Do you really think Wayne would get drafted with a 32% trey ball?
Selden shot .336 for the year and .346from the 3 during the more difficult conference play. What makes you think that he would get worse instead of better?
JayHawkFanToo
13427 posts
I agree. The taller PG has an advantage shooting the ball over or blocking the shot of the shorter PG. While dribbling the ball, the shorter PG has the advantage since he can keep the ball low and force the taller PG to play in a position that is not quite his natural position. If both PGs are going to do a lot of shooting, then the taller PG has an advantage, if they are not, then the height advantage is much smaller.
Except for the tournament where they uncorked some lucky shots, the twins were not particularly good shots. I would say go at them with short guards, move the ball a lot to tire them and draw fouls when defending the quicker Mason and Graham, A couple of quick fouls will cool them in a hurry...and then we worry about the other tall PGs :)
Here is one pre-season ranking story...
I might swap a couple of teams but overall seems pretty decent based on the available information.
FWIW, here is mine:
I think my list goes like this:
- Bill - Enough said.
- Fred - Up and coming and proved that he can flat out coach
- Huggie - Look at his record; he has had long term success.
- Lon -Successful everywhere he has coached.
- Rick - Underestimated; he has been very successful and has a good overall coaching record.
- Tubby -Overestimated; he won at Kentucky while he had superior teams but floundered with lesser talent.
- Bruce - He can win with players/teams he inherits.
- Travis - He was exposed in the last couple of seasons.
- Trent - Has had some success but his overall record is not impressive, particularly compared to the coaches ab0ve.
- Scott - Biggest waster of talent; his team did a lot better when he was suspended and the assistant coach lead the team.
Well, @KULA is dead right. So right that I could stop right now.
**Wayne simply can't dribble the ball well enough to play the point. **
Spot on. Selden may play some PG but and Frankamp will at times play PG, but the the primary PGs in this team are Mason and Graham and absent a major meltdown by both of them, they will take the lion's share of time at the PG. No sense in "developing" Selden for next year because next year he will be plying his trade in the NBA.
"foreign league"? What are you smoking?
Selden is projected to be a first round by ALL draft sites and many, if not most, have him as a lottery pick. Barring injury or a very bad season (highly unlikely), Selden will be playing in the NBA.
I am sure you are referring to the "Battle of New Orleans" played March 1981...however, Xavier did not play in that game since his first season at WSU was the 81-82 season. You must be thinking of Antoine Carr...
As @JayhawkRock78 indicated you can reach a little higher if you elevate one shoulder over the other and reach with one hand; however, a one hand dunk would require a hand partially over the 9.4" ball and so you would have to really reach 13" with the tip of your fingers on one hand to be able to dunk on a 12' basket. Using the two handed approach. you would have to reach just over 12.5' feet with both hands to dunk the ball; since jumping with both hands up normally results in less reach, a 13" reach with one hand seems reasonable, wouldn't you agree?
I would think that if a current player could dunk on 12" basket, he would do it in the All-Star dunk contest and run away with the title; nobody has ever done that. Dwight Howard, which is also a freakish athlete and only 2" shorter than Wilt tried it...
[link text](
And the top of the sticker he placed on the board was generously measured (if you can call what they did reassuming) at 12'6" but the tip of his fingers were maybe 12'-3"...and that was done with a full head of steam and his dunking arm was much lower.
Apparently Howard asked the NBA to raise the basket to 12' for the dunk contest but I believe that he would have to jump at least 6 inches higher to accomplish this.
If he plays even close to where he is expected to play, Wayne is gone after this season. No sense in experimenting with something that will most likely not happen.
As I indicated, there is no evidence of a single NBA player ever touching the top of the backboard which is 13', even with a running start (see link). I find it hard to believe that Wild could do this from a standing position...with a running start? maybe...from a standing position? highly doubtful.
PG is not Frankamp's forte. Yes, in a pinch he can play PG and be a decent one at that; however, to get to the next level, i.e. [past the first weekend at the NCAA, you need superior PG play and Frankamp is just not it. Just about every team that makes it to the Final Four has superior PG play; RussRob was a superior college PG that was undervalued because of the other, better known players on the '08 team.
As I indicated, to dunk on a 12' basket, I would think a player should be able to touch the top of the backboard (13' ). No NBA player that I know has ever touched the top of the backboard even with a running start. Sure, many claim to have done that but none has been able to actually do it with witnesses. Please note that the average player today, is considerably more athletic than a comparable player was 40 or 50 years ago, a result of the ever improving training technology that was not available back then. For these reasons, I really do not believe that Wilt, as good and freakish athlete as he was, dunked on 12' basket from a standing position...maybe with a running start...but not from standing position. I believe that this particular story belongs to the category of the 20,000 different women with whom he claimed he slept.
As far as dunking on a 14' basket, assuming his reach is indeed 9'-6", he would have to jump 54" just to touch the rim; this is more than 12" higher than anyone has even claimed to have done it, let alone actually done it. It is just pure fantasy and no human can do it; maybe one day bionics (or Flubber for you older posters) will allow someone to do it but not now, no way, no how.. The only person that could dunk on a 14" rim is Michael Jordan in a Space Jam cartoon movie.
I am a huge Wilt fan but I am also an engineer that can look at numbers and can tell the difference between reality and fantasy.
WOW!!! this a team of destiny...
Wiggins has a measured standing reach of 8'-11" by virtue of his height and freakish 7' wingspan. and a 44" vertical leap and so you have 151"total reach or 12'-7" which might allow him, in theory, to dunk on a 12' basket, since the regulation basketball is exactly 29.5" in diameter which makes it about 9.4" in diameter
Other players that might have been able to do are Michael Thompson, who is credited with the highest vertical leap, although he is had small hands that might not help, Dr. J , who had the height, leaping ability and big hands and maybe, just maybe Earl 'the goat" Manigault, a legend of the New York playgrounds that is rumored to be able to pick up a dollar bill from the top of the backboard and leave change; although it sounds more like an urban legend (he was only 6' +/-1" ) or maybe they had backboard that were not quite the 13' regulation boards in use today.
Here is an interesting article that tries to determine if an NBA player ever actually touched the top pf the backboard, something that would certainly help dunk on a 12' basket and the answer is no.
Wilt claimed to have a 9'-6" standing reach which means he would have needed to have a vertical leap of at the very least 36" to be able to dunk on a 12' basket. He was an outstanding athlete but there is no definitive documentation on what his actual vertical leap was (various stories put at somewhere between 28" and 46" ), so it is difficult to prove or disprove the dunk claim. I would personally doubt that he would be able to dunk on a 12" basket from a standing position, although with a run up start it is possible,
BTW, results compiled for the Sargent standing jump test for elite world class athletes indicate that a 34"-36" would put you at the upper 10% of elite world class athletes; the record for NBA players is 38" by Dwayne Mitchell in 2012 and the record with run up approach is 45.5" by none other than Kenny Gregory. This are verified numbers measured at combines; there are many other claims, such as Jordan 48" leap, that have never been verified. Like many other statistics, vertical jumping is one that is widely and wildly exaggerated, .Again, to be able to dunk on 12' basket you need a combination of height, huge wingspan and freakish jumping ability; very few individuals have all three.
.
Unfortunately, Wilt played in a time before ESPN and Internet and the big hoopla associated with athletes. The first true big global athlete in all sports was Mohammed Ali and in basketball Michael Jordan, not that there were not others that were popular and big but they never quite got the publicity that Jordan did. Bird, Magic and Kareem came just before the explosion in media access. I can only imagine how players such as the Big "O", Pete Maravich, Bill Russel, Dr. "J" or Jerry West would do in today's media rich environment.
I could be wrong but IMHO, his stay at KU and resulting exposure was instrumental to his making it to the NBA. I am not saying that he would not have made it had he attended a different school in his senior year, but there is no doubt that at KU got considerably more attention that he would have otherwise.
Interesting but ESPN refers to Black as the Memphis product...
I am not sure how well Selden would do playing extended minutes as PG, particularly if the other team decides to press. His natural position is the SG and I expect him to play mostly that. Poythress is overrated in my opinion and if he were a true prospect he would have gone to the NBA after one year or two...or started last year instead of coming off the bench. With all the additional talent at UK, I see him as potentially becoming the odd man out; with some experience under his belt Oubre will run circles around Poythress.
Required reading for every and all KU fans...
I am not at all saying the either player was worthless to the program and I have no problem with your logic. All I am saying is that neither player really blossomed at KU, although the jury is still out on Greene, wouldn't you agree?
Talent is overestimated all the time. Look at all the players that UK has/had and how many really made a big difference in college and the NBA. Poythress is a great example. How well a McD All-American plays in HS against kids that work at McD does not always translate to high success at the next level.
I believe Coach Williams did great at KU and he has always been vocal saying how thankful he is for getting the opportunity and how respectful he is of the program. He even got in trouble with his own fan base for wearing a Jayhawk on his sweater at the NCAA.
I don't blame him for going back home; we all knew it was matter of time. However, I do think the way the left was questionable and for this I blame Kansas native and KU alumnus and former Assistant Coach Dean Smith; he really showed where his loyalty was...and it was not his home state of Kansas.
Abso-frigging-lutely. College Basketball provide the greatest exposure a player could want. I am always amazed how people that feel college athletes should get paid, do not consider the exposure players get or the personalized coaching and access to state of the art facility and top trainers a form of payment; it definitely is is and high valued one at that...in addition to the full ride they also get.
Also, the rest of the world is catching up with us ins basketball. While a few years ago washed up NBA players and a couple of prospect could go and dominate play in the Euro Leagues, that is no longer the case; Europe is producing top players...San Antonio just lost a game to a German pro team, granted it was an exhibition game, but Germany is not even close to being one of the top basketball markets or leagues in Europe. Currently, China is the most likely destination and if you read the stories coming from there, not a place where you want to play.
At this time there is better than 50-50 chance that the game gets postponed. Steady rain all day and projected rains through the evening.
Let;s not underestimate Calipari's capabilities as a coach. Sure maybe he is not in the top 3 but certainly he is in the top 10. This 3-month ESPN article list him as #2 behind only Donovan and ahead of Coach Self who comes in as #6...
This one has him as #4 and Coach Self as #7...
This ranking has him as #4 and Coach Self as #5...
Here is one that list who would the NBA draft and Cal comes a #1 and Coach Self as #3...
You can look for yourself and I don't believe you will find him ranked outside the top 10 anywhere. Keep in mind that he learned coaching from Coach Brown sitting on the the KU bench and Coach Self inherited the position when Cal left for and assistant coach position at Pittsburgh. Underestimate Cal at your own risk.
I hear all this talk about Greene's potential,. shooting skill, sure to play on the NBA, but so far he has not even been able to break into the starting line up and, if comments on this forum are an indicator, not likely to get a lot of playing time in the upcoming season.
Is it just wishful thinking in our part? Will he be a contributor in his third and fourth year? If this is the case, have we overestimated his true potential? Is Greene "all sizzle and no steak" as the expression goes? I am nor really sure where he stands right now, but hopefully after a few games we should have a better idea.
The value of education, at least in the top schools, is no longer an issue because kids come to school to jump to the pros and not to get an education. The smart, borderline players get a degree they can fall back on but most of the better players do not, and let's be honest, we as fans do not expect them either.
The term student-athlete, as used for top players, is an oxymoron. Once in while you hear from players, such as Aldrich, that take the needed courses after going pro and get their degree; McLemore has also been going to summer school and nothing would please me more than to see him eventually get his degree. But in general, the vast majority of players that leave early and do not make it to the pros do not go back to school. In this regard the baseball rule would be the best option, since it would give kids not good enough to go pro after HS, 3 years to get the majority of their degree requirements out of the way and, if things do not work at the next level, they can also go back and finish their degree,..but this approach is very unlikely to happen.
You wrote:
It is a daunting task playing a team that could beat several NBA teams, which is why I am throwing out of the box options.
So far, UK has not proven it can beat anyone and even if they went 40-0, they still would come up short even against he worst NBA team. Keep in mind that even with 10 McDs, Kentucky is not match for an NBA in which every single player was likely a conference all-star or player of the year and it would be men playing against boys.
As far as playing a smaller lineup against Kentucky, while it might have an advantage in speed, it would have a problem scoring close as most shots would be blocked and also defending against a much taller team would be a nightmare. In my opinion, the only way to match up to them would be to use a mid-to-tall, very athletic line up, that would have an edge in speed and still be able to match up size wise. Let's not fool ourselves, regardless of what line up Coach Self uses, it is going to be a tall order to beat Kentucky and all the talent they have.
I have been of the opinion that Ellis will play the 3 this season, if he has any plans to make it to the NBA, since this is likely the position he would play there. Coach Self has also indicated that he might play Selden at the point, although, IMHO, this is not likely and if it does happen it would not be used much.
In my opinion, Poythress is very overrated. He started 31 of 33 games as a freshman and 0 as a sophomore and his number dropped considerably. With the added competition, he might well end up as the odd man out. The fact that he is on his 3rd year at UK means that his NBA potential is limited and dropping.
Talent does not change so the '07-08 teams had similar talent (lost Wright and gained Aldrich) but the main difference was the experience, as I noted in my post.
I seem to remember discussing the transfer situation before and the consensus, if you can call it that, was that either White or Greene would have to transfer since they were on a collision course and only one would survive to contribute at KU. Obviously everything here is just conjecture, but wouldn't you think that since White left and Greene stayed, Coach Self likely thinks that Greene is more likely to contribute than White would have been had he stayed?
On paper Kentucky has the biggest collection of talent ever assembled by one college team. They have height, talent, skill at all positions and enough depth to assemble two top teams. The question is will the they gel into one cohesive unit that will run the table or will lack of playing time and preferential treatment develop enough holes that will affect team chemistry and the end product be less than the sum of its parts? I don't believe the squid will let it get to that point but in his quest to please most he might end up with a team, that by virtue of its raw talent alone can still beat most other teams, but not quite the team it potentially could be.
As far as KU, I believe they have top shelf talent and could develop into an outstanding team or it might falter like last year's team. I believe that Coach Self is too good of a coach to let that happen two years in a row. Talent-wise we are comparable to the '08 team but the '08 team had the edge in experience and swagger; they believed they could play with anyone and it served them well in their run to the Championship; We have yet to see similar swagger, cockiness, braggadocio, self-confidence or whatever you want to call it from this team quite yet.
I have been saying for a while that Frankamp can be a serviceable PG but not the one that can get you to the next level. His most likely spot is as a dedicated 3 point shooter that can be used to break zones with outside shooting and crisp passing; however, he first has to develop into a reliable outside shooter, something we have only seen flashes of so far.
Bonus question: You have Greene as #10 in the rotation; how do you think he would be doing this year had Wiggins not played ta KU last season? I think he would be about the same since his main competition is Oubre, Selden (when he plays 3) and maybe Svi. No way he is ahead of Selden or Oubre and does not look like Svi will get much playing time anyway.
To be fair, he was not one of the squid's priority recruits. If everything works out for UK, it might have up to 10 players in the draft and he needs to reload. There are only so many top 10 players he can get so he needs to fill the roster with lower ranked players. Having said that, it is still a great get for Danny since Wake Forest has not been good for while and not destination for top players. A 4-star 7-footer is a good way to get the programs back on track. As Jayhawk fan I am very happy for Danny since it looks like he is getting a good start.
You are probably talking about the game in the NCAA tournament when KU beat Santa Clara and Steve Nash did not have one his better games. Keep in mind that that was one of KU's better teams and featured the likes of LaFrenz, Pierce, Pollard, Vaughn, Hasse, Pearson, Robertson, Thomas and McGrath among others. No shame in losing to that team and I don't think is fair to judge his college career by the one game you watched..
By his senior year, Nash had steadily gone from a completely unknown and unrecruited Canadian HS player, to the player that led Santa Clara to two back to back conference tiles and was selected conference player of the year two years in a row. In his senior year he was on everybody's radar, was playing for the Canadian National Team and was honorable mention All-American; he was drafted #15 in the first round just outside the lottery picks. Had he played in bigger conference there is no question he would have made the first or second All-American teams and would have been a lottery pick; everybody familiar with him knew he was going to be a star in the NBA, so his success was not a surprise. In short, there was no "transmogrification" between college in the NBA or within the NBA, just the logical progression that all players go through.
Now, Frankamp is a potentially lethal outside shooter and perhaps a serviceable PG, but he is not and likely will not be an elite PG like Steve Nash was in college and still is in the NBA. Best outcome for Frankamp in the NBA is having a role as a 3-point specialist, kind of like JJ Redick, keep in mind that JJ Redick was co-player of the year in college.
Wining the regular season indicates excellence throughout the year; winning the Conference Tournament means you get lucky for a few games, when other teams that have their tickets punched might not even play very hard. The Conference Tournament Title is really meaningful to teams that are borderline and winning it or making a good showing puts them over the top. Yes, it is nice to win the tournament but in no way I believe it is the equivalent to the regular season title. In many ways it is just a reward junket to the teams that get to spend a few days in the limelight
You wrote...
So what?
Right now, we have Greene, White, and Svi -- or we play smaller as Self says he prefers and Selden is more at home in the three spot. And as I saw someone post, where would Greene and White and CF be now if Wiggins never showed up, as far as development?
We have talked ad-nauseam about Green and White potential and so far it has been shown to be just that, potential. They were not able to break into the starting five or even get meaningful playing time and White pretty much was told that there would be little or no meaningful playing time coming, and no one here is anticipating Greene to start...and even the "meaningful minutes" part is iffy at best.
Yes, it is possible that they develop more had Wiggins not come to KU, but do you trade the year Wiggins had for a development year for White and Green with no assurance they will get any better that they are now? I don't. The expression a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush seems appropriate. With the top player in his class, you are pretty much assured a better than average to superior player (Wiggins was indeed a superior player); however, with two players that were not able to get meaningful playing time...but with potential...you might get lucky and get decent players or more likely you get bupkis. Just sayin'
I agree. At UK he will be a bench warmer that would get little developmental help for his game. At Wake he will be a starter with a solid teacher that will help him develop his game and get a potential shot at the NBA. Yes, he will not get the exposure he would at UK, although riding the pine behind McDs players might no be the exposure you want, but the NBA scouts know who the players are and they will find him at Wake Forest. Very nice get for Danny.
Interesting topic, unfortunately it reads more like fill in article than one that looks at the dynamics deeper. A wasted opportunity in my opinion.
Amen brother, Amen indeed...
Hopefully our enthusiasm is transmitted to the players and we are rewarded with an even better season that what we normally get.
Wiggins set the freshman scoring record at KU (previously hed by Danny Manning), was one of the 10 finalist for player of the year and was the top defender on the team...how can that be a negative thing? Also Wiggins made KU a top destination and without him perhaps we don't get Oubre and Alexander.
BTW on his pre-season debut Andrew Wiggins had 18 points, four rebounds, three assists, three blocks. Nice start.
It assume that Mizzou makes it to the tournament. Bleacher Report projects them as #11 in the SEC...
Same place has KU as #1 in the Big 12...
...so, chances are MU does not make it to the dance.
They are all Conference rings except the 4th has been replaced by the 2008 National Championship ring and the 8th has been replace by the 2012 National Runner up ring
Here are pictures of the 2008 ring...
The 2012 is pretty obvious as it displays "RUNNER UP."
There are the the (top) rings won in the last 10 years. The 2008 conference ring has been replaced by the National Championship ring and the 2012 has been replaced by the Runner up ring.
Coach Self has repeatedly said that the first objective is to win the conference since this means that you have arrived as a team and puts you on a good place going into the tournaments. I f you cannot win your conference, you would have an even bigger problem winning the NCAA tournament. I agree.
At Press day Coach Self said:
I hope so, because we stunk last year defensively. We didn’t put pressure on the ball. We never cut the head off. Teams got comfortable. When I say we stunk; we were probably still the best or second best defensive team in our league, but that’s not who we’ve been for years, and we’ve been better than that.
And so we don’t have a shot blocker behind us if it were not for Joel last year, there’s no telling how bad we looked at times defensively, because people got the ball where they wanted to get it, and he covered up mistakes.
This year, we don’t have a seven foot tall guy to cover mistakes like that. But I do think we are going to be able to pressure the ball, deny one pass away, and I think you’re going to see a pretty good defensive team.
It is clear that Coach Self was not pleased with last year's defensive effort and he has made a point of sending a message that it will not happen again. I am not sure how the offense will work but I am sure the defensive effort will be much, much better.
I agree. despite all the talk about the super-conferences, I still think that 10 is the ideal number of members for a conference; 18 basketball games home and away, and 9 football game alternating home and away.
Just because you think it is "vooodo math" and you don't understand it, it does not mean it is not a valid and defensible system. One last time, the story and this thread are NOT about tournament success, they are about which conference is the strongest top to bottom. Your argument is a red herring that does not address the topic at hand and you keep bringing it up even when your premise has been shown to be a canard.
Good teams lose to inferior team all the time in the tournament, it is called an upset. You bring up MU's loss to Norfolk State a couple of years ago and while on their way out of the conference, but you don't mention Duke (the best team in the ACC) losing to Mercer just this year, or UNC trip to the NIT a few season ago. Since you insist on Tournament success, just this past season, how many ACC teams made it to the tournament? 6 out 15 (40%) and how many Big 12 teams did ? 7 out of 10 (70%). Now, how many ACC made it to the Sweet 16? The answer is 1. In comparison, how many Big 12 teams made to the Sweet 16? The answer is 2 or twice as many as the ACC. By your this criteria, the ACC could never be considered a strong conference. The ACC used to be the premier basketball conference a long time ago. when they were a primarily basketball conference, but since they increased the membership and emphasized football, they are no longer the premier basketball conference.
It is obvious that we do not agree on the subject so any further posts would be a waste of time and bandwidth.
KU, ISU and Texas are pre-season top 10, so I would think they would be considered final four candidates as well.
Not a glamorous subject so it gets little attention outside of the people in the know. The nutritionist is part of The Sports Medicine Department at the University of Kansas. I would say they are pretty much up to speed and at the cutting edge.