Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#226      
Emerson Bigguns
Noblesville Illini said:
There in lies the rub. The old model (pre portal) was to bring in talent as freshman, highly skilled, and assume that they stay until they either go pro or graduate. So, that’s why we rated recruits as a gauge of our talent on the floor. Well, that’s only a part of the equation now. Transfers instantly can boost your talent in a year. IMHO, if you bring in TSJ and he elevates the teams skill, do you or don’t you consider him a recruit? I lean towards yes.
Click to expand...
The whole paradigm has shifted. You have to "recruit" your entire roster every year. Recruiting is synonymous with roster construction, since everything must be renegotiated annually.
Discounting the time/effort/NIL allocation/procurement coaches have to invest in retaining good players is selling the job they do short.
 
#227      
ChiefGritty
WhereDoWeStandWithStorr? said:
Crazy to me that nobody will have USC preseason top 10.
Click to expand...
Explain why I should think that.

To me that situation reeks of a Kentucky-Indiana NIL roster with lots of notable names but without the coaching and clear coherent structure to believe it's actually going to be a good basketball team.

Eric Musselman always has players and he's 28-48 in conference the last four years.
 
#229      
3nDGuy
Emerson Bigguns said:
He did, however, choose to play for a different coach. Wade's offer must not have been "strong...: enough.
Click to expand...
Not a great look for Will Wade with LSU’s roster being bare as can be. I’m sure there are at least a couple from last years NC state team he could use in Baton Rouge
 
#230      
NarrowJ
ChiefGritty said:
Explain why I should think that.

To me that situation reeks of a Kentucky-Indiana NIL roster with lots of notable names but without the coaching and clear coherent structure to believe it's actually going to be a good basketball team.

Eric Musselman always has players and he's 28-48 in conference the last four years.
Click to expand...

CBS & ESPN both have them at #14 in the way-too-early rankings... not top 10, but they're not being ignored by any means.

And I am joining you on the opposite side of the fence with them. They have a couple decent transfer guards to play alongside Rice, but the frontcourt is Cofie, Reibe and 3 talented but young freshmen. Also, Rice has only played more than 8 games in a season once and he's been around since 2022. Then you have the coaching of Eric Musselman that hasn't lived up to the hype and I can easily see them as a bubble team this year.
 
#231      
WhereDoWeStandWithStorr?
PleaseMakeABowlGame said:
Michigan state is better than UConn, imo.

Tennessee - I think they should be 3. You know they’re gonna rebound and play defense. Pretty much guarantees when it comes to their coach. They are a bit smaller, but athleticism wise there’s no drop off.

Then you add in as much offensive firepower as they’ve added, it’s hard to think they aren’t title contenders. Not great retention, but that’s pretty much meaningless if you can get the newcomers to buy in (see: Michigan).
Click to expand...
I think Tennessee is definitely top 10, maybe even top 5

Top 3 is too high.
 
#232      
illiniguy24
Noblesville Illini said:
There in lies the rub. The old model (pre portal) was to bring in talent as freshman, highly skilled, and assume that they stay until they either go pro or graduate. So, that’s why we rated recruits as a gauge of our talent on the floor. Well, that’s only a part of the equation now. Transfers instantly can boost your talent in a year. IMHO, if you bring in TSJ and he elevates the teams skill, do you or don’t you consider him a recruit? I lean towards yes.
Click to expand...
Yes they are “recruits” again for sure. But their high school ranking becomes mostly irrelevant. They are transferring either because of one of two of these reasons…

One, they aren’t happy or want more money. Two, they outperformed their high school ranking. Three, they underperformed their high school ranking.
 
#233      
skyIdub
Did we move on from 1980’s recruiting already?

1984 Illinois Loyalty was 9 guys in a garage outside of Monticello arguing over Loren Tate articles and the latest issues of Hoop Scoop, Blue Chips, and Street and Smiths Basketball Yearbook…..while the wives and girlfriends had a Mary Kay party and made homemade cottage cheese from the neighbors cows milk.
 
#234      
Fly Illini Fly!
Last year, Kentucky was said to have the most expensive roster. They started the year at #8.

I'm not sure what those numbers are with USC -- but I like their team preseason a lot more than I liked KY last season (doesn't necessarily guarentee they'll be any better).

KY's roster always had the feeling of overpaying for a bunch of role players as opposed to true difference makers.
 
#235      
jamarvelous31
Emerson Bigguns said:
Sportsbooks don't either (about 15th best odds to win Natty)... They tend to be better at this than anyone.
Click to expand...
I'd say it's a data point, but a sportsbooks' goal is to get slightly above break even betting on any given bet.

The name recognition of the coach, players and conference is going to lead to inflated odds relative to where the book would place them than if they were forced to answer 'who is mostly likely to win'.
 
#236      
ptgrd23
The interesting thing is, Duke’s as good as they’ve ever been. Kentucky had one of the most expensive rosters in the sport last year. It was just completely mismanaged + of course had a lot of injuries which certainly didn’t help. And now it looks like all the money in the world can’t attract them a good squad this year. Agents know too, go on a visit to Kentucky, that’ll increase your value, then choose a program that wins.
Click to expand...
Kentucky competed by cheating $$$. They bid vs. Kansas, AZ, Duke etc. Had similar level of coaching with Pitino, Smith and Calipari.
Once NIL let all schools pay the top players and Calipari was run out of town the top players do not flock to KY. One and one and transfer portal also stopped blue bloods from hoarding talent.

Now that KY has a mediocre coach they are in big trouble. Duke is paying mega$$$ and has a good coach so they are thriving.

Blue bloods cant get the top coaches anymore. Hurley, Oats. Drew, Otzelberger, Lloyd, and May all turned down KY, Indiana, Texas and UNC.
Top coaches can recruit to Illinois, Houston, Michigan, and AZ. Coach does not need to be at blue blood with crazy expectations.
 
#237      
wc_illini
Emerson Bigguns said:
Sportsbooks don't either (about 15th best odds to win Natty)... They tend to be better at this than anyone.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing you're looking at Kalshi, but the "Yes" price is inflated for teams with a high spread. The "No" prices (which put USC ~25) are more in line with traditional books (which have them 20-25). Unfortunately you can't sort by "No" price.

As for the other teams being mentioned today, averaging Kalshi and other sportsbooks, UConn is #4, We are #5, MSU is #8, and Tennessee is #13.
 
#238      
ptgrd23
Explain why I should think that.

To me that situation reeks of a Kentucky-Indiana NIL roster with lots of notable names but without the coaching and clear coherent structure to believe it's actually going to be a good basketball team.

Eric Musselman always has players and he's 28-48 in conference the last four years.
Click to expand...
Big 10 USC MBB
7-13 2025-6 missed big dance
7-13 2024-6 missed big dance

He will be fired if he does it again. However with 74 teams in field any 10-10 B10 team should make the big dance.
 
#239      
wc_illini
jamarvelous31 said:
I'd say it's a data point, but a sportsbooks' goal is to get slightly above break even betting on any given bet.

The name recognition of the coach, players and conference is going to lead to inflated odds relative to where the book would place them than if they were forced to answer 'who is mostly likely to win'.
Click to expand...
That's all true, but I would expect those effects to be much stronger for teams with recent success or very strong brand/popularity. I don't think USC basketball would benefit a whole lot from that. Regardless, as I just posted, they're more like #25 at Kalshi based on the more reliable "No" price.

Books also inflate odds (reduce payouts) for long shots in general since more dumb money is thrown blindly at those, but that by itself wouldn't re-order teams, just distort the relative chances of long shots compared to the favorites.
 
Last edited:
#241      
ImGonnaBeILL
NarrowJ said:
CBS & ESPN both have them at #14 in the way-too-early rankings... not top 10, but they're not being ignored by any means.

And I am joining you on the opposite side of the fence with them. They have a couple decent transfer guards to play alongside Rice, but the frontcourt is Cofie, Reibe and 3 talented but young freshmen. Also, Rice has only played more than 8 games in a season once and he's been around since 2022. Then you have the coaching of Eric Musselman that hasn't lived up to the hype and I can easily see them as a bubble team this year.
Click to expand...
They'll again have more wins than fans in the arena.

Some coaches just throw together a bunch of individual players. Other coaches build actual teams.
 
#243      
the juiceman cometh
Calvin said:
Guy says NIL and the portal have brought equality?? I suppose if you're Kentucky you think that. Pay for play only works to equalize things though if you've got money, or exceptional talent evaluation and development. It's more like Animal Farm equality, where everyone is equal, just some are more equal than others.
Click to expand...
Nobody thinks it's literally equal. Just more equal.

While NIL hasn't made the talent distribution flat, it has made it flatt-er. UK's 2013 class signed 6 of the top 14 recruits, according to 247. Nobody is doing anything like that the NIL era.
 
#245      
jamarvelous31
wc_illini said:
That's all true, but I would expect those effects to be much stronger for teams with recent success or very strong brand/popularity. I don't think USC basketball would benefit a whole lot from that. Regardless, as I just posted, they're more like #25 at Kalshi based on the more reliable "No" price.

Books also inflate odds (reduce payouts) for long shots in general since more dumb money is thrown blindly at those, but that by itself wouldn't re-order teams, just distort the relative chances of long shots compared to the favorites.
Click to expand...
Fair. Id also add there is an opportunity for regional bias pushing them up the list given the size of the city and state they're in..
 
#246      
ChiefGritty
Calvin said:
Guy says NIL and the portal have brought equality?? I suppose if you're Kentucky you think that. Pay for play only works to equalize things though if you've got money, or exceptional talent evaluation and development. It's more like Animal Farm equality, where everyone is equal, just some are more equal than others.
Click to expand...
It has created greater parity between the blue bloods and the upper middle class like us.

It has opened a Grand Canyon-sized chasm between the rank-and-file of the remaining major conferences and the rank and file what were once highly competitive mid-major leagues though. All of their HS scouting wins move up for more money in a year or two now.

What looks like growth in college sports is primarily feasting on the corpses of those left behind. This ravenous beast will be chewing more of its own tail than WSU and OSU over the next few years, I promise you.
 
#247      
Emerson Bigguns
ChiefGritty said:
It has created greater parity between the blue bloods and the upper middle class like us.

It has opened a Grand Canyon-sized chasm between the rank-and-file of the remaining major conferences and the rank and file what were once highly competitive mid-major leagues though. All of their HS scouting wins move up for more money in a year or two now.

What looks like growth in college sports is primarily feasting on the corpses of those left behind. This ravenous beast will be chewing more of its own tail than WSU and OSU over the next few years, I promise you.
Click to expand...
That's why I think the US Government has to be part of the solution. Unlimited immediate transfers are making every mid-major a relegation/developmental league. If the government codifies the rules by applying exemptions to inter-state commerce laws regarding "amateur" athletics, perhaps some of that can be eased. As long as student-athletes are operating as essentially independent contractors, nothing can change. The NCAA is powerless as it stands.
 
#248      
illiniwil
That's why I think the US Government has to be part of the solution. Unlimited immediate transfers are making every mid-major a relegation/developmental league. If the government codifies the rules by applying exemptions to inter-state commerce laws regarding "amateur" athletics, perhaps some of that can be eased. As long as student-athletes are operating as essentially independent contractors, nothing can change. The NCAA is powerless as it stands.
Click to expand...
Just another lawsuit waiting to happen.
 
#249      
the juiceman cometh
PleaseMakeABowlGame said:
Duke. (especially that 2024 team)
Click to expand...
Very good class but still not on the same level. 2-top 10 recruits, compared to 5(!) in that UK 2013 class. And in the post NIL world, the transfer portal is a much bigger part of the overall talent pool for recruiting than it was in 2013, and while they had some good transfers, they didn't have any of the top guys. Their highest ranked transfer was Sion James at #61. That Duke class comes nowhere near the ability of blue bloods to consolidate the top talent pre-NIL.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back