Pregame: Illinois at Minnesota, Saturday, January 23rd, 7:30pm CT, BTN

Status
Not open for further replies.
#51      

geneseo

G
geneseo
TCTORNADO said:
Unbelievable that anybody is trying to defend Tate. Just think if we had gotten Nic Moore (he'd still be playing) and Tate would be at Western Illinois.:)
Click to expand...

Tate plays for the U of I Fighting Illini... so I'll defend him.

Our field goal percentage is worse than our opponents, both overall and from three.

Our rebounding is atrocious. We're up to no 315 (from 325 last time I checked) in Div 1 in rebounding margin.

Our turnover margin and assist/turnover ratio are bright spots. Tate averages 1.2 turnovers/game.

Tate isn't the big problem here. It is rebounding and defense. Doubt that would be much different with Mr. Moore. And doubt we'll be any good until that changes significantly.
 
#52      

muskyman99

M
muskyman99
Tate

Nic Moore with his experience and leadership qualities would have made a world of difference for us. But I will defend Tate for he is who he is. He was a late first year recruit for Groce and no one had high expectations. I would have been extremely surprised if he had developed into a solid point guard. I assume he gives his best in practice and he is an Illini.
 
#55      

ssanti13

ssanti13
ssanti13
geneseo said:
Tate plays for the U of I Fighting Illini... so I'll defend him.

Our field goal percentage is worse than our opponents, both overall and from three.

Our rebounding is atrocious. We're up to no 315 (from 325 last time I checked) in Div 1 in rebounding margin.

Our turnover margin and assist/turnover ratio are bright spots. Tate averages 1.2 turnovers/game.

Tate isn't the big problem here. It is rebounding and defense. Doubt that would be much different with Mr. Moore. And doubt we'll be any good until that changes significantly.
Click to expand...

It's fair that a lot of a teams issues can summed up as a lack of quality coaching. Like we've mentioned plenty already, there are definitely some areas of recruiting and x's and o's that fall on Groce. But at some point, players are responsible. I've turned on Tate for the exact same reasons I defended him: His basketball IQ, his court vision and his ability to get to the line. All these areas of his play helped the team last year. Tate penetrating a defense and kicking it out to the perimeter to basically restart our offensive sequences is a poor example of basketball IQ and court vision. I haven't looked at the stats but I'm pretty sure he isn't getting the line nearly as much and when he does he's not hitting free throws like he did last year. And I don't think his defense has improved. It's possibly gotten worse. That's solely on him. And it's killing us.
 
#56      

Soxfreak64

Soxfreak64
Bloomington
Soxfreak64
illinitiger said:
I saw at least 2 ( in a row) productive passes in the paint against Nebraska. MM pick and rolls...
Click to expand...

I'll give Tate that. He's the only one who seems to ever find the guy on a pick and roll, and he's really good at it. That's easy money.
 
#57      

aluma

A
aluma
Somehow our team seems better with Lewis playing instead of Tate (eye test). But the thing that kills me when Lewis plays is how much the ball sticks in his hands. Sometimes when I watch the offensive ball movement it feels like the players pass just to pass. Rarely does it seem like they are passing with purpose. Another thing I've noticed is that when we do set ball screens for the point guard, the other players not involved in the screen usually just stand and watch. Unfortunately, these are the prime times to do a back-door cut and get a layup or offensive rebound (which is a foreign language to our team).
 
#58      

geneseo

G
geneseo
aluma said:
Somehow our team seems better with Lewis playing instead of Tate (eye test). But the thing that kills me when Lewis plays is how much the ball sticks in his hands. Sometimes when I watch the offensive ball movement it feels like the players pass just to pass. Rarely does it seem like they are passing with purpose. Another thing I've noticed is that when we do set ball screens for the point guard, the other players not involved in the screen usually just stand and watch. Unfortunately, these are the prime times to do a back-door cut and get a layup or offensive rebound (which is a foreign language to our team).
Click to expand...

That doesn't make any sense to me. Basketball is a game of movement. Dribbling kills movement. A team that is not moving, instead watching a player dribble, doesn't pass my "eye test."

It takes two players to make a good pass. Kind of a chicke/egg thing... Dribbling kills movement and no movement kills passing.

I still maintain that rebounding and defense are our biggest problems. Not offense.
 
#59      

geneseo

G
geneseo
We rank 315th in rebounding margin and 274th in scoring defense. No brainer.
 
#61      

Illinifanatic4ever

Illinifanatic4ever
Orange & Blue Blood in my Veins
Illinifanatic4ever
I wouldn't be surprised to see any odd combination of starting lineups for this game after last game debacle. This program needs to be salvaged starting with this game. These players were given scholorships to a Big Ten school they need to start playing like they should. Shouldn't take much for a 20 year old to hustle and act like you want to be there. Where would a lot of these players be if they didn't play Basketball? Playing at the Division 1 level is a privelage not a right. Just sad to see how far this program has sunk in the last decade. I am not blaming players only its coaching as well but man did these players look like they would rather be playing x box or updating there facebook status instead of being there.
 
#62      

IlliniBone54

I
IlliniBone54
What worries me most about this game is that it is gonna set the tone for the rest of the season. If the team comes out and looks like they quit then it's not gonna be a very fun end to the season. Losing never makes anyone happy, but when the team looked competitive in their losses over the years, such as that Michigan game in the B1G Tournament 2 years ago, I could at least stomach that.
 
#63      

jrichisamazing

J
jrichisamazing
If the teams playing poorly, Tate's not going to be productive. If the team is playing well, playing lively, moving the ball quickly, making jumpshots, then Tate's going to look alright.
 
#64      

HeartofaChampion

H
HeartofaChampion
ssanti13 said:
It's fair that a lot of a teams issues can summed up as a lack of quality coaching. Like we've mentioned plenty already, there are definitely some areas of recruiting and x's and o's that fall on Groce. But at some point, players are responsible. I've turned on Tate for the exact same reasons I defended him: His basketball IQ, his court vision and his ability to get to the line. All these areas of his play helped the team last year. Tate penetrating a defense and kicking it out to the perimeter to basically restart our offensive sequences is a poor example of basketball IQ and court vision. I haven't looked at the stats but I'm pretty sure he isn't getting the line nearly as much and when he does he's not hitting free throws like he did last year. And I don't think his defense has improved. It's possibly gotten worse. That's solely on him. And it's killing us.
Click to expand...

aluma said:
Somehow our team seems better with Lewis playing instead of Tate (eye test). But the thing that kills me when Lewis plays is how much the ball sticks in his hands. Sometimes when I watch the offensive ball movement it feels like the players pass just to pass. Rarely does it seem like they are passing with purpose. Another thing I've noticed is that when we do set ball screens for the point guard, the other players not involved in the screen usually just stand and watch. Unfortunately, these are the prime times to do a back-door cut and get a layup or offensive rebound (which is a foreign language to our team).
Click to expand...

With rare exceptions, our PG play is far too sub-standard. We may have the weakest tandem in the B1G, creating a huge drag on the offense.

I honestly think JG should try a lineup of KN, JCL and MH on the perimeter sharing ballhandling duties (mostly KN and MH) and start MF at the 4 and MT at the 5 on Saturday (after practicing that group this week) and perhaps going forward. KN can defend MN's 1. MH would love being back at the 3 and may have a career night that night, and it puts our best offensive lineup on the floor together.

Naysayers would say "But what about our defense?" Let's be frank here: our D stinks no matter who's played out there. JT has struggled defensively all season. KL is slow laterally and gets abused off the dribble. The lineup above would fare no worse defensively than any other lineup we trot out there, and at least this quintet can score with a variety of weapons. Plus, KL and JT are major drags on our O anyway. Playing a "true" PG at the 1 hasn't helped our O. KL and/or JT would sub in off the bench along with AJ (I'd give him 15-20 mpg from here on out), DJW at the 4 for 10 mpg and MM at the 5.
 
#65      

Moneybreaks

M
Evanston, IL
Moneybreaks
HeartofaChampion said:
With rare exceptions, our PG play is far too sub-standard. We may have the weakest tandem in the B1G, creating a huge drag on the offense.

I honestly think JG should try a lineup of KN, JCL and MH on the perimeter sharing ballhandling duties (mostly KN and MH) and start MF at the 4 and MT at the 5 on Saturday (after practicing that group this week) and perhaps going forward. KN can defend MN's 1. MH would love being back at the 3 and may have a career night that night, and it puts our best offensive lineup on the floor together.

Naysayers would say "But what about our defense?" Let's be frank here: our D stinks no matter who's played out there. JT has struggled defensively all season. KL is slow laterally and gets abused off the dribble. The lineup above would fare no worse defensively than any other lineup we trot out there, and at least this quintet can score with a variety of weapons. Plus, KL and JT are major drags on our O anyway. Playing a "true" PG at the 1 hasn't helped our O. KL and/or JT would sub in off the bench along with AJ (I'd give him 15-20 mpg from here on out), DJW at the 4 for 10 mpg and MM at the 5.
Click to expand...

I like this a lot. Heart, maybe you should throw your hat in the ring for JG's job, or perhaps the AD position?
 
#67      

Illinijose

I
Illinijose
I would maximize the 5 best players on the court, those that can score, defend, rebound, play make. If Thorn is healthy, I have Thorne, JCL, Finke, Hill, and Nunn. 3 subs to rest the starters (Morgan, Lewis, Jordan). Include DJ if we need one more off the bench.

We don't have an effective PG, might as well use Hill, Nunn, and JCL to bring up the ball. We don't run an offense, so why include a player who can't hit outside shots.
 
#68      

HeartofaChampion

H
HeartofaChampion
Illinijose said:
I would maximize the 5 best players on the court, those that can score, defend, rebound, play make. If Thorn is healthy, I have Thorne, JCL, Finke, Hill, and Nunn. 3 subs to rest the starters (Morgan, Lewis, Jordan). Include DJ if we need one more off the bench.

We don't have an effective PG, might as well use Hill, Nunn, and JCL to bring up the ball. We don't run an offense, so why include a player who can't hit outside shots.
Click to expand...

This reflects my earlier post in this thread. There's no reason to start KL or JT when it's clear they bring little to the table as starting 1s. We're 1-5; why not try using our 3 best perimeter players together with our two best bigs? It makes no sense to keep trotting out KL or JT at the 1.

KN can defend the opposing 1, and KN and MH can share offensive initiation duties. MF would then be playing his natural position, MM would back up MT, AJ would back up JCL and MH, and either KL or JT would spell KN. MH could slide over to the 4 at times to spell MF, or DJW could spell MF.

Don't understand why this lineup featuring the team's five best scorers hasn't been tried considering how much the team is struggling and how little our PGs are bringing to the table.
 
#69      

Ulysses Everett McGill

Ulysses Everett McGill
Ulysses Everett McGill
geneseo said:
That doesn't make any sense to me. Basketball is a game of movement. Dribbling kills movement. A team that is not moving, instead watching a player dribble, doesn't pass my "eye test."

It takes two players to make a good pass. Kind of a chicke/egg thing... Dribbling kills movement and no movement kills passing.

I still maintain that rebounding and defense are our biggest problems. Not offense.
Click to expand...

You point out huge problems with our offense, overdribbling and lack of ball and player movement. Then you say that defense and rebounding are our biggest problems. Not disagreeing with any of it; just not sure whether to laugh or cry. With all those issues on O, how bad does our D and rebounding have to be to be worse.
 
#70      

ssanti13

ssanti13
ssanti13
HeartofaChampion said:
This reflects my earlier post in this thread. There's no reason to start KL or JT when it's clear they bring little to the table as starting 1s. We're 1-5; why not try using our 3 best perimeter players together with our two best bigs? It makes no sense to keep trotting out KL or JT at the 1.

KN can defend the opposing 1, and KN and MH can share offensive initiation duties. MF would then be playing his natural position, MM would back up MT, AJ would back up JCL and MH, and either KL or JT would spell KN. MH could slide over to the 4 at times to spell MF, or DJW could spell MF.

Don't understand why this lineup featuring the team's five best scorers hasn't been tried considering how much the team is struggling and how little our PGs are bringing to the table.
Click to expand...

I'm totally on board with this. It's slightly off topic, but I always thought if Nunn had PG play-making abilities, he'd be pretty attractive to NBA scouts.
 
#71      

Ulysses Everett McGill

Ulysses Everett McGill
Ulysses Everett McGill
HeartofaChampion said:
This reflects my earlier post in this thread. There's no reason to start KL or JT when it's clear they bring little to the table as starting 1s. We're 1-5; why not try using our 3 best perimeter players together with our two best bigs? It makes no sense to keep trotting out KL or JT at the 1.

KN can defend the opposing 1, and KN and MH can share offensive initiation duties. MF would then be playing his natural position, MM would back up MT, AJ would back up JCL and MH, and either KL or JT would spell KN. MH could slide over to the 4 at times to spell MF, or DJW could spell MF.

Don't understand why this lineup featuring the team's five best scorers hasn't been tried considering how much the team is struggling and how little our PGs are bringing to the table.
Click to expand...

This lineup makes sense to me. Not sure how many minutes Thorne can play yet, so I guess Morgan may get quite a few minutes backing him up. Or, if you want to go smaller/quicker with big Mike not in, I suppose you could put DJW in at the 4 and swing Finke to 5. I'm hoping to see Thorne sticking mostly in the post vs Minny. He was out setting high picks too often IMO vs Indy. He's a low post scoring threat and best rebounder. Plus, with conditioning still a question, why have him run back down to the post and then run back up to screen.
 
#73      

TCTORNADO

TCTORNADO
TCTORNADO
The fact that the Vegas line has moved Illinois to a 1.5 pt fav doesn't make sense considering that Minny played IU to a 7 pt loss last week in the Barn and now maybe no Thorne.
 
#75      

twinky25

twinky25
twinky25
If Thorne can't play a game without having to sit out practice two days later, then I do not see how he was ready. Reminds me of how Leron Black wasn't ready earlier this season. Did we just waste a chance to get Thorne next year, by wasting him one game in a blow out to Indiana? What are these doctors telling these coaches?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.