Studying and getting hungry to grind
Illini Basketball 2026-2027
It appears big Z did by the video they just posted
Stojakovic was 2nd on the team in scoring. Mirk was 3rd.
Stojakovic averaged more points despite playing THREE LESS minutes per game. I think they play equal minutes next year.
Given that data, its over the top to firmly expect Mirk passes Andrej in scoring (unless Andrej has regressed).
Last edited:
Looks like Dre got blocked by Z.
Another big not Tomi or Z looks pretty impressive. Pro ably one of the freshmen.
Another big not Tomi or Z looks pretty impressive. Pro ably one of the freshmen.
Last edited:
is this team gonna defend? I have almost no concern on the offensive end. Last year the team stepped up the defensive end during the NCAA tourney but that was also after having 4 bad defensive performances out of our last 5 games heading into the tourney.
They'll be good at defense. The question is, top 15-20 good, or 20-30 good.
Difference between final four threat and one of a select few national title favorites
Our defensive principles are simple:
• limit shots at the rim (4th in rim attempt rate allowed)
• don’t foul (1st in free throw rate allowed)
• finish possessions with a defensive rebound (27th in OREB rate allowed)
Continue to do those 3 things at a high level, and we’ll be a very good defense.
There’s room to improve and be an elite defensive rebounding team.
We don’t press and extend our defense. So, rebounding is something we should be very good at.
Illini will be "old." Should be competent on the defensive end. When I see these scriimmages, I sometimes wonder if Jakstys might be ready to help this year. I also always like what I see from Davis. He looks like the kind of glue guy that top teams always seem to have.
Ironically for what I’m about to say, you mentioned 3 metrics, but I started considering last year if our defensive philosophy doesn’t translate well to the overall rating metrics like on KenPom, Trovik, and Miya. The teams higher on that list forced turnovers at a much higher rate, and that among other seemed to carry more weight in the ratings? Everyone talked about Michigan and MSU having the highest defenses last year, and us being “awful” (top 25 still but alright lol; just not top 5 like our offense). But as you point out we were elite in the things baked into our defensive philosophy. Rim protection, not forcing easy points via fouling, and rebound rate. We didn’t hunt turnovers which killed our rankings, but we did apply a tight pressure passed half court that allowed us to control pace and prevent teams from making an offensive play. Barring a quick shot that fortunately went in, or a breakaway, we held teams quite well.
It’s one where I think our pure overall rating doesn’t come out as high, nor tell the full story. We’re better than our rating on defense, but pundits and people like to keep it simple and go off of one true number to quote.
The key is applying these philosophies and beating UConn and MSU this year. Both have had our lunch the past few years so for our defense and team overall to be solidified in the title conversation caliber, we’ve got to win MSU at home and UConn on neutral site.
Beating Duke at Cameron is another story and honestly that’s going to be a tough win no matter what. The last time Duke lost at home was in 2024 so if we pulled that off it would be meteoric
Insightful Kenpom article:
www.nytimes.com
(it's free)
KenPom: Shooting and defending the 3 is random business (i.e., relax! It's early)
Looking back at the last three seasons collectively, early 3-point shooting defense may not be inconsequential, but it’s close to it.
www.nytimes.com
(it's free)
I don’t know if MSU has eaten our lunch. Last year we led most of the game and would have won if we could have secured a defensive rebound. 2 years ago in East Lansing was the epic KJ screw job (aided by Izzo) and then in Champaign we were a shell of ourselves with injuries/illnesses.
The defense last year registered quite well in overall efficiency when you consider how poorly rated they were the previous two years. It's not a defense designed to disrupt or generate offense, it's a defense designed to do some basic things very well allowing the offense to outscore. We will not a win a game with our defense.
I'm honing in on the UConn game as a barometer to see if we can figure that scheme out and/or Brad has any adjustments ready. 0-3 w/2 tourney exits and 3 lowest scoring games in last 3 years really makes me want to win that one. We'll have already played TT & Duke at that point, they'll have played Ohio St, @Zona, Michigan and Duke. I'm guessing neither comes without a loss, but not matter. They are playing a guantlet this year, Good God.
We had MSU beat on the road last year.
I wouldn't really quibble with anything else in your post, but the S16 and E8 games were absolutely won with defense. Illinois scored an average of 68 points in those two games, yet won them by 10 and 12 points via holding both opponents under 60 points and 40% shooting (Houston .344, Iowa .383).
The important thing he points out, is that a team’s 3 point % defense is way more tied to their 2 point % defense than we all realize.Insightful Kenpom article:
KenPom: Shooting and defending the 3 is random business (i.e., relax! It's early)
Looking back at the last three seasons collectively, early 3-point shooting defense may not be inconsequential, but it’s close to it.
(it's free)
The stereotypical analysis we hear all the time is: “made 3 pointer = not a good contest” OR “missed 3 pointer = good contest.” It’s good for making a simplistic judgement, but the truth is that 3 point percentage varies astronomically from game to game, oftentimes at inexplicable measures. It’s almost uncontrollable.
BUT, over an entire season: when a team’s 2 point % defense and rim protection is good, their 3 point % defense is likely to be good as well because teams are forced to take bad 3 point shots, because they aren’t able to get to the basket.
This correlation is fairly well defined on this graph: every Division 1 team’s 2 point % defense on the x axis. And with their 3 point % defense on the y axis.
Good 2 point defense, oftentimes coincides with good 3 point defense.
Last edited:
I may be misinterpreting your thoughts, but I'd say it the other way around: we were great at a few things on defense, but those things don't tell the full story (the efficiency metrics do, though of course season averages don't predict how you match up against a particular team).
The question for me is whether we're constrained by our personnel to be great at the things we're great at and not as good at the other things, or could changes to our approach/preparation make us better overall?
The fact that you mentioned 3 games should be all the answer we need.
Yeah all good points. Maybe there's a better phrase I could've used. But in terms of being at the top of the B1G, I suppose MSU feels like a symbolic over-the-hump win since we've lost 4 straight to them.
It would be nice to end all of our current 3+ losing streaks this year, including MSU, UConn, and Wisconsin.
There are way more than 6 better student sections than the Orange Krush.
Yes we have a 3 or 4 game losing streak or whatever it is to MSU, and I don’t like it. But with the exception of the 2025 game at State Farm where we were a shell of ourselves (and even in that game think we had a double digit early lead), they’ve all been close games and we’ve had a little bit of bad luck/flukiness/Izzo deciding he didn’t want our best player to play so had his guys make a concerted effort to jump into KJ and the refs going “oh you’re trying to get KJ off the floor with foul trouble? Cool!”/Izzo’s best player who has a reputation for dirty plays just made another dirty play but we are going to look the other way cuz Izzo! type of things happen.
We’ve lost to them yes, but I think the implication with the “eat our lunch” comment is that they’ve dominated the match up lately which isn’t the case.