Go Back   Fighting Illini Forums > Sports > Fighting Illini Basketball

Ahmad Starks to Illinois?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old May 3, 2013, 06:45 AM   #51
Symmooth
Banned
Posts: 1,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by armo859 View Post
Too small? Like Lewis Jackson? Or Nate Robinson?
Yes, maybe he's not another LJ, but, I think the Gene Hackman quote from "Enemy of the State" is apropos.

Paraphrasing: "They're large and we're small, that means we're quick and agile, they're big and slow."

On offense, Starks will get some shots blocked, like DJ often did last year.

On d, assuming Starks is quick enough to guard close and prevent penetration, it just means that his player will be able to shot a turnaround jumper with only a hand in his face, maybe. That's not really an easy shot to make. It certainly doesn't mean that he "can't guard taller players." Chet did just fine against taller players. (not saying Starks will be anywhere near as good on d as Chet)

Meanwhile, he can dribble the ball without bouncing it off his foot half the time. Besides TA, who else we got that has done that before in D1?

Huge pickup - not a superstar, but a kid who can help us win a few games next season just like Sam M did for us last year. I like it.

Last edited by Symmooth; May 3, 2013 at 06:49 AM.
Symmooth is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 07:29 AM   #52
DaytonIllini
DaytonIllini's Avatar
Posts: 19,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Symmooth View Post
Yes, maybe he's not another LJ, but, I think the Gene Hackman quote from "Enemy of the State" is apropos.

Paraphrasing: "They're large and we're small, that means we're quick and agile, they're big and slow."

On offense, Starks will get some shots blocked, like DJ often did last year.

On d, assuming Starks is quick enough to guard close and prevent penetration, it just means that his player will be able to shot a turnaround jumper with only a hand in his face, maybe. That's not really an easy shot to make. It certainly doesn't mean that he "can't guard taller players." Chet did just fine against taller players. (not saying Starks will be anywhere near as good on d as Chet)

Meanwhile, he can dribble the ball without bouncing it off his foot half the time. Besides TA, who else we got that has done that before in D1?

Huge pickup - not a superstar, but a kid who can help us win a few games next season just like Sam M did for us last year. I like it.
Starks was known as a bad defensive player on a bad defensive team in a bad defensive conference. I think it is a pretty good bet that he will have defensive troubles.

We are not certain that he can even play next year. If he cannot, this was not a good pickup at all in my opinion. If we need him, it is in 2013. We don't need him at all in all likelihood in 2014.

All we can hope for is that he gets his waiver and is willing to sublimate his pride and become a good spot up shooter and a shooter off of curls and ball screens. If he does that and we can pick our spots when to use him, he may be helpful to the team.

__________________
No nation can preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.
-- James Madison
DaytonIllini is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 07:56 AM   #53
troyk
Banned
Posts: 1,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaytonIllini View Post
Starks was known as a bad defensive player on a bad defensive team in a bad defensive conference. I think it is a pretty good bet that he will have defensive troubles.

We are not certain that he can even play next year. If he cannot, this was not a good pickup at all in my opinion. If we need him, it is in 2013. We don't need him at all in all likelihood in 2014.

All we can hope for is that he gets his waiver and is willing to sublimate his pride and become a good spot up shooter and a shooter off of curls and ball screens. If he does that and we can pick our spots when to use him, he may be helpful to the team.
Agreed. I can't see how Starks would play much with Cosby eligible, Abrams as a senior, Nunn and Tate as sophomores and Rice as a senior, plus whoever else we add as a freshman in 2014.

Hopefully he can get the waiver and be a good piece for us next year, perhaps getting 15-20 minutes spelling Tracy and whoever starts at the 2.
troyk is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 08:17 AM   #54
justsomedude
Posts: 2,554
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaytonIllini View Post
Starks was known as a bad defensive player on a bad defensive team in a bad defensive conference. I think it is a pretty good bet that he will have defensive troubles.

We are not certain that he can even play next year. If he cannot, this was not a good pickup at all in my opinion. If we need him, it is in 2013. We don't need him at all in all likelihood in 2014.

All we can hope for is that he gets his waiver and is willing to sublimate his pride and become a good spot up shooter and a shooter off of curls and ball screens. If he does that and we can pick our spots when to use him, he may be helpful to the team.
There is no way he stays at Illinois if he can't play next year. He knows there would be no minutes for him next year and would want a release anyway. Just not an option.
justsomedude is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 08:27 AM   #55
Foo G
Can bring the ball up
Foo G's Avatar
Location: Kirksville, MO
Posts: 4,117
Is it possible that Starks would enroll and wait to see what the NCAA decides about his eligibility for next season before filing the financial aid paperwork, essentially taking a spot as a "temporary" walk-on until he hears back regarding his hardship waiver?

__________________
Be the person your dog thinks you are.

"I understand there was an article written about Illinois basketball being put in its place. I'm gonna tell you what place it's in; it's in a great place. That's what place it's in." - Chief John Groce
Foo G is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 09:31 AM   #56
Shiloh
Shiloh's Avatar
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo G View Post
Is it possible that Starks would enroll and wait to see what the NCAA decides about his eligibility for next season before filing the financial aid paperwork, essentially taking a spot as a "temporary" walk-on until he hears back regarding his hardship waiver?
That's what I was wondering. Do you have to be enrolled to apply for the waiver?
Shiloh is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 09:35 AM   #57
Lebowski
Banned
Location: Peru, IL
Posts: 742
So it's not even clear that Starks will be eligible this year? Could this be what the hold up is?
Lebowski is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 09:48 AM   #58
illinibob
Banned
Posts: 1,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lebowski View Post
So it's not even clear that Starks will be eligible this year? Could this be what the hold up is?
Maybe that's the "process" he's "working through."
illinibob is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 09:56 AM   #59
Symmooth
Banned
Posts: 1,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaytonIllini View Post
Starks was known as a bad defensive player on a bad defensive team in a bad defensive conference. I think it is a pretty good bet that he will have defensive troubles.
"Bad defensive player" based on who's evaluation exactly?
I was simply making the point that short players can play good d.

His 3pt and FT% alone make him valuable, not to mention ballhandling skills.

I think the staff can teach him to play at least decent d.

I agree that he probably needs the waiver to play here at all.
Symmooth is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 10:15 AM   #60
Joel Goodson
Coffee is for closers!
Joel Goodson's Avatar
Location: Elmhurst
Posts: 3,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lebowski View Post
So it's not even clear that Starks will be eligible this year? Could this be what the hold up is?
What else would it be?

If Starks is gets his waiver, he'll be on the upcoming season's team (taking the last open scholly). If not, he'll be looking for another school.

__________________
Always Be Closing!
Joel Goodson is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 10:18 AM   #61
Lebowski
Banned
Location: Peru, IL
Posts: 742
Quote:
Originally Posted by illinibob View Post
Maybe that's the "process" he's "working through."
Lebowski is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 10:20 AM   #62
Lebowski
Banned
Location: Peru, IL
Posts: 742
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joel Goodson View Post
What else would it be?

If Starks is gets his waiver, he'll be on the upcoming season's team (taking the last open scholly). If not, he'll be looking for another school.
This...For sure
Lebowski is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 10:31 AM   #63
illiniillini
Banned
Posts: 177
I hope you guys realize the waiver is to the school. He has to sign here first before getting one.
illiniillini is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 10:36 AM   #64
armo859
Posts: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Symmooth View Post
Yes, maybe he's not another LJ, but, I think the Gene Hackman quote from "Enemy of the State" is apropos.

Paraphrasing: "They're large and we're small, that means we're quick and agile, they're big and slow."

On offense, Starks will get some shots blocked, like DJ often did last year.

On d, assuming Starks is quick enough to guard close and prevent penetration, it just means that his player will be able to shot a turnaround jumper with only a hand in his face, maybe. That's not really an easy shot to make. It certainly doesn't mean that he "can't guard taller players." Chet did just fine against taller players. (not saying Starks will be anywhere near as good on d as Chet)

Meanwhile, he can dribble the ball without bouncing it off his foot half the time. Besides TA, who else we got that has done that before in D1?

Huge pickup - not a superstar, but a kid who can help us win a few games next season just like Sam M did for us last year. I like it.
------------------------
Just to be clear, I was challenging the assumption that 5' 9" is too short to succeed in the Big Ten or at any level. Definitely support adding maximum depth to the team and players that play "fast". When Groce has the team fully stocked I can definitely see a "40 minutes of hell" approach like Shaka Smart/VCU or Don Chaney in the old days at Temple. In fact, I was struck by how similar Groce's style of play is to Shaka Smart, who was admittedly my top choice this time last year. Now I think we may actually found the better fit and that Smart might well have looked at Illinois as "stepping stone U", ala Dollar Bill.
armo859 is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 10:47 AM   #65
MTMinded
Fatigued
Posts: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by illiniillini View Post
I hope you guys realize the waiver is to the school. He has to sign here first before getting one.
I believe the school can review the situation with the NCAA before the signing occurs. (I.e. A "what if" scenario)

I'm not a betting man, but if I were, I would put my money that that is the "process".
MTMinded is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 11:32 AM   #66
scubadunk
scubadunk's Avatar
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,271
Illinois has no interest in Starks unless he can get the waiver. That is what the hold up is. They waiting to hear on the waiver before they proceed.
scubadunk is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 12:01 PM   #67
troyk
Banned
Posts: 1,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Symmooth View Post
"Bad defensive player" based on who's evaluation exactly?
I was simply making the point that short players can play good d.

His 3pt and FT% alone make him valuable, not to mention ballhandling skills.

I think the staff can teach him to play at least decent d.

I agree that he probably needs the waiver to play here at all.
If he's been a bad defender up to this point in his career, he's likely not going to change much in 6 months.

If he gets the waiver, I'm guessing he's used as a zone and press buster and a backup to Tracy.

Against teams with high-scoring backcourts, I'm guessing he doesn't play as much.
troyk is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 12:07 PM   #68
illinimic1
Posts: 51
Is there any word about D Paul, and how his visit is going? (That is supposed to be today right) And is it possible this is part of the process Stark has to work through?
illinimic1 is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 12:09 PM   #69
illinisc
Posts: 1,224
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTMinded View Post
I believe the school can review the situation with the NCAA before the signing occurs. (I.e. A "what if" scenario)

I'm not a betting man, but if I were, I would put my money that that is the "process".
I don't think this is true. A school cannot present a student athlete to the NCAA unless that student has signed a NLI or is enrolled at the school. Remember Starks is still enrolled as a student at OSU.

Quote:
Originally Posted by scubadunk View Post
Illinois has no interest in Starks unless he can get the waiver. That is what the hold up is. They waiting to hear on the waiver before they proceed.
Maybe, but they won't know until Starks is enrolled.
illinisc is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 12:11 PM   #70
Illini70math
Posts: 2,074
Starks sounds like a bit of an enigma depending on who you are listening too. He is somewhere between a team player and a ballhog who either will or will not play defense. The only thing we are certain of is that he is short -- maybe TU short!

The staff obviously wants him or they would not be spending all this time and effort on him. I am sure they are only nailing down the parameters of what has been agreed to in the event he does not get the waiver. I agree with those who believe that if he does not get the waiver, he will go elsewhere.

FWIW, the delay may not be completely independent of what happens today on the Darius Paul visit. We'll see before too long.
Illini70math is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 12:12 PM   #71
BlockI
Banned
Location: Shelbyville
Posts: 897
I wouldn't say Starks is a bad defensive player but he struggles with size and quickness. The B1G fortunately has some smaller guards like Yogi, Jackson etc... I think he will be fine as a role player. He is a good 3pt shooter and can handle the ball which we need both for this season.
BlockI is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 12:32 PM   #72
OskeeWowWow
OskeeWowWow's Avatar
Posts: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by scubadunk View Post
Illinois has no interest in Starks unless he can get the waiver. That is what the hold up is. They waiting to hear on the waiver before they proceed.
I do not think the bolded statement is correct, but I could be mistaken. I believe the hold up was within admissions 'last night'. From everything I've read regarding the medical hardship waiver, UI is the body that requests said waiver from the NCAA, hopefully with a "Rush" tied to it. I guess that could be part of the holdup IF UI is trying to complete everything at once (if that is even possible).

IMO...

*If the MHW is granted, Starks will play immediately for the Illini this season (2013-14).

*If the MHW is denied for whatever reason, Starks will not be attending UI, therefore not playing for their basketball team.

*If the MHW is denied due to UI being greater than 100 miles from Granny's house (Chicago), maybe he looks at NW, NIU, Marquette, or Notre Dame, which are all within the 100 miles radius guideline.

I don't think the "Starksplug" playing for the Illini is a slam dunk having read that the NCAA has cracked down on allowing MHW recently, so we shall see what happens.

All that said, I think getting Starks 'could' be the difference between the NCAA Tourney and NIT for the Illini. The kid steps up big in "big" games vs tourney teams LY; (25pts vs Kansas, 22pts vs Oregon, 18pts vs Arizona, & 20pts vs Colorado). Yet, he played poorly vs weaker competition. His fall off at the end of last year which led to his benching was odd, but I'm going to chalk that up as 'extenuating circumstances'.

I want the "Starksplug" playing for the Illini this season to help achieve more WINS. Plus, it probably won't hurt having an ex-Whitney Young Captain playing in Champaign so that T.Slaughter and the rest of the WY family can see 'one of their own' wearing the jersey of the state university
OskeeWowWow is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 12:46 PM   #73
scubadunk
scubadunk's Avatar
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by OskeeWowWow View Post
I do not think the bolded statement is correct, but I could be mistaken. I believe the hold up was within admissions 'last night'. From everything I've read regarding the medical hardship waiver, UI is the body that requests said waiver from the NCAA, hopefully with a "Rush" tied to it. I guess that could be part of the holdup IF UI is trying to complete everything at once (if that is even possible).

IMO...

*If the MHW is granted, Starks will play immediately for the Illini this season (2013-14).

*If the MHW is denied for whatever reason, Starks will not be attending UI, therefore not playing for their basketball team.

*If the MHW is denied due to UI being greater than 100 miles from Granny's house (Chicago), maybe he looks at NW, NIU, Marquette, or Notre Dame, which are all within the 100 miles radius guideline.

I don't think the "Starksplug" playing for the Illini is a slam dunk having read that the NCAA has cracked down on allowing MHW recently, so we shall see what happens.

All that said, I think getting Starks 'could' be the difference between the NCAA Tourney and NIT for the Illini. The kid steps up big in "big" games vs tourney teams LY; (25pts vs Kansas, 22pts vs Oregon, 18pts vs Arizona, & 20pts vs Colorado). Yet, he played poorly vs weaker competition. His fall off at the end of last year which led to his benching was odd, but I'm going to chalk that up as 'extenuating circumstances'.

I want the "Starksplug" playing for the Illini this season to help achieve more WINS. Plus, it probably won't hurt having an ex-Whitney Young Captain playing in Champaign so that T.Slaughter and the rest of the WY family can see 'one of their own' wearing the jersey of the state university
That was my point if the waiver doesnt come through he will not be an Illini.
scubadunk is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 12:47 PM   #74
scubadunk
scubadunk's Avatar
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by illinisc View Post
Maybe, but they won't know until Starks is enrolled.
The NCAA hands these out every year and they can and do give schools and players feedback on the chances of the waiver being approved. If they say the odds are not good I dont see him enrolling at Illinois.
scubadunk is offline
Old May 3, 2013, 12:56 PM   #75
illinisc
Posts: 1,224
Quote:
Originally Posted by scubadunk View Post
The NCAA hands these out every year and they can and do give schools and players feedback on the chances of the waiver being approved. If they say the odds are not good I dont see him enrolling at Illinois.
No they don't. I have a friend that works in the Athletic Dept of USC. In order for the NCAA to review the case they need sensitive information like medical records and financial statements. In order for the school to send that over the STUDENT must sign a waiver and provide those. There's no preliminary or informal process to determine the chance the NCAA approves the matter.
illinisc is offline
Closed Thread


« Previous Thread | Fighting Illini Basketball | Next Thread »
Thread Tools

Forum Jump