Illini Basketball 2016-2017

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1,176      
Govoner Vaugn Fan
Deadpool said:
Really good stuff, I would only add that Illinois is not a program you can rebuild in 2 or 3 years. It takes multiple years of successful recruiting to do it, so yeah, Groce has been somewhat underwhelming, but this 2017 talent gives me pause and I am legitimately concerned that this program won't do a lot better than Groce.
Click to expand...

There are a few coaches who could recruit well from day one at most any school, and a few programs that will draw top recruits regardless of the coach. Groce is not currently one of those high profile coaches, and Illinois is not one of those self recruiting programs. In today's world, it seems coaches that build programs need several years to start bringing in top recruits. The coach has to be in on kids early, often in their HS freshman year. I think we are seeing the success of that with the 17 class. Despite the spate of injuries last year that really demolished chances of a solid post season showing, I think he has done a great job recruiting the 17 class, and hopefully this will only continue and improve.
 
#1,178      
Tevo
geneseo said:
Agree mostly. Everything else being equal, I would chose bigger, stronger, faster all day long. But, everything else is never equal.

If "desire" is one of the two attributes that you are saying isn't teachable, I will disagree. If the coaching staff emphasizes rebounding, makes it a primary focus by practicing it every single day, by rewarding players who are the best rebounders, I think the team would respond, that is, find that desire.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was thinking of "desire" more like "motor", in that it's hard for guys (but not impossible) to develop motor. Guys like Leron have it. The coaches can certainly prioritize rebounding and reward guys who perform, and that can mean a lot, but it seems like the better rebounders are the ones who have a natural "every lose ball is mine" personality.
 
#1,179      
Calvin
geneseo said:
We are discussing my perception/opinion, that our rebounding woes are due in part to the tactics employed by the staff. I didn't present a few random stats, but the two leading rebounders of each of the last four seasons. It's a little data that I think supports my opinion.




I think you're saying there are many variables that have contributed to our consistent mediocre to poor showing on the glass including last season's disaster of ranking in the bottom 8%. I agree with that, including that personnel is one of those variables.

We have a four year record now. Groce has had the chance to recruit personnel that fit his system.

Like you, I also hope Thorne will do much to reverse the record, but gosh, we have him for one year, hopefully, not a college career; and he is a player returning from injury and has other health issues. I'll be happy if he makes it through the year and averages 20 mpg.

Black fouls and has anger issues. I have seen no evidence that Groce has been successful teaching him to play without fouling or losing his temper. I think he will be tested by opposing players and coaches. And I don't see the referees giving him the benefit of the doubt very often. He has a reputation. Cripes, his nickname is/was Savage.

Anyway, I hope you and all the others pointing to Thorne and Black as the answer are correct.
Click to expand...

Offseason talk is pretty worthless, but I'm gonna respond to some of this.

1. I can't imagine painting Leron that way. Far as I can tell he's a pretty good-natured kid who made a mistake in a bad environment. I think he'll exercise better judgment, and I'm glad he's going to have another chance after his suspension. YMMV.

2. Just using the eye test, rebounding isn't a thing with Groce. Mind you, I see a lot of MSU games, so it's night and day how passive we are compared to the best in the country. If you want to forgive last season, fine, but go back another year and we were still 161st in rebounding margin according to the NCAA website. It's abysmal. Thorne's a decent rebounder. Black has potential to be a great one. Still, as a team, I have given up on having elite rebounding --it's just not something I've seen emphasized. If that's your main point, I agree.

Personnel gets weaker and weaker as an argument after 4 seasons. If you rarely have a good rebounding team after 4 seasons, you're either not emphasizing it when you recruit, or not emphasizing it when you practice or develop your players. All that said, I give Groce a lot of credit for bringing in Tilmon. He's likely to be an improvement on the glass over anyone he's had thus far. Having Black and Tilmon on the same team gives me hope that I'm just being cynical.
 
#1,180      
Tevo
geneseo said:
Agree mostly. Everything else being equal, I would chose bigger, stronger, faster all day long. But, everything else is never equal.

If "desire" is one of the two attributes that you are saying isn't teachable, I will disagree. If the coaching staff emphasizes rebounding, makes it a primary focus by practicing it every single day, by rewarding players who are the best rebounders, I think the team would respond, that is, find that desire.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was thinking of "desire" more like "motor", in that it's hard for guys (but not impossible) to develop motor. Guys like Leron have it. The coaches can certainly prioritize rebounding and reward guys who perform, and that can mean a lot, but it seems like the better rebounders are the ones who have a natural "every lose ball is mine" personality.
 
#1,181      
Mike
Calvin said:
Offseason talk is pretty worthless, but I'm gonna respond to some of this.

1. I can't imagine painting Leron that way. Far as I can tell he's a pretty good-natured kid who made a mistake in a bad environment. I think he'll exercise better judgment, and I'm glad he's going to have another chance after his suspension. YMMV.

2. Just using the eye test, rebounding isn't a thing with Groce. Mind you, I see a lot of MSU games, so it's night and day how passive we are compared to the best in the country. If you want to forgive last season, fine, but go back another year and we were still 161st in rebounding margin according to the NCAA website. It's abysmal. Thorne's a decent rebounder. Black has potential to be a great one. Still, as a team, I have given up on having elite rebounding --it's just not something I've seen emphasized. If that's your main point, I agree.

Personnel gets weaker and weaker as an argument after 4 seasons. If you rarely have a good rebounding team after 4 seasons, you're either not emphasizing it when you recruit, or not emphasizing it when you practice or develop your players. All that said, I give Groce a lot of credit for bringing in Tilmon. He's likely to be an improvement on the glass over anyone he's had thus far. Having Black and Tilmon on the same team gives me hope that I'm just being cynical.
Click to expand...



IMHO poor rebounding has mostly been personnel & strength issues.

Last year we lost our physical bigs (Egwu, Thorne, Black). I think MM & MF will rebound noticeably better if not well this year, but they are simply not elite rebounders and to expect otherwise is not realistic.

That being said, I would certainly like to see the whole team become less soft and more physical especially in rebounding. I expect that to happen due in much part to very noticeable strength increases via Fletch. I know when my kid played AAU, he manhandled way better players through sheer strength and grit. Think we will see some of that this season with our Illini. When you are stronger than the guy next to you when the ball goes up, you simply box him out of the rebound no matter what he does. If he elbows you, jumps over you, etc. so what, you just move him back more. Some refs will call you for a foul occasionally, but establishing physical dominance is a big deal. That takes more than just determination. You have to also be strong.
 
Last edited:
#1,182      
Mike
Calvin said:
Offseason talk is pretty worthless, but I'm gonna respond to some of this.

1. I can't imagine painting Leron that way. Far as I can tell he's a pretty good-natured kid who made a mistake in a bad environment. I think he'll exercise better judgment, and I'm glad he's going to have another chance after his suspension. YMMV.

2. Just using the eye test, rebounding isn't a thing with Groce. Mind you, I see a lot of MSU games, so it's night and day how passive we are compared to the best in the country. If you want to forgive last season, fine, but go back another year and we were still 161st in rebounding margin according to the NCAA website. It's abysmal. Thorne's a decent rebounder. Black has potential to be a great one. Still, as a team, I have given up on having elite rebounding --it's just not something I've seen emphasized. If that's your main point, I agree.

Personnel gets weaker and weaker as an argument after 4 seasons. If you rarely have a good rebounding team after 4 seasons, you're either not emphasizing it when you recruit, or not emphasizing it when you practice or develop your players. All that said, I give Groce a lot of credit for bringing in Tilmon. He's likely to be an improvement on the glass over anyone he's had thus far. Having Black and Tilmon on the same team gives me hope that I'm just being cynical.
Click to expand...



IMHO poor rebounding has mostly been personnel & strength issues.

Last year we lost our physical bigs (Egwu, Thorne, Black). I think MM & MF will rebound noticeably better if not well this year, but they are simply not elite rebounders and to expect otherwise is not realistic. Rebounding is not what those two are best at.

That being said, I would certainly like to see the whole team become less soft and more physical especially in rebounding. I expect that to happen due in much part to very noticeable strength increases via Fletch. I know when my kid played AAU, he manhandled way better players through sheer strength and grit. Think we will see some of that this season with our Illini. When you are stronger than the guy next to you when the ball goes up, you simply box him out of the rebound area no matter what he does.
 
#1,185      
jmwillini
sorry if already mentioned, but saw my first college ball mag out today. Athlon has the Illini picked 11th in the Big10.

I have to figure at least 6th or 7th. Hopefully higher, barring injuries.
 
#1,187      
Hoppy2105
jmwillini said:
sorry if already mentioned, but saw my first college ball mag out today. Athlon has the Illini picked 11th in the Big10.

I have to figure at least 6th or 7th. Hopefully higher, barring injuries.
Click to expand...

Has Athlon been any good to us recently? I seem to recall someone saying they always predict us low. I mean, we HAVE been low...so I don't blame them. They probably aren't as knowledgeable about the team as we are.

If their prediction is low and ours is high, 6th or 7th might be just right. (Although, I am hoping for a surprising 4th...)
 
#1,188      
Obelix
Hoppy2105 said:
Has Athlon been any good to us recently? I seem to recall someone saying they always predict us low. I mean, we HAVE been low...so I don't blame them. They probably aren't as knowledgeable about the team as we are.

If their prediction is low and ours is high, 6th or 7th might be just right. (Although, I am hoping for a surprising 4th...)
Click to expand...

Here is last year's Athlon predictions, and actual finish in the B1G.

Athlon 2015-16 predictions:

1. Maryland
2. Michigan State
3. Purdue
4. Indiana
5. Wisconsin
6. Michigan
7. Iowa
8. Ohio State
9. Northwestern
10. Illinois
11. Penn State
12 Minnesota
13. Nebraska
14. Rutgers

Actual B1G 2015-16 Standings:

1. Indiana
2. Michigan State
3. Purdue
4. Maryland
5. Iowa
6. Wisconsin
7. Ohio State
8. Michigan
9. Northwestern
10. Penn State
11. Nebraska
12. Illinois
13. Minnesota
14. Rutgers

Overall, they did pretty well. Hard to predict the exact order exactly, but they did well predicting all tiers, teams 1-4 correctly (top 4 teams), 5-8 correctly (next 4), and 9-14 (last six).
 
#1,189      
westcoastillini
Obelix said:
Here is last year's Athlon predictions, and actual finish in the B1G.

Athlon 2015-16 predictions:

1. Maryland
2. Michigan State
3. Purdue
4. Indiana
5. Wisconsin
6. Michigan
7. Iowa
8. Ohio State
9. Northwestern
10. Illinois
11. Penn State
12 Minnesota
13. Nebraska
14. Rutgers

Actual B1G 2015-16 Standings:

1. Indiana
2. Michigan State
3. Purdue
4. Maryland
5. Iowa
6. Wisconsin
7. Ohio State
8. Michigan
9. Northwestern
10. Penn State
11. Nebraska
12. Illinois
13. Minnesota
14. Rutgers

Overall, they did pretty well. Hard to predict the exact order exactly, but they did well predicting all tiers, teams 1-4 correctly (top 4 teams), 5-8 correctly (next 4), and 9-14 (last six).
Click to expand...

Yikes. Let's hope they are a couple of tiers off for us...
 
#1,191      
ItsFootballTime
Obelix said:
Here is last year's Athlon predictions, and actual finish in the B1G.

Athlon 2015-16 predictions:

1. Maryland
2. Michigan State
3. Purdue
4. Indiana
5. Wisconsin
6. Michigan
7. Iowa
8. Ohio State
9. Northwestern
10. Illinois
11. Penn State
12 Minnesota
13. Nebraska
14. Rutgers

Actual B1G 2015-16 Standings:

1. Indiana
2. Michigan State
3. Purdue
4. Maryland
5. Iowa
6. Wisconsin
7. Ohio State
8. Michigan
9. Northwestern
10. Penn State
11. Nebraska
12. Illinois
13. Minnesota
14. Rutgers

Overall, they did pretty well. Hard to predict the exact order exactly, but they did well predicting all tiers, teams 1-4 correctly (top 4 teams), 5-8 correctly (next 4), and 9-14 (last six).
Click to expand...

That's a terrible prediction unless in the little blurb about the Illini they also predicted the starting center would miss the big ten season, the starting point guard would miss another year, the staring power forward would not play and the backup point would get injured in his hand, and both of the shooting guards would have significant injuries to over come.
 
#1,192      
RichBradIllini
jmwillini said:
sorry if already mentioned, but saw my first college ball mag out today. Athlon has the Illini picked 11th in the Big10.

I have to figure at least 6th or 7th. Hopefully higher, barring injuries.
Click to expand...

Uuuuugggghhh! Reality just hit...excuse me while I pick my heart up off the floor. Looks to me like its going to be a re-shuffle of the top 8 in the actual B1G finish for 15-16. Indiana, Wisconsin, MSU, Purdue and Maryland look pretty good for the top 5. Hopefully, we're in a fight for a 6 or 7 spot with Michigan, Ohio St, NW and Iowa.
 
#1,193      
TCTORNADO
RichBradIllini said:
Uuuuugggghhh! Reality just hit...excuse me while I pick my heart up off the floor. Looks to me like its going to be a re-shuffle of the top 8 in the actual B1G finish for 15-16. Indiana, Wisconsin, MSU, Purdue and Maryland look pretty good for the top 5. Hopefully, we're in a fight for a 6 or 7 spot with Michigan, Ohio St, NW and Iowa.
Click to expand...

Hey there's hope...Weber went from 5-13 and tied for 9th in B1G ('07-'08) to 11-7 and tied for 2nd ('08-'09). That was McCamey, Tisdale and Davis' soph years and Frazier's Senior year. BAM used that to leverage a huge contract extension we just paid off last year. :)
 
Last edited:
#1,194      
Newman
I'll take a stab at this. Had to add a couple of bold predictions, hopefully Illinois getting 6th isn't one of them.

1. Michigan State
2. Wisconsin
3. Purdue
4. Indiana
5. Maryland
6. Illinois
7. Michigan
8. Ohio State
9. Penn State
10. Northwestern
11. Iowa
12. Rutgers
13. Nebraska
14. Minny
 
#1,195      
Deleted member 29907
Newman said:
I'll take a stab at this. Had to add a couple of bold predictions, hopefully Illinois getting 6th isn't one of them.

1. Michigan State
2. Wisconsin
3. Purdue
4. Indiana
5. Maryland
6. Illinois
7. Michigan
8. Ohio State
9. Penn State
10. Northwestern
11. Iowa
12. Rutgers
13. Nebraska
14. Minny
Click to expand...

I think we're more likely around #4 this year. MH has much more overall help this year we had to rely on some young pups last year. My assumption is TA returns to form. His competitive nature makes me think the time off won't hurt his game past the first few rust removing games..
 
#1,197      
Illwinsagain
VAIllini35 said:
I think we're more likely around #4 this year. MH has much more overall help this year we had to rely on some young pups last year. My assumption is TA returns to form. His competitive nature makes me think the time off won't hurt his game past the first few rust removing games..
Click to expand...

Kool-Aid flows deep with this one.....Positive thoughts, hurt will not.
 
#1,198      
RVILLINI76
Why would Michigan State be number one in the Big Ten? Don't they lose Valentine, Costello and Forbes to graduation, their top 3 scorers(combined 44 pts per game)?
 
#1,199      
Adnarel
RVILLINI76 said:
Why would Michigan State be number one in the Big Ten? Don't they lose Valentine, Costello and Forbes to graduation, their top 3 scorers(combined 44 pts per game)?
Click to expand...
Have you learned nothing about Tom Izzo?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back