Illini Basketball 2021-2022

Status
Not open for further replies.
#53      
Yeah, Plummer lit it up against competition that blew the Big 10 out of the water come tournament time. He's not some unknown prospect. And now he has better teammates to feed him the ball
He also took a lot of shots (11.2/game), considerably more than any Illini not named Ayo. Curbelo, Miller and Frazier were all 7+. I'd expect Plummer to be closer to those numbers for us.
 
#58      
Winged Warrior
As are the posts warning people to pump the brakes on expectations going into the season. :)
giphy.gif
 
#59      
Washington, DC
He also took a lot of shots (11.2/game), considerably more than any Illini not named Ayo. Curbelo, Miller and Frazier were all 7+. I'd expect Plummer to be closer to those numbers for us.
As I said in last week's thread about this very subject, we have a pretty darn good idea of what Plummer will look like for us. In the 2019-20 season, Plummer came off the bench (as he most likely will for us) and averaged 15.2 minutes a game. During those minutes, he averaged 8.4 points on 6.6 shots per game. He shot 46.7 fg%, 42.0 3p%, and 75 ft%. He's an extremely efficient scorer that doesn't need to take a ton of shots to be effective.

And for those that are doubting him, Plummer is a known commodity. Yes, in the past, we've been burned by transfers that don't live up to our expectations. This isn't one of those situations. Our previous transfers typically fall into 1 of 2 camps. Either 1) they're coming from a lower division or, at best, worse conference, and we're hoping they can adapt their game to higher competition; or 2) we're asking them to take on a role they haven't previously proven they can play. With Plummer, neither of those things are true. He's a fifth-year senior from a Pac-12 school and he's already proven he can excel at the exact role we are asking him to play. It's okay to be excited.
 
#61      
As I said in last week's thread about this very subject, we have a pretty darn good idea of what Plummer will look like for us. In the 2019-20 season, Plummer came off the bench (as he most likely will for us) and averaged 15.2 minutes a game. During those minutes, he averaged 8.4 points on 6.6 shots per game. He shot 46.7 fg%, 42.0 3p%, and 75 ft%. He's an extremely efficient scorer that doesn't need to take a ton of shots to be effective.

And for those that are doubting him, Plummer is a known commodity. Yes, in the past, we've been burned by transfers that don't live up to our expectations. This isn't one of those situations. Our previous transfers typically fall into 1 of 2 camps. Either 1) they're coming from a lower division or, at best, worse conference, and we're hoping they can adapt their game to higher competition; or 2) we're asking them to take on a role they haven't previously proven they can play. With Plummer, neither of those things are true. He's a fifth-year senior from a Pac-12 school and he's already proven he can excel at the exact role we are asking him to play. It's okay to be excited.
I still love this analysis the second time around.

That said I'd say Aaron Cosby is an example of a lateral conference move that didn't work out.

I was never high on Cosby. He just seemed like a guy who was discontented. I don't see that with plummer.
 
#62      
As I said in last week's thread about this very subject, we have a pretty darn good idea of what Plummer will look like for us. In the 2019-20 season, Plummer came off the bench (as he most likely will for us) and averaged 15.2 minutes a game. During those minutes, he averaged 8.4 points on 6.6 shots per game. He shot 46.7 fg%, 42.0 3p%, and 75 ft%. He's an extremely efficient scorer that doesn't need to take a ton of shots to be effective.

And for those that are doubting him, Plummer is a known commodity. Yes, in the past, we've been burned by transfers that don't live up to our expectations. This isn't one of those situations. Our previous transfers typically fall into 1 of 2 camps. Either 1) they're coming from a lower division or, at best, worse conference, and we're hoping they can adapt their game to higher competition; or 2) we're asking them to take on a role they haven't previously proven they can play. With Plummer, neither of those things are true. He's a fifth-year senior from a Pac-12 school and he's already proven he can excel at the exact role we are asking him to play. It's okay to be excited.
Also, with Kofi and Belo I think he will get more open looks with us. Think how good we would have been last year had Ace knocked down his shots at a steady 40% clip.
 
#63      
I still love this analysis the second time around.

That said I'd say Aaron Cosby is an example of a lateral conference move that didn't work out.

I was never high on Cosby. He just seemed like a guy who was discontented. I don't see that with plummer.
Starks is another and, of course, comes from same conference as Plummer. That said, I’m high on Plummer and think he’ll be productive off the bench for Illini this year.
 
#64      
Washington, DC
I still love this analysis the second time around.

That said I'd say Aaron Cosby is an example of a lateral conference move that didn't work out.

I was never high on Cosby. He just seemed like a guy who was discontented. I don't see that with plummer.
NWjnqjv.gif

I've been pouring over their stats and went through both Seton Hall's schedule in 2012-13 and Utah's from last year and was planning on doing a compare and contrast. I do think the edge would have gone to Plummer, though it absolutely would have been close. Ultimately, though, I decided against it.

For me, it comes down to what we're asking Plummer to do vs. what we were expecting/needing from Cosby. This coming season, we're bringing back an All-American and the 6th Man of the Year in the B1G. We're also bringing back multiple 5th-year seniors that know the system in and out. Plus, we have a coach that seems to be pretty darn good. By all accounts, we should be an extremely solid team this season. For Plummer to be useful, as @RockfordIllini said, all we really need from him is to hit a few of the shots that Miller missed last season. Anything else he brings to the table, and I think it's obvious I'm a believer that he can bring considerably more, is absolute gravy.

Meanwhile, in 2014-15, we were an average team that got knocked out of the NIT in the first round. We had some talent: Nunn, Hill, Rice, but no one close to an All-American, and certainly not the senior leadership our current team has (no offense to Nnanna). We also had a coach that didn't quite live up to our expectations. That team needed Cosby to be extremely good to get to a 12 seed. Yeah, he didn't live up to that. Instead, he averaged right around where he did his freshman year, 7.8 Pts, 3.6 Reb, 1.7 Ast.
 
Last edited:
#66      
View attachment 12350
I've been pouring over their stats and went through both Seton Hall's schedule in 2012-13 and Utah's from last year and was planning on doing a compare and contrast. I do think the edge would have gone to Plummer, though it absolutely would have been close. Ultimately, though, I decided against it.

For me, it comes down to what we're asking Plummer to do vs. what we were expecting/needing from Cosby. This coming season, we're bringing back an All-American and the 6th Man of the Year in the B1G. We're also bringing back multiple 5th-year seniors that know the system in and out. Plus, we have a coach that seems to be pretty darn good. By all accounts, we should be an extremely solid team this season. For Plummer to be useful, as @RockfordIllini said, all we really need from him is to hit a few of the shots that Miller missed last season. Anything else he brings to the table, and I think it's obvious I'm a believer that he can bring considerably more, is absolute gravy.

Meanwhile, in 2014-15, we were an average team that got knocked out of the NIT in the first round. We had some talent: Nunn, Hill, Rice, but no one close to an All-American, and certainly not the senior leadership our current team has (no offense to Nnanna). We also had a coach that didn't quite live up to our expectations. That team needed Cosby to be extremely good to get to a 12 seed. Yeah, he didn't live up to that. Instead, he averaged right around where he did his freshman year, 7.8 Pts, 3.6 Reb, 1.7 Ast.
For me it comes down to attitude.
 
#67      
Washington, DC
Mark Alstork....(sp) ?
Wright State, he would go into the "hoping they can adapt their game to higher competition" camp.

Starks is another and, of course, comes from same conference as Plummer. That said, I’m high on Plummer and think he’ll be productive off the bench for Illini this year.
I'd say we expected too much from him. From a per-minute basis, his season with us wasn't too far off his junior year.

From looking at these numbers from our transfers, I do wonder how big of a hindrance being forced to sit a year was.
 
#69      
View attachment 12350
I've been pouring over their stats and went through both Seton Hall's schedule in 2012-13 and Utah's from last year and was planning on doing a compare and contrast. I do think the edge would have gone to Plummer, though it absolutely would have been close. Ultimately, though, I decided against it.

For me, it comes down to what we're asking Plummer to do vs. what we were expecting/needing from Cosby. This coming season, we're bringing back an All-American and the 6th Man of the Year in the B1G. We're also bringing back multiple 5th-year seniors that know the system in and out. Plus, we have a coach that seems to be pretty darn good. By all accounts, we should be an extremely solid team this season. For Plummer to be useful, as @RockfordIllini said, all we really need from him is to hit a few of the shots that Miller missed last season. Anything else he brings to the table, and I think it's obvious I'm a believer that he can bring considerably more, is absolute gravy.

Meanwhile, in 2014-15, we were an average team that got knocked out of the NIT in the first round. We had some talent: Nunn, Hill, Rice, but no one close to an All-American, and certainly not the senior leadership our current team has (no offense to Nnanna). We also had a coach that didn't quite live up to our expectations. That team needed Cosby to be extremely good to get to a 12 seed. Yeah, he didn't live up to that. Instead, he averaged right around where he did his freshman year, 7.8 Pts, 3.6 Reb, 1.7 Ast.
Agree with most, good post....we need Plummer to be our microwave on the 2nd team and a facilitator, because we have many good options on our 2nd team. I also think there's going to be a lot of fluctuations in the starting lineup this year in certain spots/positions.
 
#70      
CoHawk Fr-Soph leap incoming.

He handled his limited minutes last year pretty well. Add 10-15 lbs and a bunch more practice against these teammates....stands to reason he's going to make significant progress.
This is kind of what I dont understand. If we are not drinking orange Kool Aid then really in what statistical category did Hawkins perform well? I have looked at the numbers and they aren't that good for someone playing meaningful minutes. I hope he can improve and should but I'm glad we have Payne for defense and boards and I loved Grandison's numbers. He needs more time and looks this year..
 
Last edited:
#72      
Winged Warrior
This is kind of what I dont understand. If we are not drinking orange Kool Aid then really in what statistical category did Hawkins perform well? I have looked at the numbers and they aren't that good for someone playing meaningful minutes. I hope he can improve and should but I'm glad we have Payne for defense and boards and I loved Grandison's numbers. He needs more time and looks this year..

Maybe read my post again then? I didn't say "meaningful minutes"...I said "limited minutes". I didn't say "perform well"....I said "pretty well".

"He handled his limited minutes last year pretty well."......is the actual quote.

I'm using the eye test and not "statistical category" because he didn't play enough to establish real statistics.
He was a freshman forward at 200 lbs. in the B1G.
A 220 lb sophomore with another year of practice with this group is going to be better.
That's not orange Kool Aid.....that's just simple progression.
 
#73      
Maybe read my post again then? I didn't say "meaningful minutes"...I said "limited minutes". I didn't say "perform well"....I said "pretty well".

"He handled his limited minutes last year pretty well."......is the actual quote.

I'm using the eye test and not "statistical category" because he didn't play enough to establish real statistics.
He was a freshman forward at 200 lbs. in the B1G.
A 220 lb sophomore with another year of practice with this group is going to be better.
That's not orange Kool Aid.....that's just simple progression.
I was referring to the pretty well comment. I dont think his numbers were pretty good or well or at all and must but should improve from those sub par numbers. When the ball doesn't go in at a good rate how is that passing any eye test? I think he can improve. He will have too with more skill at the 4 this season.
 
#74      
Winged Warrior
I was referring to the pretty well comment. I dont think his numbers were pretty good or well or at all and must but should improve from those sub par numbers. When the ball doesn't go in at a good rate how is that passing any eye test? I think he can improve. He will have too with more skill at the 4 this season.
Okay. Nevermind. You're just creating an argument that i'm not interested in.

You do realize there are a whole bunch of different aspects to the game other than the ball going in, right?
 
#75      
Paducah, Ky
Maybe read my post again then? I didn't say "meaningful minutes"...I said "limited minutes". I didn't say "perform well"....I said "pretty well".

"He handled his limited minutes last year pretty well."......is the actual quote.

I'm using the eye test and not "statistical category" because he didn't play enough to establish real statistics.
He was a freshman forward at 200 lbs. in the B1G.
A 220 lb sophomore with another year of practice with this group is going to be better.
That's not orange Kool Aid.....that's just simple progression.
CoHawk had moments that showed his abilities such as rebounding and he had some blocked shots that were noteworthy.....He has a good shot but I think a strength of his is his BB IQ....Seems to know whats going on when he is playing.....Whats the best thing about freshmen ?? They become sophomores....
Said a long time ago and still is pertinent today
 
Status
Not open for further replies.