🏀 KuBuckets Archive

@DinarHawk -- you said, "Yeah, Hunter played his best game of the season."

I will correct you .. Hunter played his only game of the season!

I had forgotten what he looked like.

@jaybate-1.0 So what's the theory here? I'm a bit baffled. Self said just before the start of the season that Ellis/Mickelson would not work on the court at the same time. Now they played significant time together. Mickelson a "face up four", Self said. Is this "outside of the box"?

Me thinks this signals a change for the better. Or, at least, me hopes.

In a post earlier this morning, I mentioned that Self said in the preseason press conference that he wanted his team to have an identity established by conference play. If Self is willing to moderate, change slightly, see what his stellar recruiting efforts have created, well -- we have an identity. If today is an indication, Self may be embracing the transformation.

I fully expected today to be about pounding it inside. While Lafayette wasn't a good team a defending threes, we certainly had a skill advantage inside with Ellis and Cliff (who was expected to start). But somehow, we played our game. We played outside-in. And it was magnificent.

Only 32 of our 96 points were shots near the rim. I can't rewatch the game, but of the 32, many were of the driving variety. Very few were pure post play moves. Astonishing, really,

1. Oubre: Brannen Greene misses weights yesterday. Now Oubre is the starter for good. See what I said there? For good. I felt that once Svi was replaced by Greene, it was just a matter of time. Greene was a place-holder. It was over. UNLV game I said. Now it's really over. Oubre was spectacular. Greene could have gone to weights, but it wouldn't have mattered. While many of us in Jayhawk nation fretted over Oubre for whatever reason (myself included), I think we all have to hand it to coach Self. We have a spectacularly prepared player. 23 points, 10 boards, driving, shooting, defense. Very cool. Svi was better prepared to play early. Now, he can start Oubre, Svi has a big role and ready for next season. Perfect.

2. Mickelson: Not to overreact to one game, but has Lucas ever looked that good? Self said in the preseason that he would not play Ellis and Mickelson together. Ellis needed a tougher presence because both Mickelson and Ellis were true fours, and Mickelson a face up four. Whatever. They were both on the floor together today for stretches. Self said in the post game interview with Greg Gurley that Mickelson would be playing more. Lucas starts today, and then is playing with the scrubs. We have seen some movement perhaps in the rotation. But what I see in Mickelson getting playing time is Self perhaps acknowledging the acceptance of our destiny -- an outside/in team. If Self believes Mickelson to be more of a trued four, more of a face up guy, why would he play him we were pound it into the post?Circumstantial evidence, but still evidence. Plus, Mickelson seemed like a more difficult guy to shoot over than Lucas

3. Three Point Shooting: Did I read that right? 12 of 23? Did I read that right? 96 points? I feel complete. Some nights it won't be 12 of 23. It might be 7 of 23. But this team simply needs to shoot threes. 20+ most nights. Oubre looks like he has the stroke. Svi got it going. Mason is what we thought CF might be, without the tail dribbling. Selden perhaps can challenge 40%, but likely an acceptable 37%. And Greene is the best of the bunch. This is a spectacularly talented perimeter team.

4. Driving: The three point shooting enhances the ability to drive the ball. Defenses have to play tight and close out completely. Oubre appears to be all he was billed to be. Svi is solid in that phase with some nice agility. Selden a bee-line bull. Mason a gap exploiter. Ellis a reverse pivot machine. And Traylor (who initiated not one bit of offense today, by the way) has that quick first step.

5. Three-Point shooting + Driving = Outside/In: God bless America. This team has chance at a national championship playing this way. Playing this way, we can beat Kentucky. We can beat Duke. We can beat anyone we might face. Self just has to accept the identity and embrace it. Admittedly, it is riskier than shoveling it in to Marcus, Markieff, or TRob. But it is less risky with this team.

6. Inside Game: We were not playing Kentucky today. We were playing a low grade mid-major with some middling post guys. And we had trouble inside. Self said on the post game that Ellis lacked energy, and might be "under the weather." Not sure if it's true, or if it's just good cover. Ellis will score inside. So will Cliff. But it (post scoring) is a nice second option with those guys.

7. Box Score: I'm looking at the box score. I can't stop looking at it. 23 three pointers. Mickelson played more than Ellis. Mason 9:1 assist/turnover. Oubre a spectacular double-double. We scored 96 points on only 8 made free throws.

8. Hot Shooting Opponent: Can you imagine how this game might have gone had we played inside-out? Had we rotated the ball around the perimeter as we did in the second half against Utah? This could have been a bit dangerous. I think we would have won. But it's the next level up in opponent that would worry me.

9. Temple: Let's see how all this holds up Monday night. Temple got a couple guys eligible this past week and might be better than anticipated. Shooting in a hostile environment. That's our next challenge.

Perhaps I'm just too optimistic here. But this game -- the style in which we executed our offense -- seems like an incredibly positive development. This is how you manufacture points.

@icthawkfan316 This is my opportunity .. you got me on the "your" - "you're" thing a few weeks ago --- do you mean Kleinmann? Ball's in your court.

The spoon thing just seemed to fit as Self's comments twist us in all directions, yet we have no idea what he really means most of the time; and perhaps neither does he.

I had another thought ... Self wants to "manufacture" points. Whatever happened to posting up a perimeter guy? Self has brought that up in the past, thinking out loud. That's a pretty standard way to take capitalize on MUAs. But again, he went all last season with Wiggins on the roster and didn't post him up once.

On Manning, Self said he's "emergency" only. Heck, Self couldn't put Manning in last week -- remember his statement: “But when we’re playing well, don’t sub; playing badly you can’t put him in that situation." So he talked himself out of playing Manning just that easily.

"Emergency" is really foul trouble or injury. The good news is that Mason has the lowest foul rate per minute of the 10 players that have played substantial minutes.

In the kusports.com article today, I was glad to see Svi's name now mentioned in the PG discussion. For my money, I'd rather give Svi the minutes that might otherwise go to Evan Manning just to see.

The issue is always ball handling -- that's where we're deficient w/o Mason or Graham. I have no idea how Manning would stack up in a high pressure game, or if he could deliver the ball under pressure. Last season, Selden struggled with both. Don't know how Svi stacks up in that situation yet, either.

I asked @Jesse-Newell yesterday about Svi, and he said Self had said that Svi is thinking too much now, and thus putting him in the PG spot might not be the best move. At some point, though, he will stop thinking too much. And if Graham's out for the season, I think Svi's the best option.

@jaybate-1.0 Very nice. Self just thinks out loud. Gets out over his skis, so to speak. It's hard to know what to take seriously. In the same day, he made the useless point that Evan Manning had a good week of practice, but said that he would only be used in an emergency. Perhaps next week we'll get an update on Pollard, and be reminded that he won't play unless the entire program collapses.

I refuse, though, to get into the Traylor should/could/might play PG/initiate the offense/pass to the wing/drive to the basket/start at the top of the key/help an old lady across the street discussion.

Ok. But I have a new drum to bang ... start Oubre. It's going to happen. It's inevitable. We know it. The minute Greene moved into the lineup for Svi, it was over. Just get on with it. I say by UNLV.

Truth be told, a completely bad ass lineup would be Mason, Selden, Greene, Oubre, and Ellis. Or the preseason speculation of Selden at point now being a forced reality -- Selden, Svi, Greene, Oubre, and Ellis. Playing small. I'm not foolish enough to think that will ever happen, but isn't this about the time of the year where he broke White out as the pick and pop 4 vs. Belmont in 2012-13? 15 points and cloud of dust? Never to be seen or heard from again? Fool's gold, to be sure.

But that isn't an identity for coach Self. And we can't really expect that. Outside of the box is one thing. Outside of the planet earth is another.

I'm interested in where we're going -- here's why: In the famous preseason press conference, Self said it was important for his team to have its identity established by conference play. I'm not sure we do have an identity yet. Certainly not offensively. We know what it is, but it's an anti-Self identity. We have four games to go until conference. Four wins, by the way, whether we play inside-out, outside-in, or upside down. We are that good.

I am very encouraged by the Self's cryptic comments about the offense. The guy desperately wants to play through the post. It's like a comfortable sweatshirt, or a Brady Morningstar -- it just feels right.

But in Self's world, thinking outside the box might just be embracing the jumper. The normal world for many is not the Bill Self world of offense. Could he embrace a world that focuses on perimeter play, and a resulting world where post play is a mere consequence?

A team would be foolish not to score at the rim when it can. So we'll do that against the lesser teams. But what we are looking for, distinctly, are halves of basketball where we aren't rotating the ball endlessly (and sometimes mindlessly) looking to get to the third side to dump it into Ellis. The real fool's gold this season, against big, long, athletic dudes. We are searching for that identity. It is right before us. We have perhaps the best perimeter team we have had in the Bill Self era. And a perimeter team can take advantage of opportunities inside perhaps easier than a pound it to the post team can.

I would just say this to Self: Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth -- There is no spoon.

And Cliff starts -- of course, Cliff starting makes perfect sense. If he gets all fouled up, this might be the game for it. The more we play our best players, the better.

We'll see if Greene can keep the job. I doubt it. Oubre is closing quickly.

Self said today: “We’ll probably be more of a shoot-off-the-catch team,” Self said, “than we will be a penetrate-and-pitch type team.”

In Self-speak, I have no idea what that really means.

Self also said:

“I said all along it would probably take some time with different individuals, and certainly, the light’s starting to come on for him,” Self said of Oubre. “And when it comes on, it’s going to stay on. He’s going to do great.”

In @Jesse-Newell's article a cjonline.com, Self said Evan Manning will be reserved in an “emergency” type role in case a situation dictates that the Jayhawks need another guard. Sounds like that eliminates Manning -- which is different than what was reported of Self's comments earlier. "Emergency" denotes foul trouble or injury.

He also mentioned Hunter Mickelson .. which is probably the first time his name has come out of Self's lips for a month.

Here's the link - link text ↗

@drgnslayr - The foul thing is a legit concern for Cliff .. Lucas fouls at .193 per minute, Oubre .152, and then Cliff at .107. Those are the top three. So protecting Cliff a bit is wise. He is still isn't a crazy fouler, though. Respectable, certainly considering some of Self's earlier comments about practice.

Here's the others - Greene .099, Graham .098, Traylor .093, Selden .079, Ellis .077, Svi .049, and Mason .044.

I guess the two at he bottom stood out to me. Svi, as a 17 year old, is one of the best at not committing fouls. Mason is the best, and that's big because we need him in the game.

I would like to see Cliff get his feet wet as a starter though. Lafayette might be a good proving ground.

@justanotherfan - You make some really good points there. PG minutes are much different than others. It is constant motion. Your idea of having Selden or Svi bring it up when Mason is on the floor makes sense. In case of emergency, Mason could help. I'd really like to see if Svi could cut it -- meaning as an adequate option.

@wrwlumpy - Really appreciate these lead in posts in advance of game day. Good start to the discussion.

I say Self sticks with Greene until UNLV game, and then Oubre starts at the three.

As for the other post spot, who knows what he'll do. I think he should start Cliff and just be done with it, but he's being more conservative with it. Cliff and Ellis are our best post combo. But oddly, I don't mind Lucas starting. It just seems silly to have a starter that doesn't even play rotation level minutes most of the time.

Let's all remember, too, that you can play 36 minutes and get more rest during a game than when you play 32 minutes. It's all based on when the substitutions are made. Let's say we are one minute before the TV timeout. Self calls a timeout, takes out Mason. Mason sits through that timeout, the minute of floor time, and then the TV timeout All he missed was a few minutes of floor time but got lots of rest. Usually, you're not going to call a TO for that. But Self could do that sort of subbing around an opposing team's TOs, or other stoppages such as reviews -- that's why you have assistant coaches to monitor that, as the color guy mentioned on Saturday.

Mason appears to be in the best shape any player I can recall. I've never seen him appear winded. And the wearing down thing -- if all breaks right, we'll play 40 games. In the NBA, it's 82 plus perhaps multiple playoff series. I don't think the two are even comparable. The players are usually playing only two games per week. The same for March, and even then, it's 2 in 3 days, and then 3-4 days of rest.

Another issue if he wants to keep Mason fresh is practice. Limiting the extra hard work there, or shaving it down.

I"d play Mason as much as I could, with strategic blows. I wouldn't reduce his minutes. Just my opinion.

With all that said, if you're an opposing team, what do you do? I'd attack Mason, try to foul the guy up. Then get him out and put major pressure on the ball handlers.

The issue before us now is not really whether Mason will get tired. The issue is what we do when he is out because of fouls or injury.

Manning is not a serious option for a long stretch. A minute or two, sure. But who knows how he'd function in a big environment. We can only speculate.

I'd be interested in why Svi wouldn't be at least an equal option to Selden. Svi is clearly a better passer. He appears to a slipperier penetrator -- Selden is more point A to point B. We've seen Svi drive and dish like a PG. And he appears (emphasis on "appears" ) to have better ball handling ability than Selden -- though we have not seen him under the duress we saw Selden under last season.

@jaybate I have thought about this long and hard. Mickelson should/could/might be used to initiate the offense. I've even thought about him as the backup point guard. I'm dead serious here.

I'm not saying in a dribble the ball down the court sense, or handling the ball. Or doing anything else that a point guard would do .. but we should/could/might have him initiate the offense.

We do have to find a way to manufacture points because we simply don't have any guys that can score conventionally. And by conventionally, I mean other than three point shots, because three point shooters can miss, and then what are you left with? We can't live or die by an actual outside shot in basketball. That's a sure fire way to lose to a team you're supposed to beat in the NCAA tourney.

Now, what I mean by initiate the offense is make a pass. See what I mean? Mick will have the ball, let's say out front -- right, the same spot we tell our PG's NOT to pass to bigs when they are coming down the court; this is different. though. It's strategy.

Mick could then make a pass and intitiate our offense. What an advantage this will be, particularly if he is quicker than the guy guarding him. See what I'm getting at? We're manufacturing points. Mick could drive if his guy isn't as quick as him. And I'm guessing there will be no stopping him on his path to the hoop. But if not, he can pass to another guy. Get us going.

Now, since we play 3 out, 2 in, one of our perimeter guys may be in the high post. I'm not sure where Mickelson will go in the offense after he "initiates it" .. maybe he remains as a perimeter player in the offensive flow. Haven't thought that through just yet. I apologize. Of course, Mickelson's defender will probably slack way off since Mick won't shoot beyond 15 feet. And if Mick thinks about driving, his defender may be so far off that stopping the drive won't be much of an issue, even if Mick's a little quicker. Heck, Mick might get trapped by some overly agressive opponents. But those are details.

In thinking this through a bit, this is an opportunity for KU to manufacture points. You hear me, manufacture, synonym create. All that outside shooting stuff, particularly Ellis, is fool's gold. You know, completely unreliable. Perhaps lucky, as some might say.

We might be on to something here. Does anyone else agree?

@Crimsonorblue22 If I would ever put him in that position, I'd have him try to back dribble out and look for a quick bail out pass back to the PG. A trap on the wing or out top, is a much different animal than the trap on the block where you might have cutters coming at you that can score. What we didn't do vs. SDSU, for example, and did better later in the year. With a skilled player like a point guard, you might try to step through and pass. Personally, I'd just be worried about Traylor hanging onto the ball.

And, of course, the whole discussion is likely a nullity. Remember when we had a similar issue at kusports.com when Self used Releford and Young at point in practice? We knew that wouldn't happen. He was pushing Tharpe:

“Maybe we should play Rio, but maybe take some pressure off of him (by putting him at 2-guard) and play Travis at the point, something like that,” Self said Thursday at his weekly news conference. “We just haven’t found the one guy that says, ‘Hey, you’re his (Johnson’s) backup.’ We’ve looked at some different things to try to get some guys back there,” Self added, noting Young’s point guard stint only lasted about 10 minutes, despite the fact “he passes it well.”

@Crimsonorblue22 You are making the assumption that Traylor can effectively pass out of the strong double. I would caution you not to simply assume that Traylor can handle such pressure. And remember, when a double comes, defenders don't simply stagnate. As part of the scheme, they move to defend the most dangerous players. How many times does Mason get an easy bucket out of a double? Very rarely and he is an incredibly skilled ball handler.

@JayHawkFanToo Self obviously referenced Traylor initiating the offense. That has been the discussion. I don't understand your focus on the word "should." That's not the important word there. "Should", "Might", "Could", "Being Considered". It doesn't matter. Self said that he has thought about it, and talked about. Why are you threatened by the discussion? Self specifically said "I've even thought about making him the backup point guard ..." He then qualified it by the initiate the offense thing. All, some, part, or a fraction thereof, is silly.

I note that you don't tell me why it isn't silly.

You can like someone, and criticize them. You can actually love a person, and critique them. You can value a coach, his contributions, and his successes, all while offering constructive criticism of some of his methods and decisions.

It's kind of funny that you cite Mellinger. Really? The guy that writes on every topic? He "writes about sports" so he's your authority. Tell me his qualifications? It is comical in one instance Self is beyond reproach, and in the other you cite Sam Mellinger? Laughable.

Why do you think any of these reporters don't challenge Self? None of them. They don't point out his contradictions. They don't challenge him at all. I wonder why. They want to get treated well, they want access, they want information.

Look at what Mellinger says of Traylor: "He's quicker than any defender likely to guard him, so he wouldn't be pressured, and it would also help clear space for guys like Mason, Selden and Oubre to drive to the basket."

It sounds nice to say that it will clear the lane. But we have a 3 out, 2 in offense, not a 4 out, 1 in offense. If Traylor is on the wing, one of the three normal perimeter guys will necessarily be playing or beginning the offense as the four. It changes nothing. Alternatively, if the three perimeter players are still on the perimeter, we're playing a difference offense -- a 4 out, 1 in.

And if you're defending Traylor, what do you do? You slack off, you stay at appx. 12 feet because his range is at best 15 feet. When he's at 20 feet, you can close out easily as he moves in. Mellinger doesn't know what he's talking about -- this would actually clog the lane. If Traylor is quicker, and can't shoot from outside, wouldn't that also encourage the defender to slack off so he can stop the penetration? Of course. But Mellinger is a tremendous authority.

What's interesting is that Self said, "...there would be no one that could apply pressure because he could drive around anybody." This statement, because it's Self, should go unchallenged? This is the underlying premise of his new found theory?

Does anyone believe that? Let's use KU's roster. Suppose Blue team is Mason, Selden, Greene, Traylor, Ellis. Red team Graham, Svi, Oubre, Alexander, and Lucas.

Traylor is moved to the wing, we sat 3 out, 2 in. Greene is the 4. Do you think that Svi and Cliff could trap and apply pressure? Do you think that Graham and Oubre could jump Traylor if he puts the ball on the floor? Does anyone think that Cliff would even bother to guard him in the open floor, or on a wing?

Now, if you use Ellis, a guy with range, that's a totally different dynamic. Traylor offers no perimeter threat, and thus does not have to be respected outside.

Tell me how Traylor will initiate the offense "away from the basket"? What, pass the ball to Mason? And how does that do anything? How does that "manufacture offense."

And tell me why he "wouldn't be pressured"? As I said above, he wouldn't be pressured if his defender slacked off. If a team wants to get aggressive, perhaps trapping his tail the minute he took a dribble.

I'm not trying to insult you here, though you obviously are taking great effort to insult me. But what's missing is the why.

So try this .. something that might be new to you. Don't just tell me Self is right, tell me why Self is right? Actually, tell me why this will help us "manufacture" points, which is Self's stated goal?

@Crimsonorblue22 I don't know, who would be open?

@Lulufulu Fade curl is a combo of two concepts -- Fade is when you'll see a cutter move, for example, from baseline toward the wing. With the ball at the top, the cutter then fades to the corner for the pass. It's very effective when the cutter is coming off a screen, and the defender moves inside. The fade takes him away from his defender. In a true motion offense, the offensive player (usually) has a choice in what he does, based on the defender's choice. It's why Self loses his mind sometimes -- guys make the wrong choices.

A curl is simply where you curl around a screen in a fish hook shape. A fade curl is when you make a curl cut and the defender anticipates the curl -- the offensive player fades back against his initial curl, away from his defender. Fade curl, curl fade. Same thing.

On your question about the second half -- check out my post in the thread about Want A National Title: Three Point Shooting. If you scroll down the thread, I responded to @icthawkfan316 and broke down the two halves. Pretty stark contrast.

Actually, I think Self went to the look inside deal in an attempt to preserve the lead, much as a football team might run it off tackle leading by three touchdowns.

@jaybate-1.0 Well, I make great habit of reading your entire posts and as usual, greatly entertained.

Perhaps Jamari might react, though, as the national guard troops did in First Blood when asked to charge the mine -- "I didn't come here to get killed", or something like that.

On the other hand, the idea of Jamari initiating the offense might come to quick and abrupt halt when, say, Oubre and Svi, decide to improvise in practice and trap Jamari the minute he gets the ball -- in the same manner in which a coach of significantly low IQ might figure out quite quickly.

Of course, when a strategist extends his personnel beyond their capabilities, or too ambitiously, or acts arrogantly, unexpected losses occur -- if Self really pursues this unwise strategy, we'll perhaps note this as our Market Garden moment.

@BeddieKU23 From a technical standpoint, playing outside-in in Self's offense would really just takes some tweaks. It's more of a focus, vs. any sort of system change.

I don't think we're going to play 4 out, 1 in. Self won't do that. I'm not suggesting that either. Wholesale offensive change is not necessary.

We typically play 3 out, 2 in. Within our motion, there are multiple opportunities for kick outs -- Ellis dropped one off for Selden vs. Utah. There are many times when the 4 screens across the top parallel to the baseline, most of the time to the wing. That can adjust to the top. This allows the PG to drive drawing the wing defender. Options like this are everywhere in our offense. Within the offense, we've seen the ball go to the post, from the wing, and then the wing slides to the corner for a three. We've also seen Self "run" a three point shooter. Every team has that set or sets. It's used in late game situations. You've also seen KU run a 1-4 flat set -- used most infamously for EJ's failed runner vs. Michigan. But from a 1-4 flat, Self surely has a couple three point options. You mentioned set plays. One was at 16:00 vs. Utah where Greene got the open three -- there are number of others in Self bag. We've also seen the pick and pop four (Andrew White vs. Belmont in 2012). Self likely won't go small, with a three man at the four, but that's an option.

I guess what I'm saying is that to change attitude and approach, the outside-in "focus" is easily possible within our offense, and is part of our offense right now. I say this as an absolute certainty.

My firm opinion is that any coach that really thinks that Jamari Traylor should be used to initiate the offense, should see a psychiatrist. Meaning, in need of psycotropic drugs. I would actually question Self's sanity, again, if I felt he really meant it. I don't think he does. We know Self says off the cuff stuff and it never pans out. Sometimes I think he says things simply to be entertained by the reaction.

@drgnslayr -- I think Frank is better than Tyshawn as a sophomore by quite a distance. The only TT that I would even consider having in my lineup would have been the last half of the 2011-12 version.

@nuleafjhawk I always appreciate a subtle slam, as I pick myself back up ....

"Are Jay Bilas and Chris Piper the love children of DickVitale?"

Who are the women?

Hmmm .. wonder if Ojeleye pairs with Frankamp and goes to WSU?

@wrwlumpy Confidence. It can make us better. It can provide definition to our rotation. It may create more minutes for both Svi and Oubre. I like ball handling. It's of high value to me. But sometimes personnel losses can lead to a clearer identity. Would i rather still have Graham? Sure. But the loss can propel our rotation. Utah was a nice, tidy 8 man rotation with Lucas getting scraps. Confidence.

@icthawkfan316 Well, you inspired me to add to the info. Thanks for that. How about, "trying" or "looking" to pound it inside?

Ah, yes. I agree on the defense of course. I guess I'm extremely satisfied with 60 points total. Further, I"m extremely satisfied with the team defense from this team, given our personnel. There will be times when the other teams score. We have to match that. Hot shooting teams, big teams that kill us inside, etc.

@BeddieKU23 Remember, this sort of stuff doesn't take a wholesale change, it just takes adjustments and focus on portions of the offense that are already there. There are multiple times in their offense where they can screen to the shooter, or where the shooter can simply circle back. When a shooter in an offensive flow simply circles back, you can reset right from there. It's as if the offense stalls for a moment and restarts. But what I'm talking about are simple things. Self's offense has multiple sets and options for three point shots. Watch the set at 16:10 of the first half. Watch how we got Greene a nice three point shot. This was never run the entire second half. Not once. That's all within what we do, if Self will let it happen.

@icthawkfan316

1. Singular Focus On Getting It Inside: I don't think I'm misinterpreting at all. The second half was stagnation caused mainly by a near singular focus on getting the ball inside. I did rewatch the entire game. There are times when getting the ball inside works beautifully. But of course, opponents adjust. Against Utah, we tried mightily to get the ball in, and our offense stagnated. We played much differently in the first half than the second half. Ellis did not take one outside shot in the second half (see Self's fool's gold comment below), and we only took two legit three attempts (one was at the end of the shot clock) vs. 8 in the first half.

2. Look At Our First Half Run: We were down 12-6. In those first number of minutes, Ellis scored twice inside, and then got two free throws. Those quick inside baskets accounted for two of our three inside baskets in the first half -- where we led by 21. Greene got his one attempt three point attempt. Down 12-6. Then, guess what? Selden hits at three, Ellis hits a three, and Ellis hits a two just inside the line, and we're tied 14-14, and off to the races. We hit 3 more three pointers, stretching the lead to 21.

3. More First Half: Look at our scoring. Five three pointers = 15 points. 10 free throws = 10 points. Traylor jumper, Ellis jumper, Selden jumper, Greene a runner = 8 points. And just two Ellis buckets near the hoop, and one for Traylor = 6 points. In the first half run, we made 23 points from outside shots, and just 6 points from near the hoop buckets. (note: on the ESPN play-by-play, it shows Ellis' second shots as a jumper, but it was the pivot, over the shoulder). Now, I don't mind getting the ball inside. Ellis got two free throws, and so did Traylor inside in the first half. But Oubre had four free throws and Mason two in the first half run.

4. Self "Fool's Gold": After the game, Self said, "sometimes that's fool's gold too when your best inside player is shooting jump shots", referring to Ellis getting those early points. That's unreal. He thinks Ellis' three and then long two was "fool's gold." This is what kick started our run, along with Selden's three. This after multiple attempts to get the ball in unsuccessfully to Cliff (blocked by the back board) and Lucas (misplays). When I look at what Self's saying, he's saying pound it in more. Again, he's saying "we don't play through our bigs enough."

5. Second Half Looking Inside: The second half was plagued by continually looking in to Ellis as he tried to post up inside. During the Utes run, nearly every offensive set involved looking inside. Self, in his post game, said that KU needed to play more inside/out --- that is all we did. In the second half, we took three, three point shots. The first one, Mason's, stopped the Ute's first run. The second and third three pointers can on the same possession. Selden missed, and then after wasting much of the clock attempting to get the ball in, Mason missed a force three at the shot clock buzzer. That came before 10:00 minute mark. After the 10:00 minute mark, we did not shoot another three the rest of the game. For this team, that is a ridiculous waste of our skill set. We didn't run one set to get a three point shot, like the one referenced above for Greene at the 16:00 mark of the first half.

6. Ellis Plagued By Blocks: There were times when we did get some drives to the hoop in the second half. Ellis drove a few times. Turned it over, got it blocked. Mason drove on another possession, dished, and Ellis got his shot blocked again. Early in the half, second possession, we had a run out and Ellis got blocked yet again. He is not Marcus Morris. We don't have that player (again, unless Cliff comes on).

7. Mason To The Paint/Slashing: Self said in the post game interview that Frank needs to "touch the paint" and we need to get him "creating for others." I agree. Rarely did that happen. In one instance he dished to Ellis who got blocked. Mason may not be the best at that. But I think more slashing to the hoop, as Oubre gets better, will help. Svi has a knack for it, too. **Outside-In is slashing, too."

8. More Singular Focus By Self: Here's what Self said in part to Fraschilla - "We were so stale offensively the second half." He said "I wish our offense could get where we're a bit more fluid, and could play inside-out better ... we don't play through our bigs enough." That's all we tried to do in the second half. We stagnated because we did that most of the time in the second half. Again, three, three pointers -- and two of them came on one possession, and one of those a forced shot as the shot clock expired. Interestingly, it was a step in three from Mason that stopped a long Utah run in the second half.

9. Real Fool's Gold: The real fool's gold here is when we do feed the post, and we're able to beat teams with lesser bigs -- and we think we're getting somewhere. This group of bigs, unless Cliff explodes, can't match up against bigger, more athletic guys, and still score with regularity.

The Utah game is instructive. We gunned threes in the first half, made outside shots, ballooned the lead to 21. Five three pointers. Guys hitting jumpers, and guys getting to the line playing attacking the hoop.

We need to recognize that right now. Make subtle changes to our offense to get more three point looks, and most of all, to encourage those shots. Again, I recognize the value of getting the ball inside. But so far, this team has shown it is wildly inefficient near the rim and much better away from the basket.

The Fool's Gold is that we will be able to win the national title playing inside-out this season.

By the way, I'm sorry to deluge everyone with long posts here -- but I am very passionate about this topic. This is the key to our national title hopes this season.

We have reached the precipice. We've been here before. Last season, after a rough stretch of games through early December, it was quite obvious that Self-ball and the lineup constructed by Self weren't meshing. We couldn't play defense, and the modified rules application didn't help. We were soft. We were finesse.

Everything we said about that team this time last December was true, and it played itself out over the course of the season, resulting in a March collapse. Embiid's injury severely limited our options in March. Even then, Self refused to change our style of play, or modify the focus of our offensive schemes. It was pound it inside. The Self mantra -- we do what we do.

This season, we stand 8-1. Quite impressive. And we stand at 8-1 in large part due to better preparation, both by players and coaches. This team "fits' with Self's style of play much better than last season's team. Everything looks better. And it starts defensively.

But what has become obvious through the first nine games of this season is that we have an outside/in team being forced to play inside/out. We continue to ignore our offensive assets.

It has never been worse than the second half yesterday. Self clearly instructed his crew to pound the ball inside. To work "inside-out" as he said in the post game interview. And it nearly cost us the game. In the first half, we were 5-8 from three, then just 1-3 in the second half. This team only shot 11 three pointers.

And Self is wondering why we are offensively challenged?

This season, Self has constructed a team that more fits his style of play. Defensively, they are dominant. I don't toss that word around flippantly. Team wise, they are dominant. The impressive defensive efforts we have seen are without the vaunted (and perhaps overvalued) rim protector.

But we are missing that one important element -- reliable inside scoring. Of course, Ellis is good. And he can score. But he can be shut down. Long, tall, athletic guys destroy him. And when teams scheme to stop him, as it appeared Utah did after Ellis' early flurry, he's limited.

Self diagnosed the obvious issue: “We don’t throw it to the post and score. We’re not very big. Then our two biggest guys have a hard time in there. They haven’t developed that yet. We’ve got to find different ways to manufacture points, and we’re not doing it off our defense and we’re not doing it in transition.”

We have to find a way to manufacture points? This statement is astonishing from a coach whose team just shot only 11 three point shots (making six). "Manufacture points?"

How about scheming to your strength?

Here's the ultimate issue: How does this version of the Kansas Jayhawks win the national championship? Of course, it is the only relevant question.

How do we maximize our offensive pieces -- not just to win conference, not just to succeed in Ames, or Waco -- but to win the national title?

It is painfully obvious. But is it obvious to Self?

Self said: “What we’ve always done, whatever we’ve done, we’ve always tried to get a lot better at doing what we do,” Self said. “I don’t think it’s the kids’ fault. I think it’s something we’ve got to come up with a way to help them, more than us doing better at what we do. We’ll come up with something. It won’t be a major deal, but we’ve got to do some things to get them to believe (that) what we do works.

We have hammered this since before the season. Maximize the skill set on your roster.

The only reason we won at Georgetown was Brannen Greene's epic performance. The power of three. Three pointers win games. Three pointers are critical when your team is so plainly deficient in its two point game.

Self could rationalize the value of the two pointer -- at 65% in the post, 100 shots would yield 130 points. To approach that, you would need to shoot over 43% to equal the post game. I get it.

But that isn't the 2014-15 version of the Kansas Jayhawks.

This KU team should play outside/in. Play to its strength, which will also help open up its weakness. Outside/in means shoot a much higher volume of three pointers. Turn the boys loose.

Here are some discussion points:

1. Why Play Outside/In? -- Fools Gold: Self is famous for using the term "fool's gold." He uses it to describe successes that really aren't worth much, but create a false sense of security. That's our inside game right now. Ellis can take it to guys that are not long, athletic, or tall. In the tourney, we'll bump up against that type of team. We need to be able to beat that type of team to win the title. Does anyone envision any realistic scenario where we beat UK without a strong three point showing?

2. Stats Back It Up: Read @Jesse-Newell's article today ↗ on our two point rates. It hammers the point. We are making just over 50% of our shots at the rim, compared to prior teams making appx. 65%. We get 14% of our shots blocked, which is way above prior teams (at 9% or below). And here's the big one -- we are shooting just 50.3% on shots at the rim, and are ranked 288th nationally in 2 point percentage. In the Self era, all teams except one have been in the top 30, and that team (2005-06) was 69th. This is incredibly instructive.

3. Compare 2 point % to Last Season's Defense: Last season, our kryptonite was our defense. Remember the stats? Scoring defense was ranked in the mid-200s nationally, unlike really any other Self team. This season, it's the 2 point percentage. And that's because we can't get good shots up. It is a rerun of the Stanford game.

4. Cliff: Self refuses to rely on Cliff. He seems to favor Traylor, many times. This is concerning to me. Cliff is your best talent. However, he is still 6'8", and will still face the scoring challenges inside. He's not a skilled scorer inside yet. That would come with more experience. But part of this equation is simply playing the guy 25 mpg. Best players on the court.

5. Play Outside/In: This gets tossed around. But what does it mean? In this era, we're talking about three pointers. It does not mean just jacking up three pointers. But what it means is scheming to get open three point looks. Your team focus is to get those looks. You move your big men; you toss in to toss out; you run your shooters; you drive to push it out to the shooter. Watch Creighton. Very importantly, as well you scheme your personnel to the three pointer. This could certainly include playing small at the 4 to include an extra shooter.

6. Inside Game That Results: Assuming we shoot at a decent three point rate, this changes the dynamic inside, and logically, creates better looks inside. Defenses have to stop us. And if we're scoring from outside, that's the biggest danger.

7. Preseason Three Point Shooting Bluster: Self talked in the preseason about shooting more threes. The talk is cheap. This season, we are actually shoot few three pointers per game than any team under coach Self. Through yesterday's game, we're shooting a paltry 14.88 three pointers per game. Our number of three pointers per game has declined steadily since peaking in 2010-11 (which was the epitome of the inside/out team). This has to change.

8. Credit To Self: We are 8-1. We can give Self all that credit. But we have to look forward. As Self recognized, the loss of Graham changes the dynamic of the team. In any case, it appears that he is recognizing the need to create more offense. And that his team, as constructed, can't score the ball inside.

9. Concern With Self: In the quote above, Self finished the statement with the following - ",,, but we’ve got to do some things to get them to believe (that) what we do works. " That won't work. That will not lead to a national title this season.

10. Three Point Attempts: Iowa St. shot over 23 three pointers per game last season. We don't have to become Iowa St. But 20 per game should be the target. This KU team has the skill set to shoot over 40% from three point range. Greene and Mason both appear to be guys that can shoot mid 40s; and from this point forward, I'm confident that Selden, Ellis, and Svi can be at or near the 40 mark. Oubre likely more in the 35% range.

Three point shooting is the method to "manufacture" the points that coach Self is admittedly looking for. But as with other items that may benefit KU basketball, the question always comes back to Self -- can he adapt? Will he even consider working outside of the box (and outside of his pound it inside philosophy)?

I'm a skeptical pessimist (if that is a proper term) when it comes to Self changing anything. Thus, despite being 8-1, I am doubtful that a national title is in our future. I love this team, I love our players, but we are plainly not maximizing our assets on offense.

As usual, Self is the one person most in control of altering determining our destiny.

*As a complete aside, when looking at 2 point %, our 2010-11 team was ranked #1. Further, our 2010-11 team had the highest 3 point % in the Self era. And we lost to VCU. The title left on the silver platter.

@DanR Or as Self said, he'd really like to play Selden at the 4, but he didn't know how we'd guard anybody. He talks himself out of his thought many times in the same sentence.

@KUSTEVE Absolutely not. We're not near our peak.

I have disagreed for years with @jaybate-1.0 on this topic. I do not believe for one minute that Self creates situations or permits his teams to "labor" with the risk of losing the game. The disagreement might just be a matter of degree. Sure, he might flop down in his chair a few times and say, "Fine, do it your way", and sit there with his arms folded. That might last two minutes. But the premise that he scripted the second half flop to any degree is far-fetched to me, given the value of these non-con wins.

Now, that being said, I fully believe @jaybate-1.0's suggestion that Self is trying to create the inside-out team that he wants. I believe that he did all he could to get his guys to create scoring opportunities inside and feed the post. We saw that in the second half. And we almost lost the game.

And guys, this is the greatest danger facing this team. I'll address that a bit later.

@nuleafjhawk Your point is obviously correct .. free throw practice is not a waste of time. I bet Self limits the free throw practice to situations when the guys are tired after running up an down the court; then he has them all shoot 10 or 15 free throws while tired. As you know, practice time is limited, so that's probably what the author is referring to. That he wants them to practice free throws, but it's difficult to allocate precious practice time to it. I'm quite sure "on their own time" means come to the gym where a team manager or someone can monitor. I'd also bet Self makes them run, get a bit winded, before practicing.

Traylor Absurdity

@jaybate-1.0 - Glad you started this thread. We can put this to rest quickly.

This is typical Bill Self absurdity. In yesterday's game, Traylor got stuck once dribbling the ball down the court. I'm sure that's what triggered the ridiculous comment by Self in the post game press conference.

Personally, I don't know why he does this. I would say that it makes him look like an idiot, but I know that he doesn't mean it. It is patently absurd.

Think about every basketball game you have seen. Have you ever seen someone with Traylor's skill set play point or initiate the offense for any stretch? Of course not. Absurd.

Remember the 2011-12 season when talked about having Kevin Young play point guard? Self says stupid crap like this every so often. Self talks in the preseason about how we're best with more ball handlers, and then he tosses this out?

The Young comment was nearly as absurd as this. Traylor can't dribble the ball, he's poor passer, he barely qualifies as a full time big off the bench. I feel embarrassed saying the obvious. Yesterday was one of his better efforts of his career, but we've seen the other Jamari Traylor, too. Traylor is our third post player, and he's lucky to have that job.

Manning No Answer

As for Evan Manning, right, he could get some PT vs. Lafayette. But other than that, our two best options to assist Mason are Svi and Selden, in that order. Manning has no business on the court in high powered games. We know that. More Self absurdity.

More of Self's quote on Manning: “I meant to play him today,” Self said of Manning. “But when we’re playing well, don’t sub; playing badly you can’t put him in that situation. We’ve got to have a ball-mover back there.”

Ah, a nugget of truth -- we need a ball-mover back there. Who fits that bill? Svi does. Svi appears to have the ability to handle the ball, and he appears to control the ball better than Selden (or certainly equal to Selden). Svi also seems to be one of the best passers/delivers of ball on the team.

Between Selden and Svi, we can cover the Graham minutes. Mason will be playing more, of course. It is the hand we are dealt. It can make us better.

@konkeyDong And by the way, I'm just kidding around with you on my last post. No malice, as jb would say.

A couple of topics -

1. We all know what Brannen Greene is now, right? A place holder. This is the precurser to the transition to Oubre. Mark it down, January 19, at home, vs. Oklahoma on Big Monday. Following an Iowa St. road loss the previous Saturday. Oubre moves into the starting lineup (if not before). Self does not have the patience level to tolerate the travails of a "shooter" in his lineup. If Greene played lock down defense, that would be one thing. But he doesn't. This cannot stand.

2. Of course, we were all blessed with this comment from Wayne Selden this morning - “Teams don’t really know what we’re going to come out and do because we don’t really know what we’re going to come out and do sometimes,” Selden said. “Our main thing is trying to get it inside and playing inside/out, but then we could have nights we shoot the ball really well.” ------ I really don't know what to say.

3. But, here's another comment from Selden - “This year we’re really having to buckle down because we have nowhere near the skill we had last year. Losing two of the top three draft picks, we don’t have what we had last year. I think we’re taking it more serious, and we’re a tougher team than last year,” ---- This is exactly why we're a better team this year. I think this gives validity to the "standing around and watching" discussion @drgnslayr has led. I'm a believer. Further, the "tougher" thing is quite obvious. When you listen to Selden, I don't think our discussions here are that far off from reality. How can it be? How can a team discard two OADs, the 1st and 3rd picks, one being a rim protector, and get better?

4. Three point shooting: Selden's inside/out comment, of course, made me puke a little. Here's further evidence. KU has shot 15.37 three pointers per game this season. Its lowest per game total of the Self era (exactly equal to 2006-07. Self, of course, said we were going to shoot more threes this season. But we are winning -- but three pointers need to be a bigger focus to tackle some of the top teams with long and athletic big guys.

5. Holly Rowe: I know we like to rib Holly. Here's my gripe. Fat gals that try to look hot -- that try to get that perfect picture to actually make them look smokin'. Look at Holly's twitter picture. We see this stuff all the time. It is clearly not a fair rendition of the actual person. And that, my friends, is my only gripe with Holly. I'm guessing many of us here had a late night run in with a Holly Rowe or two in college. Ask @MoonwalkMafia -- he's still in college. It's not a bad thing. @jaybate-1.0. clearly has a soft spot for Holly. Might actually think that he's a touch enamored. Mesmerized by her uniqueness. Fantasizin' about all the lovin' that Holly could bring. @jaybate-1.0 said, "she makes you feel a little better after watching her do her thing." I bet she does, jb, I bet she does. Me, I'll take the skinny hot chick askin' the questions every day -- with breasts that demand attention.

Here we go:

!Reporter4.jpg ↗

By the way, I ran a statistical model to please @konkeyDong and I have found that Greene's effort vs. Georgetown was 76.25% "luck" (but my model is only 90% accurate). You can't expect all of your three point shots to go in, of course, so a statistical portion of those makes are "luck." I determined that in the next 5 games, Greene will shoot 29.4% from three, as he will revert to the mean. Of course, I don't know what the mean is for Greene so I ran multiple other models for Greene, based on a sample of players similar to Greene. The chances Greene shoots better than 29.4% is 41.2%. If he does shoot better than 29.4%, then we shall consider that "luck." Why? Because I say it to be true. And because only "lucky" players shoot better than their statistical mean. Greene's shooting over 50% from three this season. That is 12.2% luck, because the sample player of Greene's ability shoots 37.8%. So, Greene's success has largely been premised upon "luck."

I also found that there is only 35.8% chance that KU will make its three point shots going forward. That, of course, is because they have made that exact same % thus far this season. My model has a +/- error of 4.8% because you just never know what happens when the ball goes in the air. Or whether coach Self will pull a shooter who might make a shot before he actually takes it. Regardless, anything beyond the 35.8% rate is considered "luck", again with a 90% accuracy rate.

I will tell you that this statistical analysis is not useless. While it proves nothing, and may not apply to certain examples, and may not reflect the realities of sports and competition, and seeks to explain subjective influences using objective information, it is a valuable consideration, at least 68.2% of the time.

@konkeyDong No, the stat is useless. Completely useless. And the stats come from folks that aren't involved in sports, or the games. All they do is crunch numbers. So perhaps they are the Cessna mechanic, while those that actually "do" are the pilots.

The best teams are not the teams the blow teams out regularly. Stats don't measure character, and chemistry, and what it really takes to win consistently. Winning close games does not point to being less fundamentally sound. You say that is what is attempting to be proven. Those two events -- close games vs. being less fundamentally sound have nothing to do with one another. The entire discussion assumes that connection to have validity. I have coached several teams in each sport .. baseball, football, and basketball. And the best teams I've ever coached played a lot of close games, but had the knack for regularly winning close games (and did not regularly blow people out).

UConn was 40th in scoring margin last season. But I understand the circular nature of this discussion .. "oh, that's not what we're trying to show." Or "the NCAA tourney is luck." Or whatever.

Here's what the article said: "A measure of the deviation between a team's actual winning percentage and what one would expect from its game-by-game efficiencies. It's a Dean Oliver invention. Essentially, a team involved in a lot of close games should not win (or lose) all of them. Those that do will be viewed as lucky (or unlucky)."

That is just complete b.s. A team "should not win (or lose) all of them"? Right, they "should not." It's just a fundamental flaw to assume that it is "luck" when they do. The mistaken premise is the assumption that they "should not." That does not consider that good teams, the best teams, actually "should."

It assumes that good vs. luck is defined by the margin of victory. Only someone who has not been around sports would even consider that as a measuring stick. It ignores the concept of consistency, which is a key component of great teams.

Look, I know I won't convince you. So I'm not even trying. Not sure how much you've coached, or been in that situation. But you certainly approach it with a certain arrogance .. perhaps one that is lacking from practical experience.

I've seen this stuff first hand. I coached a basketball team, and we rarely won by double digits. But we never lost. We beat teams that would blow out the teams that we beat by a handful of points. Same in football. Style of play dictated that in some years, we were going to have smaller margins of victory. And certainly in baseball, where a pitching/defense teams .. such as the Royals .. are not going to win by large margins. But the Royals, actually, were not a "lucky" team. They had perhaps the surest of things, a lockdown bullpen. The baseball team I coached this past summer couldn't seem to blow anyone out, but we kept winning, and kept getting tourney trophies. We were consistent.

When one connects margin of victory and luck, it denotes a lesser level of skill or "earning it." And a lower reliability in repeating the result. And that just isn't the real world of sports. It ignores one important variable -- consistency. Great teams have consistency. And that ain't luck.

@konkeyDong - So, folks that do stats are just way smarter than everyone else? We just simply don't understand what they are trying to do, so we can't question the value or validity?

Lucky because you win close games? Hogwash and bullsh**. Great teams win close games. Champions win close games. And I don't need a statistical lecture to know that.

What that tells me, if I'm smart enough to figure it out, is that "luck" statistic has nothing to do with who might or might not be the best team, or the champion.

Therefore, it is useless tripe.

I wish I could have participated here .... great posts. Got hammered at work and simply couldn't do much other than poke my nose in here a few times. Thanks for all of the nice comments.

Just saw @Jesse-Newell is picking Utah tomorrow. I'll have to ponder that for a bit.

A hard fought win vs. a physical team. Refs certainly permitted a rough game. I like how we responded. Some quick observations:

1. The Power of Three: It is amazing what some three point shooting. I still think we need to shoot more. Greene had his best night as a Jayhawk. This is what a hot shooter can do for a team. Outside in. Repeat. Outside in.

2. Return of the Quick Hook: Kinder, gentler Bill Self? Uh, no. Svi returned to the game, turnover, done. Mickelson in for an Anrio Adams' moment, then done. It has returned.

3. Oubre Minutes: A bigger look. Lots of good stuff. Has a natural ability to get to the hoop. Seems tentative at times, but a work in progress.

4. No Svi: Welcome to KU basketball. Perhaps getting a tough of a lesson this evening. Unsure why Self viewed him as a bad option tonight. But Greene certainly was the better choice, given the performance. Will be interested to see if he starts Saturday.

5. Mason: Made some bad errors. But his defense on Smith-Rivera changed the game. Very subtle, but he contested shots, shut off the lane, against a pretty darn good guard. Wish he would have passed to Greene after the steal with 30 seconds. Greene automatic at the line.

6. Selden: Just can't seem to finish at the hoop. His drives still aren't productive. Not bouncy enough for the one handed slam.

7. Box Out: Flaw in Cliff's game ... box out. Multiple times where he failed to put a body on his man on boards. Seemed really obvious.

8. Ellis vs. Big Guys: It is a struggle. His tool box of moves is terrific vs. guys his height or lower. It is what it is. But he did enough tonight. And actually, he worked very hard on defense. I do see improvement. Also hit the boards consistently tonight.

9. Mickelson Purgatory: One would have thought that Mickelson might have gotten a shot tonight, but his lack of PT demonstrates that he is completely and undoubtedly out of the mix. He'll be gone after this season, assuming he graduates and gets the Tarik Black, post grad transfer.

10. Graham Developing: Graham, to me, is everything that he was advertised to be. He handles the ball well. Plays decent defense. Good shooter. In his eighth game, we should all be very comfortable with our point guards this season.

This game was very similar to the Colorado dogfight we lost. Different year, different team. Tougher team. Better team.

Regarding the Big 12, the biggest mistake we made was not adding Louisville. Add Louisville and any of the others discussed .. BYU, Houston, Cincinnati, whatever .. and all issues solved. Louisville would have been the perfect BB add as well. But of course, we might not have to discuss winning 10 conference titles in a row, which would be an added benefit.

@wrwlumpy - So what will the grandkid call you? Combine Grandpa and Lumpy -- you get Grumpy. Maybe not.

@JayHawkFanToo @jaybate-1.0 Have Josh Smith chase the guy he's defending?

Guys, guys ... that would be game planning. Come on, this isn't football. You don't change what you do based on the opponent.

Traylor gets a one game suspension. Perfect. The time fits the crime. It gives Traylor perhaps a mental break. And it gives us a break from the poor play. Perhaps Traylor can get it going.

And who knows, maybe Mickelson gets a shot and impresses. Or Lucas gets 22 minutes and shows he might be the better option. Who knows.

And I belatedly apologize for my immaturity.!Baby.jpg ↗

@JayHawkFanToo You don't need to start that crap again. Creating your own narrative and this "HEM doesn't like Coach Self" stuff. You can't even have fun with this. I'm just kidding around. I know, tough to comprehend.

But to all who don't want to play WSU -- just a bunch of clucking chickens.

!chicken.png ↗

@Kong I know that was your point. You misapplied why I pointed out UNC. It was not to say, they're doing it, we should. It was to point out that the "exposure and money" reasons Self has given are invalid.

You say no one would care, other than regionally -- as if that's a reason not to do it? Then eliminate much of our non-con, and much of our conference schedule.

Look, folks that don't want this like you can argue this 'till your blue in the face.

But your still chicken ...

@Kong I'll address one of your points. Referencing UNC playing Davidson is not same as the "jumping off the cliff" analogy. The point is that Self's explanation of exposure and money both apply to that example UNC plays Davidson, and I'm watching them play Eastern Carolina right now. Kentucky plays Eastern Kentucky, who we almost lost to last NCAA tourney. Somehow, someway, they are able to make it work from an exposure and money standpoint -- two peers, UNC and UK. It can work just fine for KU.

Hey, Coach Self, chicken hawks, is what you are. Chicken, chicken, chicken. Go squawk like a chicken. Run to your mommy. I'll get you your Barbie doll, if you want. How many different colors of panties do ya have?

Now, you can turn your back, and be the better man; or you can kick their ass.

Interfering with duties of an officer is usually not that big of a deal. Could have been saying his name was "jaybate" instead of Jamari, or not backing off when asked to, or protesting his buddy's arrest a little too vocally. But just speculating since I don't know the facts.

I'm not an apologist for this sort of stuff, by any means, but this sounds like one of those things that a normal college kid could get. Didn't hurt anybody at least.

Probably worthy of sitting out vs. Georgetown maybe.

And actually, that might be helpful all the way around. Jamari has been struggling. A break might be a good thing.

My position on this is the same as with MU ... play them.

But WSU is different. Self's position on MU isn't based on alleged logic. It's based on emotion. So it's hard to argue against the emotional decision not to play MU. It's easy to argue against the WSU avoidance.

Self has said that we have to play games that benefit Kansas. He uses two points there -- money and exposure.

However, both are poor arguments.

A great example of a similar team that plays an in-state basketball school is North Carolina. A program on the same elite plane as KU, yet UNC played Davidson at a neutral site. Davidson is comparable to WSU. WSU is not a perennial power. Davidson isn't either. Both have had their good runs, here and there. If North Carolina can play Davidson at a neutral site, Kansas can play WSU.

Each year we play game at the Sprint Center. One year it happened to be Davidson, then Oregon St., another New Mexico, this season Utah. Perhaps I'm missing something, but it would seem to me that none of those schools give us exposure to any particular recruiting hotbed, nor do they give us a national exposure game. They are pedestrian games. Even if one of the teams is ranked, they are not exceptional national games.

Further, none of the games generated one ounce of increased fan interest. It is just another game. WSU would certainly be different. Such a match-up could generate more national interest, particularly in the first few seasons of the games.

We played a home and home with Colorado?

Look, I'm sure someone can make the case not to play WSU. But you'd have to work at it. Sometimes, though, when someone is kicking sand in your face you just have to pound them into the sand. Life is not without risk. Sure, we could lose. But the build-up and the anxiety of a game that has subjective repercussions is why we play the games. It's the beauty of sports.

Let's play WSU.

I rewatched the game this morning. During the game, I was sure Florida played a number of zone possessions late in the first half. They really didn't. They just switched a lot, particularly up top, and trapped short corner area. Had a zone look to it. But it was man. I did the live blog with @brooksmd @DanR @jaybate-1.0 @Jesse-Newell and others. So perhaps I was distracted.

A couple observations:

1. Credit Self for Win: In situations like this, it's easy to credit the players. But most of the credit goes to Self. Though we weren't in the locker room, I'm quite sure he calmed everyone regarding the deficit and how we could get back to even, and of course hammered home the nails that needed hammering. During the game, he tried multiple combinations. In the second half, he made a great call trying Oubre. Made perfect sense, as Vitale mentioned -- Oubre being a slasher. That didn't pan out, but we made progress on the deficit. He then went with Graham/Mason together and that worked beautifully. He went with Traylor over Cliff a bit longer than I would have -- but his move worked. Cliff had an incredibly active final 10 minutes of the game. But here's the other thing, how many times do teams make a run, only to have the other team recapture the momentum. That never happened. Credit Self.

2. Traylor: Self said last week that Traylor had been consistent up until the tourney. I disagree. He's been fumbling balls, been out of position, not blocking guys out, and contributing little to no offense all season. Look at 11:33 of the second half for another brain cramp. Traylor was nearer the man on the baseline, the ball went out top, Cliff was on him, and Traylor inexplicably flew out to try and contest a three pointer. The shooter calmly dumped the ball down the unguarded player on the baseline for the bucket, as Vitale convulsed. Lucas is playing better than Traylor now. And I can't fathom why Self is playing Traylor over Cliff (when Cliff had only one foul). Self said he wasn't pleased with Cliff's attentiveness the first half. Whatever. Cliff is just better. That said, I think Traylor's just in a rut and he'll get out.

3. Oubre/Greene: Token playing time. Seven guys got the majority of the PT. Lucas, Greene, Oubre got 9, 8, and 8 minutes each. But I sense that if either Oubre or Greene did something productive, they would have gotten more PT. Not so much with Lucas.

Selden had a terrific bounce back game, and he keyed the win. But the comeback was keyed by coach Self.

@JayHawkFanToo I agree and disagree with your assessment of Svi. Actually, I think he has been very consistent. Perhaps the most consistent guy on this team. He's not our first or second or third option. But I think the way you use consistency is referring to scoring. Perhaps a better term is "production." He has not consistently produced points -- not consistent production. Is that fair?

He was at a quickness deficit when he got stuck on Hill. He did a nice job shutting off drives when he guarded bigger guys.

But he made two real nice plays -- at 8:10 in the first half, in the middle of UF's run, he had a nice drive and dish to Ellis for a bucket. Then, in the second half, at 18:50, he drew a key charge.

I can't stand the use of the term "glue guy" -- that denotes to me lack of production. But he's in that phase now where his production is going to be inconsistent -- good not great as you say.

I was surprised when I saw the box and he played 24 minutes. I expected about 18 minutes. The best is yet to come.