We disagree if you think that we had great consistent inside presence last year with Black. While Black had more inside skills than other players on the current team (e.g., Kipper) I thought our froncourt and inside game last year was weak and one of them most obvious deficiencies that even BU stressed on some post conferences. This year, we unfortunately lost even Black.
I do not think anyone is claiming that a big consistent inside presence would not help, just that our view of what happens IF one of our bigs (Giorgi/Kane/Higgs/De La Rosa) does not develop as a consistent inside presence is different. You think we can be effective, I say we can't. At least in contending for NCAA, which IMO is really the measure, because just improving on 4-14 is meaningless since we set the bar so low ourselves having one of worst seasons in 20+ years. If we just marginally improve on last year, it would be the worst 2-year stretch in B1G since 1973-1975 (Harv Schmidt and Gene Bartow). We are talking pre-Henson years.
Getting this out of the way first -- a 4-14 team needs to improve in multiple phases by definition, and I personally won't be happy with the outcome of this year unless Illinois is seriously considered as part of the NCAA tournament conversation (i.e. last eight out, NIT bid).
I'm curious about what you're referring to when you talk about a post presence, specifically on offense. I admit I didn't follow along last year as closely as I usually do, but I seem to recall Underwood talking a lot about finishing around the basket. I don't think that he was referring specifically to post players making post moves, though, and his offense seems to revolve more around taking advantage of space and mismatches rather than anchoring the other team's best defender near the rim and scoring over him.
That doesn't mean that you don't want big men who can score around the hoop, of course. (And to be fair, Mike Finke was about the best on the team in the paint, though a lot of his points there seemed to come at the expense of smaller defenders.) But having that type of player doesn't seem to be a requirement to effectively running Underwood's offense.
If you're just talking about guys who can finish layups and dunks in space, though, sign me up.
Defensively, no argument from me that Illinois needs better rim protection, and that's likely to come from the big men. I think they can work around it if they don't show improvement there, mostly by cutting down the number of shots (and specifically, shots in the paint) the other team takes. That means better perimeter D, better rebounding, and maybe even more turnovers. No doubt that they're nibbling around the margins if they can only improve on those areas and not rim protection, though.
I just don't think that post play is a particularly important part of today's game. I look at it like stealing bases -- everyone did it back in the 80s, but between the emergence of the power game and the realization that getting caught stealing is a very bad event from the offense's perspective, stealing has become limited to a few elite guys who can do it at a high rate of success. Same with old-style back to the basket post play. If you have a guy who can convert on McHale up-and-unders and Sikma reverse pivots at a high rate, you want to use him. But most guys can't do it, and if they can't, those shots aren't a particularly good option.
I'd love to see this team have a very effective post player for a number of reasons, including aesthetics and novelty. But I don't think that we're going to benefit by having a square peg hammered into a round hole.
