I think that speaks more to the fact that he’s an excellent coach with time to prep. I don’t necessarily think that’s enough to say he’s bad with in game adjustments. He may very well be, but I’m just not sold that you can gather that based on these BTT games
as I think JB is an excellent coachWoah! What’d you do with the real MattD?
I get your point, but I’ve consistently maintained that JB is a good coach, but not great.
I think that speaks more to the fact that he's an excellent coach with time to prep. I don't necessarily think that's enough to say he's bad with in game adjustments. He may very well be, but I'm just not sold that you can gather that based on these BTT games
Was just using the BTT second game record in furtherance of that argument, rather than a primary basis. Do agree that 7 games is a bit small, but when combined with what we’ve seen with our eyes, I think it’s at least a plausible argument.
I agree that this year we’ve seen some poor in game coaching in some spots (inbounding, 1-3-1 late in games), but I don’t see that as a pattern over JB’s whole tenure. Hasn’t even been discussed until this year and previously people have talked about how good he is out of timeouts and switching defense at the right spot
I agree that this year we've seen some poor in game coaching in some spots (inbounding, 1-3-1 late in games), but I don't see that as a pattern over JB's whole tenure. Hasn't even been discussed until this year and previously people have talked about how good he is out of timeouts and switching defense at the right spot
Hasn’t been discussed because we’ve been winning until this year…that’s true with almost any coach. Its the same analogy I made a few months back with respect to Hoke. Denard was able to cover up his garbage, and once he left the wheels came off. Reality is that most are less inclined to cite coaching flaws/shortcomings when the team is winning, despite the fact that obvious flaws exist, the winning just so happens to make the flaws less visible/pronounced.
Now I’m not saying JB is Hoke, because he’s far better than Hoke, but he does have a few flaws, and he’s not as adaptive as I’d like him to be.
as I think JB is an excellent coachWoah! What’d you do with the real MattD?
I get your point, but I’ve consistently maintained that JB is a good coach, but not great.
wasn’t trying to make a point, just goofing around
as I think JB is an excellent coachWoah! What’d you do with the real MattD?
I get your point, but I’ve consistently maintained that JB is a good coach, but not great.
wasn’t trying to make a point, just goofing around
Good to have those lighthearted moments as well, we’re a pretty serious group around here!
I think this year, the past week especially, have really exposed some flaws in Beilein as a coach that the class of 2012 covered up with their talent. I believe that the stars aligned for the 12/13-13/14 seasons in a way that they are unlikely to again (i.e. an under the radar player blowing up to the extent that GR3 and Burke did, and GR3 bringing McGary along), and unless Beilein adapts and makes certain changes, he has peaked. Let's take a look at his strengths and weaknesses and where he and the program have to improve:Strengths:
-Talent identification: Indisputable, he has far more hits than misses, both with high-end talent and under the radar guys. THJr, Bruke, Stauskus, GR3, Caris, MAAR, Booker, Bates-Diop, he simply ID’s players as well or better than anyone else. Offering Walton before Izzo was a great call (although on the flipside, I would really like to have Javon Bess given the current roster makeup right now).-Offensive skill development: The low TO% and (normally) great shooting is certainly in part a product of playing with 4 perimeter players, but the staff also does a great job coaching and developing fundamental offensive skills from the day the players arrive in Ann Arbor.
-Offensive scheme: Floor spacing is supberb, passing and driving lanes are open that allow for players to take advantage of their skill development. Beilein’s teams are a headache to defend.
Weaknesses:
-Talent acquisition: Recruiting failures have been well-documented recently. I worry that this is a personality issue, and something that can’t be remedied with more resources or effort. What can be remedied is the amount of redundant skill sets on the team. I worry that the recent success has gone to Beilein’s head, and he believes he can win with any mix of skill sets.-Defensive scheme/personnel: This is the trade off for the low TO% and good shooting that comes with 4 perimeter players. Beilein’s teams will always be undersized and will struggle on the boards due to their lack of size and physicality. This is something that UM can live with if the talent/athleticism is present to compensate.
-In-game coaching: This is where most will disagree with me. Beilein gets flustered in-game and makes poor decisions. We’ve beaten the 1-3-1, the inbounding, and other specific scheme issues to death, but the thing that sticks out to me is the lack of command that Beilein has in high pressure situations. Asking the players what they want to do at the end of the Northwestern game with regards to fouling or playing defense is outrageous. It’s as concerning as the story about Beilein flipping out in the huddle at the end of the Tennessee game last year, and I believe it was Spike who said he just started shouting and talking so fast that no one could understand what he was saying, and it was the PLAYERS who had to calm the COACH down. That’s unacceptable.
I worry that the talent acquisition won’t mask the other flaws going forward, and that Michigan does not win another Big Ten title or advance to a Final Four again under Beilein. That’s not to say he’s a bad coach, far from it. He likely has 3-5 years left, and if he simply keeps us afloat, a team that makes the tournament 80% of the time and reaches a Sweet 16 or two, then the program will be ripe for a more dynamic personality, like LaVall Jordan or another young and aggressive coach, to come take the program back to the level it was in the 80s. If Beilein lands 2 of Brown/Langford/Murray/Battle/Winston/another high-end player in the next 2 years, then I’m wrong and the sky’s the limit for this program in the near future. Here’s hoping.
I agree with much of what you said. Evwry coach needs some elite talent to be an elite team, even one as good as JB. It remains to be seen whether JB can pull in another elite player or two in the near future.
This is what irks me the most about JB - the team seemingly never improves on boxing out…it absolutely drives me nuts. Honestly, for a coach that is heralded as a ‘fundamentals’ guy, we just cannot seem to box out under his watch. It’s an issue every year. Some of it is personnel, but I mean seriously, how hard can it be to teach your players to box out every single possession?
The lack of boxing out literally just cost us the game vs Wisconsin. We outplayed them in every other facet of the game.
I think the kids just weren’t strong enough matt d. i saw plays where they were trying to and were just undersized/didn’t match wisconsins intensity. I chalk up that loss to rebounding/fifty fifty balls and those three bad possessions around 4 minutes. we had to play perfect to beat them and couldn’t afford stupid mistakes, of which we made a few. also those refs were garbage. just putting that out there.
I think the kids just weren't strong enough matt d. i saw plays where they were trying to and were just undersized/didn't match wisconsins intensity. I chalk up that loss to rebounding/fifty fifty balls and those three bad possessions around 4 minutes. we had to play perfect to beat them and couldn't afford stupid mistakes, of which we made a few. also those refs were garbage. just putting that out there.
Not buying it, that can’t be the excuse every year. If our roster is undersized, it’s still a coaching issue because he recruits to fit his perimeter based system. If the personnel can’t match the intensity, then sit out the players that are not giving it their all.
Need 2 dogs on the roster…1 Dawson type that just swallows everything coming off the glass and just punks the opposition, and a shot blocker (Teske is already coming).
Beilein took a 4 seeded Michigan team on an NCAAT run where he faced:
Shaka Smart
Bill Self (1 seed)
Billy Donovan (2 seed)
Jim Boheim
Rick Pitino (#1 overall seed)
Not only are those coaches some of the best in the country, but they all play very different styles. You can’t look at that tournament run (and opponents) and say Beilein can’t prepare his team. In game coaching? Beilein has had his fair share of “huh?” moments, but you are stretching here MattD.
And lol… Compare Spike’s March success with Dawson. If Dawson is your dream player and Izzo is your dream coach, why can’t Dawson lead his team to the Final 4?
And lol.... Compare Spike's March success with Dawson. If Dawson is your dream player and Izzo is your dream coach, why can't Dawson lead his team to the Final 4?
First off, I nearly loathe Izzo. Second, who said anything about a comparison between JB/Izzo or Spike/Dawson. Just more antagonizing on your end.
Simply saying that our team fails to box out, and that we need a few rebounders, nothing more, nothing less
Beilein took a 4 seeded Michigan team on an NCAAT run where he faced: Shaka Smart Bill Self (1 seed) Billy Donovan (2 seed) Jim Boheim Rick Pitino (#1 overall seed)Not only are those coaches some of the best in the country, but they all play very different styles. You can’t look at that tournament run (and opponents) and say Beilein can’t prepare his team. In game coaching? Beilein has had his fair share of “huh?” moments, but you are stretching here MattD.
Again, more antagonizing on your end. Your game is so old.
I’ve explicitly stated (within the past day nonetheless), that JB is great at preparing the team given a reasonable amount of time
Well under Bo Ryan the Badgers have never played on a Thursday of a B1G tournament. Wisconsin is just a bad matchup for Michigan overall.
Matt, clearly you understand we have had young and undersized teams the past few years before this one, especially with guys like Glenn and Novak playing the four, and Morgan at the five.
I agree, the lack of boxing out is a huge problem. With that said, let’s see how guys like Doyle, Donnal, Chatman, Wilson, and Dawkins rebound with 3-4 years of experience under their belts like Wisconsin’s bigs seem to have every year. Irvin with 11 boards today, after being an awful rebounder as a freshman, is a good sign.
This Michigan team has been playing some very good ball over these past few games. Wisconsin is a deep, talented, strong and experienced team that we took to the wire, despite somehow getting only four foul calls in the first 38 minutes. That was a strong effort today.
Matt, clearly you understand we have had young and undersized teams the past few years before this one, especially with guys like Glenn and Novak playing the four, and Morgan at the five.I agree, the lack of boxing out is a huge problem. With that said, let’s see how guys like Doyle, Donnal, Chatman, Wilson, and Dawkins rebound with 3-4 years of experience under their belts like Wisconsin’s bigs seem to have every year. Irvin with 11 boards today, after being an awful rebounder as a freshman, is a good sign.
This Michigan team has been playing some very good ball over these past few games. Wisconsin is a deep, talented, strong and experienced team that we took to the wire, despite somehow getting only four foul calls in the first 38 minutes. That was a strong effort today.
As I’ve said before, size isn’t the issue, it’s toughness and the failure to teach the softer players to box out. Novak was an excellent rebounder, he did the dirty work before he left his feet and I loved him for it.
Our rebounding issues are 2 fold - recruiting and lack of coaching/emphasis for boxing out. Youth/size ceases to be an excuse when you are approaching a decade. Let’s be realistic, were simply never going to be a good rebounding team under JB.
Really, size isn’t the issue? Kentucky killed us on the glass because Morgan and Robinson were soft and lazy, not because they were giving away 3-4 inches per man?
Until this year, we have been undersized at the four and five positions, other than our tourney run in 2013 when Mitch did a great job of rebounding as a true freshman.
Again, you just completely ignore the fact schools like Wisconsin and MSU routinely have four year big men starting. Again, let’s see where our guys are when they become upperclassmen.
If you’re telling me there’s no meaningful difference between a freshman and senior in basketball, both in terms of experience and strength, I question your common sense.
Sure, given our style of play, we’re never going to play two rugged bigs at once. That doesn’t mean our current group of players won’t be good rebounders by the time they are upperclassman.
I think his major flaw is recruiting. I would say there probably isn’t another coach in college that could do more with 5 elite players on the floor than JB. If his recruiting game was on par with Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, etc, we would be a perennial elite 8 team. That said, I definitely see an evolution taking shape here in recruiting, where we have gone from vying for mid tier talent at the start of his tenure, to actually getting the attention of some elite players. Sure, we are striking out on most at this point, but I think that’s part of the process. I’m with Matt, I want to see what happens with the '16 class before I levy judgment. If we snag Battle/Langford, Towns, and maybe a PG in '15 or '16, then were breaking through. The Nike thing is a factor in this too. Theres simply no denying that Adidas is costing us in the bball recruiting game. Look at those jerseys we had on for this tournament. Could Adidas have come up with a more hideous design?