I think the Matthews get elevates guys like Jackson (the top guy on the board for me), Young, Cain, Lawrence and Livers, diminishes Tillman and even Wilkes, and basically eliminates Smith and Gaines. Don’t get me wrong–Wilkes is a terrific player and I’d love to have him (and I like Tillman too), but there’s going to be some overlap and difficulties playing everyone together–try to construct an offense playing Simpson, MAAR, Matthews, Wilkes/Tillman and a big, for example, and if you can, tell Thad Matta because he tried with a similar team and it didn’t work so well. Jackson, Young, Lawrence and Livers, by contrast, fit well with our roster as 4s, and Cain is a versatile, multi-position player who really complements Matthews and can play alongside him.
He looks like a young Tom Chambers (without the crazy hops) shooting the ball there. Seems like an outstanding fit for us. Rankings are interesting. From those highlights, I’d take him over TJ Leaf.
I don’t see Duncan starting at the four if we get a guy with Young’s size.
Senior Duncan Robinson will not go to a bench role for young. Wilkes yes, but not young.
I’ll ask what I asked above–what half court offense are you running with a lineup of Simpson, MAAR, Matthews, Wilkes and a big? Who spaces the floor to give your athletes driving lanes? If they do get to the basket and the defense helps, where is the ball going?
I would start young/Wilkes over Robinson as it seems you would. What we would do doesn’t matter, knowing beilein and what he would do, I’m just assuming Robinson is locked in the next two years.
Great point. All 5 would be average/below average 3 point shooters. Robinson fits in well with those 4 and him starting at the 3/4
Seems like arguing about the starting lineup two years down the road is a lost cause. So many question marks…
I think we can all agree that with Simpson, MAAR, Matthews in the rotation, there’s probably a need floor spacer. With Duncan Robinson in the rotation there’s probably a need for some defensive help.
There’s also still a void to fill for defending more traditional power forward. I think guys like Young, Livers, etc. would fill that gap obviously.
Like Dylan says, we’ll see (two years down the line and once Young hopefully commits).
I wasn’t suggesting Duncan would be on the bench. I’m suggesting if we get Young (or Jaren Jackson for that matter), Duncan won’t be playing the four.
In this offseason, I think you’re very likely to see Duncan working on increasing his agility, his vertical, and his quickness, with the thought that he can become more of a wing playmaker. He showed those skills at times last year. I’d say in two years, he’s probably either our starting two or our starting three, and I think MAAR may be coming off the bench in a sixth man role. Just my prediction.
I’m just not sure you can get away with Duncan defending fours. Young looks like he’s got much more length and jumping ability, and a wider body.
This thread is about Kyle Young. Really like those highlights and I think he would be a good option to at least compete for the starting role as a freshman. Would depend on how quickly he picks up offensive and defensive schemes, as is the case with most freshmen. Shows some ability to hit some mid-range shots and definitely has the size to guard bigger 4s.
Moved the Duncan Robinson talk to another thread… Kyle Young seems like a pretty good fit at the four. Not necessarily going to do much off the bounce, but he can pick and pop, hit catch and shoot threes and is a plus finisher around the rim.
I agree. Young is the guy I want the most out of our remaining (reasonable) targets
Same here. I want young pretty badly due to his upside and the fact he’ll be around a few years and be very productive.
Young is perfect stretch 4 that Beilein never had, but I am not optimistic about his recruitment.
You don’t need great shooters to have a great offense. North Carolina had the best offense in the country and shot 32% behind the arc. Michigan had a couple very good outside shooters and couldn’t scrape the top 30. Obviously there are schemes and skill sets of players that can be utilized to have a successful offense without real good shooters.
And there were numerous articles throughout the season about how UNC was an anomaly in today’s game. If you have a dominant big man, are one of the best offensive rebounding teams in the country, are one of the best fast break teams, and are also one of the better defensive teams in the country, then you might be able to get away with being a poor outside shooting team.
Michigan is a ways away from having any of those 4 qualities, so it makes sense to have some good shooters on the floor.
I don’t think UNC’s recipe is very easily mimicked. UNC had a pretty unique blend of talent that allowed it to succeed like that. Given today’s game and Michigan’s offense, floor spacing is always going to be critical.