I'd like to talk a bit of strategy here. I know most of us are inclined to chalk up this loss to Villanova just being dominant, Michigan going cold from 3, etc. but I think there are a few lessons Beilein should build on from here.
I need to first apologize for my dad, who declared in a group text that this DiVincenzo guy was Luke Hancock 2.0... at a time when Michigan was still winning and DiVincenzo had just made his first 3 and had a total of 5 points. This was deja vu in the worst way possible: guy comes off the bench to light it up from 3 and Michigan has no answer. Meanwhile, we hold the Naismith winner to 9 points on 13 shot equivalents with 2 turnovers. What?
Did Michigan's defensive strategy simply not account for DiVincenzo's ability? I really hate the notion that sometimes players just get hot and there's nothing you can do. Clearly, there was something Michigan was doing defensively that was allowing DiVincenzo to get too many clean looks. Mathews was on him most of the game and did an abysmal job anticipating picks, Michigan tried to switch and DiVincenzo was able to either a) step back for a 3 if the switching defender played off, or b) drive to the hoop if the swiching defender played tight.
All in all, I think this actually was a very winnable game if Michigan had scouted DiVincenzo properly and primed Mathews to guard much tighter and evade the pick. Can't let this type of bullshit ever happen again, as it's now cost us 2 national championships in 5 years. Also would be nice if we could get one of these absurd 6th man performances in a national championship some day.