I would just want Dickinson involved in some way
I think I disagree with this, just because the odds of you getting a tip in with two seconds left off a miss are so much higher than Texas getting a reasonable look if they get the rebound or Tech makes the shot and they have to inbound from under the opposite basket. I think 2 seconds left at the touch point with the net/rim is pretty safe. For reference, Michigan had 3.6 seconds to run the Jordan Poole play in Houston.
I mean, Texas got a 28 footer off at the buzzer. Maybe not a great look but definitely a chance to win the game. Michigan also won the Houston game 
3 Likes
Yeah, and it would be as a roll man probably to some extent but I don’t think you are drawing up some kind of high low or post up set in that situation because there’s too much that can go wrong and you can’t minimize the variance. Much more likely to be left in a spot where you have a broken play.
Michigan checks in at #3 on The Athletic’s power rankings this week. They write a long section on us so I’d recommend reading it. But here’s the closing statement:
On Tuesday night, Michigan — a team that spent the first few weeks of the season beating teams it was obviously superior to — did more than prove itself as a top-10-ish team. In one fell swoop, it elevated itself into the national title contender conversation, where, barring something drastic, it will stay for the rest of this season. The Wolverines are real, and they’re spectacular.
3 Likes
Well with Michigan-Houston my point was that the extra second and a half was why it was a Poole feet planted shot and not a MAAR half court chuck.
As a man of the odds, I’m very fine with the shot Texas took in relation to the odds of my team getting a tip in off a missed look. I’m not saying one is right or wrong, just my person view. If all people would do the same thing in every situation basketball wouldn’t be very fun, just everyone running the exact same stuff lol.
I feel like we have enough quick hitter that we could possibly go to, but if they zone or switch everything it could blow the play up which is the concern. A double drag or Spain BS with Livers or Franz setting the extra screen would be a solid options.
Mike Smith’s turnover propensity makes him being the main option slightly scary. Same for Livers, he’s the best pull up mid range shooter but if he is dribbling into the lane with 3 seconds I’m a little scared. Franz is the least likely to turn it over
Texas Tech left 3 seconds on the clock after the shot. If you look at the Jordan Poole shot, he actually got it off in less than 3 seconds. I think the point is that you rather take the clock down to a Tie/Win scenario as opposed to a Win/Loss scenario.
I’m impressed that TT was able to execute that set well without it coming out of a timeout. You can see Beard directing traffic and guys getting precisely to their spots. They have clearly practiced this exact set for a late clock look, and I’m not sure you can ask for any more than that from your team. At first glance, it appears to be the old last second dribble down the floor and shoot set that we all hate. But, this set is real, considered, and drilled. The ball is in your best (only?) shot creator’s hands and he has the option of using a ballscreen, driving while knowing exactly where 3 teammates are spotted up for potential kickouts, or just burying a shot from one of his preferred spots on the floor. To ask that a kid make the optimal decision in that set while leaving no time on the clock for an answer is not reasonable.
8 Likes
I would rather maximize my win %. Especially if the other team is better and overtime might not look good. Again, this isn’t a binary “one is right one is wrong” thing, I’ve already said that different people likely view it differently. I’m not arguing that you should think like me, that’s just how I personally view it.
Agree. It’s basically a risk adverse question. Would you rather have a higher percent at winning, but risk losing OR a lower risk at winning while minimizing the chance at a loss? There’s probably no wrong answer since there will be advocates on both sides. Similar to going for a 2 point conversion in a one point game with no time left. Not a perfect analogy but you get the point.
1 Like
Kinda a perfect analogy IMO actually lol. I’m a risk taker, what can I say.
In a real world scenario I’d prefer to see the actual numbers going into a game. Your team’s Offensive rebound Rate, the defense’s rebound rate, and the general percentage of 30 foot jumpers that go in (not to mention the percentage of 2-3 second possessions that actually get that shot off) are all of interest here.
Crashing heavily in that situation also could lead to a foul on the rebound. Another way to lose.
Yeah – I thought it was well executed all around. I was just pointing out that if you want to critique something you’d rather leave a second less on the clock. The actual action I thought was all on point.
1 Like
Looking at the NET team sheets this morning, it’s interesting to me that UM is 1 of 3 teams in the top 40 where the average NET of our opponents in wins is under 100. So while there’s only been the one marquee match up with Wisconsin, UM has still had a pretty balanced schedule of solid teams that they couldn’t just walk through. And it helps when you actually win all your games. But even just comparing to other unbeatens at the top in Baylor and Gonzaga, they’ve each beaten at least 5 teams ranked 200+ while UM just had the 1 in Oakland.
3 Likes
Yeah, I was thinking about that related to Gonzaga and Baylor. I don’t have any questions about Gonzaga’s standing at the top of the rankings even if they’re not going to play much meaningful basketball the rest of the way. Baylor though is another story. They’ve been great and haven’t offered any reason to doubt them. But they’re about to enter their first tough stretch of games. I want to see if they’re as good as everyone says when they play Texas, Kansas, Texas Tech, etc. It is possible that they’re going to take some losses and show some flaws that make you wonder if they really are the consensus #2 team in the country.
2 Likes
Yep, Oakland is the only truly terrible team Michigan played. And even they are good compared to some of the dregs Iowa and others played. Michigan is first in Wins Above Bubble, just ahead of Gonzaga.
Interestingly, Baylor doesn’t get much mention for a weak schedule (likely because they played and beat Illinois) but Michigan’s has been tougher than theirs as they haven’t played any of the top teams in the B12 yet.
1 Like
Looks like Baylor has had games postponed/canceled with Gonzaga, Texas and WVU. So a bit of bad luck on their end so far with that. I think Baylor gets leeway because they were seen as a top 2 team coming in so they don’t need to prove themselves, unlike Michigan who was fringe top 25 coming into the year and gets the “yeah but who have you beaten?” question every day.
2 Likes
I think I’d put Michigan and Baylor in the same tier, but Gonzaga ahead of both as a clear #1.
But I do think Michigan poses the scariest matchup for Gonzaga of anyone in the country. Size advantage at every frontcourt spot, Brooks on Suggs, Dickinson on Timme. Juwan passed his first Gonzaga test with flying colors.
1 Like
I mean it’s one of the only options but Brooks guarding Suggs probably wouldn’t go well for Michigan. Maybe Brown eventually takes that role but Suggs has been outstanding. Per 40 minutes 21ppg 7.7 assists 7.7 rebs 3.9 steals.