In Re: GRIII/Horford - System/Position Played
There's been scattered discussion in a number of threads regarding GRIII and Horford and their concerns about playing out of position or in a system that doesn't fit their style/strengths.
I've been thinking about this issue a bit and wanted to make it its own topic.
Does the player's position and/or the system in which they play dramatically affect their ability to display their skills?
Did playing the PF in Beilein's system really hamper GRIII's ability to showcase what he can do? Did the lack of post-up touches really do the same to Horford?
I've attended/watched about 90% of Michigan's games over the past four years, and it appears as though players under Beilein that have the ability to impact the game are given the opportunity to do so...regardless of position played.
There's ample evidence of this. McGary is but one example. As a center, he often times led the break, handled the ball down the court and dished it off or drove to the hole. How many times did he get the ball at the top of the key and either drive to the hole or pass it off to someone on the perimeter or cutting to the basket? He also displayed some post-up moves as well as the ability to hit 15-foot fade-aways.
Novak is another player who played every position other than center and was still able to showcase his skills, impact the game and thrive.
Beilein has also adjusted his "system" mutiple times over the past five years because of the strengths of his players. The offensive system ran by Morris was adjusted for Burke...and then it evolved siginificantly again this year for Stauskas and Caris. Not to mention the major overhaul for last year's Syracuse game....when everything ran thru Mitch.
There is no doubt that GRIII contributed significantly the the team's success, but there were countless times where he'd get the ball around the perimeter, take one or two awkward dribbles, and then just give the ball up. He had many opportunities to show that he had the skills needed to be an effective SF. If GRIII had those skills, Beilein wouldn've done things to take advantage of them. Contrast that with Nik, Caris, Tim, and Mitch...who would get the ball in similar circumstances and then make something happen.
Horford also contributed to the team, but he also had more than ample opportunity to get the ball in the post and do something with it...but often times wasn't able to do so And his defense really seemed to deteriorate as the season went along.
Again, I'm not saying GRIII or Horford are without skills or didn't contribute to the team's success. What I am saying is that I think both overplayed the importance of their position and/or the team's system when evaluating their own talents and when making their respective decisions to leave the team.
Thoughts on this?
TL;DR: Does the position/system really matter? Are GRIII and Horford maybe not being honest about their skills/abilities and thus somewhat blaming Beilein's decisions/system for not allowing them to showcase skills that they maybe do not possess?
I posted this in the Horford to Florida thread.
He didnt have to say anything but he's mad about playing time. This was never about system, look at Mcgary and Morgan they did very well in this system. Horford was mad because he didnt play more.
Daniel Feldman @danfeldman31 · Apr 10 When I spoke to Horford's trainer and "best friend," Larry Turnbow, he had some choice words about Beilein and RE: Horford's playing time.
Mark Snyder @Mark__Snyder · 2h Horford on Florida: "I believe in the coaching staff and they believe in me."
I disagree that it was "never about the system". Horford wanted more post touches, and Beilein really isn't interested in giving it to him. All year he would post up and yell for the ball to the point where it was audible over the TV broadcast. He would get a touch like 25% of the time he had position.
He obviously has a turnaround jumper in the post that he likes that we saw a few times this year. It's a finesse move that has fallen out of favor largely the way the game is being played today and especially under Beilein. He probably saw Patric Young getting 5-6 post touches a game and wanted a piece of that action. If that's who he thinks he is, I can't blame him for going for it. I don't necessarily agree but time will tell.
I posted this in the other thread as well, but Horford said himself that any big can be successful in this system as long as they have the minutes. So either he doesn't believe what he himself is saying or he is lying about it being about the system.
Jon didn't get the minutes, right?
But he knew Mitch was leaving according to him. So he knew he was the only true 5 on the team and he knew he was going to get the bulk of the minutes. So either he didn't like his role here or he didn't like Beilein or he doesn't think that as long as you get minutes, you can be successful in Beilein's system.
Horford did talk about the system in addition to the things you mentioned.
In the end, he had all of his family and people close to him in his ear...they think he's better than he is and he wasn't being used correctly.
Horford was playing 50% of the minutes at midseason and doing just fine in this system. Remember, everyone was calling him and Morgan...MORFORD?
No one was complaining then.
Horford was even STARTING this season because Morgan kept picking up early fouls and getting benched 2 minutes into games.
No one was complaining then.
His game went to shit and Morgan kept playing well - hell, even better. Morgan got the minutes.
Now it's time to complain.
I said this 3 weeks ago, Horford just went into a slump at the WORST time, just like last year with Morgan. Look at Walton, he slumped early and had time to work his way out of it. Stauskas slumped in the middle of the season, he had time to work out of it. Horford (and Morgan last year) stunk at the END of the regular season. You can't experiment and fight through struggles during the tournament...you just play with what you have. There is no time to watch and wait like Stauskas @ Iowa.
I think Horford had a shot at starting next year alongside McGary. Either way, he had 20mpg staring him in the face if he played to his ability.
He was pissed because he IS a hard worker, he DID put in the time, he DOES workout for an hour after EVERY game...but it wasn't enough at the end of the season and when it wasn't, his family and people around him got in his ear and he finally started agreeing with them.
Best of luck to him at UF, he's still going to have to play well.
And with reduced PT Horford DID struggle. And the idea that getting lots of minutes in an offense that's better geared to his game is going to help him seems pretty darned plausible to me--especially if he can get it on a Billy Donovan-coached final four team. We might be annoyed that he left, but this is a pretty plausible move, ESPECIALLY if Beilein was not all that high on him. Neither we nor he knows if it will work, but trying seems like a fairly good idea. This guy wants to make some money to start a business, and he's doing what he sees best--good luck to him.
*exaggeration
He couldn't catch, his defense wasn't as strong, he wasn't making shots. He really didn't start to find his game until the last couple of games in the NCAA Tournament.
I think it was a general consensus around here that people agreed he was in a slump. It got to the point when people would grown when he entered the game at the end of the year. Mid-season it was almost unnoticed when Morgan and Horford would rotate. Once his game started to come back at the end of the year there was a collective, almost sarcastic, cheer for him.
And I understand his thinking 100%, I just don't agree with it. It's not mutally exclusive.
I think he didn't get minutes because it was tournament time and we didn't have minutes to waste. If this was a January game versus NW...absolutely, give him minutes and get his confidence back and let him work his way out of it. But tournament time is winning time, we don't have time for all of that...it's time to go, we've got to win or we're out, we can't afford to watch someone struggle and work their way out of anything. It's D1 basketball.
It's probably a combination of both. Minutes are useless if you aren't being given opportunities to make plays. Also, Morgan and McGary are very different players than Horford. Morgan and McGary were far more mobile and Morgan thrived in a pick-and-roll offense. Horford does well enough with Beilein's kind of offense but does a lot better when he is being given the opportunity to post-up. Beilein doesn't incorporate much of that into the offense. Thus, the relevance of Morgan and McGary's success is less applicable to Horford. Just because one player has success doesn't mean that another player will have success. Horford needs an offense that allows him to feature his skills. Florida offers much more of that and Donovan has graduated several talented big men. It makes sense. Beilein won't utilize Horford the same way that Donovan will and thus minutes in Florida will mean more than they will here at Michigan. Also, just because Horford's trainer and friend disapproves of his minutes allocation doesn't mean Horford shares the same belief. To an extent, he probably does, but he might also want more opportunities rather than just minutes. MHoops post on the transfer indicates that Synergy Sports found that Michigan posted up 2.7% of their offensive possessions whereas Florida posted up 10.8%. Florida offers him a system where he can show a more unique skill set that can distinguish him from other big men and hopefully get him drafted. I hope it works out and good luck to him.
In GRIII's case, I never really understood his perceived preference to play "SF", because in Beilein's offense there is no SF. There are two guards (1 & 2), two wings (3 & 4), and a big (5). So basically the 3 and 4 in Beilein's offense play similar roles, out on the perimeter. The only difference between the two wings is that one guards the other teams 4, which is what GRIII had to do.
Was that preventing him from showing his potential? Maybe he thought it made him look a little smaller cause he had to rebound against bigger players? I dunno.
For Horford, he has more of a case to me, because there really is no back-to-the-basket post game in the offense. I don't necessarily think he is gonna turn into Tim Duncan by going to a different offense, but if he thinks that's where his strength lies and he doesn't get to do it in games, let alone work on it in practice, then I see where he's coming from.
Wish 'em both the best though.
In Beilein's offense there is a PG, two wings, 1 stretch PF and 1 post.
The SG and SF positions are more alike than the forward positions.
For example, LeVert and Stauskas were FAR more interchangable, than GRIII and either of those 2 guys.
But the biggest difference is who you're guarding. Just because Beilein runs a 4-out system doesn't mean everyone else does.
THIS means that GRIII is guarding a post player and playing defense in the paint. This means he's routinely overmatched and forced to play down low and post defense more than he wants to or would if he was at SF.
Offense is only 1/2 the equation.
I think the examples you give help to answer your question.
Like a lot of continuity offenses, Beilein's system rotates people through several po:sitions and it's ideal for players whose skills don't quite fit a traditional role: the point guard that doesn't have to have the ball in his hands all the time, the big that's agile and can run the floor (McGary) or is deadly from the perimeter (Pittsnogle).
I'm not sure why GR3 wouldn't be able to develop that kind of versatility, but there are players that can't and they wouldn't be a good Beilein-fit. There's a reason Beilein's never recruited any of the not-very-mobile enormous 5s that some systems can thrive on.
1. Bielien's system is extremely efficient when run correctly
2. Beilien's system will showcase certain skills in a player (shooting, ability to read situations and make the right pass/cut) and not others (i.e. a center's back to the basket game).
Not every player will look their best in this system and that's ok, it's nothing to get upset/butt hurt over. Robinson's issue was more of a team make-up issue, where he had to play a role he wasn't built for and didn't want to play, but he did it without complaining for 2 seasons. Neither one of these things is a flaw with either the system or the player(s).
For the record, there's nothing realIy holding Robinson back from being a better offensive force (besides guarding bigger 4's tiring him out more). But to the NBA, "Uber-athletic sophomore that we can mold" SOUNDS a lot better than "Junior who can't quite play to the level of his talents", so I can understand his choice.
I hope Horford does well wherever he goes, but I don't think Florida is that place. They really a ton on their guards. I don't really remember them running their offense through Patrick Young at all.
I firmly believe that JB would adjust his system to the talent on his team. He's done it almost every year at Michigan. I think if GR3 would have returned next year, he would have gotten alot more touches in his "comfort zone" than he did his freshman and sophomore seasons, regardless of whether he played the 3 or the 4 (not that there's much distinction b/w the two in JB's system). But with Nik's phenomenal season and Caris being very productive in his own right, there's only so many touches to go around. I think next season, GR3 would have been our second best player behind Caris, so it would have been in the team's best interest to get him a good amount of usage. But it wasn't in the team's best interest this season as we had Nik and Caris and GR3 didn't have quite enough dribble drive game to warrant more usage on the offensive end.
I think a skilled big would get touches in the post if he's capable of producing there. Morgan and Horford aren't guys that warrant those types of touches. McGary still didn't have a significant back to the basket game either, but he could do damage in the high post and would have gotten alot of touches there (he got a decent amount in the tourney last season).
I think JB would adjust no matter what talent he's given to do what's best for the team. But I also think he has a comfort zone and is going to try and recruit to that comfort zone the best he can. Which is why we have targeted MAAR, Dawkins and Huff this offseason and not traditional bigs despite our "need" there (few quality big man transfers and recruits available probably had alot to do with this too).
The real test of your argument might be Ricky Doyle. From his profile, looks like he can play a Beilein 5 (pick and pop, pick and roll type game), but he also has a post game. Will be interesting if we see some post-ups for him a year or 2 down the line.
The fact that John Beilein can adjust his system to fit the talent and maintain remarkable consistency has been evident in the offensive efficiency numbers, particularly in the past two seasons, where it seems the philosophy has matured with the talent in those seasons. It has been discussed before, but the average offensive efficiency this year was about 1.21 with a standard deviation of only about 0.1, and it was a fairly similar distribution last year too. To me, this is evidence of a system which can accommodate different players to achieve pretty consistent results, and it seems to me that, given time, a coach can develop a system which allows for the installation of a rather varied range of players and still highlight the skills of many of them.
but you can't argue that he would have been better than JB's other options at the 3.
I've never understood GR3 saying he wanted to play the 3 to show off his offensive skill better. The 3 and the 4 do the exact same things in Beilein's offense. If anything, he gets a more favorable match up (slower player) at the 4. The only difference is on the other end, guarding someone slightly bigger.
April 26th, 2014 at 10:54 PM ^
Wut.
The players can say whatever they want about fit or playing time but you cannot be an objective doubter of the offensive system. If you're all in then you play however the team needs you to play.
That's quite the strawman. No one is saying that the system is bad -- however it is a system and like all systems has strengths and weaknesses of which particular players might find themselves in. They didn't feel like the system allowed them to showcase their strengths, which is true to an extent. There's nothing wrong with saying that and it's not a shot at Beilein either. Not everyone can play in RR's spread, not everyone can play in TTU's air raid, etc. Maybe they just don't wanna play in that system. GRIII played out of position for two years -- I think he certainly played however the team needed him to play.
I believe(d) in both too..however, for VERY different reasons. I hope it's the same for you.
I never understood why fans got on THJ after last year. He was GREAT for us after a pretty awful sophomore year.
The GRIII deal is different, he did play great the last 10 or so games. But he's going to be drafted off of potential, THJ came back and COMPLETELY polished his game. If you understand basketball - you can look at sophomore THJ and junior THJ and just see he was simply a better basketball player. Sure his shot was more consistent and his shot selection was much better. But he was a better leader, a better defender and his ball handling - my GOD - it was night and day. He could barely dribble his sophomore year. We had Burke and NO one else. THJ played PG for us during stretches of last year when teams wouldn't like Burke take the ball up the court (vs. OSU and VCU in particular). He was MUCH more polished.
THJ didn't need to come back because in this system he wasn't going to get that much better.
I don't think that's true for GRIII...in this system he CAN get better if he returned. However, the risk is pretty heavy he doesn't. Because now he's going to get drafted on potential. If he comes back and is the same guy...he loses that and is a 2nd round lock. For GRIII I think it's just a matter of did you want to be in school another year and play college basketball? If that's a "no thanks" then go. For THJ it was "look, you really need to go now because you've maxed out what you can do here..." and if he returned it would've just been for the college experience and nothing to do with the draft, because he wasn't going to go any higher.
...he wasn't highly touted at all, but a lot of those same people you're referring to also said that if he came back he'd get better. That's likely not true. Even if he was a touch better, he's almost a 2nd round LOCK. He left when he should've. But no question he didn't have a crazy amount of hype.
As to your 2nd paragraph, that is where I can see the other side. I'm not saying he (GRIII) SHOULD have come back, but if he did, he could've gotten A LOT better in comparison to THJ from his junior to his senior year. If GRIII comes back and grows and reaches even part of his potential he could work his way into the draft lottery and not have to worry about workouts. As of now he's a fringe 1st rounder and he's going to have to test well to get 2 feet in.
GRIII has a ton to work on - THJ didn't have much left. GRIII can become a better ball handler, a better defender, better off the dribble (which he started to show in the last 10 games), GRIII could become a 1st Team All-B1G player. Right now what was he? Honorable mention?
So I'm just saying the comparison doesn't work for me personally. I'm not saying I don't think GRIII will succeed or I don't think he'll test well. I'm saying he has basketball reasons he could've come back and improved...THJ didn't. If THJ came back it would've just been because he loved college and wanted to play another year - can't fault him for that, but he wasn't going to all of a sudden be some lottery pick and national POY candidate. GRIII has the skillset to do that next year.
For me...Morris needed another year, Burke left on time, THJ smartly came back another year and left on time, Stauskas left on time, GRIII is fringe (I see both sides, personally would've preferred to see him do one more year if he was truly committed), McGary needed another year (but obviously had no choice), LeVert needed another year (however, I don't think he needs 2...I think if he does 2 he runs the risk THJ did if he came back for his senior year), Walton and Irvin both need 2 more years (not sure Walton won't be a Appling like 4 year player).
is about offense.
Let's not forget to take into account that regardless of Beilein's system...GRIII had to guard other post players/PFs.
That is going to have some impact.
April 27th, 2014 at 10:38 AM ^
Bottom line: Stauskas and Levert were/are better wings so they got the minutes at the "2" and "3" that GR3 wanted. If I had to buy NBA stock I would by theirs over GR3 right now too.
If GR3 was better he would have gotten more run on the wings but he wasn't. With a freshman PG UM needed wings that could create for themselves and others to run the O. GR3 couldn't do that. He was a great finisher who could sometimes create for himself (if by that you mean create an elbow jumper). That would have clogged the O as GR3 getting more touches and initiatiing offense would have led to more TOs and worse shooting. Something Coach B just can't allow given our defense short comings.
The only chance GR3 really had was if Coach B decided to go big. By that I mean he could have played Levert at PG and then Stauskas and GR3 at the wings. This could of worked but ultimately I think Coach B wanted Walton on the floor at PG more than he wanted Irvin or Max at the 4. I agree with Coach B there as well.
April 27th, 2014 at 11:35 PM ^