Mchem, IMO Livers is going to be a reliable 3 point shooter from day 1. He is a good fit for Michigan’s system, which would not mean anything if our system sucked… Lucky for us JB’s system does not suck and is superior to Izzo’s. In my opinion our roster still has some issues, but I am not worried about adding Livers at all. He is a very good piece added to our team/system.
Ward @MSU is a reasonable proxy for all the teams you mentioned, so as a case study it is valid.
Is this our 6’8" version of Zach Novak? (minus the motor…which compared to Zach is probably unattainable)
This isn’t to say his system doesn’t work but Michigan has pretty much been looking for a stretch 4 for close to a decade. Robinson didn’t really resemble a stretch 4. Maybe the closest could have been Smotrycz but that didn’t work. I like Livers and hope he can hit shots but Michigan currently has a player that came in with a rep of being a big time shooter and he hasn’t hit anything the past 2 years.
No doubt JB is always looking for a perfect stretch 4. He always wants one but apparently they are difficult to land. I look at Livers and his frame, height, outside shooting, and overall decent athleticism and I see a guy who addresses the weaknesses in the games of our prior power forwards. Novak (too short); GR3 (Not reliable enough shooting 3); Smotrycz (not an explosive athlete/ weak defensively); Irvin at 4 (lacking size/somewhat unreliable 3 point shot/ lacking finishing power around rim/ guarding opposing 4’s wears him down). Maybe I am wrong but with some work on his body, I believe Livers could be an all around good player without the glaring weaknesses that our prior so-called-but-not-quite-stretch-fours possessed.
Sorry if this question was already answered: Anybody know if Livers is eligible for the Kalamazoo promise scholarship? Could Livers potentially walk-on?
On the Kalamazoo Promise–he’s eligible, but it only covers tuition and not room, board, books or fees. It’s a great thing for education, and usable to recruit and get preferred walk-ons from Kalamazoo, but no big time athlete is going to pay between $12k and $15k a year when there are plenty of schools which will offer full rides.
Thanks. I did not realize the Kalamazoo promise does not cover expenses beyond tuition.
We do, and we also had Vogrich who didn’t shoot as well as projected… We also have had players who came in without reputations as big time shooters who shot very well–Dawkins and Albrecht, for example, each shot 32% from 3 in their final prep school years, and LeVert was about 5 percentage points below his college numbers). I’m not sure of your point. If it’s that sometimes people shoot better or worse than they are projected to do, duly noted, but for the most part, guys who shoot well in high school and/or AAU tend to be good shooters.
Why do we care if Glenn Robinson wasn’t a traditional stretch four? We went to the title game, followed by a Big Ten championship and Elite Eight, and Glenn was a very big part of that in his two years here.
I’m with u that kid is going to be a problem and I think he would have given us a lot of versatility. We never offered though so who knows.id still take him or young honestly.
I really think Eastern would still be An interesting option.classfikked up very fast. I like it but leaves you wondering what if as well.
I think we need stronger rebounding at the 4, even if strategically it isn’t what we emphasize – better rebounding instincts, fundamentals, and fight. Young probably would have been better, but Livers is worth locking up.
While odds on any of them individually were long, I would probably still want to be able to absorb one of the 5stars whether through assumed attrition or through holding the 4th spot. Some of the risers we have already in the fold having good senior years, Jumpman launch, and for those deciding late our performance on the court can change a lot. Plus the LaLu connections where relevant.
I would probably have held off on Brooks in order to put a bit more weight on those still yet to decide, but have no issue giving Cain or Young the last spot if they are interested so long as we have a good read on how to fit in one of bowen/jackson/wilkes if need be. Its probably too early in what is hopefully another push to the top of the b1g to plan to get one of those guys but in 2-3y I hope that is the mentality – that we save slots for these types bc we expect in a situation where there are 3 of them, and several playing with our current top60 commit, that we will get one.
My point is they have been looking for one for such a long time that the demands put on the 4 at Michigan is far too much to expect a lot of good production which entails both on the offensive and defensive end. The best one they had was probably Robinson but he had NBA talent around him at every other position. I like Livers but I wonder if there is enough NBA talent around him where he won’t be overwhelmed and exposed at times.
So landing a guy that can hit open shots, rebound, and defend with a 6-foot-8 frame – basically a check list for what Michigan has failed to recruit at the four spot – is a bad thing because they haven’t gotten anyone that can do those things before?
My point is I think they have brought players in past years that thought they could fill the bill. Is there enough top talent to insulate him? It could be discussed that the biggest weakness on the team has been able to find a 4 that suits the team and can make this team a national title contender.
I think that’s certainly been one of the biggest recruiting misses since GR3. That’s kind of the point though, Livers is a good fit for that spot by almost any account. You are essentially trying to say that he’s not because Evan Smotrycz/etc. didn’t live up to his recruiting ranking when the two are completely unrelated.
If I am understanding ASF, I think he might be referring to the larger part of the class as well. Livers by himself might be a good contributor as will everyone else in the class, but is there an alpha dog/go to player in the group that will make every one else’s life easier because he is on the floor. IMO that is the only thing that this class is missing. It almost feels like a bunch of great complimentary players, but they dont have anyone to compliment.
That’s fair I suppose (but I don’t think that’s really what he said or is saying). It’s interesting to look at the 16/17 classes together:
- PG: Simpson/Brooks
- Wing: Watson/Matthews/Poole
- F: Livers
- C: Teske/Davis
That’s basically the core of the team going forward, but it won’t be the only core until MAAR/Duncan graduate (and they kind of fill the gaps in that group for a year IMO).
It sounds like your issue is more with the system than the players? Beilein is very comfortable playing undersized forwards in the “4 spot” instead of “traditional 4s” … complaining about it isn’t going to change Beilein’s style. Beilein’s never going to recruit and play a front line Purdue had last season.
The question is can Beilein put together a roster that can win and compete at the highest levels. Looking at the B1G & NCAA banners his teams have hung from the rafters, I’d say yes.
And from there the question is can Livers fill a role that Beilein needs from one of his wings? I think Livers can. Yes, I though Chatman could and that didn’t work out. Yes, I think Smotrycz could have, but he opted not to stick around the system long enough to find out. DJ Wilson, we’ll find out this year. Novak, not ideal fit, but team won — and that’s a key metric for success.
I am trying to say he will be relied upon a lot he’s currently the only man capable of playing the 4. I like his shot and lift on his shot but he will be asked to do a lot more than that being the only one there.
I don’t see why he’d be relied on any more or less than any of our other recent 4’s. He’ll have Wilson his freshman year and then whatever recruit we get for 2018.