|01/18/2019 - 5:11pm||I'm sure the seeding is fine…||
I'm sure the seeding is fine, good for controversy. Interesting matchups like 2012 vs 1979 are at the heart of offseason message board discussion type stuff.
Going to have to agree to disagree about 1996 vs. 1997. I just deleted a big write-up because we agree on the more pertinent question, which is that 1995 had better tools than 1996. 1996 had, in my opinion, the worst skill position lineup of any team between 1985 (when my memories begin in earnest) and the onset of the RR era, with only 2001 really able to join that discussion (rescued by Marquise Walker).
|01/18/2019 - 4:43pm||Nice theory. They tried it…||
Nice theory. They tried it with Garoppolo and it didn't work out. I wouldn't be surprised if they drafted someone if they thought that guy had a chance to blossom, but unless Brady says he's stepping down, it's hard to tell how long the guy will be warming the bench. We can say 2-3 years, but 3 years is actually a while. Virtually nobody waits the way Rodgers did; at most, it's a year, and then results are expected.
And where the Pats draft, a sure-thing QB is hard to come by. Belichick is not the sort to mortgage the franchise on a pick that's not a sure thing, which means you wait for someone to drop to you, and those players are well-enough scouted that it's unlikely to find a quality option.
And Brady might not be totally cooperative, either. Perhaps he should be, and perhaps the Pats shouldn't care, but Brady is still their best chance to win trophies until he retires or his arm falls off.
|01/18/2019 - 4:36pm||A rush end? I don't recall…||
A rush end? I don't recall that. He was technically a DT on the recruiting boards and he moved to 5-tech behind Chris Wormley almost immediately. It's not like they couldn't have put him at 3-tech if they had felt the need; we could have used him there this season. He was never a weakside DE type at any point in his recruitment or college career.
|01/18/2019 - 4:27pm||I feel like 1996 is getting…||
I feel like 1996 is getting overrated by suggesting that it had a better roster than 1997. There were some departures (Bowens and Irons the most notable) but Anthony Thomas was a key supplement to the offense. And, in Brian Griese, Michigan finally had a stable and reliable (if not generally spectacular) QB.
The 1996 offense remains one of the three worst of my lifetime. 1997 wasn't great, but it was better than that.
I was born the day of the 1979 UM-OSU game, so I have no personal experience to share about that team, but I'll bet it wouldn't have gotten blown out by Alabama the way the 2012 team did (Bama finished #1 in the 1979 season if you'd like to throw up a bit in your mouth), so I think that was a good choice.
|01/18/2019 - 12:10pm||If I were in town I'd be…||
If I were in town I'd be interested. Finally got into LCA at the GLI, love the arena.
|01/18/2019 - 11:59am||This is a reasonable place…||
This is a reasonable place for Michigan to lose its first game. Things go wrong, some shots that should go in clank, a couple of key fouls early, Happ goes off. Then we spend a few days hand-wringing about Michigan's weakness in post defense and start predicting doom against teams with big men that are offensive dangers. Unsaid but not absent from this plot: Beilein then sucks a couple of teams into the trap and Michigan beats teams with high-scoring bigs by 10-15 later in the season.
Or maybe it's not reasonable and Michigan wins on the road anyway because this team is different. Who knows?
|01/17/2019 - 8:51pm||The NBA has been on the rise…||
The NBA has been on the rise for several years now, so stuff like this is bound to happen. The Lebron move might make a difference (not only is he out west, but he's obviously not going to win his conference) but some of the trouble might be the feeling that we know how the season is going to finish.
A couple of years ago, when Golden State was the new thing, they were exciting and still kind of an underdog favorite (because they hadn't won anything yet) and there was genuine uncertainty about what would happen when the Warriors and the Clippers and the Thunder and the Spurs met in the playoffs, when all were great teams. Lebron was out east, so the Finals were guaranteed to be interesting and competitive.
Now, it's still the Warriors. And, as far as most people are concerned, some pretenders.
That can shave some viewers.
|01/17/2019 - 8:47pm||The NBA playoffs are very…||
The NBA playoffs are very effective at resolving who the best teams are. As a result, there are vanishingly few genuine upsets. Low seeds have basically no chance.
It means that the champion really is the best team, it's not a fluke. Flukes happen in college basketball, and they happen in baseball, and they happen to some extent in the NHL; even in the NFL, where there's an article on the Ringer right now about how unflukey it is, you get champions like the Ravens a few years ago. But even the most surprising NBA champion of my lifetime, the 2004 Detroit Pistons, were clearly the best team in the conference and went back to the Finals (to game 7!) the next season.
It is what it is. Seven game series in basketball have such a massive sample size of "tests" that the best team will generally win. The downside is that we all know that the Warriors will be in the conference finals and that the Western champion will probably win again.
|01/17/2019 - 5:57pm||Good stuff.
"Certain elements" suggests, to me, that if Warinner sticks around we'll keep his basic terminology, technique, and line calls for the running game. Which makes sense and won't greatly affect what the passing game does.
|01/17/2019 - 5:29pm||Perhaps, perhaps not. Which…||
Perhaps, perhaps not. Which plays didn't compliment each other? Maizen said that Michigan never developed plays to work off of the inside zone play, but that's just not the case. See the leak concept against MSU, for example.
It's possible that Michigan didn't do it enough, but I find assertions like this are generally based off of vague impressions rather than careful scrutiny.
|01/17/2019 - 5:08pm||(No subject)|
|01/17/2019 - 5:07pm||It's not clear what "routes…||
It's not clear what "routes weren't set up very well" actually means. We don't have comprehensive all-22 coverage, so we don't have a good idea of how all of the route combos set up. I have a better idea of how Clemson and Alabama run their passing offense than Michigan because the Film Room channel used all-22 footage, even though I scoured every bit of Michigan stuff I could find this year.
Often the issue appeared to be Shea. I discussed that here when I overanalyzed some plays from the MSU game. One play in particular (Brian clipped video of it here) I noted that Shea should have thrown the ball and did not until it was too late; my analysis is actually a bit shallow because I didn't get a chance to analyze the replay clipped above, but I dissent from Klatt's commentary there--DPJ cut inside of his single-coverage defender 20 yards downfield and had room and Patterson absolutely should have thrown him the ball.
Shea simply did not pull the trigger at times when there was a man to throw to. The MSU game has another, obvious example of this when he rolled out and had DPJ wide open in the end zone and didn't throw to him.
This is where I wonder if Harbaugh's QB coaching style has an effect, encouraging caution given the philosophy of the coach and the team. And if a defense that is really good at man coverage but is pretty vanilla in its understanding of zone makes it tough for our QBs to pick apart zone coverages from teams that know what they're doing.
|01/17/2019 - 3:41pm||I would be delighted with…||
I would be delighted with such a play, because it means that Michigan looks at the numbers and does what the numbers advise. Similarly, if they call a run (everyone calls runs! Bama ran almost 60% of the time on first down in first halves I charted for last season!) and Shea sees that there are 7 defenders, 6 blockers, and DPJ singled up on the outside, I hope he checks to PA and throws a vertical to DPJ for 80.
Just having an offense that consistently exploits that stuff is big.
|01/17/2019 - 3:36pm||I'm not sure JBB caused all…||
I'm not sure JBB caused all that slowdown. But Steuber really, really struggled against OSU, and that hurt our offense significantly.
I don't think "quick-twitch" was the issue with the passing game so much as teams quickly learned that Michigan struggled to throw against zone coverage and played it an awful lot. People say "throw the shallow crosses!" but against zone that's asking a guy to catch a pass and get blown up two yards down the field. Zones can, of course, be picked apart, but Shea wasn't great at doing that.
|01/17/2019 - 3:28pm||Tempo isn't a function of…||
Tempo isn't a function of having one man or multiple men call the plays. It's not like there was a debate over the headset every down before the play got called; the play was typically in with 20+ seconds to go. The contrast with the Hoke/Borges regime with the team getting to the line with 5 seconds left in the clock is stark.
It's more fundamental than that--tempo teams can slow down, but they can also speed up, because the entire way the team practices and communicates is different. Harbaugh, with his NFL background, ran an NFL-style QB-centered playcalling process, where the QB receives the play, calls it, and controls the LOS. Even though, due to complexity, Harbaugh didn't give the QB much authority to adjust things.
Modern high-tempo offenses (the high-end stuff, like Oklahoma State, Ole Miss, etc, that Michigan will definitely not become) work with vanishingly small playbooks. They require the whole team to look to the sideline for the playcall, which can be done quickly, and adjustments come from the sideline only.
There's a middle ground available, and I think Michigan can find it. If it wants to. But it is a function of the entire team, not just "who calls plays." The committee wasn't the issue there--it was the process that Harbaugh wanted the team to go through.
Michigan certainly went 3, 4, and 5 wide a fair amount last year. They need to actually use the strengths of those formations, and perhaps be willing to run by spreading teams out. With blockers like DPJ, one would think that you could run with 4 guys split out and extra space on the field.
If Michigan goes 4-wide, I want defenses to be stuck worrying about single coverage on one of our three great receivers or terrified of Zach Charbonnet or Chris Evans in space. And when they cheat a safety down, Michigan has to be willing and able to drop back and pull the trigger to a single-covered wideout every time.
|01/17/2019 - 3:00pm||I don't blame Gattis for…||
I don't blame Gattis for this, and it's good that he's getting out and doing interviews, but these are platitudes that tell us very little.
How little? Every one of them could have been said by a coach prior to this football season and could not be disproven. "Total offense" and "Group effort" are good things to say, but there's no consensus definition of those terms that differentiates them from what we already saw. RPO, spread, other schemes based upon personnel? We ran spread formations (a fair amount, actually) and ran some RPO and of course ran "other schemes." Rock touches spread and balanced? I dare say that they were too spread out and balanced. Guys like Mckeon and Bell and McCurry were getting targets along with DPJ and Nico Collins. Chris Evans was getting carries between the tackles, etc.
It's not that he won't actually produce a good offense, but these quotes don't say much on their own one way or another. The #1 issue I had with the offense was play distribution and the way possessions seemed to be thrown away in the first half most of this past season. None of what he says addresses that.
|01/17/2019 - 11:51am||We were in on Wahlstrom and…||
We were in on Wahlstrom and it looked good to land him; there were varying reports of why he didn't come (couldn't get admitted was one issue promulgated, but there might be a different reason that was the real one) but we were close.
He may be having a bad season at BC but that's unsurprising given that BC is going through an extreme version of what we went through in Red's last season. Everything is bad there.
|01/17/2019 - 11:03am||Our top scoring line…||
Our top scoring line performed better than I think anyone expected they would going into the season, which helped the team's performance a great deal. Those guys are gone, and with Jack Hughes unable to get far enough ahead to enroll this year, Michigan was left with few good front-line options; the best option is the subject of this thread.
Mel is pursuing a two-pronged recruiting strategy, both going after some top prospects like the Hughes brothers and also securing commitments from guys who will enroll later and hopefully develop into solid college players for longer periods of time. This gives Mel room to go for a couple of reach guys (Cam York, one of our commits, is lighting it up for the NTDP right now) while also having guys he has scouted and recruited ready to join the team when some of those guys go to the OHL or straight to the pros.
|01/17/2019 - 11:00am||So he should have fired the…||
So he should have fired the man responsible for making Michigan hockey what it is? None of us would care about hockey if Red weren't there. Ultimately, Red had to make the decision to step down. And the extra year he came back partly by request, Warde was still getting settled in and wisely chose not to launch blindly into a coaching search when he didn't have the data.
Mel has been doing fine. The team made the Frozen Four last year. They're not scoring enough this year and there are a few too many defensive breakdowns. It's not the end of the world (look at what's happened to BC!) and it can't reasonably be assessed to Warde's performance.
|01/17/2019 - 10:42am||So your argument is that…||
So your argument is that Warde should fire Mel Pearson?
|01/17/2019 - 10:41am||That's a great way to ensure…||
That's a great way to ensure that good young players never come to your school. Then it won't matter if you let them go or not, because nobody good enough is ever on the roster.
World Juniors is a great tournament and a great experience for the players that go. There are occasional hiccups (Mike Cammalleri caught mono at World Juniors in the 01-02 season and missed a key stretch run, but came back for the postseason and helped lead the team to the Frozen Four) but you also see players emerge and hit the stretch run hot, like Zach Werenski in 16.
|01/17/2019 - 10:39am||Ugh. This is terrible news…||
Ugh. This is terrible news for a team that's already teetering outside of the tournament right now.
|01/16/2019 - 11:04pm||There’s no money in college…||
There’s no money in college hockey for FSD. They can’t get a big UM-MSU package like they used to have because BTN owns the rights. FSN has the rights to Minnie games because they used to broadcast EVERY Minnie home game and a fair number of their road games and people up here actually watch in significant numbers. It’s a completely different market and always has been.
Change needs to come from BTN, not from Warde.
|01/16/2019 - 10:51pm||Honestly, this doesn’t seem…||
Honestly, this doesn’t seem that hard. It’s Teske, followed by Simpson. Poole, Matthews, and Iggy are all excellent, and Michigan regularly wins games in which at least one of those guys is basically invisible-someone else can step up and supply what’s missing.
Things get really nervous when Teske is out of the game. His impact on offense goes beyond the visible and counting stuff; he always knows where to be and his ability to seal defenders is vital for other guys who drive. The way the offense stalls when he’s not there goes beyond the stats he brings.
HeiZen is being overly harsh on Brooks. He plays well in occasional spurts and doesn’t hurt the team; on occasion he’s been a real factor. There just isn’t a lot of usage available for or needed from him. His D is worse than Z’s, but then, so is literally every other point guard’s. It’s possible he gets passed by DDJ at some point, but it’s also possible that Beilein’s PG magic makes him a vital player down the road.
I am less optimistic about Davis.
|01/16/2019 - 10:44pm||Huh, that’s interesting.||
Huh, that’s interesting.
|01/16/2019 - 2:06pm||This weekend was yet another…||
This weekend was yet another chance to launch into a prolonged stretch of better results by tying or winning in night two, thus making the weekend a solid net positive. We've basically been waiting almost the entire season for Michigan to put together a complete weekend and it never happens.
And unless something radical changes, they'll miss the tournament as a result.
|01/16/2019 - 1:56pm||End thread.||
|01/16/2019 - 1:45pm||I don't want that request to…||
I don't want that request to succeed. But what I'd like even more is for it to be a huge, noisy, public controversy that is embarrassing for Georgia. And if for Georgia, which is located in the pretty easy-going town of Athens, then also for the entire SEC.
|01/16/2019 - 1:41pm||He graduated. The grad…||
He graduated. The grad transfer rule, to me, is a great feature, a reward for academic success and a boon to people like Hurts who are good but supplanted by someone who is better, and other such situations.
The Fields transfer, if he is immediately eligible, is free agency. Hurts put in the work and has earned his chance somewhere else.
|01/16/2019 - 1:32pm||Hurts is considered more…||
Hurts is considered more limited as a passer. He can do it, of course, but there was a narrower frame of circumstances where he could succeed.
If there's an offense where he can learn to pass effectively and show some promise for the next level, Oklahoma is it; and Oklahoma can still use his running ability.
Higher pressure here, since he'll have both Tua and the previous officeholders to deal with, but it'll be interesting to watch.
|01/16/2019 - 12:29pm||Michigan rarely ran true gap…||
Michigan rarely ran true gap-blocking plays this past season. The base run for most of the year was the pin-and-pull zone, and there was a great deal of split zone and inside zone as well. The Zone Read Bluff Arc play that ran for huge yards against Wisconsin was a bluff of split zone action; read plays like Shea's first down pull run in that clinching drive against Michigan State came off of pin-and-pull looks.
Down G is a hybrid gap/zone play but it plays well off of the existing zone looks, particularly pin and pull, where the player the guard blocks is expecting the action to go outside of him and instead gets sealed off.
Michigan rarely, rarely ran pure power, and the classic counter was even rarer. Michigan was running staple Ed Warinner zone plays almost all year long.
|01/15/2019 - 6:57pm||Just a note: I think many…||
Just a note: I think many agree at least partly with you. The post you’re responding to wasn’t saying bombs were a mistake, I think; he was suggesting that Harbaugh could get too conservative about bombs and run instead. Minor quibble.
|01/15/2019 - 2:22pm||It is simply fallacious to…||
It is simply fallacious to assert that questions about how Harbaugh will break down gameplanning and playcalling are equivalent to questions about his desire to win.
It sounds suspiciously intellectually vapid feelingsball "they just didn't want it enough" radio takes that completely ignore the things actually going on the field (that the take-supplier doesn't understand) for a simple but inaccurate solution.
Harbaugh's desire to win is not in question. His perspective on what it will take to win and lose is not fully known. If he believes that having Gattis run a gun-spread offense in the mold of Jim Moorhead is the only way to win, he'll do that. But if he believes that running the football two thirds of the time is the best way to win, that's what he'll do.
Harbaugh quite clearly believed that running the football frequently was the key to winning last year, because that's what he did. So the question is not whether or not he wants to win, but what he believes is most likely to result in wins in 2019.
And we simply cannot answer that question yet.
|01/15/2019 - 1:11pm||Army is going to be a tough…||
Army is going to be a tough game. This past year we pointed and laughed at Oklahoma when Army took them to OT (we had to follow it on twitter, it was a pay-per-view and not available nationally).
Army basically turned the game into a series of exceedingly long drives that ate up yardage and the clock. People attempted to use the game to criticize eventual Heisman winner Kyler Murray for getting caught in such a close game, but he barely had any time to do anything with the football; when they were on offense, Oklahoma was fine, but they had half-hour breaks between possessions.
Brown, assuming he is sticking around, will once again have to scheme against an option offense and shut it down. The good news is that even with weaker personnel, Michigan should be able to compete and defend a lot better than Oklahoma. The bad news is that we may only get 8 possessions and we'd better get a decent lead to hold on to.
|01/15/2019 - 12:37pm||A very, very good question.||
A very, very good question.
|01/15/2019 - 12:27pm||I've made this argument…||
I've made this argument before. I'm trying to drill down more on Bama's playcalling, because their offense was so effective and I felt like Michigan just wasn't challenging the entire field the way Bama was.
I'm not finished yet and might not have time to finish this week (which might mean, ever. We'll see). I've charted 9 games, through the LSU game.
The key is that I'm charting first halves only--Alabama played a lot of garbage time; remember that Tua Tagovailoa didn't play in the fourth quarter until the LSU game.
Through nine games, in the first half, Alabama has:
183 first downs (!)
They have called runs on 102 of those first downs
Overall, they threw 53% of the time; on first down, they ran 56% of the time.
These stats are affected by body bag games a bit; Against Louisiana-Lafayette, they ran on first down 83% of the time. In "big" games they tended to pass more, culminating in the last game I've managed to tally, LSU, where they ran on first down only 30% of the time in the first half, and ran a total of 16 times against 29 passes.
Remember these are first halves only. BTW, they had fewer than 7 drives in a first half only once; in four games they had 8, and in one game (Ole Miss, unsurprisingly) they had 9.
More to come, perhaps.
|01/15/2019 - 12:15pm||Gentry wasn't used well, in…||
Gentry wasn't used well, in my opinion. Part of the problem is that he did not demonstrate the live ball skills one would think would correspond with his size. And since defenses played a lot of zone, his targets were often tight windows between the shallow and deep zone defenders that relied upon precision rather than his superior physical attributes. Getting Gentry in man going down the seam is a great idea that rarely or never happened.
|01/15/2019 - 12:06pm||One thing that might be…||
One thing that might be available is the all 22 from the playoff game against Oklahoma and the final against Clemson. That offers far, far more data on the passing game than the tv angles we get for most Michigan games.
Stay tuned, I might have some playcalling analysis on Bama from the season at some point, though it's of a more limited utility.
|01/15/2019 - 11:49am||I'd be interested in someone…||
I'd be interested in someone Who Knows taking a deeper dive into this. Teske is a terrific defender in most circumstances. However, we are frighteningly shallow at the 5; elsewhere, Michigan specializes in forcing low-percentage shots.
So I wonder if the strong play of opponent 5s is due to a conscious choice. Either:
Either of those might be decent choices against most teams. My memory on this isn't great, but it feels like opposing big men aren't getting much success when Michigan throws a double team their way, but often find Michigan declining to do so. Which would favor option 2.
|01/15/2019 - 11:44am||I'm skeptical that we're…||
I'm skeptical that we're really going to see a fundamental change in Michigan's offensive committee structure, but I'll be pleased if it happens. One of the challenges Michigan had in putting "speed in space" is that it was running some of the kinds of plays you talk about when you say that--jet sweeps, quick flare screens to WRs, etc. But they were awkwardly executed, never seeming to get the idea quite right. The lone exception was that dummy screen-and-go to DPJ against (Maryland, I think?) that they threw out there because they were basically giving up on bubble screens the rest of the year.
Gattis, we presume, knows how to coach the players to execute plays like that better. He also sat under Moorhead when Moorhead's philosophy was that if you leave a WR in man, his QB was going to throw and they were going to make the play. And they did.
But Gattis was just co-OC at Bama, so there's no telling what he will do specifically. If the team takes time to gel, Gattis doesn't have a track record one can look to and say, "he'll get this together," the way we have with Warinner. It'll be hard for Harbaugh not to start taking some of the reins if the team doesn't start out explosive.
|01/15/2019 - 11:36am||We'll see. Makes me wonder…||
We'll see. Makes me wonder if Warinner is still here in the fall. He had a significant role in the offense last year (perhaps too big, depends on who was really the one pushing for the heavy running orientation, since it was far more of an effort than in past Harbaugh years here). Now he may be taking a step back, depending upon whether or not Gattis continues to utilize Warinner's expertise in selecting run concepts.
Also, even if he designs and calls the plays, I have a hard time believing Harbaugh will be able to sit back all season if Michigan throws a lot early and winds up struggling with TOs or quick 3-and-outs that tire out the defense. But he's got to buy in if this is the plan.
|01/15/2019 - 11:34am||Harbaugh has, every year,…||
Harbaugh has, every year, shown an ability and willingness to change and adapt. Both in the offseason and during the season; frankly, sometimes too much.
But even when he reformated the basic look of the offense, as he did this past year, the committee structure was still in place.
We'll see if that really changes or not.
|01/15/2019 - 11:32am||This is an underrated factor…||
This is an underrated factor in the offense's grind this past year.
Our offense was kind of a moneyball concept--with defenses designed around the spread, force mismatches by loading up on beefy blocky/catchy types and pound them. New England just eviscerated San Diego doing EXACTLY that on Sunday.
The thing is, they succeeded because they executed well.
Michigan's TEs weren't dominant blockers. Mckeon was ok--he blocked well when he identified and engaged the right guy, but he very often failed to do so--but he was a non-factor in the passing game. Gentry was a factor in the passing game, but not nearly as much as he should have been, and he wasn't a real blocking threat. Eubanks was less featured, though seems to be a capable receiver.
Running 2 TE sets works if you can clobber smaller defenders in the run or if you can dominate lumbering LBs on pass routes; Michigan's TEs did not do those things, and so they wound up just taking snaps and passes away from guys like DPJ and Perry and Collins and Black.
I liked the concept in theory. In practice we were giving yards and points away.
|01/14/2019 - 10:49pm||I would think so. MLB is the…||
I would think so. MLB is the dream job for a PbP guy because it's basically full time. No college sport is a full-time gig.
|01/14/2019 - 10:47pm||What's weird to me here in…||
What's weird to me here in Minnesota is that the best announcing voice in local baseball belongs to... Dan Gladden, the guy who's supposed to be the jock color commentator. When I first started listening to the occasional Twins broadcast up here I thought he was the lead guy. He's really good.
|01/14/2019 - 10:46pm||Shep literally had hours of…||
Shep literally had hours of notice to begin his Tigers stint, so there was no time to refine his style for Baseball. Between lead time now and spring training, there's a decent chance that he'll calibrate himself for the full-time baseball gig.
|01/14/2019 - 10:44pm||It's the difference between…||
It's the difference between radio and tv. TV announcers let the images speak; on radio they have to call everything. Some crossovers like Scully used the radio style for both, but in general tv guys should and do occasionally pot down and leave the air clear.
Think of the Woodson punt return TD and the difference between the calls of Beckman and Jackson. They were both perfect calls for their medium. Jackson let you soak in the excitement of the moment. Beckman actually drew out the call of the play a bit and amped up the audio-only excitement by calling back to Desmond.
The calls would have been completely wrong reversed. They were just right where they were.
|01/14/2019 - 9:11pm||Good for him, I guess. He's…||
Good for him, I guess. He's been working his way up for a long time. I like a lot of his stuff; I hope he's good.
I feel bad for Mario, who lost his dream job. I was never particularly impressed with him, though, and the tv broadcast really pales in comparison to the quality of the radio team, specifically Dan Dickerson.
I hope Shep works well in the new role.
Takes one potential Michigan football pbp replacement off the table. Honestly not sure who the logical next man up is there.
|01/14/2019 - 8:30pm||In the clip included, the…||
In the clip included, the act of flipping removed any real accuracy from the throw. Where the ball wound up was kinda random, and since it's still a near-post ball, the ability to make something out of that is limited. I would think that retaining and using possession would always be more valuable. And in a late-late-clock situation where you're worried that stoppage time will expire, it's just as likely to expire while the thrower is backing way up.
|01/14/2019 - 8:27pm||I wonder about that.
I wonder about that.
He's 7'1, he shows the ability to defend smaller players, great on defense, great conditioning, huge block rate...
I'm not saying his shooting will ever make him a stretch 4, but isn't there still a place in the NBA for a "rim protector" type? What does he lack for that skillset? We're not talking about the focal point of a team, but it seems to me that he can be a rotation piece. Am I missing something?