B1G/NCAA basketball

[Hannibal]

I think that we have as much talent as a typical Elite Eight team, but last year's UK team or similar powerhouses? That, I'm not so sure about. This team might still be overacheiving somewhat.

[hack]

5 kids on this team will be drafted: Burke, McGary, Hardaway, Robinson, Stauskas. Maybe more. It's an absolute orgy of talent, especially when you recognize that some of these kids were way underhyped as recruits and also that Beilein is doing a great job coaching them up. Overachieving is not possible this year.

[iam416]

I think that we have as much talent as a typical Elite Eight team,

This. UK was super-talented last year. UNC was super-talented the year they annihilated MSU. Florida was super-talented, at least the second go-around when everyone game back.

They are not, in any way, as talented as any contender ever is. They're amongst the 5 or 6 best teams in the country. They're not an all-time elite talented team.

[iam416]

Talent aside, they're also not balanced. UK was uber-elite talented last year and balanced up and down.

Hell, Ohio State was, IMO, better, more balanced team two seasons ago with Diebler, Buford, Sullinger, Lighty and Craft.

[hack]

There are 5 future NBAers on this team. If the typical Elite 8 team has that, that's 40 future NBAers in a weekend. So, if this is a typical Elite 8 team -- and it might very well be -- it's not because that's what the talent dictated.

Anyhow, not all of Michigan's NBA prospects are going to have ten-year careers mind you, but it's a ton of talent. I don't think this is a most-talented-ever type of team. Not in the era of one-and-done, that's for sure. I'm not saying it's special or historic (Indiana's team looks roughly the same minus the POY candidate), but in the current era of college basketball, Michigan's team looks like a typical juggernaut:

-one or two one-and-done candidates

-another freshman or two who are major contributors but who won't be around for four years

-a bona-fide All American/POY candidate

-a few solid upperclassmen who will get their chance in the NBA

-a few role players.

I think its also correct to say they are among 4 or 5 teams this year who are contenders, and they don't stand out from that pack. Which, frankly, informs the ongoing coaching debate, because those other contenders don't have 5 future NBAers this year. They have some, and some of them are for sure going to be better NBA players, however.

I think the Kentucky comparison is interesting. That same orgy of talent - 5 players drafted. But they were, from beginning to end of the year, heads-and-shoulders above the rest of the field. One loss all year, though they would have had more if they played in the Big Ten and not the SEC. But what's interesting to me is that Anthony Davis won player of the year awards last year as a 6-11 defensive anchor with a very raw offensive game, and our candidate for those awards this year is a 6-foot PG. MKG = GR3, save for MKG is a hellacious defender and Michigan doens't make a big deal out of that sort of thing.

I think this is all relevant to the current question of whether the defense-first approach is a fit for college basketball and whether post play is a relic of the past. And, another question -- just exactly how much talent do you need, vis-a-vis what you do with it?

[hack]

Talent aside, they're also not balanced. UK was uber-elite talented last year and balanced up and down.

Hell, Ohio State was, IMO, better, more balanced team two seasons ago with Diebler, Buford, Sullinger, Lighty and Craft.

It's pretty balanced. The five best players on Michigan are a PG, 3 wings and a C. And one of those wings plays well in the PF role.

That's because Ohio State, coughcough ahem, was a defense-first team. These days, given the drive-and-kick game, if you can stop perimeter penetration either with a guy like Craft or with a guy like Anthony Davis, you're halfway there.

[WM Wolverine]

This team is very, very talented but it's also very young. 4 freshman, 1 sophomore among the top 7 players in minutes. Hardaway, Morgan (both juniors) are the only upperclassman getting minutes.

[The Oracle]

As far as what this team is built for, JB has shown his system works during the regular season. JB, with his couple of runs at WVA, has shown it can work and work well in the tourney. And those WVA teams didn't exactly have talent. There is no one way that is tourney build strong. It's mostly a crap shoot once you get in there and past the first 2-3 seeds. What kind of talent that has made deep runs in the past isn't really relevant either, even though this team would compare to many talent wise. All they have to worry about is what is out there this year and, as Talent said, Michigan is right there with the top teams that have the best chance to win it.

[hack]

This team is very, very talented but it's also very young. 4 freshman, 1 sophomore among the top 7 players in minutes. Hardaway, Morgan (both juniors) are the only upperclassman getting minutes.

Not uncommon. Burke is pretty damn seasoned for a college player these days. Horford is in his third year in the program.

[hack]

As far as what this team is built for, JB has shown his system works during the regular season. JB, with his couple of runs at WVA, has shown it can work and work well in the tourney. And those WVA teams didn't exactly have talent. There is no one way that is tourney build strong. It's mostly a crap shoot once you get in there and past the first 2-3 seeds. What kind of talent that has made deep runs in the past isn't really relevant either, even though this team would compare to many talent wise. All they have to worry about is what is out there this year and, as Talent said, Michigan is right there with the top teams that have the best chance to win it.

In the end, I agree. The ultimate litmus test is did you win or make it to the Final Four, but, say, what if Michigan lost in the second weekend of the tournament despite a game in which the offense wasn't disrupted to the point of ineffectiveness and the defense played well? It can happen, and that's just the ball's bounce.

I do think, however, that Kentucky last year is indeed a telling comparison. I'm pretty dedicated to what works, and in basketball that means ruling the paint. Seven Seconds or Less never did much for the Suns and it's not doing anything good for the Lakers now. I'm not willing just yet to abandon the paint, even though I recognize the need to adapt and the value of stretching the floor. And I think it's important to remember that getting proper spacing via a stretch 4 doesn't mean abandoning paint-based principles full stop. You can still be a defense-first team and you can still run your offense through the post.

In the end, Kentucky is a great comparison and thanks to talent for making it. Their best player was a rim protector and they were a defense-first team; they ran roughshod over college basketball. Our best player is a PG and we're an offense-first team; we're a solid contender along with some others.

If you strip out all the secondary factors, that might be the nut of it right there. Or it might be oversimplification. But it's worth mulling over.

[iam416]

UK defended the hell out of people. People bag on Calipari, rightly so in many instances, but if you don't want to play defense, you won't ever play for him.

As far as Beilein and the NCAA tournament -- he's been at a "BCS" program for, what, 10 complete seasons? He's made 1 E8 and 1 other S16. The E8 run featured a near death first round loss and a ridiculous "Pittsnogglian" shooting display against Wake. Also, that Cleveland kid was on fire. Forget his name. His S16 run was helped by the 3 seed going out in the first round.

Beilein may be a great coach, but you're not going to prove it up with his NCAA tourney performance, which has been meh.

Over the same span, Izzo has been to 3 FFs and not one of those teams was a 1 seed (2, 5, 5).

[lineygoblue]

I still think that Izzo is headed for being ONE OF the better coaches in the B1G rather than THE BEST in the B1G.

And IMO, the "THE BEST" came at the expense of Michigan fighting with both hands tied behind its back for 10 years.

[iam416]

Anyway, M, honestly, is still a bit of an unknown. They have 6 fairly hard to monstrous games in their last 11. We''ll see how they look in those games -- look, as opposed to win, necessarily. Sure, they're going to beat Ohio State, but do they do it in the 50s with the game mostly around a 5 point spread, or do they do it scoring 70+ with the game at a 10-12 points spread? Same with playing at Wisconsin.

[hack]

UK defended the hell out of people. People bag on Calipari, rightly so in many instances, but if you don't want to play defense, you won't ever play for him.


Precisely. Huge talent + great defense = dominating. In our case, huge talent + decent defense = rightful place amongst a batch of contenders. If it was there to be done over again, I would have made Hardaway and Stauskas scrap for minutes based on who plays better defense. But doing that would have meant moving Robinson to the 3 spot, and it seems like Beilein's prioritised Robinson at 4 over good defense.

[iam416]

I still think that Izzo is headed for being ONE OF the better coaches in the B1G rather than THE BEST in the B1G.

That's more a product, I think, of the influx and establishment of some really good coaches. Matta has been better, by a hair, than Izzo since he took over at Ohio State. Bo Ryan works fucking miracles in Madison. Crean has things humming at the IU factory. And Beilien is getting things going. I also like Groce, January blues aside. And Tubby is solid. I mean, it's just a really good coaching league.

That said, Izzo's career is clearly the best in the league. He's been completely brilliant, IMO.