🏀 KuBuckets Archive

@dylans At least you have no concerns about Braun or Mitch ...

The one I think we might be overestimating his immediate impact is Wilson. I could see that not being as soon as some project.

Agreed. I would suggest, and have, that nearly every year under Self we have a top 5 roster. Meaning we might trade with four teams but not a fifth. Very few exceptions. Maybe a couple of times. And a number of times, we arguably have the best roster. Last year we were preseason #1.

The lesson is that true champions are determined by tournaments. You have to persevere and overcome. Good fortune and bad fortune are all part of it.

And the true champion may not be the absolute best team. Two different things.

Lots of debate and discussion on Marcus Garrett's shooting. Forget that. We all love having Garrett on the team. I'd like to suggest that whoever would like to contribute, just a quick statement of what you like best about Garrett. It will be amazing to see the list pile up on this guy, and to realize, as many have pointed out, that his positives are immense.

For me - The lost art of challenging the passing lanes.

Hampton? Walker? Nah ...

“The biggest skill that Moss brings to the table is the ability to create his own offense. When you look at the Hawkeye offense, there aren’t many guys who can take defenders off the dribble. There was a reason that when the shot clock ran down that the Hawkeyes would look for Moss, so he could get off a shot. The 6-foot-5 guard out of Chicago has a smooth game. He looks comfortable on the court and everything is fluid.”

“The other thing about Moss’ offensive game is his ability to score in transition. He was without a doubt Iowa’s best scorer on the fast break. He has soft hands and never panics on the break. It’s where he is most comfortable at and he’s capable of finishing with either hand. He can also break down defenders on the dribble and get to the rim.”

Goodness ... Dotson, Moss, Agbaji, SDS, Doke? With Wilson, McCormack, Garrett off the bench? If Self pulls this off, the guy deserves incredible credit given the adversity created by the Adidas deal.

Moss is more important than Wilson for 2019. Way more important recruiting wise to fill a necessary hole.

@KUSTEVE Some observations - when he's only shooting limited threes per game, that's a demonstration of futility. We need a perimeter player to be a threat. But the important point isn't just threes -- it's the all shots away from the rim.

But as I brought a a while back, Aaron Miles transformed to at 50% three point shooter by his senior season.

He dominates the intangibles. He rebounds. He can get to the rack. He steals. He's long. He can handle the ball. He hustles. He defends. He has a great attitude.

I love the point about the non-presumed OAD thing. Look at our perfect roster. Doke, SDS, Agbaji, Garrett, Dotson, McCormack, Lightfoot, Braun, McBride, Enuranu. Let's add Wilson and the grad transfer.

@dylans Any citation to PER is a good one. It's a testament to Garrett's other stats that he can be at 12.8 with the shooting issues. Can you imagine if the guy could get those shooting stats up?

@Texas-Hawk-10 I still fail to see why conference games are given more value. He shot better in conference play his freshman year too. They don't count more when it comes to the tourney seeding. I would think any trend up is good, but his trend line has been up and down. That's just my opinion. If the trend line was going upward, and we could say that he was building upward, ok.

But the poor shooting form thing is obvious. We all know that's the bigger issue. I've never seen any player shoot well like that -- except maybe some 8th grader.

But as I posted on another thread yesterday, this guy is a big key to our success. And as I've tried to mention regularly, we all love having Garrett on the team -- it's really just the role/minutes that are the debate. If his shooting is remains an issue, then off the bench is the best role.

@kjayhawks On his ppg, I looked at the last half of his junior season, on points scored. Regarding Releford, his PER was 17.4 for his career, 17.9 his sophomore season. Garrett is 12.3 for two season, 12.8 last season. But Garrett is a better rebounder by 1.2 per 40 min played, and .5 more on steals per 40. I couldn't find RRob's PER, and stats are hard to compare because RRob played point -- thus assists/steals higher as a consequence. I think they all all/were excellent defenders. Good guys to compare.

kjayhawks said:

@Texas-Hawk-10 exactly, Marcus Garrett is ahead of where Releford and RusRob were as sophomores IMO. If you read the book beyond the Phogg, RusRob wasnt allowed to take 3s after the first 5 minutes of the half because he was so bad at shooting. Releford averaged less than 5 points per game before the second half of his junior year.

Easy, partner. I would suggest that we're not talking the same league here.

Garrett has shot roughly 25% from three. That is historically bad. You will not find another KU perimeter player that low after two full seasons as a rotation player, at least in the Self era.

Releford was 37.8% as a freshman, and 32.5% as a sophomore. Of course, was over 40% his senior season. And he avg. 7.2 pts in the last half of his JR year, not 5, fyi. He was the fifth option there, after TRob, TT, EJ, and Withey. Releford was a stout role player. Great D. Garrett could be Releford if his shooting got more acceptable.

RRob was 28.6% as a freshman and 32.2% as a sophomore. And stayed in the 32% range thereafter.

As a comparison, Wiggins was 34%.

As far shooting, when you dip below that 35% level, you are below average.

But when you go below 30%, you're scraping toward the bottom of the bell curve. Below 30% is really bad. Garrett is 25% for his career and has made no upward move from that purgatory level. And there is no hope gleaned from his shooting form.

We all remember RRob being really bad from three his freshman season. But he shot better in that season than Garrett ever has.

And this is a bigger deal. The eye test. Garrett has horrible -- just horrible -- mechanics. And he's NEVER shot well, not even in high school as someone posted.

Back in RRob and Releford's day, Self was a control freak on threes. He's evolved his approach on threes. Night and day, almost.

Garrett has the worst mechanics from outside of any KU perimeter player I can remember.

All of this Garrett discussion brings me to what I think is the key here -- Garrett can absolutely help us win. He has helped us win. I wouldn't trade him away. He's a key cog. The other elements of his game are so good, that if the shooting spikes a bit, look out. I love having Garrett on this team. Self playing him in some key situations last season won us some games. His role just needs to be managed based on his poor shooting (which is a critical, critical element because it can hamper your entire offense, because of how the defense handles that poor shooter).

@Texas-Hawk-10 It's as simple as this -- if I'm an opposing coach, without a doubt, I say that I want the net result of a possession to be Garrett shooting the ball away from the rim. Is there a better realistic outcome to a possession (aside from a turnover, or Doke shooting a three)? Wouldn't you offer that advice if you were coaching?

I would always sag off of Garrett. Always.

As a note, I think that Garrett banked in at least two of his 8 makes in conference play this past season. I think (just memory) that one was at home vs. Texas when he had the really good game.

@KUSTEVE Didn't they outlaw hazing?

Gorilla72 said:

McTait on Twitter this morning, regarding Garrett. Tait caught up with Garrett at the Washburn basketball camp.

“Garrett said he’s still recovering from that high ankle sprain and is about 90-95 percent. Shut it down for nearly all of April & May to recover. Didn’t even do much shooting... Said he feels great today though & is happy to be back to work.”

So he hasn’t been working on his shot?

I can hardly believe this. A solid shooting drill, to form the muscle memory discussed by @drgnslayr, is to take a chair or stool, put it at about 10 feet, take proper form, and shoot with just your arms/wrists. You can lower the basketball goal a bit to be somewhat proportionate to sitting. But it's not important. You can help set that proper form without having legs, for goodness sake. It's also a great drill to teach players to be quiet with their upper body when they shoot. The drill isn't perfect, of course. But I will never understand why a kid that has shooting issues as deep as Garrett, isn't 100% in on changing his form and cementing that moving forward.

@Crimsonorblue22 Oh I think every little bit you move out makes it just a bit harder to guard (man or zone). This is over one foot. That's a lot. It exposes you just a bit more. Many passes clear a defender by inches. Help becomes a bit more difficult of course. And I think it would challenge the zone concept more than it would at present distance. But your risk of getting burned goes down a few percentages.

The change will obviously knock the avg. three point percentage down. I wonder how much it will decrease attempts?

BeddieKU23 said:

I agree moving the line back puts a premium on guys with unlimited range. I think this may help the most for KU with opponents who have stretch bigs. Most bigs that stretch it normally are not the natural shooters of the world, its usually something developed. It could negate some schematic advantage teams would try and use against KU- the Villanova's of the world etc.

That's a great point .. one foot feels like a mile from distance. There are freaks, of course. But stretch bigs aren't usually those freaks.

KUSTEVE said:

@HighEliteMajor Marcus was 48% from 2, so that's not too shabby. Where the disconnect comes from is 24 % shooting from 3. The good news is he only attempted 49 3-pointers last year, and with the line moving back, that could drop. Drive, Marcus...drive...

Two point shots, yes. But his field goal percentage on jumpers, meaning shots not at the rim inside the three point arc -- which are different -- was just 29.8%. By comparison, Agbaji was 40.7%.

So when he took a non-three pointer that was not a shot at the rim, he made less than one-third of those shots. That's not a particularly positive.

As comparison, Dotson was 20.5% and Moore 25%. Both really bad. With Dotson, of course, we can forgive it. He shot 36.3% from three and did well at the rim (see below). Plus only 14% of Dotson's total shots were in this category.

Marcus' field goal percentage at the rim was 57.3%. Compare to Agbaji 66.7%, Dotson 61.8%, and Grimes 54.4%. Would love to see that creep into the mid-60s. (for a laugh, Moore was 35.5%). I think he can do that.

Why is 60% important? 60% equalizes a 40% rate from three. I've always looked at it that way. Getting to the rim has value. But if you don't equal or outstrip the good three point shooters, you're behind the curve.

The avg. three point shooter shot 35% in CBB. That's 52.34% from two, just to stay even with the avg. shooter.

That's why Doke's 80% at the rim is so valuable. To reach that value per shot, a three point shooter would obviously have to be over 50%.

For Marcus to counter his deficiencies from the three, I think work inside the arc will go a long way to increasing his value. I personally doubt he can achieve anything satisfactory from three, but we'll see.

Aaron Miles went from 24.5% on threes his sophomore year to 50% his senior season. So I will never say never.

@Crimsonorblue22 I've really felt that guarding the arc with a zone is workable. A focus on the arc. Think of a 3-2, with a long guy up top, in the middle, how Self used Brandon Rush in 2008 in that zone. Extend that more to the arc.Then SDS and Doke in back to protect on the drive. I only like this though against certain teams, and situationally. One of the back guys (SDS, Mitch) would need to be able to work to the arc a bit too, looking for skip passes. Doke's side would be vulnerable to that. But if we're in a spot where man ain't workin', it's a reasonable alternative. You generally concede the two point jumper -- meaning you know it won't be as contested as you otherwise might. One downside is that your big guys can potentially get fouled up on drives if they aren't disciplined (like Withey was .. we didn't really play a lot zone with him, but he was very disciplined. Some funky D's I recall on the way to the FF though).

@KUSTEVE I would say, though, that good defenders can be really compromised by scheme. If our perimeter defenders are focused on helping on the drive, which we are prone to do, we could be in the same spot. Though, I'd rather have good defenders regardless. It is a massive chess game.

And I do think, as you mentioned, the three point line going back will help us defensively.

Net? I'm confident in Dotson and Agbaji being fine from the distance. Others? But I think that the line going back, by consequence, makes post play incrementally more valuable. Thus that can be a plus.

to get to @BeddieKU23's question, I think the line going back, though, makes the better shooters that much more valuable. I also think the farther it goes back, it makes the guys that are really "toe on the line" three point shooters less valuable. Thus there are some pretenders from three point range that have diminished value. It will make things even more challenging for a guy like Garrett.

I liken it to when high schools/colleges changed bat standards. There was less exit velocity. It made guys with bat created power less valuable, but the true power guys .. the guys that could still hit it deep with the changed standards had increased value. That's because the rest of the pack has less value.

So all in all, I think it will be a benefit for us. We have difficulty guarding the line anyway, so that % will be down without any change in our defense (vs. the entirety of our opponents). Our three % will dip a bit too theoretically (but still has a chance to increase). But I think we win on the deal ion the end because the value of post play will increase some -- the basket at the rim increases in value.

Now, I didn't talk about 2 pt jumper field goal percentage. I really have no idea there. I know we had some bad 2 pt % guys on jumpers -- Dotson was horrible and Garrett really bad too (but better than Dotson). We won't have Charlie Moore so all FG % increase.

But interestingly, Agbaji was very good on two point jumpers -- over 40%. Somewhat Vick like.

I listened to the radio yesterday and UMKC's coach was on. He was talking about how defending the three requires a much different dynamic, that generally accepted principles of defense don't necessarily work, and that to properly defend the three, it takes more creativity. He mentioned how the shell drill is not an effective method of working on defending the three point line (I'm assuming he was referring to the 5 on 4 shell drill). It was a interesting discussion.

I'll say this, I think that our defense has always been very "help" oriented. That's a killer if the focus is on defending the three point line. With size inside, we shouldn't have to rely as much on the "help" concepts because we have more rim protection. But Self always does. Three point teams of course try to stretch the post defenders out of position as well. Self has always felt that the drive is more dangerous than the three point shot (at least it appears that way from 1) our defense and 2) his discussions over the years). Lots of challenges.

Frankly, I've been shocked over the last few years at how poorly we defend the three. This is on coach Self to get this figured out, because it has been our Achilles' heel.

BShark said:

Crimsonorblue22 said:

Somebody said he wanted to try D-1

Bedore confirms 🐦 View Tweet

Funny -- Look at the first comment on the link. Some dude says he's better than Svi. Opinions ....

Injury prone is injury prone. Freak injuries find some folks more than others. We shall see.

@dylans Women's college BB is a different, significantly inferior game. It's really a different sport. I didn't realize that's why a KU fan would would watch men's college BB.

@Crimsonorblue22 I'd ask them just for the fun of, first, playing them -- nice bit of intrastate venom; and second, so we can at least try to make up for the 2015 embarrassment. I think you'd like to see his drunk wife screaming as we waved the wheat.

Man, good thing we have E. Tennessee, Monmouth, UW-Milwaukee, etc. Would hate to see us waste our time playing a Wichita St. team that would do nothing for us.

The images of a Jayhawk, running around, clucking, is still haunting me from debate's past. Chick .. Chick .. CHICKEEEN!

*And yea, I know, we'd have to play at WSU too sometime to make the deal happen.

@Crimsonorblue22 Destined for the Sprint Center ....

The issue is not recruiting outside of the top 20. The issue is identifying guys that are presumed OADs. That may not be a fixed number each year. Different classes mean different things. There might be 8 presumed OADS one year, and 15 the next. And the #20 kid might be a presumed OAD and the #12 kid not.

I chuckle at the idea that KU, with Bill Self as the coach, focusing on non-presumed OADs, could be akin to Iowa St. Now, lose coach Self? That's a different deal.

So, tell me, what presumed OAD has made a transformational difference in our outcome at KU since Self has been here -- a difference that really meant something?

I suggest only one -- Josh Jackson. But even with that, we only made the EE.

It's just beyond me why those results cause such recruiting effort over multiple years.

That's a straw man argument. No one says it's "automatic" or that we might not miss or strike out. Of course, things "could" work out poorly. Of course.

As with anything else, it's percentages. Likelihoods. Risk. One of the worst arguments is to compare an absolute when the absolute is not part of the initial argument.

If we focused on non-OADs through 80ish, the great likelihood is that such a focus will pay allow a greater a pay off in that range than we have seen in the past. How many recruits have been left hanging, waiting on an OAD decision? If we made certain kids the priority and the first choice, instead of a second or third choice -- being KU and a blueblood -- that would lead to more players in that range. If we limit expenditure of recruiting capital inside the OAD range, that recruiting capital is focused elsewhere. The amount of travel, time, and effort focused on the OAD group is significant.

It's not that there isn't risk. There is. But a focus of energy and resources, and prioritization of certain players, is better the gamble.

That is particularly true given the alternative. One thing that can't be ignored or debated -- our return on presumed OADs has been pitiful. That, alone, might suggest a different path.

Crimsonorblue22 said:

@HighEliteMajor you are not cool or a young guy. But that's ok. Some have it and some don't. They aren't doing gang signs.🤣

As in TJ Gassnola, our .. uh .. former associate with Adidas.

I’ve surmised you’re not a young gal either, but you are kinda cool ...

I hope it’s not TJ’s replacement .. or maybe I do🤔

Someone is going to have to tell me what the stupid hand signs mean.

... somehow anything Hanni says makes me think of the snobbing guy a the country club talking about Buffy and her polo pony.

Bilau look really good shooting in a storage room on a rim that's bent down three inches in the front ...

https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/2019/josaphat-bilau-233297 ↗

@BShark Didn't you say Wilson might follow this guy to Texas?

rockchalkwyo said:

KUSTEVE said:

If Q had demanded to play pg, wouldn't he have the same opportunity with us that he would've had anywhere else in his junior year after DD left? I wonder if Q's drama is why DD waited so long to announce... maybe there was some friction there...maybe DD didn't like Q saying the line about only seeing half his game...hmmmm....vewwy interesting...

This is spot on, IMO. Grimes won't use all 4 years of eligibility so does he care so much about having the spot light in 2 years at another program vrs. KU. At least at KU he would have more in game experience as opposed to just practice experience. Just weird.

Also, KUSTEVE your signatures, or whatever they're called, crack me up!

@KUSTEVE Ah, but we're assuming that coach Self would have given him the PG spot as a junior. Not sure I can make that leap ...

Also, your bi-line .. "
"Good luck, Q. Hopefully there won't be another DD at your next stop." Nice.

Heck, I might replace "DD" with "PG".

@KUSTEVE I think that if we add Wilson, and he starts at the three, we slide Agbaji to the two spot. I'm all for adding Wilson. We could have Agbaji, Wilson, and Garrett cover the 2-3 spots in some manner or form. And I think we could get by with Dotson at PG, with Garrett as some cover, and McBride in bursts, depending upon his readiness. What I don't know for sure is Wilson's readiness to start.

The key to next season is Agbaji. Forget adding any other player as a requirement to compete for a NC. If Doke, SDS , and Dotson are as expected, Agbaji becomes the key. If he elevates his game as his talent would indicate and finds consistency, look out. His all around effort is high level. Hits the boards. Everything you'd want. Although pounding it to Doke inside will be our bread and butter, when things get late in the game, and the big fella might be a bit winded, Agbaji might very well be the go to guy. He's got "it." I've mentioned that thought before, I think after his first game or two. We've got a special player.

Telling stat on Q. 3.6 rebounds per 40 minutes played. Agbaji - 7.1 Garrett - 6.0 Dotson 4.5.

Effort.

I love Self’s comment about supporting his decision to transfer. That’s some backhanded support.

Bosthawk said:

Anybody heard anything from Vick?

Yes, he’s in Memphis. Had pressing family business to attend to.

KansasComet said:

Great news on Devon Dotson returning! Quentin Grimes was great against Michigan State. He is an excellent ball player and will continue to get better. Sad to see him go. From year one to year two can make a big difference.

Stop the presses. Who is this @KansasComet? Nice to see you return.

I ask those “once a Jayhawk, always a Jayhawk” folks — what you say now?

Q?

BeddieKU23 said:

KUSTEVE said:

We'll lose Devon, and then Q will announce he's coming back to play point guard...ugh...

Worst case scenario rather have neither then just q

You’re a harsh man ...

@Texas-Hawk-10 @KUSTEVE You both may be on to something here ... the ground and pound offense, win 59-55. Tough, hard nosed defense. Feed the post. And feed it again. And just in case you weren't sure, feed it one more time. Just up Bill Self's alley. The kind of offense that inspired "Fool's Gold" lectures. Only this time, it's a necessity. Where's the post-feeder extraordinaire when you need him (B-Star)?

Just ... gotta ... guard ... the ... three ... point ... line. Gotta find a way.

If Wilson comes (and I know I'm an isolated voice on this), that could set up a nice 3-2 zone. Long out top. It's a great way to guard the three point line. And you'll have Doke, SDS, Dave and the best shot blocker in all of mankind, Mitch, manning the back line. But silly me thinking zone is an answer if you get a gunning team like Auburn that you can't keep up with. It also allows us to play the offense we want to plan, with two bigs.

dylans said:

I’m kinda over kids who don’t want to be at KU. F’em. If he shows up KU will be better (and he will play hard), but DeVonte declaring he would skip the combine and return to KU was the coolest thing I can think of. Wish we could get that kind of commitment out of another player of that caliber.

There is a bit of fallacy in thought I've seen here a few times. That somehow the college game can't survive without the kids that that don't care about college basketball. That somehow CBB needs to restructure to try to entice and ensnare the top end talent.

Screw that. CBB isn't about RJ Hampton, or Andrew Wiggins, or you name the presumed OAD.

CBB is about the school, the alumni, the tie to a program. The uniform is more important than the person occupying it.

The RJ Hampton should be able to play an make money. I actually applaud his decision.

The issue continues to be folks wanting to change CBB so that the RJ Hampton's of the world can be accommodated (paid). But that's a mindset that applies to all aspects of life.

The better path is for CBB to retrench and be CBB. Not a quasi-pro league.

KUSTEVE said:

Here's my case for Marcus being better at pg than anywhere else on the floor:

1- Teams sag off of Marcus because of his crappy jump shot. But teams NEVER sag off the ball, because that would leave all the passing lanes wide open. Man to man...zone...they all are based on playing the ball. This means that teams sagging into the paint when Marcus was playing the wing aren't going to do that if he's bringing up the ball. So, I don't think teams are going to be able to sag off him with the ball in his hands.

2- Last year, after Doke went down, and Vick went MIA, they started driving him to the basket, and he scored 20, 18, and 15 in 3 consecutive conference games. So, we know he has the ability to drive the ball. He will probably be one of our last options, but we know he can get to the hoop. And he made many really good assists on those drives.

1. The Achilles heel is the shooting. But, like many other players growing into the game, Marcus's season was a case of shooting much better in conference than he did in pre-conference. In conference play he made 47 out of 88 shots altogether for a nifty 53%. Now, he didn't suddenly turn into Svi from 3, but he did make 8 out of 25 for a 32% clip. 33% from 3 equates to a 50% two point shooter, so I don't think he's as far off as many think.

4- The best ball hawker since Russ Rob would now be essentially playing on the ball every play. His 1.4 steal rate could rise considerably playing on the ball. 2 - 2.5, maybe? Add in a 5.0 asst rate, with 10 ppg, and you have a valuable guy any way you look at it. Yes, he's going to be a pass first guy, nor will he blow away defenses with his speed like a Frank or a DD, but he could end up being very valuable in his own way.

@KUSTEVE Marcus has value, and Marcus has many positive attributes.

I'll add to the discussion with a couple considerations. It would be interesting to see him regularly guarding the opposition's point guard. That is very compelling to me. And we need just some reasonable progress shooting.

I would suggest, though, that defenses could (and would be more likely to) sag off of Marcus if he ran the point. The reason being is that sagging off of him, while he has the ball, lessens the threat. Lessens the threat of him passing, meaning the on ball defender can limit a passing lane, and lessens the threat of him driving (his best offensive skill) because the defender would create more room to cut off the drive. When guarding him away from the ball, you don't have the luxury because of the back cut or cuts that get him in space to then attack the rim. I think we saw teams adjust even to that after he has a few good games driving to the basket. Simply playing him at a different angle to remove that threat.

But nothing is perfect. It is easy to nit-pick. Again, some compelling points and it may be best option.

Odd .. if Grimes thought he should be playing PG, he committed to KU after Dotson committed. Not sure what his camp thought.

@KUSTEVE The plodding part is how I’d describe him when he is in the PG role. A tail dribbler. Slower bringing it up. Protect the ball. Not in a sprint. Not quick with the ball laterally. Handles not super strong. Contrast to guys we’ve had .. Taylor, Tharpe, Mason, DG, Dotson. More Selden-esque with the ball than similar to our prior PGs. He’s a better dribbler than Selden though. But you never know how a guy responds, and we won’t know until he’s in that role more significantly.

@Texas-Hawk-10 You make good points about Garrett. Concerns are that Garrett is slow with the ball. Plodding is the word that comes to my mind. He is zero threat scoring wise beyond driving as has been discussed many times. That said, I have no idea if McBride could handle it. Either way, we’d be in an unenviable spot.

@BShark Yea, we’re good. No better coach for a flawed roster.

BShark said:

HighEliteMajor said:

Say Dotson doesn't come back. So what?

NIT

My answer? Bill Self. He wins.

Say Dotson doesn't come back. So what?

Let's understand this ... when the next "big thing" is discussed. I understand that most of the CBB players are "all about going pro." But there is a difference.

The difference is, and this is a big one -- the biggest point -- the presumed OAD is entitled to go pro. We are all just blessed to have him. We are lucky that he chose us. He doesn't really need us. KU is just a pit stop on the road to the NBA. It's not a home, it's not a life long connection. It's all about the presumed OAD, and his touches, and his starts, and his role. This is all about being forced to wait a year because of what the OAD believes is a dumb rule.

Drama queens. Prima Donnas. The entitled.

Just say no.

@BShark Your logic is inescapable of course ... I’m a whiner on this topic.