MattD is spot-on, and said a lot of what I’ve been thinking all day. This is not a tough, physical team, nor have any of Beilein’s teams been that way. We do not have the ability to pound out a win against a decent team on a night when our shooting is cold, but putting this kind of team out there is just the way Beilein coaches and it’s not likely to change. And in any case, our problem is not so much not having enough bigs, but not having enough good ones. Morgan and Horford are soft inside on offense and defense, despite having the most experience of anyone on the team, but if they had been developed better, we’d have no problems along those lines this year. Not that Beilein hasn’t had success doing things this way, but you can’t help but feel that there’s another step up he could take over the long term.
Agree too that this game really exposed this fundamental weakness again, and that it’s going to cost us quite a few games this year. I can easily see us losing 4 or 5 NC games, even with McGary playing.
2 unused scholarships. Should have guys to pick from… Not can’t find guys. Go to champ game & Now we end up with so so 2014. It should be better. Period.
They are not mutually exclusive, you don't have to acquire rebouding at the expense of shooting/spacing, that is a misconception.
They may not be mutually exclusive theoretically, but there are so few guys that have the skill set that Beilein requires that are also physical banger types. McGary is one…and was the #2 recruit in the country at one point. If you can’t just pick and choose your players, then you have to prioritize, and Beilein’s priorities are clear. It’s kind of like lamenting that Denard isn’t an elite passer. Getting all of that in one package, while “possible”, is just too uncommon to simply say “that’s what we need, why don’t we have it??”
Perhaps I should’ve clarified better - when I say you don’t have to acquire rebounding at the expense of shooting, I meant that from an entire roster standpoint rather than an individual player. In other words we should have half of our bigs as shooters, with the other half composed of bigs that are more defensive/rebounding oriented in nature.
I don’t know if the approach in recruiting half and half specialist makes that much sense with JB going 8 deep.
I think Voltron is spot on. I don’t think it’s a skill problem, though. The team is fundamentally sound. The issue is getting players that also have size and strength. If we can get 6’8’’ versions of GR3 then we aren’t having these discussions. If we can get Caris Leverts that don’t need a year or two of muscle before they can bring some physicality . Without being a blueblood it’s a tall task seeing as those player’s are pretty good in their own right, which is why we have to trade off strenght and weaknesses.
Don’t necessarily have to be specialists, but just getting some tougher kids on the interior would help tremendously in my opinion. Personally, I would’ve loved to have a kid like Jaylen Johnson. Maybe he doesn’t have a consistent shot from deep right now but you can see that his shot is developing. And he appeared to be an adequate rim protector and rebounder. I’d like to see us add a few more players in that mold.
Don't necessarily have to be specialists, but just getting some tougher kids on the interior would help tremendously in my opinion. Personally, I would've loved to have a kid like Jaylen Johnson. Maybe he doesn't have a consistent shot from deep right now but you can see that his shot is developing. And he appeared to be an adequate rim protector and rebounder. I'd like to see us add a few more players in that mold.
I don’t think he has the size to be a 5 in our system. If he had an inch or two, he’d be perfect. I don’t think he has the skill to be a 4.
I suppose I could see Morgan and Horford “replaced” by guys with a similar shooting/passing skill set that are more physical players. But it does become a system issue when you replace stretch 4s with bangers. You can’t make that switch in a vacuum because then it is a system issue…it all works together to Beilein’s vision, and so making that change no longer fits.
Don't necessarily have to be specialists, but just getting some tougher kids on the interior would help tremendously in my opinion. Personally, I would've loved to have a kid like Jaylen Johnson. Maybe he doesn't have a consistent shot from deep right now but you can see that his shot is developing. And he appeared to be an adequate rim protector and rebounder. I'd like to see us add a few more players in that mold.
I don’t think he has the size to be a 5 in our system. If he had an inch or two, he’d be perfect. I don’t think he has the skill to be a 4.
I assume you’re referring to shooting when you say skill, because Johnson is a good ball handler and passer for his size.
Overall though my issue is why does shooting have to be a prerequisite skill with defensive tenacity playing second fiddle? A good amount of posters always say “he can put on weight” or “get stronger” to basically justify the fact that a player is small or simply soft. Well my point is, why can’t we take a player that is physically/defensively ready and develop his shooting?
Don't necessarily have to be specialists, but just getting some tougher kids on the interior would help tremendously in my opinion. Personally, I would've loved to have a kid like Jaylen Johnson. Maybe he doesn't have a consistent shot from deep right now but you can see that his shot is developing. And he appeared to be an adequate rim protector and rebounder. I'd like to see us add a few more players in that mold.
I don’t think he has the size to be a 5 in our system. If he had an inch or two, he’d be perfect. I don’t think he has the skill to be a 4.
I assume you’re referring to shooting when you say skill, because Johnson is a good ball handler and passer for his size.
Overall though my issue is why does shooting have to be a prerequisite skill with defensive tenacity playing second fiddle? A good amount of posters always say “he can put on weight” or “get stronger” to basically justify the fact that a player is small or simply soft. Well my point is, why can’t we take a player that is physically/defensively ready and develop his shooting?
I think it’s easier to add size to a fundamentally sound bigman as opposed to adding perimeter shooting. If we continue to win, we will have a great chance at bringing in the perfect stretch 4s. The 6’8’’ two way forwards have everyone calling them. Chatman, who isn’t done growing, and GR3, who is a inch or two off, are pretty close to it, everything considered.
I think it’s easier to add size to a fundamentally sound bigman as opposed to adding perimeter shooting. If we continue to win, we will have a great chance at bringing in the perfect stretch 4s. The 6’8’’ two way forwards have everyone calling them. Chatman, who isn’t done growing but needs to add muscle, and GR3, who is a inch or two off, are pretty close to it, everything considered. Wilson and Donnal are top 100 recruits imo. We are going to be ok.
Totally agree regarding Chatman, perfect fit. However I think we may be in for a “down” year next year in light of our heightened expectations because we’re probably going to be extremely soft on the inside. My greatest fear is that it will negatively impact our future recruiting because we haven’t experienced sustained success on a national level
My greatest fear is that it will negatively impact our future recruiting because we haven't experienced sustained success on a national level
I don’t see that happening. We got good players pre-national title run. I expect we’ll only see an overall boost in recruiting. Especially with someone like Beilein with such a good reputation. And he’s going to be putting MORE players in the NBA.
I think it's easier to add size to a fundamentally sound bigman as opposed to adding perimeter shooting. If we continue to win, we will have a great chance at bringing in the perfect stretch 4s. The 6'8'' two way forwards have everyone calling them. Chatman, who isn't done growing but needs to add muscle, and GR3, who is a inch or two off, are pretty close to it, everything considered. Wilson and Donnal are top 100 recruits imo. We are going to be ok.
This is where we fundamentally disagree. I think you’re placing too much of a premium on actual size, rather than the defensive tenacity of a given player. I think its easier to develop skill (shooting included) vs. tenacity/toughness. GR3 is essentially the same size as Dawson, but yet Dawson is a much better defender/rebounder. Izzo never had to “develop” Dawson’s tenacity/rebounding, it is something inherent. Size doesn’t really matter that much in Dawson’s case, he is simply not going to be bullied, whereas GR3 leaves a lot to be desired on that end of the court. It is true that you can add 20lbs to a player’s body, but I don’t think you can 20lbs to a player’s heart. You can be a good rebounder/defender at 6’6, but only if you have the desire/inclination to do so.
I love GR3, but let’s be real, he simply isn’t a 4, and it has little to do with size and everything to do with toughness. We need toughness, lots of it in my opinion.
I think it's easier to add size to a fundamentally sound bigman as opposed to adding perimeter shooting. If we continue to win, we will have a great chance at bringing in the perfect stretch 4s. The 6'8'' two way forwards have everyone calling them. Chatman, who isn't done growing but needs to add muscle, and GR3, who is a inch or two off, are pretty close to it, everything considered. Wilson and Donnal are top 100 recruits imo. We are going to be ok.
This is where we fundamentally disagree. I think you’re placing too much of a premium on actual size, rather than the defensive tenacity of a given player. I think its easier to develop skill (shooting included) vs. tenacity/toughness. GR3 is essentially the same size as Dawson, but yet Dawson is a much better defender/rebounder. Izzo never had to “develop” Dawson’s tenacity/rebounding, it is something inherent. Size doesn’t really matter that much in Dawson’s case, he is simply not going to be bullied, whereas GR3 leaves a lot to be desired on that end of the court. It is true that you can add 20lbs to a player’s body, but I don’t think you can 20lbs to a player’s heart. You can be a good rebounder/defender at 6’6, but only if you have the desire/inclination to do so.
I love GR3, but let’s be real, he simply isn’t a 4, and it has little to do with size and everything to do with toughness. We need toughness, lots of it in my opinion.
You have a case of confirmation bias sir. The numbers don’t show that Dawsen is significantly better rebounder, in fact, it’s impressive their numbers are close with GR3 playing farther away from the basket.
Dawson can’t shoot. Show me bigmen who were defensive mind and aggressive who added a perimeter shot?
Chatman is going to be a bigger stretch four, along with Wilson and Donnal. Chatman is also a oft-described excellent rebounder. Just my opinion but I’m sure we both are set in stone. The biggest problem is getting guys who don’t need to mature physically a year or two after they get on campus, unless they have a really high ceiling (Wilson, Levert).
No sir, you are simply wrong. Gr3 averaged 5.4 Rebs last year on 33.6 MPG, while Dawson averaged 5.9 on 26.9 MPG. GR3 averaged 1reb/6.2min wile Dawson averaged 1reb/4.55min. Essentially if both players averaged 35 mins a game GR3 would average 5.65 reb per game whereas Dawson would average 7.7 reb per game. That’s a pretty wide margin.
Sure, Dawson can’t shoot as well as GR3, but if we’re being honest he does everything on the defensive end MUCH better.
Don’t think the problem is physical development, case in point would be GR3 (about as physically developed as you can get), as much as being soft. We simply go after soft players and I think we could do wonders by brining in more McGay-esque players. I do agree that Chatman seems to be more of a physical presence on the glass, but I don’t know if he is a 4. I mean, we had posters on here saying Irvin was a 4 during preseason. That’s when I knew this “system” argument had gone into the realm of being non-objective.
Branden Dawson is a year older and played significantly closer to the basket. You created this narrative that GR3 is soft and will use anything to confirm it.
Irvin and Chatman are clearly different players. All the recruiting services are backing that he can play the stretch 4 and will has the frame/ potential height growth to jump over a lot of people ranked over him.
I think it's easier to add size to a fundamentally sound bigman as opposed to adding perimeter shooting. If we continue to win, we will have a great chance at bringing in the perfect stretch 4s. The 6'8'' two way forwards have everyone calling them. Chatman, who isn't done growing but needs to add muscle, and GR3, who is a inch or two off, are pretty close to it, everything considered. Wilson and Donnal are top 100 recruits imo. We are going to be ok.
This is where we fundamentally disagree. I think you’re placing too much of a premium on actual size, rather than the defensive tenacity of a given player. I think its easier to develop skill (shooting included) vs. tenacity/toughness. GR3 is essentially the same size as Dawson, but yet Dawson is a much better defender/rebounder. Izzo never had to “develop” Dawson’s tenacity/rebounding, it is something inherent. Size doesn’t really matter that much in Dawson’s case, he is simply not going to be bullied, whereas GR3 leaves a lot to be desired on that end of the court. It is true that you can add 20lbs to a player’s body, but I don’t think you can 20lbs to a player’s heart. You can be a good rebounder/defender at 6’6, but only if you have the desire/inclination to do so.
I love GR3, but let’s be real, he simply isn’t a 4, and it has little to do with size and everything to do with toughness. We need toughness, lots of it in my opinion.
I believe you just simply don’t see too many “tenacious” players that are true Beilein stretch 4 material. Are they out there? I’d say yes. Are there many? I’d say no.
Branden Dawson is a year older and played significantly closer to the basket. You created this narrative that GR3 is soft and will use anything to confirm it.
Irvin and Chatman are clearly different players. All the recruiting services are backing that he can play the stretch 4 and will has the frame/ potential height growth to jump over a lot of people ranked over him.
That’s garbage and we both know it as it relates to Dawson. He averaged 4.5rebs on 20.6 mins during his freshman year, which equates to the identical rebounding rate of his sophomore year. I’M not creating anything, it is what it is. GR3 is a phenomenal player, but let’s not pretend that he doesn’t have problems on defense and rebounding, because that’s simply not true. There isn’t enough bias in the world for me to fabricate for a player/team when I know good and well it isn’t true or logical.
I clearly recognize Chatman and Irvin are different players, just used that as an example of how delusional some people can be with this “system” argument. I think Chatman is more suitable at the 4 than Irvin (not saying much), but I have to see him in action on a college court before I can declare him as sufficient on the glass/defense
I think it's easier to add size to a fundamentally sound bigman as opposed to adding perimeter shooting. If we continue to win, we will have a great chance at bringing in the perfect stretch 4s. The 6'8'' two way forwards have everyone calling them. Chatman, who isn't done growing but needs to add muscle, and GR3, who is a inch or two off, are pretty close to it, everything considered. Wilson and Donnal are top 100 recruits imo. We are going to be ok.
This is where we fundamentally disagree. I think you’re placing too much of a premium on actual size, rather than the defensive tenacity of a given player. I think its easier to develop skill (shooting included) vs. tenacity/toughness. GR3 is essentially the same size as Dawson, but yet Dawson is a much better defender/rebounder. Izzo never had to “develop” Dawson’s tenacity/rebounding, it is something inherent. Size doesn’t really matter that much in Dawson’s case, he is simply not going to be bullied, whereas GR3 leaves a lot to be desired on that end of the court. It is true that you can add 20lbs to a player’s body, but I don’t think you can 20lbs to a player’s heart. You can be a good rebounder/defender at 6’6, but only if you have the desire/inclination to do so.
I love GR3, but let’s be real, he simply isn’t a 4, and it has little to do with size and everything to do with toughness. We need toughness, lots of it in my opinion.
I believe you just simply don’t see too many “tenacious” players that are true Beilein stretch 4 material. Are they out there? I’d say yes. Are there many? I’d say no.
Perhaps you’re right, but what is a true Beilien 4? It seems to me, at least according to some posts on this thread, that the only requirement is being able to shoot from deep. If that’s the case, I think that logic/strategy is fundamentally flawed. Basketball is played on 2 ends of the court. There is room on the roster for players that can’t shoot the long ball, there is value in defensive oriented players. Hell, Mitch can’t shoot from deep, and he’s arguably our most valuable player.