Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#428      
The way that fans, coaches, players themselves, etc all need to pretend every player is going to be taken in the first round of the next year's NBA draft isn't really good for anybody and just makes these discussions fake and dull.

I hope NIL starts to change that.

Also just for the record:

Reed Sheppard: 43rd in the 247 composite for 2023
Jeremiah Fears: 33rd in the 247 composite for 2025
Yes, great points. Reed’s ability to shoot the 3 is way ahead of Fears, but I like the historical ranking context. Fears reclassing to ‘24 should drop him in the rankings, though not sure how/if the composite factors in age and physical readiness.
 
#429      
Wait... So Riley wasn't a take in 2024 for UK, but Fears is?

the phantom menace GIF by Star Wars
 
#432      
And to add a little more to this … We’ve got an open ride …

And if anyone’s learned anything about Brad … If he can upgrade the talent … He will … He will recruit over kids

You add Jasper to this team and it’s a no doubt top 5 preseason team … No doubt … Man would that be fun to watch …
We're putting this down as a good thing?

I don't think it's a good thing, but it's the reality of the NIL world we find ourselves living in. Gone are the days of the 2-4yr player development program. Players want to play/get paid today not 1-2 years down the road, so they leave at the sniff of a better opportunity elsewhere. Likewise, any smart coach has taken his 2-4yr team development blueprint and tossed it out the window. They have to recruit with the intention to make the team better today, not in 2 years, because the talent necessary to win a natty isn't sticking around that long.

Personally I find this to be a bit of a sad state of affairs, but it's what's necessary to win.
 
#433      
Yes, great points. Reed’s ability to shoot the 3 is way ahead of Fears, but I like the historical ranking context. Fears reclassing to ‘24 should drop him in the rankings, though not sure how/if the composite factors in age and physical readiness.
It's way ahead of just about everyone. Someone said 52% over one season of college ball. If anyone shoots that on reasonably high volume against good competition, they're a 1st round pick, regardless of their other qualities.
 
#434      
It sounds more and more like the only sure one-and-done next year is Pope.
Sure seems to be helping us out to say the least...I don't want him to be a one and done.

In addition to Mr. Jack Gohke and SMU for firing their coach...

just can't thank Scott Drew enough for not taking that job...

Unless of course he comes in and scoops in Jasper - if we're 1st (seems like we might be), seems like they might be 2nd?
 
Last edited:
#435      
It's way ahead of just about everyone. Someone said 52% over one season of college ball. If anyone shoots that on reasonably high volume against good competition, they're a 1st round pick, regardless of their other qualities.
Yeah, which is why Reed shot up draft boards compared to his recruiting ranking (which ChiefGritty called out), was the 3rd overall pick, and top American drafted.

I was trying not to harp on the drastic difference in shooting, but you’re right…Reed was 52.1% from downtown last year, per his NBA draft profile. Fears shot 24% from 3 this year at AZ Compass Prep, which is pretty rough. Here’s a list of some of the worst 3pt % NBA players with at least 3,000 attempts…they all were at least 30%. Hope Fears develops.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3232.png
    IMG_3232.png
    702.1 KB · Views: 314
#436      
I don't think it's a good thing, but it's the reality of the NIL world we find ourselves living in. Gone are the days of the 2-4yr player development program. Players want to play/get paid today not 1-2 years down the road, so they leave at the sniff of a better opportunity elsewhere. Likewise, any smart coach has taken his 2-4yr team development blueprint and tossed it out the window. They have to recruit with the intention to make the team better today, not in 2 years, because the talent necessary to win a natty isn't sticking around that long.

Personally I find this to be a bit of a sad state of affairs, but it's what's necessary to win.
I take a slightly different viewpoint, and this has nothing to do with the new reality of NIL. The job of the coach is to always be looking at ways of upgrading the roster, even if it means "recruiting" over players. At top flight programs, you always strive to have the best players you can get. If players start seeing their role diminishing more than they want (or perceive promised), then it is in their best interest to move on. If we want to be a top-tier school, it is time we act like the top-tier programs. Brad clearly gets it, and I am glad this is the direction we have gone.
 
#438      
I don't think it's a good thing, but it's the reality of the NIL world we find ourselves living in. Gone are the days of the 2-4yr player development program. Players want to play/get paid today not 1-2 years down the road, so they leave at the sniff of a better opportunity elsewhere. Likewise, any smart coach has taken his 2-4yr team development blueprint and tossed it out the window. They have to recruit with the intention to make the team better today, not in 2 years, because the talent necessary to win a natty isn't sticking around that long.

Personally I find this to be a bit of a sad state of affairs, but it's what's necessary to win.

I agree with your post but its not sad, just different.
It is way overdue for players to have freedom of movement and compensation for their contribution to these schools

Let's call it evolution.
 
#442      
I don't think it's a good thing, but it's the reality of the NIL world we find ourselves living in. Gone are the days of the 2-4yr player development program. Players want to play/get paid today not 1-2 years down the road, so they leave at the sniff of a better opportunity elsewhere. Likewise, any smart coach has taken his 2-4yr team development blueprint and tossed it out the window. They have to recruit with the intention to make the team better today, not in 2 years, because the talent necessary to win a natty isn't sticking around that long.

Personally I find this to be a bit of a sad state of affairs, but it's what's necessary to win.
Yeah, player development is now at the NBA level. At least with the Lakers
 
#445      
Seriously this is the viewpoint stemming from the possibility of adding a top 10 player?

LOL
The question is, but at what cost? Your word carries value and when the value of your word is damaged.... you've got real problems.

So, we get a one and done, while undercutting another kid/family. The instant gratification is most definitely there. However, insiders, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure this is the exact issue that Chester got irate over and ultimately it led to a parting of ways. Is that accurate?

At the end of the day, recruiting is about relationships, with the final nail being money.

We still don't know what this team is going to be in 2024-2025. It's a crapshoot. I can, with certainty, tell you that the way we did things this past year(a complete roster overhaul) is not sustainable YoY. When you start recruiting over guys....you better damn we'll be sure that the top 10 player plays like a top 10 player. If you're going to go down that path, your conversion rate has been be 100%.

That's just my take.
 
#446      
I take a slightly different viewpoint, and this has nothing to do with the new reality of NIL. The job of the coach is to always be looking at ways of upgrading the roster, even if it means "recruiting" over players. At top flight programs, you always strive to have the best players you can get. If players start seeing their role diminishing more than they want (or perceive promised), then it is in their best interest to move on. If we want to be a top-tier school, it is time we act like the top-tier programs. Brad clearly gets it, and I am glad this is the direction we have gone.
The job of the coach isn't to upgrade the roster. It's to win. Cal was wearing out his welcome for that very reason.

All that glitters isn't gold. Finding shiny new jewels and randomly adding them to a necklace doesn't necessarily make it more beautiful.

There's all sorts of spin out there but we essentially dumped podz two years ago to get skyy Clark.

Last year was a master class on team chemistry. It remains to be seen which of the last two years this season will most resemble.
 
#447      
The job of the coach isn't to upgrade the roster. It's to win. Cal was wearing out his welcome for that very reason.

All that glitters isn't gold. Finding shiny new jewels and randomly adding them to a necklace doesn't necessarily make it more beautiful.

There's all sorts of spin out there but we essentially dumped podz two years ago to get skyy Clark.

Last year was a master class on team chemistry. It remains to be seen which of the last two years this season will most resemble.
The quality of the roster and wins are generally highly correlated. Cal won a ton of basketball games at Kentucky almost every season (as does North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, etc.). His issue was not making it out of the first weekend of the tourney the last 3 seasons (and Kentucky has high standards). Part of that is roster construction, getting team chemistry, and a major part coaching deficiencies.

More often than not, it is easier to win more games when you have the superior horses. Sure there will be examples like Podz, but those are likely outliers versus the rule. I will take the Brad approach over the Weber and Groce approach any day of the week.

I believe the coach should always be looking to recruit over players to make the team better, and the players should make it very hard to be recruited over through practice and game results.
 
Last edited:
#449      
Some seriously weird takes going on here today. Upgrading the talent of the roster is a ALWAYS a good thing. It was a good thing in the past and it’s a good thing in the present.

If you don’t want to be “recruited over” then get better.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back