Mark Smith transferring from Illinois

[doowink]

C'mon folks. We're obviously all entitled to our opinions, but how bout we just take the high road and not berate an 18 year old kid and make assumptions for which we have little or no data. For all we know, he may have wanted to stay and his parents counseled him to leave. Or BU could've asked him to leave for any number of reasons. We really don't have any reliable information one way or the other. So instead of kicking a kid while he's potentially down, let's just learn our lessons as a program/fandom and move on.

I for one (like many here), wish he had stayed, thought he had potential and a high ceiling. But at the same time, I understand the reasons for leaving just on the surface on things given our roster situation and playing style (again, not knowing any real details).

Oh well, wish him the best. Moving on.

Well said...wish him nothing but the best....hope all works out for him...good things usually happen to good people

 

[orangem]

I've read none of this thread, so apologies if this doesn't flow with recent posts, but I have to vent about the reaction of some our "fans" to Mark leaving.

<rant>

First of all, Mark Smith needs to make the decision that's best for him. He doesn't owe the university or its fans anything. If Mark feels it isn't going to work for him here and he's willing to sit out a year for a fresh start, so be it. For our "fans" to then call a 19 year old kid a "quitter" and "soft" and belittle him (especially on Twitter) is disgraceful. It's also totally counterproductive! Do you think our current recruits look at that and think "Wow, that's a fanbase I want to represent!"

If you feel like Mark should have put his head down and stuck it out, I get it. But look at it from his point of view. He was sold by our coaching staff on coming in and being the starting PG and leader of this team. However, it was clear from the first game of the season that he was never going to play PG in this system (even before Trent emerged). Now did Mark adjust well to that? No—and that's on him—but there's also little doubt in my mind that our staff told him what he wanted to hear to get him, with little intention of actually following through.

How would you feel if you were recruited for a new job and your employer sweet-talked you by telling you that you'll have a senior role with X, Y, and Z benefits. Then you start working and find out your being asked to fill a totally different role. I know I'd be pissed and start looking for a new job! Why do we ask athletes—especially amateur student-athletes—to do anything different?

Wake up folks, this is today's college basketball. Coaches ask players to leave, players tell coaches they're leaving. There's more player movement than ever before, and IMO it's not necessarily a bad thing (do we not live in a free market economy?). And guess what, we'll likely benefit from a player transferring to us from another program. Will we criticize him for his lack of loyalty to his previous program? I bet not.

</rant>

TownieMatt, I agree with almost everything you're saying except your attack on the staff that they had little intention of following through on big plans for MS. MS began the year as a starter, and he kept getting substantial playing time long after his lack of production would have dictated minimal minutes if the staff did not intend to give him every opportunity.

 

[LBZ]

but there's also little doubt in my mind that our staff told him what he wanted to hear to get him, with little intention of actually following through.

How would you feel if you were recruited for a new job and your employer sweet-talked you by telling you that you'll have a senior role with X, Y, and Z benefits. Then you start working and find out your being asked to fill a totally different role. I know I'd be pissed and start looking for a new job! Why do we ask athletes—especially amateur student-athletes—to do anything different?


</rant>

Agree with the entire rant minus this part as it assumes he was lied to. How he was recruited or those conversations were between the coaching staff & Mark. Mark also wanted to be the guy that stayed at his home state school. Which is great! Though really do not suspect his recruitment was the sort that required a bottle of snake oil. But again, his recruitment conversations were private & to assume anything is wrong.

I wish MS & his family nothing but the best going forward.

 

[Andy Kaufman]

I hate to see this but it is probably best for all concerned. On the plus side it opens a scholarship for BU to go get a player better suited to his up tempo program. Good luck to Mark.

 

[Kathy]

Knight would lose a player a year from his coaching style.

Disappointed Smith couldn't stick it out and try to improve his game to fit into the system.

I'm okay with that if it translates to the same winning percentage he had at Indiana.

 

[Deleted member 3875]

Tubby Smith says hello.

 

[LisaMarie]

I understand the point, and its a good one. However, I find the criticism of BU's sideline demeanor very similar to the old Bears fan criticism of Lovie Smith being too stoic on the sideline. The old, "fire and passion" argument. "Lovie is a bad coach because he is too laid back, he needs more fire, he needs to yell more.." To me it was overly simplistic and was an easy reason to point to after a bad season. Just like the "Underwood is too intense, and he is losing the kids, he needs to lighten up, be more supportive etc..." Too simplistic, very easy, but probably not really the answer. There is so much more to a coach than what we see on the sideline during games. IMO, fans really can't make effective judgments like this unless they have a level of access greater than the average supporter.

I agree with the poster below that as long as your personality/style/demeanor is in the fat part of the bell curve it probably won’t be much of an issue. And with the other poster who noted that it’s a market and it will work itself out.

I will admit to having preconceived notions about Underwood from commentary his tournament runs at SFA, which focused on how hard his teams practiced, like having a hard practice the morning of their game against ND. (They lost.) I wondered at the time how that would play at a high major. We’ll see. I’m looking forward to next season.

 

[TownieMatt]

TownieMatt, I agree with almost everything you're saying except your attack on the staff that they had little intention of following through on big plans for MS. MS began the year as a starter, and he kept getting substantial playing time long after his lack of production would have dictated minimal minutes if the staff did not intend to give him every opportunity.

From what I understand about Mark's recruitment, he was told he would play PG. That never happened—even before Trent broke out. Now maybe it wasn't the staff's intention to play him off the ball when they recruited him, but looking at the roster, it was the obvious move.

When it comes to PT, you're absolutely right. I actually think the staff gave Mark far more playing time than he deserved (advanced stats suggest he should have been an end-of-the-bench guy and he was getting starts even late in the year). I think the goal was to give him every chance to break out while playing off the ball and hope it would enough to keep him happy.

In the end, I think the staff deserves blame for selling a recruit on a role that he was never given a chance to play—and Mark deserves blame for not adjusting to a new role for the good of the team.

 

[BWilson25]

Just HAVE to BLAME somebody.

Guess what? Sometimes things just don't work out...

 

[haasi]

From what I understand about Mark's recruitment, he was told he would play PG. That never happened—even before Trent broke out. Now maybe it wasn't the staff's intention to play him off the ball when they recruited him, but looking at the roster, it was the obvious move.

In the end, I think the staff deserves blame for selling a recruit on a role that he was never given a chance to play—and Mark deserves blame for not adjusting to a new role for the good of the team.

+1. I also believe that this was the reason we pulled it out over Kentucky Duke and MSU- he wanted the ball in his hands and a feature role. They wouldn’t tell him that, obviously. We did. That fit in with what he and his dad wanted. Obviously, expectations weren’t met- on either side.

I think he could have had that role if he could have demonstrated he was suited to it, but he showed that he was nowhere close (at this point) in terms of vision, quickness, and ability to create for himself and others.

If we promised him the opportunity to play PG immediately - and it’s my understanding that we did - it was either that we sold him a bill of goods to get him to commit (with the intent that he would probably play primarily off ball) or that our evaluation of him way off base. I tend to think it was the latter- no bad faith, just unsatisfactory scouting of him, not surprising given that he completely dominated the competition at Edwardsville


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GForce]

From what I understand about Mark's recruitment, he was told he would play PG. That never happened—even before Trent broke out. Now maybe it wasn't the staff's intention to play him off the ball when they recruited him, but looking at the roster, it was the obvious move.

When it comes to PT, you're absolutely right. I actually think the staff gave Mark far more playing time than he deserved (advanced stats suggest he should have been an end-of-the-bench guy and he was getting starts even late in the year). I think the goal was to give him every chance to break out while playing off the ball and hope it would enough to keep him happy.

In the end, I think the staff deserves blame for selling a recruit on a role that he was never given a chance to play—and Mark deserves blame for not adjusting to a new role for the good of the team.

We don't know what went on in practice. Maybe they kept trying him at PG, but others on the team were clearly ahead of him.

 

[Johnny Lawrence]

I think Underwood is close to a Bobby Knight type coach. I am hoping he don't lose it like Knight did. When you are that close to going over the line all the time mistakes can easily be made. You get more bees with honey and many of these bees watch these games and coaching techniques.

I thought the saying was "You can catch flies with honey but you can catch more honeys being fly."

 

[Kathy]

+1. I also believe that this was the reason we pulled it out over Kentucky Duke and MSU- he wanted the ball in his hands and a feature role. They wouldn’t tell him that, obviously. We did. That fit in with what he and his dad wanted. Obviously, expectations weren’t met- on either side.

I think he could have had that role if he could have demonstrated he was suited to it, but he showed that he was nowhere close (at this point) in terms of vision, quickness, and ability to create for himself and others.

If we promised him the opportunity to play PG immediately - and it’s my understanding that we did - it was either that we sold him a bill of goods to get him to commit (with the intent that he would probably play primarily off ball) or that our evaluation of him way off base. I tend to think it was the latter- no bad faith, just unsatisfactory scouting of him, not surprising given that he completely dominated the competition at Edwardsville


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You don't know what was told to him, so this is just speculation. Pretty definitive to be speculating.

 

[TownieMatt]

You don't know what was told to him, so this is just speculation. Pretty definitive to be speculating.

If you think we landed Mark Smith over UK and MSU without telling him he would have the ball in his hands and a feature role...

...we did.

 

[UofI08]

I don't know. I don't think you can blame a staff that gave the kid more opportunities than, quite frankly, he deserved. He had a starting spot in an offense that can use multiple point guards at the same time. Natural PGs can command an offense even if they are on the floor with another PG. He was given every opportunity and then some.

 

[BWilson25]

I'm starting to wonder if certain posters even watched our games this season.

 

[haasi]

You don't know what was told to him, so this is just speculation. Pretty definitive to be speculating.

No, not speculation. Everyone (him, his dad, underwood, reporters, etc.) on record saying having the ball in his hands and playing PG was a primary factor in his recruitment and that Illini told him they saw him as PG. Some examples:

He added that UK and Michigan State see him as more of a combo guard, while Illinois and Ohio State view him as strictly a point guard.

http://www.kentucky.com/sports/college/kentucky-sports/uk-basketball-men/article145022884.html

Illinois' Mr. Basketball, Mark Smith, is closing in on a college decision,... “I feel like I'm better with the ball in my hands as a point guard”

https://www.aseaofblue.com/platform...th-not-far-college-decision-duke-entering-mix

Led by new coach Brad Underwood, Illinois is the home-state option.
“I like Coach Underwood,” Smith told the Herald-Leader. “I feel like he’s going to do good things there. They said I would have the ball in my hands a lot and be able to make plays. And they’re bringing in good players.

http://www.zagsblog.com/2017/04/19/duke-set-home-2017-guard-mark-smith/


Right after he committed:

“He’s a future point guard. There’s no question about that,” Underwood said. “He can play a lot of places, but most importantly, he's a point guard”

http://www.bnd.com/sports/high-school/prep-basketball/article147100034.html





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TownieMatt]

No, not speculation. Everyone (him, his dad, underwood, reporters, etc.) on record saying having the ball in his hands and playing PG was a primary factor in his recruitment and that Illini told him they saw him as PG. Some examples:




http://www.kentucky.com/sports/college/kentucky-sports/uk-basketball-men/article145022884.html


https://www.aseaofblue.com/platform...th-not-far-college-decision-duke-entering-mix



http://www.zagsblog.com/2017/04/19/duke-set-home-2017-guard-mark-smith/


Right after he committed:


http://www.bnd.com/sports/high-school/prep-basketball/article147100034.html





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's, uhhhhhhhh, not a good look for Brad.

 

[bombayIllini]

I recall an interview (IIRC with Lucas), where he said that Mark was "large" (IIRC) and implied he has difficulty moving quickly (quick enough for B10 games). Nothing negative, just an observation.

Mark Smith struggled.

 

[haasi]

Mark Smith to transfer

Given the above - there can’t be any legitimate dispute we recruited him on premise that he’d be PG and have ball in his hands. Now the question is whether we were lying to him or just poorly scouted him, and I think it’s probably more of column B than column A. He played meh competition in HS, we all thought he was awesome and could probably make the jump to college PG, and BU thought that even if he had freshman growing pains, he could eventually get there. The biggest misperception here by BU may actually have been that he figured that even if Smith had a rough time to begin with, Smith would have the mindset to power through the difficulties and develop the skills he needed to play both on and off ball - which he clearly wasn’t signed on for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JFGsCoffeeMug]

Given the above - there can’t be any legitimate dispute we recruited him on premise that he’d be PG and have ball in his hands. Now the question is whether we were lying to him or just poorly scouted him, and I think it’s probably more of column B than column A. He played meh competition in HS, we all thought he was awesome and could probably make the jump to college PG, and BU thought that even if he had freshman growing pains, he could eventually get there. The biggest misperception here by BU may actually have been that he figured that even if Smith had a rough time to begin with, Smith would have the mindset to power through the difficulties and develop the skills he needed to play both on and off ball - which he clearly wasn’t signed on for.

I get that Mark Smith wanted--and expected--to have the ball in his hands. That's what he's familiar with. That's what he's comfortable with. But once you have the ball in your hands, you need to know what to do with it. And if you don't make the right decisions, and you don't demonstrate that you can adapt to run the system the coach wants to put into place, then you can't expect the ball to stay in your hands.

That sounds like a fit problem to me, so I'll take MS at his word on the reason behind his transfer.

 

[haasi]

I get that Mark Smith wanted--and expected--to have the ball in his hands. That's what he's familiar with. That's what he's comfortable with. But once you have the ball in your hands, you need to know what to do with it. And if you don't make the right decisions, and you don't demonstrate that you can adapt to run the system the coach wants to put into place, then you can't expect the ball to stay in your hands.



That sounds like a fit problem to me, so I'll take MS at his word on the reason behind his transfer.

Just in case not clear, I agree with all of what you said. I just think that when we told him he’d be PG, we probably hadn’t adequately taken stock of his game. It was probably a combo of wishful thinking about his game and desperation - being willing to say anything to get him to commit, when program was in flux, ppl were leaving, and we needed to make a big splash.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[UofI08]

I get that Mark Smith wanted--and expected--to have the ball in his hands. That's what he's familiar with. That's what he's comfortable with. But once you have the ball in your hands, you need to know what to do with it. And if you don't make the right decisions, and you don't demonstrate that you can adapt to run the system the coach wants to put into place, then you can't expect the ball to stay in your hands.

That sounds like a fit problem to me, so I'll take MS at his word on the reason behind his transfer.

Exactly.

Also, he was a true freshman. There's still a decent chance he'll turn into a good PG, and it could've easily happened here. It's not like Underwood has some master plan of lying to recruits. Let's use a little common sense. If you're the coach at Illinois and your top competition is Duke, Kentucky, and MSU, you sure better be using the playing time, ball in your hands, recruiting pitch.

 

[haasi]

Exactly.



Also, he was a true freshman. There's still a decent chance he'll turn into a good PG, and it could've easily happened here. It's not like Underwood has some master plan of lying to recruits. Let's use a little common sense. If you're the coach at Illinois and your top competition is Duke, Kentucky, and MSU, you sure better be using the playing time, ball in your hands, recruiting pitch.

Yup. No way he would have come if we didn’t overpromise a bit. Nothing wrong with that - just the risk it backfires when it turns out he can’t do the job you sold him on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ScottHall72]

Whatever happened to competition and the best man wins?
Lucas won the starting PG position, Frazier eventually blew past Lucas and Smith. Lucas had a timeout, got his mind right, came back and earned his way back into the starting lineup.
Smith had plenty of opportunity to show what he had.
Illinois would not have won a Big Ten game if Underwood had "put the ball in Smith's hands" and let him be the starting PG all year.