Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread

#51      
The bar of dissatisfaction has been raised again. It wasn't all that long ago that a top 25 raking was a great season. Then they needed to finish 2rd or 3rd in the BT regular season with a semi final appearance in the the BT tourney to be considered enough. A Sweet 16 was mandatory as well.
Now, unless they win it all some fans will consider the season a failure. The team is required to have 15 lottery eligible players or the team has no depth whatsoever.
Feel like what people would like to see is a lead guard off the bench. That isn’t that crazy a request.

Sure there’s some unrealistic expectations that if we don’t pursue and get Christian Anderson we ought to be shamed.

However, just getting a guard who’d play the Harmon role of 15-20 minutes of the bench would satisfy most people (including me). There’s really no reason that role shouldn’t be attractive for someone looking to jump from the mid majors.

We need depth. The top-end of the roster is good enough.
 
Last edited:
#52      
Not adding Mr. Blackwell could be a blessing in disguise........we have a tight well connected base of returning players who took us where we hadn't been in 25 years and everyone except KW and Bam have returned from our major tick players.....to blend in a transfer ( Vaaks ) and an excellent 5 man recruit class seems very doable and seamless , based on the personalities of said retention returnees............our strength should be our TEAM personna and nothing against Mr. Blackwell but we have many players who each could lead on any given game.....expecting Mr. Blackwell to be the Alpha on a team already full of Alpha's might cause some friction with the core EDG's ,mentality,,,,,,,,,,

After careful reflection I believe we will be better off in the course of the season to play the players who gleefully said " I'm back " , not someone chasing the Benjamins.....as BU said , these guys play for the name on the front of the uni , not the back name......

JMHO......................
 
#53      
Scholarship vs. Walk-on isn't too much of a thing to track anymore. Every team has 15 roster spots to fill regardless of that distinction.

By my count our roster sits at 12.

FR (4):
Morillo, Brown, Coleman, Davis

SO (4):
Jakstys, Mirkovic, Fagbemi, Vaaks

SR (4):
T. Ivisic, Z. Ivisic, Davis, Stojakovic

3 open roster spots as we sit today.
Zens makes 13.
 
#55      
Coleman is not backup PG. He’s going to start at SG.

Morillo is interesting since he can play 1-4. The thing is we’re counting on him to be ready. If he is, he’ll definitely see the court since he can fill 4 of the 5 spots.
We only had two lead guards on the team this past season, and they played on the court a lot together. Both those guys could also play an off-ball/wing role, so KB essentially was the backup "PG" even though he started at "SG" (later in the season - earlier in the season those roles were reversed).

This is why I am not a fan of using the traditional PG, SG, SF etc. designations in modern basketball, especially for a team like ours that doesn't run it's offense based on those traditional roles. Using designations like lead guards, wings, and bigs is a lot more useful (though also doesn't tell the full picture). Our normal lineup typically features a lead guard, two wings, and two bigs, but we have multiple people who can play multiple roles. Our small ball lineup basically swaps out a big for one of our longer wings (BH this past season, some speculation that Morillo would play a similar role this upcoming season). I expect that Coleman will start as a wing, but also spell Vaaks at times as the lead guard.
 
#56      
Quick recap of the offseason so far:

Staff: "It's going to be so great when we build the team around Mirkovic and bring back as many contributors as possible."

Staff: *brings back everyone, adds 2 top 30 freshmen and a top 10 transfer guard*

Board: "What's the plan for backup PG? Who is going to be the guy? How can we trust in freshmen to contribute a season after our top 2 contributors were freshmen?"

It's like last year, but speedrun since the staff brought everything together so quickly.
 
#58      
Happy 4/20, Pru!
wos13.jpg


Every day is 4/20 to me..............it really really is............

pf01.gif
 
#59      
I see more KJ than I do Keaton. (outside of just being two European guards and looking more alike)

The shot is more like KJ than Keaton — form and creating space off the bounce.

Keaton killed you with poise in his decision making. Called it the “old man game.”

Vaaks is more-so quick and decisive, like Kasparas.

I actually think he can be better than KJ — or definitely more efficient — if he keeps the TOs down (which Kasparas struggled with).

I see what you are saying, but I still like the Wagler comparison better because of the 3pt shooting.

KJ - 31% from 3, 50% 3pt rate
Wagler - 40% from 3, 48% 3pt rate
Vaaks - 35% from 3, 68% 3pt rate

Teams were okay letting KJ settle for a 3. Teams did not want Wagler shooting 3s and they don't want Vaaks shooting 3s.
 
#60      
We only had two lead guards on the team this past season, and they played on the court a lot together. Both those guys could also play an off-ball/wing role, so KB essentially was the backup "PG" even though he started at "SG" (later in the season - earlier in the season those roles were reversed).

This is why I am not a fan of using the traditional PG, SG, SF etc. designations in modern basketball, especially for a team like ours that doesn't run it's offense based on those traditional roles. Using designations like lead guards, wings, and bigs is a lot more useful (though also doesn't tell the full picture). Our normal lineup typically features a lead guard, two wings, and two bigs, but we have multiple people who can play multiple roles. Our small ball lineup basically swaps out a big for one of our longer wings (BH this past season, some speculation that Morillo would play a similar role this upcoming season). I expect that Coleman will start as a wing, but also spell Vaaks at times as the lead guard.

You also don't need a ball dominant lead guard all the time when the offense can run through Mirk and/or Tomi. That's the benefit of having skilled bigs.
 
#61      
We only had two lead guards on the team this past season, and they played on the court a lot together. Both those guys could also play an off-ball/wing role, so KB essentially was the backup "PG" even though he started at "SG" (later in the season - earlier in the season those roles were reversed).

This is why I am not a fan of using the traditional PG, SG, SF etc. designations in modern basketball, especially for a team like ours that doesn't run it's offense based on those traditional roles. Using designations like lead guards, wings, and bigs is a lot more useful (though also doesn't tell the full picture). Our normal lineup typically features a lead guard, two wings, and two bigs, but we have multiple people who can play multiple roles. Our small ball lineup basically swaps out a big for one of our longer wings (BH this past season, some speculation that Morillo would play a similar role this upcoming season). I expect that Coleman will start as a wing, but also spell Vaaks at times as the lead guard.

Agree with a lot of this. The five position designations haven't been replaced because there isn't a straight-forward way of explaining fit when most 2-4 players have multi-positional fits. For example, Petro fell out of the rotation from poor play but his fate was fully sealed once the staff was comfortable with Wagler taking on ball handling responsibilities.

I usually prefer to write out how many minutes-per-game each player will play to think about lineups and roles.
 
#62      
We only had two lead guards on the team this past season, and they played on the court a lot together. Both those guys could also play an off-ball/wing role, so KB essentially was the backup "PG" even though he started at "SG" (later in the season - earlier in the season those roles were reversed).

This is why I am not a fan of using the traditional PG, SG, SF etc. designations in modern basketball, especially for a team like ours that doesn't run it's offense based on those traditional roles. Using designations like lead guards, wings, and bigs is a lot more useful (though also doesn't tell the full picture). Our normal lineup typically features a lead guard, two wings, and two bigs, but we have multiple people who can play multiple roles. Our small ball lineup basically swaps out a big for one of our longer wings (BH this past season, some speculation that Morillo would play a similar role this upcoming season). I expect that Coleman will start as a wing, but also spell Vaaks at times as the lead guard.
I think the difference is we usually have guards capable of providing a spark off the bench:

2021 - Ayo, Curbelo, Miller, Trent
2022 - Curbelo, Trent, Plummer
2023 - Skyy, Harris, Epps
2024 - DGL, Harmon
(just listing all the guards - somebody played off the bench and provided a spark on each team)

Past year it was no one. And coming year it’ll likely be no one as well.

The Wisconsin game was brutal. Keaton the only ball handler; only played 6 guys. This year will be the same thing in a similar scenario.

It’s just not ideal to have guard depth as a weakness for two seasons in a row. Especially when it’s easily avoidable.
 
#63      
I'd say we are in a pretty prime spot. Minus Blackwell or some other high end addition, most likely not a preseason #1. But I'd say we are a solid title contender (top 5/10 type of team).

As I see it, we know the following. We have 5 guys returning all who played significant minutes into early April. We know those 5 can play at a high level. Vaaks has proven that as well at high D1 against quality competition. One would suspect at least a couple of the freshman will prove to be at least solid next year such that they could play 5 to 10 minutes a game and not kill you. Odds are based on rankings one of them will exceed that.

Also by my count we have 4 open slots (11 currently accounted for) and a roster that screams title potential. Won't be surprised if we get some late arriving Euro over the summer. We are kind of in a spot where we can be a little picky. It's not like the staff has to go find a big time starter level player. We can look for "fit" knowing that we already have something pretty solid.

I have been a Brad critic in the past but his performance in March shut me up & he has bought credibility. I'll assume he knows what he is doing & we will add some quality in those remaining roster spots.
 
#64      
I see what you are saying, but I still like the Wagler comparison better because of the 3pt shooting.

KJ - 31% from 3, 50% 3pt rate
Wagler - 40% from 3, 48% 3pt rate
Vaaks - 35% from 3, 68% 3pt rate

Teams were okay letting KJ settle for a 3. Teams did not want Wagler shooting 3s and they don't want Vaaks shooting 3s.

The cool thing, is whichever comparison you like better, we get a 2nd year version!
 
#65      
Hadn't updated in a while, but not much movement the last day or so:

Brandon Lee (G, Illinois) enters the portal
Tibor Mirtic (F, Penn St) enters the portal

Eian Elmer (G/F, Miami OH) commits to Wisconsin

 
#66      
I see what you are saying, but I still like the Wagler comparison better because of the 3pt shooting.

KJ - 31% from 3, 50% 3pt rate
Wagler - 40% from 3, 48% 3pt rate
Vaaks - 35% from 3, 68% 3pt rate
Teams were okay letting KJ settle for a 3. Teams did not want Wagler shooting 3s and they don't want Vaaks shooting 3s.
Prior to his slump, teams were NOT okay letting KJ settle for a 3. Go watch the Indiana game — they deliberately sagged off and got torched.

I guess I’m more-so referring to playstyle. Statistically, I’m sure there’s a better answer.
 
#67      
Because the players we brought back would be top 10-20 portal additions for most other teams which means we had to invest a lot to keep them. Then we add another top 20 transfer, then the #8 ranked recruiting class (which back in the day would have made everyone lose their minds by itself). Look at what those other teams have to replace. They HAVE to bring in big name guys if they want to compete with us ;)
I get it and I agree with you - one national media guy said we currently have the most expensive roster in the country (partly because we have 13 guys right now and others are still filling theirs out)

I think we could be even better than last year if folks take a natural step forward year over year and Vaaks, Coleman and Morillo are as good as I think they can be - all are high IQ lead guards and Coleman and Vaaks can really stroke it from three. And we know Mirk will be higher usage this year. We shouldn't have to rely on one lead guard like Keaton as much next year, which will raise our floor, so if Vaaks has an off night, others can pick up the slack.

But when we hear we still have money to spend on the right player that donors would be excited about - its' human nature to want to spend it - it's why MSU fans get riled up about Izzo refusing to spend big in the portal every year when clearly he has the donor funds to do it. And while this team will be elite offensively - I think we'll be better than last year as scary as that is - there is a real question defensively how we stop teams with quick guards - it was an issue last year and will be even more of an issue this year without Bam. Maybe that is the one more addition the staff will make by finding a "Dame Sarr-lite" from Europe this summer - a long athletic defender that can stop the quicker guards and is ready to play right away and doesn't require a lot of usage offensively.

Blackwell was so enticing because he's elite offensively and would be another perimeter defender all in one player that would make us the no-doubt #1 team going into next year. I know it was his side that backed off (I still have no idea where he's going to go to compete for a national title on a team that won't have a bunch of other high usage players - Louisville (they got Wooley back over the weekend to go with Shelstad) and Duke is loading up), it would seem we would have the most clear spot for him on an unselfish team that is the highest efficiency offense he can join - but that is another story and I know we need to move on
 
#68      
I see what you are saying, but I still like the Wagler comparison better because of the 3pt shooting.

KJ - 31% from 3, 50% 3pt rate
Wagler - 40% from 3, 48% 3pt rate
Vaaks - 35% from 3, 68% 3pt rate

Teams were okay letting KJ settle for a 3. Teams did not want Wagler shooting 3s and they don't want Vaaks shooting 3s.

I'm bullish on Vaaks 3-point shooting. Using the Jock comparison to show Vaak's shooting improved as the season went on:

KJ 3-point shooting
November & December: 41.6%
Rest of Season: 26.4%

Vaaks 3-point shooting
November & December: 30.6%
Rest of Season: 35.8%

Plus, Vaaks was shooting a lot more 3's than KJ (as you mention).
 
#69      
I don't think people are worried about what Vaaks will be bringning to our team. The biggest concern I'm reading is that we are relying on freshman or on players who haven't played lead guard to fill in that role when Vaaks is off the floor. This puts us a Vaaks injury or Vaaks foul trouble away from a lot of potential problems. I'm excited about what Coleman looks like he'll bring to our team, but he isn't a lead guard. Having watched some tape of Ethan Brown, he doesn't strike me someone who's ready to play lead guard for a championship level team. It looks to me like he's going to need some more time to grow.

I would echo the commenters who are saying they wish our coaching staff would add a veteran lead guard.
Seems like same argument heard in 2023-24. Disaster year with no PG. This year we have one in Vaaks and three frosh with some experience at the position in Morillo, Brown and Coleman. Why do we think we are going to get a better fit in the portal unless we give them guarantees and BU won’t do that. Posters keep saying we won’t get another Wagler. True but how about a Mirk, Ayo, Trent, etc. etc. BU wants winners who fit and he has been pretty damn successful at it.
 
#70      
While I am very optimistic and excited for next season and the new players. No matter who plays at guard, what I think will be the biggest difference next year is that we will most likely have significantly more turnovers. Wagler took on so much responsibility to have the ball in his hands when it mattered most and to create offense personally and for others. He did this so well and with an incredibly low turnover rate. His decision making/skill (along with our offensive rebounding) is the reason we had such an efficient offense. Keaton did this as a FRESHMAN….astounding really!
 
#71      
Alright alright, I think both sides of the “boom or bust” aisle have been reading the other’s as a lot more drastic, since criticism tends to feel harsher than it really is. I, during this recruitment period, have trended towards pessimistic I’ll admit, but I don’t think it’s without merit. Nor without some optimism as well truthfully, so maybe I can put some of my perspective in a long winded respectful post.

FWIW, I don’t think anyone is assuming Coleman won’t be fantastic. Or Morillo, or Brown, etc. for that matter. Though insiders have also said don’t be expecting a Keaton out of them. Understandable as Keaton is a 1-of-1 for this program. But it raises the question if it’s the same team minus Keaton, and we don’t bring in a new Keaton, do we take a step back? Realistically I think “no,” because a summer of training and development mean Coleman and the others don’t need to be a full Keaton replacement because the progression of the others will be enough to cover that gap, if they follow the right path.

I think for myself, again I’d just feel more confident if we noticeably filled in the gaps of last years team: Defense, someone that can prevent even a 6’ guard from repeatedly driving to the basket. Assists, how many assists did we have in the Final Four game? Other games across the season? True Depth, we have a mid season injury or event that keeps a starter out for weeks every year here lately. Do we have pieces to cover that so we don’t see our seed slide? Say that ten times fast. Athleticism, as we were getting torched and winded by the end of games last year. Positional size is great, but so is being able to out run high level teams, and make end of game free throws when we’re tired.

These are just where I see a big portal guard pick up assisting. Having an Anderson or Harris would also mean Coleman can become a dependable flamethrower off the bench and develop accordingly. And in rebuttal to we can’t bring someone that high profile because we have too many stars, I simply ask how Florida or Duke are expected to because they’re the favorites to land these two right now.

On the topic of too high of expectations, yeah we need to cool our jets on it’s either Title or failure. I am an Underwood truther and will sing his praises every single day, and he has raised us to a higher floor and ceiling. Rejoicing in our consistency of making the tournament is fantastic and will never be taken for granted, but also there’s justification that the bar moves up a bit now that we’ve gotten past the first hurdles. We also need to be realistic with expectations and I personally see, with how other programs are coming together, a preseason ranking easily in the top 10, with a shot at top 5. It feels like a bunch of us are looking at this team as title favorites at the moment and I think we’re just missing pieces to be in that conversation, but that’s just me. How the season unfolds though we can honestly become that!

I love this team. I love the retention, and I legit jumped around the house cheering when Drej announced he was back along with the others. Why some might be bummed is because there was considerable talk that we’d get both Andrej and Blackwell amongst the retention. So removing cornerstone piece of the excitement understandably feels a bit hollow. But, nothing on God’s green earth will ever make me cheer less for this team. Critiques come from passion and wanting to finally win it all, or at the least have a program that is consistently viewed as an annual threat like Houston is. I cannot wait for the Boys in Orange and Blue to run it back.
 
#72      
I'm bullish on Vaaks 3-point shooting. Using the Jock comparison to show Vaak's shooting improved as the season went on:

KJ 3-point shooting
November & December: 41.6%
Rest of Season: 26.4%

Vaaks 3-point shooting
November & December: 30.6%
Rest of Season: 35.8%

Plus, Vaaks was shooting a lot more 3's than KJ (as you mention).

KJ 2nd year (in the US): 42.3%
 
#74      
What is the likelihood of Bam (and Ben I guess) coming back if 5 year eligibility happens?
 
#75      
I've got a weird practical question about scholarships that probably bothers me more than anyone else cuz I just like to know how stuff works.

Let's say a guy (okay, Ty) enters the portal intending to transfer. Let's say he then decides to come back (not unheard of).

At what point does any scholarship once promised for any future academic years go away? In other words, at what point during the portal/commitment process does the contractual relationship, so to speak, no longer exist? Is it at the moment they declare to transfer, or is it when they sign at another school? Just curious about the logistics of all of this.

Please note I am not in any way implying that he or Brandon would return, but...how does it all work?
 
Back