Billions of Chinamen and that's the best Communism can create?
Should I even suggest that genetics, DNA, and .. er, the politically incorrect stuff holds back China on the basketball court?
Or do they just not work as hard as our, uh, "urban" hoopsters?
Or am I just trying to cause trouble here?
My broken nose story. I was a boxer for a number years. Nothing big. Small clubs and such. Got hit thousands of times. Never once broke my nose. But then I got this big fight and of course, first round, broken nose. I lost the fight but got another shot at him shortly after that and won.
But Adrian didn't want me to box anymore.
@ParisHawk These are the standard masks ↗ in S. Korea nowadays.
I think it's pretty funny that Self says that he'll be ready. Bragg sure looks ready, doesn't he?
I like Self's comments. No wiggle room for Bragg. Self expects him to play. Be tough, buddy, we play through stuff like this at Kansas. Great early message.
@Texas-Hawk-10 It's this type of wild speculation that I can't bite on ... you said "That torn meniscus kept his numbers down quite a bit ..." The linkage is just not credible.
You have no idea. He was in Missouri's starting lineup for their first regular season game (a loss to UMKC -- see how I worked that in).
Further, you have made another significantly speculative statement that because Williams fouls less, he's a better defender. There is also the possibility that he is very timid and cautious on defense. Your statement is just silly speculation. Good, aggressive defenders can certainly have higher foul rates.
Your final point is a reasonable one regarding versatility - that he supposedly can play both the four and five. I'm not so sure Coleby couldn't. Chukwu is clearly a five.
I take it you do acknowledge the unavoidable stats that I cited but simply choose to discount them?
@Texas-Hawk-10 I wouldn't land on Williams' side too quickly.
Williams scored better than both -- .404 per minute vs. .268 (Chukwu) and .330 (Coleby).
But Williams was equal to Chukwu rebounding (.247 vs. .242), and not as good as Coleby (.292).
Chukwu had .068 blocks per minute, Coleby .051 vs. Williams at just .025.
Coleby was 79% from the FT line, while Chukwu and Williams were 60% and 61% respectively.
Coleby was excellent 71.1% on shots at the rim, Chukwu 67.8, while Williams was a poor 57.4%
Coleby had a 66% overall shooting percentage, Chukwu 53.2%, while Williams was pretty bad at 41.8%.
I disagree with the premise that Williams would have the biggest immediate impact. That "impact" would be well over one year away. A lot of time for development. And really, Williams just wasn't that good.
The best prospect to develop with the higher upside is Chukwu (as you mentioned). And at a solid 7'0", he would provide a much different dynamic defensively than the other two.
Personally, I'd go Chukwu, then Coleby, then Williams.
I think Self would have gone Chukwu had he been ready to commit and take the scholarship. Chukwu really only looked at east coast schools the first time around, or those in very close proximity. Self could not wait and see. Coleby was the bird in the hand. When we look at Coleby's stats, he's certainly a reasonable add at his current rate of return. A guy that looks better on paper than all three of our non-descript back-up bigs.
But I'm not saying Williams wouldn't ultimately be better. Don't really know. But given that Chukwu only had one season of college ball .. at Providence no less .. I would also bet on that dude having the biggest upside at Kansas, and I actually would expect him to be the better player of the three (if he was at Kansas) in 2016-17.
We will never know.
Respectfully, I think some are missing what is really important here. Is Traylor a good player?
As an example, @ParisHawk tries somehow to compare Traylor to Releford, stating, "As far as Jamari, yes there is criticism of his contribution and some people want him to see the floor less. Those same people love a 5-year player like Releford."
The big difference between Traylor and Releford -- Releford was good. Traylor is not. I like good players on the floor. And Traylor has not been a good player.
The Past Is All We Know: All I can comment on is the past. And in the past three seasons, Traylor has usually been bad, or at least, "not good." He'll have peaks .. some games where he shines, like Eastern Kentucky. But is normal game is poor. If Traylor performs at what has become his typical level, the fact is, he is the biggest threat to our possible success this season, as we head into next season.
Crunch Question: There is a crunch question to ask yourself. This to me seems to be the best way to objectively assess Traylor real value -- Ask yourself, would you be the least bit concerned if Traylor was out for the season? Of all of KU's scholarship players, if you had to choose one to lose, wouldn't it be Traylor?
There Is No Specific Defense Of Traylor: When one looks at our games and the stat lines, Traylor's minutes distribution makes no sense at all. It's actually quite astonishing how a player that does so very little on the floor gets so many minutes. There we so many more arguments to be made for Brady Morningstar. Those that defended Brady had passion, and they pointed to specific things he contributed to the game. With Traylor, unlike other players, all we really get in defense of Traylor is "Self must be playing him for a reason." We get no specific defense. That might indicate that Traylor could be viewed as the best option given other worse options. I believe that has been the primary reason for his playing time.
No Scoring: Traylor scored 4 points or less in 19 games last season (not counting the Georgetown game where he was suspended). That is futility defined. Traylor had the worst points per per minute of any scholarship player except Lucas -- .233 vs. .230. Both very bad. And in one very important category for a supposed power forward, Traylor scored at a very poor 54.8% at the rim. Cliff Alexander, by the way, scored at 68+% at the rim. An interesting question on Traylor, as noted by @jaybate-1.0 above -- what does he do well offensively? What is his money-shot? We're in year 5, and in my best Judge Smails voice, "Well, we're waiting!!"
Turnovers: Traylor can turn the ball over. Traylor turned the ball over.074 times per minutes. Compare that to Frank Mason, who handled the ball all the time at .061 and Devonte Graham at .063. Ellis was .059 and Cliff was .056. Dwight Coleby, by the way, was .044.
Horrific Rebounding Per Minute: We know this well. Self rebounded last season at the embarrassingly low rate of .182 per minute (Lucas was .288, by the way). Justin Wesley is the only "regular" post player under Self that a worse rebounder. How can anyone ignore this from a post player? Compare Traylor to Coleby ... the guy that got just 16 minutes a game for Ole Miss. I'll take Coleby, who rebounds at .29 rebounds per minute. Coleby averaged 4.8 rebounds per game playing 16+ minutes per game, and Traylor averaged just 3.8 rebounds per game playing 20+ minutes per game.
More on Rebounding: Traylor had 10 rebounds in an early game vs. a mid-major last season. Traylor followed that up with 7 against UK. But only had more than five rebounds just four times the rest of the season. What was really the issue with rebounding was the fact that he regularly disappeared - a majority of the time. In 24 games, he had four rebounds or less. But in 14 of those games, he had two or less. That’s astonishingly bad. It’s that sort of poor production that kills us in tight games.
Free Throw Shooting: Did anyone notice Traylor's free throw shooting? Right, Traylor shot 60% from the line last season, and 62% for his career. Again, another extremely poor statistical category.
Undersized: Another killer when it comes to Traylor is that he is undersized. Self slipped last season in frustration and referred to our 6'5" post player (or something like that). Now, Traylor isn't that short I don't think. 6'6" is more like it. But he isn't wide, he isn't thick, and he regularly gets pushed around down low. He can't hold his spot. This is a regular theme.
The Myth of Energy and Effort: We hear about Traylor's energy. We watch Traylor. We know it is a myth. He will have many high intensity plays, like the link cited by @wrwlumpy. But that is rare. His normal level of play is no where near the peaks. He is the picture of inconsistency when it comes to effort. He'll get caught standing around when he should be blocking out, he will fail to tip a ball out off the rim, and he'll be late helping on the backside. These failings are not unique. Most players have them. But I mention them because his supposed strengths are energy and effort. The fact is, he'll make a highlight play or two. But the average product is, well, just average. And it certainly doesn't erase his statistical deficiencies.
Two Glimmers: The only glimmers with Traylor are that he gets some blocked shots, which is a positive. But most every block is coming from off the ball -- I can't recall him blocking the shot of the player he was guarding more than a couple of times. He also can grab a few steals. His activity in that regard is a positive.
There Is Always Next Season: My view of Traylor is based solely on what I've seen. No one knows what he'll do this season. The past, though, is an excellent indicator of the future, particularly for a guy who will now be in his fifth season in the program. For Traylor to be near a productive player, he'll need to get significantly better in points, rebounds, and turnovers. Not likely.
This has nothing to do with liking Traylor personally, or his story, or rooting for him, or whether he's a Jayhawk for life. This is business. And when one analyzes his on-court production, there is only one answer -- from a statistical standpoint, Traylor is the second worst rotation level post player under coach Self (Justin Wesley being the worst -- and yes, even Christian Moody was better). That is not good company to keep.
I want to win. I like good basketball players that lead to wins. That's why I'm not a Jamari Traylor fan. It's that simple.
Selden at the three makes perfect sense. I would start Selden at the 3, and then Mason and Svi at the 1 & 2. Bring Graham in to spell Mason and Svi, and Greene in for Selden. We could also run Mason, Graham and Svi together.
Selden is a poor ball handler. I think Self has really wanted to get Selden away from those responsibilities. How long ago does the "Selden can play point guard" stuff seem now? It is nice to fantasize about a big point guard, but you have to be able to handle the ball. Self drops instructive hints from time to time -- and his "big wing" comment as it related to Selden was a important one last season. Everyone I'm sure, including Selden, felt a path to the NBA was a ball handling role. That ain't Wayne.
And I respectfully differ with @BeddieKU23 on this one. I wouldn't let Ellis near the 3 spot. Like trying to fit Wayne into a ball handling role because of what folks might project him to be, trying to fit Ellis into the 3 spot would likely hold similar issues at the college level. I don't see it as a fit. But we'll see how that plays out.
@ParisHawk The 10 rebounds stuck out to me .. good catch on the offensive rebounds. Traylor had really about six decent rebounding games last season, including 10 vs. UCSB. I say that because Self described Canada as a "mid-major." Traylor followed that up with 7 against UK. But only had more than five just four times the rest of the season.
What was really the issue with rebounding was the fact that he regularly disappeared - a majority of the time.
In 24 games, he had four rebounds or less. But in 14 of those games, he had two or less. That's astonishingly bad. It's that sort of poor production that kills us.
Couple that with a below average scorer, a guy that gets pushed around in the paint, and an average defender at the absolute best -- well, that's why I don't like him on the floor.
For Traylor to help Kansas this season, and not be a net negative, he needs to rebound. It's that simple. Otherwise he costs us possessions and points by his mere presence.
@Crimsonorblue22 @RockChalkinTexas - Thanks.
Help me .. has anyone found a boxscore from Tuesday's game??
@JayHawkFanToo Or maybe not .. at least now. Lots of other news on recruits, the draft, etc. However, once the WUG get going, that will be the litmus test. They'll be on ESPNU. I bet we get some pub out of this.
@Texas-Hawk-10 The PG play falls on coach Self. Same as it did when TT was out of control. The PGs play the way Self apparently wants them to play. Self has the ultimate hammer -- the bench. He tolerated TT, and perhaps encouraged much of it. We (you, me and most everyone else) may want a distributor, but I don't really think Self sees it that way. I think he prefers an attacking PG vs. a distributor. As for ball movement, I don't know. I'm not convinced that was a problem. We couldn't not score inside, and I don't believe any of that had the least bit to do with the ball movement this past season. Ball movement is of course a big part of getting the ball into the right spots, but we were flat lame upon receipt of the ball. Also, for what it's worth, we abandoned our offense after the TT game and went to the perpetual weave.
@KUSTEVE I agree completely. We should have USA uniforms. Period. And you mention black swim suits -- right on point. Red, white, and blue and only red, white, and blue. We don't need black. We don't need neon green. Wave the flag. You're representing your country, not anything else.
At first, this seemed like a cool thing. I posted yesterday that my opinion has changed. If we could go back an change things, maybe we don't do this. The main reason is that it excludes two very important pieces to our 2015-16 puzzle, Svi and Diallo. Obviously, missing Greene and Graham has put a major damper on the festivities, too. We have 4 rotation players not even participating. And our transfer (Coleby) is not part of it, either. That all stinks. But like many other things in life, you have to make commitments not knowing how the landscape can change in between. It has just changed for the negative. But that doesn't mean it will end negatively.
You never know how things work out. I wouldn't bet against us having a pretty good run in this tourney. The best part? -- KU hoops in June and July.
I believe all games are on ESPNU, though some may not be live. If they aren't live, then they'll be on ESPN3. I understand that there will be no block of the broadcasts. I called KU today. But got no good answer as to why the Sprint center games aren't televised.
@ralster said, "Personally, I’d have taken NO outside guys, and just done it with Jayhawks. It feels a bit peculiar that they (WUG) picked KU to represent the 'best tradition of US college basketball’…and we have 2 non-program guys + cannot take 4 of our own jayhawks. Sucks actually."
With no Svi or Diallo (or Coleby) and adding two guys from other teams -- I agree, this is not what I envisioned.
Personally, I now think we would have been better off doing a preseason deal in August or September with our guys only. We'll see how this goes. And the two exhibitions against Canada aren't even televised. Are you kidding me? We couldn't pry some TV time away from some lame network?
I think we discussed this possibility a bit a ago, as well as the possibility of a Wake player link. Makes perfect sense.
@jaybate-1.0 If the pipeline is broken, is it just a ruse that we are considered a favorite for a guy like Bolden? You know, I'm not sold on the whole conspiracy theory thing. But I remain willing to be educated.
@konkeyDong I'll let you have the last word here. This is a great discussion. I think the key here is that everyone chiming in just doesn't want anyone killed. We all want civility. It will never be that way totally. But intolerance .. that dirty word to some people .. is truly the only way to change it. As a society, we've become intolerant toward many things that are going out of style - smoking and littering to name a few. I wonder if "killing people" could make that list?
@globaljaybird You're right, it is a crapshoot. I saw where Self says it would be 6 weeks before he could start any sort of rehab. That tells me it will at least three months after that before he's possibly ready to roll. This is clearly bad news -- but from a timing perspective, better now than any day later than now.
Not my choice. Bolden, Herard, Adebayo, or Azubuike -- better choices.
@hawkmoon2020 The reason I focus in on inner city thugs is because that is the center of violence in this country. It is fact. It is reality. To deny that is simply an attempt to rationalize. I live in Johnson County. Do I have daily fear filling up my gas tank? Walking at night? Forgetting to lock my front door? Why not? Because I don't live among the thugs. It is reality. I target thugs because thugs are the problem. Thugs are the issue. Whether they are black, white, or something in between, I don't care. Folks that hurt other people, that rob, rape, kill, and maim are my enemy. And I'm not going to worry about offending the racially sensitive if that implies something that causes discomfort. I side with the good folks that battle the thugs every day -- and those good folks are black, white, and something in between as well.
I'm not sure that your comments regarding "whitey" etc. make sense. I am all for the inner city folks arming themselves to protect themselves from the thugs around them. The chance that I'll need my gun in Johnson County is slim. The chance that someone will need their gun to ward off intruders at 41st and Brooklyn in KCMO, is much higher. Certain folks in this country want to eliminate the good citizens from owning guns, and have no solution for the thugs that continue to possess guns.
It is interesting that you point out race. My position is one that "black lives matter." They matter greatly to me. That's really my point. Most of those killed in the inner city violence are black. This article ↗ is one of many discussions on that point. I value that little 3 year old's life that was killed last week in a KCMO drive by shooting as precious and irreplaceable. It sickens me that anyone has to deal with what inner city folks have to deal with. The nice lady who works hard and takes the bus every day, the kid that plays on his porch, the elderly gentleman that has lived in the same house for 50 years, or the families gathered for a July 4 celebration. They are all subjected to the same crap.
And don't interpret my statements as being 100% supportive of police. Much the opposite. I support good police officers. I don't support police officers that use their badges to unjustifiably kill and maim. I don't support the percentage of police officers who are power freaks, and who are dishonest. It's a hard job. It certainly has challenges, seeing violence every day. But if you can't handle those challenges, then one shouldn't be a police officer. Making split second decisions that are life and death many times can't be overlooked. But as a cop, you can't abuse your power.
@sfbahawk I like the link. What say you about the fact that the large majority of gun deaths and injuries are perpetrated by criminals that hold guns illegally? I still circle back to the crunch question -- how do we get guns away from the criminals that have them? Once we have that solution, I will gladly entertain laws that limit gun ownership for the law-abiding. Until then, someone who enters my house without my permission and threatens my family will not have a nice day. But I don't carry a gun. I've made the decision that carrying a gun is too risky for me personally. I don't want to live like that, and I'll take my chances in that regard. But if I feel unsafe, I like having the choice.
I do prefer basketball discussions here. So I apologize for my digression.
@JayHawkFanToo I see your point. In the post above you just referenced "kids" so I fixated on that a bit in my reply. Further above, though, you referenced "top recruits". I think I would agree with you there. Would the top guys really want that system? OADs? I doubt it too. A guy outside that range? Certainly more likely. Heck, like anything else, it would personal preference. It was a rare occasion that I would see a kid H.S. or below that didn't like that style, but for the big, immobile dudes.
@nuleafjhawk Now, you're talking something different. Folks that legally carry guns commit how many crimes? This is my point. Rarely. The criminals commit crimes. The criminals are the ones carrying guns illegally.
The quandary that we are in is that criminals get guns, whether it is legally or illegally.
The argument that "Too many people that carry guns for self defense wind up getting shot anyway, or shooting themselves or their own loved ones" rings hollow with me. Guns are dangerous.
When you look at numbers, this is miniscule. So some idiot shoots his wife. That's an argument for what? To prohibit me or you from having a gun to defend themselves? It's like arguing that knives should be illegal because your neighbor stabbed her husband.
There is a box that gun control advocates get in, that can't be escaped. How do you disarm the thugs? Laws would disarm law abiding citizens. The ones that don't commit crimes.
@nuleafjhawk There is something wrong with a society that has to carry guns. Gun ownership, of course, is a different deal. Really, this entire society would be largely void of the need to carry guns if our inner city thugs didn't have them. That is the reality. Folks want to carry guns because there are vicious animals that will kill, rob, rape, and maim for little more than a few dollars.
That's why folks carry guns. Because they could be standing in a quik shop when a thug comes in with a gun.
The mass shootings that just occurred pale in comparison to the carnage that is inflicted each night in our cities around the country. It's sad, but how many blacks have been killed in senseless inner city shootings since this mindless church shooting? The same folks that get all wound up about a cop killing a black man refuse to take the same action to protest and show anger with a drive by shooting that kills a 3 year old, like what occurred in KC last week. That sort of crap happens regularly, but folks accept it because they are too cowardly to stand up to it. It's much easier to hold up signs, loot business like the common criminals that they are, and call cops racist than protect the lives of the nice inner city folks that are terrorized by this violence daily. It's really a joke.
So that's why folks want to carry guns. To defend themselves from the thugs.
@JayHawkFanToo See, I think they do. The teams I have coached, every kid generally loved pressing, trapping, and the full court style. It's really the most engaging part of the game. Meaning, playing frenetic is very contingent upon how you play defense.
For example, if you take the ball out of the hoop and go. But then sit back in a 2-1-2 zone or basic m2m, things are lurching. But if you bust out quick on offense and you press and trap all over the court, that's a totally different ballgame. The defense creates the offense and is really becomes a fun part of the game.
This really sucks. Most young guys recover and it is no problem once recovered. But I really think this is a 3-4 month deal.
FYI, partially torn is the same thing as a sprain, which is the same thing as a strain. Sprain is usually used when it is tendons/ligaments; strain when it is a muscle. When someone sprains their ankle, it's a partial tearing of structures, as opposed to a full tear (or a rupture).
So, the partially torn tendon is a sprain. Same thing.
Oubre goes to the NBA; Greene has surgery; we don't land the OAD; Graham goes down.
Who said Svi was the most important player for the upcoming season?
Let me toss this in .. during Louisville's 2013 title run, the Cards ran a high-paced offense, and defensively pressured and trapped all over the court. It was very similar to VCU's approach.
Another point I'd suggest is that a lot of kids love playing the fast paced game. We hear it all the time when there are comments from recruits. I always like playing that way. I think maybe we underestimate that kids dread the slower paced, get it to the third side, feed the post stuff. That's not a comment on merit, it's just a comment on what a teenage kid would prefer.
The jury is really out on whether Smart can really coach to the higher level of play beyond one famed tourney run. But I certainly think that kids will want to play for him -- Texas is a big deal, Smart is a personable guy that players tend to like, and his style of play is attractive to many kids.
That doesn't mean he beats Kansas on the court. But he may beat us on a few recruits. No big deal.
@JayHawkFanToo I watched a lot of the NBA playoffs. I felt they were refereed a bit different than the regular season. But no, I think in CBB there is more contact, more interference with drivers to the hoop, more defensive activity that doesn't get called, and less space to drive. The constant talk over the last two seasons is trying to increase the "freedom of movement" thing.
I know you fight this scheme thing at every turn, and you really don't think it's possible to get Brannen Greene open for three pointers.
As much as I would like to see Bragg simply given a rotation level role, history tells us that Coach Self will play both Lucas and Traylor ahead of him, or at the very least, one of them. I really hope I'm wrong, and at least by conference play, Bragg has proven himself over at least Traylor.
@JayHawkFanToo The defensive three second rule you mentioned which seems to create different offensive opportunities, particularly the two-man game all over the court. But also how the game is refereed. The application of the rules, as compared to college. In CBB, it is just a much more physical game -- more is permitted to stop the guy with the ball and to impede offensive basketball. It the "freedom of movement" thing I'm so tired of hearing about. I prefer CBB.
The "can't create your shot like an NBA player", by the way, is a red-herring when it comes to coaching college basketball.
If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times -- scheme. It's the primary way that shots are created in the college game, and is much more important as the relative skill level of players decreases. The college game's defensive rules (lack of restrictions) make scheming even that much more important.
@wrwlumpy Thanks .. I am always interested when folks suggest that we replace coach Self -- who would you rather have? That's much different than who would we want as his replacement if he left. Is there a coach you'd rather have for, say, the next 10 years? I can't think of one.
I still am very sure that Self caused the team slump by word and deed. That is really not that surprising. Self attacked the three point in his verbiage, surely did so with the team, and instructed the team to take a completely new offensive approach which disdained the three point shot. I believe that 100%.
Even if Self wouldn't have vocalized the 'fool's gold" thing in the media, his "deed" -- the tactical offensive change -- was a big deal all by itself and gave an insight into practice discussions.
Now, some might suggest that I'm the delusional one. That's fine. I just like how the evidence stacks up in this case. Greene's hip injury explains a portion of Greene's ills behind the line.
@REHawk You know, I don't think it's the playbook. The offense thing isn't that complicated. I think it is Self's tolerance level. Just like folks have different tolerance levels as parents, coaches are the same way. Some coaches will tolerate certain errors. Some won't.
I think you are right to be concerned about Diallo. Everyone should be concerned about Diallo. We just don't know.
I am solidly on the record suggesting that OADs aren't the best choice under coach Self. My opinion is coach Self driven to a large degree, and my perception of why he gives guys the minutes they get. I always have said that Brady made him feel comfortable. Like an old pair of shoes. He knew what he was going to get. EJ, by comparison, some high peaks, but perhaps some deeper valleys.
Cliff is a great example. No one will say that Cliff made unique mistakes. But my guess is that it was a combination of mistakes and other factors -- demeanor, responsiveness, retention of info, repetition of the same errors, etc. One coach may have said, "Look, I'm willing to accept this stuff because he has higher talent, and I'll get better production." Another coach, not so much.
The same things that drive us crazy about coach Self, are what makes him a great coach. I've said this before -- hard-headedness and "do it my way or the highway" can be a coach's greatest strength and greatest weakness at the same time. In some moments, it works. In other moments, like the last two seasons, it didn't always work. But the "didn't always work" still resulted in excellent seasons, just not perhaps reaching each teams' peak.
@sfbahawk I do think you misinterpret Self's "fool's gold" comment. I don't disagree that Self dislikes the scenario you painted, nor that it's part of the distaste.
Personally, I think it is mainly because of his bias towards offense that focuses on getting interior shots. I have to agree with him there. That's my preferred offense, too. But he is just more strict in his approach. He believes that the further away the shot, the more risk involved, thus they are less reliable. He does give as much weight, as many of us do, to the fact that you get three points vs. two for certain shots. I think he also believes that kids/players get enamored with the long shot and that gets them away from "better" offense. He has seen teams go in the tank shooting threes, as we all have. I think he simply thinks that an offense predicated on shooting a high rate of threes equals more risk. That's all.
His first utterance of "fool's gold" was after our outstanding first half vs. Utah, criticizing Perry Ellis. Given the circumstances there, as well as the timing after the spectacular Texas Tech effort, I think it's mainly because of his bias towards his offensive approach.
@JayHawkFanToo I never said you did say we didn't have good three point shooters.
The question is not ambiguous. Last season. You can look at the numbers. But if you did not watch these teams enough to know their composition, I understand. Did you watch Wisconsin, Duke, and Michigan State with any frequency?
@JayHawkFanToo So to the point, did the three final four teams that shot high three point rates have better three point shooters than Kansas?
Self's discussions of playing with small guards sounds a bit like reminiscing to me -- things sound a little bit better than perhaps they really were. He talked about it last pre-season too, I think mainly because he also had CF.
I've wondered a little about moving Selden to the three and getting him away from any real hint of ballhandling -- leaving the 1-2 rotation between Mason, Graham, and Svi. That's what I would do. The "big wing" comment Self made (and that I reference regularly) has always stuck with me.
I do think you are right. High achievement this season rides on Svi to a great degree.
@elpoyo Right. You are free to state your opinions. You just run the risk of getting them refuted when they are factually incorrect; and you run the risk of engaging a discussion on opinions when others disagree. We all run that risk when we start posting.
I just think your initial post on Bragg perhaps did not reflect the opinion you stated in later posts. No worries.
Keep posting. We really aren't "all sunshine over here."
I've never been lumped in with the sunshine group I don't think. But I'm good with that for a change.
@justanotherfan Don't worry about Graham and Mason together. Self would stagger their rest. Further, Svi is your third ball handler, not Vick.
Believe me, I like your rotation. I doubt Self does.
Here's my rotation viewing it from Self's eyes right now.
Starters: Mason, Graham, Selden, Ellis, Lucas.
Rotation Subs: Traylor, Svi, Diallo, Greene.
Minimal Play Sub: Bragg.
No play subs: Mickelson, Vick.
My only hesitancies are Graham or Svi starting, or Lucas or Traylor starting.
@drgnslayr I agree with your approach completely, but I would just lock Wayne into the 3. Let Mason Graham and Svi do the 1-2 thing. Keep Wayne out of the ball handling situations as much as possible. Let him be that "big wing" that Self said he really was, with Greene as his back up. But locking into the 2 is fine with me. Svi and Greene then can do the 3 thing. The point is the same, but your argument is probably better since he has been at the 2 primarily for his two seasons here.
Either way, when Wayne's on the court, he is nothing other than what his predetermined position is. Leave him there.
@elpoyo I guess I'm not tracking with you at all. Your response has nothing to do with the discussion you began.
You said "Bragg’s first choice was UK and once he didn’t get any attention from Cal, he chose his 2nd option."
I responded saying that "Bragg’s finalists were Kansas and UK. There were zero reports that UK didn’t give him attention." You didn't cite anything to show that UK didn't give Bragg attention. In fact, Calipari made an in home visit ↗ and Bragg had an official on campus visit during their Big Blue Madness. UK was pressing hard for Bragg. Bragg just chose KU.
So it wasn't a matter of Bragg choosing his second option as you state. He chose his preference.
Your reply today was to say "Either he has an obsession with UK or he’s just trying to go out of his way to diss them" and to cite the article where he accidentally said UK in his hat ceremony, and some twitter link about his NCAA bracket where he picked Kansas?
That makes zero sense, and doesn't address the discussion point you began.
In your original post, you were suggesting that you were calling "it like it is", but each of your statements were incorrect.
I take this time to address your incorrect post because it was specifically (and misleadingly) made to demean our recruiting efforts -- to suggest that we got guys only by default, or that transfers (at least the two you got right) are less worthy adds. I'm sure you aren't a Withey fan.
Self flat out won the recruiting battles for each guy we got, just like he lost the battles for some guys we didn't get. The turnaround in 60 days of recruiting was amazing. That's what we want from our coach.
@elpoyo Bragg's finalists were Kansas and UK. There were zero reports that UK didn't give him attention. Diallo was not a "lock" for ISU. ISU was never the favorite. Kansas was pretty much the leader starting last December. And as additional info, Graham was not a transfer.
@Statmachine Well, remember, Self wanted Shepherd. He just committed to TCU over Kansas before Embiid. He would have dealt you that hand.
If your argument is publicity, I mentioned that. If that's what we're about, signing guys so we can get the next guy, I don't agree at all with that.
I want to win the NCAA tournament. So far, Wiggins/Embiid and Oubre/Cliff = 2nd round exits. Lots of circumstances, but that is the ultimate result. Not a definitive argument, but part of the discussion.
No doubt, Karviar Shepherd .. IF you believe that coach Self would have developed him better than TCU. This is also a system thing. How would he be utilized here vs. TCU?
We regularly suggest that bigs should come here because we will better prepare them. I believe that. If you think coach Self and his staff are better with big men than Trent Johnson and his staff, then that should answer the question.
Maybe Shepherd's numbers are 20% better, I don't know.
Embiid? Great player. Much better than Shepherd. Not even a question. But, Embiid was hurt quite a bit, and out when in counted in March, and left after one season. Cliff? Excellent player. His travails are well documented. Again, out when it counted.
We lost in the 2nd round both seasons in the NCAA tourney.
I cannot even conceive of an argument to suggest that one would rather have had Embiid and Cliff for the two seasons we did, over Shepherd. Look what we got for it? What do we have now?
I'm not talking the publicity and any of that stuff. I'm talking purely on the court. Heck, we got some bad publicity on Cliff.
We would now have Shepherd heading into his junior season. We have no idea what Diallo will be. That could change the discussion. But as of now, it's easy.
@BeddieKU23 You said, "Self has proven once again he can haul in the guys especially late in the game. Now its up to him to coach em up."
Boy that's true. Graham and Svi last year late, and now the three guys this year.
@KUSTEVE You're certainly an optimist, but I don't think you're blind. Call it rational optimism. Heck, we all know this class could be gold, or it could go the way of the dodo bird. No way to tell yet. But the rational optimism is appreciated. Amazing where we sit now vs. 60 days ago.
I would have gone a 10 if we had gotten Tyler Davis instead of Diallo.
I'm sure Rico Gathers' shoplifting will morph into blaming the NCAA because players allegedly don't get enough benefits, or some other nonsense deflecting from the fact that Rico Gathers committed a crime and it's his fault.
@Texas-Hawk-10 I do think he is a project as well. Seems like the perfect project, though, to take on if we could. Do you think that his flaws are coachable? Swinging down on his blocks, for example, seems fixable. Saying he's our next Jeff Withey might be a bit of stretch, but I don't see how anyone could not view adding Chukwu as a positive. If you take him on, the worst you have is an underachieving 7 footer as your 5th big guy. On the other hand, it would seem like he's the classic upside gamble.
But it's irrelevant. He visiting UVA, MSU, and UConn.
I have to say that my position on Traylor is based on seeing him play for three years in a Kansas uniform. But if Traylor plays well, I'd be more than happy to become a fan. Rebounding would be a good start. Of note, Chukwu's rebounding rate is 33% better than that of Traylor (which supports your point a bit ... should be a bigger margin). And Coleby's was about 20% better than Chukwu (again supporting your point).
@KUSTEVE If Bragg, Diallo, Vick, and Coleby are a 10, what would Rush, Chalmers, Wright, and Downs be? Is this recruiting class on par with Bo Derek, the original 10? Or Morris twins, Tyshawn, Releford and Withey's transfer? Or even TRob, EJ, and X? I'm skeptical. Maybe your 10 is like how they do grades now in high schools -- where a kid can get better than a 4.0? I think this giddiness deserves an explanation.