🏀 KuBuckets Archive

@BeddieKU23

We probably do put too much emphasis on KU's weaknesses (I know I do), but that is because that's what will end our season. You can focus quite a bit on strengths when you have a team that you don't expect a national title out of. You know you are going to take some losses, but can enjoy the rest. When you have championship aspirations, those marginal things matter.

Think about the Royals for a second. Their bullpen is awful, and the starting pitching is pretty suspect. The lineup probably isn't productive enough in the lower third. But because this is, at best, a 70 win team, the fact that they may win 5 or 10 fewer games because of those specific weaknesses is kind of irrelevant. You can just enjoy Gordon being a savant in left, Mondesi's speed, Soler's power, etc. This isn't a playoff team, so blowing games here and there doesn't matter as much.

If the Royals were a contender, any one of the flaws I listed above would be all we could talk about because the starting pitching, bullpen or weak lower third of the lineup could be the team's ultimate undoing. But this team isn't good enough for those flaws to derail them because they don't have enough strengths yet. We bemoaned Yost's tactical mistakes in 2013-2015 because that was something that could have cost a really talented team a chance at the mountaintop.

That's where KU is, except it's an every year thing. We have a chance at the mountaintop, which highlights flaws rather than emphasizing strengths.

The Doke vs. Hurt question is hard. Hurt would help space the floor a bit, and that may be next year's fatal flaw. Not saying Hurt will out-produce Doke next year. But from a pure basketball fit perspective, the lack of shooting on this team could be its doom. Whether they are ready or not, Braun and/or McBride may have to play just to provide some shooting. That may hurt us on the other end, but I'm just not sure how this team functions as currently built if they do not add some shooting.

On the other hand, Doke will almost certainly be further along in his development and commands automatic double teams in the post, something Hurt may not do. But the flip side is that I'm not sure we have guys to punish constant doubling of the post. Doke commanding lots of double teams simply may not matter if we can't make teams pay for leaving people on the perimeter.

That's a long way of saying I don't know, but also that @FarmerJayhawk is right. We desperately need floor spacing for KU to be a top 10 team next season. Without it, we are a good, but flawed team that probably peaks as a Sweet 16 level squad.

Marcus Garrett is an interesting case. He's going to be a four year player. We all know that.

The question is how much more he can improve if he does not improve as a shooter.

We all agree that Garrett does very well at the little things and is an outstanding defender. Those are skills that he owns, and I am not all that concerned that those will erode or that his effort will take a step back. However, I am still concerned. My concern comes from questioning how much more Garrett can improve as a player if his most glaring weakness does not improve. Simply put, how good does he have to be at the little things if he continues to shoot around 30% from the perimeter?

Garrett's lack of shooting puts incredible pressure on the rest of his game. He has to rebound and defend at such a high level simply to be playable. That's why I wrote about Garrett doing a complete teardown and rebuild of his jumpshot yesterday. I fear that Garrett has maxed out his potential if he does not improve as a shooter. It's just too big a hole in his game (like being a guard that can't handle the ball). His improvement as a player at this point is almost exclusively dependent on his development as a shooter.

Woodrow said:

Looks like the Hauser brothers from Marquette are visiting Wisconsin, Virginia, Iowa, and Michigan st.

They have to sit, but they can really shoot it.

Kcmatt7 said:

@BeddieKU23 If Bryce Brown did at KU what he did at Auburn I think he gets drafted. That's all I'm saying. 141 threes is absurd. And that is something that I'd harp on.

I definitely think Bill sells him a starting spot. Or at least phrases it, that if he can't beat out either of those two, he isn't an NBA player anyways.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

There's a very recent KU comp to Bryce Brown - Malik Newman.

Newman averaged 14.2 PPG, 5 RPG, 2 APG last year at KU, and had the huge NCAA tournament that led his team to the Final Four.

Brown averaged 15.9 PPG, 2 RPG, 2 APG this year for Auburn, and had a huge NCAA tournament to lead his team to the Final Four.

Both guys are 6-3 SG. Both were in the same HS class, with Brown just five months younger than Newman.

Brown's shooting percentages this year were 43/41/81.

Newman's last year were 46/41/84.

There's not that much difference between the two, honestly. Score first, undersized SG's don't have a lot of margin in the NBA. Not sure that Brown gets drafted coming out of KU.

Tucker probably gets drafted if he puts up numbers similar to what he did at Little Rock at a P5 school. He's 6-5 and athletic. That additional size makes all the difference. In that respect, because he just needs to play in a P5 conference, KU doesn't have a decided advantage over Auburn on this.

I agree with @SlickRockJayhawk. I don't think KU is at risk for more penalties. They have been hit with a huge player penalty already. Unless Arizona, Oregon, Louisville, Maryland, LSU, etc. are all getting hit with significant penalties as well (all 2019 NCAA tournament teams) it is doubtful the NCAA comes down on KU because it would wreck the tournament going forward to ban that many major conference schools.

That being said, if @BShark and @Kcmatt7 are correct that Braun and McBride need more time before they are ready to contribute in a significant way, then the roster is still pretty flawed. There's not much shooting on this team. Agbaji is the best shooter in the rotation. You're still dependent on Doke inside, and without a guy like Dedric, there's not much offensive firepower on the block, either. You're basically hoping Devon Dotson morphs into Cassius Winston and next year's squad is some version of this year's Michigan State team. But that depends on Dotson taking a pretty big step forward.

2019 still could be a flawed team. If our incoming freshmen don't add perimeter shooting, this team will still struggle. While Doke is a tremendous player, he's still a limited player (not great defensively, only an average rebounder for his size).

I guess what I am saying is that there is still a long way to go to make sure next year's squad is not fatally flawed like this year's squad was. Shooting and athleticism are still at issue, particularly on the wing. If we don't get a big, athletic wing that can shoot (really, we need two of those unless Braun is one) then we basically have last season all over again, and without Dedric. That's a Sweet 16 peak.

Now if we add some star power on the wings, then we have something. But that is still to be determined. There's still a lot of tunnel left before we step into the daylight.

Garrett's shot requires a full tear down and rebuild. This isn't something you fix with a few tweaks. This is a literal rebuild from the base.

You spend a week or two just addressing his footwork and shot preparation. No ball, just going through the motions step by step, slowly at first, then quicker as you build that good muscle memory. His shot is so bad that you have to eliminate everything and start over because there are too many bad habits to deal with. Once you deal with the footwork and shot preparation, then you introduce a ball to make sure that he can catch and line up his shot properly without having his mechanics suffer. This part of the process will take 4-6 weeks at a minimum. That means if he started today, it would be the end of May and he wouldn't even be shooting yet, just getting the catch and footwork right.

From there, you start with set shots, no jumping. The focus would be on shot preparation and release mechanics. Again, this is several weeks of training that would take him into early July. And he's not even shooting real jumpshots yet.

Once you add jumping, you have to take it slow. If the form starts to break, you go back a few steps to make sure the technique is good. You don't progress until its right. That's another month. We're into August and he may not be shooting much outside 15 feet, and probably still not quite up to game speed.

And this all requires a shooting coach to watch his form on each shot. He has to have someone there to watch his form every time to make sure he doesn't slip into any bad habits. That's 16 weeks of work just to get to a point where he can hoist a few hundred shots a day, and he has to have somebody watching his form every shot to be certain he isn't getting sloppy. It's a long road to rebuild a jumpshot.

BShark said:

Woodrow said:

Charlie is headed to Depaul

Well, at least the want to be close to home line seems very legit with this.

Rumor has it that Moore had been back and forth to Chicago a few times this year due to his parents being ill. This is one of those cases where what people are saying publicly (non-basketball decision, desire to be closer to home) are actually the real reasons. He's dealing with some family stuff. That's tough at any age.

This is good news, but it still doesn't fix the problems KU had this year. And that is completely dependent on Doke staying healthy.

BeddieKU23 said:

In Self's perfect world Garrett plays 40 minutes.

He's gonna play 30 no matter who's on the roster

And that would be a mistake unless he fixes his jump shot this summer.

Given the reveals so far, they need two more guards, a true big man and another wing.

Tyshawn is likely one of their guards. TRob could also participate as the other big man, although they may need someone with more size since both Perry and Kevin Young are undersized. Xavier Henry could be an interesting addition, but probably won't be on the squad. They need at least one shooter, so someone like Tyrel Reed would be nice. Withey would be a great add to give them size. Most teams have at least one guy over 6-10, so having a footer will be important.

With his injury history, I think Doke most likely makes the jump. The window for being a pro is short, particularly for a guy like Doke that has already experienced lots of injuries. Given his injury history, I doubt that Doke plays much into his 30's. More than likely, he's done professionally by 31 or 32, maybe even sooner.

Because of that, when he's evaluating his pro prospects, the potential of one more year of earnings is huge because he only has maybe 10 or 12 years anyway, possibly fewer than that. That's why I think he is gone. He is on track to graduate, but his pro opportunity window is shrinking (NBA window may already be closed). Doke could have an overseas career that nets him a few million by the time he's done over the course of his career. He's unlikely to ever be a star or net the huge payday, so having an extra year of earnings represents 8%-10% of his total career earning potential. Another injury plagued (free) college year might close that window, too.

I'd love to see him back at KU, but what's best for him and his family is likely to jump to the pros.

If the Royals bullpen was average, they would likely be .500 or so right now.

Tucker would be a great get right now. He's a guy that almost certainly would come in and contribute immediately. He will be 22 in September, so he may have a bit more athletic development to go. He probably won't average 20 per game like he did for Ark-LR, but he certainly could. And he did that while shooting a fairly efficient 49% from the field and 41% from three.

Slotting him in the backcourt with Dotson would make for a very nice combo. It would also help slot guys into some more natural roles, particularly if Hampton comes to KU as well, allowing KU to bring both Agbaji and Garrett off the bench, Agbaji as the sixth man, Garrett as the 15 mpg glue guy.

Of course, that's in a perfect world.

@Kcmatt7 knocks it out of the park above. Read and re-read that post because it is exactly true.

For every Frank Mason (guy ranked in the 50 - 100 range that develops into an NBA player) there are a dozen Conner Frankamps. For every Ron Baker, there are ten Rio Adams. That's just the nature of things. Once you drop down below the top 20 or 30 players (guys that generally are both skilled and athletic) you have to bet on skilled kids that may not have the athleticism to translate to the next level, or athletic kids that may never be skilled enough to contribute in a meaningful way at a program like KU.

Some kids just don't improve much once they get to college. It's not a lack of effort or hard work. It's just that they have already maximized their athleticism or skill level (or both). I think someone like Perry Ellis is a great example of this. I would never question Perry's work ethic or commitment. He was as good a player, and from all reports, as good a person, as you would hope to have wearing the Crimson and Blue. But Perry also came to KU as a bit of a finished product. He improved while in Lawrence, of course. He matured as a player and as a person. But if you were to compare his development curve to that of Frank Mason, there's a clear separation (why Frank is in the NBA while Perry is not). Perry had nearly maximized his development before arriving at KU. He was already at 80% of what he would eventually become. Frank was probably only at 50% or so.

When recruiting, you have to look for that, but that's more art than science. You don't know if a kid has already topped out their growth, athleticism or skills. You won't find that out until they come into the program and start lifting, being challenged by more skilled peers, etc.

Grimes was a HS PG. Grimes played PG in the FIBA tournament last year. He's a big, athletic PG. His size and athleticism will make him money playing basketball as a PG.

Bill Self opted to use him as a floor spacer because that is what KU lacked on this roster outside Vick. With the Lawson brothers, Garrett, Azubuike, Dotson, etc. at the beginning of the season, the only two "shooters" were Vick and Grimes. When Grimes shot well, he generally played well because that was his role on this particular KU team. When he didn't, he really didn't have a fit because Dotson was the ball handler and Lawson was the primary offensive option.

Now, I will admit here that what Grimes should have done is making himself into a defensive stopper to have a secondary role on this team. Defensive stopper, floor spacer gives him a nice NBA floor as a 3 and D wing/ secondary ballhandler. But I also have to observe that it is difficult to change roles, especially for younger players.

Either way, the fit at KU for Grimes is uneven at best. He's not going to be the PG and usage as a floor spacer stagnates his own growth.

Could he have contributed in other ways - absolutely. But I firmly believe that Grimes got into his own head throughout the season when he struggled and never could reset himself in an effective way. That's on him, but also the coaching staff. But I also believed during the season that moving him onto the ball for a few games could have really unlocked Grimes' game. Unfortunately, this KU team was ultimately flawed either way, so unless Grimes became a 20/8/5 guy, I don't know if the final outcome would have been any different.

Several posters above mentioned player development. Let's take the Quentin Grimes situation this year.

Grimes is/ will be a point guard at the next level. Self played him on the wing as an off ball shooter all year. Given that, why would Grimes come back? He's not playing at the position he will play as a pro. Maybe he can develop more, but again, he's playing out of position, so that might be limited.

If we want highly rated guys to come to KU and stay at KU, we have to consider how they are being used and if the development they are getting is helping them. It has to be mutually beneficial. We can't just expect guys to come and stay when they are not also benefiting from the basketball side of things. Remember, these kids can go to school anywhere, so we have to focus on the basketball situation.

Grimes isn't coming back because he can't improve more at his pro position because he never had the opportunity to play on the ball here. Simple as that. Dedric isn't coming back because his best shot as a pro is now. KJ probably won't be a pro, but he has graduated, so he might as well move on. Moore doesn't fit into Self's scheme very well, and likely wouldn't have played much next year, either.

Everything I saw on TV and heard from people that went suggests that it was more like 8k to 10k fans there. Definitely a great turnout for a spring football game at KU.

I think Auriemma could handle the coaching part of the men's game. The struggle would be the recruiting side of things. Getting guys to buy into listening to a "women's coach" could be tough. Recruiting from that angle could be even tougher. That takes nothing away from what Auriemma has done in his career. He's great. I just don't know how the players would respond, or if he could get them to commit.

KJ is a nice player to add to any team that wants to go to the tournament next year. He's not a starter necessarily, but he will be nice coming off anyone's bench. I wish him the best.

@BeddieKU23

Part of re-tooling this group is understanding that Garrett and Lightfoot are not starters on next year's team. Penciling either of those guys in as a starter automatically caps the potential of that team.

Both are good role players that should figure into the rotation. But if either is playing more than 20 mpg, we already know they aren't making it past the Sweet Sixteen.

You are 100% right about the offense being flawed with Garrett. If Braun and Agbaji fill out the perimeter with Dotson, and Garrett comes off the bench, that's a good start. Or if KU finds another freshman here late (or a grad transfer) to fill that other wing spot, that helps a lot. The team should build around Lightfoot and Garrett as the sixth and seventh (or seventh and eighth) guys, not the fourth and fifth or fifth and sixth.

@Woodrow

Stackhouse has been coaching the G League team for Toronto (I think) for the last couple of years. The big question for those guys is whether or not they can recruit and how they handle boosters. Many of them are excellent coaches that just aren't good recruiters.

College hoops is 40% coaching, 40% recruiting and 20% booster/alumni relations. If you're a great recruiter, you can get by as a poor coach, or vice versa. But if you are weak in two areas (recruiting and alumni relations) you are screwed because that's more than half your job, no matter how good a coach you are.

@Bosthawk

You pose an interesting question. The thing is, lots of "real world" jobs are starting to offer those same things.

For instance, I am a lawyer as I have said before. Many law schools are now offering programs that allow undergraduate students to start law school early if they are enrolled in a special program through that university. This allows students to save time in college if they want to move on to law school. Even before that, most every high school now offers opportunities to get college credits while in high school, allowing kids to spend much less time in college. And both college and graduate schools are offering more internship and externship opportunities.

The point is, many students do in fact have the opportunity to leave the traditional schooling environment early to work, and many are taking that opportunity. Several law schools are introducing pilot programs now that allow a student to take their final semester online while living/working in the region that they want to ultimately practice in. Now obviously, those students still have to graduate, but they are not on campus in the traditional sense.

My point is that these opportunities are offered constantly. I had friends in college that took jobs based purely on the fact that their new employer would pay for them to complete their undergraduate or graduate degree. They accepted the job and left the traditional "college life" to work and make money. Now granted, most were juniors or seniors, but the result was the same. And it usually wasn't for hundreds of thousands of dollars, either.

I agree with @Kcmatt7 that the roster turnover this offseason is a good thing. KU went into 2018-19 with a flawed roster. They lacked shooting on the perimeter. They lacked athleticism up front. Running it back with the same basic roster would guarantee that next year's ceiling is Sweet 16. The turnover could be painful, but gives KU a chance to rectify some problems.

The grad transfer market should be intense. Kentucky got a huge boost this year by adding Reid Travis. If KU were to add a similar guy that could bring in immediate shooting or athleticism, that could be a huge boost for next season.

I would not be surprised to see KJ Lawson depart. He's getting married this summer, and may have opportunities professionally overseas. Moore is gone. Dedric is gone. That's his "group" that he came in with. He gave two years to the program, and isn't far off from graduating. But again, I think this gives KU a chance to retool completely, as opposed to half measures.

@dylans

You make a fair point. Although let's be honest here for a second - how many KU teams have been historically great over the last 25 years?

2011 was really good, but not an all time type of team. Maybe that team could have won in a wide open year, but they weren't world beaters. Same for 2016. Really good team, but not world beaters that you knew could beat any team, any style, any night.

When I think of all time type teams, I think of that 2007 Florida team, the 2008 KU team, the 2009 UNC team and the 2012 UK team. Those teams established themselves as the team to beat fairly early in the year and even though each team lost games along the way, it wasn't a surprise to see them standing under the confetti in April. Going back a ways, the 1992 Duke team and the 1996 Kentucky team fit that description as well. Maybe you throw the 1997 KU team and 2003 KU team, but there were other teams those years.

But that's the thing. You get one or two years where you have an all time great team that is incredible. Every other year, its you and a bunch of other really good teams in the mix.

@FarmerJayhawk

Topeka High's coaching staff is pretty good. The Topeka school district has focused their top football coaches at the school to the detriment of the other two schools in the district, but it has made Topeka High a very strong 6A team in Kansas. As a result, most every good middle school player goes to Topeka High as well, which creates good competition in practice (another key development factor).

This year's team just wasn't good enough. It had nothing to do with peak. We had a flawed team that likely would not have advanced beyond the Sweet 16 even under the most favorable circumstances. That's just the nature of college basketball and how this team was put together.

The ceiling for this team just wasn't that high given all of the injuries, suspensions, leaves of absence, etc. Even without all of that, I'm still not sure this would have been a Final Four team, although they certainly would have been much closer.

I am not disappointed with how this team finished. They probably got pretty close to their peak if we are really being honest. This wasn't going to be KU's year.

jayballer73 said:

SO considered more of an Athlete right? - - Thomas has already made a verbal to another school - can't remember who though - - going out of State. - -ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY

Thomas has given a verbal commit to Minnesota. I think he may be flippable under the right set of circumstances. He's quite an athlete as well.

The tough catch about recruiting lower ranked guys at KU is that they may or may not play, which means they may or may not develop. Agbaji played and will develop as a result. But what if Grimes had been the type of elite player we had hoped? Agbaji probably doesn't play, or plays inconsistently while Garrett is hurt/ineffective.

The bigger issue is that Self has missed on his primary targets the last few years. This year's squad looks much different if you have Zion or Romeo on it. Zion because he and D Lawson inside would have basically been unguardable. Romeo is everything you wanted from Vick, plus more. This year's team was always a bit flawed because they lacked shooting outside and athleticism inside without SDS.

Next year's recruits address the outside shooting issue, but nothing has changed the interior athleticism problem.

Harden is a tremendous athlete. Might get moved to defense in college because of his athleticism. Likely will not play quarterback in college. While they are at it they need to get his backfield mate Ky Thomas in the fold. Thomas is a running back and can stay at RB in college. Thomas may be the top player in Kansas next season.

There are a ton of flawed teams out there. That's been the problem all season. The NET is bad, but it also was a lousy year in terms of overall talent and depth across the country. Add on top of that several injuries to key players (Bol Bol, Azubuike, etc) and its easy to see why the tournament has fallen short. There wasn't a truly great team in the country. Just a lot of good teams with one or two huge flaws.

BShark said:

No idea what Simi Shittu is gonna do but he had a rough year at Vandy and they fired their coach. If he does transfer I'd be super interested.

The Garland injury really messed up everything at Vandy. The PG makes that whole situation go (or not).

I still think you should have to be at least .500 in your conference to qualify for the tournament. Like I have said on here before, teams would be playing must win games in February if they knew one or two more losses would knock them out of at large consideration.

After all, if you are 7-11 in conference, why should you get an at large bid?

If brackets are truly fair, the Big 12 should only get 6 or 7 teams in. There's no reason that all three of Texas, Oklahoma and TCU should make the field. Similarly, both Clemson and NC State from the ACC should have some work to do to get into the tournament. I'd have similar questions for Minnesota, Ohio State and Indiana. Of those 8 major conference teams, I would argue that maybe 4 should make the field instead of all 8 (For me, it would be TCU, NC State and Minnesota only, but the committee probably picks more).

Being mediocre in a major conference should not get you into the tournament. Indiana is mediocre. So is Oklahoma. So is basically everyone in the PAC-12. If the PAC-12 wasn't considered a major conference, they would only be sending their champ to the dance.

It's time for the NCAA tournament to stop rewarding the mediocre teams in major conferences. I watched Murray State and Belmont on Saturday. Both of those teams looked like NCAA tournament teams (9 losses between them). And yet some major conference team with 13 losses will probably go to the tournament ahead of Belmont (the loser in the conf. title game). Mid majors and low majors only get two or three shots at good wins each year, usually on the road. Look at Oklahoma's road record against potential tournament teams - lost at KU, Texas, K-State, Texas Tech, Iowa State, Baylor, won at TCU. Didn't play another non-con road game against a potential tourney team. You can do this with almost every "bubble team" from a major conference and find almost no quality road wins. Why should Oklahoma get credit for going 1-5 against KU, K-State and Tech. NC State's best conference win is either Clemson at home or Syracuse at home. If you gave Belmont home games with UNC, Virginia, and Virginia Tech and road games at Duke, Florida State, Louisville and UNC, they would do no worse than 0-7, which is exactly the mark that NC State posted in those games.

kjayhawks said:

@justanotherfan Raimey looked like the best player on the court for much of that game to me.

Raimey is a KCK kid. I haven't seen him play live since he was in middle school (he was well ahead of his peers then). It looks like he has been rounding out his game quite a bit.

He and Braun are two very different style of players. Braun is a true wing player. Raimey is much more of a lead/combo guard. They would look very good in the same backcourt.

As far as I know, Raimey is being recruited by a lot of the local programs right now (Creighton, Wichita State, etc.) but he has been to late night, so he is definitely on KU's radar.

I like some things from the video @BShark posted, but also see some concerns. Braun looks bigger than 6-5 or 6-6 in the video, which is always nice. He also showed a nice stroke, and the ability to finish in the paint.

I am a bit concerned with his handle. He got his pocket picked on back to back plays in the highlight. One was a straight pick, the other was sloppy handling on his part. I didn't see poor ball handling throughout the clip, but it was there on those two plays.

Otherwise, he gets where he wants to get and can really shoot it.

I didn't see a lot of his defense or rebounding.

KT Raimey (#0 for Olathe North) also looked sharp in this game. He had some sloppy plays in the game, but also that big time throw down, and a couple of nice finishes around the basket. His shooting touch has also improved from the outside. He could be a nice local target (was at late night in 2018).

Dotson's performance yesterday was a perfect example of the gaps in his game that he has to address before he is NBA ready.

At his size, he can't be just a slasher. He will get banged up that way even if he does get stronger.

Gorilla72 said:

Lord, please don’t let KSU win the Big XII outright. Their fans will be insufferable! 🙏

Probably, but at last check, 14 is more than 1.

The bigger concern is how this affects him going forward. His defense is a big part of his value. Without that, he's a pretty average player.

FarmerJayhawk said:

Another thing to keep in mind is Grimes is almost a year younger than most freshmen. He doesn’t turn 19 until May. Cassius Stanley is actually almost a year older than Grimes. I think he’ll take a big step forward in his age 19 season. And it’ll be his first full offseason at KU. More time with Hudy and the coaches working on his shot and getting more comfortable around Dotson and Agbaji will be really helpful.

Grimes' age is a factor in his development, particularly his strength. As he continues to mature, that will come. Grimes could explode at any moment because he already has lots of skills.

If Dotson's shooting continues to develop he leaves after next season. @dylans pointed out a common thread with the small guards - injuries. At the pro level, these guys take a beating. Dotson's best chance to earn a good pro salary is to grab that chance ASAP because injury could effectively end his NBA career.

Even a small erosion in his speed or explosiveness probably means he can't play at the NBA level. That's just the way it is for a player his size or smaller.

BShark said:

There's a lot of "he shouldn't have gone to Kansas, Self sucks" in that article from anonymous coaches. :/

Vecenie's wrap-up is really good.

Self is an excellent college coach. That's well documented.

Self also is not particularly good at developing NBA players. Also well documented.

Self does his best work with players that are good to great college players (the Perry Ellis types) that will be in school for four years, learn the system, etc. He's not as adept with the OADs. We all know this. That should not be a surprise to any of us.

Self is a great coach. He is not great at developing NBA talent.

College basketball (outside of the top handful of programs) generates almost all of its money from the NCAA tournament. The NCAA tournament, in turn, generates about 90% of the overall NCAA budget on an annual basis. So the question is this - do the networks (ESPN, CBS, TNT, etc.) pay top dollar to televise the NCAA tournament.

The question moving forward is two parts:

1. How many top players go the NBA/G League/D League route
2. How do the networks/advertisers respond

We already know what college basketball looks like if you subtract the TV money. Go to any mid major and you will see it. Drive down to Wichita State, or up to Creighton, or over to any number of other mid major programs. Even the ones that do sell lots of tickets do not have the same financial strength as those that appear on TV regularly. And these are programs that have consistently had success.

If the TV/advertising money dries up, college basketball will have to change because the current model is unsustainable without that money.

This is a great class for KU. You always run the risk when you make a new hire that you won't have time to recruit that year. Miles did not allow that to happen. Excellent job by Miles and the entire staff.

The truth is that regardless of the issues this KU team has, they will still likely win the Big 12 as long as they stay undefeated at home and don't drop another bad loss on the road. The Big 12 champ probably ends up with six losses this season. I think KU can find a way through the rest of this season with only three more road losses, so they can still probably tie for the conference crown if they hold at AFH.

At this point, Self might as well figure out if he can get Grimes jumpstarted. That's literally the only way out of this current mess. Grimes is the only player on the roster that has the talent to change the trajectory of this team (Round of 32 exit). KU may need to experiment with Grimes handling the ball more so that he can start getting downhill. Too often he has been a non factor standing on the weak side of the floor beyond the three point line, neither crashing the boards or getting quality touches.

This season is lost if Grimes doesn't get rolling, so everything that happens over the next four weeks should be focused on doing just that. Garrett doesn't have the top end offensive talent to do that. Vick is a guy that benefits from others getting him open shots, so he can't be relied on to create those looks himself. Dotson is probably playing about where you would have expected him to.

This is about getting high level production from Quentin Grimes. Its the only way to save the season.

@DCHawker

I've watched Grimes extensively this year. He seemed to lose his aggressiveness as he started picking up cheap fouls, and hasn't gotten it back at all. He just seems to be passive in every facet of the game. Rarely drives to the basket (even though that's probably one of his top skills). Rarely crashes the glass. Rarely pressures the ball defensively. It's like he is avoiding contact at all costs. I don't know how you fix that.This may just be a lost season for Q.

Ultimately, a lot of what happened Saturday isn't Garrett's fault. The ball should not be in his hands nearly as much as it is. He is being used as a second or third option when he should be a fifth option. He has had some good games of late, but a lot of times, as @Fightsongwriter pointed out, slightly better defenders changed what he was able to accomplish.

If Garrett is going to play heavy minutes and a team isn't guarding him (i.e, the Kentucky strategy), you have to move him off the perimeter. Put him along the baseline, where he can cut and rebound rather than on the wing, where his man can disrupt entries, deter drives, etc. Basically, make his man guard the baseline instead of guarding the lane. That gives driving lanes to our guys from the top and the opposite side. It cuts the floor in half, but it also keeps the extra defender honest, and makes Garrett a threat on every weakside rebound. That's how you punish teams for not guarding him.

@Crimsonorblue22

Other teams have sagged off Garrett. Kentucky flatly wasn't guarding him. PJ Washington said their gameplan was to not even challenge his jumpshot attempts.

Its the same thing Oregon did with Landen Lucas. They just ignored him defensively.

Its what VCU did with Morningstar.

We have seen this movie before. It takes a bold strategy to actually not guard someone. Teams have been playing off Garrett, but you can drive on a guy playing off you. You can't drive a guy if he's just going to wait for you to get into the paint. There are several clips already on Twitter of Washington with a foot already in the paint when Garrett had the ball.

UK took the drive away because they just didn't guard him. His man was already where he wanted to go. That makes floaters and layups tough because you can't create an angle to get around the defender.

When a guy is four feet off you, you can get a running start and drive. They are too far away to pressure you, but close enough that you can create an angle. That's what Iowa State and Texas did. There were times where Washington was 8 or 9 feet off Garrett. You're just running into the defense at that point. Even if you get a running start, they have plenty of time to react.

@BShark

The only option is to stick with other options that may cost us games now, but pay off down the line. Whether that's KJ, Grimes, Agbaji or someone else, KU has to find a way to keep teams from sagging into the paint.

I'm not sure KU can play 4 out a lot with Garrett because he can't punish opposing 4s if they stay in the paint. UK had the perfect plan against that lineup. Calipari was prepared. We need a lineup to go to if another team does that, or if another team goes small and guards Garrett with a smaller player.