I like Wilson's video (and calling out MattD just a little bit)

Recruiting
21
I think your missing the point of the 4 man in our offense.

His position does not require a post game. How many times did GR3 post up this year? How about Zach Novak? Beilein is looking for a perimeter oriented big man, with length and skill. We are looking to overcome some mismatches we all witnessed when 6’4 Novak and 6’6 GR3 get picked on some in the post.

Wilson, from VERY limited tape, has an outstanding looking jump shot, form and all. He also posses the skill to take it to the basket when needed.

We have back to the basket options in Doyle, Donnal, even Chatman in mis matches. Wilson is being recruited because his skillet does indeed fit with what were looking for at that 4

Point is, just think about what we have seen our 4 man do the past 3 -4 years, then ask yourself if Wilson could fit there. The answer is yes, and the staff agrees.

Btw, idk how some of you have seen enough footage on defense to conclude he won’t make it here… Ridiculous.

You essentially make my point for me, perhaps the role of our 4 man should include being effective on BOTH sides of the floor. Why settle for a one dimensional player, when you can potentially have a 2 way player?

With all due respect to GRIII and Novak, whom I both admire very much for their contributions to Michigan basketball, their defense/rebounding in the post is probably our biggest weakness. With respect to offense, perhaps if we had a low post option or if we had legitimate post defenders, we would be raising an NCAA championship banner rather than a Final Four banner. I was in attendance for the championship game vs. Louisville, and I can tell you with certainty that our lack of rebounding was the singular reason we did not win that game(well that and the fact that the refs were simply horrible). I use this game as an example because of the magnitude of the game, but the same holds true for the entire season - we were simply a below average defensive/rebounding team.

That being said, if playing those type of players is a weakness, why continue to adhere to “the system”. Doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. I don’t care if Wilson is a stretch 4 in our “system”, I care about winning.

All I see pro-Wilson guys talk about is offense, well guess what, the game is played on both ends of the court.

Btw, your last comment about limited footage is the exact type of hypocrisy that baffles me - you claim that its ridiculous to conclude that Wilson can’t play defense. If that holds true, then it is also “ridiculous” to conclude that Wilson CAN play defense. Absolute hypocrisy at its very best.

22
It just baffles me how people are questioning his defense and decision making??? Huh?

Must have missed his game tapes on YouTube that show ANY of that

Exactly, what is this analysis based off of? Highlight tapes? Until you watch several games in their entirety I do not think you can pass judgement on decision making and defense.

You make my point for me - you can’t claim that Wilson CAN play defense from limited film if that is the premise used to attack my analysis.

23

I didn’t make the point that he COULD play defense, I made the point that it’s a ton easier to pick on a post defender who is 6’4 and 6’6 then it is against a kid who is 6’9. So understand my point.

No, rebounding was not a huge reason why we lost. There was a difference of 5 rebounds. It sounds like you have a problem with the system. One of which that has been successful for Beilein for almost 40 years, but hey…

If we went for a player, in particular a 4 man, who was a monster on the glass, played in the post and had an all around game we would go after Kevon Looney… We did and lost out. There are only so many players with all around games and everything YOUR looking for. When you miss out, you get the next best thing.

There is absolutely nothing in that film to evaluate his D ability how he rebounds or decision making. He is a talented offensive 4 man with big upside. He is athletic. If your disagreeing with that then we just have a fundamental disagreement of what talent and upside are.

Btw, UM adheres to “the system” because it is successful. National championship game with Beilein recruited players. Tell me how many other teams can say that last year? It works.

24

The bottom line is:

Wilson supporters, like myself, have evidence that he has offensive tools, and a lot of upside. There is no reason anyone should be commenting on his defense, decision making, speech patterns or ability to make a mean steak because none of that is available to watch in the videos.

I also have evidence to know that we can win in this system. There will always be changes and evolutions of it, but you get who you can get in recruiting and work around it. National title game…

I just don’t get the argument here

25

It’s pretty clear from watching what limited film we have available to us that the kid can shoot and that he isn’t exactly the most adept at making decisions with the basketball.

Even Dylan in his scouting video breakdown mentions a certain “tentativeness” to Wilson’s game that definitely shows up on tape. That tentativeness is what I described when I said he seems to be a step slow in making decisions with the ball in his hands.

You can get away with that in high school, but at the next level a lot of those passes he makes will result in turnovers. Being a step slow on the defensive end leads to easy buckets.

He’s getting by on his size for now, but at the next level that wont cut it, seeing as he does not appear to be a very adept athlete. Combine that with his slight frame, and I’m not certain how much upside he’d have as a stretch 4.

You need to be able to do more than just stand in one spot and shoot in this system.

26

Does Wilson set an announcement date?
Or does he run out of Crisler screaming and jumping up and down after he gets his offer?

27

Hopefully the latter. I’m impatient.

28

Someone posted this on The Fort a couple of days ago. It’s practice footage DJ…

29
The bottom line is:

Wilson supporters, like myself, have evidence that he has offensive tools, and a lot of upside. There is no reason anyone should be commenting on his defense, decision making, speech patterns or ability to make a mean steak because none of that is available to watch in the videos.

I also have evidence to know that we can win in this system. There will always be changes and evolutions of it, but you get who you can get in recruiting and work around it. National title game…

I just don’t get the argument here

The bottom line is:

Wilson questioners, like myself, have evidence that he doesn’t have the defensive tools, and limited upside. There is no reason anyone should be commenting on his offense, decision making, speech patterns or ability to make a mean steak because none of that is available to watch in the videos.

I also have evidence to know that we can win in this system. There will always be changes and evolutions of it, but you get players that improve upon your weaknesses, and you will WIN a national title game…

I just don’t get the argument here

30

Don’t understand saying that Wilson has “limited upside”… 6-foot-9, extremely long arms, growing, good ball skills and a jump shot. His ceiling is through the roof.

31
I didn't make the point that he COULD play defense, I made the point that it's a ton easier to pick on a post defender who is 6'4 and 6'6 then it is against a kid who is 6'9. So understand my point.

No, rebounding was not a huge reason why we lost. There was a difference of 5 rebounds. It sounds like you have a problem with the system. One of which that has been successful for Beilein for almost 40 years, but hey…

If we went for a player, in particular a 4 man, who was a monster on the glass, played in the post and had an all around game we would go after Kevon Looney… We did and lost out. There are only so many players with all around games and everything YOUR looking for. When you miss out, you get the next best thing.

There is absolutely nothing in that film to evaluate his D ability how he rebounds or decision making. He is a talented offensive 4 man with big upside. He is athletic. If your disagreeing with that then we just have a fundamental disagreement of what talent and upside are.

Btw, UM adheres to “the system” because it is successful. National championship game with Beilein recruited players. Tell me how many other teams can say that last year? It works.

I’ll respond point by point:

First, I couldn’t disagree with you more regarding picking on smaller players. I rarely, if ever, seen opposing coaches picking on Draymond Green in the post, despite the fact that he was 6’6. You know why, because Draymond was physical, and he played with tenacity in the post and on the boards, and simply wasn’t going to be outworked. GRIII, and in my opinion, Wilson, simply don’t have the tenacity to deal with that degree of physicality. Sure, size helps, but the tenacity and physicality are the true factors. GRII has way more in terms of size/athleticism relative to Green, but nowhere near as effective.

You selectively choose to highlight the fact that we were only outrebounded by 5. While that may be true, we lost the game in the second half, and without looking at the box score, I would venture to say we were outrebounded by double digits in the second half. Thus if we were only outscored in the 2nd half, and rebounding was the determining factor, it would seem logical to say that we lost the game due to rebounding (or lack of).

I don’t necessarily have a problem with the system per se, but I do feel it is a little too conducive to finesse basketball vs. physicality, especially on the defensive end. I feel our brand of basketball could be more physical to say the least. Let’s face it, we have a reputation as being soft, and I doubt anyone would disagree with that.

If you claim there is absolutely nothing on film to evaluate Wilson’s rebounding, decision making, or defense, then that also means there is nothing on that film that indicates he is a talented 4 man with big upside. That is what you call hypocrisy. You can’t isolate the variable that you are a proponent of while disregarding all the other variables, that is just flat out garbage and a total lack of objectivity.

If you like his game, just say you like his game regardless of his defensive or rebounding abilities (or lack of), or that you’ll agree with what the staff does just because. I can respect that type of opinion because at least in reflects honesty. But to say you can’t evaluate anything other than the variable you want to highlight is BS and we both know it.

32

Just for clarification, we were outrebounded by 10 in the 2nd half by Louisville. Bottom line, we keep Louisville away from the offensive glass in the 2nd half, we come home with a Championship. This is what Michigan needs to address in order to be more successful in my opinion. No way possible you should be up 1 entering the 2nd half, shoot 55% in the 2nd half and lose. One reason, and one reason only, we weren’t tough enough.

33
Don't understand saying that Wilson has "limited upside"... 6-foot-9, extremely long arms, growing, good ball skills and a jump shot. His ceiling is through the roof.

Dylan/Joe - I think you know that was a satire on the previous post. But I’ll address it anyway - when we use the term upside, it generally indicates that a player has the requisite athleticism but may lack the skill/polish at this point of the developmental process.

Jaylen Johnson comes to mind, needs work on his jumpshot, but clearly has the physical/athletic tools to be an impact player in the future. It is generally easier to refine/develop a player’s skillset vs. gaining a half second on a 40 yard dash, or 6 inches on vertical. Smot was never going to be an impact player, he simply lacked the requisite athletic/physical ability to truly utilize his skillset. I think he honestly had skills, but he was so limited athletically that it really didn’t matter. I think Wilson obviously has more bounce relative to Smot, but he is not the fleetest of foot, and is not aggressive going to the rim at all. When I look at his film in totality, I see a good possibility that he will most likely be strictly a spot up shooter for Michigan, and won’t have enough of a presence on defense to warrant significant playing time.

What do long arms really mean? As mentioned before, Pau Gasol, Shawn Bradley, Tim Hardaway Jr., Greg Monroe, etc. all have long arms, but yet I don’t think anybody would characterize those individuals as good defenders. Length is certainly an asset, but ONLY if utilized with tenacity and physicality.

34

To put the above post in context, let’s examine current Michigan players as primary examples. GRIII is generally considered to be a lottery/mid first round pick by all NBA draft boards. Stauskus isn’t on anybody’s 1st round mock boards, perhaps he is a 2nd rounder on some boards ( I really can’t confirm without further research). GRIII is not considered a finished product, but gets the lofty mock position because of “upside”.

Comparing those 2 players, Stauskus literally does everything better from an offensive skill perspective - he has better handles, better court vision, and definitely shoots the ball better. Neither of those individuals are world class defensive players, I’m sure we’d all agree about that. They are roughly the same height/length, so we have to ask why is GRIII so desired by the NBA while Stauskus is not? Very simple, GRIII is an all world athlete that has an NBA physique right now.

Bottom line is that “upside” in the traditional sense means that a player has the requisite athleticism as opposed to skill/length. I’d be shocked if DJ Wilson was on anybody’s mock board because of his “upside” in the next few years.

35

We get it dude. You are not happy with offering Wilson. Fact is - we need another frontcourt player & there are not many left that we can get that are better than him. So “if” we can get him…lets make best out of it. Some think he would be great. Also - everyone thinks its a given that he would come here. He still has offers from other nice schools including Gonzage…so I think we might be jumping to conclusions a bit.

36
To put the above post in context, let's examine current Michigan players as primary examples. GRIII is generally considered to be a lottery/mid first round pick by all NBA draft boards. Stauskus isn't on anybody's 1st round mock boards, perhaps he is a 2nd rounder on some boards ( I really can't confirm without further research). GRIII is not considered a finished product, but gets the lofty mock position because of "upside".

Comparing those 2 players, Stauskus literally does everything better from an offensive skill perspective - he has better handles, better court vision, and definitely shoots the ball better. Neither of those individuals are world class defensive players, I’m sure we’d all agree about that. They are roughly the same height/length, so we have to ask why is GRIII so desired by the NBA while Stauskus is not? Very simple, GRIII is an all world athlete that has an NBA physique right now.

Bottom line is that “upside” in the traditional sense means that a player has the requisite athleticism as opposed to skill/length. I’d be shocked if DJ Wilson was on anybody’s mock board because of his “upside” in the next few years.

These comparison’s are interesting but not that meaningful. NBA draft status may or may not reveal a player’s value as a college player or to his particular team. And we are talking about a kid in Wilson who missed his junior year due to injury and is entering his senior season of high school ball. Trying to assess his NBA draft status three years or more from now is impossible. It depends in large measure on his physical development. But a 6’9" kid with a great wingspan, ability to put the ball on the floor, a nice shooting touch who has to grow into his body has a lot of upside IMO.

37
Don't understand saying that Wilson has "limited upside"... 6-foot-9, extremely long arms, growing, good ball skills and a jump shot. His ceiling is through the roof.

Dylan/Joe - I think you know that was a satire on the previous post. But I’ll address it anyway - when we use the term upside, it generally indicates that a player has the requisite athleticism but may lack the skill/polish at this point of the developmental process.

Jaylen Johnson comes to mind, needs work on his jumpshot, but clearly has the physical/athletic tools to be an impact player in the future. It is generally easier to refine/develop a player’s skillset vs. gaining a half second on a 40 yard dash, or 6 inches on vertical. Smot was never going to be an impact player, he simply lacked the requisite athletic/physical ability to truly utilize his skillset. I think he honestly had skills, but he was so limited athletically that it really didn’t matter. I think Wilson obviously has more bounce relative to Smot, but he is not the fleetest of foot, and is not aggressive going to the rim at all. When I look at his film in totality, I see a good possibility that he will most likely be strictly a spot up shooter for Michigan, and won’t have enough of a presence on defense to warrant significant playing time.

What do long arms really mean? As mentioned before, Pau Gasol, Shawn Bradley, Tim Hardaway Jr., Greg Monroe, etc. all have long arms, but yet I don’t think anybody would characterize those individuals as good defenders. Length is certainly an asset, but ONLY if utilized with tenacity and physicality.

It is not necessarily easier to refine skill set than it is to improve speed and vertical. Look at Morgan in high school and now. He’s made huge strides in every measure of athleticism. Stauskas has improved his vertical significantly in one off season. You make a lot of generalizations to support your view that Wilson will never be more than a role player, spot up shooter, or has limited upside/ceiling. IMO, if Wilson is willing to put in the work, he has major upside.

38
To put the above post in context, let's examine current Michigan players as primary examples. GRIII is generally considered to be a lottery/mid first round pick by all NBA draft boards. Stauskus isn't on anybody's 1st round mock boards, perhaps he is a 2nd rounder on some boards ( I really can't confirm without further research). GRIII is not considered a finished product, but gets the lofty mock position because of "upside".

Comparing those 2 players, Stauskus literally does everything better from an offensive skill perspective - he has better handles, better court vision, and definitely shoots the ball better. Neither of those individuals are world class defensive players, I’m sure we’d all agree about that. They are roughly the same height/length, so we have to ask why is GRIII so desired by the NBA while Stauskus is not? Very simple, GRIII is an all world athlete that has an NBA physique right now.

Bottom line is that “upside” in the traditional sense means that a player has the requisite athleticism as opposed to skill/length. I’d be shocked if DJ Wilson was on anybody’s mock board because of his “upside” in the next few years.

These comparison’s are interesting but not that meaningful. NBA draft status may or may not reveal a player’s value as a college player or to his particular team. And we are talking about a kid in Wilson who missed his junior year due to injury and is entering his senior season of high school ball. Trying to assess his NBA draft status three years or more from now is impossible. It depends in large measure on his physical development. But a 6’9" kid with a great wingspan, ability to put the ball on the floor, a nice shooting touch who has to grow into his body has a lot of upside IMO.

Fair enough, I can see that this may be an apples to oranges comparison for some.

Let’s isolate the analysis/comparison to incoming freshman since that is essentially what we are talking about - how does a high school player’s game translate to college?

Zak Irvin vs. Andrew Wiggins - there is not an individual on this planet that would proclaim Wiggins to have a better skillset than Irvin - Irvin has a better shot, more range, better ballhandling ability, moves better without the ball, and the list could go on forever. That being said, there is not one analyst, coach, recruiting service, or anyone affiliated with basketball that would take Irvin over Wiggins. Since neither player has set foot on a college court, upside/potential has to be based on what a coach/analyst anticipates that player can do at the collegiate level. Accounting for the fact that Irvin has the better skillset right now, then we would have to assume that Wiggins’ athleticism is the upside, and hence he is in higher demand because of that. He can refine/develop his skills with coaching, but those god given gifts are what distinguishes him from all other players, and that is the truth. Those inherent gifts simply can’t be taught or obtained through repetition.

39
Don't understand saying that Wilson has "limited upside"... 6-foot-9, extremely long arms, growing, good ball skills and a jump shot. His ceiling is through the roof.

Dylan/Joe - I think you know that was a satire on the previous post. But I’ll address it anyway - when we use the term upside, it generally indicates that a player has the requisite athleticism but may lack the skill/polish at this point of the developmental process.

Jaylen Johnson comes to mind, needs work on his jumpshot, but clearly has the physical/athletic tools to be an impact player in the future. It is generally easier to refine/develop a player’s skillset vs. gaining a half second on a 40 yard dash, or 6 inches on vertical. Smot was never going to be an impact player, he simply lacked the requisite athletic/physical ability to truly utilize his skillset. I think he honestly had skills, but he was so limited athletically that it really didn’t matter. I think Wilson obviously has more bounce relative to Smot, but he is not the fleetest of foot, and is not aggressive going to the rim at all. When I look at his film in totality, I see a good possibility that he will most likely be strictly a spot up shooter for Michigan, and won’t have enough of a presence on defense to warrant significant playing time.

What do long arms really mean? As mentioned before, Pau Gasol, Shawn Bradley, Tim Hardaway Jr., Greg Monroe, etc. all have long arms, but yet I don’t think anybody would characterize those individuals as good defenders. Length is certainly an asset, but ONLY if utilized with tenacity and physicality.

It is not necessarily easier to refine skill set than it is to improve speed and vertical. Look at Morgan in high school and now. He’s made huge strides in every measure of athleticism. Stauskas has improved his vertical significantly in one off season. You make a lot of generalizations to support your view that Wilson will never be more than a role player, spot up shooter, or has limited upside/ceiling. IMO, if Wilson is willing to put in the work, he has major upside.

Good point, perhaps I should clarify my argument. It is certainly possible to improve your speed, lateral movement, vertical, etc., but the question is to what extent? Let’s first analyze the players you reference above.

Smot reportedly increased his vertical by 4 inches from his freshman to sophomore campaign, that being said, did it make a difference? In order for Smot to overcome his athletic shortcomings and have the ability to finish over PF’s and Centers, he would have literally needed to improve his initial vertical by 10 inches. That, in all likelihood, is not humanly possible.

I agree with you that Morgan has increased his athletic abilities, there can be no doubting that. That being said, would you characterize Morgan as an above average or good athlete in the Big Ten. I would say no, and I’m sure most would agree he is an average athlete in the Big Ten.

With regards to Stauskus, he does appear to have increased his vertical, don’t know if I would say significantly though. I really don’t think Nik was below average in terms of vertical last year, he was probably average in that category, and now perhaps above average. Nik’s biggest athletic shortcoming was probably lateral movement on defense, and I’m sure he addressed that as well. That being said, I can almost guarantee Nik won’t go from below average to above average in terms of lateral mobility. I think most would expect Nik to be average if he has improved, and that is fine.

Now, let’s move on to players that have refined skill/development:

THJ - went from below average/bad ballhandler as a freshman, to average/above average as a junior.

Victor Oladipo - went from awful 3 point shooter(21%) His sophomore year to good/borderline great 3 point shooter(44%) his junior year

Jason Kidd - went from a bad 3 point shooter(27%) his rookie year to good 3 point shooter(42%) later in his career - 2009-2010 season

Chauncey Billups - went from a bad decision maker early in his career(assist to TO ration was never above 2:1 for the first 3 years) to a great decision maker while with Detroit(above 4:1 during the 2005-2006 season -WOW THAT IS GOOD)

To kind of bring this all together, my general point is that you have less upward mobility for athleticism as opposed to skill. To a certain extent you are born with athleticism, but you can develop skill, which explains why coaches at all levels place such a premium on athleticism, and you hear common phrases such as “shooters are a dime a dozen”. I look at this from a tiered perspective. If we group athleticism and skills according to tiers, you have groups such as this:

Awful
Bad
Below Average
Average
Above Average
Good
Great

With respect to athleticism, players generally have upward mobility of 1 tier, maybe 2 in extreme cases. In other words perhaps you can go from below average to average, and maybe even above average(highly doubtful). However, in terms of skill, players generally have the upward mobility of at least 2 tiers, and perhaps 3 as evidenced above. Players can acquire/enhance skills through repetition, but I don’t care how much repetition/training a player does, he is simply not going to gain 10 inches on the vertical or gain 2 seconds on a 40 yard dash.

40

I don’t even know how to respond to Matt D. He see’s his side and nothing else. Matt, I have tried to explain all I can. For you to not make connections at this point is nuts.

The video shows his offensive skillet. That’s what has high upside in some (most “experts”) opinions, including our staffs. To comment on decision making and defensive abilities in ludicrous to me. Sorry bud… Your looking way too deep into a highlight package. In top of that, you seem to not agree with what the philosophy of Michigan basketball.

But to each his own. I can picture you in the stands…