My read is he's less preficting winning but assessing WAR for teams where his goal is just "who is best relative to the middle".
Re: the methodology difference (essentially it being additive is the difference) he explains here:
Illinois 105, Minnesota 97 Postgame
Re: the methodology difference (essentially it being additive is the difference) he explains here:
Yes. A really, really fun team to watch. And Hank Gathers was a heck of a player. RIP
I much prefer our style of play today, fun to watch vs our previously good defensive teams that couldn't score, not fun to watch.
Sure about that?
sacraig
- The desert
In 1990, Loyola Marymount beat Michigan 149-115. The 264 combined points are the most in an NCAA Tournament game all time.
I was in Vegas betting for the first time, and that game was the first and last time I have bet an Under....
The 1962-63 Illini were 20-6 with 12 games of 90 or better. The beat Indiana in Huff Hall 104 to 101 and lost the return match to Indiana 100 to 103. Dave Downey set the Illinois single game scoring record in the loss with 53 points.
Harry Combes era. He thought defense was something you played in football. But his teams could run and gun.
Would you rather have this or giving up 38 points to Penn St. and loosing? The NBA style game can’t hurt recruiting.
OrangeBlue98
- Des Moines, IA
Oh, to be clear, I would MUCH rather watch this style of play all else equal. The end of the Weber era was painful.
I'm not asking for Dick Bennett at Wisconsin levels of defense (we'll probably never see that given how the game is called today anyway). I just want to see reasonably good defense. Reasonably good defense for Illinois would mean a legitimate chance at a national championship. I get they may not have all of the pieces for that type of defense. For example, there's no good rim protector. But I still struggle seeing a team with the overall athleticism of this Illinois team struggle so much defensively. Unfortunately, we're late enough in the season that I'm not sure you can really make a major scheme adjustment. They just may need to ride with what they have with some smaller adjustments.
We played a team that was on an insane shooting bender, and we have people here who want to go zone or go under screens. Many of whom say this without realizing if you do that, you’re going to give them even more open looks.
If we did that, it would be, “Our defense sucks. We went from giving them open looks to WIDE open looks.”
This is why the coaches, like @illini0440, coach.
If we did that, it would be, “Our defense sucks. We went from giving them open looks to WIDE open looks.”
This is why the coaches, like @illini0440, coach.
If it was just the Minnesota game, I'd agree with you. However, if you look at the body of work, our defense is objectively bad. The PSU game was basically a layup drill for PSU on offense, same with Maryland. You can accept it when the other team makes a series of contested 3's, but it's pretty hard to understand a defense that time after time allows a post player to back down a smaller defender in the paint with no defensive help
Don't ever think your efforts are not appreciated!
Yes, I think the Illini fan base gets so pumped every time he scores. Dain has that Warren Carter effect. Just a real charismatic personality .
Back on News Years Eve weekend, when I was visiting family in PA, I told my BiLs that we'll see what's going to happen. BUT, the Illini are going to be fun to watch.
I am old school. I prefer the 45 second shot clock. I think 30 second shot clocks encourage more NBA style play, which hurts less athletic players.
Big Jack
- Decatur
Some people just don't get it.. save you voice! They just fill the need to !!!!! and complain... If you were not at that game then shut the hell up. Because if you were at that game you would understand you saw maybe a once in lifetime college basketball game for the ages and we won.. Nuff Said!
I’ve wondered this myself. As a HS coach typically we’d switch zone to man or vice versa just to keep the offense guessing. It could even be for one play for for a SLOB/BLOB, I think trying that is at least worth a shot.
OrangeBlue98
- Des Moines, IA
Reasonable minds can certainly differ on this, but overall I do like the faster-paced game. I live in Iowa, and Iowa high schools adopted the 35-second shot clock starting with last season (Side note - I was actually a radio play-by-play announcer on the infamous 2016 Iowa 4A/large school state semifinal where one team stalled all four minutes of both overtimes before hitting the game-winning shot at the end of the second overtime. I feel like that was the game that eventually led to national adoption of the shot clock in high school, even though it took 6-7 years). Even in high school, a shorter shot clock improves the flow of the game. Conversely, I actually think a shorter shot clock actually helps good defenses that work on getting stops. Before the shot clock in general or the shorter shot clock, offenses could get away with more with defenses that weren't good at getting steals.
I always had this conversation with the coach at the high school where I used to live and did the radio play-by-play. His team always played great defense, but they never blocked a lot of shots or got a lot of steals. He was always hesitant about the shot clock, but I would always tell him that a shot clock would be great for his team. If they play great defense for 33 seconds without a shot clock, the opponent can just keep passing the ball around. With a 35-second shot clock, if you play 33 seconds of great defense the other team is forced to take a bad shot.
While I don't want to see the NCAA go to a 24-second shot clock like in the NBA and the Olympics (30 is great in my opinion), I feel like the day is coming where the NCAA will just adopt the FIBA/international/Olympic rules as their standard. The big tell for me was moving to the international three-point line.
Thank you for the details and interesting story about 2016. While I agree the 30 second shot helps defenses. My point was that it hurts offenses. Especially, for less athletic players who can’t create their own shots. Offenses that require more passing, cutting, similar to our 2005 team is what I miss.
That would have been my guess.
I'm sorry Mr. Hamer Sr., didn't mean to insult your son and I will say that him being the reason our defense is some hot dog water is little more than message board fodder and innuendo at this point, I can agree with that 100%
But unless you really are ZH's dad.... I think you might have a problem with grasping basic facts: in what world is a 28 year old still a kid? Him being a student manager while in college doesn't make any difference (you do realize that time as a construct continues to move forward right?). You said it yourself, he's literally been out of college for almost 2x the time he was in college.
Also here's where our defense has ranked previously from the 19-20 season onwards, after his first couple seasons Brad consistently put a top 35 Defense on the floor:
35th
7th
29th
26th
And sorry, of course the buck stops with Brad but if ZH actually is in charge of the defense this year, to say we can't criticize a P5 Asst. coach (making 200k+ again) because he's "only" 7 years removed from college might be the one of the worst takes ever seen on this board lmfao
Last edited:
Man... That had to be some riveting play by play... Were you doing a full stand up by the 2nd overtime?
Haha! Actually all UI employee salaries are public as its a state institution. See below, he actually makes more than the Head Women's Soccer Coach in fact!:
Last edited: