Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#328      
Self is without a doubt a great coach but those are pretty basic sets. You have one setup and then a varied counter as a defense adjusts to take it away.

I don't think he really does anything revolutionary on the offensive end. He really runs a fairly simple offense and puts an extremely talented group of players on the floor that are able to execute it.
yep, and the fact that we can see them all kinda makes any innovation to them moot.

But it actually speaks to the larger point, and something I think isn't discussed enough. Just because you know something, doesn't mean you can teach it.

I always found it ridiculous to hear how good an Xs and Os guy Weber was. People said that because he knew a lot about the game. But could he impart it to other players?

To Deron, he obviously did and the guy made an extraordinary jump. beyond that, his offenses seem to be stagnant because whatever he knew he couldn't get the players to do.

The genius of Self is that he gets his guys to execute. yes, that comes with some top recruits (although not as loaded with 5 stars as other blue bloods).
 
#330      
Self is without a doubt a great coach but those are pretty basic sets. You have one setup and then a varied counter as a defense adjusts to take it away.

I don't think he really does anything revolutionary on the offensive end. He really runs a fairly simple offense and puts an extremely talented group of players on the floor that are able to execute it.
You’re right. It is simple. It’s screen the screener…but then he has the perfect counterpoint for that play IMO. It’s like classic rock guitar 🎸 riff…sometimes the simple stuff works best.)

1.) I think most would say simplicity is a key ingredient in teaching/coaching.

2.) The devil is in the details

He does a lot with a little and he gets a lot of mileage out what he does. But it’s the intangibles too. He’s shown a tremendous ability to add a tweak here or there to his base offense without changing the core of it.

The simplicity allows him to be more adaptable…most everything he runs has about 3-4 options. And the counters are usually very basic…but intuitive/built in and thought out in regards to various coverages.

I just think he’s very good at paring things down to the essentials and adding just enough variation.

And btw don’t judge his entire catalog on just these two quick hitters. There’s quite a bit of subtle nuance in a lot of what he does.

*I just put these particular screenshots up because I had looked at them recently in this very interesting article. It’s quite long.
But it’s pretty cool if you like that sort of thing…

 
Last edited:
#332      
I like Morez and it seems like he's trending up but his high ranking is sitting at 43 overall. Illinois is in range for recruits in that range all the time.

Hansberry is 67, Clark 33, Rodgers 59, Epps 72, Miller 33, Curbelo 47, Kofi 46, Ayo 32. Plus a number of other top 100 recruits like RJ, Goode, etc.

Brad has basically been getting similarly ranked talents in nearly every recruiting class.
ESPN has him at 25
 
#335      
Brad us the only coach in America with recruiting connections. Good point.
Worth the effort . . .
IMG_0737.gif
 
#336      
Tough to say “far from the best” and then cite one example because the teams he’s responsible for assembling go farther then their regular season might predict.

Also two championships to one is not nothing.
True but Self loses a lot of credit because of the FBI investigation and using ineligible players. I know other coaches did the same but it hurts where I rank him
 
#338      
I you're going to compile a list of the NCAA coaches to win at a very high level without cheating, you will have an empty list.
There is a difference between a coach who was part of the scheme and a coach who might not of had direct knowledge. Self Sampson Pearl Calipari Pitino Miller and Wade all are in the same camp for me

I think Izzo Few Bennett Painter Barnes currently run relatively clean programs even before NIL. I think Weber and Keady tried to run clean programs. I could be wrong.

 
Last edited:
#339      
Brad us the only coach in America with recruiting connections. Good point.
That's not the point. Tim Anderson and Chester Frazier have established recruiting pipelines.

A new coach with new assistants would have to build new bridges. They would likely succeed but it's going to take time and effort.

Although a smart new coach might try to keep one or both.
 
#340      
That's not the point. Tim Anderson and Chester Frazier have established recruiting pipelines.

A new coach with new assistants would have to build new bridges. They would likely succeed but it's going to take time and effort.

Although a smart new coach might try to keep one or both.
Every coach at a major program has their own connections, bridges, pipelines, whatever you want to call it. That's how most of them get the job in the first place. They all have recruits that they are close to commitments from. A top 50 player from Chicago is no better or worse than a top 50 player from Dallas. We all loved Dee and Deron just the same. So, the players may be different than we expected, but who cares. Unless you bring in a mid-major coach, and with the money we're putting into the program, I doubt that happens, this fear would be unfounded.

Yes a new coach often keeps on a guy for continuity, but with the transfers these days and the age of our current roster, there won't be much continuity anyway. So unless a new coach says, this guy is better at recruiting, developing, scheming, etc than anyone I have, then there's really no reason for him to keep an assistant he doesn't know and doesn't know his system.

So an AD may say, I recommend keeping coach X, but leave the decision up to the new coach. Any AD that demands an assistant be kept, or keeps a head coach not meeting expectations because of assistants, should be fired.
 
Last edited:
#342      

sacraig

The desert
#343      
Every coach at a major program has their own connections, bridges, pipelines, whatever you want to call it. That's how most of them get the job in the first place.
It's not that simple.

Two of the best new head coaches this past season were Dennis Gates and Jerome Tang.

While the results have been undetermined and mixed; Duke, UNC, UM, IU, and Louisville have gone with unproven alumni in recent years.

MSU did pretty well promoting a long time assistant.
 
Last edited:
#345      
Who would place above him? Guys won the conference 95 percent of the time he’s coached. Has two national titles. So many guys in the argument have left the game recently.
Funny, first thing that comes to my mind is they are all leaving because NIL evens the field, and they can't let their images be marred when everyone sees them operate on a level playing field....................
 
#346      
Funny, first thing that comes to my mind is they are all leaving because NIL evens the field, and they can't let their images be marred when everyone sees them operate on a level playing field....................
All the really famously successful coaches were really really old. Even Jay Wright was 60.

Them retiring really isn't too surprising. Supposedly, Scheyer is making like 7-8 million a year at Duke if I was him and maintained that job I would probably retire at 45. If I was Sean McVay i would've retired after the the Superbowl win.

Now, Im also probably not psychopathically committed to the extent that's what makes these coaches very successful but if I was a multi millionaire I would be happily retired and not enduring the stress of major head coaching job. Maybe even demote and go coach at like University of Hawaii of something.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.