I said last night. that Charles has to play with much more confidence on the offensive end, and not let misses and/or mistakes lead to more misses and/or mistakes, as sometimes occurred last year. He is a leader on a team filled with younger guys, none of whom has ever been a top 4 offensive option on a college team, and he has to set an example that you respond to a missed free throw shot, a bricked 3, or a turnover has to be immediately forgotten and moved on from. That's a must if we're going. to hit our ceiling as a team.
However, and this is a big however, the notion which has been oft-stated in the aftermath of last night's game (our season opener) that we may well have to cut Charles's minutes because he is not a good shooter and/or free throw shooter, and the team needs to shoot better strikes me as strange. For ten years, Michigan basketball fans have railed against "soft" players who could not guard, including, amongst the targets, guys who are currently playing in the NBA (Tim Hardaway, Nik Stauskas, Mo Wagner, Duncan Robinson (or, as he was called on another site, Uncan because, you know, no D, get it?). Now, we have guys who are elite defensively and folks are figuring out lineup revisions because those guys have some deficiencies on the offensive end.
Here's the dirty little secret of today's college basketball--if you're elite on one end, and don't have deficiencies on the other, you're gone in a year or two at the most. So yeah, our only senior isn't a great shooter...which is precisely why he wasn't going to be drafted last year, and he's back. That doesn't mean he's not among our most necessary players. It just means that in a sport where guys have to play both ends (like hockey and National League baseball), he's going to have to play better, and find a way to reduce his weaknesses.
Charles is our best defensive rebounder by a lot. He's our best wing defender by a substantial margin. We are going to win games this year on defense. Certainly we have to play (read shoot) better offensively than we have so far, but sacrificing what you're great at so that you can be better on the other end only works if you're getting more than you're giving up. I don't see it--we could replace Charles with Nik Stauskas and we wouldn't be a great shooting team, merely a much better one. And there ain't no Nik Stauskas's sitting on our bench.
Again, Charles has to play better on the offensive end. If he's still playing like he did last night a month from now, I'll reconsider. Until then though, I'm not taking my captain, my senior leader, my guy who pulled from the draft and bought in, my toughest wing, and slashing his minutes. That would, in my opinion, hurt the team's chemistry, his chances of recovering his confidence and shooting decently, and the bottom line.
However, and this is a big however, the notion which has been oft-stated in the aftermath of last night's game (our season opener) that we may well have to cut Charles's minutes because he is not a good shooter and/or free throw shooter, and the team needs to shoot better strikes me as strange. For ten years, Michigan basketball fans have railed against "soft" players who could not guard, including, amongst the targets, guys who are currently playing in the NBA (Tim Hardaway, Nik Stauskas, Mo Wagner, Duncan Robinson (or, as he was called on another site, Uncan because, you know, no D, get it?). Now, we have guys who are elite defensively and folks are figuring out lineup revisions because those guys have some deficiencies on the offensive end.
Here's the dirty little secret of today's college basketball--if you're elite on one end, and don't have deficiencies on the other, you're gone in a year or two at the most. So yeah, our only senior isn't a great shooter...which is precisely why he wasn't going to be drafted last year, and he's back. That doesn't mean he's not among our most necessary players. It just means that in a sport where guys have to play both ends (like hockey and National League baseball), he's going to have to play better, and find a way to reduce his weaknesses.
Charles is our best defensive rebounder by a lot. He's our best wing defender by a substantial margin. We are going to win games this year on defense. Certainly we have to play (read shoot) better offensively than we have so far, but sacrificing what you're great at so that you can be better on the other end only works if you're getting more than you're giving up. I don't see it--we could replace Charles with Nik Stauskas and we wouldn't be a great shooting team, merely a much better one. And there ain't no Nik Stauskas's sitting on our bench.
Again, Charles has to play better on the offensive end. If he's still playing like he did last night a month from now, I'll reconsider. Until then though, I'm not taking my captain, my senior leader, my guy who pulled from the draft and bought in, my toughest wing, and slashing his minutes. That would, in my opinion, hurt the team's chemistry, his chances of recovering his confidence and shooting decently, and the bottom line.
