I think there is certainly merit to the logjam among proven commodities theory…but its not like we don’t play smallball all the time. So I can envision a lineup where Caris slides to the 3, MAAR at the 1 or 2 combined with Spike and/or Walton, especially when we need speed on the floor.
Caris won’t play 40 minutes so MAAR will at least see the floor. He’s a really exciting player and hard to imagine that they shut him down after his freshman campaign.
Also, if we play small ball as much as we have in the past, I can see MAAR playing alongside the PG rather than the Walton/Albrecht combo of the last two years. I don’t think we’ll see Walton and Albrecht on the floor at the same time this year.
Late to the party but here’s what I hope/expect the minutes to be:
Walton 28-30 Spike/MAAR 10-12
Caris 25-28 Spike/MAAR 12-15
Irvin 28-30 Dawkins/Caris 10-12
Cam 14-18 Dawkins/Robinson/Irvin/Wilson 22-26
Doyle 22-28 Donnal/Wilson 12-18
I realize Wilson isn’t a 5, but then again Neither was Smotz but JB still was forced to use him there due to lack of depth at the position. I believe there are games this year where we are going to run into a similar situation.
I also think Cam’s ceiling is much higher than Dawkins and Robinson’s and an off season in the weight room working on his lower body is going to do wonders for him.
I wanted to give Doyle more minutes, but that all depends on his conditioning. If he can get himself in shape enough to handle 30 minutes, I think he gets those minutes.
I was tempted to give Caris more minutes, but I think that would be irresponsible with all things considered. If we want to make a run in the NCAA tournament, Caris needs to be healthy. Can’t afford to run him into the ground. Same goes for Walton. I want him to be a 35+ minute a night player, but it’s not worth the risk.
I will be surprised if Wilson doesn’t get more minutes than Donnal. Provided Wilson can stay healthy, which to this point has proved difficult in HS and College.
I think Wilson is very talented, the most talented 4/5 option on the team. Best shot blocker, moves the best, good vision, nice looking J, and a good handle for his size. Needs to calm down a tad bit on the court. Somewhat over exuberant!
I also think Wilson may be the tallest man on the team. Looked that way to me in person.
I guess I just don't understand Dawkins being a lock for the rotation vs. MAAR...........both showed flashes in relatively equal terms, I just think popular opinion may be swayed toward Aubrey since he put together his best stretch toward the end of the season, and did it in consecutive games. MAAR showed just as much promise, but his instances were distributed throughout the season rather than a cluster. In my mind though, there is no doubt MAAR has a bigger impact/net positive as a 2 way player.For me, it’s about what I expect the rotation to be, and I expect versatility of some of the other players to unfortunately keep MAAR from the “top 8” in the rotation. He is hindered because unlike the 3 and 4 spots, which only really have one proven player (Irvin), the 1 and 2 spots have 3 proven players (Walton, LeVert, and Albrecht). I would expect if Levert or Walton were taken out, Albrecht would be the man replacing them.
That’s not to say I don’t think MAAR couldn’t contribute in meaningful ways if given the opportunity, but in terms of who I think will get the minutes I expect Beilein to give the heavy brunt to his seniors and juniors.
I think this hits the nail on the head.
The catch is that the 1 and the 2 spots are pretty much locked down and you know Spike is going to be the first guard off the bench. We don’t really have a clue who will play the other wing next to Zak, but Dawkins is the most proven right now.
There are also more candidates to play the other wing though so in that regard making the rotation could be even harder.
I think this roster is totally a swiss army knife. JB will be challenged finding the best lineups but I suspect there will be much maniacal glee along the way for him. I can see some odd combinations that might work out really well.
Big Boy lineup
Levert
Irvin
Robinson/Chatman
Wilson/Wagner (assuming he’s the real deal)
Doyle
Run/Gun
Dwalt
Levert
Dawkins
Irvin/Chatman
Robinson/Wilson (I realize no true center but if you want to run a team off the floor you have enough athletes here to play the 1-3-1)
Small Ball
Spike
Dwalt
Levert
Irvin/Dawkins
Doyle/Wilson/Wagner
Lots of options. Should be fun.
I think both a run & gun and small ball lineup would include MAAR.
I can see 6 players getting significant playing time if healthy
Walton
Spike
Levert
Dawkins
Irvin
Doyle
The next 2 is Donnal and MAAR, but both will face tough competition from others, and I can see MAAR hold onto his ground.
Chatman, Robinson, Wagner, Wilson will have to fight hard for their minutes. If Spike red-shirts, everyone will benefit.
I don’t see the point in trying to pick only 8 guys with a roster this deep. Pick a starter and his back up and split the minutes as appropriate. For example, Walton plays 30 and Spike gets the other 10. Caris gets 32 at the 2 and Rahk gets the other 8, Irvin 28/Dawkins 12, Chatman 20/Wagner 20 and Doyle 22/Donnal 12/Wilson 6. Change the names and/or the minutes, but the theory remains the same. It is not like past years where we had to pick the best 8 guys and roll with them or play Walton and Spike at the 1 and 2 just to get them on the floor. Unless that combination gives us some advantage on offense or defense, why limit our talent?
I don't see the point in trying to pick only 8 guys with a roster this deep. Pick a starter and his back up and split the minutes as appropriate. For example, Walton plays 30 and Spike gets the other 10. Caris gets 32 at the 2 and Rahk gets the other 8, Irvin 28/Dawkins 12, Chatman 20/Wagner 20 and Doyle 22/Donnal 12/Wilson 6. Change the names and/or the minutes, but the theory remains the same. It is not like past years where we had to pick the best 8 guys and roll with them or play Walton and Spike at the 1 and 2 just to get them on the floor. Unless that combination gives us some advantage on offense or defense, why limit our talent?
I’d be shocked if either Chafman or Wagner get anywhere close to 20 minutes let alone both. But it would be great if they were playing well enough to earn those minutes.
I don't see the point in trying to pick only 8 guys with a roster this deep. Pick a starter and his back up and split the minutes as appropriate. For example, Walton plays 30 and Spike gets the other 10. Caris gets 32 at the 2 and Rahk gets the other 8, Irvin 28/Dawkins 12, Chatman 20/Wagner 20 and Doyle 22/Donnal 12/Wilson 6. Change the names and/or the minutes, but the theory remains the same. It is not like past years where we had to pick the best 8 guys and roll with them or play Walton and Spike at the 1 and 2 just to get them on the floor. Unless that combination gives us some advantage on offense or defense, why limit our talent?I’d be shocked if either Chafman or Wagner get anywhere close to 20 minutes let alone both. But it would be great if they were playing well enough to earn those minutes.
Still with the Chatman hot takes? He will be one of the most improved players In the league next year. Is Bates-Diop a bum too? He had a similar flash a brilliance mixed in with wtf kind of year. Ever hear of developing?
Still with the Chatman hot takes? He will be one of the most improved players In the league next year. Is Bates-Diop a bum too? He had a similar flash a brilliance mixed in with wtf kind of year. Ever hear of developing?
Based on what, exactly, other than your wanting it? Wishing and hoping that he will be doesn’t remotely make it so. And yes, Bates-Diop may indeed turn out to be a disappointment too. But as underwhelming a season as he had last year, he still put up better stats than Chatman, in fewer minutes. And as far as development, Chatman had a whole year to develop, and still went scoreless 3 of his last 4 games. Where the “flash of brilliance” from Chatman was, I have no idea. The fact remains that players who are going to be high quality starters as sophomores usually show quite a bit more than Chatman did last year.
Still with the Chatman hot takes? He will be one of the most improved players In the league next year. Is Bates-Diop a bum too? He had a similar flash a brilliance mixed in with wtf kind of year. Ever hear of developing?Based on what, exactly, other than your wanting it? Wishing and hoping that he will be doesn’t remotely make it so. And yes, Bates-Diop may indeed turn out to be a disappointment too. But as underwhelming a season as he had last year, he still put up better stats than Chatman, in fewer minutes. And as far as development, Chatman had a whole year to develop, and still went scoreless 3 of his last 4 games. Where the “flash of brilliance” from Chatman was, I have no idea. The fact remains that players who are going to be high quality starters as sophomores usually show quite a bit more than Chatman did last year.
In the two games before the last four you mention, Chatman scored 6 and 7 respectively against OSU and Maryland, on 6-9 combined shooting in 28 total minutes of playing time. For the last six games, he was 10-19 from the field, 3-6 from 3, and 3-4 from the line, all huge improvements on his performance prior to that time. Each side can cherry pick the stats they want to support an argument on this. I’ve seen highly rated guys with first year stats like those of Kam go on to be really good (Deshawn Sims), and guys who never developed (Bobby Crawford). I think he’s going to be good, and that’s not just based upon wishing and hoping, but rather flashes I saw, and the passing ability and court vision he possesses, which are pretty unique for a guy his size. You disagree. We’ll see this winter.
I don't see the point in trying to pick only 8 guys with a roster this deep. Pick a starter and his back up and split the minutes as appropriate. For example, Walton plays 30 and Spike gets the other 10. Caris gets 32 at the 2 and Rahk gets the other 8, Irvin 28/Dawkins 12, Chatman 20/Wagner 20 and Doyle 22/Donnal 12/Wilson 6. Change the names and/or the minutes, but the theory remains the same. It is not like past years where we had to pick the best 8 guys and roll with them or play Walton and Spike at the 1 and 2 just to get them on the floor. Unless that combination gives us some advantage on offense or defense, why limit our talent?I’d be shocked if either Chafman or Wagner get anywhere close to 20 minutes let alone both. But it would be great if they were playing well enough to earn those minutes.
Still with the Chatman hot takes? He will be one of the most improved players In the league next year. Is Bates-Diop a bum too? He had a similar flash a brilliance mixed in with wtf kind of year. Ever hear of developing?
Its not a “hot take.” Just my opinion based on what I saw. If I am wrong, then great. I think its funny that you want to talk about “hot takes,” when you have Chatman and Wagner both averaging 20 minutes. There is zero chance of that happening.
Here’s something Brian Cook posted at Mgo: “The coaches have been talking up Wilson’s “productive” redshirt year… and I’ve also heard that he stepped it up in a big way after Wagner came in on an official visit and took it to him.”
Grain of salt stuff but interesting nonetheless
Still with the Chatman hot takes? He will be one of the most improved players In the league next year. Is Bates-Diop a bum too? He had a similar flash a brilliance mixed in with wtf kind of year. Ever hear of developing?Based on what, exactly, other than your wanting it? Wishing and hoping that he will be doesn’t remotely make it so. And yes, Bates-Diop may indeed turn out to be a disappointment too. But as underwhelming a season as he had last year, he still put up better stats than Chatman, in fewer minutes. And as far as development, Chatman had a whole year to develop, and still went scoreless 3 of his last 4 games. Where the “flash of brilliance” from Chatman was, I have no idea. The fact remains that players who are going to be high quality starters as sophomores usually show quite a bit more than Chatman did last year.
In the two games before the last four you mention, Chatman scored 6 and 7 respectively against OSU and Maryland, on 6-9 combined shooting in 28 total minutes of playing time. For the last six games, he was 10-19 from the field, 3-6 from 3, and 3-4 from the line, all huge improvements on his performance prior to that time. Each side can cherry pick the stats they want to support an argument on this. I’ve seen highly rated guys with first year stats like those of Kam go on to be really good (Deshawn Sims), and guys who never developed (Bobby Crawford). I think he’s going to be good, and that’s not just based upon wishing and hoping, but rather flashes I saw, and the passing ability and court vision he possesses, which are pretty unique for a guy his size. You disagree. We’ll see this winter.
Sorry, but you’re the only one guilty of “cherry-picking”. You can’t argue that a player is “developing” or making “huge improvements” when you have to pluck examples which are both more limited and earlier in the season to try to make a case, while dismissing poorer performance over a longer stretch of games later in the season (by which time he should presumably have been MORE “developed” and “improved”, not less). “Flashes” that are no longer than a play don’t cut it…anyone can have those, but I guess you’re going to imagine you’ve seen what you want to. And “passing ability” and “court vision”? Seriously? He only had six assists for all 18 Big Ten games, which was fewer than Beilfeldt, for pity’s sake.
Personally, I’ll look at a guy like Dawkins as far more likely to have a great year next year, based on “flashes” like scoring 31 in a game, or shooting 48% on threes in the Big Ten.
Still with the Chatman hot takes? He will be one of the most improved players In the league next year. Is Bates-Diop a bum too? He had a similar flash a brilliance mixed in with wtf kind of year. Ever hear of developing?Based on what, exactly, other than your wanting it? Wishing and hoping that he will be doesn’t remotely make it so. And yes, Bates-Diop may indeed turn out to be a disappointment too. But as underwhelming a season as he had last year, he still put up better stats than Chatman, in fewer minutes. And as far as development, Chatman had a whole year to develop, and still went scoreless 3 of his last 4 games. Where the “flash of brilliance” from Chatman was, I have no idea. The fact remains that players who are going to be high quality starters as sophomores usually show quite a bit more than Chatman did last year.
In the two games before the last four you mention, Chatman scored 6 and 7 respectively against OSU and Maryland, on 6-9 combined shooting in 28 total minutes of playing time. For the last six games, he was 10-19 from the field, 3-6 from 3, and 3-4 from the line, all huge improvements on his performance prior to that time. Each side can cherry pick the stats they want to support an argument on this. I’ve seen highly rated guys with first year stats like those of Kam go on to be really good (Deshawn Sims), and guys who never developed (Bobby Crawford). I think he’s going to be good, and that’s not just based upon wishing and hoping, but rather flashes I saw, and the passing ability and court vision he possesses, which are pretty unique for a guy his size. You disagree. We’ll see this winter.
Sorry, but you’re the only one guilty of “cherry-picking”. You can’t argue that a player is “developing” or making “huge improvements” when you have to pluck examples which are both more limited and earlier in the season to try to make a case, while dismissing poorer performance over a longer stretch of games later in the season (by which time he should presumably have been MORE “developed” and “improved”, not less). “Flashes” that are no longer than a play don’t cut it…anyone can have those, but I guess you’re going to imagine you’ve seen what you want to. And “passing ability” and “court vision”? Seriously? He only had six assists for all 18 Big Ten games, which was fewer than Beilfeldt, for pity’s sake.
Personally, I’ll look at a guy like Dawkins as far more likely to have a great year next year, based on “flashes” like scoring 31 in a game, or shooting 48% on threes in the Big Ten.
Seriously, why even waste your time debating with him?
If you watched Kam play down the stretch… He definitely improved. He wasn’t a star, but he looked so much more comfortable on the floor. The big shift late in the season was that Michigan was able to play Kam instead of one of the walk-on guards and shift everyone down a position. Kam’s improvement was just as important as Zak’s to make that shift happen.
Here’s what I wrote after the Illinois game:
Chatman isn’t always perfect, but his improved play has enabled Michigan to rest the backcourt with a much more effective ‘big lineup’ with Irvin at the two. Chatman grabbed four defensive rebounds and while he missed his four shots from the field, he still played an improved floor game and was active defensively.
Aubrey obviously showed more scoring potential than Kam (and he earned the spot last season obviously), but there are things that Chatman can bring to the table that Dawkins doesn’t.
If you watched Kam play down the stretch... He definitely improved. He wasn't a star, but he looked so much more comfortable on the floor. The big shift late in the season was that Michigan was able to play Kam instead of one of the walk-on guards and shift everyone down a position. Kam's improvement was just as important as Zak's to make that shift happen.Here’s what I wrote after the Illinois game:
Chatman isn’t always perfect, but his improved play has enabled Michigan to rest the backcourt with a much more effective ‘big lineup’ with Irvin at the two. Chatman grabbed four defensive rebounds and while he missed his four shots from the field, he still played an improved floor game and was active defensively.Aubrey obviously showed more scoring potential than Kam (and he earned the spot last season obviously), but there are things that Chatman can bring to the table that Dawkins doesn’t.
Seriously, why waste your time explaining this to them?
Near as I can tell, much debating around these parts is partaken as an excuse to belittle.