Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread
- Status
That is 100% true. My point wasn't really about petrovic. It is that people thought he was going to be a rotation guy and he ended up not being good enough. So when someone says that player x isn't needed because we only go 8 deep they are missing the fact that last year one of those "8" was petrovich until he turned out not to be.
I'd love for the Coleman and Morillo to be great next year. If they are, then that 9th man doesn't matter. However, if they aren't great, and one of the other random guys people think cannot crack the rotation is better than advertised, the season could still be salvaged.
Zens all day everyday as a complimentary role player in this offensive system over Ty/Lee. I see significantly more upside for him in what we've established. I think he's a PERFECT fit here in what we'll ask him to do.
Ty/Lee absolutely made the correct choices. And so did the staff. Glad the staff was upfront with them. Hope they both kill it at that level and get paid the following year like DGL.
Ty/Lee absolutely made the correct choices. And so did the staff. Glad the staff was upfront with them. Hope they both kill it at that level and get paid the following year like DGL.
The romancing of Ty’s performance and abilities from 3 yrs ago on this thread are at cottage cheese levels!
He was probably offered a 9th man and didn’t want it. He got a degree and landed somewhere else where he’ll get PT. Great for him. Let it go.
It's a good thing the staff has the summer to figure out if they want to add a Euro.
I wouldn't use our 2024-25 season as an one worth replicating. We're aiming to be a/the top team, not #20.
Jake came in as a low usage starter from a low major, and (while he was a great 5th/6th man his second year) I think we can aim a bit higher for someone competing with the #47 freshman for #8 on the team. The two transfers that were #7-9 in the rotations of last year's elite teams were Malachi Smith and Kalifa Sakho (quality starters on mid-majors). I'm pretty sure both were brought in for depth rather than starting roles, and a player of that caliber definitely raises the floor for our top 8 (and gives us lots of options to see if anyone sticks at #9). I'm thinking a 4 to give us more front court depth, though a defensive guard might be useful too.
I get the argument that between all our freshman, we can expect 1 starter and 1-2 solid bench players, giving us 8-9 guys. But none of Torvik's top 5 (plus #9 UConn) had a true freshman outside the top #32 play more than 10% of the time. And the top 30 freshman weren't all good enough to be starters on elite teams (or even bench players in many cases):
#7 Arenas (USC): very inefficient, but missed half the year with injury
#13 Harwell (Hou): apparently good on defense, but 30% of minutes, terrible shooter, and out of the rotation by end of season
#19 Khamenia (Duke): 50% of minutes, decent bench player
#21 Jasper Johnson (UK): 30% of minutes (less at the end of season), not efficient
#22 Abaev (Cinc): 30% of minutes, inefficient, out of the rotation after returned from mid-year injury
#24 Aristode (AZ): 30% of minutes, decent bench player on paper, but mostly out of the rotation by end of season
#26 Able (NC St): 50% of minutes, decent bench player
#27 Adams (Maryland): starter, but very inefficient, probably would've been decent in the right bench role
#28 Reibe (UConn): 35% of minutes, out of the rotation by end of season
#29 Ingram (Florida): 8% of minutes, even less by end of season
#30 White (Syr): 35% of minutes, decent bench player
The chances of getting a starter dropped off pretty fast at #19, so Coleman is on the right side of that, but just barely. Even half of the #20-30 guys fell way out of the rotation by the end of the year or were on bad enough teams that they would have on an elite team.
I'm not trying to criticize our roster. I trust our staff. I just think it's very reasonable to think there's room for one more guy (reasonably proven, i.e. mid-major starter or major contributor) competing for #5-7 in the rotation.
Last edited:
robertgoulet
IL Board Resident Crooner
- Austin, TX
Surely I’m not old enough that Kenneth Lampley is the son of Sean Lampley…
pruman91
- interviewing new NL's daily....I really really am
works for me and they have the summer to figure out better on who plays better at the 9-10-11 roles........I wouldn't be surprised at all to see another new player being a higher than expected performer at this level....................
You guys jest but I am dealing with a woman that signs letters as Dr. ___ J.D. Esq. based upon the fact that she has a law degree but is not even licensed to practice (at least in this state). She also throws in a about three other weird designations representing who knows what. This is in her capacity as the president of a condo association which tells you pretty much everything you need to know.
Not sure that JJ isn’t slated for emergency role. Think he could fit the 5-10 min role but would worry if one of three goes down for several games. Certainly would like to see some depth as it is very possible to lose all three bigs in another year.
Not expert but Petro didn’t fit the system they adapted. Don’t think that was because of his ability but his fit. Not unlike Ty. Could have been entirely different if Petro was available early and Wagner was not given the opportunity. Vaaks fits the offensive system replacement for Wagner. This team will be good because it fits what they want to do rather than adapt to what they have to do with the talent they have. Rating systems can rate skill but not fit. Reason a team of five stars are usually good but usually not great.
We are between 1st and 5th in pretty much all preseason lists for next year so I’m not sure what this “not #20” talk is. The 9/10th man isn’t going to torpedo our season, I mean they’ll be lucky to get spot minutes.
To me, it’s just nice to be worried about who is going to pass the ball to Blake Fagbemi when it’s 92-57 with 36 seconds left instead of whether or not we’re NIT bound with RayJ Dennis headed to Baylor.
It's not about adding a 9/10th guy. It's about adding a piece that pushes Davis or Morillo down to that 9th man role.
Maybe, I just have higher expectations but I think when you look at what Illinois has retained and added already and compare them to the rest of the NCAA that it's time to push your chips in and go all in on competing for a title.
I love the retention and the returnees but it's easy to to just look at the final four appearance and forget that the team struggled in February. They got an awesome draw and took advantage but wins over Penn, VCU, and Iowa in March aren't super impressive, but a lot of the issues that showed up in February still exist(lack of defense/athleticism on the perimeter) and an offense that tends to stagnate and rely on a lot of one-on-one and iso stuff to create shots(look at how the ball stagnated against UConn).
Injuries happen and freshman don't translate all the time. What happens if Coleman or Morillo don't pan out right away? What happens if Vaaks gets injured? Does anyone think that you're going to beat Duke, Florida, or UConn playing Jake Davis significant minutes?
Nothing is going to guarantee success but the NCAA looks wide open and adding a significant piece at guard could be the different between seriously competing with the likes of Duke or ending up like Purdue and having a successful season but still end up being kind of disappointing and never a true threat.
Ty would've likely been our best, most versatile defender and 2nd best rebounder if he had stayed. That alone would've gotten him more than spot minutes at the end of the bench. He probably wanted to be a for-sure starter, which they couldn't promise him, so he left.
I keep reading stuff about having a 9th or 10th man or whatever. Everyone knows Brad prefers an 8 man rotation, BUT, in my opinion, you really need 9 or 10 guys who are CAPABLE of giving you minutes. Injuries and bizarre stuff IS going to happen. That’s just reality. You can never have too much depth.
Who knows? Maybe those pieces are already here in Zavier Zens, Ethan Brown, or Landon Davis.
But you have to have those guys deep on the bench in case the injury bug hits you hard.
Who knows? Maybe those pieces are already here in Zavier Zens, Ethan Brown, or Landon Davis.
But you have to have those guys deep on the bench in case the injury bug hits you hard.
There is a limit to the NIL available. It is not the university that goes all in but the donors who are going to pay the nil. We have football competing for those dollars. There is also the issue of finding a piece that fits and won't be a locker room issue. There is more to it than just buying the best players available - ask Louisville or Kentucky or BYU how that went for them last year. And unless you have one of the largest budgets, you have to take your chances that some bad things don't happen. It is not easy to get to a final four, let alone win a title, even if everything goes right. There is a team of very smart and savvy people trying their best to field the best team possible. If you have a couple of million to spare, I am sure they would take you up on it and add another piece assuming one is available that makes sense but that is a big if.
We had 8 high major starting level players last year - two of which were untested freshman that worked out. So that means we went into the year with 6 starting level players including Davis and Humrichous. We have 6 again this year - Mirk, Tommie, Z, Davis, Stoj and Vaaks. Compare those 6 to Tommie, Z, Davis, Stoj, Humrichous and Boz - four of whom are back with another year of experience. We are in as good or better shape going into the summer as we were last year. We are going to need a couple of freshman to contribute, but not to the same extent as last year because the established players can take up that burden.
Team construction is a balancing act and an art, not a science. We won't know the results until they play out. Have to just relax and look forward to what that will be.
And by the way, these freshman that we will be giving the opportunity to compete will be the backbone of the team in a year or two.
Last edited:
Tevo
- Wilmette, IL
I'm not sure he was efficient enough to get a LEED cert.
I really thought what I said was more clear, but apparently not since you read it so differently. I said nothing about where I think the current ream would rank (for the record, I'll go with the books and put us around 5th, so there's no need to assume I'm a doomer).
You referenced Jake in 2024/25 (or someone like him) as an example of a good 9th man, and I was saying "2024/25 shouldn't be our blueprint for this year because we were #20 in 2024/25, but we're aiming to be top 5 or top 1 this year." Of course that has more to do with the top 8 than whoever was 9th. But if there's a blueprint for this year, it should be Michigan, and they weren't afraid to bring in more talent than they could fit in an 8-man rotation (and it likely helped them weather Cason's injury).
So let me start over. We have four returning/transferring starters and two returning solid bench players. Coleman is the presumed 5th starter, though last year's top 20 freshman show there's some risk there (but the floor is likely a solid bench player, in which case Jake could start). Morillo presumably rounds out our top 8, but since half of last year's #20-30 freshman weren't good enough for an elite team's bench, there's clear risk with a #47 guy. One of Zens/Brown/LDavis might surprise, so that lowers the risk, but certainly doesn't eliminate it. I'd like to think we're better at evaluating talent than the rankings, so maybe I'm overly pessimistic to even consider that we might only get one high quality player out of those freshman in their first year, but to me it's not something to ignore. We've had our misses too. (And I'm not predicting anything, just considering the odds).
Since I'd like to have one more solid 6-8th guy (I'd take someone better than that, but I get that we couldn't keep everyone happy when we tried), but many posters here think it's a pipe dream to think anyone good would come for a bench role, I gave examples of decent mid-major starters who transferred to be key bench players (both knew they'd be reserves and both ended up 7th in minutes) on deep elite teams. Maybe those guys didn't exist this year (or maybe an overseas late addition will be that person for us). But it isn't a crazy idea.
If it's just a $ issue, then I agree there's nothing to discuss. But most people resisting bringing in another quality guy seem to be saying there just isn't room on the roster, and that's what I personally disagree with.
I think we're in better shape now than we seemed at this point last year. But there were some huge surprises (both positive and negative, but very much net positive IMO) last year that I don't think are likely every year, so I think we likely need to be quite a bit better going into next year to have good odds of finishing higher.
What percentage of seasons do we lose one of the original top 8 players from the rotation for an extended stretch, or for the season? Any reason for not playing counts -- injured, didn't live up to expectations, anything. From my (weak) memory, we lose someone almost every season. That means that player #9 will likely be a main rotation player for at least part, if not a significant portion of the season. When you throw in the occasional illnesses, family emergencies etc, player #9 is a non-trivial role. You may now continue the argument about the value of player #10 in the rotation.
I suspect players #9 and #10 are the fallback guard and fallback forward, so the above argument may apply with a 50/50 split to which of #9 and #10 get the tick.
I suspect players #9 and #10 are the fallback guard and fallback forward, so the above argument may apply with a 50/50 split to which of #9 and #10 get the tick.
No one can conclusively resist because there is not enough room on the roster because it is so player dependent in terms of fit and availability, and representations made to the existing players to induce them to sign. I think a lot of those people you say are resisting are just doubting that there is a player good enough to make a difference that would be willing to accept that role and not be a risk to the locker room or the retention of the freshmen that they have recruited. The coaching staff is not going to recruit over players they have promised not to recruit over. Yes, the current roster have all signed. But give me an example of an available player that we should be going after at this point that wouldn't break any promises or representations the staff has made to the other players. If the staff thought that there is such a player, they would go after them.
I really don’t think people are “resisting bringing in another quality guy”, in fact it’s being said we likely will. I’m just saying it’s not gonna wreck our season if we don’t immediately go out and find the next Justin Harmon. Justin Harmon or 3ppg sophomore Jake Davis are not saviors that are going to vault us to a guaranteed NC.
No way, our best defenders are Z and Andre. We are losded with wings better than Ty. So Ty left. . Ty unfortunately never devekoped enough to play in our current system. He was a good teammate but just has too many shortcomings given pur current system and the roster. Time for both to move on unless he didnt want to.play. He was buried on the this teams roster. Thats why he left. Its tine for everyone to move forward.
Last edited:
Well, it could win you a game or two in the regular season. That itself is a difference in a seed line.
If we had anybody to come in and get the ball past half court outside of Keaton, I think we win the Wisconsin game at home. Playing 6 guys was very hard - but it’s what you face when the guys at the end of the bench are essentially unplayable. You don’t want that to be the case.
If you take Justin Harmon off the team when TSJ was out, I think we lose one or two games that we didn’t.
Last edited:
- Status