Unfortunately, as many have observed, this kid lacks mobility. He can get away with that in HS, but a 6-7 college guy like Jamari Traylor would probably own him just because of his lack of quickness and agility. He's a project that may be productive as a third year sophomore.
justanotherfan
3643 posts
The list for those who can't get it.
1. Manning
2. Chamberlain
3. Lovellette
4. Mason
5. Collison
6. LaFrentz
7. Collins
8. Pierce
9. Valentine
10. Robisch
My gut says yes, but the Selby/Knight thing makes me wonder. They were essentially ranked the same, sometimes Selby was ahead, sometimes Knight was. Selby didn't pan out. Knight did. Is that Self's fault? Not really.
But the thing is, I have to wonder had Selby played for Cal, who does an excellent job of preparing guys for the NBA, if he would have had a better chance to stick in the NBA than he did. Self has said himself, he isn't focused on preparing guys for the NBA. That's a fair statement, but if you are an OAD prospect and you're choosing between a coach that isn't focused on preparing you for your career and one who is, that choice gets a lot easier.
I used ESPN throughout because I wanted consistency and I can't find consolidated rankings going back that far. I agree that Bledsoe was a great prospect and was ranked by others. I didn't realize until I did this list he wasn't ranked by ESPN (spent almost as much time looking for him in the rankings as I did putting the chart together). It's safe to say either way that Bledsoe wasn't a top 20 player and that no one considered him an OAD prospect until he went to UK. That to me is a pretty impressive thing, to go from being a secondary prospect to being an OAD and now a high level NBA player.
You're right that Calipari has succeeded with lots of high ranked guys. In fact, he has never had a guy ranked as high as Selby, Alexander and Henry not pan out (although Labissierre may be the first). That's what gives him the recruiting advantage.
I still talk to guys that are connected to NBA people from time to time. NBA guys regard Cal as a guy that understands how to prep players for the NBA, so they look at Kentucky players with confidence that if a guy can play at Kentucky, he can handle NBA level competition. That's not the case at most college programs because scouts worry that a coach will use his system to hide flaws that get exposed at the next level.
So no, I don't think UK is doing anything illegal. They just happen to have the coach that prepares NBA level talent better than anyone else, so more NBA level talent is going to go there until other college coaches catch up in that respect.
I agree that most of the UK guys were lottery picks. That's part of the point. Let's do the list again, but this time using the ESPN's recruiting rankings.
I put this chart together pretty quick, so I hope I didn't make any mistakes, but the point is pretty clear. Calipari gets a top 5 recruit, that recruit gets drafted, usually in the lottery. The only exceptions to that are Andrew Harrison (44 after his sophomore year) and Labissierre (28 after his OAD year).
Every other top 5 recruit - Rose, Evans, Wall, Cousins, Knight, Davis, MKG, Noel, and Randle went in the lottery, and most went in the top 5. Nobody can match those results.
For Self, he's had fewer top 5 recruits, just Henry, Selby, Wiggins and Alexander. 2 went in the lottery, one went as a second rounder (Selby, at 49) and one was completely undrafted (Alexander).
When Calipari gets talent, those guys come in, they play, they get drafted. Period. Most even move on to a successful pro career. Self can't claim that same success.
Calipari had a guy that wasn't even ranked in the top 100 go as an OAD (Bledsoe). Cauley Stein was ranked lower than Perry Ellis when they arrived on campus. He went in the lottery after his Junior year. Ellis was undrafted as a senior. You can't claim that he doesn't develop guys.
The only high recruits that went undrafted for Calipari were Aaron Harrison and Alex Poythress. Both have bounced between the D-League and NBA. That is not the case for any other coach.
The fact is, Calipari rarely misses when given talent. I realized that I did not include Marcus Lee (#25 recruit, transferred to Cal, where he will play next season as a senior).
We can compare guy to guy.
Davis and Wiggins were both 1, 1 guys. Embiid and Noel compare fairly well. Knight and Henry. TRob and Cauley Stein. McLemore and Murray. Oubre and Booker. Diallo and Labissierre. Andrew Harrison and Selby. Bragg and Lee. Selden and Aaron Harrison. D. Johnson and Alexander (maybe).
But Cal still has Young, Randle, Jones, MKG, Wall, Cousins, Bledsoe, Lyles, Towns, Teague, Orton, Rose, Evans, Kanter... and most of those guys weren't misses. Most were hits, honestly. Cal gets guys and then gets those guys to deliver on their potential more often than not.
The Calipari OAD count
- Dajuan Wagner - 6th pick in 2002. Averaged 13 ppg as a rookie, got injured his second year, then developed ulcerative colitis and nearly died before having a portion of his colon removed. In basketball terms, he was a bust, but I'm going to classify him as a bust - health.
- Shawne Williams - 17th pick, 2006. Up and down career. Productive for a couple of years, but never really a force. Given where he was drafted, and the fact that he stayed in the league for nearly a decade, I would call him below average, but not a bust.
- Derrick Rose, 1st pick, 2008. Youngest MVP in the league, ever, then fought injuries after that, now a shell of his former explosive self. Basically went from being one of the ten best players in the league to being an averagish (if injury prone) player (paid like a star). Limited success - health.
- Tyreke Evans, 4th pick, 2009. Up until this season (injury plagued), Evans averaged no less than 14.5 ppg. That's a pretty good 7 year career. Success.
- John Wall, 1st pick, 2010. All star. Top 8 PG in the league. Success.
- DeMarcus Cousins, 5th pick, 2010. All star. One of the few 20-12 guys in the league. Success.
- Eric Bledsoe, 18th pick, 2010. Starter or rotation player through his entire career, the last two as a 20 ppg, 6 apg PG. Success.
- Daniel Orton, 29th pick, 2010. Absolute bust.
- Enes Kanter, never played, but still 3rd pick in 2011. Has been a rotation player his entire career, and a double figure scorer in all but his first two years. Success.
- Brandon Knight, 8th pick, 2011. Double figure scorer his entire career. Success.
- Anthony Davis, 1st pick, 2012. One of the best 7 players right now. Huge Success.
- Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, 2nd pick, 2012. Excellent defender, poor shooter. Regarded as a top defender, but ceiling is limited by offensive limitations. Limited success because you want more from a lottery pick.
- Marquis Teague, 29th pick, 2012. Scraped together three years in the NBA, now in the D-League. Bust.
- Nerlens Noel, 6th pick, 2013. Another tremendous defender with limited offensive ability. He's been a rotation player or starter in all his stops. Limited success because you want more from a lottery pick.
- Archie Goodwin, 29th pick, 2013. Probably should have stayed in school. Struggled for a few years before fading out of the league.
- Julius Randle, 7th pick, 2014. Very early in his career, but has averaged double figures in both his full seasons (rookie season lasted 14 total minutes before he broke his leg). Early Success.
- James Young, 17th pick, 2014. Has only played a limited amount for Celtics. Early bust.
- Karl Anthony Towns, 1st pick, 2015. Regarded as one of the best young big men in the game. Early Success.
- Trey Lyles, 12th pick, 2015. A rotation player for a playoff team. Early success.
- Devin Booker, 13th pick, 2015. As mentioned before, he dropped 70 in a game for Phoenix and is one of the guys they are building around for the future. Early success.
- Jamal Murray, 7th pick, 2016. Averaged just under 10 ppg this year as a rookie. Early success.
- Skal Labissierre, 28th pick, 2016. Bounced between Sacramento and Reno this year. Too early to tell.
Out of the 22 OAD players Cal has had, the only ones that did not produce even one solid NBA season are Orton, Teague, Goodwin, Young (still in league) and Labissierre (still in league). You could throw Williams and Wagner in as guys that didn't put together sustained careers. So that's 7 OADs that didn't work out. The rest were all somewhat productive. Cal has a 2-1 conversion rate on OAD talent.
Self has had, not counting this year, far fewer OAD players - Henry, Selby, McLemore, Wiggins, Embiid, Oubre, Alexander, Diallo. Out of those 8, Henry, Selby and Alexander are currently out of the league, with Diallo having a season similar to Labissierre as a rookie. Self isn't converting at a 2-1 rate on OAD players.
If you were investing in a portfolio and you could pick between 2 managers, one who had a 2-1 conversion rate, the other that was closer to 50%, and the guy with the 2-1 conversion rate had capitalized on every major asset he was entrusted with (Rose, Evans, Davis, Cousins, Wall, etc?) or the 50ish% guy that hasn't capitalized on the same asset quality at the same rate (Henry, bust, Selby - ranked higher than Kyrie Irving by some, bust)?
Uh, at Memphis, as I have cited before, in the three years before Derrick Rose committed, Memphis went to the Elite Eight in each season.
They did that with an interesting assortment of talent along the way.
Then they got Rose and went to the National title game. Then they got Evans and went back to the Sweet 16. So the last five years of results before that group were as follows:
Elite Eight, Elite Eight, Elite Eight, Title Game, Sweet 16.
Maybe there are places that have had better five year runs, but that is pretty darn good, and I certainly wouldn't fault a recruit for picking a school that has been that successful in the recent past, particularly if you were a PG at the time having just seen Cal put his last two OAD PGs into the draft in the top five. If you're John Wall and you're paying attention, that's the school (and coach) you have to very seriously consider.
@Kcmatt7 and @BeddieKU23
In the case of Mitchell Robinson, Stansbury was originally recruiting him for A&M when he was an assistant there. When Stansbury got the WKU job, he hired Shammond Williams as an assistant there. Williams is also Robinson's godfather. Those two longstanding relationships sealed the deal.
As for Kentucky, Calipari has demonstrated that he is the best coach for OAD players. Here's a list of his OAD players that have become All Stars in the NBA - Rose, Wall, Cousins, Davis. Karl Anthony Towns is close to that level. Devin Booker dropped 70 in a game this season. Eric Bledsoe is a starter. MKG is a starter. Julius Randle is a starter. Tyreke Evans is a starter.
That's a great record of success. Trae Young's dad mentioned that during his recruitment. If your goal is NBA and you aren't at least considering UK, you are doing yourself a disservice as a top 25 recruit.
No other coach has that type of record with guys going to the NBA and being ready to contribute immediately, especially as rookies or 2nd year players from an OAD situation.
Self has yet to produce an OAD all star. Same for Izzo. Same for Roy Williams. Coach K has Kyrie Irving, but you could argue that Irving wasn't really influenced by Coach K with just 9 games played at Duke. Calipari is the one able to do it, and he has done so consistently, while at the same time winning, something other programs that have produced OAD All stars (Texas with Durant, UCLA with Love, Ohio State with Conley, etc) haven't been able to keep up.
Now, perhaps Self gets an All Star with Jackson, or with Wiggins eventually, or perhaps Embiid if/when he can stay healthy. But look at Calipari's track record again. He already has Wall, Cousins, Davis and Rose to his credit, and Karl Anthony Towns right on the heels of that group. Coach K just has Irving. If Fox or Monk makes it big, that just increases Cal's lead on the rest of the pack.
From a recruit's perspective, that's hard evidence that you can't ignore.
I think the SGA bump is because of what Malik Monk did at Kentucky. Super athletic guard (won McDs AA dunk contest), then goes to UK and looks like one of the best shooters in the nation. SGA isn't as good, but he's a top 25 player based on that type of assessment.
Also with these recruiting services, more than the rank, look at if their grade is changing. For example, 24/7 has 5 players rated 100, 8 more ranked 99 and 16 ranked 98. You could, based on that, probably move the #29 ranked player into the top 15 depending on how you feel about a guy, or move the 8th ranked guy down to 12 or 13. When the grades start to go up, that's a sign of a real shift.
ESPN is much less generous with the high grades - two 97s (Porter and Ayton), three 96s (Bamba, Carter, Duval) and six 95s (Sexton, Trent, Jackson, Knox, Robinson, Washington).
I used Paint on Microsoft to just do the lines. I can't draw a straight line to save my life, but the computer can do it for me :grinning:
I understand your concern, but if you had put up a chart like that after last season, it would have looked like this:
We had two guys coming back that played quite a bit (Mason and Graham), a guy that struggled to get significant minutes at times (Lucas) and then three guys that were basically secondary subs (Svi, Bragg and Vick).
Who knew for sure that Svi and Vick could step into much, much bigger roles this season? Vick played 5 times more minutes. Svi more than doubled his minutes. Lucas added 50% more minutes.
The question isn't known entities. It's talent. We know that Newman and Preston are superbly talented. That replaces Frank and Lucas/Bragg right there. Garrett can replace Vick's role, and Vick can replace Svi's role if Svi leaves. The only question (a big question) is how to replace Josh Jackson.
I think we will be okay, though. We have enough weapons coming in to be okay. The ceiling will be determined by how we answer the Josh Jackson question.
Memphis has to have two way players against the Spurs. Tony Allen is a great defender, but his inability to shoot means teams outright do not cover him in the playoffs. Memphis trying to shake things up by starting Selden, but they are overmatched here.
This is absolutely true in college where knowing the game plan/ plays of the opponent helps you out tremendously during the regular season. The downside of that is that in the tournament, you don't have as much scouting time, so having more talented defenders helps when there is less preparation time to drill the game plan in.
Take our loss to Oregon for example. Knowing our tendencies would have helped the Ducks, but having Bell on the back line swatting every shot made a much bigger difference than just knowing the scouting report and positioning.
I heard a coach once say that offense is about skill, defense is about effort.
That seems about right to me. The things you do on offense - shooting, passing, dribbling - are all about having certain abilities.
The things you do on defense have some skill elements, but chances are if you have the physical talent to be good on offense, you can carry those same things to the defensive end, and if you work hard, can be a solid defender.
Trying harder will make you a better defender. It won't necessarily make you a better shooter/passer/dribbler.
I will agree with you on that because Garrett will be here longer as you said.
However, I measure things by impact on the individual seasons.
For example, who had the greater impact at KU, Frank Mason or Andrew Wiggins? The answer is easy in that it was Frank, but if we don't pair Frank with a surefire top 3 pick like JJ and probably two other future pros in Svi and Devonte (and possibly a third in Vick before its all said and done), is Frank's impact consensus player of the year, or just a small guard that tries to do too much?
Put another way, if Wiggins had gotten the PG play that JJ did, would his impact have been greater? Probably.
So looking at next year, the question is how much can Garrett help with each group he is with that will determine his overall impact. Can Garrett ever get us over the top because of his own skill or improvement year to year? I don't know. How about Preston? Maybe (still way to early to tell and I need to see him defend).
The Billy Preston mixtape scouting report.
Things I like.
-
He's a big, physical guy. 6-9, 230 and, if reports are to be believed, hasn't done much weight training. There are a lot of people out there that would do a lot of things that can't be written here to look like that without living in the gym for 10+ years.
-
He handles well... for a big guy (we will come back to this).
-
His jump shot is as clean as a lot of guards. He can pull up from 20 off the bounce, and his balance/footwork are pristine.
-
He has the physical skill to guard 3-5 (maybe 1-5 if he's willing to dedicate himself on that end).
-
He is "game strong." Look at him taking contact. It just doesn't matter. He doesn't lose his balance or his speed. He's similar to Josh in that respect. Absorbs the contact but doesn't lose speed or explosiveness.
-
Both his jumpshot and his footwork are improved from his junior year. He got better in observable ways. That's a huge plus for a guy as old as he is (turns 20 this fall).
Things I don't like.
-
He seems like he's playing at about 60% capacity most of the time. That's a hard habit to break.
-
He believes he handles the ball well, but his handle needs to be much tighter to do the things that he has done in the past in college. He will get his pocket picked with that loose dribble at the next level.
-
He's quite old for his class, which make his HS exploits much less impressive when you realize he was a year older than most seniors and 2-3 years older and more mature than most of his opponents.
Things I need to see
-
Effort - He has worlds of talent, but he doesn't always try to access that ability, particularly defensively.
-
Continued improvement - because he's so old, his development curve is further along than most (he's more than 2 years older than Udoka and nearly the same age as Svi). He has to continue to improve on the court because the natural improvement that comes with getting older and maturing is nearly done for him.
That's a bold prediction. I hope you are right, though because I think Preston is going to be pretty special.
Looking at the highlights, there are things to like and not like.
Things I like:
1. He's athletic. Always important as you move up a level.
2. He's got good size.
3. He has good body control when taking contact
4. His jumpshot mechanics are fairly sound (more on this later)
5. He handles the ball well
6. His court vision and court awareness are good
7. He's aggressive to the rim and will finish with a dunk (important when you get to college and those shots are challenged).
Things I don't like:
1. Not going left as observed by @Kcmatt7
2. His jumper is more of a set shot than a jump shot. Additionally, he got very comfortable in high school pulling up over smaller guys (he's 6-6 and probably was guarded by guys smaller than 6-2 nearly all the time). That won't be the case in college, so he may need to get more lift.
3. Unsure about his acceleration ability
4. The highlights don't show him actually defending any perimeter guys. Can he get down in a stance and stay in front of guys?
He will be good. He has the skillset for it. The question is how much adjustment he will need to deal with since he is so used to be so much bigger/stronger than his opponent every night.
The NCAA tournament rewards specific kinds of good teams and punishes specific kinds of good teams.
To win the NCAA tournament, you have to be able to play different ways, at different speeds, utilizing different stars. You have to be unpredictable. You have to be able to get easy shots and hit threes. You must be able to defend good perimeter scorers and win the rebounding battle.
If you have specific and obvious weaknesses (inability to rebound, poor FT shooting, lack of depth, etc.) you will get beaten in the tournament because once in six tries you will run up against a team that exposes those weaknesses.
Take UCLA this year for example. One of the best collegiate offenses of all time. Poor defensively, particularly at the guard positions. They get shredded in the Sweet 16 to the tune of 39 points by a PG. They lose.
Take Villanova this year. They were somewhat iffy on the interior all year. Wisconsin battered them physically inside. Season over.
Syracuse made it to the Final Four last year because they switched from their famous zone to a man to man look in the Elite Eight. Oklahoma rode Buddy Hield to the Final Four with their best team in nearly a decade, but then got hammered by a much more complete team.
Look at the title games over the last several years. More often than not, the more complete team has triumphed. That's not an accident. The most talented, most complete team is most likely going to be the one that survives six very different tests over three weeks.
It's not just most talented. It's also most complete. It's why Wisconsin beat Kentucky in the Final Four a couple years ago. Kentucky was more talented, but Wisconsin was more complete (balanced inside and out, while UK was an interior force).
There will be a game where you can't hit from outside and need to score inside. If you can do that, you advance. If not, you go home. There will be another game where all driving lanes are cut off and you have to hit some threes or you go home. The next weekend, maybe you can't do anything and you just have to crash the boards to stay afloat. Maybe you have to lock down defensively against an All American. Maybe you need rim protection.
March exposes flaws because if you can't find that solution, you lose and go home. The tournament has a way of sorting itself out and leaving you with the team that had the fewest flaws. Maybe that is the best team. Maybe its not.
But everyone signs up knowing the way this works. It's not like you get to March and everyone is surprised by the format, as if they just introduced it. You know in November how it sets up.
That's why I argue that the goal should be to make the team as complete as possible, with as high an overall floor as possible, even if that means you have one or two more losses going into the tournament, because you have to survive those tests, and each test is much different and challenging in its own way.
In a way, it's like the old Mortal Kombat games (apologies to those that didn't like/ didn't play them). You would pick your character in single player mode and then have to beat a series of different fighters to win the 1P game. On the first couple of levels, (like the first round of the tournament) you could use one or two basic moves and still win. After that, though, if you weren't good at executing lots of different moves, the computer AI would basically destroy you if you were too predictable.
And so it went as you advanced further and further. Get too reliant on one move, the AI starts countering it and you lose (lack of depth and creativity). Unable to execute your specials to knock off lots of power (similar to not having big time stars), you lose because you're barely chipping away at your opponent while they hit you with haymaker after haymaker.
You only won if you could execute lots of different moves effectively. Same here. You only win if you can succeed in a variety of ways and limit your flaws.
Now, let's look at the last several KU teams and their flaws.
- 2017 - lack of depth, iffy FT shooting
- 2016 - lack of a go to scorer, rim protection
- 2015 - lack of a go to scorer, rim protection
- 2014 - injuries, rim protection, PG play
- 2013 - inconsistent PG play, interior depth
- 2012 - overall depth, team athleticism
- 2011 - outside shooting consistency, perimeter defense
Now think back to the tournament losses for each of those teams and remember the issues that haunted us in those games. Very similar to that list, isn't it. Thing is, those problems didn't pop up in the tournament. They were there all year. They just sunk us in the tournament.
A D2 coach has a lot more stability in their personal life. There are lots of D2 coaches at moderately successful programs that can stay for 15-20 years. That's not happening at the D1 level unless you are really good at a strong program.
I don't know Ballard's situation, but if he has a wife and kids, he could legitimately raise his family in Topeka without ever worrying about moving during their entire school career. I am pretty sure that wouldn't be the case if he stayed as a D1 assistant or made the jump to D1 coach.
Not saying Ballard doesn't want that. Maybe he does. Just saying that there's more out there, like @BShark said if he doesn't want that.
Looks like falling enrollment was the key factor. The article says they were told they needed to get back up to 200 students and they were only around 160. With their financial struggles, I am sure they were struggling to give financial aid and given their location, it's likely a lot of the students would need aid to go to a private school.
It's unfortunate, honestly, but I would hope some of the teachers go into the local public schools there in Jersey City and continue their work with students. It's pretty clear from some of the students that they have turned out that these people have a passion for what they do.
I'll be honest when I say I probably shouldn't have read this at the office. I need a good walk after that. It's a reminder that we all have to be aware of those we are close to when they are struggling.
North Carolina recently changed their law in an attempt to become eligible for the next round of NCAA tournament site designations. Will be interesting to see how other legislatures handle this issue now that North Carolina was a test case for how organizations will respond.
Last night's game was looking like it would be good, but the refs destroyed the pace in the early part of the second half with so many calls. The game just never go on track until about the 7 minute mark in the second half.
Once guys got into a groove it got better, but I think we missed out on a potential classic. The officials stole the game's momentum and really bottled up the playmaking. I don't think that favored one team over the other, though. Gonzaga had some chances, but they couldn't pull away even though UNC wasn't making any shots. That was what hurt them and ultimately cost them a national title.
I think the Big 12 suffers from one major issue - the schools in this conference other than KU often suffer from a good coaching not having elite players, or elite players not having a good coach.
Huggins is a good coach. WVU has good players, but not any elite ones. That hurts come tourney time. Last year Lon Kruger had a lottery pick. He rode that team to the Final Four. This year he has nothing. We all see what happened.
Jamie Dixon is a good coach. He's at TCU. No NBA talent there.
Hoiberg was a good coach at ISU. Can anyone think of any lottery picks that he had?
Part of that is that the Big 12 conference footprint doesn't have a ton of basketball talent aside from Texas. There's just not a lot to draw from as far as local NBA caliber talent.
That makes it really difficult come March. The Big 12 has lots of really good college teams, but you have to raise the talent level to match that on the coaching side of things (the Big 12 has, top to bottom, probably the most coaching talent of any league). Who has the most talent in the Big 12 consistently? KU of course. Is there any surprise we dominate the league? We have the most talent and generally speaking, that is a huge difference.
Let's look at the three major games (McDs, Jordan Brand and Nike Hoops Summit) and check the rosters to see how many are committed to Big 12 schools:
McDs - 2, Billy Preston (Kansas) and Trae Young (Oklahoma).
Jordan - 2, Preston and Matt Coleman (Texas).
Nike - 1, Lindell Wigginton (Iowa State).
Think about that for a second. Out of the players considered elite, the Big 12 has four (4!!!) that are committed to play in the conference.
Flip over to the ESPN 100 recruiting. Let's look at the top 50 players.
Zero top 10 recruits heading to the Big 12 so far, although 4 top 10 players are still uncommitted.
2 top 20 recruits coming to Kansas (Preston) and Oklahoma (Young).
Coleman (ranked 27) heading to Texas.
Wigginton (ranked 42) going to ISU.
That's it for the top 50.
Here's the rest of the hundred - 58 (Terrance Lewis to ISU), 61 (Marcus Garrett to Kansas), 66 (Jericho Sims to Texas), 68 (Zach Dawson to Oklahoma State), 74 (Royce Hamm to Texas), 89 (Derek Culver to West Virginia).
10 players in the top 100 are heading to the Big 12, with two each to KU and Iowa State, three to Texas and one each to Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and West Virginia.
The SEC has 20 top 100 guys going to 9 different conference schools.
Pac-12 has landed 18 going to 9 of their schools.
The ACC has 16 going to 9 schools.
Even the Big 10 has 12 going to 8 schools.
6 schools in the Big 12 split 10 top 100 guys. That means nearly half of the conference is missing any top 100 talent. Three quarters of the Pac 12 has top 100 talent. The SEC, ACC and Big 10 are all bigger, but they have 8 or 9 schools getting top 100 talent, which means the top of their conferences boast more talent (although the Big 10 is pretty thin talentwise, but we saw what happened to that conference in the regular season).
Simply put, the Big 12 isn't getting enough talent into the conference, particularly at Oklahoma, Iowa State and Baylor, 3 schools that have done well enough recently enough to compete for recruits. You can't expect to compete at an elite level if you lack elite talent. Just ask the Big 10, the conference most comparable to the Big 12 in terms of incoming talent, about how that's working out.
Basketball, because it can be dominated by one or two great players, is prone to dominance you can't see in other sports because the best players can play such an outsized role.
Jordan's Bulls won 6 of 8 titles in years he played in the 1990s.
Lebron James has been to the Finals in each of the last six seasons.
If you have one of the top talents, you are automatically good. That's just what happens with basketball. Magic's Lakers, Bird's Celtics, as long as those guys were healthy, their teams were among the best.
College is a bit different because coaches tend to focus on systems more because the talent is always changing, but that means the best coaches have an advantage - it's no accident that the last 10 titles in college hoops look like this - Donovan, Self, Williams, Coach K, Calhoun, Calipari, Pitino, Ollie, Coach K, Wright. That's 6 titles from current HOF coaches Williams, Coach K, Calhoun, Calipari, and Pitino, two from likely HOF coaches Wright and Self and one from a coach that probably would have been a HOF coach had he stayed in college (Donovan). We could stretch it back a few more years and we would find Donovan again, Williams again, Calhoun again, Boeheim (another HOF coach), Gary Williams (another HOF coach), Coach K again, Izzo (another HOF coach), Calhoun again, Tubby Smith, Lute Olson (another HOF coach), Pitino again.
Out of the last 22 titles, 15 have been won by current HOF coaches. The only coaches that have won titles in the last two decades plus that likely won't make the HOF are Tubby Smith and Kevin Ollie, and perhaps Billy Donovan since he moved to the pros. They represent just 4 titles.
That influence is unlikely to ever change.
The importance of the NIT depends on where your program is.
For an established program like KU, that would represent a failure.
For a building program like TCU, the extra month of practices, games and pressure situations is a huge benefit. In a lot of ways, it's similar to a building football program (something we are familiar with) and making that first bowl game. You get the extra month of work with your players, the extra time preparing for an unfamiliar opponent, getting used to the longer season.
Remember, if TCU hadn't gone to the NIT, they play 5 fewer games. For a college team, that's between 12% and 15% of the season. Their season would've ended on March 10, which means no more practices, no more film, etc. Instead, they went three more weeks of practice, film, preparation, etc and because it was "in-season" that helps because of NCAA rules regarding practices and workouts in season vs. out of season.
That's an incredible benefit that Dixon can build on. They return 5 of their top 6 scorers, 4 of the top 5 rebounders and their top 2 assist men. And now they have played in March, in pressure games. That's more valuable for a program that's building and worth more than a first round NCAA exit because KSU, OSU and others did not get as much postseason work.
Here's my take.
Self is a tremendous coach. He's one of several truly great coaches in the country. If we imagine our coach as a superhero, Self is a superhero while Bruce Weber is the guy that gets out of the cab to watch the superhero and supervillian fight, then runs down the street screaming.
But what do all superheroes have? They all have a flaw or weakness.
Self's is that he tightens up in certain situations, at which point he can become predictable and rigid, which exposes him to being outcoached simply because everything is telegraphed. Of course, when the scheme you are rigid to has resulted in over 600 victories against fewer than 200 defeats, you earn the right to be a bit stubborn.
Before this year, it was always a challenge to get Self to break away from the high-low. That was his thing, and he always wanted to run it, even when his best players were perimeter guys.
This year, Self finally broke away from that. I thought he had finally slain the beast. But there's still a dragon lurking inside. Self still tightens up, and rather than be fluid and flexible, he becomes rigid and predictable. That helps a lot in a two day turnaround.
Think about Self's most frustrating tournament losses - UNI in 2010, Stanford in 2014, Wichita State in 2015, VCU in 2011, Villanova last year, Oregon this season. The common thread is that they were all that second day of the turnaround.
It's easy to prepare when you know if the game gets tight, Self will revert to a predictable pattern. Your goal is to set out a close game, then hope you make plays when you know the fastball is coming.
Self needed to make a change on Saturday night. He needed to be flexible rather than rigidly adhere to the system. The process works, but Self needed to, in that moment, get outside the box. diagnose the problem and fix it.
The problem - Bell was killing us. His quickness and shotblocking was cutting off our attack of the lane. Since we couldn't finish in the paint, our drives weren't collapsing the defense, meaning we couldn't get good looks on threes. Even later in the game when we did get some good looks, we didn't convert because our shots were rushed.
Okay, so what's the fix.
Simple - the five out lineup that we ultimately finished the game with. Only problem is, Self went to it with three minutes left when he should have played that lineup from the under 8 timeout through the end of the game. The season is on the line. That was our only hope.
Jackson, Svi, Vick, Graham, Mason. Oregon counters with their best lineup (Bell, Brooks, Ennis, Dorsey, Pritchard). Defensively, KU puts JJ on Bell (Bell is taller, but JJ is quicker and doesn't give up much weight here), Vick on Brooks (Vick has the athleticism edge even though Brook is a bit bigger), Graham on Dorsey (to counter his size), Svi on Ennis (the lesser scorer) and Mason on Pritchard.
Oregon doesn't post Bell up much, so Josh doesn't have to worry about direct post ups and just has to focus on keeping Bell off the glass.
Offensively, Bell can no longer just stand in the paint because he has to guard someone away from the basket. This opens up driving lanes and makes the defense have to rotate. A rotating defense is a shooter's best friend because you can see shots develop as the ball is swung and the defense is scrambling. We never made Oregon scramble Saturday night because every time we drove, Oregon just waited on Bell to turn us away.
Self finally recognized the adjustment, but it was too late. KU was at a point of needing to shoot threes by then. Given a bit more time and the option of driving to the basket, things may have turned out differently, although it may not have considering we didn't make shots.
But again, making the defense rotate would have been huge because that gives our shooters a chance to get their feet set and ready to release rather than trying to get away from a defender to set up a shot.
I think this season helped Self grow as a coach. Moving away from the high lo and traditional two post game to a game that suited his team's best personnel was a big step for him. I was hoping it would make him more flexible in game as well, but that is still something to work towards.
But still, the man is 623-192 over his career. He has found things that work at every stop. I'm not off the band wagon. I just want to swing it in for a quick tuneup.
Bragg is a significant concern.
If we don't have Preston for academic reasons, we are back to playing four out again next year, except without Josh Jackson, whose skillset made that possible (tall enough and athletic enough to handle the defensive assignment against just about every 4 in the country). That would be... less than ideal.
I was basing on foot speed and lateral movement alone, not how he did as a defender in that situation. There aren't enough college PGs that will attack a big off a PnR for him to get meaningful reps in college in that type of situation defensively. Because of that, I don't know that we can really determine his defensive ability at the next level while he's still in college.
If Graham is back, he runs point, Newman slides to the 2, with either Vick or Svi playing the 3 spot.
Garrett and Vick or Svi comes off the bench.
Doke starts at the 5. Bragg or Preston at the 4. Non-starter of Bragg and Preston comes off the bench, Coleby is the 4th big. Lightfoot grabs the extra minutes (still will need to add weight and get stronger).
Just not sure where we can fit another backcourt recruit if Graham stays. Cunliffe will be eligible and in the mix for PT at some point. Vick and Svi have to get minutes. I just don't know where you find the time.
The NBA is going super small, but Doke isn't an immobile guy. He moves quite well. He's much more similar to a guy like DeAndre Jordan. He runs the floor well, can elevate and finish and can easily play as the lone big man because of his size, strength and shot blocking ability.
The NBA trend to go smaller helps a guy like Doke that is mobile, but it hurts the pro prospects of a guy like Landen that isn't as mobile and would have trouble switching on the PnR. 10 years ago, a guy like Landen would get a very long look in an NBA training camp because of his size and bball IQ, and would probably have a career somewhere. Now, because most NBA teams don't play two true bigs at the same time and Landen isn't a shotblocker, it's tough to play a big that can't either switch onto smaller guys on the PnR or play as the lone rim protector in a small lineup. But that change helps a guy like Doke.
I don't know that the injury changes that plan for Doke. He can block shots and can probably handle some switches. He doesn't need to be a scorer because he won't be in lineups as a stretch four. He will be an anchor 5 (similar to a guy like Jordan or Capela for the Rockets). The NBA would probably prefer that Doke not try and be a scorer because they don't have to create post touches for him if that's the case. Rebound, defend and dunk. That's what they want from a guy like Doke. He can already do all of those things.
Udoka would be staying regardless. He is not old enough to be eligible for this year's draft. He was always going to be a two year player. It sucks that he got hurt, but he was coming back either way.
There's not much scarier right now than Frank Mason at full speed crossing half court. He's a dangerous, dangerous man, especially on the break.
This team can really put a college team into a meat grinder on both ends.
On defense, because Josh Jackson is so versatile, he can anchor the defense the way a traditional shot blocking center usually would, but still also destroy ball handlers off switches in the PnR. He can trap, and with his size he is disruptive on traps (forced the travel in the corner and created the Vick 360 off double teams).
The rest of the guards can turn up the pressure on the perimeter. Graham, Mason, and Vick can really get after guys, and because Mason is such a good rebounder even at his size, KU gives up nothing on the glass even playing four guards.
On offense the weapons are overwhelming. A million ways for a season to die - choose one:
- Mason iso
- Graham iso
- Jackson iso
- Mason drive and kick
- Graham drive and kick
- Jackson drive and kick
- Svi for three
- Vick lob
- Lucas lob
- Jackson lob
- Jackson post up
- Lucas post up
- Svi drive
- Graham corner three
- Vick transition
- Jackson transition
- Mason transition
- Graham transition
- Mason PnR
- Graham PnR
- Jackson PnR
- Weave
- I think you get the point
That's a lot of ways for a season to die. Purdue experienced them all. Their season is now dead. That is not a coincidence.
Whichever team wins that UCLA-UK game tonight is a scary, scary team.
That's actually what this brought to mind for me, too!
Oregon is us (or we are Oregon) to a large degree. They run almost everything through Brooks. He and Jackson going back and forth should be some of the best basketball we will see all year. That matchup alone is worth the price of admission.
Their key guy will be Dorsey. He and Graham should matchup, although it will be interesting to see what happens when Vick is in the game. Had Dorsey not gone to Oregon, it's likely he would be at KU and Vick would be somewhere else. Vick has to know that, and probably would like to demonstrate that KU ended up in the superior position.
I expect a huge game from Lucas, oddly enough. He struggled last night, but he remembers that Villanova game and I don't think he wants his career to end like that. Lucas double double to the tune of 14 points, 15 boards.
Vick is going to be a major player next year. That 360 was him announcing his presence to the rest of the country. When he's going nuts next season, people will remember the 360 as his coming out party.
I have no issue with the teacher holding Frank accountable. I think it taught Frank a valuable lesson.
The issue is that Lutz shouldn't use that as some sort of prop to a joke during a press conference because that's not the appropriate time and place, as @JayHawkFanToo, @stoptheflop and @mayjay point out above. If Lutz is having a private conversation with Self, that is an okay thing to say because it won't come off as a potentially mean-spirited dig.
Lutz is a professional and should know better.
That's the same strategy I am guessing they used this week. Roberts works on Purdue with Self.
Snacks and Townsend split up Oregon and Michigan, working with Case to get whatever video stuff they need - this is where having a good basketball mind as video coordinator is helpful to speed this process up. Quite a few really good coaches at both the college and NBA level got their start as video coordinator because you do so much analysis of game plans that you can't help but improve your X and O ability.
You're planning to win the whole thing, of course. You put together the team with the focus on getting to March. You work out in October planning to be the only team standing when the confetti rains down that first Monday in April.
But you have to play the games one at a time.
Great leaders manage both. You have to think macro, but act in the micro. Yes, the idea is to win the whole thing, but you can't gameplan for the confetti until you beat Purdue, then Oregon or Michigan, then (UNC/Butler/UCLA/UK), then finally whoever emerges from that other side of the bracket.
As of right now, you have all of your resources available for both Thursday and Saturday. You will know before you play Purdue whether you get Oregon (somewhat shorthanded) or Michigan (amped up, but not necessarily a great team overall). The best gameplan is to blitz Purdue early so you don't have to grind against Swanigan and Co., potentially leaving our front line banged up with a short turnaround.
But if you can't blitz Purdue quickly, you still have to be sure to win. Yes, the assistants have already started working on a potential Michigan gameplan and a potential Oregon gameplan. Jeremy Case and the video team have already put together the clips and the assistants have already done their initial review. I'm sure Case has already done his cuts through Oregon's win and Louisville's win in the round of 32, and he may have even already talked to whichever assistant is responsible for that pregame about what he has seen, gotten their feedback, etc.
But I would bet they haven't spent any shootaround time on anyone other than Purdue. Self has probably been briefed on Saturday's potential opponents, but his focus has been fully on Purdue.
Once that Purdue game is over, because the early prep work has already been done on both Michigan and Oregon, the gameplan will probably be done within an hour of the finish of the KU-Purdue game (since we have the late game). At that point, Self will work with Case and whichever assistant has done the prep work to finalize the gameplan. At Friday's shootaround they will put everything in and then review Saturday morning before the game.
Self probably stopped looking at anything other than Purdue stuff sometime Monday or yesterday at the latest to make sure he focuses on the details of Purdue. The assistants responsible for Michigan and Oregon will probably stop looking at that stuff today so that tomorrow's shootaround is all about Purdue.
The only focus tomorrow will be Purdue. You do the homework early so that everyone is entirely focused on Purdue from the time they wake up until that game is over.
When I was in high school we made it to the state semifinals my senior year. Also in the semis was the team that had beaten us in the finals the previous year. Both teams were angling for the finals rematch, but first, we both had to handle our business in the semis.
We played the early game, pulled away late and won our game by double digits.
They played the late game. They were sitting in the stands during our game "scouting" us. They should have won easily (they were the top seed and I think had already beaten this opponent earlier in the regular season by double digits). The lost.
All of that scouting and preparation they did for us was worthless because they lost to a team they handled easily earlier in the year. They played for third the next day. We won the title.
The point is this. Anybody still playing right now is good enough to beat you if you get ahead of yourself. If they weren't, they wouldn't be here. KU has to focus 100% on dealing with Swanigan, Haas and Purdue's shooters, because if they don't, winning two games this weekend will not be an issue that this team will ever get to confront.
Win the game in front of you. Saturday can take care of itself when it gets here.
The ACC wishes their teams had performed to seed expectations so far.
That's the thing about the tournament. Because upsets happen, performing to seed is a pretty good accomplishment.
The Big 12 has had a pretty good postseason so far.
TCU may win the NIT
KSU won their play in game. Oklahoma State lost, but in a very competitive game.
Iowa State won their first round game.
KU, Baylor and West Virginia are all still dancing (and all three have a pretty good chance in their S16 games).
The Big 12 is guaranteed a winning conference record in the NCAA tournament (sitting at 7-3 right now - I don't include play-in games, so I didn't count KSU's win over Wake Forest).
That's a strong showing, and suggests that Tech probably should have gotten a chance to play in the postseason.
Honestly, I think we don't double Swanigan. He's a good passer and Purdue has plenty of shooters. Not sure we gain an advantage from sending bodies at him. I would rather not distort the shape of our defense trying to take the ball out of his hands because Purdue has the shooters to punish us for that.
I would rather double Haas. He's a lesser player, not as good a passer and could be forced into some turnovers. Swanigan has 112 turnovers in over 1100 minutes this season. For comparison, Frank, a top PG, has 83 in over 1200 minutes. But Swanigan is a big man that also has 103 assists on the season (third on their team). Haas has 76 turnovers in 663 minutes this year, and just 20 assists. Simply put, Swanigan will find the shooters. Chances are, Haas will not (and he's much more likely to cough the basketball up).
The danger is when Swanigan and Haas are on the floor together because we don't really have a good matchup. I would actually put Vick on Swanigan. Vick is quick, long and athletic, plus it would mess with Swanigan a little bit to have to try and seal off such a wiry guy. I guarantee he's never had a guy like Vick on him. He's going to get his points. Why not disrupt his rhythm by switching from a guy like Lucas to a guy like Vick? See if you can confuse him every now and then.
Either way, KU should push the pace at every opportunity. Purdue likes to play fast, but they don't have the horses to run with this KU team.
The question in this game is who has to change to match up with who?
Does KU have to put a second big on the floor to match up with Haas/Swanigan, or does Purdue have to go smaller to match up with the four out look?
Who has to bend to who's will?
The answer to that question will probably tell you who will win this game.
Jackson can't guard Swanigan all night. Swanigan is too big and physical. He's got nearly 50 pounds on Josh. Swanigan can't guard Josh all night. Josh is too quick. That match up may materialize occasionally, but it won't be there all night. Neither coach can afford for their guy to pick up fouls in a bad matchup.
Trying to get the first game tipping after 7 in the Central time zone makes that near impossible. They would have to tip region 1, game 1 at 5:45 Central, followed by region 2, game 1 at 6:15 Central. That would let them tip region 1, game 2 at 8:15 and region 2, game 2 at 8:45.
But again, that makes that first game really early, especially on the west coast. The goal is to have game 1 of both regions wrapping in prime time, and the second games both tipping in prime time (hoping that people will get pulled in to watch the entire second game since its the marquee matchup of the night).
Tip times are determined to put the #1 seeds in opposite time slots each night.
For Thursday, that means that the West and Midwest #1's were always going to be opposite each other. Could they have flipped it and put Gonzaga on late? Sure, but given that the Zags play WVU, that means that WVU's viewers would be tuning in for a game tipping at 11 pm local time. Unfortunately, because the bulk of tournament teams are in the Eastern and Central time zones, that makes working the TV schedule out pretty brutal because you don't have enough west coast teams.
They compensate by having the West Region tipping 30 minutes later than the Midwest.
Same thing takes place on Friday. UNC plays early, and what would have been Villanova's spot plays late. They can do that because the two marquee matchups on Friday are both in the South region, with the premier matchup being that UK-UCLA rematch. You also notice that what is thought of as the premier matchup gets the 9:39 time slot both nights.
Really, it's a compliment to KU that they get the late CBS slot. That means it's the best game of the night. Had Louisville beaten Michigan, they probably flip the slots to have that Oregon-Louisville game in the 9:39 spot. So really, if you want to blame anyone for this scheduling, blame Louisville.
I don't know that Self's situation is as dire as you paint it. He got Jackson, he has Azuibuke and he has Bragg, although Carlton has not developed the way anyone would have hoped or predicted. He has Billy Preston coming in next year.
I think the trouble for Self had been that he didn't embrace a more perimeter styled game until this season, so it was tough to recruit that type of player. Josh Jackson has changed the way a wing recruit will look at KU (for the better). If you were a wing recruit before, you look at Andrew Wiggins standing on the wing wishing he could get the basketball in a loss to Stanford. Now, you look at Josh Jackson putting up a monster game in the NCAA tournament.
It changes the entire perception. What KU really needs is for Billy Preston to come in next year and just blow up. The development of Bragg (and the "career" of Diallo) did KU no favors on the recruiting trail. That's not ShoeCo. That's a style choice that Self has begun to remedy this season.
The temptation next year would be to return to high low, but with Preston and Azuibuke, Self should still be looking to push tempo. If he can redeem the career of Malik Newman, that's another feather in his cap that recruits will start to notice. The development of Mason and Graham helps, too, but what KU really needs is an NBA star, and I think that guy is Josh Jackson.
The key for KU is to make Swanigan work, but to prevent his kickouts. Swanigan can go for 35 and Purdue won't beat us if we neutralize the rest of their shooters.
If Swanigan goes for 25, has 8 assists and they make 12 threes, they will absolutely beat us.
We have to be content with Swanigan doing his damage. Make him shoot over high hands. Lucas is big enough to bother Swanigan's shots if he just stays big inside. We don't want to put him on the line a bunch, but we don't want him shooting 65% from the field, either.
More than anything, though, we cannot allow Purdue to play two big men at once. We have to run them off the floor when they try to play Swanigan and Haas together. Limit Haas to less than 15 minutes. He's their third leading scorer, but if they can't play Swanigan and Haas together, that's a huge benefit to KU.
This may be the game that we need that Josh Jackson game, the 25 point, 14 board, 7 assist, 3 block, 2 steal performance that he has been holding in his back pocket all year. This may be that game where Jackson needs to dial that one up to overwhelm Purdue by being, without a doubt, the best player in the country.