Can you imagine facing Indiana with Blackmon Jr and Bolden?
Yes, I can. I have not seen the clips yet of Bolden continually driving from the perimeter to the rim, so I think we could defend him well. With that said, I’d be much more afraid of him in UM’s offense than Indiana’s (please reread that last sentence, Jonah). Regarding Blackmon Jr, he’ll be a tough guard for anyone, like Gary Harris with MSU, BUT it was Michigan (not MSU) who made it to the championship game last year and we’ll have a few pretty good defenders on the perimeter next year. I wouldn’t worry if I were you. Plus, it’s a GOOD thing for Michigan to have such high level of competition in the B1G.
Let’s call it like it is here buddy - you selectively choose to address 1 SINGULAR element of my post while neglecting to address the remainder due to the simple fact that you know its true. Once again, the hypocrisy, and even downright exaggeration is simply mindboggling to me.
Anger about the team? Disappointment? First off, I’m a season ticket holder, and have been so during the Coach B tenure - I have to be one of the biggest proponents of Michigan basketball, and that is putting it mildly. I LOVE the direction our basketball program is headed, and I think we have a very good team. That said, do we not have room for improvement? Am I wrong for wanting more? Quick analogy - most people that love M basketball also love M football - do you think for 1 second people are “negative” towards M football because they feel as though Al Borges should be fired. Hell no they aren’t negative, it’s just stating the obvious, the man is simply incompetent at his job.
If you want to label my thoughts as being “negative”, so be it, once again I don’t care. The true question to be asked, is whether my concerns/opinions are valid? If so, then that simply dictates that you, and/or others would just prefer blind support of the team/coaching/recruiting, even if it flies in the face of logic.
If you don’t like the truth, I can’t help that, but I will continue to bring objective dialogue, and if you don’t happen to agree, just refrain from responding. If you want to live in a fantasy world, more power to you, but I choose to live in reality.
Agree to a certain extent, but if the kid releases a top 5, and Michigan doesn't appear on that list, I would assume we will not be in the hunt in the end. Of course, things change, especially if the team is winning. But let's be honest here, we're not in the mold of Kentucky where we can just swoop in at the end and grab a player at will. We don't have that storied tradition YET, and we certainly don't have the Kentucky type of culture.
Bottom line - for coachces recruiting is a job, not a hobby, regardless of how creepy it may seem on a moral level. In today’s coaching climate, where recruiting literally begins in 7th grade, diligence is required, and I’d hate to lose out on kids simply because we’re giving the vibe that we are not prioritizing.
I too would be disappointed if Michigan weren’t in Bolden’s top 5, especially after the apparent lack of interest from and being shut out by Looney, who, IIRC, said he didn’t hear enough from Michigan. I understand that recruiting is part of the job, and if you have to pander to the egos of 17 year olds, I guess that’s what you have to do. BUT, BA has tweeted enough that Michigan is different from other schools, and I’m sure that extends to recruiting. I, for one, appreciate Beilein’s apparent consistency in sticking to his recruiting philosophy, including wanting players who are “running through the doors”, so to speak, and his “playing by the rules”. I’ve got to imagine that the coaches see the need for a player who can defend and rebound down low with the loss of Morgan and McGary, and if they think Bolden is that guy, hopefully they’re telling him regularly that there’s a big opportunity for him, etc., etc.
My point exactly. Today's college basketball climate compels teams to re-load not rebuild. In my opinion, coming off a national championship game, we should be more selective to the extent that we reload rather than rebuild. Replacing players like McGary and GR3 with the likes of Wilson, rather than Bolden, is an extreme dropoff in my opinion. In retrospect, I'm sure if you had known that we would take Wilson OR Bolden rather than Wilson AND Bolden, your opinions would have been a bit more pessimistic in regards to taking Wilson. Simply put, if you are going to replace McGary and/or GR3 with a first year DJ Wilson, your team is going to suffer in production by a wide margin.
I think most of us agree that there is a legitimate need for an impact 4 in this class to increase our odds at another deep tournament run. But that’s all it would do - increase our odds - there is no guarantee. The goal every year should be national championship, but not at the expense of core values. In fact, I think if Michigan continues to focus on the core values, chances of sustained success are greater. I think the Kentucky model - let’s face it, no one else does what they do and IMO I don’t think there’s room for two programs with that same model - is risky for anyone other than Kentucky (and as last year proved, it’s not without it’s faults even for Kentucky). It’s clear to me you’re a big fan of the KBFM (Kentucky Basketball Factory Model) and wished Michigan employed it, but for the record, I’m not and don’t.
But regarding Michigan striving to win championships, it’s clear next year’s team will be weaker in the post than this years. But, Michigan might have the best collection of wing and guard talent in the country - Stauskas, LeVert, Albrecht, Irvin, Walton, Chatman. And I think you’re wrong not to include Chatman in your options at 4. Granted, he’ll have as hard a time defending big guys as GRIII, but I have confidence the coaches will have learned from that. There are things you can do with team defense to minimize that. But I think defensive rebounding will be better with senior Horford and freshman Chatman than it was with junior Morgan and freshman Robinson. When we face a big team in the tournament, it’ll be tough, there’s no denying that, but not impossible.
Bottom line is this, I think at some point Coach B needs to recruit players that are more defensive oriented in the post and more proficient in the post on offense. I love his philosophy for the guards/wings, but I absolutely HATE getting punked by MSU, Wisc, OSU, simply because they have bigs that are 10 times more physical than our bigs. It's pitiful, and it needs to be addressed. We have enough damn shooters, we need to diversify our game, even on offense. Even against Wayne State, all we did in halfcourt sets is pass the ball around the damn perimeter for the first 6 minutes without generating any space because we don't have a big that can command a double team in the post. The only play we can really run a halfcourt offense with any efficiency is the P and R, and that shouldn't be the case.
At some point, you have to recruit actual bigs, not shooting guards that are 6’8. That is the reason why we’re raising a final four banner rather than a championship banner on Friday.
If THIS is your bottom line, then what is it doing in a thread about Bolden?
Matt, I’m not going to address your entire post listing how you’ve been right about everything, but which one or our bigs - Horford, JMo, Mitch or Max - is a “6’6”-6’8" shooting guard" who is soft and lacks physicality?
Can you imagine facing Indiana with Blackmon Jr and Bolden?
Yes, I can. I have not seen the clips yet of Bolden continually driving from the perimeter to the rim, so I think we could defend him well. With that said, I’d be much more afraid of him in UM’s offense than Indiana’s (please reread that last sentence, Jonah). Regarding Blackmon Jr, he’ll be a tough guard for anyone, like Gary Harris with MSU, BUT it was Michigan (not MSU) who made it to the championship game last year and we’ll have a few pretty good defenders on the perimeter next year. I wouldn’t worry if I were you. Plus, it’s a GOOD thing for Michigan to have such high level of competition in the B1G.
You misinterpreted what I said. I’m not stating we cannot beat an Indiana team with those guys, just that it would suck to see them donning another jersey.
My point exactly. Today's college basketball climate compels teams to re-load not rebuild. In my opinion, coming off a national championship game, we should
be more selective to the extent that we reload rather than rebuild. Replacing players like McGary and GR3 with the likes of Wilson, rather than Bolden, is an extreme dropoff in my opinion. In retrospect, I'm sure if you had known that we would take Wilson OR Bolden rather than Wilson AND Bolden, your opinions would have been a bit more pessimistic in regards to taking Wilson. Simply put, if you are going to replace McGary and/or GR3 with a first year DJ Wilson, your team is going to suffer in production by a wide margin.
I think most of us agree that there is a legitimate need for an impact 4 in this class to increase our odds at another deep tournament run. But that’s all it would do - increase our odds - there is no guarantee. The goal every year should be national championship, but not at the expense of core values. In fact, I think if Michigan continues to focus on the core values, chances of sustained success are greater. I think the Kentucky model - let’s face it, no one else does what they do and IMO I don’t think there’s room for two programs with that same model - is risky for anyone other than Kentucky (and as last year proved, it’s not without it’s faults even for Kentucky). It’s clear to me you’re a big fan of the KBFM (Kentucky Basketball Factory Model) and wished Michigan employed it, but for the record, I’m not and don’t.
But regarding Michigan striving to win championships, it’s clear next year’s team will be weaker in the post than this years. But, Michigan might have the best collection of wing and guard talent in the country - Stauskas, LeVert, Albrecht, Irvin, Walton, Chatman. And I think you’re wrong not to include Chatman in your options at 4. Granted, he’ll have as hard a time defending big guys as GRIII, but I have confidence the coaches will have learned from that. There are things you can do with team defense to minimize that. But I think defensive rebounding will be better with senior Horford and freshman Chatman than it was with junior Morgan and freshman Robinson. When we face a big team in the tournament, it’ll be tough, there’s no denying that, but not impossible.
Actually, you’re wrong, I’m not a fan of the UK model of recruiting, at least at it applies to Michigan. We simply don’t have the tradition and/or culture to attract 5 one and done types per year. But I think you’re mistaken in the fact that great recruiting has to come at the expense of core values, the 2 are NOT mutually exclusive.
There may be some validity to the Chatman contention, he seems to be a good rebounder from everything I’ve read/seen.
Bottom line is this, I think at some point Coach B needs to recruit players that are more defensive oriented in the post and more proficient in the post on offense. I love his philosophy for the guards/wings, but I absolutely HATE getting punked by MSU, Wisc, OSU, simply because they have bigs that are 10 times more physical than our bigs. It's pitiful, and it needs to be addressed. We have enough damn shooters, we need to diversify our game, even on offense. Even against Wayne State, all we did in halfcourt sets is pass the ball around the damn perimeter for the first 6 minutes without generating any space because we don't have a big that can command a double team in the post. The only play we can really run a halfcourt offense with any efficiency is the P and R, and that shouldn't be the case.
At some point, you have to recruit actual bigs, not shooting guards that are 6’8. That is the reason why we’re raising a final four banner rather than a championship banner on Friday.
If THIS is your bottom line, then what is it doing in a thread about Bolden?
Look at my post in its entirety - in essence I’m conceding the fact that Coach B typically recruits finesse players rather than defensive oriented players that have a strong interior presence. Taking that into account, you have to look at a given recruit’s ability to mitigate the weaknesses of his game. In other words, if you’re going to knowingly recruit a player that is suspect on the glass/defense, you better make sure that kid can step in and contribute on offense immediately if you are losing McGary/GR3.
Matt, I'm not going to address your entire post listing how you've been right about everything, but which one or our bigs - Horford, JMo, Mitch or Max - is a "6'6"-6'8" shooting guard" who is soft and lacks physicality?
How convenient that you won’t respond to my entire post? Seems like I’ve seen that before…
Anyway, did I say anything about our CURRENT players, or did I limit the discussion to recruiting for this year and beyond? I think there are inherent flaws with recruiting players to play the 4/5 that can’t rebound or defend the paint. Call me crazy, but I think rebounding and interior defense are pretty significant in basketball, but again, what the hell do I know?
Can you imagine facing Indiana with Blackmon Jr and Bolden?
Yes, I can. I have not seen the clips yet of Bolden continually driving from the perimeter to the rim, so I think we could defend him well. With that said, I’d be much more afraid of him in UM’s offense than Indiana’s (please reread that last sentence, Jonah). Regarding Blackmon Jr, he’ll be a tough guard for anyone, like Gary Harris with MSU, BUT it was Michigan (not MSU) who made it to the championship game last year and we’ll have a few pretty good defenders on the perimeter next year. I wouldn’t worry if I were you. Plus, it’s a GOOD thing for Michigan to have such high level of competition in the B1G.
You misinterpreted what I said. I’m not stating we cannot beat an Indiana team with those guys, just that it would suck to see them donning another jersey.
I guess I did misinterpret. Sorry. I would definitely have liked to see Blackmon at Michigan, and if Bolden goes elsewhere, that would be disappointing too, but I wouldn’t waste too much time dwelling on it.
Actually, you're wrong, I'm not a fan of the UK model of recruiting, at least at it applies to Michigan.
If you had left it at that, then I would have accepted it, albeit surprised based on what you’ve written previously. But then you go on to say this:
We simply don't have the tradition and/or culture to attract 5 one and done types per year.
Which implies that you would be fine with it if it were possible. You partially explain it in your next sentence:
But I think you're mistaken in the fact that great recruiting has to come at the expense of core values, the 2 are NOT mutually exclusive.
I never said that, although I think it would be extremely difficult to get a class of 5 one-and-dones or lure a kid by telling him what he wants to hear rather than what he needs to hear without slipping at least a bit from at least one of these:
Integrity: Do what’s right because it is the right thing to do.
Unity: Team first, Lead by giving, Make teammates better.
Passion: Commit to excellence with positive energy and relentless persistence
Diligence: Pursue excellence with 100% effort and efficiency everyday
Appreciation: An attitude of gratitude, grow in both victory and defeat
Bottom line is this, I think at some point Coach B needs to recruit players that are more defensive oriented in the post and more proficient in the post on offense. I love his philosophy for the guards/wings, but I absolutely HATE getting punked by MSU, Wisc, OSU, simply because they have bigs that are 10 times more physical than our bigs. It's pitiful, and it needs to be addressed. We have enough damn shooters, we need to diversify our game, even on offense. Even against Wayne State, all we did in halfcourt sets is pass the ball around the damn perimeter for the first 6 minutes without generating any space because we don't have a big that can command a double team in the post. The only play we can really run a halfcourt offense with any efficiency is the P and R, and that shouldn't be the case.
At some point, you have to recruit actual bigs, not shooting guards that are 6’8. That is the reason why we’re raising a final four banner rather than a championship banner on Friday.
If THIS is your bottom line, then what is it doing in a thread about Bolden?
Look at my post in its entirety - in essence I’m conceding the fact that Coach B typically recruits finesse players rather than defensive oriented players that have a strong interior presence. Taking that into account, you have to look at a given recruit’s ability to mitigate the weaknesses of his game. In other words, if you’re going to knowingly recruit a player that is suspect on the glass/defense, you better make sure that kid can step in and contribute on offense immediately if you are losing McGary/GR3.
I think it took a while, but I think we got to the point that most of us agree on and you just summed up surprisingly well. I do think there is an overwhelming negativity to your posts, but if one reads carefully, they can pick out some good points. I had to turn on my MattD calibrator.
Surprisingly? Let’s be real here, I’ve been one of the more objective board members, if not the most objective board member, to date.
Honesty/Truth/Objectivity are far from negativity, in fact proper assessment requires those attributes. I live in the real world, and if some posters, including yourself, don’t want to read objective and honest opinions, then perhaps refraining from reading/responding to my posts would better serve your purposes.
Bottom line is this, I don’t praise any and everything regarding Michigan basketball, regardless of whether we’re talking coaching, players, recruiting, etc. - if it deserves praise in my estimation then I will post accordingly, and if not, I will critique accordingly.
I refuse to offer blind support, if that’s the case we should all trade in our laptops and member IDs (not to mention our intellectual capacity to a certain extent) for pom poms, but I’m not in the business of cheerleading.
My honest opinion of some board members is this - a good portion of board members simply say “let’s go Michigan”, “I trust coach B”, “the kid has upside”, “the system has worked so far” in blind support of the team, and that’s fine to a certain extent, but don’t confuse that with logical, rational, objective opinions and analysis as it applies to basketball. We need discourse on the good, average, not so good, and downright bad components of Michigan basketball.
I wasn’t commenting on your basketball knowledge or basketball opinions. I was commenting on your writing “tone”. And you just gave another example. You either like to belittle people or you unwittingly do it.
My honest opinion of some board members is this - a good portion of board members simply say "let's go Michigan", "I trust coach B", "the kid has upside", "the system has worked so far" in blind support of the team, and that's fine to a certain extent, but don't confuse that with logical, rational, objective opinions and analysis as it applies to basketball. We need discourse on the good, average, not so good, and downright bad components of Michigan basketball.
Dude. You’ve got a slim window here to pull yourself out of the fire, but instead you’re turning up the elements of your ‘posting personality’ that so many (including myself) object to. There is a huge difference between being “objective” and being negative and abrasive, and you are on the wrong side of it.
Honestly, I think you should take to heart the fact that multiple people think your style is too abrasive, maybe look in the mirror, and realize that your intent is getting lost. You probably do not realize the way you’re coming across and there is so much potential for these discussions if the focus is on your content.
Besides all that, I don’t think people are blindingly supporting the staff…I think they saw with their own two eyes Michigan reach a level it hasn’t reached in 20 years. THAT buys some leeway. It’s not just pom poms.
In light of the fact that my posts have become somewhat polarizing to some members, I decided to take your advice and examine my own posts.
In my defense, I will say that my original posts which sparked heated reaction (Wilson) were not offensive/abrasive to other members and were exclusively focused on Wilson’s game, but other members responded to that harshly for some reason (this is what really frustrates me), and even went to the extent of insulting me on a personal level. This is when my posts appear to have taken a more aggressive tone.
With that said, I can see where some of my posts might have been adversarial in nature, and for that, I apologize to any board member that I may have offended. That is not my intent, nor the message that I would like to convey.
I love Michigan basketball, and the corresponding dialogue within the Michigan basketball community here on UMHoops, and I will continue to post my thoughts on all things Michigan basketball with a view towards being more diplomatic.
Once again, I’d like to apologize to any board member who I may have offended, rubbed the wrong way, or otherwise irritated.
I’m excited about the upswing in the program and the upcoming season. Let’s continue the great discourse and enjoy the ride.
Matt, I'm not going to address your entire post listing how you've been right about everything, but which one or our bigs - Horford, JMo, Mitch or Max - is a "6'6"-6'8" shooting guard" who is soft and lacks physicality?
How convenient that you won’t respond to my entire post? Seems like I’ve seen that before…
Anyway, did I say anything about our CURRENT players, or did I limit the discussion to recruiting for this year and beyond? I think there are inherent flaws with recruiting players to play the 4/5 that can’t rebound or defend the paint. Call me crazy, but I think rebounding and interior defense are pretty significant in basketball, but again, what the hell do I know?
Here’s what you said:
“On record as saying that I’m not a fan of recruiting “bigs” that are really 6’6 - 6"8 shooting guards that lack physicality and are soft for lack of a better term”
You didn’t qualify it or limit it to any time frame. You said “Bigs”, plural. So you weren’t talking about just one recruit.
And who has time to respond to everything you say here besides you?
I commend you for that response, Matt. I think the blowback on Wilson was because of the prior thread, where you were hard on the kid. There’s an unspoken code of conduct where you take it easy on the student-athletes, no matter their shortcomings because they’re just kids doing the best they can. I do think that if you keep this stuff in mind in future posts, you’ll see less and less of it.