Illini Basketball 2024-2025 Team Grade

It’s a C- for me. Given the money spent, I can’t go any higher than that. We spent the 2nd most in the Big 10, and we finished in 7th place. We were 1-9 vs the top 15 teams in the country.

I think the standard at Illinois should be making the NCAA tourney. That should not be seen as an achievement. It’s what the team should do given the investment. I grade based on ROI.

If I felt the struggles this year we’re going to lead to a great team next year i would be more forgiving on my grade, but it’s not. 2024-25 was a one off, one time roster. Built for 1 season. So if you build a team that does what Illinois did this year, it’s a C-

College evals should be looked at in the way pro sports are. If the Dodgers just make the playoffs, but don’t even get to the LCS or even World Series, their season is a D at best given what they pay out in salaries.

Oracle21 said:

It’s a C- for me. Given the money spent, I can’t go any higher than that. We spent the 2nd most in the Big 10, and we finished in 7th place. We were 1-9 vs the top 15 teams in the country.

I think the standard at Illinois should be making the NCAA tourney. That should not be seen as an achievement. It’s what the team should do given the investment. I grade based on ROI.

If I felt the struggles this year we’re going to lead to a great team next year i would be more forgiving on my grade, but it’s not. 2024-25 was a one off, one time roster. Built for 1 season. So if you build a team that does what Illinois did this year, it’s a C-

College evals should be looked at in the way pro sports are. If the Dodgers just make the playoffs, but don’t even get to the LCS or even World Series, their season is a D at best given what they pay out in salaries.

Click to expand...

There’s going to be quite a few teams that get a C then which is fine. Indiana clearly failed as they were number 1 in spend. Those who spend more should typically do better but that’s not always true. However, I would still spend more to maximize the chances of doing well.

Also, numerous players will be back from this team so bar should be higher next year. Either finish top 5 in conf and/or make second weekend.

Seppuku said:

I voted a “D” but I was this close to giving an “F”…

The talent on this team is F4 level; I told many that this might be the best talent we’ve ever had on a single team, and definitely the most complete team (unlike many other great teams, this one had holes: we, at least on paper, had legit PG, shooters, slashers, physical big, athletic/shooting big, etc.). So, 2nd round exit, 7th place finish, and many embarrassing losses are just too many strikes.

Underwood is just not a great coach, it’s a proven fact at this point. We are not making F4 with him, let alone win an NC

Click to expand...

I think he will bring us a final four. I just doubt he brings us a national title. He is very good at recruiting and working the stupid portal. I think he and his staff are good at player development. He is above average at in game coaching but not great. But you put it all together and he is a top 20 coach. His job is incredibly hard with the new portal and rules. As mad as he makes me, I won't underestimate him either.

Rothfactor1 said:

His job is incredibly hard with the new portal and rules.

Click to expand...

He has the 2nd biggest payroll in the conference. How much easier can it get relative to what every other coach faces?

C. Passing comfortably but not commendable. Too many faults and deductions. Never figured out how to solve the TO margin problem.

Perhaps if this year builds to a Final 4 or Elite and an A next year, we’ll look back on it as a really good C.

grue2 said:

Expectations:

For a B:
- Double bye in the BTT and at least one BTT win. With 18 teams, I may need to include 5th as "acceptable".
- Win the first round of the Dance.

Anything less is at best a C.
Failing to dance is an F.

Winning the BTT and 1 win in the dance is an B+/A-.
Getting to the Sweet 16 is an A.
Getting to the Elite 8 is an A+

Click to expand...

So you are saying if we were one of the last 4 in and made an Elite 8 run the season would be an A

I think regular season has to be factored in.

If you are disgusted that you are looking at the recruiting thread more than talking about our next opponent at this point of the season.... It's not a success. Yeah I'm bitter and it's gonna be worse tomorrow.

Your opinion may turn out to be correct. But personally, I'd like to see ANY evidence that makes people think Brad can take us to a F4. One Elite 8 in his eight-year tenure (and a lot of bad NCAAT losses) isn't evidence of that possibility to me. To the contrary, I think the one Elite 8 appearance was a fluke, a one-off, and not likely to be repeated by Underwood.

I'd never say he's a bad guy. He certainly is not.
He's just an excessively paid coach without the in-game skills necessary to get the Illini to that next level we all want.
A coach needs to adapt in-game when things aren't going well. How many times has Brad ever succeeded doing that against other top teams? Very few.
JMO.

Navy_illini said:

So you are saying if we were one of the last 4 in and made an Elite 8 run the season would be an A

I think regular season has to be factored in.

Click to expand...

If we make the elite 8, as one of the last 4 in, we probably had some injuries during the season, and/or growing pains. Things smoothed out by the end. I'm okay with that.

I know KenPom isn’t everything. We want to see wins and banners and tournament success.

But in terms of “how good of a team did we get to enjoy watching this year?”

This year’s Illini finished 17th in KenPom. That’s our 4th highest in the past 20 years. 2 of the 3 teams with better finishes were coached by Brad Underwood.

mysterio2525 said:

If you are disgusted that you are looking at the recruiting thread more than talking about our next opponent at this point of the season.... It's not a success. Yeah I'm bitter and it's gonna be worse tomorrow.

Click to expand...

KenPom had us as #17. If you believe in analytics, the season ended exactly when it should have... It's not what we hoped for, but it's hard to argue that we under achieved, especially considering we were one of the youngest teams in the nation.
Better days are ahead.

Seppuku said:

The talent on this team is F4 level; I told many that this might be the best talent we’ve ever had on a single team, and definitely the most complete team (unlike many other great teams, this one had holes: we, at least on paper, had legit PG, shooters, slashers, physical big, athletic/shooting big, etc.). So, 2nd round exit, 7th place finish, and many embarrassing losses are just too many strikes.

Click to expand...

IMO. we didn't have F4 talent. you look at the 1 seeds and they are loaded top to bottom, a couple all american level studs, we just aren't at that level. To have F4 talent I think you generally need an all- American level player or being putting studs at every position ...we didn't have anyone all american level, KJ had his moments both good and bad, but too many turnovers & not enough athleticism/defensive prowness to be that level at this point in his career. Riley had his moments and can score at that level, but not enough strength/defensive ability at this point in his career, both need a couple years. Tomi fits the bill IMO as the 3rd scorer, love Morez & what he brings, but a bit more offense is needed. Kylan & Tre I think got to the point that they could fill the 3-5 best player roles on a F4 level team, Ben/Jake/ DGL not the bench strength of a 1 seed.

Very subjective, but I went with C.
Pros
Managed to bring in a bunch of really talented players on a complete roster overhaul. Not one starter returned, but this was a good roster in a lot of ways.
Bonus points on evaluations since there were some pieces we seemed to be interested in but ultimately passed on when valuations got out of hand.
Seems ahead of the curve on NIL. Yes, boosters and the dept are really important parts, but coach is the face of the team and inspires those operations.
Offense was again one among the best in the nation.
No really visible off court issues, and while we tend to put things under a microscope, team looked like it had good cohesion.
Although we were disappointed in the back half of the season, a tourney bid was never really in doubt, and even late a 3 or 4 seed was in play. One tourney win is better than none.

Cons -
Complete roster overhaul. Not one starter returned.
Inconsistent. I expected the inconsistency, but when it borders on soft, I'm more inclined to count it against the coach/team. I don't expect a ton of high level mental toughness from young players --they typically need time to grow into that.
Defensive issues. 40 on KP isn't bad, but a lot has been said on that, and while I'm no expert, my eye test also said we 40th.
Leadership. Really subjective, but I didn't see the kind of rallying I would have liked, or individual guys that could help the team avoid hanging it's head too much, or better yet, someone who had another gear to lift the team through a bad stretch. Definitely games where they rallied and fought through adversity, so maybe I'm being critical.

I know the middle season had a lot of adversity, and I'm in no position to judge how much they overcame in that stretch, but it's worth noting that we had guys who had their energy levels depleted from sickness and there were injuries. That sort of thing can affect players way more than we as fans know. Overall I was on the same arc as most fans here --got carried away with the early success, and took a while to see they weren't going to be as dangerous in March as we'd hoped.

I went with B because it was a likable but flawed and young team that did try hard. We lost basically the whole team from last season, and we would have been much worse if we brought the few possible returnees we had back. Purdue, MSU, and even Maryland had a core of guys coming back (or a really good freshman in Queen), we basically had to build a whole new team. These days, if you have to buy a whole new team you're going to have to spend a lot of money. We should get a core back for next year with the guys we got last year as well. It's a lot easier to supplement than buy a whole new starting five, which we did and then some. NIL has changed a lot but the thing that is still the same, in the Big Ten at least, is you have cycles. The cycles are shorter these days but last year we had a team that had played together and was good that we could supplement and this season we had to start the process over which will hopefully pay off next season. Did we have a bad ROI on some players like Hummer? Sure, and we had some inconsistencies from our freshmen which is to be expected. Overall, we had a season that I'll take on our off-cycle seasons.

Greensboro said:

IMO. we didn't have F4 talent. you look at the 1 seeds and they are loaded top to bottom, a couple all american level studs, we just aren't at that level. To have F4 talent I think you generally need an all- American level player or being putting studs at every position ...we didn't have anyone all american level, KJ had his moments both good and bad, but too many turnovers & not enough athleticism/defensive prowness to be that level at this point in his career. Riley had his moments and can score at that level, but not enough strength/defensive ability at this point in his career, both need a couple years. Tomi fits the bill IMO as the 3rd scorer, love Morez & what he brings, but a bit more offense is needed. Kylan & Tre I think got to the point that they could fill the 3-5 best player roles on a F4 level team, Ben/Jake/ DGL not the bench strength of a 1 seed.

Click to expand...

I agree to a point.

Florida, Auburn, and Duke are loaded but I think Houston is very beatable.

If the Illini managed to get to the final four I think Duke is likely waiting there for another lopsided loss but Tennessee and Houston/Purdue would all be winnable games for Illinois if they had taken care of business against Kentucky.

Honestly maybe you get lucky and see Bama or BYU waiting for you instead of Duke and now you're sitting a winnable game away from a national championship appearance and you're a hot shooting day away from winning it.

I think that's what I find so frustrating about the Kentucky loss. The bracket lined up perfectly and they had a legitimate chance to get to a final four by winning a couple coin flip type games.

Last year I think they were a final four team in any other region but they happened to draw UConn(I think they make a title appearance if they're on the opposite side and beat Purdue if they get a third shot at them in a reverse of the Flyin Illini beating Michigan twice and losing in the tourney).

I have modest expectation for a new team led by two freshmen and that's why I gave it a B. My biggest question is what is the formula to win in the future? It is ideal to bring in a player like TSJ but I think that's going to be harder (not impossible). The European pipeline is nice but can we find the next Luka/Jokic? Probably not. I wish we will have a discipline team with good in game strategies. That will win a lot of games even when you don't have a player at TSJ's level. So far, I see Brad's strength is one step ahead of the majority of the teams in brining in non-prep players that fit his scheme. He is going to lose that edge overtime to a degree. He can use some good assistants for strategy and player development.

Mobi said:

I have modest expectation for a new team led by two freshmen and that's why I gave it a B. My biggest question is what is the formula to win in the future? It is ideal to bring in a player like TSJ but I think that's going to be harder (not impossible). The European pipeline is nice but can we find the next Luka/Jokic? Probably not. I wish we will have a discipline team with good in game strategies. That will win a lot of games even when you don't have a player at TSJ's level.

Click to expand...

My thought is it is two different things to bring in a soph TSJ who becomes senior TSJ than to go find senior TSJ in the xfer portal. Dent is probably the closest thing to his production/output and you're probably paying at least 3M for that.

I think this staff is pretty good in the area of player development, but there's a large amount of luck involved there as well, I suppose.

Roster building is a classic knapsack problem/algo where we must produce the largest sum of value, while constrained by a budget. It's tough, but we've done well the past 2 seasons imo.

NarrowJ said:

My thought is it is two different things to bring in a soph TSJ who becomes senior TSJ than to go find senior TSJ in the xfer portal. Dent is probably the closest thing to his production/output and you're probably paying at least 3M for that.

I think this staff is pretty good in the area of player development, but there's a large amount of luck involved there as well, I suppose.

Roster building is a classic knapsack problem/algo where we must produce the largest sum of value, while constrained by a budget. It's tough, but we've done well the past 2 seasons imo.

Click to expand...

I think it is difficult these days to even bring in a soph TSJ (see AJ Storr.) We will see what happens after the revenue sharing. Our player development is actually not bad (see Will) but obviously it is not good enough to bring new players up within just one year to reach the 2nd week. Truthfully, we are very likely still playing right now if we have had a better defense coach.

It’s scary how many fans think this season should be rated above average.

PepeSilvia said:

I agree to a point.

Florida, Auburn, and Duke are loaded but I think Houston is very beatable.

If the Illini managed to get to the final four I think Duke is likely waiting there for another lopsided loss but Tennessee and Houston/Purdue would all be winnable games for Illinois if they had taken care of business against Kentucky.

Honestly maybe you get lucky and see Bama or BYU waiting for you instead of Duke and now you're sitting a winnable game away from a national championship appearance and you're a hot shooting day away from winning it.

I think that's what I find so frustrating about the Kentucky loss. The bracket lined up perfectly and they had a legitimate chance to get to a final four by winning a couple coin flip type games.

Last year I think they were a final four team in any other region but they happened to draw UConn(I think they make a title appearance if they're on the opposite side and beat Purdue if they get a third shot at them in a reverse of the Flyin Illini beating Michigan twice and losing in the tourney).

Click to expand...

I think the difficulty on this topic is deciding what final 4 talent means...to me when you take out the game to game noise variation you can make a final 4 w/o F4 talent or fall short of F4 and still have F4 talent. I haven't watched any of Houston to pretend I can comment on if they are close to the other 3 1 seeds.

I agree with your analysis of last year's team, they were special, just not UConn level of special.

This year's team had too much variation and is a little hard to evaluate on F4 talent... I think we needed more balance & an Alpha to carry us through the rough spots. When we really needed a bucket or a stop I like having an Ayo/Shannon/Kofi that you know can get a bucket & at the same time we had enough defense to make a stop. Riley/KJ got us some big buckets at times, but lacked the consistency to do it night in and night out & defensively we really struggled to get stops at critical times. We played well enough at times to beat a F4 team, but poor enough to lose to anyone in the tournament on other nights. IMO some are overrating talent based on potential & draft status on where they think Riley/KJ can develop...but neither are Alpha level at this point

NarrowJ said:

My thought is it is two different things to bring in a soph TSJ who becomes senior TSJ than to go find senior TSJ in the xfer portal. Dent is probably the closest thing to his production/output and you're probably paying at least 3M for that.

I think this staff is pretty good in the area of player development, but there's a large amount of luck involved there as well, I suppose.

Roster building is a classic knapsack problem/algo where we must produce the largest sum of value, while constrained by a budget. It's tough, but we've done well the past 2 seasons imo.

Click to expand...

My opinion is just bet on size and athelicism.

Obviously you have to be able to play basketball too but watching this years team felt too much like I was watching Iowa play at times with how often guys were getting were getting blown by.

I never thought I would call a Brad Underwood coached team soft but they were kind of soft.

PepeSilvia said:

My opinion is just bet on size and athelicism.

Obviously you have to be able to play basketball too but watching this years team felt too much like I was watching Iowa play at times with how often guys were getting were getting blown by.

I never thought I would call a Brad Underwood coached team soft but they were kind of soft.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Size, athleticism wins if skill level is moderately even.

I do think a lot of our defensive woes are scheme-induced, aka we overplay out top and rely on the big dropping + rear view contest far too often. It's a side effect of how we play the screens and the drop coverage. But like others have pointed out, Tomi lacks the physical parts (foot speed, quickness, etc) to be able to go hard hedge a screen and then recover. He is pretty good in drop, but we just can't really do a whole lot else with him, so we were shoehorned into the guards having to fight through every screen and then recover and/or rear view when he is out there.

The team being soft I pretty much agree with as well. Maybe its kind of a side effect of being young & underdeveloped physically. WR made huge strides in the weight room and it shows, but he still isn't exactly a stalwart on D yet.

NarrowJ said:

My thought is it is two different things to bring in a soph TSJ who becomes senior TSJ than to go find senior TSJ in the xfer portal. Dent is probably the closest thing to his production/output and you're probably paying at least 3M for that.

I think this staff is pretty good in the area of player development, but there's a large amount of luck involved there as well, I suppose.

Roster building is a classic knapsack problem/algo where we must produce the largest sum of value, while constrained by a budget. It's tough, but we've done well the past 2 seasons imo.

Click to expand...

I also like the idea of focusing on character. Really excited by getting pieces like Tre White & Kylan back- Tre seems to have bought into the culture & the idea of a winning culture & personal development. For Kylan it is partially about coming home & wanting to be a part of this program, probably some of the reason we got TSJ a few years back as well, between Chicago native and relationship with Tim. Need to try to focus on kids that aren't just chasing the short term NIL $ & understand that developing in the same program/system means something for there long term growth. Not saying they will end up the next TSJ, but beginning of a development is getting these kids back for more than 1 year.

Past that I like Pepe's plan on focusing on length & athleticism...but probably add skill & dawg in there as well. For some of those defensive lapses, I would have liked to have Sencire, Ty or someone else to take to the Pizza Hut parking lot

C+, would be a B if just looking at the numbers nation wide, with 350 some teams we are clearly a top 10% program relative to all D1 basketball teams. But given the resources and the conference we play in, I think it more fair to grade relative to the B1G for the season, that brings the grade down to C, maybe C+ for the year. Overall we were a slightly better than average B1G team this year. Could win against any team, but could also lose. B1G conference record wise we are out of the top 16% the bell curve would map to high performers. Still uncertain about how I feel about this season. If we build on this years players and results, I think a C+ can be considered positive given the bad injury and illness luck this season brought.

Regular season (50% weight) C :
some solid wins (Oregon, Arkansas, Mich) but ugly losses (Duke, NW, MDx2, USC, Neb),
7th in B1G and were not in the Big Ten title conversation the last 2 months of season
Post Season Big Ten Tourney (20% weight) C
1 Win and 1 non-competitive loss
Post Season NCAA Tourney (30% weight) C
1 decent win against UX, 1 non-competitve loss vs KY

Overall C - not sure how this could be graded any higher.