Basketbullets: 2018-19 Michigan State, Part Two
3/9/2019 – Michigan 63, Michigan State 75 – 26-5, 15-5 Big Ten
On the one hand: it was a five point swing against the team I like to see win basketball games. On the other: it was so ludicrous that it immediately crushed all hope, and that turned out to be the right emotional state. I of course refer to the 15 seconds during which Zavier Simpson missed an uncontested layup and Cassius Winston subsequently banked in a three. These are not the events that need to happen if you're going to win on the road against a top 10 team.
There were many problems. Some with Michigan, some with the way the game was officiated, some with the ensuing lineups after the way the game was officiated. But also aaaargh, randomness.
Anyway:
I repeat: a dude. The #1 reason Michigan's offense bogged down was Michigan State's ability to switch screens. The guy who gave them that ability: Xavier Tillman. Tillman had 5 blocks in this game; his performance was reminiscent of Michigan going up against Isaiah Roby last year.
Both Roby and Tillman were able to mirror and contest Michigan shots on supposed mismatches, sending Michigan into a bog of uncertainty and recriminations as the "be aggressive on switches" option backfired. Via Orion Sang, DeAndre Haynes on Tillman's impact:
“I mean, he was really good," said assistant coach DeAndre Haynes. "He impacted a lot of our shots. Every time we drove to the basket, he was blocking one of our guards’ shots. It was tough.
"We tried to change some things up with him, but he’s really quick off his feet. He uses his body well, and he was able to get his hands on a lot of balls that usually we make in games. Our guards really work on the layups we have. He was a better player today. He was an impact today, couldn’t do nothing with him.”
Michigan was horribly inefficient when they drove that supposed mismatch.
**By my count, Michigan scored 24 points on the 29 possess. (0.83 PPP) Michigan State switched with its '5' man. Xavier Tillman's ability to effectively switch unlocked this gameplan for MSU. His defense was *superb,* stifling Michigan guards all night: pic.twitter.com/9hc1AYGkNE
— Eric Shapiro (@eric_shap) March 11, 2019
Nick Ward going out was the best thing that could have happened for MSU in these two games.
This is the primary subject of a new Solving Basketball podcast that I haven't had the time to listen to yet but I guarantee is very good.
NEW pod! @HalfCourtHoops is back for another game breakdown, this time on Michigan-Michigan State. The x's and o's and coaching adjustments that went into Saturday's game. Plus what the NBA does to attack switches
— Jordan Sperber (@hoopvision68) March 11, 2019
iTunes: https://t.co/YMnAu3ZwjF
YouTube: https://t.co/MHmVWcFbyj
Dumping it down. Michigan again struggled tremendously to take advantage of the other portion of that switch. Teske got the ball once, IIRC, and was called for a dubious travel. Extremely frustrating. Understandable, maybe, as Michigan is a team that absolutely never posts and you can't go from "we never do this" to "we are very good at this" in two weeks. But holy hell, frustrating.
I wonder if this will be an offseason focus for Michigan. It probably should be. Tillman's coming back.
[After THE JUMP: gnome autoviolence]
Are you allowed to contest vertically? At Iowa: no. At Maryland: yes. At Michigan State: lol why even ask. Dan Dakich repeatedly pointed out Izzo wheedling the refs early in the game and that paid off with a large number of Winston drives to the hoop on which Michigan was in good position and vertical only for Winston to get a call because he contacted a Michigan player's chest. That was supposed to be excised from the game, and sometimes it is. Sometimes it isn't.
So, in an event similar to Tyler Cook getting a foul call on Teske halfway through the first half against Iowa, Michigan suffered a foul it couldn't cope with when Brazdeikis took contact from Winston halfway through the first half and got called for his second. I guess it's tough sometimes because the offensive player gets into the defensive player's space and the arms come down as a result of that but the difference in the way this stuff gets called home and away is striking.
People complain when you complain but a 28-7 FT disparity (two FTs were late intentional ones) when Michigan entered the game with one of the lowest FTA rates allowed nationally, with many of those FTs questionable to inexplicable, massively impacts the game. For all the bitching about Michigan's second half offense they finished this game in a point range (0.95 PPP) that they can and have won games with this year.
While I'm on the subject. What?
I think that dethrones the Iggy held-ball-type-substance against Maryland for worst call of the year.
Oblig autobench. There is a valid reason you might autobench a player: if that guy is going to play like crap on defense because he's afraid of a foul. This does happen, you should pull him if his replacement is decent. That is emphatically not the case for this Michigan team without Charles Matthews.
Yes, Brazdeikis did foul out in 22 minutes. But benching him didn't increase that number. It just moved those minutes later in the game.
Michigan did get some good production from Weird Guys: Brooks had a couple of steals and had 5 points on 4 shot equivalents; DDJ had a couple of assists and wasn't overwhelmed on defense. Brandon Johns playing a position he hadn't really played all year, well…
three consecutive MSU buckets, two of them real real bad
…suboptimal. He got 13 minutes. Iggy fouled out; Livers was limited to 27 minutes despite finishing the game with two fouls. This isn't changing. Beilein's going to do it. I'm going to complain about it.
Evolving on switches. If an opponent has a center that can stay in front of Simpson I don't know if the switching situation is going to get any better. Simpson isn't a threat to shoot over Cs so they can sag, taking away both drives and passing lanes. Moving that action to Poole is a potential solution but the team's offense has revolved around Simpson at its best moments this year. Poole's only had the occasional flash as a creator. I'm doubtful that would end up being a major improvement.
Probably have to try it at some point, though. The other possibility might be a weird one: Livers, who must be checked at the three point line and might have the size to get the ball into the post against a 6'8" guy. Or Iggy, I guess, but Iggy is a black hole.
There is probably not a solution. Switches put you in iso situations.
That being said… Michigan really lacks consistent one-on-one playmaking – someone that can just go downhill and get a bucket. @hoopvision68 mentioned it on his pod today, but Michigan is in the 30th percentile in isolation offense, shooting 32.6% (37% eFG) in those situations.
— Eric Shapiro (@eric_shap) March 11, 2019
Teams that have mobile, switchable centers will be a tough matchup for the rest of the year, however long that is.
Examples?
this game was not good. but off the top of my head, UM adjusted against illinois to stop their freshman in transition. and i believe they have switched matthews onto point guards multiple times during the game; i think cowan at MD was one of those times.
and many times he has started the game with teske going one on one against good centers. if it works, he rides it. if it doesn't he doubles down.
This is just not even close to being true. Tommy Amaker never made adjustments. JB makes adjustments all the time. He's one of the best coaches out of a timeout that I've seen. If you want to argue he doesn't adjust enough, that's a completely different ting entirely. But to say he never adjusts midgame is just absolutely false.
I would love to hear examples, or even one example. I will agree that he is one of the best at drawing up a play out of a timeout, but I wouldn't call that an adjustment.
Come on man, he sat himself for an entire half against Penn State and we made a huge run! Big time adjustment there.
lol, good call
this is totally wrong
March 11th, 2019 at 12:43 PM ^
Hey, Warde, are you listening? Clearly you're wasting money on the winningest coach in program history. Just delegate all coaching to Random Internet Idiot. You'll save a fortune!
so - ya just cut-and-pasted it, huh? how many other places have posted this?
I didn't see us switching 1/5 ball screens all that much in the 1st half. We switched everything 1 through 4 though. In the 2nd half, MSU almost went exclusively to the 1/5 ball screen. I think I remember maybe 1 pick from Goins, but otherwise it was all Tillman.
MSU realized it was a problem for them when Michigan switched 1/4 screens and just went excusively 1/5 instead. Teske, as great as he is, doesn't quite move his feet fast enough, and MSU could take advantage.
teske, for whatever reason, seemed a step slow all game. i noticed it especially early in the 2H. i was calling for castleton to get some minutes but then johns came in. ugh. i thought teske looked dead by the end of the game.
Beilein did not change that strategy at halftime. There were a number of drives at the start of the second half that they switched. Once they called the and-1 on Castleton and then the imaginary foul on Teske, UM switched back to the hedge and recover. I think Beilein was afraid that his bigs would foul out. Also, when they got the switch onto Teske later, he didn't contest at all and Winston had 2 easy layups. At least that's how I remember it, not going to go back and re-watch.
False. All of it.
Second half keys to a Michigan victory:
— LAbound (@LAbound2) March 10, 2019
Prevent second shot opportunities for MSU.
Continue to switch the ball screen
The End
Have no clue why Beilein is going back to hedge + recover. Did he not watch film from the first contest?
— LAbound (@LAbound2) March 10, 2019
John Beilein will be the cause of a 2nd straight loss to MSU because he went with hedge + recover for PnR coverage in the 2nd half rather than switching as he did in the first half.
— LAbound (@LAbound2) March 10, 2019
John elected to revert to hedge + recover in the 2nd half as he did in the first matchup and was promptly destroyed much like the first matchup. Very bad coaching vs PnR. First half we switched and there was zero reason to change that philosophy https://t.co/05NSD7iLRv
— LAbound (@LAbound2) March 10, 2019
So, that's your twitter handle. Your point?
No it's not my twitter handle smartass. And I suppose Matt D doesn't know what he's talking about either? Sit this one out bub.
I just went back and re-watched the first half and only saw ONE occasion where Michigan switched a 1-5 ball screen. Early in the game they got turnovers off the 1-4 and 1-3.
Maybe I'm missing something, but can somebody show me some clips? I don't think Michigan changed their strategy, it's that MSU changed theirs.
I agree with this 100%. Question though, is this a Beilein decision, or a Yaklich decision?
March 11th, 2019 at 11:22 PM ^
While Izzo crying and screaming is not "outcoaching" I do agree that it worked.
Beilein should school the refs too, and the rest of us support him in that and not worry about the consequences.
They cannot throw him out of every game.
March 12th, 2019 at 12:52 AM ^
The last time Beilein got on the refs, he was tossed for the first time since the 70's...so maybe that's not a good idea.
Beilein better deliver...or what? You'll bless us with more rants and ad hominem attacks?
March 11th, 2019 at 12:31 PM ^
I guess it's tough sometimes because the offensive player gets into the defensive player's space and the arms come down as a result of that but the difference in the way this stuff gets called home and away is striking.
MSU @ M February 24th
MSU 30 FTs - M 20
M @ MSU March 9th
MSU 30 FTs - M 7
60 to 27 IMO means the issue isnt home vs away. The issue is the guys selected to cover B1G games have teams they like or maybe coaches they fear (MSU) and teams they don't like or coaches they dont fear (like us).
Once free of these officiating idiots Michigan thrives and MSU dies.
March 11th, 2019 at 12:56 PM ^
In AA the difference in those FT's came in the final minutes when we were trying to foul. MSU outplayed and out coached us then. However, it would've been nice to get an equivalent level of BS calls in our favor the first game as MSU got on Saturday. We win by double digits in AA if called similarly in our favor. And by double digits in EL without the homecooking.
Yeah, it was pretty even IIRC in the game at AA before Michigan started fouling to extend the game.
It was like 28-7 when Michigan started fouling in the second half.
I'm never a big fan of looking at the foul disparity as proof of anything. That's a typical Izzo strategy to get calls to go his way. Some teams just foul more and some teams foul less and you can call a game perfectly and have a big disparity.
But Michigan doesn't foul much and were called for a lot of phantom calls, specifically on Winston drives (the and1 on Castleton and at least one on Teske), that were very bad.
Well said. I believe Beilein knows he's getting shafted by the refs for the phantom calls you note. In his post-game presser, he said this:
Beilein: “They only made six threes. That’s a goal for us, to hold them to five or six threes — they only made six. But they got to the foul line like crazy. We don’t foul, and somehow we got in big foul trouble today. Blame me for that.”
The key words, "We don't foul, and SOMEHOW we got in BIG foul trouble.." and "BLAME ME FOR THAT." That's super passive aggressive for, "there's no logical explanation for it but maybe I didn't verbally abuse the refs enough like my counterpart, so I'll just say it's my fault, stay classy, avoid a fine, and hope people can read between the lines."
Well done Luke15.
Twice this year I was the "victim" of Beilein speak---it took me a while to understand what he was really saying and mostly it was "playoff, playoffs, you are talking about playoffs?"
I think you are reading his words correctly.
That's a great quote. Didn't see that. I don't even think that's passive aggressive. That is very thinly veiled.
"We don’t foul, and somehow we got in big foul trouble today."
There are few more direct ways to imply about that "somehow" without directly stating that the somehow was the refs and then you've gone direct enough to get reprimanded by the league.
Agreed.
The Loyer fall was certainly one of the worst but there were others. That travel call on Teske was incredibly important - it was off a timeout and right when Michigan needed a bucket to stop the bleeding and recapture some momentum. The worst part about it was that the guy closest to the play with a clear view of his left (pivot) foot didn't make the call. The guy behind the play with an obstructed view made it. At first glance, did it look like he traveled ? Yes - but his foot never came off the floor. Pay attention and make the right call.
Winston had an and-1 vs Castleton and drew a foul on Teske that were downright horrible calls. There were little to no contact on both. These calls helped State keep pace before their big run and of course changed the way Michigan defended. And Iggy's 4th was bullshit, especially considering the same ref missed contact on his hand during a shot just seconds earlier.
These refs are basically fucking Frank Drebin posing as an umpire, making whatever call the crowd loves.
And yeesh - those two buckets Johns ceded were pretty bad - he just totally vacated the area beneath the basket on both plays. I hope Castleton gets more of those minutes going forward.
That travel call was the last straw for me. After getting poor officiating all night, that was just, like, c'mon man.
I read the long form piece about Tim Donaghy a couple weeks ago and they talk about the league going back and looking at some games he officiated and there were instances in which he called like 8 fouls in a row on the same team without calling one on the other team.
It felt like that after that travel call.
I don't think there was anything nefarious going on, but when refs are playing in that environment with degenerate loser fans breathing fire at them and degenerate loser coaches spitting in their face, it's going to be hard not to be affected. And that's why there's a big home/road disparity in conference play.
Some people (mostly msu fans but also some Michigan fans, somehow) argued that he did travel but that it was a close call. My response to them is, oh I didn't realize they changed the rule where you get to pivot on one foot. But yeah it looked to them like a step because Teske's feet hit at different times. These are NCAA D1 refs in the most important conference game of the year and they make obstructed-view calls because their eyes play tricks on them. That's where we're at.
Posted almost the exact same thing in the other thread. We don't get home officiating advantage like MSU does.
The real tip-off on the bias was watching the refs go over and feel the need to rationalize to Izzo every single call against MSU, as if they were a child having to explain their bad report card to their parents. He is a whiny little d-bag, but clearly he was in the heads of the refs. I am usually glad that Beilein takes the high road and is a classy guy, but every once in a while I wish he would really speak his mind and unload on the terrible officiating.
March 11th, 2019 at 12:31 PM ^
The 2 on 2 game with Simpson and Teske has been so blown up/exposed that, going forward, it really it not an option-against any team with half a defensive brain. It Michigan is going to insist upon this being a critical option they need to put the ball in Poole's hands and pick a screener whose defender will have significant difficulty defending Poole. This will demand a lot of defensive scrambling and there will either be lanes to drive or wide open catch-and-shoot opportunities.
March 11th, 2019 at 12:35 PM ^
Bingo.
March 11th, 2019 at 12:51 PM ^
Except you're relying on Poole to actually make a pass. That's a pretty big if at this point.
Yeah, I don't want to shit on Poole, but the last thing I'm looking to do is get him the ball in decision-making situations.
Indeed. Kid has a ton of potential, but until he learns to play within himself and let the game come to him, he's doing as much harm as good
A bad decision making poole is a better offensive player in that situation than Simpson. You want Simpson to run the offense but we are excited about hitting 1 ppp right now, the offense isn't consistent or good. We either need to go less ball screen heavy or switch the pick and roll set against any team with a mobile 5.
This isn't true. The problem is that Simpson was atypically a bad decision maker Saturday. No idea why he kept going at Tillman. There were other options, better matchups and open guys that he missed.
He was brilliant against Maryland. He's been brilliant most of the year. He just had a bad game. No reason to overreact to it.
March 11th, 2019 at 12:45 PM ^
I just don't know that I'm emotionally ready for this post mortem, yet.
March 11th, 2019 at 12:59 PM ^
Looking forward to M v MSU in the B1G final, playing in different brackets in NCAA and then playing in the final game. Looking forward to Beilein and players figuring it out, Izzo without homecourt ref advantage (not to mention better refs), and two great M victories.
The worst call in basketball I've seen all year is definitely that Iggy jump ball.
Why does it seem like there is zero accountability for referees in every sport? It doesn't matter if you do a good job or a bad job, you don't have to face scrutiny after the game for your decision-making. I get that it's a thankless job, but still.
Ultimately, you want basketball officials to largely call the obvious stuff at this point. Too many games are impacted because the refs put some team in the bonus halfway through the period.
Yeah, that one probably can't be topped.
Since it seems pretty obvious at this point that we sometimes struggle to generate good shots in a half court situation, could they just stop exacerbating this problem by purposely taking the air out of the ball?
Look, officiating should never be excuse. But the way the game is called and how you are forced to play in connection with it, from the standpoint of rotations and substitution minutes and matchups --let alone on the scoreboard-- matters.
And if it didn't, then Izzo wouldn't be outside the coaching box on the fucking court working the officials every time he's free to do so without the actual threat of a T for doing so.
Having worked as an official, I can tell you that you don't like dealing with loud, obnoxious coaches with that rep especially on their home floors with a packed crowd behind him, and so as long as his bitches aren't personal about legitimate calls against his team, you will allow him to do what he does --and cope.
You are taught to listen and be approachable, but as much as officials deny it, no doubt ongoing intimidation will get you calls. And officials are nominally interested in foul totals for each team.
Let's also be clear, it's much better to call a violation for traveling than a second-half and one foul on a crucial starter for either team.
Beilein by contrast, has the rep for not ref-baiting, so even though he's a nice guy, when he complains, officials are less tolerant of his behavior -- just because it's out of character.
After the game on Saturday, Beilein complained about the officiating in a passive-aggressive way, putting the sting of the rebuke on himself in lamenting that his team got called for so many fouls, even though it 's top ten in the country in not fouling. And so, in blaming himself, was he suggesting he should have been more vocal about the free throw disparity? Don't know. But he talked about it as a factor.
Again officiating is what it is in any game. The focus should never be on it, except that when it happens at certain venues over and over, and you can almost predict it --it really sucks when it does -- and has the appearance of impacting the outcome or prompting a discussion about it.
It seems to me that being ejected against Penn State had a little bit of an impact on Beilein. I think he believed he has earned some respect and some leeway with the officials, both in terms of how games are called and his ability to influence or impact officiating in the same way as other coaches. His comments after it happened also seemed like it was something that he took personally. I don't think he has looked as engaged since that incident.
The way I see it most officials don't have spines and allow themselves to be bullied by guys like Izzo. And then they eject Beilein for complaining about one of the most ridiculous moving screens you will ever see in that PSU game. That is an inexuscable double standard by the officials. The consistency of college basketball officials is a joke and we don't need people making excuses for them at this point, they need to do their job better. They injected themselves into what was arguably the biggest game of the Big ten season and allowed themselves to be bullied by Izzo, that is a travesty to be honest.
It drives me crazy that we give officials an out so to speak and excuse shitty performance because of hostile crowds or whining coaches. Part of their job is suppose to be able to block that out and call a fair game, but people have come to expect and almost accept home cooking as a thing, which in actuality is just an excuse for officials not to do their jobs.
March 12th, 2019 at 11:51 AM ^
This is just based on my opinion, but I feel like technical foul calls and ref control (or lack of it) of coaches is one of the worst parts of college basketball.
The Izzo example is perfect. For three (going on four) decades, Izzo has whined, bitched and moaned in press conferences and on the court. Since he does all three things constantly, refs expect it, live with it and probably allow it to affect them as well.
You'd think a quiet coach would be in a better position with refs, but I honestly believe just the opposite happens. Take the Beilein ejection from earlier this year. If Izzo does that, does anyone believe he gets ejected, or even a single Tech? But since Beilein is quiet, I have no doubt the refs felt he was showing them up.
I did not play big-time basketball but even going back to my high-school days I have long had the hypothesis that coaches that have been around forever (Coach K) and have a tendency to act like a complete child on the sideline are never going to get dinged by the refs. It is what it is, but I do think it sucks.
I am not claiming to be a basketball Xs and Os guy, but one thing that we often do that seems apparent to this amateur is when we do ball screens with Teske where X is the ball handler, we risk having two offensive liabilities determining what is going to happen.
Sure, both X and Teske have had a few games where their shots are falling, and when one (or both) is on, we win in a laugher.
However, more often than not, both of them are off (after Teske's 2nd airball, he should have been removed from ball screens the rest of the game) - and when they are both off, we are doomed.
Worse - against State, bringing Teske to the top of the key brings Tillman more into the play, and Teske out from under the basket where if nothing else he might get a couple garbage put backs or tap out a couple rebounds.
So to me, having X and Teske do a ball screen adds up like this on a coaching UFR:
X when MSU goes under or plays off : -1
Teske when MSU allows him to pop for an open 3: -1
X when Tillman switches onto him: -1
Michigan rebounding when Teske is standing 20 feet from the rim: -1
In short: it's a disaster.
How about having Iggy as the screener? Or having Livers as the screener and Iggy handling it?
Anyway, our hopes seem basically that either X or Teske is hot from 3 or we are doomed. There seems to be a better way to go about this.
Am I wrong?
In theory I don't think you're wrong but if Teske is on the court but not setting the screen, where are you going to put him? In the lane where he is clogging up the paint? In the corner where you don't have to guard him anyway?
Comments