I think his point was theres some great classes that come in right after a coach gets hired. Whether they perform well or not wasnt really the point.
2017 Coaching Carousel
- Status
I think his point was theres some great classes that come in right after a coach gets hired. Whether they perform well or not wasnt really the point.
Lavin's recruiting is perhaps a bad example of what to call a monster class. He came in late and took a lot of risks he probably wouldn't have once he'd built up his team --he had little to lose with some of those. I don't have a problem with that, but it means you're at high risk for setbacks between the class on paper, and what you actually have to work with.
I don't think anyone would argue that change is disruptive and entails risks: but, the thing that matters is, are you better off over the long run? My take is that we're FAR below our potential right now. I also think we can screen for what we want in terms of recruiting, system, etc.. It'd be interesting to see a poll of the users on the question, but discussing it would probably stir the usual controversy.
The thought is if the talent is there, a good coach should be able to perform well.
Emphasis on good. Obviously the classes pointed out were great, but the coach didn't perform up to their standards.
mattcoldagelli
- The Transfer Portal with Do Not Contact Tag
What's the point of getting a 1-seed if you don't win the whole tournament?
Catching up again :thumb:
If guys are already known as an NBA prospect to the point where they wouldn't transfer upon a coaching change simply because it's delaying their departure to the NBA, they'd just go to the NBA earlier. That happens all the time. Also, we certainly have to extend or fire Groce after the season. Coaches don't operate on 2 year contracts in college sports. That shows a complete lack of faith from the administration, and broadcasts that to opponents, recruits, and the players. And yes, you can fire Groce after making the tournament. The failings under his regime are well documented, the hot seat is known, and nobody would really question unseating him if he just squeaked into First Four or something like that.
You can have x's and o's guys on the bench, but I really think the model you are proposing is more effective in football than basketball (there are certainly more cases of it we can point to). Additionally, and S&C touched on this, Groce has been loyal to his own detriment at this point, I find it hard to believe he'll make a change. Additionally, we already added Darren Hertz as special asst to HC in the last 2 seasons after Brandon Miller went to Butler (iirc) and saw zero noticeable impact there (he's certainly not being sent out recruiting, and there haven't bee improvements on the court schematically).
Speak for yourself. Maybe you shouldn't take it so personally when you make a claim without any evidence, and then someone takes the time to actually disprove it. Tilmon could easily transfer for any assortment of reasons, and he could also bust. Just because he is committed to Illinois doesn't spare him from any of the variety of things we've seen happen to top prospects across the country at other schools.
I'd agree with the first and second points. Our teams have bad habits. When they reel those in and play together, we've at times looked OK or even good for stretches, but the issue is when things get tough, or we get ahead, the bad habits start to come out due to adversity or comfort (thus why I get so angry at my TV when we go into 'prevent' offense with 4 minutes left with a lead!). I would add that our teams tend to display signs of a lack of basketball IQ, although some pieces are not necessarily victim to that.
I think there's definitely reason to believe recruiting is in fact boosted in the first year, because realistically, coaches can sell that any perceivable problems in the product are not theirs, but rather inherited, and also, as has been mentioned, coaching changes all come with hope and excitement. There are cases where this would not apply, such as moving from an excellent recruiter to a poor one, or are operating in a scenario a la Kentucky where your standard is incredibly difficult to maintain for ANY coach, you will likely see the first year have solid returns.
I agree with these points and think it is important to look at trends nationally (which, while inconclusive and not necessarily gospel when assessing our own situation, can help us evaluate potential scenarios). Many trends will be subject to small sample sizes, but they are still helpful and should be based in data available. UofIChE06, in my opinion, went a little overboard on trying to look at other possible factors in the individual points of the data set in this particular case, but those are important to look at as well because we are talking about 17-22 year old kids, after all.
I don't understand people being so averse and offended by being proven wrong. The data says you were incorrect. You weren't personally attacked. This is just discussion, not an attack on your character or intelligence. He took the time to fact check.
If guys are already known as an NBA prospect to the point where they wouldn't transfer upon a coaching change simply because it's delaying their departure to the NBA, they'd just go to the NBA earlier. That happens all the time. Also, we certainly have to extend or fire Groce after the season. Coaches don't operate on 2 year contracts in college sports. That shows a complete lack of faith from the administration, and broadcasts that to opponents, recruits, and the players. And yes, you can fire Groce after making the tournament. The failings under his regime are well documented, the hot seat is known, and nobody would really question unseating him if he just squeaked into First Four or something like that.
You can have x's and o's guys on the bench, but I really think the model you are proposing is more effective in football than basketball (there are certainly more cases of it we can point to). Additionally, and S&C touched on this, Groce has been loyal to his own detriment at this point, I find it hard to believe he'll make a change. Additionally, we already added Darren Hertz as special asst to HC in the last 2 seasons after Brandon Miller went to Butler (iirc) and saw zero noticeable impact there (he's certainly not being sent out recruiting, and there haven't bee improvements on the court schematically).
Speak for yourself. Maybe you shouldn't take it so personally when you make a claim without any evidence, and then someone takes the time to actually disprove it. Tilmon could easily transfer for any assortment of reasons, and he could also bust. Just because he is committed to Illinois doesn't spare him from any of the variety of things we've seen happen to top prospects across the country at other schools.
I'd agree with the first and second points. Our teams have bad habits. When they reel those in and play together, we've at times looked OK or even good for stretches, but the issue is when things get tough, or we get ahead, the bad habits start to come out due to adversity or comfort (thus why I get so angry at my TV when we go into 'prevent' offense with 4 minutes left with a lead!). I would add that our teams tend to display signs of a lack of basketball IQ, although some pieces are not necessarily victim to that.
I think there's definitely reason to believe recruiting is in fact boosted in the first year, because realistically, coaches can sell that any perceivable problems in the product are not theirs, but rather inherited, and also, as has been mentioned, coaching changes all come with hope and excitement. There are cases where this would not apply, such as moving from an excellent recruiter to a poor one, or are operating in a scenario a la Kentucky where your standard is incredibly difficult to maintain for ANY coach, you will likely see the first year have solid returns.
I agree with these points and think it is important to look at trends nationally (which, while inconclusive and not necessarily gospel when assessing our own situation, can help us evaluate potential scenarios). Many trends will be subject to small sample sizes, but they are still helpful and should be based in data available. UofIChE06, in my opinion, went a little overboard on trying to look at other possible factors in the individual points of the data set in this particular case, but those are important to look at as well because we are talking about 17-22 year old kids, after all.
I don't understand people being so averse and offended by being proven wrong. The data says you were incorrect. You weren't personally attacked. This is just discussion, not an attack on your character or intelligence. He took the time to fact check.
Last edited:
Foggy Notion
- San Francisco
If a high seed does not yield success in the tournament, however you choose to define success, then there is no point, except that it is evidence of a great regular season. Tournament seeding reflects on-court performance that actually happened, unlike recruiting rankings, which merely reflect opinions about future performance.
Totally fair.
Admittedly, part of my inherent opposition towards the Groce pitchforks stems from a total lack of understanding within said group in regards to how basketball on the offensive end has progressed in the last 10 years. Not everybody, obviously (as clearly illustrated above), but man - hang out in a game thread and watch the fallacies fly.
Groce is a very, very bright basketball mind. Implementing his system...well that hasn't gone so great.
mattcoldagelli
- The Transfer Portal with Do Not Contact Tag
A high seed, like a good class of recruits, doesn't guarantee anything, but it sure makes your job a lot easier.
Oddly enough the same cast of characters seem to appear again and again at the top of recruiting and seeding.
Foggy Notion
- San Francisco
Indeed, and we have a good class of recruits coming in next year.
Serious Late
- Peoria via Denver via Ann Arbor via Albuquerque vi
Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhh. A #1 seed (or high seed in general) implies a season with many more ups than downs. It guarantees more entertainment than disappointment over the course of a season. On court results also provide more hope (in my opinion) than highly rated recruiting classes. A highly rated recruiting class doesn't move the average fan either (who likely doesn't have a clue about the recruiting). Wins, on court performance, even without a title, still has a lot of merit to those who follow the team, imo. A top recruiting class without results is as likely a net negative as a net positive. Hard to see how a high seed with an early tourney exit is a net negative (particularly given where our program is right now).
I am to the point i just want to be able to appreciate game to game results. Beat the 50-100 Kenpom teams however it looks, play competitive with top 50 Kenpom teams (and win a few), easily handle the teams 100+ in Kenpom. All I really hope for each game at this point. So far, we are a -3 in that category. 2 blowouts to top 50 and a loss to a 100+ team. No wins that go above and beyond reasonable expectations to offset the bad. The sound of a high seed and an early exit feels a lot more satisfying than a top 15 recruiting class right now.
The writing on the wall is getting clearer and clearer to read with each poor performance. Everything will play out in its own time. As we get further in the season I suspect we will start to hear about a lot more potential candidates. I just hope we don't jump on another flavor of the month.
Last edited by a moderator:
I hope we call a few guys before Cuonzo. I think the board got infatuated with the name after rumors spread of reciprocal interest.
Mediocre coach.
The sad thing is that mediocre would be an upgrade right now.
GortTheRobot
- North Bethesda, Maryland
The truth certainly does hurt. Archie Miller, please. Unless you can land Marshall or Jacobson.
Didn't Capel get fired for going 14-36 last two seasons at OU?
And Tiny Gallon getting paid. Had a nice run with Blake Griffin.
That's right, I couldn't recall what happened. Thanks
Illini4Reel
- Champaign, IL.
Twitter is having a night with the Illini. "John Groce" has been a top ten trending topic in the US.
- Status