Author: Drew Montag

The (#2) University of Michigan men’s basketball team played two games last week, and they won them both. On Thursday (01/03/2019), they beat Penn State 68-55, then on Sunday (01/06/2019), they beat (#21) Indiana 74-63. Both games were in sold-out Crisler Arena. The two wins raise Michigan’s record to 15-0 (4-0 in the Big Ten).

Time for more Questions & Answers:

Q: I get the “good basketball” part, but what’s up with the “bad officiating” bit?

A: I’ve been watching Big Ten basketball since the 1974-75 season (44 years), and I’m still not used to how bad the officiating can be. This week was particularly bad. In both games, the refs took over in the 2^nd half, determined to keep the game close. I counted 12 bad calls in the PSU game, and 10 in the IU game. The really frustrating part was that 8 of the bad calls in the IU game were in a row, all against Michigan, just when UM was about to put the game out of reach. They showed the replays on the scoreboard, and they were all terrible calls. With fair officiating, Michigan wins this game by 25 points.

Q: You’re really going to complain about the officiating when Michigan won both games by double figures?

A: You bet! The refs are supposed to officiate the game without looking at the score, but they really tried hard to keep both games close. UM couldn’t buy a decent call for over 7 minutes in the 2^nd half of the IU game. It was ridiculous. The Big Ten has always had mediocre officiating, but these two crews really took it to the extreme. They were just horrible.

Q: Enough of that; let’s hear about the “good basketball”.

A: Michigan played very well in both games, despite the poor officiating (that’s the last time I’ll mention it). Michigan was supposed to beat PSU, probably by more than 13 points, and they played a good solid, unimpressive game against them. Michigan was also favored in the IU game, by 8 points, so they actually beat the point spread. IU was ranked, and they have two very good players, so UM had to play well to beat them.

In the PSU game, Michigan only trailed twice (5-4 and 7-6) before they got the lead for good, and kept it in the 6-8 point range for the rest of the 1^st half, and in the 10-12 point range for most of the 2^nd half. PSU did get within 8 points a few times in the 2^nd half (51-43, 53-45, and 55-47) before UM pushed the lead up into double digits for most of the rest of the game.

In the IU game, Michigan led for the entire game, although it was only a 2 point lead early (11-9), before UM went on a quick 12-0 run to make the lead a little more comfortable. UM got the lead as high as 19 points (32-13, with 8:29 left in the 1^st half), but generally kept the lead in the 12-14 point range. IU crept a little closer in the 2^nd half, but UM kept them at arm’s length.

Q: What do the team stats tell us?

A: Actually, the stats were much less impressive than I expected.

In the PSU game, Michigan shot pretty well overall (25-for-55 = 45.5%), they shot 3-pointers decently (5-for-14 = 35.7%), and they shot free throws decently (13-for-19 = 68.4%). They lost the rebounding battle (37-29), but they won the turnover battle (10-18). Michigan won this game because PSU couldn’t hit 3-pointers (1-for-14 = 7.1%). Was that good defense by Michigan, or ineptness by PSU? A little of both.

In the IU game, Michigan shot well overall (29-for-58 = 50.0%), they shot 3-pointers pretty poorly (4-for-16 = 25.0%), and they shot free throws pretty well (12-for-16 = 75.0%). Once again, UM lost the rebounding battle (34-31), but they won the turnover battle (3-7). Look at those turnover numbers: 10 turnovers total between the two teams! Those 4 extra possessions were key to Michigan’s win. Not-so-fun fact: UM started the game 4-for-6 from 3-point range, and missed their last 10 attempts.

Q: Who looked good for Michigan?

A: A few players had a good week:

• Jordan Poole was the high scorer for Michigan in both games, with 17 vs. PSU and 18 vs. IU. He had a little trouble with his 3-point shot (1-for-4 and 2-for-6), but he managed to score in other ways to help Michigan to victory.
  
• Charles Matthews hit double figures in both games (14 and 18 points), and even grabbed a few rebounds (5 and 6). He shot 3-pointers very well this week (1-for-1 and 2-for-3), and played great defense, especially in the IU game.
  
• Ignas Brazdeikis hit double figures in both games (16 and 10 points), and grabbed 11 rebounds vs. PSU for his first career double-double.
  
• Zavier Simpson almost hit double figures in both games (8 and 12 points), and he did a great job running the offense and playing tough defense.
  
• Jon Teske didn’t hit double figures in either game (9 and 6 points), but he was very important defensively in both games. He couldn’t stop either of the opposing centers completely, but he did his best to slow them down. He had 2 blocked shots in each game.
  
• Brandon Johns, Jr. had one forgettable game (no shots taken in 2 minutes vs. PSU) and one breakout game this week (8 points and 8 rebounds in 13 minutes vs. IU, both career highs). He looked very comfortable and poised out there vs. IU, and helped hold the fort when both Teske and Davis had foul problems.
  

Q: Who looked not-so-good for Michigan?

A: A couple players had an “off” week:

• Eli Brooks had one of his least effective weeks, with 2 and 0 points.
  
• Austin Davis scored 2 points in each game, but committed too many fouls to stay out there for long (2 and 4).
  

Q: Who else played?

A: Only one of the scout team players got into a game:

• David DeJulius played 1 minute in the IU game, but didn’t attempt a shot.
  

Q: Who didn’t play?

A: The big story this week was the absence of Isaiah Livers. He missed both games with back spasms. He warmed up in both games, but didn’t play. His availability going forward is “day to day”/”game time decision”. UM needs him back and healthy, as soon as possible. He’s become a very valuable 6^th man, subbing in at either the 4 or 5 and giving Michigan a spark.

Other than DeJulius, the rest of the scout team players didn’t play this week: C.J. Baird, Colin Castleton, Adrien Nuñez, and Luke Wilson.

Q: What did we learn this week?

A: We learned that Michigan can elevate their level of play when the Big Ten schedule rolls around. In the five December games after the Purdue game (at Northwestern, home vs. South Carolina, Western Michigan, Air Force, and Binghamton), Michigan didn’t look particularly sharp, although they were sharp enough to win them all. If Michigan had played the way they did vs. WMU this week against PSU or IU, they probably would have lost, but they elevated their game to match the competition.

We also learned that Brandon Johns is starting to “get it”, and that he can be a viable sub at the center position.

Q: What’s next for Michigan?

A: Michigan plays two games this week, one on the road and one at home. On Thursday (01/10/2019, 8:00 p.m. EST, FS1), Michigan plays at Illinois, then on Sunday (01/13/2019, 7:30 p.m., BTN), they play Northwestern in Crisler Arena.

Illinois is currently 4-11 (0-4 in Big Ten), with no impressive wins, and losses to Iowa State, Nebraska, Florida Atlantic, and Northwestern. They have some height: two 7’0″ guys, but no true “stars”. It’s tough to win any game on the road in the Big Ten, but this is a game that Michigan should win convincingly, if they focus and play their “A” game.

Northwestern is currently 10-5 (1-3 in Big Ten), with one decent win (Georgia Tech) and losses to Fresno State, Indiana, and Oklahoma. They have a little bit of height (three 6’10” players), and a few decent players. Michigan has already played Northwestern once this season (in Evanston on 12/04/2018), when they won a close game 62-60. This game should be a lot like the UM/PSU game last week. If UM plays a decent game, they should be able to beat Northwestern by double digits.

That’s it for this week. Come on down to Crisler for the Northwestern game.

Go Blue!

Happy New Year! Forget about the Peach Bowl, Michigan is a basketball school now.

The (#2) University of Michigan men’s basketball team played one game last week, and they won it. On Sunday (12/30/2018), they beat Binghamton 74-52 in Crisler Arena. The win raises Michigan’s record to 13-0 (2-0 in the Big Ten).

Time for more Questions & Answers:

Q: Wait, #2?

A: Oh yeah, I haven’t mentioned Michigan’s AP ranking this season. They started the season ranked #19, and have steadily climbed the rankings (#18, #9, #7, #5, and #4) to get to this point. The #1 team, Duke, has lost once, but they have looked very good. While all the other teams ahead of them in the rankings have lost a game or two, Michigan has managed to remain undefeated, including impressive wins over Villanova, North Carolina, and Purdue. Michigan is now one of only four teams that are still undefeated. The other three are: (#4) Virginia, (#6) Nevada, and (#22) Houston.

By the way, Michigan ended the calendar year 2018 with a record of 34-5, including a 14-game winning streak near the end of last season, and a 13-game winning streak to start this season. Wow! They’ve won 27 of their last 28 games.

Q: Why “Ho-Ho-Ho-Hum”?

A: It was a “ho-hum” kind of win, with some “Ho Ho Ho” thrown in for the Christmas/holiday break. Once again, Michigan “played down” to an obviously-inferior-but-pesky opponent in a guarantee game for all but the last eight minutes. The game started out looking like a rout, with UM hitting their first three shots, all 3-pointers, and leading 9-3. Then, they missed their next nine shots in a row, over a six-minute period, and trailed 11-9. The game was tied up 14-14 and 16-16 before UM went ahead for good, 19-16, at the 9:06 mark. Although they never let Binghamton catch up, they sure took their time shaking them off. The lead shrunk to 2 points a few times in the 1^st half, and was only 5 points (34-29) at halftime. Binghamton was still within 3 points (46-43) with 11:49 to go in the game, and only down 7 points (50-43) with 8:36 left. That’s when Michigan finally woke up, outscoring Binghamton 24-9 in the last eight minutes to win comfortably.

Q: What was the problem this time?

A: That’s where the “Ho Ho Ho” comes in: Michigan looked like they had just gotten back from a few days off for their Christmas/holiday break. They looked rusty and distracted and just out of sorts. They didn’t exactly “look past” Binghamton, but they didn’t take them very seriously. Once again, I don’t think it’s a real problem, and I expect them to be much more focused when the Big Ten schedule resumes next week.

Q: What do the team stats tell us?

A: Actually, the stats were much better than I expected. Michigan shot pretty well overall (30-for-63 = 47.6%), they shot 3-pointers very well (11-for-18 = 61.1%), but they shot free throws poorly (3-for-6 = 50.0%). They won the rebounding battle (37-31) and the turnover battle (8-14). The 3-point barrage won the game for Michigan.

Complete stats here.

Q: Who looked good for Michigan?

A: A few players had a good game:

• Ignas Brazdeikis had a real up-and-down-and-up-again game. He hit one of the early 3-pointers (at the 18:53 mark), then couldn’t buy a basket until the 3:37 mark in the 1^st half. He was more consistent in the 2^nd half, finishing with 21 points and 8 rebounds. He shot a decent percentage overall (9-for-18), but he was perfect shooting 3-pointers (3-for-3).
  
• Jordan Poole scored 18 points, all on 3-pointers (6-for-10). His six 3-pointers is a new career high for him.
  
• Zavier Simpson only scored 2 points, on free throws, but he contributed in other ways. He was Michigan’s leading rebounder (9), and had 10 assists.
  
• Isaiah Livers wasn’t the leading scorer for Michigan, but he was probably the reason Michigan won. He came off the bench and scored a career-high 17 points on fantastic shooting (8-for-10 overall, 1-for-2 from 3-point range), and he gave the team a much-needed spark every time he came in.
  

Q: Who looked not-so-good for Michigan?

A: A couple players had an “off” game:

• Charles Matthews had a miserable game, with 7 points on 3-for-12 shooting.
  
• Jon Teske had an “off” game as well, with 4 points. With his height advantage, he should have had 18-20 points, not 4. He kept settling for 8-foot jumpers instead of dunks, and he missed most of them (2-for-6 shooting).
  
• Eli Brooks had one of his least effective games, with 3 points on 1-for-4 shooting.
  

Q: Who else played?

A: Most of the scout team players got into the game:

• Colin Castleton played 1 minute, but didn’t attempt a shot.
  
• Austin Davis played 6 minutes, but didn’t attempt a shot.
  
• David DeJulius played 2 minutes, and scored 2 points.
  
• Brandon Johns, Jr. played 1 minute, but didn’t attempt a shot.
  
• Adrien Nuñez played 1 minute, but didn’t attempt a shot.
  

Q: Who didn’t play?

A: C.J. Baird and Luke Wilson didn’t get into the game.

Q: What’s this about Midterm Grades?

A: Even though Michigan isn’t quite to the halfway point in the season, with 13 games played and 18 left to go, the end of the non-conference portion of the schedule is a logical time to look back on the first (almost) half of the season and assign midterm grades. Here goes:

Freshman Eligibility

• Ignas Brazdeikis (A) – Iggy has been sensational so far this season, with only one “off” game (Western Michigan). He leads the team in scoring (16.5 points/game), and is shooting with pretty good accuracy (50.7% overall, 42.9% from deep). He’s been Michigan’s high scorer in 6 of the 13 games so far.
  
• Colin Castleton (Incomplete) – Colin has only played in 7 games so far, and scored 6 points. He hasn’t appeared ready to play regularly and contribute yet.
  
• David DeJulius (Incomplete) – David has only played in 9 games so far, and scored 6 points. He hasn’t appeared ready to play regularly and contribute yet.
  
• Brandon Johns, Jr. (Incomplete) – Brandon has only played in 9 games so far, and scored 7 points. He hasn’t appeared ready to play regularly and contribute yet.
  
• Adrien Nuñez (Incomplete) – Adrien has only played in 9 games so far, and hasn’t scored yet. He hasn’t appeared ready to play regularly and contribute yet.
  

Sophomore Eligibility

• C.J. Baird (Incomplete) – C.J. has only played in 7 games so far, and scored 3 points. He’s on the scout team, and only plays in “garbage time”.
  
• Eli Brooks (B) – Eli has been the most pleasant surprise so far this season. He had a very quiet freshman season, but he’s much more confident and productive this season. He has played in all 13 games, has scored 56 points (4.3 points/game), and has shot pretty well (44.9% overall, 34.5% from 3-point range).
  
• Austin Davis (C-) – Austin has had a slow start to this season. He has played in 10 games so far, and has only scored 15 points. He is shooting a nice percentage though: 7-for-11 (63.6%). He has had problems with committing silly fouls, and seems a step slow out there.
  
• Isaiah Livers (B+) – Isaiah has been another pleasant surprise this season. While he was nominally a starter last season, he didn’t play much, and didn’t do much when he did play. This season, he has been a big contributor to Michigan’s success. He doesn’t start, but he’s Michigan’s sixth man, and he usually sparks the team when he comes in. Last season, he played forward, but this season he is playing center much of the time. He’s a different kind of center than Jon Teske, and he allows Michigan to play “small ball” and push the tempo a little more. He has played in all 13 games, he has scored 103 points (7.9 points/game), and has the 2^nd best 3-point shooting percentage on the team (20-for-43 = 46.5%).
  
• Jordan Poole (B+) – Jordan has definitely improved from last season, but not as much as expected. Still, he is the 3^rd leading scorer on the team (13.5 points/game), and the best 3-point shooter (34-for-68 = 50.0%). When he’s hot from 3-point range, he’s one of the best in the country, but when he’s cold, it can be painful.
  
• Luke Wilson (Incomplete) – Luke has only played in 4 games so far, and hasn’t scored yet. He’s on the scout team, and only plays in “garbage time”.
  

Junior Eligibility

• Charles Matthews (B+) – Charles can take over a game and be unstoppable, or he can go invisible out there. When he’s “on” and into the game, he looks like a future NBA player, but he occasionally loses focus, and just drifts around. He is the 2^nd leading scorer on the team (13.9 points/game), but his shooting percentages aren’t very good: 43.2% overall, 31.1% from deep. He has improved his free throw shooting from last season. He’s up to 61.9%, which is respectable.
  

• Zavier Simpson (B) – It’s hard to grade Zavier out there, since many of the things he does don’t show up in the box score. He isn’t scoring much (6.7 points/game), and his shooting percentages aren’t very good (41.7% overall, 27.6% from deep), but he does have the most assists (81) and steals (20) on the team by far. He does a good job running the offense, and he is tenacious on defense.
  

• Jon Teske (B) – Jon has done a good job taking over as the starting center, and he does some things very well, but he’s not a complete player. He is the 5^th leading scorer on the team (7.5 points/game), he’s shooting pretty well overall (50.0%), and he leads the team in rebounds (82) and blocks (27). On the other hand, he’s not as quick or nimble as Isaiah Livers, and he’s not the 3-point threat that Isaiah is, shooting 3-for-15 (20.0%) so far. Still, it’s nice to have a 7’1″ guy out there protecting the rim.
  

Q: What did we learn this week?

A: We learned that Michigan can win a guarantee game with a “ho-hum” performance after a distracting holiday break. That’s about it.

Q: What’s next for Michigan?

A: The Binghamton game was Michigan’s last non-conference game. Big Ten play starts this week. Michigan plays two games this week, both at home. On Thursday (01/03/2019, 7:00 p.m., ESPN), Michigan plays Penn State, then on Sunday (01/06/2019, 4:30 p.m., CBS), they play (#23) Indiana.

Penn State is currently 7-6 (0-2 in Big Ten), with no impressive wins, and losses to DePaul, Bradley, and Alabama. They don’t have much height: two 6’9″ guys, and two 6’8″ guys. This is a game that Michigan should win convincingly, but they’ll need to focus and play their “A” game.

Indiana is currently 11-2 (2-0 in Big Ten), with wins over Penn State, Northwestern, and Louisville, and losses to Arkansas and Duke. They have a decent amount of height (three 6’10” guys), and a hotshot freshman guard (Romeo Langford). This game will be every bit as challenging as Michigan’s other games against ranked opponents (Villanova, North Carolina, and Purdue), and Michigan will have to play very well to beat them.

That’s it for this week. Come on down to Crisler for the two Big Ten games.

Go Blue!

The (#4) University of Michigan men’s basketball team played one game last week, and they won it. On Saturday (12/22/2018), they beat Air Force 71-50 in Crisler Arena. The win raises Michigan’s record to 12-0 (2-0 in the Big Ten).

Time for more Questions & Answers:

Q: What was uninspiring about this win?

A: Air Force is another team that Michigan should beat easily, and they won comfortably, but they sure took their time doing it. They had another slow start, down 10-5 at the 13:35 mark. An 11-0 run put UM on top, 16-10, and they never trailed again, but they had a hard time putting AF away. It was a 7-point UM lead at halftime (28-21), and AF got within 6 points (34-28) with 16:42 to go. Michigan kept the lead in the 8-10 point range for the next 4-5 minutes, then they finally pulled away, although they didn’t really put the game away until they hit a 3-pointer with 4:15 left, which made it a 21-point lead (66-45). Still, it was a win, even if it was an uninspiring win.

Q: Any ideas why Michigan played an uninspiring game?

A: Once again, it looked like the players were distracted by all the holiday happenings, and they were looking forward to a few days off at home. Coach Beilein mentioned in an article this week that having just one game a week doesn’t keep the team very sharp, and it showed. Also, they played about as well as they needed to to beat Air Force, and they didn’t waste any extra effort on beating them by a lot. I don’t think there’s anything to worry about.

Q: How were the team stats?

A: Uninspiring? Michigan shot decently overall (28-for-60 = 46.7%), they shot 3-pointers decently (10-for-32 = 31.3%), and they shot free throws pretty well (5-for-7 = 71.4%). They out-rebounded Air Force (32-27), and won the turnover battle handily (11-20). The 3-pointers were the difference in the game.

Complete stats here.

Q: Who looked good for Michigan?

A: A few players had a good game:

• Ignas Brazdeikis bounced back from his worst game as a Wolverine (last week vs. Western Michigan) with a much better game: 19 points on 7-for-13 shooting, including 3-for-7 shooting from 3-point range.
  
• Charles Matthews had a nice game, with 17 points and 7 rebounds. The only downside was his 3-point shooting: 1-for-6.
  
• Jordan Poole also hit double figures, with 11 points. He shot pretty well (4-for-8 overall, 3-for-6 from 3-point range).
  
• Isaiah Livers broke out of December slump, with 11 points. He had an identical line to his roommate (Poole): 4-for-8 overall, 3-for-6 from 3-point range.
  
• Eli Brooks chipped in 6 points off the bench, on 3-for-6 shooting. He also handed out 4 assists, and played 25 minutes.
  

Q: Who looked not-so-good for Michigan?

A: A couple players had an “off” game:

• Zavier Simpson only scored 2 points, on 1-for-5 shooting. He did have 7 assists.
  
• Jon Teske had an “off” game as well, with 2 points. With his height advantage against Air Force, he should have had 18-20 points, not 2. He even had one of his shots blocked by a 6’6″ guy.
  

Q: Who else played?

A: Once the lead got up over 20 points with 4:15 left to go, Coach Beilein put in a few subs for some game action: C.J. Baird, Colin Castleton, David DeJulius, Brandon Johns, Jr., and Adrien Nuñez. Actually, Johns made a brief appearance in the 1^st half, but fouled a 3-point shooter and was pulled after less than a minute. In any case, a couple subs took some shots (Baird, Castleton, and Nuñez), but only Castleton scored (3 points, on an offensive rebound and a nice “and one”).

Q: Who didn’t play?

A: For some reason, Austin Davis and Luke Wilson didn’t get into the game. I have no idea why.

Q: What did we learn this week?

A: We learned that Michigan can beat a decent team with an uninspiring effort. We also learned that the last game before the Christmas/holiday break is hard to get up for. Finally, we learned the difference between “full” (the North Carolina game) and “sold out” (the last couple games). This game was the 6^th in a row that Michigan has technically “sold out” in Crisler, but the number of actual fans in the seats has varied wildly.

Q: What’s next for Michigan?

A: Once again, Michigan only has one game this week, at home, and on the weekend. This week, Michigan plays Binghamton on Sunday (12/30/2018, 12:00 noon, BTN) in Crisler Arena. This is Michigan’s last non-conference game before Big Ten play resumes in January.

Binghamton is currently 4-9, with no impressive wins, and losses to Cornell, New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT), Colgate, Army, Morgan State, and Youngstown State. They don’t have much height: three 6’9″ guys, and a couple 6’8″ guys. This is another game that Michigan should win easily, assuming that they can wake up and play their normal basketball. Statistically, Binghamton is the easiest game on Michigan’s schedule.

That’s it for this week. Come on down to Crisler for the Binghamton game.

Go Blue!

The (#5) University of Michigan men’s basketball team played one game last week, and they won it. On Saturday (12/15/2018), they beat Western Michigan 70-62 in Crisler Arena. The win raises Michigan’s record to 11-0 (2-0 in the Big Ten).

Time for more Questions & Answers:

Q: What was ugly about this win?

A: WMU is a team that Michigan should have thrashed by 30 points, but it was still a 5-point game in the last two minutes. WMU led or was tied for virtually the entire 1^st half, with UM getting their first lead of the game at the halftime buzzer (30-28). Michigan used a 10-0 run in the closing minutes of the half to erase an 8-point deficit (28-20), then used a 14-4 run coming out of halftime to open up a decent lead (44-32, with 14:46 left in the game), but they let it slip back to 5 points (45-40) in the next two minutes. They made WMU look better than North Carolina, Purdue, and Villanova. Maybe WMU played one of their better games, although the stats don’t bear that out, but certainly UM played one of their least inspired games. It was sloppy and choppy, but at least it was a win, even if it was an ugly win.

Q: Any ideas why Michigan played so poorly?

A: I suspect that the biggest problem was a letdown, after so many challenging games in a row. I don’t think they exactly “looked past” WMU, but they may have taken them too lightly. I also suspect that the UM players were thinking more about the end of classes, study days, finals, and the holiday break than they were about serious basketball. They didn’t appear focused. WMU won most of the 50-50 balls, and the Michigan players often seemed one step behind them. They couldn’t slow down WMU’s high scorer, who lit them up for 31 points, including several amazing circus shots. It was scary to see how poorly Michigan can play when they don’t have their hearts in it.

Q: How were the team stats?

A: Not very impressive. Michigan shot pretty poorly overall (24-for-54 = 44.4%), they shot 3-pointers fairly well (7-for-18 = 38.9%), and they shot free throws pretty poorly (15-for-25 = 60.0%). They tied (32-32) in the rebounding battle, but won the turnover battle handily (8-16). Those eight extra possessions were the difference in the game.

Complete stats here.

Q: Who looked good for Michigan?

A: A few players had a good game:

• Charles Matthews was the star of the game, with 25 points and 10 rebounds, for a nice “double-double”. He had the buzzer-beater layup that gave Michigan its first lead of the game at halftime, and he had a nice corner 3-pointer with 1:13 to go in the game that gave UM the breathing room they needed to close out the game. He even hit his free throws (11-for-16)!
  
• Zavier Simpson scored 15 points, including 3-for-4 from 3-point range. This was very encouraging, since he had missed his previous 10 3-point attempts, dating back a month. He wasn’t perfect, with more turnovers (4) than assists (3), but he ran the offense pretty well.
  
• Jordan Poole was the only other Michigan player in double figures, with 14 points. He shot pretty well (5-for-9 overall, 2-for-3 from 3-point range).
  
• Austin Davis only had 4 points, but he played better than he has in a while. He had to play more minutes (9) than usual, since Jon Teske got in early foul trouble. He did a very nice job defensively on WMU’s 7-footer.
  

Q: Who looked not-so-good for Michigan?

A: Everyone else:

• Ignas Brazdeikis had his worst game as a Wolverine, with 4 points on a pair of late baskets. He finally looked like a freshman, and not even a good freshman. He forced his way into the lane several times with no hope of making a basket. He was just hoping someone from WMU would bail him out by fouling him. Even when he did get fouled, he missed his free throws (0-for-3).
  
• Jon Teske had an “off” game as well, with 3 points. He got 2 quick fouls in the 1^st half, and sat for long stretches. He only played 25 minutes. Fortunately, he and Austin Davis and Isaiah Livers forced WMU’s star big man into a sub-par game (7 points), so Teske’s weak offensive play didn’t hurt the team much.
  
• Isaiah Livers has been in a slump for most of December. He only had 3 points in this game, on 1-for-6 shooting (0-for-4 from 3-point range). The team needs him for “instant offense” off the bench. On the positive side, he did help contain WMU’s big man.
  
• Eli Brooks also had an “off” game, with 2 points on 1-for-3 shooting (0-for-2 from deep). He’s another player who is counted on for instant offense, and he didn’t provide it in this game.
  

Q: Who else played?

A: No one else played. Coach Beilein has shortened up his bench considerably, with only three subs.

Q: What did we learn this week?

A: We learned that Michigan can “gum a team to death” when they can’t win with style points. We learned that UM is still capable of “playing down” to inferior competition. And, we learned that Iggy is human.

Q: What’s next for Michigan?

A: For the rest of the month, Michigan only has one game each week, all at home, and all on weekends. This week, Michigan plays Air Force on Saturday (12/22/2018, 4:00 p.m., BTN) in Crisler Arena.

Air Force is currently 4-6, with no impressive wins, and losses to Texas State, UMBC, High Point, Colorado, Pacific, and Army. Since they’re a service academy, with strict limits on height for admission, they don’t have much height: a 6’9″ freshman, and a 6’8″ sophomore. This is another game that Michigan should win easily, but so was Western Michigan. UM will have to play with a lot more focus and determination than they did vs. WMU if they want to beat Air Force.

That’s it for this week. Come on down to Crisler for the Air Force game.

Go Blue!

The (#5) University of Michigan men’s basketball team played two games last week, and they won both of them. On Tuesday (12/04/2018), they won at Northwestern 62-60, then on Saturday (12/08/2018), they beat South Carolina 89-78 in Crisler Arena. Michigan’s record is now 10-0 (2-0 in the Big Ten).

Time for more Questions & Answers:

Q: Adversity? And that’s a good thing?

A: Yeah, some adversity is a good thing, just not too much. Michigan had been largely unchallenged in their first eight games, winning each of them by at least 17 points. There had been a few scary starts (down 10 early to North Carolina, for example), but Michigan was usually firmly in command for the last 10 minutes each game. Not in the Northwestern game: Michigan only led by six points (36-30) at halftime, but they started the 2^nd half with a 9-0 run to make it a 15-point lead (45-30) with 17:19 left, and it looked like the game was over. Hah! Northwestern went on their own 15-2 run to get within two points (47-45), tied the game at 54-54, then went ahead 56-54. It was still tied at 60-60 with 2:09 to go, and Michigan scored the final points with 1:53 left, then played good defense to shut Northwestern down and hang on for the win. So, there was plenty of adversity, and Michigan handled it pretty well and got the win. They should learn a lot more from a close game than they do from a 27-point blowout.

Q: Was there any adversity in the USC game?

A: I mean, a little? Michigan didn’t blow them away, but they had a comfortable lead for the last 16 minutes of the game. The 1^st half was close, but once Michigan got the lead over 10 in the 2^nd half, they didn’t let it get below 9 the rest of the way. USC was much better than their record and early results would suggest, but Michigan handled them pretty solidly.

Q: How were the team stats?

A: About what you would expect: sad in the Northwestern game, and better in the USC game:

Overall shooting

24-for-55 (43.6%) vs. Northwestern

28-for-54 (51.9%) vs. USC

3-point shooting

5-for-20 (25.0%) vs. Northwestern

10-for-24 (41.7%) vs. USC

Free throw shooting

9-for-13 (69.2%) vs. Northwestern

23-for-30 (76.7%) vs. USC

Michigan out-rebounded Northwestern (33-26) and USC (37-24).

Michigan tied in the turnover battle vs. Northwestern (9-9), but lost the battle to USC (16-10).

Complete stats here: Northwestern
USC

Q: Who looked good for Michigan?

A: Several players had a good week:

• Ignas Brazdeikis hit double figures in both games (23 points vs. Northwestern and 17 points vs. USC). He was 3-for-6 shooting 3-pointers vs. Northwestern, and he was 11-for-12 from the free throw line vs. USC.
  
• Jordan Poole also hit double figures in both games (15 and 26 points). Those 26 points are new career high for Jordan, and he did it in the game that was billed as a “Poole Party”.
  
• Jon Teske only hit double figures in one game (8 and 15 points), but he was a defensive force in both games.
  
• Charles Matthews had a miserable game vs. Northwestern (3 points), but did a little better vs. USC (12 points).
  
• Zavier Simpson hit double figures in one game this week (10 and 7 points), but he contributed even more with his assists (5 and 7). He also played great defense.
  
• Isaiah Livers also hit double figures in one game this week (0 and 12 points).
  

Q: Who looked not-so-good for Michigan?

A: A couple players had disappointing weeks:

• Eli Brooks chipped in a 3-pointer vs. Northwestern, but was held scoreless vs. USC.
  
• Austin Davis didn’t even attempt a shot in either game.
  

Q: Who else played?

A: No one else played. Coach Beilein has shortened up his bench considerably, with only three subs in each game this week.

Q: What did we learn this week?

A: We learned that Michigan can handle adversity. We also learned that Michigan can give up a good-sized lead (15 points) in the middle of the 2^nd half, that they can go 9 minutes without scoring, and that they can give up 78 points. All of these are ominous signs, and they’re going to catch up with Michigan some time this season. After the UNC and Purdue games, it looked like Michigan had everything figured out; now it’s obvious that there are some chinks in Michigan’s armor.

Q: What’s next for Michigan?

A: For the rest of the month, Michigan only has one game each week, all at home, and all on weekends. This week, Michigan plays Western Michigan on Saturday (12/15/2018, 2:00 p.m., BTN) in Crisler Arena.

WMU is currently 5-4, with no impressive wins, and losses to Nicholls State and USC Upstate. They have one good player, Seth Dugan, a 7’0″ senior who leads the team in scoring. It will be interesting watching Dugan and Teske go at it.

That’s it for this week. Come on down to Crisler for the WMU game.

Go Blue!