Just go on Torvik, and set the "end" date at Selection Sunday of the year you're investigating.
You'll be able to see all ADJ-OE and ADJ-DE ratings.
Last edited:
Illini Basketball 2026-2027
- Status
You'll be able to see all ADJ-OE and ADJ-DE ratings.
skyIdub
"I can't tell you. Secret."
Crazy how Michigan tricked everyone into thinking they were good last year just by winning the title... those darn stat junkies fall for that stuff every time. Weren't they like 312th in efficiency going into the tourney?
*scribbles notes on pad*
These were the top 5 offenses going into the tournament:
.....
These were the top 5 offenses after the tournament:
Just saying…I’d much rather have to figure out how to try and stop people from scoring than try to figure out how to score….
Of course the statistics support your case, but if the statistics were different than a different case could be made that would be entirely different than using actual statistics in comparison to actual results.What in the third level of circle logic is this?
At the end of the day, it's about your net value.
A team with the #1 offense and #15 defense will be the same quality of team as someone with the #1 defense and #15 offense.
Who wins if the two teams face off is about marchups.
Recently, we've beaten ISU and Houston - two teams with inverse strengths and weaknesses when compared to Illinois.
skyIdub
"I can't tell you. Secret."
Go ahead and patent this now, the committee wants a cut
The irony in all this is I think there’s a fun reasonable discussion on if this group can make top 15 defense or not haha
Torvik keeps track of FT% defense, which basically means how well your opponents shoot free throws against you. Illinois ranked 256th in this statistic.
In FT RATE defense, which means how often your opponents get to the FT line, Illinois ranked #1.
Penn had the #3 FT% defense in the country, holding teams to just 67.4% from the free throw stripe against them.
Illinois however, shot a pretty efficient 16/21 against them in the tournament (76%).
In FT RATE defense, which means how often your opponents get to the FT line, Illinois ranked #1.
Penn had the #3 FT% defense in the country, holding teams to just 67.4% from the free throw stripe against them.
Illinois however, shot a pretty efficient 16/21 against them in the tournament (76%).
Last edited:
The only outliers if you go back all the way to 2002 are those two weird UConn teams and the Syracuse team that hopped on Anthony's back.
That might be one of the most pointless stats I’ve ever seen when your example is a neutral site game. However, your first statement of us being 256th does somewhat back up the argument that our home court advantage is not great.
I’m coming into this with an open mind, it’s interesting to me. Does FT% defense correlate more with home crowd or more with quality of opponents? For example, if Penn was 3rd nationally, where was Purdue/Duke/Kansas/Kentucky ranked in the stat?
Here’s the top teams nationally:
You have to scroll way way down below 100 to find Duke, Purdue.
On3 with their first mock - lot's of Arkansas and Arizona. Vaak's 20.
1. Tyran Stokes, Kansas (No. 1 in Rivals Industry rankings)
2. Hugo Yimga-Moukouri, France
3. Caleb Holt, Arizona (No. 2)
4. Jordan Smith, Arkansas (No. 3)
5. Alijah Arenas, USC
6. Sayon Keita, North Carolina
7. Dylan Mingo, Baylor (No. 9)
8. Thomas Haugh, Florida
9. Braylon Mullins, UConn
10. Cam Williams, Duke (No. 4)
11. Bruce Branch, BYU (No. 5)
12. Abdou Toure, Arkansas (No. 12)
13. Stefan Joksmimovic, Serbia
14. Miikka Muurinen, Arkansas
15. Amari Allen, Alabama
16. Brandon McCoy, Michigan (No. 13)
17. Moustapha Thiam, Michigan
18. Motiejus Krivas, Arizona
19. Ivan Kharchenkov, Arizona
20. Stefan Vaaks, Illinois
21. Matt Able, North Carolina
22. Christian Collins, USC (No. 6)
23. Cameron Houindo, France
24. Anthony Thompson, Ohio State (No. 10)
25. Tounde Yessoufou, Baylor
26. Alex Condon, Florida
27. Neoklis Avdalas, North Carolina
28. Billy Richmond, Arkansas
29. Rueben Chinyelu, Florida
30. Patrick Ngongba, Duke
1. Tyran Stokes, Kansas (No. 1 in Rivals Industry rankings)
2. Hugo Yimga-Moukouri, France
3. Caleb Holt, Arizona (No. 2)
4. Jordan Smith, Arkansas (No. 3)
5. Alijah Arenas, USC
6. Sayon Keita, North Carolina
7. Dylan Mingo, Baylor (No. 9)
8. Thomas Haugh, Florida
9. Braylon Mullins, UConn
10. Cam Williams, Duke (No. 4)
11. Bruce Branch, BYU (No. 5)
12. Abdou Toure, Arkansas (No. 12)
13. Stefan Joksmimovic, Serbia
14. Miikka Muurinen, Arkansas
15. Amari Allen, Alabama
16. Brandon McCoy, Michigan (No. 13)
17. Moustapha Thiam, Michigan
18. Motiejus Krivas, Arizona
19. Ivan Kharchenkov, Arizona
20. Stefan Vaaks, Illinois
21. Matt Able, North Carolina
22. Christian Collins, USC (No. 6)
23. Cameron Houindo, France
24. Anthony Thompson, Ohio State (No. 10)
25. Tounde Yessoufou, Baylor
26. Alex Condon, Florida
27. Neoklis Avdalas, North Carolina
28. Billy Richmond, Arkansas
29. Rueben Chinyelu, Florida
30. Patrick Ngongba, Duke
They really need to weight it against the free throw % the opponents average for the season to determine how good a team is at stopping the free throw
Kansas was 13th.
Purdue was 186th.
Kentucky was 236th
Duke was 111th.
I will say -- Houston was 32nd (4th in Power 5) and Alabama was 35th (5th in Power 5). IIRC, those were our two worst FT shooting games last season.
I've been more curious about opponent free throw attempts per team foul. Duke was an outlier there at 0.86 followed by us at 0.92 then Yale and Iowa St at 0.96.
I'd expect to find teams that don't foul much at the top of that list since opponents spend less time in the bonus, but that wasn't the case- except for Illinois, the rest of the top 8 in fewest opponent FTs per foul were outside the top 35 in fouls per game (and an average rank of ~70). So there's something unique about these teams' style of play.
Was Duke really intentional to avoid fouling shooters but otherwise played very physical, perhaps backing off a bit if the other team was in the bonus? If so, is there something to that strategy? Our low-foul approach certainly reduced the stress of fouling out, but could our defense benefit from playing more aggressively?
I'd expect to find teams that don't foul much at the top of that list since opponents spend less time in the bonus, but that wasn't the case- except for Illinois, the rest of the top 8 in fewest opponent FTs per foul were outside the top 35 in fouls per game (and an average rank of ~70). So there's something unique about these teams' style of play.
Was Duke really intentional to avoid fouling shooters but otherwise played very physical, perhaps backing off a bit if the other team was in the bonus? If so, is there something to that strategy? Our low-foul approach certainly reduced the stress of fouling out, but could our defense benefit from playing more aggressively?
Which is why I like to look at it amongst power 5 teams (problem is you'll kinda need to count all the way down).
Of the top 50 nationally, there were only 7 teams who were from the P5. Though #1 was Cal and #2 was Boston College (both from the ACC).
.....
Here's the free throw percentage defenses of every BIG TEN team, ranked. Illinois was 8th:
Moron who made that doesn't remember 1915. Illinois was the national champion.
Username checks out
Sounds good to me. Hang the banner.
It might have to do with how players act on the free throw line.
I've seen some guys have their arms up while the opponent is shooting, and maybe that distracts the shooter.
You can decide if our beloved Illini earned that title. There was no national championship tournament in 1915...but the Fighting Illini basketball team earned 16 victories without a loss.
But some organization named the Helms Athletic Foundation was founded 21 years after that season. Some part of that Foundation retroactively awarded the national title to the Illini.
So there you have it.
- Status