5 Key Stats That Defined Illinois' Sweet 16 Victory vs Houston

In this story:
On Thursday night, Illinois met Houston for a highly anticipated Sweet 16 clash – one the Cougars were expected to control. Instead, the Illini led for 86 percent of the game, extending their lead as much as 18 points in the second half before ultimately prevailing 65-55 to punch their ticket to the Elite Eight (for a matchup with fellow Big Ten squad Iowa).
As has been the case recently, Illinois fans were treated to 10 final minutes of elevated blood pressure – but it was surely worth it this time around. Here are five key stats that explain how Illinois mounted its lead, nearly lost it, but in the end was able to stave off Houston:
5 key stats that explain Illinois' NCAA Tournament win over Houston

The rebounding margin in Illinois’ favor: nine
The question heading into this one: Who would be the more physical team – and, in turn, who would control the glass? The Cougars are the embodiment of intensity and physicality, but on Thursday night, it was the Illini taking the fight to them. And, as a result, Illinois won the game.
With 43 boards to Houston’s 34, the Illini took care of business on the boards, paced by lead guard Keaton Wagler, who snagged 12 rebounds. (Fellow freshman David Mirkovic also wrangled 10.)
Andrej Stojakovic’s points off the bench: 13
The first half was a brickfest from both squads, as the two units combined for 46 total points. The shots weren’t falling for anyone – except Andrej Stojakovic. Coming off the bench for the Illini, he managed nine of his 13 points in the first half.
He attacked the cup, hit a smooth midrange fadeaway and even knocked down a three for good measure. Especially in the first half, Stojakovic single-handedly kept Illinois not just afloat, but in command.
Houston’s field-goal percentage: 34.4 percent
We knew Illinois was capable of elite defense. The length, size and overall IQ on this Illini roster is immense. But on that end, there hasn’t been a consistent product on the floor for 40 minutes against a worthy opponent.
There was on Thursday, though. The result: a 22-for-64 (34.4 percent) shooting night for the Cougars. Communication, closeouts, effort, rotations, scouting-report awareness – Illinois earned an A-plus in all of the above categories. Operating at this level defensively has reopened the door to a national title ceiling for the Illini.
Illinois’ second-half points: 41

Houston’s defense is really good. And it is practically custom-built to give Illinois fits. And it did exactly that in the first half, holding the Illini to just 24 points. But in the second half, the Illini found the answer to Houston’s blitzing coverage, with the ball flying around the perimeter as players made quick decision after quick decision.
Brad Underwood has boasted about his players’ decision-making and IQ all year long, and it all came to life against the Cougars. Wagler’s oft-discussed poise was on full display, and the rest of the supporting cast continued to make the right plays, as well.
The Illini’s free-throw percentage: 57.1 percent
Now, on a negative note (there’s always a few, even in wins), Illinois was abysmal from the charity stripe. The Illini appear to be a stellar free-throw shooting club based on overall numbers (77.8 percent as a team), but they seem to fall apart from the line in the biggest games – especially in the clutch.
Illinois went 12-for-21 (57.1 percent) against Houston – which included missing two front ends of one-and-ones (costing the Illini as many as four points). The star freshmen pair of Wagler and Mirkovic combined to go 2-for-7. The Illini need to figure it out from the line, or they will be extremely vulnerable in crunch time.

Primarily covers Illinois football and basketball, and Kansas basketball, with an emphasis on analysis, features and recruiting. Langendorf, a third-generation University of Illinois alum, has been watching Illini basketball and football for as long as he can remember. An advertising student and journalism devotee, he has been writing for On SI since October 2024. He can be followed and reached on X @jglangendorf.
Follow jglangendorf