Well, the 9th man needs to be capable of getting onto the court so that you have a playable option in case of emergency/injury. (To judge this, we can say 28 games is a fine bar)
If not, then it's likely the team has a depth issue.
Illini Basketball 2026-2027
If not, then it's likely the team has a depth issue.
And (again) games appeared in does not prove a player is capable of meaningful playing time
These players tend to come in the game when the score is out of hand or for spot minutes if there's foul trouble
There is literally zero point in reading in to the number of games a guy came in and played for 30 seconds
You know what, that's a fair point. If you want to slice it that thin, let's go for pastrami.
When you say 9-deep, I assume you're saying a 9-man rotation. So, what is a rotation player? I've typically seen it defined as someone who plays at least 10 minutes. I drilled down into that season a little more, and for the sake of argument included some numbers on players playing 5+ minutes as well.
Games with Skyy:
Competitive games - There were 5 in the Skyy Clark era. There was not a single competitive game in the Skyy Clark era where 9 players played 10+ minutes. In 4/5 of those 8 players played 10+ minutes. In the one exception, against Northwestern, only 7 players played 10+ minutes. In that game Sencire, despite starting, only played 9 minutes, and Ty, Lieb, and Paxton Warden were able to check in and combine for 2 minutes. Bar the Northwestern game, all of the other competitive games had 9 players check in for at least 5 minutes.
Blowouts - Skyy played in 8 blowouts. 9 players made it to 5+ minutes in 7/8. 9 players got to 10+ minutes in 7/8 blowouts.
In total, 9 players made it to 5+ minutes 12/13 Skyy games, and to 10+ minutes, 7/13 Skyy games.
Games with neither/Skyy nor Luke
Competitive: There were 7 competitive games in which Skyy did not play, before Luke came back. 0/7 featured a 9th player with at least 5 minutes. 5/7 did not even have a 9th player check into the game.
Blowout: There were 3 blowouts in this time period. All three had at least 10 players check in. 2/3 had player #9 play at least 5 minutes. 1/3 had player #9 play at least 10 minutes.
Games with Luke
Competitive: After Goode came back, all 10 games were competitive. We had 9 players check in 8/10 of those games. We had 9 players play 5+ minutes in only 3/10 of those games. We did not have a single game in which 9 or more players played 10 minutes, even after Goode came back.
Takeaways
So, if rotation is 5+ minutes, then we only had 17 games with a 9-man rotation (in which 9 or more players played 5+ minutes) and 12 of those were with Skyy, so after Skyy left, we only got to a 9-player rotation in 5 of the remaining 20 games.
If rotation is 10+ minutes, which to me seems reasonable, then we only had 9 players meet that bar in 7 games, and every single one of them was a blowout while Skyy was still on the team.
As an added fact, after Skyy's last game against Northwestern, in 7/19 of our remaining games a 9th player did not even check in, even for spot minutes.
So, yeah, I take issue with the idea that at any point in that season we played 9-deep in any meaningful way....
But assume we did. Who was the 9th man? You've framed it as being Ty, but if you look at those box scores, after Skyy left Ty was solidly in the 8-man rotation, as was Sencire. They had been promoted to 7th and 8th man by teh beginning of conference play, and were never demoted back. In fact, neither Ty did not come in 9th in minutes in a single game after Skyy's departure, and Sencire only did one time. Here are the guys who came in 9th in minutes for the 20 games Skyy did not play in:
None (only 8 played) (7x)
Brandon Lieb (6x)
Luke Goode (2x)
Jayden Epps (2x)
RJ Melendez (1x)
Sencire Harris (1x)
Zaccharie Perrin (1x)
This is just all a lot of info to say that this 9th man framing is at the same time both an oversimplification of something complicated (the fluctuations of a roster and minute allocation for dozens of reasons) and an overparsing of something relatively unimportant (the quality of a player likely to mostly play spot minutes and in blowouts).
And lastly, this. The utter absurdity of looking at the chaos that is the 2023 roster's minute allocation, looking at our current roster, and trying to make any kind of comparison. Unless things go just horribly wrong, we won't be in the kind of situation where we are asking Zens and Brown to be Ty and Sencire. And if things go that wrong, then there is no magic that any coach could have conjured in the transfer portal that would have saved it.
I believe Pat Riley coined the "Disease of More" as something that gripped teams, post-championship. Basically, winning takes everyone buying into a role and focusing on the team success. Once its achieved many guys who were once happy to play a role, want more money, more playing time, more media exposure, more plays designed for them, etc... Which ruins the chemistry that got them to the title.
Yes, that was what I heard on the podcast... coming back to me now. Appreciate the refresher!
I'm confused... Are the freshmen we recruited so bad at basketball they wouldn't be able to step onto the court and have some idea what is going on?
There are a handful of teams in the B1G for which Landon Davis would represent the highest or 2nd highest grade on a recruit, per 247. (88) He's our lowest.
skyIdub
"I can't tell you. Secret."
This 9th man stupidity might just be the dumbest debate in Loyalty history.
That is really saying something.
We are in the best spot in this programs history and there is so little to question about really anything....so yeah.....9th man is really important sh#t.
That is really saying something.
We are in the best spot in this programs history and there is so little to question about really anything....so yeah.....9th man is really important sh#t.
I'd also like to add this context, for those who refuse to look down the bench farther than our "Top 100" guys.
Ethan Brown as a prep is rated on par with Trent Frazier, Alan Griffin, Coleman Hawkins, DGL, and Luke Goode. All were quite playable as freshmen.
Landon Davis is rated higher than Demonte Williams was...
A few of those guys turned out to be some of the most beloved players in the last 20 years.
Both Davis and Brown were targeted and pursued early in the cycle. We didn't "settle" for these guys. These are guys the staff WANTED.
Is rated higher than all I mentioned. I kind of put him in the Top 100 basket. Close enough for horseshoes... I think everyone assumes he is going to play. A lot of people act like Brown and Davis have no shot at being decent this year. Our history with similarly profiled guys says different.
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
Doesn't make the top 100 list, let's be real.
Those towards the end of the bench will be in a "yet to be determined" situation. If nothing else, all the practices before the first season game will show us who's who as far as the pecking order. It will also definitely provide a lot to talk about regarding a story for each player and their progression or not. Will be looking forward to it since there may be someone who may surprise all of us with the competitive team challenges ahead.
skyIdub
"I can't tell you. Secret."
Ok...you got 99 examples. Begin.
Regardless of where you stand on the depth of our team, why are we talking about any of our not-so-elite previous teams?
If you want to compare our upcoming roster with last year, 2020-21, or maybe 2023-24 that's one thing. But who cares what our roster looked like when we ended the season ranked outside the top ~10? And I'd really rather compare to previous champions and/or the top 2-3 in final rankings.
If you want to compare our upcoming roster with last year, 2020-21, or maybe 2023-24 that's one thing. But who cares what our roster looked like when we ended the season ranked outside the top ~10? And I'd really rather compare to previous champions and/or the top 2-3 in final rankings.
Likely, other than Ethan himself (along with friends and family), there is no one who wants him to surprise us all and become an Illini star and favorite more than me. But having seen some tape of his play, he is way below B1G standard for strength and speed for that level of contribution this year. Nevertheless, he has passing and shooting skills that could get there. Now, developing his handle and defense becomes the challenge. He may get there and I hope he does....but it will take a while. It will all depend on his patience and work ethic...not common in 18 yo kids today. But to get to where he is, it takes more of those virtues than most.
In an off-season with so few questions, this will be fun. The staff will quickly get a good idea of who can compete now, as opposed to down the road, since these guys will be practicing daily against, perhaps, the best team they will play all season.
The pedigree of these guys is better than many seem to realize. We'd have been absolutely pumped to have guys like Zens, Brown, and Davis in Brad's first couple of years. Are they one and done superstars? Highly unlikely. Are they D1 caliber players? Almost certainly. Could you mix any one of them into a game for 5-8 minutes along with the studs we know we already have, and not get blown out the gym? I'd bet my orange and blue beach house you could.
If the staff doesn't like what they see this summer, there is space to add.
This entire thread is a great illustration of how far we've come in the Underwood era.
I’ve come to trust our staff’s evaluation of players.
We’re watching tape of him that’s probably quite dated by now, while they’ll be sitting front row in summer workouts.
Did we all watch Wagler vids last year and determine he’d be a top 10 pick? Brown/Zens don’t need to be that- merely must be capable of soaking up a couple minutes here and there.
Let’s not forget how quickly we can transform players bodies in this program either.
wettsten
- Chicago
No. 1: Stefan Vaaks, Illinois
"Imagine the highest volume shooter in a power conference who also happens to be its most efficient. So, in every sense of the word, we're talking about the very best shooter in one of the premier conferences in college hoops. Now, think of a pick-and-roll maestro who led his squad in assists per game – same high-major level. Blend those two players together, and you would have the archetype perimeter player, right?
That would be Illinois’ incoming transfer Stefan Vaaks, who led the Big East in three-pointers made, attempted and percentage while pacing his squad with 3.2 assists per game.
To make non-Illini Big Ten fans even more anxious, consider this: Vaaks isn’t just a sharpshooter. A 6-foot-7 guard, he is a true three-level scorer – and an efficient one (shot 51.7 percent on two-pointers). Oh, and did we mention that he did all of that as a freshman?
There are areas for improvement in Vaaks’ game – namely his rebounding (2.5 boards per game isn’t cutting it) and his defense. But Illinois head man Brad Underwood has already proven capable of extracting every ounce of ability from most every player who comes through Champaign."
Is it crazy to say Vaaks could be a version of 2022 Alfonso Plummer? Just from a shooting and scoring standpoint. People forget just how good that guy was.
Last edited:
I had Claude write a script that takes past incoming Illini composite ratings and their freshman year Torvik ratings (avg of PRPG! and D-PRPG) to take a stab at some probabilities based on this year's incoming freshman class. Here's what our past recruits with Brad looked like (for reference, on a great team, starters are typically 3+ and reserves are 2-3):
I had the script estimate the probability that our entire freshman class will yield at least:
- one good starter and one solid reserve: 57%
- one borderline starter and one solid reserve: 66%
- one borderline starter and one borderline reserve: 78%
- one solid reserve and one borderline reserve: 86%
And if you're dying to know what it says about a 9th man:
- one solid reserve and two borderline reserves: 59%
This is based on a small sample size (35 recruits), so I'm just throwing it out there for fun. I think we all want better than a 66% chance of getting at least a borderline starter and solid reserve, and the coaches know these guys better than any of us, so hopefully enough of the guys coming in end up on the higher side of these predictions.
I had the script estimate the probability that our entire freshman class will yield at least:
- one good starter and one solid reserve: 57%
- one borderline starter and one solid reserve: 66%
- one borderline starter and one borderline reserve: 78%
- one solid reserve and one borderline reserve: 86%
And if you're dying to know what it says about a 9th man:
- one solid reserve and two borderline reserves: 59%
This is based on a small sample size (35 recruits), so I'm just throwing it out there for fun. I think we all want better than a 66% chance of getting at least a borderline starter and solid reserve, and the coaches know these guys better than any of us, so hopefully enough of the guys coming in end up on the higher side of these predictions.
Well, I'm not sure why it sounds that what I'm asking for is so abstract.
Sophomore Jake, Freshman DGL, Freshman Ty, Freshman Sencire, Freshman Goode, Freshman Melendez, Freshmen Coleman Hawkins. Every one of those guys played in over 74% of our games and averaged 2.0 points while doing so.
Is it crazy to say a similar asset would be nice for this year's team, in the 9th man role?
It's just an extra safety blanket when you endure injuries/other absences. Big difference playing 6 guys versus 7 (and even 7 guys versus 8). It's called depth!
Last edited:
DGL, 149 composite
Ty Rodgers, 59 composite
Sencire Harris, 113 composite
Luke Goode, 103 composite
RJ Melendez, 94 composite
Coleman Hawkins, 167 composite
And Zens coming in this year is #104.