🏀 KuBuckets Archive

Svi and Dok have the benefit of being young for their respective classes. Svi will graduate this year and turn 21 in early June. Azubuike will turn 19 in mid-September. That means that even if he comes back to KU in the fall, Azubuike could still get drafted before his twentieth birthday, and still having been at Kansas for three years.

It isn't so much years in college as it is age. Take Josh Jackson. He was at KU for only one year, but he will turn 21 in just a couple of weeks. Svi is younger than Jackson, but will have spent 4 years at KU. Azubuike arrived at KU with Jackson, but is thirty months younger than Josh Jackson!

Age is what matters most. And for those that care, here are the birth dates of each of the players in KU's incoming class, including Silvio even though he's already on campus.

Silvio De Sousa - October 7, 1998

Devon Dotson - August 2, 1999

David McCormack - July 2, 1999

Quentin Grimes - May 8, 2000

Look at that list again, think about the argument I just made, and you understand why I am so excited about Grimes' potential. Here are the birth dates of every player ranked in the top 10 in next year's class (Grimes is currently 8 on ESPN):

Barrett - June 14, 2000

Williamson - July 6, 2000

Reddish - September 1, 1999

Bol - November 16, 1999

Langford - October 25, 1999

Johnson - October 11, 1999

Simons - June 8, 1999

Grimes - May 8, 2000

Bazley - June 12, 2000

Little - February 11, 2000

Coaches and evaluators are discovering that age matters quite a bit. Zion Williamson, for instance, is a big, strong kid, and he doesn't turn 18 until this summer. Yes, he's an undersized PF, but how often are you going to run into a 6-6, 270 pound 17 year old that is both strong and agile like he is? That's why he's ranked so high. That's why Grimes keeps moving up. That type of athleticism at 17 is impressive because those kids are still growing and getting stronger naturally, without even considering work in the weight room or on the court.

On the other hand, a kid like Silvio, if he's going to play at the next level, really only has two more years at KU to develop. That's why he was eager to re-classify. He turns 20 this fall. He's probably leaving KU after the 2020 season either way. McCormack is probably on that same path. Same with Dotson.

If Grimes doesn't have the season he's hoping for, though, he could be back. He will turn just 19 next spring. He could legitimately be the #1 pick as a 20 year old leaving as a sophomore if he isn't a high lottery selection, although he talent probably makes him a lottery pick next summer anyway.

Some evaluators are even starting to sort players in tiers, then sorting those tiers by age, then ranking the younger players higher, because if you show me two kids that are equally skilled, but one just turned 15 last month, and the other turns 17 in six months, even if they are both sophomores, the younger kid is better by default because he's more than a year younger in actual age, regardless of classification.

That's why I have said Grimes is a top 5 talent in his class for a while now. If you consider him almost equal to Langford and Simons, you are quickly reminded that Langford is more than six months older, and Simons is eleven months older! Cam Reddish is nine full months older than Quentin Grimes!

That's a head start for each of those guys, and yet Grimes is basically right on their heels from a skill and athleticism standpoint, even though each of those guys was probably almost ready to start crawling, or already crawling, the day Grimes was born. That matters.

Doke's biggest challenge will be mobility. He's a big guy, but he has to be able to competently switch onto some of the quickest guards in the world in the new NBA and defend those guys in space. If he can show he can do that, he is a lottery pick. If he can't, he probably comes back to school because there's nowhere to put him in the modern NBA.

I have read that big men have trouble finding the optimal release point and shot arc for FTs because of their longer standing reach and overall long limbs. The ideal shooting motion is a more compact movement, but big guys tend to have lots of moving parts in their shooting stroke.

That can be corrected obviously - Dirk Nowitzki immediately comes to mind as a great FT shooter, but I think it takes more time for a big man to develop a good shooting stroke, particularly a big man that developed as a big guy playing in the post. Guys like Nowitzki developed as perimeter oriented players. Anthony Davis was a guard for most of his life. But some of the bigger guys tend to never have developed much in the way of shooting touch outside the paint anyway.

As a result, their release is inconsistent and their shooting suffers.

I wouldn't classify Doke as having the yips. With the yips, you suddenly can't do something simple that you've been able to do in the past. If Doke had the yips, for example, he would be missing layups and dunks. He was never a good FT shooter. Nerves and confidence may be keeping him from improving, but its not the yips because he was never good at it.

I have seen an option QB suddenly get the yips and become unable to pitch the ball with a particular hand. He ended up only being able to run the option one way - he would always keep if he went the other way because he was afraid to pitch it.

Chuck Knoblauch got the yips and couldn't throw to first. There have been basketball players that got the yips and couldn't make FTs, but they were average to good FT shooters prior to that. Jon Lester may have gotten the yips for a while when he refused to throw the ball to first with a runner on.

Yips is a mental/muscle thing. The mind locks up the muscle memory, to the point that executing a basic action becomes labored - like having to remind yourself how to turn a doorknob because you once burned your hand on a hot knob or something. You are physically able to do the task, but your brain won't let your hand grasp and turn the knob because of the fear/nervousness.

Doke is just a bad FT shooter that is struggling with his confidence. His motion and release are all over the place. His goal, rather than becoming a good shooter, should simply be improving to around 55% or so. High enough that he isn't a total drag, but not so high that such improvement may seem impossible to him.

By no means am I advocating going completely away from Doke. He is still our best option. But if a team commits to that strategy, we have to adjust. We can't just sit on our hands and hope things turn out okay, because that usually leads to things not turning out okay.

Doke was playing pretty well last night in limited minutes, but that is all overshadowed by the final stretch. You think he went to bed thinking about the dunks he had, or with images of those missed FTs? We have to put him in a position to succeed. If a team commits to that strategy, Doke has to be running the baseline, trying to catch lobs or something. Just standing in the corner eliminates him and clogs the paint because you don't even have to follow him out there.

If not for the FT stuff, the story would (and rightly should) be about Young playing one of his best overall floor games of the season. He played really well and put together a great game that helped his team win.

Self should have gone back to Mitch. When we talk about confidence, we have to look at two things.

First, does this help or hurt Doke's confidence when he's struggling? I say no, but that's debatable because Doke at least knows that Self will stick with him.

Second, does this help or hurt Mitch's confidence? Mitch is sitting there seeing what OU's strategy is. He sees Doke missing FTs and the lead dwindling. And yet Self doesn't look his way to stem the tide. Does Self have that little confidence in Lightfoot to at least make OU play ball instead of a foul-a-thon? And Mitch was playing some solid ball, too. Yet Self still wouldn't go to him down the stretch in a critical game.

There's two elements of confidence here. Even if Doke's confidence wasn't shaken, do we know what kind of message that sent to Lightfoot?

I just don't know about the confidence argument. Yes, you leave him in to show you have confidence in him, but you don't want to hang the loss on him. Think about how Doke is feeling this morning - he missed 7 FTs down the stretch, KU basically didn't score and the lead disappeared. That's a lot of responsibility to hang on a guy to do the specific thing he does worse than anything else on a basketball court. You're asking him to perform the one specific skill he struggles with.

In 1995, Nick Anderson of the Orlando Magic missed 4 FTs at the end of an NBA Finals game that the Magic ultimately lost on the way to being swept by the Houston Rockets. Prior to that, Anderson had never shot worse about 67% from the line. The next season, he shot 69%, but as he has admitted, his confidence at the line was shaky the entire season. The next year, his confidence cratered. He shot 40% from the line. He never shot better than 63% after that season. He went an entire season (21 games) toward the end of his career where he didn't shoot a single FT as he basically avoided going to the line.

Doke already struggles at the line, so I doubt his FT shooting gets worse, but as a big man, we cannot afford for him to avoid being fouled altogether, as Anderson did when he began struggling (averaged less than 2 FT per game in his two worst shooting seasons, despite playing starter level minutes). By the end of his career, Anderson basically stood out beyond the 3pt line because he didn't want to go to the line. Doke can't do that at his size. He has to be physical. I just hope last night doesn't start eroding his confidence.

The solution is pretty simple, actually. The NBA has a rule in the last two minutes of any quarter, if you foul someone away from the ball, the team gets two shots and the ball. Before that, you can commit the off the ball fouls like OU was doing, but inside two minutes, if you do that, you will never get the ball back even if they miss FTs.

For college, I would probably do last three minutes of each half since there are no quarters. That minor tweak would preserve the last three minutes, but still put the onus on teams to shoot well from the line. We knew that the foul strategy was coming. We got burned last night by it.

@Statmachine

When a team is taking off ball fouls, they will usually inform the officiating crew that they will be fouling away from the ball. This is to prevent injuries so guys don't have to be overly physical to draw the whistle. Ultimately, that keeps a guy from getting beaten up or possibly hurt. That's why the officials were watching Doke and Freeman - the officials had already been told fouls were coming.

@JayHawkFanToo

But what does this do to Doke as far as confidence? He knows OU's whole strategy was to foul and see if he missed. That could wreck his confidence long term from the FT line.

OU told the referees they would be taking fouls against Doke. That's why the officials were watching him so closely. Making sure things don't get out of hand.

This is on Self. He allowed Kruger to make him play 4 on 5. You can't just put Doke in the corner there. You have to take him out. You can't let him be the goat there.

This one is on Bill Self, not Doke.

Grimes could be one of the five best players in his class once everything is all said and done.

KU may have to close games with an offense for defense switch, using Mitch on O and Doke on D. Mitch isn't a great FT shooter, but he can hit them. He's not as good as his 82% this year, but he could probably settle in around 70% or so. That's good enough to close out games.

Shooting FTs underhanded is the best way to avoid changing Doke's overall motion. It's a completely separate thing that shouldn't affect the other aspects of his game (it's not like he's going to try and shoot underhanded in the post). The only issue is whether he has the mental concentration to ignore the taunts from opposing fans, but being even a 60% FT shooter is worth 10 points on the season for him, and the returns explode even more if he can get to 70%, plus he can be more assertive around the basket because he won't have to worry about getting fouled if he can shoot a decent percentage.

@HighEliteMajor

Obviously, for kids that aren't going to play basketball beyond college, the NCAA is the best option. There's not even a debate there. I will concede that point.

However, the question is whether its the best option for kids that do have pro options, specifically the top players.

The college game and the pro game are very different. The rules are different (shorter shot clock, deeper three point line, etc.). The talent level is vastly different - there are less than 200 guys in the NCAA right now that will have NBA careers of any substance, and those players are clustered on only a few teams, so chances that you are seeing an NBA caliber player (or even a near NBA player) across from you are pretty low.

The strategy and preparation are different. One of the larger criticisms of NCAA is that most coaches will not deter from their system, regardless of player talent. As a result, you are often facing a system, not talent.

And of course, roles are different in the NCAA versus the NBA. Think about how often you saw the Morris brothers shoot threes in college. Marcus shot a total of 123 threes in 109 college games. Markieff shot 94 in the same 109 games. Not counting this season, Marcus has shot fewer than 123 threes in an NBA season only once (his rookie year, when he played only 17 games total). He's shot 94 this year already in just 25 games. Markieff has never shot fewer than 94 threes in a season, including this year, where he has already shot 94 threes.

The NBA has required them to change their offensive game. They rarely play in the post, instead playing as pick and roll or pick and pop big men. Both Morris twins face the basket regularly and rarely play with their back to the basket.

In short, their collegiate experience didn't really prepare them for what they need to do in the NBA. They were able to adapt, but the expectation of them is different than what they did in college.

You can look to a guy like Perry Ellis - incredibly successful here at Kansas, but his NBA career has comprised of just one NBA preseason game. The things he did at KU did nothing to prepare him for a potential NBA career.

That's not to say that Perry did not benefit from his time at Kansas. He undoubtedly did. But from a basketball perspective, if you were to assess whether he benefited purely on a basketball level from playing NCAA ball, the answer is no. He needed to play SF in college, primarily facing the basket, playing on the perimeter, guarding perimeter guys, etc. It was to KU's benefit that he play primarily inside, a position he would never play professionally. As a result, the chance that Perry could leave KU and play in the NBA actually went down the longer he stayed at KU. Chances that Perry ever makes the NBA at this point are pretty remote. Had he come out of HS and gone into a more basketball focused program that had him on the perimeter working as a SF, perhaps two or three years of that would have prepared him for a pro career.

KU never lacks for talent. To say that would be crazy. From a pure talent perspective, KU always has a top 10 roster, most times a top 5 roster. The last time KU didn't have a top 10 roster was probably 1998-99. Even the 2009-10 roster was a top 10 roster from a talent standpoint. It's just a matter of maximization.

This is part of the ceiling/floor argument I made in another thread. If you have a top notch talent roster, and you play for the high floor, you will always have a certain amount of regular season success. It's guaranteed because over the course of the season, your talent will carry you to more overall wins because the peaks and valleys of your talent will even out at a higher level than most other teams. That's how you win 13 consecutive conference titles.

But come March, the peaks matter more than the valleys. You have to have the highest possible peak in March because there's less chance for things to even out and win. We are always faced with the "7 out of 10 times, we win that game" problem. The issue is, you don't get 7 out of 10 in March. You get one. And in one, the peak matters more than the floor. Floor gets you to the Sweet 16 or Elite Eight. Ceiling gets you titles.

We have the talent. We just need the ceiling.

This isn't a surprise to me. The longer the process drug out, the more of a possibility this became, particularly because now that classes have started, drop deadlines to preserve his academic record (important for APR purposes) if he did leave were approaching. This lets him leave in good standing without KU taking a hit, provided his fall grades were solid.

As I have posted before, the NCAA acts as if they are the only option. With more international teams willing to sign US HS players, that isn't the case, and with games streaming on the internet, its no longer the burden it was 15 years ago to evaluate a prospect in Europe or elsewhere.

I don't think this starts a trend, but it is another option for kids. NCAA isn't the only game in town for top prospects, so their eligibility process better speed up. Preston can simply withdraw his request and leave. Other kids could do the same - submit information, gauge interest and, if the NCAA doesn't rule them eligible at the end of the fall semester, take the contract. That route would only be there for the top 20 or 30 prospects, but it would speed the entire process up for everyone.

Good luck to Billy Euro balling.

And if what @Texas-Hawk-10 says is true for Grimes, he certainly has the talent to get a Euro contract.

Cunliffe can shoot. Shooters get hot. How many times have we fallen victim to a hot shooter in March who averages 5 or 6 points a game, then hits five threes against us? And yet we never seem to have that guy on our side... wonder why?

@BeddieKU23

We do, but Silvio doesn't have the offensive skill that Preston does. Silvio won't command consistent double teams in the post. He won't hit 15 foot jumpers.

Silvio compares favorably to Darnell Jackson and I hope he has that type of career. But Preston is so much more skilled. That's a huge thing.

@Gunman

Some are. That's the disadvantage of having only one P5 conference on the west coast. There simply aren't that many higher seeds to send out west.

Look at the top 20 right now (basically a proxy for the top 5 seeds).

The teams furthest west geographically (in order) are Gonzaga (13), Arizona State (16), Arizona (14), Texas Tech ( 8 ), Oklahoma (4), Wichita State (7), Kansas (10) Purdue (3), Auburn (17), Cincinnati/Xavier (11/12), Kentucky (18).

So if Oklahoma or Purdue is currently the 1, Wichita State is the 2 out west, Gonzaga is the 3?, then ASU or AU is the 4 and Auburn or UK is the 5. That's the geography of it. If they stick to the hard curve, Oklahoma is the 1, but Duke becomes the 2 in the snake.

They also have to fill 1st and 2nd round games in San Diego and Boise. That's 16 total teams that have to go out there, or four higher seeds. Again, who goes out there? Gonzaga, Arizona State and Arizona, obviously. But who beyond that? Wichita State? Oklahoma? Purdue? KU? Kentucky? Texas Tech? Who is the fourth?

That's the challenge for the NCAA. There just aren't enough schools further west that grab high seeds. You have Gonzaga and usually a couple of Pac-12 schools and that's it.

Lots to take up here.

There are two schools of thought. One is to go to your core group of players early, and ride that group as far as the core will take you. This is the "high floor" argument. You sacrifice some upside along the way at times, but you know you are getting production at level X all the time.

The other method is the high ceiling method. Maybe you lose a game here or there working with raw, but talented players, but you can realize the highest potential that way.

Self, by his nature, is prone to favor the high floor. You don't win 13 conference titles in a row (and finish either first or second in your conference every year since the Clinton administration - true fact, look it up) without getting a high baseline of production every season.

But there's a cost to that. I've written many times on this board that the streak in some ways is a curse for KU hoops because trying to make sure we beat Texas Tech or Baylor in January or February prevents us from getting ready for March. We have yet to find a way to balance those costs.

The 2011 season will continue to haunt KU because that was, in many ways, Self's best overall team. The very next year the leftovers from that team - Johnson, Releford, Taylor and Robinson - took an otherwise undermanned KU team all the way to the national final!!! How does that group, plus two lottery picks end up losing to a good but not great VCU team? And how do Morningstar and Reed combine for 16 (16!!!) shots when neither one was hot?

Self, in many ways, is a better coach when he is somewhat limited, because he's prone to tighten his rotation in tough situations anyway. Remember 2008? That team went 8 deep, but in the national title game, all of the minutes went to basically seven guys - Rush, Chalmers, Collins, Arthur, and Jackson each played 29 or more minutes. Kaun and Robinson both played about 20. Aldrich played a token 4 minutes that even the biggest KU fan can't really remember (he did not record a stat). Give Self a lineup he can roll with and a couple of token subs, and he's happy.

In some ways, that's what is exciting about this year's squad if Billy Preston becomes available. All of a sudden the rotation on the perimeter is Graham, Newman, Svi, Vick and the rotation in the post is Azubuike, Preston, Lightfoot, with Garrett and De Sousa taking the roles as bit players. With that group, Self is no longer tinkering with minutes. He plays his 3 out, 2 in, rotating Lightfoot as the stretch man inside, while Newman fills the Sherron Collins role of instant offense off the bench. Collins played huge minutes for KU that year - he missed six full games and still played just 300 fewer minutes than starter Russell Robinson (the only player to start every game that season). Newman could revive that role, and might even find himself offensively.

Of course, all of this still depends on Preston...

Let's remember that geography is a factor when determining where to send teams. As a result, KU being in the same region as Wichita State or Missouri isn't that surprising because they aren't in the same conference (so no conference restriction), but are in the same general geographic area. Given the geography, all other things being equal, it would not be surprising to see KU end up in matchups with WSU, Creighton, Mizzou, Tulsa, Oral Roberts, Nebraska, UMKC or St. Louis if those schools were to make the tournament simply because geography would dictate that those schools stay close to their home, which would usually result in being in the same location as KU, particularly if those schools were not the "host" school as Wichita State is in Wichita, or as Creighton and Omaha are in Omaha.

If KU ends up on the 2 line and MU ends up on the 7 line or 10 line, its almost certain they end up in the same place. Same for WSU if they end up seeded opposite KU. The only way to separate is if the seedings don't match.

This actually will hurt mid majors quite a bit because any conference loss is probably giving them a Category 2 or 3 loss.

Here are the current Non P5 schools in the top 75 at KenPom:

Villanova - Big East (1), Gonzaga - WCC (6), Cincinnati - American (7), Wichita State - American (15), St. Mary's - WCC (19), Nevada - MWC (20), SMU - American (32), Seton Hall - Big East (34), Marquette - Big East (41), Butler - Big East (42), Houston - American (44), Western Kentucky - CUSA (47), Boise St. - MWC (50), BYU - WCC (52), Middle Tennessee - CUSA (53), New Mexico St - WAC (54), San Diego St. - MWC (55), Providence - Big East (57), East Tennessee - Southern (59), St. Bonaventure - A10 (64), Murray St. - OVC (65), Davidson - A10 (66), Missouri St - MVC (69), Northern Kentucky - Horizon (70), Louisiana Lafayette - Sun Belt (73), Vermont - America East (74), Old Dominion - CUSA (75)

Now look back at that list. If you're Villanova, you're okay because you could drop a road game to any one of several conference opponents and be okay, because four other conference teams are in the top 75. The American is also okay because four schools there are in the top 75. The WCC has three. Mountain West has three. Conference USA has three.

But if you're New Mexico State, East Tennessee State, Missouri State, or any of those other schools with no other top 75 school in their conference, you basically have to go undefeated in conference to protect your seed, regardless of your noncon schedule, because any conference loss is a category 2 loss, and a conference loss at home is a category 3 or category 4 loss. That's pretty demanding to say you have to be unbeaten in conference, or at least unbeaten at home with no more than maybe one or two conference losses total.

This is why so many middling P5 teams make the tournament as bubble teams. They get higher value losses because getting blown out by a top conference team is worth more than losing a tough road game for most mid majors. I would rather see the NCAA committee require a .500 conference record to qualify for NCAA consideration. That way a weaker P5 conference team can't load up on cupcakes, then sneak into the tournament because they went 1-4 on the road against top 75 teams, while a mid major team went 0-1.

Either that, or design a true bracket buster weekend where top mid majors get a shot on a neutral court against mid level P5 team. The winners of those games would separate themselves from the losers for NCAA bids.

My issue with the Cunliffe thing is that right now, by yanking his minutes around, you may be damaging his confidence for later on. Right now, he feels like if he makes a mistake, he's going to get pulled. As a result, he's thinking rather than playing free. That's a tough habit to break. You don't want to put the idea in his head that the coaching staff doesn't have confidence in him.

You don't want an athletic shooter like Cunliffe gun shy, because that may hurt his ability to contribute next year. That's why I say hold him out. It's more about the mental side of things than eligibility. If you aren't going to play him, tell him he's not going to play, but that you're expecting him to be in the rotation as a contributor next season. Don't jerk his minutes around this season because he may start changing his game without even realizing to avoid the quick hook, and once that aggressive edge is gone, it's hard to get back.

@JayHawkFanToo

I have no issue with the 8 man rotation. My issue is more that when you are integrating a new player like Cunliffe, you need to give him more run than this, particularly when he didn't have the opportunity in non-con because he was a transfer. If you're going to play him this sparingly, it may have been worth more to the program to redshirt him this year with the intent of having him as a rotation player next year.

@BShark

Mitch Lightfoot has been a pleasant surprise in all respects. He has shown good perimeter touch and has been a better rim protector than I think anyone could have anticipated. I don't think I saw any scouting report that suggested he would be a good shotblocker. This could change the trajectory of his entire career. He could become a starter if he can continue to improve, something I would not have thought possible after his freshman year.

As for why Self doesn't play Cunliffe, Self often shortens his rotation too early IMHO. He's the one in the Hall of Fame, so take that opinion for what any opinion posted on the internet is worth, but I think the streak influences him to win games in January and February rather than develop guys for March. I'm not even sure that's a criticism really, because the results speak for themselves.

:trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: and counting...

@mayjay

The third and the fifth one actually do look like they could be sisters.

Baylor took a step back this year, but they aren't a bad team. Of their six losses, five are to ranked teams and their only questionable loss is the ISU loss, and even that was at Hilton. Not sure what to make of this Baylor squad. They lack the perimeter scoring that would probably have pushed them past a couple of those ranked teams. They are a dangerous team, but not good. Could make some noise in the NIT, but not an NCAA tournament team.

@drgnslayr

Lightfoot is not ideal, but without Preston, he was the only option, and to his credit he stepped up. But this is where De Sousa can help the most. Lightfoot is a limited player at this point in his career. So is De Sousa. However, if Self can rotate them in the lineup well, neither Silvio or Mitch will have their weaknesses exposed for extended periods. In effect, their individual limitations can help disguise each other's limits in the long run.

This is an imperfect team. @StLJhawk is right that Sam, though limited, also could contribute. We aren't looking for double figure scoring from Cunliffe. We need his ability to stretch the floor, handle the ball a bit, and play solid defense. If he can do that for 8-12 minutes per game, that's a huge boost. Maybe he has a game where he hits a couple of threes and scores 10 or 12 points. That's a bonus. The hope is that he provides steady depth.

@mayjay

There is still a belief among some that minorities cannot be leaders unless they are leading other minorities. I experience that even now. I can be on a general committee or board for various organizations, but I can't chair that committee or board, unless its a committee for diversity, or a board of mostly minorities. There's still a societal bias that minorities cannot lead, or cannot lead anyone other than other minorities.

Ben Roethlisberger and Tom Brady (both great, Super Bowl winning QBs) yell at their offensive coordinators and coaches every year. Analysts talk about how that shows their competitive fire. When Cam Newton does it, it shows a lack of discipline and a lack of leadership from him.

That bias seeps into the business world as well.

I once knew a guy that would storm through his office regularly yelling at his subordinates - he was regarded as a guy who "knew how to get things done." I could never do that, because its not my personality, but also because people would see my yelling as a lack of self control, undermining my leadership.

The significance of having an all black starting lineup was that there was a belief at that time among some coaches that you had to have at least one white player on the floor with the black players to make the "smart" plays. It was accepted by that time that African American players could make the athletic plays, but they were not seen as coachable, and it was believed that you needed a "coach on the floor" to make sure they ran the plays correctly, etc.

That's why having an All-Black lineup was so significant and truly important at that time. It showed that black players were capable of being athletic and smart and poised. That was always the knock - that black players would not be smart and poised, and therefore you could not win a championship with a team of black players because when things got tough they would panic or make mistakes. Texas Western dispelled the notion that black players were only athletic.

It took a team with five black starters because otherwise there were people that would continue to say you had to have at least one white player on the floor at all times if you wanted to win a championship.

Cunliffe's sample size is far too small to draw any significant conclusions on right now. He has played a total of 57 minutes for KU so far. That's basically three games worth of rotation bench play. He's played well twice, poorly twice, and too limited to make a judgment in his other three appearances. Saying a guy was good or bad in less than 5 minutes of action is nearly impossible. They could make one good play, get pulled and you say they were good, or make one bad play, get pulled and you say they played poorly. The truth would be they made only one play (positive or negative) and didn't get enough other action to really say one way or another how they played.

De Sousa played just 4 minutes against KSU. He broke a sweat, but you can't say much more about his performance because it was too brief to evaluate. On the other hand, he played pretty well against WVU. He was active, got some rebounds, made a couple of heady plays. Had he only played 3 or 4 minutes, he likely doesn't make those plays and we have another unknown performance.

Self is in a position where he needs to give Cunliffe and De Sousa both 8-10 minutes of game action each night. I think they can help in some limited roles, but playing them for only a couple of minutes a night doesn't give them a chance to make an impact. Maybe Cunliffe misses his first shot and gets yanked (I lived through that for a season in high school - you cannot be productive if you think you will get pulled if you miss a shot). If that's the case, he won't even have an opportunity to be productive and this is a wasted year for him. Same with De Sousa.

KSU might be able to defend the home court tonight, but they are in for a tough season.

Just looking at their schedule, they have OU and TCU coming to Manhattan this week. Those are almost must win games for them, because the next four conference games after that have three on the road, and the single home game is KU going to Manhattan, while the Cats travel to Texas, West Virginia and Baylor. KSU is 2-3 in conference right now. If they don't at least split this week's games, there's a chance that they are 2-9 in conference the next time they catch their breath.

They need W's because the season could get away from them really quickly if they don't.

Newman is a mystery for me right now. He's not playing poorly, but he is not shooting the ball well at all. I am somewhat concerned about the after affects of his concussion. He's 11-36 from three since he returned from the concussion. He was 17-45 before the concussion. He's 14-19 from the line since the injury, which is still pretty good, but he was a perfect 11-11 before that.

I just don't know if Malik is 100% right now. I hope he is, because concussions are serious, but he doesn't seem quite right with the way he is playing right now. He's just a little bit off right now.

This is the same doctor accused of abuse with the national gymnastics team. No surprise that this wasn't isolated to just that team. Tragic that it went on this long.

The ISU game did not change the current situation. This is a talented but fatally flawed roster as currently constructed. We don't have the size to rebound, and we lack the depth to make up for it with frenzied pressure. We can't win six games in March like that.

That's not even a criticism, really. That's just a statement of fact. This team, in its current form, can't win a title. I don't even know that it will get to the second weekend. There's a recurring nightmare of KU giving up offensive board after offensive board as a team shoots just 30% from three, but gets enough boards to ultimately upend KU in the Round of 32. That's in play, folks.

Maybe this squad gets hot and blazes the nets for a couple of games in the tournament, because we know when this team is on from three, there's not a team in the country that can contain them, but even then, that probably pushes them to the Elite Eight at best. To win in March, you have to be able to win in a few different ways. This team can win one way right now. Unless Malik Newman suddenly shows that on any night he can drop 40 to prove that KU is never out of it, I don't see this team getting deep without adding the size they so desperately need.

@Jayballer54

If the investigation is really going to take until March, they should just declare him ineligible this year. He's a basketball player. There's no point in dragging this into March and declaring him eligible on March 15.

@Crimsonorblue22

He was good last night. Can he be consistent, though? This is his freshman year and he's had more games with 0 points (5) than in double figures (4).

With Stokes out, his opportunities will increase, but that could also expose him. He had three turnovers last night, and three in the previous game when he played a lot of minutes as well. He may well be a guy that is prone to coughing the ball up, but can score well with the defense shifting away from him.

We will see...

Smith will almost certainly be traded. I can't see the Chiefs paying him that kind of money with the current roster they have.

Johnson is a toss up. He hasn't stayed healthy consecutive years since 2012-2013. That makes him tough to keep, although he is still productive. The Chiefs probably part ways simply because the defense has been so bad.

Hali will be cut, or will retire.

Dee Ford will probably re-negotiate, or be traded/cut

Revis will either retire or return. It's doubtful they cut him at that salary level.

Harris and West both come back because those are fairly reasonable deals. Same for Parker, Schwartz and Bailey.

Fisher makes a lot of money, so if an upgrade is available, he probably gets cut/traded.

Houston is the hardest call because he can dominate, but he hasn't been consistently healthy since 2014. He's not old, but you can't dominate when you aren't on the field.

I can't see the Chiefs cutting some of the cheaper guys. You have to have backups, and none of those guys makes outlandish money. The Chiefs should be aggressive, though. They have a flawed roster, and the window with Hunt, Kelce, Hill and Mahomes offensively may only be open for a few years.

Without Stokes, they basically have two legitimate offensive players - Brown and Wade. Sneed is okay, but he is not going to be able to fill Stokes' shoes. Maybe they have some people that can help on a by committee basis, but not a lot of raw talent.

If we add Langford, the expectation should be championship.

Grimes and Langford would be the most talented backcourt Self has probably ever had from a raw talent, NBA potential standpoint. If Azubuike is back, we still have the Lawson's, we have PG's galore, Cunliffe, Mitch, etc. That's a national championship roster. I wouldn't run out and print 40-0 shirts or get a tattoo, but that lineup would be more talented than the 2008 title team, and probably also better than the 2011 Elite Eight team, which was arguably the most talented team under Self.

If Langford signs, everyone should know what the expectation is.

Malik's shooting percentages aren't bad. His problem right now is that he is taking too many threes. He took 13 threes last night (made 5). That's not an awful overall percentage, but because he's taking so many threes, he's not getting to the FT line. He's shot 22 FT all season. He took 21 FG last night alone. That means that Malik is shooting 1 FT for nearly every 7 FGA. For comparison, last season Frank shot 1 FT for about every 2 FGA. If Malik were at a more manageable 1 FT for every 3 FGA, he likely would have gone over 30 last night simply by getting to the FT line. Malik shot 1 FT for about every 4 FGA at MSU, so he can certainly get back into that range. If he was at 1 FT for every 4 FGA this season, he would probably be averaging a half point more per game. If he was at 1 FT for every 3 FGA, he would probably be averaging a full point more per game.

Malik's overall play has been more efficient, but his low FT rate is keeping him from capitalizing on that efficiency.

When I was in high school, my team was undersized, like a lot of high school teams end up being. We had only one player over 6-2 when I was a senior, and he was only about 6-4 or 6-5. We were not big.

On top of that, we really only had a couple of guys on the team that were more than 200 pounds.

We mostly had a lot of lanky, athletic type guards. We had some shooters, a few slashers and some random wing athletes (myself included).

We shot a lot of threes, we pressed quite a bit and we went nine deep. That was the only way we could survive. We couldn't slug it out in the half court. We were never going to win a war of attrition, so we had to dial up pressure from everywhere.

That required a lot of energy. Not just conditioning, but actual energy. When you have to pressure the ball 70 feet from the basket on every possession, you need depth. When you have to pressure every pass and catch on the perimeter to make sure there's never an easy post entry angle because every post matchup is a MUA for the other side, that takes effort.

We would pressure catches all the way out to about 30 feet just to make sure entry angles were long, and we did that Every. Single. Possession.

I thought about that watching KU play Tech last week, specifically watching Vick. He looked worn down. Not a loss of focus. Just worn down from having to battle bigger guys off and on on defense, then try and get out and run, crash the glass on offense. That's exhausting.

I remember we used to rotate who had to match up with post guys just to keep each other fresh. I'd spend a few possessions on the other team's PF, then switch with someone to guard their PG. That just limited the amount of physical wear and tear that each of us had to take in a given game.

KU has a problem though. They aren't 9 deep. They only play 7 right now. That means that at all times their five perimeter guys (Graham, Vick, Svi, Newman and Garrett) are working, and typically either Vick or Svi is battling a bigger guy. That's not workable over an entire season.

We need to be stealing some minutes with Clay Young. He showed that he was passable early in the season. He won't be a star, but he can play 4-5 minutes each half. He's got enough bulk and strength to face off with bigger guys, and if he does that, it saves Svi or Vick from the physical beating you take doing that.

We also need to be saving Lightfoot. He's still developing, and we can't stunt his growth by having him get too worn down to help us come March.

Now obviously, if Preston and De Sousa come available, this is all irrelevant - we add two big guys and go nine deep.

But until then, we have to protect what we have. That means adding at least one more person to this rotation, even if its only a few minutes each half. Young can go out there for a few minutes and play with energy, while Vick and Svi save their legs, both for now, and come March.

Reid is a good coach for a bad team, because he can turn a 5-11 team into a playoff team.

However, Reid is not a good coach if you are trying to actually win in the playoffs. He can take you from mediocre to competent, but he cannot take you from good to great. He is similar to Marty Schottenheimer in that way. They can keep you from being bad, but they won't necessarily get you over the hump to win the big one.

Bill Belichick is the opposite type of coach. He can't take you from mediocre to competent. We saw that when he was in Cleveland. But if you already have pieces in place, he can build from there to make your team great. Andy Reid could succeed in Cleveland because he could get enough out of guys to go from 0 wins this past season to 5 wins next year, then 8 or 9 the year after that, but they would peak with between 9 and 11 wins, and maybe one or two playoff wins, depending on how long he was there.

The Chiefs are no longer trying to build up from the Pioli disaster. It's time to hire the "championship" coach.

Officials were right to toss Thomas. I don't know that he intended the chop to the throat, but there has to be a zero tolerance on that type of play. That was a frustration type play that is dangerous.

@Texas-Hawk-10

Absolutely agree. Skill guys, particularly RBs and WRs, can help right away because if you have speed, or elusiveness, that translates right away, particularly if you play for a coach that can get you in good situations.

@Jayballer54

The NCAA does actually monitor social media to some degree. They want to make sure that schools are not illegally recruiting student athletes. Most kids stay off boards like this, but there are NCAA folks that monitor facebook and twitter for just that reason.

With football, you have to wait for most recruits to develop anyway. Only a few guys are really ready to play as true freshmen. The rest need a year of development, either as a redshirt, or as a backup/special teams player. So while some of the best (the five stars and the top 4 stars) will be ready out of the gate, many of the remaining players will sink or swim based on how they develop. This is why a 2 star like Aqib Talib can go on to be an All Pro type player, while a 4 star might flame out.

Some kids can dominate lesser athletes in high school, but never adapt to handling guys that are as big and as strong as they are. Lots of linemen end up like this on both sides of the ball. They overwhelm high school players, then can't even get off a block in college.

@BeddieKU23

Garrett has to act like he's going to come to the top in KU's regular offense, then go back door. He won't be open most of the time, but once or twice a game, it will be there. He has to screen off ball, then cut hard to the rim. He has to cut to score every time just so his man has to play him. If his man is sagging lazily, Garrett gets a layup. If he is playing good defense, the other team doesn't have the luxury of 4 on 5 basketball.

I don't know enough about KU's underlying schemes to know all of the options on different plays, but Garrett has to look at those options and know when he can cut to the rim, and where shots are coming from so he can exploit offensive rebound opportunities.