The changing of Mirk's role is certainly driven by what the staff wants to do. I can't imagine he's just saying this because it is his idea.
Illini Basketball 2026-2027
Yup. This notion of "saving" guys so they're fresh come tournament time is not well thought out. Using that logic, why not just skip practice, so our guys are fresher for the real games and we don't get injured in superfluous practice? Or go beyond ND football and just request that we skip our regular season and be auto-qualified for the tournament so we can be completely fresh?
The idea is to win every game in front of you. Winning the most games during the season helps you in the tournament because you'll get a better seed. Possibly more importantly, it helps develop the habit of winning.
These are 18-22 year old guys. Playing 30+ mpg is unlikely to deplete their energy for a game days or weeks later.
There's a reason the vast majority of coaches play an 8-man rotation and tune that down to 6/7 come tournament time. You want your best guys on the floor. And you want those guys to be a well-oiled machine which requires them playing together a lot.
RabidDawgClassic
- Los Angeles, CA
I agree that top teams often pare down for the tournament. But the last 5 champions all got at least 14mpg beyond their top 8 over the whole season. Maybe it had nothing to do with their success, but it's definitely common among the elite teams. And it wasn't 5 guys getting 2-3min of garbage time on a regular basis- their 9th men averaged 9.6mpg and their 10th men averaged 2.4mpg.
Just looked up UConn's last NC. Seven players averaged 14 or more minutes per game for the whole season. That's a 7-man rotation. And it was paired down for the tournament.
For Florida last year, also 7.
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
Just a somewhat bored Illini propaganda post on this Friday afternoon, but I was just thinking how there always seem to be a lot of good Big Ten basketball programs in the 2020s, but really only a couple have been consistently players. Sure, Iowa and Maryland pop up here and there, Wisconsin is quietly consistent, etc. However, I just wanted to look at (A) what teams had made a "deep" Tournament run, defined here as Elite Eight or beyond, and (B) what teams had been able to hang a Big Ten Championship banner of some type. And since this is a propaganda post, I am absolutely giving us a share of the 2021 championship, lol.
DEEP TOURNAMENT RUN
National Championships
Michigan (2026)
Final Fours
Purdue (2024)
Michigan (2026)
Illinois (2026)
Elite Eights
Michigan (2021)
Purdue (2024)
Illinois (2024)
Michigan State (2025)
Michigan (2026)
Illinois (2026)
Iowa (2026)
Purdue (2026)
BIG TEN CHAMPIONSHIP BANNER
BTT Championships
Illinois (2021)
Iowa (2022)
Purdue (2023)
Illinois (2024)
Michigan (2025)
Purdue (2026)
Big Ten Championships
Maryland (2020)
Michigan State (2020)
Wisconsin (2020)
Michigan (2021)**********
Illinois (2021)**********
Illinois (2022)
Wisconsin (2022)
Purdue (2023)
Purdue (2024)
Michigan State (2025)
Michigan (2026)
While there are a decent number of Big Ten teams who have done at least one of those, there are only three who show up on every list:
1. Michigan - 1 National Championship, 1 Final Four, 2 Elite Eights, 2 Big Ten Championships and 1 BTT Championship
2. Illinois - 1 Final Four, 2 Elite Eights, 2 Big Ten Championships and 2 BTT Championships
3. Purdue - 1 Final Four, 2 Elite Eights, 2 Big Ten Championships and 2 BTT Championships
And it's actually crazy how evenly matched they are in these categories! All have had their ups and downs, but with Michigan's rebound these last two years, these seem to be pretty clearly the "big three" of the Big Ten this decade. And considering Michigan just had a coaching change and that we will come into the season ranked significantly higher than Purdue, this year really could be a GOLDEN opportunity to solidify ourselves as top dog in the conference. Great job, Brad and Co.!
DEEP TOURNAMENT RUN
National Championships
Michigan (2026)
Final Fours
Purdue (2024)
Michigan (2026)
Illinois (2026)
Elite Eights
Michigan (2021)
Purdue (2024)
Illinois (2024)
Michigan State (2025)
Michigan (2026)
Illinois (2026)
Iowa (2026)
Purdue (2026)
BIG TEN CHAMPIONSHIP BANNER
BTT Championships
Illinois (2021)
Iowa (2022)
Purdue (2023)
Illinois (2024)
Michigan (2025)
Purdue (2026)
Big Ten Championships
Maryland (2020)
Michigan State (2020)
Wisconsin (2020)
Michigan (2021)**********
Illinois (2021)**********
Illinois (2022)
Wisconsin (2022)
Purdue (2023)
Purdue (2024)
Michigan State (2025)
Michigan (2026)
While there are a decent number of Big Ten teams who have done at least one of those, there are only three who show up on every list:
1. Michigan - 1 National Championship, 1 Final Four, 2 Elite Eights, 2 Big Ten Championships and 1 BTT Championship
2. Illinois - 1 Final Four, 2 Elite Eights, 2 Big Ten Championships and 2 BTT Championships
3. Purdue - 1 Final Four, 2 Elite Eights, 2 Big Ten Championships and 2 BTT Championships
And it's actually crazy how evenly matched they are in these categories! All have had their ups and downs, but with Michigan's rebound these last two years, these seem to be pretty clearly the "big three" of the Big Ten this decade. And considering Michigan just had a coaching change and that we will come into the season ranked significantly higher than Purdue, this year really could be a GOLDEN opportunity to solidify ourselves as top dog in the conference. Great job, Brad and Co.!
You can draw the line for a rotation anywhere you want, but the last five champions all got a lot more minutes outside their top 8 than we did last year:
| 9th+ Men | 9th Man | 10th Man | 11th+ Men | |
| Michigan | 18.7 | 13.0 (Cason; Tschetter was 8th with 13.7) | 2.1 (Goodman) | 3.5 |
| Florida | 14.8 | 6.5 (Klavzar) | 5.3 (Handlogten) | 3.0 |
| UConn | 14.1 | 8.2 (Stewart) | 2.5 (Ross) | 3.3 |
| UConn | 15.8 | 11.6 (Diarra) | 1.2 (Johnson) | 3.0 |
| Kansas | 19.3 | 7.9 (Yesufu) | 4.4 (Adams Jr.) | 7.0 |
| Average | 16.5 | 9.5 | 3.1 | 3.8 |
| 2025-26 Illini | 8.1 | 2.9 (Petrovic) | 2.0 (Lee) | 3.1 |
I'm not saying we should force it and play terrible players if that's what we have. But depth appears to be a good thing, and should be used if we have it.
Last edited:
Florida has a loaded frontcourt but still has an issue with guards unless Aberdeen gets a waiver. Which if he does then it would open up every 4 year guy to return for a 5th year this year.
I think Duke should pretty clearly be 1. Think Illinois has a legitimate case for 2 though.
Not true. He’s applying for a waiver for a season he was injured (but perhaps may have played too many games, we’ll see).
It would not “open up every 4 year guy to return.” (like Boswell)
That's where I'm at as well.
For me "rotation" would be 70% of games played, and at least 5-10 minutes per game. That generally means coach trusts you to play in most games, not just cupcakes.
Do I hope we play a 9 man rotation?
Generally yes, and most years we do actually... but if our 9th Man isn't even serviceable, which is unfortunate, then no.
From a roster building standpoint, the expectation should be to have 9 playable guys. Right now we have 8; with the gamble that one of the freshman can emerge.
Probably worth noting that we were also unexpectedly down Ty Rodgers too.
Seems like the team is in a good position this year to give opportunities in the 8/9 spot if guys perform at the level needed
Bolded is the key.
They didn’t last year - Lee and Petro. And all of Brown, Williams, Zens are rated below where Lee was.
I'm looking at UConn's NC team. Their 8th guy was at 11.5 mpg. Which is barely part of the rotation. I don't know where you're getting your numbers, and assuming they're accurate, they're showing that most teams play an 8-man rotation.
I think it's also relevant that our likely starters for next year's team are pretty clear. And those 5 guys will play as much as possible because they're likely just better than the rest. The only exception is Z, who will by necessity need to play a lot, and maybe Jake. Obviously it's possible a Keaton-type could surface, but I''m guessing that was a once-a-century event.
As another poster pointed out, if we would have had Ty, he likely would have played some of those 8/9 man minutes.
It would be interesting to see whether these teams were so good because they played 9+ guys or if they played 9+ guys because they were so good. In other words, were they playing with such large leads throughout the year that they could afford to give the end of their bench more minutes?
Looking at Michigan from last year, in games decided by 10 or fewer points, their 9th+ man averaged just 7.6 minutes. So, in competitive contests they tightened their rotation significantly.
11.5mpg is definitely part of the rotation, especially if that’s spread out over 30 or so games.
Like I said, I'm not here to debate the minimum number of minutes to say a guy is in a rotation. I'm just pointing out the quantity of minutes played by the 9th+ guys of these teams
These are from sports-reference, but I had to do some math to convert their minutes-per-game-played (which would inflate these numbers) to minutes-per-team-game (the more conservative approach).
They blew out a lot of teams so badly (even some very good teams), that they could afford to empty the bench often.
Same here. Mirk is a great player but I am not sure if he had a go-to move. I hope he can finish more efficiently like Andrej.
He played in 12 games which is more than 30% of the season and he played in the 2nd half of the season including postseason play(NIT).
Injury hardship waivers have only ever been granted for guys that were injured in the 1st half of the season. Returning in the 2nd half makes him ineligible as does playing more than 30% of games.
Luke Goode just had his waiver denied for the same thing(as had every player that appealed this). He played in 10 games as a sophomore but he played in all of them in the 2nd half including postseason play.
The injury hardship waivers therefore would not apply to Aberdeen and the only way he would be eligible is via a court injunction to grant him a 5th year which would open the door for all 4 year guys to return.
It probably depends how you calculate it and what your source is.
Using sports-reference, Michigan's 9th man in minutes on the season was Cason, and he played 9.8mpg in games decided by 10 or fewer points. That includes 6 of those 15 games that he missed; excluding those, he was the 8th man, and Tschetter was 9th with 13.6mpg).
Last year, in our 17 games decided by 10 or fewer points, our 9th man (Petrovic) played 1.4mpg, and our 9th+ men combined for 1.9mpg. That includes 4 overtime games vs just 1 for Michigan. Excluding 6 of those games where one of our top 8 were out, our 9th+ men combined for 2.4mpg (still includes 2 overtime games). We had an 8 man rotation that tightened up to 7 or 6 due to injury.
Edit: I agree that Ty Rodgers could have changed that for us. My point isn't to complain that we only played 8 guys last year. It's to push back on the idea that depth is overrated, especially when such claims are supported by incorrect assumptions about recent champions.
Last edited:
People forget this time last year, Tomi was our consensus All-American/best player.
lstewart53x3
- Scottsdale, Arizona
Comparing top end talent on the top teams using the Draft Kings player of the year betting odds (roughly 100 players on the list):
Another way to look at the numbers:
Michigan has the most players on the list with 5, but zero in the top 10. They’ll likely be very good again. Florida is the only team with two players in the top 10. We’re close behind with players at #4 and #11. Duke looks good, but not “best team ever” good. Michigan St has the #1 player (Fears), but only 3 players total (#1, #33, #79).
| School | Players | Player #s on the list |
| Michigan | 5 | 14, 18, 27, 52, 58 |
| Arkansas | 4 | 8, 64, 65, 87 |
| Duke | 4 | 3, 25, 34, 55 |
| Florida | 4 | 2, 9, 22, 59 |
| Houston | 4 | 39, 40, 92, 95 |
| Illinois | 4 | 4, 11, 35, 72 (Mirk, Vaaks, Andrej, Tomi) |
| Kentucky | 4 | 16, 62, 67, 68 |
| North Carolina | 4 | 31, 44, 54, 88 |
| Tennessee | 4 | 12, 36, 82, 97 |
| USC | 4 | 45, 48, 80, 81 |
Another way to look at the numbers:
| School | Players | Best Rank | Top 25 | Top 50 | Avg Rank |
| Michigan | 5 | #14 | 3 | 3 | 33.8 |
| Illinois | 4 | #4 | 2 | 3 | 30.5 |
| Florida | 4 | #2 | 3 | 3 | 23.0 |
| Duke | 4 | #3 | 2 | 4 | 29.3 |
| Arkansas | 4 | #8 | 2 | 2 | 56.0 |
| Kentucky | 4 | #16 | 1 | 1 | 53.3 |
| North Carolina | 4 | #31 | 0 | 2 | 54.3 |
| Tennessee | 4 | #12 | 1 | 2 | 56.8 |
| USC | 4 | #45 | 0 | 1 | 63.5 |
| Houston | 4 | #39 | 0 | 2 | 66.5 |
Michigan has the most players on the list with 5, but zero in the top 10. They’ll likely be very good again. Florida is the only team with two players in the top 10. We’re close behind with players at #4 and #11. Duke looks good, but not “best team ever” good. Michigan St has the #1 player (Fears), but only 3 players total (#1, #33, #79).
Last edited:
#9thman debate
