Illini Basketball 2018-2019

[goillini30]

This is from Mark Titus' article about Michigan today, and the highlighted part is what has been bothering me so much last season and this one. BU isn't trying to figure out how to win the most games with what he has, he's forcing players to play a style they aren't currently capable of. Could it pay dividends down the road? Maybe. But we're paying him a bunch of money to win games now.

 

[bombayIllini]

Since I have nothing better to do. Some stats from ESPN on previous games cached by BU (all 1/2 rounds of the Dance):

School: score: FG%. With winning team in bold

2013
SFA: 77 : 52.9
VCU: 75 : 46.2

SFA: 60 : 35.1
UCLA: 77 : 54.7

2014:
SFA: 50 : 33.3
Utah: 57 : 47.2

2015:
SFA: 70 : 30.9
WV: 56 : 30.8

SFA: 75 : 45.3
ND: 76 : 56.9

2016:
OSU: 91 : 54.7
Mich: 92 : 51.8

His teams, at the 1/2 rounds at the dance averaged 47.96 against them and yet won 2/6 games. And, lost 2 games by a single point, one by 7 and the UCLA by 17.

I also took a quick peek at the scores while BU was at SFA. Seems like his teams won big win their normal opponents (mostly double digits) and the games they lost were relatively smaller margins (I would say single digit).

Have not checked the OSU track record.

Does not seem bad to me.

 

[dbeverly26]

I've had this exact thought multiple times (even when BU was at OSU). His best production there even came once be dialed it back into a more traditional set.

Now, BU isn't running some crazy innovative defense that's never been run at a high level, but at some point the question arises: if it's such an effective defense, why don't more high majors run it? I think it's a deeper question than that, but still, thoughts to ponder.

Because the Norman Dale Fan Club will come out of the woodwork screaming about how it will never work, and how a low FG% allowed is the metric you should measure a defense by? Just a guess.

College basketball as a whole has seen a philosophical shift over the past ten years away from MVC-ball (slow pace, nobody crashes the boards, nobody pressures the ball) but Dick Bennett's death grip is still strangling this sport. It's far lower risk to run with the herd.

 

[foby]

This is from Mark Titus' article about Michigan today, and the highlighted part is what has been bothering me so much last season and this one. BU isn't trying to figure out how to win the most games with what he has, he's forcing players to play a style they aren't currently capable of. Could it pay dividends down the road? Maybe. But we're paying him a bunch of money to win games now.

I thought he was getting paid a bunch of money for building a program that after a few years time allowed to be built, would consistently rank in the top 25, make the dance every year, and have big success in the tourney every few years. My bad.

 

[dbeverly26]

This is from Mark Titus' article about Michigan today, and the highlighted part is what has been bothering me so much last season and this one. BU isn't trying to figure out how to win the most games with what he has, he's forcing players to play a style they aren't currently capable of. Could it pay dividends down the road? Maybe. But we're paying him a bunch of money to win games now.

Is there evidence that the bolded statement is true? And is there evidence that there's some other style out there that would allow a team with 1.5 post players and a bunch of freshmen to play defense at an elite level?

Our defense this year is not where it needs to be, but in terms of adjusted efficiency it's roughly where Nevada was last year, and about 40 spots above where Underwood's OSU team was. And the supposed improvement that his OSU team had when he changed styles was largely related to the quality of competition, and an increase in offensive efficiency that was likely unrelated to the defense. This narrative needs to die.

 

[goillini30]

Is there evidence that the bolded statement is true? And is there evidence that there's some other style out there that would allow a team with 1.5 post players and a bunch of freshmen to play defense at an elite level?

Our defense this year is not where it needs to be, but in terms of adjusted efficiency it's roughly where Nevada was last year, and about 40 spots above where Underwood's OSU team was. And the supposed improvement that his OSU team had when he changed styles was largely related to the quality of competition, and an increase in offensive efficiency that was likely unrelated to the defense. This narrative needs to die.

I don't think this roster could ever have an elite defense, but could it be middle of the pack if we weren't giving up wide open layups and free throws? I think so, but that is clearly just my opinion.

 

[goillini30]

I thought he was getting paid a bunch of money for building a program that after a few years time allowed to be built, would consistently rank in the top 25, make the dance every year, and have big success in the tourney every few years. My bad.

Ha, yeah, that last sentence came off more aggressive than I intended, should've proof read I guess. I'm not out on the BU era or anything, I've just been disappointed in his stubbornness to not try to adjust his style to the realities of the roster.

 

[dbeverly26]

I don't think this roster could ever have an elite defense, but could it be middle of the pack if we weren't giving up wide open layups and free throws? I think so, but that is clearly just my opinion.

Yeah, it's unknowable. It looks like my opinion isn't in the mainstream, at least here...

Just out of curiosity, what would you consider a middle of the pack defense? We have a bad defense by major conference standards, but that still puts us in front of about 240 teams or so. I'd like to see this team improve about 20 spots on both sides of the ball for this season, which should land us around where most of the NIT teams would be. I don't think we'll win enough games to get in due to the schedule, but I'd feel better if we were right there, and if all of our key pieces returned for next year.

It's been really tough separating the progress and performance of this team from the wins and losses. Given the circumstances I feel like it's appropriate to do so, but I can understand why folks are unimpressed.

 

[Deleted member 643761]

People who preach "rebuilding" don't even understand what rebuilding in basketball means.

First, we were an NIT team pretty much for the entire previous coaching regime and we all thought it was not enough. The goal was talking an NIT team and making it a consistent NCAA team. That does not necessitate driving the program to the bottom before supposedly commencing some miraculous ascend.

Second, and more importantly, rebuilding in basketball takes players with consistent recruiting and infusion of talent. Is recruiting going well? C'mon... consistent good recruiting does not mean consistently bad fall (and even empty) classes, it does not mean taking wild shots in the Spring and running out of scholarships, it does not mean that the majority of your own recruits (Smith, Alstork, Vesel, Ebo, Higgs, Kane... or even Jones and De La Rosa currently) do not pan out.

Rebuilding means consistency, and consistency does not mean just hitting a good season when we make the NCAA like we have done in the past (2012-13, 2008-09, etc.) under the previous regimes that failed. Some fans who preach "rebuilding" are just blindly hoping for that, which I believe may indeed happen with Frazier/Ayo in the next couple of years. But what are the elements of "rebuilding" beyond that? Talent infusion? Recruiting? The state of the program right now (beyond the losses) does not indicate real elements of rebuilding.

Of course, we can ignore all that and we can all blindly preach "patience" and "rebuilding," it is only year 2. We may eventually hit an NCAA tournament season and we can all celebrate, maybe even raise a banner "Made NCAA Tournament."

Will preaching impatience some how help?

By definition nothing happening in the Underwood era is consistent or inconsistent. It's less than two years.

Funny how you give just two reasons for developing consistency. Talent infusion and recruiting which are essentially the same thing.

Some of us believe we might have a superior coach and perhaps might see good player development.

 

[Deleted member 643761]

This only works if the players stick around. Underwood's system isnt something that is learned in 1 season. In order for this thing to work he needs to start keeping guys around. Losing so many last yr did not help matters any. Imagine this team with Leron and even Finke. We would be a lot better. This team is young and its going to take another year to really start seeing results as long as nobody of importance jumps ship.

Juwan evans learned it in one season.

Experience matters and helps every system. But if our topfreshmen can't be expected to perform because our offensr and defense can't be picked up then I'd dump Underwood.

Of course that's not the case and it can be learned effectively in a season.

 

[Deleted member 643761]

Through his first 6 games in an Illini uniform he averaged 12ppg. It's not the offensive side of the ball that makes Mark a liability. That will be exposed when SEC conference play starts, just as it was last year when big 10 play started. He will be a good player, statistically, for Missouri, but if you give up as many as you score that's a problem.

Missouri dropped 55 points on Kennesaw state. That's just the pace to suit Mark Smith

 

[Obelix]

Will preaching impatience some how help?

By definition nothing happening in the Underwood era is consistent or inconsistent. It's less than two years.

Funny how you give just two reasons for developing consistency. Talent infusion and recruiting which are essentially the same thing.

Some of us believe we might have a superior coach and perhaps might see good player development.

As I have said over and over again, strong recruiting is a necessary but not sufficient condition. Other factors such as chemistry, player development, etc. can help, but the major problem is that "necessary" element.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion of Underwood as a superior coach and others have portrayed him as a master of player development and the genius of system that will outsmart and outperform other excellent coaches in the B1G and around the country but as said before I have not honestly seen any justification of those claims yet.

 

[alaskaillini]

Juwan evans learned it in one season.

Experience matters and helps every system. But if our topfreshmen can't be expected to perform because our offensr and defense can't be picked up then I'd dump Underwood.

Of course that's not the case and it can be learned effectively in a season.

It takes more than 1 player learning the system to make it work.

 

[alaskaillini]

As I have said over and over again, strong recruiting is a necessary but not sufficient condition. Other factors such as chemistry, player development, etc. can help, but the major problem is that "necessary" element.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion of Underwood as a superior coach and others have portrayed him as a master of player development and the genius of system that will outsmart and outperform other excellent coaches in the B1G and around the country but as said before I have not honestly seen any justification of those claims yet.

I think you are overstating the opinions of BUs supporters. The opinion was that he was an improvement over Groce who appeared to be lacking in the player development and scheme department. I don't think anyone had any illusions that he would fool all the other B1G coaches all the time, just some of them some of the time. We shall see.

 

[DudeIllini]

As I have said over and over again, strong recruiting is a necessary but not sufficient condition. Other factors such as chemistry, player development, etc. can help, but the major problem is that "necessary" element.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion of Underwood as a superior coach and others have portrayed him as a master of player development and the genius of system that will outsmart and outperform other excellent coaches in the B1G and around the country but as said before I have not honestly seen any justification of those claims yet.

So you want BU fired? Who do we hire that we can get and who has the recruiting prowess that you desire?

 

[IllFanInMi]

Will preaching impatience some how help?

By definition nothing happening in the Underwood era is consistent or inconsistent. It's less than two years.

Funny how you give just two reasons for developing consistency. Talent infusion and recruiting which are essentially the same thing.

Some of us believe we might have a superior coach and perhaps might see good player development.

IMO, balanced talent and chemistry are the most important factors to success in all sports. Are they the only factors? Obviously not, but I would bet my piggy bank that most coaches would tell you they are of utmost importance . Sure, great coaches can get teams to perform above expectations with less talent, or occasionally even make a miraculous run, but not consistently.

I would never claim Self, K, Calipiri, Izzo, etc. are overrated in terms of X’s and O’s, development, leadership, etc., but let’s be honest, they ALWAYS have superior talent and balance. A down talent year for them is most teams dream team. Many site Bo Ryan as an example of a coach who did great things with less talent, but his teams still had talent, he did a great job of development and coaching it to higher levels, so he to me is a good example of a coach that did more with less.

I have referenced a friend of mine who was Head Football Coach at Tennessee. He changed a lot of things their, culture, fan support, fundraising, Tennessee NFL alumni support, etc, BUT the one thing he KNEW WITHOUT A DOUBT is he had to recruit top talent and get NFL talent to come there. As a matter of fact, his measuring stick was how many NFL prospects did he have, it was a standard barometer used in the SEC.

BU must recruit the balanced B10 talent that fits his systems, without it, whether he is, or isn’t some mastermind strategist, player developer, etc probably won’t get him and this team to a level, he and Illinois Nation want.

 

[Deleted member 643761]

It takes more than 1 player learning the system to make it work.

Yes. And more than a month. But his osu team figured it out in a single season

 

[Deleted member 643761]

Obviously Jawun Evans was a McD AA and was the Freshman of the Year in B12 (before Underwood) despite missing more than month due to injury. Surely Zion Williamson and RJ Barrett picked up K's system right away, and I bet they would have no problem learning Underwood's system in the first month.

The whole team seemed to have figured it out

 

[skyIdub]

As I have said over and over again, strong recruiting is a necessary but not sufficient condition. Other factors such as chemistry, player development, etc. can help, but the major problem is that "necessary" element.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion of Underwood as a superior coach and others have portrayed him as a master of player development and the genius of system that will outsmart and outperform other excellent coaches in the B1G and around the country but as said before I have not honestly seen any justification of those claims yet.

 

[Obelix]

The whole team seemed to have figured it out

Brad Underwood's first (and only) season at Oklahoma State (2016-17) was eerily similar to Groce's first season at Illinois (2012-13). Both teams started well out of the gate (we won Maui and ended up 13-1 in pre-season), both teams really struggled at the beginning of their conference schedule (BU opened 0-6 in Bib12, Groce 2-7 in B1G), and both teams rallied to make the NCAA tournament (Illinois as a #7 seed, OSU as a #10 seed). Illinois advanced one more round but both ended their season playing very well with heartbreak losses (UI to Miami - the BAD call, OSU to Michigan). It is amazing how eerily similar those seasons were.

Does this mean that those players were executing superior systems and all those players on those rosters figured out the systems whereas players who followed did not have the intellectual ability to figure out the systems? Of course not. There are many reasons you can have a good season, you hit that right fit and chemistry, you can avoid some positional gaps, some players may surprise, etc. But it does not mean that you have a superior system and somehow players do not "get it" anymore, or that you have built a consistent winner.

Consistency (not just having a good season) requires talent, and when you have some huge gaps like our frontcourt, your overall system will not look good. Even when some players or elements are OK, it affects the overall product and takes a toll on the whole team. It's a team sport, it's like an orchestra, if some performers can't perform, it affects the whole product. Even under other great coaches and systems, our current team would have severe limitations.

I do not consider BU a superior coach with a superior system, there are many great coaches and systems and we will be regularly competing against as we have already. But I have nothing against BU's system, I have actually said many times that I like his system. But without upgrading the talent on the roster and closing some of those huge gaps (e.g., frontcourt), posters will likely keep complaining that our players do not get it. Or at best, hit a good season here and there, but never build a consistent B1G winner.

 

[Epsilon]

View attachment 3831

I have been wondering how to think about this ratio in the larger context of a pass denial defense. On one hand, we give up a lot of easy points, but on the other hand we also have the best turnover +/-. Is there a ratio or stat out there that better captures effective defense, considering a team's style on a holistic basis (aside from total points allowed).

 

[Epsilon]

Wouldn't that be Kenpom? Points per possession adjusted to SOS. He has us at 119.

Thank you. That makes sense. Still a lot of room for improvement.

 

[Deleted member 8632]

Brad Underwood's first (and only) season at Oklahoma State (2016-17) was eerily similar to Groce's first season at Illinois (2012-13). Both teams started well out of the gate (we won Maui and ended up 13-1 in pre-season), both teams really struggled at the beginning of their conference schedule (BU opened 0-6 in Bib12, Groce 2-7 in B1G), and both teams rallied to make the NCAA tournament (Illinois as a #7 seed, OSU as a #10 seed). Illinois advanced one more round but both ended their season playing very well with heartbreak losses (UI to Miami - the BAD call, OSU to Michigan). It is amazing how eerily similar those seasons were.

Does this mean that those players were executing superior systems and all those players on those rosters figured out the systems whereas players who followed did not have the intellectual ability to figure out the systems? Of course not. There are many reasons you can have a good season, you hit that right fit and chemistry, you can avoid some positional gaps, some players may surprise, etc. But it does not mean that you have a superior system and somehow players do not "get it" anymore, or that you have built a consistent winner.

Consistency (not just having a good season) requires talent, and when you have some huge gaps like our frontcourt, your overall system will not look good. Even when some players or elements are OK, it affects the overall product and takes a toll on the whole team. It's a team sport, it's like an orchestra, if some performers can't perform, it affects the whole product. Even under other great coaches and systems, our current team would have severe limitations.

I do not consider BU a superior coach with a superior system, there are many great coaches and systems and we will be regularly competing against as we have already. But I have nothing against BU's system, I have actually said many times that I like his system. But without upgrading the talent on the roster and closing some of those huge gaps (e.g., frontcourt), posters will likely keep complaining that our players do not get it. Or at best, hit a good season here and there, but never build a consistent B1G winner.

Were JG's seasons at Ohio "eerily similar" to BU's at S.F. Austin?

 

[Deleted member 643761]

Brad Underwood's first (and only) season at Oklahoma State (2016-17) was eerily similar to Groce's first season at Illinois (2012-13). Both teams started well out of the gate (we won Maui and ended up 13-1 in pre-season), both teams really struggled at the beginning of their conference schedule (BU opened 0-6 in Bib12, Groce 2-7 in B1G), and both teams rallied to make the NCAA tournament (Illinois as a #7 seed, OSU as a #10 seed). Illinois advanced one more round but both ended their season playing very well with heartbreak losses (UI to Miami - the BAD call, OSU to Michigan). It is amazing how eerily similar those seasons were.

Does this mean that those players were executing superior systems and all those players on those rosters figured out the systems whereas players who followed did not have the intellectual ability to figure out the systems? Of course not. There are many reasons you can have a good season, you hit that right fit and chemistry, you can avoid some positional gaps, some players may surprise, etc. But it does not mean that you have a superior system and somehow players do not "get it" anymore, or that you have built a consistent winner.

Consistency (not just having a good season) requires talent, and when you have some huge gaps like our frontcourt, your overall system will not look good. Even when some players or elements are OK, it affects the overall product and takes a toll on the whole team. It's a team sport, it's like an orchestra, if some performers can't perform, it affects the whole product. Even under other great coaches and systems, our current team would have severe limitations.

I do not consider BU a superior coach with a superior system, there are many great coaches and systems and we will be regularly competing against as we have already. But I have nothing against BU's system, I have actually said many times that I like his system. But without upgrading the talent on the roster and closing some of those huge gaps (e.g., frontcourt), posters will likely keep complaining that our players do not get it. Or at best, hit a good season here and there, but never build a consistent B1G winner.

You keep saying things like "Consistency requires talent" as if there are people who don't agree with the notion. Enough already. Most of us aren't incessantly saying the same thing because it's so damn obvious that none of us thinks it bears mentioning.

I don't believe that BU's system is superior. I pretty much don't buy into superior systems. But I do buy into superior coaching which is getting players to perform within the system chosen. I feel that BU may very well be that sort but I understand that the support for that hope is weak at this point.

I also believe that player development is not just about taking 2 stars and making them 3 stars and so on but rather it's making players perform within your system. I think that BU has shown a lot of promise in that regard.

I'd like to upgrade the talent in the front court of course. Hell, I'm up for upgrading it in the back court.

But in two classes he's gotten Kane, Giorgi, and January. I believe that is a solid group that is capable of being part of a strong NCAA tourney team. yes it would have been nice to get a blue chipper that was contributing in a bigger way right now, but this is now a group that can compete at a 8 seed level next year and the following 2.

 

[dbeverly26]

Wouldn't that be Kenpom? Points per possession adjusted to SOS. He has us at 119.

Yeah, I'd say that the opponent's points per possession is the stat that matters, and all of the other stats (FG%, turnovers, rebounds, etc.) are components of that. But what matters at the end is how many points you give up, with the pace of the game as vital context. Your opponent's PPP on offense provides necessary context as well.