Illini Basketball 2024-2025 Team Grade

Definately agree we need to add some dawg to help out Kylan and Morez( our only dawgs right now) and regarding skill we need one or more 38%+ 3 point shooters besides Tomi. And the athleticism( Sarr?) to be able to blow by people on the bounce. If Tomi can get stronger( and correspondingly a bit tougher ) and possibly a bit quicker that sure would help as well as one more rim protector big( haven't heard anything on this baord about that being in the works).
Combine that with a reshuffled staff who can dial up proper defensive schemes and an offense that is less stagnant and has more player and ball movement in the half court and we could be really good. A lot to ask to have all that fall into place next year but it is possible.
C+ for this year based on insane reliance on 3 point shooting as an emphasis on offense when we lacked the shooters to come even close to executing that effectively and our poor defensive schemes and adjustments counterbalanced by credit for riddled with key injuries and illness mid season. Still we were pretty much fully healthy against KY and we laid an egg and were basically out toughed by a team not known for being tough.

Changed my grade again, and not upward. Left a little room to drop. Not smart enough to keep the important pieces happy.

I'll wait to see how roster retention shakes out before revisiting

For having not really typed out a true response or anything, I have actually been thinking about this a lot ... and I am not sure. I know some will see this as illogical, but I actually view how much of the core we could have retained as an integral part to how forgiving I am about this season. With some (IMO) essential pieces already gone, I have soured on how the year turned out. You can't really ~feel good~ about all of the rationalizing about illnesses and youth and injuries if there is no promising culmination at the end - such as really hitting our stride with this group next year. This is the exact type of team we all would have been absolutely ecstatic about heading into next year in the old era of college hoops.

However, semi-OT, it has gotten me thinking about how I generally feel about Illini seasons. I would say these are generally the broad categories that allow me to hold my head high as a fan, be proud of where the program is and enjoy flaunting some of our success to my buddies. It's totally subjective, but these are genuinely the things that add up to give your program a "status," and (as silly as it might sound) at the end of the day that really matters to me as a fan. I tried to generally equate each category into metrics within each that would be roughly equivalent (or close) via my own super subjective points system.

NCAAT Performance
10 - Final Four or better (win or not, getting this far has me SO ecstatic about a season, no questions asked)
7 - Elite Eight
5 - Sweet Sixteen (roughly half as good as a Final Four)
3 - Second Round (winning one opening game doesn't really move the needle for me, lol, our stay is still pretty short)
2 - First Round/NCAAT appearance

Number of Wins
8 - 30 wins (regardless of how the Tournament goes, this is an "elite" benchmark that deserves recognition better than an Elite Eight but worse than a Final Four)
5 - 25 wins (roughly equivalent to a Sweet Sixteen season, all things considered)
3 - 20 wins (pretty much "as cool" as making the Second Round)

Big Ten Banners
7 - Big Ten regular season OR BTT championship (I used to feel differently, but with imbalanced schedules, winning the BTT is just as cool to me now)

NCAAT Seed
5 - #1 Seed (win or lose, being named as a #1 seed is a huge accomplishment to me ... honestly as memorable as losing in the Sweet Sixteen sometimes)
3 - top 4 seed (I always saw this as a cutoff for the "good teams," being a protected seed and all)

AP Ranking
5 - top 10 AP ranking (being a "top 10 team" affords you more bragging rights with your friends than I think most here appreciate)
3 - top 25 AP ranking ("being ranked" is sort of the baseline of being a relevant college hoops program ... while not exactly comparable to making the Second Round of the NCAAT, it's fairly close)

I totally get most people wouldn't rank stuff like this, and that's fine ... for me, something like having two NBA draft picks is pretty meaningless, and I am not a "NCAA Tournament run or bust" person all things considered. If you used those points systems, though, this is how every season I can really remember would rank (skipping 2020 because no NCAAT).

2005 - 42
2001 - 29
2024 - 27
2021 - 23
2002 - 23
2003 - 21
2004 - 20
2022 - 20
2022 - 19
2006 - 14
2025 - 6
2013 - 6
2011 - 6
2023 - 5
2009 - 5
2007 - 5
2010 - 3
2014 - 3
2017 - 3
2019 - 0
2018 - 0
2016 - 0
2015 - 0
2012 - 0
2008 - 0

So yeah, my rating system that I totally just made up right now might be incredibly stupid and you might disagree with it on a fundamental level ... but can anyone say this season doesn't remind them a lot of 2013 or 2011? We had a team that could be exciting, reached some exciting highs, could never fully put it together and eventually went down in the Second Round without non-NCAAT accolades to show for it. So while I generally was going to grade it a bit more favorably due to some of the specific memories (e.g., Arkansas/Oregon wins, extending the winning streak vs. Michigan, watching some of our younger guys develop, etc.), there is plenty of reason to see this as a "C" type of year. It's right in the meaty, middle part of that curve that is undeniably better than some of the worst years we've watched this century, but it was missing the types of accomplishments and memories that would make it stand out to me as a fan. :/

Fighter of the Nightman said:

For having not really typed out a true response or anything, I have actually been thinking about this a lot ... and I am not sure. I know some will see this as illogical, but I actually view how much of the core we could have retained as an integral part to how forgiving I am about this season. With some (IMO) essential pieces already gone, I have soured on how the year turned out. You can't really ~feel good~ about all of the rationalizing about illnesses and youth and injuries if there is no promising culmination at the end - such as really hitting our stride with this group next year. This is the exact type of team we all would have been absolutely ecstatic about heading into next year in the old era of college hoops.

However, semi-OT, it has gotten me thinking about how I generally feel about Illini seasons. I would say these are generally the broad categories that allow me to hold my head high as a fan, be proud of where the program is and enjoy flaunting some of our success to my buddies. It's totally subjective, but these are genuinely the things that add up to give your program a "status," and (as silly as it might sound) at the end of the day that really matters to me as a fan. I tried to generally equate each category into metrics within each that would be roughly equivalent (or close) via my own super subjective points system.

NCAAT Performance
10 - Final Four or better (win or not, getting this far has me SO ecstatic about a season, no questions asked)
7 - Elite Eight
5 - Sweet Sixteen (roughly half as good as a Final Four)
3 - Second Round (winning one opening game doesn't really move the needle for me, lol, our stay is still pretty short)
2 - First Round/NCAAT appearance

Number of Wins
8 - 30 wins (regardless of how the Tournament goes, this is an "elite" benchmark that deserves recognition better than an Elite Eight but worse than a Final Four)
5 - 25 wins (roughly equivalent to a Sweet Sixteen season, all things considered)
3 - 20 wins (pretty much "as cool" as making the Second Round)

Big Ten Banners
7 - Big Ten regular season OR BTT championship (I used to feel differently, but with imbalanced schedules, winning the BTT is just as cool to me now)

NCAAT Seed
5 - #1 Seed (win or lose, being named as a #1 seed is a huge accomplishment to me ... honestly as memorable as losing in the Sweet Sixteen sometimes)
3 - top 4 seed (I always saw this as a cutoff for the "good teams," being a protected seed and all)

AP Ranking
5 - top 10 AP ranking (being a "top 10 team" affords you more bragging rights with your friends than I think most here appreciate)
3 - top 25 AP ranking ("being ranked" is sort of the baseline of being a relevant college hoops program ... while not exactly comparable to making the Second Round of the NCAAT, it's fairly close)

I totally get most people wouldn't rank stuff like this, and that's fine ... for me, something like having two NBA draft picks is pretty meaningless, and I am not a "NCAA Tournament run or bust" person all things considered. If you used those points systems, though, this is how every season I can really remember would rank (skipping 2020 because no NCAAT).

2005 - 42
2001 - 29
2024 - 27
2021 - 23
2002 - 23
2003 - 21
2004 - 20
2022 - 20
2022 - 19
2006 - 14
2025 - 6
2013 - 6
2011 - 6
2023 - 5
2009 - 5
2007 - 5
2010 - 3
2014 - 3
2017 - 3
2019 - 0
2018 - 0
2016 - 0
2015 - 0
2012 - 0
2008 - 0

So yeah, my rating system that I totally just made up right now might be incredibly stupid and you might disagree with it on a fundamental level ... but can anyone say this season doesn't remind them a lot of 2013 or 2011? We had a team that could be exciting, reached some exciting highs, could never fully put it together and eventually went down in the Second Round without non-NCAAT accolades to show for it. So while I generally was going to grade it a bit more favorably due to some of the specific memories (e.g., Arkansas/Oregon wins, extending the winning streak vs. Michigan, watching some of our younger guys develop, etc.), there is plenty of reason to see this as a "C" type of year. It's right in the meaty, middle part of that curve that is undeniably better than some of the worst years we've watched this century, but it was missing the types of accomplishments and memories that would make it stand out to me as a fan. :/

Click to expand...

Two points Fighter (three, including 'thanks for doing this')
- 2022 is in twice, not sure what year's missing
- got to at least include 1989 in there right? Wonder where that fits.

Battle89 said:

Two points Fighter (three, including 'thanks for doing this')
- 2022 is in twice, not sure what year's missing
- got to at least include 1989 in there right? Wonder where that fits.

Click to expand...

I have watched / listened to Illinois basketball since the 1960's. !989 has to rank right at the head of the classs in my opinion.

Fighter of the Nightman said:

So yeah, my rating system that I totally just made up right now might be incredibly stupid and you might disagree with it on a fundamental level ... but can anyone say this season doesn't remind them a lot of 2013 or 2011? We had a team that could be exciting, reached some exciting highs, could never fully put it together and eventually went down in the Second Round without non-NCAAT accolades to show for it. So while I generally was going to grade it a bit more favorably due to some of the specific memories (e.g., Arkansas/Oregon wins, extending the winning streak vs. Michigan, watching some of our younger guys develop, etc.), there is plenty of reason to see this as a "C" type of year. It's right in the meaty, middle part of that curve that is undeniably better than some of the worst years we've watched this century, but it was missing the types of accomplishments and memories that would make it stand out to me as a fan. :/

Click to expand...

The problem I kind of have is so much of what fans deem a successful season is colored by preseason expectations. For instance 2011 and 2013 were quite different. 2013 I think the fanbase considered a rousing success for the most part since it was Groce's first season with a team full of guys nobody expected much from by that point. The season started really hot then cooled off (then got hot again) but that was definitely seen as a successful season compared to expectations. 2011 was really disappointing (9th preseason on Ken Pom and some people had us in the final four preseason) and probably got Bruce fired as much as 2012 did. For me preseason expectations play a big role in how a team is perceived and this (2025) team basically met the preseason expectations. They showed flashes of being way better and flashes of being much worse but overall kind of what you get with a young team that never played together before. Similar on Ken Pom to the preseason, similar preseason bracket positioning, etc.. The Big Ten turned out to be a lot better than people projected as well, which played into the difficulties we ran into during the season, but overall very similar to what you'd expect. The unfortunate aspect of them not playing together next season as well is frustrating though, as you said.

C is average. Think we were a B.

We went 6-0 against Missouri, Iowa (twice), Michigan (twice) and Indiana.

We won 60% of our B1G games, and 21 regular season games.

We made and won a game in the tournament.

If you have been a fan since Harv Schmidt like I have, this was an above-average season, deserving of a B grade. If you were only a fan since the mid-Henson years or later, maybe you could have a different viewpoint. But when we beat our rivals, win 20+ games in the regular season, go 12-8 in the B1G, go to the NCAA tourney and win a game, that is a successful and above-average season. When you accomplish this with only 3% of the prior year minutes returning, it is quite an accomplishment. For everyone that thinks this team and coaching staff underperformed, they are judging that from the team we thought we were right after we beat Oregon and Indiana, not from where we were at the end of last year.
Just recall the feeling on here last year - we are way ahead this year compared to where we were then. All a matter of perspective.

Fighter of the Nightman said:

... for me, something like having two NBA draft picks is pretty meaningless ....

Click to expand...

I'll trim that work down a bit: yes, placing guys in the NBA matters for recruiting. But only if that leads to subsequently getting guys on the Illinois roster who lead the Illini to winning at the very, very highest level.

alaskaillini said:

C is average. Think we were a B.

We went 6-0 against Missouri, Iowa (twice), Michigan (twice) and Indiana.

We won 60% of our B1G games, and 21 regular season games.

We made and won a game in the tournament.

If you have been a fan since Harv Schmidt like I have, this was an above-average season, deserving of a B grade. If you were only a fan since the mid-Henson years or later, maybe you could have a different viewpoint. But when we beat our rivals, win 20+ games in the regular season, go 12-8 in the B1G, go to the NCAA tourney and win a game, that is a successful and above-average season. When you accomplish this with only 3% of the prior year minutes returning, it is quite an accomplishment. For everyone that thinks this team and coaching staff underperformed, they are judging that from the team we thought we were right after we beat Oregon and Indiana, not from where we were at the end of last year.
Just recall the feeling on here last year - we are way ahead this year compared to where we were then. All a matter of perspective.

Click to expand...

Are you talking about this season? We beat Michigan once, not twice. At their place.

We won 22 games this year, not 21.

Of those 22 wins, 6 were against Quad 4 teams. Teams that were paid to come to Champaign and ... I am won't finish that.

Winning 60% of B1G games is much better than winning a lower percentage, but that is not going to get us very far. We finished in 7th place in the B1G, out of 18 teams: good, not very good. We were judged a 6 seed in what seems to be the most accurately-seeded NCAA tournament ever: that places us 21-24 Nationally. In context, that is good, not very good. "In context" requires a bit of thought.

I am not attracted to the idea that we finished in the top 10%, even though that is inarguably true. What am I getting at? There should not be nearly 400 division I teams to compare to (and play), just like there are not 400 NBA teams.

Following that reasoning, which no one need do, it's just my framing after all: if there were 100 division 1 teams, we'd be in the top 20-25. If there were 50-60 teams, we'd be in the top 40-50%.

I think we'll see NCAA basketball carved up differently in the next few years, so that the "Premier League" or whatever they call it will include no more than 100 teams and possibly fewer (75?). That changes the perspective on our accomplishment this year, and going forward.

C. As others mentioned this type of season should be the floor. Too many “train wreck” games where the game was over at halftime and horrible losses against NW USC and Nebraska.

A repeat performance next year would be graded more like a D in my opinion.

I gave this team a C/C+. This program should be a consistent second weekend program. In my view, if you are in the Sweet 16 anything can happen. Illinois is not there yet.

OrangeKrush1981 said:

Are you talking about this season? We beat Michigan once, not twice. At their place.

We won 22 games this year, not 21.

Of those 22 wins, 6 were against Quad 4 teams. Teams that were paid to come to Champaign and ... I am won't finish that.

Winning 60% of B1G games is much better than winning a lower percentage, but that is not going to get us very far. We finished in 7th place in the B1G, out of 18 teams: good, not very good. We were judged a 6 seed in what seems to be the most accurately-seeded NCAA tournament ever: that places us 21-24 Nationally. In context, that is good, not very good. "In context" requires a bit of thought.

Click to expand...

Right about MIchigan - not sure what I was thinking. We won 21 "regular season" games.

We used to want to finish top 4 in the B1G (when there were 10 teams). Now with 18, top 4 is the equivalent of top 7. Doesn't get us anywhere but the NCAA tourney. Not saying it was a great year in the B1G (but we were at a significant disadvantage with injury and illness for a lot of that time).

Didn't say that it was an A season. But if top 24 isn't a B season, your standards are a lot higher than mine. For me, last year was an A season - hung a B1G tourney banner and an Elite 8 banner.

Twenty five years ago, a 20 win season meant that you had single digit losses.

I broke the Illini grading down into categories.
Defense -D, For most of the year the Illini couldn't stop anybody from getting to the basket. 3 point shooters loved to play against this non existent defense. Just like shooting warm up in practice.
Rebounding-B+. This was probably their strong suit this year, although they were manhandled in a couple of games
Free Throw shooting-B. Most of the guys were pretty good free throw shooters except Rez.
Ball Handling-C-, This is one of the poorest ball handling teams I have seen in 70 years at Champaign.
Passing-C+. The Illini [KJ] constantly gave the ball away to the opponent, many times just carelessly tossing the ball away.
3 point shooting-C- This team was touted to be an excellent 3 point shooting team from day 1. They wer in the top 5 in the country in taking 3's but ranked down in the low 300's making them. My head still is aching from the clanging of the ball on the rim.
Mental and Physical toughness-C-. Too many times this team was not ready to play mentally, they came out and sleepwalked thru a game. Physically they let teams push them around. I put the mental part on the coaching staff.
Overall offense-B-. When this team decided to get to the basket with players rotating to the hoop aided with excellent passing then getting 3 point shots off that they were pretty good.
COACHING-C-. Brad's inability to coach defense really hurt this team all year with opposing players coming in and some having career nights against a super highway to the basket. Brad and the entire coaching staff being unable or failing to make in-game adjustments to stop opponents runs[C]. Early in the season Brad used his bench very wisely and got good contributions from several players but that went away down the stretch which I think hurt the team and turned those same contributors away as we have seen in the PORTAL.
The atmosphere around this staff, I give a D. There is something going on with this staff vs. players over the last several years that is turning top players away from Champaign. I don't think it is the NIL either. Some of these guys are going elsewhere and have productive seasons. The latest of these is Tre White who gave us some very good games and showed he is a leader, Morez who is one of the BEST players to come to Champaign in years. Yes, he needs a little fine tuning but that is Brad's job. Look at all the other schools reaching out to Johnson, they see something!
All in all It appears Brad's focus on some of the players in the Portal indicates he is not going to change his game plan, more offense, no defense, no physicality which lead to NO CHAMPIONSHIP RUN!

One Man Fast Break said:

A top 16-25 program historically doesn't mean you make the Sweet Sixteen perennially or anything close to 50 % of the time though, because there's naturally a lot of year to year ebb and flow as well as high/low extended periods. A period with a bunch of Sweet 16s in a relatively short time period is a historically great period for Illinois. That doesn't mean 1 in 20 years should be the "norm", not by any means, that's quite bad. But I also think expecting it as some sort of baseline for a solid season is unrealistic. There are maybe 5 programs that can expect that throughout the modern tournament era and then maybe another 5 at a given time based on where they are presently. 00-06 is basically the golden age of Illinois basketball post World War II. Until further notice, that's basically the program's "ceiling" (which is not a bad ceiling to be at to be fair), and while it's great to set high expectations, we also shouldn't pretend it's baseline. Illinois got a bit unlucky to get Self poached at the exact time Illinois could have really solidified itself as one of the preeminent programs of the 21st century but it is what it is. As far as sleeping giant, maybe, maybe not. Chicago kids are always kind of an ebb and flow for how they view Illinois, and outside of a small blip in time you certainly can't rely on like Central Illinois to be a consistent producer of elite high major talent.

I'd say 2020-2025 is a fairly decent indicator of where Illinois "should" be in the college basketball pecking order, which is not bad by any means. Basically, 7 seed (season cancelled before postseason, but that's about where they would have ended up based on projections), 1 seed, 4 seed, 9 seed, 3 seed, 6 seed. Perennial tournament team (average seed 5). 1 Big Ten regular season championship (that could have been two but for COVID shenanigans) and 2 BTT championships, in the deepest era for the Big Ten historically. Record of 6-5 in the Tournament with one underachievement and four about as expected, and then if they had but one over-achievement it would even that out. Using that as a standard, this season is pretty average within it (4th best out of the six and very close to the mean overall).

Click to expand...

While I appreciate your points, I have some very key issues that will take me way too long to say, lol:

EDIT: I typed a whole bunch of babbling that anyone should feel free to read, but the main point is this ... those of us who expect "top 15 results" (i.e., better than recent performance, when accounting for the NCAAT) effectively want our NCAA Tournament performance to simply catch up with our regular season performance. While that doesn't apply to this year, specifically, I think everyone would be SO much more at ease if the 2021 team made at least the Elite Eight like they should have, the 2022 team was able to win a Second Round game as a #4 seed and the 2023 team at least got to the Second Round. We are actually better than that 16-25 range historically, and it's only our ~top 30-40 NCAA Tournament historical performance that drags down the average ... and that leads to the frustration, because we all feel like they should mirror each other more.

1) There is a VERY good argument that Illinois should be even better than we have been historically, based on "built-in" advantages such as alumni/fan/donor base size, recruiting footprint, fan support, facilities, etc. While we AVERAGE OUT to a 16-25 program, the full story is more complicated. Our average has been dragged down by abnormally quick descents into worse periods, such as post-Deon Thomas saga and then the late Weber/Groce years. A clear pattern is that once a competent coach has had a chance to rebuild, we usually found it very easy to achieve ABOVE that 16-25 range rather quickly. 1983-1990 was closer to a top 10 program in the nation, 1998-2006 was EASILY a top 10 program in the nation and - even despite some NCAAT disappointments - our overall stats from 2020-2024 had us at least knocking on the door of top 10 ... I would argue this year might have tipped the scale in the balance of that overall grade being just outside of that goal, as the 2025 point of evidence now makes 2023 look less like a random fluke.

2) It is also worth noting that if Illinois even performed to its seed line on average over the years in the NCAAT, we would probably be a top 10 program historically. For example, even keeping our AWFUL record in the Second Round as a #4 seed (games we should theoretically be winning 50%+ of the time), consider the following reasonable changes:

(A) 1987 makes the Elite Eight rather than getting upset First Round
(B) 2001 makes the Final Four as a #1 seed
(C) 2021 makes the Final Four as a #1 seed
(D) EITHER 1989 or 2005 is able to win it all as the odds-on favorite that year.

Our all-time stats change like this:
NCs: 0 --> 1
Final Fours: 5 --> 7 (tied with UConn)
Elite Eights: 10 --> 12 (2 behind Villanova and 1 more than Arizona)
Sweet Sixteens: 14 --> 16

All of a sudden, we very quickly have as many National Championships as Syracuse, as many Final Fours as UConn, more Elite Eights than Arizona, etc. If you start making our record as a #4 seed in the Second Round ANYWHERE above 50%, then we are literally closing in on the likes of Louisville and Indiana for Sweet Sixteens.

My point is that perhaps what we "should expect" is top 15 rather than where we have wound up ... and that would, IMO, be reasonable. The Blue Bloods are the only programs we should just flat-out accept as better than us for the foreseeable future ... but why on Earth would we shrug our shoulders at programs like Syracuse, Arizona or even MSU as just "naturally" being above us. We have an odd and complex history, but it has been astonishing that so many different coaches have been able to walk in and quickly get us to the level of top 15 nationally, competing for Big Ten championships and routinely getting top 4 seeds in the NCAA Tournament. It's easy to "accept" and forget that our 0 National Championships easily could have been 2-3 or that our 5 Final Fours easily could have been 7-8, etc. with a bit more luck and a bit more simply performing to the reasonable standard of our seed line.

Battle89 said:

Two points Fighter (three, including 'thanks for doing this')
- 2022 is in twice, not sure what year's missing
- got to at least include 1989 in there right? Wonder where that fits.

Click to expand...

Haha, my bad on the list. It should have gone straight from 2004 with 20 points to 2022 with 19 points. I accidentally listed 2022 with 2004's point total first. As for 1989, I limited it to seasons I could remember ... I can only wish that I could have watched such a team!! FWIW, using my points system, they would have been third at 28 points ... hurts that they didn't win the Big Ten like the 2001 team, which finished 1 point ahead of them. I feel like the 1989 team would have been the type of team that definitely would have won the BTT had it been around.

My vote: C
One of the things that chafes me is how we (under Brad) have never been a tough out in our last game. Just rubs me the wrong way (I guess that's chafing isn't it...)

2021 Loyola-Chicago wins by 13
2022 Houston wins by 15
2023 Arkansas wins by 10
2024n UConn wins by 25 (including an embarrassing 0-30 run); at least this was playing a #1 seed
2025 Kentucky wins by 9 (yay the best!)

No bangs, only whimpers. I love being in the tournament, so Brad has done well there, but man I've just hated how we end our seasons under him.

Now that the season is officially over:

Illinois finished 17th in KenPom. That’s our 4th best finish in the past 20 years. 3 of those 4 teams were coached by Brad Underwood.

To highlight how far this program has come in the past decade, here were the 4 finishes in KenPom during Malcom Hill’s 4 years, where we didn’t make a single NCAAT:

‘14: 53
‘15: 61
‘16: 125
‘17: 66

just curious if you are of the same opinion of Houston. They went toe to toe with Duke & Florida and looked pretty much equal.

Personally, watching Houston play made we wish we had Morez & Sincere back to go with Ty & Boz. Scoring might have been a problem, but we wouldn't have been accused of being soft & the other team would have left wondering if they had played basketball or been to the Pizza Hut parking lot.