Great addition in Mortiz Wagner


#141

I agree Bacon. I’m now beginning to wonder if the props Jmo was giving Donnal at the end of the '13/'14 season were more a matter of trying to boost the kid’s confidence. Jmo is a very smart young man who loves Michigan basketball, perhaps he knew a confident Mark Donnal would be needed after he left.


#142

Wrt, sometimes, guys perform better in practice than they do in games and vice versa. It’s not common but in my experience, sometimes you go into a season excited about a guy because of how well he has practiced but for whatever reason, isn’t able to immediately translate that into on court performance.

Perhaps with a year of playing experience, Donnal and Chatman will feel more comfortable and look less hesitant than they did last year…in Chatman’s case you saw him improve in this regard the last couple of weeks of the season.


#143

I think it is too early to write both off yet. They were both young with no understanding of the college game and had a rough transition. Some people make the jump better then others. A year under their belt could be huge for them…


#144
Wrt, sometimes, guys perform better in practice than they do in games and vice versa. It's not common but in my experience, sometimes you go into a season excited about a guy because of how well he has practiced but for whatever reason, isn't able to immediately translate that into on court performance.

Perhaps with a year of playing experience, Donnal and Chatman will feel more comfortable and look less hesitant than they did last year…in Chatman’s case you saw him improve in this regard the last couple of weeks of the season.

We can beat around the bush all we want here…but the reality is that any practice reports of offensive competence from non-proven commodities have to be taken with a grain of salt because we are simply not a good defensive team. Has less to do with practice player vs game player, and more to do with practice competition level in my opinion. Each case is unique, but we need to keep that in mind when hearing reports.


#145

In general, practice reports mean very little next to on-court performance against real competition. Playing against your friends and teammates when it doesn’t count is never the same as playing against an opponent when it does. Not even close.

And while I wouldn’t write Donnal or Chatman off 100%, the fact is that neither is likely to live up to the expectations we had for them coming in. In college basketball, a year is plenty of time to see what someone has. That’s not to say that they will necessarily be playing the best they ever will by the end of their freshman year, but they should at least be showing signs of greater productivity. Chatman absolutely did not, and neither did Donnal, despite being given every opportunity. Compare Chatman’s play after he had the better part of a season under his belt to Dawkins’. Not even close.


#146
And while I wouldn't write Donnal or Chatman off 100%, the fact is that neither is likely to live up to the expectations we had for them coming in. In college basketball, a year is plenty of time to see what someone has. That's not to say that they will necessarily be playing the best they ever will by the end of their freshman year, but they should at least be showing signs of greater productivity.

So, basically you are writing them off.

I am not guaranteeing that they will live up to whatever expectations you might have had, but I think you are way too dismissive, especially with regards to Chatman.

The past few years of college basketball are littered with examples of players both highly touted and not-so-highly touted that struggled their first year(s) only to eventually play their way to all-conference honors and even the NBA draft. Two instant examples that all Michigan fans should remember (and which have been mentioned often on this board) are Darius Morris and Adreian Payne. Both were abysmal their freshman year. It isn’t like Morris’s path to the court was blocked by superior players. It was blocked by his own poor play. And while Payne may have had serviceable players in front of him, he looked like a fish out of water on the basketball court. He looked like a stiff–nothing at all like the player he was as a senior.

I only bring up these 2 because I am sure all Michigan fans are familiar with them. Off the top of my head, Patric Young and Marcus Paige are 2 McDonald’s all-Americans who greatly disappointed their respective fan bases as freshman, only to become all-conference / all-American types as upper classmen. Examples of less highly touted players include Denzel Valentine (turnover machine as a freshman, but without the assists or good shooting), Matt Costello (Mr. Basketball), Rakeem Christmas, Frank Kaminsky.

I’m not saying that Chatman and Donnal will be great. Or even that it’s more likely that they will be meet expectations than not. But you are way too dismissive of their futures, particularly Chatman’s. He played JV ball as a junior and then played senior ball against sub-standard competition. An adjustment period is not unexpected. Donnal–he is admittedly much less likely to be an impact Big10 player, since he had a year to prep for this season. But he was less highly touted and is an undersized 5, so expectations probably should have been a bit lower for him in the first place.


#147
In general, practice reports mean very little next to on-court performance against real competition. Playing against your friends and teammates when it doesn't count is never the same as playing against an opponent when it does. Not even close.

And while I wouldn’t write Donnal or Chatman off 100%, the fact is that neither is likely to live up to the expectations we had for them coming in. In college basketball, a year is plenty of time to see what someone has. That’s not to say that they will necessarily be playing the best they ever will by the end of their freshman year, but they should at least be showing signs of greater productivity. Chatman absolutely did not, and neither did Donnal, despite being given every opportunity. Compare Chatman’s play after he had the better part of a season under his belt to Dawkins’. Not even close.

Lol… that is such garbage. Did we see everything Darius Morris and Caris LeVert had to offer their first year? There are hundreds upon hundreds of examples of college basketball players who didn’t show much as freshman but become very good college players.

And before MattD says “you can’t be sure they will improve”… that isn’t what I’m saying. Speaking in absolutes either way is stupid. Implying no players significantly improve after their freshman year is equally as stupid to implying that all freshmen will.

Heck, the 2015 NPOY, Franky Kaminsky, would have been written off by MChem. One season of basketball would have been enough for MChem to know that Kaminsky was a below average college player… lol.


#148

On Donnal, at times he has shown flashes of being a good player. Two real issues I have with him: (1) he doesn’t seem to have a big motor - he’s a lot better when he plays at a higher gear, but he’s rarely in that higher gear; (2) what prevents him from being a really good pick and pop player, IMO, is that he’s got a really slow release on his jump shot, so he’s easy to close out.

As far as Chatman, I don’t think practice reports were the reason for the optimism; I’d say it was more like his five star ranking. In any event, I’ll remind people that DeShawn Sims looked worse than Chatman as a freshman, and while he looked a little better overall, Darius Morris’ shot looked even worse than Chatman’s. In other words, there’s plenty of time for him to get better, and he certainly picked it up toward the end of the year. IMO, he just needs some added strength, confidence, and some work on his shot. That’s not easy to fix all at once, but it’s doable for sure.


#149

A week or so ago, Beilein said that they had met with all the players, conducted the interviews and were doing the individual workouts. He said that everyone was happy with their role. I assume that included where he saw each player playing the bulk of their minutes and what skills they needed to be working on. I wish I knew what he told each player.


#150
And while I wouldn't write Donnal or Chatman off 100%, the fact is that neither is likely to live up to the expectations we had for them coming in. In college basketball, a year is plenty of time to see what someone has. That's not to say that they will necessarily be playing the best they ever will by the end of their freshman year, but they should at least be showing signs of greater productivity.

So, basically you are writing them off.

I am not guaranteeing that they will live up to whatever expectations you might have had, but I think you are way too dismissive, especially with regards to Chatman.

The past few years of college basketball are littered with examples of players both highly touted and not-so-highly touted that struggled their first year(s) only to eventually play their way to all-conference honors and even the NBA draft. Two instant examples that all Michigan fans should remember (and which have been mentioned often on this board) are Darius Morris and Adreian Payne. Both were abysmal their freshman year. It isn’t like Morris’s path to the court was blocked by superior players. It was blocked by his own poor play. And while Payne may have had serviceable players in front of him, he looked like a fish out of water on the basketball court. He looked like a stiff–nothing at all like the player he was as a senior.

I only bring up these 2 because I am sure all Michigan fans are familiar with them. Off the top of my head, Patric Young and Marcus Paige are 2 McDonald’s all-Americans who greatly disappointed their respective fan bases as freshman, only to become all-conference / all-American types as upper classmen. Examples of less highly touted players include Denzel Valentine (turnover machine as a freshman, but without the assists or good shooting), Matt Costello (Mr. Basketball), Rakeem Christmas, Frank Kaminsky.

I’m not saying that Chatman and Donnal will be great. Or even that it’s more likely that they will be meet expectations than not. But you are way too dismissive of their futures, particularly Chatman’s. He played JV ball as a junior and then played senior ball against sub-standard competition. An adjustment period is not unexpected. Donnal–he is admittedly much less likely to be an impact Big10 player, since he had a year to prep for this season. But he was less highly touted and is an undersized 5, so expectations probably should have been a bit lower for him in the first place.

Not sure what you mean by saying I am “way too dismissive” All I’ve said (and you’ve said that you don’t disagree with me) is that neither Chatman or Donnal is likely to live up to their original expectations.

Yes, as you and others have strained to point out, you can roam around college basketball and find guys who had bad freshman years and still turned into really good players. But it is far more common for a player who is eventually going to be as good as a guy with Chatman’s expectations should be to show a lot more in their first year than Chatman did last year. As I said quite clearly, that doesn’t necessarily mean they are as good as they’re going to get after one year, but you normally see SOME signs of star-caliber talent, even if they’re inconsistent and obviously have things to learn. Chatman-none.

Chatman was a high 4 star recruit, top 25-30 in the country. By their second year, a guy rated like that should be a high quality starter, averaging double digits, at or approaching all-conference caliber and NBA-draftability. Is it POSSIBLE that Chatman will still hit that level in 2015-16? Sure. Is it likely, based on what he showed last year relative to what most guys headed for that level show as true freshmen? No. I’d love to be surprised, no doubt. I’d love it if we could potentially rotate three starting-caliber guys (Irvin, Dawkins and Chatman) through the 3 and 4 next year. But based on the hard evidence of what he showed on the court last season, there’s no justification to project him as that good, other than wishful thinking. Will he still play and contribute, and probably be better than last year? Sure. Will he be better than backup caliber? Much less likely.


#151

We’ll see what happens. I can point to two guys in the last 7 years who played under this very coaching staff who went from being awful in their freshman year to very good by their second and third years - Darius Morris and DeShawn Sims.

I think Chatman was indeed playing better ball toward the end of the year. If I recall correctly, he had 14 against Rutgers in our last home game. In any event, I think it’s way too early to conclude anything.

Is he likely to be an All-American? No. Is he likely to be a complete bust (I would define this as a non-starter and/or below average player by his junior and senior years)? WAY too early to tell, and I’d say “no” to that question.


#152

Guys just some perspective for both sides - it’s all about your patience level and how you define ‘bust’ or ‘success’ along those lines. Some people want instant impact while others are content to let it play out 4 years before coming to a conclusion. I fall on the instant impact side of things but I can see where others are coming from. No right or wrong on this one in my view, just subjective preferences in terms of defining success and the relevant timeline.


#153
We'll see what happens. I can point to two guys in the last 7 years who played under this very coaching staff who went from being awful in their freshman year to very good by their second and third years - Darius Morris and DeShawn Sims.

I think Chatman was indeed playing better ball toward the end of the year. If I recall correctly, he had 14 against Rutgers in our last home game. In any event, I think it’s way too early to conclude anything.

Is he likely to be an All-American? No. Is he likely to be a complete bust (I would define this as a non-starter and/or below average player by his junior and senior years)? WAY too early to tell, and I’d say “no” to that question.

Sorry, not sure what “better ball” you were watching from Chatman. He had 13 against a very weak Rutgers team, yes, but he was scoreless in the other three of the last four games. Zero points. And his other stats were not much better. That is not a sign of his starting to get it after a season under his belt.


#154
Guys just some perspective for both sides - it's all about your patience level and how you define 'bust' or 'success' along those lines. Some people want instant impact while others are content to let it play out 4 years before coming to a conclusion. I fall on the instant impact side of things but I can see where others are coming from. No right or wrong on this one in my view, just subjective preferences in terms of defining success and the relevant timeline.
Guys just some perspective for both sides - it's all about your patience level and how you define 'bust' or 'success' along those lines. Some people want instant impact while others are content to let it play out 4 years before coming to a conclusion. I fall on the instant impact side of things but I can see where others are coming from. No right or wrong on this one in my view, just subjective preferences in terms of defining success and the relevant timeline.

Well, I don’t necessarily expect “instant impact” from any freshman we’re likely to get, if that means that someone is going to step right in and be one of our top players and an all-conference contender right off the bat. But I like to see the top rated ones make more than a token contribution in their first season, and show signs that they have a high ceiling for the future.

We’re lucky if we get one elite or near-elite recruit a year, and Chatman looks like he’ll be our only recruit in that category until 2017 now. It’s a big blow and leaves a big hole in our talent pool if he turns out to be just average, or even if he takes 3-4 years to be a significant contributor. If we’re going to compete for Big Ten Championships or higher, we can’t afford to whiff on guys like Chatman.


#155
Guys just some perspective for both sides - it's all about your patience level and how you define 'bust' or 'success' along those lines. Some people want instant impact while others are content to let it play out 4 years before coming to a conclusion. I fall on the instant impact side of things but I can see where others are coming from. No right or wrong on this one in my view, just subjective preferences in terms of defining success and the relevant timeline.
Guys just some perspective for both sides - it's all about your patience level and how you define 'bust' or 'success' along those lines. Some people want instant impact while others are content to let it play out 4 years before coming to a conclusion. I fall on the instant impact side of things but I can see where others are coming from. No right or wrong on this one in my view, just subjective preferences in terms of defining success and the relevant timeline.

Well, I don’t necessarily expect “instant impact” from any freshman we’re likely to get, if that means that someone is going to step right in and be one of our top players and an all-conference contender right off the bat. But I like to see the top rated ones make more than a token contribution in their first season, and show signs that they have a high ceiling for the future.

We’re lucky if we get one elite or near-elite recruit a year, and Chatman looks like he’ll be our only recruit in that category until 2017 now. It’s a big blow and leaves a big hole in our talent pool if he turns out to be just average, or even if he takes 3-4 years to be a significant contributor. If we’re going to compete for Big Ten Championships or higher, we can’t afford to whiff on guys like Chatman.

Your analysis isn’t great. Is there a mute button on this site?


#156
We'll see what happens. I can point to two guys in the last 7 years who played under this very coaching staff who went from being awful in their freshman year to very good by their second and third years - Darius Morris and DeShawn Sims.

I think Chatman was indeed playing better ball toward the end of the year. If I recall correctly, he had 14 against Rutgers in our last home game. In any event, I think it’s way too early to conclude anything.

Is he likely to be an All-American? No. Is he likely to be a complete bust (I would define this as a non-starter and/or below average player by his junior and senior years)? WAY too early to tell, and I’d say “no” to that question.

I saw way more out of Morris and Sims as freshmen then I did either Chatman or Donnal. Sure the later 2 will improve but will it be enough for them to be key contributors on a league contender? I have my doubts.


#157

I would agree that DMo showed more as a freshman – although he disappointed overall in a disappointing season – but DeShawn Sims had an awful freshman year. Similar to Kam as he shot well under 40% on twos and turned the ball over a bunch.


#158
Guys just some perspective for both sides - it's all about your patience level and how you define 'bust' or 'success' along those lines. Some people want instant impact while others are content to let it play out 4 years before coming to a conclusion. I fall on the instant impact side of things but I can see where others are coming from. No right or wrong on this one in my view, just subjective preferences in terms of defining success and the relevant timeline.
Guys just some perspective for both sides - it's all about your patience level and how you define 'bust' or 'success' along those lines. Some people want instant impact while others are content to let it play out 4 years before coming to a conclusion. I fall on the instant impact side of things but I can see where others are coming from. No right or wrong on this one in my view, just subjective preferences in terms of defining success and the relevant timeline.

Well, I don’t necessarily expect “instant impact” from any freshman we’re likely to get, if that means that someone is going to step right in and be one of our top players and an all-conference contender right off the bat. But I like to see the top rated ones make more than a token contribution in their first season, and show signs that they have a high ceiling for the future.

We’re lucky if we get one elite or near-elite recruit a year, and Chatman looks like he’ll be our only recruit in that category until 2017 now. It’s a big blow and leaves a big hole in our talent pool if he turns out to be just average, or even if he takes 3-4 years to be a significant contributor. If we’re going to compete for Big Ten Championships or higher, we can’t afford to whiff on guys like Chatman.

Your analysis isn’t great. Is there a mute button on this site?

No mute button, sorry. Just a little box where you can type your superior analysis. Which you, for some odd reason, failed to supply in response. Wonder why?


#159

Agree on Morris (who then improved so much he left the very next year), disagree on Sims. And even if Chatman didn’t show a lot, don’t you think Dawkins was a very pleasant surprise, and has a chance to be really good?


#160

Good stuff here with Wagner. Basically said UM’s style attracted him based on Euro similarites in outside shooting, off ball movement, Sanderson - I.E. we don’t put an absolute premium on ballhandling and athleticism. I do love his competitive spirit

Recruiting: Chatting With 2015 Michigan Commit Moritz Wagner. http://t.co/CcMbLezKAI pic.twitter.com/CovKTDBkVy

— Thomas Beindit (@tbeindit) April 22, 2015