Latest analysis from Beilein not encouraging
I have been busy and not able to post this earlier, but Beilein's comments after tOSU game are not very encouraging. Here's the quote and link from The Wolverine (bold added by me): http://michigan.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1185166
"They were playing us like a couple teams have played us this year. They lock the rails on all our shooters on both sides," said Beilein. "There's no weak side help; they are making us play a two-man game. It was a good defensive plan, but we still got to the rim a lot. We missed a good number of not easy shots, but shots we should have made."
The end result was yet another heartbreaking loss to a very good opponent.
"We're getting there," said Beilein. "We've got to keep working on the best way [to play]. We experiment every day how to score points in the Big Ten. It ay set us back at times, but we're trying to get a plan for the future."
Reasons this bothers me beyond the obvious:
1) This is an X & O's issue which is one of the things people quickly bring up when describing Beilein.
2) Beilein admits they have encountered this before and they still haven't figured out a game plan for it.
3) In year three of any coach I would hope that halfway through the season the coaches were not still trying to get a plan for the future figured out.
All of the guys seeing time are Beilein guys. How does he not see the plan here?
I know this is from a press conference immediately following the game and he probably wasn't in the best mind set but this does not instill confidence in the players or the fans.
February 4th, 2011 at 2:59 PM ^
How many Big Ten coaching victories do you have?
February 4th, 2011 at 3:04 PM ^
And to think I was going to +1 you for sharing the same heritage.
What the hell, can't hate on a fellow dutchman.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:12 PM ^
Since you're Dutch, I know that basketball is one of the many arrows in your quiver, because we are all tall and athletic (and handsome, rich, etc), and your original post did demonstrate some real solid knowledge of the X's and O's. I just didn't quite agree with the grim outlook on Beilein's comments. Maybe I'm just reading them with a different filter/lense. Nothing personal, that was just my semi-snarky way of saying I'm trusting the knowledge Beilein has. He's probably Dutch too. Dankuvel.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:18 PM ^
Well, you're both cheap.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:31 PM ^
they split my +1
February 4th, 2011 at 6:18 PM ^
We prefer the term 'frugal'.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:24 PM ^
You are correct. I love the game dearly. I follow Michigan religiously. Seeing this team not perform to the standards I grew up with creates a certain level of frustration.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:32 PM ^
Michigan had what sort of dynasty built during your childhood to garner such nostalgia and furrowed brow?
February 4th, 2011 at 4:48 PM ^
We were a premiere program from the late-60's through the mid-90's. Hell, we went to 3 NC games in a 5 year span, won Big Ten titles, were nationally ranked regularly, etc. How old are YOU? I'm only 30, and I can remember this, starting in around '86.
February 4th, 2011 at 5:54 PM ^
It's true: up until the Ellerbe years, we were a national power. Having said that, the years of mediocrity (or worse) since 1998, coupled with us falling behind in the facilities arms race - and the fact that we are apparently unwilling to make the kind of ethical compromises needed to land certain recruits - are significant handicaps now. The average 17-year-old has no memory of us being good, doesn't get to see flashy facilities on recruiting visits, and we can't grease the wheels like some other schools. At least the facility issue is on its way to being rectified.
February 4th, 2011 at 8:44 PM ^
Ditto
February 4th, 2011 at 10:51 PM ^
Michigan was not consistently a premier program from the late 60s through the mid-90s.. I am 55 years old and remember it all. We were an up and down program through that time, where the ups were very high. Michigan basketball was basically a wasteland until 1964 when Cazzie Russell arrived.. The team immediately made 2 final fours in a row, followed by an elite 8 appearance, with three straight conference championships. Cazzie left and the team immediately reverted to its past or the next 4 years It had Rudy Tomjanovich for three years, but he was a one-man show and the team was not good. In 1971, Henry Wilmore and some others arrived and the team had two good, but not great years. The 1973 team was expected to be a powerhouse with supersoph Campy Russell added to Wilmore and his fellow seniors. The team finished under .500 in the Big Ten.
The disappointment with that team was so great that someone ran for ASG (or is it SGA? - I can't remember) the following year on the Dump Orr (the coach) platform. Orr saved his job, however, when the team that was not expected to do well tied Indiana for the conference championship and then beat the Hoosiers at Champaign (neutral site) for the playoff to get the lone NCAA bid. A win over Notre Dame with John Shumate and Adrian Dantley followed, but Marquette beat Michigan in the Regional Final. Three straight good or great years followed, with the team losing in overtime to eventual NCAA champ UCLA in the first round, a loss to undefeated Indiana in the NCAA finals and then a #1 ranked team that lost to UNC-Charlotte in the elite 8.
In 1978, Phil Hubbard got injured before the season and fof the next 7 years the team was run of the mill with no NCAA appearances (the tournament had expanded by then but not yet to 64 teams) and one truly awful team in Frieder's first year (I believe it was 1982). In 1985 the team had a great year and won the Big Ten championship; from then through 1990 Michigan was a premier team (including the 1989 title of course). In 1991, the team was lousy for a year before the Fab FIve came in 1992.
From 1985 to 1996 or so was Michigan's only long stretch as a premier program. A pretty good run, with two 3-4 year great runs in the 60s and 70s respectively.
February 5th, 2011 at 1:41 AM ^
Excellent comment. Question though (and I have no idea whether you know this or not) was Michigan/Indiana the only intra-conference NCAA Basketball Championship Game or no? I have a hard time believing there could be another.
February 5th, 2011 at 9:13 AM ^
February 4th, 2011 at 3:34 PM ^
you're trying to get an awful lot of mileage out of being dutch
February 4th, 2011 at 11:00 PM ^
And I do so without any sort of apology.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:39 PM ^
Ik spreek maar een beetje nederlands. Kunt u dat alstublieft langzamer zeggen?
February 4th, 2011 at 11:05 PM ^
"Good afternoon". "I speak some Dutch" or "I speak a little Dutch".
That's all I got.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:24 PM ^
with Scarlett Johansson, but I believe I can state with reasonable certainty that she is hot.
And I've never been the POTUS, but believe I can opine on who it gets to be and how he is doing.
And I've never driven in the Indy 500, but I know it would scare me shitless.
And, even when I've never been somewhere before, I am absolutely certain I don't need a map or mapquest.
But rendering an opinion on how a college basketball coach is doing? I know I can't do that unless I've actually done it myself.
Can we please stop using that as a criteria or criticism!
February 4th, 2011 at 3:00 PM ^
I don't think you should worry so much. He still has the mindset of scoring 80 pts a game in the Big East, but we don't need to score that much to win. He realizes that they just have to play good defense and let the offense flow from there. Plus it is year 4.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:01 PM ^
It's Beilein's fault Michigan missed 14 lay-ups? What kind of offense would you like to see? One that gets you less attempted lay-ups?
How about a little credit for playing OSU practically to the wire, at their place... and nearly beating them in AA? How many teams have done that this year? Michigan was predicted to be in the bottom third of the Big Ten this year. OSU is unbeaten and #1 in the country. I guess I don't see what the problem is at this point.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:11 PM ^
As The Impaler corrected me this is year 4. As Bray pointed out the expectation was that the team would finish in the bottom of the big ten. As the coach of the team pointed out, he's still trying to figure out a plan that will work.
This is not viewed as a problem? Wow, expectations for success have changed.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:36 PM ^
around here (that is, the ability to do so even though someone is struggling in--ahem--year four; it has taken this long to have a complete team of Beilein recruits IN YEAR ONE AND TWO of their tenure in the program. But I take a lot of encouragement from Bray's comment--yeah, they missed an atrocious 14 layups, but no one can encourage them of just throwing them up from outside.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:48 PM ^
So he should have had a plan already in place, yes? That's what you're saying. And that plan shouldn't have changed, ever? That's what you're implying, too. By saying Beilein shouldn't be working on a plan by now, you're saying you expected him to come up with a plan that would never need to be changed and re-evaluated.
Good luck finding a coach you like.
February 4th, 2011 at 11:01 PM ^
Was it Rich Rods fault for turnovers, dropped passes, tackling, mistakes, and penalties? No the coach doesnt play the game, but its his responsibility on how his team plays. I am not a fan of beilein. He hasnt recruited any NBA potential players. Hes only made 1 tourny, and the next year goes below .500 with the same players minus CJ Lee...Seriously?
February 4th, 2011 at 3:07 PM ^
The quote you posted yourself is why I'm not worried really: "It was a good defensive plan, but we still got to the rim a lot. We missed a good number of not easy shots, but shots we should have made."
We're also a very young team, so it isn't about a coach in year four (not 3) planning for the future, it's about planning for the future with the VERY YOUNG team he has.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:12 PM ^
Gee that sounds familiar
February 4th, 2011 at 3:14 PM ^
Doesn't make it any less accurate than when it was used for RR either.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:18 PM ^
Wow, I hadn't thought of that! That MUST be the first time this board has seen an analogy between RR and JB without any context whatsoever! You sir have a unique and valuable point of view! PLEASE POST MORE OF YOUR ENLIGHTENING, THOUGHT-PROVOKING COMMENTS!!!1!
February 4th, 2011 at 4:40 PM ^
The
/s
It ooozeeees.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:49 PM ^
He predicted their defensive plan, had an offensive plan to counter it, and guys missed layups. It's not like they were completely undefended, but, man, Stu was killing me in the second half.
Get some more guys who can finish, get the young guys more experience and hopefully bulk, see how that works next year.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:11 PM ^
2) Beilein admits they have encountered this before and they still haven't figured out a game plan for it.
I'm sorry, where did you read that they haven't figured out a game plan for that tactic? You even included the quote from Beilein about missing a lot of shots they should have made, which is true (in no small part because the refs permit Ohio State to use their arms like battleaxes) - would you not assume that making the shots is part of the game plan? They were the same kind of shots over and over - it wasn't just random luck that we ended up at the rim a lot.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:16 PM ^
If you have watched this team on a consistent basis for the past year and understand the game, you can not argue that Zack Novak and Stu Douglass are good players but their strength is not finishing around the rim. So a game plan that would repeatedly get Stu into a position of having to finish at the rim is a poor game plan. Players play, coaches put them in the position (or not) to succeed.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:24 PM ^
Agreed on those guys being able to finish at the rim. That said, it really frustrates me that Novak hardly even looks to drive towards the rim, even when the defenders have practically given it to him. I could see him being able to drive and dish (like D-Mo is so effective doing) on a semi-regular basis, helping to free up outside shooters more.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:41 PM ^
Unfortunately, I don't think Zack has enough quickness and speed to get around most big ten defenders and get to the rim. I have seen him be more aggressive against some defenders and try to drive, but often times the defender can catch up to the initial move and shut the path to the hoop off. His typical response has been to dribble back out and restart the offense when this happens. Stu falls into this same category although he has shown a little more determination in getting into the lane and to the rim.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:44 PM ^
What should the gameplan have been? Don't be general like "get Morris to the rim more," I mean, how would you roll out the X's and O's to make it happen? Because, we had to be doing something better than OSU was in order to make the game a lot closer and more interesting than it should have been. Given 1) the obvious talent deficit between the two teams and 2) the hostile environment, something else was evening the score. What was it?
February 4th, 2011 at 4:14 PM ^
I don't question how hard Beilein gets his players to play for him which is a big part in his teams ability to compete with quality competition on a regular basis. When you take into account all of the factors to judge a coach on I think Beilein rates highly in the majority of categories.
The biggest area I think he has struggled at UofM to date is how to field a team that can be competitive on a consistent basis in the big ten (and thus the national stage). That is in line with the OP. This is not just my opinion. Multiple times over the past two seasons Beilein has made comments to the effect of his needing to learn how to win in the big ten. (no I don't have links, but I am not misrepresenting this either). What is so odd is that he did it at West Virginia in the Big East which certainly is a physical league.
To your question about schemes. Obviously it depends on what the opponent is running defensively, but two of the weaknesses repeatedly exploited is the teams lack of athleticism and lack of height. To address the athleticism issue I would limit the amount of time Zack, Stu, (and even Vogrich) see the court at the same time. When they have to play together, I would put them towards the top of the key split on the angles with Morgan in the high post (instead of at the top) and run more of a flex which would open up opportunities for either Hardaway Jr or Morris to penetrate off the edges. This would take advantage of the athleticism the team does have. This would also open Zach & Stu up for three from a better position and still keep Morgan in a position to use his skills at hitting a 15 foot jumper or attacking the rim to receive a pass or clean up. Regarding the height issue. I don't understand why we can't see Morgan and Horford on the floor at the same time. Especially against a team like Minnesota. I believe the team would have had a better shot against Minnesota had Beilein gotten 15 - 20 minutes of a Morgan, Horford, (Smot or Zack), Hardaway, Morris line-up.
February 4th, 2011 at 4:33 PM ^
The problem is, you're criticizing tactics and insisting on a wholesale strategy change to fix it. "Run more of a flex" is like saying Lloyd Carr should have implemented RR's zone read more often. The flex offense just isn't in the playbook. You might be able to get a basket off a timeout in extremely occasional situations by drawing something on the erase board that's out of a flex offense playbook but you can't just implement that in weekday practices and expect to run it play in and play out for a whole game. Same for putting Horford and Morgan on the floor at the same time - that's a complete rewriting of the playbook. You want Horford on the court with Morgan but he's just going to wander aimlessly around on offense because he can't fill Smotrycz's role or Novak's role, and the plays in the playbook don't match up with that personnel scheme. And the worst thing a coach can do is pull his best players from the court in an effort to "match up" - that's suicide, plain and simple.
As for Horford, he's absolutely not a 20-minute a game guy. You have to have your best players out there, and Horford is at the back end of the rotation for a reason. Expecting his height to be a magic bullet to counter Jared Sullinger is unrealistic. And really, "height" is not synonymous with "frontcourt depth." The height problem has as much to do with them having taller guards than we do.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:14 PM ^
It's hard to execute X's and O's when you're, you know, playing the best team in the country on the road. Maybe that's just me.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:15 PM ^
At this point, it's less X's and O's vs. Jimmy's and Joes. The team is still pretty young. Our guys aren't really the slash and drive type, they're more snipers than burners.
Once Morris and Hardaway learn how to finish their drives under control, get the benefit of the doubt on foul calls, and overall, play slightly smarter, this team will convert more of those layup attempts.
It would also be easier if we don't face a planetoid sized shot blocker.
February 4th, 2011 at 4:19 PM ^
U of M was outmatched physically and talent level last night by OSU.
<br>
<br>Some of this will improve with age and body maturity with the youngsters and some of it will have to come through recruiting.
<br>
<br>Obviously it is easier to recruit shooters onto this system but it is crucial to get some better post players. Recruiting seems to be improving and I am hopeful it will continue.
<br>
<br>The kids played their butts off on Defense last night but couldn't overcome the talent/experience differential or "home cooking".
February 4th, 2011 at 3:16 PM ^
Maybe the problem with his "game plan" is simply that he doesn't quite have all the developed talent he wants at this point but doesn't want to call the players out publically. i.e. he knows how to counteract it but doesn't know how to effectively do so with this young team. Isn't the fact that this team has played good teams tough enough to convince you he knows what he is doing?
February 4th, 2011 at 3:20 PM ^
We lost a close game to the undefeated #1-ranked team in its own gym (in a game that featured some serious home cooking). Besides the fact that losing is never fun, I don't think you can come away too down from that game.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:26 PM ^
jmblue, you just don't get it. John Beilein, a coach considered by his peers to be among the best Xs and Os coaches (and coaches, period), obviously doesn't understand how to make a gameplan. He admitted it in some out-of-context post-game quotes for goodness sakes!!! It doesn't matter that they're playing the #1 team in the nation on the road - HE'S HAD FOUR YEARS. That's just another EXCUSE. Also, he's from WEST VIRGINIA. This information alone is more than enough to make a decision about his coaching ability. I don't see how ANYONE could come to any conclusion other than that we've accepted mediocrity and he should be fired yesterday. JB MUST GO
February 4th, 2011 at 3:31 PM ^
what you did there...
February 4th, 2011 at 3:30 PM ^
Its not just the youth thats hurting us. Michigan has gotten pretty good production out of the freshman. We have undersize big guys (except for morgan) having to play guys who are much bigger and stronger then them. Not being able to recruit and getting the needed height and size for the big ten is clearly hurting this team. Evan will only be a outside guy, Horford seems to be a hybrid type player, Blake doesnt even look close to being ready to contribute, and morgan is our only true big guy
Stu Douglass isnt help out much either. He clearly hasnt stepped it up in the big ten play and has been playing far below avergage. The guy had several easy baskets he should have made and didnt last night. He isnt hitting at a high average from beyond the arc unlike out of conference play. Stu is 12-36 from three, which is 33%, and is averaging 6.8 points per game in big ten play. He had two games of 15 and 17 points.
I still believe that next years team will make a run for the big ten title and firing John is not the answer. dont know about you but im tired of transition periods and want a stable program.
February 4th, 2011 at 4:50 PM ^
Hit two huge shots to seal the win at MSU. Sometimes they go in, sometimes they don't. I'd question his ball handling much more than his shooting.
February 4th, 2011 at 3:46 PM ^
Look, we played the #1 team in the country very tough for the better part of the game. We've done that twice this season. What more do you want? Don't expect miracles! It will take a while for this team to gel. We have one of the youngest teams in the country. With the guys we have coming in next year the future looks very bright at Michigan.
One last though concerning your X's n O's comment. It's very difficult for Beilein to find a solution to the defensive strategies being deployed against us. The reason is we have NO SCORING LOW POST PRESENCE. If and when Michigan lands a low post talent in the mold of a Tractor Traylor or a Jared Sullinger you will see significantly different results. The real challenge Beilein is facing involves going out on the recruiting trail and convincing low post scorers to come to Michigan. There is allot of negative recruiting going on out there regarding Beilein's "Princeton" style (read perimeter oriendted) offense.
I believe we have one of the best coaches in the country. If we give him enough time he will get us to where we want to be. Baby steps...
February 4th, 2011 at 3:48 PM ^
OSU has a great defense. What did you expect? Even the best Xs and Os won't shred their defense and that's why they will likely reach the final 4 this year.
Plus who besides Morris is going to make an athletic play on this team? Some of the freshman will down the road but they are sloppy right now. Xs and Os put the players in a position to make the play but it's not going to guarantee a basket.
February 4th, 2011 at 4:00 PM ^
Just a thought, but Beilein isn't paying his players(or their parents, or their agents, or their parent's agents). This puts us at a small disadvantage to Ohio State. Now, I know you're thinking that if Beilein is fired, Billy Donovan and Jay Wright are going to fight over the chance to coach Michigan, but it may be time to accept the fact that this may not be the case. Beilein is setting Michigan up to contend next year. Just chill and try to enjoy what they CAN do this year.