established rotation players can find more playing time; it took him a while to adjust and he still got caught off-guard by last year's early entry decisions by Jordan Poole and Iggy Brazdeikis. Howard seems to know how the game is played and his experience as both a former elite player and the father of high-level prospects should serve him well.

Player development: Incomplete. The unexpected breakout of Austin Davis indicates Howard at least should be good at getting the most out of his big men. That said, it's way too early to put a grade on his player development. This is something to revisit a year or three down the road.

Scheme: B+. I really like the framework. Howard didn't stand pat with John Beilein's offense despite having his pick-and-roll duo as seniors, instead building around the ball screen offense with plenty of NBA sets and added wrinkles. The defensive philosophy was also clear: play man defense with the occasional zone changeup (almost always after a timeout), use drop pick-and-roll coverage when possible, run shooters off the arc, and force players to beat you one-on-one.

I need to see more to move the grade any higher, especially since he could build so much off the Simpson/Teske pick-and-roll—we'll get a clearer view of how Howard wants to operate as he molds the roster to his preference instead of working with another coach's players.

Game management: B-. The area I most want to see improvement. Howard made some strange lineup decisions during the season that were usually borne of his strong adherence to the hated autobench policy. His best schematic adjustments often came either between games against the same opponent (see: hedging Cassius Winston and leaving Xavier Tillman to shoot in the second MSU game) or too late in the game to alter the outcome (see: playing Brandon Johns at center against Wisconsin).

I wouldn't say Howard was bad at game management by any stretch. He had to work within some serious limitations when Franz Wagner and Isaiah Livers were absent for significant stretches of time. He utilized timeouts well on both ends, drawing up effective plays and using that zone changeup to flummox offenses running a set to beat man. I would've loved to see him in a postseason tournament setting this year. Alas.

[Hit THE JUMP for what I'm missing most about the tournament, what next year's offense could look like, and more.]

there'll never be another Captain Hook [Marc-Gregor Campredon]

Who are you most sad about not seeing in the tournament?

Who deserves it the most? X for sure

Who I wanted to see go nuts? Franz! But! I would of loved see Livers or even Brooks go off (Brooks is the type of player that could)...Or a Teske redemption. Man it’s tough.

— Mike (@LordBallsmore) March 24, 2020

There were plenty of players I looked forward to watching. When the postseason was called off, however, my mind went straight to Zavier Simpson. I could list so many reasons. He's a senior. He's not an NBA prospect and his game is a strange fit in most high-level pro leagues; depending on how (and where) he wants to live his life, he may have played his last organized game. Even in the context of everything that's going on right now, I feel awful for him.

It's also for selfish reasons. We're never going to see a Michigan point guard like Simpson again. That'll be welcome in one respect: shooting. In every other way, we're worse off. He was one of the best passers in the country and also one of its best defenders. His mood-to-size ratio was off the charts. He set the emotional tone for the program for three years.

Listed generously at 6'0", Simpson made the sky hook his signature shot. You know, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's shot. Kareem, notably, is a full 14 inches taller than Simpson and arguably the greatest center of all time. Simpson started with right-handers, added the left, and reached the point he'd make one on a fast break:

try that, Kareem

I don't think it's an exaggeration to say nobody is going to play the point guard position at this level like Zavier Simpson ever again. When the game tried to move away from him, he bodied it up and made it go where he wanted. I'm going to miss watching him play.

the next Stauskas? LeVert? Iggy? [Campredon]

What do you anticipate the playcalling to look like next year with no Simpson to run the offense (how many pick and rolls, who increases their usage, etc)?

— David Lectka (@davidlectka) March 23, 2020

Until we know next year's roster, I have to largely punt here. (I promise I'll have plenty of content on this once the roster is set.) It's safe to assume the offense will be more egalitarian and run less through one player without Simpson; we could also see a slight downtick in pick-and-roll usage, though Howard's NBA background and his playcalling this season indicate it'll still be a huge part of the offense.

Given the glut of skilled players who can play the four and five, I anticipate Howard will utilize more horns sets, which is a great way to take advantage of multiple big men who can make plays on offense. Otherwise, there are a lot of things still up in the air that could dramatically change the way the offense looks:

• Isaiah Livers and Franz Wagner are both getting NBA Draft feedback. Livers is the only player on the team who's proven he can shoot three-pointers on the move. Wagner could blossom into the living mismatch that is an oversized wing who can shoot and make plays off the dribble.
• Adding Josh Christopher, an attacking two-guard with great size and athleticism, would have a significant impact on the distribution of usage.
• Between potential grad transfers in, the implied potential transfers out, the potentially close battle between David DeJulius and Eli Brooks, and the possibility Christopher takes away 25-30 minutes per game in the backcourt, the situation at point guard is unsettled.
• Colin Castleton is a wild card at center. He's by far the most mobile of the three options (over Hunter Dickinson and Austin Davis) and has the most potential to add a three-point shot this year. He could be Moe 2.0; he could be the same guy he was this year and get squeezed out of playing time.

We'll revisit this.

#mgomailbag I dislike the outsized impact foul trouble can have. What would you think about no player foul limits, but adding more FTs per foul (i.e. a player's 6th foul = 3fts, 7th = 4 etc. - or whatever numbers make sense)?

— Bryan Mortenson (@BryanMortenson) March 24, 2020

I agree that fouls have too much of an impact on the college game. Backup center is a position of greater import than it should be because of the current foul limit and the way the game is officiated—and, yes, the way coaches often overreact to foul trouble.

Messing with free throw numbers feels too gimmicky and overimpactful, though. A player's foul that wouldn't normally result in a free throw—ex. if someone picks up their sixth on a charge—now becomes, in essence, an NBA technical. Players in foul trouble would be targeted to the point we could see a lot of James Harden-like play at the end of games, except with players far less skilled than James Harden. It also might end up with coaches benching these players anyway because the defensive penalty isn't worth keeping them out there.

Instead, I'd rather bump the foul limit up to six. The NCAA had the five-foul limit in place four decades before they introduced a 45-second shot clock. It's past time to adjust for the massive increase in the speed of the game since then. Sure, it no longer aligns with the NBA by fouls allowed per minute. Neither does the shot clock and the three-point arc. Sometimes the simplest change is the one to make.

From 1942-43 until the 1944-45 season, when the foul limit was moved from four to five, the NCAA had a rule in place that allowed players who hadn't fouled out in regulation to commit a fifth foul without being disqualified if the game went to overtime. They got rid of the overtime exception when they increased the foul limit. At the very least, they should absolutely bring that back.

This is the organization that banned dunking for a decade, however, so I'm not holding my breath.

How many minutes could you play in the starting rotation on the Fab 5 teams and they still could win consistently? What about any of the title game teams? I know that's a crazy question but I've always wondered this about myself and I wouldn't last very long. — Mike

It definitely wouldn't be long for me, either: I'm 5'10", 165 pounds, my basketball career peaked when I was the distant second-best player on the three-on-three Superball (Ann Arbor's Gus Macker ripoff) fourth grade champions, and my capacity for physical activity is perilously close to zero. My most effective way to contribute to any team would probably be to cherry pick at the opposing team's basket instead of playing defense and even that would feature some panicked missed layups as real athletes bear down on me.

Because the Fab Five and title teams were so dominant on most nights, I could probably stay out there until the first media timeout (the first stoppage after the game's first four minutes) without these teams falling in too deep a hole from which to dig out.