How there was no old-timey comment/pic to go with "Rufus Teesdale" is just completely dropping a ball that you normally hit out of the park. (#mixed metaphor)
And yes, after this year, Draymon Green hurts even a little bit more.
Do you think Coach Beilein wasn't selective enough in the 2013 class, seeing that none of the recruits are in the top 50, and one of them is outside the top 100?
At this point Beilein has earned the benefit of the doubt when it comes to jumping on recruits early. When he grabbed Glenn Robinson III he was an unranked three-star; he is going to finish his high school career with five stars on Rivals and won't be far off on Scout. Nick Stauskas has broken into the top 100 on all sites as well; I think he'll be a fantastic two-guard for Michigan. Last year Beilein won a recruiting battle with Cincinnati for PSU decommit Trey Burke. The year before he grabbed Smotrycz before his profile blew up and was higher on Tim Hardaway Jr than anyone else. Beilein's evaluation skills are clearly a notch above the field.
So there's that. Beilein's taken a lot of lightly-regarded three stars who happen to blow up either before or after they hit Ann Arbor. Michigan's 2013 class may be in the process of doing that. Derrick Walton just went for 47 in a playoff game; Zak Irvin has had a strong high school season. I'm guessing those guys are more likely to move up than down, though Scout's Brian Snow doesn't seem like he's going to budge on Irvin just yet.
Even if those guys aren't in line for some of the meteoric rises we've seen Michigan recruits have, they don't have to get bumped much to be on par with 2012. Irvin's on the edge of the top 50 on Rivals and Walton is 87. They're starting out with more rep than Robinson or Stauskas, more rep than three of MSU's four 2012 commits.
As for Donnal, I don't care as much what the ratings say about him because it's at that five spot that Michigan is so divergent from a conventional team. Donnal has an extremely high skill level that makes him a great fit for Michigan. Hypothetical athletic limitations—which may or may not be a big deal for a post who just finished his junior year of high school—make him the #124 player in a nationwide ranking; in Beilein's eyes you can bet he's a lot higher.
When Carlton Brundidge, a guy who still has a lot of time to turn into a useful player, is the best case for a Beilein recruiting miss* attempting to criticize his 2013 class is like shooting a guy wearing six bulletproof vests.
*[I don't think anyone expected post-signing-day pickup Colton Christian to be anything other than what he is; jury is out on Bielfeldt. Beilein is making a lot of encouraging noises about him. #pleasebelikedraymondgreen
Also, a large number of Beilein recruits that went elsewhere have gone on to agonizingly good careers elsewhere: Kyle Kuric, Kevin Pangos, Klay Thompson, etc. Hell, Green was supposedly about to commit to Michigan before Izzo swooped in on him.]
A follow-up from the Michigan Today story featuring the "athletic colors" and the "official colors" that were so divergent:
After reading about university colors on MGoBlog, I thought you find find some additional information of interest.
An Ann Arbor News article from November 29, 1998, "Hue-ing the line: True blue, maize ways" follows up on the Fall 1996 Michigan Today story "Which Maize? Which Blue?" The 1912 official color color samples (housed at the Bentley Historical Library) were tested in 1997 with spectrophotometers by X-Rite (a company in Grandville, Michigan founded by Rufus Teesdale a Michigan graduate).
According to the Ann Arbor News article, the spectrophotometer readings were converted to printing instructions noting that the numbers "were tweaked a bit to account for some fading of the ribbons since 1912."
The spectrophotometer readings of the 1912 official color samples were:
MAIZE: 9 cyan, 28 magenta, 59 yellow, 0 black
BLUE: 93 cyan, 76 magenta, 24 yellow, 2 black
The 1912 report on the official colors reads a lot like current complaints about color, "In short, the blue color, which is the one longest associated with the University, starting with a shade almost as dark as "navy blue" has gradually weakened until it has the hint known as "baby blue." the maize, likewise, has faded to correspond, and is now an expressionless pale yellow. So delicate have the colors become, that they have not only lost their original character, but are ineffective in decorations, and useless to the Athletic association, which has been forced to employ colors entirely different from those which recent graduates regard as University colors. It is only necessary to see the diversity of the banners which are displayed in the store windows to realize the confusion which exists."
Every time I bring this up I'm pleasantly surprised by how seriously people take this. Again, I've heard that the athletic department would like to move away from the kind of yellow that gets us mentioned in the same breath with the Sounders and Oregon when SI writers are bagging on these babies:
I hope they come with sirens, ladders, and hoses
Let there come a day when Roy Roundtree is wearing sunglasses in Crisler just to look cool instead of prevent retina damage.
On Michigan's late game success.
You mentioned that you don't buy into the "grit" factor as a possible explanation into their 13-5 record given the difference in efficiency margin. I agree that Eckstein-adjectives don't rationalize the difference but I was curious if there is any game experience stats out there that could help.
I know that UM is still young in terms of overall team experience but there's no question in my mind that Novak and Douglas' four years of relevant playing time contributes to that record despite the efficiency. I would also think that having Morgan and Hardaway being second year starters adds to that explanation given the relative short time periods that excellent teams have their players for before they leave for the draft.
I don't know how you would measure it but is there anything that quantifies the experience of the players actually playing minutes in the game. Having two starters that have played significant time over four years has to be somewhat rare in the Big 10's upper tier.
Kenpom does have an experience measure that adjusts for minutes played. Michigan is 209th of 345 with an average of 1.54 years of experience. This is a massive improvement on last year when they were 335th*.
As for Michigan's super-experienced dudes, Michigan's two is better than OSU's one (Buford) and MSU's one (Green; Thornton has not seen a lot of time in his career), but Green has a usage of 28%, Buford 23%. Stu and Zack are around 15% each. Their involvement in the offense summed about equals Green's.
Meanwhile when I think clutch late-game performances, I think Trey Burke putting it as high off the glass as possible against OSU and hitting free throw after free throw. This blog has a tag about Burke's clutch play even though it tries not to believe in clutch. That's a freshman.
So I cannot agree with your police work here when poor Northwestern is so much more experienced (89th), relies two massive-usage upperclassmen, and endured maximum epic pain in all late game situations this year. BOOM REVERSE ANECDOTE'D.
In the face of the post-Merrit/Lee implosion I'm a convert to the gritty winning winners bit, but I think that's equally useful at all times during a game, in practice, etc., not especially at the end of a game.
*[BONUS KENPOM STATISTICAL OUTLIER: Michigan gets 17% of their minutes from its bench. That is 343rd(!) nationally. The only teams more reliant on their starters are Siena, a 14-17 MAAC team, and Youngstown State, a 16-15 Horizon League team.
Oddly enough, having few bench minutes is much less of a problem than having a ton. Alabama is the most bench-heavy team in the tournament at #45 and they are up there involuntarily after two starters were suspended midseason. #60 Kansas State is the first team on the list that seems to have voluntarily played its bench a lot. Life's better at the bottom: 14 teams in the 300s in this category (ie, a third of them) made the tourney, including S16 seeds Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Wisconsin, Louisville, and Michigan.]
How there was no old-timey comment/pic to go with "Rufus Teesdale" is just completely dropping a ball that you normally hit out of the park. (#mixed metaphor)
And yes, after this year, Draymon Green hurts even a little bit more.
next year our bench usage is going to go way up. you know that robinson III and mcgary are going to get lots of time, and if staukas can shoot like we hope he can, he'll be on the floor too. that means that at least nine players (morgan, horford, smot, burke, hardaway, robinson III, mcgary, vogrich and staukas) should see significant time. and that doesn't factor in brudage or biefeldt who we all hope will be good enough to see minutes.
This year's team has no depth, is a guard-oriented small-ball team that leans heavily on it's starters. Next year,it's going to be a deep, tall, and forward-heavy. The front-court will be at least a four-man rotation of Smotrycz-Morgan-McGary-Horford.
Quite the change from Novak-Morgan-Smot. Small forward will be some combo of Robinson, Vogrich, and Smotrycz. Hardaway will have to shift to the 2. Stauskas is actually the guy they need most to contribute immediately, because there aren't enough ball-handlers. Hopefully he can replicate Douglass' former role of 3rd-guard.
Things will be very very different - Except at PG, where Burke will still have to play heavy minutes and run the team.
So . . . geometry was not your strong suit?
Hardaway is not shifting to the 2. His handle is way too loose. Anytime he dribbles in traffic he loses the ball.
I won't pretend to know the difference in offensive roles between the 2 and 3 in the Beilein system, but Hardaway's probably going to be guarding more 2s next year with Douglass gone.
Offensively - Burke's the ball handler and there is no Plan B, just like this year - there aren't many ballhandlers. Stauskas - maybe, but he unlikely to be able to play the same number of minutes as Douglass. Vogrich's handle is no better than TH. Robinson?
I think Hardaway's just going to have to improve his ball handling.
If you plug in the CMYK values above for maize into a color conversion tool, the result is orange - like Ilinois orange.
That does not look like Maize at all.
Because your link looks almost brownish, but the font you put up looks very maize-y. Yet, they're the same color?
The blue at least looks like the blue, which does resemble the older, not quite as dark look Michigan uses.
It's an effect of looking at a color compared to a white background vs. a black border and text. The text editor might have also gone to a websafe color which could be a bit lighter.
I agree. I tried two different sites to convert from CMYK to RGB because I thought the first one had a miscalculation.
That site came up with #FFCC66 for websafe, which looks a lot better, but still not close. That's the websafe color though, and not the actual color that it calculated.
How CB would recruit at Michigan was an unkown when he took the job. But I think we can all agree that he has surpassed expectations in that area and proven himself to be a fantastic talent evaluator.
The most exciting aspect of his recruiting is the versatility of some of the players. Most of these guys can play multiple positions.
is CB john beilein's evil twin brother, chris?
I'm guessing he meant Coach Beilein.
It's worth nothing as well that Mark Donnal, as a sophomore, was 6'9", 200 pounds, and is a a high three-star to low four-star depending on what site you choose to look at. If Irvin, Donnal, and Walton don't improve a lick, this is the second-best ranked class Michigan has pulled since Amaker got Courtney Sims and Brett Petway.
is a miss. He's a true freshman who has not clearly grasped the concept of JB's offense which is considered to be one of the more complicated system to learn from. You have to appreciate how quickly Burke has picked up the system and how well he has been playing this year.
Brundidge often plays on a team that relies on athleticism and does not offer a lot of fundmentals. This is where he's behind the learning curve. The talent is there as evidenced with his performance at AAU ball where he scored 40 plus points two times. He's a different kind of G from Burke in which he's more of a combo G who can score.
I would wait until the end of his career to fully judge Brundidge.
Look at Stu and Novak. Two players who had almost zero division 1 offers coming out of high school and were unranked recruits. Today, they leave as the ones who put their stamp on the program with their leadership and long lasting impact on and off the court.
It's also worth noting that Beilein took the 2013 class before 1) mcgary committed and 2) this season's success put us firmly back on the map for big time recruits. Even if we could have done better than the kids we have (debatable - they look good), there was no way Beilein could know we'd be looking this much more attractive for recruits now than we did last summer.
Also, sneaky Fargo reference there, Brian.
Great point guard play, great coaching, and great leadership usually allow teams to excel in late game situations. We have all three of these. Brian seems to think that basketball is played by emotionless robots who exhibit maximum effort on every single possession, thus making a team's close game record random.
... for non-repeatable events that went your way (good) or against you (bad). Every game has some - even bridge or chess (who do you draw in the tournament? are they sick that day?etc.).
Saying that luck plays a factor is not the same as saying the team didn't deserve the wins or wasn't good.
Saying that luck plays the biggest factor is saying that the non-repeatable events are more important than repeatable qualities of the teams involved. Over many teams across many years, this is indisputably true. Whether it's true for this Michigan team this year is virtually impossible to prove or disprove.
That said, just because there is no statistically significant effect produced by leadership as currently measured across many teams over many years doesn't mean that there isn't an effect on this Michigan team this year. So sure, maybe we won more close games due to heart and character and a will to win.
Problem is, most teams about whom this can be said tend to stop doing that rather suddenly, often in the tournament just after the season. Especially when all it takes is one bad bounce ...
Beilein's been good, but not quite as good as you make it out to be. Christian is a big negative on his resume that can't be ignored. Expectations were low, yes, but correctly so. He takes up a scholarship like anyone else. The hope was that he could develop into a reliable role-player, but he hasn't done that and he's already a junior next year. He's Bielien's Amadou Ba, without the center-size. Other black-marks:
08: Cronin was a total bust and looked like it even before his injury.
09: Vogrich is debatable, but McLimans remains an on-court liability.
10: Christian and Horford - who the jury is still out on. His slight build has turned out to be as much of an issue as critics expected. Thankfully he's red-shirting, because he needs it.
11: Too early to call on Brundidge and Biefeldt, but CB is off to a very rough start.
...And, while some of the just-missed targets have turned out to be very good (e.g., Benzig, Pangos) Prather has turned out to be very overrated.
What Bielien's done is find extremely underrated players early. He's been very good at locating the shoulda-been-a-5-star guys in Morris, Hardaway, Burke and now perhaps Robinson. However, while finding quality 'sleepers' like Morgan and Novak he's also whiffed on a number of role-player types - quite badly. I don't know if his 'batting average' is better than typical or not, but there's plenty of reason to question some of his decisions. The depth issues that exist on this team aren't just because Morris went pro and Horford got hurt. The back-end of the bench is not performing as you'd like, and even Smotrycz and Vogrich have failed to exceed their recruiting profile.
As for the '13 class - it's way too early to say but they all look like great fits IMO.
I guess you just can't please some people.
I'm not complaining. He's done a great job overall and an excellent job unearthing talent. I'm just not going to say he's above being questioned. He makes his share of mistakes in recruiting and it's okay raise concerns.
No, you're absurd. Cronin's NCAA career lasted 26 minutes of playing time, and he was hurt for every single fucking second of it. He wasn't a bust, he was injured. Further - he was a virtual no-star recruit, of an equivalent stock as Novak and Douglass. To call that a "bust" is beyond idiocy. You are seriously saying that in the 26 TOTAL minutes of time he played, you could incontravertibly see his future?
Colton Christian signed well after signing day, and had a single D-I offer - to Tulane. He isn't a "massive black-mark" he is a miss - one that has cost us nothing. What players have we turned away in the past 2 years due to a lack of available scholarships?
McLimans was another last-second addition, a backup for Nate Lubick AND Robin Benzing. These guys often don't pan out.
The fact that every single player he's brought in isn't a rotation player isn't a criticism, it's a simple fact of life. The fact that every single guy you mentioned was a 2-star, last second grab, further exacerbates that.
You're being ridiculous.
Taking what you call 0-star recruits is a decision Bielien made. Credit due when they pan out, but criticism is appropriate when they don't.
Novak and Douglass were totally different than Cronin. They were clearly low-ceiling mid-major players given an opportunity on a bigger stage. Every team needs shooters and these guys could shoot. These two were clearly not nearly the same risk/reward as Cronin, who was an obvious project, even when he committed. Because of the injury, the situation is murky, but he never looked remotely close to athletic.
Christian and McLimans cost us a scholarships. That means we have to pass on guys in the '12 class, including a badly needed backup PG. That is far from nothing. Having people on scholarship who don't contribute is a failing, regardless of their rank or when they commited.
And acting as if having a non-contributing scholarship player is a "significant problem" in comparison to any program in the country is failing of thinking.
Not significant problems. The only significant problem for the program currently is lack of a back-up PG. Otherwise, things are going great.
Beilein's done a great job, but we don't have to go to extreme of describing him as an all-knowing deity. He's made a handful of mistakes with a great many success overriding that - leading to a program that is in great shape. Those mistakes still exist, even in what is otherwise a bright context.
In fairness last year's point guard left early
You can pick out any coach and he will have recruited players that simply did not pan out. If the number of players that are "busts" is greater than those that succeed, then there should be complaining. This could not be further from the case with JB. Not only has he found "diamonds in the rough", but his elite talent evaluation skills have led to signing a player like Glenn Robinson III before he blew up.
Robinson, in my opinion, will be the best player on the team as soon as he steps on campus. I have had an opportunity to watch him play several times the last two years, and the kid is the most talented player to have signed with UM since Jerod Ward. Obviously Ward never lived up to his talent, but that is more on coaching than anything else.
The point I am trying to make is that Michigan has experienced recent success without "elite" level recruits. Now that JB is bringing in top notch talent, there is no limit to how high this program can climb. In no way can you reasonably justify any complaints for the job Beilein has done recruiting thus far.
The simple alternative is to NOT take a player like that. Save the scholarship. Let people who play like walk-ons be walk-ons, and reward them with scholarships once they've put in their time. Christian may be a great guy for all I know, but handing him a scholarship when his best alternative is Tulane is not a decision that helps the basketball program succeed.
It's more justifiable with Center types like Cronin and McLimans because you can't find 7-foot walk-ons so easily.
You're blasting him because the back half of his bench is bad on a program that three years ago was lucky to make the tourney on a hope and prayer?
Not blasting at all. Just pointing out that Brian's analysis ignores some significant misses. Every program has them, but Bielien doesn't posses a full-clarity crystal ball either.
3 guys that had 0 stars when they received an offer "not panning out" is not a "significant miss".
So any player on scholarship that isnt a solid contributor (notice I didn't say on the floor because some of the players you mentioned get playing time, they're just liabilities according to you) is a fail?
Please find me a halfway decent D1 basketball program that uses a 13 person (# of scholarships) rotation with none of those players as liabilities. I suppose you think David Cone was a bust too since every QB any football team ever recruits should be a 4-year starter.
No, I don't expect Beilein or any other coach to bat a thousand. But, I do expect him to put a roster together that has more than 6.5 useful players.
Freshman who don't contribute aren't failures, but upperclassmen are. Ideally, there are some younger players at the end of the bench who, while maybe not ready for action, show some ability and signs of future production.
I'm not rating Beilien as Pass/Fail. If I was, it's obviously Pass. But there have been INDIVIDUAL failures to identify talent. Enough that Beilein's judgement shouldn't be considered flawless.
Yes, I consider David Cone a miss - do you consider his recruitment/scholarship as something that made the football program better(mic-skill aside)?
I don't think he planned on Darius Morris leaving on a 2nd round draft grade, or Horford being out for most of the year. Horford had the look of a useful 12-15 minute rotation player this year when he was actually playing.
What kind of player did you expect for Beilein to recruit in the early years? The program was a disaster. He does not get down with the Calipari's of the world, or go after those kind of players. And quite honestly, as good as Kentucky is, I am glad that he doesn't. Any success Cal has had has been removed from the record books, and it is probably a matter of time before his Kentucky accomplisments are as well.
As soon as Beilein was hired, everyone knew it was a 4-5 year rebuilding project. I am completely fine with the level he is recruiting at now.
But every team is going to have some attrition/injuries. You have to expect it. That's where Brundidge, Christian and McLimans being worse than replacement-level Big10 players is a problem. Sometimes walk-ons like Okunne or Merrit can fill gaps, and couple years ago they HAD to, but that should not be the case anymore.
I, too, am glad we're not Kentucky or post-Fab5 Michigan. I'd like to strike a balance between NBA lotto picks and 4-year players like Novak/Douglass/Morgan who are willing to fill a role.
I'm also more than fine with where recruiting is. Call it nit-picking if you like, but there have been some questionable decisions mixed in amongst the overall success. But every recruit in the '12 and '13 classes seems like both a pretty high level talent (well above the Novak/Douglass/Vogrich range) and a good fit for Beilein teams. I don't think that's been the case for previous classes.
You keep ragging on Brundidge as a failure when he's true freshman. He came in as a 2 guard. Just who's minutes was he going to take?
But it's fair to say he had a disappointing first season. He was supposed to be a combo-guard type. In theory, he could at least be backing up Burke (another true freshman) for the limited minutes when he's off the floor.
The backcourt sub right now is....Vogrich I guess. It's not like competition is stiff for a role off the bench.
Remember though, he signed Christian when he was still having trouble filling the roster with quality players...at that point he had to take some chances just to have a reasonable roster. That won't be the case going forward. All part of building.
duplicate - sorry
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that takes into account minutes played, only years. So while Zack and Stu are l ly counted as your average senior (think equivalent to Austin Thornton), in minutes-played they're probably among the top of the league.
Do people really prefer this look (iconic yes, but do you really want to go back):
To this one:
I know, I know, GET OFF MY LAWN, right? But I just don't see it.
And how could we change the perfection exemplified in these:
Yes. I prefer the fade and completely shaved head to the do's these kids are sporting these days.
Faded yellow > highlighter yellow > burnt orange.
John Beilein : Wolverines Basketball :: Billy Beane : Oakland Athletics
Hopefully not because the A's were only good for a couple years (largely due to having 3 awesome underrated pitchers that Beane himself didnt even scout) and never won any championships. They're garbage again and will continue to be garbage until they raise their payroll. Don't believe Hollywood movies.
I was going to say this, but he did win a couple AL West crowns. So, we've won the B1G once and it was shared with two teams that were a notch better than we were. This doesn't inherently make us any better thus far than Beane and Oakland, but the difference is the level of consistency Beilein is building at Michigan.
It sure looks like Beilein has us on an upward trajectory that has us headed for the national stage in the coming years. I undoubtedly believe Beilein will win more championships and have hopes that we will have at least a Final Four or two to show for the Beilein era when all is said and done.
is that since he has coached at every college level, he will know if you are good enough to play or if you need just enough help to become one of the best.
If Beilein recruited all 2 stars I would trust him and say that he knows what he is doing