Michigan Men's Basketball; John Beilein and Defining Recent Success

Submitted by Steves_Wolverines on

Hello and Happy Aloha Friday.

This offseason is still in its infancy, we’ve seen the usual terrible threads rear their ugly head, and our countdown is still in offensive linemen territory. 

This board has had significant debates within countless threads regarding John Beilein and the state of the Michigan Men’s Basketball program. There seems to be many users perched at both extremes; the sky is falling crowd, where John Beilein can’t do anything right, and needs to be shown the door sooner rather than later; and the crowd that has belief in John Beilein, his straight-arrowed approach, and success to date and potential for even greater success. We’ve seen birthdate as a hypothesis for determining what crowd you fall in to. We’ve seen differing definitions for a successful season, successful tenure, and recruiting hauls. We’ve also seen questions of how successful a “football” school should be when facing off against “basketball” schools.

My postulation is that the college basketball game is more of a “what have you done for me lately” business. High school players that travel the AAU circuit and earn McDonald All-American and Mr. Basketball accolades are on a one-track mission to go to the University which provides them the best opportunity to put their talents on display for one-two years, and then get drafted into the NBA (ideally as a lottery pick). I believe things such as “tradition” and geographic location can be thrown out the window when these high school athletes are deciding on which University they will attend. They only care about winning during their short time at college, and then fulfilling their dream of playing in the NBA. This is not a fault for these athletes; it’s simply the nature of the business. They know that the way out of wherever they came from, or how they financially help out their family, is to make it to the NBA and succeed.

The data I selected for this review is to look at which programs have been successful “lately”. I chose to go back to the 1999-2000 season. I chose 1999 as my starting season because 1) players on those teams are still competing in the NBA, and 2) coaches from 1999 are still coaching. The table below is broken up into three sections. The first section highlights teams that have made it to the National Championship game since 1999. The list of schools I chose to review is made up of teams that have been to a Championship game. This is how many define success; winning championships. The next section highlights wins, losses, NCAAT wins, and the number of 5-star recruits (as reported by 247 sports). I chose this time period to highlight which teams have had the most recent success. I also listed the number of players from each University are currently in the NBA (*this was made up prior to the 2016 NBA Draft). The last section shows wins, losses, bowl wins, and National Championships in football dating back to 2000-2001.

 

 

  1999 - Present   Basketball 2013-2014 - Present         Football 2000-2001 - Present      
Team NCAAT Championship Game Appearances NCAAT Championships Wins Losses NCAAT Wins 5* Recruits NBA Players Wins Losses Bowl Wins National Champions
                       
Arizona 1 0 92 18 6 4 13 93 103 4 -
Butler 2 0 59 39 2 0 2 - - - -
Connecticut 4 4 77 34 7 1 7 91 103 3 -
Duke 4 3 86 24 8 8 18 58 135 1 -
Florida 3 2 73 35 7 3 10 147 60 8 2
Illinois 1 0 54 48 0 0 2 76 117 2 -
Indiana 1 0 64 37 4 3 4 64 126 - -
Kansas 3 1 85 24 5 7 19 67 123 3 -
Kentucky 2 1 94 21 10 13 20 75 118 3 -
Louisville 1 1 81 23 5 0 4 137 65 7 -
Maryland 1 1 72 30 3 1 3 103 95 5 -
Memphis 1 0 61 39 1 1 3 82 113 3 -
Michigan 1 0 67 38 4 0 6 129 72 5 -
Michigan State 2 1 85 27 7 0 6 125 78 5 -
North Carolina 3 2 83 29 8 3 16 100 99 3 -
Ohio State 1 0 70 35 1 1 5 166 37 9 2
Syracuse 1 1 69 33 5 2 8 81 113 4 -
UCLA 1 0 65 40 4 3 14 114 89 5 -
Villanova 1 1 97 13 8 1 4 - - - -
Wisconsin 1 0 88 25 11 0 5 146 64 7 -

 

I wanted to see which schools are not only winning in the regular season, but also making multiple runs in the NCAAT. The figure below shows that Wisconsin and Kentucky have had the most success in the NCAAT, while only Villanova and Arizona can claim more regular season wins. MSU is right alongside Duke, UNC, UCONN, and Florida. Michigan is in a cluster than includes Indiana, UCLA, Maryland, and Syracuse. Illinois, Memphis, Ohio State, and Butler are the four teams which have had the least amount of recent success in the NCAAT.

The next graph illustrates 5-star recruits with recent success. The big three of Kentucky, Duke, and Kansas hog most of the 5-stars. Wisconsin, MSU, and Louisville have been successful while bringing in zero 5-stars; Michigan isn’t far behind. 

The next graph attempts to highlight how successful a program is at winning and getting their players to the NBA. It should come as no surprise to see Kentucky, Kansas, Duke, and North Carolina lead the way. Arizona, UCLA, and Florida comprise the next group. Michigan is on par with MSU, OSU, UCONN, and Wisconsin. 

The final graph attempts to highlight which schools can be defined as a basketball or football school (or both). Quadrant 1 (upper right) schools have had success in both football and basketball. Quadrant 2 (upper left) schools have had more recent success in football. Quadrant 3 (bottom left) schools have had little success in either football or basketball. Quadrant 4 (bottom right) schools have had more recent success in basketball. 

Analysis and Conclusion

I firmly believe in John Beilein, his system, his recruiting, and the success he has brought to this program. Beilein has shown time and again that his teams can compete against Kentucky, Kansas, Duke, etc. He has brought multiple NCAAT runs, Big-10 Championships, a NPOY, and success at getting players to the NBA. This presentation of information shows that Michigan isn’t too far behind the elites in college basketball.

My hope for the future is to have a decade of success similar to what Bo Ryan was able to do at Wisconsin. I believe that Beilein is the right coach for the job, and has the players in place to make a deep run this year and next year.

Go Blue!

Comments

magonus

June 25th, 2016 at 6:50 AM ^

This is a solid analysis but has one fundamental flaw and that is your measure of success. For Michigan, there is only one standard of success and that is winning the national championship. Anything short of that is a failed season. So yes, Beilein has knocked on the door of success but he has yet to actually have a successful season. I believe Beilein can get us there but it's an uphill slog when you look at some of the players teams like Kentucky and Memphis get and some of the refs teams like Michigan State and Wisconsin get.

The Priapist

July 7th, 2016 at 10:39 AM ^

Is considered to be a "tournament run"???

Two years (consecutive, BTW) where they went deep--but is winning one game, or even two, considered a "run"?

I agree on the bar thingy. At LEAST several years of Sweet 16, with making a regional final every couple years.

Either Michigan is MICHIGAN, or they aren't.

champswest

June 25th, 2016 at 11:21 AM ^

One of the measures of success, but I don't think you need to win the National Championship to be considered a successful program. I also don't think that putting guys in the NBA needs to be a goal or measurement of success for Michigan.

Steves_Wolverines

June 27th, 2016 at 5:11 PM ^

To be considered a successful college basketball team, you need to have multiple deep NCAAT runs (ideally winning one), conference championships, and the track record of sending players to the NBA. 

College basketball to the NBA is the career path for many (if not all) of the Top-50 (100?) players every recruiting cycle. They want to go to a University which gives them the best chance to win, showcase their skills in the one or two years they are in college, and then get drafted into the NBA. 

Maybe winning the championship is too high of a bar to define success (it is), but a team needs to have the potential to reach the championship every season, regardless of roster turnover or how bad a draw you get in the tourney. 

M-GO-Beek

June 25th, 2016 at 12:03 PM ^

Great read, but your data kinda contradicts your own posutlation that recruiting is a "what have you done for me lately business.  You didnt make a chart for it but you juxtaposed NCAATW with 5 star recruits, and there are clear discrepencies in those columns. Arizona, UCLA, Kansas all did well in 5 stars, but had few less NCCATW then would be expected for it yet Wisconsin, Lousiville, Mich State all did well in NCAATW without the help of 5 stars.

Steves_Wolverines

June 27th, 2016 at 5:06 PM ^

Good point.

I still think getting a significant number of 5* recruits is a result of winning championships, and being in a position to compete for a National Championship every season, regardless of roster turnover. Which is why UK, Duke, UNC, and KU are recruiting more 5-stars than almost anyone, and continually make deep runs in the NCAAT. 

The graph is also contradicting, with Wisconsin, Villanova, UCONN, MSU, and Louisville having success without the help from 5-stars. 

I could have expanded from looking only at 5-stars, like maybe Top-50 guys. That would have shown more separation in the elites vs teams that struggle with recruiting. For example, OSU would likely have a higher number of Top-50 recruits vs their 5-star total of just one.

And I do believe the best-of-the-best will still only consider teams that can all but guarentee a conference chamionship, a final four run, tons of nationally televised games, and proven track record of getting players to the NBA.

DarkWolverine

June 25th, 2016 at 6:35 PM ^

Still Struggling vs. MSU
An important measure of success is vs. Izzo at MSU. Some seasons we are competitive, others not so much. If we can't be the best in our state, we will struggle nationally.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Richard75

June 28th, 2016 at 6:00 PM ^

UK-UL is a bad analogy. Those games are always competitive, and thus actually are a sign that UL is quality, even though the Cards have been on the short end lately.

Conversely, U-M hasn't given State a game the past couple of years. A lot of our fanbase seems to just want to shrug this off, but there's clearly considerable distance between the two programs right now.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

93Grad

July 5th, 2016 at 4:32 PM ^

looking at Belein and what do the football results have to do with anything?  it seems like you did some cherry picking there to support a conclusion you came to before the analysis.  Belein had a great 2-3 year run but the other 6 years have been pretty pedestrian.  So to me, the jury is still out and these next couple of years (both on the court and the recruiting trail) will be really important in determing the overall health of the program.

Steves_Wolverines

July 5th, 2016 at 5:53 PM ^

I chose 2013-2014 as my starting year because of my theory that players are interested in the "waht have you done for me lately". Players from that recruiting class are still in college, so I thought it would be a good baseline to evaluate success from that recruiting class to the present. 

And I threw in football stats as a guide to highlight which how the football teams has compared to the basketball team, as each of the schools above have been to a Championship in basketball since 1999-2000. This was to highlight how difficult it is for "basketball blue bloods" to also have a successful football team. 

At Michigan, I'd guess that our fanbase prioritizes football over basketball. At UK, KU, UNC, Duke, and UCONN, I would guess it's the opposite. This may be another reason as to why the Florida's, Ohio State's, MSU's, etc can't keep up with those blue blood programs, albeit . 

To demand perfection in both sports may be the dream of every fan, but in reality it's extremely rare to come by. Which is why it's hard to fathom why some people here demand UK level recruiting, wins, NBA products, conference championships, and tourney runs from a school that considers basketball secondary to football. This is why I would consider what Beilein has done here so far a success. He's won conference championships, made it to the National Championship, sent players to the NBA, and has shown his Michigan teams can compete with anyone.