By:
Advanced search…

Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Michigan vs Wisconsin BTT championship

Billy Donlon deserves a boatload of credit. He is essentially our defensive coordinator and he finally has this team playing tough on that end of the floor.

Hats off to JB for bringing that guy in and a huge thank you to Wright State for being stupid enough to fire him.
 
I am enjoying the win. Somebody else asked if we still wanted Beilein gone, and I said I wouldn't mind if we brought in a fresh face. I'm not letting prisoner of the moment stuff make me forget about everything else I've seen over his tenure. Throw the RichRod comparison out the window if you like. It had more to do with comparing their gimmicky offenses than anything else. Not calling for him to be fired, I just know that I would like to see a different style of play. There's nothing wrong with that.

Siva getting to the rim at will was a product of having no interior defenders or shot blockers. Behanan was a man against boys in the 2nd half as well. But I don't wanna keep bringing up games like this when we're all feeling good so I'll shut up about it.

Moving on to OkSt.
 
I'm not sure how "gimmicky" this offense is. I feel that thinking is outdated with the way college basketball today is.

If Michigan had ONE big guy that was able to post up (ie Ethan Happ), the whole "gimmicky" feel would be gone. But when I watched them, especially most recently, they do a ton of back cuts, rolling cuts to the rim that were often found (MAAR most often), screens for shooters, etc... When I watch it, I don't feel like I'm watching a team that tosses it around the perimeter for 25 seconds and heaves a three.

Yeah, it would help to have a big guy that can just engulf the center and grab boards, but few teams have that.
 
Can we just be happy for a few days? We'll have long months in the offseason to discuss how we should get rid of this coach or that coach. Geez!!

Let's remember that Louisville team was bought and paid for with hookers and cash, but nah...
 
I can drop that word then. I just know when we lose games it's usually when we chuck up 25 plus three pointers and it drives me nuts.
 
I think you can say the same for any team that goes in a slump. Typically, whatever they do goes out the window in favor of bad offensive execution.

The recent run has shown what this offense can be when executed properly. It's fluid and people are making cuts everywhere. Wilson has been able to pull the bigs away from the rim and make it easier for guys like Simpson and Walton to get to the rim.
 
For what it's worth on the Beilein strategy conversation, I've been searching for some defensive fast break numbers for quite a while now, since a positive impact there is needed to offset the lack of offensive rebounds. Seems like this data is only available if you have a paid subscription to either kenpom or synergy, but UMhoops just posted some info from Synergy that I can now plagiarize..

Hard for me to quantify this without seeing more data, but UM ranks in the 80th percentile, only allowing 0.959 points per fast break possession, and only allowing fast breaks on 10.7 % of their defensive possessions. For reference, their overall defensive PPP is 1.001 which ranks 144th out of 351 (59th percentile). Again, hard to quantify without knowing the average PPP, but there is at least evidence that Beilein's approach of not crashing the boards is having at least SOME positive impact.
 
One more whack at the horse, and I'm not claiming it means much, but I did the research so I'm sharing.

During Big Ten play Michigan was outscored on second chance points 217-173. They outscored opponents in fast break points 124-72. That's a net gain of 12 points in favor of UM.

If anyone knows of a free source where these stats are compiled it would be really nice to compare the totals with the rest of the country. What I'd really like to see is where the 72 fast break points allowed puts them, and if the difference between that and the mean comes close to making up for the 44 point deficit in 2nd chance points.
 
Last edited:
deathroh said:
One more whack at the horse, and I'm not claiming it means much, but I did the research so I'm sharing.
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing.

I have to agree, I also think it doesn't mean much.

I don't see how getting out rebounded would have any correlation with the creation of fast-break opportunities.

EDIT: Maybe you're thinking that the type of bigger players would get out rebounded might also be the type of big players who would be more affective in transitional scores on fast breaks.

I guess that could be a thought.
 
Last edited:
The thought is that Beilein teams don't attempt to crash the offensive boards and instead attempt to get back on defense to mitigate fast break opportunities.

Many people complain about the lack of rebounding, but I'm trying to see if it's truly offset in this other area like I'm assuming Beilein intends it to be. And I don't necessarily think it would be totally offset, but generally speaking the kids that Beilein has recruited have skill sets that promote offensive efficiency over brute strength and athleticism.

Nobody liked his comment the other week about not trying to crash the boards because they can't, and I agree that it was a poor choice of words, but it's a known deficiency that I believe is made up for in other areas when you look at the offense as a whole.


Edit: I was typing when you made your edit, don't read my post as starting, "The THOUGHT is.." No snark intended
 
Last edited:
deathroh said:
One more whack at the horse, and I'm not claiming it means much, but I did the research so I'm sharing.

During Big Ten play Michigan was outscored on second chance points 217-173. They outscored opponents in fast break points 124-72. That's a net gain of 12 points in favor of UM.

If anyone knows of a free source where these stats are compiled it would be really nice to compare the totals with the rest of the country. What I'd really like to see is where the 72 fast break points allowed puts them, and if the difference between that and the mean comes close to making up for the 44 point deficit in 2nd chance points.
Click to expand...

Was over at mgoblog watching one-frame-at-a-time and noticed Michigan had several fast breaks against UW, some just off of a rebound. Watching that really emphasized your points here about fast breaks.
 
Yeah. If you send less people to the boards, there is less of a chance of a fast break going the other way. He isn't talking about a fast break off of a steal. It's just the transition game after getting a rebound.
 
deathroh said:
Edit: I was typing when you made your edit, don't read my post as starting, "The THOUGHT is.." No snark intended
Click to expand...

That's okay.

Before I edited, I wrote it the way I did just to razz you a little.

All in fun, of course.
 
deathroh said:
One more whack at the horse, and I'm not claiming it means much, but I did the research so I'm sharing.

During Big Ten play Michigan was outscored on second chance points 217-173. They outscored opponents in fast break points 124-72. That's a net gain of 12 points in favor of UM.

If anyone knows of a free source where these stats are compiled it would be really nice to compare the totals with the rest of the country. What I'd really like to see is where the 72 fast break points allowed puts them, and if the difference between that and the mean comes close to making up for the 44 point deficit in 2nd chance points.
Click to expand...

Not exactly what you're looking for, but MGoBlog provided some stats that are relevant for our upcoming game against a State that is OK.

"As you might expect from a team that rarely turns the ball over and largely abandons the offensive glass, Michigan's transition D is good relative to their halfcourt D. They provide very few opportunities (18% of opponent shots). Their transition eFG defense of 53% is barely worse than halfcourt (51%). Meanwhile Okie State's transition is often forced; they're only middling at converting transition opportunities."
 
tinselwolverine said:
That's okay.

Before I edited, I wrote it the way I did just to razz you a little.

All in fun, of course.
Click to expand...


Yeah but yours was funny, mine just would have come off as snotty. If I'm going to make the effort to talk shit I at least want it to be funny on some level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

About Us

Founded in 2011, Detroit Sports Forum is a community of fanatics dedicated to teams like the Lions, Tigers, Pistons, Red Wings, Wolverines, and more. We live and breathe Detroit sports!

Stay Connected

Forum statistics

Threads
32,987
Messages
1,110,000
Members
945
Latest member
Smokey

Affiliates

    Discussion Hub
Back
Top