MBB 2015-16 Trending Up Posbang
I think we all were a little worried early on with some truly dissapointing basketball. When you pair that with an abysmal last season and losing out on some big name recruits, it would be easy to express concern over the direction of the program.
But after the recent blowout wins (albeit against the most garbage of teams) and solid play overall from out most important contributers, I think we should start feeling good about this team. We may not be elite this season, but we are definitley a tournament team that has really turned things around in a short period of time as we assemble a solid resume.
Quality Wins:
- Texas (8-3 with notable victories over now #7 UNC, and @Stanford)
- @NCST (9-3 victory over potential #1 pick Ben Simmons and LSU)
Blowout Wins:
- YSU 59 pt win
- UNCC 55 pt win
- DSU 47 pt win
Quality Losses:
- #6 Xavier (12-0)
- #18 SMU (11-0)
- UConn (Currently 8-3 with losses to 9-3 SYR, 10-3 Gonzaga, and #4 Maryland)
Key Performers:
- Caris Levert 17.3 pt, 5.4 rb, 4.8 a, 1.2 st, FG% .503
- Duncan Robinson 12.5 pt, FG% .574, 3PT% .595
- Derrick Walton 10.4pt, 4.7rb, 4.3a, 1.8st, FG% .485, 3PT% .528
December 24th, 2015 at 10:56 AM ^
Is it really still a quality loss if you lose by 24?
December 24th, 2015 at 10:58 AM ^
Given we were on the road in a hostile environment against a team that is still undefeated and would be a top tournament team if their coach wasn't shady.
December 24th, 2015 at 11:15 AM ^
Anything more than 20+ is a blowout IMO. Best case scenario, we remove the word "quality" and just view it as a loss.
But overall, I agree the team is looking better, albeit against mostly inferior competition. They look ready for what should be an somehwat easier B1G slate than in past years.
December 24th, 2015 at 11:21 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 24th, 2015 at 11:41 AM ^
December 24th, 2015 at 12:20 PM ^
a blow out loss is no different than a close loss to a mediocre/poor team. we have 3 blowout losses; albeit against good teams.
that said, they were early in the year and the BIG season is the key to making the tourney. 10-8 will do it.
December 24th, 2015 at 2:11 PM ^
This is absolutely wrong. A loss to someone like Bryant will look much, much worse than a loss by any number of points to a top-20 team.
You really think the committee will care if Michigan lost by 24 or 14 to SMU in November?!
You are right that 10-8 should get us in, though.
December 24th, 2015 at 11:41 AM ^
December 24th, 2015 at 6:19 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 24th, 2015 at 7:00 PM ^
I hate when people say quality loss. Why cant it just be a loss to a quality team?
December 24th, 2015 at 10:59 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 24th, 2015 at 11:22 AM ^
are against JV teams. Not quality wins, but great practice time for our varsity. I don't see us getting to 18 wins, so it's NIT for us this year. Maybe we can win it.
We are at 10 wins. Let's see the football team match that next week!! Go Blue!
December 24th, 2015 at 11:24 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 24th, 2015 at 11:31 AM ^
and maybe an upset of MSU, I would be ecstatic by the end of the season.
December 24th, 2015 at 11:30 AM ^
Penn State, Rutgers, and Minnesota are very bad teams. They play them 5 times.
You can't find 3 more wins on the schedule?
You're underrating this team.
December 24th, 2015 at 11:33 AM ^
...it's tough to find 3 more wins. Plus, I think its a bit of stretch to think we will win all 5 games against PSU, Rutgers and Minn. I can definitely see us drop 1 (or even 2) on the road.
December 24th, 2015 at 11:50 AM ^
Only 1 of those is on the road (@ Minnesota). Penn State is home and neutral court game.
@Ilinois, and Indiana, Northwestern, and Iowa at home are very winnable games. Could be favored in all of them.
@Ohio State and @Wisconsin can be done. They've lost to teams not nearly as good as Michigan on those courts.
December 24th, 2015 at 12:09 PM ^
Penn State at MSG is still a road game. Also, keep in mind we were favored in a couple of those blowout loses, so being favored in a game doesn't mean much this year.
At best, we have middle of the road big-ten talent (Lavert, and maybe Walton, being the only exceptions). From your list above, with the exception of NW and Penn State, we don't have the talent to keep up. No doubt we could get hot and win some of these games, but its probably a stretch to think it will be consistent.
Last year, we were completely shut out from post season honors. I think we were the only team to which that happened, and that's a rarity. I know we had some significant injuries last year, but I think that is good indication of how we are this year.
December 24th, 2015 at 2:14 PM ^
Penn State at MSG is still a road game.
I think it's as much of a road game for us as it is for PSU. We'll fly, they might drive so the commute is similar. And we always fill MSG with alums. The crowd will be 85/15 in favor of Michigan.
December 24th, 2015 at 11:31 AM ^
December 24th, 2015 at 2:13 PM ^
Big Baller.
December 24th, 2015 at 12:22 PM ^
name the 7 BIG teams better than UM.
December 24th, 2015 at 1:14 PM ^
...only I think we get 6 teams (I think the big ten is a little down this year). With that, teams I see getting in from the big ten (in no particular order):
MSU
Maryland
Purdue
OSU (yea, a big stretch, I know)
Indiana
Northwestern (its about damn time!)
If there was a 7th, I think Iowa gets the nod over us.
December 24th, 2015 at 11:02 AM ^
December 24th, 2015 at 11:04 AM ^
I don't think we can call this a tourney team yet. We have blown out the high schools we have played and have gotten blown out by the upper end teams. Unless we get better rebounding and defense this team will struggle to get the 10 or so wins they need in the B1G to get to the tourney.
That being said... I will have fun watching them get better all year long.
December 24th, 2015 at 11:04 AM ^
December 24th, 2015 at 11:06 AM ^
December 24th, 2015 at 12:30 PM ^
How is that a contradiction? In fact, Beilein contradicts his own style with his big man recruiting. He recruits post players like Doyle (and Davis next year) when he never runs a post up offense. He should be recruiting athletic big men who can run the pick and roll and grab offensive rebounds, since that's the only offense a big man needs to be able to perform in Beilein's system.
December 24th, 2015 at 12:56 PM ^
December 24th, 2015 at 1:07 PM ^
December 24th, 2015 at 1:20 PM ^
I think you're being liberal with the term excellent there. McGary is the only big that I would consider excellent. Morgan and Horford, even though they were solid, were nothing more than the 5th option for our offense. McGary, come tournament time, was our 2nd option, and he was an elite recruit coming in (yes, the 1 time Beilein managed to land an elite big man recruit). Wilson and Wagner have potential and could get to that level, but as of right now we haven't seen much from them. That's understandable for Wagner as he is a true freshman who is learning a completely new system and is adjusting to life in a different country. Less understandable for Wilson who, in the short amount of time that he has been healthy the past year and half, hasn't done a whole lot on the court.
December 24th, 2015 at 1:30 PM ^
December 24th, 2015 at 1:36 PM ^
"Morgan and Horford, even though they were solid, were nothing more than the 5th option for our offense."
Apparently you can't read? Solid = not good in your world? My point with the McGary to Morgan/Horford comparison was that McGary was an elite big man recruit and took us to another level than Morgan/Horford did. Unless you want to argue that the NCG = elite 8 too. The difference between the NCG team and the elite 8 team wasn't Trey Burke and Tim Hardaway Jr, those players were replaced by the emergence of Stauskas and Levert. It was the absence of a game changing big man like McGary, who was our most valuable player during the tournament run. Oh, and he did that as a freshman, so there ya go.
December 24th, 2015 at 2:03 PM ^
December 24th, 2015 at 2:07 PM ^
Currently, yes. Morgan and Horford are no longer on the team if you didn't know.
December 24th, 2015 at 2:19 PM ^
Whose job is it to get these big men on the roster?
December 24th, 2015 at 2:13 PM ^
I'm not entering into this particular tiff, but your assertion that McGary v. Morgan was the difference between the NCG run and the Elite 8 run is insane. Individual NCAA tourney results are way too random and specific to assign to big picture crap like that.
The difference in reality was Kansas failing to foul in an obvious fouling situation and a sub-35% 3-point shooter hitting a gamewinner with LeVert in his jersey. The important thing is that both teams put themselves in position to make a run via seeding, and the latter team actually did a better job.
December 24th, 2015 at 2:22 PM ^
McGary absolutely was the difference. Not the sole difference but by far the biggest one IMO. The guy put up like 25 and 12 against an elite center in Jeff Withey, which helped Michigan beat probably the 2nd best team in the field that year. He dominated everyone until we got to the Louisville game, that was absolutely a huge difference. Morgan played really well in the tournament his senior year, but he wasn't able to go toe to toe with Kentucky's bigs like McGary was able to do with Kansas', and that proved to be a huge difference in that game as Kentucky murdered us in the paint and on the boards. 2013 Michigan also played in probably the most competitive Big Ten conference there's ever been, which no doubt hurt their potential tournament seeding.
December 24th, 2015 at 2:31 PM ^
If two fluky plays go the other way 2013 tops out at the Elite 8 and 2014 is the final 4 team that people would be bitching about not boosting recruiting.
No matter how many ignorant narratives people want to write, it's luck that swings the pendulum in the tourney.
December 24th, 2015 at 2:45 PM ^
December 24th, 2015 at 2:58 PM ^
1. I opposed your opinion that Morgan was not a good enough big man for his team to make the final four. You took that to mean that I think we shouldn't recruit big men. I think we recruited Morgan, so I think we should recruit big men too. We agree!
2. I only spoke on the 2013 and 2014 teams. Neither of those teams snuck into the tourney. Who are you talking to?
3. As for UCLA, we tried the Sam Gilbert thing in the 90's and we got in trouble :(
December 24th, 2015 at 3:01 PM ^
Well, apparently suggesting that the players actually make a difference is an ignorant narrative, so I'm sorry for being ignorant. I guess I was out of line for thinking McGary might've made a difference in the Kentucky game, where we got completely dominated inside, and might've rendered Harrison's 3 moot. I guess I was also out of line for suggesting that the recruitment of a future 1st round NBA pick is more impactful than the recruitment of a decent 4 year college, future European pro player. So again, sorry for my ignorance.
December 24th, 2015 at 3:15 PM ^
C'mon. You know I never said that McGary wouldn't have made a difference. What I DID say is that Michigan was good enough to win that game without him. Considering they lost a close game by a fluke basket, I am probably right.
You said that Michigan NEEDS an elite big man like McGary to make a final four. That is inaccurate, and that is all I am saying.
As for the ignorance thing, it's ok. I forgive you.
December 24th, 2015 at 3:34 PM ^
Now who's making the strawman? I never said Michigan needs an elite big man like McGary to make a final four. I suggested that McGary, who won the region's most outstanding player in the 2013 tournament, was the difference between where the 2013 team finished and where the 2014 team did. Apparently you think that's an egregious statement, I don't. You pointed to 2 plays as the difference and ignored the reason those 2 plays were even in positions to impact the outcomes in the first place.
December 24th, 2015 at 3:52 PM ^
This is what you said verbatim:
"The difference between the NCG team and the elite 8 team...was the absence of a game changing big man like McGary"
This is what I said was wrong, and it is wrong. There are only two meaningful differences in the performances of those two teams.
1. 2014 achieved more in the regular season.
2. 2013's luck ran out in the tournament 2 rounds later.
Both teams were capable of winning a title. Both teams were likely capable of losing in the opening weekend. I personally hate the attitude of judging an entire team and season by ignoring an entire season of games in favor of a series of coin flip games in a tournament that rarely crowns the best team.
December 24th, 2015 at 4:06 PM ^
I know what I said, and I reiterated it. Nowhere in that quote does it say that Michigan NEEDS an elite big man to make the final four. The tournament is about matchups, Kentucky was obviously a bad one for us given their size but guess what, a guy like McGary could've made it a more favorable one. That's all I'm saying. Kentucky exploited that weakness to the tune of 17 offensive rebounds and a +11 in the rebounding category. The goal is to reduce the number of matchups that could be unfavorable, and having a top notch big man does that for a perimeter oriented team.
Also, if you're gonna look at the regular season accomplishments, you need to factor in that the 2012-2013 Big Ten was a lot stronger than the 2013-2014. You had Indiana, OSU, MSU, and Michigan that were all like top 15 teams, plus a very good Wisconsin team that choked early in the tournament. Compare that to 2014 where Wisconsin, MSU, and Michigan were really the only teams that were title threats among the conference. So a much easier conference slate helps explain the 2013-2014's team regular season success compared to their predecessor.
December 24th, 2015 at 3:17 PM ^
December 24th, 2015 at 1:45 PM ^
December 24th, 2015 at 2:18 PM ^
An elite big is what is missing from this team. If we could get one, we'd be in contention for the Big Ten title. It's incredibly frustrating. I think it's totally fair to at least cock an eyebrow in Beilein's general direction, when it comes to his defense, and post recruiting (if not recruiting in general).
He's a fantastic teaching coach on the offensive side, and a very good in game coach. He's an even better person and role model. By no means am I saying he should be on the hot seat, but that doesn't mean there aren't area's that need considerable improvement.
December 24th, 2015 at 12:59 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad