Why no low post?
You guys will know better than me, so someone please explain to me why we have no low post game? After watching what Bo Ryan did in the second half against us, just dumping the ball into the post, and if the double came or the angle wasn’t there for a shot, dumping it off for open threes, why isn’t Beilein taking advantage of this the first few games of this tourney where we have the marked size and athleticism advantage in the post? McGary, Horford and Morgan were all far bigger and more athletic than the SDSU bigs, but there was almost no low post game to speak of last night when the game was tight and the perimeter cluttered. Most of Big Puppy’s points were fast break and board put backs. Instead even Bill Raftery was complaining about how Michigan wasn’t “feeding the big dogs” in the box, and we bore witness to a cluttered perimeter game where SDSU focused on lane denial, that played a big part in preventing Trey Burke from going off.
Michigan won thanks to torrid 3 point shooting and fast break points against an inferior foe, but VCU looks to bring far more pace and energy and defense. We might not have the bigs to post effectively on Kansas/NC, but is Beilein missing out on a decided advantage here that may cost us vs. VCU? McGary, Morgan and Horford have all shown semblances of post moves throughout the season, albeit sporadically. I just don’t understand why Beilein doesn’t leverage the post to open space for his stars on the perimeter.
Someone educate a layman here.
Belein's offense just isn't set up that way. It usually works through high picks, followed by the pick setter flashing to the basket, or kicking the ball out to the wings. It's an offense that works outside-in.
You could see the size advantage last night was significant. Whenever SD's bigs tried backing down our bigs, it was like hitting a brick wall.
Beilein's offense is more varied and dynamic than I think you give it credit for.
Darius Morris was posted up a lot under Beilein to take advantage of his great size advantage. I'm sure we'd see more of it if we had the players, but as everyone has mentioned, we're a little bit a way from having a guy we can just throw it to and let do work.
Is a futile exercise. We don't have a pure post player right now.
Well said. If you've got a good low post player, running an inside-out offense can free up those players on the wings for open 3's. However, if that post player doesn't demand a double-team, he's on his own.
We don't currently have that kind of low post player. This Ricky Doyle kid that just committed recently sounds like he has that kind of post game. Having that kind of player with JB's guard oriented offense could be interesting.
Just to echo this. Bo Ryan spends a lot of time teaching his players (guard to center) how to play with their backs to the basket. It's a central part of his offense, which frequently tries to find mismatches by inverting his bigs to the perimeter (that's why he needs a center that can hit around 30% of his 3's). And Evans is a really good post player with a huge variety of moves.
Beilein doesn't emphasize post-play, players don't really learn it in high school or AAU anymore, and therefore our bigs have really rudimentary post games. McGary has that half hook he uses off the glass and Horford has a similar shot turning into the lane. Those can get a few points a game, but they're not going to generate the same kind of 'throw it in the post, score or force the defense to react, move the ball, get a shot' offense that Wisconsin can.
March 22nd, 2013 at 11:15 AM ^
has the best low post skill for our current bigs. but still not very good. if he develops that little jump hook on a consistent basis, his playing time could increase dramatically.
you're underestimating Beilein's obstinance. On defense there have been many occaisions this season where having two bigs on the floor would have served this team well. Beilein seems to have this vission of "the beautiful game" to me and many times I feel he sacrifices matchups for his vission. I also don't understand his reluctance to play more zone.
Brian has had about 40 posts about how feeding the post is inefficient. It's got math and everything. That's why.
This is just like the spread argument. Some people have been taught a certain way to play basketball and they burrow in as that is the only way. Plenty of teams have won the NCAA title without feeding the post. In fact very few teams have an effective post game. The point is right now we are better with Burke with the ball in his hands then our big men. Maybe next year when Mcgary and Horford get a little more comfortable they will feed them in the post, they have the talent to be effective. When they can prove it to Beilien in practice, I 'm sure Beilien will adjust the offense just like he did when Morris and Burke showed him they could work the pick and roll.
Currently we have the 2nd most efficient offense in the country out of 300+ teams. I don't think our problems are offense related.
The salient point for us is not whether we can run a low post offense or not. It's whether we can defend a low post offense or not.
We really struggle in that category. VCU does not have a low post game, so that won't be a factor in us winning or losing that game. But if/when we face a Nix or Zeller type of player in the Tourney, we will struggle.
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:43 AM ^
Our post play/strategy/talent seems to have a negative affect on rebounding. I wish we were less of a finesse team and more of an inside power team. When the shots aren't falling (like last night for Burke), the inside post is often times what's needed to win.
March 22nd, 2013 at 12:14 PM ^
is why i think Kansas is a tough matchup for Michigan in the sweet 16 (yes, I'm assuming Michigan beats VCU), with Withey manning the post..
We have been a top 5 offense all year according to Kenpom and there are questions about the effectiveness of our offensive structure?
You ask why we don't "leverage the post to open up the perimeter". Beilein's offense does the opposite, by opening up cuts and drives to the lane with the threat of the 3-point shot. Seems to be working pretty well, no?
Bottom line: Michigan's Bigs aren't very good post players.
McGary especially, and Horford show promise in the low post, but they just aren't very good right now. Both are probably at least a year away from being proficient offensive players in the low post. Just look at our buddy's in EL, it's taken Nix and Payne 3 years to begin to live up to potential.
Beilein prefers to have McGary and Morgan work out of the high post and I can't say that I blame him. McGary's best plays in the paint come from offensive rebounds or hard drives from the high post. Genuine nice low post moves are few and far between, and at this point, I have little confidence when the M Bigs are attempting to score with low post moves.
I would rather see THJ flash into the low post and make a quick move on a smaller guard, than see Morgan, Horford, or McGary get the ball in the low post.
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:09 AM ^
This guy agrees with you.
...just ask any of the past 10 NCAA champions and their coaches...Belein needs to play Horford more (not sure why Morgan only got 1 minute)...LeVert is terrible, he is serviceable on defense but is a liability on offense...Move Morgan to the 4 (where he should be) and let McGary and Horford roatate as the 5...GR3 can then move to the 3 (where he obviously benefited last night) and things will work out well...If and when Mich plays Kansas they will need to play their bigs regularly or lose, its as simple as that...Mich cannot depend on Burke forcing shots or THJ or GR3 shooting over 80% to win every game...We need rebounds and points in the paint to beat the elite teams on the road
low-post game is different than using bigs to board and get points. McGary got some points and boards last night but did not do it using a low-post game (outside of maybe one made FG that I recall)
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:12 AM ^
What you're describing is a more traditional two guard line-up. Belein runs a three guard offense, using Burke, THJ, and Stauskas to set picks and line up on the 3 point line, creating open shots, or lanes to the basket for people rolling off of picks.
It may not be the type of offense that you want to see, but it's effectiveness is proven.
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:28 AM ^
...Beilein can still play his 3 guards so long as he has some height down low to stop easy lay-ups and get offensive (and defensive) boards...Beilein's offense works great most of the time, but when Mich shoots bad, we gotta change it up...our defense is the problem, and that problem is stemming from the line-up...gotta go big to win championships, small ball simply doesnt do it anymore because it is too easy to score on in the paint
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:48 AM ^
This offense either needs to play small or have a stretch 4, (which we don't have since Smot transferred, he was soft defensively but would have been a helpful piece). Having 2 players that can't score past 8 feet on the floor means that there's no reason for their defenders to move to the perimeter, which is how we create space for Burke to drive and thereby unsettle the defense.
We've had to play with two bigs occasionally when we're getting exploited inside, but it hasn't really worked. I agree that there are huge defensive and rebounding issues with the lineups we play, but what you're proposing hurts our offense more than it helps our defense. (Plus, it's way too late to change now).
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:52 AM ^
You do realize that, with your proposed lineup of Burke, THJ, GRIII, Morgan, and McGary, you'll have two bigs clogging up the middle on offense. That will bog the whole offense down. You can't put either one of those guys on the wing and you can only have one big setting a pick at a time, so where do you put them?
You can't run an inside-out offense with any of our bigs. They don't have the post moves for it.
Two bigs may help with defensive rebounding, but you're setting yourself up for offensive brutality.
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:24 AM ^
Another issue I have with our coaches is refusing to play two bigs when needed. Wisc went ham on GRob for like 10 mins with no adjustment. If I remember right we played 2 bigs a lot vs MSU and I thought we played well doing it. You can't go four G/F and one big if a team is that much larger then you. Odds are it won't end well in rebounding and in the score.
I do like our coaches and wouldn't trade them for anything but they need to adjust at times and use our bigs as players and not just big humans who screen and rebound.
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:40 AM ^
for our HOF-bound coach. Do you perform miracles ON the court, too? Can we suit you up?
March 22nd, 2013 at 11:30 AM ^
Beilein in the HOF? I doubt it.
March 22nd, 2013 at 12:25 PM ^
in 20 years. I am hardly the only one who thinks it.
Beilein has almost 700 career wins, and he'll probably coach another 5-7 years. There's a good chance he'll be a strong HoF candidate when he hangs them up.
March 22nd, 2013 at 11:06 AM ^
We can't play long with the two-big lineup because none of our guys can hit a jumper. This allows the defense to stick with shooters while at the same time clogging the lane for cutters. It kills the offense.
If Mark Donnal is physically ready to play next year, you'll see some of what you want as Michigan will be able to play a little bigger yet still spread the floor.
Have you seen our guys with their backs to the basket, or god forbid they try to face someone up? It just is not their game at this point.
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:05 AM ^
like John Belein's offense?
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:09 AM ^
Beilein is not tied to any one strategy. There was a great article yesterday where he explained that he used the 1-3-1 out of desperation, because it matched the players he had at a particular time and place. As another example, Beilein used Kevin Pittsnoggle (spelling?) outside at WVa because that fit his skill set.
The point is that I am confident Beilein will do more in the post when he has the players who are capable to play that way. He is doing what he can to maximize our opportunities with the current players. We have some very talented athletes, but we don't currently have the right guys for a strong low post game.
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:20 AM ^
That has been my only grip with Coach B. Zero Post game. If I were a big I wouldn't even look at Michigan. Bigs in our offense are just screeners and rebounders. Its not just throwing it down to Mcgary or whoever. You need to run post players to get them in the right area of the court(what block they perfer, excell at). See the Wisc game for how that works.
I think Mcgary could be a very good post player but he will never get the touches to figure that out(or the coaching?). Last night he got the ball and made a strong move to his left and then made a nice pass to GRob which should have been a score if Mcgary doesn't touch the ball on the rim.
People saying "ahhh its not that important anymore in game blah blah.." I can tell you that my AAU teams/High School teams have done much better when we have big kids we could dump down to and run post plays for. I really like watch coach B does with his outside offense when the ball is moving(not so much the pick and roll a 813189237 times). I have even used a few base things from it but the lack of anything post is just wasted talent on the floor.
The new commit we just landed seems to have a great post game for his age. I am worried it will be wasted at Michigan. I hope not. But from what I've seen.. It will be.
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:29 AM ^
....with you Shredder!!!
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:43 AM ^
in about 1990, when the post game started going out of fashion in college and the NBA. If Beilein's style is working on all cylinders it gets the bigs even higher-percentage looks than the traditional low-post game. Dunno if you were watching a few years ago when Dariue was routinely feeding JMo for 10-12 a night. . .
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:52 AM ^
1990? Hakeem torn up the NBA in 94 and 95? Bigs were everywhere in the NBA through out the 90s.
Anyway yes Morris did a good job of finding his bigs. But what we ran up vs a bigger Duke team and lost by only bucket but its a part of the game imo and should be used to get the big dogs a drink now and then. Also draw fouls..ect ect ect
As Barkley said on TNT once..
"I always got limos for my PG so they get to the game safe so their little bodies can dribble the ball up the court and give me the ball on the block"
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:58 AM ^
Throughout the 90's (even the early 2000's), sure. There aren't any back-to-the-basket bigs anymore, though. They want guys that are tall, but can get out and run too.
It's not a 7 footer's game anymore, just ask Shaq.
Edit: If the right 7footer were to come along, he'd be great. There just aren't many, if any, that can play the up tempo style that most teams want to play now.
March 22nd, 2013 at 11:02 AM ^
No I agree now that the NBA has no good bigs. Dwight Howard should be a man but isn't. Shaq would feast on this NBA. The bigs will return again some day. Right now they are just rare.
March 22nd, 2013 at 11:02 AM ^
Hakeem and Ewing are about the last of the old style, versitile post move centers though. Add Shaq if you want to, just for the triangle's emphasis on running the offense through a post-up center (though his post game was not, um, as aesthetically pleasing). Duncan, who spans these two eras, is a great example. He's shifted from that post to face up game to doing almost all his work off the pick and roll, either running to the hoop or popping to the elbow.
March 22nd, 2013 at 11:09 AM ^
I think David Robinson was a few years younger than Hakeem & Ewing. He was another good post player.
Great point on Duncan. He did have the post moves, but has changed his game over the years.
It is just a different game today. You even used to see small forwards set up in the post, like Mark Aguirre, Alex English, Adrian Dantley, James Worthy, Larry Bird. 3's hardly ever get into the post anymore. They want to line up on the three point line and shoot or drive.
March 22nd, 2013 at 11:15 AM ^
The point about the 3's is really telling.
Just to be clear, I think the post game can be really valuable. I'd love to see THJ stay another year and develop one. But it's just not something that gets taught or emphasized.
One of the things that's really telling is just how long it took LeBron to figure out that he needed to develop a post game, when it was clear for a long time that with his combo of size and handle, a post game would make him virtually unguardable (ie do you play him with a 4? He takes you to the perimeter and goes past you. Do you play him with a quicker 3? He destroys you in the post.) That's the thing that made him virtually unstoppable but it took him 10 years in the league to figure it out. Maybe he'll start a resurgence, all those guys you mention were great to watch.
March 22nd, 2013 at 11:25 AM ^
LeBron - right on. Even Jordan, in his later years especially, went to a post game.
Take it a step further: Joe Dumars, a two guard, was famous for taking his player down in the post. He had the strength and the moves to score from there almost at will.
You're right. It's not taught or emphasized anymore. It's too bad; it's a great skill to have.
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:57 AM ^
Exactly right. The predominant skill set the NBA is looking for among bigs right now is not post play, it's screening, rim running, and the ability to hedge the pick and roll hard on the perimeter and recover to contest at the rim. The archtypal NBA big right now is Tyson Chandler and he almost never plays in the post.
"Throw it in to Kareem" is no longer the way most basketball is played (and of the last few NCAA champions, you probably have to go back to either Florida with Al Horford or UNC with Sean May to find a team that ran their offense through the post a significant number of possessions).
We could be bigger. We would probably be better if we had, say, Jared Bergeron from Wisconsin. It would help us defend. But we still wouldn't be throwing it to him in the post. He'd be picking and popping [Knick fans, feel free to add a Clyde Frasier-esque litany of rhyming adjectives here].
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:22 AM ^
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:26 AM ^
Throwing the ball to the post doesn't do much, unless your post player is a significant threat to score from that area. If he isn't a threat, there is no double team, which means you just wasted about ten seconds on the shot clock.
I love Burke as much as the next guy, but the offense looks the worst when he's trying to do too much on hiw own. That's when the offense gets one dimensional. When he runs the offense, it's beautiful. When he gets caught up in the one-on-one matchups like he did last night, or like he did against Traevon Jackson in the BTT, the offense doesn't flow.
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:30 AM ^
...but McGary and Horford are incredibly effective in the post when given a chance: most teams will double either of them, hence opening up a shooter or making a nice turn-around hook shot off the glass
March 22nd, 2013 at 11:05 AM ^
but that's not what the numbers suggest...
Michigan is actually fairly efficient when it does throw the ball in the post but part of that is undoubtedly a product of small sample size. However, no team is scoring over a point per possession on post touches and many teams are well below — making it clear that post offense isn’t the most effective offensive play by any stretch. Michigan is significantly more efficient in other offensive play types. For example the Wolverines score 1.14 PPP on pick and roll scenarios (including pass outs), 1.20 PPP when passing to a cutting player, and .932 PPP on spot up jumpers (which account for roughly one quarter of Michigan’s offensive possessions). Trey Burke in isolation, Nik Stauskas or Tim Hardaway Jr. coming off of screens or Glenn Robinson III cutting to the basket are just a couple of offensive play types that are significantly more effective than a post-up in the Wolverine offense.
http://www.umhoops.com/2013/01/15/behind-the-numbers-post-offense-and-d…
March 22nd, 2013 at 12:55 PM ^
Don't use math or any new evolving advanced stats. When I grew up watching Kareem that was the way to play so that must be the right way.
I love despite overwhelming data that people still come on here with knocks on Beilien like they are Phil Jackson. Here is a summary of the data on Beilien's offense.
1. #2 rated offense in the country by the most respected and accepted metric Kenpom.
2. #1 in the country in turnovers on offense despite being 1 of the youngest teams in the country.
3. Over the last 6 years we have seen countless announcers gush over Beiliens offense.
4. Surveys among other coaches in college basketball constantly put Beilien near the top when they are asked about top strategists.
Despite all this and the fact we have gone from a national laughingstock to top 10 program in 5 years, due to some of the best talent evaluation anyone has ever seen, we still have guys coming on here bitching about his offense.
I get furious during a lot of our games because our offense looks bad or we are not rebounding or not moving the ball, but you do realize the other team has 5 scholarship players on the other team and a coach that has scouting and video of our team?
This times a thousand. It's amazing how quickly people have taken our recent success for granted. No matter what happens in this tournament, or any other, John Beilein should be hailed as the savior of our program. Let's stop complaining about post touches when we have the fucking Wooden award winner (knock on wood) at PG.
March 22nd, 2013 at 10:33 AM ^
Yes you are right throwing down to post doesn't do you a whole lot(like here go get me points.. Unless your Shaq or something) BUT if you run a play to have Mcgary come across the lane off the screen where he gets it in layup land then yes it does a lot. Michigan never runs a single post play. It blows my mind.
March 22nd, 2013 at 12:17 PM ^
The play you're describing is not considered a post play. That's a pick & roll.
Edit: If Michigan used their pick & roll to get mis-matches, where the big ends up with a guard on them, then yes! Let the big post up down low over the smaller player.
I don't know the stats, but %'s have to be much higher when a big is posting up a guard.
March 22nd, 2013 at 12:41 PM ^
Huh pick and roll? No I am not talking about a pick and roll. I am talking about cross screens and down screens and peels and what not to open up the big for a pass from the wing.