not on the bubble, but brian, do you agree that we need one more win to be a lock?
Basketball Will Love Me Again
2/12/2012 – Michigan 70, Illinois 61 – 19-7, 9-4 Big Ten
Sports have their own distinctive rhythms, sounds and moments and rituals that worm themselves into the observer's subconscious after repeated exposure. Basketball is rife with them. The seismic thud of the ball hitting the floor is shockingly tactile from time to time, especially during your first game of a new season. Back-to-back TV timeouts are agony and boredom. And the interval between a three-pointer's departure and arrival, when three fingers are raised in slow motion and a long heavy intake of breath fills the lungs, is the sort of intermittent reinforcement that ends with people saying "but she loves me… she's just misunderstood."
When those rhythms conspire against you in a cosmically unfair (and usually deeply random) fashion, building-wide manias develop. Rattling post after post in hockey, an avalanche of seeing-eye singles in baseball, the clang of iron on open look after open look—these things turn crowds into scalded, nervous things. When the shot goes up, the reaction is something it would take Steve Buscemi to adequately convey.
Oh no, here we go again
Maybe this time basketball will love me
Maybe this time basketball will care
Basketball is just misunderstood
No officer I would not like to press charges against basketball
Maybe next time
Probably next time
Definitely next time
Basketball is just misunderstood
When Tim Hardaway Jr. got an open-ish look from three early, he passed it up. He faked, got past the closeout, and took an open look from the elbow. He missed. He got another midrange jumper a minute later, which he missed. A minute after that he got an open look from three, and the building kind of moaned.
It was a complex moan. It acknowledged the fact that this was a very good shot and that if you are Tim Hardaway Jr. and you're not going to take this shot you probably shouldn't be on the floor at all and while there may be some basketball teams who could afford to bench Tim Hardaway Jr., Michigan is emphatically not one of them. It also loathed everything about the preceding sentence because none of it meant Hardaway was at all likely to make it. It was a richly subtextual moan. Given enough time and processing power, Ken Pomeroy could calculate Hardaway's shooting percentage from it. He would find it is not high at all.
Hardaway made it anyway. The building thought maybe basketball would bring it flowers.
It was the other one, though, that really got hearts open again, really open and ready for a surprising reversal that is in no way surprising. It wasn't a good shot, really, but when you're 6'5" and can jump really high there are few truly contested threes. This has been a foundational component of Hardaway's game and seemed brilliant when he was hitting 42% of them. When you're hitting 27%, not so much. Hardaway was hitting 27% as he made a token move to the basket and stepped back for a semi-contested three.
He'd hit one earlier and maybe the wincing wasn't quite as overt as he rose up. This one was perfect. It hit nothing whatsoever on its way through the hoop.
Hardaway didn't push it. There was no heat check, because sometimes a thing like making more than half of your shots in a game is a delicate one that must be shepherded through dangers.
Hardaway wasn't the only struggler to prop up fading hopes of effectiveness. Matt Vogrich had eight points on three shots, all makes, and Novaked himself a game-changing play* when his super-quick rotation on Meyers Leonard condemned Leonard to the bench for most of the first half. Evan Smotrycz hit a couple threes and managed 13 points; though he turned the ball over twice he was also credited with four steals. Michigan did not get blown off the court in the long stretches where a foul-limited Morgan wasn't on it thanks in large part to Smotrycz.
Both Vogrich and Smotrycz followed Hardaway's example and didn't push it. Between the three of them they took eight threes and hit six. As a team Michigan attempted just 35% from beyond the arc. It was a strange mirror of the first half against Nebraska, when Michigan took two thirds of its shots from three against the worst interior defense in the league. Here they took most of their shots from two against one a team much better on the interior than the perimeter.
Whether that was just what Illinois does—they're second in the league at preventing three point attempts—or Michigan treating their newfound deep shooting touch like a Faberge egg, the end result was a building that did not moan. Primed to believe long shots could actually go through the net, when Vogrich rose in the second half there was just anticipation.
Long may it last. It won't last. It might last. Basketball has been more into flowers lately.
*[Except of course if Novak had tried to do the same thing they would have called a block on him because referees hate Novak even more than opposing fans do.]
Bullets Will Drive Us Apart
As always, rely on MGoBlog for your super accurate predictions. In the preview I openly quailed at the prospect of Meyers Leonard going up against Michigan's undersized front line. At halftime I felt like the six-point lead was a missed opportunity that would bite Michigan in the ass after Leonard returned from the game-changing charge Matt Vogrich took on him for his second foul. Leonard's 7'1" frame sauntered onto the court and… scored one point in the second half. He had all of three FGAs, all of which IIRC were putback attempts (he had four offensive rebounds).
That's the game right there. I'm not sure how much of that was Michigan's doing and how much was Illinois drifting away from the early game plan (in short: "ALL OF THE LEONARDS") in favor of whatever it was they decided to do instead. It felt like Illinois didn't even bother looking inside much in the second half. When they did, doubles convinced Leonard to kick it out and active hands from Morgan and Smotrycz forced a number of turnovers. It's a tribute to someone on the coaching staff—maybe various someones—that this motely crew of iffy athletes and short guys finds itself an above-average Big Ten defense.
At least I was on point with the increased use of zone—plenty when Leonard was on the court—and the total uselessness of the backup center (zero points, two attempts both on offensive putbacks against McLimans in 14 minutes). Didn't see Tyler Griffey as the guy who would light up Michigan's sagging perimeter defense.
Player items. Hardaway, Vogrich, and Smotrycz are essentially covered above. All had efficient shooting days for a change; as a unit that put Michigan over the hump despite a 5 of 15 day from Trey Burke. It certainly didn't feel like a 5 of 15 day from Burke, but there it is.
Not much stands out from the boxscore except another game in which Michigan had the crap kicked out of it on the boards. Illinois rebounded 40% of its misses. Michigan is now significantly below average in both offensive (10th) and defensive (8th) rebounding. This is an obvious consequence of moving Douglass into the starting lineup after they cruised through the nonconference schedule seeming like a good to very good DREB team. Not that doing that was a bad idea.
The upside of that. Michigan got a ton of fast break and secondary transition points; in the second half when Illinois was crashing the boards hard anything that didn't end up getting rebounded by the trees fell to a shorter faster Michigan player and the resulting transition opportunity was often an odd-man break. I'd be interested to see a breakdown of Illinios points off of offensive rebounds versus points in transition when Michigan actually got the board. I'd guess it would be a small advantage to Illinois, but not one that outweighs the benefits of going small to Michigan's halfcourt offense.
Small sample size. Vogrich is 5/5 from three in his past two games. Result:
Prior to the Nebraska win, Vogrich was shooting 20.5 percent on the season. Now, after one solid week, he's up to 30.8 percent from downtown.
Big Ten… um… title? It is vaguely possible. Via UMHoops, the four contenders (I've taken the liberty of bolding games versus the top four):
|MICHIGAN ST. (9-3)||OHIO ST. (9-3)||MICHIGAN (9-4)||WISCONSIN (8-4)|
|vs. Wisconsin (8-4)||at Minnesota (5-7)||vs. OSU (9-3)||at MSU (9-3)|
|at Purdue (6-6)||at Michigan (9-4)||at N’Western (5-7)||vs. PSU (3-10)|
|at Minnesota (5-7)||vs. Illinois (5-7)||vs. Purdue (6-6)||at Iowa (5-7)|
|vs. Nebraska (3-10)||vs. Wisconsin (8-4)||at Illinois (5-7)||at OSU (9-3)|
|at Indiana (7-6)||at N’Western (5-7)||at PSU (3-10)||vs. Minnesota (5-7)|
|vs. OSU (9-3)||at MSU (9-3)||vs. Illinois (5-7)|
You'll note that Michigan is one of them and that their last game against the cream of the crop is their next one.
It will take either a huge closing run or a specific combination of results to get Michigan a banner; I'd say we can forget about it if Michigan loses against OSU. Unless OSU loses at Minnesota that would mean Michigan was two back with four games left.
If they managed the upset, though…
Illinois team practice. In games they headbutt each other and are eaten.
Weber watch. The vibe I get from the various Illini fans whose blogs I read or who I follow on twitter is extreme frustration with Bruce Weber. That makes sense after concentrating on Illinois's play. The Illini are like a pack of gazelles: breathtaking to watch run around but utterly incapable of passing the ball. Gazelles have hooves, and this fact explains things. Only two or three of the Illini have hooves. The rest of that is on Weber.
I mean, Brandon Paul should be an All-American. Instead he has a lower ORtg than literally every Michigan player with enough playing time for Kenpom to register save Vogrich. If they miss the tourney dollars to donuts Weber is having his hissy fits at home next year*. Because he won't have a job. I'm saying they'll fire him.
*[Seriously. Weber's fits might be worse than those of Bo Ryan and Tom Izzo. At least Ryan and Izzo seem to have a tangible effect on their teams. The only way Weber's message is getting through is if he's screaming "DRIBBLE AIMLESSLY AND THEN TURN THE BALL OVER." I mean:
Three of 22 pictures from the Detroit News gallery above feature Weber having a fit.]
Trillion watch. McLimans had a rare first-half trillion in four minutes.
Sold out? The game was technically sold out. Emphasis on "technically": large chunks of the upper-bowl endzones were empty the whole game. Who is buying those tickets and then ignoring them? I know they're not season tickets up there, so someone must be purchasing and then not using large chunks of the endzone upper decks. Strange.
Incredulous block/charge of the week. Brandon Paul's late first half clobberation of Trey Burke. Burke was set well outside the charge circle and Paul blew him up; this was an and-one instead of Paul's second. I haven't seen a replay but live it was a crazy call.
The only thing I can think might even vaguely justify the call is that Paul didn't hit Burke in the dead center of his chest. For some reason refs have a tendency to call blocks when a stationary defender takes an off-center or glancing blow from the offensive player. Why I don't know. In a situation like the Burke/Paul confrontation it seems like there are only two possible outcomes: a charge or a no-call. Referees disagree.
UMHoops recap. They went inside the play with some Jordan Morgan bunnies. The Crimson Quarry breaks down Indiana's deployment of the 2-3 zone. Michigan ran a lot of 2-3 in the second half yesterday and may resort to it at times down the stretch when they're at a significant size disadvantage (most of the time). Just Cover on the argument about 8-10 Big Ten teams making the tournament.
People are talking about seeding. A four, a five? There are distinct loci on the map of college basketball that Michigan now firmly occupies instead of the Purgatorial listlessness that once loomed over the program for over a decade. People are talking about Michigan's chances to win the conference title, regular season and tournament. That's not to say that Michigan will win either (the former hinges upon whether or not Michigan can beat the Buckeyes at home on Saturday), but people are talking about it. Think about how insane that is, as a concept and as a potential reality. A little over four years ago, Michigan was busy losing to an Amaker-coached Harvard squad, a moment in history that typifies the Universe's mischievous sense of humor.
It's worth noting that with Michigan's ninth win of the conference season they have permanently taken themselves off the bubble. For the first time since [REDACTED] Michigan's not going into Selection Sunday on pins an needles, even if they lose out. That was a preseason goal Michigan has met with authority.
I'd be on serious pins and needles if we ended up 9-9 and then lost in the BTT to finish 9-10 in the conference. I suppose we would make it but it would be close and I don't think we're a lock until we win one more (Ohio would be a great 1 win to have).
because there's no way this team loses out, but losing out would make UM 18-12 against D-1 schools and 3-7 over the last 10 games of the season. That's a bubble sort of resume, especially since it would mean another loss to a terrible team (Penn State). I'd be nervous.
I think there are enough good wins to get UM in, but conference tourney weirdness always seems to happen and teams that limp to the finish line sometimes are victims of that.
Clearly, we're not on the bubble now, but losing 5 games in a row to close the season, 6 if we lost the 1st BTT game, and we'd be 19-13 (9-10). That would put us squarely on the bubble.
a discussion? I am not sure if you guys notice, but this is a good basketball team, that is 9-4 in the toughest conference in college basketball. Good basketball teams do not lose 6 in row, particurly with the schedule UM has after OSU.
It is just unbelievable to me that some UM fans people refuse to believe that UM is good team or dare I say slightly better if Hardaway and Smotz play well. This team still has shot to win the conference title and people are talking about not making the NCAA tournament, get out of here with that crap.
Also, UM is among the leaders in terms of top 50 wins and the SOS is obviously very high. This is a team worried about seeding, not about making the tourny.
"Michigan's not going into Selection Sunday on pins and needles, even if they lose out."
Because the writer of this site mentioned it? And commenters are saying that is probably not true. Obviously, we're playing very well, and in the hunt for the Conference title, and no one is saying we are going to lose out. At no point did anyone refuse to say UM is a good team.
lose out, so what is the point of even discussing it? Nobody outright stated this wasn't a good team, but if somebody is mentioning the possibility of losing out than they clearly don't have as much confidence in this team, as they should.
I apogilize if my orginal comment came across as overly defensive, but I am getting a little tired of people being overly pessmissic, with regards to a team that is 9-4 in this conference.
Perhaps because pessimists are rarely dissapointed?
was on the 2007-08 Harvard squad that beat us. I guess that helps me in my effort in getting over that loss/debacle/horror show, 4+ years after the fact . . . .
I would say we need to win at least one more game. If we were to somehow lose out from here including a likely first round game in the Big Ten Tourney then it could happen that we would be left out. However, I don't see this happening. I think we win at least 3-4 of the last five games with a possibility of sweeping. In the Big Ten Tourney who knows. If everything goes to plan and this is how Michigan finishes the season I would argue Michigan should at least be a 3 seed especially if more teams in front lose.
Time will tell.
4 way tie possible.
heres Denard and Roy at MSU instead
I think Burke was still moving there if ever so slightly. A 50/50 call if anything.
Yeah, I thought that was close, but not a bad call.
Yeah, I think it was the right call. A lot of block/charge disagreements simply come from different perspectives. On the view behind Paul, you could see Burke still clearly sliding in. When they showed the typical sideline view, it looked like he got there.
Those are always tough calls, but desptite Brian's protestations, I think refs get them right more than they get them wrong.
a lot of it is perspective. sideline view <> the opposite end. i thought it was a charge, too, but didn't have a problem either way.
the truly bad calls were two separate plays where the midcourt ref called fouls under the hoop, with his colleague right on top of the play. that shit drives me even more crazy - unlike a charge / block, you can't see the play. put the damn whistle away and get off my tv.
I'm pretty sure the empty seats in the upper deck end zone are student tickets. They were empty for the MSU game because 200 people hadn't even picked up their tickets yet. Students not showing up results in empty seats in the overflow section.
those students need to sell their tickets or give them away and anybody who didn't use student tickets should be permanently banned from ever getting them again.
It was same issue at the wisconsin game (probably more but i dont know - thats the only conference game ive been to)
I've been searching for a good comp for Burke for a while. Harlan or Raftery said he has a little Tony Parker in him. I think that makes a lot of sense -- great to the rim and as a finisher, smooth shot out to 20 feet. No comment on his skills with the ladies.
Parker isn't a bad comparison, but Burke reminds me more of a young Jameer Nelson. Burke's not quite as thick as Nelson, but his body type is closer to Nelson's than it is to Parker's, as is his style of getting off shots in traffic.
So Smotrycz and Hardaway room together?
Shouldn't we say it was a "Jeremy Lin lead" Harvard Squad?
You'd be better off saying it was a "Jeremy Lin-led" Harvard squad.
/grammar and spelling fixation.
3 years ago the athletic department had the brilliant idea to let you order ball tickets with football tickets. This worked in that student tickets went from ~500 in 08/09 to the 2000 or so they have been the last three years (team being better helps too). However, every year some never pick up there tickets or only go to the MSU game and hence their seat is sold but empty.
iPad my bad
It's hard to complain about a win but I am getting sick of being destroyed on the boards. That's a much easier victory yesterday if Illinois didn't get all those offensive rebounds. I may be wrong but it felt like many of the Illini's 3's were scored from second and third chance opportunities.
Sometimes I do a double take when I see that we are actually 9-4 in conference play. I don't think we have been that far above .500 in conference since the 1997/98 season.
It looks like we have the best schedule to end the season but it's not as pretty as it looks.
OHIO STATE: Even though we have them at home, there's no way they're going to look as bad as they did against Sparty again. This is going to be a tough game.
NORTHWESTERN: They are up and down. But we had to go into overtime to beat them at Crisler in a game we were very fortunate to win. They also seem to love to give us fits in recent years. Last year, we got killed there by an awful NU team. They do have a home win over Sparty this year so you never know which team is going to show up.
PURDUE: Knocking on wood but I feel pretty confident this will be a win.
ILLINOIS: We haven't won there since 1997. It's one of those arenas where fate won't let us leave that place with a win even when the Illini are struggling. I remember a handful of close losses. Last year when we went on our run to finish the regular season winning 7 of 9, one of the losses was at Illinois. We tried a 3 pointer at the buzzer to win but it didn't go in. Can't remember who took the shot.
PENN STATE: Awful team but we're on the road where bad thing can happen. Didn't we need a miracle final couple minutes to win there last year?
In the end, I feel we'll be a game or 2 short of winning the conference. But it will be our best finish in conference in a long time.
Last year, we got killed there by an awful NU team.
I don't know if I would qualify last year's NU squad as awful. They were 7-11 in conference, 20 wins overall, and a bubble NCAA team. We weren't the only team that had trouble with them. Rebounding: Any time we're running the small lineup with Smot at the '5', we're probably going to get pounded on the boards. I noticed a lot of defensive switches with Burke on the block trying to out-muscle guys 8" taller than him that led to some offensive boards for Illinois. As frustrating as the overall rebounding was, we did get some huge rebounds at key junctures in the game. I saw some decent box-outs from our guys that were giving up plenty of height. If I were an Illini fan, I would be completely frustrated by yesterday's performance. There were so many instances when Burke or Stu switched on defensive plays and were matched up with bigs on the block. Illinois didn't exploit these match-ups at all (with the exception of a lot of offensive rebounds).
PENN STATE: Awful team but we're on the road where bad thing can happen. Didn't we need a miracle final couple minutes to win there last year?
It wasn't exactly a miracle, but we did come from behind to eek the game out. However, that was against an NCAA-bound PSU team. This year's PSU is awful.
My guess is those blocks of tickets belong to brokers. I have been scouring Craiglist for 4 tickets to this weekend's game. There are plenty to be had, but they're in the upper bowl/row 40 and start at like $100 each.
During the broadcast, they said Michigan held a 15-0 advantage in fast break points. I don't know how many more we added after the comment was made, but if you know how many points Illinois had from offensive rebounds, you'd have your answer.
The two things are related but not 100%. In fact he majority of fast break points yesterday came off of tournovers not defensive rebounds. I really wish we would push it more off of defensive rebounds to punish teams for sending so many guys to the glass.
I was pleasantly surprised to see Hardaway get himself involved offensively without taking a bunch of contested and low percentage shots. Once he got into the flow of the game (with the rest of his teammates) he really took off. So far this year, I have spent most of my time cussing at him on my couch. Yesterday, I didn't.
But really, if we lose out, we don't deserve to make the Dance. And being on the bubble won't hardly be our biggest problem at that point. Because if you can't at least finish 2-3 with that schedule.... Finish at least 4-3 with the Big Ten Tournament (preferrably 5-3) and 24-10 is a team the likes we haven't seen around here in a LONG time.
UM Football or UM Basketball?
which is typically as the player starts to bring the ball up before he jumps. This is rarely called correctly and often the player arrives late and gets the charge anyways.
For the of God men, we're not going to lose out.
You mad bro?
"Extreme frustration" might be an understatement. Living in Chicago I know several people who are rooting against their own team because they want Weber gone ASAP. For several years people were pointing to the recruiting classes that came in 2009 (Rivals #s 38 (Richardson), 42 (Paul), 120 (Griffey) and 128 (Bertrand)) and 2010 (Rivals #s 31 (Leonard), 35 (Jereme Richmond, long thought to have been a likely 5 star but ended up not being one) and 84 (Crandall Head). Their 2011 class also ended up top 15.
So they're talented, but mediocre and they suck to watch. You can understand why the fans are so mad.
I don't think Zook actually left Champaign O_o
So nice to see Hardaway Jr have a good game.I hope it's a preview of this to come.