Now it is, yes.
Have you given up on him ever being successful in that role or is that just a “not there yet” situation? It’s seems hard to believe that Zak could do that and Charles, who seems taller and more athletic and not exactly slight, would never be able to handle the same? I wonder if this isn’t part some ring rust and part that Zak had experience in that role from his first year here.
Coach Beilein indicated last night Livers and Teske were in line for more minutes going forward. He wants to play Livers more but he has standards, and Livers appears to be reaching them here in early January. Livers will play as many minutes as he can handle and his handle is growing
@Inmycourt Now it is? It was in the post you responded to.
@therealmirman I think Charles is way too skinny for the role and I’m not sure that Michigan would gain a lot from it (especially in the future with Johns and Iggy added to the rotation). Don’t see the need to put that wear and tear on an already slight frame (and there aren’t guys at the 2 or 3 on the bench pushing him up the lineup).
Fair enough - I guess his musculature may belie a slight frame.
We also need more out of him on the offensive end than we needed out of Zak (even if in some games Zak made himself higher usage than was optimal).
Any thoughts/info on my question about Duncan as a catch and shoot shooter vs. off the dribble/on the move?
I also wonder if anyone in the media has probed into the possible similarity between Greg Bird and Moe’s injury. I know nothing about this stuff, but it sounds like the os trigonum Bird had?
I’d have to look closer at the numbers to check.
Don’t follow the Yankees so no idea about Bird’s injury.
I know many probably have a biased answer, but am curious if @umhoops took Crean’s commentary as a backhanded compliment, or if Duncan truly is a good help defender?
I didn’t read it like that. Obviously he’s not a good 1-on-1 defender (he actually had at least a few decent one on one possessions last night) and he has picked up this habit of fouling all the time which is driving Beilein crazy.
But when he does have good moments defensively, they usually are because he’s helping in the right spots and proving to be somewhat disruptive.
I’d say that his ability to be in the right spot is also a bit limited by his lack of an ability to always influence a shot though. A great help defender is someone who can be in the right spot and then block shots with the help.
Thanks Dylan - I agree that the fouling is the biggest issue of all. It’s like his mind tells him “ooh the ball, I’m going to swipe at it” but it’s a half second too late! When he goes straight up, he usually at least forces a harder shot.
Also, he doesn’t grab many rebounds, but I do feel he gets a few hockey assists on the boards.
But as others pointed out, if he truly is someone to gameplan against because of the help defense (as Crean stated), then certainly the best counter for an opponent would be to make him guard the ball in 1-on-1 situations
Sometimes commentators just say silly, uninformed things.
The large sample size argument does not really work for me. I have mentioned it before but from the beginning of this year many people have been talking about how Robinson is doing a better job at puling the trigger on less than ideal shooting situations. It seems to me that Robinson, in past seasons, has always refused to shoot unless he is pretty square, pretty on balance, not on the move and close to the 3point line—it was frustrating as a spectator because turning down decent, if not ideal looks has negative consequences attached. It seems to me, but I am not sure, that Beilein has challenged him to shoot more shots that are less than ideal but still decent looks. He has answered the challenge in terms of taking those shots but he has not answered the challenge in terms of making them. The context within which Robinson is shooting has changed. We have a new sample size.
Bird had “excess bone growth in his foot.”
Hope it’s not the same. Bird needed surgery, He was awesome once he returned from surgery but he was out for months.
Tom Crean has been universally hailed for his analysis this year. Not only that, but this is something that I’ve already talked about here this season after watching Duncan closely on D.
I think it is more likely that Wolverheel is Tom Crean’s umhoops username than it is likely that Crean would gameplan against Michigan based upon how awesome Robinson is at off the ball defense.
I think it’s more likely that the people saying Tom Crean was wrong aren’t watching, which is totally fine, the vast majority of people don’t watch specific players play off ball defense, or don’t know basketball very well.
I also don’t think Matthews has the bulk to handle the 4 defensively on any regular basis either. Zak was very underrated in his defense and ability to bump and grind with the 4’s as a player. This is why it is so important to get Livers up to speed. I’ve said from the beginning of practice that Livers would need to be ready to play and play at lot because of the weakness at the 4.
Moving forward JB’s task needs to be to continue to prepare Livers and also get Poole to see the game from a total aspect (offense/defense). Those two have the skill/athletic ability and if there basketball IQ progresses could help this team surprise come BIG tournament.
I think it is not even debatable that Robinson is much better at off the ball defense than he is at on the ball defense, because he obviously is…Even if Robinson was actually pretty bad at off the ball defense Crean would still be gameplanning to put Robinson in 1 and 1 situations just like every team we play. Placing Robinson in 1 and 1 situations is not Crean’s way of avoiding Robinson’s awesome off the ball defense.
Crean was being nice.
“Robinson is really good at off ball defense”
There’s a million ways he could’ve said to attack him 1 on 1 without saying that. He sure wasn’t “just being nice” when talking about Iowa’s issues.
I will try to get the exact quote and the context. I could have mis interpreted what he was saying but it was, as if, Crean was rationalizing his decision to attack Robinson 1 on 1( like everyone else) in a way that avoided saying he was bad at 1 on 1 defense.