🏀 KuBuckets Archive

@wrwlumpy Perhaps you can tell me where there is not equal opportunity in America?

@ParisHawk I accept the info that she's excellent. My main point is that the attacks on @elpoyo, as in the past, continue to be over the top. He's a counter point. He says things others may not. But intolerance of his statements ... and the denigrating "troll" stuff is simply seeking to silence his contributions.

@mayjay You and others are highly/overly sensitive. You refuse to discuss issue because the offend. You refuse to consider that gender, race, other issues that offend are part of decision making. There are always factors in one's ascending to higher places that go beyond pure merit. Merit, by and large, is the greatest factor for success in this country. By a long way. That's what can't be ignored.

Hudy deserves everything she's gotten.

However, in this day of anti-white man sentiment (the source of all evil on the planet), I think it is very relevant inquiring or asking of perhaps her gender contributed to her recognition.

Liberals do that. Liberals want to level what they perceive to be an un-level playing field, and thus they think like that. Merit isn't the dictionary definition. Merit, to liberals, also entails what one has had to overcome, their supposed place in the society, as perceived by the liberal.

It's affirmative action, right? That's all. So when non-liberals like myself consider what has been done by others, I keep in mind that there might be some political motivation. Why? Because I've seen it in action. Many, many times.

It's funny when liberals, who profess one argument, use that argument as an "untruth" to try to attack another argument. Nice try, counsel. So you think I might fight against the idea of "white privilege", so you use an argument you believe in to try to counter mine. All the while ignoring the fact that your belief in "white privilege" happens to disintegrate your response. Right?

There are always factors in one's ascending to higher places that go beyond pure merit. Always. And sometimes that sex, race, whatever. That's a much different issue than opportunity. Opportunity is what this country grants. For example, I'm not hiring someone with neck tattoos. I'm not hiring someone with pants hanging half way down. I'm not hiring someone that can't enunciate the English language.

Tough darts. Does that make in harder on Hispanics who perhaps can't speak English as well. Of course it does.

And Hudy's ascension was clearly harder given Bill Self's admitted thoughts.

Likewise, liberals in this country attach more merit to the achievements of the non-white man, all other things being equal.

@elpoyo's question was well placed. But as noted, it can be answered to show Hudy deserves every accolade.

The very valid point, that can of course be refuted with facts and info (as some have suggested above -- albeit a bit snippy in some cases), is whether perhaps her gender (and being unique in being a female trainer of men) was a cause of her getting whatever recognition. It really is a harmless question and it is a legitimate question. Again, best refuted with facts and info as opposed to indignation. If someone thinks it's sexist, so what?

@KUSTEVE Ok, the bull dyke thing is going to cause the PC crowd to implode. But I don't know if anyone said she's a token. I'm not sure anyone even implied it.

@JayHawkFanToo The uniqueness of her being a woman seems to have been noted by Bill Self, as Bill Self admitted that he said to himself, "I don't want to hire a woman to be a men's strength coach. Who does that?'" So we can dispense with the whining about sexism related to the @elpoyo's question.

So it is a very legitimate point. I think there is certainly merit to the possibility that she gets notoriety by being a woman, and that can lead to folks recognizing her.

But the point is what has she done to outshine her competition? We aren't "in the know" so we don't really know. I'm interested.

@Texas-Hawk-10 With your logic, we wouldn't play Nebraska. Or Davidson. Or Utah. Or Texas AM. Or Colorado. Or Arizona St.

And you say play regularly. I just want one home and home for now.

@elpoyo asked a very legitimate question and gets attacked like usual. What does make her so great? I don't see our guys improving anymore physically than others.

@Texas-Hawk-10 Of course, since and including 2000, Wichita St. is 385-179 ... nearly a .700 winning percentage. Under Gregg Marshall, since and including 2007, a .743 win percentage.

That said, not perfect, not the best team in the country, all the qualifiers I'm sure a point/counter point would assert. MVC, all of that.

Playing top competition sure hasn't seemed to get us ready to win big when it counts. There just isn't any sure fire formula.

Beating a non-dead horse, but how fun would our non-con be if we removed Nebraska and played at WSU, and removed Washington at the Sprint Center and played MU there instead? That's right, I forgot, we get nothing out of playing either WSU or MU, our feelings are hurt with the latter, and we're scared of losing to the former. But we get so much out of playing Nebraska and Washington.

CBS has the same opinion - Story Link. ↗. Whoopee.

@kjayhawks Although RPI is not worth a lot -- WSU was 29, Nebraska 111 last season. The quality of program isn't even close. We can make all of our excuses or rationalizations, but Self is ducking WSU. For every reason not to play, there is a counter argument, or example, that defeats it or shows its hypocrisy.

Interesting that playing Nebraska on the road exposes both the WSU hypocrisy and the MU hypocrisy all in one.

Its not a "no win" situation to play home and home with WSU. If we win, we win. And it looks better at the end of the season to have a WSU road win than a Nebraska road win.

I was quite sure someone would want to claim Stanford was better. They were a 10 seed that got beat by Dayton in its next game. They lost 13 games.

Remember all the KU whining when we played WSU -- that WSU was seeded too low as a 7? That we somehow got screwed playing them?

It's all just opinion of course on who was better.

But I don't think its really opinion that beating WSU on the road is more impressive to the selection committee than beating Nebraska on the road, and losing to WSU on the road is less harmful than losing to Nebraska on the road (using the last 5 seasons and this coming season as examples).

@Texas-Hawk-10 Right -- because you know it to be true.

Words like "may" and "likely" and "probably", while sometimes noncommittal, most of the time denote reasonableness.

I've always said we should play WSU each season. They're a real program, national program, and they have a nice villain as their head coach (to most KU fans). Play them home and home. Much more fun than playing at Nebraska (the first team to bolt the Big 12 by the way for the "they tried to destroy the conference and thus we should play them" majority opinion). And a better program than Nebraska by far.

But then again, my logic of enjoying a rivalry thing doesn't seem to resonate. We can find every reason not to play them, as I've seen here over the years. But one good reason to play them is to kick their a** and shut them up.

The fact is, we can make excuses about 2014. They kicked our tails. With all due respect @kjayhawks, we lost tourney games with Ellis healthy and a comparable player (Black) in the lineup (see Stanford). And WSU was better than Stanford. WSU dominated the game.

But we won't play them because we don't need to. Or whatever. But we'll go play at Nebraska. Double hypocrisies.

@jaybate-1.0 Question - don't you think some coaches purposefully do not pursue OADs, which are the supposed best players? Like John Beilein? He certainly could compete for them but chooses not to. And I do think others could compete but stay out of that murky pool -- many times an allocation of resources vs likelihood of reward issue.

@Texas-Hawk-10 While I believe there is little chance it gets to the Supreme Court, saying there is "no chance" is flat wrong. There are many, many cases that get to the SC when there is prior legal "precedent." In fact, you need only look an many of the rulings in the 60s and early 70s on major social issues where the SC changed the law. Same stuff now. And on other issues, many cases are decided on the specific facts of the case. Further, the respect for precedent relies solely on the folks wearing the robes and their judicial integrity. Remember, plaintiffs (and the politically motivated folks behind the plaintiffs) in these cases shop for the right judges. Just like regarding the "travel ban" issue we've recently seen. And in the sports context, think about why many labor issues are in Minnesota. Because of one judge, David Doty, who was a major labor sympathizer. That's why the plaintiffs sued there.

So there is certainly a chance, and given how politics bleeds now deeply into the judiciary, I actually wouldn't be surprised at anything these days. In fact, we would be wise to expect it.

@jaybate-1.0 I think you are the first person to project Newman off the bench. Don't let his dad hear you say that -- he'll say Malik is staying and then he'll leave the next day.

Headlines we don't want:

1. Udoka has set back with wrist.

2. (Insert name) tears ACL.

3. Preston ineligible.

4. Vick gets another drink thrown in his face.

5. Self calls Graham "combo-guard."

KU wins the Big 12. Zzzzzzz.

@BeddieKU23 @KUSTEVE I am in the clear minority here, and I think elsewhere. The KU fans I associate with seem to have the same split opinion-wise and most don't want to renew the rivalry.

@DoubleDD Don't be fooled. MU is not "racist." A complete fiction. The entire deal was escalated by false claims and half truths. I'm not an MU defender of course, but the real story was the pathetic response and approach to the b.s. by the administration -- and that gives you a 25% drop in enrollment.

@KUSTEVE I guess then the fact that our rivalry was longest standing rivalry in all college sports (or close to that), back to before world war I, back to the civil war (before the playing field) means nothing then? For reference Border War. ↗) If that's how you feel, that's how you feel. Anyone who has grown up with KU sports despises MU.

I don't get it.

Question, and to my original point, did anyone gain significant enjoyment related to the games with MU and the rivalry? That's what is to be gained. That's point of being a fan, right?

If you say no; or yes, but that MU's dastardly deeds outweigh that' significant enjoyment of games and the rivalry, then I get it.

My point is not to look at MU, and what it does for them, or helping them. Look at what it does for us. And if that's not much, then the opinion is pretty easy to arrive at.

Some of the comments seem very MU focused. Who cares about MU? I think the focus should be what it does for us.

Well, it's nice of the big oaf to compliment Hudy.

@mayjay Well, it is a PC reaction. It's someone being offended when no offense was indicated or intended. Someone could be offended by nearly any descriptive word. All of the big guys noted are a touch slow and clumsy -- Kaun, Aldrich, Withey. They aren't as quick and coordinated as smaller guys. And their not as quick and coordinated as other big guys, say Embiid. That's the completely benign comparison in a basketball context. That's what's important. Now you bring up handicapped people. Ridiculous.

In fact, I'm offended that you'd associate the word "oaf" with handicapped people in first place. Why would you do that? Why would you even think that? Are you calling handicapped people "idiots" or "morons" because two definitions of oaf is "idiot" and "moron." You should really think before you make such comparisons. But it does show how your mind works. Right? Or not?

Mitch is a classic developmental guy. We should expect results in 2018-19, or that he plateaus and transfers -- on his own accord, of course. Patience is easy on a guy like this. But if he's not there by his junior season, it's a wasted scholarship and time to cut losses. I think he'll get there.

@mayjay I like the visuals.

However, who is the one that is bitter and angry?

They're (MU) fine moving on. They're happy to make peace and enjoy their son's wedding together (to further the analogy).

We, on the other hand. don't want to sit near them, won't stand together for pictures after the ceremony, and won't interact.

Bitter. Angry. Unseemly.

Hey, if the KU/MU rivalry wasn't worth it ... meaning the enjoyment doesn't outweigh one's bitterness, then ok. That's how your (and other's) position make sense.

I would point out that, for example, parents of murdered children have come to forgive the murderer. I can't imagine being that forgiving. The scales would work against forgiveness for me on that one.

This is truly an "opinion" issue here. Our life has been good without MU, no doubt. Things just smell better when they aren't around.

I think one important fact is that it was actually the Missouri governor (Jay Nixon) that opened his mouth about the Big 10 -- referencing the infamous comparison between Wisconsin/Northwestern and OSU/TT academically. The Big 10 had an expansion committee and MU was one of the teams on their radar. I'm not saying MU is right. Nor that they operated ethically in dealing with their Big 12 partners. I'm agreeing with the opposite conclusion. That they did not handle this correctly, or ethically.

What I am saying is to look at our responses to that. We have control of that -- "I hope to never see them again" or "screw them." Just recent examples of what many have said. Heck, I've said something similar at a time I'm sure. I guess that might be reasonable in the immediate aftermath, but now? I don't know on the timing. But we are now 5+ years out.

And one thing is for sure. MU's decision to leave the Big 12 was smart. Very smart. If the Big 10 came calling now, you think we might consider jumping, assuming legal entanglements might be overcome? Perhaps we might just do it a different way.

Maybe time to ... slowly ... let ... it ... go.

We're just really better than the prolonged bitterness. At least I think we are. But so be it.

What is the main purpose of rooting for a sports team -- in the final analysis? Enjoyment, fun -- something like that. And it becomes a deep loyalty. When another fan base hates what you love, that can inspire some serious enjoyment of life.

I can tell you that I never had more fun than when we beat MU in big games. Greatest game in AFH history? Right. Amazing game. Someone remember the 2007 game at Arrowhead? Reesing to Meier. What got our blood boiling? Norm Stewart. Steve Stipanovich. Jason Sutherland. The Antlers.

Some may see it as "hatred." Kind of. I mean, we're not killing anybody. So it's not really like that. It's sports hatred, and it is very healthy. Red Sox/Yankees, Duke/UNC, Michigan/Ohio St. We had that. We don't have that any more. Solely because Bill Self says so.

Bill Self is the boss at KU. I'm glad about that. But he is dead wrong on this issue. Far beyond wrong.

Nose, face, one cut off to spite the other. All the while sucking on our pacifiers.

Or the ever angry, vengeful, scorned woman whose husband left her for the hot 25 year old. She may be right about who is wrong, and who ruined (or tried to ruin) everything. But it's an ugly and unflattering look.

Not one I prefer for KU.

@jayballer54 And importantly for KU moving forward, Udoka and Preston aren't even on the list. Nice.

nuleafjhawk said:

I realize that I'm a communist or whatever, but guys that stay one year mean nothing to me.

Maybe the best quote of the calendar year. And when someone adds "whatever" to a quote like that, it adds depth. It presents many considerations.

I just don't give one rip about the NBA, or NBA careers, or any of that. My consideration is KU basketball only, first and foremost. I want players where the other stuff happens because of good careers and contributions to KU hoops.

And ladies and gentlemen, it has been proven, beyond doubt, that one year, OADs are not needed for that. I've long held that position.

If we are unable to snag big time post players as has been speculated, then why not focus on the next tier and PROMISE recruits that we won't be crooning for the next top 10, possible OAD? It's as easy as doing it.

But sure as day is long, we'll be after the next top 10 center that will leave us at the alter. And leave us with nothing else much to show of it in the recruiting class.

Look at our post position. It's really sad. Udoka is terrific. Preston, we'll see -- then what?

It's dangerously thin.

For the life of me, I can't figure out why we can't or won't cash in on some #50 something big guys.

I do think a large part of it is our hyper focus on the top guys. Chasing the ones in the bush vs. getting one in the hand.

That one in the hand will give us multiple seasons in the program. Real KU guys. Not the pitstop stuff.

I may be a commie too.

The issue is not doubting Devonte, but it's questions about Devonte as the point guard -- as the team leader with the ball.

Here's EJs stats his Junior season - 10.2 PPG/3.5 assts/1.8 tov/43% shooting

Devonte is not near the ball handler that Mason was. That's a high bar though. Devonte's ball handling is good, but more in line with a Tyshawn -- a glider. He's not a guy, so far, you can just throw the ball to and have 100% confidence. But he's pretty darned solid.

The stat comparison to Mason on turnovers is interesting -- Mason had 1.9 tov as THE primary ball handler. Devonte had 1.8 as the two guard, playing point perhaps 5-8 minutes a game.

Here's a comparison -- EJ had 1.8 tov his junior season. Exact same as Graham. When EJ became the point guard, that became 3.1. Worth watching with Devonte.

But here's where I see a difference in favor of Devonte. You'll see that EJ and Devonte have roughly the same shooting percentage their junior seasons, but Graham averaged 3.2 more points per game. First thought -- Devonte shot more, right? Barely. EJ 11.0 attempts per 40 minutes, Devonte 11.6.

The difference in how they scored. EJ just 1.5 free throw attempts per 40 minutes; Devonte 2.9. EJ shot worse from three, and made just 1.8 threes per 40. Devonte made 3.0 threes per game. Advantage Devonte.

Devonte got the line a bit more, and benefitted from Self's "open season" on three point shots. But Devonte shot at 38.8 and EJ 33.8 from three their junior season. EJ dipped to 33.1 his senior season.

Another interesting note. Devonte got to the line a whopping 4.3 times per 40 his freshman season. That has dropped quite a bit since. EJ did nearly the same his freshman season at 4.0 per 40. But EJ only play 151 minutes to Devonte's 517 their freshman seasons. Devonte's per 40 is more reliable.

I think Devonte has a great chance to get to the line at least twice as much as this past season, which would be over 5 per 40, and to bump his three percentage up to his prior percentage -- freshman season he was 42.5 and sophomore 44. EJ got to 40% his sophomore season but was a career 34.2 shooter from three. Devonte is at 41.2 for his career. That is a huge, huge difference. And I see no scenario possible where Devonte shoots below his three point % last season. Odds favor improvement.

Devonte will be better a good bit better than EJ this season. I am quite confident in that. While some of the numbers may compare a bit, and they were in the same situation -- being behind a PG in the class ahead of them, Devonte is simply the better player.

But it is unfair for us to compare Devonte to the greatest PG in KU history. Mason won POY from everyone. Mason got the FT line 7.3 times per 40. Good grief. And he shot 47.1% from three. He was all everything. We may never see a KU PG like that again in our lifetimes. That shouldn't be our bar.

As far junior seasons, Graham is better than EJ. Graham's PER was 17.4 last season. EJ's was 14.8 his junior season. Mason was 18.1 in his junior year. EJ plunged to 11.8 with the ball in his hands. Mason, of course, exploded to 25.5 his senior season. Graham? I'd bet on right around 19-20. That's where Tyshawn Taylor was his senior season, and that would be just fine.

I think this really comes down to the eye test thing. Can Devonte stand up and be the man? Or is he a two guard being miscast as a PG, like we found out was the case is EJ?

I'm going with @KUSTEVE on this one. We can't expect Mason. But there's no reason at all to expect an EJ like collapse. I'm going with a TT like senior season.

@Texas-Hawk-10 The Spurs are set at point guard … as news today that they may take a run a Chris Paul. Just information.

@BeddieKU23 You mentioned Vick. I think Vick could start over Svi. He seemed favored down the stretch last season.

@justanotherfan Nah, the way things work is we'll play Mizzou when they have their best team since 2012 and we have our worst. Should have been kicking their a**es the last five seasons. Sure, we'll play A&M and Nebraska and Colorado, but not MU. We just gave away five thumpings of our most hated rival. But we've enjoyed our pacifiers.

Self leaves, life goes on. I wish I had an ounce of worry about it. I don't. He's given us a chunk of his life. There are other good coaches that can keep us chugging along. We might not win the big 12 every year (horrors), but you never know how other things might shake out. We could descend in the darkness or maybe a new coach will win a national title with Self's players. Or maybe Self stays 15 more seasons and all is good.

Thought for sure we'd get the 'cocks, since they got the FF and Martin had coached against Self.

Kobe Bryant. Volume shooter deluxe.

@Texas-Hawk-10 Ok, perhaps I am simply ignorant. It's the NBA. So I'm not a great source. But such a definitive statement seems unwise. It is unlikely that your premise is relevant. I don't think any team would draft Mason as their "point guard of the future" -- like the guys you see at the top of the draft. Further, it would seem that many teams do, in fact, draft more than one point guard; and that some teams use first round picks on possible back ups. Of course, the Spurs may not draft Mason. That's likely correct given the numbers and draft positions. But to dismiss it seems silly.

Sounds perfect. Or how about one of the Sixers 2nd round picks, after they snag JJ with the third pick? To join Embiid. I might actually watch some NBA.

Why would Svi have an announcement date if he's leaving?

Common usage in a basketball context is much different, and the intent is obvious. Of course, if someone is looking to be offended, they will be offended. The PC police are always patrolling, always looking to claim something to be an insult. Good grief.

We are definitely a better team with Svi. No doubt. Skilled and experienced, there is an argument that he could end up being our 2017-18 MVP. There is the possibility, as well, that he doesn't start. Regardless, I hope he comes back. I would be interested in the argument that we are better without him.

KC Star article says he's a 6'7" forward. The guy shrunk. Interesting to hear how he has expanded his skill set since leaving Kansas, particularly ball handling.

I'm not saying the Udoka is Okafer, but Udoka this season could be a highly productive "only big on the floor." He can give us rim protection that we lacked with LL. @jaybate-1-0 is right. The lock down defense is impossible without credible bigs. Coleby was not a credible big. Bragg wasn't either (though he had the talent to be). And LL lacked in the rim protection category. Self's best coaching job in my opinion with the patch work up front.

This season seems like it might be different defensively.

We will not be as strong on the perimeter, which is not a bold statement. But could we be better?

I don't think we'll necessarily be better over the course of a season, record wise, but we may be a team more sustainable in March. Better D.

It's a national championship season at Kansas, and we expect that, until it isn't.

The key is inscribed with #BIFM I hear (or maybe not).

@jaybate-1.0 All the stuff with Bragg adds up to a guy with a major marijuana problem. Lots of whispers on that topic. But he seems like a guy with a good attitude. Was positive on the bench. That has to be it. And it would explain his middling performance. But of course, there may be other off court stuff beyond what we know, or facts that aren't public too.

I think the Coleby transfer deal has come clearer into focus. The KC Star reported that Self and Coleby talked and it was arrived at that Coleby would be best served going somewhere else. Right, he wasn't going to play.

Coleby said, “It’s tough to leave but something that had to be done,” Coleby said. “He (Self) said he didn’t want me to leave, but he agreed it was probably best for my future. If I could put up the numbers it probably would be the best thing I could do.”

Self said, “Dwight and I have visited about this multiple times since the end of our season and he has worked so hard academically to put himself in a position to make this decision,” Self said. “We wish Dwight nothing but the very best moving forward. He felt the opportunity to go to a place and have the option to play quite a bit more and have more of a significant role would enhance his chances to play professionally in the future.”

Jack Whitman's arrival sealed the deal.

Coleby was nudged out. Strategically. Gently. Diplomatically. Zero doubt now. One of those deals where Self supplied the information and Coleby was left to make the decision -- maybe not this harsh, but "Dwight, we love you. We want you to stay. But you won't play much."

We've seen it before.

Self did the guy a favor. And he cleared a scholarship. Funny how that works.

@jayballer54 You said -- "WTF - - -to well he must not be concerned about winning - - to well at least he didn’t go to Duke - - to well this really lowers my expectations for the year - - to we needed him - - to well glad he didn’t come if he didn’t want the spotlight --to well he isn’t that good anyways ..."

That is exactly what we see here sometimes. Almost verbatim.

@nuleafjhawk Imagine putting your stadiums on Champions Drive and none of them every being a champion? So Missouri-ish.

@JhwkrRedLegs So tell me more .. what do you suggest happened in the locker room? Sorry if I missed something posted on another thread on this topic.

@BeddieKU23 I have kind of looked at this differently. Just one theory. And I'll admit the evidence seems to indicate that Whitman may have been a reaction to word Coleby might leave.

But it could be something else. Coleby's transfer thoughts could have been the reaction.

To be honest, who here really thinks of Coleby to be a reliable 3rd big? Not me. If fact, the idea of Coleby playing any substantive minutes made me long for the days of Jamari Traylor. Really, it did.

In fact, other than a few flashes, Coleby just wasn't very good. We can run the gamut of excuses, but he took forever to rehab and many times was useless. That's reality. Of course, he was of great help on a few occasions.

If you were Bill Self, would you bank on Coleby to be your #3 big?

I think it's a reasonable possibility that Self was investigating the transfer possibilities and was looking to upgrade. He thus upgraded with Whitman. And it's possible that upgrading with Whitman was the impetus for Coleby to consider transferring.

Why? The #4 big is not a great place to be, particularly in a team that has played small in the past year.

Of course, the associated scholarship issues could be entangled.

You can thank the Title IX baloney regarding scholarships. Football is classified as a male sport, when it is open to all comers. Women just aren't able to compete. (you know, those antiquated views on gender some suggest I guess don't apply for women when it comes to football). It's not that they CAN'T, it's just that they are not good enough.

This is the absolute travesty and injustice of Title IX.

It's comical. Had a acquaintance/friend whose daughter had never rowed in her life. She got a full ride D-1 scholarship for rowing.

Meanwhile, a kid who has played baseball his entire life, is D-1 level quality, gets 25% -- I've seen it with the players I've dealt with. All so a girl who has never played a sport gets a free ride -- all in the name of gender equity (and oddly, or interesting, or hypocritically, or all of the above, the same people who profess gender equity ignore the fact that the genders aren't equal. Or they are only equal when it is convenient. In fact, with some of this garbage, I can't believe there's not a scholarship category for "casserole" -- See Stewie for that explanation).

Football revenue powers D-1 sports -- all D-1 sports, women and men. And it is the men that support the women. How sexist. But undeniably true.

This is a 2012 list I had. It may be off by a few.

!0_1494946366433_Scholarships.jpg ↗

@JayHawkFanToo @Kcmatt7 Combine Weber and Cuonzo? Can anyone do one of mix deals where they combine faces? A squeaky black dude .. Mike Tyson?