🏀 KuBuckets Archive

@drgnslayr asked if the OSU game could be a let down game. I ask the same thing about tonight's game. I think this game could fit the bill, particularly since Baylor is now 1-3 in league. It would seem that it would be very easy for a young team to "assume" that we will win this game; and I think it would be very easy for a young team to have an emotional letdown after Saturday, particularly on a 48 hour turnaround. It would surprise me if we lost, but it would not surprise me if Baylor is up by 5 at half.

@DinarHawk Don't let that point convince you. Self said that prior to the SDSU game that they knew SDSU would trap the post. And he then admitted on Hawk Talk that they should have prepared better for that.

@konkeyDong We'll just have to agree to disagree here. You seem to think mixing up strategy is "irrelevant." I cannot disagree more. Defenses adjust to what they see. Variations keep them a step slow.

You seem to think that that the guys not executing has little to do with proper preparation. I'm curious as to how you explain the points Self has admitted to regarding not preparing? And don't you think it's reasonable that our guys, with their relative inexperience at the D-1 level, were under- prepared?

And I don't "trust." I watched us lose to Michigan when our guys were not instructed to foul. I hear coach Self yesterday say that we haven't worked on fouling in such a situation.

I've coached a lot of basketball, and this isn't rocket science. Press break needs to be aggressive, and varied. Quite frankly, the bigger guys are, the easier it is to break because they can pass the ball further. We did the same thing, and did it poorly. As a result, our 17 point lead turned to 5. In the tourney, that spells disaster -- see Michigan.

Thanks for the excellent discussion.

@konkeyDong I'll hit right on the press issue. Really appreciate the discussion. I did not say that we did not have a press break strategy. I said we just had one. Sitting back, which we did, and passively passing over the top, is a flawed strategy. You must be aggressive and crisp. But it can't be your only press break.

There are two main points to my criticism. 1) That we have we have just one press break strategy, and 2) that we approach a press passively.

Very importantly, the press did change the game and allowed them to get the lead cut to 5 by the 13:29 mark. The press changed the pace of the game, it changed the momentum, it allowed OSU to get fired up, and it changed who was in control.

-The press changed the pace of the game from KU being into control, to OSU.

-OSU got a steal and a quick bucket off the press at 18:20, lead 48-32.

-OSU got a steal and three pointer off the press at 18:07, lead cut to 48-35.

-OSU got a steal, but didn't score at 16:48.

-There was the tech on Embiid, lead cut to 52-44.

-Wiggins turns it over, just following the press break, rushing a drive that wasn't there, Forte for three, lead cut to 54-47.

-Then after Forte's made three, the ball bounces around, Traylor walks away from it, we get the ball in. Selden then throws it away, the same cross court pass the Tharpe; Forte pumps his fist; Brown hits a three, lead cut to 55-50.

I'm sorry, here, but it was the press that changed everything. Lead cut to five. New ballgame.

On the first point, there is simply no denying that we employed just one strategy to break the 2-2-1 half court trap. Self had his two guards, Tharpe and Selden, get the ball to near half court, then pass either back to the other guard, cross court, or to a big guy at the wing/corner. During OSU's run to cut it to five, we did get one lob dunk out of that strategy.

My criticism is the the following:

1. Self had our 3 camp near the top of the key. He did not have him flash. So he was useless. We never threw one pass to the 3 in the middle. And the three never created even a diversion to permit a different pass. You can use the 3 to flash, draw a hard recover by the defender, which then opens a passing opportunity. We did not do that at all. Getting a flasher the ball allows the flasher then to turn and attack, or pass to the 1 or 2 guard streaking down the sideline (whichever side has the defender that recovered on the second level. That's attacking.

2. Self did not employ any screens against the zone press. For example, the 3 coming up and back screening say Marcus Smart in the front of the zone so a guard can dribble to defeat it. Screening against any zone is a huge part of the strategy. That's attacking.

3. Our guards never once took the ball hard on the dribble, and hit a seam. My opinion is that if you do not have enough confidence in your point guard's ball handling to do that, he should not be on the court. Both Tharpe and Mason are capable of that. It needs to be part of the strategy. That's attacking.

4. We employed exactly the same floor spacing and positioning. 2 guard facing the front side of the 2-2-1. It is acceptable to attack and even front with and odd front, going with 1 or 3. A flasher can come from 1 of those 3. And each time, we left our post guys back, waiting. Changing floor positioning is aggressive. It needs to be part of the strategy. That's attacking.

5. Further, we did not try a skip pass. This is risky. it's one that was wide open vs. Villanova. A pass from near court, just before the half court line to the opposing wing. That area was open as the 3 in the middle drew the defender. It is not to be tried every time. It is risky. It depends on the athleticism of the back defender, too. It is part of a strategy. That's attacking.

6. Finally, one of my pet peevs. We allow OSU to set up on a made basket. The guy closest to the ball does not throw it in. On the last turnover by Selden noted above, Traylor just watched the ball bouncing away while OSU set up. To be aggressive against a zone, you have the guy closest to the ball throw it in immediately, many times you can get the ball to a guard a bit on the run. Against a 2-2-1, the middle is vulnerable. That's attacking.

But with regularity, we sent lob passes between our two guards just before half court. Our passes were not crisp. And we did not attack open areas with our passing.

Most importantly, though, we had just one passive strategy to attempt to defeat the press. It's easy to prepare for. I would expect a D-1 team to have a myriad of press break strategies. Simply called by name. To mix things up, to make an opposing team pay for the temerity of even thinking of pressing us.

You say that it is lack of experience. Do you think these guys maybe saw a 2-2-1 3/4 court press before? They were given one strategy to break it. Just one.

And you mention lack of execution. Remember Atlantis? We weren't prepared. Then Self admitted they weren't prepared for the post trapping vs. SDSU. Then Self admitted yesterday that they weren't prepared to foul with the lead because they hadn't practiced it. Lack of preparation is an issue.

The strategy employed Saturday was insufficient (I nearly said incompetent, but didn't). Ok, I'll say this -- it was borderline incompetent.

Quite the puzzling game today.

1. Wiggins: Did he even want to play today? I have to hand it to Self for sticking him on the bench.

2. Press: Wow. This was the catalyst for OSU's run. We still can't handle that 3/4 court 2-2-1 press. We were ill prepared. We have one press break strategy. Sit back passively, pass over the top. And you can see the result. When the passes are defended, we dribble right to the trap spots. This is very disappointing. Yes, we did make them pay a couple of times. But this is a huge problem that needs solving by coach Self. Selden was absolutely horrible trying to implement Self's strategy. But it is the strategy that is seriously flawed.

3. Ellis: Again, kudos to Self (I guess). He saw something, apparently, where he felt that Traylor was the better option than Ellis. I have not watched the game again, will do that in the morning. But I have no idea what that might be. Traylor had a mere 3 boards in 19 minutes. It just never seems like he gets rebounds. But it is clear the kid has worked hard on the offensive end. I will be excited to see his progress next season.

4. Tharpe: Excellent offensive game. So impressive that I can easily forgive the so-so defense, 6 turnovers and passive approach on breaks (this is a real weakness we haven't discussed much). Tharpe was so terrific shooting the ball that the rest didn't matter today.

5. Black: Played terrific in the first half. Then didn't see him. I have no idea why. Seemed like he was a match-up problem a bit. But again, he disappeared on the bench.

6. Frankamp: Ah, the quick hook. One minute, missed three, didn't handle the shot clock -- and done for the day. Welcome to life as coach Self's whipping boy. All of the equity you build up is gone in nanosecond.

7. Greene: Played very well, and again, banished to the bench. Greene must be so incompetent on the court that Self felt that watching Selden throw the ball away was the better option (though I did think Selden did well on defense). Just a little frustration here .. Greene competes, demonstrates in his brief time on the court why he deserves minutes, and it's as if it didn't happen. But we won, right? So who cares? Well, what happens in a tourney game when Wiggins takes the night off like today, or is in foul trouble? And we need a wing to compete? Yes, that's me banging my head against the wall.

8. White: Very deep in the doghouse apparently. Something.

9. Mason: Thought he was very good on D, was aggressive, but seemed to be looking for his own shot a bit. Would really like to see him drive with the intent of dishing.

10. Embiid: Holy. Crap. Don't have to worry about this guy not having a chip on his shoulder, or playing passively. The greatest KU center since Wilt is his destiny. Please, coach Self. I beg you. Hedging a ball screen in the first 3 minutes is not worth getting a foul slapped on Embiid. Protect your ticket to a national championship.

Incredible first half which was essentially neutralized by the 2-2-1 press in the second half. Would you press KU? I would.

@wissoxfan83 - The practice thing is completely legitimate. That's our missing piece. I will say that Self has made reference to practice before on players. I've listened to his comments this season and he hasn't made comments detrimental to White, Greene, or CF, for example. He has made a point of saying that Black was the best player in practice a couple times. Black seems like the absolute perfect first big off the bench for this team -- except the fouling. When he can play for stretches, it's usually positive. Last game it appeared that Self had no concern about Black's availability, meaning he didn't pull him really to protect him from fouling out. The practice explanation on the Lucas vs. Black thing is probably the best -- but all that counts is what happens when the lights come on. So far, advantage Lucas. But it's what Self is looking for, that's important. Seems like Black is the guy.

@jaybate - I don't know, jb, still seems like Cy Young stuff to me. We are simply crimson and blue soldiers here, and glad to have the general back. RCJH back at you. Take care of yourself.

@wissoxfan83 do you think Self has any real faith in his bench?

@jaybate 1.0 yep, just googled "cup of the carpenter images" and there it was .. I bet you could right click on what I have and it would be all yours.

@jaybate 1.0 You really need to fix your avatar .. things don't feel aligned.

!Cup.jpg ↗

We all think KU has this thing turned around, that we're past the hardest part of our learning phase, that the last three games has this ship going in its inevitable direction. Right? It fits with what we've seen, and what we were conditioned to expect heading into the season.

But I don't think we can say that. Look at last season's team. Experienced. Seniors -- and they lost three in a row in league, in February; one game was perhaps the biggest upset of the entire NCAA season.

This team is the second youngest team in NCAA D-1. It just seems inevitable that this team will snub its collective toes more than once, or twice. Don't we all really expect to lose some games in conference? And if history shows us anything, the predicted losses don't always turn out to be the losses.

Actually, we should expect another valley. I would be surprised if we didn't have one.

It would also not surprise me at all if we lost to Oklahoma St. today. I don't expect that, but it would not surprise me. We aren't a juggernaut yet. We have demonstrated that we can lose at home. And college basketball is such that just when a team seems to peaking, someone knocks them off the that peak.

And if lose to Oklahoma St. today at home, the enthusiasm and positivity of the last three games should not be lost.

I'm going to toss this in today -- I think Frank Mason has a big game. Double digit scoring type game. He's a better defender than Tharpe, and have a feeling that his ability to get to the hoop might be necessity.

@globaljaybird - Right, if I'm Travis Ford, the first thing I try to do is get Embiid to hedge on a ball screen and dribble hard at his hip. Actually, I would have a set play whose sole purpose is to try to draw a foul on Embiid as well. If ball screens get switched, don't you know Ford will (or should) direct his players to try to pump fake Embiid, just like ISU did at the top of the key late in the ISU game. If I'm playing KU, #1 on the chalkboard is to get Embiid out of the game. If we sacrifice a few possessions as a result, so be it.

@RockChalkinTexas Should your quote read "Jamari, Landen and hell even Tarik should all come off the bench ... "

It had been a while since I saw a college player get 5 fouls in 5 minutes. Coach Self must really believe that what Black brings to the table is vastly superior to Lucas.

@ralster thanks for the explanation. Right on target. I did have some scrub at kusports.com refer to me as LowAverageMinor a few times. Quite ingenious. But then I saw the derivatives of Jaybate's screen name and I didn't feel as violated ...

@VailHawk - Well, thank you. Pretty much as Ralster said. It was just a way of emphasizing that we are talking about KU hoops, and (arrogantly) not the little people of college basketball. In that sense, I always felt out of place posting about football.

@approxinfinity (and @bskeet ) this all looks great. Really appreciate all of your work and effort here.

So, I learn Blown graduated from KSU. Things just don't make sense anymore. I'll toss in a blockbuster then. I was born in ... yes ... Missouri. Quite disturbing.

@KUSTEVE Right, Johnson played ahead of Embiid. And @FarSideHawk is right. We did continue to recruit Johnson. He committed to UK in Jan/2013 after we signed Embiid. So Embiid was signed before Johnson's recruiting was done. Further, Randle didn't sign/commit until the spring. Again, Embiid was signed in Nov/2012. From what I have read, UK wasn't even recruiting Embiid.

And just to add to that, I don't think UK overrated Johnson. He's a fine player. But he is nowhere near the talent that is Joel Embiid, as you imply.

Sometimes in recruiting you get lucky based on time and circumstance. It worked out well.

At kusports.com last fall, I was skeptical of Embiid solely because of his ranking ... then I watched some video. As useless as video is for perimeter guys, it is very helpful on big guys in discerning skill, such as footwork, use of opposite hand, shooting touch, athleticism, and post moves. Embiid was all of that. Some big guys you see are just playing over the top of your normal high school or AAU big guy, and that's useless in assessing how good they might be. Embiid was much more than that.

@RockChalkinTexas There are few coaches that I really would criticize for their coaching, but Scott Drew is one.

My most vivid memory is how poorly in prior years that his teams have played zone. They seemed like that team where the coach said, "hey, we're playing zone today." But they play it quite a bit. A little hazy here, but I recall a day/evening watching Syracuse, and then Baylor. And it was like professional zone then amateur zone.

It's kind of like they're a zone and a man team. It's hard to be both.

Much like Rick Barnes, "underachieving" is a word many times associated with Scott Drew based on talent.

Nice topic .. first, I'd say without a doubt that this is not a trap game. If we were on the road at say West Virginia, maybe. But OSU is a top team this season, they won here last year, and I can't imagine a let down. I think it is highly beneficial to be play OSU, actually.

On the White, Greene, Frankamp deal, I have literally written them off. Self talks a lot about wanting to play guys, like he did about White last season. I'm sure we'll see glimmers of guys here and there, but I think it's nearly over there. But for foul trouble, discipline, or an injury, Self has developed the guys he thinks will make us into title contenders and it seems that he's going to run with those guys. It's been about 45 days since Self said that he needed to pick one and play them as the 5th perimeter guy. He's played 4 perimeter guys the last few years. I don't see it changing except here and there.

@globaljaybird - You said "Surely there are major minutes next year for White, Greene, & Oubre, Tharpe & Conner should they all still be here." You didn't mention Mason. I just don't see any reason to believe that more than 4 guys get major minutes. Tharpe, Mason, and two more. Oubre is that top 10 guy, so one more spot? At most, a 5th guy that gets 8 -10 ... at most. And the X factor not mentioned, Wayne Selden. Likely right now that he returns. So in a realistic scenario, Oubre could "plug in" for Wiggins as Oubre said that Self told him he would do; and we have our same four man perimeter rotation with that plug in -- Tharpe, Mason, Selden, and Oubre. That leaves White, Greene, and Frankamp in the exact same position they are in this season.

A transfer there is a near certainty, and I think that there is a distinct risk that White and Greene both jump ship.

@globaljaybird I saw Cauley (Stein) a few times too. The best player on the ONW team was Shavon Shields (now at Nebraska). Cauley was soft, didn't give effort, and was regularly handled by high school players that weren't close to D-1 talent. Two D-1 guys like that an no title. Heck, one year they got knocked out in sub-state.

@JayDocMD Actually, I think that all of the names I listed developed exactly as we should expect them to under coach Self. The numbers bear that out. But with a OAD, you have such a brief period of time to unleash the potential, thus the margin for error is much thinner.

@drgnslayr - you mention seeing this level out. I'm leery of our post positions leveling out. We have Ellis, who after 2014-15 may turn pro; but no top 50 talent either now, or for next season (other than OAD Alexander or possibly OAD Turner). If we get a top 50 for 2015 (non-OAD), those guys, many times, aren't ready made to start (Morrises, TRob, Ellis, Withey, etc). So that's where I'm a bit concerned.

I would toss this in .. we had Simien, then Wright, Jackson, Kaun; we moved to Aldrich, and the Morrises; then to TRob and Withey; and now to Ellis. Not a OAD among them.

High talent level guys. At least two seasons.

Would you rather have that type of transition in your post players, or would you rather have Embiid one year, Turner the next, Zimmerman the next? Each year rolling the dice that you actually land the right one to continue the level of play?

I guess I should answer my own question.

If, as @jaybate suggested, Embiid will be around for year two, I think that would sway me to take Embiid.

But if not, if Embiid is around for only one year and his presence doesn't translate to a title, I'd take Karviar Shepherd.

My point here is that we don't have to participate in the OAD drama. Self could simply choose not to participate. It's seems weird for me, maybe, since I believe strongly in rankings. But I also believe strongly that it's awfully hard to really maximize any freshman.

@drgnslayr really brings up a great point .. does having Embiid get us Myles Turner? And to extend that further, does having Embiid and Turner get us Stephen Zimmerman? If it does, is that how we want to live?

The rotating door of players, and bodies, and development, and hype, and "being young" -- I don't think we have to live that way.

I know I'm swimming upstream here. And if we win a title ... "if"... then I'll be the first one in line proclaiming the OAD experiment a success. But the pursuing and focusing on the highly ranked non-OAD seems like a pretty darn solid path to a national title. I'm fine with sprinkling in an OAD in a clear position of need; but other than that, it's simply mortgaging the future and creating an incredibly unsure future.

@JayHawkFanToo, @bskeet and @wishawk .. that's a great point. Wiggins wouldn't be here. I'd take McLemore because he would have a year under his belt and he's an elite player.

Actually, I wish we had Ben during his true freshman season when we made it to the title game. On it's face, we might assume his talent would have pushed us over the edge to a title. But you never know how he would have changed the dynamic.

We have a little bit of time before our next game, so I thought I’d hit on a topic that has been on my mind a bit – Joel Embiid vs. Karviar Shepherd. Who would you rather have at KU right now?

The answer seems easy, but bear with me.

To reset last fall, KU was recruiting Karviar Shepherd, who committed to TCU. Shepherd is a long, 6’9” center, ranked #77 with Rivals and #65 with ESPN. He had been in the top 50 and dropped a bit in the final rankings. We then were able to wrangle Joel Embiid, who shot up the rankings.

A few assumptions as I address the topic:

1. That Joel Embiid is a OAD;
2. That we do not win the national title in 2013-14;
3. That coach Self recruited Shepherd because he really wanted to sign him.

I also understand that Embiid was not a presumed OAD when he signed.

My question touches upon the OAD dilemma and an approach to recruiting. One year of Joel Embiid, or four likely years of Karviar Shepherd? Don’t focus specifically on Shepherd, or whether you like him as a player, or whether his ranking is high enough (not top 50). Focus on the idea of having high level, developed talent in our program for multiple seasons. You could compare Embiid to a Perry Ellis type. Or any other PF/C that we could have possibly signed that was a three to four year player.

It is more of an approach to recruiting.

We got Embiid because Shepherd did not commit. That’s a near certainty. Based on the assumptions above, would you rather have Karviar Shepherd right now, or Joel Embiid? If we know we’re not winning a title, would you make that trade right now?

Ok, I understand, we don’t know if we’re going to win a title. That’s part of the intrigue. But making that assumption, I think, defines your threshold or OAD tolerance. Thus, is an OAD like Embiid “worth it” only if we win the national title?

When Wiggins signed, my take was that I wished that he’d gone elsewhere, but if we win the national title this season, then that would change my mind. I still feel that way (but I could see my mind changing .. we'll see). My logic, in part, was that we risked transfers by some of our very talented three to four year players (Greene, White, Frankamp) because at least two of them would just not play much, if at all; and we would be setting those guys back in their development regardless. I was more conservative than some in projecting that one of them would be in the rotation (White or Greene). I contrasted that to Julius Randle, who would be coming right in to fill an obvious hole. He was a guy that would not create the risks of transfer of high level talent.

But with Embiid, we don’t really have any major transfer risks. So more similar to Randle. This is simply a comparison. It could be comparing Julius Randle to Karviar Shepherd (or a similar player). Or comparing Perry Ellis to Nerlens Noel ... Noel for a year of Ellis for three? Assuming we don’t win the title, would you rather have a four year player like Karviar Shepherd, to develop, and to potentially impact this program for three more seasons? Or the OAD Joel Embiid?

Take that a step further. Say we don’t win the title. White and/or Greene transfer. So in 2014-15, we have no Joel Embiid, no Andrew Wiggins, no Karviar Shepherd, no Brannen Greene and/or Andrew White (and there is a distinct chance we lose both).

It is doubtful that Cliff Alexander would have been dissuaded from signing by Karviar Shepherd. Shepherd could have possibly started this season, and then slip back as the third post man for his sophomore season. He’d then be primed to start his junior and senior seasons. It is possible, if not likely, that Ellis is gone after his junior season. Who’s there to fill the post void in 2015-16? Right now, really low ranted guys – Traylor, Lucas, and Mickelson. Or a roll of the dice and a jump back on the OAD merry go round.

Our 2013-14 prospects would have been harmed by not getting Embiid. But our next three seasons would be undoubtedly brighter. Again, assuming Embiid is a OAD. Mortgaging the future a bit.

The ride is nice with Joel Embiid right now. But how ridiculously sad is it that we likely only have two – three more months of Joel Embiid on a KU basketball court? And is the OAD approach to recruiting the best thing, long term, for KU hoops?

Would coach Self just be better off ignoring the OADs and focusing on developing high level talent? Quite simply, is that the better way to win a national title?

As we’ve seen Embiid explode, I’m interested in everyone’s opinions here.

@MoonwalkMafia - Hmmm. ISU's "boo everything" fanbase reminded me quite a bit of the Missouri crowd. It's the kind of fanbase that has never really won a title at anything, that feels that they are disrespected, but have done nothing to earn respect -- they are kind of lost. So they scream without purpose.

@globaljaybird - Great article on Embiid by Myron Medcalf at ESPN today. Yes, my man, Embiid is the key to our assent ... and he better be, with Black getting five fouls in five minutes.

http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/92544/joel-embiid-can-carry-kansas ↗

@joeloveshawks No, I agree with you and I wasn't meaning to call you out there. I was kind of meaning that I hate that I'm thinking this way .. that a loss here isn't that bad in the scheme of life .. but, if we lose, the world doesn't end.

I can't stand the "if we don't win it's not a big deal" approach.

But really, if we lose this game, and take care of the business we should take care of, we're 15-3 in league.

Win all at home; lose at BU, ISU and OSU on the road. Life could be worse.

I'm not that concerned with whether we win the big 12 or not .. I am most concerned with this team being ready to win a title. Having our bench developed for emergencies. Giving minutes to the best players for that pursuit. Getting our best PG figured out. And most of all, ensuring the development of our most highly talented freshmen (Wigs, Selden, Embiid), so they are ready to win 6 in a row.

@jaybate 1.0 Ok, now you start with this reverting to the mean thing. The problem is that your logic is right on the money. If we miss our first 3 or 4 threes, it could be a long night outside. What I really want to see is if ISU doubles the post, and if we react like we did vs. SDSU, or like we did after we really worked on it (vs. KSU). This could also be one of those nights where we get in significant foul trouble.

I do understand that there is criticism of Wiggins. My first thought when Selden dove for that basketball against OU was .. great, but would Wiggins ever do that? Ok, I did think "why did he call a timeout so quickly instead of passing to an open man right next to him" .. but then I had the Wiggins thought.

Remember, Wiggins is no different than any other freshman .. except that he is more talented. Because of his talent, he's probably been a bit more coddled. Maybe his personality is less aggressive. Whatever.

I have coached many, many seasons of youth sports, and one thing I've noted is the "big kid" phenomenon. What happens is that the big kid is perceived to be more mature, or smarter, or tougher, just because he's big. Just because a 13 year old is 6'1" doesn't mean he's smarter or more mature or tougher than the 5'0" kid. But everyone expects that big kid to be different emotionally than the smaller kid.

I think this happens with elite talents. Their talent is greater, but the rest of their make-up is no different than the average talent.

So, with Wiggins, we judge him because he's has all of the press, he's a high-level talent, he's a superstar in the making. But the guy is a freshman.

We haven't seen him dive hard for a ball. But I bet we will. That hasn't had to be part of his game probably to this point. Same with 100% hustle. He hasn't had to. In fact, he might have been conditioned most of his playing days to be the opposite of what Self is trying to instill.

It may be in part why his family thought Self was the best coach for him.

From the start, I was not a fan of the Wiggins signing. Lots of reasons. I'm reserving final judgment.

But I do think that we are right to expect him to hustle, to expect him to dive, and to be all everything. You don't have to be a high talent to dive on the floor. But I also think that we should not forget that he is still learning how to really play the game. And I think that giving him a bit of rope on that .. for little bit longer perhaps .. is reasonable.

@Blown This might be one of those games where Self is forced to go small, with Wiggins at the 4. Embiid is quicker. So that will help. Certainly something to keep an eye one.

Think about this possibility -- both Greene and White transfer.

It's possible.

Kelly Oubre's coming in and both White and Green could view him as the presumptive starter at the 3. If Selden stays, the two spot is locked.

Even if Selden does turn pro, both Greene and White could make their transfer decisions before Selden would make his.

Anyway, I do think it is a distinct risk that we lose both. But I firmly believe right now that we will lose at least one. That's how it was shaping up the precise minute that Wiggins signed.

,It is weird .. White is the 5th perimeter guy in vs. SDSU, a whole 3 minutes. and hasn't played since. Greene mop-up duty. And CF gets only 5 minutes despite playing well the other night and hitting 3 today.

I heard Norm Roberts on 810 Thursday and he said Self wanted to cut back Wiggins' and Selden's minutes, saying that they were playing too many minutes; this all in the discussion on CF, Greene, and White.

But this is just morbid, really. Self isn't going to play these guys more than he absolutely has to.

Some discussion that CF played against OU really only because we had foul trouble. No foul trouble today; CF gets 5 and that's it. It is what it is.

But really a perfect game. Dominated from the start. Selden and Wiggins both played great; Tharpe with 9 assists and no turnovers. Awesome.

@RockChalkinTexas Who are favorite color guys? From a non-irritating perspective, I don't mind Fran. I also think Steve Kerr is pretty good. Maybe my favorite is Jimmy Dykes.

I know I'm in the minority, but I really liked Bobby Knight. He didn't over-talk. Made great coaching points. Some of these guys, like Stan Van Gundy during the Atlantis deal, just have to talk to fill every moment of space.

Another guy I think that does a good job is Jon Sunvold ... now awaiting that crimson and blue lightning bolt to hit me.

Jay Bilas' theorizing on Embiid, much like his NCAA rants, are missing key pieces of logic.

Don't get me wrong. I selfishly want Embiid to stay. I will be more than entertained watching coach Self try to tell Cliff Alexander that he'll have to come off the bench. And if Embiid stays, we are perhaps the presumptive #1. But now, back to reality.

Bilas believes that because Embiid is the "real deal", he should be more likely to stay.

The opposite should actually be true.

If you are the "real deal", by staying, all you are really doing is risking your career. The "real deal" is going to make it in the NBA. The "real deal" is going to have a career regardless of his college body of work. The "real deal" is the the elite of the elite.

As the "real deal", you should not be so concerned with what college does for you. As the "real deal", you should be more concerned with what college does to you. Sure, college could make him better ... no doubt. But it is simply weighing the risks, based on where you are.

The injury risk is not limited to ACLs. Micro-fractures (Greg Oden), stress fractures (Sam Bowie), backs (Mitch McGary), dislocations (Sean Livingston), broken legs (Kevin Ware), outside issues like motorcycle accidents (Jay Williams) or auto accidents (Bobby Hurley). Use your imagination.

As the "real deal", he's a top 5 pick. His first contract will set him for life. If he is prone to a certain type of injury, such as some degenerative condition in his back that is undiagnosed, it may arise as he plays more. That could possibly arise in a second season at KU.

Look at Marcus Smart. What has he gained? Do we think that he has lengthened is NBA career by staying? He's the "real deal." All he did was run the risk of injury and lower his draft position. If he raises it, he goes from say #6 to #3.

Contrast that to Wayne Selden. He definitely should stay. Why? He would be in the latter part of first round at best. But with a year or two extra, he then could realistically move into the high first round. But more importantly, a guy like Selden could really develop in college, thus adding to his career. Couple that with not being a high first round pick, you have your answer.

Could Embiid make his career in the NBA better by staying? Sure. But when you're a top 5 pick, the risk outweighs the reward.

@drgnslayr - Wondering here if Cindy could kindly suggest to coach Self that selecting a three point sniper as regular part of the rotation would be a wise thing to do? We could all pony up and send her a fruit basket or something ...

@AsadZ Jimmy Johnson, former Dallas Cowboys coach, freely admitted that he had different rules for his stars as opposed to the average player. I think that makes sense in the pros. But not in college.

There have been more than a handful of times where I was shaking my head that Wiggins stayed in the game after boneheaded plays, and then loafing afterward. It's just an interesting dynamic right now. Seems like Self is ok with it.

Can you imagine Wiggins diving for a ball like Selden did? Hopefully we'll see that.

@Chris1955 -- "Could a major part of the weirdness of this team, malaise if you will accept this term, be because Andrew Wiggins is getting away with play that would normally send a freshman Jayhawk to the bench?"

Good question.

Short answer, it could be. But your observation is not unique. I've been trying pay attention to how Wiggins' handles things over the past handful of games.

I would sit his ass on the bench, to be honest.

Call it "Wiggins Rules."

@VailHawk Perfect title to the thread.

What has the better odds:

1. CF doesn't play at all vs. K-State;

2. CF plays the same minutes vs. K-State as he did last night; or

3. CF plays 2 or so minutes and gets yanked for turnover or mistake.

It is really amazing that a sub like CF was able to play important minutes in lieu of one of the four perimeter rotation players, and the world did not come to an end.

Coach Self had said we played such a tough schedule it was hard to play the subs -- right. A road game, in conference, against a team coming of its own road win against Texas, is a better situation?

Self made the point that no one remembers the non-conference. And has made in clear that that the non-con is not as important the as conference season.

His own logic doesn't wash here.

The fact is as we have surmised ... playing these guys regularly, even if it is just one of them (for consistency sake) ... will not cause an implosion.

Naadir Tharpe said he suggested to Self that CF stay in after half to "give him some confidence." Exactly.

I will say, if Tharpe and Mason are two of the other four perimeter rotation players, it will be awful hard to make CF the fifth. We would just be lacking so much in size and length.

@drgnslayr .. you exude positivity. Well done. The area of the positivity that I am becoming more skeptical on is Tharpe. When he came down in the latter part of the game, I think we were down 4, and he immediately shot a three, I was shaking my head. I do think, though, that he is trying to do what you are suggesting. But at the midpoint in his junior season, I am becoming skeptical of a leap forward. He is a necessary and key component. But I think if we shift to Mason now as the primary PG, we'll be better off by March.

Really enjoyed your positive thoughts.

And I do respectfully disagree with @jaybate on his prior posts on Ellis at the 3 as any long term idea. But I am in with it for small, targeted stretches during a game, if the match-ups dictate. Heck, I'd play all perimeter guys and no bigs if the match-ups dictated. During the game Sunday, I thought about that Perry at the 3 idea when he was rendered useless down low by the double teams.

My question would be that if he swung to the wing, he is guarded by a wing. So it would seem he would lose the quickness battle. But if he could then post up the 3 that is guarding him, that is where perhaps we could use the match-up.

I still think we have better guys to function on the perimeter to go to ... and say a Greene or White at the 3 with Ellis at the 4 is better than Ellis at the 3 and Traylor or Lucas at the 4. But again, we have to react to matchups.

@KansasComet - "Let the best players play."

Non-Conference is over. What is the best rotation? Who should start? My humble opinion:

Starters

1. Frank Mason.

2. Naadir Tharpe

3. Andrew Wiggins

4. Perry Ellis

5. Joel Embiid

Rotation Bench

1. Wayne Selden

2. Andrew White or Brannen Greene

3. Landen Lucas

4. Jamari Traylor

Bench (emergency/blow-out playing time)

1. Andrew White or Brannen Greene

2. Tarik Black

3. Conner Frankamp

A couple of thought -

-The idea would be that, ideally, Selden would earn his way back into the starting lineup.

-I believe the best point guard to prep for March is Frank Mason. Commit to it. Go with it. Tharpe a key rotation piece.

-I hedged on White or Greene -- pick one. Doesn't matter. Just pick one. And that "one" could compete to get in the starting lineup. If Selden didn't improve, then this "one" would ideally start over Tharpe. Greene is maybe the more pure shooter, long, athletic. White is an excellent rebounder, more experience, and maybe more ready. Coin toss. Don't think there is a wrong choice.

-The Lucas-Traylor minutes might vary game by game, with the one getting rotation minutes, the other getting minutes in the 5-9 variety.

As of now, this would be my preference.

Let's say we use this information, create a rotation by position, and toss out the obvious anomalies.

Starters: Embiid, Ellis, Wiggins, White, Mason.

Off the bench: Lucas, Black, Tharpe, Selden.

Hmmm. Might work. I'd flip Traylor for Black, though. I'd still want Selden playing at least 18 per game because he's in a valley now .. we don't want the development slowed.

@jesse_newell - Shooting cures many woes. Cannot agree more.

I called Hawk Talk last night and asked coach Self about the double teaming in the post, and our approach. Specifically, I asked about cutters and not attacking. I was curious as to why we appeared out of sorts there. Seemed to completely take us out of our game.

Coach Self was pretty direct in his response. He said their strategy was when the post man dribbled back out of the double team, to send a cutter to the basket. He said they didn't do a very good job of that and pointed out that KU only scored once on it (citing the Mason example I had referred to). Self cited an example when Black had a cutter but tried a cross court pass. But it sounded like they wanted to send a cutter, but failed to recognize it properly when the post man retreated from the double team.

He made the point of having to make them pay when they doubled, and that they didn't do a good job of that. Self also said that the double teaming in the post negated their post advantage, and they didn't react well to it.

He mentioned that they knew ahead of time that Fisher would employ this strategy, but Self said at the end of his comment that he "didn't get them playing the way they should have against that (referring to the trap)." Self was quite candid and took responsibility for it.

I posted this in response to @jaybate on another thread -

Do not believe your own negativity. Refuse to believe it. I promise you that the issues on this team are not as broad as you believe right now. There are technical items to correct. That is mainly a young team learning from its coach. But it is also a coach learning from his team. Self blew it yesterday in prepping these guys for the post double team (more on that tomorrow). That took our post guys out of the game. This team needed more coaching and prep. We saw it vs. Villanova .. we got stung hard by the press. Coach is learning his team. He learned more yesterday.

And I promise you ... cross my heart ... we get a little outside shooting going from three, and you will see the parting of the Red Sea. It is a magical thing.

Positivity, my man. This is like a Rubik's cube. A freaking mess ... until it isn't. Just have to know what colors to rotate, and which way.

I sense Self is still feeling that out.

The more I think about this, the more I am convinced that coach Self is really figuring out how much coaching this team needs, and the kind of prep it needs. Much different than the last few years. But again, shooting is a magical thing. And when those Rubik's cube colors rotate the right way, watch out. We aren't that far away.

@drgnslayr and @jaybate - Holy cr*p .. I'm already to watch the football game, and you guys write some epic novels here. Good thing for the DVR. I can't avoid reading this stuff.

Though I'm not sure jb is buying the positivity here .. are you?

I just posted on another thread that I really think Self is learning how much this team needs to be coached. He may have underestimated it a bit. And perhaps he underestimated how much this team needs to be inspired. Not by the whip, so to speak, but by the passion, and by the word.

@moonwalkmafia posted an interesting tidbit back when Tyler Roberson was visiting. He saw him at a restaurant and said he looked disinterested and projected that he wasn't coming to KU. Our guys have that disinterested look sometimes now. They are passive, they stare into space, they don't seem passionate, and they certainly aren't vocal.

They don't play as if they are better than the other team, and they don't act like it. It is swagger (I don't say swag).

Self wonders who the leader is, who will step up.

I would say unequivocally that this team needs Self to lead. He needs to inspire the swagger. Not an easy task ...

I'm going to defend Mason a bit here. We did see him score 14 yesterday, right? He was the best perimeter player yesterday, right?
I do understand the focus on his size. But he does guard. He is intense. He's able to stick with bigger guys pretty well. And he's just a freshman.

Was Mason over-matched against Duke? Was he over-matched yesterday? If so, I didn't see it. He is making far fewer mistakes than Russell Robinson or Tharpe did as a freshman, or TT as a junior.

We have a special player here ... patience.

@jaybate - Do not believe your own negativity. Refuse to believe it. I promise you that the issues on this team are not as broad as you believe right now. There are technical items to correct. That is mainly a young team learning from its coach. But it is also a coach learning from his team. Self blew it yesterday in prepping these guys for the post double team (more on that tomorrow). That took our post guys out of the game. This team needed more coaching and prep. We saw it vs. Villanova .. we got stung hard by the press. Coach is learning his team. He learned more yesterday.

And I promise you ... cross my heart ... we get a little outside shooting going from three, and you will see the parting of the Red Sea. It is a magical thing.

Positivity, my man. This is like a rubik's cube. A freaking mess ... until it isn't. Just have to know what colors to rotate, and which way.

I sense Self is still feeling that out.

@dylans I respectfully disagree. Actually, in watching Greene quite closely, I would describe his defense as highly adequate, if not pretty good at times. I've posted on this before. I'm not saying he is a good defender yet.

Importantly -- If his defense was that bad, how does he play 30 minutes in a two game stretch for coach Self? Heck, as the 5th perimeter player, that is amazing.

I have not heard coach Self ever criticize his defense. I heard him compliment him on how hard he played. In the times Self has discussed Greene, I have never heard the defense issue come up.

Further, my observations were that Greene over that two game stretch was clearly that he did stick with his man, was able to slide and provide help, was aggressive and active (poking the ball away a few times) without talking unnecessary risks, seemed to move well, and fought over screens. I didn't see perfection .. what I mean is, many of your criticisms could be laid at the feet of all of our defenders from time to time. We should not hold Greene, or any sub, at a higher standard.

I think this defense thing is, with all due respect, a bit of a red herring. It's a kind of up in the clouds, highly subjective catch all that we use sometimes to try to explain why a guy isn't playing.

I still think Selden should start -- I think you keep developing him. I just think you can find 15-17 minutes per game from the 4 top perimeter guys to include Greene or White, without any real harm.

@CaptnMo If coach Self really said that Brannen Greene wasn't ready for a game like this, he is being completely disingenuous. I didn't hear it, so operating off your info here. We watched Greene play well in a much more difficult environment at Florida, and we watched him make key plays against Duke in Chicago on a big stage. Heck, Wayne Selden didn't look ready for a game like this. Andrew Wiggins didn't look ready for a game like this. Perry Ellis sure as heck didn't, either.

@jaybate, respectfully, I think you are making this a bit more complicated than it is. Before the game, you suggested that Tharpe and Mason, were too short to match up vs. SDSU. You mentioned specifically, in a pregame post, Greene or AW3 getting a lot more minutes as a result. Your logic, pregame, was right on point regarding Greene or White, and how they could have helped match up. (as an aside on the short guys, I think Mason did well on D, Tharpe did not).

Your logic now is simply a hypothesis of why Self didn't play either one - "Greene or White risked higher TOs without higher strips." You noted what you are hypothesizing to be his strategy. From a stat standpoint, AW3 has few turnovers per minute played this season than Selden. Greene's TO rate is a bit higher than Selden.

And tell me, who has been more disruptive as a defensive player, Selden or Greene? Greene, when in, is aggressive, tips the ball away, and gets after it. Andrew White is significantly better rebounder than Selden, 20.2 per minute vs. 10.6 per minute. Plus, White showed that last year as well (23.2 per minute).

But I think we're making this more complicated than it is, and we don't have to.

Green, White, Frankamp -- none of them are a cure all. Heck, Greene or White could have easily gone 1 of 5 from three yesterday.

But what I am talking about is building a diverse attack that gives you the best chance to win in all circumstances. Right now, we have three perimeter players whose strength is driving to the hoop (Selden, Wiggins, Mason), and one who is an average three point shooter (Tharpe) that doesn't have any stand out skill.

We don't have a player on the perimeter to provide the complimentary skill of nailing the three, and we're doing nothing to ensure that we have one come March. That is very concerning to me. @lulufulu85 read my mind.

And I think, most importantly, the trade off by playing say Greene or White 15-17 per game would not cause any reduction in our likelihood of winning games.

We won the disruption stat. That is nice. But we lost by four at home.

I am very confident that if this team had a distinct three point threat, it would open up more offensive opportunities across the board.

This is not hard. This is not complicated. We were beaten by SDSU because of three main reasons -- but one (three point shooting) will continue to haunt us if adjustments aren't made:

1. We were thrashed on the boards:

SDSU hammered us on the boards, and continually outworked us for the ball. Some of the boards were the luck of the bounce. But mainly, we didn’t get butts on guys and they got to the hoop and capitalized. How many follow dunks did they have? This is in part an effort issue, but it’s also an issue of fundamentals and positioning on the court. Traylor has made strides, but he gets 3 rebounds in 18 minutes? Black has the same rate – 1 in 6 minutes. And Ellis gets 5 in 22 minutes? I don’t know. Lucas just must be a significantly inferior player in Self’s eyes. But he sure got after it when he was in, and when he’s been in this season, he looks like a superior rebounder to both Traylor or Black. Lucas is at .325 rebounds per minute, Black and Traylor at .266 and .226 respectively. Black’s average is higher than his career average. Traylor is about the same as last season. Interesting, Josh Davis, a senior transfer (like Black) from Tulane pulled down 14 boards in 31 minutes for SDSU.

2. We were out-coached.

Fisher had the strategy of doubling our post players and Self did not have an answer. What was our response? To dribble away from the double, to attempt cross court passes, and most importantly, to play passive rather than aggressive.

Let me ask you this: Did you see any perimeter players cutting to the basket when our post players were doubled? There was one time when Ellis hit Mason in the middle of the lane for a hoop off of a double. This wasn’t a cut, though. Mason was just there. The entire game there were no cutters to the basket. This is how you make them pay. They double, and your post player can shoot a pass to a cutter from the perimeter for an easy basket.

This is basketball 101.

Another thing that we did a few times was that we pivoted away from the double teams. What do you do if the offensive player pivots away? You close out and tight the trap.

But what we did, mainly, was play scared and non-aggressive. We routinely dribbled out of the double team, away from the hoop. Ellis and Embiid thus were rendered quite ineffective as they retreated. Ellis went 1-9. Embiid shot the ball a whopping 5 times. Embiid was provoked into a couple of turnovers throwing it across the court. I believe Ellis fumbled the ball away once on a trap.

What else would you expect off the double in the post? A pass to a shooter for a step in three. No dice there, either.

Fisher doubling the post was a main contributor to our poor two point shooting percentage. Not the only reason, but a main contributor.

Score that one to coach Fisher by a knockout.

3. We have no three-point shooting in the rotation.

Next, again, beating the dead horse, we have zero three point shooting. This time 4 for 16. Our three starting perimeter players were 2 of 11 from three. Good three point shooting can cure a lot of ills, including being out-rebounded and getting out-coached, or being out-played in another phase of the game.

After the Toledo game, I noted that our performance there was the exact recipe for a tourney upset. All that bailed us out was Tharpe’s 4 for 5 three point shooting effort. I asked what would have happened if Tharpe would have gone 1 for 5 that game instead?

There’s your answer – Tharpe went 1 for 5 from three vs. SDSU. Of course, much different type of ballgame. This was a bar fight. Toledo was more up and down the court. Both recipes for losses. Why? The lack of three point shooting. Against Toledo, remove Tharpe’s 4-5 from three and we were still just 3 for 9, and one of those was from non-perimeter player Perry Ellis – so our perimeter guys were 2 of 8.

Our problem here is so blatantly obvious. We need three point shooting to bail this young team out when other things don’t go well. That is the main point. But our options behind the arc are limited to average at best three point shooters.

Self now has constricted his rotation to 4 perimeter players. And none of the 4 perimeter players is an elite three point shooter. You need three point shooting to boost you to victory in games like today, when you get out-coached or out-played in an important phase of the game (which was in the post vs. SDSU). Or when you lose the battle of the boards like we did.

Oh, but coach Self did give us a token look – the flavor of the day was Andrew White. Predictably, he missed a three. Predictably, he gets three minutes. Predictably, he never sees the floor again. I’m tired of predicting. Would it have made sense to use, say, Brannen Greene against SDSU’s length? Of course it would have. Of course, he doesn’t play.

The bigger concern going forward is the drum I’ve been beating for a while – we lack three point shooting in the rotation. Who is the elite shooter? Self has refused to choose either Frankamp, Greene, or White, as he admitted was best for the team, and he has refused to play one of them regularly. Coach Self is neglecting the use and development of not only a plentiful asset on this team, but an absolutely necessary asset.

Shooters need comfort and confidence, and they need to be able to get in the flow of the game. Much different than a post player. They need to feel they can shoot without looking over their shoulders. Their “head” is as important as their stroke. Shooting is a difficult craft. When your head is not right as a shooter, and you lack comfort and/or confidence, your chances of success go way down. For our shooters to help, they have to play regularly -- whether it's one of them, or more. And that will require a major adjustment by Self. That’s the bottom line.

Self may be an excellent coach, but right now, he is mismanaging this particular asset. This mismanagement, if it continues, will significantly decrease the chances of KU winning a national title. And that, my friends, is all that matters.

@drgnslayr Sure, I understand what you're saying.

The reason I said "slimy" is that, if the narrative is believed, Self did not make contact with KY after he had committed, as he stated. However, the AAU coach (Kool-Aid), who was in contact with both Self/Self's staff and KY, as a middleman, ensured that KY would back out of his commitment to SDSU; and did so in return for another one of his players (Merv) getting a scholarship for the purposes of making him more attractive to other colleges after a year at KU. A convenient quid pro quo. "Kool-Aid" brokered the deal -- if the narrative is to be believed.

How about "distasteful" instead of "slimy"? That's distasteful to me.

A lot of things in life are distasteful, but necessary. I'm not criticizing it. It's how the game is played, and I enjoy winning. No rules were broken. We were in a desperate situation in the post. And that move got us to the title game. I guess this scenario doesn't cross the ethical line for me. But I do feel as if I need a shower ....

@jaybate 1.0 Nice job, jb. Enjoyable read.

Ok, I learned something -- an explanation of the otherwise inexplicable Merv Lindsay signing. Why would this guy come to a place he would never play? Many of us asked this question at the time (with some of those lovely responses at kusports.com - "Self has an eye for talent"; "diamond in the rough"; "he wouldn't sign a guy if he didn't see something in him" ). The quote from the San Diego paper is at the bottom.

So, KY and Merv had the same AAU coach, a guy named "Kool-Aid." Merv had no D-1 offers. Kool-Aid brokers the deal. KY switches from SDSU to KU, and a week later Lindsay comes to KU -- Lindsay's basketball value gets "laundered" so he is suddenly more attractive to other D-1s (having been a part of the KU program). Setting up the transfer.

Slimy underbelly of college hoops on display.

However, think about how important that KY signing was? He was our first big off the bench in our 2011-12 championship game season. Without him, it would have been Wesley. The KY signing was crucial.

We were desperate with a capital "D". When we talked about Self "scrambling" that spring, we weren't blowing smoke there. Grabbing whatever he could get his hands on -- Traylor, Anderson, KY -- and if you had to tamper with a committed player and take a Merv Lindsay in a deal with an AAU coach, so be it. After that experience, and the "all in" experience with Kaleb Tarczewski, doubtful Self gets "surprised" again.

As I've mentioned before, we want coach Self on that wall, we need coach Self on that wall. He did the job that had to be done. Absolutely no qualms with it at all.

Here's the quote from the SD article:

"There also was the suspicious signing a week later of Mervyn Lindsay, a guard who reportedly had no previous Division I offers but conveniently had the same Southern California AAU coach as Young, Elvert “Kool-Aid” Perry. The conspiracy theory: The man named Kool-Aid brokered a package deal with Kansas, which was short quality players but had multiple scholarships available after the Morris twins left early for the NBA. Lindsay, the thinking went, would go to Kansas for a year and have his basketball value “laundered,” then transfer elsewhere. And sure enough, on cue, Lindsay transferred the following year to New Mexico (where he remains buried on the bench)."

@jaybate 1.0 I would of course prefer a 6'4" point guard. But I might suggest that your are overvaluing a few inches there. Against certain teams, you might not be able to get away with both of them on the floor together. But for whatever it's worth, Louisville had two below 6'0" guys at that 1 and 2 spots and won the title (Siva and Smith). I'm not comparing Mason/Tharpe to those two.

Your question: "But, realistically, how are these two ever going to guard long guards?" I think you know the answer. They'll just have to survive. Much like the 6'8" guy in the post deals with Embiid. Or a Russ Smith, for example, might guard a Wayne Selden. They survive. They use their assets to compensate for what they are lacking. An undersized PG has to anticipate, has to use better angles, has to close out better, and has to be more fundamentally sound. But it ain't perfect.

And the defensive game plan incorporates strategies to help, just like it might in the post.

Brady Morningstar was a good defender. Why? Did he physically overwhelm? No. He just knew what he was doing. That's what the shorter guy has to do.

I do see an excellent defender in Frank Mason. He ain't there yet, but he's getting there.

Don't forget, as well, that the bigger guy has to guard a Frank Mason on the other end of the court. That's part of the equation. And most teams won't be all big and long. Again, I'd rather have the TT type body (height/length -- a nightmare to play against). But all's not lost if we don't have the perfect physical specimen. There's no dressing up your "disruption" point, though. I don't think Tharpe or CF will ever excel at that. Mason might. But again, time.

And note, I did not say Brady was an excellent defender. A good defender, yes. I have my limits.