I’d pencil eli In there. That’s a starting roster of all upper classmen. With a very young bench, albeit a bench with potential.
I’m surprised there’s a bunch of folks here who seem to like our chances to go deep better in two years over next year particularly while adding Pierce. Seems more than a few would rather prepare for two years out. I think that’s blowing a very real chance next year to go deep.
Now pierce isn’t a reed Travis level transfer but he appears to my eyes to be a reliable option coming in. He also fits what we need. A nice offensive weapon who can rebound and pass very well while getting us buckets. I think his passing and vision could help immensely.
I like your optimism Sly, but I think the biggest problem with projecting next year’s team to go deep, especially if Eli is starting at the 2 and Pierce at the 3, is shooting.
X, Brooks, Pierce, Livers, Teske is a starting lineup that shot 30%, 29%, 32%, 42%, 29% from three last year. It’s almost impossible for me to see a team like that make a deep run. I remember hearing people say no team that shot the three as poorly as Duke this past season had ever made the final four, and even their extreme talent level wasn’t enough to overcome that.
It could be reasonable to expect a shooting improvement from those four guys, but I’m extremely skeptical of how much.
I just watched pierces soph. highlights. Only watched junior year stuff previously. I think this would be a huge get. He can get baskets. I’m really surprised his percentage dropped so far from year to year as his shot looks really nice each year. He also has some nice shot creation to his game.
This year’s lineup had a chemistry and execution issues on offense, and this year’s defense squandered its own chance to contest 5-10 possessions in key rivalry games, and still went 30-7 and was in a position to take away a game and a banner from MSU which played near-mistake-free basketball and did not give away easy baskets. Michigan’s offense will likely be better next year, and the loss of Matthews could be compensated for by the fielding of a lineup in which, as Beilein said, there’s the chance to bench somebody who “isn’t making good decisions at the time”, or however he put it diplomatically.
IMO, given the right mix – which probably includes 1 or 2 of Pierce or Wagner and 1 of 2 freshmen ready to contribute – this team will be more ready to go head to head with MSU. MSU is seen as the preseason favorite, and the bluebloods aren’t looking like they’ll be incredibly foreboding next year, so it stands to reason that Michigan isn’t too far off that kind of projection. It’s also going to be a year in which Teske won’t have to play in fear of foul trouble because backup C is a strength. IMO that’s a huge factor. Next year is a year to take our shot.
If we replace Poole and Brazdeikis with Brooks and Pierce, I disagree that the offense will be better next year. Hope I’m wrong.
I’m extremely high on Jalen Wilson so maybe he can factor in, and I’d love to pull Wagner - I believe in his shooting ability now and his readiness to play day one.
I just don’t think you can build a team around Simpson/Teske if they both remain 30% shooters from three and surround them with any additional non-shooters. If Pierce is a good shooter again, that’s great. If Brooks’ 3 point percentage rises 10% in the offseason, that’s great too. But there’s a lot that needs to happen for me to make those presumptions.
I believe the opposite. While Poole and Iggy are definitely more talented and dynamic offensive players I think Beilien’s offense would run better and be more efficient with Pierce and even Brooks plugged in at the 2. I just think they fit better. Give me Pierce and Wagner in the starting lineup and I will all of a sudden have very high expectations for the season.
I agree. But brooks needs to shoot with confidence for this to occurr and pierce needs to shoot like two years ago. The ball will move better for sure though and I think coach bs offense will be clicking. The passing , ball movement, spacing and decision making should be much better though. They must hit the open shots. Could be much better looks and decision making though
My post above listed the shooting percentages from last season only of the five hypothetical projected starters being discussed. Basketball reference has Pierce at 32.4% last season. I get that he shot better as a sophomore.
My point is - it would be ideal to build around Simpson/Teske with three guys you’d consider knock down shooters. I don’t consider Pierce to be that based on his prior stats, or film. If he shoots like he did as a sophomore, then he would be a great addition. I’m also jaded toward grad transfers and their projected productivity after JaAron Simmons was a shell of what he showed on tape all season.
Don’t know his rationale for 32%, but basically every low division guy sees his shooting % drop when he faces better competition. So, I’d expect his numbers to drop at least a little when he’s playing the majority of his schedule against B1G defenders.
I’m not sure that’s accurate. A drop-off in production numbers like pig, rag, etc., sure, because generally guys going up a level go from being the guy to being a role player, and because they can’t consistently beat their guy off the bounce as they can at a lower level. A drop-off in 3 point shooting percentage–that, I’d have to see. And even if it’s the general rule, Pierce in particular was a vastly better shooter when he was a soph than he was as a junior precisely because he didn’t have to be the guy, and didn’t have to create shots for himself–that was the function of his PG who had assist numbers similar to those of X. That would be his role on Michigan. He might not shoot 41% from 3, but between going back to his comfort zone, role wise, and recovering from the shooting hand wrist injury, I would be surprised and disappointed if he didn’t shoot 37% or so from 3 next season.
Has anyone studied this or are you just basing it on your own opinion?
I would think that 3-point shooting percentage is one of the least dependent stats on level of competition. I’d think it has far more to do with role, team construction, shot type (catch and shoot vs off the dribble), etc.
Obviously something like free throw shooting would be an item that isn’t at all correlated to level of competition. I’d expect to see drop offs in things like 2-point shooting, shooting at the rim, ball screen numbers, maybe assist/turnover numbers, free throw rate, etc.
Sure – agreed. You want 40% shooters around your P/R. Livers is one of them. The potential players that can fill the two remaining spots plus a backup role include Brooks, who could step up and be a 3&D player, as could DDJ. Then there’s Wilson, Bajema, and Johns. And then some combo of Wagner, Pierce, Hyland, and maybe some other name not yet on the radar.
So you’re looking at a group of at least 5 guys to fill three roles, and likely more like 7 or 8 guys. I’m confident that Beilein can find two two-way players to shoot 40%, or in the upper 30s, and a bench guy to play light minutes.
None of them have to come in and be all-conference types. Just need them to be good role players around Simpson, Teske and Livers. We’ll also get likely 10-15 minutes of heavy Castleton use.
To add on, a lot of people looked at Iggy’s three point percentages in high school and predicted they’d get better despite the increase in competition. This of course being based on the film showing a lot of contested, off the dribble shot attempts. Alas, he was a 39% guy here on nearly 150 attempts. One player is definitely no trend, but I don’t think it’s an agreed upon thing at all that higher competition level = three point percentage decrease. Seems like a totally case by case thing to me.
I keep checking this thread expecting some substantive news, but it still hasn’t happened yet. It feels like we’ve been speculating for months now with no actual progress on gaining new players.
We surrounded this year’s Jr Simpson and Teske with non shooters. We will be hard pressed to be as poor of a shooting team as we were this year. Matthews and Poole were not strong threats IMO. Livers starting is going to help. I am one who believes we will be a better team than last year. Let’s see who we land over the next couple of weeks but if you assume Pierce and Franz…I will take next year’s team over this year’s 30 win team. Next year will remind many of us why JB is an elite coach. He started this past year with open heart surgery, missed the summer and early fall workouts, practices, probably wasn’t 100 percent most of the year and had to deal with some “team” issues which were above normal. I just see so many reasons to believe next year will be quite good. Maybe not in December…but in March.
Matthews was a non-shooter (who somehow shot 35% from three in conference play), Poole was shooting out of his mind for two months and that was a huge part of the 30 wins. Even if he didn’t shoot up to his potential down the stretch, he’s certainly a shooter. And Iggy hit 39% (43% in conference). I agree Livers will shoot well and be a huge piece.
My entire reasoning that I think next year’s team won’t be as good offensively as this year’s team was centered around the idea of Brooks and Pierce starting and playing major roles. If Livers, Wilson and Franz are the starters at the 2-4 next year, I’d feel more confident in the team’s offensive ceiling.
Castleton’s development (which we are both very confident in) remains a key going forward. He is that Wagner type unicorn that can open up Beilein’s offense. Plus, I believe he was touted as an excellent defender.