Illini Basketball 2024-2025

Status
Not open for further replies.
#52      
Having two sub-350 teams on our resume is really dragging down a non-conference SOS that includes Tennessee and Alabama.
 
#55      
This going to sound kinda weird, but I think playing Chicago State helped in some ways. First, it got some meaningful minutes with some of the bench guys in the early stages of the game so they were playing in rotation and while the team was not just playing out the string. Just seeing the ball go in the basket seemed to help guys like Gibbs-Lawhorn and Davis with their confidence. And the up-tempo pace was a welcome change from the Tenn and Mizzou slogs. Seems to me controlling the pace is a big key going forward. Rebounding and attacking once they break backcourt pressure seems like keys to being able to speed up the game. But most of what I know I probably learned from some on this board...as well as many culinary things
 
#56      
I think we will be ok, our non-conf SOS is 16th now and we still have Dook yet on the docket. Every power conf team schedules these bottom feeder games.

One non-conference strength of schedule is 233rd per KenPom.

Auburn, Duke, and Tennesee have 1 game against 300+.
Alabama played #299 and no teams 300 or worse.
Kansas played #287 and no teams 300 or worse.
Baylor played #296 and 1 team 300 or worse.
Michigan has 0 games against teams 300 or worse.

On the flip side, MSU played 2 and UCLA played 3. Iowa State played 3 (and #289 and #294 as well). I'd say it's a pretty mixed bag, but those games are absolutely dragging down our NCSOS.

Illinois has 3. I really wish we would stop scheduling teams THAT bad and schedule teams in the 150 - 250 range instead (SIU-E, Ark-LR, etc.). I know you can't always predict it, but Chicago State and Maryland-Eastern Shore are pretty regularly below 300.
 
#58      
This going to sound kinda weird, but I think playing Chicago State helped in some ways. First, it got some meaningful minutes with some of the bench guys in the early stages of the game so they were playing in rotation and while the team was not just playing out the string. Just seeing the ball go in the basket seemed to help guys like Gibbs-Lawhorn and Davis with their confidence. And the up-tempo pace was a welcome change from the Tenn and Mizzou slogs. Seems to me controlling the pace is a big key going forward. Rebounding and attacking once they break backcourt pressure seems like keys to being able to speed up the game. But most of what I know I probably learned from some on this board...as well as many culinary things
I think you’re right and the nice thing about this board is that everyone agreed and there were zero complaints about playing Chicago State.
 
#62      
One non-conference strength of schedule is 233rd per KenPom.

Auburn, Duke, and Tennesee have 1 game against 300+.
Alabama played #299 and no teams 300 or worse.
Kansas played #287 and no teams 300 or worse.
Baylor played #296 and 1 team 300 or worse.
Michigan has 0 games against teams 300 or worse.

On the flip side, MSU played 2 and UCLA played 3. Iowa State played 3 (and #289 and #294 as well). I'd say it's a pretty mixed bag, but those games are absolutely dragging down our NCSOS.

Illinois has 3. I really wish we would stop scheduling teams THAT bad and schedule teams in the 150 - 250 range instead (SIU-E, Ark-LR, etc.). I know you can't always predict it, but Chicago State and Maryland-Eastern Shore are pretty regularly below 300.

How in the heck is it 233rd? That seems broken as 3 of the games are vs top 10 teams and then also Arkansas and Misery.

This is what I found:


#16 seems far more accurate

233rd? That's just weird

EDIT: Yeah, I'm sorry I cannot take Pomeroy NonConf SOS seriously. You're telling me this is the toughest non conference schedule in the nation?


16th is probably the correct one imo
 
Last edited:
#63      
I think we will be ok, our non-conf SOS is 16th now and we still have Dook yet on the docket. Every power conf team schedules these bottom feeder games.
One non-conference strength of schedule is 233rd per KenPom.

Auburn, Duke, and Tennesee have 1 game against 300+.
Alabama played #299 and no teams 300 or worse.
Kansas played #287 and no teams 300 or worse.
Baylor played #296 and 1 team 300 or worse.
Michigan has 0 games against teams 300 or worse.

On the flip side, MSU played 2 and UCLA played 3. Iowa State played 3 (and #289 and #294 as well). I'd say it's a pretty mixed bag, but those games are absolutely dragging down our NCSOS.

Illinois has 3. I really wish we would stop scheduling teams THAT bad and schedule teams in the 150 - 250 range instead (SIU-E, Ark-LR, etc.). I know you can't always predict it, but Chicago State and Maryland-Eastern Shore are pretty regularly below 300.
My guess is the scheduling decisions have been made doing the math about opponent’s rank vs how bad you beat them. Because despite the low strength of schedule, we are highly ranked by the computers. The reason is we have beaten those low ranked teams by very large margins.

As much as we hear about analytics for Illinois basketball, and the rise in use of computers in tournament seeding, it is likely they are also crunching the numbers about relative merits of playing opponents of various ranks and the margin of victory needed.
 
#64      
My guess is the scheduling decisions have been made doing the math about opponent’s rank vs how bad you beat them. Because despite the low strength of schedule, we are highly ranked by the computers. The reason is we have beaten those low ranked teams by very large margins.

As much as we hear about analytics for Illinois basketball, and the rise in use of computers in tournament seeding, it is likely they are also crunching the numbers about relative merits of playing opponents of various ranks and the margin of victory needed.

The SOS is not low. Check out my last post. Our NonConf has #1, #4, #8, #19 plus Misery. The SOS index on Pomeroy is some sort of weird net index thing, I wouldn't use that at all. The schedules that are ranked at the very top of it are absolutely horrendous.
 
#65      
One non-conference strength of schedule is 233rd per KenPom.

Auburn, Duke, and Tennesee have 1 game against 300+.
Alabama played #299 and no teams 300 or worse.
Kansas played #287 and no teams 300 or worse.
Baylor played #296 and 1 team 300 or worse.
Michigan has 0 games against teams 300 or worse.

On the flip side, MSU played 2 and UCLA played 3. Iowa State played 3 (and #289 and #294 as well). I'd say it's a pretty mixed bag, but those games are absolutely dragging down our NCSOS.

Illinois has 3. I really wish we would stop scheduling teams THAT bad and schedule teams in the 150 - 250 range instead (SIU-E, Ark-LR, etc.). I know you can't always predict it, but Chicago State and Maryland-Eastern Shore are pretty regularly below 300.
My issue is you play enough of those 150 teams and you’re gonna have a bad loss having an off day when the goal of those games is to work on specific things and play a home game in front of fans.

When the seasons done, they seem to just put emphasis on what you did vs Q1 and Q2 games (and where they happened). Nobody is getting credit because they dominated Q3 teams instead of Q4. That’s partially why the mid-major good teams get low seeds, because they don’t get the Q1/Q2 opportunities.
 
#66      
So because a metric doesn't agree with your opinion, it's not correct? LOL, good god man.

Florida A&M played 7 games against Top 70 opponents. We played 3. And we played 2 of the 10 worst teams in the country. That drags our NCSOS WAY down, which is what the OP was saying.

Us having the 16th HARDEST NCSOS is absolutely absurd. Go look at who Memphis has played. KP has them 4th.

But have fun looking at whatever metric confirms your priors.
 
#67      
You can't count Duke. We haven't played them yet. But you're just wrong.

Some teams at the top: Memphis, UNC, Purdue, Alabama, Oakland, Baylor, Kansas.

ESPN has our NCSOS at #150. They have Memphis 1st overall vs. KenPom which has Memphis 4th. They have Florida A&M 15th.

 
Last edited:
#69      
This going to sound kinda weird, but I think playing Chicago State helped in some ways. First, it got some meaningful minutes with some of the bench guys in the early stages of the game so they were playing in rotation and while the team was not just playing out the string. Just seeing the ball go in the basket seemed to help guys like Gibbs-Lawhorn and Davis with their confidence. And the up-tempo pace was a welcome change from the Tenn and Mizzou slogs. Seems to me controlling the pace is a big key going forward. Rebounding and attacking once they break backcourt pressure seems like keys to being able to speed up the game. But most of what I know I probably learned from some on this board...as well as many culinary things
Back when I used to coach (HS/JHS west Texas), I ALWAYS wanted a track meet. I had my guys push and push and push. I had some track stars and it worked quite well. Other teams wanted to slow it down and run patient sets, but I could always get the game speeded up by pressing and over playing. There were times we'd give up easy buckets, but, usually we just kept running.

Opposing coaches hated playing us. My team knew that. We fed off it.
 
#71      
This going to sound kinda weird, but I think playing Chicago State helped in some ways. First, it got some meaningful minutes with some of the bench guys in the early stages of the game so they were playing in rotation and while the team was not just playing out the string. Just seeing the ball go in the basket seemed to help guys like Gibbs-Lawhorn and Davis with their confidence. And the up-tempo pace was a welcome change from the Tenn and Mizzou slogs. Seems to me controlling the pace is a big key going forward. Rebounding and attacking once they break backcourt pressure seems like keys to being able to speed up the game. But most of what I know I probably learned from some on this board...as well as many culinary things
Agreed! Brad is just as good at schedule construction as he is roster construction.
 
#73      
Evan is going to be tracking roster turnover results throughout year. Apologies if this has been posted/shared already.

I was wondering how many of those players were at BYU with Pope that are now at Kentucky. Feel like that should be factored in as a “returning player” for him
 
#74      
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back