Maryland 66, Michigan 56 Comment Count

Ace



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.

Comments

Stringer Bell

March 1st, 2015 at 2:44 PM ^

That's a ridiculous argument.  All points are created equal, no matter when they're scored.  If you give up a big run early in the game, you're stuck playing from behind.  If you don't, you have a chance to take and build on a lead, that way when the opposing team goes on a run late in the game you aren't stuck having to catch up.  Minutes in the 1st half are just as important as minutes in the 2nd half, which is why it's asinine that Beilein insists on benching guys like MAAR and Irvin, 2 of our most important players, for 8-10 minutes at a time in favor of a couple of walk ons who shouldn't be playin, especially since they have yet to come close to fouling out at any point this year.

bstaub32

March 2nd, 2015 at 10:05 AM ^

I agree with MGOBender, and I also coach basketball for a very successful high school program in PA, all points and minutes are equal only if you don't account for home court, momentum, player's energy, and time to adjust to the game as it is happening.

It is clear that if you pick up 2 fouls in the first half you go to the bench. Just as all of us know this, the players know this. They need to either play better defense (not fouling) or make smarter decisions to not foul BECAUSE of the depth concerns.

The depth concerns aren't an excuse to leave them on the floor. It is easier to "steal" minutes with role/bench players in the first half then it would be the final 5 minutes of a conference road game.

JOHNNAVARREISMYHERO

February 28th, 2015 at 9:39 PM ^

The foul called on MAAR was a joke.  Beilein could have cried about it after the game, but when asked he kind of just brushed it aside because he knows it was a joke of a call.

The first half reffing was comical that game.  No surprise once the refs let us play that we continued to pull even and ahead.  

The refs did us in that day with a horrible call in favor of MSU.  

Amaizin' Blue

February 28th, 2015 at 6:05 PM ^

Anyone curious why we didn't foul at the end to at least try to eat into an 8-10 point lead with 3s?



With a minute to go we didn't foul. Then they foul Spike to get their seniors an ovation. Would leaving Spike in and fouling their scrubs with 30 seconds left be a bush league move? Do you let them enjoy senior day or try to see if they miss a FT and we get hot from downtown?

JOHNNAVARREISMYHERO

February 28th, 2015 at 9:52 PM ^

I thought about that too, but maybe Beilein wanted to just get out of there and get back home.  I don't know, but now that you present that situation, it makes me feel like fouling the scrubs could have lead to a bunch of missed FTs.  I just think because of our no depth, everyone is gassed by the end so it limits us from hitting a barrage of 3s at the end.  We missed a ton of open 3s to begin with, maybe Beilein just said fuck it, lets go home.

With our luck, the scrubs would have made all their FTs.  Personally I'd rather not let them get the glory of getting into the scorebook versus us.  

 

PAproudtoGoBlue

February 28th, 2015 at 7:55 PM ^

I like this team.  Beilein has the misfits within 3 plays down the stretch on the road in leauge play.  Taking teams to OT and squeezing out W's.  Not good at all against the elites but I think I'll love this team next year.   

JBE

February 28th, 2015 at 8:30 PM ^

This two foul argument is so strange. It's always smart to sit your key players after they pick up two fouls in the first half. If they get a third foul before half, and then happen to get a fourth early in the second half, then you're essentially forced to play roulette with your team for the rest of the game.

You want your best guys on the court for the majority of the final ten minutes of the second half, when the highest percentage of games are won or lost. Managing the rotation so your key guys have at most two fouls going into halftime is the best way to ensure they'll be out there for the final ten. It's just sound basketball. That's why the majority of coaches do it.

Just because MAAR and Irvin didn't happen to get into foul trouble doesn't mean it was the incorrect play. It could have also easily gone the other way, especially with young players, and all of a sudden you've got one or two important guys with 4 fouls early in the second half of a close game, and you're forced to play guys with less skill and experience to try and close out. Most of the time that doesn't go well.

gbdub

February 28th, 2015 at 11:50 PM ^

So instead it's better to sit your best players for 10 minutes in the first half, so the game gets out of reach before the final 10. That makes perfect sense!

Benching guys with two fouls works if and only if you have backups that can keep the game close. Michigan doesn't. You can't win the game in the first half but you can definitely lose it. And we have, multiple times, while one or two of our best five sits on the sideline.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Gucci Mane

March 1st, 2015 at 12:40 AM ^

I never got the thought that a coach would sit a player, in order to avoid sitting a player. In hoghschool I remmber getting taken out after two fouls 90 seconds into the game. Coach was gonna take me out but I said "nah I'm good" then I played the entire 32 minute game without another foul.

JBE

March 1st, 2015 at 9:29 AM ^

I'd always rather have the key guys out there at the end of the game. Plus, the game wasn't out of hand at the end of the first anyway. The Kenpom % Ace sites is intersting. He says the percentage went down, but the next sentence states Michigan did pull within three in the second half, effectively bringing that % back up. I'd much rather be within three points in the second half than within 10 or so at the end of the first, when you have the whole second half to get back into it. If you go down by double digits late in the second the % is often insurmountable. If Beilein is forced to play the walk-ons for a long spell in the second half as opposed to the end of the first that Kenpom most likely is going to be even worse than it was at half time. It's playing the percentages and Beilein made the right call.

gbdub

March 2nd, 2015 at 9:54 AM ^

But we wouldn't lose him for the last 10 minutes! Maybe the last five, if we'd played him the whole first half. So you're trading ten minutes in the first for five minutes in the second, which seems bad.

And anyway I don't think "sit a guy with two fouls" is always, or even usually, bad. The problem I, and apparently the blog owners, have is the rigidity of the policy. The context of the fouls should matter. So should the game scenario. Honestly I think the way this went down, MAAR should have sat for a few after his second foul, but when it became obvious that we were getting whipped without him on the floor, sending him out for the last five minutes or so would have been worth the risk. But Beilein apparently won't even consider that, which seems needlessly crippling.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

WolverineinWestTX

February 28th, 2015 at 9:13 PM ^

I do also think that although most I read are not overtly anti-Beilein, the fact that many are complaining MAAR was not in the game, considering what we knew about him at the beginning of the year, again speaks volumes to the player development within this program.

SysMark

March 1st, 2015 at 12:33 AM ^

No one wants to hear it but the fact that they were within 3 in the seond half completely vindicates the strategy.  They were undermanned and on the road.  Keep it close as long as you can and try to pull it out.

JOHNNAVARREISMYHERO

March 1st, 2015 at 2:06 AM ^

The game was there for the taking.  In fact, we had multiple stops on defense and followed them with no points.  You could sense the momentum shifting.  You have to take advantage.  Missed layups by Doyle and some missed wide open 3s were killer.  Maryland made the open 3s.    

If we make those 3s, we probably win.     In those must have spots, we missed our 3s and Maryland made them.

 

JohnnyHolliday…

March 1st, 2015 at 6:10 PM ^

My Terps were certainly spent from the Wisconsin game and a very hard practice Turge put them through. I've appreciated the discussion here of the foul policy. All I can say is to confirm from a Maryland fan perspective that it may have been worthy of the "rare exception" that has been mentioned. Perhaps the only postseason that hung in the balance was the NIT and that just doesn't make the grade for Beilein to make an exception.

CoachBP6

March 1st, 2015 at 4:11 AM ^

Beilein is fine. The fact that we could've won several games, against ranked teams, with the current roster, is absolutely unreal. Took down osu, should've beaten Illinois, were two bad overtimes away from beating Wisconsin and msu, could've beaten Indiana, and we're in this game til the end. If this team were healthy there is no doubt we make the tourney. Finish recruiting strong, and next year is looking very nice. I'm not worried about the basketball program at all, in fact I am optimistic that next season we will have a formidable team that will undoubtedly be one of the best teams in the big tennnnn.

My only real beef with Beilein are his late game inbounds plays, and not moving away from the 1-3-1 when it is the obvious thing to do. At present we don't have the length to excel with the 1-3-1. With the addition of teske and caris returning (hopefully) I think next year the 1-3-1 could be very deadly.

myrtlebeachmai…

March 1st, 2015 at 5:02 AM ^

What if it's about policy... As in designed and known by the players to discourage fouling?

Get 2 fouls, you sit, period. It may be what he deems necessary to instill such a "don't foul" ethos in total. A team just doesn't end up with one of the top FT disparities and fewest fouls, so much as to have a reputation for it, by accident.

Sure it's draconian, and no one has to "like it" except the coach. It's like the parenting equivalent of one set of parents yoinking their kid from what he's doing after the first warning, vs the annoying kid who gets told "no" a thousand times with no actual consequence and therefore continues to be a little gremlin.

While I'd argue there should be rare exceptions, like the Burke/Spike championship game above, does this season/situation seem important enough to try and save by compromising policy? If anything, the notion that the players themselves will realize their fouling could impact both their playing time and impact a game to the point of a loss just solidifies the point.

SysMark

March 1st, 2015 at 1:32 PM ^

This is definitely part of it.  There's a rule that if you foul twice in the first half you sit, and I think it's a good rule.

I also however think it's a good strategy and don't under stand the negative fixation on it.  If you have to play Dakich and Lonergan at some point I'd rather it be in the first half, as long as the game is within reach.

KRK

March 1st, 2015 at 1:36 PM ^

I find that hard to believe given how innovative Beilein is. Not saying it wrong or doesn't exist he just doesn't seem like the type of coach to do that. I don't even mind benching the guy after two it's the duration that bugs me. Give the guy a breather then put him in.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

ShmittBlue

March 1st, 2015 at 1:39 PM ^

Great thought, Myrtle. We tend to hang on each game and question how each game is handled. But coaches like JB have a philosophy for each situation and they build their programs and game plans on principles. See Izzo emphasizing rebounding and toughness (famous for football pad practices). JB's teams are known for not fouling and not turning it over. He also has a policy, if you will, for offense. Rarely do his teams shoot or attack early in the clock. Sometimes those policies or principles can bite you, but as has been mentioned elsewhere, I'm comfortable with his policy and principles that have brought us banners and deep tourney runs.

panderberg

March 1st, 2015 at 8:40 AM ^

OK, back to zero - I know I'll get "negged" for this:

 

We really weren't all that great pre-injuries to Levert & Walton. Too much attrition. Surprisingly, the loss that hurt perhaps the most was Horford transferring!

OFC, Stauskas would be welcome, as would Robinson and McGary.

 

An idle question: Beilien sends a whole lot of his players to the League - why doesn't he get recruits like Calipari does?

Romeowolv

March 2nd, 2015 at 8:46 AM ^

We got shredded in man and the one-three-one.

 

While you disagree with the strategy, Beilein has ALWAYS pulled a player with two fouls in the first half.....as do the vast majority of D I hoops coaches.  Seems like a bit of piling on to continue to bring it up.  Our lack of depth is most of the reason for the loss...not his two foul policy.

gbdub

March 2nd, 2015 at 10:01 AM ^

Beilein can't fix the lack of depth this season. But he could adjust the two-foul policy to accommodate the lack of depth, so it's a fair criticism. You don't win a game like this one without taking some risks - keeping MAAR on the floor seems a risk worth at least some consideration.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

cstrable

March 2nd, 2015 at 10:38 AM ^

Two things...

 

Beilein is not dumb. He knows the only shot Michigan has to get to the tournament is the B1G Tourney. If I'm a coach, I'd be using these games as glorified practices. Practice things you may need later, etc... The 1-3-1 can be effective, and playing it when man to man was working seemed dumb, unless you're using it to teach the kids how to run it during a game. If this was a game Michigan had to have to get into the tourney, or had to have to make an impact on their season, I'd be frustrated with it. It wasn't, so I'm not.

 

As for the 2 fouls thing, there's a remedy for that. Don't commit 2 fouls.

Simon

March 2nd, 2015 at 3:22 PM ^

The problem with the 2 foul pulling is that there is zero viable bench options and this team has the slimmest of margins to pull victories out, especially on the road against solid opponents.  Dakich and Lonergan provide you zero, at no fault of their own, they are walk ons for a reason. When either is on the court, the Wolverines are playing with an effective zero usage player at offense (5 points in 100+ Big Ten minutes combined) and someone to attack on defense.  This has repeatedly burnt the team over and over again.

It would be a little be more acceptable to me if Beilein was able to figure out a way to get Chatman, Donnel, Doyle and Biefieldt more PT but it seems like we are incapable of playing with two bigs.

On the 1-3-1, the open threes were in large part due to Trimbles ability to dribble out of every trap.  It seemed like a dozen times that he got around a trap or a strong hedge and resulted in short bursts of 5 on 3 basketball.  

With all that being said, the team puts up a fight most outings and games are entertaining despite losing 3 guys to the NBA, a Senior Transfer and the 2 best players on the current roster. It could be a lot worse.

Jonesy

March 2nd, 2015 at 3:59 PM ^

Seemed to me that the 1-3-1 looked better in this game than in any other except I think it was Illinois?  We lost this game because we couldnt buy a three and they couldnt miss a three.  Our looks were just as good as theirs.