Big Ten Basketball Update

i have to say, i'm a little deflated about our season because of the obvious.  i hope we win tomorrow, but if we don't you can officially put a fork in our season.   

is nice to see sparty lose though.  so we've got that going for us. 

Izzo better start deflecting by commenting about not commenting about Howard but then expanding about how he won’t be commenting about it by explaining why he won’t be commenting……  

i’m sure there were hugs all around on his sideline and in the handshake line.

Beat Rutgers - at this point the basketball team earned the “s”. 

Beat sparty and finish ahead of them in the B1G.

Non-OP worthy question: is Coach Howard banned from practices too, or just the games?

I feel incredibly sad about the rest of the season. I would like to see the kids kick ass in the remainder, but the air is out of my sails. I met Juwan 3 years ago after the ND game in the rain, he was incredibly kind and generous with his time.  I feel like when he lost his mentor last year it affected him A LOT! Donnie Kirksey I mean. He was a father figure to Juwan as I recall, and I met him too. Same night, also kind and generous. I hope those sails fill back up soon. His and mine.

Thanks BLUE!  Is that Rockford, IL in your name?  I read about a big pile up on I-39 recently; hope ya’ll were safe.

Can Juwan recruit now?

At worst he has to sit at home and either think about long term plans for the program or engage more with his family and give himself a well earned break. Neither of these is a bad thing imo.

Izzo said the refs were on high alert due to Michigan 

Of all the ridiculously absurd takes about Sunday, Izzo just may have won by comparing it to the Malice at the Palace. Maybe he should worry more about his own team, who look like a bunch of high schoolers lately. 

Hey Tom, Gabe Brown says get your fucking hands off me. 

 

Doesn't really go anywhere on this board, but the astonishing run of the 2004 Detroit Pistons as the most unusual championship team in recent NBA history continues apace with a new achievement this week:

The championship team by which all other non-star-driven teams are judged, always. 

And I, again, must emphasize that they are unusual, but not a fluke. Flukes don't make it back to the NBA Finals the following year and nearly win them again. Only the mid-aughts Pistons did that. The ultimate do-it-together team. 

OK, Juwan may be suspended, but he can't be prohibited from talking to his own son, right? I'm thinking he scouts Rutger, runs it all through Jace, and Jace is player-coach tomorrow night. M pulls off the crucial W.

Other bubble notes for the evening:

Would have been really nice if Northwestern could have kept up their 20 point lead.  12 points will likely move them up a couple spots back into the top 75 but 20+ would have moved them into the 60s likely.  Them staying in the top 75 could be very important for Michigan because it would keep that game an important Q2 win instead of a nearly meaningless Q3 win.

SDSU just barely lost to Boise St. in heartbreaking fashion.  They were up 1 with the ball, got fouled with 9 seconds left, missed both FTs and fouled BSU with 1 second left.  Guy made both FTs for a 1 point BSU win.  Would have moved that game to Q1.  I doubt they'll move down far so they'll have more chances to move up to top 30 (they are currently 33rd, likely won't drop below 35th).

On that note, this massive MSU loss makes that home game now a Q2 with probably little chance of MSU getting back to top 30 in NET.  Still worth it, but means we only have 3 remaining Q1 games now instead of 4.

UNLV continues its run of strong play by winning at rival Nevada.  That game is pretty safely a Q2 game now.

Buffalo won their 7th straight but it was only by 2 over lowly Miami (OH) so they probably won't move up in NET. As an aside, man, the MAC is horrible this year, especially the Michigan schools.  That's a shame.

Did he have to play some weird guys?

First time I've felt like visiting RCMB for schadenfreude...they didn't disappoint and they ALL want izzo gone before he dantonio's things.

Izzo preaching about sportsmanship carries about as much water as Izzo lecturing about women’s rights

Tiny Tom is really worried about the handshake line?  Seems like a distraction for a guy who needs to keep his focus on protecting the rapists he has coached.  That is a likely a full time job housing, feeding and running interference for them.  Yet, he has time to provide his thoughts on whether two grown men have a minor altercation?  I'll pick men fighting over men raping women but I am not like Tiny Tom, I guess.

That team is going to play inspired ball, Phil and Sadi can coach.  We win 2 or 3 of our last 5.

We're going to Indy on a roll and fired up.

That Sparty game reminded me of the Malice at the Palace.

Izzo the excuse maker

@TrueBlue2003

SDSU actually moved up three spots in the NET to #30, meaning for the time being, that is a Q1 victory and gives Michigan a total of four.

My prediction, Michigan wins out and wins the B10 tourney. A new era of "Bad Boys" takes over 

Well the win over Iowa is certainly starting to look better, so that can only help Michigan's cause. 

Tonight will likely tell us what direction the team goes in the rest of the way. Do they come out fired up, ready to play and fight for their postseason lives? If so, they still have a great chance to be in the tournament, suspensions or not. 

If they come out flat and let Rutgers do what it wants, you can probably stick a fork in the season and call it done.

How Izzo hugs the players and opposing coaches after a game:

The new blog update sucksssssssssss

Who is number 10 in the gif above?  he NAILED Izzo in the head!!!! lmao.  Love it.

We will see if “Starter Brandon Johns Jr.” looks more like he did when he started in March last year, or more like how he has looked all season

@Champeen

That's Matt Costello, owner of one of the most punchable faces you'll ever encounter and wearer of a near-constant black eye.

@stephenrjking

I'm not necessarily a huge fan of this kind of stat (2004 Pistons only NBA championship team without a top-75 all time player). For one, it's kind of a moving goalpost; eventually you're going to have more teams qualify, or former champions fall off as the top 75 list is revised, or else you're going to have to keep expanding it top-100, top-150, etc., and that cheapens the impact of the stat imo.

But also I feel like it really undersells them to call them a "non-star-driven team." Non-superstar-driven team maybe? But that team had plenty of star power, just not top-75 all time star power. It had an incredibly talented and balanced starting roster top to bottom, which I'm not sure any championship team since can say. The 2006 Heat is probably the only one that comes close, although that is a little deceptive since they had a number of stars on the tail end of their careers (Shaq, Gary Payton, Alonzo Mourning).

Maybe I'm a homer, but if you had a 3-on-3 tournament where each team was made up of the three worst starters from every championship team from 2004 until now, I'd think those Pistons would be the clear favorite. I.e. they didn't necessarily have the superstar power at the top, but I think they clearly had the strongest bottom half of the starting lineup of any championship team since, which really speaks to their depth. And honestly, I'm not sure if I could even name the three worst starters on that team (Tayshaun is probably one of them, but the other two are open for debate), which is the only team I could say that for, and really sums it up.

@MH20

yeah, I saw that re: SDSU. I figured they wouldn't drop much if at all but shocked they moved past two teams that didn't play.  Obviously very close and they'll bounce back and forth.

I'm more concerned with Northwestern (and Rutgers) being top 75 by end of season.  Turns out Northwestern only moved up one spot to 76th after beating Nebraska by 12.  Really would have been nice if Nebraska didn't make that late rally.

Also surprised UNLV only moved up two spots after an 8 point road win over a not horrible team but hopefully that means they'll stick in the top 100 even if they lose a couple games.

XM wrote "I hope we win, but if we don't you can officially put a fork in our season." I don't agree.

First, Rutgers is playing very good ball, and we've got a suspended coach and 2 players. Not gonna be easy.

Second, If we were to lose, then turn around and beat Illinois Sunday, that probably actually improves our chances of making the tournament.

Third, as we can see by the tiny changes to NET rankings from recent wins/losses by other bubble teams or Michigan opponents, by this point in the season each additional game has relatively little overall impact unless it's a huge outlier - M beating #3 Purdue on the road, for instance. 

Season is long. We still have 5 games and BTT to make or break our season. At this moment we're most likely on the good side of the bubble - split our remaining games and we're in.

@UMinSF

You are absolutely correct that the season won't be totally over with a loss tonight but the path becomes MUCH more difficult.

And in fact, I suggested above that 2-3 with a win in the BTT could be enough.  And seeing what's happening on the bubble, I think getting in in that scenario might be more likely than I initially thought.

What I think you're missing is that NET rankings for your own team don't matter much.  It's your Ws and Ls in Q1 and Q2.   Even if a loss doesn't drop them in NET very far,  Michigan needs to improve their Q1 and Q2 records, not make them worse.  

Take Creighton for example.  The bracket matrix has them one spot ahead of Michigan despite being more than 30 spots lower in NET (33 to 64).

And that's because Creighton has a comparable Q1 record (3-5 to 4-7) but a much better Q2 record (4-2 compared to 2-3) such that Creighton is 7-7 v Q1+Q2 but Michigan is only 6-10. Both teams have one Q3 loss.  Those quadrant records tend to carry the most weight.

@shadowstorm, I think we're getting into the weeds a bit on what we define as stars and superstars. But the CW in the NBA is and has been, for decades, that you need superstars, probably at least two of them, on your roster to win NBA titles. The Pistons had excellent players, but none of them were superstars, and only one of them (Sheed) ever looked at any time in his career like he could become one. 

Obviously, they were a team with excellent players; they won the NBA title. But none of them are top-75 types and none of them are even *close* to being top-75 types, and that is unique. 

I'm really not sure what you are disagreeing with here. 

@ShadowStorm33 and SRK

I felt exactly the opposite, Shadow - what's amazing to me is every other NBA champ had a top 75'r, not that this Pistons team didn't.

Proves NBA really is a superstar-driven league, so it's truly impressive a collection of good players could be championship caliber.

That said, your assertion the Pistons had the best 3-5 starters intrigued me. I'd say the Wallaces were 1-2 (probably wouldn't say that if Ben didn't make HOF), so that leaves Chauncey (or Rasheed) as #3, Hamilton and Prince.

You may very well be right from 2004 on regarding 3-5 starters, but that Pistons team didn't have a stellar bench either beyond Lindsey Hunter (Oker? Corliss? Eldon Campbell? Decent role guys, nothing more). That team made the most of its talent and peaked when the top of the league was down. Super smart/cohesive/well-coached team.

I think the point is EVERY other champion had at least one and usually 2 or even 3 players better than anyone on those Pistons teams.

The great GS teams might give them a fight - Klay/Draymond + Iguodola/Looney/McGee. That's probably a step below the Pistons, but not a huge one. Add Steph AND Durant, that team obliterates them (and almost any team ever).

Just for fun, I went back a bit further.

'98 Bulls were 17-2 with starting lineup of Jordan/Pippen + top 75 Rodman/Kukoc/Harper. If they'd come along a bit later they'd probably realize they didn't need to start Luc Longley. That 3-5 is pretty damn good, and 1-5 is amazing.

'80s Lakers were loaded. (Kareem/Magic + Worthy/Scott/Rambis AND guys like Wilkes/Cooper/McAdoo/AC Green/Mychal Thompson/our own Mike McGee etc. not even starting. Sure, Rambis would be lowest guy, but Worthy's top 75 #3, better than anyone on Pistons -  and top 75 McAdoo coming off the bench! 2 top 10 all-time (top 5?) + 2 more top 75 - whoa.

Bird/McHale + top 75 Parish/DJ/Ainge with top-75 Walton off the bench isn't bad either.

Anyway, fun topic - thanks to SRK for bringing it up.

@ Trueblue2003

I think we're basically in agreement.

I get it - Q1/2 wins good, Q3 losses bad. I just think it's unlikely one team sneaking into/out of Q2 will make or break our tournament future. Suppose it's possible. Hope we're not on such a razor's edge, of course.

My pov is simple regarding Rutgers game:

One: Barring something unusual (giant upset), one game doesn't make much difference in a team's tournament prospects. Relatively even match-up = small impact one way or the other. Tonight is either a pretty good win or ok loss.

Two: Our games this week are similar to our last two (though less daunting at home). Win both and we're in GREAT shape. Split is fine. Lose both and we'd better finish strong. Iowa/WI split was fine; so is Rut/Ill.

Main point: 5 games left + BTT. Rutgers is just one. Season is not dependent on tonight's game.

Boy I hope replies work soon. Go Blue!

@UMinSF

yes, it's unlikely that Northwestern being a Q2 or Q3 is what makes or breaks Michigan.

What matters is what Michigan does.  And yes, I think we'll essentially split our remaining games.  The thing is, we have an odd number and I think there's a huge difference between going 3-2 (should be fine) and 2-3 (sweating it out).

But totally agree it's not over, even if we lose tonight.  But even going 2-2 after tonight will be tough.

@SRK

I loved that Pistons team and you're right it was the most team team (ie sum greater than the parts) in NBA history, IMO.  And no fluke, like you said.  They should have won back to back.  Still can't believe Rasheed left Horry in game 5.  Ugh.  And still can't believe the Spurs came back from nine down in the second half of game 7.  So so close.

Anyway, I do think that Billups was a guy that looked at points in his career like he could become and maybe even was a superstar even if superstar lite (but to your point, nowhere near top 75 all time).

He was drafted 3rd and many thought he was on his way to being a superstar.  Stumbled in Boston but really came into his own in Detroit.  Part of the reason his stats aren't/weren't in superstar range was because of the balance Detroit had and that it was a pretty low scoring era.  But he came up huge in big game after big game.

I wonder how many players have averaged 20+ points in multiple NBA finals.  Billups did it and I can't imagine many have.