@jayhawk12 How was our defense last season?

-Respectfully, you wouldn't "pack it in" as a preventative zone. That makes no sense to me. Why do you think we would have had to do that? And you're right, I don't like a "pack it in" zone, unless matchup wise, it was the best option.

-See my response to @Crimsonorblue22 - you reduce your "issues" defensively. If you have a point guard who continually compromises your defense by permitting penetration, it's over. It was over. We got killed. And if you have a post player who can't handle guys on the block that are of any size, you're dead in man. You have to always have help. Zone gives you help.

-And I agree, I don't think a zone defense would have beaten Stanford. You're right there. It was our lack of an effective zone offense that doomed us. We didn't need Embiid (or Wiggins) for that matter, to beat Stanford if we ran an effective zone offense. They isolated our weak guys, and took away our strong offensive players (Ellis and Wiggins). You would agree that we should have beaten Stanford with or without Embiid, right?

@KansasComet Come on, make yourself crazy. What would you do if you had a magic wand?

One strategic item that you would like coach Self to do -- just one?

@Crimsonorblue22 You say that if "... they can't keep their man in front of them in man, they won't be able to in a zone either."

I respectfully disagree with that. Zone is premised, obviously, on covering an area. If you get a blow by on a wing, or out front, you have immediate, built in help. Secondly, you usually always have a nearby help defender.

Obviously, you have to have some level of ability at keeping your man in front of you. But you can hide guys, as you know.

Yes, Syracuse does go to man every so often.

Personal preference, I would play 1-3-1 nearly all the time, unless my personnel strongly dictated otherwise. I'd play it against Forte, Heslip, and ISU. You account for shooters in zone. You fear shooters. You shade shooters. You track shooters. Watch Syracuse. It's beautiful thing. Boeheim is a defensive genius with his 2-3. But shooters beat any defense, right? Not just a zone. But they can kill a zone, no doubt.

@icthawkfan316 Do you think you can't do both in practice? I think other teams do. UK was younger and obviously did.

I do think you can, but clearly, if you're learning zone with limited practice time, you are sacrificing valuable PT that could be used getting better at man full time. Again, though, we can't do what UK did?

I firmly believe we had a national title caliber team. No doubt in my mind.

While I value point guard play highly, the issues are broader than just that. To focus too much on personnel, which is really excellent top to bottom, is to downplay what has really caused many of our tourney failures. Point guard play didn't lose us the game to Stanford.

Donovan would be my top choice, if he'd leave Florida.

Then Stevens.

The Tim Miles suggestion is really interesting.

@drgnslayr - "And every team is unique and strategy has to fit their uniqueness so they can become most effective."

With a system coach, talent adapts to system. It is a key consideration in why, possibly, we don't seem to get the most out of our talent.

Regarding zone, I have the following thoughts on the comments above:

1. Shifting to zone primarily, or full time, would have likely been the best move for the 2013-14 Hawks. I struggle with how zone could have been worse than what we saw. If we are to worry about the development of our man to man defense for the next season, we are thus discounting the value of "this" season. We had national championship caliber talent, and holes to mask. @jayhawk12 questioned the point of being a zone team for one season -- the point in being a zone team for one season is to win that season, plain and simple. What gives the team on the floor the best chance? I do concede that perhaps Self tried zone in practice and thought it would be a worse disaster. But Self never said that in any interview, or on Hawk Talk.

2. I don't advocate playing zone primarily unless it's necessary with Self as coach. But if Self wants to play hard nosed man to man, he better recruit those type of players. Zone is a viable defense that you can win with. But certainly, incorporating zone in our scheme is realistic. @jayhawk12 notes Self's record. I go to national titles. 11 seasons, one title. I also look at teams that have won titles. They have played zone more than "a few possessions each game."

3. @icthawkfan316 hit on the point that concerns me most -- the ability to passionately teach zone defense. "My feeling is we would probably need to bring someone else on staff that has an expertise in this area to get a team that plays a good zone defense. Otherwise, I fear we'd be Baylor 2.0." --- that is squarely on point. With a normal Self team, using it as a change up is probably all that is really needed. But we have to recruit guys that fit that man to man scheme -- Tharpe doesn't. Ellis doesn't appear to fit it.

4. Regarding pace, @jayhawk12 questioned whether you could increase pace with zone. Actually, zone makes it easier. You can play at a much quicker pace playing zone when you incorporate trapping and pressure. The 1-3-1 can be the most aggressive defense (half court trap), or a pack it back and make them shoot kind of defense. Lead into the 1-3-1 with the 3/4 court 2-2-1 that @VailHawk mentioned, and you have chaos -- and the potential to create the scattered play that we were the victims of multiple times this season. The trapping and pressure increase pace. But you can do this, too, with good man principles. Zone, though, doesn't necessarily slow pace.

5. @crimsonorblue22 - the coach you speak of was a wise man. Too many times folks play zone and think it's a time to relax. Excellent man principles translate directly to zone. I think particularly on body angle. You make an excellent point, and it's why teams should be able to flow between both defenses. Stanford did it quite well a month ago, I would say. Where zones are exposed is when defenders play flat -- great example are our back line screen plays for lobs against the zone. Self takes advantage of defenders playing flat. If teams play zone with the tenacity of man, that's a tough nut to crack.

The idea that you can't do both effectively should be completely discarded. We have seen multiple teams be effective running both, most recently Stanford in their win over the Jayhawks. Simply discarding zone defense is a short-sighted, dogmatic approach that puts KU at a disadvantage. And we're at that disadvantage because Self won't approach it with an open mind -- like many, many other coaches do. And like other national title winning coaches do.

@KUSTEVE Well, then, we are clearly on the same page.

@dylans I personally think that the Mason/CF combo will be just fine. My only concern is Tharpe messing it up, to be quite honest. I was very impressed with how CF handled the situations he was placed in.

Since KU’s exit, we’ve had a lot of quality discussion about what is wrong with Self’s Jayhawks. Those discussions, though, are really our observations as to what could be done to improve the Jayhawks.

None of us will sit here and say that we’d do a better job than coach Self. That’s a given. That’s not the discussion. The discussion is “what can be done to help improve our chances at a national title?”

I firmly believe that coaches get very focused on their system, and how they do things. They develop tunnel vision. They become arrogant because of their success. This isn’t unique to coaches. It happens in all walks of life. Ever met a thoracic surgeon? Arrogant surgeons can kill people.

Surgeons who are not willing to consider their mistakes, or their outcomes, are dangerous. Same with coaches.

Coaches who will not open their minds can destroy their team’s chances at success because they have a dogmatic approach to their trade. Their lack of vision limits the ceiling of the teams they coach. Coaches who are not flexible and who will not adapt to what they have, and to their competition, suffer a distinct disadvantage. Don’t get me wrong. The adherence to approach and system is a large part of what makes many coaches successful. But it can drag them down.

This is the only real flaw that I see with coach Self. It’s really that simple. Great recruiter, great person, good X’s and O’s guy, excellent teacher of the game, terrific manager of people. What else is there?

Humility. The concept that his way may not always be the best way.

We’ve seen examples, such as coach Self’s obvious reticence to accept blame. We’ve seen glimmers – the classic “and we’ve got to coach it better” – from time to time. But generally, it’s a consistent blame on the execution by the players. Essentially, if we’d just run our stuff better, we’d win.

Well that isn’t always the case.

So all I ask of coach Self – Free your mind. That is all. Free .. your .. mind.

With an open mind, all things are possible.

Since KU’s exit, there have been many suggestions on what could be done to improve KU’s chances in March. I have read nearly everything written here. Below are my respectful suggestions, which incorporates thoughts from a number of posters at this site:

1. Expanded Zone Offense: No surprise here. Our zone offense is stagnant many times. Two simple elements of focus, and a third necessity. First, more active screening. By and large, KU’s zone offense only screens near the top of zone for the lead guard, or on the back line to set up a lob dunk. Active screening across lane and at the wing can create more seams for penetration and lanes for entry passes. Second, ensuring that our lineup always has a clear and present three point threat. The classic zone buster. Always. And free that zone buster to shoot. Third, we have to have skilled scorers at the high post. Can’t beat the zone if you’re feeding a guy who can’t score from the free throw line.

2. Pace of Game: When coach Self arrived, there was this fear that he would play a slow brand of basketball. It isn’t a fear any longer -- it’s just fact. Self doesn’t not really encourage a fast paced game. He may say that he wants a faster pace, but his actions discourage it. Turnovers cause you to find the bench. Quick shots? Look out for the hook. Who throws the ball in? Oh, the guy we have designated to throw the ball in. Press? Nope, too risky that we’ll give up an easy basket. Aggressive press break? Not the usual gameplan – slow, methodical passing. Random, targeted trapping? Rarely – simple man to man will do. Note to Self: Take advantage of your athletic superiority. When you play a slower game, you permit less skilled teams to remain a part of the game. Strategic use of the press is a must. Is there risk? Sure. But there seems to be more risk in being conservative, particularly in March. Further, playing at a faster pace regularly will make it much easier to deal with teams that play fast in the tournament.

3. Valuing The Basketball: This change is important. I understand that the easy approach is to simply conclude that all turnovers are bad. However, in my view, the over emphasis on valuing the basketball has inhibited our offensive growth -- it has been a horse collar to this team. It is a climate of unacceptability that appears to make guys play tight. Yes, turnovers are not good. But they aren’t always bad. In fact, 15 turnovers can be much better than 7 turnovers. It all depends on the amount of possessions in a game and the pace of the game, and what that pace of game does to your opponent. A team that doesn’t turn the ball over is usually not playing aggressive enough. This goes hand in hand with the prior paragraph on Pace of Game. Increasing the pace will generally increase turnovers. But that change in pace will also affect our opponent. If we are playing a team that wants to play slowly, there is usually a reason why. The most common explanation is that it’s because the opposing coach knows that the fewer possessions, the more chance that he has to stay in a game against a team with more highly skilled players. Wouldn’t that be what you would do if you played KU? To me, this is why we have been susceptible to upsets. Coach Self permits opposing teams to dictate pace and style of play. The Texas Tech game at Lubbock this season was a classic example. UNI was another. Coach Self would be well served to adjust his mindset and be willing to accept more turnovers. Again, we don’t want turnovers. But sometimes, turnovers are indicative of aggressiveness. It is a necessary evil, but not one to overreact to.

4. Take Advantage of Match-ups: Undoubtedly, this is an area where our current system fails – unless, by default, we have a match-up advantage on the post. Sometimes that match-up might be our shooting guard isolated on his defender, or our point guard taking a smaller guy to the block, or Ellis taking a bulky four man out on the wing. Taking advantage of match-ups to exploit scoring opportunities creates a more dynamic offense. This is a pretty simple concept, but one Self’s system routinely fails to incorporate. Similarly, playing small creates incredible match-up problems for opponents. We saw it first hand against MU in 2012. We simply couldn’t have Withey and TRob on the floor together for long stretches due to MU having Kim English at the four. Self is resistant to playing anything but a conventional attack. Sometimes match-ups dictate something different.

5. Be Bold: Coach Self is notoriously slow to adjust. His belief, which is not an uncommon coaching trait, is to most times “do what we do”, with faith that it will prevail. I just ask coach Self to trust his instincts. If it appears that an adjustment might work, side with boldness instead of the conservative path. We have history that supports that, too. On our final four run in 2012, coach Self boldly utilized the triangle and two. I think with the 2012 team he felt that because of the lack of depth, he had to think outside of the box. Boldness includes pressing, playing small, going with the hot hand – anything that rocks the boat. My suggestion is to always think out of the box. What limits boldness? Fear and arrogance. Fear that moves will fail, and arrogance that “system” will ultimately prevail. I ask that coach Self discard the chains that limit boldness.

6. Accept Zone Defense: This is came up early in the season – many, including myself, felt that an “all in” switch to zone defense with our personnel would have been the best move for the Jayhawks. We had a young team. We had a big, back line defender in Embiid. We had a three who was long and athletic. We had a point guard and four that couldn’t defend. And we had a post player (Black) who was in constant foul trouble. Coach Self is a strong believer in man to man defense. But that strong belief prevents him from freeing his mind. This past version of the Jayhawks was by far the worst defensive team at KU under coach Self. There was simply no way Self could cover for Tharpe, and the numerous times he compromised our defense. Then, on the back line, Ellis was soft and largely ineffective. Add to that a team devoid of veteran defensive leaders who had played under Self, and our defense was a disaster. We played multiple teams that ran zone. Louisville ran large doses of zone on its way to the 2013 title. UConn played zone. UK played some zone. Florida played lots of zone. But somehow, coach Self concludes that zone won’t work here. That simply lacks any logic. Brilliant coaches run it. Championship teams use it. Somehow other teams can run both. But we can’t. Zone defense needs to be accepted as a realistic alternative.

7. Cultivate Three Point Shooting: One concern is that coach Self fails to cultivate three point shooters. There doesn’t seem to be a urgency on Self’s part to play a dead-eye shooter. And shooters are faced with the famous quick hook. Cultivation of three point shooters requires a coach to understand that a shooter needs freedom. It’s not like a power forward pivoting and scoring on a post move. A shooter has to have a mind that is free of doubt. A coach has to offer freedom, has to accept misses, and has to accept shots that may be taken before a post entry pass is attempted. Just a touch more flexibility. Three point shooting can, and many times does, dominate the college game. In March, there are times when you catch a hot shooting team. We have to be prepared to have an answer. For KU to play at its maximum potential, there has to be a bit of leniency here by coach Self. We’ve seen vaunted three point shooters struggle here. Giving the shooters a touch more leeway is a great start.

There’s my seven point plan to make us more competitive in March, again incorporating thoughts from many posters on this site. Would be interested in everyone’s thoughts.

@KUSTEVE I see you listed Tharpe first among the point guards. And then you said "That's a really good team, folks."

I wonder if you considered the contradiction there?

@Crimsonorblue22 We really need a couple of consistently good teams in this conference. It seems like it's just a rotation of possible contenders.

@Crimsonorblue22 Kansas had offered that kid back his junior season. But sounds like from the article he's wanting to stay on the east coast.

@truehawk93 Jonathan Holmes is a PF too, right?

@icthawkfan316 Buddy Hield (OU) played on Ellis' team. They played a regular circuit of games best I could tell when I looked back then.

@bskeet Ellis was way overshadowed .. he dropped 28 and couldn't even get a mention on sportscenter (who focused on Wiggins).

@konkeyDong - Appreciate the info. With NC State, too, they were the ones alleged to have tampered with Graham in the first place, thus the fight to get his release. Wish App. St. would have given his release to anyone but NC State.

@nuleafjhawk Yea, I know you're not attacking him. I'm ok with some of the blame. But I was just thoroughly impressed with Stanford's game plan.

One thing about Wigs, the guy can't pass and set up other players. In that situation, that's the blame I lay on him. Lots of attention should mean lots of opportunities to set up other guys.

Another player on our radar?

Sviatoslav Mykhailiuk | Undecided | 6-foot-6 | Ukraine

Mykhailiuk is considered one of the best 16-year-old players in the world and, after the recent Nike Hoop Summit, has drawn the interest of a number of high-major basketball programs including Iowa State, Virginia, Kansas and Oregon. He exploded on the European scene last summer, averaging 25 points, eight rebounds and four assists at the FIBA Europe Under-16 tournament.

The young Ukrainian can play both guard spots, although he is best suited right now to play off the ball at the college level. He is an excellent shooter with NBA range and a strong, physical player for his age. As the son of educators, Mykhailiuk will be a high school graduate and enroll in college at the age of 17 -- if he’s not pressured to sign a pro contract. There’s a great chance we will see him in college next season.

http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/ncbexperts/post?id=2196 ↗

@nuleafjhawk I really have to take issue with the Wiggins thing. Much like a D-coordinator bracketing a star wide receiver, Stanford took Wigs out of the game, correct? I'm not sure what he could do there. We permitted Stanford to control pace. They thus limited our break opportunities. And we did nothing to push the ball after made baskets.

SDSU caused us fits with aggressive doubles on the block. Stanford made Wigs a none factor by rolling to his strength (reverse pivot), and shutting of penetration.

I give Wigs a complete pass on the Stanford game.

Ten minutes into that game, I was curious as to what we'd do to help after half-time. I got my answer.

Who didn't see it that way?

Unranked to #36 .. an Embiid-like assent.

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/recruiting/rankings/rank-2993/0 ↗ ↗

1. Arizona, 1997. The worst because it was the best KU team ever.

2. VCU, 2011. Silver platter.

3. Syracuse, 2003. Free throws.

4. Maryland, 2002. Winner of semi easily better than Indiana.

5. UNI, 2010. Just embarrassing.

6. Michigan, 2013. Because we were a veteran team, presumably with all the pieces.

7. Kentucky, 2012. Mitigated because of our incredible, unexpected run.

8. UCLA, 2007. A bit forgotten because we won the tourney the next season.

9. Virginia, 1995. Thought Kemper was an advantage.

10. Rhode Island, 1998. Arrogant Jim Harrick made it worse.

@joeloveshawks

why so large?

@ParisHawk I was just kind of hoping the press would come out at the 10 minute mark in the second half given the pace of the game.

And are you really implying an excuse for losing to UNI? Is that what I'm seeing?

@truehawk93 What's a FarokManesh? A guy that turns the ball over if pressed.

@Virgil_Caine - VCU is the top of my list too. I've said this many times ... silver platter. The national title was there on a silver platter.

@drgnslayr You do know I was kidding around there .. back at kusports.com, more than few suggested that Brady had an NBA career ahead of him. Some of us questioned whether he had a college career behind him*. Anyway, if I recall correctly, one was our friend @jaybate, but my recollection may be a bit hazy ....

*Again, kidding.

@icthawkfan316 .. thought you might appreciate that.

And @Crimsonorblue22, that would be a blue pill. Definitely a blue pill there.

@JayHawkFanToo These stats are useless. I don't see any categories for crisply passing the ball back out to the top of the key, providing a fine post entry pass, minutes played without a meaningful statistic, or games played in front of a player with more upside?

How can one assess Brady Morningstar without those stats?

If these are all the stats that matter in basketball, how can one truly gauge the greatness that is, and was, Brady Morningstar?

Playing in Finland? And here I thought he was, upon graduation, on the cusp of an NBA career. Glue is really valuable in the League, don't ya know ....

@Hawk8086 But let's hope not .. would absolutely love to see this guy develop into a reliable rotation guy. Hard not to root for both he and Jamari.

@truehawk93 See, I think Lucas could. Small, small chance. But if we land Turner, his playing time will essentially be the same. Maybe less because there are no foul machines like Black (hopefully).

If Lucas were to sit out next season and transfer, he'd have two seasons left and all he would have lost is another season on the bench.

Just a scenario .. I don't want it and don't expect it. Would love to see Lucas earn big minutes with development.

@JayHawkFanToo "Unless, unbeknown to us,Tharpe has graduated and he is granted a release to play his senior year elsewhere, there is no way he would transfer and sit one year just to play one more year, particularly when he is the incumbent PG and the position is his to lose. Even if he loses the starting position, he will still play substantial minutes."

I question that. Why not? He has one more season of basketball. That's it.

Assume that Self has told Tharpe that his belief is that Mason or Frankamp will earn the starting job. And assume that Self has told Tharpe that the other player that didn't win the starting job will likely be the back up.

Wouldn't you, if you were Tharpe, consider transferring if that were true?

Now, I think the chances of that being true is slim. I doubt Self would tip his hand. Self probably really wants Tharpe to stay. First, Tharpe could be much better. Second, Tharpe provides significant security even if Mason or CF is Self's quiet choice at the moment. Third, Tharpe maybe Self's choice right now to start (ugh).

The reason I do think that a Tharpe transfer is at least a chance is because Self has been displeased with him to a very significant degree to start both of the last two seasons. There is that small chance that Self may just be done with that.

But I don't think so.

@drgnslayr Graham's visit was Friday and Saturday, so Self was off to Texas for Sunday.

We are plainly recruiting two players for two spots. I say that because Self clearly said after the banquet that they could sign "one or two" more players.

If both players want to come, one will leave. That simple.

@JRyman and @BucknellJayhawk3 - all very good points.

Connor Teahan could have played at a mid-major and chose to stay here.

With White, though, doesn't he have a shot at some kind of pro career? Greece, Turkey, wherever?

You both are right .. there is clearly more to this if he has made the decision to stay.

I'd like nothing more than for AW3 to stay, and have a breakout season.

@drgnslayr - thanks for the headline cite.

I fall squarely in the camp that a kid should be able to turn pro immediately after coming out of high school. And really, I think a kids should be able to turn pro anytime.

@wissoxfan83 's reference to the baseball rule is excellent. It is really the perfect rule. You can go if you're ready. But if you commit to college, then three years is commitment. But that is the perfect rule for the college basketball fan.

There has to be some give and take. That gives, and takes.

Make no mistake, the transition to 20 years old is solely and completely for the NBA's benefit. The NBA GMs would much rather harvest players from a free minor league system, closer to a finished product. It is NBA driven because they hold all the power. The NCAA should readily accept because it helps their product.

Theoretically, I would much rather see it go the other way -- they could leave anytime they want. As a fan, I want them to stay and play college hoops.

I do, however, completely disagree with the conclusion of @jaybate 's comment -- " ... and it increases the complexity and duration of decision making in which players are exposed to parasitic exploitation without compensation."

The use of the term "parasitic exploitation" ignores the concept of human choice. It is common for those opposed to the NCAA, such as Jay Bilas, to create a narrative that is akin to slavery (I am not saying @jaybate has done this directly, but indirectly by the choice of wording). It is the ultimate victim card to play. It is the easiest way to engender sympathy.

That narrative conveniently ignores choice. Actually, in a few back and forths with Bilas on twitter, he just ignores those facts that don't fit his narrative.

The letter of intent is a contract. It is a written agreement that has specific terms. Either you accept those terms, or you don't.

And you can walk away. If you really, really want to work while going to school, you can. If you feel that you are being exploited, then don't do it. There are thousands upon thousands of young ladies, I would presume, that were in difficult financial situations but did not resort to prostitution. Ultimately, it is a choice.

That choice destroys the counter-argument. Thus the Bilas crew like to argue that some kids really don't have a choice. That, of course, is silly. The vast majority of impoverished young men and women don't resort to a life of crime. Athletes are not "forced" to accept the terms of the contract. They could, ultimately, do whatever they want to do.

In fact -- and we know this to be a fact -- the terms of a full ride scholarship is very favorable to the athlete. Why? Because a very, very high percentage couldn't get paid coming out of high school for doing what has brought to them the scholarship in the first place. Brannen Greene couldn't have earned any real sort of living playing basketball. So he has taken an otherwise unmarketable skill and turned it into a pretty nice payday.

To receive free food, clothes, living arrangements, tutoring, books, tuition, etc. -- for playing basketball -- is an exquisite deal. Not to mention the opportunity to earn a degree.

If one cries "parasitic exploitation", then I wonder if the alternative of said basketball player filling out an application for the local McDonald's, earning $8 an hour, for a multi-billion dollar company, might be a tad bit worse on the "exploitation" scale?

But he is free, of course, to make that choice.

@icthawkfan316 Couldn't have said it better. I am a big AW3 fan and want the best for the guy. It would have been great to see what White could have done with regular playing time. I've heard a couple suggestions that he redshirt this next season.

I would just like to know why he would stay? What's the rationale?

Here's the only link to the boxscore I could find this morning -

🐦 View Tweet/photo/1

@KirkIsMyHinrich Sorry, meant to reply ... I don't want to recruit presumed OADs. The guys who say they're turning pro, and that's their assumption. Potential OADs? You gotta go after top talent (like Selden).

Yes, very entertaining. Heck, all your injury speculation had us posting links to the knee pads/braces/quilts a ways back.

I am curious as to the nature of Selden's knee injury.

I do wonder sometimes, though, if Self tries to give his players a little bailout for perceived underperformance. Maybe Selden had a little cartilage issue. That wouldn't necessarily limit explosiveness, or stop him from scoring the basketball (it could, too).

What I'm getting at is some of Self's injury talk, I think, is cover for his players.

@ralster I'll have to admit, part of me likes the idea of Turner passing on KU. Part of me would also be very curious how we would play in the post next season if Cliff were ineligible.

Four man rotation of Ellis, Lucas, Traylor, Mickelson.

Very curious.

Would that be bad? Would be get dominated inside? Would it be a disaster?

@ParisHawk I do find it interesting that Self said the night of the banquet that he could sign "one or two" more. Simple numbers say if it's two, then someone has to leave.

You would think that if someone was going to leave of their volition, then it would be done by now, as you noted.

That seems to indicate that someone's scholarship is hanging in the balance, right? Meaning outside events will dictate whether that player keeps his scholarship.

Who is that player?

@justanotherfan We're not full, even if Graham commits. Don't you know, scholarships become available upon the snap of Self's fingers ...

@icthawkfan316 Guess Haith doesn't like the on campus stroll down Champions Blvd. Likely perplexed by the contradiction.

@wissoxfan83 - "Ultimately how KU fares is what's most important."

Bingo. A point of which there is no debate.

@icthawkfan316 Just when I think I'm out, they pull me back in .....

@jaybate 1.0 I have to run and can't reply, but terrific post. Great read.

@JRyman Ok I will leave you alone. No annoyances wanted here.

@joeloveshawks I agree with you. I just see no scenario that he would play, assuming that coach Self's thinking remains constant. Obviously Greene, Selden, and CF were above him in the pecking order, and now we add Oubre.

The redshirt thing is interesting, but man, if you're Andrew White, you burn that, which means you can't transfer w/o losing a year of eligibility. He would have to be pretty assured that playing time would be there. Maybe it would.

But as we speak, Self's recruiting top dudes for the 2015 and 2016 classes.

I still think he's gone.

@JRyman I'm not following you. Are you suggesting that Embiid's stress fracture was due to getting thrown to the ground at ISU and/or OSU?

And I don't understand really at all your reference to "big picture." You say "Self sat Embiid, the big picture there was for his health, not for the team." Uh, right, that's what I am kind of suggesting should have been done right after the knee injury. You're saying it was "for his health, not for the team." So a coach should sit a kid to make sure he's healthy, with team goals in mind?

It is a given that most kids want to compete and play. A coach makes the decision.

And by the way, I'm guessing here, but it sounds like your knee cap popped out on your little high jump calamity. I'm quite sure you're not comparing that to the pounding of D-1 basketball. And I'm glad ice helped, though.

@drgnslayr There were clearly stretches where I think playing White over Selden would have made sense. But Self must know something there (we would assume). I mean he played a hurt Selden over White, and White barely got a sniff?

The separation between the two must be astonishing in Self's eyes.

I recall that Self said he didn't play White as much in 2012-13 because of ball handling. Selden is a worse ball handler than White.

You make an excellent point.

@wrwlumpy No, no .. I want Turner. Most definitely.

We have three primary post rotation spots. He's not bumping any highly ranked guy. He'd bump Traylor or Lucas, and a transfer, Mickelson.

If, however -- example -- we had signed top 50ish post guy in the 2013 class, and not Embiid, I would be strongly opposed to signing Turner.

But the time to address not pursuing Turner is multiple months ago. Locking up a non-OAD. However, Turner could be seen as a replacement for Embiid, who was not a presumed OAD. So it's hard to criticize that.

Really, it is Alexander. I'd rather have the 3+ year guy there -- when do we get off the Merry-Go-Round?

@JRyman No, this is on coach Self. But it doesn't mean he necessarily did the wrong thing.

Self knew about both Selden's knee and Embiid's knee/back, right?

Self makes the decisions on who plays. No one else (unless it is so serious that a doctor has to step in).

Coaches hold players out of games who want to play all the time, just to make sure they're healed.

You say if it's an injury you can play with, "then why not?"

A consideration as to why not -- Big Picture.

If you are focused in the big picture, you may want to heal your players so that they are as close to full speed as possible when it is really important -- March.

Again, I'm not saying coach Self was wrong, necessarily. It could have been a risk analysis. The stress fracture though is not an unforeseen consequence. It just might have been a low risk perhaps.

And with Selden, don't know how long he would have been out with surgery at the start of the season. That seems different than Embiid's deal to me. On Embiid's deal, when I saw the picture of his knee hyperextending (which I posted here), that was a big deal.

Curious on other thoughts on the subject.

@ParisHawk I agree 100% with your position on injuries. Coaches pushing guys to come back too quickly from injuries is short-sighted. It's a philosophy that lacks big picture perspective. I am nearly 100% certain that Embiid's back injury resulted from the knee injury.

Coach Self, after the season, referenced the stress fracture Embiid suffered "against Oklahoma St." If Embiid had suffered a fracture when he fell vs. Ok. St., it would not have been a stress fracture.

The term is "stress". It was not a traumatic injury. A stress fracture is due to load or force being placed on an area over time and the bone not properly healing itself as it normally does. This is completely different than a fall, or one time deal. The stress fracture did not occur when he was "slammed to the ground."

One's own body composition -- the elements that heal bone -- can make that person more susceptible to stress fractures, too.

Most likely, it was a result of Embiid compensating for his knee injury (near ACL tear) in the TCU game, thus creating more load and stress due to his altered stride or gait, and protecting it when he landed after jumping. That's just speculation, but it fits completely. It then reared its ugly head in the WVU game at home when he landed awkwardly, and his back muscles seized up to protect it. I talked with an orthopedic surgeon, who is a good friend of mine, and he thinks this is exactly what occurred as well.

Self rushed Embiid back from the knee injury vs. TCU, remember? We had a tough stretch of games. Bad, bad decision. We said it then. Then after that stretch, he sat him for a bit. Damage was done.

Focusing on winning during the season, perhaps the focus on the oh so important conference title, cost us Embiid in March. And a chance for bigger things.