Posted by colorblind79 on 3/21/2011 8:34:00 PM (view original):

Jeff Kincannon
PG | 5'10" | 176 lbs. | 3.3 GPA
Community HS | Ann Arbor, MI

PG

709

 

Athleticism 93   Speed 84   Rebounding 22   Defense 88   Shot Blocking 1   Low-post 43   Perimeter 57   Ball Handling 71   Passing 59   Work Ethic 69   Stamina 72   Durability 50   Previous Season Stats GP MPG PPG RPG FG% FG3% FT% APG SPG BPG 21 28 42.0 0.5 70.0 58.0 65.1 6.2 3.2 1.4

	Current Rating	Potential			Current Rating	Potential
Athleticism	93	Low		Perimeter	57	High
Speed	84	Low		Ball Handling	71	High
Rebounding	22	Low		Passing	59	High
Defense	88	Average		Stamina	72	High
Shot Blocking	1	High		Durability	50	Average
Low-post	43	Low		FT Shooting		High

#9 PG, #38 Overall, *****; no promises...possibly redshirting.  Kincannon is a bit raw as a guard, but he's already a nice athlete and defender, so he wouldn't be a trainwreck as a player to see immediate playing time.  Still, he's supposed to be a great team player, per his evaluations, so there's a chance in spite of his very lofty rankings that he'll be willing to redshirt, and could possibly be a four-year player (due to his adequate but not superb speed).  He should, of course, develop very nicely.  I believe that his potential in Perimeter and Passing are much higher than 20 points from where they are now.

Kincannon developed extremely well and I wish he'd stayed to help us another year.

Yr.	GP	GS	MIN	FG%	FG3%	FT%	OREB	REB	AST	TO	STL	BLK	PF	PTS
52	34	34	25.9	.508	.449	.776	0.5	1.7	3.5	1.0	0.7	0.1	0.9	8.4
51	35	0	13.4	.542	.424	.682	0.3	0.9	1.7	0.8	0.5	0.0	0.6	4.2
50	17	0	2.4	.556	1.000	.000	0.1	0.2	0.4	0.2	0.2	0.0	0.1	0.6
Averages				.521	.447	.736	0.3	1.1	2.2	0.7	0.5	0.0	0.7	5.2

Yr.	GP	GS	MIN	FGM	FGA	FG3M	FG3A	FTM	FTA	OFF	REB	AST	TO	STL	BLK	PF	PTS
52	34	34	880	93	183	40	89	59	76	17	57	118	33	24	3	32	285
51	35	0	468	52	96	14	33	30	44	9	30	61	28	19	0	22	148
50	17	0	40	5	9	1	1	0	1	2	4	6	3	4	0	2	11
Totals	86	34	1388	150	288	55	123	89	121	28	91	185	64	47	3	56	444

No awards.

Team Records:

6th in 3pt%

	Current Rating	Potential			Current Rating	Potential
Athleticism	58	High		Perimeter	49	High
Speed	64	Average		Ball Handling	56	High
Rebounding	40	High		Passing	62	Low
Defense	56	High		Stamina	72	Average
Shot Blocking	29	Average		Durability	53	High
Low-post	48	High		FT Shooting		High

#23 SF, #114 Overall, **; no promises.  James Edwards looks a little underwhelming at first, but he's got a lot of areas of high potential that I can actually picture him becoming a legitimately good SF/SG.  His only real area of weakness in the long term is passing (well, I guess FT%), and for an SF he's already in a decent enough place there.  I picture him as an SG in the short run though, mainly because we're desperate for some depth at the position.  For the time being, he's merely a minute-eater, but he should be fine in that role and I think he'll grow into a good contributor with time.

	Current Rating	Potential			Current Rating	Potential
Athleticism	89	Average		Perimeter	55	High
Speed	59	Low		Ball Handling	58	Average
Rebounding	76	High		Passing	66	Low
Defense	75	High		Stamina	62	Low
Shot Blocking	63	Average		Durability	62	Average
Low-post	92	Average		FT Shooting		Low

#6 PF, #12 Overall, *****; no promises.  The big problems with Jason Bowers are work ethic and FT shooting.  If he gets on the floor right away (in an SF capacity, probably) then he'll progress well enough.  We're going to have to play big this year to accomodate the lack of guards left over from last year's team, and the mediocre local crop from this season's recruiting class.  The only other big on the team who can shoot from the outside at all is Allen Sheehan, and he's too good of a FT shooter to move away from the basket.

	Current Rating	Potential			Current Rating	Potential
Athleticism	89	Average		Perimeter	57	High
Speed	82	Low		Ball Handling	89	Low
Rebounding	19	High		Passing	90	Low
Defense	95	Low		Stamina	79	Low
Shot Blocking	13	Average		Durability	74	High
Low-post	31	High		FT Shooting		Low

#1 PG, #10 Overall, *****; promised 10 minutes.  Other than his mediocre speed, Michael Tevis is a polished pass-first PG with the potential to become a scorer.  We sorely needed his help, and beat Michigan in our biggest recruiting battle of the year.

	Current Rating	Potential			Current Rating	Potential
Athleticism	92	Low		Perimeter	70	Average
Speed	63	Low		Ball Handling	71	Average
Rebounding	34	Average		Passing	43	Average
Defense	78	High		Stamina	72	Low
Shot Blocking	19	High		Durability	46	Average
Low-post	49	Low		FT Shooting		Average

#67 SG, unranked overall, no stars, JuCo 2; no promises.  He's filler, but I've seen worse.  I really don't foresee a good career for this guy.  He's just a minute-eater and we could easily not play him at all and see him transfer after this season.

	Current Rating	Potential			Current Rating	Potential
Athleticism	62	Low		Perimeter	70	High
Speed	62	High		Ball Handling	65	Average
Rebounding	13	High		Passing	77	Low
Defense	39	High		Stamina	69	Low
Shot Blocking	13	Average		Durability	62	High
Low-post	41	Low		FT Shooting		High

#137 SG, unranked overall, no stars, JuCo 2; no promises.  We had a big chunk of money left after beating Michigan for Tevis and poaching Villalta from Notre Dame, so I looked around for unsigned players.  Kingery was considering Sim-coahed Western Illinois, and didn't feel strongly about them, so I went ahead and took him so we'd have the body and some money for next year.  I actually find him more appealing than Villalta, at least as a scorer off of the bench.  Neither is great, but we'll see how they progress.

The Preseason #6 Michigan State Spartans:

Name	Yr.	Pos.	A	SPD	REB	DE	BLK	LP	PE	BH	P	WE	ST	DU	FT	TOT
James Moore	So.	PG	95	91	26	84	21	58	72	92	96	84	73	86	B	878
Michael Tevis	Fr.	PG	89	82	19	95	13	31	57	89	90	65	79	74	C+	783
Michael Kingery	Jr.	SG	62	62	13	39	13	41	70	65	77	47	69	62	C-	620
Douglas Villalta	Jr.	SG	92	63	34	78	19	49	70	71	43	62	72	46	C	699
Charles Joyce	Jr.	SF	88	62	65	91	67	90	48	74	74	43	70	66	C	838
Benny Feldman	So.	SF	92	71	48	98	30	64	55	65	69	60	72	54	B-	778
James Edwards	Fr.	SF	58	64	40	56	29	48	49	56	62	43	72	53	D+	630
Allen Sheehan	Sr.	PF	93	62	85	99	76	90	55	63	61	71	78	79	A-	912
David Vosburgh	Jr.	PF	80	50	87	98	81	94	22	62	53	52	73	56	C+	808
Lawrence Bernier	So.	PF	84	53	81	93	75	76	22	63	61	43	82	71	B-	804
Jason Bowers	Fr.	PF	89	59	76	75	63	92	55	58	66	29	62	62	D+	786
Christopher Mitchell	Jr.	C	88	43	99	99	99	92	8	53	71	84	71	68	C-	875
Averages	-	-	84	64	56	84	49	69	49	68	69	57	73	65	-	784

Name	Yr.	Pos.	Flex	Motion	Triangle	Fastbreak	Man	Zone	Press
James Moore	So.	PG	F	B	F	C-	B	D+	D+
Michael Tevis	Fr.	PG	C-	F	F	F	C	F	F
Michael Kingery	Jr.	SG	F	F	F	B+	F	F	B
Douglas Villalta	Jr.	SG	F	F	F	B+	F	F	C-
Charles Joyce	Jr.	SF	D-	B+	D-	D-	B+	D-	D
Benny Feldman	So.	SF	F	B-	C	F	B-	C	C
James Edwards	Fr.	SF	F	F	C-	F	D+	F	D+
Allen Sheehan	Sr.	PF	C+	A	D-	D-	A	C-	D-
David Vosburgh	Jr.	PF	D-	B+	C-	D-	B+	C-	D-
Lawrence Bernier	So.	PF	D+	B-	F	F	B-	F	C+
Jason Bowers	Fr.	PF	F	D+	F	F	C-	F	F
Christopher Mitchell	Jr.	C	C-	B+	D-	D-	B+	D-	C

Connecticut (0-0)
Exhibition 1, not a bad start to the season.  UConn is ranked right now.  Obviously we don't have much of an emphasis on the 3-pointer.

Our class was ranked 6th.  We are ranked 6th in the preseason.

I didn't post this yesterday:

Syracuse (1-0)
Anyways that was Exhibition 2, against the 15th ranked team.  As losses go, not bad, but I also know that we're overrated this year - at least at this point.

------------------

Michigan St. (1-0)
This opponent was coached last year, and well, by someone in his first year there so I figured he'd stick around for a while.  He retired instead, so this is a bad win. 

ranked 6th

Michigan St. (2-1)
We completely fell apart in the second half after leading by 16.

---------------

Utah (1-2)
I think this team is trying to find its identity now that Freund is gone.  We'll be okay but we're currently overrated.

ranked 10th

Michigan St. (6-1)
I waited a while to post again, partially because we had a Hurricane Irene-induced blackout.

---------------

Michigan St. (6-1)
----------------

Michigan St. (6-1)
This team is really not as good as its hype.

-----------------------

Michigan St. (6-1)
Army took us to overtime!  Okay, so we are probably a top-10 defense, so far...that's partially due to slowing down the games a lot.  I dunno, I think we're a top 25 team but I do not think this is going to be a Final Four year.

ranked 9th

Michigan St. (7-1)

This was a comfortable win and maybe the team is learning its identity.

09/02/11 am	at Manhattan	6-4	37	24	majresorter	1-0	-16	77-53	w
09/03/11 am	at #4 Maryland	9-1	2	7	davis	3-9	even	49-70	l
09/04/11 am	Off Day

RPI 10, SOS 37, ranked 10th

Wisconsin (8-3, 0-1)
This is a very good start to conference play.  Wisconsin is always reasonably strong.

RPI 9, SOS 20, ranked 8th