Lucky, Clutch, Baseline, Choke, Unlucky

Here's how this usually goes. I figure out a way to frame something. You're tired of hearing about the subject, but I can't not say more because I think that I've figured out a way to better explain it. 64% of you don't really care so you jump off the bus early in the article. The 36% that care really enjoy the deeper dive.

So that's where we're headed. It's the same subject as I covered in this article on Sunday morning and on the Light The I episode yesterday. The Illini are 0-4 in down-to-the-final-shot games. Does that mean we choke? Does it mean we simply don't have a closer like Ayo? If Luke Altmyer led the football team to a 9-1 record in one score games the last two seasons, does this 0-for-4 streak mean there's no such guy on the floor for this Illini team? Or is this all just math?

Our starting point: Illinois has won 13 Big Ten games by an average of 16 points. Illinois has lost four Big Ten games in excruciating fashion. I'm setting aside the non-conference for now – the whole "the only reason the Texas Tech game was a four point win was because of that ridiculous intentional foul call on Kylan Boswell with 12 seconds left which gave Texas Tech two free throws and the ball" debate can be had another day – and I'm sticking with just the Big Ten games. Because those four losses in conference games give me a very clean way to frame all of this.

Essentially, this post is a response to this comment on the previous article:

Robert, I enjoy your objective approach to the game, but I do feel it disregards the impact and importance of being able to close games out; there’s no statistic for that aside from winning the game. While chance plays a role, so does securing the rebound (Dre), or stopping the unfettered path to the basket (Z and others). One could easily flip the script from “big wins, small losses” to “we have not won a consequential close game all season”. Part of that is coaching, and part of that is guys stepping up. Either way, we will be very vulnerable to losing in the tourney unless some stepping up occurs on this team.

It's a great point. As I said in the article after the game and on the podcast yesterday, when Luke Altmyer was winning game after game with late scoring drive after late scoring drive, you didn't see me putting it all on "luck." I even wrote a long article comparing USC's season in 2024 (when Miller Moss was their QB) to our 2024 season and showed that USC also had the chance to win three games with last-possession drives and Moss just didn't have it. Altmyer being clutch and Moss being choke-y on late game drives was really the only difference between 10-3 Illinois and 7-6 USC that season.

So yes, as Scott asked on the podcast yesterday, is this team just missing an Ayo? Is this all just "need a guy to make one single play late and we don't have that guy"? Do we need a basketball version of Altmyer?

Or is it math? Baseball teams that win their games 10-1 and lose their games 4-3 are eventually going to win a ton of games (and will see betting lines heavily skewed in their favor despite their W-L record). If you're playing the card game War and you have a bunch of face cards buried deep, it doesn't matter if you just lost to a 6 with a 5, lost to a jack with a 10, and then lost to a 4 with a 3 on the first three hands. Eventually, your collection of face cards will bury your opponent. It's just a matter of time.

That's why the metrics still love Illinois basketball. I'll give you an example using scoring margin:

You need to have similar strength of schedule when comparing two teams – St. Louis beating up on a weak A-10 and outscoring opponents by 19 isn't nearly as impressive as Michigan outscoring opponents by 21 – so I'm going to use Illinois and Kansas. Out of 365 teams, ESPN's BPI has the Kansas Strength Of Schedule at #3 nationally and the Illinois SOS at #8. BPI keeps track of "Quality Wins" (wins over other teams in the BPI top-50) and both Illinois and Kansas are 9-6 in that category. Both teams have played nobodies and blown them out and both teams have played top-10 opponents and gone down to the wire. And here are their scoring margins on the season:

Illinois: +16.1 (7th nationally)
Kansas: +8.5 (49th)

That matters in a "baseball team keeps winning by 10 and then losing by 1" sense. That's one of those "eventually, this team will just keep putting down face cards" kind of things. Vegas loves teams that have won by 21 and then lost by 1 because eventually those are two 10 point wins. (And yes, I wrote about the other side of this when the 2024 football team was 10-3 yet had only a 10 point scoring margin across nine Big Ten games.)

ALL OF THAT is why I feel really good using this Big Ten season for the Illini – average margin of victory of 16 points, four losses by 3, 3, 2, and 1 – to discuss all of this. Because it all comes down to this. When you see this information...

Illinois has been tied or had the lead with one second remaining in all 17 Big Ten games

...then how does the 13-4 record in those 17 games hit you? "Chokers"? Or math?

I say both. Yes, "chokers" is harsh, but... hear me out. Introducing Robert's Clutch Or Choke Continuum. I'd turn that into an acronym but yikes.

Here's how I view it. And if you want further explanation, I went through this in detail yesterday on the podcast. With Illinois being 0-4 in four games that were tied with one second left, I can put the five potential records for those four games in a neat little box:

4-0 - Luck
If you're winning four games that were tied with one second left, it's luck. You can claim every player on your team is Clutchy McClutchsterson but let's be honest, that's luck. You should have lost at least one of them.

3-1 - Clutch
If 2-2 is the expectations in four games like that, then 3-1 probably means you have an Ayo. Ayo didn't win every game at the buzzer (like Braggin' Rights during the 2021 season) but he won more than his fair share.

2-2 - Baseline
This is pretty simple. Over time, teams will win around 50% of the games that come down to one final shot in regulation. One play is going to decide it.

1-3 - Choke
If there's a category for "Luke Altmyer always came through on late game drives", there needs to be a category for "USC went 7-6 in 2024 because Miller Moss never came through on late game drives." The same is true for basketball.

0-4 - Unlucky
If you're losing four games that were tied with one second left, you're unlucky. You can claim every player on your team is Chokey McChokesterson but let's be honest, you've been unlucky. You should have won at least one of them.

This continuum makes this debate fairly simple (at least to me). And it answers the question posted above. There's room for both "nobody is making a play" and "OK, come on, this is flat-out unlucky." Being "not very clutch" can take you to a point, but 0-4 in final-possession games is a level beyond that. And I'd say the same if we were 4-0 (like I did pretty much weekly during the 2024 football season).

And it's why I urge people to enjoy the hell out of situations like the 2024 football season. Sometimes the sun shines on you (Kansas City Chiefs: 11-0 in one-score games in 2024) and sometimes it's pitch black in the middle of the night (Kansas City Chiefs: 1-9 in one-score games in 2025 and yes, 7 of those 9 happened with Patrick Mahomes at QB). These things come and go, even with one of the clutchiest quarterbacks in history.

And this is me feeling... encouraged that it hasn't flipped back yet? It's not always a season-to-season thing. If .500 is the expectation in "down to one final shot" games, then odds are that we drift back towards .500. When you're winning by 16 and losing by 1, that is, believe it or not, the actual expectation (to regress towards the mean). Sure, your team might really mentally struggle late, and that trend might continue, but the way to not make it matter is to play games where you should win by 13 and only win by 7 (instead of being up 5 and blowing it late).

Please note that I'm discussing this topic independent of the "does this team have the defense to last in the Tournament?" debate. That's a different topic (and a massive concern). If the defensive numbers continue to drop, that means we're not going to have an average margin of victory of 16 in our conference wins anymore. The games will be closer and the lack-of-clutch will matter more.

But as it stands today, I believe that I can make these two statements:

1. Illinois hasn't made the clutch plays late. It's why we're 13-4 in the Big Ten instead of 14-3.
2. Illinois has had terrible luck in down-to-the-final-shot games. It's why we're not 15-2.

Basically, it's this: We're 13-4 in the Big Ten when we absolutely should be 15-2 and playing Michigan to tie up the conference race on Friday night. I'll grant you one of those losses because we struggle late in games and just can't close.

Will you grant me the other one because we're unlucky?