@MattD Who had played out of position to a point where it hindered their development?
Sims and GR3 in particular
If gr3 gets more time at the 3, production most likely increases, thus mitigating the need for more Levert.
Fair enough, though why should Beilein sacrifice LeVert’s development for GRIII’s?
GR3 lack of development/ regression - having the ball in his hands isn't the only way he could've improved his skillset, that's kind of absurd actually.
That’s a slight mischaracterization. In terms of other schools/systems, I just meant that more of the ball - to develop ball skills, ball handling in particular - was the main thing that I think GRIII as an individual could have used more of.
JB should've focused more attention to GR3 in terms of ball handling and change of direction to develop him as a player and placing him in better sets to maximize the skills he did have. Camping out on the right wing for 3s doesn't suit his game. Pinch post suits his game much better. Transition suits his game much better. JB failed to do both of those things which are more efficient for GR3. Volume, skillset and scheme are distinct terms. Fact is, with his athleticism, GR3 had an unlimited ceiling at UM, and he failed to even come close to that ceiling under JB. In terms of regression, I don't know that I've ever seen a player with GR3's athleticism actually become worse from first to second year on the defensive end in addition to rebounding, but that happened under JB's watch.
JB’s job is for the team to perform. You say “JB failed to” do something during a year in which his offense was the highest performing in the KenPom era. I’d say considering anything that happened on the offensive end a “failure” in that context is ridiculous. Why in the world would we judge him on a particular individual’s development in light of that?
Utilization - my contention was utilization on an individual basis, whereas your interpretation refers to a team concept. As stated, Gr3, as an individual player, could've been utilized much better. Team wins don't correlate to what's best for an individual, much the same as you essentially said that better utilization of GR3 wouldn't be beneficial to the team - opportunity cost
It has definitely become clear that we’re arguing different things. I guess my question is, why would we care more about one specific player than the team? Did I stumble onto the GRIIIHoops board? I personally care about GRIII a lot…just like I do his teammates.
I’d say JB is doing both extremely well, but he’s not going to cater to any individual. In fact, maybe this is in fact why he’s currently struggling with the supers. He’s not going to cater to their development to the detriment of the team (which, to be clear is not anywhere near the same as saying he doesn’t care about players’ individual development).
Truth is he does his work recruiting whereas JB does his work post LOI.
I actually disagree with this characterization. It implies that Cal outworks other people in the recruiting trail. I’d say identifying under-recruited talent is “harder” than what Calipari does.
The only reason I’d question his results is because it’s not a level playing field. It may be more level sooner than later.
would anybody in there wildest imagination have projected UK to the champ game in early March.
This is exactly like your draft argument. Why is early March the arbitrary time period chosen? Fact is, in the pre-season, many people who get paid to talk about college basketball wondered if Kentucky would lose a single game. I would say Kentucky’s regular season vastly underperformed expectations, finally coming into form and meeting pre-season expectations in the post-season. Why would we only judge the upswing and not the whole picture? On the whole, I’d say the team met expectations.
At the very end of his career, GR III let a few comments slip that indicated that he was dissatisfied with having to have played out of position for his entire career at UM. It is not a reach to say that he puts part of the blame on his lack of development on Beilein for not using him correctly.
But this has been my issue with GR III all along: that with the so-called unlimited ceiling athletically, he never displayed the consistency, desire or drive to match it. He sulked, hung his head, stared off into the distance. Talented players are asked to play out of position all the time for the benefit of the TEAM. Just look at Novak, our 6’4 power forward. Also, let’s face it: GR III didn’t display the consistency or the necessary improvement in his handle to be “featured”, even when he was put in the 3 position at the beginning of this past season. He had his opportunity to step up to the plate (Beilein even said openly that we would play more GR III at the 3 in 2013-14), and he failed his trial period. Plus, Mitch got hurt, and there’s nothing Beilein could do about that.
True, GR III may have done much better at a school where his pure athleticism would have been better utilized, like a Florida or a Louisville. But then again, maybe not. Ultimately he was at Michigan, and he played within Michigan’s offense. And that’s a fact he never fully embraced.
Coaches can coach until the cows come home, but it’s ultimately up to the individual player to take the reins and make the improvement. The massive improvement in Caris, Nik, JMo, Novak, Horford, etc… should be a testament to the fact that this staff can develop players. But I don’t buy the argument that this staff couldn’t develop GR III or “use him correctly;” Beilein has modified his offense time and time again to suit the players he has. GR III didn’t succeed because he didn’t have the intangibles to match the talent.
Debate was about player development rather than team success, hence my contention about GR3.
Cal - he is out working us on the recruiting trail in my view. Almost every recruit interview that has UK interest has something in common…they all say UK is coming after them “hard” or the “hardest”. I think JBs approach is much more conservative, I don’t think he “sweats” kids, and I think that works to our detriment at times if true.
I actually agree with you, MattD, I think he’s almost too nice about recruiting, when in reality, to get the top targets you have to do some things that just aren’t in Beilein’s coaching philosophy, which is a major reason why I don’t see us ever being on the level of Duke, Kentucky, UNC, Arizona, etc. in terms of recruiting.
My thing on GR3 playing the three… The three and the four are essentially identical positions in Beilein’s offense. Beilein ran a lot of set plays to get GR3 the ball. GR3 used almost as many possessions as Nik or Caris. I know Glenn was frustrated by ‘playing the four’ and was in the breakout room when he talked about it in Indianapolis before the Elite Eight, but I think that’s just more about how his game developed. He never had the confidence to create off the bounce and he was playing with two guys (CL, NS) that did.
Was anyone that surprised that Glenn ended up playing some four at the summer league?
Now does that fall on Beilein and his assistants? I don’t know. GR3 started working with the guards and wings in practice this year and I think it’s pretty clear that whatever Michigan does to develop shooters and ball handlers works pretty well, but for whatever reason it never clicked with Glenn.
At the very end of his career, GR III let a few comments slip that indicated that he was dissatisfied with having to have played out of position for his entire career at UM. It is not a reach to say that he puts part of the blame on his lack of development on Beilein for not using him correctly.But this has been my issue with GR III all along: that with the so-called unlimited ceiling athletically, he never displayed the consistency, desire or drive to match it. He sulked, hung his head, stared off into the distance. Talented players are asked to play out of position all the time for the benefit of the TEAM. Just look at Novak, our 6’4 power forward. Also, let’s face it: GR III didn’t display the consistency or the necessary improvement in his handle to be “featured”, even when he was put in the 3 position at the beginning of this past season. He had his opportunity to step up to the plate (Beilein even said openly that we would play more GR III at the 3 in 2013-14), and he failed his trial period. Plus, Mitch got hurt, and there’s nothing Beilein could do about that.
True, GR III may have done much better at a school where his pure athleticism would have been better utilized, like a Florida or a Louisville. But then again, maybe not. Ultimately he was at Michigan, and he played within Michigan’s offense. And that’s a fact he never fully embraced.
Coaches can coach until the cows come home, but it’s ultimately up to the individual player to take the reins and make the improvement. The massive improvement in Caris, Nik, JMo, Novak, Horford, etc… should be a testament to the fact that this staff can develop players. But I don’t buy the argument that this staff couldn’t develop GR III or “use him correctly;” Beilein has modified his offense time and time again to suit the players he has. GR III didn’t succeed because he didn’t have the intangibles to match the talent.
Double standard - in one breath you say a “coach can coach until cows come home but it’s up to the player to improve.” Literally the next sentence you say that Caris Nik Jmo Novak Horford (don’t recall him improving) are a testament to the staffs developmental ability.
Basic takeaway - JB should receive all the credit when a player develops/improves, but if a given player fails to develop then it’s not through any fault of JB, the player simply didn’t “take the reins”
That is…baffling
In Beilien’s system a normal 3 is a 4. Even while at WVU, he used 6’6" Frank Young at the 5. His goal is to create mismatches and take advantage of those. And he generally does.
Amazing to see the questioning of the most successful coach Michigan has had in a long time. Everyone wants more and I understand that but name one program in the country that hasn’t had a down year in the last 15 years. Winning will go in cycles if we want to be realistic.
The person most responsible with their improvement or lack thereof is always going to be the player. Beilein and LaVall weren’t holding Trey, Tim, Nik and Caris’s hands while dragging them to the gym – those kids were flat out hardworkers.
What we can say is that John Beilein is very focused on skill development and a number of his players have made a lot of strides in those departments.
Jon Sanderson has always been worth his weight in gold since he arrived as the physical improvements over the last few years don’t really compare to anything we’ve seen at this program in a long time.
Well put, but the truth is the more raw talent you accrue, the less development/coaching you have to do, and hence the chances of having “down” years are decreased.
My thing on GR3 playing the three... The three and the four are essentially identical positions in Beilein's offense. Beilein ran a lot of set plays to get GR3 the ball. GR3 used almost as many possessions as Nik or Caris. I know Glenn was frustrated by 'playing the four' and was in the breakout room when he talked about it in Indianapolis before the Elite Eight, but I think that's just more about how his game developed. He never had the confidence to create off the bounce and he was playing with two guys (CL, NS) that did.Was anyone that surprised that Glenn ended up playing some four at the summer league?
Now does that fall on Beilein and his assistants? I don’t know. GR3 started working with the guards and wings in practice this year and I think it’s pretty clear that whatever Michigan does to develop shooters and ball handlers works pretty well, but for whatever reason it never clicked with Glenn.
Dylan do you remember an article snippet that you referenced last pre-season that quoted some writer ( SI maybe ) saying Glen was the most impressive individual performer that he had seen in his “team tour” of preseason squads? Seem to remember him raving about Glen’s long range shooting and improved handle? Always wonder why that didn’t translate to game action in a consistent way.
My thing on GR3 playing the three... The three and the four are essentially identical positions in Beilein's offense. Beilein ran a lot of set plays to get GR3 the ball. GR3 used almost as many possessions as Nik or Caris. I know Glenn was frustrated by 'playing the four' and was in the breakout room when he talked about it in Indianapolis before the Elite Eight, but I think that's just more about how his game developed. He never had the confidence to create off the bounce and he was playing with two guys (CL, NS) that did.Was anyone that surprised that Glenn ended up playing some four at the summer league?
Now does that fall on Beilein and his assistants? I don’t know. GR3 started working with the guards and wings in practice this year and I think it’s pretty clear that whatever Michigan does to develop shooters and ball handlers works pretty well, but for whatever reason it never clicked with Glenn.
Same thing on offense within OUR offense, but not nearly the same thing in Terms of NBA preparation, which is what this dialogue is about. it’s very rare that NBA 4s camp out InThe right corner.
Also, why are we limiting the dialogue to offense only. It’s as if nobody wants to acknowledge that giving up 2-3 inches and 10-20 lbs on D doesn’t take a toll on offense.
My thing on GR3 playing the three... The three and the four are essentially identical positions in Beilein's offense. Beilein ran a lot of set plays to get GR3 the ball. GR3 used almost as many possessions as Nik or Caris. I know Glenn was frustrated by 'playing the four' and was in the breakout room when he talked about it in Indianapolis before the Elite Eight, but I think that's just more about how his game developed. He never had the confidence to create off the bounce and he was playing with two guys (CL, NS) that did.Was anyone that surprised that Glenn ended up playing some four at the summer league?
Now does that fall on Beilein and his assistants? I don’t know. GR3 started working with the guards and wings in practice this year and I think it’s pretty clear that whatever Michigan does to develop shooters and ball handlers works pretty well, but for whatever reason it never clicked with Glenn.
Dylan do you remember an article snippet that you referenced last pre-season that quoted some writer ( SI maybe ) saying Glen was the most impressive individual performer that he had seen in his “team tour” of preseason squads? Seem to remember him raving about Glen’s long range shooting and improved handle? Always wonder why that didn’t translate to game action in a consistent way.
Jeff Goodman is a hack.
Double standard - in one breath you say a "coach can coach until cows come home but it's up to the player to improve." Literally the next sentence you say that Caris Nik Jmo Novak Horford (don't recall him improving) are a testament to the staffs developmental ability.Basic takeaway - JB should receive all the credit when a player develops/improves, but if a given player fails to develop then it’s not through any fault of JB, the player simply didn’t “take the reins”
That is…baffling
I’d frame it like this…if you have a large sample size that says one thing, and one single data point that says another…is the one data point more likely to be an exception, or prove that the whole theory is wrong?
I don’t think there’s a real answer, but I’m surprised you’re baffled.
Double standard - in one breath you say a "coach can coach until cows come home but it's up to the player to improve." Literally the next sentence you say that Caris Nik Jmo Novak Horford (don't recall him improving) are a testament to the staffs developmental ability.Basic takeaway - JB should receive all the credit when a player develops/improves, but if a given player fails to develop then it’s not through any fault of JB, the player simply didn’t “take the reins”
That is…baffling
I’d frame it like this…if you have a large sample size that says one thing, and one single data point that says another…is the one data point more likely to be an exception, or prove that the whole theory is wrong?
I don’t think there’s a real answer, but I’m surprised you’re baffled.
Where is the large sample size of players that have significantly improved under JB?
The list goes…THJ, Levert…crickets. I’m not placing Nik in That category because his improvement was more about increased opportunity vs dramatic improvement. He was lethal as a freshman but was limited to being a sideshow because of Trey.
The list of players that remained stagnant…Manny, Gr3, Vogrich, Horford, Max, Wright, Sheopard, Grady, Smot…sad part is 3 of those players had really high ceilings, but none developed presumably because they weren’t “shooters”
Natural development - Trey, Nik, Jmo, Novak
Sure I left out a few that didn’t have large roles, ie Merrit, Gibson, Lee
Seems to me the track record isn’t as good as some would like to think.
My thing on GR3 playing the three... The three and the four are essentially identical positions in Beilein's offense. Beilein ran a lot of set plays to get GR3 the ball. GR3 used almost as many possessions as Nik or Caris. I know Glenn was frustrated by 'playing the four' and was in the breakout room when he talked about it in Indianapolis before the Elite Eight, but I think that's just more about how his game developed. He never had the confidence to create off the bounce and he was playing with two guys (CL, NS) that did.Was anyone that surprised that Glenn ended up playing some four at the summer league?
Now does that fall on Beilein and his assistants? I don’t know. GR3 started working with the guards and wings in practice this year and I think it’s pretty clear that whatever Michigan does to develop shooters and ball handlers works pretty well, but for whatever reason it never clicked with Glenn.
Dylan do you remember an article snippet that you referenced last pre-season that quoted some writer ( SI maybe ) saying Glen was the most impressive individual performer that he had seen in his “team tour” of preseason squads? Seem to remember him raving about Glen’s long range shooting and improved handle? Always wonder why that didn’t translate to game action in a consistent way.
Jeff Goodman is a hack.
Was he the aforementioned writer G? Doesn’t he work for ESPN now? Can’t seem to find that article.
Jevhon Shepherd and Anthony Wright and Grady and LLP are JB’s fault?
My thing on GR3 playing the three... The three and the four are essentially identical positions in Beilein's offense. Beilein ran a lot of set plays to get GR3 the ball. GR3 used almost as many possessions as Nik or Caris. I know Glenn was frustrated by 'playing the four' and was in the breakout room when he talked about it in Indianapolis before the Elite Eight, but I think that's just more about how his game developed. He never had the confidence to create off the bounce and he was playing with two guys (CL, NS) that did.Was anyone that surprised that Glenn ended up playing some four at the summer league?
Now does that fall on Beilein and his assistants? I don’t know. GR3 started working with the guards and wings in practice this year and I think it’s pretty clear that whatever Michigan does to develop shooters and ball handlers works pretty well, but for whatever reason it never clicked with Glenn.
Dylan do you remember an article snippet that you referenced last pre-season that quoted some writer ( SI maybe ) saying Glen was the most impressive individual performer that he had seen in his “team tour” of preseason squads? Seem to remember him raving about Glen’s long range shooting and improved handle? Always wonder why that didn’t translate to game action in a consistent way.
Jeff Goodman is a hack.
Was he the aforementioned writer G? Doesn’t he work for ESPN now? Can’t seem to find that article.
Yeah…its insider article I think
Same thing on offense within OUR offense, but not nearly the same thing in Terms of NBA preparation, which is what this dialogue is about. it's very rare that NBA 4s camp out InThe right corner.
While I take your point and think that in some ways, you and I are arguing past each other, I also think the reason why people are having trouble separating the two is because suggesting that Beilein should be tweaking his offense to better prepare one individual for the NBA simply does not compute.
Also, why are we limiting the dialogue to offense only. It's as if nobody wants to acknowledge that giving up 2-3 inches and 10-20 lbs on D doesn't take a toll on offense.
That’s a good and fair point.