I know I'm in a small minority here. I just want to see Tilmon in O&B and can only give Groce the credit for getting him. Then I consider others in the class and add TJL to the mix and conclude that maybe it just took this long.
2017 Coaching Carousel
- Status
I know I'm in a small minority here. I just want to see Tilmon in O&B and can only give Groce the credit for getting him. Then I consider others in the class and add TJL to the mix and conclude that maybe it just took this long.
89illinigrad
- Chicago
I hear you and I kinda feel the same way. I think that, unless you're a hot coach (like Shaka or Stevens), that immediately creates a buzz around the program, you need time to build relationships with recruits (and their AAU/HS coaches). We're starting to see these relationships pay off with Tilmon and I think Groce could really capitalize on the downstate talent coming up in the next few years.
Basically, I would hate to see all his hard work go to waste and have to start again from square one, but at the same time I want to see him prove himself on the court as well. It still comes down to how the team does this year and if they make the Dance.
Hear you and completely follow the rationale. I hope we make the tourney but don't see it happening. I think Groce is good as gone.
If this were a baseball roster, who on our team would have a goor WAR? I suppose Hill is it. Our roster is very meh. That is on Groce too and reason enough to fire him. In reality though, he seems to have turned the corner. Just to late.
A certainty? I think guys in shoes play better. Yeah, that's it.
There's really not a difference between our previous classes and this one. The talent level is steady-eddie and has been for many years now spanning two coaching administrations.
And besides, there is no possible rational basis to conclude that Tilmon (RSCI #25) will have the same impact as Markelle Fultz (RSCI #5) or Ben Simmons (RSCI #1). Simmons was a National POY candidate and LSU missed the tournament, and Fultz is a do-it-all superstar and Washington is 8-7 with no chance at the dance.
Elite NBA lottery talent cannot conquer bad coaching, and Tilmon is not elite NBA lottery talent.
The evidence just doesn't back that up. Mark Gottfried was a fired ex-Alabama coach who had been sitting around for two years. Cuonzo Martin was a mid-major Keadyball devotee cleaning up Tennessee after Bruce Pearl had greased up all of those relationships.
And those are just examples of non-"hot" coaches coming in and bringing in a raft of 5-stars. There are plenty of other examples of coaches coming in and bringing in solid talent that fits.
I think everyone is underestimating how quickly the right coach could make himself at home here. This is a good job in pretty good shape.
And let's be clear, IF that statement is true, you absolutely do not fire him and stick it out, come hell or high water.
Firing a coach is not a question of punishment for previous failures. Those lost seasons are a sunk cost. The sole question is what option presents the brightest future.
If the Groce era is on the verge of a greatness that we couldn't reasonably expect to find on the open market, then any failures this year or in prior years are irrelevant and you lock him down to a long-term deal.
But what all available evidence and rational analysis indicates is that we're not turning a corner, rather we've already turned one. We have, at this moment, as good and as talented and as deep and as experienced of a roster as Groce's recruiting efforts indicate he will ever be able to bring to Illinois. At least at perhaps the 85-90th percentile on that spectrum. Over the next two months we're going to find out what that's worth. The early returns are that it's not worth much, and that any return to where Illinois ought to be under John Groce would be just a matter of blind luck, not design.
At that point, the open market presents the more likely avenue for future success. That is why you make a move, not as an act of wrath against past failures.
I get where hermie is coming from. I go back and forth on this. I think there are a few coaches who are great at preparing game plans, making adjustments, and adapting to the strengths of their roster. Groce is not one of them, but I don't think that's a deal breaker; even the best coaches will struggle to win consistently on the basis of X's and O's if they're at a talent disadvantage. There are other coaches who run systems that allow them to compete with lesser talent (usually pace-dictating schemes - slowdown offense, WVU press, etc.). Groce runs a generic system without many imaginative wrinkles. Doesn't bother me, as it's one that's supported by plenty of good basketball minds and analytics models.
At the end of the day, I think that being a strategy whiz and tactical savant is overrated at the college level. I think that Groce is a below-average basketball mind relative to his B1G peers, but I don't think it matters a ton. In the college game, talent wins. This is especially true when you get talented kids in the program for multiple years, so they learn how to play technically sound defense, understand your philosophy, and develop a comfort level with each other.
I think that Groce is a good enough coach and leader of men to win with a deep, talented, experienced roster. Sure, in a vacuum I'd rather have Archie Miller or a few dozen other coaches, but the way Groce's recruiting has ticked up and considering the surfeit of downstate talent the next few years, the question is at least worth asking: if we win 19 games and miss the tourney this year, are we more likely to rebound as a program with Groce on the bench and potentially a roster that's loaded with 4-stars, plus 5-star guys like Tilmon and (maybe) Dosunmu and Okoro, or are we better off gambling on a promising up-and-coming coach but potentially losing Tilmon, Frazier, maybe JCL, and who knows what other players/recruits/relationships? I'm not saying there's not a right answer--I personally feel that if JG doesn't turn it around this year he's got to go--but the possible ramifications are disconcerting.
At the end of the day, I think that being a strategy whiz and tactical savant is overrated at the college level. I think that Groce is a below-average basketball mind relative to his B1G peers, but I don't think it matters a ton. In the college game, talent wins. This is especially true when you get talented kids in the program for multiple years, so they learn how to play technically sound defense, understand your philosophy, and develop a comfort level with each other.
I think that Groce is a good enough coach and leader of men to win with a deep, talented, experienced roster. Sure, in a vacuum I'd rather have Archie Miller or a few dozen other coaches, but the way Groce's recruiting has ticked up and considering the surfeit of downstate talent the next few years, the question is at least worth asking: if we win 19 games and miss the tourney this year, are we more likely to rebound as a program with Groce on the bench and potentially a roster that's loaded with 4-stars, plus 5-star guys like Tilmon and (maybe) Dosunmu and Okoro, or are we better off gambling on a promising up-and-coming coach but potentially losing Tilmon, Frazier, maybe JCL, and who knows what other players/recruits/relationships? I'm not saying there's not a right answer--I personally feel that if JG doesn't turn it around this year he's got to go--but the possible ramifications are disconcerting.
Last edited:
You said it better than I ever would have. My original point was that it is more complicated than making or not making tourney, and would have been easier last March.
Malcolm Hill is Mike Trout on the Angels man.
Re: my last post, to clarify, I'm not implying that our current roster is devoid of talent. Just saying that I think Groce can win with a team built around JCL, Black, Tilmon, Frazier, Dosunmu, both Finke bros, et al. Not sure he'll accumulate that roster, but if he does is it worth keeping him? Basically, it comes down to this: does consistently good recruiting compensate for mediocre coaching?
If Malcolm Hill were the Mike Trout of college basketball we'd be the 1979 Indiana State Sycamores and undefeated right now.
I do too. But we're going to be proven right or wrong by mid-March.
You can say it all you want, that doesn't make it the truth.
Let's put a real fine point on this: I think Ben Jacobson or Kermit Davis (or pick your non-"sexy" hire) would be more likely to land Ayo Dosunmu for Illinois than John Groce.
I know few will agree with that conclusion, but I think perceptions around Groce, the appeal of Illinois to recruits, and the value of long-term "relationships" on this board are a tapestry built out of the narrative arc of the past decade of obsessing over the blow-by-blow minutiae of Illinois basketball recruiting and have become decoupled from the broader objective reality.
It's myth and folklore, not empiricism.
That's fair. I apologize for speaking ill of Mike Trout.
It depends on how you define "good", "compensate", and "mediocre".
The shortest answer is "no" though.
And I disagree with your definition of deep and talented when you referenced our roster. Thus our failure to reach similar conclusions. I also think an Illini roster with Tilmon is better than one without regardless if some 5 star didn't bring a championship to their team. Oh well. It's been a constructive conversation on what blend of coaching and talent it takes to improve. I'm betting we pick upgrading coach this go around. I just wouldn't. I'm not sure I'm right so I'm not telling you you're wrong.
You think next year's roster is better than this year's? I'm curious, can you expand on that?
I'm wondering how much of that is expected contributions from Tilmon and Frazier as true freshmen.
UNLV and Wash are good indicators the answer is no.
Washington maybe you can say they dont pull in top 10 classes every year but they are loaded with top 100 guys. UNLV always surprises me how they pull guys in without having any real success with them for 20 years.
There are also examples of teams that over perform with less talent...
Really I could cherry pick data all day, fight every angle on this, but in the end there isnt an answer to your question. Can any one on this board really argue our team doesnt have the talent (at least from the rankings perspective) to at least make the tourney? JCL and Black were top 50 players, Hill and Abrams were top 100 (top 75?). DJW was a top 100 player and AJ was a borderline top 100 player. Depth and experience are there too. Someone posted somewhere on this board recently (sorry I cant be more specfic) showing our preseason rankings and EOS rankings. We dropped every year. The sum never equaled the parts. So in our case I dont think talent can overcome our lack of coaching.
I think the most important aspect of college basketball is either getting players who fit your schemes well, or being able to change schemes to fit the talent you get. Lack of an experienced PG and talented big men have killed this team and will most likely cost Groce his job.
BananaShampoo
Captain 'Paign
- Phoenix, AZ
That is a really interesting question. Never seen it really applied to college basketball. I think it would have a wider range simply because of the fact you have only 5 players on a court at any one time with higher individual usage rates so one player can make a higher impact. For instance, Michael Jordan's WAR when in his prime was probably on the order of +12. Those bulls teams were probably an average 50 win team without him (they won 47 and 57 games in the two season he played baseball), and an average 62 win team with him. Obviously he would have one of the highest WARs of all time.
Here's how I see it for the Illini this season (I'd consider replacement level an average starter on a middle of the pack B1G roster):
Malcolm - +4
JCL - +2
Leron - +2
Abrams - 0
TJL - 0
Mav - 0
Thorne - 0
Finke - 0
DJW - 0
Kipper - -1
Jordan - -1
Tate - -3
I only included guys who have played any meaningful minutes. This would give our overall team a +3 assuming they all played equal minutes, meaning if that were the case we should be expected to win 3 more games over the course of a season that an average B1G team, assuming coaching were equal as well. Take out Tate completely and play only Abrams or TJL and you could expect 3 more wins than if he played all PG minutes. Kipper I had at -1 because of small sample size but that could change over the course of the season and as he gets more minutes he might prove to be at least a replacement level player. Feel free to quibble as you wish but this is my personal assessment based on what I've seen this season so far.
The notion that our roster/team is very talented and deep is laughable.
Whether Groce has turned the corner in recruiting is another question though. His 2017 class is good, with positional balance, but not exceptional. It is a really good foundational class to build around, something that Groce should have done in year 2 or 3, not in year 5. So the question is whether this class represents the beginning of even better recruiting, or it just happens to be one of his better classes that Groce would be able to once in a while get.
Pretty similar to the quick change of opinion on Weber and Pitino by some posters. Just because a coach may occasionally have a pretty good season, it does not necessarily negate previous failures, and does not necessarily mean that the coach has turned the corner and this is the beginning of better things to come.
Consistency, in both cases, is the differentiating factor.
Turned the corner was a bit much. Would love to take that back. Bottom line, I'd like to keep this class vs a lateral move and lose it. Whitman won't do a lateral though. This gets interesting.
Interesting indeed, and one of those seasons that B1G is pretty unpredictable so far, top to bottom.
When you take a really clear-eyed look at what a lateral move looks like, you realize that it's a non-existent risk.
BananaShampoo
Captain 'Paign
- Phoenix, AZ
Agree. The answer is no. There are myriad examples of teams with above average to great talent who go nowhere almost every year. On the other hand I can name many teams with average to slightly above average talent but great coaching who win a lot of games every year and often make it far in the tourney. Wichita State, Northern Iowa, VCU, Wisconsin, Michigan under Belein, Butler. The thing is, too, these teams with great coaching also perform much more consistently. They don't often get blown out because they are underprepared. With excellent coaching, even if you can get average talent for your conference you will win a lot of games. Get above average talent at least and you can go very far in the tourney.
mattcoldagelli
- The Transfer Portal with Do Not Contact Tag
The question really isn't "do we have a very talented and deep roster?" It's "should this roster be able to make the tournament?" To which I think the answer is unequivocally yes, especially in a down-ish B1G.
Agree we should make it but the state of the conference is not really relevant. We're not a title contender.
- Status