Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#177      
Plain and Simple
St Johns,, no football,,, all NIL goes towards Basketball
But I'm sure, NIL $ is lower without football $
 
#179      
But, but, but we were told it's still EARLY! Kidding aside, it feels like this is the case. What a system; tampering, back channeling, however you label it. Agents and parents pimping their kids for the highest offer. These are the scenarios everybody saw coming when the "NIL" came to fruition. Unsustainable. The fan experience has already been obliterated, and they are the economic driver of the system.

Name, image, likeness was not sold as pay to play. But that is exactly what it is.
Is it "pimping your kid" to want them to make money and be secure in life? Is me sending my kid to a STEM camp this summer, on the off chance it'll spark an interest in becoming an engineer or doctor down the road also me "pimping my kid?" If my kid asks me for career advice one day and I convince him to leave his current job for a new one that pays more, did I just "pimp my kid?" Man, the way some of you all talk about these players is wild.
 
#180      
With all of the backchanneling that's gone on this year by agents, the portal process is accelerated. Kids hitting the portal already have idea of what schools they will look at. So, last year's roster building timeline doesn't really mean all that much.
Can you give us any positives? Cause it seems like we are putting all our eggs in the basket of Sarr/Riley and possibly getting neither if we wait to long on Riley and he goes pro.
 
#183      
They have a lot of money left. They will spend it, let it play out. We have way more of a roster at this point than we did last year.
This Up Here GIF by Chord Overstreet


I only have the knowledge that we have a better roster now than at this point last year, Ill trust Lville with the $$.
 
#184      
Sure, if Riley got offered $30,000,000 he would probably stay. It’s the $4 million that might not be a risk worth it for him. In this economy that barely is gonna buy the iPhone 17
 
#185      
With all of the backchanneling that's gone on this year by agents, the portal process is accelerated. Kids hitting the portal already have idea of what schools they will look at. So, last year's roster building timeline doesn't really mean all that much.
So are we behind in panicking, or do we still have plenty of time for that?
 
#186      

Illinois Reaches Out to Veteran Sharpshooter Currently in Transfer Portal​



He would be a piece potentially and maybe he could be the backup guard, but he's only a shooter, 80% of his shots are from three, doesn't rebound, get steals, set up teammates, he's just on the court to shoot. He's a 6'4 Ben Humrichous. And he's the 11th best SG available in the portal right now, to show how thin the pot has gotten.
 
#187      
Jamir Watkins is a stud, a proven scorer. The 3rd time could be the charm for the Illini in his recruitment. It was the charm for Quincy Guerrier a couple of years ago. Except Watkins, a Senior, is an even better player, one at a position of need for the 25-26 Illini. But how high will the bidding for Watkins go? Would the Illini be able to win a bidding war for the services of Watkins? What would be that cost?

If it was me, I'd wonder if I could add two very good (and younger) players to the Illini for the price of one Jamir Watkins. Here are the names of two potential transfer players who together might not cost any more than Watkins.
Sophomore F/G LeJuan Watts of Washington State, 6'6", 233 pounds, 13.7/6.7/4.4 averages, and 54.9/42.2/73.4 shooting.
Sophomore G/F Kennard Davis Jr. of Southern Illinois-Carbondale, 6'6", 215 pounds, 16.3/4.9/2.6 averages, and 44.5/37.6/76.3 shooting.

Watts is strong and athletic. He can play either SF or SG. He's only a Sophomore. He averaged a solid 6.7 rebounds/game last season, and his 4.4 assists/game shows his playmaking ability. And his 42.2% on 3-pointers was outstanding. I'd imagine he's even strong/athletic enough to play some small-ball 4 at times.

Davis is tough and athletic. he's primarily a SG, but he can also play SF. He too is only a Sophomore. His rebounding last season, 4.9/game, was very good for a SG. His 2.6 assists/game shows that he's not selfish. Davis made a lot of tough 3s last season for SIU, many late in the shot clock. He was very good at 3s, both catch-and-shoot, plus step-back 3s. He has a solid mid-range game, plus he finished lots of drive to the hoops, including tough finishes through contact.

Watts is garnering interest from Texas and Michigan, among others. Davis is garnering interest from Purdue and Iowa State, among others. I would really hate to see Watts to Michigan, and/or Davis to Purdue! These two players are exactly the type of tough/physical/athletic players that many of us Illinois fans like to see in the Orange & Blue. I think that both players will be able to score, pass, rebound, run the court, and defend in the style that Brad Underwood likes.
 
#188      
Wally, Lumpy, Beaver, Eddie Haskell, Bill Scott
Correct. Actor David Kent as Bill Scott, according to IMDB. I'm sure Ward was playing golf that afternoon with Fred Rutherford.
 
Last edited:
#189      
Is it "pimping your kid" to want them to make money and be secure in life? Is me sending my kid to a STEM camp this summer, on the off chance it'll spark an interest in becoming an engineer or doctor down the road also me "pimping my kid?" If my kid asks me for career advice one day and I convince him to leave his current job for a new one that pays more, did I just "pimp my kid?" Man, the way some of you all talk about these players is wild.
My argument is not that it isn't right. We would all do the same to try to maximize the benefit to our child. That is not my point. My point is, the current model is not sustainable. Fans will become disinterested in college basketball eventually and stop contributing money to it. It is already happening. At some point, the only interest will be from family of players and those who gamble on sports. The pie will begin shrinking, and "NIL" payments are soon to follow. I'm just playing out the scenario here. The money will eventually not be there to pay these guys millions of dollars. Plain and simple, IMO. The long term prospects for college sports are not good as a direct result of having no system in place. I'm all for the free market, more so than many, but a wild west with no system in place will not last.
 
Last edited:
#190      
He would be a piece potentially and maybe he could be the backup guard, but he's only a shooter, 80% of his shots are from three, doesn't rebound, get steals, set up teammates, he's just on the court to shoot. He's a 6'4 Ben Humrichous. And he's the 11th best SG available in the portal right now, to show how thin the pot has gotten.
How’s his handles and his defense?
 
#192      
I think that 6'8"/6'9", 250-255 pound, 19-year-old Montenegrin Forward David Mirkovic is a great addition to the Illini. I hope that he can be with the team for at least two years. If he works hard with Fletch, I could see him adding to his strength, improving his quickness, and increasing his vertical. He has a very good 3-point shot, but he seems very slow getting his shot off. D-1 defenders will close out on him very quickly on 3s, and I have my doubts that Mirkovic (at least now) will be able to drive to the hoop past those defenders. And I really worry that Mirkovic will (for now) not be able to guard quicker opponents in our man-to-man defense. So, as of right now, I would expect Mirkovic to start this coming season at PF, but I think that is far less than optimal for the Illini. (And BTW, Ty Rodgers, to me, is not really a 4, a starting PF, at 6'6", without a proven [yet] outside shot.) I think that the Illini might want to consider recruiting a starting PF (doesn't need to be a star) via the transfer portal.

Here are four examples of possible transfer 4s via the portal:
Sophomore Malique Ewin of Florida State, 6'11", 230 pounds, 14.2/7.6/1.7 averages, and 59.6/0.0/65.3 shooting.
Junior KeShawn Murphy of Mississippi State, 6'10", 230 pounds, 11.7/7.4/1.6 averages, and 56.6/14.8/61.9 shooting.
Sophomore Alvaro Folgueiras of Robert Morris, 6'9", 215 pounds, 14.1/9.1/3.2 averages, and 54.8/41.3/78.4 shooting.
Junior JaMichael Stillwell of Milwaukee, 6'8", 225 pounds, 13.0/10.7/1.4 averages, and 46.8/28.6/56.2 shooting.

IMHO, any one of these 4 proven players would be better (this season) as the starting PF than David Mirkovic. I would just hope that one of these 4 would be an "affordable" transfer option for the Illini.
Until he proves otherwise, Ty is a 4. Last we saw him he didn't remotely have the skills you'd want a 2 or 3 to have. Maybe he's developed those skills in the past year. That would be great.

While I agree that Mirkovic may not be ready to start and that it would be great to add a starting-caliber PF, you're really off on your height demands. Houston just made the Finals where their top guys as far mpg went 6'1, 6'2 6'3, '6'6, and 6'8. Height is great if you have the skills to play a spot. If you don't have the skills, it doesn't mean !!!!.

I suspect that our 4 spot will be a mix of Z, Mirkovic, Ty, and whoever else we might get.
 
#193      
College sports have (for our lifetimes) been about who is getting the most money. Like any other sport, having the most money doesn't guarantee success, but it does make it more likely. So if you want to be a fan of a winning team, you give the team money.
Seems obvious that you should probably define "for our lifetimes."

- for 3 year olds on Illinois Loyalty, yeah you're probably right about the $$$$
- for 83 year olds, not so much
 
#195      
My argument is not that it isn't right. We would all do the same to try to maximize the benefit to our child. That is not my point. My point is, the current model is not sustainable. Fans will become disinterested in college basketball eventually and stop contributing money to it. It is already happening. At some point, the only interest will be from family of players and those who gamble on sports. The pie is shrinking, and "NIL" payments are soon to follow. I'm just playing out the scenario here. The money will eventually not be there to pay these guys millions of dollars. Plain and simple, IMO. The long term prospects for college sports are not good as a direct result of having no system in place. I'm all for the free market, more so than many, but a wild west with no system in place will not last.


True across the board. The biggest problem I see is that the only people I see defending the current system usually use the claim that it is better for the players. That is 100% true. It would also be better for me if I made $5 million a year...but my company would be bankrupt pretty quickly. The problem is that what is good(or great) for the players is sometimes awful for the people that matter...the fans. If they don't prioritize the fans quickly then you are right, it all dries up.
 
#197      
You're both right IMO. This new landscape is not sustainable. Try and imagine a good player picking us because they want to get a U of I education. Academics trumps athetics. LOL
 
#198      
Seems obvious that you should probably define "for our lifetimes."

- for 3 year olds on Illinois Loyalty, yeah you're probably right about the $$$$
- for 83 year olds, not so much
I estimate since around at least 1960 this has been true, so most still-living lifetimes at this point. (The slush fund scandal started 1962 and that idea doesn't just come out of nowhere.)
 
Last edited:
#199      
Zero reason to panic.
What is the plan if we wait on Will/Dame and we end up with neither? Last year we pivoted to European players, but we have already taken one and FL_8905 said we have money set aside for the other.

I don’t remember what kind of money was being offered to guys who pulled out of the draft at the deadline. What kind of bidding war were those guys compared to top guys in the portal now?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back