You probably heard that Jereme Richmond received probation for his gun charge on Monday.  As part of the plea deal, the judge dropped the aggravated battery charge against him.  Richmond was sentence to 18 months on probation and 200 hours of community service.

Hopefully, this is the end to Richmond’s downward spiral.  In 2011, he left the team for a few days in January, left school to declare for the NBA in April, (went undrafted in June), was arrested in August, and tested positive for marijuana while out on bond in October.  A kid who looked like a lock for NBA stardom as a high school freshman now must work his way in through the D-league or Europe.

I really don’t want to turn this into a “stay in school, kids!” post.  While it’s true he declared for the draft too early, it’s clear that Jereme Richmond’s issues extend beyond basketball.  I really feel for the kid.  There’s so much pressure on a child that gets named a top-20 player nationally as a high school freshman.  You’re 14 or 15 years old and everyone has already decided that if you’re not in the NBA by age 20, you will have failed.  Add to that the anger issues that led to his dismissal from his high school team (and a rumored fight with a teammate last year), and it’s a structure that’s set up to fail.  I hope he gets the help he needs as he tries to make a run at his dream through the back door.

But I’m still left to wonder – what if he had stayed?  What if he never declared for the NBA and stayed in school? What if he had worked through his issues? What if the structure of college basketball had helped him turn things around last summer?  Is he the piece that’s missing?

I have a friend who certainly thinks so.  He’s my most Weber-loving friend, and all season he’s been pointing to the loss of Richmond as the reason for certain losses.  He staunchly maintains that with Richmond in the starting lineup, we would have beaten Missouri, Penn State, and now Wisconsin.  Bring Richmond back, put him at the 4, and in his eyes, we’re 18-2.

I tend to dismiss a lot of what this friend says of late – he honestly can’t see anything but an “unfair campaign to run Bruce Weber out of town”.  He sees the world through “Weber can’t catch a break” glasses and refuses to even acknowledge that Weber’s seat is the slightest bit warm.  There’s always a reason (or excuse) why we’re underperforming, and I tend to ignore his emails more than I respond.

But today, I considered his Excuse Du Jour:  If Richmond stays, we’re 18-2 and headed for a top-4 seed.  Is my friend… correct?

On one hand, his case certainly has merit.  This is a McDonald’s All American kid with a year of experience who would help in some of the areas we lack, namely offensive rebounding.  Give Jereme a few put-backs every game, give us a legitimate frontcourt option next to Meyers – remember how well Jereme understood the art of the up-fake? – and this team would have a serious second option down low.  Add to that Jereme’s passing ability and ballhandling skills (he could play the point in a pinch), and it’s hard to see us losing at Penn State with him in the lineup.

On the other hand, it really isn’t hard to see us losing to Penn State with him in the lineup.  Would Jereme Richmond really help when we’re needlessly passing the ball around the perimeter waiting for something to open up that’s just not there?  I’m really not sure if personnel is the issue at this point.  Myke Henry can play a pretty solid flashing 3/4 against a zone, but he doesn’t get to play because he struggles on defense.  Would having a talented 4 who could play on the wing or down low really help us when we’re folding up shop while Purdue goes on a massive run?  Many of the issues in our losses have been mental, and I’m not sure Jereme Richmond’s instability would really help in that regard.

So which is it?  I vote no.  As in no – we’d probably still be 15-5 with Jereme Richmond in the lineup.  The main reason: I spent 90% of the breakdown above talking about offense.  Our coaches spend 90% of the time in practice coaching defense.  And with Jereme’s mental lapses on D last year, I’m not sure he’d prevent the easy looks and offensive putbacks that killed us in games like Purdue and UNLV.  It would be nice to have another (athletic) option on D, but I’m not sure one player could fix our faults.

What’s that?  Our coaches spending “90% of the time in practice coaching defense” sounds preposterous? Hey, those aren’t my words.  Here’s what beat writer extraordinaire (and I mean that – he rocks) Paul Klee had to say in this IlliniHQ podcast:

The mentality of this staff is defensive minded, 85-90 per–whatever you want to put it–that’s the percentage of time they spend on defense, and that’s what their belief is. They want to muddy it up.

There.  There’s my answer.  My answer is no – Jereme Richmond would not improve this team right now (at least not to the point of 18-2).  He would simply be one more player in practice going through defensive drills over and over.  And while having an athletic wing forward would probably improve our defense, and the offensive putbacks he would provide might improve our offense, I believe the struggles of Brandon Paul and Meyers Leonard would be his struggles, too.  Sometimes, talent just can’t overcome a hesitant offense, a short bench, and a team that isn’t meshing with the coach.  We’re 6 times more talented than Penn State – I’m not sure pushing us to 7 times more talented would be enough to pull out a victory.

So there’s my answer, Michael, you ubiquitous strawman of Weber defense.  I think our problems extend beyond talent.  We have 7 RSCI top-100 players on this roster – I’m not sure an 8th would really make much of a difference.

And sorry for burying the lede.  Here – I’ll close with it.

85-90% OF PRACTICE TIME ON DEFENSE ZOMGWTFBBQ