The same players play offense and defense and no the effort is not there.
i refuse to even consider this a possibility
The same players play offense and defense and no the effort is not there.
The only time I've really seen this team play with effort on the defensive end for a whole game was the MSU game at home, and voila, held them to 57 pts the entire game, let alone the 51 in the second half by Wisconsin yesterday.
Also gotta take GR3 out of the game, or take Nik out and move GR3 to the 3 spot. I'm tired of watching him get worked by bigger guys on the defensive end (not entirely his fault) but then do nothing to take advantage of his offensive skill set and athleticism on the offensive end against these bigger more lumbering players. It's extremely frustrating to watch.
When I said that we need to play 2 bigs and gr3 at the 3 in january i was chastized......I am tired of being undersized, that sounds bad......anyways back on topic......It is just hard to get freshman to play 40 minutes of defense, let alone freshman who arent great defenders in the first place. 1-3-1 zone the majority of the tourney?? I dont know I get dumber every time I watch this team I think.
This, in theory, is a great idea - if only for a handful of minutes at a time to mix things up. Two things to consider, though:
(1) GRIII has completely lost his outside shot. He was regularly knocking down 3-pointers and mid-range shots early in the year. That hasn't happened in recent weeks. Even when Stauskas isn't hitting, his mere presence on the perimenter makes opposing defenses react.
(2) Can GRIII guard quicker wings? I think so, but it's still an unknown commodity. Stauskus has struggled against 2 guards and wings, too, so maybe this is a moot point.
I really like JB as a coach, and am not standing on the ledge like many other UM fans after the recent spate of losses. But I have to admit that I didn't enjoy watching Evans manhandle GRIII on the block repeatedly in the 2nd half. I think Horford or Morgan might have been a better matchup there. If GRIII's offensive game is on, then I'm not complaining. If his offensive game is not on, I would opt for the better defender against a guy who's killing you with his post game.
It's true that he was getting manhandled in the post, but my primary thought during that stretch of the game was "damn it, it's too easy to feed the post when you aren't getting any effective pressure on the ball."
I spent my Fridays this winter watching a high school team that was horribly undersized--only had one player over 6'2", and he was a thin, inexperienced 6'4" kid who was giving up about 50 pounds to everybody he had to defend. Most of the time they were playing four guards and a 6'2" center and they'd be giving up at least four inches at just about every spot on the floor.
One-on-one situations on the block were death; they won most of their games anyway, because they pressured the ball so hard on the perimeter. It wasn't easy to get the ball to the low post and when the other team did it was often with a pass that pulled the post man off the block, or he'd field it low and get into trouble with a quick double team. Sometimes it was a matchup zone, sometimes it was just really aggressive man, but the principle was always "harass the ball hard on the perimeter or we get killed down low."
There's no one answer here. You can try to get better post defenders on the floor, or you can look to put pressure on them somewhere else.
Well-stated. Team defense is team defense, and pressure "D" by the smalls certainly helps the bigs down low. Wisconsin thrives on team defense, and they do it with an athletic deficit against most B1G teams.
is never going to have a lock down defense, it is simply not what he stresses. I don't think Michigan has all that bad on ball defenders, at times they can be disruptive up top and there certainly is athleticism on this team. This team is, by design, a team where the best defense is a good offense. The problem is that the offense is just not working right now. They are turnover prone in transition and threes are not falling on a regular basis. You take those two things away from this team and there is not much there. I think that you are going to find that a lot with Beilien's teams. I think at some question becomes is it OK. Is it OK to have a supremely talented team who plays a style of basketball that will struggle with in conference play, but be capable of winning six in a row every year once the dance begins. The proof is going to be in the pudding. This team needs to make some noise in the tourney or I think the question becomes is this the staff to take the team to the next level. I don't know the answer to that right now.
I've been on the 'play 2 bigs' bandwagon for a long time.Along with the obvious rebounding advantage, it also gives opponents a matchup problem with THJ.I believe the main reason Coach B doesn't do it is because it means a big has to play on the wing.Coach B is an offensive minded coach,he recruits that way and makes substitutions based more on off. than def.and fails to make def adjustments during games (no adjustment vs Zeller last Sunday was the most egregious example)
it's a mentality. These guys don't have it .. . It could be youth. But the chicks dig scars attitude is absent from this squad. . . This could be the year we could really have used Novak and Douglass. . .
Where exactly would we use Stu? At the 1 instead of Burke? At the 2 instead of THJ? Novak, yes, would love to have at the 4 being spelled by GR3. But Stu? Chicks did not dig Stu's scars.
Um yes because Stu could play DEFENSE. put him at the 2 and put thj at the 3. Or even put him at the 3 in place of stauskas.
Stu was an excellent defender, but last year's version of Stu was a senior who learned to play great defense over the course of 4 years. I don't think I would have labeled him as a defensive stalwart during his freshman year.
Your point is taken, though. It would be great to have a defensive-minded perimeter player.
You, sir, just hit the nail on the head. Our worst defenders are freshman. How long did it take Stu to become the best on-ball defender on the team? Exactly. Not in 30 games. Nik is slow. We knew that when he signed. And GRIII seldoms goes all out on the defensive end. These traits aren't going away in a single season.
in that sentence about Tom Brady and Michael Jordan. But here's my $.02
I'm way more of a believer in the "we're young" camp than the "we have no heart" camp. If you look at GR3, he's being asked to guard players that are bigger than him for probably the first time in his life. Watching him, he doesn't look strong enough to body them up, and he also just hasn't had time to develop that part of his game. It's takes a very different game to defend the perimeter than it does to defend down low. Give him time to bulk up this offseason and gain some defensive bball IQ points.
With Stauskas, I think he also needs to hit the weight-room. Just because he's "more than just a shooter," it doesn't mean that he is very athletic. He isn't quick enough to get around screens and stay with teams' quick slashers. So for him too I say hit the weights and work on foot speed.
Youth, no matter how talented, can't always trump seasoned veterans.
Go down to the Y and watch the old dudes take it to the high flying high school kids (extreme example I know).
Not only is there teamwork and gel on offense but a lot on defense and the best way to solidify any team into a truly solid one is time.
May be another horrible example but I look at my younger brother's AYBT (form of AAU) basketball team. Most of their tournaments as freshmen/sophomores they were playing against juniors and seniors. Many times their tallest guy would be the other team's shortest starter but at the end of the game my brother's team would be up comfortably. They started playing together in the 5th grade so by that time they were all in sync.
Last year's Michigan team was less talented overall than this year but they had senior leadership from guys that were in the program for 4 years. The game slows down as you get older which could be seen yesterday as Wisconsin's older team seemed to be able to run at half speed and take out Michigan's youthful team running full pace all game.
I would say Mattison's defense was comprised with a lot of guys that got playing time early on in their careers so he wasn't starting over like Rich chose to do. This has helped the football transition. Basketball has transitioned which is why I think it's just lack of upperclassmen running the court. THJ is about it. Burke does it out of necessity but being forced (probably a harsh word to use) into that position two years in isn't quite as effective as a player 4 years in that has gone through the entire process and comes out hardened.
as much as they could ... or much really. Tied last year for Big championship ... that is it. Out quicky in Big and NCAA. Underachievers because no one is committed to the D... but we have alot of NBA talent. Right?
Who is going to step up and improve on D next year? Anyone?
UM hockey is on tonight. Red will tell you D and heart wins championships. The bball team has a long was to go. Sorry. That # one rank got to their heads and they never recovered.
Bring back the Fab Five. This team is soft
Jesus. If it was a GERG defense we would be sitting at .500.
winning percentage w/ GERG as DC?
Too bad the folks at USA Basketball don't know as much about basketball as some of the posters here.
Michigan is getting bounced in the second round of the tournament.
against teams wth physical big guys, is Gerg's 3-3-5, to this basketball team. More zone defense would be this teams 4-3 defense (relatively speaking). Must be a WVU thing. Belien is starting to look about as stubborn as Rich Rod, making in game adjustments.....
That's how I see it too. The problem we have, IMO, is that our HC fancies himself a defensive expert (father of 1-3-1 popularization) so I dont think HE thinks he needs a defensive expert. The better analogy, again IMO, for the OP would be an Offensive Coordinator for RR cause the Spread n Shred had "hit the hall" offensively.
For reasons I simply cannot fathom Beilein REFUSES to even try a zone defense no matter how badly the man to man is working. For a guy who is always spoken about in revered tones when the subject of zone defenses is brought up (as recently as yesterday I might add) he doesn't seem to believe it anymore.
I'm baffled. There isn't a soul watching M play over the past month that cant see that we're struggling mightily on D and yet we cling to the man to man like it's the Holy Grail. There must be a reason but it sure escapes me.
Good call man. We should play zone against a team that has at least 3 shooters on the floor at all times.
Not to mention they have switched to zone a few times over the past few games.
Too many opinions, not enough knowledge. It's hard to even talk basketball with the knee jerk reactions of this fan base.
There isn't a soul watching M play over the past month that cant see that we're struggling mightily on D and yet we cling to the man to man like it's the Holy Grail. There must be a reason but it sure escapes me.
We have played some zone. When we've done so, we generally haven't any more success than in man. There's no magic bullet here. We aren't very talented defensively. That might change in the future, as some of the guys hit the weights, study film, etc., but that's where we are now.
For reasons I simply cannot fathom Beilein REFUSES to even try a zone defense no matter how badly the man to man is working.
There's no reason whatsoever to be baffled by this. Beilein has stated on more than one occasion that he hasn't been using zone defenses in games because when they try it in practice, the team doesn't execute it well. It's as simple as that.
I also believe Beilein said sometime in the middle of the season that his zone defense is something he likes to implement all-or-nothing at he beginning of the off-season. To me it seems like he saw his team on paper and predicted that their talents would be best used going with a Man defense. It hasn't worked out, but it's impossible to say whether or not his zone defense would work any better. This team has been giving up 3's like they're charity all season, and I doubt zone defense would have helped matters in that regard.
overachieved the last two years by playing great D, despite having minimal offensive firepower. The bandwagon fan climbs up, surveys the landscape, and weighs in (on people with more talent and brains than they ever have). "They're p*ssies," he declares, "Beilein can't coach D." Then he sinks back to sleep.
It's the Dunning Kruger effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning_Kruger) in full bloom
x Thought better of my caustic post. . .
The two years before the current season, Michigan was even worse in defensive efficiency. Last year, they came in at 176th, and the year before they were 140th. They were 135th in opponent FG% last year, and 106th the year before.
So before you go ripping people for saying "dumb" things, try doing 3 minutes of research.
Hate to say it, but if you saw the same first half of the Wiscy game that I saw, our offensive production was, to put it kindly, inconsistent.
Bench Glen. Start Mitch and Morgan
This would be great if you were given 7 fouls instead of 5.
I don't see any physical limitations from the players as a reason to be so poor defensively. Beilein plays smallish line-ups when GRIII is considered a 4 and Morgan a 5. I see no reason McGary shouldn't develop in to being able to guard any 5. GRIII should be able to handle any 3. THJ should be able to handle any 2. Burke could have trouble with bigger 1's but should be fine off of the dribble and on the perimeter. Physically, Michigan has the ability to have a solid defense. I just don't see the mentality. I think McGary will be a good defender but he still has a lot to learn. I think he has a nastiness about him though. I don't see it with GRIII, THJ, Burke, or Stauskas. I think guys are frustrated that Burke dominates the ball so much. They lose focus because they aren't getting enough touches or opportunities to score. This shouldn't be an excuse not to give maximum effort defensively but I do think that is part of what is happening. Aside from poor rebounding, the defense played well for much of the MSU and IU home games. I believe this was due to the team playing with maximum effort and focus. Coaching deserves some of the blame for the inconsistency and mostly poor defense as the norm. However, I think they are coaching it and emphasizing it. I question the buy in of our players. I think they all want to shoot a lot and score a lot and win with flash. I would love to see Beilein recruit some guys with a nasty streak. I feel that he might start to look like a better defensive coach as a result.
Cause Bill Carmody was fired!
That's not the only issue. Hardaway and Stauskas are shaky on-the-ball defenders and frequently allow penetration, while GR III is weak at defending the post.
which lies with the wings. Stauskas has gotten better, but GRIII is out of position, often guarding bigger guys, and still learning. Clubbing a freshman with his talent and promise over the head in imaginary fashion on the internet seems to get a lot of people off, but it really doesn't do much.
That isn't poor execution, that's by design. Whether it's effective or not is an empirical question, but McGary and Morgan are doing what they're taught.
Anybody have stats on our defensive efficiency vs. ball screens as opposed to other types of sets? It doesn't seem to me that they've been a particular problem, but I could be wrong.
Michigan needs the fab five to talk to these youngsters. Play with a nasty streak and swag.
So to sum up the board the last 2 days.....the team sucks at defense, doesn't try hard, can't rebound, has no heart and is poorly coached.
So explain what the team expectation would be if we had those things?
Also, is Beilien the greatest recruiter in the history of basketball considering he just rolls the ball out and let's all these quitters just loaf around the court?
If someone complains about the offense can we just simply say..Michigan is #2 in the country in offensive efficiency!!!! I understand the defensive concerns. Certainly a problem, but the morons on the radio complaining about Beiliens offense and all we do is jack up 3's is just too much.
If this were a GERG level defense, they would be giving up 100 a game.
i think one of the posters may have hit on a solution-we should try a 3-3-5. Maybe if we had eleven guys on the floor, we could get an occasional stop. I realize there would be a problem getting enough touches for everyone on the offensive side of the floor but it's worth a shot.
I don't think this team is as bad on defense as a lot of people think. Part of it is that a lot of teams are having streaks against Michigan where they throw up contested shots at the end of the clock and they fall, not to mention hitting every remotely open shot. I'm just happy that opponents see Michigan as a team they have to make a super-human effort against; it seems like it's been forever since that happened.
Despite the whining in an earlier, ill-fated thread, this is still a young team. It's leader is only a sophomore, and five freshmen are getting playing time. I'm still happy with where this team is. They were one decent break away from being tied for first place this year.
Besides, if the Wolverines make it to the second week of the NCAA Tournament, many of the same people who are complaining about the team now will be posting about how great they are.
Is an idea that could help with an inexperienced team like ours. Zone in general is something I think we need to try more. Syracuse is one example of a team that plays a superior zone defense.
The few times we have tried the 1-3-1 this year we've been torched. Tried it briefly yesterday and it was "ok".
GRIII and Stauskas get beat a lot. Doesn't matter if we are man or zone, the defense needs to rotate and ours doesn't.
I would have liked to seen a starting line up, Trey Burke, THJ, GR3 (at the 3 spot), J Mo, and Mitch "Monster" McGary with Nick Stauskas being that shooter/scorer spark off the bench. That way you have GR3 in a position more suitable for his size and strength along with J Mo who is the best defensive player and understands where guys have to be on the floor. In hindsight its looks to me that, that would have been a more productive line up as far as grabbing rebounds and defensively though the offense may have suffered a bit in some games. It may be to late to tweek the line up in that manner and of course as the saying goes hindsight is 20/20.
I honestly just think that Stauskas and Robinson haven't really had to play defense much in their careers. Just look at how Nik is always showboating in front of the other teams bench. Does that look like someone who is used to hustling back on defense? And Robinson is just atrocious at boxing out. This is something that I learned in little middle school basketball. They've been able to outscore everyone in their life, and for the first half of this season they did it too. They need to learn how to win with defense.
In his career had to have taught defense at some point. However, for some reason, defense has not been a priority for this team. You would hope that over the offseason (because at this point, the light isn't going to be turrned on now), those who are defensive culprits will take the time to learn how to defend their positions more effectively.
But most importantly, they have to want to play defense. Maybe because they were scoring stars in high school, they didn't need to play defense because it was high school competition and they could get by with just scoring. But one year into their B10 career, hopefully it will hit them that defense is just as crucial. I can't contemplate why they don't think that now and at least put forth a modicum of effort.
But maybe they need defensive anuerysms. Stauskas and Robinson won't turn into Novak and Stu overnight. But at some point, the light better come on or we'll be stagnant.
We should note that Stu himself wasn't the Stu we now remember when he was a freshman, either. He was mediocre at best defensively when he was an underclassman and gradually improved.
And I don't remember Stu and Zack being that great at defense as Freshmen, especially Stu. Zack was always competitive and played with an edge, but he developed his defensive skill over time.
Good Lord, give it a rest!
Tell me what you've read about any of the kids who've come into the program the past year. "Great ballhandler", "phenominal shooter", any other offensive term.
Ever remember hearing we signed a "lock down defender"? There's a reason for it. Kid's are recruited on their size/ability on offense (usually WITH the ball) or inside presence. They LEARN defense, in a system, it takes time.
This year we're lucky to be where we are defensively. We've hit the wall physically (as freshmen do if they play a lot early) at this point, because the length of season and physical demands are mor ethan they've EVER encountered before.
Morgan's injury hasn't let him return to form (like McGary's earlier). Stauskas and Robinson's recent struggles are due to the wear down that occurs by this point. The "freshest" guys out there are Levert and McGary b/c they've played tons less.
We will be fine next year, just on experience and conditioning alone. The ONLY "fix" that could help right now is moving GRIII to the 3, which requires not only 2 of our bigs to take the 4 and 5, but finding a suitable swap for THJ and Stauskas at the 2. It's not something Belien's seemed to want to do. Maybe next year with healthy bigs and Donnal adding to the mix...
Relax and enjoy the ride... if anything, losing gave us time to rest and heal (Morgan/THJ).
This Michigan team is still remarkably young. The public accollades issued to them for draining the bucket with threes and "jamming it down", even on this blog, gets way more love and adoration than steals, blocked shots and forcing turnovers.
Michigan is just not very good defensively this year. It will get better next IMO.
I'm confident in Beileins approach.
Out of curiousity, what makes you confident in Beilein's defensive approach?
I don't think many people thought defense was a problem last year with a senior-laden group. It was that we were unathletic and couldn't score enough. Now we have the athletes and it's taking them time to adjust defensively. I think we'll get there in time. Unfortunately, not this year.
Defense was a problem last year. Look at the numbers.
Numbers don't account for overachieving or underachieving based on skill, size, and roster depth. None of which Michigan really had on defense.
Given they were so small and had no elite defenders, I would say they overachieved. The stats you keep referring to fail to tell that story.
Also, you might want to drink a glass of optimism when the MGoBoard gets overhauled and negbangs are reinstated.
There is a difference between optimism and ignoring reality, which a lot of posters here seem to be very good at.
Statistics can deceive. Last year's team won a lot of close, low-scoring games. This year's team, not so much. Last year I felt OK if a game was played in the 50s or 60s. This year I feel like it's hard for us to win that way.
I understand that you "feel" a certain way. Unfortunately, like most posters on this topic, your feelings contradict the reality that has played out over the last 20 years with Beilein.
Making some free throws, tip backs and layups would help.
assuming the players decide that they want to be better. Experience brings improvement.
We just might be a better offensive team by the end of next year also, as we shift to more balance and less Burke dependent.
Michigan doesn't have a skilled big. Sadly, we're relying on players that no one else wanted (Horford, Morgan) or a true freshman. Michigan is generally doomed once the ball goes into Zeller, Payne, Berggren etc; They can either help out and leave Hulls, Harris or Brust open for three, or sit back and watch those big dudes repeatedly make bunnies. Needless to say, when M throws the ball in to Morgan, Horford or McGary, Stauskas won't be left open for the kick out.
Obviously, there are other problems, but this one seems like the most glaring.
I agree that we don't have any really skilled bigs (although McGary has showed flashes), but an unskilled big post player is better than an unskilled skinny post player, which is what Robinson is when he plays PF.
Playing Morgan/Horford and McGary together may not help with the Zellers of the world, but we would have more size and athleticism in the front court than almost any other Big Ten team. And on offense, Robinson is giving nothing at PF. May as well give McGary a shot to grow as a viable post presence.
My sense is that McGary will probably be a turnover/foul/airball machine if he roams too far from the basket. Also, without Stauskas on the floor, it's going to be brick city from three. But yeah, Robinson just seems lost out there at PF. Beilein needs to try something, I guess. Maybe it's time for "Burke and Hardaway shoot, everyone else just rebound" and hope for the best.
country at one point. Develop him beyond an airball machine which I don't believe he is at this point. That is crazy to even consider.
Does this mean.....flight tracking?
I heard from a little birdie that Rick Pitino is going to be the defensive coordinator of basketball operations here.
Why don't we start (C) Morgan/Horford, (PF) McGary, (SF) Robinson, (SG) Hardaway, and (PG) Burke, with Stauskas as the 6th man? Before the season, almost everybody who made basketball projections assumed that would be the starting lineup. McGary got off to a slow start because of injury, so that lineup became moot. I always thought Robinson was just a stop-gap at PF until McGary and Horford were in game shape. Everyone's healthy now, so why not put people in their natural positions? It's not like we're so desperately lacking big bodies that Robinson has to play out of position.
That bigger lineup would help with our biggest problems: rebounding and defense. . Some people think Robinson's not athletic enough to defend quicker SFs? Give me a break--the guy is an NBA SF who I'm sure can keep up the Mike Bruesewitzes of the Big Ten. Christ, Burke is an NBA PG, Hardaway will be an NBA SG, Robinson will be an NBA SF, McGary will be an NBA PF, Morgan and Horford are natual centers. Throw that lineup out there and make the other team adjust. How often do you get a lineup like that, with near-certain NBA players spanned across four of the five position groups? Stop being cute, and just put guys at their natural positions. We're all going to look back and cry at the lost possibilities when Burke, Hardaway, Robinson, and McGary are serviceable-to-good NBA players at the positions they should have been playing this year at Michigan.
I think the main issue is on offense. We'd need one of them to be out on the perimeter and then we'd basically be playing four on five. Also, when GRIII is playing the four, it's easy for him to beat his man downcourt for transition baskets. We'd give that up if he were playing the 3.
When Robinson isn't hitting from outside, which he isn't, it doesn't matter if he plays the four or if McGary does. Plus, McGary could better post up his man and he gives us better rebounding and match-ups on defense. Think about Mitch and Jordan grabbing defensive boards and out letting to Burke, Hardaway and Robinson on the break.
Even a slumping GRIII still warrants having a defender on him. You can't completely ignore him like you could Morgan or McGary if they're 20 feet from the basket. Defenses also have to be mindful of him as a cutter. Our offensive scheme thrives on proper spacing. If you put a guy with zero perimeter shooting touch on the arc, it will screw things up. The defense can play a box-and-one on Burke then.
And again, when GRIII is at the four, he can easily beat his man downcourt for transition baskets. This advantage is lessened against Wisconsin because they rarely ever turn it over (part of what makes them a tough matchup for us), but against most teams it's significant.
This is where losing Evan Smotrycz hurts. He was a true 4 on both ends (although we often had to play him at the 5 because Horford was hurt).
He's saying there'd be three defenders in the paint on the pick-and-roll instead of two.
The bigger lineup is not going to help with the horrible perimeter defense.
I don't recall Michigan's defense being regularly shredded last season with Novak at PF so that should be a clue that there is much more wrong than size.
I agree with your post.The answer to your question is 2 bigs means 1 of them has to play on the wing.Coach B is an offensive minded coach (recruits off 1st,subs based primarily on off.,an doesn't seem to make in-game def adjustments) No adjustment against Zeller last Sunday was infruriating.
Just remember there was a time not long ago where basketball would almost have to be labeled OT on this board and basketball would NEVER have a post on the front page. I don't agree when people criticize the players, but am totally fine if people get after the coaches. Some idiots will call for firings and smarter people will analyze the games and point out stats and adjustments. Big time, elite programs get this kind of attention, and negative or positive, if people are talking I think it's good. John Beilein has had one elite recruiting class, and the talent level of the roster is rising. Three of those players are Big Ten starting players on ANY team. Wait till he has a couple of those classes a few years into their development, and then judge or claim he has peaked or reached his ceiling.
Hire an asst coach from Sparty. They can board.
A better football analogy for this year's defense would be 2000, when the defense was young and breaking in 8 new starters IIRC, and understandably was inconsistent and generally not that good. What we're seeing now isn't the equivalent of the RR era when he was jerking his coordinators around and there was no coherent philosophy.
I don't question our teams heart,I think it's more a matter of us being a finesse,smallish team in a physical league.Also most of the guys seem to be more laid back with the exception of McGary. Our defensive short comings are obvious.The 'teams just get hot against us' meme is crazy and statistically improbable.
you dont just simply put your best offensive players out there ,game in and game out.u need a few guys who are simply defenders,rebounders,junk yard dogs.that is what this team is missing.horford needs to play alot more minutes.
I'll try one last time. Here are the average national rankings of Beilein's teams since 1997:
Defensive Efficiency: 150th (only been in the top 100 twice)
Opponent Effective FG %: 158th (only been in the top 100 twice)
Opponent Floor %: 117th
Opponent Offensive Rebounding %: 228th
Turnovers Forced: 202nd
1st half points allowed: 78th. 2nd half points allowed: 101st (suggesting that his defenses get comparitively worse after halftime).
I don't know how people can look at a near 20-year history of Beilein putting out poor defenses and somehow conclude that this year is just an anomaly or that youth is to blame. John Beilein is just not a good defensive coach.
I'm not saying he's a bad coach overall or that he should be fired or anything like that, but anyone expecting the defense to get much better over the coming years is in for a major disappointment.
You might as well give it up ghost. Logic and facts have non place in an argument fueled by passion and emotions. Beilein is a great defensive coach because people WANT that to be true-analytical analysis be damned.
And I too did not slam any players or do something as ridicoulus as asking him to be fired. I asked us to play zone a bit more....as did Brian FWIW.
Your problem wasn't that you wanted us to play zone, it's that you were all histrionic about it.
The problem we have, IMO, is that our HC fancies himself a defensive expert (father of 1-3-1 popularization) so I dont think HE thinks he needs a defensive expert.
For reasons I simply cannot fathom Beilein REFUSES to even try a zone defense no matter how badly the man to man is working.
There isn't a soul watching M play over the past month that cant see that we're struggling mightily on D and yet we cling to the man to man like it's the Holy Grail.
When you're verging in psychoanalysis of the coach because he does something you
disagree with, it probably won't be well-received. And for the record, we do play some zone in every game. I don't think we've ever gone 100% man in any one game. From what I've seen, the zone has been at best a mixed bag.
Well my analysis has been based solely on numbers, and that hasn't been received well either. People simply will not accept reality, and rather than attempt to respond with an alternative analysis, they just downvote because they realize it's impossible.
You consider that "histriionic?" My first point I qualified with an IMO and was in response to the OP's question about where will we find our Mattison for basketball. My second point might have been a bit dramatic but lets face facts - we run zone for maybe one or two possessions a game tops. And that's it. So he doesnt refuse to run it he certainly refuses to run it for more than two or three minutes of a 40 minute game. And my third point I'll stand by. Do you argue that our defense has not struggled over the past month? And one way to get different results is to run different defensive sets.
It is my opinion we should run more zone. It is also our Brian Cook's opinion we should run more zone. I have no idea if it would produce better, worse or the same results - nor does anyone else - but I would like to see us try it for more than a small portion of the game.
Ghost hit the nail on the head though. He is presenting nothing but facts and is getting downvoted significantly too. I guess facts and histrionics arent very "well-received" either around here these days.
I don't understand. Are you arguing that coaching has little to do with defensive performance? Defense is a whole lot more complicated than just staying in front of your guy.
I was at work and only able to listen to the game on the radio... when I looked at the final box score I was baffled by the distribution of playing time. McG barely played half the game. Morgan had 8 minutes? I heard he played like shit first half, but only 8 minutes played total? Can anybody explain this to me? What did I miss that would clearly justify this?
Maybe some of the panic is of the chicken little variety????
So here is the experience for Wisc starting 5. Senior, Senior, Senior, Junior, Sophmore, verse our starting 5 a Junior, Junior, Sophmore, Freshmen, Freshmen. There is your answer. Defense is something you learn after getting your butt kicked a few times. This may be a misprint but according to ESPN GRIII and Evans are the same height and weight. Yet one owned the other in the post. Watching GRIII's response to Evan's moves it was not that he was muscled down but clueless on how to play defense. We forget he was a late bloomer, not this finished basketball product.
There was suggestion that 2 bigs would work better. In college, runnning with two post players without one being a perimeter threat is really tough. Recall Izzo's difficulties getting Payne and Nix on the floor at the same time. It only really clicked when Payne became a perimeter threat. If we still had Smotrycz I think you have something to work with. But our bigs are currently not talented enough for that to work. What is ironic is that Nix hit is career high today. All that work for a Big10 career high of 17 points.
Now there is critisim that Beilein cannot coach defense. I would say that is by design. Unless you can recruit superior atheletes ala Kentucky you have to pick & choose the character of your team. It is sort of like critisizing Bo Ryan for Wisconsin never having a great offense. You pick what you want to be strong at and hope that is good enough. I think if Beilein was given last year roster for UK he would have done just as well as anyone else. If Beilein can recruit good players including a few who will stay around for a few years, I think he can coach up the defense to be more then adequate. Indiana improved significantly with a year of experience.