First, Math never loses, and damn if this team isn't due for a hot shooting streak in March. The last two tournaments, Michigan shot much, much worse than they did in the regular season. In '18, they went in shooting 37% from deep, averaging 74+ppg, then went on to shoot 28% at 69ppg (and a ghastly 21% from 3 if you take out the TA&M curb-stomping). The 2019 team went 35% from outside entering the Dance to a how-is-this-possible 23% on the way out.
It's really not hard to imagine that we see the inverse of that this year, especially with the lowered expectations and friendlier gyms, as others have noted. I suppose it's possible that across the board, the field in general shoots worse in the tournament, that they all struggle with the bigger arenas, feel the pressure, etc, but if that was the case, wouldn't some nerd already have informed us of such a phenomenon?
While at this point it would be a win if they can just maintain the 39% clip they're at now, what if they light it up for 44% on average for the tournament, and instead of going a combined 4-42 (aka ten freaking percent
) from three in the last game of the season, maybe they shoot 59%, and hit 13 or 14 treys? That'll take down a Gonzaga.
Throw in (2) Dickinson playing like he did in the games where the opponent hadn't already faced him (won B1G frosh of the week some seven times; we'll only need that form 4-5 games), (3) the dominance on neutral courts they've shown under Juwan (and back to JB), (4) getting out of the B1G, and (5) having been in Indy for the conference tourney...there's a lot working in their favor we've lost sight of from being so up-close.
Of course Michigan's not the favorite, but if they win it all, it's not going to look stunning in retrospect. We already know the D should still be a strength even without Livers, so we really don't need to see some insane number of breaks or upsets to take down the nets. Which takes us to (6), which is the most anecdotal, but have you noticed how often in a competitive NBA playoff series, someone loses a star player, but then that team goes on to win the next game or even two, before ultimately they succumb?
Well, if these guys rally around their fallen captain, they won't have to keep beating the same team over and over down a man; it'll be a fresh opponent every time, and I think that serves to diminish to some extent the damage done by losing one of the league's best players.
Alright having said all this I realize it's kind of just a longwinded way of saying what others have, that the margin for error's cut - as in, need to miss fewer shots - but once I looked it up and was reminded just how horrid the shooting was in 8 of the last 9 tournament games, idk, just seems like it won't be surprising at all if they get hot from outside and sustain it, and you combine that with fundamental defense, and they'll handle anyone.
EDIT: (8) Vegas: Michigan is still 4th to the gambling public, not far behind Baylor (+900 vs +750), and the B1G leads conferences as the favorite to host the champ at +110, the WCC next at +120. The point isn't that Vegas favors Michigan overall, just that, it's never that much of an upset when the team giving the fourth least-favorable odds takes it down. The idea that now there's basically no chance is just deeply irrational, periodt
It's really not hard to imagine that we see the inverse of that this year, especially with the lowered expectations and friendlier gyms, as others have noted. I suppose it's possible that across the board, the field in general shoots worse in the tournament, that they all struggle with the bigger arenas, feel the pressure, etc, but if that was the case, wouldn't some nerd already have informed us of such a phenomenon?
While at this point it would be a win if they can just maintain the 39% clip they're at now, what if they light it up for 44% on average for the tournament, and instead of going a combined 4-42 (aka ten freaking percent
) from three in the last game of the season, maybe they shoot 59%, and hit 13 or 14 treys? That'll take down a Gonzaga.Throw in (2) Dickinson playing like he did in the games where the opponent hadn't already faced him (won B1G frosh of the week some seven times; we'll only need that form 4-5 games), (3) the dominance on neutral courts they've shown under Juwan (and back to JB), (4) getting out of the B1G, and (5) having been in Indy for the conference tourney...there's a lot working in their favor we've lost sight of from being so up-close.
Of course Michigan's not the favorite, but if they win it all, it's not going to look stunning in retrospect. We already know the D should still be a strength even without Livers, so we really don't need to see some insane number of breaks or upsets to take down the nets. Which takes us to (6), which is the most anecdotal, but have you noticed how often in a competitive NBA playoff series, someone loses a star player, but then that team goes on to win the next game or even two, before ultimately they succumb?
Well, if these guys rally around their fallen captain, they won't have to keep beating the same team over and over down a man; it'll be a fresh opponent every time, and I think that serves to diminish to some extent the damage done by losing one of the league's best players.
Alright having said all this I realize it's kind of just a longwinded way of saying what others have, that the margin for error's cut - as in, need to miss fewer shots - but once I looked it up and was reminded just how horrid the shooting was in 8 of the last 9 tournament games, idk, just seems like it won't be surprising at all if they get hot from outside and sustain it, and you combine that with fundamental defense, and they'll handle anyone.
EDIT: (8) Vegas: Michigan is still 4th to the gambling public, not far behind Baylor (+900 vs +750), and the B1G leads conferences as the favorite to host the champ at +110, the WCC next at +120. The point isn't that Vegas favors Michigan overall, just that, it's never that much of an upset when the team giving the fourth least-favorable odds takes it down. The idea that now there's basically no chance is just deeply irrational, periodt
Last edited:
