Changing the Conversation About Caleb
TL;DR Lay off the kid - he's skinny and will get better as he develops.
I feel like people are being too hard on Caleb. He isn't the one-and-done some thought he was. He really was almost exactly what the scouts had him pegged as https://247sports.com/Player/Caleb-Houstan-46093910/high-school-242257/. I have seen a young player steadily develop in a system that initially asked more from him than he was ready to provide.
Meanwhile, I feel as though many people are being hyper-critical of him. Hell, Seth even used him as some strange description for Chris Hinton in the Georgia UFR https://mgoblog.com/content/upon-further-review-2021-defense-vs-georgia-0. He's a freshman that hasn't played up to his recruiting rankings. Let's cut him some slack and let him develop, not turn him into some kind of trope for disappointment (especially not before he finishes his first season - let the kid write his own story before you write him off).
I believe that he's going to have an excellent career at Michigan, specifically because he currently lacks certain physical tools - which will have him stay in college longer than an equally skilled but more physically developed player would. He is not physically ready enough to be dominant in the B1G right now, but this is an issue that can be solved. Skinny boys can become physically developed men. We've seen this time and again via Camp Sanderson. Caleb may not be who we thought we were getting today but in the future (I'm thinking his junior year) when he is physically ready for the NBA, I can only imagine where his skill game will be as well. That more complete player is going to be fun to watch.
This season may be disappointing but this program's future is bright. And as always, don't be a dick to kids.
Uhhhhh. So is this is all we doing today
Some valid points, but this feels like you're yelling at all the kids when one misbehaves.
A lot of posters have talked about his growth on defense and also offered some fair criticism of the inconsistency of his shooting. These comments are posted to the board. It's not like they are sending them to his twitter feed.
It's tough to put criticism in context. Complaints tend to be loud. Has there been criticism of Houstan here and on social media? Absolutely. So this thread responds to some of the sharpest.
It's tough, because we tend to pick the most inflammatory stuff we disagree with and respond to it. It's easier with social media elevating the loudest voices (Seth has been vocally critical of Twitter's continual effort to elevate stuff that angers people, and I agree with him about that).
The reality is that there isn't one universal voice saying stuff. A lot of people wanted Harbaugh fired, and people like me became vocal about it, but there were a lot of people who wanted to be patient. Some spoke up about it, but others were simply quiet; what's the point of getting into an argument that goes against the majority that are actually angry enough to post in a thread? At some point you just don't bother.
It's hard to have conversations like that, and to incorporate all the different views in one OP, you have to write even more stuff, and take it from a guy who is almost certainly the longest-winded regular commenter on this board: people just don't have the time to read all of that stuff.
Just part of the challenge of internet discussion.
I'm just wondering if there was something specific that prompted the OP. It comes across like there was a trigger that needed to be responded to... especially with the reference about "not being a dick to kids".
In the last game thread, there were some harsh comments early on, no doubt. When he started to hit buckets and make some defensive plays, there was also a fair bit of euphoria that this team could take off if he puts it together. It didn't seem to me to be an unusual amount of venom.
To be clear, I agree completely that everyone should be respectful of the kids playing the game.
I also happen to be on the side of being really glad he is on the team. His inconsistency has been a bit surprising, even with him being a freshman. But, we should have high hopes that he will make a leap next year to reach his potential.
SJK both sidesing a discussion. Never seen that before.
Coke is a hell of a drug. To be fair, angel dust makes anyone fly. That said. LAPD is terrible from the fifties
rodney's next arrest landed on my desk. not kidding. talk about a hot potato.
Honestly, I haven't seen anyone say anything more critical about him than what you've said here.
I guess I missed something.
Peruse the thread of any game where he had a bagel (or close) from the field and you'll see some colorful language.
Game threads are not a place for level headed discussion.
This!!!!
Precisely why I avoid game threads.
I know a lotttt of people who are really critical of him in a similar manner to what I've seen on this site.
He ended the regular season shooting 37% from three on high volume. His defense improved steadily throughout the season. He solidly made the all big ten freshmen team. If his expectations weren't one-and-done type player, we would be talking about how bright a future he has.
A year at Camp Sanderson, and he should be able to improve his defense to the level of an average Big Ten wing. It will also help improve his finishing at the rim through contact. Realistically, he's not too far away from being a 12-15 PPG scorer.
If he can also work a bit on hitting contested shots and his handle, All Big Ten second or third team isn't crazy for next year.
Didn’t Houston skip his senior year and enroll early?
edit: he did, but he is Canadian so he’s the same age, 19, as normal freshman. Canadians have grade13. (Though Houston went to a FL HS.)
List of players I can remember off the top of my head having a bigger impact as freshman:
1. Trey Burke
2. Hunter Dickinson
I'll hear an argument for Tourney McGary, but other than those two, I would argue he has been on par with any other major minutes freshman we have played. The reason he receives so much criticism is his lofty rating coming in, and the fact we needed him so much more than other Freshman in the past. Livers was what, the 5th option(?) as a freshman. Franz was streaky. Timmy H didn't have the same expectations bother personally and team wise. Irvin and Stauskas could be 'just a shooter'. Iggy didn't have to be a primary guy and was streaky as heck.
Houstan will be fine. I'm excited about his potential and think he has the makeup to be a straight dog maybe as soon as next year.
Edit to add: I'm thinking this modern day streak since Beilein got us to a perennial tourney power. Past decade/15 years or so.
Iggy didn't have to be a primary guy and was streaky as heck.
Some serious revisionism here. Iggy was our leading scorer that year. And is Houstan not streaky?
Stauskas could be 'just a shooter'.
And Houstan isn't?
And what about Manny Harris? Derrick Walton Jr? Or even Diabate?
Houstan's been asked to shoulder more of a load than he may have been ready for, and I think he's grown, especially as a defender and rebounder. But he clearly hasn't played like the one-and-done lottery pick he was billed to be. Honestly, the fact he plays so many minutes is more a commentary on our lack of depth than anything.
My argument is more that he is on the same level impact-wise as Iggy, Stauskas, etc.
I think both he and Diabate have had a similar level of impact. I think Diabate misses some of the criticism that Houstan gets b/c he was expected to be raw, whereas people thought Houstan was going to be a killer from the drop.
I did leave out Harris and Walton. I could see them being on the shortlist of impact freshmen above and beyond Houston.
March 12th, 2022 at 10:04 PM ^
You are crazy
Franz and Iggy definitely 100% made bigger impacts than Houstan as freshmen
Darius Morris, Levert, and Irvin were all better as freshmen as well. Caleb is just very limited, he can't create his own shot, or shoot off the dribble, or take it to the rack He is a spot up shooter only and even then he takes a long time to get his shot off. On the plus side he is a very good free throw shooter and has worked hard to improve his defense.
Morris was a breakout as a sophmore. Freshman Morris averaged 2.6 assists and 4 points a game.
Irvin never started a game as a true freshman and averaged less than 7 per game.
Levert was rail then. You could see the potential, but he averaged 10 minutes and 2 points a game. He was definitely not a more important freshmen than Houstan
March 12th, 2022 at 10:02 PM ^
All of the fab 5. And likely a dozen others easily.
He was not exactly what scouts said he would be, except for being bad on defense. Everyone said he was an elite shooter, easy plug and play to replace Livers' 3 point shooting, but he wasn't. He was an average shooter, with a really high turnover rate. He was disappointing as a freshman, I don't see a way how you can say he wasn't a disappointment. I get saying you shouldn't consider him a bust because it's early, but unless you had zero expectations of him, he was a disappointment.
I understand that freshman perform badly all the time, but his skillset wasn't being a lock down defender or elite off the dribble guy and the level of competition caught him by surprise. He's a guy everyone thought will shoot at an elite level, mostly spot ups, and attack closeouts. He was average at the first part, and the turnovers made attacking closeouts inconsistent efforts.
I still think he'll be good, and be a Cam Johnson type in the future.
I'm personally most surprised that he played at a school that faced high level competition regularly at Monteverde and so it would seem his transition to the college game would have a smaller gap than some other highly touted recruits.
If he hangs around I think he'll certainly improve. If he can, at bare minimum, improve his defense and long distance shooting then he'll have a real valuable skill set
Glen Rice was 3 for 12 his sophomore year from 3. I’ll reserve judgment on Caleb until after he finishes his Michigan career.
Very high expectations often fall flat. Let's just say that Caleb has a lot of upside. I hope he gets there.
What makes you think he has a lot of upside? Below level athlete for Michigan, had no passing vision, and average wing span. He also struggles to keep balance on movement shots. If he works his ass off he can be an above average big ten player but I don't see a lot of natural tools other than that smooth stroke.
Glen Rice was 3 for 12 his sophomore year from 3.
You left out a couple details: he averaged 17 points and 9 rebounds per game (leading the conference).
Also, that was the first year of the three-point shot in college basketball.
Rice averaged 7 and 3 as a freshman.
Johnny Davis averaged 7 and 4 as a freshman.
Keegan Murray averaged 7 and 5 as a freshman.
That's true. Of course Rice also shot 55.0% from the floor as a freshman, and scored those 7 ppg in only 16 minutes per game. We won the Big Ten that year, and he had to sit his turn. Context matters.
Put freshman Glen Rice on this Michigan team, with zero depth and a guaranteed 30-35 minutes per game, and he'd have put up a lot more than that.
That's not a great comparison. Rice didn't shoot threes that year because the 3-pointer was new to the sport, not because he couldn't. He was always a really good shooter.
He shot .429 from 3 as a junior before going .516 as a senior. And the initial college line was only 19’ 9”, right?
42.9% is a really, really good percentage for a whole season. 51.6% is insane.
Yes, it was a shorter line, but if you're somehow arguing that Glen Rice wasn't a good shooter, you're missing the mark (pun intended).
You might also note that he shot 55% or better overall from the floor all four years. The guy was a scoring machine and our great depth kept his stats down, if anything.
I’m not comparing senior Glen Rice to freshman Caleb Houstan. 0.516 is incredible. But Rice didn’t arrive in Ann Arbor as a fully formed All-American as a freshman. Being disappointed with Houstan’s freshman year is unfair to the guy.
Your last sentence is fine. But you picked a really strange player to compare him to.
Actually I think the original 3 point line was 17’9
Not in the Big 10.
I think part of the problem especially the first half of the season was Juwan playing him 35 minutes a game. Kid was struggling and Juwan kept him in the games, it was hard to watch. I think led to alot of the fans frustrations.
He's had some encouraging moments. His defense is excellent. He does the little things well that don't show up in box scores. I've said it before but I see alot of similarities to Keegan Murray. I'm hopeful he can have a similar 2nd year improvement. But Keegan is actually a 21 yo sophomore. Similar builds and styles. 🤞🏼
March 12th, 2022 at 10:11 PM ^
"Defense is excellent". lol.
Agreed. Once again as I mostly say. “Half of the posters have never played organized sports, and the other half, have never played college sports starting at age 17. I’m positive Caleb won’t be bothered by the negative energy of his own fanbase either. He will be great, soon.
I agree, the players do not deserve disdain for the season. The question is why did Coach Howard continue to run ineffective players for 30+ minutes per game?
The team, and individual players, would have been better served by sitting Houstan, Jones, and Brooks, for longer stretches during games. The hook was quite quick for Bufkin, Johns, and Collins... if they even got in! However, the starters were allowed to be turnover machines, and air ball specialists without nary a minute on the pine for reflection.
Good question as to why did Coach Howard play ineffective guys for 30+ min per game? Might be they practiced much better than the rest. We barely have a clue to how these players perform during team practices. Just a guess.
Uhh yeah, practice. There was a stretch during the season (3 games, 2 losses) where Houstan shot 4/25 with 1/14 from behind the arc, and averaged 35 minutes per game. I don't care how good he may practice, a more competent coach would have sat him.
I remember when Beilein relegated an ineffective Simpson to the bench for a half dozen games or so. He learned, got better, and led the team to the title game later that season.
March 13th, 2022 at 10:36 AM ^
And play whom instead at his position? Brandon Johns? One of the freshmen guards? How’s he going to get better by sitting on the bench? Like the rest of this team (except Jones & Brooks), we had mainly freshmen with a soft sophomore center. The real test of progression will be next year, who improves and by how much.
Agree 💯
The question is why did Coach Howard continue to run ineffective players for 30+ minutes per game?
Who else was he going to play? Jace? This team has paper-thin depth.
I didn't say give all his minutes away. But, 35 minutes while being that inefficient required some time on the pine to reflect. Question, would Beilein have rode an unproven, inefficient freshman THAT long?
Pick one...
Williams, Johns, Bufkin! As a matter of fact, Bufkin hit the clinching shot versus OSU (while Houstan shot 0/10), don't you think Kobe could have gotten a few of Caleb's 32 minutes the very next game when Caleb was shooting 3/10?
Again, would Beilein have ridden an ineffective, inefficient, unproven freshman for 30+ minutes per game?!