Jamal Cain Offer (17) Reaction Part 1

Submitted by Matt EM on

So, I'll be posting here from time to time with UM Bball related updates on prospects with serious UM interest. Brian was gracious enough to allow this, and I certainly appreciate that. I only hope to supplement the already excellent work the entire staff here at MGo does.

 

With that being said, Part 1 of the Jamal Cain Offer/Visit Reaction.

 

http://endlessmotor.net/2016/04/28/jamal-cain-um-visit-and-offer-reacti…

Matt EM

April 28th, 2016 at 12:44 PM ^

Brian Snow has expressly stated that he's never watched Cain play live, and he's known to be stubborn with his initial opinion. Remember his reluctance to move Irvin into top 100 territory, literally took him to the final rankings update when all other sites had moved Zak squarely within top 40 range. The guy just doesn't budge.

Here's the killer though, how do you state you won't move a prospect into top 100 territory when   A) you've never seen him play live   B) The AAU season is a long ways from being over

 

Just doesn't make sense in my opinion.

Matt EM

April 28th, 2016 at 12:52 PM ^

Perhaps he caught Cain in Indy? As someone that has seen Cain a ton, and generated highlight films on him, there is no doubt in my mind he's a top 100 talent. He has produced at a high level against the EYBL competition, which is no doubt the best AAU circuit in the country. His game is most definitely legit. I'm telling you right now, when the updated rankings come out (sans Scout), Cain is going to see boost.

Lanknows

April 28th, 2016 at 1:03 PM ^

Beilein's guard and wing recruiting is really beyond reproach. He instincts should be trusted ahead of any recruiting ranking out there. Period. Big man recruiting is a different story but consider the track record for wings at Michigan

  • Hits: Douglasss-Novak-Hardaway-Irvin-Dawkins-Rhakman-Levert-Robinson-Stauskas-Robinson
  • Misses: Brundidge, Vogrich
  • TBD: Chatman 

That's a hell of a batting average, especially given that some of those were late-in-class desperation additions.

....This is also why anyone sweating Ibi Watson's ranking is either a fool or not paying attention.

 

93Grad

April 28th, 2016 at 1:17 PM ^

he looks very much like the middling 3 star he was ranked to be.  Meanwhile, Chatman looks nowhere close to his rankings so I think your TBD is generous.  

But I agree that JB has hit on more players at the 1-3 positions than most coaches.  4 & 5, not at all.

Trader Jack

April 28th, 2016 at 1:37 PM ^

If you're looking at the 4 position the way it's played at most schools, you're probably correct. But in terms of Beilein's offense, he's actually been pretty good at evaluating talent there. Novak, GRIII, Irvin, those make up the majority of players Beilein's had at the 4 in his time here and have all been hits.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Lanknows

April 28th, 2016 at 1:53 PM ^

Irvin and Novak were not recruited to play the 4 - they've done so out of necessity. I think they always had the 4 in mind for Robinson but hard to know for sure. He counts as both a wing and a 4, as does Chatman.

Beilein has failed at getting production from true 4s. This resulting in 3s moving to 4 and 4s moving to 5 (when they can't hack it at 4.

Hit:  Robinson

Miss: Smotrycz (good player but between the transfer and being a backup to Novak you can't consider this a success), McLimans (same class a Morgan - one of them was supposed to be a PF), Bielfeldt (used at 5, not offered a 5th year), Wilson (moved to 5), Donnal (moved to 5)

TBD: Wagner and Chatman.

Trader Jack

April 28th, 2016 at 1:59 PM ^

I don't completely disagree with this and readily admit that it's hard to know if Beilein recruited Irvin and Novak with the 4 in mind for them or not. I will say, though, that IIRC Irvin played the majority of that Charlotte game his FR year at the 4 after Robinson left with a back injury.

I also think you're using the same argument you made to consider Dawkins a hit to count Smotrycz as a miss. Plus, Wagner is already a 5 and I guess I always assumed Wilson and Donnal would be as well. But, again, it's hard for us to know where Beilien envisioned them playing when he offered them scholorships.

Lanknows

April 28th, 2016 at 2:13 PM ^

and if Stauskas or Levert had left with a back injury he would have played most of the game at the 3.

Fair point that Dawkins and Smotrycz should probably be viewed the same way. My only argument is that Smot was an elite recruit who was supposed to play the 4, but never beat out Novak and transferred because he was unhappy and then didn't do anything special at Maryland. He was arguably better for Michigan at the 5 than at the position he was recruited to play.  Dawkins still has 3 years ahead of him, started for Michigan (last year), played the position he was recruited to play, and left for positive reasons (to play with his Dad).  So, I admit it's a fine destinction.  You could call both failures or both successes, depending on where you draw the arbitrary line.

Lanknows

April 28th, 2016 at 2:22 PM ^

Clearly Beilein is comfortable recruiting people who could be either.  But his best success at 5 has come with guys who are decidedly NOT wing players (Morgan, Horford, McGary) and his best success at the 4 has come with guys who clearly are (Robinson, Irvin, Novak). 

Yet, he keeps recruiting guys these tweener guys for the 4 spot that are too small for 5 but not athletic enough to play 4 for Beilein (Donnal, Bielfeldt, Wilson, Christian).  The closest that has come to working is Smotrycz and he transferred in tears.  Wagner could change that, but so far it's been a disaster. 

I'm not going to be happy about the next 6'7-6'9 guy who lacks guard skills, weighs less than 230 pounds, has mediocre athleticism, plays shoft, but can (sometimes) hit a 15 foot jumper.

Beilein doesn't seem to know what works in his own system at this position. It's baffling, but hopefully he is figuring it out. 

Lanknows

April 28th, 2016 at 2:53 PM ^

I'm not sure you can argue "need at the 5", when need at the 4 was just as glaring. Bielfeldt and Doyle got most of the 5 minutes and Wilson was around too. Chatman was awful and played 50% more minutes than Donnal did in Big Ten play. If Donnal could play the 4 he would have.

Wilson has already shown he can't play the 4 - see the argument above.  Dawkins did one thing well (hit 3s), Chatman was bad, those guys are unplayable (at the 4).

Lanknows

April 28th, 2016 at 1:38 PM ^

Was recruited late in the cycle and hit 50% of his 3s in conference play over 2 years. He had mid-major offers but was an instant contributor and valuable rotation player.

Ideally, he would have red-shirted, because despite his limitations he has the raw ingredients (length, leaping ability, and a deadly 3 point shot) to be an excellent player. He will still be playing college basketball after Moritz Wagner is gone and he has a shot of making the NBA as a 3&D player if his dad can improve the D part from godawful to living-up-to-his-physical-potential.

Chatman is not living up to his ranking, but he has 2 more years and has shown flashes of being a good player. He doesn't have to be an NBA player to be a hit - he only has to be a quality starter or rotation player a la Stu Douglass.

Lanknows

April 28th, 2016 at 2:06 PM ^

Elite rebounding and very good shot-blocking and together with Morgan took this team to the elite 8 before starting for Florida and currently playing in the NBDL.

He was a 185 kid with offers from no one when Beilein signed him.  This was an epic success for Beilein.

Donnal's a senior and is not going to go down as a great example of Beilein recruiting ability, especially since he was a well-regarded recruit to begin with.

Wagner might be a great find...let us hope.

WorldwideTJRob

April 28th, 2016 at 2:15 PM ^

I didn't call him a miss but they were ready to run him out of town at Florida. Now part of that could've been unfair expectations given his last name there but even here he averaged 2.9 pts, 2.9 reb and .9 blocks a game. That's not exactly earth shattering numbers and I doubt Coach B uses Horford as one of his success stories when he is recruiting other big man.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Lanknows

April 28th, 2016 at 2:26 PM ^

But his raw production was limited by the fact that he played behind McGary and Morgan.  His per minute numbers were very good and again his rebounding was nationally elite.  Beilein turned that guy into somebody pushing to make the NBA.  Beilein can't sell it, but he's the best example Beilein has for developing a no-name skinny recruit into a NBA-caliber center.

Also remember that Horford left because he didn't just want to run the pick and roll and he didn't want to sit behind McGary. At florida he got to play the 4 and shoot 3s.  I think after 4 years at Michigan, his logic made a lot of sense.  He just wasn't quite as good as he hoped he'd be and ended up playing less than he would have at Michigan. I'm sure that was frustrating for him (and Florida fans who expected another Al).

WorldwideTJRob

April 28th, 2016 at 2:46 PM ^

His per minute numbers were pretty because he played very few minutes. I would be intrigued to see how much his rebounding rate would've went down if he played more minutes here. I'm not saying he was a bum or anything approaching that but to say he is NBA-caliber is a tad bit of a reach. The guy that plays ahead of him on the Canton Charge was an average big man in the Horizon League. I doubt NBA GM's are knocking down the door to sign Minnerath let alone his backup in Horford.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Lanknows

April 28th, 2016 at 3:05 PM ^

Minutes per game. Morgan 23 / Horford 16

His rebounding numbers were consistently good, every year, with or without McGary, at Michigan, at Florida, everywhere.

I'm not arguing that Horford is an amazing player but he was a quality college center and the fact that he is even in the NBDL (vs working in an office or even in a lower league abroad) is a testament to his ability.  The guys who make the NBA are ELITE.  Horford may never play there but he was still a very good college player.

He's an excellent rebounder and quality defender.  If he can show the ability to make 3s he'll probably get a shot in the NBA.  At Michigan he was outplayed by Morgan (whose hustle, intelligence, and fit were fantastic) and McGary.  Had those guys not been around Horford is probably a double-double machine and goes down as our best C in the Beilein era.

Not convincing Horford to stay was one of the biggest mistakes Beilein made, but in his defense he though he was keeping McGary.

Michigan (and McGary) would have both been better off if McGary had declard for the NBA after his freshman season.

pescadero

April 28th, 2016 at 5:07 PM ^

Elite rebounding and very good shot-blocking

 

...just no.

 

His peak shot blocking rate was 3.3/100 possessions.

All of the following had better block rates in the B1G the same year

 

AJ Hammons
Nnanna Egwu
Elliott Eliason
Alex Olah
Amir Williams
Frank Kaminsky
Donovon Jack
Matt Costello
Jordan Dickerson
Gabriel Olaseni
Melsahn Basabe
Luke Fischer

He wasn't top 10 in the B1G in block percentage. He wasn't top 10 in the B1G in defensive win shares. He wasn't top 10 in the B1G defensive rating.

 

Elite rebounding

 

We must have a very different definition of "elite"

 

He was not in the top 20 nationally in Offensive Rebounds, Defensive Rebounds, Total Rebounds,  Offensive Rebounds per game, Defensive Rebounds per game, Total Rebounds per game, Offensive Rebound Percentage, Defensive Rebound Percentage, or Total Rebound percentage.

 

 

Lanknows

April 28th, 2016 at 5:32 PM ^

25.6% = Horford's senior year @Michigan

26.0% = #20 player in the country (all leagues)

Power conference players ahead of him:

  • DJ Shelton 30.7% (Wash St),
  • Richard Solomon 28.4% (Cal),
  • Joel Embid 27.3% (Kansas),
  • Noah Vonleh 27.3% (Indiana)

All of the above are playing pro basketball, 2 of them NBA lotto picks.

I said he was a good shot blocker not elite - but if you want to compare him to AJ Hammons and Amir Williams (who were on the floor mostly for their shot-blocking) have fun.

In reply to by Lanknows

pescadero

April 29th, 2016 at 1:37 PM ^

So like I said... not even top 20 in defensive rebound rate.

 

...plus he played so few minutes, he doesn't even qualify.

 

You said he was an elite rebounder.

 

Elite rebounders don't play less than 14 minutes per game, are in the top 5-10 nationally in multiple rebounding categories, and barring injury get drafted in the NBA.

 

Elite: the choice or best of anything considered collectively.

 

 

 

Lanknows

April 28th, 2016 at 1:59 PM ^

Hit: McGary (duh), Morgan, Horford (arguably Beileins biggest success given what he was out of HS - barely recruited at 185 pounds and 6'9 at best).

Miss: McLimans, Cronin, Doyle

Between this and the 4 spot you can see an obvious problem -- Beilein has recruited far too many 4s and not enough 5s.  Thanksfully this seems to have been rectified in 2016 with 2 true Cs.  But Beilein's best Cs have been guys many programs would consider power forwards. 

BigBlue02

April 28th, 2016 at 2:52 PM ^

Doyle was a true sophomore, so I'm not sure how he can be a bust yet. If you continually give Chatman an "unknown" (which I think he should get because he is still young enough to blossom into something), then Doyle is also an unknown. Cronin retired due to health issues. He is a bust the same way Austin Hatch was a bust. McLimans is really the only 5 to be an upperclassmen and not be productive at Michigan under Beilein

Lanknows

April 28th, 2016 at 3:19 PM ^

Doyle was better as a freshman than sophomore, lost his job to Donnal (who is not good) and then his backup role to a skinny freshman.  Beilein recruited 2 guys to replace him soon after he saw what Doyle offered.  His rebounding rate was terrible, which is kind of a big deal at the position (no matter what ridiculous argument some people made about it not mattering). 

Yes, he has 3 years left in college and could round into a decent player somewhere else, but his Michigan career is over and (unlike Dawkins) he didn't contribute significantly to the team winning significant ball games the last 2 years.

Chatman improved dramatically from year 1 to year 2 and has 2 years left at Michigan.He was always going to be raw given his age and where he come from (a tiny high school in Oregon). He projects to be a critical backup next year and could be starting the year after. He may continue to struggle but we don't know and most guys tend to improve.TBD is fair.

Fair point on Cronin, but he never sounded like a guy destined to be a starter to me.