Definitely would fit in perfectly into the 3/4 role on this team
Illini Basketball 2024-2025
- Status
RabidDawgClassic
- Los Angeles, CA
Here’s Crazy Rabid’s path to Illinois getting a share of the B1G regular season title. It’ll be rough on our end, but other team’s schedules are such that it’s doable. Or at least not not-doable.
1. Illinois must win out. We lost all margin for error with losses to USC and Nebraska. 15-5.
2. Purdue loses at Michigan, At Michigan State and at Illinois. A loss at Indiana would be bonus, but not counting on it. 15-5
3. Michigan State loses at Illinois, at Michigan and at Maryland. 15-5
4. Maryland loses at Ohio State and at Michigan. Losses at Nebraska and/or Penn State would be bonus. 14-6
5. Michigan loses at Ohio State, at Michigan State and home to Illinois. Losses at Indiana and/or Nebraska would be bonus. 15-5
6. UCLA loses at Illinois and at Purdue 14-6
7. Wisconsin loses at Purdue, at Michigan State and at home to Illinois 13-7
And with that plan, Illinois would be the #1 seed in the B1G Tourney. Please note: I am in no way predicting this will happen… just showing you one possible path that is not outside the realm of reason.
1. Illinois must win out. We lost all margin for error with losses to USC and Nebraska. 15-5.
2. Purdue loses at Michigan, At Michigan State and at Illinois. A loss at Indiana would be bonus, but not counting on it. 15-5
3. Michigan State loses at Illinois, at Michigan and at Maryland. 15-5
4. Maryland loses at Ohio State and at Michigan. Losses at Nebraska and/or Penn State would be bonus. 14-6
5. Michigan loses at Ohio State, at Michigan State and home to Illinois. Losses at Indiana and/or Nebraska would be bonus. 15-5
6. UCLA loses at Illinois and at Purdue 14-6
7. Wisconsin loses at Purdue, at Michigan State and at home to Illinois 13-7
And with that plan, Illinois would be the #1 seed in the B1G Tourney. Please note: I am in no way predicting this will happen… just showing you one possible path that is not outside the realm of reason.
How about the calculation that if we had scored a total of 8 more points in regulation in four games (TN, NW, MSU, NEB), we would be 19-3 and 10-2 (tied for lead) in B1G. Small difference in scoring; big difference in record.
blackdog
- Champaign
It's been noticeable how he's been forcing shots less. During his major slump he was taking a ton of bad shots so it seems the idea of having to give it up and get it back is making a big difference.
Not likely but fun nevertheless. I did not count on us winning the conference. I am more excited about Post Season Play. Beating Duke would be fun.
Is there a world where Riley comes back next year and he is the PG?
Imo he’s serviceable as a ball handler but we do need an experienced PG.
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
Delete ... thought I was in the Rutgers pregame thread, lol.
Last edited:
Illini in Italy
- Illini HQ, Florida Panhandle
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
I've posted a lot about our shooting from the field, but I just wanted to vent today about something even more frustrating ... our turnovers. I looked at our turnovers vs. power conference competition, and believe it or not it actually pissed me off WAY MORE to find that there was almost no correlation between a win and a loss!
Average in Wins: 11.7
Average Overall: 12.2
Average in Losses: 12.9
So we are literally just turning the ball over constantly 12+ times per game no matter how well we are playing otherwise?! That is literally just CHRONIC laziness and completely unacceptable! These are D1 athletes, and I get the impression this is like the inbounds plays for Underwood - something he "shouldn't have to teach" or whatever ... well, these stats should be readily available to you if they are to me, and you DO have to teach it, Brad!!
How can one manufacture any real hope for this team when even if we are shooting well, we are liable to just cough the ball up routinely?! I know many have probably moved on from this dream after yesterday, but if we WERE to somehow find ourselves in a meaningful NCAA Tournament game in March, it's these absolutely stupid mistakes that will be the things that separate the winner from the loser in 90%+ of close games. And we are intent on stacking the cards against us and forcing ourselves to shoot our way out of any mess we create, lol. That's weakness, plain and simple.
With all that said about us pretty much turning it over every game win or lose, there is still a huge spread between what this Illini team could look like if they just showed up mentally and took care of the ball vs. our truly lazy and sloppy performances.
- The only time we had fewer than 10 turnovers vs. a power conference team? We had just 6 at Indiana, and we dominated a Quad 1 opponent 94-69, setting a literal record for that arena.
- The three times we had more than 15 turnovers vs. power conference teams? 15 turnovers in an embarrassing home loss to USC. 16 turnovers in a monumentally humiliating 71-90 home loss to Maryland. And 17 turnovers at Nebraska, in one of our biggest dud performances I can remember in a long time.
Hope you are all able to distract yourselves better than I am today with our good news on the football recruiting front!
Average in Wins: 11.7
Average Overall: 12.2
Average in Losses: 12.9
So we are literally just turning the ball over constantly 12+ times per game no matter how well we are playing otherwise?! That is literally just CHRONIC laziness and completely unacceptable! These are D1 athletes, and I get the impression this is like the inbounds plays for Underwood - something he "shouldn't have to teach" or whatever ... well, these stats should be readily available to you if they are to me, and you DO have to teach it, Brad!!
How can one manufacture any real hope for this team when even if we are shooting well, we are liable to just cough the ball up routinely?! I know many have probably moved on from this dream after yesterday, but if we WERE to somehow find ourselves in a meaningful NCAA Tournament game in March, it's these absolutely stupid mistakes that will be the things that separate the winner from the loser in 90%+ of close games. And we are intent on stacking the cards against us and forcing ourselves to shoot our way out of any mess we create, lol. That's weakness, plain and simple.
With all that said about us pretty much turning it over every game win or lose, there is still a huge spread between what this Illini team could look like if they just showed up mentally and took care of the ball vs. our truly lazy and sloppy performances.
- The only time we had fewer than 10 turnovers vs. a power conference team? We had just 6 at Indiana, and we dominated a Quad 1 opponent 94-69, setting a literal record for that arena.
- The three times we had more than 15 turnovers vs. power conference teams? 15 turnovers in an embarrassing home loss to USC. 16 turnovers in a monumentally humiliating 71-90 home loss to Maryland. And 17 turnovers at Nebraska, in one of our biggest dud performances I can remember in a long time.
Hope you are all able to distract yourselves better than I am today with our good news on the football recruiting front!
What about looking at points scored (or rather, given up) off turnovers? We have a knack for making live-ball turnovers at the top of the key that turn into easy buckets. I wonder if there are fewer of those kinds of turnovers in games we win? (But more dead ball turnovers so the total number of turnovers remains high.)
Some boxscores list points off turnovers, so film-viewing isn't needed. Though ... I can't summon the energy to look at even the boxscores. Much easier to toss out suggestions here.
OrangeBlue98
Iowa is not in a great spot right now (LvilleILL1)
- Des Moines, IA
This is pretty complex stuff, and as pretty much everyone on here knows I can't stand Dan Hurley. But the stuff UConn runs offensively is really good and is something we need to be doing more of. I hate the five-out offense where you have at least one person just standing in the corner to allegedly space the floor. The game is about movement, and the way UConn can run patterns that deviate into secondary plays is something to behold.
You simply cannot tell me that with some of the players we have that we couldn't run something resembling this. You still have great floor spacing, but all five players are moving and you're running people off of multiple screens to create mismatches and moving everyone around the floor.
You simply cannot tell me that with some of the players we have that we couldn't run something resembling this. You still have great floor spacing, but all five players are moving and you're running people off of multiple screens to create mismatches and moving everyone around the floor.
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
Unfortunately, Sports Reference is what I use for this stuff because it's really easy to tally. However, I am indeed crazy enough to have looked up our points allowed off turnovers in those games...What about looking at points scored (or rather, given up) off turnovers? We have a knack for making live-ball turnovers at the top of the key that turn into easy buckets. I wonder if there are fewer of those kinds of turnovers in games we win? (But more dead ball turnovers so the total number of turnovers remains high.)
Some boxscores list points off turnovers, so film-viewing isn't needed. Though ... I can't summon the energy to look at even the boxscores. Much easier to toss out suggestions here.
Points Allowed From Turnovers
L by 19 vs. Maryland ... 27 points
L by 13 vs. Alabama (Birmingham) ... 18 points
L by 9 at Rutgers ... 18 points
L by 10 vs. USC ... 18 points
L by 6 at Nebraska ... 17 points
L by 2 vs. Tennessee ... 12 points
W by 3 vs. Missouri (STL) ... 12 points
W by 4 at Washington ... 12 points
W by 8 vs. Ohio State ... 12 points
W by 13 vs. Arkansas (KC) ... 11 points
W by 39 vs. Penn State ... 10 points
W by 6 vs. Wisconsin ... 9 points
L by 4 at Northwestern ... 7 points
W by 32 at Oregon ... 6 points
L by 2 at Michigan State ... 4 points
W by 25 at Indiana ... 4 points
W by 9 vs. Northwestern ... 2 points
So if you left every single-digit game alone but simply adjusted our double-digit games down to allowing 9 points off turnovers ... these would be our results. Those that changed at all are in bold, and those that flipped are bold and green.
L 87-91 vs. #8 Alabama (Birmingham, AL)
W 90-75 vs. #19 Arkansas (Kansas City, MO)
L 66-70 in OT at Northwestern
W 86-80 vs. #20 Wisconsin
W 64-63 vs. #1 Tennessee
W 80-74 vs. Missouri
W 109-77 at #9 Oregon
W 81-74 at Washington
W 91-51 vs. Penn State
L 72-73 vs. USC
W 94-69 at Indiana
L 78-80 at #12 Michigan State
L 71-72 vs. Maryland
W 83-74 vs. Northwestern
W 74-72 at Nebraska
W 87-76 vs. Ohio State
Tied at 73 heading into OT last night vs. Rutgers ... let's just say we win with momentum.
So instead of 15-8 overall, 7-6 in the Big Ten, 6-7 in Quad 1 games and having just lost 4 of our last 6...
... with this simple change we'd be 18-5 overall, 9-4 in the Big Ten, 9-4 in Quad 1 games, on a 4-game winning streak, we'd have a fond memory of a thrilling victory over #1 Tennessee and we'd have had zero-sweat in wins vs. Mizzou/Washington.
And none of that even gets into the VERY high likelihood that if we are only giving up 9 points off of TOs vs. Maryland (1-point loss above) and USC (1-point loss above), we VERY likely are also playing well enough to win those games on our home court. Those two changes would have us at 20-3 overall, 11-2 in the Big Ten, 10-3 in Quad 1 games and having just won 14 of our last 15 games.
TL;DR
So yeah, to this point we have done a spectacular job of wasting an immense amount of talent and squandering would could be a VERY special season basically by being lazy. There is little else to it ... injuries don't excuse this trend, and we have also proven we are perfectly good at turning it over for points now that we are "whole," too. Turnovers are MENTAL mistakes 90%+ of the time, so this basic mental cluster**** is obviously going to then affect how we are playing in every other area of the game, such as making wide open shots.
Illinicpa14
- Chicago
This was always my issue with Hawkins turnovers - they always seemed to be at a bad time and led to a breakaway momentum dunk.Unfortunately, Sports Reference is what I use for this stuff because it's really easy to tally. However, I am indeed crazy enough to have looked up our points allowed off turnovers in those games...
Points Allowed From Turnovers
L by 19 vs. Maryland ... 27 points
L by 13 vs. Alabama (Birmingham) ... 18 points
L by 9 at Rutgers ... 18 points
L by 10 vs. USC ... 18 points
L by 6 at Nebraska ... 17 points
L by 2 vs. Tennessee ... 12 points
W by 3 vs. Missouri (STL) ... 12 points
W by 4 at Washington ... 12 points
W by 8 vs. Ohio State ... 12 points
W by 13 vs. Arkansas (KC) ... 11 points
W by 39 vs. Penn State ... 10 points
W by 6 vs. Wisconsin ... 9 points
L by 4 at Northwestern ... 7 points
W by 32 at Oregon ... 6 points
L by 2 at Michigan State ... 4 points
W by 25 at Indiana ... 4 points
W by 9 vs. Northwestern ... 2 points
So if you left every single-digit game alone but simply adjusted our double-digit games down to allowing 9 points off turnovers ... these would be our results. Those that changed at all are in bold, and those that flipped are bold and green.
L 87-91 vs. #8 Alabama (Birmingham, AL)
W 90-75 vs. #19 Arkansas (Kansas City, MO)
L 66-70 in OT at Northwestern
W 86-80 vs. #20 Wisconsin
W 64-63 vs. #1 Tennessee
W 80-74 vs. Missouri
W 109-77 at #9 Oregon
W 81-74 at Washington
W 91-51 vs. Penn State
L 72-73 vs. USC
W 94-69 at Indiana
L 78-80 at #12 Michigan State
L 71-72 vs. Maryland
W 83-74 vs. Northwestern
W 74-72 at Nebraska
W 87-76 vs. Ohio State
Tied at 73 heading into OT last night vs. Rutgers ... let's just say we win with momentum.
So instead of 15-8 overall, 7-6 in the Big Ten, 6-7 in Quad 1 games and having just lost 4 of our last 6...
... with this simple change we'd be 18-5 overall, 9-4 in the Big Ten, 9-4 in Quad 1 games, on a 4-game winning streak, we'd have a fond memory of a thrilling victory over #1 Tennessee and we'd have had zero-sweat in wins vs. Mizzou/Washington.
And none of that even gets into the VERY high likelihood that if we are only giving up 9 points off of TOs vs. Maryland (1-point loss above) and USC (1-point loss above), we VERY likely are also playing well enough to win those games on our home court. Those two changes would have us at 20-3 overall, 11-2 in the Big Ten, 10-3 in Quad 1 games and having just won 14 of our last 15 games.
TL;DR
So yeah, to this point we have done a spectacular job of wasting an immense amount of talent and squandering would could be a VERY special season basically by being lazy. There is little else to it ... injuries don't excuse this trend, and we have also proven we are perfectly good at turning it over for points now that we are "whole," too. Turnovers are MENTAL mistakes 90%+ of the time, so this basic mental cluster**** is obviously going to then affect how we are playing in every other area of the game, such as making wide open shots.
Kind of like yesterday the DGL turnover he tried to tip the ball and led to an ace Bailey massive dunk getting the crowd pumped. That’s worth more than just 2 points.
Not sure where to put this, but is there a place that tracks every possession outcome that you can export from?
He’s too long and loose with the ball.
redwingillini11
White and Sixth
- Batavia
I am not sure if this has been addressed anywhere. Has there been any consideration of whether the Fletch process is having a negative effect on three point shooting? There is absolutely no doubt what Fletch does for us is incredibly impressive and I think has huge benefits. But is the arm muscle development, or perhaps legs if you think about it, causing our three point shooters' motion to get off, especially half way through the season? I remember it being posited that Jake Arrieta may have been too jacked to sustain what he was doing and that is why he really only had two seasons of elite play. Taking it to an extreme, too much muscle at some point starts to hinder your athletic abilities...
I saw this chart the other day, can't find it now, but three point percentage is down for pretty much every single transfer in since arriving at Illinois. On the list of what changes there could be, the Fletch process seems like it could be playing a factor.
Now I'm not saying that we shouldn't have Fletch keep doing what he is doing. But maybe understanding this, we should consider an offense doing something more in line with what Fletch is training everyone for. Like, oh I don't know, for example, driving to the basket?
I saw this chart the other day, can't find it now, but three point percentage is down for pretty much every single transfer in since arriving at Illinois. On the list of what changes there could be, the Fletch process seems like it could be playing a factor.
Now I'm not saying that we shouldn't have Fletch keep doing what he is doing. But maybe understanding this, we should consider an offense doing something more in line with what Fletch is training everyone for. Like, oh I don't know, for example, driving to the basket?
Correlation versus causation. It could be a number of factors. A lot of our transfers have been coming in from mid majors where they probably didn't have to expend as much energy on either end of the court, which drastically affects your shot when you're an underclassmen with your body still developing. TSJ on the other hand doubled the amount of 3pt shot attempts while he was here so you expect a bit of a decline. Ben Humrichous was a volume scorer at Evansville and was streaky even there, going 30/62 before Christmas break, and going 16/66 in the latter half of the season.Side note: I've said it all along that Ben would be best getting 15 mpg, and having that be his role here but unfortunately the staff gave him a different selling point.
Either way, with so many moving pieces and underclassmen, you expect inconsistency and that's what we got. It's not a formula for winning even when there's plenty of talent on paper. It doesn't help that we have an accountant trying to coach our ballers about toughness instead of someone like Chet.
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
I posted this in the Bracketology thread, but I wanted to see what even an OKAY 3-point shooting outing every game could do for this team. I get that this is a rather simple exercise and way more factors go into a win/loss, but just consider these three results as a decent measuring stick for our 3-point shooting since January 1st.
1. 55.2% at Oregon ... obviously abnormally high.
2. 34.4% at Indiana ... you'd THINK replicable with our full team.
3. 32.3% vs. Penn State ... not awful considering KJ was out and is our best shooter.
4. 30.3% vs. Wisconsin
5. 28.1% vs. Northwestern
6. 21.4% at Rutgers ... just really, really bad.
So looking at all of our games, that 30% against Wisconsin seems like a good barometer for a "decent performance" for what we could reasonably expect from this group. So if you just had us making 30% minimum of our threes in every game ... we'd have these results vs. power conference teams ... flipped results in green.
L 87-100 vs. Alabama (Birmingham, AL)
W 90-77 vs. Arkansas (Kansas City, MO)
W 59-56 at Northwestern
W 86-80 vs. Wisconsin
W 73-66 vs. Tennessee
W 80-77 vs. Missouri (St. Louis, MO)
W 109-77 at Oregon
W 90-77 at Washington ... WAY more comfortable!
W 91-52 vs. Penn State
W 84-82 vs. USC ... technically it would go to OT, so I assume we pull it out!
W 94-69 at Indiana
W 84-80 at Michigan State
L 77-90 vs. Maryland ... only closes the gap a bit.
W 86-74 vs. Northwestern
W 83-80 at Nebraska
W 93-79 vs. Ohio State
L 79-82 at Rutgers ... but who knows, as we are maybe not playing from behind late.
So yeah ... we'd be 20-3 overall, 11-2 in the Big Ten and 10-3 in Quad 1 games. DAMN, man ... by just shooting 30% or above every game. Obviously, you are going to have off days, but 30% is like not good at all, haha. That's honestly the only thing allowing me to cling on to some hope that we can go on ANY sort of run is that I just keep waiting for our shooting to at least SOMEWHAT normalize.
1. 55.2% at Oregon ... obviously abnormally high.
2. 34.4% at Indiana ... you'd THINK replicable with our full team.
3. 32.3% vs. Penn State ... not awful considering KJ was out and is our best shooter.
4. 30.3% vs. Wisconsin
5. 28.1% vs. Northwestern
6. 21.4% at Rutgers ... just really, really bad.
So looking at all of our games, that 30% against Wisconsin seems like a good barometer for a "decent performance" for what we could reasonably expect from this group. So if you just had us making 30% minimum of our threes in every game ... we'd have these results vs. power conference teams ... flipped results in green.
L 87-100 vs. Alabama (Birmingham, AL)
W 90-77 vs. Arkansas (Kansas City, MO)
W 59-56 at Northwestern
W 86-80 vs. Wisconsin
W 73-66 vs. Tennessee
W 80-77 vs. Missouri (St. Louis, MO)
W 109-77 at Oregon
W 90-77 at Washington ... WAY more comfortable!
W 91-52 vs. Penn State
W 84-82 vs. USC ... technically it would go to OT, so I assume we pull it out!
W 94-69 at Indiana
W 84-80 at Michigan State
L 77-90 vs. Maryland ... only closes the gap a bit.
W 86-74 vs. Northwestern
W 83-80 at Nebraska
W 93-79 vs. Ohio State
L 79-82 at Rutgers ... but who knows, as we are maybe not playing from behind late.
So yeah ... we'd be 20-3 overall, 11-2 in the Big Ten and 10-3 in Quad 1 games. DAMN, man ... by just shooting 30% or above every game. Obviously, you are going to have off days, but 30% is like not good at all, haha. That's honestly the only thing allowing me to cling on to some hope that we can go on ANY sort of run is that I just keep waiting for our shooting to at least SOMEWHAT normalize.
- Status