Maryland 66, Michigan 56
File photo [Barron]
Yes, we have to talk about it.
John Beilein is a great coach. His tenure at Michigan has left no doubt. Even great coaches, however, have their downsides. Beilein's rigidity with his foul policy qualifies, and—along with a perplexing insistence on sticking with the 1-3-1 while Maryland rained in second-half threes—it cost Michigan a shot at this game.
Muhammad-Ali Abdur-Rahkman picked up his second foul with 12:27 to go in the first half; the score was tied at nine. Zak Irvin committed his second with 6:55 to play in the half; Michigan held a 19-18 lead. Beilein went with a lineup that included walk-ons Andrew Dakich and Sean Lonergan, and didn't re-insert Rahk or Irvin until the second half.
Maryland entered halftime up 30-21 after the Wolverines scored on just one of their ten possessions after Irvin hit the bench. Using KenPom's win probability calculator, which factors in that Maryland entered the game with an 81% chance at victory, the Terrapins' win probability jumped from 78.0% to 93.3% during that span.
Although Michigan got within three during the second half, Maryland pulled away each time the Wolverines drew near, usually with an open corner three against the ineffective 1-3-1 zone. The ten-point swing with Rahk and Irvin on the bench in the first half held up as the final margin of victory.
Abdur-Rahkman finished with seven points on seven shots, seven rebounds, two assists, and three fouls in 28 minutes. Irvin had 15 points on 14 shots, three rebounds, three assists, and just the two fouls in 31. Lonergan had no points, two rebounds, and a foul in 11 minutes. Dakich had a three-pointer blocked in his three minutes.
It's not fair to Beilein to only point out the negatives. For the second consecutive game, Kam Chatman looked like a different player, scoring seven points on 3/5 shooting. Spike Albrecht tied for the team lead with 15 points. Irvin displayed a level of aggressiveness, ballhandling, and court vision that he didn't possess earlier in his career.
Beilein is coaching these guys up, and we'll undoubtedly be singing his praises again soon. Today, however, he wasn't close to his best.
February 28th, 2015 at 9:10 PM ^
was allowed to be aggressive. Saying they finished with 2 or 3 fouls for the game is not a good enough evidence to say that they won't foul at first half. Team didnt' go after them at 2nd half because that would be a bad strategy in which it would take them out of the game instead of running their usual offense. 1st half? Teams will go after them hard to get 3rd/4th fouls at 1st half.
I rather save them for the 2nd half instead of them fouling out early at 2nd half beacuse of stupid gamble like this.
Would you rather play both of them and have them get 3rd foul at 1st half then get 4th foul at 2nd half? In all likelihood, you're going to play a walk-on like Dakich or Longeran trying to close out the game. What if it's a tight game and you don't have a key player beacuse you chose to gamble at 1st half? That's not a good strategy to have
February 28th, 2015 at 10:49 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 11:44 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 28th, 2015 at 9:23 PM ^
Are you a coach? You forgot a detail that makes for a huge flaw in that argument: Michigan is in a zone so you can't really attack one guy. Zones don't allow for that. Besides, that's not always good offensive strategy anyway. An offensive gameplan takes advantage of the whole team. If you all of a sudden tell them to go at one guy, it gets you out of what you want to do and often ends up being good for the defense. Sure, go ahead, go at the guy and don't run your offense. Best case scenario is he gets his third and comes out anyway. Worst case, you just altered the gameplan from whatever you thought was optimal before.
for the multi-post. def did not attempt to save more than once.
February 28th, 2015 at 9:23 PM ^
Are you a coach? You forgot a detail that makes for a huge flaw in that argument: Michigan is in a zone so you can't really attack one guy. Zones don't allow for that. Besides, that's not always good offensive strategy anyway. An offensive gameplan takes advantage of the whole team. If you all of a sudden tell them to go at one guy, it gets you out of what you want to do and often ends up being good for the defense. Sure, go ahead, go at the guy and don't run your offense. Best case scenario is he gets his third and comes out anyway. Worst case, you just altered the gameplan from whatever you thought was optimal before.
February 28th, 2015 at 9:23 PM ^
Are you a coach? You forgot a detail that makes for a huge flaw in that argument: Michigan is in a zone so you can't really attack one guy. Zones don't allow for that. Besides, that's not always good offensive strategy anyway. An offensive gameplan takes advantage of the whole team. If you all of a sudden tell them to go at one guy, it gets you out of what you want to do and often ends up being good for the defense. Sure, go ahead, go at the guy and don't run your offense. Best case scenario is he gets his third and comes out anyway. Worst case, you just altered the gameplan from whatever you thought was optimal before.
February 28th, 2015 at 9:31 PM ^
And there are tons of offensive actions run to attack particular areas of the zone, to include the players defending those areas. Many times the main benefit of the zone, the ability to defend aggressively because of the help in various areas protecting the basket, is diminished when a player is in foul trouble.
is all about NOT attacking specific players, it's about attacking seams, flashing to the open spots (not where players actually are), and then moving the ball as the zone moves. The zone allows a perimeter guy to play "closer" to his guy (which you might be referring to as aggressive). He is less worried about the guy blowing by him than in man-to-man, because if he's beaten, he doesn't have to aggressively try to stay in front of the guy, he can just let him get to the second level where he knows he has help. Zones are naturally great for perimeter guys in foul trouble.
But the whole argument being made by Ace (correctly) is that 2 fouls in the first half for guys that average 3.2 and 1.5!!!! fouls per 40 minutes does not constitute foul trouble. It's still highly unlikely they foul out even after getting 2 in the first half so not only should they not be taken out (especially Irvin), they should play exactly as aggressively as they usually do, which has been discussed on here is probably not even aggressive enough, but that's a separate topic itself.
enough to post it 4 times ! ( just kidding. sometimes the site is so slow it looks like it didn't go through . I give you a pass on that )
February 28th, 2015 at 4:04 PM ^
While we're licking our wounds and second-guessing on-court decisions, I like knowing that Maryland is looking back over their shoulder, thanking their lucky stars that they pulled it out, and wondering why it was so hard for them to beat Michigan. Even in a loss, this team makes me so proud.
February 28th, 2015 at 7:31 PM ^
If we made anything from behind the arc, we win. Instead, we missed those open 3s and the Maryland possession that followed usually resulted in a 3. A lot of 6 point swings.
February 28th, 2015 at 4:08 PM ^
Beilein's rigidity with fouls cost us a National Championship...we were up 11 or 12 pts. in the first half...had he brought Burke back for the last 5 minutes of the first half I am sure we would have been up 10 at half instead of 1.
You gotta have balls and play for the win. Especially in a National Championship...but also especially when your team is going nowhere and you're playing a ranked Maryland at their place and you have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO LOSE.
DAMN BEILEIN - grow a pair!!
February 28th, 2015 at 4:58 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 5:25 PM ^
Spike went crazy and got us the 11/12 pt. lead. You bring in Burke for the last 6 minutes and Hancock doesn't erase it like he did.
The team was discombobulated with Spike in there. Nobody knew where to be or where he was dribbling to.
You don't bench the national player of the year for that long. You trust him and play for the win!
February 28th, 2015 at 5:33 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 8:55 PM ^
You bring in Burke for the last 6 minutes and Hancock doesn't erase it like he did.Why, is Burke going to guard Hancock in this scenario? Our offense cooled down in the final minutes of the first half in that game but it was really the D - especially on Hancock - that was problem.
We scored 39 points in the first half. That really wasn't the issue.
February 28th, 2015 at 6:20 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 4:47 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 5:02 PM ^
We have to remind ourselves after every game, the roster is totally in shambles depth wise.
Almost half our allotted players provide very little and in some cases nothing either because of injuries and transfer restrictions.
We had plenty of wide open threes that we missed. In fact, Irvin had a wide open three on a transition drive to the net and kick out, and missed badly. Instead of being down 1, the next possession on defense, we didn't secure the rebound and gave up a 3.
Multiple point swings just like that made the game margin worse than it should have been.
I am baffled by our inability to make open shots this season.
February 28th, 2015 at 5:43 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 6:37 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 28th, 2015 at 8:20 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 8:30 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 8:57 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 11:07 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 11:39 PM ^
If a guy picks up two quick, bad fouls, sure, sit him down and let him clear his head (for a few minutes). But if he's not prone to fouling out (which MAAR apparently is not) and is picking up fouls in the normal flow of otherwise good defense, I think you need to trust him to keep playing (especially when the alternative is to put out a guy who just can't hang).
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 28th, 2015 at 6:54 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 28th, 2015 at 8:16 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 11:41 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 28th, 2015 at 11:52 PM ^
I'd rather do what maximized my expected minutes from my best player, whether or not those come in the first or second half. What makes you think that MAAR was going to foul out with five minutes left if he isn't benched after two fouls but Dakich only plays three minutes in the other situation? Do you think MAAR is somehow more likely to pick up fouls in the first half than in the second?
Why do you think 3 minutes at the end of the game is more important than 3 minutes at the start? That just seems like narrative trumping fact. The only argument I could see is that Dakich would play worse during the final 3 minutes compared to the opening 3 minutes because of nerves, or that MAAR would play better in the final 3 minutes than the first 3 minutes because of magic reverse nerves. I've seen anything to suggest that from either guy. But still, even if you accept that you have to weigh the improvement in play in the final minutes against the reduction in time played for your better. If MAAR was very foul prone, then maybe he needs to sit a lot of the first and second halves to save him for the final minutes when he (for some reason) plays better. But he's not. Unless you think Maryland "going after him" in the first half was going to vastly increase his expected rate of fouling, you should play him. After the fact, we can see that he only committed one foul going full tilt in the second half. Hence benching him was wrong in this game unless he would have picked up two fouls during the time he was benched. May be he would have, but it's very unlikely. So it looks like it was wrong to bench him.
February 28th, 2015 at 4:52 PM ^
At some point, doesn't MAAR have to be a lot smarter and not get 2 fouls? It feels like every other game, he does this. Especially on the road, the home team is usually going to get the whistle on anything close. I think he is developing nicely, but he continues to no show in the first half and wait to wake up in the second half doesn't help either.
In general, we are a team that doesn't foul much, yet today, three crucial players were in foul trouble.
I know there is a fine line between playing tough defense and playing smart defense (strong, but making sure you don't foul), but I feel like these guys have to be a lot smarter and stay on the floor.
They know what's behind them on the roster. I am sure these guys support and love Dakich and Lonergan, but let's be real, neither of those guys can be on the floor for any more than 2-3 minutes at a time if we expect to win. The fact that either plays any time beyond the last minute of a blowout win is scary to begin with.
Obviously Beilein banked on a few things happening
1. Walton, Levert, and Irvin being healthy all season
2. Doyle and Donnal being a lot better than they are
Its painful to watch games that you have a chance to win just to piss them away by playing walk-ons that essentially turn the game into 4 on 5. Lonergan never looks to shoot.
February 28th, 2015 at 5:59 PM ^
not to foul a ton because that's their tendency when they get significant playing time because 1. the speed of the game is too fast for them, 2. they don't know what things they can get away with and what things they cannot get away with, 3. referees are all different in almost every game so it's hard to adjust one style to another while adjusting to the opponent. The best way to cure it is more experience.
February 28th, 2015 at 5:02 PM ^
I know this blog's writers don't have a ton of experience with basketball when, of all things, they whine about the sitting a player with 2 fouls in the first half. That is not what is costing Michigan right now.
February 28th, 2015 at 7:49 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 11:11 PM ^
But its become its own meme: "Brian and Ace complain about 2-foul policy" And they don't even present an argument beyond fouls per 40. That's a flawed argument for many reasons:
Players don't play 40 minutes. So you should really look at fouls per 32 or something.
You leave a guy on the floor in foul trouble and he is going to play softer defense. That's a fact. You can sometimes go to zone to help mitigate foul trouble, but then you're weighing other deficiencies against the back-up player.
None of these players is a guy where you're like "we need him in there to survive." If that were the case, I'd bet we'd see JB let a player or two go with two fouls.
Finally, the time in the game where things happens, matters. If MAAR fouls out with 4 minutes to go because you let him get his 3rd foul, you lose him for the last 4 minutes. You can't recover from those last four minutes. The game is done. If you sit him for 4 minutes in the first half, you lose him for those 4 minutes, but you can recover. There's time left to make adjustments. If you go -6 in both 4 minute stretches, the former cannot be recovered from. The latter can.
February 28th, 2015 at 5:48 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 6:16 PM ^
February 28th, 2015 at 6:39 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I think what gets lost is that these are players, not machines. Full disclosure: I coach basketball.
Points or time in the first half isn't the same as time later. That's a often stated falsehood. The reason being this: If you give up a 10-2 run in the first 3 minutes of the game, you have 35 minutes to adjust to that, make changes and recover. If you give up a 10-2 run in the last 3 minutes of the game, you have no chance to recover from it. You just get to hope that you had a 9 point lead.
Second, sure the "half" is a little arbitrary. However, it's a chance to rest and regroup. This goes back to the fact that players are humans, not machines. A rested player is going to play better defense and is less likely to foul. You get a chance to reinforce your game plan and make adjustments when necessary.
I've never seen a team come out at halftime and go after a player with 2 fouls. But I've seen them come out after halftime and go after a player with three fouls You don't want to be on the receiving end of that. It may force you to play zone or do something that doesn't play to your strengths as a team.
There's so many reasons to avoid a third foul before halftime. There's a reaosn coaches will avoid that third foul 95% of the time. It's NOT a deficiency of Beilein's.
Comments