Basketball 10-0 POSBANG
December 8th, 2018 at 4:15 PM ^
Give me point please.
December 8th, 2018 at 4:16 PM ^
Athletic teams with length always give Beilein teams fits. They can guard the perimeter and recover quicker on switches. They also have long arms to get in the passing lanes. Drawing out their bigs really didnt work until late. Couple all that with them making a lot of bank shots and there ya go.
December 8th, 2018 at 4:34 PM ^
You do realize that Michigan scored 1.25 points per possession, right?
The turnovers were a problem, but that was it, really, on offense. South Carolina's defense was extremely hot & cold; if they didn't get a turnover, they conceded points. (Michigan scored 1.6 ppp when they didn't turn the ball over). Not all of those turnovers were forced, either; there were quite a few sloppy plays by Michigan's offense.
I mean, this explains the Oregon game from the 2017 tournament, but I don't think it describes today's game at all.
December 8th, 2018 at 5:24 PM ^
This comes close to eptomizing what drives me crazy about our fan base (myself include) and why we get such inflated expectations that get dashed time and again. We make so many excuses, make up fancy, conditional statistics, cherry pick stats, and ignore the actual eye test. You don't get to make up "what ifs" or "if we would have done that". There is no "well if we didn't turn the ball over..." or "if the refs would stop with their Michigan bias" or "if that fluke, generational play wouldn't have happened". We are what we are.
Enjoy this team for what it is and stop trying to mold them into something else. Enjoy the evolution should that change.
December 8th, 2018 at 6:12 PM ^
Good Lord, this is crazy.
I'm not making up any statistics, or cherry-picking anything. The purpose of using advanced statistics is that the eye test is often extremely misleading. In fact, relying on the eye test is a good way to make sure that you have, at best, a superficial understanding of whatever it is you're studying. Do you shop based on the eye test? ("Wow, that car looks fast! Here, take my money!").
Statistics make for more-informed arguments. When you measure something, you can make objective comparisons instead of subjective ones. The eye test is notoriously subjective; if you don't like defense, you wouldn't have liked many of Michigan's last 24 games. In which they're 23-1.
1.6 ppp, excluding turnovers, is an extremely high number for this team to achieve and speaks to the quality of shots they were getting, their aggression on the drives, and the great play on the offensive glass. I'm not suggesting you can exclude the turnovers from the game, but what I am saying is that the entirety of USC's defensive prowess in this game was in forcing turnovers -- and the "eye test" tells me that some of those turnovers weren't actually forced (e.g., Iggy's charge, Charles Matthews stepping on the sideline while receiving a pass, lazy alley-oop passes, etc.)
So, when refuting an argument that says that Michigan can't play offense against athletic teams like South Carolina, the fact that they did extremely well on offense overall, and exceptionally well in all areas except turning the ball over, is relevant to understanding the game.
December 8th, 2018 at 5:30 PM ^
December 8th, 2018 at 6:03 PM ^
No, it wouldn't have. That's nutty. Do you know how many 1.6 ppp games Michigan has in the KenPom era?
One. The Houston Baptist game in 2013-14, which was sandwiched between the Big Ten / ACC Challenge loss at Duke and the home, two-point loss to Arizona. That team went on to go 15-3 and win the Big Ten by two games.
1.6 ppp is crazy good. Really, really good. 114-78 final score good, if they'd managed it. It's not sustainable. (Neither is zero turnovers for the whole game, BTW -- Michigan has never done that, at least in the modern era).
Your argument just shows that you've made your mind and now you're trying to twist facts to suit your narrative. Michigan played exceptionally well on offense, outside of the turnovers. It's ludicrous to sit here and talk about how Beilein's teams have problems with defense's like South Carolina's after this performance.
December 8th, 2018 at 6:40 PM ^
No argument, just saying athletic teams give them the most trouble. Not complaining about the outcome and not fancy statting the fuck outta my Saturday. Just an observation from watching similar games. I like that they won against a quality team while not playing their best.
December 8th, 2018 at 4:30 PM ^
WOOT, WOOT!!!
December 8th, 2018 at 4:36 PM ^
Gotta love Jordan Poole's exuberance.
December 8th, 2018 at 4:37 PM ^
bang. me.
December 8th, 2018 at 4:43 PM ^
I'm in for the POSBANG!! This team just continues to impress to the nth degree!! Keep the hammer down the rest of December, and steamroll these next few teams!!
December 8th, 2018 at 4:44 PM ^
It was crazy, our subs hit threes
December 8th, 2018 at 5:31 PM ^
Well, Livers BANGED four 3's, anyway, so one sub was crazy.
December 8th, 2018 at 5:03 PM ^
High octane game. Poole was ballin. SC dudes could get to the rim.
December 8th, 2018 at 5:17 PM ^
All well and great but what was Zavier’s mindset after the game?
December 8th, 2018 at 5:24 PM ^
Everyone who said a basketball national championship isn’t the same as football ?
December 8th, 2018 at 5:26 PM ^
In for the BANG! 10-0 is awesome however the wins come. Keep rolling!
December 8th, 2018 at 5:31 PM ^
Not a great game, but a great coach and a great team. Go blue!
December 8th, 2018 at 5:35 PM ^
Great start to the season!
December 8th, 2018 at 5:41 PM ^
A win is a win, any way you slice it
December 8th, 2018 at 5:46 PM ^
What is our best start ever? Looking at the schedule, 17-0 seems very realistic leading into the Wisconsin game.
December 8th, 2018 at 5:51 PM ^
the best start was the 12-13 team i believe they went 18-0 their first loss was at Ohio St
December 8th, 2018 at 6:14 PM ^
Actually they were 16-0 going into that game.
December 8th, 2018 at 9:09 PM ^
Its 16-0. If we go 16-0 this year our 17th game will be at home vs Northwestern
December 8th, 2018 at 6:00 PM ^
I'm here for the Poole Party
December 8th, 2018 at 6:05 PM ^
SC put the best game together of any opponent so far. Tough team! But Michigan is TOUGHER! Go Blue!
December 8th, 2018 at 6:12 PM ^
Not worth starting a new thread but I believe KenPom projects us to go 15-5 in the Big Ten, winning the conference outright. Combine that with 11-0 in the non-con and we’re looking at a projected 26-5 season overall in one of, if not the strongest, conferences in America.
My question is should we couple that regular season record with a BTT win or run to the championship game does that warrant a 1-seed?
There’s obviously a lot of unknowns at this point the main thing being the relative strength of competing teams and how our marquee wins will stack up at the end of the year.
FYI Kansas and Xavier had seven and five losses respectively last year as one seeds, which would be comparable to our projected record for this year.
December 8th, 2018 at 6:16 PM ^
An outright conference championship (especially at 15-5 or Torvik's 16-4) and a decent showing in the Big Ten tournament, plus the quality non-conference wins, would absolutely be in the conversation for the one-seed. As you point out, it depends to a great deal on how the teams around Michigan fare.
It's early yet, but Michigan is currently a 1-seed on the Bracket Matrix (Duke, Gonzaga, Kansas, Michigan, in order).
December 8th, 2018 at 6:23 PM ^
Agree, likely would but also depends on how others fare.
December 9th, 2018 at 9:36 AM ^
Thats long range planning...a 1 seed...
December 8th, 2018 at 6:16 PM ^
Survive and advance
December 8th, 2018 at 6:36 PM ^
They didn’t really play anyone though at the beginning in 13. That year was exciting at the beginning but not this exciting since we actually have played some damn good teams this year.
December 8th, 2018 at 8:30 PM ^
I have a man crush on Beilein!
December 8th, 2018 at 9:07 PM ^
Basketball is Love. Basketball is Life
Team is so exciting to watch play. And think we still haven't had a game where everyone was clicking. In the beginning of the year Matthews and Ignas were on fire. Now Ignas and Poole are on fire. If we ever have a game where Ignas, Poole, and Matthews are on Watch Out
December 8th, 2018 at 10:09 PM ^
Teske will not give you the highlight plays that Mo Wagner gave, but with his defense and shot blocking he really makes it hard to score in the middle. Jordan Poole looks like a first round talent along with Izzy