Joel Goodson
- it's all ball bearings, nowadays
(IIRC,) $20M, which isn't exactly a drop of the hat. Even more so, considering he left in 2000.
2017 Coaching Carousel
- Status
(IIRC,) $20M, which isn't exactly a drop of the hat. Even more so, considering he left in 2000.
The voice of reason. I have seen teams turnaround with one player. I will agree that it is now inexcusable not to play TJL as our primary PG. DJ also needs more meaningful minutes. Not sure where we get more minutes for Kipper, but he deserves a chance as well.
I have to wonder where the minutes for JD will come from. Leron's return has affected that. Another player will be added to the roster soon, which will make a difference, too.
TheFameProtector
- Champaign
Man, really is sad that even just a week or two ago the "JFG" tag was still being thrown around with spunk. Tupper hit it on the head...rough week for Illini basketball and especially Groce.
Great points, and when he didn't land this type of class I knew we were in the hurt locker. That is why it is hard to gauge a coach on 4-5 year plans. You need a couple of years to make your recruiting connections than 2-3 years to see if those recruits pan out. Like others stated our talent is more on the offensive side. We have guys that can hit 3's and guys that can score inside. I believe ABER metrics is the basketball version of moneyball type metrics. We are probably not a good ABER metric team. Kris Bryant is a 5 tool baseball player, Big Papi is a 2 tool player. We have too many 2 tool players and need multi-functional guys that can dribble, shoot, pass, run/jump, and rebound.
Here are the 5 tools of basketball by Dre Baldwin:
1)Inside scoring around the basket/ at the rim. Layups, dunking, post moves. The high-percentage shots we all want.
2)Outside scoring/ shooting. This includes free throw shooting. These are your jumpshots, pull-up jumpers, 3-point baskets.
3)Ball Handling. This includes passing. Your dribbling, limiting turnovers, getting to spots on the floor using your handle.
4)Rebounding. When a shot misses, go get the damned ball. Boxing out, how well you retrieve loose balls.
5)Defense. Team defense and man-to-man D. Knowing your rotations; being in proper help position; closing out on shooters; playing tough D without fouling; staying in front of your man.
The 5 major individual stat categories are 1)scoring 2)rebounds 3)assist 4)steals and 5) Blocks
The NBA looks for these 5 tools 1) Create your own shot 2) Create shot for another player 3) Spot shooter 4) Rebound 5) Defend a position
A subset tool for these are things like player height, speed, max vertical, quick leaping.
As a team and individuals strength is probably spot shooting. But we found out this weekend our ability to dribble, score off the dribble, set up others, rebound, block, and steals were suspect. Regarding the subset tools we meet the height requirement, we can be long if we need to. But we are slow at some positions and lack the quick leaping. Who were noted 5 tool NBA players? Guys like Lebron, Scottie Pippen, and Dr. J are examples. Bottom line is that we have guys that are 1-2 tool players against top 25 teams. Hill is the closest one to a 3 tool player and we don't have enough complementary players to make us a 4-5 tool team (lack shot blockers, guards that steal the ball, good defenders and rebounders). TJL can possibly develop into a 3-4 tool player on the college level. We need to recruit and develop our players to close these gaps. If we can't get our 5 star players we need to get several guys that have 3-4 tools but also meet some of the other physical requirements (speed, quick leaping).
1)Inside scoring around the basket/ at the rim. Layups, dunking, post moves. The high-percentage shots we all want.
2)Outside scoring/ shooting. This includes free throw shooting. These are your jumpshots, pull-up jumpers, 3-point baskets.
3)Ball Handling. This includes passing. Your dribbling, limiting turnovers, getting to spots on the floor using your handle.
4)Rebounding. When a shot misses, go get the damned ball. Boxing out, how well you retrieve loose balls.
5)Defense. Team defense and man-to-man D. Knowing your rotations; being in proper help position; closing out on shooters; playing tough D without fouling; staying in front of your man.
The 5 major individual stat categories are 1)scoring 2)rebounds 3)assist 4)steals and 5) Blocks
The NBA looks for these 5 tools 1) Create your own shot 2) Create shot for another player 3) Spot shooter 4) Rebound 5) Defend a position
A subset tool for these are things like player height, speed, max vertical, quick leaping.
As a team and individuals strength is probably spot shooting. But we found out this weekend our ability to dribble, score off the dribble, set up others, rebound, block, and steals were suspect. Regarding the subset tools we meet the height requirement, we can be long if we need to. But we are slow at some positions and lack the quick leaping. Who were noted 5 tool NBA players? Guys like Lebron, Scottie Pippen, and Dr. J are examples. Bottom line is that we have guys that are 1-2 tool players against top 25 teams. Hill is the closest one to a 3 tool player and we don't have enough complementary players to make us a 4-5 tool team (lack shot blockers, guards that steal the ball, good defenders and rebounders). TJL can possibly develop into a 3-4 tool player on the college level. We need to recruit and develop our players to close these gaps. If we can't get our 5 star players we need to get several guys that have 3-4 tools but also meet some of the other physical requirements (speed, quick leaping).
Last edited:
I listened to part of the FSU game on the Illini network. In the 2 games in Brooklyn, Illinois was 9 for 40 from 3 point land. That will not cut it an against quality competition.
Tupper now sings a different tune than himself was singing just a few days ago, yet, more critical of players than the coaching staff. Shame...
Hey Tupp, didn't you write a column just a few days ago praising Tate? If you did not buy it, why did you write a separate article?
Good article from Robert: Macro
Robert compares Groce to Leonard Hamilton after attending their press conferences. Hamilton sees the forest while Groce sees the trees.
I couldn't agree more. One prime example is Groce's use of Tejon Lucas (or lack thereof). It's Groce's job to know that Tejon is ultimately a better option than Tate, and to give him plenty of minutes against the first four cupcakes so he can develop. Instead Groce looks at the micro and plays Tate only to be burned once we play better teams. It seems everybody except Groce knew this was going to happen.
Robert compares Groce to Leonard Hamilton after attending their press conferences. Hamilton sees the forest while Groce sees the trees.
I couldn't agree more. One prime example is Groce's use of Tejon Lucas (or lack thereof). It's Groce's job to know that Tejon is ultimately a better option than Tate, and to give him plenty of minutes against the first four cupcakes so he can develop. Instead Groce looks at the micro and plays Tate only to be burned once we play better teams. It seems everybody except Groce knew this was going to happen.
Hamilton is hardly the model of coaching, long term successful strategy, or preparation, he has a losing conference record in 14 years at FSU and he has not made the NCAA in 4 straight years. So his looking at the forest is not exactly working either.
Yes, Hamilton is not a great coach by any stretch, but I do think the point about Groce holds true.
It is not really a groundbreaking point to give Lucas more minutes than Tate, the point could be made without watching any of the Illini games, even in pre-season.
But the whole article of "Hamilton/macro vs. Groce/micro" is a failed attempt to make that point, when the example Robert picked (i.e., Hamilton) is a coach who has a losing conference record and has not made the NCAA in more consecutive years than Groce.
I don't think Robert was comparing credentials but only the difference in the answers. Robert agrees with Hamilton's way (regardless of whether Hamilton is good or not) and disagrees with Groce...especially for this team.
Joel Goodson
- it's all ball bearings, nowadays
They didn't. But they had significantly better athleticism and length than us.
It is not credentials, it is approach and use of examples. Hamilton was a really bad example, and his macro approach has not worked either. Results speak for themselves. Poorly researched IMO.
Groce is not doing well, really little to do with micro vs. macro when it comes to Tate/TJL. Tate has not worked in 4 years, he has limitations. I do not believe it is Tate's fault, Tate is hardly our problem IMO. Micro, macro, middle, half-micro, full-macro, etc. does not matter. TJL gives you a better chance, although I personally do not believe that TJL is the answer to our multiple problems.
To continue on a tangent, the craziest thing about the NIT was that Temple was the most impressive team...
Who predicted that one pre-tournament? I guess we are both interpreting it differently. The way I read that article, Robert wasn't saying Hamilton is necessarily good because of his approach, just that Hamilton's strategy is what Robert also would choose when it comes to getting players more experience/how to approach the season. It could have been Bill Self, Archie Miller, Pitino Jr., or Coach K up there saying it. It was just the philosophy he liked.
This is especially true in regards to TJL vs Tate or putting DJW in at some point. I'm guessing in an exact moment Tate might edge out TJL because of defense or some other reason (based on numbers) but getting TJL or DJW minutes now might keep guys fresh down the road and pay dividends in March. Groce's philosophy is to go 4 minutes at a time. Robert thinks he should step back and look at the whole season instead of each 4 minutes. Hamilton just happens to do it.
Regardless, TJL won't solve everything, you are right. And honestly, Tate should have simply not been getting much playing time in general. Groce made a bad call and now he's paying for it.
On a similiar note, Groce's teams (used to) peak at the end of the season. I wonder if that micro philosophy helped him perfect his line-up and that is what had his teams playing great ball at the end of the year at the expense of wins against good competition earlier on in the season?
I understand your point, but other than last year, Groce had been very good early on in November and pretty good towards the end. His teams generally tanked in the middle part of the schedule.
Personally, when it comes to TJL/Tate, I really can't see a macro/micro point. TJL gives you a better chance even today (see FSU game), so even if Groce is focused on micro (which IMO he should, as he is fighting for his life) he should still play TJL, although again, I am not convinced TJL is the long term answer at PG (not just in comparison to Tate).
Groce has been good at press-conferences and interviews, I never really read too much on what he has said as a major philosophical/strategy fault. He says all the right things, presents himself and UI well. That's the good news. Problem is that he is not a very good overall coach. JMO.
True and unfortunate. I know Groce deals a lot in stats and percentages. Maybe he uses those same metrics to decide who has earned playing time. Early on, Tate would probably be high in most categories. I mean, even his shooting is good in practice, he just rarely hits in a game.
That could be his undoing. Instead of taking a risk on TJL earlier, he used his numbers and gave Tate the nod based on that. TJL may not be the answer, but I hope he and Frazier together give us plenty of superior PG play for the next few years. (As long as Frazier still comes here...)
Yes, although IMO, Groce can completely change is philosophy on stats, micro/macro, freshmen/seniors, etc. and still would not make much difference. I think the question to be asked, is whether Groce is the right coach to return UI back to prominence (or even relevance - beggars can't be choosers).
After watching Groce for 5 years, I have lost all confidence that he is the right man for the job.
MountainmanMitch
- Where God lost his shoes
As a lifelong fan over 50, I want Coach Groce to succeed. My initial reaction to him was that he was "all hat and no cattle"...talked in cliches, slightly affected. I never found him to be as authentic as the rest of the posters on message boards. Now, full disclosure, I supported Coach Weber until the final year when it was clear he has lost the program. But that finals run earned him a long rope for me.
After Coach Groce got them within an eyelash of the S16 in his first season, I was ready to eat crow. Since that season, my initial reaction has returned to define him. I am not convinced he has the demeanor nor acumen to be an effective Division I coach.
However, I would support him getting another year with the 2017 recruits provided two things occur:
1) the wheels don't completely come off of this team and we show signs of improving.
2) Coach Groce makes changes to his staff, specifically bringing in a seasoned X and O's senior assistant who can game plan and manage substitution patterns.
In my heart of hearts, I don't think Coach Groce will succeed even with the incoming class and new staff members. But, I support giving it a shot.
After Coach Groce got them within an eyelash of the S16 in his first season, I was ready to eat crow. Since that season, my initial reaction has returned to define him. I am not convinced he has the demeanor nor acumen to be an effective Division I coach.
However, I would support him getting another year with the 2017 recruits provided two things occur:
1) the wheels don't completely come off of this team and we show signs of improving.
2) Coach Groce makes changes to his staff, specifically bringing in a seasoned X and O's senior assistant who can game plan and manage substitution patterns.
In my heart of hearts, I don't think Coach Groce will succeed even with the incoming class and new staff members. But, I support giving it a shot.
What does that mean record/performance wise?
Personally, if Groce makes the NIT, I think he survives, although I have lost confidence that he is the long term solution. Having said that, I have not seen anything from this team thus far that makes me believe that we make the NIT.
Joel Goodson
- it's all ball bearings, nowadays
Sadly, the evidence keeps growing. Groce really needs to stop the bleeding, and soon, to keep his job. And if losing this class is collateral damage, so be it.
We keep talking about Groce, but there is an experience team that needs to do some soul searching. I re-watched the game and saw players not helping on defense. It was more important for their player not to score than to rotate over and stop the player with the ball scoring. Saw this multiple times, and being "slow" wouldn't explain it. They received a beat down and I believe those players who will fight back are the one who will see more time.
- Status