🏀 KuBuckets Archive

And it wouldn't be a discussion without @JayHawkFanToo citing Self's resume. Diminishing returns? How is it then that our three point percentage went down the minute we started shooting less three pointers? Seems like we were getting pretty good returns, and we were 20-4. You speak of balance, but our threes decreased in a much larger proportion compared to prior seasons, when our drive it to the hoop game began. And you spoke many times defending Self on the constant post feed game saying we needed to score inside, yet Self abandoned that in large part, just as many of us suggested months ago. He chose a more singular focused drive it to the hoop game. Interestingly, our field goal percentage at the rim has not improved during that stretch, thus the inside game did not improve. Yet our record got worse during that stretch. That's reality.

I'm done, and I'm going to enjoy the game today. Just win.

@drgnslayr And play defense. Dictate the game on the defensive end.

@tundrahok Never too late to join the discussion .. your analysis on the value of the three point is right on point. I agree with you on Self's take on it. But I asked this question through the TT game ... would you rather bet your life on Greene making a three or any of our bigs scoring on the post up? Self decided he didn't like either idea and went with a primary strategy of attacking the basket, and lowering the number of threes.

Time to rock today,

@tundrahok Of course, I don't disagree with you. That analysis has been part of the discussion this season. The conversation from my end this entire year is that an increased amount of three point attempts is reasonable because 1) we don't score reliably at the rim, and 2) we are excellent outside shooting team.

I have posted numerous times that if we're scoring 65% at the rim, this conversation is different. We're shooting 56.5% at the rim, and 35.2% on two point jumpers. And 37.5 on three point attempts. Self has actually gone the other way this season, shooting fewer three pointers than we normally do.

One thing that the "three pointer is too risky" crowd forgets is that we lose games missing close shots, too -- most notably the Stanford game and the recent KSU game. The "bunnies" thing.

My view is that simply making the three ball a large part of your strategy, and the predominant one this season, would have made us a better offensive team. 20-25 is what I suggested back in late November. That's the kind of team we have. But sure, we can win other ways.

Now, on to beating WSU ... just win.

Well, before you get out over your skiis too far, it's never been about threes "made." It's about threes attempted.

Here are some stats for your consumption:

In 2014, Wisconsin made the Final Four shooting 21 three pointers per game during the tourney. Florida shot 16 per game during the tourney, also getting to the Final Four. And, of course, UConn shot 19 threes per game during the tourney, on its way to winning the national title. During the season, Wisconsin shot 20.7 threes per game and UConn shot 18.52 threes per game. Florida shot 17.74.

In 2013, Michigan shot 21 per game in the tourney on its way to beating KU and getting to the title game. Michigan shot 19.71 per game for the season. Wichita St. shot 20 per game on the way to the Final Four during the tourney, and 19.61 per game that season. Syracuse, who also made the Final Four (whose threes were down a bit in the tourney), shot 17.42 per game for the season. Louisville shot 15 per game during the tourney, significantly higher than our rate in our bad ball stretch. They also shot 17.27 per game during the season.

Now, why did you have to bring up Fool's Gold on game day? We just made 9/13. Positivity, my man.

@JayHawkFanToo It may not be "fair" to not include the KC Metro in crime, but I was comparing Wichita to Lawrence, OP, and Olathe as far as crime. That's all. I referenced the KC Metro area re: sports. KCMo is far worse than Wichita crime wise, and so is KCK in my opinion.

But yes, I'd take Wichita over many other bigger cities for sure.

@JayHawkFanToo No. You said 4 in 10 days for Kansas. I just added that it will be 5 in 11 days tomorrow.

NC State -- Barber and Lacey starting guards. We were both guys' second choices. Lacey went to 'Bama and then transferred to NC State. We could have Barber/Lacey starting now instead of Mason/Selden. Interesting how things work out.

@JayHawkFanToo Actually, 5th game in 11 days as well.

But really, we had five full days of rest between games. So no, because of that, I don't think fatigue is any factor at all. Their bodies have had more than enough time to recover from three games in a row.

I'm hopeful that no one is getting excuses staged and ready. Excuses won't needed. We're kicking WSU's ass tomorrow.

@wissoxfan83 Now is not the time for logic, or numbers, or stuff like that. It's all Jayhawks. It's positive thinking. It's faith. At this time of the year, I have a hard time being objective. That said, I do think we match up well. WSU is not the WSU of last season. No Cleanthony Early. That's a different team. They lost to George Washington and Illinois St. Lots of things that could happen to result in a KU loss ... this is Self's moment to shine.

I like the Duke pick .. I've got them over Wisconsin in the final.

But really, so long as UK loses, most of the basketball world will have some sort of happiness.

@drgnslayr You're right, NMSU wasn't very good. What was with that zone? The pass to the middle was open all the time. I don't understand the theory behind that defense.

My inclination is to think everyone will be "fresh" Sunday. All these guys are young. Can't image anyone being worn out.

@BeddieKU23 Your first point is an excellent one. When we got up early, my daughter asked me "When do you think they'll tie it up?" We're all scarred by that stuff. But we did hold the lead convincingly.

@KUSTEVE We all hope you're right.

Guy at ESPN doesn't think so.

WSU Over KU ↗

He's an idiot (time for name calling). We're better. We win by 6.

@Hawk8086 Personally, I don't think Traylor is ever a good match up for us. It is a rare occasion that he is an advantage. But you're right, I think Self could use him if Carter is too quick for Lucas. I doubt Lucas will have an issue because he won't have to follow that screen. Carter isn't a threat from outside. Lucas can sag off and look to help on the drive. But I'm with you on Oubre. He's kind of the "one of these things is not like the other" on the floor. No one will match up with him. Personally, I were WSU, I'd shade Oubre and make Selden beat me.

Seems to me that @Lulufulu was having a bit of fun, too. WSU is located in the city of Wichita, and they are our next opponent. Not worthy of getting the third degree.

To be very precise, the area around WSU is a crap hole. No area like that in Overland Park, Olathe, or Lawrence. If you don't think so, go spend some time there, just to the west of campus. Getto.

Just for fun, I looked at crime stats. Violent crime was higher in Wichita by a 2-1 ratio than the rest of Kansas per 100,000 residents. That was in 2013 -- Wichita crime ↗.

Of course, anyone who has been to Wichita knows there are just some very rough areas. Areas that are the stereotypical "hood." But there are some really nice areas, too. And the nice areas far outweigh the crap.

As for sports, most Lawrence teams of any quality come and play in the KC/Johnson County area. Many more sports opportunities here for Lawrence teams, than in Wichita for Wichita teams.

I might be a little biased on my general distaste for Wichita, though. A friend of mine from college was kidnapped and murdered by a couple of gang members there in 1996. He had just watched KU beat Arizona in the 1996 tourney in the Old Town area. After the game, he was forced to get in the trunk of a car, driven to another location and was shot and killed.

@drgnslayr great post. Here are my thoughts to add to the discussion. A Baker's dozen, no pun intended -

1. Playing Small: The big thing playing WSU is the fact that they play small. A review of their roster shows that they have no one over 6'7" that plays regularly. They have 6'11" kid who averaged 5.8 minutes per game. But their bread and butter is their guard play. They start four guys 6'4" or less with one 6'7".

2. Match Up Issues: Because they play small, the issue becomes who Ellis and Lucas guard. One option is to have Ellis guard the 6'4" Evan Wessel. He is not much of a scoring threat. We could then put Lucas on Carter. Lucas will be susceptible to the pick and roll with Carter as Carter is quicker. On the perimeter, Ellis is a better match to guard Carter. Thus our dilemma. WSU plays very small. If we can't match up defensively, we'll see Oubre at the 4 spot like we did vs. ISU.

3. Match Up Issues II: Our ability to guard WSU's base lineup will be key. That is because I think WSU will really struggle to guard Lucas and Ellis in the post, with their lack of size. The early part of the game will give an indication on how this will play out. If we can guard, we can turn that into a big advantage like we did in the second half against UNC in the 2013 tourney.

4. WSU Aggressive On D: WSU plays very aggressively on D. They hedge hard out top, they double when the opportunity presents itself. Very well coached on defense. I would expect their strategy early to be to double our big guys, given the size discrepancy. That will create a key challenge for a big guys ... passing out of the double team. If I'm anticipating WSU's move, I'd really think about sending cutters to the hoop if they double. And doing that aggressively. WSU may double like SDSU did, remember that last season? We weren't ready to hit cutters and that killed us. Later in the season, we saw guys cutting to the hoop on those doubles a little better. But I've never been satisfied with how we attack double teams in the post. It seems that our major reaction to that is to back dribble out. That's not aggressive. That's passive. And that permits the defense to take away a match up advantage without making them pay.

5. Two Bigs: WSU will play two bigs together from time to time, playing two of the three, Kelly, Morris, and/or Carter together. When they have two bigs on the floor, though, I still don't think that we have distinct advantage. But it is conventional and that is how we play. And I think, overall, we have an advantage when they are forced to play one less perimeter player. But they might bench Wessel, who doesn't score much. This may be where the game goes.

6. WSU Offense: Lots and lots of ball screens on the perimeter. They prefer inside ball screens (to permit drives toward the lane). They bring their big guys out (Carter/Kelly/Morris) and they'll set screens. The big guys are all over the place setting screens. They will roll off those screens to the hoop. But where they thrive is Baker, Cotton or Van Vleet driving and kicking to the outside shooter. Each of them can get to the hoop. This is really their main method of attack. Another important element is that they will invert their offense. They don't send their post guy out to shoot threes -- really ever. But they will run their perimeter guys through the post, and they will flash for post up looks. I saw Baker do this a few times yesterday nearer to the high post. In other games, I've seen Baker and Cotton both post up low.

7. Numbers: I think many may initially think of WSU as a good three point shooting team. But they aren't stellar. They shoot just 35.7% from three (we shoot 37.5%). We are streakier (obviously). But they shoot more three pointers than we do -- 35.1% of their shots are three pointers (compared to KU at 28.1%). And they really don't score at the rim that great, at 60.2% (compared to KU at 56.5%). Both teams are about the same in % of shots on two point jumpers (33.4% WSU/33.6% KU) and % of two point jumpers made (37.9% WSU/35.2% KU). When looking at the numbers, WSU is a team that shoots more threes at a little lower rate. They score better at the rim than we do. And they are little better on two point jumpers. Three guys shoot their threes -- Baker, Cotton, and Van Vleet. But Baker is by far the best -- near 40%. Van Vleet is good at 36.2%. And Cotton is bad -- below 30%. They work hard to get Baker looks from three. He has shot 198 threes, compared to Cotton and Van Vleet (a combined 213).

8. When Numbers Could Be Misleading: Although some of the numbers seem to favor WSU, those numbers could be a bit misleading. When has WSU faced a team like Kansas this season? When have they faced our athletes? When have they faced our defense? We can't look at our numbers in a vacuum, and we can't look at WSU's that way either. I think the biggest item to consider is their three point percentage. Although they have shot more three pointers than we have, they are below 700 for the season, which is less than Notre Dame and Villanova, for example, and certainly not in the Davidson (884) stratosphere. But will they be able to drive and get shots near the rim as easily against Kansas as they did in the MVC? They relied heavily on that during the regular season.

9. Self's Strategy: Speculation here, but part of Self's strategy might be to force them to shoot from three more than normal. That might be a bit counter-intuitive. But Self believes offensively that shooting threes is not a reliable strategy. He will be looking at WSU's low three point percentage. He will also be looking at the fact that WSU does pretty well attacking the hoop. Packing in the defense a bit to cut off driving lanes .. much like ISU did against us in the second half of the Big 12 title game, and then giving more attention to Baker, might be the best approach to WSU. Force threes, and try to ensure that someone other than Baker is shooting them. Really, I might just play Baker like a glove. There is no Cleanthony Early on this team. Obviously, if WSU is hot, this could really backfire. Whatever you do can backfire. As viewers, we'll be able to tell our strategy pretty early. And as always, in game adjustments could be the deciding factor. Hope Self is on his game tomorrow. Don't underestimate coaching. As much as well dislike Gregg Marshall, he is an excellent basketball coach. This game lies in Bill Self's hands. He'll come through.

10. A Key Defensive Thought: I didn't see this a bunch yesterday, but over the season, I saw multiple times when WSU would drive and then shoot the pass from under or just in front of the hoop to the opposite wing/corner for the open three. Our off-side defender simply needs to be on alert for that and not get sucked in. This is particularly the case if the shooter on the wing is Baker. It could present the opportunity for some turnovers, or force bad shots or bad bail out passes by the driver.

11. Switching Screens: I know this is heresy in some quarters, but we could switch screens from time to time. I just think that stopping their big three from penetrating will be a key to this game and I wouldn't hesitate to switch screens if necessary. But we can't leave Traylor, for example, on any of their top perimeter guys. I worry about Traylor because Self tends to use him that way some times. Heck, that 3-2 zone with a matchup look on Baker, where ever he moves, is probably a great option, as well.

12. Brannen Greene: This seems like a really bad match up for Brannen Greene. I don't see Greene keeping up with their main three perimeter players. Of course, if Greene gets it going from three, we won't care whether Baker or Cotton burn him a few times.

13. Kansas Wins: This just seems like one of those games where we really do match-up well. Ellis should be able to score inside. That will be a big, big key. If Ellis can hang defensively with one of their smaller guys, that inside advantage will be heightened because they won't be able to match up on our end. Lucas is not a skilled scorer, but he'll be the biggest dude out there. Again, how we handle their double teams, which we know will be coming, will be key. This is a game where I do wish Mickelson was a bit more seasoned. He'd have multiple shot block opportunities and we could use that length vs. WSU drives. My concern is how aggressively WSU plays the perimeter, and how we handle that. If we can, we'll get lots of opportunities. And most importantly, what do they have inside to really slow down Mason? The three point floodgate is opening. We could use a nice and tidy 7/15 (of course, I want more .. but I can't be greedy). KenPom says we would win 52% of the time. That isn't optimistic. But I am. We're better. KU 68 WSU 62.

@drgnslayr -- Yes, this is the topic of the day. We just need to put a team in the Final Four. That's the promised land. It's the only way we can get absolution. Then, we need to consistently put teams in the Final Four. Fairly or unfairly, it is THE standard of excellence in the eyes of the college basketball world. And yes, I think it is a fair judge of excellence.

@wissoxfan83 Well, half your avatar is worth a compliment ... you are complimented for marrying up.

@JayHawkFanToo And they Can't Be In the CBI. But hey, they're wrestling for a national title this weekend. Bunch of grapplers. Sweaty guys, and all.

@dylans I just posted this on another thread .. awesome avatar. They don't make video games like that any more. Spent many hours getting to .... and finally beating .... Tyson. I struggled with one character for a long time .. Sandman?

@brooksmd -- As long as UK went down. Heck, I'd root for MU against UK right now. In theory, I mean, if MU was in the tournament.

Nice link ... Pretty good avatar too, running close with @cragarhawk and @dylans.

But the way the tourney works, if we can get one team to the Final Four, our conference is vindicated. Who has the best chance? OU?

@jaybate-1.0 This is an interesting inference. I really enjoy how you toss out theories. Makes us think. But I was kind of buying the theory that has been forwarded here by others that our style of play is vintage Michigan St. How does our approach differ from the MSU approach?

Uh, the ISU loss doesn't help that Big 12 tourney resume.

Why does this feel good? It shouldn't. We shouldn't take pleasure in the misery of others. But speaking of Mizzery, perhaps ISU has taken their place as our most hated rival.

Look at that box score -- UAB outrebounded ISU 52-37. And ISU was 6/23 from three. Self texted me and said "See!!"

1. Cliff: This situation has to annoy coach Self to no end. But this is not an issue where we should demonize the NCAA. There are clear rules. It now appears that Cliff or his family broke the rules ("appears" ). But even if they didn't, there is a fairly simple process for exoneration. Given the time frame now remaining, it is over. The third party documents -- likely held by his parents -- would have been produced if they were going to be provided. The fact that they aren't produced tells us something, or at least implies improper conduct. But of course, they broke no laws. It's not illegal. Just compromises eligibility.

2. Landen Lucas: Notice how Landen looks better now, than in the first part of the season. Part of that is experience. But part of that is the fact that we're not simply doing the post feed deal with him. Our offense is not premised at present around the post feed. Lucas' talent/skill deficiency is not as exposed. That's not a slam at all. He is just a sophomore and seems like he can be a reasonable back up now. And the game situations have clearly enhanced his development. Landen is doing everything asked of him. He deserves to start. I love seeing the guy on the floor. But also, he is not a guy that Self can rely upon to score in the post on the post feed in future years. That would be gambling on much more development.

3. Chris Jones: Odd topic here .. but in my Frank Mason post, I flat forgot about Chris Jones, the top Juco guy of that class. Another guy Self had pursued over Mason. He was dismissed from the Louisville team. Yet another reason why we are darn lucky to have gotten Frank Mason. But man, Louisville is different without Jones.

4. Self's Expectations: Did anyone see this quote from Coach Self? Self said, after the brackets were released: "If this team gets a chance to play in an Elite Eight game, it's been a hell of a year. Let's call it like it is." When I read that, I really couldn't believe it. "One hell of a year"? I'm not saying that given our position in UK's bracket that getting to the Elite Eight might not be our reasonable season's conclusion, I'm just curious about the message it sends. I don't like the comment at all. Simply playing UK is one hell of a year? How about beating UK's ass, and we can then start having that discussion.

5. Defense: Lost a little in all of the offensive discussion is the vast improvement in our team defense. I think we would all agree that this team is better defensively than last season. Again, we lose Wiggins and Embiid, and we're better? I point to two important things. First, no Naadir Tharpe. When we see Mason and Graham busting their butts, it further exposes how much of a liability we had in Tharpe. Self best off season move was cutting Tharpe. Bar none. Second, the vast improvement on the defensive end by Perry Ellis. It's holding his position more than anything, but he also takes very good angles in the post based on ball position. He works hard, and he hits the glass on the defensive end. And as a side note, there is never ever any discussion on how this team is coached defensively. We might question the use of zone from time to time, but as far a man to man defensive coach, we have the best in the business.

6. Villanova: As a #1 seed, Villanova is an absolute joke. Gonzaga is better. Arizona is much better. They just aren't that talented. A team where the three ball has masked their deficiencies a bit. This seeding just makes no sense to me at all. I also think KU and Virginia are more deserving. A lot of this is subjective, of course. I struggle to find anything real impressive on their schedule.

7. Gottliebism: Doug Gottlieb takes some well deserved gruff from KU fans. He's quasi-impartial. But we all are. He was the one guy calling our 2008 team the best team in the country literally all season. Anyway, his comment from Sunday -- he said Arizona was going to get to play a "virtual home game" in its first game against Texas Southern. The game is in Portland, Oregon. I felt like the Aflac duck.

8. Field Goal Percentage At The Rim: This is one of my favorite stats. Of the top 8 seeds, the field goal percentage at the rim ranges from 62.1% - 69.3% -- except Kansas, which is at 56.5%. So we're dead last by a large margin. Had this discussion a bit on another thread. This is still concerning. Interestingly, of the top 8 seeds, we are just 6th in three point attempts.

9. 2012: Coach Self cited 2012 as comparison to this season. He cited that Tyshawn Taylor did not hit a three point basket until the final game in the tourney, and that we didn't hit a shot outside 3 feet against NC State (a little exaggeration). But in looking at the 2012 team, we averaged 15 three pointers per game in the NCAA tourney and average 16.48 for the season. Compare to the 11.5 per game in our bad ball stretch. Three pointers aren't a cure all, as I've said all year, but with this particular team, they appear to be a necessity.

10. Breakout: Sometimes slumps are broken gradually. Sometimes it happens in a rush, and the floodgates open. That's all I'll say. Or, as I posted on another thread, maybe the boys need a good old fashioned Slump Buster ↗. Or, maybe the slump is better than the cure ↗. Let's just hit some threes.

11. Excuses: Ah, I hear them coming already. We lost Cliff. We got a bad draw. We had foul trouble. Anybody can beat anybody in a one game draw. We're hurt. The tournament is all about luck. It's all match-ups. Self can't put the ball in the hole. We missed bunnies. The other team took away (insert name or aspect of our offensive game). This team really isn't that good. We had a short turn around. We have tired legs. I'll tell you, the "missing bunnies" thing from the Stanford game last season was perhaps the single most shortsighted and shallow excuse ever related to Kansas hoops. I ask all of you prone to making excuses -- watch the entirety of the games. Not just in length, but in depth. I'll contrast it a bit to 2013. When we lost to Michigan, there were no real issues with Self's handling of that game, short of a few late game and OT decisions that are up for fair debate. But the loss to Stanford was a plain and obvious failure of our coaching staff to properly game plan and then adjust during the game. Big difference. That's what to watch for. We need coach Self and his staff to have their "A" games.

12. Our Expectations: To begin the year, my expectations were a national title. When you look at other teams, Kansas is not an overall talent deficit to any team, except UK. Duke is arguable. A national title was a reasonable expectation. The reality is that this team is Self's baby. He recruited it, he developed it, he cultivated it, he molded it, he puts it out on the floor -- every aspect is controlled by coach Self. And it was all geared for this moment. The best possible teams we have to beat to get to the Elite Eight (chalk) are WSU and ND. That's it. And a 15 seed. Kansas should be better than all of those teams. I expect an Elite Eight. That's my reasonable expectation right now. I don't think it's a "hell of a season" if we get there, though. It's chalk. 2012 was a hell of a season. 2008 was the mountain top. While I will not be satisfied, I will be relieved if we just beat WSU, to be honest.

13. NCAA Tournament Is Beautiful: The next 11 days, Thursday, March 19 - Sunday, March 29, is beautiful. Nothing better. After 11 days we'll be down to four teams. The promised land. And if we play to our capabilities, we can be there. Yes, we can. We simply cannot beat UK playing the style that we are playing now. But we can beat UK. And we all know what style will be required to beat UK. Let's get there and find out.

I'm off early Friday for the drive to Omaha. Hope we get rollin'. We can win 6 games in a row. Damn right we can.

Someone please explain to me the stupid hand signal from Tyler Self. Even after you explain it, I won't get it.

@BeddieKU23 - Your post is terrific.

First, you said, "Usually that is in the flow of the offense and not forced or a wasted possession. He's likely to bench you if you throw up a 3 out of his realm of expectations."

This nearly an undeniable truth.

Second, you said, "Pretty hard to run a set play 3 when we are dribble weaving for 20 seconds a possession."

Again, perfect. Our four out/one in offense we ran Saturday is just that -- the weave. There is nothing to it. Just weave, and look to attack. It was the right thing to do vs ISU, given our other decrepit offensive set, but ISU just "packed it in" as Self said, and we had no answer. Advantage Hoiberg in the second half Saturday.

Third, you said, "I watch a lot of College Basketball and I see a lot of offenses that are designed to open up shooters. Either with aggressive drives for kick outs, or having good passers. I think KU does neither above average."

Once again, right on point. Did anyone watch Brigham Young/Ole Miss last night? Talk about offenses, and ball movement (particularly BYU). I'm warped, I know, but my greatest fantasy is taking our athletes and our quality of basketball players -- which exceeds that at BYU or Ole Miss -- and put them in that type of offensive system. All the while having them play the same defense that Self teaches.

This group of players playing that sort of offensive basketball? I can't even imaging how high our ceiling would be right now.

@BeddieKU23 That is interesting stat on our shots getting blocked. The convergence of two things 1) our continued efforts to score on the post feeds, and 2) the inability to get shots over long and athletic players. Our eyes did not lie.

@JayHawkFanToo I read your context reply ... the only reason context didn't matter to me was because I was speaking of the reality of the numbers, and approach to the game. That was my tunnel vision. I was speaking of the fact of the matter, not the reason. The fact is, we score at very low rate at the rim. Much worse than any other 1 or 2 seed. And the fact is, we shoot a low rate of threes in comparison to that group. The point of that post was simply as it is, and as it has always been -- logic dictates that when you are pretty bad scoring at the rim, that perhaps you try the three ball at a higher rate. Particularly when you were so good at it.

But, yes, UK's height explains some of the discrepancy. In looking at numbers over the years, they are 4% over a normally excellent at the rim team (65%). I would suggest that their height advantage is worth just that -- 4%. And that is definitely a big deal. Doesn't sound like, but it is. I'm kind curious how we stack up against the other top seeds, as the other six outstripped us by quite a ways as well. We were the one major outlier. I did notice UVA was last among the group in three attempts and was 7th at the rim -- but the at the rim % was still 62.1%.

@JhawkAlum You said, "But as many have noted above, Self has his system and doesn't stray away from it."

If Self doesn't want to stray from his system, in my opinion, he should be wildly if not singularly focused on recruiting players that fit his system. And he should not deviate. I've spent some time on that topic.

See, it's not that Self being a system coach is all that much of a problem. I'm actually a fan of the high/low in concept. But if you're going to be a strict system guy, you've got to have the pieces that work well in that game.

@ParisHawk - I think Self would love to see 5/11 each game. I'm sure he's tried everything he can to pull them out of this funk. Talking about it. Not talking about it. Extra shooting practice. No shooting practice. Yoga. No Yoga. Heck, they might have even tried to bring in some after hours "slump busters." I wouldn't bet against it. Getting a guy or team out of a slump is very hard to do -- it just happens naturally. Getting into a slump is much easier than getting out. As we all know, this slump is pretty much all mental right now. The guys are excellent shooters. It's just getting through it. And many times the floodgates open. It could happen this weekend. If this team starts hitting threes, they can beat anyone. I have no doubt that they could beat Kentucky.

Before this bad ball thing started, I was hoping for this exact draw -- to beat UK's ass in the elite eight and deny this supposed greatest team ever a final four.

Right now, to be honest, I'm just hoping we beat WSU. For once, my expectations are lowered.

For those that aren't up to date on the slump buster thing, here's what I found on line Slump Buster ↗

@sfbahawk You agree that coaches can affect a shooter's confidence. I assume because you did not disagree, that you do not disagree with the other questions posed.

To be sure, it's not just the fool's gold comment. It is the complete change in offensive strategy. The behind the scenes stuff, I believe, had probably more of an affect. The fool's gold comment was the public declaration of what occurred behind the scenes.

And no, I don't think it affected just Greene. The reason I believe that is because it was team wide. Our entire team's three point shooting went in the tank. This affected our entire team. And that gives more credence to my theory (I believe).

I believe Self reached a breaking point with the three point stuff. It wasn't so much the threes, but the inability to score inside. We know that kills him. It was part of the post-TT comments. All this boiled over in the TT press conference, where we had just blown TT out on the road -- no small feat given what TT has done at home this season.

After TT, we saw a complete change in how we played offensive basketball. To drive his point home, I think Self made a three point shot edit -- we're going to score getting the ball to the hoop. The three point shot is only taken under certain conditions. And I think he laid out those conditions to the team. This changed the dynamic on the offensive end significantly.

The numbers do not lie regarding the large change in attempts. The numbers don't lie regarding our incredible drop off in percentage made.

And you say "fragile psyche" as if that is what is required to have this happen. It's not. Tough, mentally strong athletes can be affected all the time by coaches. Players psyches don't have to be fragile to be thrown into a slump. Coaches can knock players and teams out of rhythm. Heck, problems with a girlfriend can do the same thing. If I learned that Brannen Greene was having major girlfriend issues that coincided with the downturn, I would rethink this. But acknowledging that a girlfriend issue could affect a player would be to acknowledge that my theory is plausible.

But I will say that the team wide downturn supports my theory even more.

There is little doubt in my mind that Self made a three point edict, given the numbers and style of play that followed the TT game. I notice you agreed that coaches can affect a shooter's confidence level. Once you've made that leap, the rest is not difficult.

I'm not asking anyone to buy this theory as the gospel. I just think it is a very plausible explanation, and that the pieces fit. You can't agree that it is a plausible explanation?

@wissoxfan83 said:

This sucks for everyone.

Well, except Lucas and Mickelson, of course!

@sfbahawk I understand that you disagree. You seem pretty confident that a coach cannot affect a shooter's confidence level. Do you agree that a coach can help a shooter gain confidence? Do agree that confidence can help an athlete's performance? Do agree that shooting the basketball involves a freedom of thought and mind? If you agree to the prior three questions, do you also agree that the converse is also true?

But I disagree with your premise. I do not think Self has Greene out there solely because of three point shooting. You and I may agree on the Svi comparison. I don't think Self does. I do think that part of the reason why Greene is out there is because of the three point threat. Meaning, teams respecting that shot. I do think that Self sees Greene as being satisfactory in many areas, and I think he trusts Greene right now more than Svi.

I do understand your argument. But remember, my point is that the comments sent him into a spiral and changed the entire offensive dynamic -- and hole from which he has not dug out.

@VailHawk Some folks aren't liking our chances Bracket Lames ↗ But bracket opinions are just that.

The WSU game will be a perfect test for Self's brand of ball. Though WSU's attack is different than ISU's, we've got experience against that style of play. Not sure they've played a team as sound defensively as we have been lately. I haven't looked at their schedule.

@jaybate-1.0 That is all very nice of you to say. We all know that we are simply subjects here, and you are the master. I mentioned to a business friend of mine in San Diego who's a KU fan, that I post on Ku hoops from time to time, and he asked me, "Do you know that jaybate guy?" I said yea, kind of ...

But yes, we do disagree on this item at the moment. Perhaps time will provide more clarity. I remember a very detailed discussion with you over the course of many months/years about the propriety of EJ playing PG. I believe I finally conceded that one to you, but my memory might be a bit hazy. I'm very hopeful that I can provide a well drafted concession speech in a few weeks.

And did you just suggest that I might be a woman? I would have hoped that my clearly sexist remarks of the past, and during in-game chats, would have answered that. But nonetheless, where's that picture of the Texas girl? I miss her.

@Bwag I'm not anti-BG .. but he is a one-dimensional player in my book. Some may disagree, but I think Svi is better at literally every aspect of the game except for three point shooting. I would not play BG if his three gun isn't a focus when he is in. Maybe others see that differently.

@HawksWin If you are a poor rebounding team, then it is much better for you to change the normal rebounding dynamic. Most rebounds are close to the basket, thus that stat reflects interior rebounding more than anything.

The longer the shot, the longer the rebound (generally). So, if you are a poor rebounding team, a longer shot provides you a better opportunity for a rebound. The bounce of the ball is more random, the longer the shot.

Against UK, you'd rather have longer rebounds, as it will generally bounce farther away from the basket. So that, again, supports more three pointers.

@DinarHawk - For us to beat UK, we'd likely need a 12/23 from three type of night. We just aren't beating them playing the game we're playing now. But I think we could if we're hot from three, and stretch their D, and create opportunities to get to the hoop.

@HawksWin Yes, it does.

And for what it is worth, this stat has nothing to do with context. The stat shows that we, by and large, have difficulty scoring at the rim. UK is tremendous at the rim.

Yet we shoot the same number of three pointers. When you have difficulty scoring at the rim, a random thought might be that other options should be exploited.

I do understand that some folks mightily resist that.

Very interesting stat I heard last night -- one commentator said UK had shot 529 three pointers this season. That sounded familiar.

UK shot 529. Kansas 528.

UK scores at 69.3% at the rim. KU 56.5%.

@Blown No, no .. I don't think you have a closed mind at all. And I didn't say that.

I said "Free your mind". Much different. A closed mind to me is someone who simply refuses to consider other alternatives. I have not suggested that is you. When I say "free your mind", I simply mean to expand it.

Think about things in a way that is outside of one's comfort level, and to consider that there is a world out there that may be beyond what one has already experienced. We seem to get caught up here in "Bill Self knows" -- well, yes he does. But his approach to the game is just a small sliver of the basketball universe. It is why I love watching basketball. I can learn something every time I watch a game.

Free Your Mind ↗

@Crimsonorblue22 My perspective on the comments and mentality of the fool's gold deal is combined with our complete shift in offensive strategy. We all have our perspectives based on our experiences. My experiences come from, first hand, seeing how athletes are both positively and negatively affected by coaches. Folks sometimes forget that the players are still kids ... they may be 18, but they are kids with all of the same insecurities as normal kids. If you've never experienced it, I would understand your skepticism. And, of course, it's just my opinion.

I also understand how it is easier to go through a basketball season without critical thinking. Life is the same way. It's much easier to accept what is given to you with a smile on your face. And it's much easier not to challenge anything.

It's not that I don't understand that you are proud to wear your crimson and blue glasses. Blue pill, is blue pill. It's a choice not to think critically.

I guess I just don't understand the point of making snide little remarks about posters and topics, without coming to the table with any substance to challenge the thought process.

So you know, as a general rule, I typically choose to avoid folks without substance.

@Blown I would tell you that I give zero credence to the balanced schedule thing. Seriously, every team has video on other teams, and many play others twice. So no, I don't see that as a reason. Teams game plan, teams do lots of things. Coaches adjust. As I've said in other posts .. including the Myth of Three Point Defense .. coaches scheme get their looks. Other teams have been doing it all season long, and are still doing it. Again, I think we look at our little KU vacuum and think that this is the only possible way.

@Blown Not sure what stats you're looking at -

Post Texas Tech, we have gone 32/122 from three, or 26.2%. Your numbers suggest that in 10 games we shot nearly as many three pointers as we did in the prior 24.

In the first 24 games, including Texas Tech, we were 166/406, or 40.8%. You need to double check your numbers.

We are now 198/528.

You cite "Big 12", but this is irrelevant as the delineation is the Fool's Gold comments and change in offensive strategy.

You cite Utah as a before and after on percentages, and I'm not sure why.

And so your premise is that our team was so tired, so gassed, that they just couldn't shoot three pointers effectively anymore -- while the rest of the college world kept draining them?

I wish I could even give a shred of credibility to that argument. I can't.

And I guess I'm not seeing your claimed inverted relationship between post scoring and three point percentages. I know we scored at the rim at nearly 65% in 2012 and at 67% last season. But to your point, I in no way dispute the power of inside-out basketball. In fact, I'm a big fan of it when you have personnel to match.

Remember, regardless, other teams find ways to shoot threes and make them at high rates. And that's not premised many times on post scoring. Many times, the threes and outside game create inside opportunities -- ISU and WSU are good examples.

One question: So the first 25 games, we had appreciably different inside scoring than the last 9 games?

@dylans That's fine, and I respect that. Seeing other teams play can just affect one's perspective when assessing the propriety of Self's offensive approach. Threes are much, much more than just keeping the "D honest."

You say that three point shots are the easiest to miss - would it surprise you to know that our three point percentage, even with the 9 game downturn, is still higher than our two point jump shot percentage?

@Shanghai_RCJH You really believe that coach Self didn't want to win the ISU game? I'm puzzled.

Adding to the discussion, it is common for folks to reference too much reliance on the outside shot as a reason to support Self one track approach. But did you see Self's quote from after the ISU game?

"We had no inside game at all. They just packed it in and dared us to make plays and we couldn't make them."

Then look at ISU's offense. Folks claim they rely on three pointers. But look at the box score. ISU went 2-16 from three. How does a team that relies so much on threes actually win when they're not hitting threes?

@dylans Here's the thing ... you can have both. You can have a slashing game, you can have an inside game, and you actually can shoot threes. They work together. Have you watched Gonzaga play? Duke? Wichita St.? You obviously saw ISU. And you've seen OU. Just examples. Not perfect teams. Just examples.

This entire change was because we could not score on the post feed. Something we recognized in early December, which Self finally relented on in early February. But along the way, we were shooting threes. We tried to feed the post. We tried to score inside. But in the alternative, we shot the three ball.

You can have both. You can drive and slash to get your inside looks, and you can also shoot threes.

Ask yourself this ... how many times have you seen a Kansas guard drive into the lane, draw the defense, and pass to the three point line for the open shot?

You make the mistake of thinking that shooting the three at a high rate is living and dying by the three (your one armed bandit reference). But it absolutely is not. And I'm sure you know that I have never suggested ... ever ... being a one dimensional, three point gunning team.

There is this myth you perpetuate, as well, that we would hit an inevitable cold streak shooting the three ball. We weren't shooting a crazy percentage, though. We were just over 40%. Heck, the 2011 team shot over 40%. And they clearly played inside-out, feed the post, basketball.

One thing I will point out is that we are talking about this team, and this year.

What I do not understand is why with a team that is your best perimeter shooting team in the Self era -- Self said that -- why you go so firmly in the other direction? If you are a bad shooting team, I get it. If your just average, the perhaps it's arguable.

I guess what I'd say further is that we many times look at this with tunnel vision. We just see our team. There is a who world of offensive basketball out there. Much like a football coach may be more a defensive guy than an offensive guy, that is coach Self. He has a very limited view of offensive basketball. And just because coach Self says it, doesn't make it right.

He has force fed an offensive strategy on a group of players that had a very different skill set and strength. With a team that has a TRob and Withey, it would be a very different conversation.

@drgnslayr to your point, no, we don't click our heels and change back right now. I think we are what Self has made us to be. And look, that could very well get us to the Final Four. I've said all along that the NCAA tourney is what matters most. I will not care one bit that we went 5-4 in the last 9 if we win our next 4 games. And if we win our next 4, we can argue and debate all we want, but Self would have gotten us to a Final Four. That's all that counts right now. Self's best coaching job was 2012 -- getting us to the Final Four. All that matters now is how he coaches the next 4 games.

I also wondered like you why Self would go zone very late, but not try it earlier. But then again, what's new? Why wait until the 2:00 minute mark to press vs. UNI? He's the same guy he's always been.

@RedRooster I agree, it is sad. It's sad that something that had such promise was not permitted to grow and reach its peak. But, alas, there is a new day. And that is the NCAA tourney, If we win four games, and get to the Final Four, we won't care.

@Crimsonorblue22 There are times I do not understand your comments, other than realizing you took the blue pill a long, long time ago. It isn't too late. There is a big basketball world out there that doesn't operate under Bill Self's offensive script. Lots of teams that have won national titles doing it a different way.

@Blown Respectfully, I think you are looking at this too simplistically. Things happen for a reason. See me my post on Self Fulfilling Prophesy. Following up on @cragarhawk's comments, do you really think that this three point shooting slump just happened? Challenge your thought process here. Ask yourself why something happens, and why it happens so dramatically. And ask yourself why this slump was so perfectly timed to fit with the "bad ball" change in our offensive approach. Find another team in the nation that this has happened to.

You cannot ignore the edict from the boss. You cannot ignore the head games that were being played with our shooters. Brannen Greene went from shooting over 50% from three before the "fool's gold" garbage, to under 15% after. A death spiral. In fact, wasn't Brannen Greene the real target of the fool's gold comment? His game, more than any player, is premised upon shooting from three point range.

Fool's gold -- the actual fool's gold -- is worthless, right? It's fake. It's of no value. Tell that to Brannen Greene.

If folks want to simply chalk our shooting going in the tank to happenstance, I've got some property to sell you near the local dump.

You will see that you are correct, the numbers don't lie. We are 5-4 in the last 9 games since Self changed our offensive approach. Our conference game margin has gone from an impressive +9.33 ppg to a measly +2.55 ppg. That coincided with a precipitous drop in our three point attempts -- from nearly 17 per game to just about 12. During this 9 game stretch, we have never shot as many three pointers as our average had been in the prior 25 games. Further, a numbers don't lie item, go read Jesse Newell's article ↗on how our offensive efficiency has tanked during this 9 game stretch (it didn't include ISU, but that would only add to the narrative)..

By the way, wasn't it a beautiful thing when this team was shooting the ball from outside? Weren't we at our best offensively? And seriously, why did coach Self fight against that so much?

A good thing to remember -- there are other brilliant basketball coaches that disagree with coach Self offensively. Coach Self isn't the offensive gospel. He's just one guy, with a very narrow view of offensive basketball. Free your mind.

We are now on the door steps of the NCAA tournament. Once 21-4 and sitting at 10-2 in the league, Kansas finished the league campaign 3-3 and stand 5-4 in its last 9 games. This should cause even the biggest Bill Self fans great pause. Our change in fortunes on the court were directly tied to the change in offensive strategy directed by coach Self. The NCAA tourney awaits. How did this happen, and why?

1. Self Fulfilling Prophecy defined: "Any positive or negative expectation about circumstances, events, or people that may affect a person's behavior toward them in a manner that causes those expectations to be fulfilled."

2. Texas Tech "Fool's Gold" Commentary: Following the Texas Tech game in Lubbock on February 10, coach Self said the following: "It's fool's gold. You can't bank on making 55 percent or 50 percent of your threes." Of course, that is true. But at the time, Kansas was shooting over 40% from three point range as a team, through 24 games -- an impressive number through a stretch of games accounting for over two-thirds of the season. It was actually our most reliable offensive weapon. Self used the fool's gold comment at half time of the Utah game, remember? Self chided Ellis after Ellis' spectacular first half performance because Ellis had the actual temerity to score from the outside -- citing Ellis' performance as "fool's gold."

3. The Point of Fool's Gold: Self's point was that fool's gold is fake, it's something you can't rely upon. It's not the real deal. Most importantly, as we know, 'Fool's Gold' is of no value -- that was the message to the team. You have to score inside. Self of course wanted to improve his inside game. A worthy goal. But in the process, he insulted, discredited, and devalued the guys that had carried his team to a 20-4 record at the time. This is where, in my opinion, the disconnect began with this team. And this disconnect led to our 5-4 finish.

4. My Comments Post TT: Here's what I said immediately after the Texas Tech "Fool's Gold" comments: "But here's even what's worse - Bill Self's comments last night cheapen and devalue what the team has accomplished. Imagine if you're a player (hearing that from coach Self). Now imagine if you're a father. Your kid is great a soccer and is just so-so at basketball. But you hate soccer. And you tell your kid, "Hey, that's great, but try playing a real sport like basketball, and I'll be impressed." Horrible, right? Instead of providing inspiration and positivity, he cheapens and devalues their efforts and team strengths. Imagine Brannen Greene. 'Hey, buddy, you're fool's gold.' Comes across that way to me."

5. Psychological Impact: This gets subjective, of course. But does anyone doubt that coaches can inspire players to greatness? Does anyone doubt the value of coaches, behind the scenes, in creating an atmosphere of success? Does anyone doubt that a coach can play mind games with players? Does anyone doubt that some of these guys might have fragile psyches, or be a bit insecure about their role and their value to the team? I believe that Self's public and private disdain for the three point shot psychologically destroyed this team's greatest strength. It led directly to the horrible performances we have seen from behind the arc.

6. Self's Fulfilled Prophecy: The shooting slump -- the travesty that has been our three point shooting since Texas Tech -- was Self created. I have zero doubt about that. This was not a reversion to the mean. It was a coach tearing the offensive heart out of his team. Now, I know, some will immediately react and believe this not to be true. But let's think about this for a moment. A coach is the ever present source of inspiration and confidence in a team. And though I am not one to cite Sam Mellinger too often, he made the following statement in the KC Star Saturday morning that is nearly an undeniable truth -- "Shooting is best done with clear minds." This is gospel. Self has rarely given his players that clear mind. Again, we have seen him show great disdain for the three pointer over the years. Three point shooters have been the biggest recipients, this side of an Anrio Adams three second pick, of the coach Self's quick hook. Self has made comments in prior years about not settling for threes. It's a common refrain. Threes are second class. We know where he stands on the topic. We heard him say on Hawk Talk that we need "reliable offense." We know what he meant. Self wanted us to have less reliance on three point shooting. Now he has that. I wonder if this is what he envisioned?

7. Post Texas Tech: I believe that what happened after the TT game was that coach Self had reached his breaking point. In his mind, he truly believed that this team could not, and would not, be in a position to compete for a national championship relying on outside shooting. So everything changed. He would not stand for the reliance on outside shooting any longer. He demanded that his players change their approach to the game. He demanded that we get the ball to the hoop. He demanded a style of play that was, in his opinion, more reliable. He demanded not settling for three pointers. It was a thought process borne in a long term approach to the season. Bill Self felt that we could not reach the Final Four playing the way we played through the Texas Tech game. It was an illusion to Self. It would not work in the NCAAs when things get down and dirty. We were too reliant on outside shooting. We heard Brannen Greene comment that threes needed to be taken in the flow of the normal offense. We saw players routinely pass on three point looks in favor driving to the hoop. Frank Mason, who was gunning at over 40%, completely changed his approach. Selden, Greene, and Oubre all hesitated. It is subtle, folks. But that's all it takes. All it takes is a slight hesitation. A slight second thought. The look is gone. Or, don't shoot unless we're under 10 on the shot clock, don't shoot the three if you are guarded, don't shoot a three if we still have the opportunity to drive the basketball. Restrictions. Interestingly, Self just said Friday that his guys could shoot open threes against Baylor, but that he "hoped to hell they wouldn't."

8. Numbers Do Not Lie: In the games since the Fool's Gold comments at TT, Kansas has shot just 26.2% from three point range. This from a team shooting over 40% at the time. Worse, our three point attempts dropped dramatically from 16.9 per game, to 11.5 per game in our 9 games of "bad ball." There is more to the drastic change in numbers than merely a slump. This was a wholesale change in what was acceptable, and what was not acceptable. The drastic drop in three point attempts tells that story unequivocally. Further, very importantly, before "bad ball" -- we were averaging a +9.33 average ppg margin in conference play. After "bad ball" -- we were averaging just a +2.55 average ppg margin in conference play (including the conference tourney).

9. Brannen Greene: Greene, I believe, was the biggest psych job. Why do I believe that? Because his game, much more than any Jayhawk, is premised upon his outside shooting. He was our three point gunner. He was the guy that commentators were regularly calling the best shooter in America. He was the guy that Self was calling the best shooter during his tenure at Kansas. Then, the Fool's Gold rant. Through the Texas Tech game, Greene was shooting 53.2% from three. Since the Texas Tech game, Greene has shot 14.2%. Some may say coincidence, I'm sure. I would suggest that Self largely contributed to the decline, if not flat out caused it. Greene, who is an NBA prospect solely because of his shooting, essentially saw his main contribution to the team devalued, and called fake and worthless. Don't for one minute underestimate the power of coach Self's opinion on these young men. And the change in strategy -- the second thought in this shooter's mind -- surely led to uncertainty when Greene began to pull the trigger. The rhythm was lost and the spiral began.

10. Conference Myth: Remember, Self's change in offensive focus did not win us the Big 12 conference. We won in spite of it. We were 9-2 in conference, and finished 13-5. Through the Texas Tech game in Lubbock, we were 20-4. We come home vs. a zone defense team (Baylor) and won, 21-4 (the bridge to the change in strategy). At many times during those first 25 games we looked dynamic on offense. We demonstrated that we could overcome large deficits (Florida) and we showed that we could blow the doors off teams with incredible halves of basketball (Utah). We we shooting over 40% from three point range. We were at 8th in the nation in three point percentage.

11. Bad Ball: @jaybate-1.0 gave us the term "bad ball." Self said we play ugly. This began, really, when Self finally accepted that we have a very limited ability to score on the post feed. On January 31, 2015, Self proclaimed that we were not an inside-out team. This thought process led to a different way to get the ball to the hoop, as Self alluded to directly after the Texas Tech game -- talking about getting the ball to the hoop off the bounce, and other ways beyond the post feed. Whatever the term, we changed significantly after the Texas Tech game. Bad ball was born. We then embarked on a wholesale change in the manner in which we approached offensive basketball. Our three point attempts dwindled. Our offense was now 100% committed to getting the ball inside, with the strategy of driving the basketball, creating off the dribble, drawing fouls, mucking it up, and "finding a way to win", as Self said just the other day.

12. Futility of Bad Ball: The day that this was plainly evident was February 15, 2015, at home, against TCU. The day the season died. We had lost to WVU in our first true "bad ball" game, and then was locked in a tight game with TCU, at home, at the three minute mark. The writing on the wall was evident. In the 9 true "bad ball" games, we have gone 5-4 under the rule of "bad ball." Numbers do not lie. Against ISU, a main premise of bad ball failed. We could not keep a lead. We build a 17 point lead, only to see it lost in a flash. This was reminiscent of the Utah game where we built a 20 point lead on the backs of our outside shooters, only to see it lost when Self directed a return to the pound it inside philosophy he is so fond of. Bad ball failed. Bad ball has led this team to 5-4 -- that is futility. As @Jesse-Newell has noted, our offensive efficiency has tanked since this new strategy was put into practice. The dynamic outbursts of the first 25 games were replaced by the drudgery on the offensive end. An attack in large part premised upon drawing fouls, and getting to the line. Further, Self conveniently ignores that his preferred approach has significant pitfalls. Ironically, the inability to make "bunnies" impacted both the Stanford game last tourney, and was a key factor in our loss to KSU (as Self reflected upon after that game). Again, our most reliable offense had been our outside shooting through the Texas Tech games. We could not score reliably near the rim. The bad ball strategy further relies upon the whistle our referee friends -- a fickle thing that can wax and wane like the tides of the ocean. And not something one should bank on to lead them to the promised land. A distinct element that is out of one's control.

13. The Answer -- Why Self Switched To Bad Ball: It was yesterday, following the Baylor game, when Self gave the answer. Self commented that our 2012 Final Four team played this way. He noted that Tyshawn Taylor didn't make a three the entire tournament, until the title game, and that we didn't score a basket outside of three feet in beating NC State in the tourney run. Self reminisced in his comparisons, referring to the fact that this version of the Kansas Jayhawks' identity was "finding a way to win."

14. Could Self Be Right?: Absolutely. Self could be dead on correct. The greatest stage awaits. The ultimate judge and jury. If Self's gamble that "bad ball" can carry us to the Final Four is right, he wins this great debate by knock-out. Of course, he could change course and revert to a different style of play, and also reach the Final Four. Self would win, once again, by knock-out. And that's the reality of coaching at Kansas. Fairly or unfairly, Self will be judged by his team's performance in March. Fairly or unfairly, every big time coach is judged in this manner, and compared to other coaches. But Self has made a big gamble, risking this team's future on a bet that turns it's back on what used to be this team's greatest strength. Self consciously chose not to embrace this team's strength and chose not to scheme to take advantage of it -- he chose a strategy that minimized that strength. Self gets paid to make these sorts of decisions. It's his team, it's his call. We will soon see if this decision will lead the Jayhawks to the promised land. Kansas will, once again, be in a terrific position as a #2 or #3 seed to make a run to the Final Four. Self could be right. Every KU fan hopes this gamble was the right one. We shall soon see.