The Official Heartbreak City Michigan Postgame Report

#1

cncchris33

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
32,228
Likes
44,510
#1
Such a difficult loss. The game was a difference in an athletic team that CAN shoot vs an athletic team that CANNOT.

1. The Call. I won't make this, yet another place to argue about it. I'll just say that it is the hardest call to make, maybe in all of sports. I initially disagreed with the call, yet after review and considering the bang bang nature, I can't fault the official for interpreting that call the way he did in a tenth of a second's time. In a 2 point game, I feel 6 missed FTs had a larger impact than a singular foul call, even at that juncture. We can't blame the refs without acknowledging that we lost the game in other areas as well. Enough about that call.

2. Pick and roll defense was about as awful as I can remember. Stokes and McRae really failed to communicate numerous times leading to multiple dunks for Morgan.

3. Derek Reese, I love your hustle and occasional tough rebound, but you are going to have to learn to defend. At worst, keep your man in front of you and give up a jumper. He was routinely abused off the dribble, and it has been a common theme for him much of this season.

4. Stokes probably feels like he let his team down, but you got us there, almost single-handedly at times. Hold your head high big fella.

5. McRae really tried to will this team to win, and darn near did. His 5 missed FTs were huge, and with every one, I told my wife that I had a sneaking suspicion that missed FTs would haunt us in a game when the opponent was as hot as UM.

6. It's a testament to our guys' will and pride to come back from being down 15 late in the 2nd half, and had a chance to win it. Be disappointed in defeat, but be proud of this team for not folding. That was a gutty effort.

7. We outrebounded, had more steals, had more blocks, had half as many TOs, shot twice as many FTs, only attempted 11 3-pointers, and nearly matched them from the field (52% to 55%)...and still lost. That almost never happens, but when your opponent shoots 11-20 from 3, you just throw your hands up, and give credit where due. Our perimeter defense wasn't all that bad, as many of their makes were contested, but at some point, you have to do something to take that shot away altogether. However, UM is difficult to dictate because they can drive and are pretty skilled off the bench.

8. Feel bad for the seniors to lose that way. Maymon and McRae have endured a lot in their career. Applaud their contributions, and I will always be greatful for the efforts this season. Both will be sorely missed from a leadership standpoint.

9. Coach Martin has some choices to make on his future. I think he is going to be presented with other opportunities, and I won't fault him for exploring them. I hope he returns, because I witnessed a coach grow up significantly in the last two months. I'd like to find out first-hand what we have in him, rather than watch Marquette, Wake Forest, etc, find outvthat he actually has some talent that he just needed some time to unearth. This is in no way a suggestion that we undoubtedly have John Wooden reincarnated in our midst, but I think he showed enough over the last 11 games to cause me to think that perhaps the light came on for him, and his team fully bought into his coaching.

10. Next year, we have a chance to be a really good team again. We also have a chance to be very average and inexperienced. A lot depends on the Stokes decision, and MJ Rhett's decision. Get those two guys, and we have a solid, if not excellent frontcourt lineup again, and perhaps deeper with the freshman additions. Larry Austin is also important, along with Hubbs' development. JRich will be the heart and soul of this team, and erased any doubt that he can lead and shoulder the scoring load (shameless self-acknowledged plug). A lot of decisions could swing the balance of our outlook next year. Let's get some breaks going our way, and come back strong!!!

Go Vols!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#2
#2
#7 just really sucks, this team played a great game in the 2nd but the threes were just too much. Good write-up!

When will Rhett and Stokes make their decision?
 
#3
#3
1) You left out the part about Martin making an terrible decision to throw the ball in to Stokes 12+ feet from the basket rather than get it to McRae or Richardson. Martin apparently wanted to spread our guys out and assumed that Stokes would be single covered and could create. Centers don't create from outside with 10 seconds to go; slashing playmakers do; that's why you have them. Stokes should have not gotten the ball to begin the play--but since he did and was doubled immediately, he had to pass it, but didn't. Tried to force something that was not there.

2) no excuse not to communicate on pick & rolls--the essence of solid defense.

9) Find out what we have in Martin? How long has Martin been a Div. 1 coach--more than 10 years, yes? How long has he been at UT--four years? Martin is who he is--he's not changing. We had some talented players, and the team played pretty well down the stretch. That's all. He is a good man and seems like a mid-level coach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6
#6
1) You left out the part about Martin making an terrible decision to throw the ball in to Stokes 12+ feet from the basket rather than get it to McRae or Richardson. Martin apparently wanted to spread our guys out and assumed that Stokes would be single covered and could create. Centers don't create from outside with 10 seconds to go; slashing playmakers do; that's why you have them. Stokes should have not gotten the ball to begin the play--but since he did and was doubled immediately, he had to pass it, but didn't. Tried to force something that was not there.

2) no excuse not to communicate on pick & rolls--the essence of solid defense.

9) Find out what we have in Martin? How long has Martin been a Div. 1 coach--more than 10 years, yes? How long has he been at UT--four years? Martin is who he is--he's not changing. We had some talented players, and the team played pretty well down the stretch. That's all. He is a good man and seems like a mid-level coach.

1. This has been stated ad nauseum, but I guess you just choose to ignore it. The double team was anticipated. Whoever touched the ball with 9 seconds left was going to get doubled. Stokes is the best player on our team at passing out of a double team. It was a smart call to have him initiate the action, draw the double, then look to dish to McRae who was at the top of the key starting his cut through a wide open lane when the whistle was blown.

Stokes may have tried to push a little too deep into the lane, but it was still a bad foul call in that situation, and I'm definitely not going to fault the guy for trying to make a play. The play design was good though.

2. 6 years as a head coach is still very young in a career. 3 at Missouri State that included a huge turnaround and a really bad snub from the committee his third year (RPI in the 30s but no bid). 3 years at UT. He's still learning his trade and seems to be trending up. To suggest otherwise just shows you have an agenda or don't know the facts, which may be the case since you don't even know how long he's been here.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#7
#7
#7 just really sucks, this team played a great game in the 2nd but the threes were just too much. Good write-up!

When will Rhett and Stokes make their decision?

Agree. It's like the perfect formula for us to win a game, but being outscored 33-9 from 3 is hard to overcome.
 
#8
#8
Michigan makes pick and roll defense tough because help has to come from far away because of all the shooters on the floor. The defender has to try an fight over the screen, but if the ball carrier turns the corner, it's impossible for the defender trying to fight over to drop back to the help defenders man. That means the help has to come from another spot on the court, but Michigan has the floor spaced in a manner that makes the help come from a long way off. I give them credit for running and excellent offense.
 
#9
#9
Didn't get to watch the game. How were Cuonzo's in-game decisions?

They were mostly fine. Nothing he did or didn't do as coach cost us the game. Poor defensive communication and execution and missed FTs combined with a hot UM team. All credit to UM. They made shots from everywhere, and neutralized Stokes for the most part.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#10
#10
We'll just have to agree to disagree about #1. I don't think it's why we lost, as no one play/call determines that, but it was a horrible call.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11
#11
Good write up, but I respectfully disagree about our perimeter defense. A lot of their makes were either wide open or with one of our defenders late closing out. Only a few were truly well contested. Granted, that's what Michigan does best, but we didn't make it too hard on them.
 
#13
#13
Michigan makes pick and roll defense tough because help has to come from far away because of all the shooters on the floor. The defender has to try an fight over the screen, but if the ball carrier turns the corner, it's impossible for the defender trying to fight over to drop back to the help defenders man. That means the help has to come from another spot on the court, but Michigan has the floor spaced in a manner that makes the help come from a long way off. I give them credit for running and excellent offense.

Definitely true. Their offense puts tons of stress on you to execute perfectly. Effort, communication, and rotation have to be just about flawless, and even then they'll still get their looks.
 
#14
#14
Good write up, but I respectfully disagree about our perimeter defense. A lot of their makes were either wide open or with one of our defenders late closing out. Only a few were truly well contested. Granted, that's what Michigan does best, but we didn't make it too hard on them.

When a team has as many high-level shooters as UM, it's hard to defend them all without leaving the paint grossly exposed.
 
#15
#15
1) You left out the part about Martin making an terrible decision to throw the ball in to Stokes 12+ feet from the basket rather than get it to McRae or Richardson. Martin apparently wanted to spread our guys out and assumed that Stokes would be single covered and could create. Centers don't create from outside with 10 seconds to go; slashing playmakers do; that's why you have them. Stokes should have not gotten the ball to begin the play--but since he did and was doubled immediately, he had to pass it, but didn't. Tried to force something that was not there.

2) no excuse not to communicate on pick & rolls--the essence of solid defense.

9) Find out what we have in Martin? How long has Martin been a Div. 1 coach--more than 10 years, yes? How long has he been at UT--four years? Martin is who he is--he's not changing. We had some talented players, and the team played pretty well down the stretch. That's all. He is a good man and seems like a mid-level coach.

I'll agree on #2, but that's it.
 
#16
#16
We'll just have to agree to disagree about #1. I don't think it's why we lost, as no one play/call determines that, but it was a horrible call.

Like I said, I'm not going to turn this thread into another discussion about it. There are a half dozen other threads to do that in. It is what it is. Bad call or not (which is debatable), I can't in good conscience hold it more accountable than our own failed attempts to win at the FT line.
 
#17
#17
When a team has as many high-level shooters as UM, it's hard to defend them all without leaving the paint grossly exposed.

Oh I agree. I still just don't think we did as well as we could have. When McRae and Stokes are bickering with each other over who missed assignments off of screens your communication isn't where it needs to be. We tightened it up in the second half though, which I tip my cap to them for being able to do after the barage of 3s in the first half.
 
#18
#18
When a team has as many high-level shooters as UM, it's hard to defend them all without leaving the paint grossly exposed.


you have to deny the ball, front and force them to your help. We didn't do much of either.
UM coach is an offensive whizz. Just beautiful spacing and use of picks.
One great play is they go set a pick for the wing player on one side as he penetrates. Meanwhile, on the backside as the driver of the ball draws attention, their big man sets a back pick on another wing's man to receive the pass and an open look. They hit those like a machine and they did it to us on at least 4-5 threes last night. We didn't know it was coming and had no communication on the back picks that freed up the wing. Was disappointing that many of those looked like surprises to us and we didn't defend or adjust.
Honestly, I can't believe young coaches don't base their offensive system off of his. It works, and he churns out nba players. No sense at all at running motion or any other offense with the spacing and open looks they get against everybody they play.
 
#19
#19
you have to deny the ball, front and force them to your help. We didn't do much of either.
UM coach is an offensive whizz. Just beautiful spacing and use of picks.
One great play is they go set a pick for the wing player on one side as he penetrates. Meanwhile, on the backside as the driver of the ball draws attention, their big man sets a back pick on another wing's man to receive the pass and an open look. They hit those like a machine and they did it to us on at least 4-5 threes last night. We didn't know it was coming and had no communication on the back picks that freed up the wing. Was disappointing that many of those looked like surprises to us and we didn't defend or adjust.
Honestly, I can't believe young coaches don't base their offensive system off of his. It works, and he churns out nba players. No sense at all at running motion or any other offense with the spacing and open looks they get against everybody they play.

Totally agree. It's predicated on having guys who can shoot, but that's the kind of guys you recruit to play that system. It's doubly difficult when they can shoot and take it to the rack. Even Albrecht wasn't scared to drive. They are an offensive machine, and very, very difficult to defend. When they shoot 20 3-pointers and make 55% of them, they are nearly unbeatable.
 
#20
#20
Great write up Chris, agree on it all. Was definitely an odd game, we shot over 50% and scored more than 70, we almost always win when those things happen. What got us here is ultimately what disappeared, defense and free throw shooting.
 
#21
#21
9) Find out what we have in Martin? How long has Martin been a Div. 1 coach--more than 10 years, yes?

Wrong.

How long has he been at UT--four years? Martin is who he is--he's not changing. We had some talented players, and the team played pretty well down the stretch. That's all. He is a good man and seems like a mid-level coach.

Wrong again.
 
#22
#22
Tennessee was tentative in the game during the first half and after a decent start, did not respond well to the body blows UM was inflicting on them. But to their credit, the team did get their feet set under them and played much better defense in the middle to late part of the second half. I felt they put more pressure on the ball by 'bellying' up which caused UM problems.
 
#24
#24
Hard to beat a very good team when you give up more than 9 threes vs them. Like th Heat the Wolverines are a great three point shooting team.

There was basket not made that just wouldn't go down in the second half if I recall right the
Wolverines made a three.
Some other Basket they didn't make in the second half.

At least the Great Jordan MCcrae finished his Big Orange career with A Playoff year.
He makes me think of Kevin Durant.
 

VN Store



Back
Top