John Beilein selected as Asst. Coach for USA Basketball Junior Natl Team

John Beilein selected as Asst. Coach for USA Basketball Junior Natl Team

Submitted by robbyt003 on March 12th, 2013 at 2:27 PM

LINK

Beilein will be an assistant coach for USA Basketball Men's Junior National Team at this summer's World University Games. 

Davidson coach Bob McKillop will serve as the team's head coach, and South Carolina coach Frank Martin will be an assistant coach alongside Beilein.

 

Revisiting The AP Poll's Behavior Towards Michigan

Revisiting The AP Poll's Behavior Towards Michigan

Submitted by LSAClassOf2000 on March 12th, 2013 at 11:51 AM

REVISITING AP POLL BEHAVIOR: HOW MICHIGAN FARED             

We’re quite used to following the polls week after week around here, but now that it has been about two months since I last did this and the regular season has come to an end, I thought it might be of some interest to revisit some of the trends in the AP poll voting.

SUMMARY TABLE:

 

TOTAL VOTES

1233

AVERAGE RANK (ALL VOTES)

3.973

MEDIAN

3

MODE

2

STD. DEV.

2.221

VARIANCE

4.933

HIGHEST VOTE

1

LOWEST VOTE

17

 

Even though we are #6 in the AP Poll right now, you can see from the summary statistics that we averaged higher in individual voting throughout the season, and that a good portion of those votes fell within a relatively narrow range of values. That would tend to speak to our performance being seen as extremely good overall, if nothing else, at least by the voters in the poll.

You will note from the graph of average rankings below that we reached our zenith in the ranking (#1) in the Week 13 poll on January 28th. At that point, we were 19-1, coming off the win against Illinois in Champaign.  After this, of course, we went 6-5 for the remainder of the season, and you can see the steady decline save for a spike at Week 17, which was the February 25thpoll. At this point, we were 23-4 and coming off wins against Illinois and Penn State at Crisler. I was working visually off of the schedule to compile this (so hopefully the record week-to-week is accurate), but it should show give you an idea of the sensitivity of the poll’s results to our performance.

 

AP POLL WEEK

WON

LOST

CHANGE IN AVG.FROM PREVIOUS WEEK

1

Preseason

0

2

1

0

0.26

3

3

0

0.94

4

5

0

0.51

5

7

0

0.71

6

9

0

0.01

7

11

0

1.18

8

12

0

0.12

9

13

0

-0.06

10

15

0

0.09

11

16

1

-2.12

12

18

1

1.91

13

19

1

1.10

14

20

2

-1.86

15

21

3

-0.95

16

22

4

-2.52

17

23

4

2.26

18

24

5

-2.63

19

25

6

-0.16

 

Not including the Preseason, of course, the remaining 18 weeks of polling saw 11 weeks where we experienced in upward movement in our average and 7 weeks of a downward turn. What is interesting here, of course, is that the average movement of, well, the average in the weeks of upward movement was 0.83, and the average downward turn was -1.47. I only did this calculation for Michigan, but it would be interesting to do the same analysis for other teams.

MORE DATA AND STUFF:

Here is what the total votes per rank looked like for us in the regular season -

 photo APBallotsTotalVotesRSFinal_zpsc001b40a.jpg

It is interesting to see it this way - following the weeks in isolation, I don't think we get the sense of what this trend actually looks like, but it looks pretty good as the largest numbers of votes over the course of the season went to 2nd and 3rd place in the poll (if it were a running history and not a snapshot).

 

 photo APBallotsPctOfTotalVotes_zpsc41f2565.jpg

 

Here are the percentages of the grand total by poll ranking. As you'll see, nearly half of the votes cast for Michigan in 19 polls were for 2nd and 3rd place. Really, the same essential information as above, but a slightly different way to see how we stacked up across all the polls.

 

 

 photo APBallotsAvgRatingRSFinal_zps2a44f662.jpg

Here's the running average ranking for each week. Sadly, you can see February on this one, but considering that we maintained an overall average rank in the raw voting totals of 3.97, it doesn't seem as bad as it might look here.

Here are the weekly distributions in isolation. Apologies for the somewhat varied scaling on these.

 

 photo APBallotsWeek1_zps0042b329.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek2_zps0474bd0f.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek3_zpsf5af7e58.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek4_zpsdebad89c.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek5_zps3dc483bb.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek6_zpsa8efe2d3.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek7_zpsf26ebef0.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek8_zpsc67d9777.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek9_zpse77735fd.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek10_zps5c875337.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek11_zps8e918cb4.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek12_zpsfcac7073.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek13_zps06f3329a.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek14_zps828d8281.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek15_zps1798bf6e.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek16_zpsf85e5723.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek17_zps5e598585.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek18_zpse3e6ab12.jpg  photo APBallotsWeek19_zps5fa95ca3.jpg

Exhausting, I know.

IN SUMMARY:

As I mentioned, some of this has been seen on the blog before, but in isolation, like the weekly poll itself. The idea here was to take the whole body of data and see how Michigan fared in the entirety of the AP voting, and hopefully you agree that we did not do too badly for ourselves at all when looking at it like that.

 

(OT) 30 For 30

(OT) 30 For 30

Submitted by Noahdb on March 12th, 2013 at 11:20 AM

This is non-MIchigan related, so I apologize in advance. 

The next installment of ESPN's 30 For 30 airs on Sunday at 9 p.m. There has been some discussion of the series here, so I thought people might be interested. I got to see an advance screening of the next episode last night and thought it was terrific.

The title is "Survive and Advance" and the focus is on Jim Valvano and the 1983 NC State team that won the national championship after one miracle after another. This was a team that lost its leader to a broken foot for several weeks during the middle of the season. At one point, they were 9-7. They went 8-3 down the stretch but had to win the conference tournament to get into the NCAA tournament. 

They were trailing in every single game in the ACC tournament and had to rally to win at the last second each time. After getting into the tournament, they had to come from behind and win at the buzzer in three of their first four games. And then they had to do it again in the NCAA finals. 

The odds were so spectacularly against them....it really was a once-in-a-lifetime thing. The only other prolonged run I can think of against such long odds (in a sports setting) was the 2004 Red Sox coming from an 0-3 defecit and beating the Yankees in four straight (with two come-from-behind wins and then Schilling's effort in Game Six). 

The 30-on-30 focuses on Derrick Whittenburg (he of the broken foot). The opening scene is him getting dressed for the funeral of his teammate, Lorenzo Charles. For you young whippersnappers, Whittenburg fired the last second shot in the championship game. It was woefully short and Lorenzo Charles grabbed it and dunked it for the winning points. 

Whittenburg told his teammates after the funeral that he wanted them to all get together once a year. The only time they seemed to be seeing each other was at a funeral and he didn't want that to continue. 

The documentary weaves Jim Valvano's fight with cancer into the story. They don't pull any punches either. 

I got to watch the screening in Reynolds Coliseum, NC State's homecourt from the 40s until 2000. There were lots of red eyes and people wiping away tears after the screening. (You'll laugh, you'll cry...). 

Anyone finds sports to be compelling will enjoy this one. Sunday night...9 p.m. in the east.

B1G Tourney: Rest your starters?

B1G Tourney: Rest your starters?

Submitted by B1G_Fan on March 12th, 2013 at 4:26 AM

 Given how the team played tired in the second half of the season, an early exit won't effect our seeding to dramatically do you rest your starting 5-7 and try to hit the NCAA tourney fresh? Just wondering what people thought since the regular season title is more important to most and the ncaa tourney is more important to all.

Blind Resumes Part II - The 1 Seeds

Blind Resumes Part II - The 1 Seeds

Submitted by Paps on March 11th, 2013 at 6:34 PM

Welcome to Part II of the blind resume game.  Multiple people in my last post asked me to make one for the 1-2-3 seeds, and here it is!  The original post was comprised solely of "bubble teams" and can be found HERE.  I have made a few slight changes to the game and criteria. 

  • Because conference record can be misleading (see: St. Mary's), there is a RPI number in parenthesis after the conference record.  That is simply the addition of the RPI of every in conference team for every game they've played, divided by the amount of conference games they have played. 
  • I also got rid of the teams in the "good wins" and "bad losses" section, and replaced them by the RPIs of the teams.  (@ means away game, vs means neutral  nothing for home).  This should make the game as blind as possible, taking out all possible biases, and making it tougher to guess the teams without looking.
  • I also made my standards higher on what constitutes a good win or bad loss.  In the bubble teams section I pretty much said anything under 75 was a good win, and over about 125 a bad loss.  Now, (because let's face it- these are ONE SEEDS) anything in the top 50 is a good win, and anything below that is a bad loss.  I realize losing to the #51 RPI team isn't a bad loss.  It's more of an OK loss.  But nonetheless, I put them in there.  Consider them what you want.  It's just a bunch of information. 

Other than those three things, it works exactly the same!  Just look over the chart, pick the team you think is most deserving of a 1 seed, and then click the link below the charts to find out who was who.  I have made 4 tables of three teams, so you will be picking all four one seeds! All stats are as of 3/11/13.

 

Blind Resume Table #1:

 

Criteria

Team A

Team B

Team C

Overall Record

27-4

26-5

23-7

Conference Record

14-4 (RPI: 90.3)

14-4 (RPI: 97.2)

13-5 (RPI: 63.4)

RPI

1

6

14

BPI

2

7

10

Strength of Schedule

1

25

5

Non-Conference SOS

1

20

154

Home

16-0

16-1

16-2

Away

5-4

7-3

5-5

Neutral

6-0

3-1

2-0

Record vs. RPI Top 25

7-1

5-2

5-4

Record vs. RPI Top 50

10-2

11-3

6-7

Record vs. RPI Top 100

15-4

13-4

10-7

Last 10 games

8-2

7-3

7-3

Good Wins

RPI #s: 3,4,14,18,@18,23,25,

29,36,50

RPI #s: @14,19,@21,21,

@24,vs27, 34,35,36,@47

RPI #s: @5,7,12, 23,42,43

Bad Losses

RPI #s: @66,@83

RPI #s: @61,@226

NONE

 

Click HERE to find out which teams are in Blind Resume Table 1.

 

Blind Resume Table #2:

 

Criteria

Team A

Team B

Team C

Overall Record

23-7

25-6

26-5

Conference Record

14-4 (RPI: 71.8)

14-4 (RPI: 95.6)

14-4 (RPI: 66.5)

RPI

10

21

5

BPI

18

30

3

Strength of Schedule

14

79

10

Non-Conference SOS

97

156

48

Home

16-0

16-1

17-2

Away

5-6

7-3

7-2

Neutral

2-1

2-2

2-1

Record vs. RPI Top 25

2-4

2-5

8-3

Record vs. RPI Top 50

7-5

5-6

8-5

Record vs. RPI Top 100

10-6

7-6

12-5

Last 10 games

8-2

8-2

7-3

Good Wins

RPI #s: 9,16,@40,40,

43,44,45

RPI #s: 8,24,@35,35,47

RPI #s: 7,@7,9,12,@12,

@14,18,23

Bad Losses

RPI #s: @51,@161

NONE

NONE

 

Click HERE to find out which teams are in Blind Resume Table #2.

 

Blind Resume Table #3:

 

Criteria

Team A

Team B

Team C

Overall Record

26-5

25-6

24-6

Conference Record

14-4 (RPI: 72.8)

12-6 (RPI: 71.8)

15-3 (RPI: 96.1)

RPI

3

12

4

BPI

1

6

16

Strength of Schedule

7

49

4

Non-Conference SOS

31

197

3

Home

15-1

17-1

14-1

Away

8-3

5-5

10-3

Neutral

3-1

3-0

0-2

Record vs. RPI Top 25

3-3

4-4

4-2

Record vs. RPI Top 50

9-4

8-5

6-2

Record vs. RPI Top 100

12-5

11-5

14-4

Last 10 games

9-1

5-5

7-3

Good Wins

RPI #s: 10,@16,@17,vs32,40,

44,@45,46,50

RPI #s: 7,14,vs21,@23,29,vs40,

@42,42

RPI #s: 1,7,@18,18,@29,39

Bad Losses

RPI #s: @51

RPI #s: @182

RPI #s: vs73,@94,126,@164

 

Click HERE to find out which teams are in Blind Resume Table #3.

 

Blind Resume Table #4:

 

Criteria

Team A

Team B

Team C

Overall Record

24-5

30-2

24-7

Conference Record

14-4 (RPI: 66.6)

16-0 (RPI: 168)

13-5 (RPI: 60.1)

RPI

9

11

7

BPI

17

5

9

Strength of Schedule

23

78

5

Non-Conference SOS

174

39

55

Home

16-1

15-1

17-1

Away

6-3

10-1

6-5

Neutral

2-1

5-0

1-1

Record vs. RPI Top 25

4-2

2-1

4-6

Record vs. RPI Top 50

8-3

5-2

8-7

Record vs. RPI Top 100

12-4

11-2

11-7

Last 10 games

9-1

10-0

7-3

Good Wins

RPI #s: 3,10,16,@16,vs31,

@44,@45,@46

RPI #s: 21,24,@33,33,35

RPI #s: vs6,12,14,23,37,

42,43,@43

Bad Losses

RPI #s: @51,@130

NONE

NONE

Click HERE to find out which teams are in Blind Resume Table #4.
 
I hope you enjoyed Round II of the Blind Resume Game! Hope Michigan can grab a good seed and go far in the tourney.  Thanks for reading!  Go Blue!

Trey Burke Named 1st Team All-American by SN—and Sources Say He'll Win Big Ten POY

Trey Burke Named 1st Team All-American by SN—and Sources Say He'll Win Big Ten POY

Submitted by Raoul on March 11th, 2013 at 3:15 PM

Congrats to Trey Burke for being named first team All-American by Sporting News. The others: Victor Oladipo (Indiana), Kelly Olynyk (Gonzaga), Otto Porter (Georgetown), and Marcus Smart (Oklahoma State).

Also, reports on Twitter are that Burke will be named Big Ten player of the year tonight:

Hearing from several sources that U-M PG Trey Burke, one of five finalists for the Cousy Award, will be awarded Big Ten POY tonight. #bookit

— Chris Balas (@Balas_Wolverine) March 11, 2013

And: Michigan's Trey Burke officially a finalist for the Bob Cousy Award

The other five finalists on the list are: Syracuse's Michael Carter-Williams, Saint Mary's Matthew Dellavedova, Miami's Shane Larkin and Oklahoma State's Marcus Smart.

The Cousy Award will be announced during Final Four weekend.

EDIT: It seems likely that Burke will eventually gain consensus first-team All-American status. According to the Michigan record book, here's the select company he would join:

Cazzie Russell 1965

Cazzie Russell 1966

Rickey Green 1977

Gary Grant 1988

Chris Webber* 1993

Thank you 2013 Michigan basketball

Thank you 2013 Michigan basketball

Submitted by umumum on March 11th, 2013 at 3:10 PM

Let's thank and say nice things about the basketball team and staff before the season ends in 4 weeks.  While there were certainly moments of disappointment for Michigan fans at Crisler and in cyberspace, our disappointments must pale when compared to those of the players and staff.  Or at least it should be so, if we put our participation in proper perspective.  We were one rimmed out tip and one half-court throw from going 27-4 and a #1 seed.  Instead we will have to be content with a 25-6 mark and a #3 seed.  The Horror!

While we are far from assured of a better record next year--you can't lose a Trey Burke without it hurting big time--Michigan basketball has clearly returned to an elite level.  I, for one, am thrilled to again be invested enough to be disappointed in the kind of losses we had this year. 

(Slight Mod Edit - unfortunate typo corrected. No "h" in Crisler. LSA)

Home FT Shooting: A Plea to MGoFaithful

Home FT Shooting: A Plea to MGoFaithful

Submitted by ChiCityWolverine on March 11th, 2013 at 2:36 PM

I cringed at Crisler in the last minute of the game as GRIII, Hardaway, and Trey headed to the line while players and fans alike waved their arms to quiet the crowd.

My proof: http://www.sloansportsconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Goldman…

I pulled this paper from the MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference. For those unaware, it is an annual conference now sponsored and covered by ESPN that celebrates the nerds of sports. Panelists explain the ways data is helping us understand performance better than ever. This research paper (though based on NBA data) documents disparaties in home/road performance in two variables: offensive rebounding and free throw shooting.

As expected, offensive rebounding improves in a home environment which makes sense due to the effort and energy required. However, free throw shooting in pressure scenarios is worse at home than on the road. The worst environment to shoot a free throw is in a quiet, nervous home arena, yet road environments cause no significant effect, positive or negative, to free throw shooting.

My plea is for Crisler Center fans to greet Michigan FT shooters with a steady buzz of solid, maybe not defeaning applause in support of our players. It's tough when the building goes mostly silent and 13,000 fans expect you to make every shot.

Disclaimer: This is no excuse for our gut-wrenching loss yesterday, just my thoughts on how we can give our team the best home court advantage possible.