Illini Basketball 2024-2025 Team Grade

[lstewart53x3]

In various threads, we’ve talked a lot about how we all view this past season. So I figured I’d give everyone the chance to vote.

I chose a B grade for this season and here’s why:

1. After graduating 5 seniors last year, one All-American and another First Team All B1G, then losing another 6 guys to the transfer portal, we all knew this season was going to be a total rebuild.

2. I don’t blame Brad all that much for losing guys to the transfer portal. Resources must be allocated. Money for Dain might mean not enough money for Will, etc. And I’m not too sure we would have been all that much better with the transfers instead of the guys we got.

3. I do blame the staff for the miss evaluations of Booth and Ben. I understand transfers are not a sure thing. Self missed on Storr. Sean missed on Maddox. Misses happen. But had we passed on Ben and replaced him with an actual sharpshooter or a defensive stopper (hey Ty), that could have helped this season.

I also blame Brad for not fixing the defense in the off-season or getting the right defensive guy in place. With how bad our defense was to end last, that should have been a higher priority coming into this season. Either through retaining and recruiting defensive minded players or through bringing in a defensive minded coach.

4. Based on pre-season expectations, I believe expectations were met. This was a pre-season #26 team in the AP Poll and #23 team in KenPom, who will finish #17 in KenPom.

5. I also take injuries and illness into account when grading the season. While I don’t love a 6 seed, I truly believe we would have been a 3-4 seed had we been healthy all year.

6. For me, had we made the S16, I would have given this season an A. I don’t want to overly grade the season on just one game, but the way we went out left a sour taste in my mouth, like I’m sure it did for a lot of you.

So I’ll grade this season a B, met expectations, but did not surpass them.

 

[GrayGhost77]

I gave it a B, as well. Considering the insane roster turnover and having to gel as a team with so many newcomers is a monumental task. Unfortunate bouts of sickness also hampered our ability to do just that. I can't give it an "A", though, because in-game adjustments and game planning (mostly defensively) and development left a little to be desired. That's on the staff, and I feel like it held us back a little from what our true potential was as a team, even with all the setbacks. But still, nabbing a 6 seed and winning a game in the tourney being considered a "down" year is just incredible and that's directly a result of Brad and what he's been able to do so I can't give anything less than a B here.

 

[mysterio2525]

Grade C

Won 20 games and made NCAA tourney which should be the floor

Getting sick and battling injuries hurt the team and that sucks but that's life. Not doing more in the big ten or big ten tourney hurts the grade. A win against Kentucky changes a lot.The margin in this business is razor thin and I'm not gonna make excuses because that's why they get paid top 10 money. Also starting and playing humrichous that much was atrocious.

Went from get old stay old to Gerber fresh. If you do that you better win right away. If we retain tomi, morez, kylan, and Tre then you can use this as a foundational year and I'll be less harsh. Overall do like that the team and culture is improving and set up for next year. But until I see those players return for sure then I don't know. It's portal time and nothing is guaranteed.

 

[GatorMcKlusky]

Where did we rank in the Big Ten in terms of NIL payola?

 

[IMPE Legend]

Very hard team to give a blanket grade to. Almost have to do it game by game as they appeared to be a different team half the time. Health, unfamiliarity, and youth were a lot to overcome. Confusing team

 

[redwingillini11]

Agree on the B. There's some good stuff in there and they largely met expectations. However, you can't look at that stretch in the middle of the season and not deduct points for it. It gave them a lower seed in the B1G tournament (making them play a tough team in Maryland) and in the NCAA Tournament (making them play a team like Kentucky in the second round). There are some really bad losses on that schedule, and you just can't give them an A in light of that.

But overall it was a "positive" season. Therefore, B.

 

[Illini_Rich]

I’m going with a C. I get all of the minutia ie roster turnover, injuries etc, but in the big picture I expect a top 5/6 BIG finish and a tournament birth every year at a minimum. I would also expect a 2nd weekend run every 2-3 years. So how I see it this team hit the minimum so it feels average to me.

 

[WeWillWhen]

Brad’s roster. Brad’s staff. Brad’s scheme. Eight years into his tenure, and with Top 10 in the nation facilities, coach salary and (rumored) NIL, results should be better than seventh place in the B1G and a first weekend exit to a first-year coach with a 100% new roster.

I grade it a C. Demand excellence.

 

[Grandpa]

Thanks for the opportunity to share and see what others think. Please do this again after every season and in the comments post the previous results. It would be fun.
I went with a B. I don't believe that they were put in the best position to win consistently.

Edit: After reading the comments from the guys who went with C, I understand and would have put a minus after the B if it had been available.

 

[Illwinsagain]

I went with a C. Made the tourney, top half of B1G, enough talent that let us dream. Some very high highs, but the low lows were terrible. I am not taking into account how hard it was to replace nearly an entire team. Just evaluating the team that was here. Just like next year, I won't be downgrading if we happen to bring back 5 or 6 of this years team.

 

[wpr]

I gave them a C. Like mysterio2525 said, winning 20 games, making the NCAA is the floor. I will add winning a game as well.
Injuries and illnesses happen to every team. That can not be a crutch. There is a reason teams have a bench. Next man up. I accept the fact that the 8th man will not be as good as the 3rd or 4th man on the team but it is still not an excuse.
What I really want to do is lower their score because of the offense they ran. I have harped on it enough but there is no reason to ran an offense where they come up court, pass the ball a couple of times and then jake up a three that clangs off the rim. Hoping for the rebound. A junior high coach can come up with that game plan. Having a three point percent that puts them over 300 is inexcusable. Turnovers as well put them at the bottom of D1.
Having the 91st defense defending any field goal is terrible.

 

[Bucktown]

Voted a C(+), but if there is some carryover and stability to next year that leads to success, then I can see upgrading to a B as part of the 2-year plan.

An A grade would mean a banner of some kind.

No B because we underperformed expectations on nearly every metric...7th place in Big Ten, blow out loss in Big Ten tournament, no real signature non-conference wins, not ranked in final Top 25 poll, early tournament exit.

 

[WyattEarp]

 

[IlliniFan42]

Graded a B. Always compare to Lou Henson, the man whose name adorns our court floor. At this point in his career he had yet to win the conference and yet to win more than one game in a single Tournament (as there were still bye games at this point).

We built a new team, will have at least two guys drafted, now to see if what we built holds to next year, which can retroactively impact this year's grade.

 

[Mr. Roberts]

C - only because there is no C-.

7th place in the conference, 7th place finish in the tournament, beat an 11 seed in the real tournament. All mediocre results - with a highly paid coaching staff and a talent laden but inexperienced roster (albeit because our experienced players were playing elsewhere).

When I was a scout leader, we had a patrol (group of scouts) humorously named "the C+ patrol". Their patrol yell was "we're just above average, but our mother's still love us". That kind of fits this team - except that for all of the financial and emotional investment, "just above average" is a disappointment.

 

[EyeoftheIllini]

Grade C

Won 20 games and made NCAA tourney which should be the floor

Getting sick and battling injuries hurt the team and that sucks but that's life. Not doing more in the big ten or big ten tourney hurts the grade. A win against Kentucky changes a lot.The margin in this business is razor thin and I'm not gonna make excuses because that's why they get paid top 10 money. Also starting and playing humrichous that much was atrocious.

Went from get old stay old to Gerber fresh. If you do that you better win right away. If we retain tomi, morez, kylan, and Tre then you can use this as a foundational year and I'll be less harsh. Overall do like that the team and culture is improving and set up for next year. But until I see those players return for sure then I don't know. It's portal time and nothing is guaranteed.

Not sure I understand your logic. Not sure I agree that winning 20 and making NCAAT (and winning a game, which you left out)) equals a C. But I get giving a C to what you consider the floor.

Not sure what old versus “Gerber fresh” has to do with the grade though. Old teams aren’t expected to win right away? I’d say it’s more imperative than for a young squad. A group “could” return players, where old group is much less likely to. Sure, as you point out no guarantees you’ll retain players from a young squad, but no guarantee an older squad does better. And the older players that made last year’s team so special weren’t going to be on this team regardless, so we were going to be incorporating new players anyway.

 

[illinitiger]

I gave it a B and afterwards I asked my new favorite AI tool perplexity what the grade should be and here is the perplexity response:

‐--‐-----
Illinois' 2025 basketball season can be graded as a B. Here's why:

Strengths: Illinois finished with a solid 22–13 record, including a respectable 12–8 in Big Ten play. They were ranked No. 24 in the AP Poll and secured a No. 6 seed in the NCAA Tournament, advancing past Xavier in the first round before losing to Kentucky in the second round.

Weaknesses: The team struggled with consistency, evident in their loss to Kentucky and some uneven performances during the regular season. They failed to advance beyond the Big Ten quarterfinals and missed out on the Sweet Sixteen.

While Illinois showed promise and competitiveness, their inability to sustain momentum prevents an "A" grade.

 

[ChiefGritty]

View attachment 40881

And we did in fact shoot our eye out didn't we?

 

[RollChief]

Considering the circumstances, this season could have been way worse. It would have been nice to have Coleman, Luke Goode, and Dain back, but I don't think Coleman, Luke Goode, Dain, or anyone else who transferred out were going to lead us to a Sweet 16 or beyond, even if we did bring in 3 more very talented Juniors/Seniors. Even if they would have, we would be in a pretty rough spot at this point with a lot of guys running out of availability. I welcome arguments but I think the coaching staff did a very good job making some very difficult decisions with some of these guys and recruiting talent to supplement the holes from TSJ and MD this year while also getting real front court size to set us up for multiyear (next year) success.

It really felt like a rip the Band-Aid off year, because I don't think that continuing to backfill with seniors is a recipe for long-term success at the point we were at. We went from being the 11th oldest team in the nation to the 300th oldest, only returning 2.8% of minutes, which is only better than 10 other teams in D1. The task was pretty Herculean from the get-go.

There were definitely some highs and lows, I will not forget the peak sadness from losing by 50 (or however much) to Duke, but will also always remember the joy of the comeback win against Purdue, beating Indiana and Oregon by 25+ on their home courts, the Thanksgiving game, etc.

 

[robertgoulet]

B

Had half the team not been in and out of the infirmary in January I think it very easily could have been an A.

Yes probably a few more wins just due to more players available and that would have landed a better seed (which means a better matchup in Rd 2), but also overlooked is it would be more games together for a team full of youngsters, giving them more minutes to gel. Would have likely been playing past Round 2.

 

[WyattEarp]

And we did in fact shoot our eye out didn't we?

Nice.

 

[Umit9]

B.

Go Illini

 

[Illini2010-11]

F.

Before anyone jumps on me, I am obviously kidding.

Between a B and C for me, but I chose C, mainly due to some humiliating losses in February. Overall results given roster turnover would make it a B, but the major ups and downs downgrades my grade slightly. Still an acceptable season though. Next year, anything less than second weekend will get a D at best.

 

[mysterio2525]

Not sure I understand your logic. Not sure I agree that winning 20 and making NCAAT (and winning a game, which you left out)) equals a C. But I get giving a C to what you consider the floor.

Not sure what old versus “Gerber fresh” has to do with the grade though. Old teams aren’t expected to win right away? I’d say it’s more imperative than for a young squad. A group “could” return players, where old group is much less likely to. Sure, as you point out no guarantees you’ll retain players from a young squad, but no guarantee an older squad does better. And the older players that made last year’s team so special weren’t going to be on this team regardless, so we were going to be incorporating new players anyway.

In the portal era, you have to assume your players aren't staying more than one year. So if you decide to go with really talented freshman you need to win right away but your also know that volatility will be higher and you need be more hands on than you would with an older group. So winning right away is required in both cases but what's asked for the coaching staff is more on one scenario vs. the other. We saw the volatility and freshman mistakes which cost us in the end. The talent ceiling being high was there but didn't bear fruit this year.

Until I see these players stay then I'm judging them only on this year. If we retain several of the players then I can judge them on a longer timeline and this year can be looked as more developmental and graded easier. If they all transfer again (we lost several players because TA left and that's still party of Brad's grade) then I stand by what I grade that the results we got today are the bottom end of passing.

 

[One Man Fast Break]

It's a B for sure. Ultimately being a 6 seed and RO32 is a pretty average result/modal outcome historically for Illinois.

I wouldn't use "7th in Big Ten" as any meaningful measurement. The league now has 18 teams in it and the 4 most recent they added were chosen because they are desirable for purposes of raising the conference's level of prestige (while heavily football based, basketball is not irrelevant in the calculus especially with UCLA and Oregon as pretty consistent programs). The Big Ten will probably send 7-12 teams in the tournament every year in this new era of college basketball.