Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#101      
ptgrd23
PepeSilvia said:
Realistically we only beat UCLA because Shannon went postal and went 8/9 from 3.
Click to expand...
I believe we beat UCLA because Sencire and Hawkins went crazy pressing full court when we were down 10 and turned it into a lead. TSJ 3 pointers put the nail in the coffin. It took both to beat them. We held UCLA to 39% shooting while we shot 50%. We had 19 assists.

for the season Illinois averaged 12.5 apg and 45% shooting. So it was definitely one of our best games.
 
#102      
Big Jack
Combo said:
The few times Ty tried to bring the ball up the court last year, his handles looked pretty bad.
Click to expand...
Maybe I wasn't fully paying attention but did he look inexperienced yes, but he was forced to play that position during the B1G season not from the beginning of the season. His ball handling was decent and should be better with time spent in the gym. Hopefully Brad or Geoff creates some fluid play to utilize others to assist when needed..

Playing PG should not limit his ability to rebound. Never stopped Ayo , Trent or Dre. Just a matter of effort and making sure some one covers the opponents PG on missed rebounds. Also lets keep in mind he should have a munch smaller guard trying to keep him.off of the boards.
 
#103      
illiniballknower
BashCtIllini said:
Can't agree with this, and the main reason is, in almost every game we had at least a 10 min stretch where we looked like the best team in the nation.

The team didn't appear to like each other, they certainly didn't gel on the court, the offense looked horrible because it wasn't being run properly, but the talent was absolutely there. That really can't be denied.

To be real honest, they looked like a poorly coached team.
Click to expand...
Was the offensive talent there? You had Terrence and Matt and then...... Coleman over the last two years is only at 12 points per 40 minutes on a little over 52 TS%, not great. Dain was great to start the year but tapered off towards the end. RJ's handles never really improved so he was relegated to a spot up shooter that didn't hit shots. Skyy was a turnover machine and Jayden's shot struggled massively in B10 play. Ty and Sencire were bad offensive players. I just don't think they had a lot of good offensive players last year.
 
#104      
illini0440
ptgrd23 said:
I am surprised they took Nico if they did not think he could contribute. He is the only true PG on the team plus it sounds like he has a reasonable outside shot.

JMO but PG has to have decent handles and ability to feed others. We have solid offense talent on this team. Dain in the paint. TSJ and Luke can hit open 3 pointers. Ty is a beast on the offensive boards. Marcus averaged 17 ppg at SIU. If Nico can run the offense and get people open shots he should play.
Click to expand...
@Indy Illini Fan
 
#105      
fulton steamer
ptgrd23 said:
I am surprised they took Nico if they did not think he could contribute. He is the only true PG on the team plus it sounds like he has a reasonable outside shot.

JMO but PG has to have decent handles and ability to feed others. We have solid offense talent on this team. Dain in the paint. TSJ and Luke can hit open 3 pointers. Ty is a beast on the offensive boards. Marcus averaged 17 ppg at SIU. If Nico can run the offense and get people open shots he should play.
Click to expand...
I think that's pretty much everyone on the planet's opinion.
 
#106      
FightinIllini30
I think Ty Rodgers could end up being a solid offensive playmaker as a PG… but I am being quite optimistic which is not this boards style.

Also, can someone explain to me why he can’t be a beast on the boards while playing the 1? I’m genuinely asking because I can’t help but feel like those two things do not have to be mutually exclusive.
 
#107      
Second place is 1st loser
FightinIllini30 said:
I think Ty Rodgers could end up being a solid offensive playmaker as a PG… but I am being quite optimistic which is not this boards style.

Also, can someone explain to me why he can’t be a beast on the boards while playing the 1? I’m genuinely asking because I can’t help but feel like those two things do not have to be mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...
If he's going to the boards, there's a good chance that 1)he's not going be be able to get back in transition on defense and 2)they won't be able to get in transition themselves on offense.

The PG is responsible for SO much....rebounding isn't on the critical list of to - dos
 
#108      
Illini90
3ED2DF10-1AB3-4012-85E6-C40BECF3C0E1.jpeg

For the “Illini don’t have any open scholarships crowd” there’s always a way
 
#110      
Combo
Second place is 1st loser said:
If he's going to the boards, there's a good chance that 1)he's not going be be able to get back in transition on defense and 2)they won't be able to get in transition themselves on offense.

The PG is responsible for SO much....rebounding isn't on the critical list of to - dos
Click to expand...
Agree. Rebounds are nice for a PG, but they're way down the list of what's important. And if your PG is concentrating too much on boards, it's really hard to do other more important things (again for a PG).

While traditional PG duties and rebounds don't have to be mutually exclusive, as a practical matter, they frequently are to some degree.
 
Last edited:
#116      
dwpittman
One Man Fast Break said:
USA defeated Canada 118-36 in the FIBA U16 Americas Championship yesterday. Wow. That group of 2007 born American players looks awfully impressive. Won't be surprised to see a number of those guys bypass college all together for G League Ignite or what not.
Click to expand...
Isn't the Canadian basketball team just the kids that couldn't make the hockey team?;)
 
#122      
PepeSilvia
Combo said:
Agree. Rebounds are nice for a PG, but they're way down the list of what's important. And if your PG is concentrating too much on boards, it's really hard to do other more important things (again for a PG).

While traditional PG duties and rebounds don't have to be mutually exclusive, as a practical matter, they frequently are to some degree.
Click to expand...
Plenty of the best point guards of all time were terrific rebounders. If a guard gets a rebound and puts the ball on the floor quickly you don't have to look for an outlet pass immediately and can just start a fast break while opening up some longer stretch passes.

Just look at prime Russel Westbrook basically averaging a triple double and being a one man fast break. Likewise Rondo, Jason Kidd, and Magic Johnson were very good on the glass.

As far as crashing the offensive boards putting you out of position to get back defensively. That responsibility is generally whoever ends up at the top of the key when the shot goes up so it's no necessarily the point guard.
 
#123      
Combo
PepeSilvia said:
Plenty of the best point guards of all time were terrific rebounders. If a guard gets a rebound and puts the ball on the floor quickly you don't have to look for an outlet pass immediately and can just start a fast break while opening up some longer stretch passes.

Just look at prime Russel Westbrook basically averaging a triple double and being a one man fast break. Likewise Rondo, Jason Kidd, and Magic Johnson were very good on the glass.

As far as crashing the offensive boards putting you out of position to get back defensively. That responsibility is generally whoever ends up at the top of the key when the shot goes up so it's no necessarily the point guard.
Click to expand...
As I said, there’s nothing bad about the PG getting rebounds (especially with all the long rebounds you have nowadays). It’s nice if he can. But it’s way way down the list of things you need/want from a PG.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back