Stupid comment. He's also Canadian and his name is Nik so you could also say "how many white Canadian shooting guards named Nik are in the NBA?"
2014-2015 MBB - how good can it be?
I hadn't really thought about the paucity of white shooting guards. It really doesn't seem fair. Perhaps we should have a developmental league for white players. Or just direct young white children away from basketball, just as we direct them away from music, dance and roles as side-kicks in cop dramas. Perhaps it isn't too late for Nik to take up hockey like all good, white Canadians (I realize that's redundant).
You do realize that "athleticism" is not necessarily a synonym for "black"? Just as not every black quarterback is a dual threat. In what way is Stauskas not "athletic"? What part of his going to the hoop or "Game, Blouses" seem unathletic to you?
I ignore a lot of ignorance, but this sort of unthinking racism is below the minimum standards, not just of this site, but of decent society.
I agree with everything you said. I'm not expressing my opinion, but the stereotype that exists. Why do you think everyone thinks every black QB is a dual threat? Because a stereotype exists that black guys are always better athletes than white guys. You're making my point.
I appreciate your clarification. Your original post did not note that you were expressing what you see as the view of NBA executives rather than your own view. My suggestion is that when discussing race, you make very clear your own views. In addition, if you're going to argue that there is something as odious as wide-spread racism, you should provide specific examples or statistical analysis to show it, e.g.,if you could show that the expected career of a black player is different than a white player, taking into acount all other factors.
While I see a lot of embedded racism in our culture, I'm slow to accuse anyone of it absent specific evidence. Professional sports seem, to me, one area where executives are ruthless realists. They care about Ws and asses in the seats. That's all. If the verticals, shuttle times, etc. of two players are the same, they aren't going to see one as more athletic than another.
You may have a point about the NBA choosing the more athletic player long-term, but that has nothing to do with race.
Stupidest post of 2014l
...Then again, the stupidest post of 2014 is still far better than the vast majority of 2013 posts.
Okay, NOW we can kill the 2014 meme.
If no one goes to the NBA then they would be a top5 team with a legit NC shot.
and the team could be incredibly deep. If they hold on to win the Big Ten and make a deep tourney run, they could potentially be preseason #1 depending on what other teams across the country lose to the nba draft.
We should definitely be favorites in the Big Ten considering what other teams lose.
If no one goes to the NBA, I don't think the starting lineup will change (except Mitch back as a starter obviously). But we will have the deepest team Beilein has had at Michigan.
I would expect Walton and Irvin to make large leaps. Generally Beilein players break out in their second year.
I would expect Cameron Chatman to help spell Stauskas and GRIII. If Ricky Doyle comes ready to play, I think we could see another attempt at playing "2 Big" with Doyle, Beilfeldt, Horford, Donnal, and McGary all available.
I would expect Hatch and DJ Wilson to redshirt.
Basically outside of Walton, everyone is 6'6" - 6'9" with many overlapping skills, so there is tremendous depth and flexibility.
The combination of star power, depth, and game experience would be crazy. My guess is that Beilein wouldn't want to play nine or ten deep, but he definitely could if he wants to. He'd be looking at a roster with McGary, Stauskas, Robinson, LeVert, Walton, Irvin, Albrecht, Horford, Chatman, Donnal, and Bielfeldt, among others.
Bielfeldt can't even get a meaningful minute this year - be shocked if he did next.
Agreed for the most part about Bielfeldt, but I think he could proided added minutes. Especially:
1. Given the injury history of Horford and McGary (knock on wood)
2. My skepticism about Donnal's size vs. the Big Ten
3. The possibility of Beilein going "2 Big" next year
Any of those things could create the need for Bielfeldt to get 5-10 min per game.
Why do you think he wouldn't go 9-10 deep? We were routinely going nine deep before McGary went out for surgery...
He's said in the past he prefers a smaller 7-8 man rotation.
But again, we were going nine deep quite a lot earlier this season.
You might be right (at least about going nine deep), but I'm thinking about where the minutes come from - and a little about game continuity. A lot of this is complete guesswork, but...
You have 200 minutes to go around. If everyone comes back, the junior versions of McGary, Stauskas, Robinson, and LeVert all seem like 30+ minute guys, as would a sophomore Walton. Some of those guys will get much more than that, too. On most teams, Irvin would get major minutes, too, so I figure that he's probably getting at least 20 (and maybe he and Robinson should be swapped).
That doesn't leave many minutes, and I'm not sure how thinly Beilein would want to spread them. There would be plenty of capable guys, though, with Horford, Albrecht, Chatman, etc.
Just win baby.
I'll bite. Preseason #1 or #2. Mad depth, experience, length...little to no weakness that I can see...maybe defense??? Destroyers of souls.
I think the defense would come with the experience because the team has shown it can play great defense at times, just not consistently.
this site has become a pathetic shade of the michigan fan base...
IF we aren't whining our way through game threads we are bickering back and forth about what should or shouldn't be posted...
not that I will stop reading or anythign... just that this shit is embarassing...
I don't give a fuck about next season.
You do realize that "next season" will be "this season" in a year, right? I have a feeling you said the same thing last year and it turned out that you cared about 2013-2014.
If you don't care, stay out of the conversation. Those of us capable of enjoying one season and thinking about the next won't miss your contributions.
But right now they're on the verge of winning the big ten, with a favorable schedule the rest of the way., in a sport where success is fleeting due to the high turnover rate from players leaving for the NBA. Why are we talking about next year when right now is far more interesting and fun? I'm not saying you're not allowed to talk about next year,,,just that it's odd timing. Considering that "next year" is usually what fans of mediocre teams (cough Lions cough) talk about.
Or your reputation.
Anyone who has concerns about their Internet reputation on a blog has serious issues.
This thread would have never been posted last year. I feel like a lot of people are thinking that what we're doing this year is nice, but we don't have a shot at the 'ship again. While I agree that the thought of next years lineup if everyone stays is ridiculously exciting, I really think this team can make a splash in the tourney again. Plus, we have a shot to do something we didn't do last year--win the B1G.
This time last year, there were all kinds of complaints, largely about Trey Burke! I don't think a single person here had a final four run in mind on Feb 12, 2013.
We knew by this point in the season we were losing 2 of our 3 best players, and the best player in cbball. Not comparable
That's my point. Last year we had NC hopes, especially given our level of talent. This year people are all "OMG WE COULD WIN THE B1G."
My position isn't that this team is the same last year's team, but that people are already chalking up this year as a cute season where we surprised people and that's about it.
is that this time last year, we did not appear to have a better team (on paper) for the following season.
in contrast, on paper, we may end up with a much better team next year.
so it makes sense that we wouldn't have looked forward last year but do look forward this year, not because this team is doing anything less special, but because our prospects (on paper) are much better next year.
At least one will go. For one thing, it's not ideal to have 3 guys with immediate NBA aspirations come back. They'll all want to be featured, and that can't really happen. Most likely is 2 come back I think, though one or even none are possibilities..
This comment is just nonsense. Guys don't just suddenly flip from being all in for the team to being prima donnas.
This from the "Stauskas is white, how can he play in the NBA?!?!" guy? You should have stopped there.
Incredibly, there's a midpoint between "all in for the team" and "prima donna." Being featured is a key consideration for prospects, who have their stock to consider. It was cited by both GR3 and Mitch as part of why they came back this year, to showcase their games with Burke and THJ gone. In your world, anyone who leaves early for the draft is a "prima donna" since they're abandoning their team for selfish reasons - this isn't surprising, since you clearly live in a pretty stupid world where whiteness is a negative in basketball evaluation.
But they're individual decisions. If Stauskas thinks he should come back, he'll come back. Same goes for McGary and Robinson. I'd be a little surprised if all three come back, but it's definitely possible given how the draft might look.
Greatest team in the history of organized sports
We cap our season by beating the Miami heat in a non title game 123-19. Spike weds Kate Upton. Shit rules.
If everyone comes back, the team will be elite, no question, and pre-season Top 3 at least. It will be a "Final Four or Bust" type year, which I kind of hate, because it is going to make it really hard to enjoy close wins over mediocre teams or even games like last night. We will be expected to win every game and a close win over Northwestern or a loss to a good team will make us bitchy and miserable.
If two out of three come back and one of those guys is McGary, then I think that we'll still be elite.
If it's just McGary, then I think that we'll be about where we are now. Worse than 10, better than 20. Very respectable but also very flawed.
Why not? Preaseason #1 or #2. Better defensively. Offensive juggernaut, maybe averaging >1.25 ppp. NC frontrunner.
...good this team could be this year with wins at Wisco, State and Ohio...need a larger screen for my phone...ahh 2014-2015...the team could be SO good...or not SO good.
If we lose just one player - Stauskas - and bring back everyone else, including a healthy McGary, I think we get back to the Final four.
I'm not so sure. IMO Stauskas is the glue to this team the past two seasons. I think we are really going to miss him.
We'll win the national title next year and if we don't it'll be a tragedy. Playing this well in the conference right now I would expect to lose only two games or less next year. We have the best coach in the big ten and the best player development and facility's. This program is for real and things are going to continue.
Hard to say best coach in the big ten when there's others with a championship and several final fours... :-/
If you dont want to hear or talk about how good next years team can be. Then don't click the thread labeled "2014-2015 MBB - how good can it be." Pretty fucking simple.
For this man, a cold beer.