This discussion was created from comments split from: 2014-15 Season Predictions.
Well stated MB90. I couldn’t agree more, when you get to the tournament this team will be a very tough out. I like them in the S16, not many teams will match up with our guards and spread offensive approach. There will be tough times early but we are a very tough match-up outside of the B1G. It’s not where you start but how you finish that matters. Ask Connecticut!
Go Blue!
It may be tough for teams to match up with our perimeter offense, although I think we will see a reasonable decrease, the true question is can we stop the opposition? In other words, the offense can only take us as far as the defense allows us. With regard to the Uconn reference, I asked Kevin Ollie and he said those things are possible when you have the #10 D and an average offense.
Defense plays a big roll but you also have to score. Tough to expect great D with young kids who are still maturing. We’ll see, I expect them to be better in 6 months…not sure where they land in the B1G.
So my question to you Chazer - why is there a presumption that defense is tough to expect from young kids while offense isn’t? Exact same age on both sides of the court…just saying
So my question to you Chazer - why is there a presumption that defense is tough to expect from young kids while offense isn't? Exact same age on both sides of the court..........just saying
Michigan’s perimeter defense will be much much better. Freshman Walton, Stauskas, and a first time starter in LeVert… vs Sophmore Walton, Junior Levert, and Sophmore Irvin. Bigger, stronger, quicker, and more athletic on the perimeter this year. No comparison… the question is whether the interior d can match up with the perimeter d. Chatman/Wilson/Doyle/Donnal gives Michigan bigger bodies and more length then Robinson/Morgan/Horford/Biefeldt/… but none of those guys have played and im sure there will be up and downs. By tournament time though, this squad will be peaking which is all that matters.
What exactly does that have to do with the offense/defense distinction (or should I say excuse) by Chazer?
Well, Beilein thinks it’s a legitimate distinction, so I’m not sure what qualifies you to call it an “excuse”. Here’s a direct quote from the coach of the team:
“Defense is very difficult for young teams to learn,” Beilein said. “While you’re teaching that and growing in that area, you need to be scoring points to win”
There is no distinction according to that JB statement, he simply said defense is difficult to grasp for young teams without reference to a corresponding difficulty level for learning offense. He simply said you need to score, but did not speak to the difficulty of learning the same.
Furthermore, I wouldn’t really care if JB made a distinction because that doesn’t necessarily mean its correct, hence my question to Chazer about his own thoughts on the matter. Anybody can throw out a quote, let’s do some thoughtful, independent analysis
I think it’s pretty obvious when you think about it. Players spend their whole lives working on their offensive capabilities, and very little time on defense. Beilein tries recruit kids who already have a high skill level in passing, ball handling and shooting. They show up ready to learn Beilein’s offense.
Quote: MattD said:
So my question to you Chazer - why is there a presumption that defense is tough to expect from young kids while offense isn’t? Exact same age on both sides of the court…just saying.
It’s quite clear from what Beilein said that defense is tougher for young players than offense. And Beilein’s statement, despite your lame dismissal, is based on over 30 years of “independent analysis” as a coach of actual college basketball teams. What experience in coaching kids in offense and defense is yours based in?
Quote: MattD said: So my question to you Chazer - why is there a presumption that defense is tough to expect from young kids while offense isn't? Exact same age on both sides of the court..........just saying.It’s quite clear from what Beilein said that defense is tougher for young players than offense. And Beilein’s statement, despite your lame dismissal, is based on over 30 years of “independent analysis” as a coach of actual college basketball teams. What experience in coaching kids in offense and defense is yours based in?
“Quite clear” and your subjective interpretation are 2 very different things.
Playing at the collegiate level, coaching at the AAU level. How about you?
I haven’t read all the responses, but can we take the discussion to another thread? I love discussion, but I still want this to mainly be a poll/ data collector
MattD, I think it’s a physicality issue. You can shoot the ball from three fairly easy when the floor is stretched when you’re 18 or 19. I just think you can play better D when you can match the physical features of your opponent. Take your youngest player on the AAU team and put them on your oldest player. Kids are just so weak when they come out of school…look at Caris today vs. Caris when he was a freshman.
I think it's pretty obvious when you think about it. Players spend their whole lives working on their offensive capabilities, and very little time on defense. Beilein tries recruit kids who already have a high skill level in passing, ball handling and shooting. They show up ready to learn Beilein's offense.
So if the stereotype that all JB players are “high IQ/smart”, then it should be assumed our recruits show up ready to learn defense as well, no? Given that, what do you think the issue is with our D - JBs teaching, JBs recruiting, or the players simply don’t get it?
MattD, I think it's a physicality issue. You can shoot the ball from three fairly easy when the floor is stretched when you're 18 or 19. I just think you can play better D when you can match the physical features of your opponent. Take your youngest player on the AAU team and put them on your oldest player. Kids are just so weak when they come out of school.....look at Caris today vs. Caris when he was a freshman.
Chazer - I don’t think age is the issue, physicality yes, but not age. I watched Julius Randle physically punk Dawson and Payne last year while being an 18 year old kid playing against 21-22 year old men. Physicality is a mindset, mental toughness is a skill in itself.
I think it's pretty obvious when you think about it. Players spend their whole lives working on their offensive capabilities, and very little time on defense. Beilein tries recruit kids who already have a high skill level in passing, ball handling and shooting. They show up ready to learn Beilein's offense.So if the stereotype that all JB players are “high IQ/smart”, then it should be assumed our recruits show up ready to learn defense as well, no? Given that, what do you think the issue is with our D - JBs teaching, JBs recruiting, or the players simply don’t get it?
Read the first two sentences again.
I think it's pretty obvious when you think about it. Players spend their whole lives working on their offensive capabilities, and very little time on defense. Beilein tries recruit kids who already have a high skill level in passing, ball handling and shooting. They show up ready to learn Beilein's offense.So if the stereotype that all JB players are “high IQ/smart”, then it should be assumed our recruits show up ready to learn defense as well, no? Given that, what do you think the issue is with our D - JBs teaching, JBs recruiting, or the players simply don’t get it?
Read the first two sentences again.
So if we take the first 2 sentences as true to the extent that JB recruits players that already have attained a “high level of passing, ball handling and shooting” that would seem to contradict the notion that JB “develops” players, no?
I think it's pretty obvious when you think about it. Players spend their whole lives working on their offensive capabilities, and very little time on defense. Beilein tries recruit kids who already have a high skill level in passing, ball handling and shooting. They show up ready to learn Beilein's offense.So if the stereotype that all JB players are “high IQ/smart”, then it should be assumed our recruits show up ready to learn defense as well, no? Given that, what do you think the issue is with our D - JBs teaching, JBs recruiting, or the players simply don’t get it?
Read the first two sentences again.
So if we take the first 2 sentences as true to the extent that JB recruits players that already have attained a “high level of passing, ball handling and shooting” that would seem to contradict the notion that JB “develops” players, no?
No. High level doesn’t mean highest level.
Much the same that a potential lack of practicing D in HS doesn’t mean you have to be bad at it in college.