Michigan basketball freshmen doing just fine compared to their peers

So many words have been used to describe the highly-rated, 2021 Michigan basketball class:

“Disappointing.”

“Not good enough.”

RELATED

• What’s trending up, trending down for Michigan basketball

• Bracketology: Examining Michigan’s NCAA Tournament candidacy

The one most miss, though, and which is most apt would probably be “typical.”

Before the season, Michigan assistant Phil Martelli was asked about five-star Caleb Houstan.

“We were talking as a staff,” he said. “If we could just get freshman year Franz Wagner numbers out of him, that would be great.”

Wagner averaged 11.6 points per game his first year at Michigan, shooting 45.2 percent from the floor and 31.1 percent from long range. He averaged 5.6 rebounds, one assist and 1.3 steals.

Houstan’s numbers, to date: 10.2 points, 40.5 percent shooting (36.4 from three), 4.1 rebounds and 1.4 assists. His 73.8 percent from the line needs work — almost 10 percentage points lower than Wagner as a frosh — but he’s too good a shooter to not improve.

Clearly, Wagner was the better defender from the get-go at Michigan, and that’s another area in which Houstan needs work. And while he’s not putting up elite shooting numbers in his first season, he is more than holding his own against his similarly-rated classmates.

Our LosAngelesWolverine broke it down in The Fort, our premium message board:

Comparing Michigan wing Caleb Houstan to classmates

#10 (ranking) Caleb Houstan: 31.5 MPG, 10.2 points, 4.1 rebounds, 1.4 assists, .405 FG%, .364 3%, 1.6 TOs. 

#5 Emoni Bates (Memphis): 25.4 MPG, 10.4 points, 3.6 rebounds, 1.4 assists, .386 FG%, .329 3%, 2.6 TOs.

#25 Harrison Ingram (Stanford): 30.7 MPG, 11.6 points, 6.6 rebounds, 2.9 assists, .419 FG%, .326 3%, 2.1 TOs.

#19 Max Christie (Michigan State): 31.3 MPG, 9.8 points, 3.4 rebounds, 1.6 assists, .389 FG%, .337 3%, 1.4 TOs.

#27 Matthew Cleveland (FSU): 24.4 MPG, 10.5 points, 4.9 rebounds, 1.3 assists, .439 FG%, .179 3%, 1.3 TOs.

#38 Bryce Hopkins (Kentucky): 7 MPG, 2.1 points, 1.5 rebounds, 0.3 assists, .404 FG%, .333 3%, 0.6 TOs.

#37 Benny Williams (Syracuse): 11.8 MPG, 1.6 points, 1.4 rebounds, 0.3 assists, .294 FG%, .091 3%, 0.7 TOs.

In short, the Michigan wing is right there with many of his classmates, and better than several others. Michigan recruited many on the list, including Ingram and Cleveland (hard). Bates was once called a “generational talent,” but Houstan has been better by almost every metric.

As of now, it appears Houstan will be back for another year at Michigan (thought “never say never”). If he takes a second-year leap many do between their freshman and sophomore seasons, he’ll be right on track.

Comparing Moussa Diabate to his classmates

#17 (Ranking: Moussa Diabate (Michigan): 23.6 MPG, 8.7 points, 5.7 rebounds, 0.7 blocks, .555 FG%. 

#8 Jalen Duren (Memphis): 25.4 MPG, 11.3 points, 7.9 rebounds, 2.2 blocks, .638 FG%.

#28 Efton Reid (LSU): 20.2 MPG, 6.8 points, 4.9 rebounds, 0.9 blocks, .494 FG%.

#35 Charles Bediako (Alabama): 17.6 MPG, 6.4 points, 4.3 rebounds, 1.6 blocks, .649 FG%. 

Duren, another Michigan target (as were all on the list), is the best player at the position. Diabate, however, is holding his own, though we expected more from him as a shot blocker. He’s still extremely raw offensively with a developing shot, and he has a long way to go to be ready for the next level.

That might not prevent him from leaving early, however. There have been rumblings that this could be his one and only year in Ann Arbor, in which case Howard and Co. will likely be looking to the portal for help. Hunter Dickinson is likely leaving, and incoming frosh Tarris Reed, while good, will likely need some time.

For now, though, Michigan fans can appreciate what they have and the growth in a pair of players who aren’t part of a “Fab Five” redux, but were never expected to be. They’re doing just fine developing at their pace while U-M makes a run at the NCAA Tournament.