Five takeaways from Michigan Media Day 2018

Yea, but we are trending towards being a program with increasingly more depth, are we not?Look at next year and the year after that. The table is set for having very deep teams. How will JB respond if he has that kind of projected depth without huge gaps in talent level? We really don’t know. I suspect Simmons would have played more if he would have figured some of it out a little earlier…

2 Likes

The next year’s roster is always has more depth than the current one :slight_smile: And the one after that has even more.

The one thing about college basketball is that you don’t really need that much depth when you consider media timeouts, etc. This becomes especially apparent in the NCAA Tournament when all of the stoppages are even longer.

That’s why when you have a guy like MAAR, you can play him 37 minutes per night in Big Ten play.

My impression is that Beilein has always worked under the assumption it is great to have the best starting five and really grow the chemistry with that group. Then you add in a sixth man, a backup big and a backup PG and roll with that.

I generally think that teams that are praised for having great depth and playing so many guys on the bench it usually ends up costing them in the long run. MSU was an extraordinary collection of talent, but it never quite settled on what it was. Iowa rolls out different lines every night and the defense never really works. The Kentucky team with two lines is the exception to the rule, but you get the point.

The way college hoops works, if you have guys who are good enough to play coming off the bench… they often will be playing somewhere else the next year.

1 Like

Agreed. Eight is really the ideal number for a regular rotation. You can go +/- 1 on that and still be fine, but outside of that 7-9 range is not ideal. Obviously 6 is too limiting, but if you’re playing 10-11 guys every night, you tend to lose lineup cohesion, because you’ve got too many combinations out there. And if you’ve got a roster than inclines you to go 10-11 deep, that probably means you don’t have enough standout talent. A team like that may be good, but will probably not be great. Maybe if you’re a Kentucky, with more 5 star talent than you can fit into one lineup, you can do well as an exception, but very few teams are going to be in that position, and it doesn’t even work for them all the time.

One thing that has had me coming around to both of your ways of thinking on this subject is that our guys just seem so awesome in terms of conditioning. It seems like fatigue is rarely a factor.

1 Like

more or less agree. except the conference tournament, only 2 games a week and plenty of TV timeout during a game. The main benefit for having depth is injury, which is inevitable during a long season

1 Like

But Michigan won the conference tourney in back to back years despite playing one of the shortest rotations in the conference :slight_smile:

1 Like

Beilein has tended to give 3-4 guys pretty heavy use, more than other teams with a comparable talent level, but it works for him. Last year was an odd exception…only one guy (MAAR) averaged more than 30 minutes in conference games, the first time that’s happened in quite a while.

1 Like

As usual, I’m sure Beilein will experiment and then settle on a shorter rotation down the stretch. It’s worth noting, though, that the two Beilein teams that went to the final game were his two deepest at UM, where the 9th or 10th guy could come in if needed and not be entirely overwhelmed, or someone like Spike could play many more minutes than expected and still produce.
You also have guys like Chatman or Simmons who have worked their way back into the rotation later in the season, expanding the bench. I think we’ll see something like that this year with at least one of Johns, Davis, or DDJ earning more minutes by February.

IMO, last year we were a 9 man rotation. That 9th man switched between Eli and Jaaron, but we were consistently playing a 9th player that was one of those two every game. JB will never go deeper than 9.

This is how I view the rotation this year:

Simpson - Brooks or Dejulius playing a total of 4-6 minutes a game
Poole - Iggy
Matthews - Iggy
Iggy - Livers - Johns
Teske - Davis - Johns

So, I think it’ll be 9 guys. Johns is too talented to not play, IMO. I think Johns will play relatively sparingly but can maybe end up stealing a lot of C minutes from Davis as the season goes on.

1 Like

If Iggy is as good and positionally versatile as I think he might be…the pressure is going to be on all the fringe guys regardless of position. Brooks, DeJulius, Davis, Johns. If Iggy needs more minutes at the 4, I think Livers could slide down and eliminate the need for a backup C. If Iggy needs minutes at the 2, I don’t think it’s crazy to think Poole, Iggy, Matthews could play the 1-3 together for short stretches if the backup PGs aren’t cutting it. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

I can’t wait to see how the guys are positioned. One thing about Iggy and Johns is it seems like it will be too much for them, or anyone, to learn multiple positions and be effective at all of them right away. I was thinking it might make more sense for Iggy and Johns to just learn to be good wings and Matthews could backup the 2 and Livers could back up center for a small ball look. It just seems like too much to learn, and be quickly effective at a wing and 2 position; and/ or wing and center position.

Z/ Brooks
Poole/ (Matthews)
Matthews/ Iggy
Livers/ Johns
Teske/ (Livers)

That would give us 8. If Johns is not cutting it then maybe Matthews is backing up Livers too. Rather than using Iggy as the flex player maybe it should be Matthews?

To me the shorter rotation also leads to fewer turnovers. Which JB teams have typically demonstrated to be in the top 10 in the nation.

Iggy is playing the 2 and the 4, he may eventually focus on one or the other but I think you keep both as options. As I think I mentioned in this story, by learning both of those spots he can play whenever one of Livers, Poole, Matthews isn’t on the floor.

Johns is the combo forward focusing on learning the five, not Livers. If he is going to learn just one position, it should be the five IMO.

The fact that Beilein spends 90 seconds talking about learning how to pivot in his Media Day press conference has a lot to do with that too :slight_smile: Beilein could play 20 guys but if they turned it over he’d find another 20.

1 Like

I wouldn’t discount the possibility that Iggy eventually starts at the 4 this year, which might limit his minutes at other positions. I hope Livers is productive enough on offense to play starter’s minutes, but if he isn’t, Beilein will have to go with whoever is putting the ball in the hoop.

Also mentioned this in the piece this thread is commenting on. But the point about playing both positions means that Livers could come in for Poole and slide Iggy to the two, for example. Or Livers could replace Matthews and Poole could play the three (where he played a lot last year).

1 Like

Yep. Poole, Iggy, Matthews and Livers are gonna be the primary 4 guys across those three positions. Expect to see every permutation of those guys out there

I am aware of the plan I am just wondering how feasible the plan is. I wish the coaching staff would begin reaching out to me for my opinion :). I think my way makes more sense. I am wondering what you think the rationale is behind John’s learning to play 5 over Livers? They are roughly the same size. Liver’s seems stronger but not as long. Livers is the better 3 point shooter. Plus it is extremely hard to learn the 5 at Michigan as a Freshman…The wing positions are the easiest to learn, the 4 being the easiest, I think.

Also, I think it weird to spend a bunch of time having Iggy learning to play the 2. For what? So he can cover Poole for 5 min a game? Is my assumption that Poole is going to be gobbling up all the 2 minutes my mistake? I admit, I imagine Poole will be our most important piece and the primary or secondary initiator. Should I be thinking it is actually Iggy?

I think that Beilein will stay simple to begin the season
X-Poole-Mattews-Livers-Teske to start
Brooks is the main back-up at 1-2, Iggy rotates in heavily at 3-4 with the possibility of Livers sliding down to 5, Davis goes in if Teske in foul trouble. Other freshmen will have chances to crack the line-up as the season goes. In particular, Davis needs to fend off competition from Johns and Colin, Both Livers and Brooks need to step up and do well in the first 5 games.

1 Like

It will be interesting what combinations work best together. I like the idea of Brazdeikis in an instant offense role of the bench, but can also envision him being too good not to start.

Other than Livers, I can’t fathom any of the likely starters not being in the starting lineup. Simpson, Poole, Matthews, and Teske are virtual locks