Illini in the Pros (Basketball)

[iFlyBy]

He only fouled out in one game at illinois

Tell me you don't watch basketball without telling me you don't watch basketball.

Because if you actually watched basketball instead of just looking at box scores, you'd know that coaches from all schools take players out of the game when they pick up their second foul in the first half. So if a guy picks up a quick two fouls, he's sitting for a long while. And then if he picks up a third early in the second half, guess what, back to the bench. He might finish the game with only those three fouls, but foul trouble absolutely limited his minutes.

But to box score and highlight watchers like you, you'd have no idea. So instead you just point to a "fouling out" stat as some sort of gotcha.

 

[Deacon05]

I would 100 percent rather talk about cottage cheese than Morez "I left and talk !!!!" ffing Johnson. And I hate cottage cheese.

 

[EmeraldCityIllini]

I actually think Morez would have developed more and better as an offensive player here than Michigan (sue me) - Brad is simply the better offensive coach than May.

The fouling thing was very real though. Especially as we’ve learned how much Brad emphasizes not fouling - it’s not just about fouling out, he doesn’t want to rack up free throw attempts.

To be fair to Morez on “fit” though. Mara was a better defensive fit than Tomi. Less emphasis on rim protection for Morez helped the fouling issue

 

[wc_illini]

Tell me you don't watch basketball without telling me you don't watch basketball.

Because if you actually watched basketball instead of just looking at box scores, you'd know that coaches from all schools take players out of the game when they pick up their second foul in the first half. So if a guy picks up a quick two fouls, he's sitting for a long while. And then if he picks up a third early in the second half, guess what, back to the bench. He might finish the game with only those three fouls, but foul trouble absolutely limited his minutes.

But to box score and highlight watchers like you, you'd have no idea. So instead you just point to a "fouling out" stat as some sort of gotcha.

This is a complete tangent (and I'm not disagreeing that what you're saying happened), but that decision making has always annoyed me. I understand foul trouble can change a player's effectiveness and that fouls generally lead to points (directly or starting the bonus sooner), but if a good player sits on the bench and ends the game with 3 fouls, you left lots of minutes on the table.

 

[WhereDoWeStandWithStorr?]

Tell me you don't watch basketball without telling me you don't watch basketball.

Because if you actually watched basketball instead of just looking at box scores, you'd know that coaches from all schools take players out of the game when they pick up their second foul in the first half. So if a guy picks up a quick two fouls, he's sitting for a long while. And then if he picks up a third early in the second half, guess what, back to the bench. He might finish the game with only those three fouls, but foul trouble absolutely limited his minutes.

But to box score and highlight watchers like you, you'd have no idea. So instead you just point to a "fouling out" stat as some sort of gotcha.

Okay, well, let's take a look at 3 foul and 4 foul games then (wherever you'd like to draw the line).

Morez played 30 total games, and had 7 games with 4+ fouls. 30-7 = 23 other games where he could've played more minutes (but didn't).

He had 14 games with 3+ fouls. 30-14 = 16 other games where he could've played more minutes (but didn't).

___

The point is that he was our 7th man. He was seen as the 7th best player, and was therefore 7th in minutes (and wasn't even close to being 5th or 6th). If he was our starting power forward, but ended up low 20s in minutes due to foul trouble (as opposed to high 20s like Mirk), then I think it's a perfectly reasonable argument.

But, we were too busy giving Humrichous the starter minutes at the 4, hoping he'd break out of his slump, and Rez was riding the bench.

This season, we brought Ben back, but as a connective piece in a bench role. He was no longer priority over our talented freshman PF in Mirkovic, who started all the games from Day 1. Ben embraced his new role, improved his shooting, defense, rebounding, and we went on to have an awesome year.

It's just so obvious the contrast between the two situations.

 

[NarrowJ]

Okay, well, let's take a look at 3 foul and 4 foul games then (wherever you'd like to draw the line).

Morez played 30 total games, and had 7 games with 4+ fouls. 30-7 = 23 other games where he could've played more minutes (but didn't).

He had 14 games with 3+ fouls. 30-14 = 16 other games where he could've played more minutes (but didn't).

___

The point is that he was our 7th man. He was seen as the 7th best player, and was therefore 7th in minutes (and wasn't even close to being 5th or 6th). If he was our starting power forward, but ended up low 20s in minutes due to foul trouble (as opposed to high 20s like Mirk), then I think it's a perfectly reasonable argument.

But, we were too busy giving Humrichous the starter minutes at the 4, hoping he'd break out of his slump, and Rez was riding the bench.

This season, we brought Ben back, but as a connective piece in a bench role. He was no longer priority over our talented freshman PF in Mirkovic, who started all the games from Day 1. Ben embraced his new role, improved his shooting, defense, rebounding, and we went on to have an awesome year.

It's just so obvious the contrast between the two situations.

It’s not like he got a ton more minutes at Michigan… 18 vs 25

The not racking up 4 fouls in 9 minutes like he did for us helped him a ton in that regard. Also, being a lot better on the defensive end.

Our starting PF played 29.5 minutes per game so he likely would’ve played more here than he did at Michigan.

 

[Fly Illini Fly!]

It’s not like he got a ton more minutes at Michigan… 18 vs 25

Ton more minutes. 7 more minutes per game is a lot.

Keaton last season played 34. Whole lot different than if he played 27?

Also, Michigan destroyed almost everybody they played, which means they had lots of garbage time rest.

.....

If Morez played 25mpg at Illinois, he would've averaged 9.9pts and 9.5rebs. That's basically a double double.

 

[the juiceman cometh]

Ton more minutes. 7 more minutes per game is a lot.

But even that's misleading. By the end of his freshman season his minutes had increased quite a bit. From his first start on January 23 to the end of the season he averaged about 22 minutes. It was clear to everyone that if he came back he'd have played a much bigger role his sophomore season, because he was already playing a bigger role at the end of his freshman season.

 

[NarrowJ]

Ton more minutes. 7 more minutes per game is a lot.

Keaton last season played 34. Whole lot different than if he played 27?

Also, Michigan destroyed almost everybody they played, so they had the benefit for alot more garbage time rest.

7 is barely 1/6 of a basketball game, not a lot

Bigs don’t typically play as many minutes as guards so Keaton is an Apple/Orange comp

Last season Michigan played 26 games with > 10 point margin. Illinois? 22

 

[Fly Illini Fly!]

But even that's misleading. By the end of his freshman season his minutes had increased quite a bit. From his first start on January 23 to the end of the season he averaged about 22 minutes. It was clear to everyone that if he came back he'd have played a much bigger role his sophomore season, because he was already playing a bigger role at the end of his freshman season.

Agreed, and I've said this all along. His minutes in the 6-7 game stretch before breaking his wrist was very encouraging.

It's prior to that, earlier in the season, where his PT was a lot lower.

 

[RollChief]

Morez at pick #9 was the highest drafted non-freshman in the country. Sure he made more free throws this year that allowed him to stay at the end of games, but seriously ... the #9 pick wasn't even just one of the better players in the conference?

I mean you took out my point but yeah the year before if you saw him against the better players in the conference as a freshman then he didn’t look like one of the better players in the conference… he made progress from Y1 to Y2, I doubt he would have even been drafted last year and wasn’t in the conversation for any all B1G honors so no I don’t think he was one of the better players in the conference as a freshman

 

[3 point girl]

Did it bother anyone else to hear Morez & Coach Mays refer to him as an "everyday guy".

 

[skyIdub]

Two more pages of this??? Ffsjfcygtbsmomgstfugtfo

 

[jamarvelous31]

Ton more minutes. 7 more minutes per game is a lot.

Keaton last season played 34. Whole lot different than if he played 27?

Also, Michigan destroyed almost everybody they played, which means they had lots of garbage time rest.

.....

If Morez played 25mpg at Illinois, he would've averaged 9.9pts and 9.5rebs. That's basically a double double.

My dude. How many times do folks have to point out he averaged a foul out per 40 minutes?

He left for money & because he didn't feel loyalty to the staff with Tim leaving.

Everything else is retconning because it's obviously embarrassing to him to leave a team he was committed to for 4+ years.

 

[lstewart53x3]

My dude. How many times do folks have to point out he averaged a foul out per 40 minutes?

He left for money & because he didn't feel loyalty to the staff with Tim leaving.

Everything else is retconning because it's obviously embarrassing to him to leave a team he was committed to for 4+ years.

Him not getting enough minutes his freshman year being the reason he left is a silly argument anyhow. His freshman year minutes didn’t have an impact on his sophomore year minutes, which he clearly knew, since he signed two agreements to return.

Coleman Hawkins played 6 minutes per game his freshman year. Then 19 his sophomore year. Then 30 minutes per game every year after.

It’s pretty common for minutes, usage, and role to increase as a player ages.

 

[OB positive]

He only fouled out in one game at illinois

Ya because he got sat down when he got in foul trouble and then later in the games where you would normally put him back in he was a liability because of his freethrow shooting. Thats why Ben was often in the games at the end plus being a better ball handler. There is no doubt Morez had a fouling issue and it cost him a lot of playing time

 

[OB positive]

This is a complete tangent (and I'm not disagreeing that what you're saying happened), but that decision making has always annoyed me. I understand foul trouble can change a player's effectiveness and that fouls generally lead to points (directly or starting the bonus sooner), but if a good player sits on the bench and ends the game with 3 fouls, you left lots of minutes on the table.

In this particular situation the good player sitting on the bench with three fouls was also a poor free throw shooter. Thats is mainly why he stayed on the bench in those situations.

 

[InDaAZ]

When I see Morez talk, all I hear is:
Blah, blah, blah, we got Mirk, blah, blah…

 

[PleaseMakeABowlGame]

Have always felt Dusty never gets the energy he deserves for the Morez situation.

It’s always blame Morez, when perhaps we’d do the same thing if faced with the exact circumstance. Finances play a big part in these kid’s lives (and good for him for being able to make it as a lottery pick).

Sums it up pretty perfectly:

 

[doowink]

My dude. How many times do folks have to point out he averaged a foul out per 40 minutes?

He left for money & because he didn't feel loyalty to the staff with Tim leaving.

Everything else is retconning because it's obviously embarrassing to him to leave a team he was committed to for 4+ years.

As you have noted....The bold text (along with $$$) was the key......but let's continue to over analyze since....well...that's what we do...

 

[foby]

When I see Morez talk, all I hear is:
Blah, blah, blah, we got Mirk, blah, blah…

 

[Illinirog1970]

This is a complete tangent (and I'm not disagreeing that what you're saying happened), but that decision making has always annoyed me. I understand foul trouble can change a player's effectiveness and that fouls generally lead to points (directly or starting the bonus sooner), but if a good player sits on the bench and ends the game with 3 fouls, you left lots of minutes on the table.

So, what I hear you saying is that you question the strategy of head coaches EVERYWHERE who automatically sit players who get two fouls in the first half? Got it.

The reason that they do that is the player starts getting tentative in his play and trying "not to foul" instead of letting the game flow.

There are no wasted minutes, except when a player loses his aggressiveness on the court while trying to avoid his third foul. That's what happens if you leave him in. All coaches sit their best players if they get in foul trouble. those who don't pay a terrible price... like Augie vs UNC in that famous championship game (five fouls in nine minutes.)

 

[WyattEarp]

Morez wasn't seen as one of the five best players on the team. This is evident by him not being on the court at the end of games. Regardless of the fouls, if you're seen as one of the five best players, you'll be on the court at the end of the game (unless you're disqualified with fouling out, which rarely happened even with Morez).

The lineup we rode with was:

PG - Kasparas
SG - KB
SF - Riley or Tre
PF - Hummer
C - Tomi
(obviously there was some fluctuations because we had so many injuries)

For those that so vehemently disagree, go back to the game at Northwestern in the big ten opener.

Yeah, but at the same…coaches want their best free throw shooters on the floor at the end. Morez has a 61.8 % combined freethrow percentage. That matters.

Also, even if Morez hadn’t fouled out by the 4th quarter he’s more than likely gonna be playing with four the whole 4th quarter. (So that handicaps us obviously.) AND…IF you’ve got a lead in the closing moments you do not want to foul. Morez (at that time) proved over and over that he couldn’t be trusted not to foul.

 

[Grandpa]

 

[wc_illini]

So, what I hear you saying is that you question the strategy of head coaches EVERYWHERE who automatically sit players who get two fouls in the first half? Got it.

The reason that they do that is the player starts getting tentative in his play and trying "not to foul" instead of letting the game flow.

There are no wasted minutes, except when a player loses his aggressiveness on the court while trying to avoid his third foul. That's what happens if you leave him in. All coaches sit their best players if they get in foul trouble. those who don't pay a terrible price... like Augie vs UNC in that famous championship game (five fouls in nine minutes.)

Yes, that's exactly what I'm wondering. Strategies evolve as more information becomes available, so common wisdom isn't necessarily convincing. And I'm not alone:
"Naturally, each coach handles these decisions differently. (And because this issue doesn’t seem to be well-understood, I suspect many are using a sub-optimal approach.)" -Ken Pomerey (https://kenpom.com/blog/introducing-2-foul-participation/)