Just don't understand how some of you think JB can do no wrong. He is not perfect and quite simply getting beat in recruiting lately. Talk all you want about development but recruiting talent helps too. What about Horford? No one said a word about the staff unable to keep him around to help. Is it ALL on Horford. The staff couldn't recruit it's own guy to stick around. That was a fail. Simply put. Our last few recruits ate not up to big 10 champ standards. Improvement needs to happen. We ate in on a lot of 2016. But that is a world of difference than actually landing them. Because we failed to land our big targets the last 2 years with exception to Chatman.
So what if weâre not getting every guy at the top of the list? Thatâs part of the game.
You donât ever mention FIT which is just as important as anything else. FIT is why a guy like Spike or Stu can come in and be successful at Michigan where they might not at another college.
I donât think anyone is suggesting Beilein is going to make Duncan an NBA player. But at 45% shooting from 3 with a 6â7" frameâŚwhat better coach to use him than Beilein?
Itâs about fit and system. Not stars.
Yes, Booker, Kennard, etc we missed on. But we went for them.
MAAR and Dawkins werenât top of the list but the situation changed when we took them. And we wouldnât have taken them if we didnât WANT to in THAT situation.
âŚyou canât seem to understand that though. Youâd rather just whine.
Haha Ben may be the biggest chicken little in all of Michigan sports forums, which is saying a lot because there are plenty of people who complain about everything.
How do people like you even enjoy being a fan?
He would make the Eighth guy in that class. Guess the staff doesnât worry about evening out classesâŚbut geez. Count on attrition? Nice plan. Or do we do the honorable program thing of wanting to keep everyone as long as we can?
Again -we can all have our opinions. Sorry - not going to be thrilled with a D3 transfer.
3. I have doubts Robinson "can take it to the rack" and he isn't Stauskas. He is most likely close to 21 so the development angle is overblown.
The development angle should be looked based on the trajectory rather than age. Before they entered NBA hall of fame Scottie, Pippen was a 6â1 walk-on in a NAIA school, and David Robinson was a 6â6, 175 lb high school senior. Not saying that Duncan Robison or Dawkins will ever be that good, but they donât need to be half that good to have a spot on this team.
3. I have doubts Robinson "can take it to the rack" and he isn't Stauskas. He is most likely close to 21 so the development angle is overblown.
The development angle should be looked based on the trajectory rather than age. Before they entered NBA hall of fame Scottie, Pippen was a 6â1 walk-on in a NAIA school, and David Robinson was a 6â6, 175 lb high school senior. Not saying that Duncan Robison or Dawkins will ever be that good, but they donât need to be half that good to have a spot on this team.
3. I have doubts Robinson "can take it to the rack" and he isn't Stauskas. He is most likely close to 21 so the development angle is overblown.
The development angle should be looked based on the trajectory rather than age. Before they entered NBA hall of fame Scottie, Pippen was a 6â1 walk-on in a NAIA school, and David Robinson was a 6â6, 175 lb high school senior. Not saying that Duncan Robison or Dawkins will ever be that good, but they donât need to be half that good to have a spot on this team.
Trajectory and age go hand and hand.
I understand the age argument w/r/t the NBA (younger players are going to play a lot longer and are more valuable) and even height growth. But a lot of physical growth can come at different times. Skill development can really come at any time. Stauskas improved a lot and was older, LeVert improved a lot and was younger.
I believe that Robinson graduated in 2012 from Governorâs Academy (MA) before doing a prep year at Exeter and graduating in 2013 before his D3 season at Williams. I donât have his exact birth date though.
He would make the Eighth guy in that class. Guess the staff doesn't worry about evening out classes.......but geez. Count on attrition? Nice plan. Or do we do the honorable program thing of wanting to keep everyone as long as we can?
Again -we can all have our opinions. Sorry - not going to be thrilled with a D3 transfer.
Who you couldnât scout if you had a gun to your head. Any player for that matter. MattD offers controversial takes but he offers an opinion as someone who obviously knows the game. There obviously isnât a lot of respect of your knowledge of the game or you wouldnât get as much slack.
Quote from Maker this spring:
âI canât imagine where heâs going to be a year from now, or two years from now,â said Maker. âYouâre not gonna recognize him.â
3. I have doubts Robinson "can take it to the rack" and he isn't Stauskas. He is most likely close to 21 so the development angle is overblown.
The development angle should be looked based on the trajectory rather than age. Before they entered NBA hall of fame Scottie, Pippen was a 6â1 walk-on in a NAIA school, and David Robinson was a 6â6, 175 lb high school senior. Not saying that Duncan Robison or Dawkins will ever be that good, but they donât need to be half that good to have a spot on this team.
Trajectory and age go hand and hand.
I understand the age argument w/r/t the NBA (younger players are going to play a lot longer and are more valuable) and even height growth. But a lot of physical growth can come at different times. Skill development can really come at any time. Stauskas improved a lot and was older, LeVert improved a lot and was younger.
I believe that Robinson graduated in 2012 from Governorâs Academy (MA) before doing a prep year at Exeter and graduating in 2013 before his D3 season at Williams. I donât have his exact birth date though.
Not questioning if Robinson will develop under JBâŚthat is a given. Greg was inferring that Robinson had a similar ceiling as Stauskas and LeVert and I donât buy that currently, mainly because of age.
And Robinson would be a 23-25 year old Sr like Deandre Kane and could put up awesome stats and still go undrafted and be in Europe. Age is huge.
@guestavo: Gotcha. Definitely donât think his ceiling compares to LeVert/Stauskas considering theyâll both end up early entry first round picks. Seems like he could develop into a nice piece over the next four years though.
I think Duncan could really flourish against zone teams with lengthâŚthink Syracuse. The length wouldnât bother his shot, i could see him breaking that zone very easily. When I looked at him again, still reminds me of Dunleavy, but if he adds 25lbs he could be Aaron White-ish possibly but with a better shot.
3. I have doubts Robinson "can take it to the rack" and he isn't Stauskas. He is most likely close to 21 so the development angle is overblown.
The development angle should be looked based on the trajectory rather than age. Before they entered NBA hall of fame Scottie, Pippen was a 6â1 walk-on in a NAIA school, and David Robinson was a 6â6, 175 lb high school senior. Not saying that Duncan Robison or Dawkins will ever be that good, but they donât need to be half that good to have a spot on this team.
Trajectory and age go hand and hand.
I understand the age argument w/r/t the NBA (younger players are going to play a lot longer and are more valuable) and even height growth. But a lot of physical growth can come at different times. Skill development can really come at any time. Stauskas improved a lot and was older, LeVert improved a lot and was younger.
I believe that Robinson graduated in 2012 from Governorâs Academy (MA) before doing a prep year at Exeter and graduating in 2013 before his D3 season at Williams. I donât have his exact birth date though.
Not questioning if Robinson will develop under JBâŚthat is a given. Greg was inferring that Robinson had a similar ceiling as Stauskas and LeVert and I donât buy that currently, mainly because of age.
And Robinson would be a 23-25 year old Sr like Deandre Kane and could put up awesome stats and still go undrafted and be in Europe. Age is huge.
Two things (ok Iâll make it 3):
He has four years. He will sit for one due to NCAA transfer rules, then play out his three remaining years of eligibility.
I was by no means inferring that he has a similar ceiling as Stauskas and LeVert, just that this staff seems to do pretty well with guys who fit that mold. Watch what happens with Dawkins this year, and youâll see what I mean.
We got to the NCAA championship game with Morgan and Spike. I think the formula is working just fine.
3. I have doubts Robinson "can take it to the rack" and he isn't Stauskas. He is most likely close to 21 so the development angle is overblown.
The development angle should be looked based on the trajectory rather than age. Before they entered NBA hall of fame Scottie, Pippen was a 6â1 walk-on in a NAIA school, and David Robinson was a 6â6, 175 lb high school senior. Not saying that Duncan Robison or Dawkins will ever be that good, but they donât need to be half that good to have a spot on this team.
Trajectory and age go hand and hand.
I understand the age argument w/r/t the NBA (younger players are going to play a lot longer and are more valuable) and even height growth. But a lot of physical growth can come at different times. Skill development can really come at any time. Stauskas improved a lot and was older, LeVert improved a lot and was younger.
I believe that Robinson graduated in 2012 from Governorâs Academy (MA) before doing a prep year at Exeter and graduating in 2013 before his D3 season at Williams. I donât have his exact birth date though.
2. I was by no means inferring that he has a similar ceiling as Stauskas and LeVert, just that this staff seems to do pretty well with guys who fit that mold. Watch what happens with Dawkins this year, and youâll see what I mean.
We got to the NCAA championship game with Morgan and Spike. I think the formula is working just fine.
3. I have doubts Robinson "can take it to the rack" and he isn't Stauskas. He is most likely close to 21 so the development angle is overblown.
The development angle should be looked based on the trajectory rather than age. Before they entered NBA hall of fame Scottie, Pippen was a 6â1 walk-on in a NAIA school, and David Robinson was a 6â6, 175 lb high school senior. Not saying that Duncan Robison or Dawkins will ever be that good, but they donât need to be half that good to have a spot on this team.
Trajectory and age go hand and hand.
I understand the age argument w/r/t the NBA (younger players are going to play a lot longer and are more valuable) and even height growth. But a lot of physical growth can come at different times. Skill development can really come at any time. Stauskas improved a lot and was older, LeVert improved a lot and was younger.
I believe that Robinson graduated in 2012 from Governorâs Academy (MA) before doing a prep year at Exeter and graduating in 2013 before his D3 season at Williams. I donât have his exact birth date though.
2. I was by no means inferring that he has a similar ceiling as Stauskas and LeVert, just that this staff seems to do pretty well with guys who fit that mold. Watch what happens with Dawkins this year, and youâll see what I mean.
We got to the NCAA championship game with Morgan and Spike. I think the formula is working just fine.
Love the strawmans, huh?
Ha, you must be a lawyer.
(and⌠ok, Iâll make it 4)
He CAN take it to the rack.
Better get comfortable with this guy being on your team too, because by this time next week he will be ALL blue. Big big fan of this pickup.
Iâd say this team has more talent and more experience than the 2011 squad which came within an eyelash of knocking off #1 seed Duke in the tourney.
Compare the starters:
PG: Sophomore Walton versus sophomore Morris: Slight edge to Morris. Slight. Walton probably had a better freshman year.
2G: Junior Douglas versus junior Levert: Levert, no contest.
SF: Freshman Hardaway versus Sophomore Irvin: very close. Could be dead even.
PF: Junior Novak versus Freshman Chatman: I loved Novak, but Chatman has to get the edge here too.
C: Freshman Morgan versus freshman Donnal: Even.
Bench: Smote, Horford, and who else (I canât even remember if we really went 8 deep - we must have) versus Spike, Doyle/Wilson, Dawkins. Iâd give the edge to this yearâs group.
We also wonât be starting a 6-4 PF (Novak), or a two guard who couldnât really score much (Stu).
And that team was playing some outstanding basketball by the end of the year - see the blowout over TN in the tourney followed by a super close loss to #1 seed Duke.
I love how everyone wants us to follow the Kentucky model. Last time we did that, we had a totally dysfunctional team (The Taylor class followed by the Traylor class). Not to mention we landed on serious probation.
Nobodu wants us to follow the Kentucky model. NOBODY. So stop using this strawman to support your point. I like many people have no problem trusting the staffâs judgment on recruiting. But you are burying your head in the sand if you think the staff did not prioritize other wing players more.
You criticize him using a strawman and then use your own strawman two sentences later. Funny.
I guess the ultimate query for me is, why DONT talented wings with UM offers for 15 seem to be interested in us? They certainly can't be scared of MAAR, Dawkins, and potentially Robinson can they? It's not like we haven't offered top 100 players, but for some reason their general consensus of us is not encouraging. Why? It looks as if we are going to be rejected by most if not all of our preferred offers, and that is mystifying after our recent success and development rate.
The B1G will likely be the #1 or #2 conference in the country. That should get them at least 50% of teams into the NCAA Tournament. So, which 7 teams in the B1G have a better shot at making the NCAAT than Michigan? Iâll wait.
I love how everyone wants us to follow the Kentucky model. Last time we did that, we had a totally dysfunctional team (The Taylor class followed by the Traylor class). Not to mention we landed on serious probation.
Nobodu wants us to follow the Kentucky model. NOBODY. So stop using this strawman to support your point. I like many people have no problem trusting the staffâs judgment on recruiting. But you are burying your head in the sand if you think the staff did not prioritize other wing players more.
You criticize him using a strawman and then use your own strawman two sentences later. Funny.
Oh really? Here is what LA said that I was responding to in my last sentence: âI just wonder how many âunder the radarâ types we have to successfully recruit before fans realize JB knows exactly what he is doing.â
That to me sounded like an implication that Belein prioritized those under the radar recruits over higher ranked guys which is simply not true. I then used the word âifâ to signify it was not perfectly clear if that was the posterâs implication.
If you want to call that a strawman argument, I disagree, but go ahead. Either way, that is a far cry from saying that âeveryone wants us to follow the Kentucky model,â when literally no one is advocating the Kentucky model.