John Groce at Illinois
- Status
Which would benefit Groce more, Hill leaving to go pro or staying for his final year and maybe make it to the NCAA tournament?
I don't see Hill as much of a NBA player. Good college player, so I'll go with staying and a tournament. But I still think we are a bubble team next year, even if all our guys are healthy. Hope Lucas can step in and contribute some minutes, but still holes/depth issues at the 1&5. The more things change the more they stay the same.
I don't see Hill as much of a NBA player. Good college player, so I'll go with staying and a tournament. But I still think we are a bubble team next year, even if all our guys are healthy. Hope Lucas can step in and contribute some minutes, but still holes/depth issues at the 1&5. The more things change the more they stay the same.
I agree that he isn't ready but I do think he could have a shot at being drafted. His numbers are where they should be to be looked at. He plays against BIG competition and has proved he can play with the best.
For Groce, Hill leaving early might allow him to convince players he can get you to the league. It seems this is one thing that Groce lacks when recruiting. I'm curious if by doing so if that some but not all gates could be opened in recruiting. Let's be honest, these kids care more about that than a title and it would be one card groce could use. Just think if he had found away for Paul to be drafted. These last couple of years might have been a little different.
Honestly at this point the best Hill could hope for is to be a second round selection. He lacks the athletic ability that the NBA looks for. The best chance Hill has for the NBA is to come back next year and led Illinois not only to the tournament but also win a couple of games. Hill coming back would be the best for him and coach Groce.
+1. MH gets just about every ounce of production out of his available talent. Has a great BB acumen. He just doesn't have a high ceiling athletically. He'll also have to play the 3 in the NBA, where he's not nearly quick or explosive enough to defend other 3s, and he's not a dead-eye 3-point shooter who could be a 3-point specialist, so he'd have no niche role to get him in the league. I do think he'll be a very good pro overseas, though. Wouldn't be surprised if he plays 10-plus years in Europe/M.E. and makes a very good living at it.
I agree. Classic tweener. Not quick/athletic enough to play the 2, not big/strong enough to play the 3, not pure scorer enough to play either.
Classic Euro League candidate. But I still love him.:thumb:
Serious Late
- Peoria via Denver via Ann Arbor via Albuquerque vi
P5 is a football term, in college basketball there are 6 power conferences. The Big East is every bit as strong and relevant as the 5 football conferences in basketball.
I know HOC is the one that dropped the P5 phrase, this is just a side tangent. It bugs me to hear people claim a school like Xavier isn't on the level of Illinois. They absolutely are in college basketball. Which is why we will not lure a coach like Chris Mack away from his current gig. Only way he leaves Xavier is for a blue blood or something very close to a blue blood.
Can't we just use one term for simplicity's sake?
icengineer
- Southern Illinois
Isn't P6 just as easy to type as P5? Maybe we should do P5F and P6B???
The Big Ten has 14 teams. You're telling me the P5 can't have an extra basketball conference?
Let's not confuse conference and program strength and quality of basketball jobs with the strength of teams. There is a huge difference. Conference strength is really determined by the combination of basketball and football with football being the dominant parameter and revenue maker. The Big East is nowhere as strong as the P5 conferences, otherwise none of the Big East basketball programs would have left for P5. There is a reason they did. The revenue potential will never be the same, and revenue sharing without football will never work.
There are some good teams and some good programs in the Big East, but the long term potential of P5 basketball jobs will always be better. The Big East will not be able to attract the successful P5 basketball coaches. No doubt about that. But the P5 will be able to attract the successful Big East coaches, including Mack. It does not mean that every team currently in P5 will be able to attract the top Big East coaches. But some can, whereas no Big East team can attract the top P5 coaches. Tells you a lot about job potential/strength at P5 vs. the Big East.
The reason that we may not be able to attract Xavier's coach is not because the Xavier job is better than the Illini job. But Mack has elevated the team/program to a point that he can wait for a better P5 job, or a program in better shape currently. When Self left, I can tell you first hand that Matta was indeed very interested. It did not happen (our fault), but we could have easily attracted Xavier's coach. The opposite will never be true. If a coach is successful at Illinois, he may leave for Kansas or the NBA, but will never leave for the Big East and Xavier.
How about Jared Dudley as someone Malcolm Hill can look at and say, "I can make the league." I do not believe MH is probable to make a career in the NBA, but I look at that guy, and say, yeah, maybe he could.
First time poster, long time lurker. One of the criteria used to determine whether a coach is doing his job is the development of his players. For several years, many have questioned Groce's ability to do this. This year, it seems that there is evidence that several players have made a gain in development despite playing on a team that has glaring weaknesses. Maverick was labeled as useless by many but he has turned the corner. DJW was viewed as a project that some wondered whether he would ever start to scratch his potential and now he has shown some promise. JCL and Finke look like they are settling into the college game. I feel that sometimes this gets lost in the discussion because we all want to be a winner again.
I don't disagree with the sentiment at all, but I'm not aboard the Maverick hype train until he learns to rebound and/or stops his chronic sleepwalking on the floor. Wouldn't hurt him to add 10-15 pounds, too. I definitely appreciate the expansion of his offensive role, though. It's one of the more notable positives of the season.
I think the argument put forth here by some people is that Groce can notably improve what is already a part of a player's game (e.g. Nnanna being a shot-blocker, Malcolm being able to create his own shot) but that he hasn't shown much that he can develop a new skill in a player's arsenal that they never had before (e.g. Rayvonte Rice becoming a reliable 3-pt shooter).
SO I take it you do not consider taking a player from 29% to 43% placing him inside the top 75 3 pt shooters 2015 above guys like Kevin Pangos improving a player's skills? OK, let's not let actual performance and facts get in the way.
good to clarify....going from 24% in his last season at Drake to top 75 3 ball shooters at 43% supports that nicely... BTW considering in conference games only, 3pt % in 2015 he was 4th in the country at a gaudy 45% compared to 23-78 (.295) the year before.
Foggy Notion
- San Francisco
Groce improved Malcolm's candle-making skills. Seriously, though, Malcolm leads the team in every statistical category. Are you telling me that he had all of those skills before he went to college?
Ray deserves as much credit for that as the coaching staff does for facilitating his improvement. People talk about coaches like they can wave a wand and teach post moves, or teach court vision. There is no amount of teaching that can replace time spent in the gym (or weight room).
100% true. The player has to want to improve. Do you think the staff put less effort in to Tate's jump shot than they did for Ray. It would worked for Ray but not for Tate. The staff puts a plan in place for a player but the player needs to execute it. If the fire is not in the player no coaching staff will get them to improve.
I think the person who worked with Ray and showed him he could be a better shooter with improved mechanics lit the fire then broke it all down and put it back together. Once Ray got on the gun and started to see changes in the numbers it's easy to get in the gym. Just an informed opinion though.
I am not of sure your intention here saying people think they can wave a wand..I don't come across those folks. ..Most of my peer group understand the time spent in the gym with coaches at this level are position specific and though the NCAA allows only so many contact hours those coaches are entrusted to refine techniques and teach. The athlete then has to take those lessons and work the drills and skills on their own as there is def not enough time in individual and position work outs to get it repped.
As an exercise, just for fun ...Pick any 10 universities at random and try to look at their staffs and figure out which coaches are teaching
-shooting
-ball handling
-defense individual skills
-passing skills
-rebounding/positioning
or any of a myriad of specific skills that need to be refined at this level. You get a lot of coaches who say "I recruited a shooter" and are loathe to change a shot. If it can improve a skill and you have the knowledge work it... THe actuality is that each individual skill needs reps and tweaks along the way. Shooters can get better ...Tate for example, can get better. Passing, defending, ball handling, rebounding can all get better. Desire is only useful if there is a mentor who can rep and refine the skills. One without the other is a dead end. I look at staffs every time I go to or watch a game or practice or read a program and try to figure who is working what....
I find them on this board more than anywhere else. Mostly in the JG thread, oddly. You think there might be an insight into that observation?
Great post, though! I learned a few things and gained a better idea of what a staff has to do to make a player a better player. Thanks! :thumb:
Last edited:
As a coach, I can definitely say that desire is not the only ingredient needed for a player to improve his skill set. I have had players with incredible desires to get better at a certain phase of the game but unfortunately it is just not in their DNA for it to happen for them. A player can work at a skill day after day and for some reason their body just can't feel the flaw that you are trying to get them to see.
This is true. I mean, do people really think Tate isnt in the gym getting up thousands of shots? He just doesnt have it.
- Status