The Truth

Caris clearly is in dire need of another 20 lbs of muscle.

He definitely still needs to put on muscle. But I don’t think you can blame him when the coaches make him guard 4s. He should be guarding the 1s and 2s, and every now and then 3s.

I cringe at the thought of us potentially matching up with OSU in Columbus if we don’t improve our defense/rebounding.

I’m more worried about MSU. OSU doesn’t really have any players that can take over a game.

We actually did well on the boards and got more offensive rebounds than them.

I don’t have an issue with what Matt is addressing here, they are valid concerns indeed and we need to improve in these areas. The question is, if it is really imperative for us to be more imposing and physical inside in order to consistently win, how do you explain our successes the past two seasons? Two years ago we shared a B1G title playing Morgan and Novak inside most of the time. Last season we had the same sole imposing force inside that we have now in McGary. We were one bad roll away from another shared conference title and we were national runner-up. I think interior defense and rebounding are important too, but they’ve never been strengths of Beilein teams. I get that this frustrates you ( it is frustrating to me too), but to act like this will keep us from being elite or winning consistently is off-base based on the evidence the past two seasons. Also, it’s great that you would love to have some of MSU’s players and more of their toughness, but just remember there are trade-offs with players with different styles. I love Dawson’s rebounding and defense, but it would not be a treat to watch him on the offensive side. He can’t handle the ball and he certainly cannot shoot it. My point is, there are very few players and teams that do everything as perfectly as we want them to in all areas. The truth is, Every team has strengths and weaknesses.

We actually did well on the boards and got more offensive rebounds than them.

I’m sorry, but matching ISU on the boards is not doing well. We should beat them on the glass, and quite frankly dominate them if Mitch is in the lineup considering their size. Not acceptable. This game was dejavu - almost identical feel to the Louisville game, control tempo and action for the majority of the first half, lead gets snatched away in the closing minutes of the half. And then we lose the rebound battle in the second half and lose the game. Simply not acceptable, we NEED to improve rebounding and toughness period.

Idk why you assume that, ISU is a good rebounding team and Ejim LEAD the Big 12 in rebounding.

We didn’t lose this game because of either of those things, we need a facilitator who can control the pace of the game and get us good shots. Walton is coming along but isn’t there yet.

We also need to play a bit more zone so teams think twice about going at slim jim Levert.

I don't have an issue with what Matt is addressing here, they are valid concerns indeed and we need to improve in these areas. The question is, if it is really imperative for us to be more imposing and physical inside in order to consistently win, how do you explain our successes the past two seasons? Two years ago we shared a B1G title playing Morgan and Novak inside most of the time. Last season we had the same sole imposing force inside that we have now in McGary. We were one bad roll away from another shared conference title and we were national runner-up. I think interior defense and rebounding are important too, but they've never been strengths of Beilein teams. I get that this frustrates you ( it is frustrating to me too), but to act like this will keep us from being elite or winning consistently is off-base based on the evidence the past two seasons. Also, it's great that you would love to have some of MSU's players and more of their toughness, but just remember there are trade-offs with players with different styles. I love Dawson's rebounding and defense, but it would not be a treat to watch him on the offensive side. He can't handle the ball and he certainly cannot shoot it. My point is, there are very few players and teams that do everything as perfectly as we want them to in all areas. The truth is, Every team has strengths and weaknesses.

Agree for the most part, but that is why I consistently state that we need to ensure that our players are able to compensate for the lack of D with offense. Quite frankly, I don’t think we have the personnel to do that next year assuming McGary and/or GR3 leave.
I do agree that we’ve been relatively successful the last 2 years, but does that really equate to consistently winning? I want to take the next step, as I’m sure most of us here do. You can explain the success quite easily, we don’t turn the ball over and we hit 3s in quantity (not necessarily great in terms of % other than last year) which has allowed us to overcome our shortcomings on defense/rebounding. However, when the 3 isn’t falling (today) or we’re not taking care of the ball it can get ugly because let’s face it, we’re average at best on defense. We have to address this issue…soon

Idk why you assume that, ISU is a good rebounding team and Ejim LEAD the Big 12 in rebounding.

We didn’t lose this game because of either of those things, we need a facilitator who can control the pace of the game and get us good shots. Walton is coming along but isn’t there yet.

We also need to play a bit more zone so teams think twice about going at slim jim Levert.

Totally disagree, ISU is a finesse team. I think we lost the game because we were bullied in the second half, plain and simple. If you don’t think rebounding/interior defense/toughness played a huge role in the second half, look at the game on DVR a second time and if you stick by your guns I can respect that. I thought we executed on offense pretty well, didn’t knock down shots at a good clip, but the looks were decent. The defense, on the other hand was pathetic, and I think we all know that.

Idk why you assume that, ISU is a good rebounding team and Ejim LEAD the Big 12 in rebounding.

We didn’t lose this game because of either of those things, we need a facilitator who can control the pace of the game and get us good shots. Walton is coming along but isn’t there yet.

We also need to play a bit more zone so teams think twice about going at slim jim Levert.

Totally disagree, ISU is a finesse team. I think we lost the game because we were bullied in the second half, plain and simple. If you don’t think rebounding/interior defense/toughness played a huge role in the second half, look at the game on DVR a second time and if you stick by your guns I can respect that. I thought we executed on offense pretty well, didn’t knock down shots at a good clip, but the looks were decent. The defense, on the other hand was pathetic, and I think we all know that.

The number’s don’t bare out ISU being a poor rebounding team.

Agreed, but the numbers don’t disclose the entire story. Due to ISU’s tempo, they necessarily grab more rebounds because they shoot more frequently than average, and the opposition attempts more shots simply by default because ISU plays at a fast pace on offense. In essence if ISU misses, it’s usually earlier in the clock, which means the opposition is able to have more opportunities to shoot the ball as well. Bottom line is that ISU is a finesse team, we should be able to win a rebounding battle by a decent margin, especially when it matters.

ISU is built as a physical team.

Michigan lost because we didn’t play our game.
We didn’t hit our shots and we didn’t protect the ball as well as we should have.

Every team is going to be built differently and have their weaknesses.
Last year we were soft but we ended up going to the national title game.
So don’t tell me it can’t work.

Y’all missed the title of this thread: “The Truth.”

Y'all missed the title of this thread: "The Truth."
Whose truth??
ISU is built as a physical team.

Michigan lost because we didn’t play our game.
We didn’t hit our shots and we didn’t protect the ball as well as we should have.

Every team is going to be built differently and have their weaknesses.
Last year we were soft but we ended up going to the national title game.
So don’t tell me it can’t work.

Never said it “can’t work”, however I am saying that being substandard on the glass/interior D is not a forumula you want as a trademark of your basketball team if you intend to be competing for national championships, and quite frankly, I think we are headed in that direction starting next year.

ISU is built as a physical team.

Michigan lost because we didn’t play our game.
We didn’t hit our shots and we didn’t protect the ball as well as we should have.

Every team is going to be built differently and have their weaknesses.
Last year we were soft but we ended up going to the national title game.
So don’t tell me it can’t work.

Never said it “can’t work”, however I am saying that being substandard on the glass/interior D is not a forumula you want as a trademark of your basketball team if you intend to be competing for national championships, and quite frankly, I think we are headed in that direction starting next year.

Were you expecting something different from a Beilein team?

ISU is built as a physical team.

Michigan lost because we didn’t play our game.
We didn’t hit our shots and we didn’t protect the ball as well as we should have.

Every team is going to be built differently and have their weaknesses.
Last year we were soft but we ended up going to the national title game.
So don’t tell me it can’t work.

Never said it “can’t work”, however I am saying that being substandard on the glass/interior D is not a forumula you want as a trademark of your basketball team if you intend to be competing for national championships, and quite frankly, I think we are headed in that direction starting next year.

Were you expecting something different from a Beilein team?

So basically you concede that is a problem? I guess my next question would be, should Coach B attempt to improve those areas? If your answer is no, then I guess we just have 2 completely different opinions of basketball as it relates to strategy.

ISU is built as a physical team.

Michigan lost because we didn’t play our game.
We didn’t hit our shots and we didn’t protect the ball as well as we should have.

Every team is going to be built differently and have their weaknesses.
Last year we were soft but we ended up going to the national title game.
So don’t tell me it can’t work.

Never said it “can’t work”, however I am saying that being substandard on the glass/interior D is not a forumula you want as a trademark of your basketball team if you intend to be competing for national championships, and quite frankly, I think we are headed in that direction starting next year.

Were you expecting something different from a Beilein team?

So basically you concede that is a problem? I guess my next question would be, should Coach B attempt to improve those areas? If your answer is no, then I guess we just have 2 completely different opinions of basketball as it relates to strategy.

It’s a weakness, sure. It was the same thing last year.
Improve to what extent? Recruit all 6’10 bruisers? No, because that negates his strategy.

If it were my team, I wouldn’t build it the same way. So no, I don’t agree with the strategy. But it is what it is. I’ve come to accept that Beilein doesn’t put a premium on the same things I would.

I guess my contention would be that you don’t need to recruit all 6’10 bruisers, but why not have a healthy mix of bruisers and guys that have the ability to fill it up from deep? That way you can have a 2 big lineup without losing the desired spacing on offense, and yet be competent on the boards/interior.

They are not mutually exclusive, you don’t have to acquire rebouding at the expense of shooting/spacing, that is a misconception.

I guess my contention would be that you don't need to recruit all 6'10 bruisers, but why not have a healthy mix of bruisers and guys that have the ability to fill it up from deep? That way you can have a 2 big lineup without losing the desired spacing on offense, and yet be competent on the boards/interior.

They are not mutually exclusive, you don’t have to acquire rebouding at the expense of shooting/spacing, that is a misconception.

If it was that simple, I’m sure Beilein would just snap his fingers and do that.

I don’t think his “ideal” is to play Levert or an undersized 4 if he doesn’t have to.