Support MGoBlog: buy stuff at Amazon
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.
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.
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.
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.
It is a common misconception that having 2 or 3 inches on a defender is major advantage in the post. A player who lacks a good post game isn't suddenly effective when he has the size advantage.
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)
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.
...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
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).
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.
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.
for our HOF-bound coach. Do you perform miracles ON the court, too? Can we suit you up?
Beilein in the HOF? I doubt it.
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.
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.
like John Belein's offense?
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.
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.
....with you Shredder!!!
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. . .
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"
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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].
Even if we don't have an effective post player (finishing wise), throwing down to the post can create defensive havoc by requiring a help side defender, thereby freeing up an outside shooter. It may not be our bread and butter, but it doesn't hurt to throw it in as a change of pace.
As for people who say the offense works great...I've seen many a times where the offense looks extremely predictable and one-dimensional. If TB doesn't stand on his head most games, this offense looks rather weak sometimes.
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.
...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
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-de...
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.
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.
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.
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.
a player setting a screen (or a pick), then rolling to the basket is, by definition, a pick & roll. It doesn't matter where the pick is set on the floor; it's a pick and roll.
I think he's talking about the cross screens you see a lot of in flex or shuffle offenses. I think those could be incorporated rather easily. I'll bet we use them when we're running our offensive sets and not just playing two-man. I think we run them more in the high post. I'll have to watch for this against Kansas if we get past VCU (I anticipate that we're not going to see a bunch of the shuffle sets against VCU just because they put you in such scramble mode).
ahhh no its not. A "pick" on the ball handlers defender then the pick man rolls is yes a pick and roll(or a pick and pop.. Or a slip pick.. I can go all day). A "pick" or "screen(we use the word screen for more off the ball stuff)" away from the ball is not a pick and roll. There is no "roll". A guard coming off two down screens is not a pick and roll.
...we need to depend on more offensive out-put other than Burke (over-trying at times) making everything happen
periods come and go. The problem is not with Beilein's conceptions of offense, but that we have sometimes had to go to very traditional OTHER kind of guard-dominated play at times. Funny that people are complaining today, though, when the offense displayed its considerable promise--despite the fact that we're the youngest team in the tourney--last night.
You must be a nervous wreck. Michigan wins a game convincingly when their top player is ice cold and you are picking holes in their offense? All because of what VCU might do to them?
Seriously? One of the top offenses in the country and you are worried about it?
I guess Beilein could have told Burke to slow down the game and then feed the post. Then the points come that way instead of on the break and you'll feel better? Or maybe you want both? I guess Wisconsin's slow down and feed the post offense is the best in the country? Most schools look just like WI when they play...or not.
Wisconsin wins because of their style of defense and their pace, not because their offensive style is to be emulated by all.
Don't look for things to worry about.
Its not about worrying. Its about getting easy buckets, FT attempts, open 3s, more rebounding when you play better teams or bigger teams. Just because the offense is pretty solid now doesn't mean it couldn't be better or more of a threat with an added post game. Michigan went 5 mins without a score last night. Run a freaking post play to try and get an easy bucket or foul. Jump shots won't always fall....
bend his ear. They say he's not interested in winning, and just ignores the endless cries for an MSU-Wiscy-style mauling low-post style out of spite, but I for one am not buying. He will get there yet. In fact, there are rumors of Nix transferring for his senior year. ..
Yes I said scrap the offense. NO I said a wrinkle here and there of post plays would do wonders for the bigs and the offense. I even said I really like the offense. I just don't like that Bigs are just bodies out there and nothing else at times.
You are nitpicking this offense? And using Wisconsin as your shining example. That is just wrong.
If Michigan loses in this tourney, it won't be because they lack a post presence. It will likely be the defense.
Having a stronger post presence in an already great offense isn't a legit concern. Stop worrying.
It's stupid to argue over this point. Nobody said the offense was BAD. Some people are simply saying that the offense becomes one dimensional at times. Hey, maybe throwing down to the post to change up the look could help? Having multiple looks and threats is generally good, but hey you must know more than the rest of us.
Double post.
going to do, is to a state penitentiary.
Modern college basketball is predominantly played outside-in, and not inside-out. Very few teams feature a post game as the foundation of their offense.
Basketball offenses are a lot more complex than people think. It takes many hours of practice and game experience to run precisely. Beilein isn't going to change how we play during the middle of the season and certainly not during the NCAA tournament. If we had a post game it should have been developed months ago. It's ridiculous to expect McGary (a very raw talent), Morgan (not capable of reliable 1-1 offense) or Horford (frequently injured and not that much experience) to have achieved this in the pre-season or mid-season.
Come next season, you can certainly imagine a guy like McGary having offense run through him in the post at times. Just don't expect an offensive overhaul during the tourney. That's just ridiculous.
...Belein more than depends on a terrible LeVert for offensive production, there is no reason Horford should not be getting more minutes and/or going down low to him...he has a nice baby-hook and attacks the glass...which is far more than i can say for LeVert who gets more minutes (as of late) and cannot hit water if he fell out of a boat...granted he gives THJ a break, but you cannot justify sitting Morgan and Horford when LeVert and Bielfeltd get meaningful minutes
Levert is horrendous on the offensive side of the ball. He does however bring a higher level of intensity to the other end. I just wouldn't ever want him shooting the ball.
. . . you do have it figured out. And your analysis has finally convinced me Beilein is an idiot.
....I am simply poitning out that Mich needs more bigs in the rotation with the facts I have stated above...I am well aware how effective Michigan's offense is, but it is coming at the cost of a defense that is getting destroyed down low...I know both can be achieved by the proper rotation of bigs in the mix with the guard play
Yea, we don't run offense for Levert or Bielfedt. The point is there is a difference between getting playing time and running plays for someone.
We don't run offense for McGary, Horford, or Morgan.
Reasons? See above.
He plays a totally different position unless you want Horford or Morgan to play the 2-guard position. And Bielfeldt rarely gets more than a couple minutes a game.
I think Morgan's play the past couple of weeks justifies his place on the bench for now. He has nice moves around the basket and is a solid defender, but you don't have time to let them work out the kinks in win or go home game.
Akron's best 4 players were either suspended, injured or sick. They had no point guard. We have Trey Burke.
...also played an SDSU team that had one bench player with 8 minutes play and 4 starters who played 40 minutes each ...two sides to the coin
ranked team in the country extremely well. Whereas, under manned Akron, wasn't in this one when they left their hotel rooms.
Our offense is to spread the floor which leaves the middle open for cuts, screens, etc. if you feed the post, it clogs up the middle and it defeats the ENTIRE point of the offense. I really like the analogy of our offense to the football spread and Wisconsin to MANBALL.
The problem is our defense, not the offense. Poor rotation, people getting blown by too easily. Bigs hedging too far and not being able to recover, etc.
I don't think we need a low post game against VCU in the sense that you are referring. We will need McGary/Morgan/Horford to convert bunnies, as it looks like we will get many of them. They will probably be very unusual shots for them--there were several times where the Akron center would catch the ball with his back to the basket on a long pass, have nobody behind him, but would see two people coming at him from the three point line and panic, rather than just turn and convert.
So I don't think we'll need a low-post game from our bigs, just a high-bunny conversion game, which, yeah, easier said than done.
Michigan has the country's second most efficient offense. Wisconsin is 50th.
Why do they want to be more like Wisconsin, again?
He wants us to run an offense that lets us beat ourselves?
it is not our offense that needs improvement, it is our D.
36-34 games.
I'm not saying change our offense. Just throw in some post plays for easier baskets. When we go 5 mins without scoring. You go to that stuff when the offense isn't getting the shots to fall. Michigan has dug holes a lot this year with just letting it fly when defenses are good.
I don't want to be Wisc or MSU. I like what we do a lot. BUT FOR ALL THAT IS HOLY RUN A POST PLAY FOR OUR 6'10 CENTER!!! Who I think could be good around the basketball if given enough touches. Just once every 15-20 plays. Make the defense adjust a bit. I think people are saying I want to change who we are. No just add a layer.
It's not an easier basket if your bigs have no low post game. I would like to have some low post offense on our team too, but ours guys just aren't capable of that right now. I think that will change next year as McGary and Horford refine their skills more with an offseason of work (Horford has had a few seasons, but he hasn't been healthy much which has stunted his development IMO).
Totally agree—it's only an easier look if you have post players with a strong back-to-the-basket game. Right now:
This is a perimeter-oriented team. They're very good at that. Post scoring would be great and all, but it's not something you conjure out of a few new plays in March.
....but, i will gladly take more minutes from Horford and McGary who can score, rebound and block shots vs. a rotation with LeVert or Vogrich who give you nothing except marginal perimiter defense when they are not getting burned (granted Vogrich has rode the pine most of the year)
But Horford and McGary can't score unless someone else puts them in a position to i.e. pick and roll, fast break (which they would help themselves with in running the floor), or penetration causing the opposing big to help and leave our post player.
Vogrich and Levert aren't getting minutes at the expense of McGary and Horford. People who want to play two bigs are forgetting something - the offense usually determines the matchups. There are few teams that play two traditional bigs (MSU, Minnesota are the only ones that really do so in our conference). You really want McGary guarding Deshaun Thomas, Christian Watford, Ryan Evans and the other fours in our conference? He would get burned on the drive which has been our biggest problem on D all year. When McGary adds an offensive game, we can dictate the match ups, forcing teams to play two bigs on us. But right now, most other teams are going to dictate the matchup because we have no post players with an offensive skill set.
I would have been ok with giving Horford a try against Evans in that stretch where he was killing everyone from the post. He seems better able to defend if Evans had taken him to the perimeter than any other big.
But you're right, two bigs would generally have at best a neutral effect on the defensive end, and McGary doesn't defend the perimeter well at all. The key play in that quarterfinal game against Wisconsin was McGary allowing Frank Grimes, I mean Frank Kaminsky, to drive past him for an elbow jumper as the clock ran down with about 2 minutes left.
But Horford and McGary can't score unless someone else puts them in a position
That is what I am talking about. If you run a screen down or across for Mcgary then someone makes the good pass to him under the hoop he will have a high % of scoring. The People for it are not saying here Mitch get us a tough bucket and just throw it to him. There is some X and O to this. I know he isn't KG or whoever. I also am not saying during March to just change it up and try it in a tight game but something that should have been in the system by now imo.
How many bunnies have Mitch and JMo missed this year? Too many. I don't think our staff has confidence that they can finish to run more than a few plays for them. And we do run down screens for bigs. I have seen it quite a bit this year and throughout JB's tenure.
This is not a McGary/Horford vs. LeVert/Vogrich proposition, though. Beilein's offense is designed to have four players who can shoot from the perimeter. Playing two bigs is something he's been more open to this year, but it still bogs down what he can do offensively. In a system designed around spacing and outside shooting, having two big guys who can't shoot isn't ideal.
Meanwhile, Michigan's guards need the occasional break, too, and LeVert is one of the team's best perimeter defenders. Vogrich really isn't part of the rotation, so I'm not even sure why he's being mentioned here—the guy has maybe played 10 meaningful minutes since conference play began.
Yep. JB has made adjustments almost every year. But it's hard to install some new sets in a week with guys that are going to be hard pressed to do what you're asking them to. We'll see what happens next year because the offseason is where the real changes are made.
Great contribution to the discussion about a valid question/request for information.
Three of the BIG teams that stand a good chance of going deep into this tournament have at least one effective low-post guy: Zeller (he's OK in the low post, I guess), Nix and Payne at MSU, and Berggren at Wisk. The Buckeyes I don't know --- others here will have a better understanding of the kind of offense Matta runs, but it doesn't seem very low-post to me.
Anyway, for the other three teams, the low-post is an intregal part of their offense. And yes, a low-post guy at M is the offense's missing link. I believe that if JB had someone like those named here, we'd see a lot more low-post scoring, more offensive rebound put-backs (I know M does pretty well in that category already) and kickouts to the three-point snipers.
...a few of us go against the grain/coach on this article and the faithful get all pissed off!...None of us who are going against the grain are suggesting we run an offense like MSU or Wisco, we are simply stating that we have effective bigs that are under-utilized and it will most likely hurt us against superior athletic teams in the paint!!!...we have a valid point, we are not trolling, we want Mich to win badly like the rest of you...it is OK to disagree with Beilein every now and then
They aren't really that effective though other than the fast break and pick and roll game. None of our bigs have much of an offensive skill set. Mitch had 13 points last night. I believe all of them were off the fast break, offensive rebounds or a drive and dish by a guard, none from a post move. Morgan is what he is. I think Horford and McGary have shown flashes here and there, but nothing to signify we should be running many plays through them. I think McGary should get the ball in the high post more because he is better facing up than with his back to the basket and he's a decent passer. But feeding the post is not really an effective or efficient option for us on offense.
I'm all for being critical of coaches and tactics, I have many complaints about our staff/system. But I'm not going to criticize them for not doing something that doesn't make sense to do.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not pissed. I appreciate your point of view; I just don't agree with you.
Keep posting away, though.
...i also appreciate all the other points of view as well, healthy debate is good
for the impression that people are pissed, I think we are just disagreeing on one important aspect here, and that is the effectiveness of our bigs at scoring with their back to the basket. I agree you have a valid point, and this is a healthy debate, we just disagree. Keep posting your thoughts, opinions etc...
Asking our bigs to all of a sudden play that sort of game, or, in other words diverting from Belieins offense, is probably not a good idea at this juncture. We are an effective offense, we have an identity, and I do not think we should try to play 2 bigs, or try to establish a low post game all of a sudden especially against VCU.
Just because you're bigger and more athletic doesn't mean you all of a sudden will dominate offensively down low. What you just said is that we needed to feed the post every play. They would have loved that. Our strength is our perimeter players so shy would we throw the ball down low when our bigs aren't good enough to score consistently? Teams would absolutely love that!
In football you can pass to set up the run instead of the old thinking that you had to run to set up the past. In the past in basketball it was you throw the ball in the post and everything works off that. By true anymore at least not entirely, we work the ball outside to set up inside, we aren't really different than the Miami heat as far as where our talent is on the team and how we use it.
I'd rather dust off the old backdoor cut than to feed the post
Appreciate the feedback. I’m no expert. I love Beilein and he’s done a great job getting us back to prominence. He’s our coach for life as far as I’m concerned, but that doesn’t mean he should be above criticism or questions, as he and we all strive for the same thing, and that is improvement. Philosophically I question his lack of emphasis on bigs. There’s a reason the most effective basketball players teams tend to have the bigger players. Even the Miami Heat felt the need to show Bosh the money because they knew Lebron and Dwayne wouldn’t be enough. Beilein’s plan may emphasize 3s, cuts and offensive efficiency, but you can’t expect a Trey Burke on your team every year, and this comes at the sacrifice of rebounds, defense, and a low post game that can open up lanes and spaces for the perimeter.
When you reach a certain level of excellence, the scrutiny will naturally increase in granularity. Like not understanding why a certain Sports Illustrated swimsuit model made the cut because she’s not nearly as hot as the rest, but she’d still be the hottest girlfriend you’d ever have. She’s being compared to her peers.
Beilein is pushing Michigan back to an elite peer level now, and thus it will be normal for his game plan to be scrutinized for its deficiencies, and to do so is no indictment of any Michigan fan’s desire to have him as the coach, we just always want to see improvement.
...you took my feelings towards Coach B and layed them out perfectly!...I just hope his rotation gets it done tomorrow, because VCU loves to crash the boards and get second chance points
I just took a look at the top 20 NBA salaries (pasted beloow from hoopshype.com...whatever that is). I don't watch as much NBA as I used to, so I could be off here. If I'm right though, only 6 of the top 20 salaries belong to Centers.
I wouldn't necessarily say Coach B. doesn't emphasize bigs. If I remember correctly, one of the biggest reasons for hiring Coach Alexander was because of his ability to coach bigs. That, to me, shows he places an importance on bigs.
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Brandon Roy
6. Joe Johnson
11. Chris Paul
12. Kevin Durant
13. LeBron James
14. Chris Bosh
15. Deron Williams
16. Dwyane Wade
18. Zach Randolph
19. Andrew Bynum
20. Rudy Gay
Read more at http://hoopshype.com/salaries.htm#8LD4z24LlVzLlgHh.99
If all these kids that are 6'5" to 6'9" see these salaries in the NBA, and see these players' highlights on ESPN all the time, don't you think they'd want to go to a college that will run an offense that will highlight their abilities? Wouldn't that increase that player's chances of getting to the NBA?
Why is it, do you think, that we're able to recruit these great 2's & 3's, like THJ, Stauskas, Burke, GRIII, Derrick Walton, and Zak Irvin?
If we ran an offense that dumped the ball down to the post every posession, do you think they would all be playing for and/or coming to Michigan? HELL NO!
If we did run that dump it down low offense, how many bigs do you think there are playing high school basketball with those kinds of post moves? Now, how many D1 teams are there in college basketball? That's right, almost 400.
Do you think he's ignoring all of these 7' tall centers with great post moves playing high school basketball right now, or do they just not exist?
Again no one is saying to change the offense... Not sure why that is the thought here. Also there will always be more G/F then Centers. As they say "Bigs don't grow on trees" because they don't. That list of money proves nothing. No he isn't ignoring bigs at all. The new commit has a great post game for his age. The question is will he get to use it?
I don't know what you're talking about. I didn't suggest someone said to change the offense. Why would you? This is one of the very best offensive teams in the country.
I was replying to his criticism of Belein having "a lack of emphasis on bigs".
My point was that, as you say, "bigs don't grow on trees".
The reason for showing the top 20 salaries in the NBA is to show that there aren't many skilled big men (e.g. high salaried big men) in the NBA. There are big men, but they're not skilled. That's why they're not earning high salaries.
If we ran an offense that dumped the ball down to the post every posession, do you think they would all be playing for and/or coming to Michigan?
That sentence you wrote would suggest a offense change(that how it came off to me, but its the internet. No context). That is why I said that. We are not talking about doing it every time down the floor. More like three times a half.
Dude - I was responding to CLord's post and his comment about Belein's "lack of emphasis on bigs".
I noted one of Belein's reasons for hiring Bacari Alexander, then I inserted the list as an example that the NBA is not paying a lot of bigs either. My theory is there aren't a lot of bigs on there because there aren't a lot of really skilled big men in the NBA. The number of bigs on that list is disproportionate to the number of guys playing that position relative to the number of wings on that list.
There just aren't many skilled big men that can play with their back to the basket anymore.
I don't care how often you want to throw the ball into the post. If the big man is a threat to score, he'll get double teamed. That's good. If you got a guy like that, do it.
If he's not a threat to score, he won't get the double team. That's not good. If he's not a threat to score, you're wasting time on the shot clock, unless you're hoping he'll score.
Roy, Arenas, and Brand. Yikes.
Just another wrinkle that I haven't seen mentioned.
Post-entry passes are difficult. If a defending team knows that your game revolves around post play, then there are lots of things they can do to disrupt your game before the ball ever gets into the post.
So, yeah. I love post play myself. But it's not necessarily 'easy baskets' for a lot of reasons.
I like how we play. I do agree with what DD said when we lost to IU to end the season. GR3 is very under utilized waiting on the wings. Way to athletic to not tee up driving the lane more often.
