🏀 KuBuckets Archive

I'm not handwringing about a seven man rotation. I am handwringing about whether Frank's knee is going to be an issue going forward in a seven man rotation.

My worry since early in the season was the burden Frank would have to carry, as he has shown signs of wear each season as the season wound down. Frank is a warrior, no doubt, so this isn't a criticism of him. But the body can only absorb so much punishment without recovery. Frank's style absorbs (and dishes out) a lot of punishment. He has demonstrated that he is in superior physical condition.

But your joints don't care what kind of shape you are in or how strong you are. Joints wear. They just do. And when they wear, they sap your explosiveness. They drain your quickness. Not all at once. No, it's a slow bleed.

Frank needs some well timed rest, whether that's a day of practice each week, or a few minutes of game action here and there. Coach Self needs to get creative on how he can keep his best leader on the floor through April, because if this team is going to get to where it can go, Frank will be leading the charge.

As for Josh and fouls, Josh is a really difficult player to officiate for a lot of college officials because he is much more gifted both athletically and with basketball IQ than the players they see on an everyday basis. He's like Wiggins, only shifted into permanent turbo mode. Josh makes plays because of his speed, quickness, balance and coordination that would be fouls for most any other player.

Take the block last night. How many guys can go get that block without:

1) jumping on the guys back for a foul
2) having to wait until the ball came down and committing a goaltending violation
3) failing to even catch up because they just aren't fast enough

85% of D1 players fall into Category 3. They wouldn't even catch up, so forget about it. 13% are in Category 1. They can elevate to avoid the goaltending, but they aren't explosive enough to elevate from far enough behind to avoid fouling the shooter.

The last 2%? Well, most would end up mis-timing their jump and either fouling or goal tending. Probably 98% of that 2% would end up doing that.

That leaves Josh and maybe a handful of other guys that could actually make that play in that situation. So if you're a D1 official, there's maybe 4 or 5 guys in the country in any given year that could make that play. The list of guys at KU, Kentucky, Duke and UNC in the last 25 years that could make that play:

1. Andrew Wiggins
2. Josh Jackson
3. a healthy Joel Embiid (maybe)
4. Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
5. Anthony Davis (maybe)
6. Willie Cauley-Stein
7. Grant Hill
8. Justise Winslow
9. Vince Carter

That's probably the entire list. Embiid likely would not have had the anticipation and timing to make that play while he was at KU. Davis probably isn't quite fast enough. The others I'm pretty confident about, but look at that list again. Every single person on that list was a lottery pick!!! College officials just don't see the kinds of guys that can make those kinds of plays in situations where those types of plays get made, so they call it the way they call it the other 99.999% of the time.

@wrwlumpy

Everything in context.

You have to view both the positives and the negatives.

Let's take @tis4tim's blurnover.

If you focus only on the negative (the turnover) then you are upset that Josh made a lazy offensive play that cost us a possession, and could have cost us points. That's bad.

If you focus only on the positive, then you are ecstatic that Josh made an athletic play that less than 10 D1 players could have made.

I look at both.

Josh made a bad play offensively and got a bad turnover as a result. The positive (before even considering the block) is that Josh sprinted to the other end and made the play.

To me, that means that Josh will still make some mistakes, but we are better off letting him play through those mistakes because his talent will allow him to overcome some of those mistakes, and he plays so hard that he will make up for it, sometimes immediately.

The downside is that sometimes Josh tries a little too hard to immediately make up for a mistake and instead compounds it with a silly foul or getting himself out of position somewhere else.

@mayjay

Mostly Duke fans, but I have heard others say that as well. Basically saying if he was at a smaller school it wouldn't be a story because the incidents wouldn't have been on TV and few people would have seen the video, but because it's Duke, it was on TV and everybody either saw it in real time, or on the highlights.

I don't buy that, but I have heard the argument made by non-Dukies.

Some people say that if Grayson Allen was at a different program, this would be a non-story.

I actually believe the opposite.

If Grayson Allen were at a different program, particularly if it wasn't a major conference program, he would have been suspended after the very first tripping incident, and had the behavior we have seen since continued, he would likely have been hit with multiple suspensions by now, and may already have been forced out of one program.

Either the school or the conference would have suspended him initially, and he would have almost certainly gotten a multiple game suspension after his second or third incident. For a lot of programs, that would have been enough to part ways, even with a player with his talent.

Basically, if Allen was pulling these antics at a mid major or even a major conference team at the bottom of its conference (say he was at Clemson instead of Duke) he would probably already have transferred and would have a much more negative reputation following him. He'd be at mid major X right now, redshirting and trying to save his career.

@BeddieKU23

Lots of good stuff here.

You handled the positives well, so I want to focus on the other stuff.

Jackson and Fouls

This is a concern because it really takes him out of his game when he gets early fouls. He still plays hard, but he lacks that edge when he's worried about fouls. I think that means he's thinking too much and not just playing ball. That's a mental adjustment more than a physical one. He has to get used to dealing with some foul trouble. He was much better in the second half when he wasn't worried about fouls and started getting to the basket (and making free throws!!!).

Svi/Vick perimeter D

For Svi, he's getting his hips locked up too much, which is making it hard to move laterally. I'd have to re-watch a bunch of possessions from last night to check his footwork, but it may be that he is not pointing his toes outward to let him slide laterally when he gets low, so he's stepping instead of sliding, which exposes him against quicker guys. Sliding is quick. Stepping is not.

Try this as an example. Stand with your toes pointed directly in front of you and try to move laterally. You have to lift your entire foot and take a step to the side.

Now, do the same thing, except point your toes outward. Now you can just lift your toe and slide to the side. It's much quicker. I will try to watch Svi's closeouts to see if he's closing with his toes straight or pointed out. I suspect it's straight, but want to be sure.

For Vick, he's going too far on his help. The threes he's giving up are from over helping. Last night on a PnR (pick and roll), Lucas' man rolled hard to the rim. Vick's responsibility is to show in the lane to make sure the pass isn't thrown to the roll man for the dunk. However, instead of showing, Vick went all the way across the lane as if he were guarding the roll man, rather than just showing until Lucas recovered. That pulled him an extra step away from the corner, where his man was more than content to stand and wait for the ball and the inevitable wide open three.

Vick just needs to adjust and show rather than guard the roll. That will allow him to recover to his man, where he has the speed and quickness to close out low and tight.

Coleby and Lightfoot

Dwight is trying to set too good of a screen, which is why he gets the offensive fouls. He has to realize that he doesn't have to go out of his way to create contact (where he's getting called for fouls now). He can just stand there and let the guards do their thing. They are all so skilled that they don't need him to blow anybody up on a screen. They just need him to get in the way a little bit.

For Lightfoot, his footwork seems to get a little out of sorts sometimes. I think that will come with experience, which I hope he can still get this season, because we can't survive playing just seven guys every night from now until April.

Carlton Bragg

Bragg just needs to commit himself to doing two things the rest of the season. Grabbing every rebound he can when he's on the floor, and dunking the ball when he's around the rim. He needs to raise his level of aggression when he's on the floor because teams are trying to muscle him.

@kjayhawks

Not necessarily the best, but they make that top group of three a quartet for sure.

@JayHawkFanToo

The thing with both OU and Texas is that while they aren't necessarily good, neither of them is exactly a walkover. As we saw last night, OU has the talent to push the better teams in the conference at home. Texas can also do that. That's the worry. An off night could cost you a huge game.

@Kcmatt7

Foster is a great example of why Bruce Weber struggles as a coach. He's not really a player's coach (though he tries to be) and he's not a disciplinarian. He hasn't had enough success to rein in players.

For instance, let's imagine that Weber had someone like Josh Jackson on his squad. Jackson has a strong personality. Would Weber be able to channel that, or would Jackson be barking at teammates in practice and during games, or grow frustrated that Weber wasn't pushing his teammates enough?

That's the issue for Weber. He doesn't have enough credibility to be a player's coach or a disciplinarian, but he also lacks the coaching chops to just be a great X and O guy that people respect for his knowledge alone, and he hasn't had enough success to just say that guy wins wherever he goes.

@HawkChamp

Absolutely possible. But that also assumes we don't drop a game in Lubbock, or Manhattan, or Waco. I've watched Baylor enough to know they are legit. I don't think we can just assume we beat them at their place, and I also don't want to assume that we go 9-0 at home since we lose a conference game at AFH about once every 3 years or so.

Simply put, with Baylor and West Virginia both very good, the margin is pretty small this year.

@Hawk8086

You make a good point about contenders and winning on the road.

I look at it like this. The games between the contenders don't matter nearly as much. What really matters is how the contenders do on their road trips to Stillwater, Ames, Lubbock and Manhattan. That will probably be the difference in the conference race.

Let's say Baylor, KU and West Virginia all split their games with each other. No advantage gained for anyone. But let's say one of those teams goes just 1-3 in those road games I listed above, while the others go 2-2 or better. Or let's say one of those teams loses on the road at Oklahoma, TCU or Texas. Those losses matter much more because the others likely won't lose an equivalent game.

WVU has already lost at Tech, but if they protect their home floor and make sure to split with KU and Baylor, they are okay so long as they get wins in 2 of the other three places, or avoid losses to TCU, Texas and Oklahoma.

Remember, KU closes the season AT Oklahoma State. I do not want the conference title on the line with that trip looming.

This kid is interesting on video.

He's a lefty jump shooter, but finishes around the rim with his right hand a lot. Not really sure why that is, but he's pretty skilled with both hands. Has a nifty little runner he shoots with the right hand that is effective out to about 12 feet.

He can also pass with either hand. On one of his highlights he throws a one handed baseball pass with his right hand that's at least 40 feet through traffic. It's a rocket that is right on the money.

The fact that he is adept with both hands makes him a very interesting prospect. I don't know that I have ever seen a kid play like this.

Yeah, I wish he was bigger. Yeah, I wish he was more athletic. But athleticism isn't just about jumping high and being strong. He's quick, balanced, coordinated and can pass or finish with either hand all the way out to 10-12 feet. He's a hard player to classify because his skill set is so unique.

I think he could be limited defensively because of his size/length, but his quickness should allow him to compete.

I would like to still play MU for one simple reason.

Kansas is a small state population-wise. Outside of Kansas, KU doesn't have a major rival. The KU-KSU games just don't generate any interest outside the state, and every other Big 12 team has a major rival (or three) that comes before KU.

This doesn't matter that much in basketball because Kansas is Kansas, but in football, KU desperately needs a rival that matters outside the state. If K-State was a real football power, it may not make as much difference, but since they aren't, KU needs an out-of-state rival to achieve its full potential.

@HawkChamp

We will actually be able to score against UK this time. The problem will be whether we can get enough stops to not have this game played in the 90s or 100s. I predict a 97-93 final. Don't know who wins, but plenty of points will be scored.

@ralster

I believe Fran was sick, and was also a late replacement for Miles Simon due to a death in Simon's family (his dad I think). They mentioned it briefly during the telecast.

Conference expansion has also hurt football. Big 10 fans aren't exactly getting excited to watch Ohio State play Rutgers or Iowa play Maryland. That just isn't a draw. Conference expansion has stretched the interest of casual conference fans too thin.

This was always the eventual end with college sports becoming a big money event. The best teams will have good attendance, the rest will not.

In basketball, that's survivable enough because many smaller programs play in venues that seat less than 10,000 people. Here's a link ↗ to the capacities for the different D1 facilities. Look at how many of those arenas are tiny. You can survive when you're only drawing a few thousand in most of those arenas because that's capacity.

For football, the minimum stadium size for D1 is (I think) 15,000 or so. That's quite a bit more of an investment, and if you can't draw at least 8,000-10,000 in a smaller venue, you're probably well underwater.

Because of the venue size, basketball can survive with smaller crowds. Football really can't.

@drgnslayr

The personnel dictates the pace. Obviously, we shouldn't run helter skelter with Lucas on the floor because we don't get to take advantage of his best skills if we are playing up and down with him on the floor. That's part of our problem defensively, honestly.

When we go really small, or if Lightfoot or Bragg is on the floor with the four guard set, run like the wind.

When we go standard, or with Lucas and four guards, slow down a bit so Landen stays involved. Obviously run when its there, but we don't have to push the pace as much with Landen on the floor so that he can actually get set up on offense and defense.

@JayHawkFanToo

I'm not advocating to play Lucas less. Between Lucas, Bragg and Lightfoot, they played a combined 46 minutes. You could play the 5 guards together and still have Lucas play just as much as he did last night.

An added bonus of playing the five guards together is that Lucas and Bragg would play together more. Bragg showed a nice ability to throw that high low pass last season. Playing Bragg with another big may help Carlton be more effective as well.

My idea is not about cutting anyone's minutes or anything. It's about mixing up who is on the court with who to see if we can use the 7 guys that get the bulk of the minutes to create the best matchups for us (or the worst matchups for the other team).

For example, TTech doesn't really play anyone bigger than 6-8 regularly. Their 6-8 guys aren't all that bulky, either. That means that we can show the smaller lineup without getting blown off the blocks, but that Landen has a size advantage inside as well. We can wear down their bigger guys by making them guard the perimeter, then let Landen feast on them when they have tired legs in the low post. We can alternately punish them with speed and strength. Landen is a critical part of that equation. He comes out so that we can run them down, then goes back in and punishes them with his strength and size.

We can draw fouls by out quicking (for lack of a better term) them, then draw more fouls by catching them pushing Landen in the post once they are too tired to get quality defensive position. Alternating between the two gives us an advantage by making the opposition adapt to our lineup in real time.

@Crimsonorblue22

I wondered if that was supposed to be a switch last night, but I can understand Jackson's thinking.

He wanted Iwundu and he's our best defender, so I can't say that I didn't want him on Iwundu. However, you have to stay within scheme there, so if the scheme is switch everything, you switch, no question.

@Crimsonorblue22

Those 5 already lead the team in minutes, so it's more about adjusting the rotation and rest than changing up who plays. Frank and Devonte both rest for less than 8 minutes per game each. JJ plays nearly 30, and that includes games where he's played less than 20 due to foul trouble. Svi and Vick both play over 25.

I wouldn't play this group together for long. Just a 4-5 minute stretch in each half. It just alters when guys are coming in and going out. Sometimes you go back to a traditional 3 out, 2 in set from the 5 out set. Sometimes you go from 5 out to 4 out, then 3 out. Since our 5 perimeter guys already play a ton of minutes, it doesn't change much, just the sub patterns.

@StLJhawk

My idea isn't an indictment on Lucas at all. He was excellent last night. Lucas would still have a very significant role. The reason I like it is because it really puts a lot of pressure on the other team's big men.

You have to bang with Lucas, then chase around Jackson or Svi, then go back to banging with Lucas again? That's a huge advantage for Lucas to catch the opposing big after he's been worn down for a couple of minutes, or go against the backup while the starter is on the bench getting a breather. There's actually a chance that this makes Lucas even more effective. Same with Bragg and, to a lesser extent Lightfoot.

@Blown

I think JJ is getting a bit of a reputation among the college officials who don't like a freshman complaining about a no call. That likely would not be a T in the NBA, but Josh has to realize that some of the college refs don't like OADs and won't hesitate to hit him with a T.

That T completely changed the momentum of the game, and it took Josh out of his game. If I'm Self, I show Josh how that T changed the game. He's a competitive kid, but he's also a very intelligent kid, so I think he can make the adjustment quickly after these last two games.

Svi walked, no question.

But in the moment, I honestly didn't see it because I didn't realize he didn't dribble that last time.

And here's the thing - in the moment, none of the KSU players realized it, either.

Having watched last night's game, I am even more convinced that we should go with a five guard lineup. We aren't a strong post defense team anyway. We just aren't. We don't necessarily get demolished down there, and we are solid on the glass, but we aren't gaining any advantage by playing a traditional big man, and I'm not sure there's a team in the country that can match up with us if we go small like that.

Jackson did whatever he wanted when Wade was on him. Svi got good looks when they put Wade on him briefly. There's just not a real way to guard KU when they put those five out there together because most team's don't have perimeter size to handle Jackson and Svi at the same time. Jackson would destroy a 6-5 guy in the post because he's a scorer, and if you go super small, Jackson gets to do that.

We might as well push this small ball to its eventual end, which is the Mason-Graham-Vick-Svi-Jackson lineup. I just don't know that there is a big man that can actually beat us if we go small because what we might give up is more than balanced by what they sacrifice on the other end (defensive rebounding, ability to guard on the perimeter, foul trouble from having a guy that isn't used to guarding on the perimeter having to cover a guard, etc.).

We have the talent to do it. The matchups are favorable.

@mayjay

Perhaps, but how many teams out there honestly have even one big that is dominant enough to score at will against Josh or Svi?

Take DJ Johnson for example. He's a good player. But if he were matched up against JJ all night, could he post a 13-18 from the field, 8-10 from the line, 34 point, 17 rebound game? Because if he can't be that efficient and that productive, it's a wash for KSU to change their attack to force feed him. Johnson averages just over 7 shots a game right now. To get 18 shots, he probably needs 25 quality touches.

That takes shots away from Iwundu, Stokes, and Brown. And since he's KSU's best rebounder, if he isn't getting his own misses, that's probably one and done on the offensive end for them. I'm just not sure most teams have a big man skilled enough to actually punish KU for going super small, especially on a volume basis.

Does Johnson have the stamina to attack Jackson in the post on literally every possession for 6 or 7 minutes at a time, plus guard someone faster and quicker (and rebound!) on the other end? He only plays 24 minutes a game as it is. I don't think he has the stamina to actually attack Jackson efficiently for a long period of time. And if he can't, that advantage shifts back to us because Johnson has no chance to guard out on the perimeter, and he can't protect the glass if he has to guard 20 feet from the rim.

@drgnslayr

I hope we see that Mason-Graham-Vick-Svi-Jackson lineup at least once this season. That lineup is something that no other team in the country can match up with. I would like to see it tonight, honestly, during stretches where DJ Johnson goes to the bench. The other interior players aren't thick enough (or skilled enough) to overwhelm Svi and JJ. We could go to that lineup for a stretch and really throw KSU for a loop.

KU should be able to handle KSU tonight. KSU just doesn't match up well with KU.

DJ Johnson might have an advantage inside, but he's not a big time scorer. He isn't the type of guy that can hang 25 or 30 on a team, so he can't really exploit our main weakness.

Dean Wade is also not a big time interior scorer, and he also probably draws the task of trying to stay in front of Josh Jackson or Svi on the other end. Whichever one Wade ends up guarding probably goes off for a big game tonight (Likely Svi, since Iwundu probably guards Jackson).

The sneaky matchup nightmare for KSU is actually Vick coming off the bench. Vick can hang with any of KSU's starters, and if KSU has to go small to match up, they are in serious trouble, particularly if they have to play any two of their bench guards together.

This game will likely showcase our 5 headed perimeter attack. There just aren't many teams that can match up with those guys.

Finish the sentence:

Carlton Bragg is a great fit as a compliment to the four guard lineup if...

The way I finish that sentence?

Carlton Bragg is a great fit as a compliment to the four guard lineup if he rebounds effectively and scores in the low post area.

With the four guard lineup, Bragg has to handle the boards against the other team's best rebounder. As the only true big, he has to at least be even from a rebounding standpoint because he is the solo big man. IF he does that and can outlet quickly to our guards, Carlton has a huge advantage running the floor against most 4s and 5s, so he can rebound, outlet and sprint for dunks or offensive putbacks on the other end.

The problem is that I get the impression that sometimes Bragg doesn't want to bang, even though he is big enough and strong enough to do so. You have to want contact to some degree. It's the reason some guys settle for jump shots and some guys are like Frank Mason.

Bragg just needs to face guys up and use his quickness. Instead of posting deep, he should post up a step or so further out. Because he's a good shooter, guys can't just let him catch at 12, because he will hit that shot consistently if they don't go out with him. Once he catches there, he can give a pump fake and then go to his bag of tricks. Jab step. Spin baseline. Spin middle. One bounce and jump hook to the middle. Blow by for the reverse.

While Bragg does have strength, against most big men his MUA is his quickness. Defensively, he should try to bang, but offensively, he should look to use his quickness against big men, his power against guards (since most teams will have to help with a guard if Carlton beats his man in the extended post).

The truth is that Frankamp just wasn't a good enough basketball player to make it at KU. Not big enough to be a 2. Not quick enough to handle the 1. Unaccustomed to a niche role. That's a tough transition to make at the same time when you're dealing with all of the normal freshman stuff (away from home, new people, harder academics, etc).

I was always concerned about how he would pan out at KU, especially since he was a Kansas kid. Hopefully, as @JayHawkFanToo said, he can get himself together and live a productive life.

@Kcmatt7

You nailed it. Jackson's athleticism and length have changed the way this team operates. Jackson has what scouts call useful athleticism. He can use his athleticism in game situations.

For example, I remember a few years back when it was declared that Tyrel Reed had the highest vertical leap on the team. Higher than EJ. Higher than Tyshawn. Higher than Travis. Tyrel Reed had the best vertical leap. Tyrel was a heck of an athlete to be sure, but in game situations, he couldn't tap into that same athleticism, whereas the other guys could, so even though Tyrel's numbers in the gym were better, those other guys looked more athletic.

Perry was also a good athlete with impressive measurables, but in game, he can't tap into that. Jackson can. He covers so much ground it's amazing. He consumes passing lanes. He recovers before people can even realize it. And that's just on the defensive end.

Offensively, because he can post, drive and pass, he's a nightmare matchup. You can't put a 4 on him because he's too quick. A smaller wing will get eaten alive. Honestly, there's maybe a handful guys in the entire country that truly match up with him (Josh Hart at Villanova, Justin Jackson at UNC and OG Anunoby are the ones that come to mind initially). Everyone else is either too small, too slow, not good enough or some combination of the three.

Add to that the fact that Josh is sneaky strong. I remember when we were comparing him to Wiggins over the summer (sadly lost when we had to re-load everything), I mentioned that Jackson is much stronger, and pointed to a similar play that both he and Wiggins made in their high school highlights. It was a transition play where both guys took a bump in the side from a smaller guy on the break and finished - Wiggins with a gliding fingerroll, Jackson with a thunderous two hand jam. The difference in balance, strength and body control that single play showed made me even more excited to have Jackson on this team. KU has not had anyone with this kind of size, talent and athleticism in my memory.

That FT number is scary. Remember the 2008 title year? All year, the talk was about Memphis having FT shooting come back to burn them at some point. They shot 61.4% as a team. Shot 12-19 in the title game, but the crazy thing is, Memphis was a very respectable 9-12 until the last two minutes of regulation. They went 3-7 down the stretch in regulation.

They say that your greatest weakness will always pop up at the most inopportune time. I dread seeing us with a five point lead with two minutes to go and have guys parading bricks at the FT line as the lead dwindles. We either get better, or as @nuleafjhawk said above, we ain't winning nothing. I agree with @drgnslayr that we are very good, but in a single elimination format, bad FT shooting is the boogeyman that will pop up in a close regional final.

@dylans

I like big man talent, but of the best young big men Davis and Embiid have had injury/durability problems, Cousins has had issues and might be a coach killer, and I have not seen enough of Towns yet to decide if I would put my entire franchise in his hands (interesting that three of those guys are Kentucky guys).

I know Leonard has had injuries as well, but as a perimeter player, his injuries worry me less because he hasn't lost any explosiveness or quickness. With big guys, you have to worry about the wear and tear on old injuries just because of their size. Will Embiid's early career injuries pop back up in five years? Will Davis continue to have various injuries that shorten his career or undercut his production? Will Cousins be a classic good stats/ bad team guy? Can Towns sustain his play?

@JayHawkFanToo

I like Lillard, but his value decreases because he is not a top notch defender. Having a great two way player is just so valuable that I would actually pass on having the better offensive talent (Lillard) because Leonard's defensive value makes him an amazing option.

We've already seen Leonard at the highest level of the game. We know he's a winner, we know he has his health (and that Popovich will make sure he gets rest). We don't know that about any of those big guys yet.

@dylans

I would probably start a franchise around Kawhi Leonard if I had to choose. He's only 25 and is a bona fide superstar. He's a two way player that guards the best wings in the league night in and night out, plus he is now a 24 ppg scorer.

Give me that guy, and I will figure out what the heck to put around him.

Cousins attitude would scare me out of making him my centerpiece. Davis has had injury/ durability problems. Lots of guys are probably a little too old (James, Durant, Westbrook, Curry, Harden, etc.) though their talent is enticing.

WVU is a good college basketball team. They don't necessarily have lots of NBA talent on the roster, which limits their ceiling, but they are deep and they play their system, which also limits their floor.

We know almost exactly what WVU will look like every single night in conference play because they will likely fluctuate very little as the season progresses. They will press and force turnovers. If you can take care of the ball, they will struggle offensively because they don't have tons of offensive talent to beat you in the half court, but if you are the least bit sloppy with the basketball, they can run you out of the gym.

Baylor has more talent, particularly if Ish Wainwright starts playing up to his ability. But Baylor also tends to ebb and flow, although this team has not yet done that in the non-con against a pretty solid schedule.

The Big 12 is tough in this respect - there are pitfalls everywhere on the road.

Ames... Stillwater... Manhattan... heck, we haven't won in Morgantown in three or four years. Norman isn't an easy trip. Tech is feisty at home. TCU is much improved and could prove to be a problem. Texas has the talent to give people problems if they can find someone that can shoot on that roster. Baylor has as much talent as almost anyone in the country, save the very top tier.

If I told you that KU lost at Iowa State (games are always close up there), at Oklahoma State (a couple of recent losses there), at West Virginia (haven't won there in a while), at Tech (we have struggled there the last few years) and at Baylor (most talent, non-KU division), would anyone think that was completely unreasonable?

The key to winning the Big 12 is the same as always - win at home, steal one on the road against a good team, don't lose to bad teams on the road. We have won the conference because we basically never lose at home. Every other conference challenger loses one or two at home. And that is why we don't falter.

The NC game this year was better because both teams were making plays at the end. The KU-OU game was very good, but the play making down the stretch in each overtime was disappointing. The last minute of the NC game was incredible because of the shotmaking and playmaking on both sides. The game was won because Villanova had the ball last and had the chance to make one more play.

The A&M-UNI game was a crazy ending, but it wasn't a "great game." Without that ending, no one even remembers that game.

The MSU-MTSU game was pretty good, but the play making wasn't incredible. It was a "really good" game.

I would actually rank the UNC-UK game from a couple weeks ago third behind UNC-Nova and OU-KU. That game was back and forth with exceptional playmaking on both sides, amazing shotmaking, adjustments from both sides, etc. A lot of the other games on the list had great endings, but you could pick them up in the last two minutes. Those three games I would rank at the top were great throughout, to the point that you didn't want to miss the next minute at any point.

The challenge with big men is threefold.

1) Coordination. Is this guy coordinated enough with both footwork and catching ability to play basketball? How many times have we seen big men that just don't have the hand eye coordination to catch the ball or block shots, or don't have the coordination to master even basic footwork in the post?

2) Agility. Can this guy run? Can he slide laterally? Can he jump with minimal load? Can he spin and move in traffic? If you watch HS basketball, how often do you see a bigger kid (taller than 6-8) that is okay in space, but if you run a double team at him, he's hopelessly lost? Just not agile enough to move in a crowd.

3) Health. Being that big is hard on your joints and ligaments. Back problems. Foot problems. Knee problems. Ankle problems.

So let's look at the greats. Walton checked the first two boxes, but health took him down. Olajuwon had it all. Wilt had it all. Kareem had it all. Shaq had it all, but even for the ones who had it all, health ultimately limited them as they aged. Even Tim Duncan struggled with foot problems early in his career before making some training adjustments.

I don't understand the BPI, never have. I also don't understand why UCLA isn't a runaway favorite for the PAC 12 title. With Arizona and Oregon struggling, UCLA should be a dominant favorite.

I also don't understand why the Big 12 isn't a three team race (WVU, Baylor and KU). I can't see why anyone would be a 75% favorite at this stage, other than maybe a team like Wichita State in the Mo Valley, or Villanova in the Big East (97% is way too much considering that Butler, Xavier and Creighton are all legitimately good teams).

It just seems like BPI weighs things a little too heavily towards a favorite. If you told me that today, KU, WVU and Baylor all had between a 30% and 35% chance of winning the conference, with the field having a 4% chance of winning, I could certainly understand that. But to declare anyone a runaway favorite is pure clickbait, and very silly considering no games have been played.

@JayHawkFanToo

I would argue that this has always been what Coach K was like. Remember Laettner stomping on the UK player in that Elite Eight game? That was 25 years ago. Coach K didn't bench him the rest of that game. Didn't sit him in the national semifinal the next weekend. Didn't punish Laettner at all.

That was well before anybody knew that OAD would ever even be a thing.

Coach K has long been the beneficiary of the narrative that his teams play "hard" and play "the right way", but the truth is that Duke flops and pouts and pushes when the refs aren't looking and throws tantrums when things don't go their way, and if the jerseys said Coastal Carolina or Campbell or Charlotte on them instead of D-U-K-E, the reaction would be much, much different.

When Duke's players yell at opponents they are "intense" instead of "losing their composure." When they flop they are "sacrificing their body." When we hear those words used, it puts a positive spin on their silliness, and everyone buys into Duke being "right." If UNLV had done the same under Tark, or Michigan had done the same with the Fab 5, the narrative would not have been "intense" and "sacrificing their body."

@stoptheflop

For Josh, I think the problem is a low release point. Josh has a very short shooting stroke. On his jump shot, he alleviates that flat shot because he elevates so well. However, on his FT, his shot can go a little flat. He needs to extend his arm a little bit more on his follow through to get a more consistent shooting stroke at the line.

This team shoots the ball well enough that FTs shouldn't be this big of an issue, but they are. Taking some time at practice to actually concentrate on them may help, but the bigger story is to just focus in game, take some deep breaths and put them away.

@BeddieKU23

I am guessing three games because he is a repeat offender that wasn't suspended before, so he basically gets one game suspensions for each incident, with the ACC telling Duke off the record that if he is involved in any more incidents, he could be suspended for the rest of the season because of his past record. That's what I am guessing happens.

Also, with the ligament tears, it has to heal fully, then the area has to regain flexibility, then strengthened to regain stability. He's looking at probably 8 weeks minimum before they even want him trying to move the wrist around, then several more weeks to regain full range of motion. He might be able to start holding a basketball again around the end of the season if there are no setbacks.

The crucial thing though, is that he cannot do anything until the ligaments are healed fully to prevent a further sprain or new tear. Better to shut him down immediately than to even leave a possibility that he could return.

A break would have been more painful, but would have also healed more quickly.

Duke is suspending Allen this year because they can afford to lose him. They have tons of talent, so if the freshmen continue to play well, Allen will stay suspended. If they go into a bit of a tailspin after a couple games, Allen will be back.

Coach K tried to avoid it, but I bet the ACC was threatening a lengthy suspension, with the possibility of more punishment for any future incidents, if Duke did not act first.

Allen is a thug and a punk. He should be suspended at least three games.

I am going to say something potentially off the wall here.

At the end of the season, Josh Jackson and Svi will be the two best players on this basketball team. Those two will be the Batman and Robin that lead us in March, a 1-2 punch that, combined with a very experienced backcourt tandem, will be hard to stop.

JJ and Svi provide so much at the collegiate level due to the lack of elite level big men throughout the country. As a result, playing a couple of 6-8 perimeter players lots of minutes doesn't hurt you, especially since JJ is a monster on the glass on both ends. We literally lose nothing by playing small against all but maybe a couple of teams (UNC, Duke if healthy, maybe Kentucky).

Losing Azuibuke definitely hurts, because he gave us some muscle and athleticism that we don't have in a single package now. But we are still a nightmare matchup and won't confront many teams that can deal with our size, athleticism and talent on the perimeter.

I hope Coach Self uses conference season to prepare for March, because this team can position itself to go all the way.

@JayHawkFanToo said:

This morning I visited with a friend who happens to be a policeman and had seen the story. His comment was that police uniforms are designed as to not leave any doubt that the individual wearing is in law enforcement. His words were...you would have to be a moron not not know the individual was a law enforcement agent, hard to believe that a college student and a criminal science professor could not see this...I am paraphrasing, of course.

Earlier this year in northeast Kansas (I think Brown County, but I could be wrong) there was an individual that was impersonating a Sheriff's officer and pulling people over. Several people were duped by this fake deputy, although I don't think anyone was ever hurt. Suffice it to say that people can fake a police uniform in a way that can trick, or at least confuse people in the public.

You cited me to a conservative blog on the three fifths issue. There are competing historical references on this, as some say there were those in the North pushing for full personhood for slaves as a first step towards ending slavery. That's what pushed the South to the compromise. Not counting slaves at all made their population too small. Counting them fully made them people instead of property. There was a divide even in the North about how to handle that. That's what I was pointing to. They wanted the political influence that counting slaves gave them (about 50% more seats in Congress), but didn't want to risk putting slaves on equal footing by considering them as equal people. Perhaps the South didn't "create" the 3/5 compromise and I used poor word choice there, but there is no doubt that the South wanted to count slaves for political purposes without having to consider them equally.

@Kcmatt7

I live in Kansas, so as a minority my voice is rarely heard. Our own legislature goes out of its way to ensure that since many minority groups do not vote for the preferred Kansas party. In 2012, redistricting legislation was introduced by the Senate to include Wyandotte County (heavily populated by African Americans) in the First Congressional District (made up of Western Kansas). Nevermind that Wyandotte County is on the Eastern border of the state, or that Manhattan and the surrounding areas offered enough precincts to meet the population requirements, this legislation was introduced and debated on the Senate floor to effectively eliminate the political voice of heavily minority and democratic voting Wyandotte County. Obviously, this plan was ultimately rejected because there were fears that the gerrymandering would cause the court to throw out the entire Kansas plan and draw it's own districts (this happened anyway for state house and senate districts), but the fact that the Senate even brought that plan to the floor speaks volumes.

Also, go back and read about Trump and the Central Park 5. We have a president elect that I am pretty sure doesn't care about me or have to think about my existence.

@Kcmatt7

If you're a person living in a rural state with only one Congressperson, like North Dakota, Montana or Wyoming, it's pretty nice to have your vote count for as much as two or three votes in a more densely populated state like New York or California.

I posted a graphic a while back when we were talking about populations and showing how votes were cast. The current maps show mostly red because most of the states voted GOP. I did one of Kansas, with population weightings!ksmap2.jpg ↗ !map16.jpg ↗

The top map is colored to show only counties with at least 100,000 population. The bottom is colored to show only counties with at least 15,000 in population filled in, with those over 25,000 in the darker shade.

Notice that in both maps, the bulk of the state is blank. It presents a much different picture, even in a state that is very dominantly Republican like Kansas, than the map that colors every area in, regardless of population, with no differentiation for population.

The Electoral College (and the Senate structure) were both created as compromises to the Rural South to keep the more populated North from outlawing slavery simply by having more population (and the political power that comes with it). Let's remember that the South created the embarassing three fifths compromise (whereby slaves were counted as three fifths of a person for population purposes to give the South more Congressional seats and electors) to keep the slaves from being considered people while still using them for political influence.

The founding fathers could not have ever envisioned that one state would have over 60 times the number of people as another state. At this current time, Wyoming, Vermont, and Alaska all have populations small enough that they technically don't qualify for one full Congressional Seat. Think about that for a moment. Those three states have a very much outsized influence on the politics of the US when considering their population, and that shows up particularly in the electoral college, where having their two senators added to their one Congressional representative substantially overrepresents their population.

We do this in Kansas as well, with many of the rural house and senate districts having only 90% of the population of an ideal district (the size of a district based purely on population) while many of the urban and suburban districts have 105% or more of the population of an ideal district. So much for one person, one vote.

@dylans

In all actuality, rural areas are overrepresented in the electoral college.

Because each state has a minimum number of electors, and the electoral college is capped at 538, rural states tend to be over represented in the electoral college. The only real way to correct this would be to set the electoral college minimum at the smallest state (or DC), which is currently Wyoming, divide by three (the minimum number of electors currently) and then use that number to determine how many electors each other state gets.

Of course, this would vastly increase the number of electors (California would have nearly 200 under this model), but that shows just how skewed the system is since California has only 55 electors right now, compared to Wyoming's 3. Nearly every state would see an increase in electors, and the number of electors total would soar to between 1600 and 1800 (depending on how rounding is handled).

@JayHawkFanToo

I forgot about those years. Went straight to the bad years after and left out those years. Good call on that.

@ralster

There are years where I wouldn't list some of those schools. 2005, 2006 and 2009, for example, I would not have listed KU. Until this year, I probably wouldn't have listed UCLA since the Ben Howland years. Kentucky, between the 1998 title and Calipari being hired, probably doesn't make that list. UNC isn't on that list for the years between Smith and Williams. Even Duke misses that list here and there despite not having a coaching change over the last 25 years or so.

The difference for these schools is that they have the resources to get back on that list. Butler had a great run, but couldn't keep Brad Stevens. Had that been Indiana, they could have probably kept him (assuming he wasn't set on going to the NBA). They are still good, but not title contender good.

@drgnslayr

This KU team is easily in the 90s on total talent. With as many as 7 future pros on the roster, this team has tons of talent. This team is easily more talented than last year's team (probably more of a high 80s or low 90s level talent team). The most talented teams in recent memory were Kentucky 2015, Duke 2015, Kentucky 2012, North Carolina 2009, Florida 2007, Kansas 2008 and North Carolina 2005. The least talented champions were Duke 2010 and UConn 2011 and 2014.

Looking across the nation, the most talented teams (in no particular order) are Kansas, North Carolina, Kentucky, Duke, UCLA and Indiana. I would be very surprised if those six teams are healthy and at least 2 of them don't get to the Final Four. Baylor, Villanova, and Xavier are all very good, but they can't match those first six in terms of raw talent. However, I think I just listed three or four of the Final Four teams, and I am almost certain I just listed this season's champion.

Put it this way, if you told me that I had to, right now, pick this season's NCAA champion and you gave me five guesses, I would pick KU, UK, Duke, UCLA and UNC, and I would feel fairly comfortable that I would be right. Obviously that's not foolproof, but with the level of talent those five teams have (it's possible that those teams have 12 of the first 17 picks in next year's NBA draft, and possibly as many as 15 or 16 overall draftees. That's talent.