Purdue 76, Michigan 59
AJ Hammons celebrates Purdue's victory.
Midway through the second half, CBS cut to a shot of John Beilein giving Moe Wagner an on-the-fly lesson on post defense. Wagner had just committed a shooting foul on Purdue center Isaac Haas and was subsequently pulled for Ricky Doyle.
On Purdue's ensuing possession, Haas bullied Doyle down low and drew another shooting foul. Any lessons Beilein gave out this afternoon came far too late to salvage Michigan's chances of reaching the Big Ten final and locking up an at-large bid.
Instead, it'll be a stressful Selection Sunday after the Boilermakers dominated the Wolverines in the paint. Michigan played all four of their centers; none provided resistance to the fearsome duo of Haas and AJ Hammons. Hammons finished with 27 points, 11 rebounds, and three blocks; Haas added 11 points in only nine minutes. Michigan's big men combined for ten points—seven by Mark Donnal, who played only 15 minutes due to foul trouble—and four boards.
Purdue opened each half with a big run—8-0 to start the game, 9-0 to open the second half—and whenever Michigan threatened to close the gap, the Boilermakers beat them back with dominant post play; Purdue scored 44 points in the paint to Michigan's 28. Despite being overwhelmed on the interior, the Wolverines frustratingly declined to double-team Purdue's big men until less than four minutes remained; when they finally did so on Hammons, the double was weak, and a few quick passes around the perimeter resulted in a Rapheal Davis layup.
Derrick Walton (14 points, 5 assists, 4 steals) and Muhammad-Ali Adbur-Rahkman (15 points, 7/11 FG) did their best to overcome Purdue's considerable advantage inside. They got little help. Zak Irvin and Duncan Robinson shot 2/12 combined from three-point range; the Wolverines were 6/25 as a team. The Boilermakers made two fewer three-pointers—on 13 fewer attempts.
Now Michigan, which entered today as the last at-large in the field on the Bracket Matrix, will nervously await their postseason fate.
March 12th, 2016 at 10:40 PM ^
So does Beilein.
And everyone in this thread seems to be underrating the slope of the playing field. It's not level for Michigan. If Michigan wants to play it clean, they need a developer.
this is an interesting narrative that BEILEIN has been so close to all these 5 star studs yet we miss on ALL OF THEM EVERY YEAR ????
i don't believe it because there is no proof, i read recently an unnamed high school coach/ PSL saying that Beilein was out of touch w/todays young players .he also went on to say that rumors that M was close to signing Miles Bridges/Flint and a few other kids was completely false. also there was a quote that M bball is white-mans ball.
was watching Kent/Georgia today, Georgia has 6ft8 240 banger named Yante Mateen/soph. from Bloomfield Hills Lasher! kid averages a double double also a 6ft10 kid from westland named Mike Edwards/frosh ??? these kids are right in our backyard but he goes down to Toledo area to recruit Mark Donnal/soft yet misses the real stud from Toledo named Nigel Hayes???? i could go on for hours , we need a fresh set of eyes/new coach.
Yeah. What the heck! It's not like they are only a few years removed from (1) the final game in year 1 and (2) a clutch 3 away from the final four in year 2. What's that? Oh.
I haven't seen anything from that guy that says borderline 4 star. When he took that ridiculous 3 today when we were behind by double digits, I wanted to scream- loudly. Like all our bigs (save maybe Wagner) there is no toughness or willingness to get dirty under the basket. They want to take outside shots all the time instead of grind in the paint for buckets and rebounds. When we miss shots, it's one and done almost always. No one is hardlly trying to get offensive rebounds. Until Beilein recruits tough inside players (if he does) we're going to continue to see the same soft play from our bigs.
March 12th, 2016 at 10:18 PM ^
problem isn't that he is scrawny. He is 6'-9" and 240 pounds. Donnal's problem is that he is not that good at basketball. He is a terrible defensive player. He doesn't stay in front of the man he is defending because he has terrible footwork and he doesn't keep his eyes on the opponent's midsection.
March 13th, 2016 at 12:58 PM ^
has use as a 3pt specialist with the right matchups so the question isn't why did we recruit him, the quesiton is why is he playing 30+ minutes a night. The answer to that is the slow (or lack of) development of Chatman and Wilson who should be combining for more minutes at 4.
March 13th, 2016 at 10:43 PM ^
bet the LeVert and Spike injuries also play into it. That being said, LeVert and Spike are the only guys on the team that can routinely beat their man off the dribble, which would potentially open up more open looks for Robinson from behind the arc. That would hopefully improve his shooting percentage. Unfortunately, we will never know.
The shots of Spike on the bench had me concerned. His hair didn't have it's usual luster and bounce. I think that was a factor today.
Irvin is a statstical black hole. Brick after brick after brick beyond the arc.
I'd love to see a statistic that shows NET results of scoring minus turnovers or fouls that result in points by the other team. I'd almost bet Irvin is a negative.
When I watch OSU or Illinois play, I see what they're trying to do. They're young, big, athletic, with a lot of talent. They just need to gel as a team and get some experience under their belts. I have no idea what Beilein is trying to build with this team. It's like the Island of Misfit Toys.
I could see if you said Wisconsin or Iowa but not Illinois or OSU. I'd agree our guys do tend to have lower ceilings, but higher floors too, as evidenced by the records this year.
OSU has really athletic bigs that can slash and get to the hole. So I can see where Motta wants to take them. But UM just seems like such a mish-mash of oddy-bodies. I'm no basketball guru or anything--just my impression.
He is on the never ending search for Kevin Pittsnoogle - who was a 6'11 center who could shoot from outside. How many of those even exist in the college game in any particular year in this day and age? But damned he is going to keep trying to find the unicorn.
So rather than go find an athletic jump out of the gym type who sucks at shooting anything outside of 13' but impact the game defensively and in rebound ing (and could get 8 pts a nite just cleaning up all our bricks)- who are a dime a dozen - he goes back for very very poor man's Pittsnoogle's. Doyle I guess being the exception... as he has no range.
Where the guy who can't shoot is becoming such an afterthought that teams are working to rid themselves of them, isn't a concern? You can't go 4 on 5 offensively. That's what we did in the late Amaker era, and, honestly, what we do when Doyle's on the floor.
College isn't the NBA.
That's not what she said...
March 12th, 2016 at 11:15 PM ^
Stretch bigs are rare. There just aren't enough stretch bigs to sustain a college program unless you have super-duper recruiting powers and excellent foresight. NBA teams can be much more selective. You're overstating the nba case as well. NBA teams field short range bigs all the time, especially at the 5 spot. Long range shooters at the 4 spot are becoming more common, but all of those guys are still big enough to rebound and defend the post-- guys like Drammond Green, LeBron (in some line-ups), and LaMarcus Aldridge. Those guys are incredibly hard to find.
You lost me.
So we need to lose more than we currently are but at least look athletic in doing so?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
out from their hole. the sunshine must have brought them out. yesterday was pleasant.
March 12th, 2016 at 11:45 PM ^
I find myself wanting to post more just to provide visual evidence that these front-running trolls are a minority. The last near-decade of Beilein has been so much more rewarding than the prior decade of Amaker-Ellerbe-Fab5Fallout. We get to one championship game and everyone thinks this is the new normal.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
It's not an every year in the NCAA kind of place, other than one stretch (85-95, when they missed just once). It was eight years between apearances before that and then 11 years between 98 and 2009. And it was eight years in between berths from 66 to 74, which coincided with tournament expansion.
But Izzo has them competitive every year and recruiting continues to improve for the Spartans. If our coaching staff can't match MSU, we need to make a change after 9 years.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Kentucky, North Carolina, Kansas, UCLA, IU, Duke. You know what all of them have in common? All of them had a coach that stayed for 20-plus years and set them up for greater success going forward. Sometimes, it's back-to-back, like Frank McGuire to Dean Smith.
Other times, you get programs like MSU, Oklahoma State, Georgetown or St. John's, where a single coach provides that lift and the school is great for a long period, though it might not be sustainable afterward if the wrong choice of succesor is made.
Firing any coach, especially one who has provided one of the longest sustanined eras of success where your program didn't get caught cheating in the process, doesn't seem to set you up for success for the long term, does it?
Would agree with you if Coach B were younger. He is going to retire relatively soon. He will not coach another 11 years to get to your example of 20 year coaches. Like it or not, MSU is the comparison and our coaching staff is not competing. Your points could easily apply to Hoke's situation. Aren't we better off terminating Hoke before his contract expired?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Isn't that unfair because of expansion. In the current format we should be able to make it every year.
March 13th, 2016 at 12:39 AM ^
Two decade-long stretches outside the tournament. One is explained by Orr leaving and Frieder taking time to build things back up. The second was becasue of the fallout of one of the major cheating scandals in the history of the sport. We've only won 10 conference regular season titles since the NCAA tournament was started in '39.
We have 25 tournament appearances all time, including the four vacated ones. That's the same as Pitt, Mizzou and Xavier. And one more than Maryland,
What makes us unusual is that we have a higher ceiling when we're good, since we've been to the final four seven times. But still, it's not an every year in, year out thing. Hell, Calipari and Roy Williams have missed the tournament at their current schools too.
March 12th, 2016 at 10:45 PM ^
Because there's a magic spell that coaches in year 9 don't lose an NBA draft pick (and senior captain) and also their senior co-captain 6th man?
Oh wait.
Your "9th year" rant would make more sense if the team on the court was the team Beilein should have expected to have on the court.
Needs to step up and recruit some bigger guys- there are 7 footers out there, but none at Michigan right now. I'll stick with him still- he brings stability to the program, which we know shaking things up in the coaching just because can be a long term disaster (RichRod, Hoke).
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
There is an interesting article out there (can't remember what publication) that better explains Beilein's recruiting philosophy, and it was an excellent read. He is not wasting his time on one or two year players, but focusing on players he can develop and will stay. It is very obvious, that with Caris, this team would easily be in the tourney, and winning 22 games with this lineup is pretty darn good. I actually think the next 3-5 years look pretty good...losing 5 players in 2 years is tough to overcome. I have been a big Beilein critic this year, but am seeing the big picture. At the end of the day, a great coach, doing things the right way, at a football school. We will be fine!
There is an interesting article out there (can't remember what publication) that better explains Beilein's recruiting philosophy, and it was an excellent read. He is not wasting his time on one or two year players, but focusing on players he can develop and will stay. It is very obvious, that with Caris, this team would easily be in the tourney, and winning 22 games with this lineup is pretty darn good. I actually think the next 3-5 years look pretty good...losing 5 players in 2 years is tough to overcome. I have been a big Beilein critic this year, but am seeing the big picture. At the end of the day, a great coach, doing things the right way, at a football school. We will be fine!
I wish I shared your optimism. I see several disturbing trends. One is mediocre recruiting. We are not getting the elite talented players we once did. And it appears the "Beilein Magic" of finding diamonds in the rough and turning them into 1st round picks has dried up. I don't see any such players on the team right now - save maybe Wagner in 3 years. And that's a maybe. Another trend is poor player development. Outside of Donnal and MAAR, everyone on the team who wasn't a first year player either regressed or got no better. Will that change next year? Maybe, but it doesn't look promising.
Without players of talent and without bigger/tougher guys in the paint, Beilein's teams will continue to get manhandled and bullied in the Big Ten. And that's going to make it much harder to win any titles unless he can fix the......
Bad shooting. This is the 3rd trend I find the worst. The Beilein system is supposed to revolve around great outside shooting. Where is it? The latter part of the season we were not good at all. Michigan had a lot of good looks against Purdue and that's the best they could do? And the FT shooting is poor too.
The question facing Warde Manuel is how long he's going to give Beilein to fix the problems. If we miss out this year getting into the tournament, making it two in a row, that is clearly not acceptable.
Losing your top two guard's hurt. The team will make a strong run for the big ten championship in 2017. If they miss the big dance this year considering the obstacles faced this season will be shocking. Come on 12 victories in the big ten. Holy Cross you kidding me. There's no way that team wins the big ten tournament.
one and two year players worked so badly for us in the past: Trey, Mitch, Stauskas, GRIII. Let's not get anyone like that again. No one likes going to final fours and elite 8s.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I remember the years where being on the bubble was a considerable achievement for a MMB team. I'm just glad that we are at the point now where being on the bubble is a huge negative.
Beilein's recruiting over the last 3 years may be the worst brand equity leverage job in the history of big time University of Michigan sports. Coming off of a NCAA championship, Elite 8 and Big Ten Championships, and not one star recruit. Walton is easily the most talented guy on the squad. The entire front court is MAC level. Awful.
Good coach and lovely guy, bad recruiter.
is better than MAC level. He's just miscast at the 5. He should be playing the 4 with Doyle/Mo/DJ. Aubrey and Dakich's minutes should be going to a big to play the 5. And it would have helped if the refs called one offensive foul on the PU bigs who were swinging their elbows and hooking for leverage all game long.
Comments