Illinois 105, Penn 70 Postgame

Status
Not open for further replies.
#176      
Pru after dark
046a9d45dd7be364394892cf1f5867ad.jpg


cwplus79.gif


the stories I could tell...................Memories , in the corner of my mind.........................................they really really are...............
 
#179      
He’s not wrong though. Not that we played poorly, but we definitely didn’t play as well as we could have. If we played the first half the way we played the second, we win by 60.
You mean the historic 1.95 efficiency 2nd half? Arguably one of the MOST efficient halves in the history of the NCAA tournament? That is the standard you would want us to stay at?

We would have beat ANY team in the tournament by 20 plus if we play to that standard. Ridiculous bar to hold a team to.
 
#180      
All I can type is this: if Illinois can duplicate this second-half performance, then they will reach the E8 with a very good chance to win.

Great stat early on in the second half: lots of two pointers along with 3/5 from three-point land. BALANCE!!!!!

There is not a team in the tournament that would keep it within 20.
 
#181      
Penn didn't have an answer for our size and they put them away. Great to see --looked more like the 12 game win streak. They looked a little nervous early, but man did they take advantage of Penn's lack of size. What can you say about Mirk? You need a guy who just won't lose, and Mirk played like that guy. Good to see the team playing scared.

Penn was pretty bad defensively, and didn't match up well with us. VCU is a very different team and I think having fast guards is a lot tougher on this team's defense. They're also 17 points better on kenpom. They'll need to bring it.

Gotta say it was wonderful seeing the deep bench get into the game for several minutes.
 
#189      
This same statement could be said about every coach after every game from now until the end of time. Because:

1. No coach is perfect.
2. The general public only has access to a tiny fraction of the available information that goes into a coach making a particular decision.
3. Coaches have to make decisions before the eventual outcome occurs. Whereas fans get to judge each decision based on the eventual result after said result occurs.

And if we were to let the “couch coaches” in the game thread who are simply “questioning Brad’s dumb decisions” coach this season, we would’ve lost 20 games.
Way too many "non-questionable" decisions that couch coaches can see that our multi million dollar coach isn't prepared for. Thats the problem. Its indefensible and you're trying to defend it. I know this is "Illinois loyalty", but you're loyalty is to a fault right now. Those details are why people want Brad out. Its grade school stuff.
 
#191      
Loved the game.
Loved the win.
Now let's see if we can do that two times in a row.
 
#194      
You mean the historic 1.95 efficiency 2nd half? Arguably one of the MOST efficient halves in the history of the NCAA tournament? That is the standard you would want us to stay at?
Well, first of all, yes. You don't? Weird to sell your team short. Why would someone say "hey, we played this well in game 1, but let's aim lower moving forward."? Of course, I'm taking your question literally, where I know you meantit this way: "you mean to tell me that if we don't play this well the rest of the tournament you'll be a hater on the team?"

It's almost like you glossed right over the part where I said this:
Not that we played poorly, but we definitely didn’t play as well as we could have.
I mean... we played better in the second half than the first half, so we literally did not play the first half as well as we could have. In fact, most commentators and users on this forum even admited we didn't start the game well. Why did you go straight for the "I gotta get defensive" stance instead of reading the post literally?
 
#195      
Very happy we picked things up and closed this one out.

Let's keep that same energy and flow on Saturday and see if we can get revenge against Houston.
 
#196      
Well, first of all, yes. You don't? Weird to sell your team short. Why would someone say "hey, we played this well in game 1, but let's aim lower moving forward."? Of course, I'm taking your question literally, where I know you meantit this way: "you mean to tell me that if we don't play this well the rest of the tournament you'll be a hater on the team?"

It's almost like you glossed right over the part where I said this:

I mean... we played better in the second half than the first half, so we literally did not play the first half as well as we could have. In fact, most commentators and users on this forum even admited we didn't start the game well. Why did you go straight for the "I gotta get defensive" stance instead of reading the post literally?

But your baseline you are going for is possibly the GREATEST half of offensive efficiency in NCAA tournament history. Sure I “want” that, but expecting it or even being delusional enough to think it will happen again, seems like a self-imposed prison of misery I don’t need.
 
#197      
He’s not wrong though. Not that we played poorly, but we definitely didn’t play as well as we could have. If we played the first half the way we played the second, we win by 60.
I mean the story is that Penn started the game playing with an intensity and physicality they couldn't sustain for 40 minutes, not least of which because their best player should have been watching from bed.

And also just shooting percentages reverting to the mean of course.

There wasn't a big difference in the way we played in the two halves. There seldom is, for better or for worse we just play how we play.
 
Last edited:
#200      
Small gripe: KW played 32 minutes. And despite getting hacked shoved and body checked didn't shoot a single free throw. Boozer, Fears, or a host of others would have paraded to the line with the same treatment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back