This is the core we should aim to get to, and you're wrong on this I'm afraid:
I said it "isn't a bad FT rate", nowhere throughout this discussion did anyone state that it was "really good".
Your claim is a strawman.
Illini Basketball 2026-2027
- Status
This is the core we should aim to get to, and you're wrong on this I'm afraid:
I said it "isn't a bad FT rate", nowhere throughout this discussion did anyone state that it was "really good".
Your claim is a strawman.
Lol he's saying takes 750 attempts to stabilize 3pt% to stabilize when looking at shooting ability and trying to decide if a player has improved.
I don't need 750 attempts to tell you that a team is going to consistently shoot better if they get open looks in rhythm than relying on shooting contested or off the dribble 3s.
Blackport literally says "The 750 attempts are also assumed to be taken under roughly the same conditions, so if a player’s role changes, then the attempts under the two roles shouldn’t be included together ... If someone goes from a team where they have to run the offense and create shots for themselves and others to a team where all they need to do is stand outside the three-point line and catch and shoot open threes, we can be pretty confident their increase in three-point percentage is real, not necessarily because they are a better shooter but because they are in a better situation to make threes".
The NBA even has shooting tracked that shows shooting percentage increase as players are more open. It's tracked as having a defender within 2 feet very tight, 2-4 tight, 4-6 open, or 6+ wide open
Wheatgrass.
You’re trying to focus on context now, which is irrelevant in this case.
A single game sample of 26 three-point attempts is minuscule for a team because a basketball season requires hundreds of shots to separate skill from random luck. With so few attempts, normal statistical variance can cause swings up to even 50 percent. Even a couple of lucky bounces swing a team’s shooting percentage by 15% or more.
Yes, and you all have conflated “really pretty good” with “really good”. I clarified that statement immediately after by saying it’s really pretty good for a player with his shot diet (which is true). And then went on to say we could probably expect his shot diet to improve at Illinois (also likely true).
This discussion centered around nitpicking syntax, semantics and so on has taken 3 days for us to get to this point. I don’t intend to spend another 3 days micro-analyzing words and their potential meanings in this context. Good grief, man.
This. We lost that game because we missed shots we had made all year.
Not sure why we are making it more than that.
Ehhh, I can see both sides to this. Yes, you didn't say "really good", but you were responding to "under 30 is usually not great." If 29.5 isn't "really good", then "not great" would have been appropriate to begin with.
Regardless, this rabbit hole about FT rate started when debating whether Vaaks is just a shooter, and FTRate was mentioned to argue that "He doesn't put pressure on the rim". 16.8% of his shot attempts were close 2s, which was 73rd out of 92 high major combo guards (avg 26.5%). He could still have been "more than just a shooter" in other ways, and his game/role will likely change some this year, but "little pressure on the rim" seems like a reasonable take on his game last year.
Ehhh, I can see both sides to this. Yes, you didn't say "really good", but you were responding to "under 30 is usually not great." If 29.5 isn't "really good", then "not great" would have been appropriate to begin with.
Regardless, this rabbit hole about FT rate started when debating whether Vaaks is just a shooter, and FTRate was mentioned to argue that "He doesn't put pressure on the rim". 16.8% of his shot attempts were close 2s, which was 73rd out of 92 high major combo guards (avg 26.5%). He could still have been "more than just a shooter" in other ways, and his game/role will likely change some this year, but that seems like a reasonable take on his game last year.
I don't want to continue micro-analyzing words people said. At least one person has admitted that the verbatim quote that was attributed to me never happened.
My original statement was simply ".295 isn't a bad FT rate"... so, if I'm allowed, I'd like to lock that answer in. And we can move on (hopefully).
EDIT: Agree 'little pressure on the rim' is entirely correct, but the .295 FTr on only 16.8% close 2s tells me when he does get downhill he's fairly effective at using his body/size. We all hope he does this more in 2026-27.
Last edited:
Yep. Wide open looks, balls that sat on the heel of the rim and rolled off......it happens. Stinks, for us, but that's the game. The game plan was fine, the execution was fine....have to make open shots. It's really that easy.
Music to my ears…
If we’re gonna be awesome at rebounding I’d love to punish some teams in transition who try to crash - would probably make us even more awesome at rebounding.
By far my biggest critique of the team last year
They beat us by double digits in the early Non Con last year, with Reed and Mullins hurt and playing a few minutes. The only reason it wasn't a total blowout is because Boswell, of all people, went bananas with 25. We shot poorly in that game too - so they are doing something, maybe chasing their actions tires us out.
Just variance. But they were elite overall last season defending the three point shot. I don't recall so many open shots in the first meeting as in the second. Oh, and that awful blue floor haha. The teams that shot the best 3pt percentage in games vs UConn last year were Providence, Georgetown, Creighton, and Seton Hall. Not exactly a who's who of college basketball, 3 of the 4 being putrid 3pt shooting teams and 1 being average... so again just other examples of hard proof that variance exists in three point shooting, I suppose.
Ok, but again. I’m talking about the final four game. Keaton wasn’t Keaton then, Mirk wasn’t Mirk, and our defense wasn’t our defense. And to your point, there team wasn’t the same either.
I loved the looks we got in the final four game. If we could do it again, I’d take those looks all day and bank on hitting them instead of making some adjustment because we couldn’t make a layup.
If you think we got nothing but contested and hard looks all game or that it’s Brad fault we missed layups because we were tired, I think we can just agree to disagree.
The reality is, we had the lead down to 4 with 2 minutes to go. UCONN missed a shot and Demary got an offensive rebound that lead to a Mullin three. If we would have gotten that defensive rebound, that would have been anyone's game with a minute to go.
That game at MSG, in NOVEMBER, was a veteran UCONN team playing an Illinois team that was still figuring out roles. The game in March was a game that was there to be had.
Wagler was 2 of 10 from three. I would take the looks he had all day long.
Tomi was 2-7. Same open looks. I'll take them.
If a bad bounce was to be had, we got them. We had a ball that sat on the heel of the rim and they had a Solo Ball shot that bounced 10 feet in the air and dropped.
Let's not over analyze.
Hear yeah, true. My only view on it is that you need to be able to make adjustments in games. It's too easy to prepare for when you are one gear, good coaches can plan.
The team will know pretty early next year playing Duke & UConn.
I feel like people might not understand what adjustments means. It means making changes mid game.
How do you know whether we did or did not make adjustments? Were you in the locker room or in the huddles?
For that matter, what were these adjustments UCONN made?
The pattern almost always seems to be:
loss = "no adjustments" (without having anything to back that term up)
IDK, people were screaming "no adjustments" after our UCLA loss but when Werner asked LaTulip, he articulated how we made very good adjustments to our defense late 2H / Overtime (you can go back to the pod to fact check me).
Last edited:
The question for me is that when we hit the seemingly annual injury/illness stretch, will Brad not move guys deeper down the bench up, basically playing only 6-6.5 guys.
Those guys are definitely capable of making those shots but a lot of those aren't exactly easy conversions outside of two of the Boswell misses(wide open layup and putback). A lot of those Stojakovic attempts and the Mirk one are not easy conversions though.
Yes, its definitely a different game if some of those looks fall but I also think Illinois was genuinely the more talented team(Ball and Demary were both hurt) and should have been able to win that game without needing those conversions.
The difference in that game was that every time UConn needed a bucket to stop the comeback of change the momentum they were able to dial up a play that got them an open look. While Illinois and to rely on hero ball and tough shot making. Wagler probably shoots a lot better in that game if he's getting some of the same looks that Mullins or Ball were getting.
The other thing about “adjustments” is that actually it’s not always the right choice…
In fact, when you’re better than your opponent, which Brad has gotten this program to the point where we’re usually better than our opponent, moving away from your identity or plan because it doesn’t “work” right away, can be a terrible choice the coach makes out of panic.
It’s college basketball, so I’m of the opinion there’s dozens upon dozens of chess moves throughout the course of the game many fans just can’t see. BUT, for all the losses we’ve had where Illini nation bemoans no adjustments, I’m curious how many more have been won by rightfully staying course.
If Wagler got the clean looks Mullins was getting?
Wagler 7-16 44%
Mullins 5-14 35%
Shooting was horrendous for both teams in that game:
Illinois 34%
UConn 35%
They got a few more threes to go and in typical Illinois fashion we only turned them over 4x, tough game where Illinois played well but just had a ton of easy shots bounce out while Ball was knocking them in off the shot clock lol.
I'm seeing some notion that UConn somehow had a better offense last year? Wasn't even close:
2025-26 Season ORtg KP Rank:
Illinois 2
(insert an ocean of teams here)
UConn 29
Wagler 7-16 44%
Mullins 5-14 35%
Shooting was horrendous for both teams in that game:
Illinois 34%
UConn 35%
They got a few more threes to go and in typical Illinois fashion we only turned them over 4x, tough game where Illinois played well but just had a ton of easy shots bounce out while Ball was knocking them in off the shot clock lol.
I'm seeing some notion that UConn somehow had a better offense last year? Wasn't even close:
2025-26 Season ORtg KP Rank:
Illinois 2
(insert an ocean of teams here)
UConn 29
Illini in Italy
- Illini HQ, Florida Panhandle
Just further indictment of your defense.
Wisconsin twice. MSU. UCLA. Michigan (holy). UConn twice.
I love last year’s team. But our defense was fringe top 30. And it showed against elite opponents. There’s a reason our best wins were when our offense was on another level. Dre vs. TTU. Keaton vs. Purdue.
Houston being the one exception. Need more games like Houston where we shut down teams.
- Status