🏀 KuBuckets Archive

Since KU’s exit, we’ve had a lot of quality discussion about what is wrong with Self’s Jayhawks. Those discussions, though, are really our observations as to what could be done to improve the Jayhawks.

None of us will sit here and say that we’d do a better job than coach Self. That’s a given. That’s not the discussion. The discussion is “what can be done to help improve our chances at a national title?”

I firmly believe that coaches get very focused on their system, and how they do things. They develop tunnel vision. They become arrogant because of their success. This isn’t unique to coaches. It happens in all walks of life. Ever met a thoracic surgeon? Arrogant surgeons can kill people.

Surgeons who are not willing to consider their mistakes, or their outcomes, are dangerous. Same with coaches.

Coaches who will not open their minds can destroy their team’s chances at success because they have a dogmatic approach to their trade. Their lack of vision limits the ceiling of the teams they coach. Coaches who are not flexible and who will not adapt to what they have, and to their competition, suffer a distinct disadvantage. Don’t get me wrong. The adherence to approach and system is a large part of what makes many coaches successful. But it can drag them down.

This is the only real flaw that I see with coach Self. It’s really that simple. Great recruiter, great person, good X’s and O’s guy, excellent teacher of the game, terrific manager of people. What else is there?

Humility. The concept that his way may not always be the best way.

We’ve seen examples, such as coach Self’s obvious reticence to accept blame. We’ve seen glimmers – the classic “and we’ve got to coach it better” – from time to time. But generally, it’s a consistent blame on the execution by the players. Essentially, if we’d just run our stuff better, we’d win.

Well that isn’t always the case.

So all I ask of coach Self – Free your mind. That is all. Free .. your .. mind.

With an open mind, all things are possible.

Since KU’s exit, there have been many suggestions on what could be done to improve KU’s chances in March. I have read nearly everything written here. Below are my respectful suggestions, which incorporates thoughts from a number of posters at this site:

1. Expanded Zone Offense: No surprise here. Our zone offense is stagnant many times. Two simple elements of focus, and a third necessity. First, more active screening. By and large, KU’s zone offense only screens near the top of zone for the lead guard, or on the back line to set up a lob dunk. Active screening across lane and at the wing can create more seams for penetration and lanes for entry passes. Second, ensuring that our lineup always has a clear and present three point threat. The classic zone buster. Always. And free that zone buster to shoot. Third, we have to have skilled scorers at the high post. Can’t beat the zone if you’re feeding a guy who can’t score from the free throw line.

2. Pace of Game: When coach Self arrived, there was this fear that he would play a slow brand of basketball. It isn’t a fear any longer -- it’s just fact. Self doesn’t not really encourage a fast paced game. He may say that he wants a faster pace, but his actions discourage it. Turnovers cause you to find the bench. Quick shots? Look out for the hook. Who throws the ball in? Oh, the guy we have designated to throw the ball in. Press? Nope, too risky that we’ll give up an easy basket. Aggressive press break? Not the usual gameplan – slow, methodical passing. Random, targeted trapping? Rarely – simple man to man will do. Note to Self: Take advantage of your athletic superiority. When you play a slower game, you permit less skilled teams to remain a part of the game. Strategic use of the press is a must. Is there risk? Sure. But there seems to be more risk in being conservative, particularly in March. Further, playing at a faster pace regularly will make it much easier to deal with teams that play fast in the tournament.

3. Valuing The Basketball: This change is important. I understand that the easy approach is to simply conclude that all turnovers are bad. However, in my view, the over emphasis on valuing the basketball has inhibited our offensive growth -- it has been a horse collar to this team. It is a climate of unacceptability that appears to make guys play tight. Yes, turnovers are not good. But they aren’t always bad. In fact, 15 turnovers can be much better than 7 turnovers. It all depends on the amount of possessions in a game and the pace of the game, and what that pace of game does to your opponent. A team that doesn’t turn the ball over is usually not playing aggressive enough. This goes hand in hand with the prior paragraph on Pace of Game. Increasing the pace will generally increase turnovers. But that change in pace will also affect our opponent. If we are playing a team that wants to play slowly, there is usually a reason why. The most common explanation is that it’s because the opposing coach knows that the fewer possessions, the more chance that he has to stay in a game against a team with more highly skilled players. Wouldn’t that be what you would do if you played KU? To me, this is why we have been susceptible to upsets. Coach Self permits opposing teams to dictate pace and style of play. The Texas Tech game at Lubbock this season was a classic example. UNI was another. Coach Self would be well served to adjust his mindset and be willing to accept more turnovers. Again, we don’t want turnovers. But sometimes, turnovers are indicative of aggressiveness. It is a necessary evil, but not one to overreact to.

4. Take Advantage of Match-ups: Undoubtedly, this is an area where our current system fails – unless, by default, we have a match-up advantage on the post. Sometimes that match-up might be our shooting guard isolated on his defender, or our point guard taking a smaller guy to the block, or Ellis taking a bulky four man out on the wing. Taking advantage of match-ups to exploit scoring opportunities creates a more dynamic offense. This is a pretty simple concept, but one Self’s system routinely fails to incorporate. Similarly, playing small creates incredible match-up problems for opponents. We saw it first hand against MU in 2012. We simply couldn’t have Withey and TRob on the floor together for long stretches due to MU having Kim English at the four. Self is resistant to playing anything but a conventional attack. Sometimes match-ups dictate something different.

5. Be Bold: Coach Self is notoriously slow to adjust. His belief, which is not an uncommon coaching trait, is to most times “do what we do”, with faith that it will prevail. I just ask coach Self to trust his instincts. If it appears that an adjustment might work, side with boldness instead of the conservative path. We have history that supports that, too. On our final four run in 2012, coach Self boldly utilized the triangle and two. I think with the 2012 team he felt that because of the lack of depth, he had to think outside of the box. Boldness includes pressing, playing small, going with the hot hand – anything that rocks the boat. My suggestion is to always think out of the box. What limits boldness? Fear and arrogance. Fear that moves will fail, and arrogance that “system” will ultimately prevail. I ask that coach Self discard the chains that limit boldness.

6. Accept Zone Defense: This is came up early in the season – many, including myself, felt that an “all in” switch to zone defense with our personnel would have been the best move for the Jayhawks. We had a young team. We had a big, back line defender in Embiid. We had a three who was long and athletic. We had a point guard and four that couldn’t defend. And we had a post player (Black) who was in constant foul trouble. Coach Self is a strong believer in man to man defense. But that strong belief prevents him from freeing his mind. This past version of the Jayhawks was by far the worst defensive team at KU under coach Self. There was simply no way Self could cover for Tharpe, and the numerous times he compromised our defense. Then, on the back line, Ellis was soft and largely ineffective. Add to that a team devoid of veteran defensive leaders who had played under Self, and our defense was a disaster. We played multiple teams that ran zone. Louisville ran large doses of zone on its way to the 2013 title. UConn played zone. UK played some zone. Florida played lots of zone. But somehow, coach Self concludes that zone won’t work here. That simply lacks any logic. Brilliant coaches run it. Championship teams use it. Somehow other teams can run both. But we can’t. Zone defense needs to be accepted as a realistic alternative.

7. Cultivate Three Point Shooting: One concern is that coach Self fails to cultivate three point shooters. There doesn’t seem to be a urgency on Self’s part to play a dead-eye shooter. And shooters are faced with the famous quick hook. Cultivation of three point shooters requires a coach to understand that a shooter needs freedom. It’s not like a power forward pivoting and scoring on a post move. A shooter has to have a mind that is free of doubt. A coach has to offer freedom, has to accept misses, and has to accept shots that may be taken before a post entry pass is attempted. Just a touch more flexibility. Three point shooting can, and many times does, dominate the college game. In March, there are times when you catch a hot shooting team. We have to be prepared to have an answer. For KU to play at its maximum potential, there has to be a bit of leniency here by coach Self. We’ve seen vaunted three point shooters struggle here. Giving the shooters a touch more leeway is a great start.

There’s my seven point plan to make us more competitive in March, again incorporating thoughts from many posters on this site. Would be interested in everyone’s thoughts.

@HighEliteMajor

Solid post!

I agree with it all, and especially:

"With an open mind, all things are possible."

Basketball does not stand still. Strategies have to mold to the times and situations. Forcing the wrong strategy on a team because it worked in the past is not the best way to coach.

The rules change (or how they are enforced). Players change (7-footer who can handle the ball and pump the trey). Perceptions, ambitions and dreams of young players change (molded mostly by NBA players who constantly show something different).

The game of basketball is more like a fast-moving stream than a still lake.

Coaches have to stay hungry. That means they have to continue to develop just like the players they coach. The very best strategies eventually become stagnant because with time and repetition, the competition figures out the best way to defend or attack it. And every team is unique and strategy has to fit their uniqueness so they can become most effective.

I have to admit that I don't always see this philosophy practiced at KU. Sometimes it feels like there isn't enough bending... adapting to what will better serve the team. And sometimes we get predictable. And sometimes we don't adjust quickly when something isn't working. I've never felt we take advantage of our depth (when we have it). And because of that, depth can be a curse. Our last time to the championship game was with a team where we did not have our best depth, so we played less guys and they developed more of a rhythm together. If we are going to recruit all the depth, we have to use it wisely, invest in enough development so those players are useful (especially in March), and execute a game plan that takes advantage of all the energy available from having an abundance of capable players. When we don't do that, giving all our depth PT becomes a waste and takes away from our key core that could develop more harmony by having more PT together... especially with a young team (like we had this year).

Just look at AW3 this year. Every minute of PT he got only took away from developing more with other players, because down the stretch (March) he was too rusty to use in key situations. We lost too much ground if we substituted AW3 for a hobbled Selden. Therefore, AW3's net impact for the year was negative. Only because he didn't get enough PT to keep the rust off so we could use him down the stretch. I found that to be a major strategical blunder by our coaches. We could have really used a healthy, rust-free AW3 (and his experience) in March this year to take the heat off of Selden and his injured body. Selden did not produce for us in March, but that wasn't really his fault. He was hobbled and a rookie. We were stuck because we didn't have another 2 with size to defend. A rusty AW3 couldn't get the job done.

I believe we did AW3 a real disservice this year. He worked his butt off probably more than anyone else in the off-season. He hustled in fall camp. And he was rewarded with nothing. Like I said above, if he had an impact it was negative, because he didn't produce anything because his PT wasn't enough to develop anything and then what few minutes of PT he got only took away from Selden where he could develop further with more time. AW3 got the raw deal this year. Even Selden got a raw deal, too, because he was forced to play through his injury.

@HighEliteMajor

Solid post, Self should love you!

You've changed my mind about zone. For 42 years I've always mocked zone defenses as lazy and not "real" basketball. Like Scott Drew's zones. But I'm completely in agreement this past years team needed to play zone bc of our rim protectors (a positive) and terrible guard defense (a negative.). Hopefully Selden will play better D next year if he has two good wheels and Naa will...never mind...

Full court, 3/4 court and half court pressure should also be randomly played every couple games or every game as needed. @Jaybate has pounded this drum often.

PICK UP THE PACE!!! Ideally I'd like HCRW pace with Self's lock down defense. Like the 08 F4 game against UNC.

3's PLEASE!!! This might be the most important thing we can do offensively. Basketball is evolving right before our eyes. I believe there were a record number of threes launched this year in the league...golden state comes to mind... Statistically we HAVE to shoot more threes. Every year we're told how good the three shooters are but they never see the floor. Jeremy case was allegedly ray Allen but i assume he couldn't guard anyone. Personally, I'd NEVER have mason and Naa on the court at the same time. Picture this next year against TTU....PUSH the ball with CF, Oubre, Selden, Brannen and Alexander. Either Alexander dunks or someone shoots a 3. The lost art of the midrange jumper is LOST for a reason!

@HighEliteMajor

If Self is never going to make a serious commitment to zone, then I don't see the point in becoming a zone team for one season. It's not an effective strategy in the long-term. I'd prefer to use the zone more, but only as a change up. Never for more than one or two possessions in a row. This is similar to how Billy Donovan uses it. If you want to rely on zone extensively, then you have to spend extensive time teaching it. Extensive time teaching zone will take away from time spent improving man-to-man defense. I'd rather be really good with man (like we normally are) than kind of good at both.

We'll be better next season in man because we stuck with it all season. If we had switched to zone for an extended period, next season's transition to man would be more difficult.

Self's defensive record speaks for itself. I don't see the value in using zone for more than a few possessions each game.

@HighEliteMajor Love it!

There is only one thing I disagree with, and I have posted on it before so maybe you've seen it, but that is the philosophy to go "all in" with a zone defense. My main problem with that is this - so say we went zone last year. The defensive black holes at the 1 & the 4 are still here. So...are we all in on zone again next season? We've lost the big back line defender (although we might get Turner), and we've most likely downgraded at the long & athletic 3 (Oubre replaces Wiggins, but I'm expecting him to not be as good as Wiggins was on D). In either case, whether we land Turner & Oubre is good enough to be the long athletic 3 at the top or if we lack a shot blocker and are slightly worse off without Wiggins, we've essentially taken a year off where we didn't teach the fundamentals of intense, in your face M2M defense to a very young team. So be it this next season, or in 2 years, you've lost perhaps the most important year to teach your core defensive philosophy to rotation guys like Selden, Greene, Mason, Frankamp. I think the underlying reasoning here should be that you never make an "all in" switch for a single season, regardless of personnel. If you're going to make that kind of switch, it should be at a macro/philosophical level. And personally, I don't want to abandon the M2M defense. This year was an aberration. An outlier. Every other year we are statistically one of the better defensive teams in the country. We know Self's defense works almost without exception.

The other problem with switching to a zone defense, as has also been discussed, is that I don't think we have a coach on the staff that would versed enough in zones to teach it and get an acceptable product. Roberts was an assistant under Self and carried on those teachings as a head coach before returning. Howard was a former player under Self. Townsend has been with Self 10 years now. These are all "Self guys." My feeling is we would probably need to bring someone else on staff that has an expertise in this area to get a team that plays a good zone defense. Otherwise, I fear we'd be Baylor 2.0.

All this being said, I'm hugely in favor of having zone defenses in the proverbial coaching bag of tricks. Like the triangle & 2. Not as something that could carry you through an entire season, but as a change-up. Give the opponents something else to think about. I'm not sure if someone on staff would be able to teach us zones to that extent, but it needs to be something available.

After scrolling down I see @jayhawk12 has made a couple of the same points I'd made. Sorry for the redundancy!

@icthawkfan316 a well-respected coach told me if you want to play a good zone, you still have to have good m2m principles, stance, move your feet, see the ball, help, box out and so on. I agree throwing some changes would be ideal, I also think the foul calling hurt us a great deal. We've been fortunate to have great rim protectors lately too. I'd love to see some fast break, push the ball up tempo. Always felt starting out pressing gets the juices going, example when we played WV at home.
What kind of zone would you zone guys use against the heslips, fortes and ISU?

@HighEliteMajor This sounds like seven points taken from a certain coach that just played in the NC game...cough, cough...Dang it

@HighEliteMajor

Don't you think going zone would make it even harder to play at a quicker pace?

A lot of our runouts come off turnovers in the half court. We would probably force fewer turnovers playing zone unless we are really active. Like other posters have said, I'm skeptical that our coaches would teach a solid zone that generates the same defensive pressure we generate with m2m.

@drgnslayr - "And every team is unique and strategy has to fit their uniqueness so they can become most effective."

With a system coach, talent adapts to system. It is a key consideration in why, possibly, we don't seem to get the most out of our talent.

Regarding zone, I have the following thoughts on the comments above:

1. Shifting to zone primarily, or full time, would have likely been the best move for the 2013-14 Hawks. I struggle with how zone could have been worse than what we saw. If we are to worry about the development of our man to man defense for the next season, we are thus discounting the value of "this" season. We had national championship caliber talent, and holes to mask. @jayhawk12 questioned the point of being a zone team for one season -- the point in being a zone team for one season is to win that season, plain and simple. What gives the team on the floor the best chance? I do concede that perhaps Self tried zone in practice and thought it would be a worse disaster. But Self never said that in any interview, or on Hawk Talk.

2. I don't advocate playing zone primarily unless it's necessary with Self as coach. But if Self wants to play hard nosed man to man, he better recruit those type of players. Zone is a viable defense that you can win with. But certainly, incorporating zone in our scheme is realistic. @jayhawk12 notes Self's record. I go to national titles. 11 seasons, one title. I also look at teams that have won titles. They have played zone more than "a few possessions each game."

3. @icthawkfan316 hit on the point that concerns me most -- the ability to passionately teach zone defense. "My feeling is we would probably need to bring someone else on staff that has an expertise in this area to get a team that plays a good zone defense. Otherwise, I fear we'd be Baylor 2.0." --- that is squarely on point. With a normal Self team, using it as a change up is probably all that is really needed. But we have to recruit guys that fit that man to man scheme -- Tharpe doesn't. Ellis doesn't appear to fit it.

4. Regarding pace, @jayhawk12 questioned whether you could increase pace with zone. Actually, zone makes it easier. You can play at a much quicker pace playing zone when you incorporate trapping and pressure. The 1-3-1 can be the most aggressive defense (half court trap), or a pack it back and make them shoot kind of defense. Lead into the 1-3-1 with the 3/4 court 2-2-1 that @VailHawk mentioned, and you have chaos -- and the potential to create the scattered play that we were the victims of multiple times this season. The trapping and pressure increase pace. But you can do this, too, with good man principles. Zone, though, doesn't necessarily slow pace.

5. @crimsonorblue22 - the coach you speak of was a wise man. Too many times folks play zone and think it's a time to relax. Excellent man principles translate directly to zone. I think particularly on body angle. You make an excellent point, and it's why teams should be able to flow between both defenses. Stanford did it quite well a month ago, I would say. Where zones are exposed is when defenders play flat -- great example are our back line screen plays for lobs against the zone. Self takes advantage of defenders playing flat. If teams play zone with the tenacity of man, that's a tough nut to crack.

The idea that you can't do both effectively should be completely discarded. We have seen multiple teams be effective running both, most recently Stanford in their win over the Jayhawks. Simply discarding zone defense is a short-sighted, dogmatic approach that puts KU at a disadvantage. And we're at that disadvantage because Self won't approach it with an open mind -- like many, many other coaches do. And like other national title winning coaches do.

@HighEliteMajor In regards to needing to recruit guys that fit a M2M scheme, I agree, although I don't know that Self could have foresaw Perry being as bad as he is. Most freshman are going to be bad. Defense just isn't a skill that seems to be cultivated enough in high school. But you take a guy like Perry, who is athletic and has a good work ethic, and you'd have to figure he'd progress into at least an average defender.

With Tharpe, let's be honest, Self isn't recruiting him period if there weren't other misses on the recruiting trail. At least not with the idea in mind that he would be the starting point guard at any time during his career.

As to the point that both myself and @jayhawk12 made about the validity of teaching zone for one year, I don't think I am discounting the value of this season. Did we really have a national championship caliber team? We all wanted to think that during the season. We thought this because of the tough schedule we played, because we won the Big 12 again with it being discussed as one of (if not the) toughest conferences in the country this year. Problem was, for all our tough schedule our only marquee win was against a Duke team in November. The same Duke team that got upset by Mercer. And the Big 12 wasn't all it was cracked up to be, although injuries to Embiid & Niang probably tripped up the league's two best teams. So I don't know if we were NC caliber. I'm not taking into account the Embiid injury, as that couldn't have been predicted at the outset, but our guard play just wasn't good enough, at least not playing Tharpe and having Selden paired as the 2 along side him. The ball handling and decision making just wasn't there I fear. We're probably playing beyond the round of 32, but I don't think the switch to zone in and of itself would have elevated us to a national championship caliber team. Now could enough things have been done to make it that caliber of a team? Possibly. Had Self opened up to all 7 of your suggestions (which seems unlikely to happen within a single season. Perhaps 3 or 4 out of 7 to start). But with those suggestions I don't see the answer to what I think was our biggest limitation, and that is improved PG play. I've been pretty steadfast all off-season that until that is addressed, everything else is secondary.

At any rate, given that I don't think we had the personnel to compete for a NC this past year, I think it is valuing the season more to use it to teach your young core of players the core philosophical principles, namely M2M defense. As much as we'd like to think that every season is NC or bust, there are going to be seasons here and there that are more like stepping stones. Much like we talk about sacrificing games within a season to improve the chance for success in March and needing to view the season as a campaign to the tournament, there are going to be seasons that need to be viewed as part of a campaign for developing a national championship team down the line. I hate that reality, but we've talked before about how we would take an NIT season (like Kentucky last year) if it meant a return trip to the Final 4 the next.

@icthawkfan316 Do you think you can't do both in practice? I think other teams do. UK was younger and obviously did.

I do think you can, but clearly, if you're learning zone with limited practice time, you are sacrificing valuable PT that could be used getting better at man full time. Again, though, we can't do what UK did?

I firmly believe we had a national title caliber team. No doubt in my mind.

While I value point guard play highly, the issues are broader than just that. To focus too much on personnel, which is really excellent top to bottom, is to downplay what has really caused many of our tourney failures. Point guard play didn't lose us the game to Stanford.

@HighEliteMajor

1-2. I will agree that zone may have been more appropriate with last year's team than with others. It would have kept Tarik on the floor more earlier in the year and minimized the poor rotations. While our guards did not do a great job staying in front of their man last year, our poor help made that problem worse. The first half of our home game against TCU is a great example. No way their point guard should score that much and get into the paint so easily.

We could have switched to zone for Tharpe and Ellis but, Self did not recruit any of his players for their ability to play zone. If you switch to zone for two people, the abilities of everyone else are mis-used. And they may struggle just as much.

I think Tharpe's main problems are bigger than Perry's. Tharpe lacks lateral quickness and probably the discipline to commit consistently. I think Perry struggles more with vision and court awareness. He has to do a better job seeing the ball at all times and being aware of court position. Where I notice the quickness issue with Perry is when he gets switched guarding smaller (quicker) players and when he guards off-ball, away from the basket. He's also vulnerable defending in transition.

If you want to go with a zone that is active and traps 3/4 court, some of the same issues remain. You need guards that are quick out front (and ideally long) and you need the guys behind to have great anticipation. If you commit to zone for Perry and Naadir, that zone is probably most effective as a pack it in, preventative zone. I don't get the sense you are excited about this type of scheme.

Last, you point to national championships. I would only say that not all champions play more zone. Kentucky rarely plays zone. With Connecticut, Florida, Syracuse and Louisville, yes that is true. If we want to become more like any of those teams defensively in terms of how we use the zone, then I think Florida is most appropriate. But the type of players we recruit are more similar to Kentucky than those at the other schools. Self and Calipari almost always wrestle over the same top players.

With regard to this year, a zone would not have meant beating Stanford. JoJo's injury was huge because of when it happened - late in the season. We didn't have enough time to adjust. Michigan State had constant injury problems this year and never got time to play much together as a healthy unit before the tournament. They lost earlier than expected. Arizona had a late season injury and was never quite the same. KU's injury was later in the season than both of those teams. JoJo was just as if not more important to our team than any single injury to Arizona and Michigan State. We've had early exits in past years but I can't remember a year when we had a late season injury as significant as JoJo's.

My point about using M2M principles in the the zone is, if they can't keep their man in front of them in man, they won't be able to in a zone either. Our rim protecter saved us, many times this year, when he got hurt we couldn't cover our mistakes.
I'm sure we have all heard, Self doesn't recruit defensive players, he teaches it after they get here. An asst coach told me most of the kids come from programs that have zero knowledge on any defensive drills or terms. I still believe w/the excessive whistle blowing put us at an disadvantage. Does Syracuse ever switch to man? What zones would you play against Heslip, Forte or ISU? I'm not a zone fan except to throw some different looks.

Kansas Jayhawks Basketball will be just fine. I will not make myself crazy over things I cannot change. Coach Self will continue to do what he sees fit. I am good with that. I am looking forward to next years team and I could care less what other teams are doing. I am with Kansas Basketball win or lose. Another case of indirect fire.

@Crimsonorblue22 You say that if "... they can't keep their man in front of them in man, they won't be able to in a zone either."

I respectfully disagree with that. Zone is premised, obviously, on covering an area. If you get a blow by on a wing, or out front, you have immediate, built in help. Secondly, you usually always have a nearby help defender.

Obviously, you have to have some level of ability at keeping your man in front of you. But you can hide guys, as you know.

Yes, Syracuse does go to man every so often.

Personal preference, I would play 1-3-1 nearly all the time, unless my personnel strongly dictated otherwise. I'd play it against Forte, Heslip, and ISU. You account for shooters in zone. You fear shooters. You shade shooters. You track shooters. Watch Syracuse. It's beautiful thing. Boeheim is a defensive genius with his 2-3. But shooters beat any defense, right? Not just a zone. But they can kill a zone, no doubt.

@KansasComet Come on, make yourself crazy. What would you do if you had a magic wand?

One strategic item that you would like coach Self to do -- just one?

@HighEliteMajor One strategic thing that I'd like to see from Coach Self - free season tickets for all KUBuckets regulars.

@jayhawk12 How was our defense last season?

-Respectfully, you wouldn't "pack it in" as a preventative zone. That makes no sense to me. Why do you think we would have had to do that? And you're right, I don't like a "pack it in" zone, unless matchup wise, it was the best option.

-See my response to @Crimsonorblue22 - you reduce your "issues" defensively. If you have a point guard who continually compromises your defense by permitting penetration, it's over. It was over. We got killed. And if you have a post player who can't handle guys on the block that are of any size, you're dead in man. You have to always have help. Zone gives you help.

-And I agree, I don't think a zone defense would have beaten Stanford. You're right there. It was our lack of an effective zone offense that doomed us. We didn't need Embiid (or Wiggins) for that matter, to beat Stanford if we ran an effective zone offense. They isolated our weak guys, and took away our strong offensive players (Ellis and Wiggins). You would agree that we should have beaten Stanford with or without Embiid, right?

@nuleafjhawk you would be fun to go to a game with!

@HighEliteMajor There is so much more to it than just Coach Self. Your end result appears to be winning a six game tournament that often includes teams with losing records. Coach Self is not at fault for that. He puts together a winning team year in and year out. I am amazed by the run of success that we have had. The only thing I would change is the format of the tournament. I don't believe teams should be rewarded with a tournament invite, based on winning a conference tournament. Strategically no, however I do firmly believe that the best players should play. Case in point, if Frankamp was killing Tharpe in practice (which I don't know if it's true or not) then he should have gotten playing time over him.

@KansasComet Does Coach Self get credit for the successes? Do you credit him for the 2008 title?

@HighEliteMajor we did have glimpses of good D, Duke, Texas at home, OU at home, WV at home, Baylor. Our zone offense was good against Baylor. The only time I like a zone is against a quick team that gets to the rack easily. Once you get by one man in a zone, the zone breaks down and should be easy to score on. I like the zone to keep teams out of the paint. If they have good 3 pt shooters (plural) IMO, zones are worthless, unless a box and 1 or triangle and 2, but for short periods. Seeing the games when we played good M2M tells me we were capable of doing it ALL the time! I call it heart! Always respect!

@HighEliteMajor ease up on comet! I like his/her responses! So do you think Self should or shouldn't get credit! It's a team, he's part of it!

@HighEliteMajor Yes, he put the team together. There was some luck involved in the 2008 title run. Davidson had the game winning shot in the air.

@Crimsonorblue22 That's pretty funny .. the one time we played good zone offense was against Baylor. You see cause and effect, I'm sure.

Personally, I think we could have played sufficiently effective man to man if Tharpe just never played. He was the worst defensive player I have ever seen at KU under Self, in the second half of the season.

@HighEliteMajor I don't remember any teams playing zone other than Baylor, only mentioned that cause we played good D on them. They didn't stay in it to long cause it didn't work. Not funny to me! Who beside Stanford do you recall us struggling against a zone. I don't remember.

@KansasComet But Self gets no credit for strategy, scheme, leadership, etc.? I would say that he gets a huge amount of credit for that.

On luck, just throw that out the window. The bigger your sample size, the less it means. Luck is just probabilities and possibilities. And many times, you create your own luck. When your sample size increases, it's a discernible pattern.

Trey Burke's shot was lucky by many accounts. But if we foul before he shoots, are we victims of a lucky shot? Same with Calipari and Chalmers' shot. You create luck many, many times, or situations where luck can beat you.

@Crimsonorblue22 I thought you were referring to Scott Drew's inability to coach a competent zone D, as @icthawkfan316 referred to (and as has become legendary).

Many teams played zone against us -- it destroyed us early, Villanova, Florida, Colorado, etc. Then we saw it quite a bit during the league season. I recall Texas killing us with zone at Austin. They mixed it up.

Here's an article I saw on Steve Fisher switching to a 1-3-1 zone this season when needed -- as firm a man to man guy as there is. Its a great commentary on flexibility. This is all that I would ask of coach Self, or of any coach.

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/Mar/09/sdsu-basketball-zone-defense-fisher-hutson/ ↗

@HighEliteMajor I thought floridas press killed us, more than half court zone. Don't you think we improved from those early season losses against zones?

@HighEliteMajor I do like a 1-3-1 w/wigs on top, super long athlete.

@Crimsonorblue22 Right, Florida pressed, and slipped back into a 1-3-1 much of the game.

I do think we improved vs. the zone. Marginally vs. the press.

See -- 1-3-1. Wigs up top, allows you to hide your point guard on the back line or weak wing side depending on match-up. Fit us to a T. Right on there.

Heck, Self likes the 3-2. Go Tharpe/Wigs/Selden up top, bigs in back. Trap wing and box. Matchup on all high % shooters. Immediate closouts everywhere. Roll behind closeout. Has to be better than 150th or whatever in points per game allowed. Has to be.

How many breakout dunks does Wigs have from up top, middle on a 3-2?

@HighEliteMajor how many guys can we hide?

@HighEliteMajor you asked a question on successes. Next you import strategy, scheme, and leadership? It was a yes or no question? Right?

@HighEliteMajor

If the problem is the dribble penetration into the paint, then a "pack it in" zone is preventative simply because it limits open space in the middle and increases it on the perimeter. It also limits the amount of space that you ask your most vulnerable people (Perry, Naadir) to cover.

Our defense was not good last season, but it wasn't the initial penetration per se that hurt. With Embiid in the back, isolated dribble penetration can always be dealt with. What hurt was after the initial dribble penetration. The kick outs, the dump offs, the secondary drives. We were terrible stopping what happened after the initial penetration.

Yes, "zone gives you help." So does man. When the ball is on the wing, there are just as many people in the paint with man as with zone, at least when played effectively. I'm not convinced a zone gives you more help than a good man to man does. What role do you see Perry and Naadir playing in zone that addresses their man to man limitations?

As an aside, Perry does not challenge shots above the rim but he is OK on-ball when he's guarding his own position as a 4.

Yes, we should have beaten Stanford, just like Arizona should have beaten every Pac-12 team after their injury. Michigan State was more talented than many of the teams they lost to, too. The injury to Embiid counts for something. That injury happened at the very end of the season! The offense was stagnant in part because guys weren't used to playing together without Embiid on the court. Tarik is great, but he is a very different type of player than Embiid. Traylor was great, but he played many more minutes. Those types of things affect other players and their comfort on the court.

@HighEliteMajor BIG QUESTION: You've done your usual outstanding job in presenting stale-prevention playstyle evolution. But my only question is this: Could the lack of execution, especially the defensive fail-jobs by Naadir and Ellis be a logic error in our supposition that "the system is bad" or "needs revision"? What if Self simply makes a g-dd--n example out of Naa & says "you dont play if you cant play D". Just like he did with Elijah Johnson, who couldnt keep his man in front of him (compared to Brady). Maybe its time for Naa to 'ride pine', while better defense-instincts Mason and Frankamp get to play 20-25mpg as each other's subs?

System breakdown needs to be traced to its root cause, right? I hate to sound like your Self soundbite "we didnt execute...", but the fact is, when we do execute his system to a national top10 level, we win in astonishing fashion. And when we dont execute that way, even in a single game (think UNI, VCU...), we are ripe to get beat, because we are playing below our system's requirements.

General comment for those new to KU and Self basketball: SelfBall Principles:

1. Play D. Top10 FG% D. D always travels. Keeps you in a game when your offense is struggling.

2. WIN the possession battle: limit t.o.'s, get steals, win the rebounds.

3. High%looks: Its why we will always be inside-first (but just as a general philosophy). The lob-dunk is a ridiculously high% play, which Im sure Stan VanGundy figured out after his shock at seeing an actual college team dedicate actual practice time to several plays for lob dunks. Skilled bigs and stickback bigs are high% looks. As is an "open look 3, by a trusted shooter".

I would like to go a bit counter-thread here, just for the sake of advancing our overall discussion...and actually defend Bill Self by saying he is NOT as rigid as he is made out to be.
Evidence:
-Abandons some of set offense in 2012, as TRob doubled, and Withey not polished enough to create, and has Tyshawn "just drive it". Bill Self went dribble drive. Either he did it calculatingly, or Tyshawn just got so good at it along with a high70sFT%, that we survived with that playstyle. It suited his personnel.
-We do kick out for 3att often enough to have decent 3att for most games. Clearly he has NOT told players to NOT shoot, as we saw Mason try them early and often, then become more selective. I think Self's msg on 3s is dont force them up early in a possession, especially if rebounders arent set...that's just playing the percentages/smart basketball. You can of course argue that if we chucked them early and often, we would have the element of surprise, as opposed to the last 6sec of the shot clock, when everybody knows a forced, highpressure 3att is coming. One of the MAIN common issues in the UNI and VCU losses were the dismal KU 3%, and by very trusted senior shooters (Sherron 0-6, Reed 1-7). Sherron had a green light from Day 1, and Reed likely did also. I have NO doubt Jacobsen's supposed lack of structure in allowing his UNI players to shoot 3s whenever/by whomever made an impression on Self. I mean we saw Mason, Embiid, Ellis, Frankamp, Selden, Greene, Wiggins, AW3 all attempt 3s. Now the harder part: recall that many of those looks were early, but that is OK if the shooter is wide open. Open-look 3s have ALWAYS been accepted and encouraged by Self. I've seen that throughout the years, different sets of players, to realize it IS a part of his system, and he doesnt discourage open-look 3 attempts. You cannot face savant shooters like Heslip, Forte, Keiton Page, Kevin Durant and not think that you couldnt/shouldnt "free up" your own shooters. I think Rush and Chalmers always had the greenlight, just as frosh Sherron did since day 1 in 2007. Even RussRob had the greenlight, hitting the opening KU points with a corner3 vs UNC in the Final4. You know EJ and Tyshawn always had greenlights, as did Releford. Teahan also had a green light. Selby certainly did.

-Experimenting with zones and trapping. I think Self may be more rigid on his m2m defense, as "you gotta get really good at one thing" (which we did not achieve this season). Duke is also a decidedly m2m team. With all the limits on practice time by the NCAA, it is a very real decision coaches have to make as to how to spend their limited practice time. But clearly we DO have zone and trapping "pkgs" to use situationally. Now if Self wants to throw a changeup D every 3 possessions, all game long, that's his perogative.

So, feel free to armchair QB any coach, anywhere, anytime. Me personally, I just want to see solid, tough, efficient play and improvement in all the major areas, as by KU standards, this last season was THE worst team KU has had since 2006, statistically speaking.

Who knows what Self has up his sleeve for 2014-15, other than opening a can of Cliff-X-Tuff on everybody...and lets not forget K.Oubre, who might be a god-fearing kid, but fears nothing else, as he tried to dunk on Cliff in the final seconds of crunchtime, winning the game on the FT line. We need that attitude. Works best in Self's system. We know this already...

@ralster great post! Only disagreement would be on Conner's defense. Pretty shaky, along w/a few others! I have a hard time figuring why it was so bad.

@ralster You are right on point with your question: "But my only question is this: Could the lack of execution, especially the defensive fail-jobs by Naadir and Ellis be a logic error in our supposition that "the system is bad" or "needs revision"?"

I am not suggesting that man to man is a "system fail." With the 2013-14 Jayhawks, man to man defense netted a subpar result.

The fail-jobs by Tharpe and Ellis lead to the conclusion that the system has to be more flexible. If you have square pegs, it is a "system fail" to continue to pound them into round holes. That is really my conclusion.

I simply suggest that Self open his mind to the possibility that strict man to man is not the only answer all of the time.

However, I do disagree with your statement: "We do kick out for 3att often enough to have decent 3att for most games. Clearly he has NOT told players to NOT shoot."

Self plainly has told players not to shoot. Ever see Greene turn down an open look three? Many times. Why? Because it was early in the shot clock. A trained dog on a leash. Do the wrong thing, you get yanked -- like a dog on a leash. Pretty soon, you are skiddish and you won't think of doing it. Self wants the three point shot to be a later option to getting a "better" shot. The "feed the post" mantra. You don't disagree with that, right?

@jayhawk12 "Our defense was not good last season, but it wasn't the initial penetration per se that hurt."

We are not on the same page. That statement ignores the entire season. You conclude the problem was that "We were terrible stopping what happened after the initial penetration."

Penetration creates opportunity, passes, getting fouled. EJ, Taylor, even McLemore were much better in stopping penetration. CF and Mason were better than Tharpe. You simply can't expose your post players to having to bail out your point guard who can't stop penetration. You get fouled up -- see Black. Many of those were after Tharpe's guy got in the lane. If you want to try and explain away that, then I'm sorry, it's hard to discuss it. You ask any coach what's more important, he'll say stopping the penetration in the first place. You will have a certain % of times when there is penetration of course, but you can't give it up over and over. When you do you are creating too many opportunities. It's hoops 101.

I read your last paragraph and it reeks of "apologist." With that approach, you can explain away everything. I say very firmly that the Embiid injury means nothing .. zero .. when playing Stanford. We should beat Stanford in that situation. Period. But we got outcoached, plain and simple. Dawkins had the superior game plan. His defenders contested nearly every shot, as Self conceded. We did not have an answer to get open shots. Game, set, match. You are right, "we should have beaten Stanford." To fall back on the Embiid injury is embarrassing, to be honest.

No Embiid vs. Florida, or another stout team? Sure. Makes sense. Not Stanford.

@KansasComet I had asked "Does Coach Self get credit for the successes? Do you credit him for the 2008 title?"

You had said yes, he put the team together.

I then responded by asking if he gets credit for scheme, strategy, etc.

What I mean is, wouldn't he then get the blame too for failures? It's legit to say he shares the blame, right?

I have not seen anyone dispute that Self got outcoached vs. Stanford. It happens. Sometimes getting outcoached is having the wrong personnel on the floor. Sometimes not adjusting. Against Stanford, Self permitted Stanford to execute its game plan without any real strategic interference. Best he can do is try to improve like everyone else in life.

@ralster Thank you! That sums up my thoughts. Very well said. I think there are some that want to fix what ain't broke. Looking forward to next season!

@HighEliteMajor I believe he shows up to the press conferences after every game. Win or lose. It starts with the Head Coach. Now, for my question. Is it right to say "I don't want Wiggins", and then say "forget everything bad I said about Wiggins", only to flip again when the end result is not realized? That's not cool. But somehow, I am sure that is Coach Self's fault for recruiting a one and done?

@HighEliteMajor

I'm not saying initial penetration doesn't matter. Of course it does. Yes, it is the most important thing. BUT reducing all of the defensive issues to Tharpe's failure to prevent dribble penetration absolves everyone else of responsibility. There are no binarys here. Other people are somewhat responsible. The timing of Embiid's injury mattered some. You have to acknowledge those things.

Defensive statistics are team statistics. They measure your ability to play together effectively as a group. FG % defense most directly measures shot quality. As soon as someone gets by Tharpe, it becomes the team responsibility to rotate. Failure to challenge a shot after that point falls on someone else. Failure to fulfill that responsibility means that others are - to some extent- responsible. In that way they contribute to poor FG% defense.

Of course the guard that allows penetration makes it harder for everyone else to play good defense. Is it fair? no. But it is the reality. And it is the responsibility of everyone to help. In addition to being a weaker on-ball team than others Self has coached, we were also weaker making rotations. We had six freshmen come in. 5 of them played significant minutes. In retrospect, it's no wonder they didn't play together as well as the 2011 team.

As an aside, I agree that Tharpe's defense hurt Black more than others. But again, you can't absolve Tarik completely. Perry and JoJo are better at challenging shots without fouling. That is not Tarik's strength. Naadir increased Tarik's exposure to fouls, but Tarik still committed each and every one of them.

It is clear we disagree about the importance of Embiid's injury.

Do you think you can't do both in practice? I think other teams do. UK was younger and obviously did

@HighEliteMajor I absolutely think you can do both. But your point was that we go "all in" on zone, which I took to mean we practice that instead of M2M. So say in a season we spend 90-95% of the time practicing M2M (which is my guess as to how much time we spend on M2M), going "all in" on zone would mean spending 90-95% on zone in practice. That is what I wouldn't want to do. I'm on record as wanting more zone, but not ever as the primary defense taught.

And no, PG play wasn't the primary reason we lost to Stanford, although Self stubbornly going with Tharpe for far too many minutes in the second half certainly contributed. But to get to the national championship? I could see if Self abandoned Tharpe all together, then and only then would PG play not be an obstacle that we eventually would be unable to overcome.

@HighEliteMajor

" @drgnslayr - "And every team is unique and strategy has to fit their uniqueness so they can become most effective."

With a system coach, talent adapts to system. It is a key consideration in why, possibly, we don't seem to get the most out of our talent. "

Over my lifetime, I bet I've had 100 or so arguments about this subject. You are right, system coaches force their system. And they should recruit specific players that fit the system and know what they are signing up for.

I believe in it to the point where a team can improve if you adjust to what players you have. At that point, you should do whatever you can to produce the best outcomes. This is especially important with OADs... because making them endure bad play won't teach them anything they can later come back and use because in a few months they are gone.

Seems impossible to expect consistent positive results from non-4-year players if the coach is going to be a pure system coach. Self definitely fit the description over his history. But in recent years he has adapted his own rules to fit situations... primarily, OADs.

My question: will he continue to come off his rigid coaching style? Myles Turner will not fit in his hi/lo except on occasion. If Bill wants Myles to become a Jayhawk, doesn't he realize Myles skills primarily involve him facing the basket, not back to the basket? He would do Myles a great disservice by forcing him to play most of his time back to the basket. It won't help him get drafted high, and it won't be his game in the NBA.

And then... how would Bill ever hope to land a player like Thon Maker? He's preparing to go after him big time.

@drgnslayr Turner said he liked Selfs hi lo, he could play both.

@drgnslayr

Kansas
Turner says: “I like the high-low system that Coach [Bill] Self runs, due to the fact that I can play both the high and the low. Playing in that system with Cliff and a couple of other bigs over there, that would be pretty cool to be a part of.”

@HighEliteMajor Totally agree that Self ought to show more flexibility...I was simply trying to point out that he seems to show more flexibility lately (but definitely didnt convert over to predominant zone).

2 ideas:

1. Maybe Self didnt have to be so flexible in the past, simply because the execution of TheSystem was adequate, and gave better results? (why change what already is working?)

2. The other idea is that if Self ever went to zone-D predominantly, and starts practicing it--> what happens to the young'uns being brought up in the System? They start having to focus on zone-D (in the limited practice time the NCAA gives us)...and in 1 season, we have altered the developmental 'pipeline'...and basically turned our whole program into a zone-D program? That's a bigtime ramification, HEM, and my friendly thought is that its why Self wont wholesale change his base D, as that will alter the teachings to 2-3 years worth of kids?

On another note, count me "IN" on the push-the-pace tempo forced by quickly inbounding the ball by anyone off a made bucket. It would give a few more chances for our athletes to get out in transition, which we always seem to be waiting to do...but the D sucked and we hardly got steals, strips. The glimmer of hope was when Embiid blocked something, we still were able to take it and run with it. Kids do that in h.s. I agree it would give us another factor to control the game. Put some more fouls on the opponent...

This season, simply because of the huge influx of newbies, we simply were NOT good statistically in key areas. Our FG% defense sucked like a KS tornado. Our 2nd shot defense was awful. We didnt have over half of 2008's offense installed and usable and well-rehearsed. Remember, the 2008 experienced squad absolutely demolished zone-defenses...(same coach), what was the difference?

@ralster nice posts!

@HighEliteMajor I'll dispute it for you. Stanford 0-9 from 3 point range. Zero percent. Could Coach Self's defense possibly do any better than that? By the way, we knocked down 5. Andrew Wiggins did try to get involved. 4 turnovers, and I believe they were all traveling violations. He scored on at least one of those, basket disallowed however. That's another potential 12 points of offense right there. The quick whistle stifled him, not Stanford defense. 58 shot attempts and only 18 Free Throw attempts for Kansas, 47 shot attempts and 26 Free Throw attempts for Stanford. We missed a lot of layups. How is that Coach Self's fault? I am sure this team has worked on layups all season long. It happens? 15 fouls for Stanford, 22 for Kansas. Was the game called evenly? I was there, and I don't think so. Every single time KU tried to get something going, a whistle changed the momentum. Now, keep in mind that when Coach Self makes decisions in the heat of battle, with thousands of screaming fans, that has an immediate impact on the game. He is not afforded the opportunity to go grab a beer, or a shot while complaining to his significant other about the state of Kansas Basketball and what needs to happen. His life is not that easy. He is the Coach of the Kansas Jayhawks and does a damn good job at it. Switching to a zone defense? If it was that simple...

@Crimsonorblue22

" @drgnslayr Turner said he liked Selfs hi lo, he could play both."

I think he's been sold the idea that Cliff will anchor the hi/lo post and he'll see some movement around it... and he will get a bit of it just to build his tool box.

Remember Jeff Withey? Myles is a lighter version of Jeff. Even in Jeff's senior year, he couldn't do much in the hi/lo. I'm not saying Myles can't do it or can't learn to do it, but he won't be getting drafted in the No Boys Allowed league to play with his back to the basket. He'd have to put on 50 lbs of solid muscle (mostly in his lower body) to dominate in the league doing that.

And why should he be doing that? He should be out exploring all areas on the floor and learn to score everywhere. That will be his ticket to the next level, not low post play.

Still... it is a good thing for him to play some low post. Some... limited.

@drgnslayr hmmm Jeff Withey, sounds familiar!

@Crimsonorblue22

He had areas of his game that could stand improving... but, dang, I miss him on D!

@drgnslayr if it's the same guy I'm thinking of, he ended this season on a good note! Saw a recent pic, he's look pretty darn smooth! Great kid, deserves the best!

I wonder if playing M2M versus zone defense impacts recruiting top tier talent?

Calipari tries to run M2M most of the time, and just keeps zone around to use at times.

Playing M2M in your one year of college seems like a smart thing to do since it's about all you play in the NBA. Though, in reality, they often play a hybrid defense that hedges away into zone areas.

@HighEliteMajor - what are your ideas on that? I know you would like us to recruit just below those potential OADs. Obviously, Self seems to like to recruit those players now. What do you think.... would it impact Self's success at recruiting those players?

Anyone else have an opinion on that?

Could it be that now Self is committed to nailing all these top players and it is also shackling him into playing only M2M?

Everyone in here knows I'm not a Calipari fan... but he does seem to be learning more flexibility with his game. Perhaps more than Self.

Maybe it is just the fact that Calipari has been landing these top players more often and so has had more time to adjust around having all the short-term players.

Funny... it looks like Cal will only lose Randle and Young for next year. Kentucky appears to be the team to beat. But they will be vulnerable to any team that can manufacture a guard tandem like UCONN had. That's what it will take to stop Kentucky... unless they run into bad luck, like injuries.

@drgnslayr see ralster's post.

@drgnslayr Very interesting post, much to discuss. M2M has its proponents and diehards, chiefly Bill Self, Mike Kryzyewski, and a whole host of lesser known coaches. Then there's the zoner's: Boeheim, Scot Drew, and a few 1-3-1 guys...

Personally, I think playing M2M, but then having a few changeups-Ds in our bag of tricks is the way to go. I think the major problem with our team this year, is that we were incompetent (or better term is "spotty"..) with our OWN base defense. That's not going to get it done, folks.

@KansasComet: raised a very interesting synopsis of the Stanford game. I told people after that game, that we actually defended fairly well, we shot the 3ball ok, and only had 13 turnovers for the game...right at our season avg. So why the loss? MISSED SHOTS IN THE PAINT. Traylor is normally a 70% FG shooter, but he missed a lot. Recall that 2 nights before, he WAS the hot hand vs. EKY, going 18 and 15. Ellis, god love him, has problems scoring against length, and Stanford had that disciplined 6'10, 240lb senior clogging the paint. And poor Ellis, god love him, isnt an above the rim player like Thomas Robinson. Nor does Ellis have Robinson's intense inner fire, that you could see in the plays that Robinson made. TRob exuded swagger and toughness. He was as much a Man in the paint as Cole Aldrich was.

Summary: Boil the Stanford loss down to: didnt make our high% looks in the paint. The FT discrepancy and foul-calls thing is always debatable, although seems to be a factor, as @KansasComet pointed out. Frank Mason would have had 6 more assists than he did if shots actually fell...I think Frank is getting the big pix. His teammates didnt make him look very good, and some of that happened to Naa (Nuu) this whole season (Tharpe looked pretty good last year playing with a bunch of veteran seniors, and actually improved his 3% this season...but OMG the defense.)

The other idea is that if Self ever went to zone-D predominantly, and starts practicing it--> what happens to the young'uns being brought up in the System? They start having to focus on zone-D (in the limited practice time the NCAA gives us)...and in 1 season, we have altered the developmental 'pipeline'...and basically turned our whole program into a zone-D program? That's a bigtime ramification, HEM, and my friendly thought is that its why Self wont wholesale change his base D, as that will alter the teachings to 2-3 years worth of kids?

@ralster This is exactly the point I've been trying to make, perhaps more eloquently made by yourself. The long term ramifications of making an "all in" switch to be a zone team for one year. From me, a day ago:

"we've essentially taken a year off where we didn't teach the fundamentals of intense, in your face M2M defense to a very young team. So be it this next season, or in 2 years, you've lost perhaps the most important year to teach your core defensive philosophy to rotation guys like Selden, Greene, Mason, Frankamp. I think the underlying reasoning here should be that you never make an "all in" switch for a single season, regardless of personnel."

@icthawkfan316 Yep. And it only makes the case that in recruiting, a system coach should target and market to attract guys that will flourish and buy-in to his approach. Everyone knows if you go play for Izzo or Coach K or Bill Self, you are going to play tough, you will play m2m D, and you will play team-oriented ball. If you dont want that, you go elsewhere. There should be NO regrets on either side. Its a calculated business decision. I mean its a HUGE decision on bringing the right kids in. I think Self has done an admirable job at it.

Me personally, I got spoiled totally watching Russell Robinson + Chalmers wreak absolute havoc on defense, which then ignited those transition breaks and highlight reel plays Jayhawk fans always loved. More competent D results in more of those "patented KU 20-2 runs" that seem to put the game away. Notice how we rarely put anybody away this season? Notice how we couldnt play lock-down D even in our own (sacred?) gym against SDSU?

The recurring mental imagery of Bill Self/KU basketball burned in my brain by repetetive dominance of execution is RussRob or Sherron in that defensive stance, right after a made-dunk by KU. Right there pestering the opposing guard. In your face.

As HEM & I have said...recruit the 10-50ish ranked guys...guys who thus WILL stay 2+yrs, and keep that pipeline flowing. Top50 athletes are top-level athletic types too, think of Thomas Robinson, Tyshawn, Elijah, RussRob, Greene, AW3. But they stay longer, which it should be clear, is what we need.

I cannot wait to see Yr2 of Selden, Mason, Greene, and more mpg for Lucas, AW3, Traylor. The whole enchilada gets better, top to bottom. Fate robbed us of seeing Yr2 of Embiid, very sad to say, as that kid was absolutely special.

@drgnslayr You mention Kentucky and Calipari. I agree that he seems to be at the forefront in adapting what he does to tailor to (so he can cater to) the OAD. The most interesting thing is that the Harrison Twins have decided to return to KY for another year. I mean that is BIG. And hugely to their credit.

Make no mistake: BOTH Bill Self and Calipari have said they favor a 2AD rule. Even the most elemental coach knows that experienced athletes are more competent and consistent than inexperienced athletes. Plus it cuts the recruiting-wars stress in half for Calipari, and lessens it somewhat for Self, who only needs 2-3 good players every season, unlike Calipari, who needs 4-5 every season, and 4-5 so good that they are capable of starting from Day 1 (basically top10-15 guys). Calipari looked like he aged 10yrs this season (added to last year's RobertMorrisExperience).

I actually rooted for KY once they beat WSU as it was almost a joy to see freshmen actually come together and "get it" as a team--maybe because KU was facing similar struggles. As Self said, Selden "gets it"...but other team members lagged. I think Wiggins got "it", and Mason really came around. Frankamp understood ball protection, although he had an ugly t.o. when he got tripped in the backcourt, gave up a gift layup. No worries, he'll get better.

Back to KY, my respect for the Harrisons went up a lot, I saw how disconnected they were to start with...but if their Tourney run was a sign of their turning the corner...man, keep an eye on KY next season (just as an analytical royalty program observer, hehe...).

RCJH

@KansasComet I agree with the explanation of the Stanford game. We missed a lot of bunnies and that's hard to pin on Self. We actually did adjust in the second half offensively. We were much better getting the ball to the high post to Tarik and Jamari in positions where they had space to get to the rim.

I will disagree a bit with @icthawkfan316. 10-50ish guys are still athletic but there's a noticeable difference between that level and OAD level talent. I think about the 2011 final against Kentucky. We struggled with length that game too, including T-Rob, missed a ton of short shots. I struggle to remember another KU game where the "athleticism deficit" seemed as big as it did during that game.

Agree about Calipari, though. You could see the recruiting took a toll on him. He can't keep that up and has said as much.

@jayhawk12 I don't think you're disagreeing with me. I'm not opposed to recruiting top 10 talent. I wouldn't want a team built around them, but as pieces to complete the puzzle they are fine.

@HighEliteMajor Your phrase to jayhawk12 about our "lack of zone offense cost us against Stanford" is 100% correct...and for the sake of fellow Jayhawks understanding the main issue of this team: Inexperienced execution. Tharpe's D gets no pass, but his offensive execution depended on frosh being in the right place also--> a problem poor Nuudir didnt have the previous season playing with seniors...I mean, we all thought he could have been IN the game vs. Michigan as a 2nd ball-handling guard to help EJ (& EJ's body of work makes that a debatable need, going into the Michigan game. He wasnt known as a t.o. machine, nor a 10sec violator). Recall a little bit of a trap early vs. Stanford...and Tharpe passes it to the scorer's table. Was there supposed to be a KU guy in that position, that didnt make the same read?

Zone-offense incompetence just killed us. I mean 3-4 of our losses were to teams that played zone D against us--recurring theme. Man, I knew after SDSU and Villanova, that we'd get tested by any team that had a zone-D pkg installed. Why not? Bill Self's kids are young newbies, and obviously dont have it figured out. We were not the 2008Champs with the entire Self-catalogue of zone-busting plays in-place, were we?

2013-14 Jayhawks were a shell of a product. Half-baked. Raw. Not competent in some key Self-system areas. Ripe for a Tourney loss. If you cant figure out how to beat what they are throwing at ya, you're done. Self knows. But the player's recognition of, and execution thereafter is the variable not only for each player's understanding, but also as a team...with guys needing to be on the same page, at the same time. No one going to help Nuu, will result in a t.o., very similar to WR and QB on the same page as the "hot read" on a blitz. Just like Jared Sullinger in a Withey/TRob trap in the post...Sully didnt know what to do. We got 3-4 t.o.'s off of that. Embiid learned to pass out of double teams, while pressure caused Ellis (as a soph) to give several "gift" turnovers. Absolutely maddening.

Maybe the biggest tell-tale sign of a youthful team's fans needing to "cap" their expectations a bit is the whole idea of moving target incompetencies. First we cant attack a zone. Then we cant defend. But then we can defend against Texas in a jekyll-hyde turnaround. But then we cannot beat smallball IowaState in the BigXII Tourney without Embiid...then the zone offense thing finally fells us, eventhough we played decent D, and hit 3s, while Stanford hit NO 3s. When you cant trust what kind of team will show up night to night, its a sign of inexperienced frosh inconsistencies.

All this stress unfortunately caused Self to gain like 20lbs (it seems). Stress-induced cortisol-effect wt gain is the worst kind. I worry for the man, he's my guy, dont want anybody else.. At least, in one sense, our season ending early put an end to that level of stress. Now if we just get the Turner Saga-Drama to end on Apr.30, we can focus on all our pieces for next season. Self gets not only a fresh start, but has a critical mass of experience in his returnees. And Cliff + Kelly DO possess tough, aggressive on-court personalities. Just exactly what we need to sprinkle in to our mix.

@ralster

"The most interesting thing is that the Harrison Twins have decided to return to KY for another year. I mean that is BIG. And hugely to their credit.

Make no mistake: BOTH Bill Self and Calipari have said they favor a 2AD rule. "

I hate to admit it, but I actually give a 'hats off' to Calipari for getting a big chunk of his team back for next year. They will be tough to beat.... but I'm always glad to see kids stay in school, and it says something to his relationship with his players that they give up the quick cash to come back.

And it sounds like they will be carrying a chip on their shoulders to get it done next year. That is something we should have had in 2013... when we were stocked with seniors and the best shot-blocker in the country. We should have had something to prove after finishing runner up the year before. To this day I still can't believe no one made a single peep about finishing 2nd the year before.

I'll never understand why we didn't put it together in 2013. I know fingers point to EJ.... and he definitely cost us. But we should have been a more-dominant team that year. We definitely didn't have the best offensive players over other years... but we should have been able to lock down defense and win a championship. That was before the NCAA decided to hamper lock down defense with their rules adjustments.

There is a good chance we will have a TAD system in place within 3 to 4 years. The new NBA commish... Silver... promised it was his priority to bump the age up a year for incoming players. And he mentioned bringing the NCAA with him to iron out the details within the league.

@drgnslayr the only reason the twins are coming back is because they dropped so low in the draft, or they would be gone. jMO

Two main items:

1. I have not suggested that we go to zone primarily as an overall defensive philosophy. However, if our personnel are so incompetent at man that to have a chance to win a national championship in a particular season, we have to go zone primarily, then we should. I said it back in late November. In the last 11 or 12 seasons, no team had given up as many points per game as KU and won a national championship other than UNC in 2005 and 2009 (I went off defensive ppg ranking to take into account rule interpretation changes). As some of you may recall, I advocated a change offensively to begin the tourney because, with such a poor defensive team, we had little chance to advance unless we simply outscored opponents (pace of game, etc.). I just ask that Self include zone as many other coaches do in his approach, much like he did in 2008 when we won the title. Other coaches find time; we can find time. Other coaches use it -- heck, Calipari changed the entire momentum of the NC game shifting to zone.

2. Please, folks, don't live under the delusion that "missed bunnies" were the reason we lost to Stanford. This is a red herring. Don't believe that it was out of Self's control. I've posted on this before. Coach Self, after the Stanford game, said that most shots were contested and that the "The majority of them we missed, length really affected us."

Again, we can say we missed shots. But it is a coach's job to use scheme and strategy to get open shots. Look at what Wiggins said:

This from a KU sports article - “Wherever I went I saw three people. They were keying in on me,” said Wiggins, who, like the rest of his teammates, struggled against Stanford’s 1-3-1 and 2-3 zones. He was guarded by 6-7 Josh Huestis the times the Cardinal played man. "Whenever I went right, I saw three Stanford guys. Whenever I went left I saw three Stanford guys. That’s no excuse. You are supposed to find different ways to score and different ways to get your teammates involved. I failed to do that tonight.”

Wiggins didn't fail. Coach Self failed. Dawkins kicked his ass. The brilliance of Johnny Dawkins was nothing more than he looked at what other teams did to beat us, added his personal twist based on his personnel, and put his team in a position to win.

Somehow, not only was Wiggins locked down, but our bigs had their shots contested too.

Self with the patented excuse after Stanford: “It’s a little bit different pressure,” said Self, who fell to 7-2 in round of 32 games. “We’re a young team, and we certainly played young.” Of course, UK was young too.

Another link about our stagnant offense, and another observer noting how Stanford's zone stopped Wiggins.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/2014/3/23/5539692/andrew-wiggins-march-madness-2014-stanford ↗

It is simply a cop out to say that our shots didn't fall, and to defend Self as if he had nothing to do with it makes no sense in the face of the evidence. Ask yourself, what did coach Self do to help KU, strategically and schematically, to win vs. Stanford?

One thing - using the press, finally, at the 10 minute mark.

I say finally because Stanford didn't have a point guard. No, not like us -- they didn't have a solid primary ballhandler. But Self waited until the 10 minute mark to press?

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

This is not arm chair quarterbacking. This is simple. It is something that your local high school coach would exploit.

And before you give Self more of a pass, remember, he chose to start Naadir Tharpe vs. Stanford. Let that sink in.

@drgnslayr I think the issue with EJ's 2013 Hawks were that they had Withey (220lbs) and Kevin Young (180lbs) in the paint. And frosh Ellis. NO BRUTE FACTOR. And I've spoken ad nauseum of there being a lack of a 2nd athletic combo guard to play alongside EJ. EJ needed Tyshawn, and both made each other better.

Stated another way: Why was there no "chip" on the shoulder with EJ's final team? --> Because the aggressive and emotional heart of the team departed when Thomas Robinson and Tyshawn Taylor departed. Never-say-die attitude that only died after the Kentucky game was over. Personally, I will never forget the heart and fight in those 2012 RunnerUp Jayhawks, and shall root for each of those guys forever, just like I will for the 2008 guys. Special teams! Special chemistry. Recognize when its there, and realize when its not there.

@HighEliteMajor What is the easiest shot to make in the game of basketball? A layup or a dunk. Last I checked 2 missed bunnies would equal 4 points. We lost the game by 3 points. The game tying shot was in the air. Selden scored 2 points. Isn't he a starter and a 5 Star recruit. Perry Ellis scored 9 Points. Isn't he a starter and a 5 star recruit. Black had a great game with 18, but he fouled out with 5 minutes remaining in the game. Not much he could offer Coach Self in crunch time? Yet, you continue to focus on Wiggins and Self. This is a successful basketball team. A team that I support, good or bad, win or lose. To refer to my beloved Jayhawks as "so incompetent"? Really? No excuse for that. They are transitioning from boy to men. A process that I thoroughly enjoy watching. You say "Dawkins kicked Self's Ass". Again, 3 point game, tying shot in the air. Never saw a 3 point Ass Kicking.

No one is giving Coach Self a free pass. I see effort every year from Coach Self. Winning the Conference 10 years in a row is a special feat. I am sure he is more upset about losing in the tournament than I could ever be. Does it do anyone any good to complain about lack of a zone defense in late April? I doubt it. By now Coach Self has moved on to next year's team like he should. It is afterall his job to Coach the Kansas Jayhawks Basketball Team. If you are not on the bench, in the heat of battle, it is Arm Chair Quarterbacking.

"Of Course UK was young too"! I thought with you, it was Championship or Bust? Which is it? UK lost, they did the same thing our 2012 team did. Made it to the Championship game based on a lot of late game heroics, but in the end they lost. I will take my chances with a Bill Self coached team. I like the program he has built here at Kansas. I think we will have another exciting ride and I am looking forward to it. Feel free to cheer for all the other teams you speak so glowingly of.

This has been another ripping good read.

It distills to:

a) keep playing m2m with very rare junk zones, because it has gotten us 80% winning, 10 league titles, and a ring;

b) play some m2m with a lot more aggressives zones, because some teams that have won more rings have done tis;

c) no one is really saying go the Full Boeheim and zone all the time with some very rare m2m.

Folks are overlooking a real defensive innovation of this past season that may change the game.

It involves switching between two zones, or switching between zone and m2m during a single possession. Let's call this "Morphing Defense" to avoid the confusion with switching m2m defense.I never saw any offense handle morphing defense well. Its tricky to defend this way, but to me it is the way to go on defense under the new rules. Here is why.

Under the new rules, offense is now more than ever a game of shoot the trey, drive the lane for high percentage 2 and a FT, or alley-oop for the 100% two.

Morphing defense nearly ends the alley-lop, because you cannot tell when they are going to morph on you wreck the timed play that requires offenders to know where the defenders are going to be to time the pass and the jump.

Morphing defense may be even harder on driving the lane, because the driver no longer knows when the lane he is looking at is going to morph out of existence.

The morphing defense also is problematic for trifectation, because it confuses curl screens and ball screens to get open looks for treys. And these are the two most popular ways other than kick outs to get open trey looks. Morphing defense also makes the kick out shooter at least uneasy whether the defensive recovery will be m2m or not.

I am so bullish on morphing defenses that I want to see morphing defenses used end to end. I want every defensive possession (note: I introduce the notion of a defensive possession here to convey the idea that we possess the MOFOs on defense, not just the ball on offense) to start in a 1-1-1-2 alignment before the ball is about to be inbounded. As the ball is inbounded sometimes maintains 1-1-1-2, sometimes morphs into 1-2-1-1, other times into 2-2-1, other times m2m. Once half court is reached it falls into a m2m that morphs into a zone, or vice versa. Some times it morphs 5 seconds,sometimes it morphs every 10 seconds, sometimes just once.

The goal is for the offense to have make one or two defensive reads in full court, then one or two defensive reads in half court. I am pretty convinced that no D1 offense can impose its offensive game on that much defensive morphing. The offense is outside its comfort zone the entire 40 minutes of play. The pressing does not need to be balls to the wall all of the time. Sometimes high pressure, sometimes not. The game is to disrupt with misrecognition and spike the TOs and the "discomfort" level.

Morphing defense is THE END of offensive players getting in zones. It is the end of OAD offenses ever winning the disruption stat unless they play morphing defense, too.

I'm happy with Self's system as it is.

If I were UConn's fans I would be happy with what Calhoun and Kevin Ollie Ball.

If I were a UK fan, I would be happy with CalBall.

If I were a Duke fan, I would be happy with ConsonantBall.

But all of these offenses are going to get wrecked by morphing defense.

The bizarre elegance of morphing defense is that even its breakdowns ensure recognition problems for every kind of offense being run.

The calculus of morphing defense goes something like this. They can't effectively attack what they cannot read effectively. Defense always has the edge in morphing.

Frankly, I am amazed Self has not gone to this long before. His junk 3-2 is a very limited form of morphing defense itself.

I can usually come up with a counter for any defense, but morphing defense is an absolute bitch to counter.

There will be one.

But we could win a lot of games before it is figured out.

@HighEliteMajor HEM, I think your overall premise is very well put, and its definitely something deserving serious consideration by Self (we hope). Even if just from a variability standpoint, making Self's teams more unpredictable, and harder to scout, harder to prepare for. I really like that your proposals would accomplish alot of that.

I DO think that we could spend maybe 20-30% of our time incorporating other defensive strategies...and maybe now with a core group of experienced players (who've tasted defeat), we may have a bit more practice time to incorporate more advanced tactics, and broaden our repertoire. And have the player-motivation to allow focused learning...

And we can differ in the severity of the "problem", but your quote "if our personnel are so incompetent at m2m that to have a chance to win a national championship in a particular season..." touches on perhaps THE main problem in the season: defense. Would you consider it mutually exclusive for a ball club to be soo incompetent in an area, to be a 'legit' title contender in that same season? It seems to have a mutually exclusive feel to it...Also, we were pretty incompetent at our zone-busting offense. What a double fork in us, is what I say.

The other white elephant at the table in our discussion here about Self's stubborness or flexibility...is that decent coaches, with BETTER ball clubs than Embiid-less KU also flamed out and got beat--Billy Donovan's FL got beat and didnt even score 55pts (shots didnt fall?), . Didnt even make the Final Four. I find it almost unfair to blast Self for what he did with such a green team, when well-known coaches with more experienced, D-playing squads ALSO DID NOT MAKE THE FINAL 4. One could say that Calipari might be the most 'practiced' at getting the most out of freshmen, young talent...but that is only a partially oranges-oranges comparison, as his frosh are the most ready to play from Day 1 compared to anybody elses frosh. And one could counterpoint that Self's 3 uberfrosh (Wiggy, Selden, Biid) were his best players. But then you could countercounterpoint that the fact Ellis and Tharpe, both returning players were not up to par on both ends of the court, is a sign of bad coaching, right?

Arizona doesnt make the Final 4 with a loaded squad that plays D. Michigan doesnt make it. Louisville doesnt make it. Does the fact that it was KY knocking them out bring up its own discussion? MichiganState, a tough veteran, upperclassmen team, with everybody healthy...doesnt make the Final 4. Syracuse...no.1 ranked for most of the season, doesnt make the Final 4. I'm still not sure how to stratify WSU's perfect season with that S.o.Sched asterisk...They were a competent team...Villanova got beat, looking overmatched in their final game. Man, we looked overmatched against Stanford.

Finally, the point about the Stanford game and finding different ways to get teammates involved and Self's limited capabiltiy team getting scouted accurately by Dawkins, who "looked at what other teams did to beat KU"--is what any opposing coach would do, right? Not just Dawkins. What if Self's timeouts and playcalls were made within the framework of what he thought his kids could reliably execute (with their limited pkgs)...and Mason feeding the bigs, and Wiggins attacking were the gameplan. The point has been made that Mason could have had 6 more assists if paint buckets were made, right? Wiggins did NOT get favorable whistles, even getting 2pts taken off the scoreboard.

I just cannot put this team's multiple-area incompetencies in any NC discussion. No, I think KU deserved to sit at home, as there was much better offense, defense, and toughness being displayed by almost every team that made the Elite8. The operating assumption is that Self did what he could within the Oct.-March timeframe with this squad. The statistical shortcomings tell the story. This team was NOT championship material, especially without Embiid.

Why did zone defenses bother kill this team, while the 2008 Champs devoured zone defenses? Touch that answer, and this discussion ends. Competence vs Incompetence, but same coach. What's the difference between 2008 and 2013? Both had multiple MickeyDs and top50 guys. Was Self flexible or inflexible in 2008? Or was he the same in 2008? How was Self in 2012's Champgame run? Flexible or inflexible or the same?

(All this a friendly point-counterpoint debate)

Now we could start an entirely different discussion about what some other coach would have done with these same 2013-14 Jayhawks...maybe the result would have played out differently, or not. Who knows?

What this thread shows, in a macro sense, is that no matter which coach LOSES a game, he will be under scrutiny. Rightly or wrongly only depends on your point of view and personal take on the big picture.

I think its safe to say almost all KU fans want an Elite8 or Final4 type run (more than just another Conf championship)...and honestly, being a top10 squad and a 1 or 2seed every single year it is reasonable to "hope" (not "expect", there's a difference in connotation) for an Elite8 or Final4 run with such a team.

Regarding defense, and the 2 losses we had despite scoring 83+ points...If we had better D to get those 2 more wins, we likely get a 1seed, and the whole path changes, doesnt it? And Self looks like a champ for getting a group of kiddies to a 1seed, while Calipari took his group of kiddies from preseason No.1 to out of the top 25.

I also think in these discussions we get too polarized, wanting to paint each other in the half-empty or half-full camps...Its not that easy. Maybe the majority is in the middle: People may like Self's system and our W/L record and BigXII dominance, but are also uneasy about early exits in the Tourney.

@jaybate 1.0 I've read this 4 times. This reminds me of a Chinese fire drill. Mass chaos maybe.

Incompetent? Green, young, nervous, inexperienced, etc..would better describe a team that replaced 5 starters. Incompetent? So disrespectful. I am proud of this young group. Who knows how far they could have gone with a lucky bounce or two and Embiid in the lineup. All of the sudden, defense gets a lot better.

@KansasComet if you fall back on missed shots as the reason for a loss, you can do that every loss. We lost to UNI because we missed shots. VCU too. Bradley? Yep. Bucknell? Of course. The converse must thus be true. The only reason we beat Memphis was that we made shots.

Self has defined his defense by their field goal percentage defense before. That assumes that shots are contested. Contested shots are different than open shots. Against Stanford, is it even debatable that we had very few open looks? Why were we faced with a situation where we got so few open looks?

You focus on me saying "so incompetent." This is the context -- "However, if our personnel are so incompetent at man that to have a chance to win a national championship in a particular season, we have to go zone primarily, then we should."

The point is to illustrate that if our man defense is so bad that we can't win a title with it, shouldn't we explore alternatives? Wasn't that the case this season?

I admire your defense of Self and all things KU. And you're right, if we make more shots, we probably win. I just think that it goes a bit deeper than that, that's all.

@ralster

" I think the issue with EJ's 2013 Hawks were that they had Withey (220lbs) and Kevin Young (180lbs) in the paint. And frosh Ellis. NO BRUTE FACTOR"

This years UCONN didn't have a brute factor... didn't have near the interior players we had on that team.

I agree though... the big fighters in 2012 were TT and TRob. But then, when players like that leave, someone has to pick up the slack. And we'll never have a more senior team than that one. Outside of BMac... everyone else graduated.

We should have been able to grind out victories. We shouldn't have really needed a dominant force on offense. Defense should have won it for us that year. Kind of makes me question the old saying... "offense wins games, defense wins championships!"

@drgnslayr One thing that struck me about this team is that they weren't very smart. I don't know about academically smart, but they weren't very basketball smart. They were athletic - gifted, in fact. But they seemed to vanish a lot on defense and when they weren't running that bizarre shuffle on offense, they acted like they didn't know where they were or what they were doing half the time. Much of that can be attributed to youth. I think Frankamp can help that situation greatly. Whether he's a point guard or not, I don't know, but when he's in the game you can practically see the wheels turning. He seems to have very good court vision and he doesn't throw the ball away.

@Crimsonorblue22

That is exactly how it will appear and feel to an opposing offense, too, and this is why this paradigm shift will temporarily destroy the offensive dimension of basketball. A morphing defense causes far fewer minutes for an offense to recognize effectively how to attack effectively. This means that unless the opposing team plays the same morphing defense, your offense gets way more minutes of playing and scoring with effective recognition. This biases you to win. It is the unfair advantage everyone is always looking for.

"Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man."--George Patton

Playing a zone every time down the floor is the stupidest form of basketball defense, because it is the purest "fixed fortification" in basketball. The offense knows exactly which player will be where on the floor each time down the floor.

There are two reasons the zone works so well. First, it keeps the bigs near the basket rim protecting ALL THE TIME; i.e., not time waisted guarding high posts. This lowers many opposing team's shooting percentages and increases rebounding effectiveness. The second reason zone works so well for full zone teams is that that most coaches and players don't practice, or play against it full time and so coaches have troubles communicating how to break zones and players have troubles mastering recognizing seams and range of motion and aren't comfortable with all the double teaming that results with inappropriate action and penetration. All scorers say they have to get to a place where they are reacting and not thinking. A zone is a different look that makes scorers, especially unseasoned ones, think instead of react. The outside shooters usually quit thinking the quickest, and get back to reacting quickest, but even take a trip or two to adjust. For this reason, zones can be very effective early in a game and because games are unfolding complexities with time constraints, they are inordinately sensitively dependent on initial conditions. A 5-10 point lead early from frustrated recognition, rather than from just having a cold stretch, completely turns the dynamic of the rest of the unfolding game in the favor of the team that is zoning and getting the early lead. But over the course of a game a skilled coach and patient players inexorably get comfortable with the zone and inexorably find the place to attack it and the player to attack it with. The only time this does not happen is if you have such inferior talent that your three impact players hold no MUA, even after they get comfortable (frankly a rarity, if the coach is any good at positioning the impact players against the zone after the first time out). But in that case, where no MUA is held anywhere, unless you can disrupt even more defensively than the zone team, then you lose regardless of what you do defensively, or offensively. Boeheim likely gets most of his wins with early leads from troubled recognition and holds onto those leads with controlling the defensive glass and giving fewer second shots, while at the same time getting to the foul line more frequently than the opponent. That is the winning calculus of zone.

But if you have two 40% trifectates, 3 impact men (two with MUA), a guy who can either score or feed from the high post at the FT line, an explosive, disruptive m2m that hedges and helps away on scoring opps, and two bigs that can glass vacc big time, then you beat the zone 9 times out of ten, no matter how good they are at playing it, because over the course of the game, your hedging, helping m2m is creating fewer and fewer open looks, as it learn the opponents preferred offensive actions, while your offense's recognition problems are melting away and your team is getting more and more open looks.

However, playing a non-switching m2m every time down the floor is the second stupidest form of basketball defense, because the offense knows exactly which man will be on which man and so knows exactly who holds the greatest MUA and so knows who to stretch to get open, and who to screen to get open, and against whom and where to drive the ball to get a bucket and a free throw.

But the reality is that good coaches don't coach m2m without variable help; i.e., without hedging and switching, and changing who guards who from time to time without switching.

The obvious reason great coaches play m2m is m2m is that it is easier to turn an m2m into a mobile fortification than it is a zone. Good m2m defense constantly mixes up help, i.e., who hedges and who switches, based on MUAs. About all you can do with a zone is intermittently trap at the same locations with the same combinations of guys.

Early in a season Self forces players to learn how to fight over screens; i.e., he holds hedging and switching to a minimum. Next he introduces hedging. Next he introduces switching. Some times he will reverse the order based on which players need to learn what, or based on some particularly tough early opponent. But by an large he brings in the defense in pieces just as he does the offense. By March, the the defense, if the players are good natural defenders that buy into defense first, KU guards everywhere on the floor well, and ramps intensity of defensive pressure up and down to keep the opponent off balance, while conserving as much of the energy budget for offense as possible. Remember, everyone in a zone has to move side to side whenever the ball moves. In m2m, at least 2 guys are moving very little with each pass. So, while m2 is very taking to play at a high level of pressure, at average levels of pressure more frequenty played at, a lot of energy is being conserved in m2m that is being wasted in zone. Zone requires a constant expenditure of an even level of energy. m2m requires short bursts of hard guarding and then lots down times. It is these downtimes that favor the explosive highly athletic player and allow him to do spectacular things. And as the game wears on, you see m2m teams continuing to make explosive plays, whereas zone teams, if they have been being subjected to steady ball movement forcing all of them to move constantly, make fewer and fewer explosive plays on defense.

Having laid out the strengths and weaknesses of zone and m2m, I will summarize that both have weaknesses to attack and the great underlying strength of both is when they are making recognition difficult for offenses.

Repeated for emphasis: DEFENSES ARE MOST EFFECTIVE NOT WHEN THE OPPONENT IS LOOKING FOR THE WEAKNESS IN WHAT HE RECOGNIZES, BUT WHEN THE OPPONENT IS TRYING TO RECOGNIZE WHAT HE IS ATTACKING.

A corollary is: OFFENSES NEVER SCORE WHILE THEY ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY ARE ATTACKING.

Henry Iba, Dean Smith and Larry Brown 'recognized' the problem created by teams switching from zone to m2m and back again on succeeding possessions, or even during possessions, and tried to partially solve the problem by developing the hi-lo offense, that was elaborated into the Carolina Passing offense. It was/is an single offense that is run against both zone and m2m.

But the Iba/Smith/Brown solution is only a partial solution to the problem. It keeps teams from having to learn to offenses and decided which one to run after a switch; that far it is an effective solution.

But it does not solve the player's recognition problem of having to recognize the defensive set in order to choose the different options ("actions") within the single offense that are best to attack, and those options vary in the high low/Carolina passing offense. Against Stanford it took three quarters of the game for our bigs to recognize the zone and get a post man to the free throw line every time down the floor and pass to him, so that he can face basket and choose the right action: shoot, drive, feed low post, or fake drive and kick out. And different zones require the ball to go elsewhere than the high post.

So: recognition of defense is still the Achilles heel of ALL offenses, even when the same offensive sets are used, the optimal actions within them require correct recognition to select them.

THE REASON TO MOVE TO MORPHING DEFENSES IS THAT THE NEW RULES ENCOURAGE OFFENSES TO PURSUE SCORING AT THE FOUL LINE.

The old advantage of m2m--variable help--is diminished to practically no advantage at all by the new rules. Self and other coaches solved the problem by going to non-disruption defense, low pressure defense to keep the other team off the foul line, while using superior impact players to force KU onto the foul line more. The best teams this past season were the ones that created the biggest positive margin in fouling; i.e., in keeping the opponent off the line and in getting one's own team onto the line. Low pressure, non-disruption defense accomplished that by minimizing fouling, and by leaving the most gas in the tank at the other end for impact plays that drew high percentage buckets and a FT.

Alas, the good coaches figured out the defensive solution to that scheme was pretty simple. Rough the high profile OADs that can't afford to get injured up big time and don't foul the rest of their players. It was a beautiful solution. There was zero chance that Wiggins was willing to get injured, once it became clear that in the Madness, a Stanford guy was willing to put him down hard every time he played for a high percentage bucket with a FT. The unspoken rule of the new game today is: OADs cannot afford to finish all the time. The injury risk is too high. And if your best guy can afford to take an injury more than the opposing team's best OAD can afford to take an injury, then all you have to do is prove to him early that your are going to make him pay on the way, at the rim, and after, then the coach that wants to keep recruiting OADs and the OAD have no choice but leave the OAD out on the perimeter as a decoy most of the game.

So why is morphing defense the answer to OADs that can't finish against teams with best players that can afford to finish?

Because morphing defense sharply ramps up the other team's TOs and keeps the other team out of its comfort zone to a point that one can afford to park the OAD on the perimeter to avoid injury and only use him in situations where he can create a little space and shoot without getting injured.

Offense for OAD teams is entirely about how to score without risking injury to the OADs. Its a very different kind of offensive game. It is much more like what the NBA plays. The great athletes of the NBA could score on each other at will, but don't because of the unwritten rules about who will and won't be permitted at the rim. Superstars get the most lenient treatment, but even they are at risk of getting hammered, if they abuse the privilege. This is why all the great perimeter scorers in the NBA eventually have to learn to be great at the create a space game that slayr has attributed definitively to Kobe Bryant.

In D1, the OADs get almost as much of a sweet whistle as the NBA superstars do. But there is one big difference. The early rounds of the NCAA tournament are loaded with teams that don't have to give a damn about hammering an OAD. These teams have one and only one shot and they are not playing to be treated according to a 'code' next season the way the NBA players have to do even in the playoffs. If you are an NBA pro and take Lebron down to win a best of seven series, you have to come back and face the music for the rest of your that you want to be as long as possible. And you know that if you take Lebron down at the rim, you are basically a walking deadman for the reset of your career. The payback will come. So: the NBA has a code. The superstar gets to dazzle the audience from time to time at the iron, but not all the time. The non starts get to go to iron sometimes, but not all the time. Bottom line, in the NBA, you have to learn how to create "safe" space, and score; that is what is permitted on a regular basis without pay back. That is how men play the game professionally. If you can beat me creating space, then hard guarding maybe, but no ending your career. It is a code that butters everyone's bread for the long haul.

But in D1?

You've got to watch out for the merchandize, even if you don't abuse your ability to get to the hole, because there are a bunch of guys that are not so much One and Done (OAD), as One and Gone (OAG). This one tourney appearance was their gig. Afterwards, its out to the real world, not the NBA.

In today's game, defense, after a brief move to the back burner, should come quickly back to the front burner as morphing defense.

Its the surest way to win by having your OAD and having to underuse him too.

@nuleafjhawk

Sorry... I was talking about our 2013 team that was packed with seniors!

Funny you mention they (this year's team) were not the smartest with basketball IQ. And outside of running the shuffle on offense, looked lost. I kind of remember the 2013 team doing that on offense and getting stuck. When we were unable to engage BMac, we seemed lost.

Personally... I'd like to see us use some of the things the Mayor uses at ISU on offense. But then, you have to have players that really hunger for a one-on-one offensive attack. Fred is extremely good at creating rapid forming iso's. If you watch tape of his offense you will see an area of the court (on offense) that is empty, and then a slasher comes off a back screen or merely sets good position to take an interior pass and then they finish with a one-on-one near the basket. Really every player on their team could finish near the hole in a one-on-one situation. I think Fred carefully recruits players that are explosive and capable in these situations. It pays off.

ISU can do anything in that offensive set. Fred can draw up anything to work, there is total flexibility. And they have the potential to dribble-drive, too. His offense is a closer mimic to a true NBA set.

It would be nice to see us incorporate some of his tweaks on offense. We need a more open structure so we have more to counter teams that put up stiff defense.

The problem we have is we are too structured and too rigid. Our offense works great for most of the year, and we put up good numbers, so we get too confident running the same set from November thru March. But the teams that advance in March are those teams that can bend and flex to meet the moment. The teams that advance come out and execute a specific plan to beat a specific team. This is where we get nailed. In recent years it is a known entity that to beat KU you do it on the perimeter by putting high guard pressure on our 1 and 2s. Teams do that because we don't recruit true PGs... we recruit combo guards.

We will always be susceptible to an upset loss from a team that has quality, athletic guards who know how to apply pressure using x-axis basketball. If we had played UCONN this past year they would have kicked our arse.

Like I've said a million times now... until we get high-level guard play from our 1 and 2 (especially at point), we won't be bringing home any trophies in April.

@jaybate 1.0

""Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man."--George Patton

Playing a zone every time down the floor is the stupidest form of basketball defense, because it is the purest "fixed fortification" in basketball. The offense knows exactly which player will be where on the floor each time down the floor. "

Love the Patton reference! Very interesting post, JB!

I never really thought about it before, but it makes sense for opposing teams to play rough ball with potential OADs... especially the players that tend to try to avoid contact in the first place.

Your point on 'fixed fortifications' is completely valid. The key to operating an effective M2M is to bring high pressure in certain situations. So suddenly a guard gets pinched into a double-team and the rest of the defense monitors where that free guard goes and hedges over to flex into a kind of zone defense. This is true NBA-style M2M. The defense is not going to stop every play or come close. The defense looks for X-amount of situations in a game that can turn their way and create TOs or bad shots against the shot clock. By creating X-amount of those situations in a game, they consider their defense successful or not. It is known that on some nights a hot offense will override everything. So it is all about creating X-amount of situations that are potential defensive win possessions. And if they meet those numbers and still get beat by a hot shooting team, they get beat knowing they still played good defense. This is crucial in the league. To not change something that isn't broke and to know how they are beat because all teams in the NBA have hot nights where they are unstoppable.

Some of those X-amount of situations involve keeping certain players from scoring from their sweet spot and situation on the floor. The NBA is all about statistics and forcing players to create offense in their less effective manner.

Think about all that... and then think about college basketball... and how unsophisticated it is. And how it doesn't really take a sophisticated plan to win games, even in March. Any NBA team would shellac the very best D1 teams.... not just because they have the most talent... but because they know how to execute a sophisticated strategy.

Sometimes I think we just expect too much from college players. These are kids and they are still playing kids basketball. The NBA is man's league. No Boys Allowed.

And this gets into the concept of Self being successful in the NBA. He hasn't shown the level of sophistication needed in execution in college to make it in the NBA. Doesn't mean he is incapable... but D1 just can't produce that level of sophistication. That is why all these D1 coaches are a total crap shoot at the next level. And that is why there are big time surprises on who makes it and who doesn't. Perhaps Ollie is a better candidate than Self as a pro coach. First... he knows the league better having been in the league for 15 years as a player. Self never made it in the league. It's a different game. Might as well be soccer for Self... maybe even better because he would approach soccer with a completely open mind. Much of what Self does in D1 wouldn't work in the league.

@drgnslayr oh - I'm sorry. Actually, I got up at 4:00 am this morning and have been crazy busy at work (for a change). I really need to read more thoroughly before I comment.

@nuleafjhawk

It actually worked out well with your comment... it tied elements of this year's team with the year before! We still had those moments of running stagnant offense and weaves that lead to a knot instead of scoring fabric.

@HighEliteMajor No need to spin it. You described their play using the words "so incompetent". I described your comments as "so disrespectful". No confusion. I am not falling back on missed shots. You said no one could make an argument for Coach Self? I disagree.

@KansasComet - I do understand your point of view. This was a horribly bad defensive team. I wish I could dress it up.

And I wish I could convince you that it is a coach's job to strategize and scheme to put guys in positions to succeed, and that strategy and scheming leads directly to outcomes. Most of the time, all teams have highly skilled players. Coaches can make the difference.

You say -- "Does it do anyone any good to complain about lack of a zone defense in late April? I doubt it. By now Coach Self has moved on to next year's team like he should."

I'm sorry, I suppose. I kind of thought this stuff, the debate, the discussion, the interaction, was enjoyable for most here (including you). @konkeyDong and a couple others had asked me to post what I would do specifically. That's what I did.

And respectfully, coach Self should not move on. Coach Self should lose sleep at night analyzing why his teams have lost in March, and then take corrective action to fix it, whatever that is.

I suggest that there is no evidence that Self has changed anything substantive in the last five seasons. It's system, system, system. That system has been good for 10 Big 12 titles and much, much success. Great credit is due. That system has largely failed in the NCAA tournament given the roster talent, in my opinion. Scrutiny is thus justified.

Holy crap .. look at the basketball IQ in this room. I read the posts above of @ralster, @drgnslayr, @jaybate, @icthawkfan316, @crimsonorblue22, @Jayhawk12, @nuleafjhawk, @truehawk93, @VailHawk, and yourself -- it makes me think. It increases my basketball IQ. It challenges the way I watch games.

So I'll probably engage this stuff until tip-off next season.

@HighEliteMajor Coach Self has lost in March the same way that Coach K, Coach Donovan (4 straight Elite 8's, zero titles), Coach Izzo, Coach Calipari, Coach Williams, and numerous top level coaches have lost. The other team had more points at the end of the game. It is a game of will, skill, and luck. Coach Self fields an excellent team each and every year. As I have said before, the tournament format is flawed and not designed to determine the best team in Division I Basketball. It is a business designed to generate interest and revenue. It's big box office. Winning the NCAA Tournament feels great, losing it in this particular format is understandable.

In the past 10 years in your opinion, if it were a 32 team tournament, how many championships would Kansas have?

I do understand your frustration. I respect you right to have your opinion. I learn a lot from reading your thoughts and I am glad you take the time to express your opinions/concerns in this forum. I think you hold on to the losses too long. They hurt, they all hurt. We have a lot look forward to. I think Coach Self is back to recruiting aggressive players. Players that will kick your heart out!

@HighEliteMajor I enjoy the debate. I might not always agree, but sometimes I do. Sometimes I disagree, but after looking at a different perspective I change my mind. Other times we just agree to disagree. It's what makes this board fun; it's challenging. It's a group of fans who follow the team passionately. Passionately enough to take time out of their lives to share their opinions and to read others'. Many often re-watch games to help them better understand what they are seeing or why things happen the way they do.

And I don't see anything wrong with describing our M2M defense as incompetent. They couldn't defend to the level we expect. This wasn't the first green team Self has had. He's replaced all 5 starters 3 times in his tenure, yet this group was by far the worst defensive team he's fielded. They couldn't competently execute their defensive assignments.

To refer to 18 - 22 year olds as incompetent is not cool with me. These are young student athletes trying the best that they can. If I were a young man on this team, and a fan referred to me and/or my teammates as incompetent, which is pretty much an insult to their effort and intelligence, I would tell the fan that they were the incompetent one. Must be easy to sit back from the armchair and criticize this group of young men? I wonder what the players think of us?

@KansasComet Seriously, what is your problem here? Do you feel the need to twist my words because you don't like what you read? I didn't call any kid incompetent, did I? Read what I wrote. You can create whatever narrative you want. I said, once again, "However, if our personnel are so incompetent at man that to have a chance to win a national championship in a particular season, we have to go zone primarily, then we should."

I can't help you if you refuse comprehend that.

You said above, that I didn't address, the following:
"Is it right to say "I don't want Wiggins", and then say "forget everything bad I said about Wiggins", only to flip again when the end result is not realized? That's not cool. "

I don't follow - I've been pretty consistent. I don't like presumed OADs. Generally, I don't want them here. I like Wiggins personally, he's a great kid, and I was very impressed with him. I have written about both topics. I think you can dislike the concept of presumed OADs, but like the person. Is that hard to understand? Not only that, but I have defended Wiggins' performance against Stanford. I have no idea where you're coming from.

Again, I'm looking for a defense of coach Self's strategy and scheme against Stanford. You apparently aren't interested in offering that defense. I would love to hear it. Your response is basically that we missed shots, yet you ignore what Self said about our "shots" and what Wiggins said about having guys in his face the entire time.

I do respect your opinion but I don't understand your fixation here.

@HighEliteMajor Are you referring to my last post? That is not addressed to anyone? You appear to be upset by something? You said right before Wiggins made his decision to attend KU, that you did not want him. Please don't twist it now. You said it, own it. I don't have a problem, I have an opinion. Refusal to comprehend is laughable. I know exactly what I read, and I have the right to form my opinions and express them. I do not feel the need to twist your words. I feel the need to speak my mind. You know exactly where I am coming from. I don't understand the tone you appear to have taken? You mad bro?

@HighEliteMajor I imagine it was in response (although not directed at) me, given I had last posted on it. Whatever. This is the type of thing that annoyed me on kusports...the cheerleading crowd. If you don't have your pom poms out, if you criticize the team in the least, then you're less of a fan. Or you're not a good human being. Or whatever the implication is here. Nothing here has been over the line. I think that is apparent from the lack of outrage by the vast majority, save one.

For the record, you can be incompetent at something without lacking effort & intelligence. For example, I'm fairly certain I'd make an incompetent shuttle pilot. This group, for whatever reason, was incompetent at adequately and consistently playing M2M defense. Doesn't mean that they weren't trying. Doesn't mean they're stupid. From the literal definition of the word - incompetent: lacking necessary ability or skills; inadequate to or unsuitable for a particular purpose; lacking the qualities needed for effective action. There is nothing in there that insults effort or intelligence. But those definitions pretty much describe our defense to a "T".

@icthawkfan316 Not directed at you. My opinion.

I've read all the post on this thread and just want to let everyone know I'm staying out of it.

@JRyman

Mee too.

@HighEliteMajor Personally this is a very interesting thread...and in all fairness to HEM, I have also called our youthful/frosh/inexperienced '13-14 team "incompetent" at defensive execution (see my above posts)...Please no one consider that a slam on our young'uns--as they're performances are being compared to Self's other past teams (same coach)...so my critique of this year's team are purely contextual. They arent getting it done as the system requires.

@HighEliteMajor...and perhaps take this comment as me playing devil's advocate: Didnt we lose to UNI and VCU because of not playing D (like we did all year) and also, make no mistake, but trusted-senior-greenlight-shooters (Sherron, UNI...Reed, VCU) had absolutely dismal trey shooting? I mean, god love em both, but they shot us out of the gym. It happens. I'm over the anger of it--chiefly because I saw that almost all those 3 attempts were passes to an "open look 3". Tyshawn penetrated and dutifully kicked it out for our signature 3att. Same way Duke does it. Or we ball-reversal passed it to the open-look shooter. Self wants that shot.

Just think: Sherron+Reed = 1 for 13 threes, and that's 2 SEASONS ended. 2 years worth of hopes. Fans left wanting more. But these arent NBA kids. Heck, neither one of those beloved both players is in the NBA. Even Ray Allen has off-shooting nights, right? You know, maybe some people want to think that Brady or Reed were our versions of JJRedick...but that isnt true. Redick still in the NBA, and a cold-off-bench deadeye marksman. He was that way at Duke, led the ACC, and is earning millions with the same skill in the NBA. Our guys had an off-night, and it felled us, right there on tape.

And dont forget turnovers: Self preaches/teaches/fidgets/gets-red-faced/quick-hook over this very issue: We turned it over vs. UNI, worse vs. VCU (Markieff alone with 6 t.o.s). And we turned it over late vs. Michigan (EJ), we didnt make shots (EJ 1 FT, BMac point blank layup), and the other team made shots (Trey Burke).

Teams lose games because they either:

1. Turn it over too much. (23 t.o.'s vs. FL, really?...Markieff with 6 himself vs. VCU?)

2. Shoot dismally. (Ask Collison about '03Syracuse...or Memphis about '08)

3. Cant play D. (Against a 6ft, no hops Farokmanesh?)

4. Combination of the above.

Man, didnt Bill Self figure all this out YEARS ago? He harps on turnovers, zone execution, etc...He espouses high%looks to enhance the shooting. Kick out open-look 3s are considered the highest % 3att, and Duke uses that integrally, in a system-way as well. And Bill Self Defense needs no further discussion...as it affects all of this same stuff for the opponent--in our favor.

But if we dont do these main things, we are ripe to get beat. By almost anybody, including a melting pot hodge podge team like UNI. And seriously, why would we lose to some killerB team? Guarantee the answer lies in Reasons 1-4.