Its crazy! Every single time its like they have to force the ball all the way past half court to get a ball in from under the basket. Even then its almost a issue, close to being a steal or has been stolen. Frustrating to watch. The press yeah haven’t been challenged much really. However yes they haven’t pushed it enough for some easy buckets or even take it to the hoop and try to get a And 1. They settle way too much on J’s and no dribble drive game.
Yea I don’t understand why belein doesn’t come up with new inbound plays under the basket. They can never get the ball in without doing what you said. This has been a issue for years.
No. As a matter of fact, for years the narrative was that he was one of the best coaches in America on inbounds plays and out of the timeout. This is one of those places where a person on the internet can just say a thing without consequence, but it just isn’t true. Every college team gets surprised by tight situations out of timeouts now and then. As far as I’ve seen we haven’t gotten caught more than once or twice in ten games this year.
Every fan is going to place their own team under the microscope and magnify the flaws; and half the fans in America want their coaches fired and all the players replaced. But people need to be called on it when the stuff they come up with courts the ridiculous. We had one or two bad stretches with inbounding at key times in games the last few years–as almost everyone does–and. . . meme time. No.
1 Like
Fans are generally negative, unless they’re ‘pink hats’. Actually, I think the narrative on this forum mostly is from people that do watch the games. They actually had a sweet out-of-bounds play at the end of the VA Tech game with Moe taking a long pass along the base line then feeding Duncan who was cutting off the top of the key. He didn’t make it but it was well thought out.
1 Like
I’m pro Coach Beilein all day every day; hope he sticks around for 10 more years, but narratives be damned, I’ve watched this team struggle to get the ball inbounds for years. That narrative should go out the window with the famed Beilein 1-3-1 zone narrative.
I don’t think this is true.
Tbere was and probably is a stat on points per possession on inbounds plays, which I believe was separate from points per plays off of timeouts - Michigan was very high in both.
1 Like
What would be most interesting is the delta between PPP in half court and the PPP off inbounds. I would think if our offense has generally been great, that the score off of inbounds would be great too. The rise in quality based on the time spent predetermining what to do is where a coach should be measured.
The more diverse ways you can score the harder you are to defend. Right now this team is easily defended. For them to do any damage in the Big Ten they need diversity. More inside scoring, and better transition. They have the players to get it done…they need to become an elements to their offense. You know they can shoot it. How good could this team become if you had to game plan against them down low and in transition.
I agree, more diversity makes an offense tougher to game plan against. I just don’t think Michigan has the personnel to effectively run other systems?
There really isn’t an efficient back-to-the-basket post option in the rotation yet. Wagner is an explosive offensive player, but he’s best on the perimeter face-up to the hoop taking bigs off the the dribble. Neither Wilson nor Robinson really have the post skills to exploit height mismatches, either?
Walton is a solid B1G caliber PG, but he isn’t a push-the-tempo transition PG — at least not to the same level as say a Trey Burke or a Lou Bullock or even a Travis Conlon. Simpson has a chance to develop into that type of a PG, but he needs to develop more. And with MAAR struggling, Michigan doesn’t have a guard who can efficiently trigger an uptempo transition push.
Remember a couple years ago the team had Burke-Stauskas-LeVert-GR3-McGary who all were creative open court players (plus Hardaway & Morgan who ran the floor well). That team would punish you if you gave them the chance to run. This team doesn’t have enough players with that open court creativity. Next year Wagner with Matthews, Poole, another year’s growth by Simpson, maybe renewed confidence by MAAR…more pieces would appear to better align for transition offense.
I think what the coaches are stuck with this season is a more narrow range of offensive sets that fit best with this team’s strengths? And trying to execute more efficiently in that range to improve the team this season?
I read Andrew’s post on the home page and was interested in how much of our offense comes from deep. This year 47.9% of our field goal attempts are from three, which is the 11th highest rate in the country and the highest of “power 6” teams by a fairly wide margin. If it holds it would be Beilein’s highest 3PA/FGA ratio since 2009, which was the exact same.
2 Likes
Fascinating point. A bit more on that:
–2012-13: 34.2% of U-M’s FGAs were threes
–2013-14: 40.1%
–2014-15: 40.6%
–2015-16: 44.3%
–2016-17: 47.9%
The No. 1 question facing the offense—from a team standpoint—is how will U-M handle a South Carolina-style defensive approach that challenges every pass on the perimeter. Our reaction in that game was to still shoot a ton of 3s (26 out of 52 total shots), which went exceedingly poorly.
1 Like
And many wonder why we can not attract or develop low post talent?
You don’t need to scrap the system. I just see wonderful potential in Moe and DJ developing into low post players. It doesn’t matter if they struggle at it to begin with. They have the physical tools and they will need this diversity if they aspire to the next level. Run some high/low action 3 or 4 times a half to get the process started…You can always kick it out too which keeps your offense humming. I’m willing to guess that the % chance for a ‘make’ down low with either of these two at least matches the current 38% from three. It’s forward thinking to have your players develop parts of their game that need improvement. And it creates some much needed diversity. There are 7 legitimate three point threats in our rotation. We can spare some looks down low. Coaching is as much about developing talent as it is trying to fit players into your system.
What low post talent would you swap Mo and DJ for?
He doesn’t think Mo would be a 5 on any other team in the country.
1 Like
Is that a general question, such as in the same recruiting class what player would I prefer to have on the roster rather than Moe or DJ?
Going back I was a huge advocate of bringing in Moe and was 50/50 on DJ as I always saw him as an energy player almost a Rodman like player with a better yet inconsistent jumper.
As for what low post players I would trade; if just taking guys that were once reported to be targets how about I start with the class of 2015 all had Henry Ellenson, Diamond Stone and Caleb Swanigan for starters.
Moe has back to the basket skills. He has impressive footwork and spin moves. I’m not sure why people think he’s just a face up guy. He’s really good at that too but he has shown the ability to spin and make moves in the post. He’s really that good and certainly could be a dominant force in college hoops. Time to tweak the offense a bit to make sure he gets those chances.
2 Likes