🏀 KuBuckets Archive

A couple of topics heading into our first exhibition:

1. A recent quote from Bill Self that has flown a bit under the radar, but may be the most important thing Self has said in recent months -- when asked about his concerns, Self said, “Still low-post scoring offensively with our back to the basket." Pretty concerning. That was of course the root of our downfall offensively last season. Our post players simply could not score consistently on the block, which is a must in Self's system. Our close to rim scoring was woefully inefficient. Ellis, for example, struggled against players his height or taller, or with long arms. Lucas and Traylor just don't have that reliable skill set. And Cliff just struggled to get on the floor consistently. Leading up to this season, we have discussed Diallo and why he wouldn't solve that problem. He's not a ready-made, skilled post scorer. The reality is -- unless our players have improved significant -- Self needs to make tweaks to his system to create the opportunities for Kansas to be successful. The static wing entry was not successful last season, and there's a big risk that it won't be this season. Back in the early summer, I made mention that Self knows this is coming. He is fully aware that our back to the basket scoring failed last season. And he is fully aware that the same issue could arise this season. Therefore, heading in, Self needs to address that -- either by tweaks to his system, or by a different approach. We know that different schemes can hide this deficiencies. We'll see what Self has done to address it.

2. The solutions to the back to the basket scoring issues may come from two players -- Carlton Bragg and Hunter Mickelson. If this pair is the real deal, Self might not need as many tweaks. I do apologize that I've been on this Carton Bragg bandwagon since last fall, but I love his game. In seeing him play, and his widely diverse skill set, this guy can and should be able to improve Kansas immediately from where we were last season. He's going to be our biggest surprise on the floor this season. This may be a touch irrational, but I think by the end of the season there could be a reasonable debate as to who is better on the floor, Bragg or Ellis. Bragg is a guy that can impact the game in many different ways. All he needs is Self to put him to use. He can handle the ball, he can shoot from the outside, he's got a nice post game, he's mobile, and he's active. Like all freshman, he'll have a learning curve, and he will struggle, but Bragg seems like he's a big answer this season. His diverse skill set can take some pressure off of the need for Kansas to score regularly on the block. Further, Bragg is competent enough in the post to help out in that regard. The next answer is Hunter Mickelson. We witnessed a player at the WUGs that deserves PT. But more importantly, he's a guy that brings attributes to the table that our other post players don't. He's long. He can change shots. He can protect the rim. He has an ability to score down low. Adding Hunter Mickelson as a transfer looked like a wasted scholarship last season. Now, our national title hopes could ride on the pasty redhead. Would there be anything more satisfying that to see Mickelson bust out this season, win a starting job, and be a big contributor?

Here's some of what Fran Fraschilla said after attending KU's practice yesterday:

"Coaching raving about Cheick Diallo's attitude/work ethic but very raw offensively. Bragg more ready now."

"Hunter Mickelson picking up where he left off at the World Univ. Games. Can score inside."

With our stellar perimeter rotation likely set and our clear strength, with questions in the post bleeding over from last season, and with Diallo's saga, our season could rest squarely on the shoulders of Bragg and Mickelson.

I think if Self backed off on Herard it is because it would negatively impact our pursuit of a better player. I'm sure Self would gladly take Herard and one of the other guys. So I'm not sure why Self would back off just because Herard might want more P.T. (unless Herard is a complainer or something). Wouldn't Self just say, "this is our situation and we'd be glad to have you?"

@Texas-Hawk-10 - Why do you say that the 4/5 distinction "has absolutely no bearing on how Self recruits."

Personally, all I want from Self in the post is to make his first focus ensuring we have at least one post player with stellar basket scoring ability, as his system seems dependent upon it.

@JRyman I was of course kidding about the meds .. this just seemed a little out of character for you, meaning your approach.

I am very interested in hearing why I'm wrong on things. If it's just "because Bill Self does it this way", that doesn't really inspire a discussion. Perhaps that's what you want. But I love the discussion when it comes to hoops.

And I "bash" Traylor's performance. Perhaps you can defend it. I don't even think there are Traylor supporters, per se. They just don't criticize. No one here really defends his performance. Even some that have tried to explain his minutes end up conceding multiple points in some way or another.

So, would you rather have Traylor that Bragg this season? Go on record now. I'm interested.

And, actually, is there any player on this team that we all would root for more to have a great, kick-ass season than Traylor? I don't think so. It would be tremendous for him to break out and have a great, story-book season. I think we all would hope for that.

On BG's injury, I have spoken directly to an orthopedic surgeon, good friend of mine that deals with sports injuries all of the time, as part of the foundation for my comments. He agrees 100% with my comments here. Does that mean I'm right? Of course not.

I didn't hear you disputing my take on Embiid's knee injury, cause and effect, etc. That kind of played out as I mentioned at the time Embiid was rushed back, didn't it? I might have been right on that one ...

@JRyman So why do you bother? If this whole dynamic is so repulsive, what's the reason for being part of this site?

It is common place for folks to try to demean and devalue a contrary opinion by calling it "hate", because it implies irrationality. It's no different than crying racism. It's a way to squash an intelligent conversation by inflammatory accusations.

If a person refuses to consider possibilities beyond Bill Self's tunnel vision, then there is no discussion. That perspective ignores the balance of the basketball world. But it doesn't mean that Bill Self is wrong on things, either.

Folks can literally see how three final four teams approached offensive basketball, see how it could apply to our personnel, but ignore it. Call it what you want, but the refusal to consider the possibilities has a number of definitions.

No one here "hates" Jamari Traylor, or at least I don't see any hint of that. "Cyber bullying" -- good lord. I feel compelled to reply to your post because your post is just absolute and complete nonsense regarding this site. You sound like a child crying to his mommy (such a comment, ironically, may be construed as "cyber bullying" by those with thin skin).

What we -- or at least I -- see is a player who performs poorly in games, in large part. Being a "damn fine young man" has nothing to do with analyzing and critiquing game performance.

I'm not sure if you watched the WUGs, but Self put his tail on the bench much of the time. What gives?

Damn fine young men that don't produce, lose a lot of basketball games.

Jamari Traylor has been a significantly below average player for Kansas. The numbers don't lie. Just as Tyler Self would be a significantly (more) below average player. Or you. Or me. All in different degrees. We all may be fine people. But our basketball skills are varying. You are attempting to link criticism of performance to how someone might feel about one as a person.

But Traylor isn't the issue. Critique and criticism that deviates from Bill Self's approach is what offends you.

By your logic, any coach is always right because he has more information, and should not be criticized for his decisions. That is ludicrous. If that is not your position, then your post collapses upon itself.

@JRyman Perhaps this is the day you failed to take your medication. I don't know. Obviously by the other thread you started you've picked this day to lash out at your fellow posters for daring to comment, analyze and critique Kansas basketball. Take a deep breath. Count to 10.

We predicted back in the spring that Self would start Traylor at the beginning of the season. Makes sense. It's how Self handles stuff like this early.

Works for me.

@jaybate-1.0 Terrific post. We think alike, some of the times. "In the high low offense, to have a 4 and a 5 that can both score b2b and shoot it from 17-20, and put it on the deck to drive in between, yay, this is a gift from the basketball god second to none." Great quote.

Bragg is the total package.

@Statmachine I don't think Self should ever (rarely) give deference to an inferior player. I don't think it would negatively impact guys in the 15-60ish range at all (5 star, 4 star, whatever -- it's this range I prefer) . In fact, I think it would help. What I think hurts is when inferior players play over better players, younger players. And if anyone thinks this doesn't hurt Self in recruiting, they're missing the boat.

Look, we all watched the WUGs, right? We know Bragg is better than Traylor. I asked a while back if there was anyone who would rather have Traylor that Bragg this season --- crickets.

Self knows too.

@justanotherfan I have two kids in college right now. I thus have contact with multiple families -- their friends -- that have kids in college as well. Different income categories. One of my daughter's roommates got a pell grant. She doesn't work while in school right now, fyi.

And I know, the market isn't perfect. Never is. And I never said the market will regulate itself and I didn't say that is assumed. The market imperfection argument is always a safe refuge. But you don't (and can't) refute what I've said on the topic, because it is true. You said prices will go up because of the desire for profit. But you ignore the fact that prices go down because of the desire for profit. It's called a price point.

If kids borrow too much money, and can't pay it back, then they shouldn't go to college. It's not worth it. Likewise, I would not pay for my kids' college if I didn't think it was worth it, e.g., I wouldn't pay for a degree in the fine arts, or philosophy. That's a market decision.

But there is also risk with college. Every kid isn't entitled to success simply because he/she goes to college and racks up debt. It doesn't work that way. There is always risk.

You, apparently, think a kid (only if his parents can't pay) should get free money from the government and not assume the risk? Makes no sense to me.

Why point out something that is obvious -- a public defender getting paid less than an attorney at a large firm? Folks that need to work in the public defenders office either didn't do well relatively speaking in law school. The bottom of the class. Couldn't get a better job. Or they are just young and getting a foot in the door. They aren't as marketable. It's how life works.

Further, some choose to do that for a living because they want to. But like anything else, it's more about supply and demand. Generally, the smart, motivated, and talented lawyers end up making more money.

You transitioned your discussion to the plight of rural America. The government has created incentives there I recall, loan forgiveness, etc., for medical fields. I don't know the specifics. But isn't that a more reasonable approach than just saying, "free money, you get a grant?"

"Borrowing doesn't work anymore ...."

If I grant you your point for the sake of argument, I would say that throwing our tax dollars at it in the form of grants, which creates no incentive for college costs to be decreased, is no answer.

Grants -- the government paying for school -- as I said before, is a large contributor to this and doesn't permit the costs to come down closer to the real value of the education.

@jaybate-1.0 If there is no Cheick, Landon has to be in the rotation due to his rebounding. You are correct. But we have the Traylor problem and that Self-made roadblock. We only have one big man that's a liability on the boards.

Bragg showed at the WUG to be an active rebounder with an impressive rebounding rate of .44 per minute played (though rebounding rates in 8 game windows can obviously be skewed, just as Traylor rate was skewed lower than his norm).

I would expect Bragg to be a .30 on the rebounding rate, which is outstanding.

My opinion is that Bragg is our best post player, but lacks only the experience to challenge Ellis for the throne. He'll demand minutes now by his play.

@justanotherfan Again, I think the point is missed here. Borrow the money. Pay it back.

There is a big difference between being given money vs. borrowing it.

What would have happened if you didn't get grants would have been that you would have borrowed the money. Your standard of living would have been decreased a bit for the years you paid that extra money back. Life's rough. But then again, I'm guessing you would have done just fine.

So some kid that wants to be doctor should be given our money, simply because of his financial circumstances, when an alternative is to borrow it and pay it back?

This mentality of expecting others to foot the bill astonishes me on one hand, but is not a surprise on the other. That's how our culture has deteriorated.

One might wonder what is a more productive profession -- Plumber, electrician, or attorney? Regardless, our country needs each of those professions filled. A smart kid that becomes an electrician can run his own company. You talk about electricians and plumbers as if they are inferior professions.

You mention that programs are "cost prohibitive." So that's my problem? I should have to pay my tax dollars because the cost is high? Perhaps there should be a focus then on the costs.

And remember, it's supply and demand. If the cost is high, but the return is high, folks will pay the price -- see med school costs. Paying back a $200,000 student loan for an orthopedic surgeon is a certainly reasonable. If the cost of the program is not worth the attendance cost, then folks won't go -- unless there is something artificially affecting the market.

But there is the key -- unless there is something artificially affecting the market. There's your answer. The government subsidizing education artificially affects the market. It increases the costs because this monolith is helping to fund the process. Thus folks taking the programs don't feel the entire sting of the cost, and their market decision is affected. That leads directly to the rise in costs of college, because the colleges are setting their costs based on folks continuing to pay the price (and that includes their free money, or grants, on the backs of taxpayers).

Any questions?

@Texas-Hawk-10 It has been an interesting discussion .. and I meant $2500 per semester at JCCC, not per year. Tuition, books, misc.

I do appreciate that you recognize the tax contributions for items such as student loan grants are a type of charity.

On your suggestion to set up an college degree program through my business, I probably won't ever do that. Again, my choice is that I would rather take money that would otherwise come to me and provide it to what I see as a more worthy charity, such as St. Jude. If I have an employee I like, or I want to retain, I simply pay them more and they can do with the money what they would like.

@JayHawkFanToo -- that's pretty funny. One of my close friends is very liberal (masquerading as a "moderate Republican" for many years until 2008; you know, the "I'm liberal on social issues, but conservative financially" B.S. ), and I continue to prod him to send in more tax money each year as a contribution to the government. To date, I am quite sure he has not. Shocking.

There is some reporting today that UK is still very much involved with Giles, and that Giles will decide mid-November.

Understanding that none of our info is foolproof, what if Herard chooses Kansas?

We then have Lightfoot and Herard.

While we'd like to think that those two wouldn't dissuade Bolden, the timing of events here does not appear in our favor. Further, if Giles does go to UK, that certainly makes Duke a more likely spot for Bolden.

Ideally, it would be nice to get a commitment from Bolden before Herard decides.

Hmmm. Just don't know.

@Texas-Hawk-10 "Necessity"? Think about that. You're saying that college is a "Necessity."

A necessity is, for example, food, water, shelter, and clothing. Something that you can't live without, generally.

College may be a necessity, generally, to earn a better living. But that's about it -- and many folks earn excellent livings without it (exceptions not the rule).

And in reality, my suggestions stops no one from attending college. Pay for it. Borrow the money, or work, or some combination of that. Why is it written in stone that someone finishes college in four years?

A full semester of junior college at JCCC costs about $2500 full-time, or less. You can't tell me that someone can't work, borrow a little money, and pay for that. Then transition to a four year school where -- even at KU, tuition is appx. $5500 a semester. This is incredibly affordable.

Millions of folks support their families without college. Your point of view is about standard of living. That is not a necessity.

Is it not a necessity to have car? Should the government buy everyone a car? And is a 1995 Buick enough? Shouldn't it be a 2010 model at least?

You say that there is "no possible way to prevent people from taking advantage of the programs such as these."

You are wrong on that -- don't have the programs.

The government creates these quasi welfare programs that bleed us dry.

A great example is the Postal Service. A bloated entity, always running a deficit, overpaying employees, excellent retirement -- and doing a job that private companies can do better. And we keep it around so we can send a letter for 45 cents? And so business and mass market and fill our mail boxes with garbage?

Our nation is running serious deficits, and our debt continues to explode.

Unreal.

@Texas-Hawk-10 You have quoted certain passages and provided your interpretation. Thank you.

Give to "Caeser what is Caeser's", as an example. I never have said "screw the government" in totality. I guess my suggestion would be that Caeser needs a lot less than Caeser takes.

How you can logically interpret tax payers footing your college bill based on bible passages discussing food, drink, and clothing -- necessities of life -- I will never know.

Your working awfully hard to justify tax payers footing your college bill.

i would suggest that you double your contribution to the government this year. Voluntarily. You might be able to help a number of worthy candidates.

Hard to argue against the Bible.

@konkeyDong I understand your position. I believe that rules are rules, but if they're bad rules, then change them. Change the typing class rule. That permits equal enforcement. The enemy of rules is inequitable enforcement, or discretion. It creates chaos and discord. See the block/charge rule.

You get into discretion. Does the theoretically bad classes in Mali justify ineligibility? How about the bad classes some recruit has from Arizona? Or simply not taking a core class? Is taking a horribly deficient core class any different than not taking one at all?

Of course, the rules are in place because they set a standard for NCAA competition. They are so folks can't necessarily blow off school and just be an athlete -- all in theory. The difficulty with bending rules is that a slippery slope is created.

It's like nudity on TV. The more it has been allowed, the more certain folks will want to press the limits. The more the "fringe" becomes the "norm." The more the foundation of our society is chipped away. Pick your topic.

Bright line rules work.

I am biased, I admit it. I think rules work.

But I am not biased to the extent that my love for KU hoops will change my mind, nor my strong desire for a national title. If Diallo does not meet NCAA standards, he should sit.

But what ticks me off is if the rules are not applied consistently. Thus, my preference to bright line rules. That removes discretion. And discretion is the enemy of rules enforcement -- just ask John Higgins and our referee friends.

@Texas-Hawk-10 How about if you fashion a guess as to how much I contribute to various charities each tax year? My favorite charity is St. Jude children's hospital. That might address your false hypocrisy claim.

I would prefer to provide my money voluntarily, for example, to this endeavor, and other worthy charities -- as opposed to the wasteful monolith that has become our government, simply so an overpaid federal worker can process my money, take some for their retirement, and in the process devalue my "contribution" -- the charge for the government's overhead.

So I take by that question that I should be forced by the government to contribute to your college education?

I simply believe that taxes should be used for necessities. Your college education is not a necessity.

@Texas-Hawk-10 First, maybe you'll point out to me the hypocrisy.

No, I don't think there should be any "grants". I think you should be able to borrow the money and pay it back. That is much, much different, and is kind of the line I draw on government involvement. Thousands of kids work while in school and save up money working in the summer, and borrow money for school.

I know what the "grant'" system is designed to do. I don't agree with it. Borrow the money, and pay it back. If you earn a scholarship like everyone else due to grades and ACT/SAT score, or financial contribution to the school, fine, more power to you. Though at a public university, I'm generally opposed to any scholarship that doesn't pay for itself, or is not supported by donations.

Answer this, if you could -- Why should I have to work and 1) pay for my kids' college, and 2) deprive my family of money I have earned to subsidize your education; all while my kids can't sniff a grant?

Listen to the sense of entitlement -- you ask, "Should I have not received assistance because I came from a single parent family without a large income?"

Uh, no. Why should I -- "we" -- subsidize you with our hard earned money because your family doesn't have a "large income"?

You think that because of that misfortune, you should get the government to pay your way through school? Please explain to me why that misfortune should entitle you a large government hand out?

I'm sorry for your loss. But one thing that I did before I really started saving for college for my kids was purchase cheap term life insurance so that if I died, my kids' college costs were covered.

Because your parents didn't take care of that, I have to help pay for your college?

You'll have to explain to me why you should get my money, free and clear, and not have to pay it back.

@drgnslayr I don't think his course work at KU matters ... I believe the threshold issue is whether he was eligible, or whether he's a partial qualifier like McLemore and Traylor, upon graduation from H.S.

I was now curious .. looks like someone milked a wildebeest ↗.

@Statmachine I think you are exactly right on both counts. He's likely denied, but for a good reason. I read yesterday on Twitter where folks were whining about Caleb Swanigan and how the NCAA should consider his circumstances. It's the same with Daillo. If Diallo took a core Algebra course in Mali from some dude milking a wildebeest, then should that count when a kid in the US wouldn't get the same deference? Rules are rules, follow them.

Personally, I'd just rather know so we can all finally get on the Hunter Mickelson bandwagon. And it's weird how chemistry and everything else works out. A loss in one area can mean a gain in another.

The only result I fear is no result, uncertainty, a cloud hanging there in anticipation of some supposed OAD savior. Screw that. We should have inked a non-OAD post player instead stringing out our recruiting to last possible moment, and then creating this circus that should have been reasonably anticipated (or flat out known) ahead of time. But we are where we are.

Starting at center, from Jonesboro, Arkansas, #42, Huuuuunter Mick-el-son .. say it with me now.

I am resisting the urge to get into another political discussion ... we need the season to start.
.

@Bosthawk Nope, he's a non-presumed OAD, pretty much like Bragg. Likely at least two season, but that could change. Not that it means a lot at this stage, but he doesn't show up in 2017 mock drafts -- mock draft 1 ↗ and mock draft 2 ↗. The #20 player is not a presumed OAD.

@Hawk8086 @BeddieKU23 -- Yikes. So Bolden could follow Giles to Duke?

To quote Paulie from the Sopranos, "freaking shoot me now."

@JayHawkFanToo I guess I am curious as to why Bolden is waiting on Giles, if that's the case? If it's because Bolden would go to Duke if Giles didn't, that would be a bit concerning to me. What post player (other than Lightfoot) are we the leader then? Wouldn't appear to be any of them then.

Bolden is too perfect of a fit not to come here.

@jayballer54 If Bolden has Duke higher than Kansas, and would go to Duke if Giles went elsewhere, that's one possibility.

If that's not it -- if perhaps Bolden thinks Giles might go to Kansas -- Self should simply tell Bolden that he'd pull out of the Giles deal if Bolden will commit.

I sure would like to think that Bolden isn't tied to Giles' decision and isn't favoring Duke. But then again, Duke might be above Kansas in the recruiting pecking order.

@jayballer54 Right .. I think Giles commits this weekend or shortly after his visit to Duke. Then Bolden goes KU. Or at least that's how I'd like it to happen.

@justanotherfan That's a deal ... I appreciate your thoughts as well.

@justanotherfan

Guns: I'm curious if you have an answer as to how you get guns from the thugs and criminals? No liberal has that answer. Tell me how we get guns from thugs and criminals?

Minimum Wage: How can there be more low and minimum wage jobs now than pre-2008? I can't believe Obama hasn't fixed that. Really, folks are being paid the value that they bring to the table. What the $15 an hour minimum wage folks (socialists) don't realize, and ignore, is that inflation will destroy any supposed benefit they get. Example - If KC raises it's city's minimum wage, what do you think will happen? The minimum wage workers live where they work. The price of groceries in KC will go up, restaurants, everything. Further, folks will lose their jobs. Businesses are in the business to make money, and paying some unskilled person that is easily replaced an artificially high wage will change how a business operates.

College Tuition: Don't get me started. I saved for my children's education. I pay our way. Yet folks that don't save get grants. One of my daughter's friends, her dad, is a lazy ass. Bounces from job to job. Lives off unemployment. Pockets cash without paying taxes from side jobs. And his daughter, because they don't make much money, got a number of grants and her school basically paid for. It's flat bullshit (sorry).

School Shootings: You miss the point. It is illegal to bring a gun to school. No gun zones -- for everyone except the criminals. Where else would a person feel most comfortable doing such an act?

Unemployment Benefits: I know a few folks that work seasonal jobs, get laid off over the winter, claim unemployment, sit on their tails, and then cheat the system by working for cash. Unemployment benefits were meant to be temporary and transitional, not a way to make a living. And so what about record profits? That's what companies are formed for. To make money. Workers wages have slid because workers are easily replaceable. High skill level isn't easily replaceable. If someone will do the job for $10 an hour, why pay $15 an hour? Personally, I want the companies I invest in to either grow their business (stock prices), or pay me a dividend. I own my own business. I take all the risk. My employees get paid every paycheck. They have no risk in my business. If I falter, they leave. It is my skill that creates the income. Why should folks that are relatively unskilled make more? And that's the key issue. Folks that don't create money, want more money. The guy that works at the car wash doing a job anyone can do wants more money -- when he can be replaced by literally anyone.

Urban Violence: Sorry, but the poor folks in the rural populations don't murder, rob, and maim like the urban population. CEO's and profits. Again, jealously. CEOs create value and profit. They do what the burger flipper can't do. They create the job for the burger flipper -- he or she buys the franchise, takes the risk, puts in long hours, and builds a business. The burger flipper has no job but for the risk of the entrepreneur. The problem in the urban core, with the black population most particularly, is the rate of unwed births. 73% of all black children are born out of wedlock. No fathers in the home, no guidance, no morality. The black family structure has disintegrated in our urban areas. The work ethic has disintegrated. And yea, the whole war on drugs was so unfair. Here's a memo -- don't break the law. That's a difficult concept for the liberals in this country to comprehend. It must be the evil CEO, or the evil business owner. Again, no personal responsibility. Drugs are nothing but a negative for our society. But then again, loosening the drug laws and limiting the number of felons in jail will continue to add the democratic voting block. Just make sure they don't have to show ID because that is racist -- you know, to prove who you are before you vote.

Abortion: My point was that women are treated differently. With men, the point of responsibility begins when the sex act is engaged. A man is then subject to the whim of the woman. She can unilaterally terminate the life of his child and he has no say. Further, she can of course keep the child and subject the man to years of financial responsibility (which is how it should be). The woman doesn't have to be responsible with her sex act.

@justanotherfan The fact is, no matter how you dress it up, a vast, vast majority of gun deaths are committed by folks breaking the law -- as opposed to an accidental shooting, etc. Laws say "don't do it, you will be put in jail" and they do it anyway.

There is also a substantial and immoral violent culture that permeates urban America, and it is this violence that leads to a majority of gun deaths.

Hillary Clinton and President Obama stand there and decry guns, but each has armed security. It is the ultimate hypocrisy. Law abiding gun owners, who own them to protect themselves, become the enemy of those that rely on guns for their safety.

They want me to give up the ability to protect myself and my family, but have no answers on how to get the guns out of the hands of thugs -- the ones that kill, rob, maim, and terrorize. It's amazing how many country folks have guns, yet no one gets shot. Just amazing.

Why would a thug comply with any law banning guns? That's the ultimate question that folks can't answer.

But the same political party that decry guns are the same folks that avoid all discussion of personal responsibility anyway on a vast majority of topics, namely, the democratic-socialist party.

Abortion on demand? Sure, why worry about the holding a woman responsible for having sex?

Refusal to Work? Sure, why not extend unemployment benefits?

Urban violence? Sure, why not blame racism?

School shooting? Sure, why not blame the gun?

No skills? Sure, why not raise the minimum wage?

Parents Don't Save for College? Sure, give them grants.

Rant over.

Interesting to compare to the 12,564 gun related deaths in 2014. Almost exactly the same.

Doug Gottlieb is well known on twitter for mindlessly calling for more gun control every time there is a tragedy -- "we have to try something else" -- yet he was keenly silent when it was reported that the driver in question was drunk (which now maybe she wasn't). No outrage about alcohol, nothing.

Anyway, guns protect law abiding citizens from thugs. Alcohol is basically for our pleasure.

Which has more value?

And holy crap, how many families are ruined by alcohol and alcohol related actions?

And of course there are 135,000 lung cancer deaths each year related to smoking.

The mindlessness of the gun control crowd is even more exposed.

Hard to decide what's a worse discussion topic ... the ever boring Cheick Diallo saga or women's basketball?

@joeloveshawks I guess I'm not hearing anyone saying that we should NOT sign him. It is questioning the value of the signing and whether it was just to get a body in the fold.

The numbers (usually) don't lie. A few seasons ago, a poster (I forget who now) did a nice analysis over five years of low and unranked players that exceeded their ranking. It came in just below 15%. There were a few borderline guys, but roughly correct.

Mitch Lightfoot is ranked, at present, as follows: Lightfoot is #117 at Rivals, #99 at ESPN, and #132 at 24/7.

And this goes to @DoubleDD's post -- his post was made with his heart. Respectfully, it did not appear that it was done with his head -- meaning it was passionate, it was about feelings -- about a kid chasing his dreams. That's cool. I get that. It is a nice story.

However, like @DoubleDD, I want KU to win national championships. That's the bottom line. That is how I evaluate every signing … will this guy help us get to that goal?

When I look at Lightfoot, I see a relatively slow, skinny kid who isn't a ball handler type. A guy that if he plays in the post, will be annihilated in the Big 12. A guy that doesn't appear to have much as far as post moves. And a guy whose shot from three point range is a slow trigger.

What I see is a project. He is not a guy that will likely help us win a national championship any time soon. And a marginal chance to do so later.

Right now, I don't see that he helps us get to that goal. A guy like Bragg or Bolden, you can see that immediately.

As Eric Bossi said Lightfoot is a kid whose "real value" will be as a "junior and senior."

Guys like Lightfoot, like Traylor and Lucas, can become roster cloggers. They may not deter another signee now, but possibly later when they have experience, and when they have coach that favors experience. That #40 ranked player that wants to play now may be deterred by Lightfoot, who as junior, is getting better.

@DoubleDD mentioned Lightfoot in comparison to OADs -- meaning, isn't this what we want?

I would say "kind of."

I want highly talented guys that aren't OADs. Highly talented non-OADs usually means #15 - #60. It rarely means #100 or above. Historically, #15 - #60ish are the core type of guys that will put us in the position to win a national title. But it isn't of course possible to fill your roster solely with these guys.

That's where a guy like Lightfoot comes in.

The one thing I like about the Lightfoot signing that is in contrast to some other low/non-ranked signings is that Self is signing him early, and not as a late, roster filling signing. I doubt Self takes him at this stage of the game if he thinks he's a long-shot to be a quality rotation level player.

Let's see where he sits after his senior season. Kids mature, get bigger, grow, etc. @Crimsonorblue22 mentioned a Kevin Young comparison -- that would be quite nice. I'll take that right now.

The reality is that this signing will be judged in 2018-19 most likely, and by the ultimate composition of our current class.

Seems like a great kid that loves Kansas -

From the kusports.com article:

“My sights have always been on Kansas. It’s where I started and that’s where I’m going to finish,” said Lightfoot, who decommitted from New Mexico last April once it became apparent he had emerged as a big-time prospect following the state-title season.

“I met with my coach,” he said of AAU coach John Ortega and "he said, ‘What do you want out of this (re-opening recruitment)?’ I said, ‘I want to play at Kansas,’’’ Lightfoot said. “It’s been my goal since I knew what basketball was, ever since then. I’ve been working my butt off to try to get there. To all the kids sitting in the stands watching the Jayhawks, wanting to be a Jayhawk, you can definitely do it,” Lightfoot added.

Lightfoot — he said he has “aunts, uncles, cousins, a ton of family back there (in KC area),” — said his official visit solidified his decision to accept Bill Self’s scholarship offer. He said he made his decision official a couple days ago.

“My thing was I took all these visits. I was going to go where I felt comfortable. That was by far, Kansas. I felt like I was home there and it is home,” said Lightfoot, who also is a Chiefs fan (“we had season tickets for 20 years”) and Royals fan (“I watched the game last night).”

@JayHawkFanToo Right, I had said 2 of 3. I think that was realistic. Regardless of opinions on players, numbers certainly impact. I would agree though that Lightfoot shouldn't discourage any of the three.

Look at it this way, is our post recruiting a success if we get Bolden and Lightfoot only? Or Allen and Lightfoot? Or Herard and Lightfoot?

I would say no.

If it were Bolden and Allen, or Bolden and Herard, or Allen and Herard?

I would say yes.

@Texas-Hawk-10 Your summary is right on point.

This is a wait and see signing.

We need Bolden.

@JayHawkFanToo I agree obviously on the timing of the video stuff … and yes, I would definitely feel better if he finishes top 50. Admittedly superficial at this point.

But really, I'll feel much better if we get 2 of the 3 we're really pursuing hard in the post (Bolden, Allen, Herard).

I'm just concerned that Lightfoot could cost us the opportunity to do that, given our three bigs that will likely return.

The only thing I've seen on any video that is impressive about Lightfoot is his bounce. Here's another video [video](

But that doesn't mean he's not worth signing and developing. He won't look good as the 2nd post guy in the class, but would be fine as the 3rd.

As a comparison, go back and look at Carlton Bragg's videos -- the #21 player. Lightfoot isn't even on the same planet. Whether it be quickness, leaping ability, fluidity, ball handling, jump shot, post moves, whatever -- Bragg is superior. And it isn't close.

If you go to 1:35 on the Lightfoot video link above, you'll see a three point shot. This is not a guy that has the look of a D-1 level SF right now. Nor a D-1 level four. Who knows if he'll develop, or grow two inches, or bulk up, or whatever. When you look at his shot, he doesn't appear to have that natural flow to it. It actually reminds me a lot of Perry Ellis' shot. Watch Bragg's shoot. Much different.

Bragg is the kind of post player that moves like a SF, and has the game of a SF.

We just need to relax. Resist the urge to be giddy -- and for these purposes, I use "giddy" as meaning irrationally excited. Maybe we should simply square our expectations to exactly what his final ranking ends up being? See where, how and if he fits. Right now, he's a borderline top 100. So should there be any expectations? None -- zero. When/if he moves up, perhaps we reassess.

There is no way next season he's ahead of Bragg, Coleby, Lucas, or Bolden (or Herard, or Allen -- whoever we land). And there is no way he's ahead of any of our current perimeter guys. And that's fine. Come in, work, develop, an we'll see.

These comparisons to Budinger and Dekkar are like comparisons to Bragg. What I mean are guys that are NBA quality. Regardless of which commentator said what, or who posted what here, breathing Dekkar or Budinger in the same breath as Lightfoot is silly, and really unfair to Lightfoot right now. We have this tendency to have visions of grandeur with every signee -- he's this or he's that.

Chase Budinger was the #4 player in the country for goodness sake. And he plays in the NBA. I would certainly guess we would be pleased if he develops into that. As noted above, Sam Dekkar was the #13 player in the country. He's a stud. 1st round pick. Lightfoot is #117 at Rivals, #98 or something at ESPN, and #132 at 24/7.

One of these things is not like the other, which one is different, do you know? [do you know](

@jaybate-1.0 Remember, "bad ball" as it was last season, was largely the perpetual weave. The death of the high-low.

@DoubleDD You are exactly right. We need to fill a roster, and we need bodies and insurance. I just suggest that is to fill roster spots 10 or 11- 13, roughly.

I have no problem with Lightfoot as the third big in this class, if we have two top 50ish guys ahead of him. Guys like Traylor and Lucas are fine on our roster as insurance. As the 5th and 6th big. No quibble there. My emphasis is on playing.

I don't want guys like Lucas and Traylor having to play if they prove that they play at a talent level commensurate with their ranking (Lucas unranked, Traylor 132). Haven't both of them been exactly what their ranking told us they would be?

Look, neither can score back to the basket. Both are liabilities. We commiserate about losing Cliff and Embiid, or Cliff underachieving, as a reason why we didn't advance further last season or the one before season. That means, by consequence, that playing other guys in lieu of Cliff and Embiid cost us -- and it did. Lucas and Traylor. We know they did.

How much has playing Lucas and Traylor cost this team? We can see some of it as a partial excuse for our 2nd round losses. We couldn't do what Self wanted to do (and Self didn't adjust to what we had).

I'm usually against filling any hole with an OAD if it can be avoided.

I hold to my position that we can get guys outside OAD range, but in the high talent area (roughly top 60ish/or proven transfers). And sure, we'll get some lower than that. If we have an OAD here and there, or guys say outside the top 100 occupying rosters spots 10 and lower, that seems reasonable.

Lightfoot? Sure, welcome aboard. But if we don't snag two high talent bigs to fill our needs, then we've underachieved in recruiting.

@Hawk8086 Ok .. but really, do you ever want Lucas or Traylor playing for a Kansas team?

They're both below what our standards should be - to be an elite program.

Both were signed when our other options signed elsewhere (Lucas after Tarc went to AZ) and Traylor during the spring of 2011 fiasco. Both were forced signings to fill roster spots.

@BeddieKU23 @konkeyDong -- Bolden is visiting Oklahoma this weekend, per Paul Biancardi.

@Hawk8086 Blind trust. What a wonderful thing.

Tharpe, Thomas, Traylor, Lucas, Adams, Appleton, Peters, Anderson, Frankamp, Giles, Alexander, Doyle, White, Wesley, Lindsay, Selby, Mickelson, Case, Galindo, Downs.

While there have been far more hits than misses, I wouldn't bet your mortgage payment on it.

@wissoxfan83 I don't know. Seems like things from Chicago have been a little slow. Julian Wright, Sherron Colllins, Jamari Traylor, and Cliff Alexander.

Traylor was not a recruiting coup, or even near a top player. Not even top 100.

So since Collins graduated in 2010, we've had one player, who played one season, that was at top 100 player.

Of course, we snagged Milton Doyle for a few months.

Shouldn't we have a touch more activity there? Maybe my expectations are unrealistic.

"The fact of the matter is, we haven’t recruited Texas well, we haven’t recruited Chicago well, and we haven’t recruited Cali well in too long a time. Norm's kept us afloat with his east coast and south east pipeline, but if we want guys like Lightfoot to be more icing and less cake, we need to sort out that problem and sort it fast."

@konkeyDong Great quote. Great post, as @drgnslayr mentioned.

Look at our roster -- Mason (East), Graham (East), Selden (East), Bragg (East), Diallo (East), Greene (East), Vick (East). From a core talent standpoint, a big chunk comes from parts east of Lawrence, Kansas. That's seems big. And nothing in Texas, nothing in California, nothing from Chi-town, as mentioned by @konkeyDong.

The rest -- Ellis (in state), Svi (International), Coleby/Mick (Transfers), Traylor/Lucas (seriously, who cares).

But maybe I wonder why geography is important. Either we get good players, or we don't, right?

Seems like Texas would be fertile Kansas country for hoops. That seems the most important area in my book.

Here is a cut and paste from ESPN Insider regarding Adam Finkelstein's predictions. Good news is that he thinks Jarrett Allen will be either KU or UK. He also thinks Marques Bolden goes to Kansas, and that makes Allen's decision.

After a period of time where the momentum seemed to be with Duke, it seems that Self is zeroing in on this recruiting season's most important recruit (Bolden).

When we get a cease and desist letter, we'll have to remove this obvious violation of copyright laws. Read quickly.

Twelve of the 28 five-star prospects in the country remain uncommitted but as they continue to take visits and cut their lists, more and more information on their collegiate choices has begun to emerge. Here’s a look at where the most recent intel suggests these prospects are leaning at present:

No. 1 Harry Giles (PF, 6-9, 230, Oak Hill Academy (VA)/Winston-Salem NC) -- Duke Blue Devils

Duke has been the presumed leader for Giles since Day 1, and when Giles’ best friend and USA basketball teammate Jayson Tatum came on board in Durham the buzz only got stronger. Giles has taken visits to Wake Forest, Kansas and Kentucky and has only Duke left -- which gives Coach K and staff the chance to make the final impression. The Blue Devils appear to still be firmly in the driver’s seat.

Under Armour, Under Armour, USA Basketball

No. 3 Josh Jackson (SF, 6-7, 195, Prolific Prep (CA)/Southfield, MI) -- Arizona Wildcats

The truth is that this one is still very much in flux. Yes, Arizona and Sean Miller have gone from a quiet contender to a perceived favorite while Michigan State and Maryland have emerged as the two most likely competitors. There’s no denying that Tom Izzo’s top-ranked national class has Jackson excited about the possibility of coming back home to play for the Spartans, while anyone discounting Maryland’s chances probably said the same thing about Diamond Stone at this time last year.

No. 5 Malik Monk (SG, 6-3, 185, Bentonivlle/Bentonville, AR) -- Kentucky Wildcats

The Wildcats seem to be the favorite, although Arkansas and to a somewhat lesser extent Oregon appear to be in consideration as well. Arkansas has the hometown advantage, especially since Monk’s older brother Marcus starred on the football field there, but when Kentucky and John Calipari are locked in on a prospect for this long, they rarely miss.

No. 6 Bam Adebayo (PF, 6-8, 235, High Point Christian/High Point, NC) -- North Carolina State Wolfpack

Adebayo seemed like a heavy NC State lean over the summer along with his AAU teammate, Dennis Smith Jr.. With Smith having officially committed last month, most expected it would only be a matter of time before Adebayo followed suit. That hasn’t happened just yet though, as Auburn and even Kentucky have stayed involved. While Bruce Pearl remains locked in, Mark Gottfried is still the presumed favorite and has a chance to close later this month when Adebayo takes his visit.

No. 7 De'Aaron Fox (PG, 6-3, 185, Cypress Lakes/Katy, TX) -- Kentucky Wildcats

Fox is done with his visits after seeing LSU, Louisville, Kansas and Kentucky and John Calipari certainly seems to be the favorite for the player who may be the closest thing we’ve seen to John Wall (albeit a left-handed version) since the Washington Wizards guard pushed the tempo in Lexington back in the 2009-2010 season. Fox has even gone as far as publicly discussing how well he and Monk could fit together in the backcourt.

No. 13 T.J. Leaf (PF, 6-9, 220, Foothills Christian/El Cajon, CA) -- UCLA Bruins

UCLA, Oregon and San Diego State are the final three schools in contention for Leaf. Word is that UCLA is the most likely destination, but right now one of the biggest hold-ups is the fact that Leaf wants to know he’ll be in the starting lineup from Day 1 of his freshman season, and that isn’t necessarily a foregone conclusion at UCLA if Jonah Bolden decides not to pursue the NBA after this season. In other words, there’s a chance this one goes past the early signing period (which ends Nov. 18 ).

No. 15 Rawle Alkins (SF, 6-4, 200, Word of God Christian Academy (NC)/Brooklyn, NY) -- North Carolina State Wolfpack

Alkins has been a top priority for Chris Mullin from the moment he arrived back in New York and while Kentucky was perceived as the most notable threat to St. John’s over the summer, right now it doesn’t appear as if the Wildcats are going to get too involved. North Carolina State has become a definite factor though, especially since Alkins transferred to nearby Word of God. North Carolina too is working to take advantage of Alkins' new-found proximity.

No. 18 Kobi Simmons (PG, 6-5, 170, St. Francis/Alpharetta, GA) -- Ohio State Buckeyes

Ohio State, Kentucky and UNLV are the three schools that made Simmons’ final list and with Kentucky presumably intent to wait on Fox and UNLV taking another ESPN 100 point guard in Jaylen Fisher, all signs seem to be pointing toward Thad Matta right now. If that weren’t enough, Jeff Borzello reported Monday that Ohio State canceled last weekend’s visit with another point guard, Tyson Carter, perhaps signaling a potential pledge from Simmons on the horizon.

No. 19 Jarrett Allen (C, 6-10, 235, Saint Stephen’s Episcopal/Austin, TX) -- Kentucky Wildcats

Allen cut his list to eight and is coming off a recent visit to Notre Dame which reportedly went well. Nonetheless though, it's starting to look more and more like Allen could be headed to either Kansas or Kentucky, schools he'll will visit in back-to-back weekends to end the month of October. Ultimately, it might come down to the domino effect, given that both schools are in the mix for Marques Bolden. If one guy ends up at Kentucky, the other could be sealed for Kansas.

No. 20 Marques Bolden (C, 6-10, 240, DeSoto/Dallas, TX) -- Kansas Jayhawks

Coming off what was described by all reports as a great visit to Kansas, Bolden canceled planned trips to both Kentucky and Duke last weekend, fueling speculation that Bill Self had taken over the driver’s seat in Bolden’s recruitment. While Alabama is also looking to make a push, the expectation that Bolden now ends up at Kansas is what ultimately could push Allen to Kentucky.

No. 21 Dewan Huell (PF, 6-9, 230, Miami Norland/Miami, FL) -- Florida State Seminoles

Huell’s visits appear to be done now as he’s seen Miami (FL), Florida State and South Carolina in recent weeks. The Seminoles are the perceived favorites and apparently made an impression after hosting him along with several of their other top targets, yet reportedly pushed hard for the pledge but weren’t able to get it just yet. Miami is the hometown favorite and a very real contender while South Carolina got the chance to make the final impression on their visit this weekend.

No. 22 Udoka Azubuike (C, 6-10, 280, Potters House Christian/Jacksonville, FL) -- Florida State Seminoles

Azubuike and Huell were on Florida State's campus earlier this month along with Jonathan Isaac, who is already pledged to Leonard Hamilton, and so it’s clear the Seminoles have visions of pairing Azubuike and Huell together up front. He’s also visited NC State and will reportedly trip to North Carolina this weekend. Nevertheless, Florida State still sounds like the team to beat.

Let's not forget that Self just flat got lucky with Mason. If Self would have signed one of the six or seven PGs he was seeking to sign ahead of Mason, we'd never of had Mason -- Hill, Harrison, Jackson, Jones, Jordan, Barber, and Peters (we got in late on him, and not a real PG). Credit Self for having a good back up plan that worked out. Other back up plans haven't been as positive. And the fact is, Self gets the credit for Mason because he signed him.

Lightfoot is perhaps a little different in that regard. We aren't signing him because of big swings and misses.

Before we get too excited about Lightfoot and whatever he might bring, just read the write up on Traylor below from ESPN. The bottom-line comments are borderline correct. But this write up on "strengths" makes him sound like a pretty complete player.

Strengths:
Jamari is a tough and strong power forward that is athletic and competes on both ends of the floor. He rebounds at a high rate in and out of his area and is a tough match ups because of his strength and aggressiveness. He runs the floor well and will attack the rim all on clear paths. He will post and drop step or complete a drop off pass through contact. Taylor scores on the perimeter with a rhythm dribble pull up jumper mostly inside 15 feet.

Weaknesses:
He is a good defender but must work to hone his overall skills.

Bottom Line:
Taylor is physically ready for college right now. He has great upside and will be an excellent glue guy or role player on the high major level.

Personally, I think it is fine signing IF he's not the #1 or #2 big in this class. As the 3rd one, certainly reasonable.

And if he gets a bump in the rankings, that will change my opinion a bit. My opinion, admittedly, is based nearly entirely on his current low ranking (which I might add is a very reliable guide). Hearing that he surprised folks at camps is definitely a good thing.

@jaybate-1.0 I like how you talked yourself out of Traylor and Lucas making significant improvement .. your mind trumped the heart.

If Traylor could bump his rebound rate to .26 per minute, that would be a big deal. That gets him into acceptable range. And that's why Lucas is a better option than Traylor. Gotta rebound the ball in the post. Lucas is not usually a liability on the floor. He just doesn't excel. With Traylor, the rebounding is so bad it is a big liability. That's different than Lucas.

With Mickelson, he showed at the WUGs that he brings something to the table. He's just better; he can change shots, he scraps for the ball, he finds ways to rebound, he's a better scorer than the other two, he gets up and down the floor, and he can pass in the post.

It would be an absolute travesty if Self regularly plays either Lucas or Traylor over Mickelson. In situations? Sure. But not beyond that.

@BeddieKU23 I'm concerned about what signees seem possible in the spring. This seems a bit urgent to me.

If we have 2 post signees, we'll add those to Lucas, Bragg, and Coleby. So we'd only have 5, and one of them would be coming off an ACL. Another, Bragg, is perhaps a 20% chance he's an OAD (if the planets aligned). And Lucas could bolt as a graduate transfer (if he's low guy on the totem pole, and has one more season left, I don't think it's out of the realm of reason).

With all of the uncertainties, I think we need 3 post signees. If Lightfoot is the worst one, and we get 3, that isn't all bad (so long as our other two are top 50 quality). If we stretched it to the spring, I think there's a chance that our worst post signee is worse than Lightfoot.

Again, though, excitement level is a negative number regarding Lightfoot.

I cannot tell you my excitement level now that we are now in the lead for a guy ranked 117 at Rivals, 134 at 24/7, and 98 at ESPN.

Is this what Octobers are about when it comes to recruiting?

This is Jamari Traylor. This is Landon Lucas.

Unless he is one of the 13% or so that exceed their ranking, we have a roster clogger. We have insurance. We have nothing that will help us win a national championship.

If he's our third big in the class, and we have say Bolden and Herard as well, I guess ok then. Things could be worse.

Right now, we don't have Bolden or Herard or anyone else.

Excitement level is zero. Actually less than zero. It's a negative number.

"Type whatever comes into your head"

Ok, isn't Lauri a girl's name?

Is that like "A boy named Sue?"

One good thing about Big Blue Madness is that Marques Bolden was not there ...