O boy, haha.
Can Michigan's basketball team win it all?
Well if you look at the achievements of both teams over the last 2 years, you'll see that the bball team has actually been more successful than the football team during that time.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna go gouge my eyes out with an olive fork.
Yeah I guess so. I chose it more because I figured that'd be the most painful way to do it -- ripping them out with my hands just wouldn't be painful enough to fully distract me.
A rusty spork.
(Spoon might be more painful, but it's just not as much fun to say as "spork")
eye with those little plastic swords they sometimes put in fancy drinks and the other with the tooth-pick anchored umbrella they put in fruity (as in fruit flavored) drinks. No reason you shuoldn't gouge with style.
it didn't happen.
I am clueless
You could've stopped there.
So nobody is allowed to ask a question about a subject that they don't know about?
Remeber this next time you go to have your car repaired, visit the doctor, dentist, call a general contractor. Not everyone on here pretends to know it all!
No, you should have.
Seriosuly though, I think the basketball team will be better than most expect and has a chance at an NIT bid if they play well enough together and the freshman (especially Tim Hardaway Jr, and Evan) contribute enough, even early in the season.
That is one heck of a long sentence.
So sorry about the mistake. I will not repeat in the future.
Yeah, you're better off posting rumors about Brian leaving MGoBlog.
this guy not banned after the thread about Brian? If ever one was deserved and stuff...
I see what...HE did there!
He's got Rampage009 loaded up and ready to go. As a side benefit, he'll have a license to kill.
have the same flare as em0 did with the name changes, but at least hes making it easy on himself...
Can Michigan's basketball team win AT all?
You beat me to making that subtle correction
That's how I read it on first glance.
I was originally skeptical after watching Amaker recruits account for 2/3 of the points last year with Beilein only recruiting 2-stars like Stu Douglass and Zack Novak. However, I have been encouraged lately by the caliber of player that he is recruiting and I like the fact that our lineup, while young, will at least have some size this year. Regardless of system, Zack Novak should not be the PF in any offense!
Given Beilein's knowledge of the X's and O'x of basketball and the improvement in his recruiting, I will withold judgment. I think an NIT bid is a fair goal this year. So, I'm cautiously optimistic.
Who will have more wins - Michigan football or basketball? I think that is more of a debatable question than will we make the tournament or not.
You mean to tell me you get banned and you create another account with the exact same user name. You sir are certainly no em0.
Coach Alexander likes to mention on Twitter that this offense is not just about raining 3s, it's a similar offense to what the Cavs and some other NBA teams run.
Aside from that, yes Beilein's philosophy could win it all. Look at what Butler did last year. Beilein's teams just need a little hot streak and they could easily rattle off the necessary wins to win the tournament. I think it would be less likely that he wins a Big Ten championship actually.
And, given the age of our roster (only 2 juniors and no seniors) I dont' expect anything champion quality for a couple more years.
Butler was pretty talented...don't sell them short.
And, given the age of our roster (only 2 juniors and no seniors) I dont' expect anything champion quality for a couple more years.
Inexperience will hurt this year. Next year we should return 5 starters and about 8 guys who have seen significant minutes; experience should be a strength.
Experience with people who played is a lot better with our football team too. But likewise, they may have played, but they'll still be very young. The basketball team is 2 years away from a chance at being legitimately good.
Was preseason ranked 10 last year (I guess we were 15 so that's no guarantee of success) with a first-round talent in Gordon Hayward plus two other talented players in Matt Howard and Shelvin Mack (both Hayward and Mack played for Team USA in the Under-19 World Championships); this definitely was no average team. They never fell out of the Top 25 all year.
There are similarities between the styles of play that both coaches preach and you can never say never, but I would argue that Butler didn't get to the Final Four because they were just a "hot" team. The Butler team last year rebounded better than a typical Beilein team (coming out of a zone to rebound is tough). They also play a high pressure man defense as opposed to a Beilein 1-3-1 zone. And they shot one more three pointer than we did (761 vs. 760) but at a 34% clip compared to our 29%. Not saying those things (with exception made for the 3 point accuracy) guarantee or even influence the rate of success but they do say something about the differences in style.
Really I don't think that we have a dirty enough program for Beilein to win it all. I do think that he can make us relevant again and hopefully his successor can work some magic. Yet I would honestly be suspicious if we started getting lottery pick type guys or pulling recruits away from Duke type teams at this point. A couple guys sure, but not enough to win it all anyways. You can cite Butler, Nova, or St. Johns a few years back but they didn't win. Just being realistic.
What would be "suspicious" about getting "lottery pick type guys?"
Sounds $u$piciou$ to me
If you were predicted as a top 15 draft pick after your obligatory one year why would you pick Michigan right now? You wouldn't - no practice facility, bad stadium, the program has been bad for as long as you can remember, and you aren't getting paid nor any other "perks". You are going to go someplace like UConn UNC KU etc.
As I said, getting one kid sure, but getting four or five at THIS POINT - very unlikely.
This team will make the tournament. It'd be better if Zeig was here, but whatever.
This team is basically starting over. I have no faith in beileins recruiting.
That's because you just don't pay attention.
1st class: Douglass, Novak, and Cronin
2nd class: Vogrich(borderline top 100 guy), Morris(top 100 guy),, McLimas, Morgan
3rd class: Hardaway(borderline top 100 guy), Smotrycz(top 100 guy), , Horford, Christian
4th class: Brundige(top 100 guy), Burke(1op 100 guy)
Notice a trend in the above? Michigan's recruiting is improving and all this with Crisler being terrible and being the only school(well along with Iowa) to not have their own practice facility. Beilein is a good recruiter and a good coach. To suggest otherwise based on one disappointing season is asinine at best.
I hope you keep a copy of this post handy for reuse. In every basketball thread on this site, someone inevitably makes an ignorant comment about Beilein's recruiting. The steady improvement in the recrutiing classes needs to be pointed out each time.
While I agree with everything that you said, I think most people can reasonably agree that Vogrich may have been slightly over rated coming out of high school and shouldn't really be counted as a + for Beilein's recruiting prowess. Sure, the guy can hit an open jump shot. However, he is a liability on defense (granted he played well in spurts), and he cannot create anything offensively. He is an athletic nightmare in a game where athleticism rules. Not a good combo.
Maybe I am just being pessimistic, but I don't see him being anything more than an average ball player in the Big Ten. I know he will get stronger/more physically imposing as he gets older. I just don't see him gaining enough to be a dangerous ball player.
Did you know he is a true sophomore who can do exactly what beilein will need him to do....hit open 3s? Yeah, I guess it is at time to label him a bust because you didn't see anything from him his true freshman year. Our impatience for our football team is apparently spilling over to our basketball team as well.
"most people can reasonably agree"? No.
Most reasonable people know that he was a freshman last year who hardly saw the court and that no one knows how good he can or will be at this point in time.
I don't want to be an old man before we are really good again--but there's some progress. Compare it to the 80s and 90s, however, and you might want to shed a few hot salties. We routinely pulled in the McDonald's All Americans, the best classes in the conference.
Given that you have to write off this year, I think Beilein has two-and-a-half, three years, before the likes of Brandon render some stay/go judgement.
Beilein enters, leads our return to the Dance for the first time in a decade. His reward from fans: the impatience that results from increased expectations. Sometimes ya can't win for winning...
While I don't understand some of his personnel decisions, Beilein is a fantastic in-game coach. He has brought in good recruits. In the most important eyes of the athletic department, he has run a squeeky clean program that is slowly reversing Michigan basketball's tarnished image. His job is very safe.
Beilein and staff also just missed on a number of very talented, athletic, high-major wings: Casey Prather, Trey Zeigler (who chose to play for his dad), and most recently Dom Pointer. Given better facilities and hopefully more consistent recent success, I think Beilein's recruiting will be a real strength.
Also, the trend of attracting players with NBA lineages is interesting (Tim Hardaway Jr., Jordan Dumars, Jon Horford, Glen Robinson III; you could also sort of include Bartelstein in this list). Primarily, I think it's a strong indication that guys who are very familiar with basketball at the highest level tend to like the sort of system that Beilein runs. Also, more speculatively, I think it's going to lead to quite a bit of national exposure when this team starts winning, and that can only help the recruiting process.
Primarily, I think it's a strong indication that guys who are very familiar with basketball at the highest level tend to like the sort of system that Beilein runs.
Moreso I think they recognize Beilein's ability to develop players. This is his strength as a recruiter; come to Michigan, play hard, get better. The flipside is that 1-and-done bluechippers don't think their game needs improvement, so they'll unlikely stopover at Michigan on their way to the NBA. I don't think Beilein's the type, e.g., John Calipari, to wine-and-dine those guys anyway. And yes, you can win national championships without them.
Your title is misleading. It asks if Michigan's current basketball team will win it all. No, probably not. But your elaboration seems to ask if any Beilein-coached team can win it all. The answer to that is yes, but he needs the players to be able to shoot from long range. Last year the shooters just weren't hitting anything. Hopefully they can surprise us all with a good season after losing Manny and DeShawn.
I haven't laughed that hard in weeks. This team will probably lose the exhibition opener.
Can they? Sure....anything possible.
Will they? Probably not.
But if you'd care to make a little wager on the season...you know...just to make things "interesting"....let me know. A man with solid thinking like you really should profit from his wisdom.
You know I love Michigan basketball fans. So the guy comes in, makes the tourney in the 2nd season(the first time I remember Michigan basketball being semi-relevant and I'm 19 now) raises expectations and after one disappointing year, you want to throw the guy out. Because, obviously Llyod Carr never had any highly ranked years that flopped and neither did any other basketball coach to ever exist. We have a crappy arena(as much fun as I have at the games its still crappy), no practice facility, and an athletic department that just last year decided it cared about basketball. What Beilein has accomplished is an excellent job given the circumstances and he will get this program on the right track before his retirement.
Can actually remember a program that can be good, and have a bit different perspective.
And no, Lloyd never had any "flops" that were equal to "forget about the NIT" bad.
Basketball: football analogies almost never work for this reason. Basketball, having fewer players and generally lower retention, is way more prone to radical swings from season-to-season. Should UNC fire Roy Williams for missing the tournament last year after winning it all the year before? Talk about a flop!
But there was a time NC went to like 16 tournaments in a row (and for to the 2nd round some sick amount of times). So there can be some consistency with good programs. When's the last time MSU missed the Tournament? (Comparing more to NC, not us).
And I promise not to call for Beilein to be fired if he misses the Tournament the year after winning it all because all his players go to the NBA. (And really, the comparable to that situation are players Rich inherited after that stacked offense went pro. Lots of teams in football lose talent then have a down season and miss a bowl, breaking their short streak. It just never happened under Lloyd, which is what the poster was comparing).
We'll stick with football analogies. To quote you:
And no, Lloyd never had any "flops" that were equal to "forget about the NIT" bad.
App State, 2007. Adjusting for talent available, John Beilein never flopped so hard.
But it was the other guy who started the football analogy; I said it wasn't a fair comparison.
But if you just want to compare GAMES, and not seasons-
That shitball of a team went 8-22 against nobody. And Beilein had two guys who would play in the NBA *including a lottery pick), and a number overseas. At least Appy St would have been ranked in the top 40-60 in Division I.
They also lost to an under .500 CMU team....so, yeah, Beilein has flopped harder in games. And WAY harder in seasons. Because the season we lost to App St, we won 9 games, won a bowl, and had a shot at the Big Ten title, but for injuries. That's equal to a second round Tournament run. Far better than not making any Tournament.
(And adjusting for talent, it's worrisome we had more talent when Beilein came in here than we do today).
Losing a single basketball game =/= losing a football game. This entire analogy (regardless of which point it is supposed to be making) is idiotic. Even if there were ANY logical connection in comparing the two sports (and you've certainly failed to find one), you can't compare our football and basketball programs thanks to the scandal, Ellerbee, and Amaker.
The recruiting has consistently improved, JB overperformed vs. talent in his second year, admittedly underperformed vs. talent in his third. Did more than any coach of this team in over a decade. Has a better resume than any coach we've had coming in since before Fisher. The world in which we should fire him or see no future exists entirely in your mind.
There are legitimately maybe 3-4 Izzo-caliber coaches in the NCAA and they're not going anywhere. So the alternative, if we want immediate national relevance, is Calipari or his ilk. If that's what you want, say so. If not, propose something other than IM WORRIED WHEREZ THE TALENT HES WORSE THAN LLOYD.
If you have read any of the thread, rather than your usual reactionary stuff, you'd see I was responding to someone who out of no where took a shot saying What Lloyd did was far worse than what Beilein did, which I said was stupid, but then someone else kept harping on the football analogies, but even doing something bad badly, and I was pointing it out.
Reading comprehension dude. Try and think before you type.
And talent wise, if you've read the whole thread, mentions we had Udoh on the team he took over, who Beilein either didn't think was very good; didn't care if he was good or not and didn't want to try and convince him to stay; or couldn't convince him he could be successful in his system. Any of which isn't that flattering. So you have to take into account where we would have performed if we had a lottery pick front court player on the team. He's only done more than any coach of this team in a decade by ONE GAME. One win that got him into the Tournament. And actually, did it with a worse record than Amaker put up in more than one season. That's luck of the field draw, not some amazing accomplishment.
You can point of all the Straw Men you want, but no one in this thread has said Fire Beilein. It's just what your throw out there to make others look at reactionary as you are, and cover up your lack of argument with "you're one of those ARGGHH FIRE..." people.
And no one said we should go out and hire Izzo coaches. Again, might want to work on that reading comprehension. We were talking about the type of recruits we should be going after, and that there are players other than the cheating to get into school for one year before I go to the NBA and Michigan they might be good when they're a senior players. It was the type of players Duke and MSU get that was being said should be targeted; not the coaches. Players that are top 50 players, but aren't that top 10 that are going to be one and done. Ones that have real talent, NBA talent, but are going to need 3-4 years to develop. Not 4 years to hope to be good enough to play in Europe. Because the original point of the thread was how/if we could win a National Championship with Beilein. And the point is, not with the players he's recruiting now. If you don't think he can get to the point where he can recruit with at least MSU (not Kentucky, or North Carolina), then maybe YOU'RE making a case he shouldn't be the coach...not me.
And since we're on the topic...I noticed you called me out to ask me what I would think about our recruiting if we landed a certain player, which I was man enough to answer....who has already committed to St. John's...and you never answered back what YOU would think of the recruiting class without him.
Feel free to man up here. But save the weak sauce. If you're going argue, argue about what was said, and not the voices you're hearing in your head.
You're comparing a game that happened in Beilein's first season on the job (with a roster recruited by Amaker) with a game that happened in Carr's 13th season on the job, when his program had long since been established. That's not very fair to Beilein.
Because, obviously Llyod Carr never had any highly ranked years that flopped and neither did any other basketball coach to ever exist.
This is what the original thread branch starter said. But I noticed you didn't post to say how unfair that was to him. Either making odd comparisons between football and basketball, or drawing Lloyd into a thread that had NOTHING to do with him to make a point, and a bad one at that.
Then someone else continued saying, why yes, it's not a good point, but he's right, there were flops.
The argument keeps getting switched...first it was seasons that flopped. And then when that was shown to be idiotic, it was games that flopped. I even said that we were talking about seasons, not games, which was silly, but if you want to go to just one game, I can easily find one far worse.
It's not fair to Beilein, no. But none of the points made here are fair. It's the fact that no one seems to have any problem with shots at a coach who did a lot on and off the field for this University, in a topic that isn't even about FOOTBALL, but any comparisons of that highly successful coach to a coach who hasn't had time to succeed, and hasn't accomplished very much in that short time is ripe for criticism, that seems very unfair to me.
You make the 4th person here trying to defend the original point that Beilein compares favorably to Lloyd, which is idiotic in any metric or measurable. That's unfair.
Wow, I didn't think that one line would cause so much consternation below. My original point, which seemed to have gotten distorted, was that every coach regardless of talent level or time with the team can have disappointing years without needing to scream for change. It was my bad forgetting that there are so many posters here who would take an opportunity to take some shots at Lloyd, a man who I have immense respect for everything he has done for the University(and one of my coolest memories was seeing Lloyd walking to his seat before the 08 MSU game) so mea culpa
And I probably did come off a bit dickish in my original response to you. It was just that everyone else suddenly was telling me that comparing football and basketball wasn't easy to do, where it was you that made the original comparison, and I thought it wasn't so great, yet when everyone else posted, they not only acted like me who made the original comparison, they then tried to justify the comparison at the same time they were saying it wasn't fair. I expect that from CWoodson, because he's just out to get people's goats....the others jumping in didn't make a lot of sense to me (especially when some of the "oh yeah, well then THIS") were so bad.
I've got nothing against you. And yes, (while I believe you're not one), those that take an opportunity to say a guy who won over 75% of his games, conference championships in almost half his years, and won a national championship has had as many gaffs as a guy who's missed the Tournament 2 of 3 and probably 3 of 4 years isn't fair. jmblue is right, it's not fair the other way either, that a guy who coached 13 years had more time to accomplish more than a guy who's coached 3. (And likewise, picking out one or two bad days over 13 years creates a lot more opportunity than 3 also). I don't think you had any ill will intended. I'm not sure that's true of everyone on here. There's a small portion of the "I root for our coach, I rooted for Lloyd, I root for Rich" who are just covering up the "I bitched about Lloyd constantly, and now that I got what I wanted, I'm invested in Rich super-succeeding, because if he doesn't, I look stupid, so until Rich can start winning, I better tear Lloyd down". It's not everyone. Not even a majority. But around here, they probably are equal to the "I loved Lloyd, old school, blue hair, fire Rich" crowds; around here anyway (out in public those numbers skew the other way).
Did you ever actually watch Udoh play at Michigan? He would not have been a lottery pick following the 2008 season, he was nowhere near that good. Plus, Harris was a true freshman playing the 1 and 2 (he played the 3 in 2009), and Sims was a shell of the player he became the following year. That team had absolutely no depth. Guys like K-Len Morris (before he transferred), a sophomore Zach GIbson, and Derrick Coleman were expected to contribute. Two walk-ons played regularly. It was a huge loss when Jerrett Smith didn't end up on the team.
To claim that the 2008 team, which finished 10-22, had more talent that Michigan had the following year, or even now, is so unbelievably asinine that I find it hard to believe that you actually have watched the basektball team play. Beilein has built this team from nothing. Manny and DeShawn developed because of John Beilein. Give credit where credit is due.
We were talking talent, not a developed team. Yes, that team had an NBA lottery pick on it, a guy who just made the NBA, and a guy who's probably going to be a pretty good European player for a long time. If you can have 3 guys on the current squad who will accomplish those 3 things, I'd be glad to listen. And yes, it can be in 3 or 4 years when they're seniors. If you're talking talent, then yes, there was more raw talent on that team than there is today. Was it all developed in their first and second year? No, of course not, but guess what? The players on today's Michigan team aren't as developed as they will be in a few years. But the ceiling is lower, because they have far less talent.
He didn't build this team from nothing. He had 3 pretty darn good players on it. 3 players better than anyone on the roster now. So I'm not sure how you see that as building.
The question isn't would Udoh have been a lottery pick in 2008. It's would he have been if he had stayed with Michigan. The problem was he obviously didn't, and it worked out ok for him. And if Manny thought he was being developed so well because of Beilein, he'd probably be back for his senior year. So the players seem to think differently about their development in this program than you do. But maybe they don't watch the basketball team as much as you do.
Again, you can't just compare the best players. There was no talent, raw or developed, behind Harris, Sims, and Udoh. The roster after those three was a wasteland. And the very next year we went to the tournament, so how can you claim he didn't build around his available talent? They won 11 more games just a year later.
If you're honestly asking me to project where this team's players will be in 4 years, there is no point to this discussion. There could be several future NBA guys on this team, or there could be none. There is no way to see into the future. I do know that Morris and Smotrycz are top 50 recruits, Vogrich and Hardaway top 100, and Burke and Brundidge are on the way. How can you claim that this roster isn't being stocked with talented players when there will be 6 top 100 guys on the roster next season? Michigan will have more talent in the coming years than they have had in quite some time, and Beilein will likely develop that talent into something special. So, again, why won't you give Beilein any credit?
Your last point is ridiculous. One player's decision to leave a year early, in a sport where few stay for four years, does not say anything about Beilein's ability as a coach.
Because it's basketball. 3 or 4 really good players, and you don't need a whole lot behind them. Minute eaters for rest that don't hurt you. If those players are really good. You don't have the Fab Five (an overstatement of course, because that recruiting talent was unreal) backed up by another Fab Five. Sure, there are other ways to go about it, and waves of pretty talented depth can be another way to do it. There's not only one way. But to say 3 really good players aren't enough to field a good team just isn't the case. Particularly if you use your recruiting classes to supplement them, and keep that talent. With those 3, he needed a PG, which he didn't get till last year (so he was young, and of not much use), and couldn't keep Udoh, so the guys who would have been serviceable 3 pt shooting wings were playing Power Forward.
And I guess there's no point to this discussion, because yes, I think it's possible to project talent. Even 4 years in the future. I would hope that the coaches in all sports do it better than we do, but it's not rocket science. If you watch as much as you say, you can see guys who are in high school who look like they will be good in college, and guys in college who will be good in the pros. There are surprises both ways, but things like Brandon Graham being drafted high don't shock me. Seeing him come out of high school, I wasn't shocked he was pretty darn good in college too. I mean, great, you've taken the highest ranking of every recruit we've gotten, so they look better, but yes, I feel pretty secure in saying that none of them are going to be lottery picks. And we were talking pure talent, of which I'll take Udoh, Manny, and Sims over Morris, Smotrycz and Hardaway...and Vogrich, if you really want to throw him in there (might be a really fine complementary player, but who the hell ranked him top 100....? I know it happened, but THERE'S someone who probably shouldn't be guessing on talent). Can't count the other guys, because they're not on the team yet. And who knows, high school kids, may never be. And conversely, might be strengthened by having some other great player join them.
And the only thing more ridiculous about my last point is you completely discounting the fact that another of those three left after one year....and was very successful elsewhere. (And few stay four years? Come on...most stay four years. Who's being ridiculous now?).
I can give Beilein credit. Just not for the things you're all going ga-ga over. Beilein runs a super tight clean program. He seems to be making some headway in recruiting, and maybe if he can turn that into some wins, along with the practice facility he'll have next year, one of these bigger name recruits will finally pick Michigan, which will hopefully lead to more in the future. He got us into the tournament, which was nice, because we hadn't been able to get over that hump, even with better records, and won a game in the Tourney, which was great.
But everyone wants to seem to give him credit for what he hasn't done. Yet. Again, except in CWoodson's mind, no one is calling for him to be fired. We're going to be super awful this year, and it's not going to get him fired. But stop acting like he's 36 years old. He's not young enough to have 10 year rebuilding plans (which you shouldn't even need in basketball). If you want a caretaker to make us respectable, so the next guy can take the next step, as Brian has theorized, that's fine. But, if as the thread says, can he win a National Championship, then no, that's not going to be the path towards it. Which I hope isn't the way Beilein feels; otherwise, it probably would have been better for him to stay at West Virginia, and grow what he had there. The whole idea to come to Michigan over what he had already established that between the school and the recruiting grounds, it'd be easier for him to get a title run before he retired. Maybe he, the fans, and everyone else have been kidding themselves, and that's not true. But that would be a shame for all involved then.
It seems the athletic department sort of swept the basketball program under the rug after all the violations came to light. Now that the program is running a clean ship, I expect the athletic dept to give basketball more support.
Anybody who suffered through Ellerbe and Amaker -- i mean actually watched the games -- wants Beilein to get a lifetime contract.
As an avid, passionate basketball fan with some high level hoops experience in my past, I do feel strongly that Beilein could (with a couple more years) lead a very, very strong program that could go deep, deep into the NCAA tourney on a reasonably consistent basis.
The key, as our fellow posters have indicated, is recruiting. This style of play is tremendous, we just need an overall higher caliber of player, and I really like the direction this is heading with the current batch of players.
Also worth mentioning is that the whole concept is threatened by the sad one and done mentality that is working well for the Calipari/Kentucky crowd (seriously how does that guy have a job?). What it may take for Beilein to go over the top and win it all is that one tremendous player (surrounded by some good ones) who is committed to the opposite of the Calipari concept and is attracted to great team play and top tier academics. Rare, but they are out there.
Programs who cater to the one-and-done guys in hopes of immediate, though short-lived, success have been successful. But it's worth dissecting how successful they've been. Recent history shows experienced teams trump one-and-done individuals in the tournament. (I started to recap recent tournament results to back up my assertion but I'll leave that to somebody with more time.)
Suffice it to say that teams do NOT need Calipari/Huggins to win championships.
Coach K/Izzo type players. Blue-chip, but not one and done. (And I'm not sure what you'd consider NC, who's been the most successful. Maybe a hybrid that we can't hope to achieve not being NC).
Ty Lawson and Tyler Hansbrough led that UNC team, which was made clear by UNC's drop-off after their departure. So no, I don't consider 2009 UNC to be a one-and-done achiever.
That get NBA level talent, but aren't sliming themselves with the one and done mentality. So there's a lot of leeway between players Michigan gets and players Kentucky gets to be successful.
I'm saying the "programs who slime themselves with the one-and-done mentality" usually lose championships to teams with talent and experience. Last year's Kentucky team is a perfect example: they were eliminated from the tourney by a West Virginia team whose scoring came almost entirely from juniors and seniors.
Edit: there's no comparison between Kentucky's roster and Michigan's roster. All I'm arguing is that teams who don't recruit the one-n-dones can and do win championships, ergo Beilein does not have a low ceiling simply because he is not pulling one-n-dones.
I'm not saying, and have never advocated getting one and dones. I'm just saying that to win a championship, you need the type of 4 year players Duke is getting, or MSU. It's not to the par of some of the NBA talent they used to get, which causes them to not win the championships at the pace they used to (it'd had been a relative "drought" for Duke), but it's still enough to occasionally, when things mesh, to win a Championship. I don't know that Beilein's current or past recruits are any better than an occasional great 8 team. If, like the OP wondered, we want to win championships, he's going to have to upgrade that when we get better. To-win-NCAA-championships. Not to be better, or good.
Let's face it, the guy had a COMPLETE rebuilding job handed to him. I really think the easy thing for Coach Beilein would have been to stay at WVU and continue to produce NCAA tournament teams. He knew what he was up against trying to return UM to relevance, and frankly, I like the guy's coaching style and philosophy. I think he represents the University extremely well. Once the practice facility is up and rolling, his recruiting prowess will only be increased. This is a very long term rebuild, but given another two or three years, I can really see UM basketball returning to prominence.
Don't abandon the ship this year, let's support these guys and keep them motivated for the future.
I agree. The University was dealt with a bad hand for over 15 years and you can't expect the team to be in contention the first year out of probation. This is a great year to see where the team is headed. We are 90% freshman and sophmore so if we can have a productive season by winning the winable games and atleast battle the rivals down the stretch I think this season is a win. As far as winning a Championship. I think we are closer in football, hockey, baseball, and softball than we are in basketball. Give them 2-4 years and we might see a few runs in the tourney but to win it all I say more like 4-6 years based on recruiting level of UM and the rest of the elite schools. It will take a while to start stealing recruits to build a championship team.
If th new thread above this one is to be believed, synchronized swimming.
Can we at least wait until there's no more football to bitch about before we start up with the "Beilein Ceiling" argument again?
Short answers: No, this team will not with the National Championship. However, there is nothing that makes it impossible for a Beilein coached team to win the National Championship. However, as a always, it remains unlikely.
It's not like there are a whole lot of these to go around. I would worry more about becoming a perennial tournament team again. I think that is very possible. It's not only a matter of facilities and recruiting. Michigan needs to be a "cool" place for players to tell their friends they are going to attend again.
I think it can happen. After that, though, the tournament is the biggest crap shoot in sports.
I think I just took a time machine back to 2008.
considering that, earlier this year, U of M gave Beilein a contract extension to 2016:
So, I would hold that thought and perhaps re-post it in about five years.
But I wonder about the timing of the posting. It's not something we're going to have to worry about for a long time. I think we'd be better off wondering if we can beat Oakland before we wonder when we can win an NCAA Championship Game.
Mainly in resposne to Braves and Godriguez above...
Yes, give Beilein all the credit in the world for getting the team to the tournament in '09. That was a great accomplishment and should give him at least a few more years. At the same time, recognize that UM had NCAA tournament talent and similar seasons at least twice in the previous four years. '09 was essentially the same season as '07 and '06, with the difference being Beilein (w/ a huge assist from LLP) was able to win that game at Minnesota and put them over the top. In '06 Amaker flopped at the BTT against Minnesota and in '07 Amaker was a missed Courtney Sims dunk away from a win over #1 OSU and a likely bid. For anyone to imply that the late Amaker era was a complete wasteland just isn't true.
Beilein inherited a team with two top 100 guys and a future NBA lottery pick (granted they were all young). Put that together with the misses on Prather, Ziegler, and Pointer and the mismanagement of Kelvin Grady (my opinion) and it raises some concerns about Beilein's player management. As Braves pointed out, the upward trend in recruiting is encouraging, just need to land a few more big fish (Brundidge would qualify in my mind).
I think he's a good coach and I don't see any reason why he won't get UM to be a two out of every three years tourney team, but I do see some flaws.
But thanks a lot for reminding me of Udoh. Had just about put him out of my mind. Sigh.
There's a strong similarity between Gary Williams of Maryland and John Beilein. They both have a good eye for unrefined talent and develop their players to get the most out of the talent they have. They both recruit guys who fit their system, or at least "buy-in" to the system. Neither coach will compromise his reputation for the sake of wooing a high-profile recruit who might ruin team cohesion, cause of-the-court-problems or leave after 1 season. They both run clean programs and seem to genuinely care about their players. They're both criticized for not landing better, or at least more hyped, recruits. Obviously their sideline demeanors are completely opposite (I wouldn't mind if Beilein occasionally showed some of Gary Williams' fire, and Gary could use some Beilein poise). Also, Williams benefits from premiere facilities and a talent-rich DC-metro recruiting base, but I see no reason why Beilein can't put together a squad like the 2002 Maryland national championship team.
The single biggest gripe I have with Beilein is the mismanagement of Kelvin Grady. I totally agree with you there.
Beilein inherited a team with two top 100 guys and a future NBA lottery pick (granted they were all young).
But the problem is, that was all we had. Four senior starters graduated from Amaker's last team, and the fifth starter (Jerret Smith) was kicked off the team a month into the season. It's not like we had three talented players and 10 average guys. It was more like three talented players, three average guys, and walk-ons. And those three talented guys were all extremely raw. We haven't had anything resembling roster depth.
They should have been gangbusters coming out of the gate. Just that he wasn't left with the popular "bare cupboard", and that if he had taken (and kept) that talent, and added talent behind it, we could have been a lot better team the last two years. Because you'd have had that talent more experienced, and then had depth with the younger guys. Guys who were freshmen in year 2, and sophomores last year. Not that we should have won the Big Ten with Sophomore frontcourt and freshman Manny. But that didn't happen. That's all he's saying.
I don't completely disagree with what you're saying. That season was going to be a challenge. Udoh worked out to be a lottery pick, but he didn't have much hype coming in and Amaker kind of stumbled into him late in the process if I remember correctly. Amaker had two really nice recruiting classes (Horton, Abram, Brown, Hunter followed by Sims, Petway, Harris) but really fell off the table after that. Even if he wouldn't have been fired, I don't know what his plan for the front court was going to be.
I'm just saying that there was some talent on that team and that Amaker's years weren't a wasteland of nothingness. They had some good players and had some good teams, even beating MSU a few times.
I think you are slightly misrepresenting the big differences between the Amaker and Beilein era there. That BTT game against Minnesota you mention? We had that game again in 09 against Iowa, a team that beat us in OT at their place. and we won. Amaker didn't have a win in either of those two years equal to Duke(he probably had a couple equal to UCLA, but not too many). And I guess I should criticize Beilein for not landing a bunch of top 100 guys with the crappy facilities I mentioned, but he has done a fairly good job overcoming that fact to get a few top 100 guys. I'm not saying he's perfect or anything, but he really ought to get way more slack than the mgoblog community seems to give him.
I stick with the BTT '06 comparison. I would call the regular season ending home loss to a questionable Indiana team comparable to the '09 Iowa loss. In all three of those seasons, UM was one solid win away from a tournament bid. In '09 they got it and they didn't the other two.
I don't mean to come off as a Beilein hater, that is far from the truth. I think he's doing fine and on a fine upward trajectory. I just don't think it's a black and white situation where things were terrible and are now without any flaws.
in the hypothetical, existential sense. Yes, I believe they can.
Next up - the meaning of life.
I've got no prob with your post. You don't know basketball. No big deal.
I do think you're better off learning about the team by searching this site for some of Brian/others' posts on the team, spend some time at UMHoops (great blog), and just, in general, bone up a bit on the squad.
I've got no problem with general questions like this, but it makes for a better thread/debate when the OP is bringing something to the party, you know?
Every so often you come across a thread title that makes you ask: "Why, God, why?"
I suppose the inventors of the "Beilein ceiling" think he can only go deep in the tournament when benefiting from the talent-rich state of West Virginia? If Beilein can lead WVU to the elite 8, he can (NOT guaranteeing he will) lead Michigan to the motherland.
Regarding this season: it's impossible to know what to expect w/o Harris and Sims. How Novak, Douglass step up as scorers and leaders and how efficiently Morris runs the offense will determine this year's success. At the moment, I'd say an NIT birth would be a significant accomplishment and a testemant to the Beilein "system." However, if we have 4-5 guys step up as 8-10 ppg scorers, then the ceiling could be higher. Next year will shed much more light on Beilein's credentials. Obv I'm a Beilein supporter, but if the 2011-2012 squad isn't significantly better than 2010-2011 then there will be issues that need to be addressed.
But with the right players, Beilein can lead the team there. Hardaway is a great recruit, and sev. others will help a lot.
Not in the short term. But let's see what happens as we get a full roster (including more than one healthy player over 6'5") and when the program finally gets the facility upgrades that have been promised forever. There is positive momentum, but it might not be obvious this coming season.
What I have maintained with RR. Beilein has won at every level of competition he has played in, teaches fundamentals that are basic to winning basketball and makes a lot out of limited talent. He has a very specific type of player that can be effective in his system and much like the football team from last year, our basketball team this year will have more games where they get only one part of the game right (offense or defense) rather than a complete game. People keep stating size is the issue, but really it's just experience. They aren't an upperclassmen dominated team.
Will they win a championship...possibly. I certainly expect them to be competitive in the very near future. That is the only reassurance I can provide...
To win championships you just need to have one of the best teams in the country and a little luck. Can we crack the top 15 with him as coach? Yes. Top 8? Probably. So yes, we can win championships. Not every year, though.
This team will be long on heart, short on soul. Douglass and Novak are the heart, great role players. Manny Harris and DeShawn were the soul of the team: size, strength, savvy and "man-up" ability in any Big Ten game. Both had weaknesses, but both were legitimate forces in the Big Ten. Darius Morris showed a few flashes of dominance, but remains a question mark.
Belein is a strong character, very solid coach, with a strong system. Hardaway may be a go-to guy, but too many freshmen (particularly ones with names which roll off our tongues easily) have that label and end up spinning out of control at least until they figure out the college game. So any reasonable estimate is that Hardaway contributes on a somewhat small scale this first year.
What's it add up to?: This is going to be a very rough year. Michigan will win a few big surprises. We will get POUNDED by a number of teams, due to lack of size, heft and experience. In the end, we will be very lucky to make the NIT.
--0n a slightly related note, is anyone else annoyed by Beilein's habit of publicly berating players, on the sidelines, when he pulls them out? I just think it's so counterproductive, and he does it so frequently. It's counterproductive since (as I think Connie Mack said) you're not going to teach during competition. . In fact, Mack said he always waited 24 hours to say anything. Maybe I'm just oversensitive, but I think I've noticed it negatively affects his credibility and effectiveness with his players. You watch: sometimes he does it so long that he'll miss the entire next play.
Our program won't be good this year, maybe not even next year. But i do see beilein as a good coach and i think in a few years he can do some good things, but winning it all i still, sadly, think is doubtful.
I'm hearing Denard is going to walk-on and try to beat out Stu and Darius for point guard. My sources tell me Denard is quick on quick but his shot needs a little work.
FWIW Big Will is gonna play guard on the BBall team as well. sorta a bigger Mateen Cleaves.
it's the system as much as the talent level of the kids coming in...........but, it looks like UofM has a chance to be pretty good in a few years if we're able to pick up the recruits that are being talked about lately.