Jump to content

Big Ten Tournament


Recommended Posts

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Mar 14, 2014 -> 02:48 PM)
I agree with you if this is an argument about semantics. Nothing in sports is a "lock." Next year's Illinois team should be much improved, but unless a team is an NC contender, no one is a lock for the tournament. The weaknesses this year, in my mind, were (1) depth, and (2) shooting. It's not a coincidence that the best stretch for Illinois this year came when Hill and Nunn were ready for big minutes (helping with both 1 and 2).

 

Illinois doesn't have a top 10 recruiting class next year by an ordinary metric (incoming freshmen), but I would be surprised if anyone in the B1G gets greater production from newcomers next year than Illinois (save maybe Ohio State with as good as their class looks). Cosby averaged better than 12 ppg on 40% 3 pt shooting in the Big East last year. Starks averaged better than 10 ppg on 40% 3 pt shooting in the Pac-12. Darius Paul has the lowest pedigree of the three, but averaged 10 and 6 as a freshman. Add to that Leron Black, a top 40 incoming freshman at a position of need, and it's reasonable to see why Illinois is adding a LOT to next year's roster (and that's without taking into account reasonable improvement from Year 1 to Year 2 for Hill and Nunn).

 

Illinois loses very, very little this year. Ekey was useful. Bertrand had his moments. But both were really limited players whose minutes should easily be replaced (Bertrand by Cosby; Ekey by either greater minutes for Hill or some combination of Paul/Black).

 

So Illinois improves both depth and shooting next year from a team that won 5 of its last 7 (Nebraska, @Minnesota, @MSU, @Iowa, Indiana) with both losses coming to Michigan. I don't think anyone here is saying that Illinois is going to be a National Championship contender next year, but anything less than the NCAA tournament would be an extreme disappointment. Contrast that to this season when lots of people expressed concern about depth (10 eligible scholarship players, 5 of whom were freshmen) and shooting before the season.

 

The point here... Groce has done a very impressive job of remaking this roster after the end of last season. This year was always going to be a down year because of the roster turnover. It's unreasonable to not be optimistic about Illinois basketball next year.

 

I agree with basically all of this, i'm just trying to temper expectations of being THAT much better. Yes, a tournament berth should be the expectation and it would be disappointing to miss out again next year based on what they have coming in and the hopeful jump that Nunn and Hill will take again next year. But I wouldn't call it a lock and I certainly wouldn't say a 7 seed or better is a lock.

 

Keep in mind the shooting problems will continue next year. Abrams and Egwu are still your starters. Rice/Nunn/Hill played a lot of minutes here at the end and they weren't exactly lighting the world on fire. I understand that Crosby and Starks come in with a proven track record, but whose minutes do they take? And how much can you realistically expect from Black in his first season? I think if he contributes as much as Hill did you run away happy. And Hill was good, but not some unstoppable offensive force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 275
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 14, 2014 -> 03:00 PM)
I agree with basically all of this, i'm just trying to temper expectations of being THAT much better. Yes, a tournament berth should be the expectation and it would be disappointing to miss out again next year based on what they have coming in and the hopeful jump that Nunn and Hill will take again next year. But I wouldn't call it a lock and I certainly wouldn't say a 7 seed or better is a lock.

I'm on this same page. And I dont understand why it's so crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Mar 14, 2014 -> 02:56 PM)
On 1, you can never have too many guards in CBB. It's reasonable to have a 5 guard rotation. Starks spells Tracy at the 1. Whoever doesn't start out of Cosby/Rice/Nunn takes on the Bertrand role this year. Plenty of minutes to go around. And are you really complaining about too many guys at a position?

 

On 2, there are tons of options at the 4. Paul/Black/Hill should reasonably be able to give you consistent rebounding/effort points. The small lineups will feature Hill at the 4.

 

On 3, some combination of Abrams and Cosby will provide offense at the 1. And you don't need Egwu to score if he's as much of a difference maker on defense as he was down the stretch. Today was a perfect example of Egwu. He got second chance points and influenced the game significantly defensively. It is also reasonable to expect that Morgan will make a leap from Year 1 to Year 2 allowing Egwu to play less minutes which, hopefully, translates to better jump shooting.

 

This team closed the season really well (we all know how hard it is to win on the road in the B1G - especially when you are a mediocre team - so I find it odd that you are saying the win @East Lansing wasn't a really, really good win). Yeah, there are question marks but if you can't see why next year's team should be much better than this year, I don't know what to tell you.

 

1) Too many guards is not a problem, but when you're trying to project "when we add player A and B we'll be X much better!" it doesn't really work like that. Someone is going to be losing minutes. My guess is that Groce sticks with Abrams because of his "bulldog toughness" and all that, just like he stuck with Bertrand. I doubt anyone will be better than Rice, and Nunn is your future star. So adding Starks and Crosby is going to be nice, and we won't have to deal with Tate anymore, but I'm not sure that's such a huge jump in guard play simply based on available minutes. If they're all shooting 40% from three, maybe you got 4 guards and Egwu. Otherwise your 10 and 12 ppg projections don't mean much.

 

2) See, this is where the blind optimism comes in. Expecting ANYTHING out of Paul or Black next year is a complete crap shoot. We have no idea how they'll fair against Big Ten competition. None. It took Nunn/Hill 3/4 of the season to make big impacts. That may or may not happen with those guys.

 

3) We'll see what happens at PG next year. Does Groce take the tough defensive guy, or the offensive guy that can get the offense going (an assumption that Crosby can/will do this).

 

MSU was a great win, but this was such a goofy Big Ten season. MSU lost weird games at home, Wisconsin lost weird games at home. Not much of this season really made sense. You take it as a good win and you move on. They also lost to NW. They lost to Purdue. They lost to Penn State. You can say the roster changed up, and that's true, but again, 3 of your starting 5 still lost to those crappy teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 14, 2014 -> 02:00 PM)
I agree with basically all of this, i'm just trying to temper expectations of being THAT much better. Yes, a tournament berth should be the expectation and it would be disappointing to miss out again next year based on what they have coming in and the hopeful jump that Nunn and Hill will take again next year. But I wouldn't call it a lock and I certainly wouldn't say a 7 seed or better is a lock.

 

Keep in mind the shooting problems will continue next year. Abrams and Egwu are still your starters. Rice/Nunn/Hill played a lot of minutes here at the end and they weren't exactly lighting the world on fire. I understand that Crosby and Starks come in with a proven track record, but whose minutes do they take? And how much can you realistically expect from Black in his first season? I think if he contributes as much as Hill did you run away happy. And Hill was good, but not some unstoppable offensive force.

 

Realistically, I think Black has a freshman season similar to Jereme Richmond (without the off the court stuff). Richmond averaged like 8 and 5 or something. He got a lot of hustle points and rebounded well. I expect the same out of Black.

 

I think Groce has the opportunity to run out a lot of different lineups going 9 deep next year. Egwu's offense is irrelevant to me. Egwu is a difference maker defensively which should be a constant next season. Like I said before, hopefully Morgan (or Paul) is able to give 15 decent minutes a night at the 5. With as much energy as Egwu expends on defense (and, honestly, running around setting screens on offense), a reduction in minutes should reasonably lead to better jump shooting from Egwu. Tate was basically a nothing on the offensive end in the B1G. Starks will give you little to no drop off offensively from Tracy.

 

Illinois won't have a go-to-guy next year, but they should have 6 guys (Abrams/Starks/Rice/Cosby/Nunn/Hill) who can go out and get 20 on a given night. I don't know how lineups are going to shake out, but Illinois should have much better offense next year.

 

By the way, this Ohio State-Nebraska game has gotten really interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 14, 2014 -> 02:12 PM)
1) Too many guards is not a problem, but when you're trying to project "when we add player A and B we'll be X much better!" it doesn't really work like that. Someone is going to be losing minutes. My guess is that Groce sticks with Abrams because of his "bulldog toughness" and all that, just like he stuck with Bertrand. I doubt anyone will be better than Rice, and Nunn is your future star. So adding Starks and Crosby is going to be nice, and we won't have to deal with Tate anymore, but I'm not sure that's such a huge jump in guard play simply based on available minutes. If they're all shooting 40% from three, maybe you got 4 guards and Egwu. Otherwise your 10 and 12 ppg projections don't mean much.

 

2) See, this is where the blind optimism comes in. Expecting ANYTHING out of Paul or Black next year is a complete crap shoot. We have no idea how they'll fair against Big Ten competition. None. It took Nunn/Hill 3/4 of the season to make big impacts. That may or may not happen with those guys.

 

3) We'll see what happens at PG next year. Does Groce take the tough defensive guy, or the offensive guy that can get the offense going (an assumption that Crosby can/will do this).

 

MSU was a great win, but this was such a goofy Big Ten season. MSU lost weird games at home, Wisconsin lost weird games at home. Not much of this season really made sense. You take it as a good win and you move on. They also lost to NW. They lost to Purdue. They lost to Penn State. You can say the roster changed up, and that's true, but again, 3 of your starting 5 still lost to those crappy teams.

 

I don't think #2 is blind optimism. Paul is more comparable to Rice than Hill/Nunn. He's had a year in the system and has a year of college basketball under his belt. I don't know where to set expectations for Paul, but I think it's reasonable to think that he will be able to provide competent minutes. And if both Black/Paul are awful (which is unlikely IMO), you can go small and give Hill the lions share of the minutes at 4.

 

Again, the point here isn't that Illinois is an NC contender next year. And I also don't think they can reasonably be considered a LOCK for the tournament, but all the ingredients are in place for Illinois to be much improved next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 14, 2014 -> 02:15 PM)
OSU is 3-15 on threes and 7 of 18 on FT's.

 

I cant wait to finally get shooters back into the program.

 

Yeah, I'm really interested to see Ohio State next year.

 

This has been a pretty infuriating game to watch as a neutral observer. I can only imagine how you are faring, Rock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Mar 14, 2014 -> 03:19 PM)
Yeah, I'm really interested to see Ohio State next year.

 

This has been a pretty infuriating game to watch as a neutral observer. I can only imagine how you are faring, Rock.

All year its been tough, too many role players. Its like the opposite of the Lighty/Diebler/Buford team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 14, 2014 -> 03:12 PM)
1) Too many guards is not a problem, but when you're trying to project "when we add player A and B we'll be X much better!" it doesn't really work like that. Someone is going to be losing minutes. My guess is that Groce sticks with Abrams because of his "bulldog toughness" and all that, just like he stuck with Bertrand. I doubt anyone will be better than Rice, and Nunn is your future star. So adding Starks and Crosby is going to be nice, and we won't have to deal with Tate anymore, but I'm not sure that's such a huge jump in guard play simply based on available minutes. If they're all shooting 40% from three, maybe you got 4 guards and Egwu. Otherwise your 10 and 12 ppg projections don't mean much.

 

2) See, this is where the blind optimism comes in. Expecting ANYTHING out of Paul or Black next year is a complete crap shoot. We have no idea how they'll fair against Big Ten competition. None. It took Nunn/Hill 3/4 of the season to make big impacts. That may or may not happen with those guys.

 

3) We'll see what happens at PG next year. Does Groce take the tough defensive guy, or the offensive guy that can get the offense going (an assumption that Crosby can/will do this).

 

MSU was a great win, but this was such a goofy Big Ten season. MSU lost weird games at home, Wisconsin lost weird games at home. Not much of this season really made sense. You take it as a good win and you move on. They also lost to NW. They lost to Purdue. They lost to Penn State. You can say the roster changed up, and that's true, but again, 3 of your starting 5 still lost to those crappy teams.

Christ Jenks, you're ruining any sort of hope around here. Get on the f***ing JFG bandwagon already! :lol:

 

Discounting tough BT road wins after we had a complete collapse? Cmon, you didn't expect them to win either of those 3 games, no one did. Those were big wins. Stop poo pooing here, sir. Also, (see red) I'm drawing the line at you making up losses, hater.

 

Good conversation all around. I'm with Illinilaw on almost everything, so I don't regurgitate everything. I do think we're about a 7-8 seed next year. Call it a lock or whatever, but I'd say we're 90% sure to make the tournament without major injuries with this roster next year.

 

Now, go figure out the rest of the 2015 class.

Edited by IlliniKrush
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow that game was awful yesterday, and a microcosm of why this team was frustrating this year. Not even if sure we'll make the NIT.

 

I've seen talk that some bigtime boosters are offering to pony up for Crean's buyout, and then want to get Woodson after the Knicks fire him. I'm not sure I'd like that.

 

I'd be really surprised if Crean isn't back next year. But if it's similar to this year, he gawn! And if Vonleh does come back, anything short of the Elite Eight probably means Crean's gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow that game was awful yesterday, and a microcosm of why this team was frustrating this year. Not even if sure we'll make the NIT.

 

I've seen talk that some bigtime boosters are offering to pony up for Crean's buyout, and then want to get Woodson after the Knicks fire him. I'm not sure I'd like that.

 

I'd be really surprised if Crean isn't back next year. But if it's similar to this year, he gawn! And if Vonleh does come back, anything short of the Elite Eight probably means Crean's gone.

 

Deserving or not, no way an IU team with a winning record gets left out of the NIT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (farmteam @ Mar 15, 2014 -> 09:34 AM)
I have a feeling your Illini compatriots on this board will disagree with this....

 

I like Groce, but I just don't think he was a big enough name to close the deals, nor did he take over a program that was at very least consistently a tourney team when he took over. Usually that is a bad mix. Crean, even if pushed out, will always be seen as a big time head coach who's proven he can turn around a program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Mar 15, 2014 -> 09:26 AM)
Why has everyone turned on Crean so suddenly? Hell, if available, I'd fire Groce in a heartbeat and hire him.

Because he's had a ton of talent and gone nowhere with it. IU fans expect tournament success and he's laid an egg in the conference and NCAA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...