🏀 KuBuckets Archive

Selden should be able to play either wing spot in the NBA.

Look at San Antonio, for instance. They play Danny Green and Kawhi Leonard at their wing spots. Technically, Green is the 2 and Leonard the 3, but those guys interchange with each other all the time, and there are times when they bring a smaller guy in and Green plays the 3 while Leonard rests, or bring in a bigger player and Leonard slides to the 2 while Green takes a break.

Chicago does something similar when Tony Snell and Jimmy Butler play together. Wing players have to be able to guard either wing spot defensively. Offensively, wings need to be able to space the floor and score at least sometimes.

Selden is big enough to be an NBA wing. He's a legit 6-5. He's at least 220 pounds, so he shouldn't have too much trouble with bulkier guys. The questions for him are all on the offensive side of the ball. Can he handle the ball well enough to play on the floor with only one other primary ball handler? Can he score well enough to keep defenses honest, particularly shooting from the corners? If the answer to both of those questions is yes, Selden will play in the NBA for 10 years. If the answer is no, he may want to take a foreign language class or two.

@Texas-Hawk-10

I would disagree that BG is not on NBA radars. I think he very much is on their radars, but I think his performance has not been enough to get him to move up. BG is in a position to get invited to an NBA camp and probably play on a summer team after he graduates because NBA people are aware of his skillset. He will get workout invites and that type of thing. He likely will not be drafted, but he will have an opportunity to make a team.

The NBA is changing. If BG can hit corner threes and be an average wing defender, he will find a spot on an NBA bench. The NBA looks for three types of players - stars, rotation role players and end of the bench reserves. BG isn't going to be a star in the league, but he can be effective as a shooter if he improves his defense to an average level.

Cubs are a better bet right now because they are in the NLCS. Dodgers or Mets will be done after today, at which point the NL odds will shift. If the Dodgers win tonight, I expect they will be slight favorites over the Cubs.

There are only 9 spots in a Bill Self rotation, so there are nine seats for when the music stops:

1. Ball Handler
2. Ball Handler
3. Starting Wing
4. Bench Wing/Ball Handler
5. Foul Trouble Wing
6. Big Man
7. Big Man
8. Bench Big Man
9. Foul Trouble Big Man

We already know that spots 1 and 2 are taken by Frank Mason and Devonte Graham. We also know that 3 is Wayne Selden and 6 is Perry Ellis. So our dance card looks like this now:

1. Frank Mason
2. Devonte Graham
3. Wayne Selden
4. Bench Wing/ Ball Handler
5. Foul Trouble Wing
6. Perry Ellis
7. Big Man
8. Bench Big Man
9. Foul Trouble Big Man

If Cheick is eligible, he's 7. Bragg is too talented not to make him 8. Svi is too talented not to get time as well, so he's 4.

And now we have this:

1. Frank Mason
2. Devonte Graham
3. Wayne Selden
4. Svi
5. Foul Trouble Wing
6. Perry Ellis
7. Cheick Diallo
8. Carlton Bragg
9. Foul Trouble Big Man

The seven guys that will play every night are Mason, Graham, Selden, Svi, Ellis, Diallo, and Bragg. The last Wing spot is a race between Greene and Vick. The last Big Man spot is a race between Mickelson and Traylor. Now, obviously there is the issue of Diallo's eligibility. If he isn't available, then everyone moves up a spot and your bigs rotation is Ellis, Bragg, Mickelson and Traylor. Unfortunately, I think Landon Lucas is on the outside looking in with just about every scenario.

On the perimeter, it's Greene or Vick. You could have Greene's shooting, or Vick's unique combination of defense, slashing and ball handling. Thing is, Vick is probably a year away from truly putting all of those pieces together, so I think this is Greene's job once he is 100%.

So the final rotation:

1. Mason
2. Graham
3. Selden
4. Svi
5. Greene
6. Ellis
7. Diallo
8. Bragg
9. Traylor

@JayHawkFanToo

K-State wasn't that bad under Prince. In 2004 K-State went 4-7 under Snyder. They went 5-6 the next year, at which point Snyder stepped down (2-6 in conference both years). Prince takes over and goes 7-6 (4-4 in conference). He then has two lackluster years (both 5-7) and is not brought back. Snyder returns and goes 6-6, then 7-6.

K-State never really fell off under Prince. They were basically treading water after the Sproles years (ending with the Big XII title in 2003) from 2004 until 2010 when they went to the Pinstripe Bowl under Snyder. Three of those years were under Prince, but four of those years were under Snyder. Prince went 17-20 with a bowl loss (.459 winning percentage). Snyder went 22-25 with a bowl loss (.468 winning percentage). They are basically separated by a .500 season. There was never a major rebuild the second time.

If I had the choice I would take Cincinnati and Memphis. Good basketball tradition, okay football facilities. Geography works. It gives you a link between West Virginia and the rest of the conference.

The only question would be division breakdown. I think you would need to balance the football power by moving OU, Oklahoma State, Iowa State and West Virginia in with Cincinnati and Memphis, while KU, KSU, Baylor, Texas, Tech and TCU. Doing North and South would not work because the South would be too much better than the North on a regular basis. You may even need to scrap geography altogether and just keep the traditional rivals together, but divide the divisions - something like KU, KSU, Texas, OU, OSU and Memphis on one side with Tech, Baylor, TCU, Iowa State, West Virginia and Cincinnati on the other side.

To understand why David Beaty (or any other coach that KU hires) cannot use the Bill Snyder method to rise from the depths of the Big XII (and the nation) to a consistently ranked squad, we first have to understand what college football was like from 1989 (the year Snyder took over) to 1993 (when KSU made its first bowl game) and now.

In 1989, the Big XII did not exist. The Big 10 actually had 10 teams. The SEC only had 10 teams. There was a thing called the Big 8 and another thing called the Southwest Conference. College football teams only played 11 games in the regular season. There were 25 D1 independents!

Simply put, the financial structure of the game was completely different. Conference alignment was different. There were only 18 bowl games.

In order to be eligible for a bowl game, you had to win 6 games. The schedule for a Big 8 team consisted of 7 conference games, plus four non-conference games. Winning six games wasn't a guarantee that you would be invited to a bowl, however, because there were so few bowls.

In those days, the Big 8 was not a tough conference top to bottom. In fact, the bottom of the conference was embarassingly weak. Iowa St., Missouri and Kansas were all sub .500 outfits. Oklahoma State was fairly average and Oklahoma was declining after a strong run in the 1980s. There were two powerhouses (Nebraska and Colorado) but not much else.

Bill Snyder was brilliant in his understanding of this structure. Snyder immediately did two very important things. First, he made sure he never played more than one non-conference road game. Second, he made sure that he never scheduled games in Manhattan against teams that would beat him badly.

In 1989, KSU played Arizona St (#25), Northern Iowa, Northern Illinois and North Texas State. ASU blew them out 31-0, but in those days, that game was not televised, so most KSU fans didn't see their team get shellacked. They may have heard it, but they didn't see their team get overwhelmed. They lost by 2 at home to Northern Iowa, by 17 at home to Northern Illinois and won their only game of the season by edging North Texas. They were then held winless in conference play.

1989 was the last time KSU lost a home non-conference game prior to the inauguration of the Big 12. In 1990, KSU went 5-6. They were 2-5 in the Big 8, but 3-1 in non-con. Their only home loss was a blowout at the hands of Nebraska. Now, think about that from the perspective of the fan - Yeah, your team went just 5-6, but if you had KSU season tickets, you saw them go 5-1. Maybe you made the trip to Lawrence and saw them lose to KU. Maybe you went to Mizzou and saw them lose there. But for a lot of the fanbase, KSU had a pretty darn good season in 1990 because they didn't see them losing (and especially not losing badly) in person or on TV, other than the OU game on the road (a 34-7 loss). Yeah, Colorado beat KSU by 60 to end the season, but you maybe heard that on the radio or read about it in the paper. You didn't see your team just getting manhandled.

In 1991, KSU went 7-4 (no bowl). Again, they were 5-1 at home (losing only by 10 to Colorado). If you're a KSU fan, you have now seen back to back 5-1 records at home. You even got to see your squad hammer three teams, a FCS Idaho St, a Northern Illinois squad that went 2-9 and a Missouri team that stumbled to a 3 win season. Nevermind that in 3 seasons now, KSU has only beaten one team that finished with a winning record (1991 KU finished 6-5). All you see is that you're 10-2 at home in the last two years. Who cares who you beat.

Bill Snyder understood that if he could make KSU competent (i.e., don't turn the ball over, control the clock, don't give up big plays) he could beat bad teams and compete with average ones. If you don't play any good non-con teams at home, and you play in the early 1990's Big 12, you are facing one good team at your place every year (either CU or NU).

In 1992, KSU lost all five of their road games by a combined score of 156-58. However, they again went 5-1 at home (noticing a theme) by winning all three non-con games, plus knocking off Iowa State and Oklahoma State. They were on TV three times (a blowout loss to Colorado, and a two score loss to Utah State, plus a home win against Iowa State), but if you're a fan, you had five happy rides home after games in Manhattan.

In the last 3 years, if you are a KSU fan that only attends games in Manhattan or watches on TV, you have seen your team win 15 games and lose only 5. That's pretty darn good. Yeah, you've heard about and read about road losses, but you haven't had to sit through many miserable losses. That builds support.

In 1993, Snyder started winning road games, and the rest is history. KSU went 2-2 on the road, propelling them to a 8-2-1 regular season. If you're a home fan, that's now 21-5-1 that you have witnessed. That would be an incredible run.

Notice that in last four years, Snyder has played a grand total of 19 road games, with a record of just 4-15. That's not good. In conference, he's just 12-15-1 overall. That's fairly average, if not a bit below. But at home, against non-conference opponents, Snyder is now 12-0 over the last 4 seasons.

Bill Snyder rebuilt K-State football by scheduling home games he could win because he had the luxury of playing 4 non conference games. Had Snyder come to KSU even a few years later, when the Big XII came into existence, I'm not sure his rebuild works. Sure, he would have been in the weaker North, but he would have likely lost to Nebraska, Colorado and either Texas or Oklahoma every year, plus losing his road games, likely meaning he never gets to that sixth win necessary to go to a bowl. More TV games means his home fan base sees him going 5-4 instead of 5-1. That's huge.

The challenge is even greater for Beaty at KU because he can only get 3 non-conference games. It's important when building a program that you go on the road for at least one non-con game to get some exposure outside your regional area. Following the Snyder model means you're probably losing that game, meaning you're 2-1 in non-con, plus losses to Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and K-State perennially, plus road conference losses when you go to Ames, Austin, Morgantown or Lubbock. That's 7 losses annually basically automatically. You're on TV basically every week, meaning everybody sees Baylor hang 60 on you. Everybody will see TCU go for a zillion yards later this season. You can't build just by being competent because competence still means 7 or 8 losses every season.

Instead, you have to look to upgrade talent, even if that means that you suffer through mistakes. You have to know that you're going to get crushed for a couple years while you build that talent up Monday through Friday, knowing that no one will see results on Saturday either this season or next.

If I were Beaty, I would be redshirting almost every freshman I recruit for next year. Those kids are going to be the difference between you going 0-12 or 1-11 and going 1-11 or 2-10. But they may also be the difference as third year sophomores between going 6-6 and 7-5 or 8-4. That's the payoff.

But that payoff requires patience, because it will take 2 more recruiting classes (Class of 2016 and Class of 2017) before KU even has the numbers to compete in the Big XII, and that's assuming that in addition to adding 25 scholarship players, you also grab 5-7 premium walk-ons each year, to basically introduce 60+ new players into the program in the next two years. For what its worth, I think Beaty is doing this correctly.

I support what Beaty has done so far, but let's put the idea that he should follow Snyder's model to bed. We can't build up this team by simply taking what we have (as Snyder did) and drilling mistake free fundamentals. We don't have the talent for that, and we can't get away from the demands of the Big XII schedule to do that. We have to at least get to a Big XII minimum as far as talent is concerned because we have to be able to go 3-6 in conference to even sniff a bowl game.

FiveThirtyEight.com just put out NBA player projections. I thought their projections on Cliff Alexander ↗ were very interesting. This is based purely on his college stats, but it pretty much suggests that Cliff's college performance makes him a potentially elite rebounder, finisher and shot blocker among other rookies. The player most similar to Alexander is DeAndre Jordan. Not a bad comp. Zach Randolph and Samuel Dalambert are other successful players with comps to Cliff. There are some duds out there - Chris Taft and Randolph Morris - but even BJ Mullens has been a decent bench player, and Jordan, Taft, Morris and Mullens are Cliff's closest comps.

The projections for Kelly Oubre ↗ are not nearly as positive. His lead comp is Xavier Henry. He has some positive comps (Jason Richardson, Luol Deng, Thaddeus Young), but his closest four comps are Henry, Daquan Cook, Shawne Williams and Zach Levine. Not a star in the group. Not even a high level starter.

There's about a 50/50 chance Cliff makes it in the league by his comps. I think that's about fair.

Oubre has about a 40% chance to make it. Seems backwards for a lottery pick and an undrafted FA.

I think a couple of years ago TimeWarner and Cox showed the pregame stuff, then blacked out the game itself.

Baseball is regionally popular. Football is nationally popular.

That means that for the playoffs, weekend games would be popular in the cities with participating teams, but would likely not do well in cities without teams.

Weekday games may attract other viewers that are general sports fans, even if they are not fans of the teams involved.

Without the Yankees, Angels and Red Sox, the networks worry that they can't draw big national viewership, even though the Royals, Cardinals, Tigers, Diamondbacks, Padres and Rays were all the most popular primetime program in their respective markets. Think about that. One fifth of the league was basically the Seinfeld/Friends of the primetime TV market. I didn't see a single Dbacks or Padres game this year, but chances are if you lived in Phoenix or San Diego, you watched them a few times this summer.

But again, that's a regional popularity, not a national one. This is why people believe (incorrectly) that baseball is dying. Other than the Yankees, there aren't any baseball teams that are popular across the country. The midwest has been Royal and Cardinal crazy for the last couple of years, but chances are if you live outside Kansas/Missouri/Nebraska/Iowa/Arkansas that probably doesn't mean much to you.

However, football is nationally popular. The Cowboys, Packers, Giants, Raiders, Patriots, Bears, Washington football team, and Steelers all have pretty strong followings nationally. You can go almost anywhere in the country and find fans of those eight teams, and not just a few here or there. I know people that love the Packers that have never even been to Wisconsin.

That's the big difference with football vs. baseball.

I don't have too much of a knock on any of this.

Taylor gets a bump from the change in style. The uptempo style that Havoc brings should give him a bit of a statistical bump because UT will play faster and get more possessions. Taylor is very good in the open floor, so I could also see him being much more efficient.

Hield is the best returning player in the conference, so no issue there.

Diallo will be very good if/when he is eligible.

That Preseason team is as solid as it gets.

Morris and Mason are the potential replacements for Taylor, but if Texas finishes in the top 3 or 4 in the conference, they will probably have an all conference player. Taylor will likely have the numbers, so he will probably get the nod. If that group stays healthy, the only thing I could see changing is Niang getting bumped for McKay or Ellis getting bumped by Diallo, but again, we are talking about teammates switching out. Otherwise, that list is probably going to stay the same barring injury.

@BeddieKU23 said:

Other than snacks, our assistants are not getting any younger

Snacks is getting younger? That's amazing. j/k. No malice.

In seriousness though, I think Miles would be a great addition to the staff at some point. He has a great understanding of the game, he's played professionally in Europe, was a high level college player and has potential as a recruiter.

@jaybate-1.0

Got to agree although I think you could put Gale Sayers on this team and it would still go 0-fer.

Seeing as Gale Sayers is 72 (a quick 72, but 72 nonetheless) and has had some significant knee surgeries, I don't think he would be the game breaker he was 50+ years ago. Riggins might still have some carries in him, but I don't think he could do it every week.

All jest, no malice.

@jaybate-1.0

Hard to say. On one hand, there are probably lots of "interesting" things that happen on these trips.

On the other, with the needed emphasis on sexual assault on college campuses, maybe you do introduce some "professionalism" into the mix to make sure Star Recruit doesn't do anything foolish.

Either way, this news is troubling.

Yes, colleges have used sex as a recruiting tool in the past, but that's a terrible idea to basically use the females on campus as merchandise for the purpose of recruiting. That is disrespectful and low brow.

Turning it over to prostitutes is even worse, particularly because some players may be minors on their visit. Just irresponsible on the part of the university.

@Statmachine, @HighEliteMajor

The lower ranked players are going to start committing much earlier, because when the music stops, coaches will find a spot for a top 10 guy. They won't necessarily find a spot for a guy ranked 54. Plus, so long as you don't sign an LOI, you can always switch your commitment late if anything changes.

There's no benefit to high ranking guys signing early unless they know for sure where they want to go, otherwise its to their benefit to just keep the options open. There isn't a program in the country that wouldn't love to sign a top 20 player.

Coleby's injury really isn't a huge blow in the grand scheme of things. He loses the opportunity to practice this season, but he will be healthy in time for off season work, so he should be able to work on things then. He will get to focus on the mental side of things this year, and he's already played D1, so he will come back next year knowing the schemes, and should be in shape, assuming that his rehab is complete sometime in late April or early May.

As @Texas-Hawk-10 said, Coleby wasn't really slated to be the starter, so the recruiting needs don't change. Coleby is there to replace Traylor and Mickelson, not to replace Ellis and Diallo (assuming Diallo is eventually ruled eligible).

If KU football wants to improve, they should look for athletic players that may not get a lot of attention from other schools because they don't play for strong HS teams.

If I were them, I would focus on Kansas City, Kansas, Topeka, and Wichita.

Currently, the starting QB for Hutchinson JC is a kid from KCK. He was on scholarship at Minnesota, but left without playing. He's a clear D1 talent. If I were Beaty, I would be all over this kid.

There are a couple other kids in KCK that are fringe D1 prospects, but are good athletes. Beaty should be targeting those types of players because he is so short on athletic players that signing (or getting walk-ons) that are athletic may help him with his depth.

Same thing in Wichita and Topeka. There are at least a couple players in both cities that are not really ranked right now, but are athletic enough to be D1 players despite playing on bad teams.

You land five or six of those kids (some on scholarship, some as walk-ons) you can rebuild the infrastructure of the program. That's where the focus should be right now. Building in the foundation to hopefully have success in a couple years.

I didn't watch the game, so I can't speak to it, but the calls covered in the article are pretty bad.

On the first play, the only potential hold is on the receiver blocking the guy and pushing him out of bounds. If I had seen the penalty enforcement, I could figure out where the penalty was since that should be a spot enforcement.

On the second play, the official doesn't move his feet as the action comes, so he doesn't have a very good angle. You can see that he doesn't move at all during the play (doesn't even shift his position until he reaches for his flag). That's poor technique at best. He should have shuffled to get a better look at the block, which would have allowed him to see the block more clearly. However, he is screened out by the LB as the LB shuffles along the line, so it may have appeared to him that the DL was holding the OL to prevent the OL (#74) from blocking the LB. However, if the umpire moves his feet here, he has a clear look to see that in fact DL #98 is being held by OL #73. With the big bodies in there, and not moving his feet, he blows this call because he simply can't see the action.

The fumble is a tough call. Can't see it, but as I learned when I first started officiating (officiated football for 10+ years) you look awfully stupid when you point one way and the other team comes out of the pile with the ball.

The last call is another case of poor technique. I can't see the officials eyes, but his feet are turned upfield. However, he should be looking into the backfield because the ball is still behind him. His responsibility is the block where the OL #73 tackles #40 from behind. However, he is looking upfield before the ball carrier passes him. He's anticipating the ball carrier turning the corner rather than watching the blocks until the ball carrier passes him.

In the first case of poor technique, it can be chalked up to laziness. The guy doesn't move his feet, which means he has no angle to see the play. It's quite possible that he was a little tired from trying to keep up with the athleticism and was afraid of being sucked into the play. However, you can see from his position that he isn't even ready to move when that play happens. He's standing straight up. No bend in the knees. No athletic position. He's standing there like he's waiting on the bus. He wasn't ready for the play and he missed the call.

In the second case, it can be chalked up to over-anticipation. The official assumes that the ball carrier will turn the corner and starts upfield before the ball carrier reaches him. He's ahead of the play when he should be behind the play. He doesn't need to beat the ball carrier upfield. He needs to make sure there is no backside hold or clip. Even his position isn't particularly good. He is at the line of scrimmage, but he should be watching the backfield as the ball approaches, ready to shuffle as the ball carrier crosses the line, and jog upfield if the ball carrier breaks containment. Instead he likely was too far upfield, stepped back, then stepped forward when the runner passed him. As a result, he missed the call because he wasn't in the right place to see the block that was solely his responsibility. That's right in front of him. He's the only official watching that area, but he's looking upfield, so the crew looks bad.

I would guess you could find 20-25 more plays during this game where the officials were in the wrong place, or looking in the wrong area based on what I am seeing in this handful of plays based on the type of mistakes being made. Big XII needs to review the officials here to determine why they are not positioning themselves correctly.

@MoonwalkMafia

When Dean Smith coached a UNC, for a long time he required players to go to church on Sunday. It could be any church of their choosing, but he required it for a number of years. Granted, this was a long time ago, but he did it.

There are lots of coaches with tough rules. Gill played for Tom Osborne during an era when Osborne had some pretty strict rules. Obviously, those rules later eased quite a bit. Dan McCartney at Colorado had some very strong teams (and won a national title) with lots of very strict rules.

I've seen people on this board say that Gill gave the players too much freedom after Mangino was so tough. I've seen people say Gill was too strict with his rules. I honestly don't think it was either.

I think that after Gill lost his first game to an FCS school, it gave the people that didn't want him hired some space to start chipping away. When that happened, the players saw that Gill didn't have support any more, so they knew he couldn't come down on them. Gill lost the team because he lost the powerful alums. I heard people after that first game talking about gathering funds to buy him out. If you're a player, and you hear that powerful alums want to get rid of your new coach, are you going to listen to anything he says at that point? Probably not. He has no hammer anymore. He can't suspend you because his job is already on the line. And that's after the first game!

Gill was doomed almost immediately.

Weis was doomed when he left ND. Actually, Weis may have been doomed long before he ever arrived at KU. Either way, there was no chance Weis was succeeding, but the alums had already jumped the gun on firing Gill because they overestimated the attractiveness of the KU football job. They thought they could attract a big time, up and coming coach. Instead they got a coach that was just a big name and an empty suit.

Gill actually had the team heading in the right direction. He had a ton of young, athletic talent on both sides of the ball. He had a stable of running backs, some big wide receivers, a ton of speedy DBs and lots of athletic LB/DE type guys. He also had some huge linemen. Now, almost every single one of those guys was a freshman, RS freshman or a sophomore when Gill left, but there were pieces there. Had KU made the right hire after Gill, they would be in line for a mid-level Big 12 finish this year, and a shot at a bowl.

But Weis, because he was a big name and was arrogant, decided to clean house, in part because there were some problems, and in part because he didn't want the success to be attributed to Gill's players. And yet, every major contributor during Weis' time at KU was a Gill recruit. That's why we have 60 scholarship players this season. That's why Beaty is basically trying to build a burnt out house. Weis was possibly the worst coach that could have been hired in that situation, but because certain alums wanted to make a "splash", he got the job.

So really, I lay the last few years of football futility at the feet of a handful of prominent alums. Most people will never know who they are because they were anonymous when the Gill buyout went down, and they used that money to influence the Weis hire.

@jaybate-1.0

I hope not.

There just isn't enough legitimate major D1 talent on that roster to expect much in terms of wins this season or next. There are only 60 scholarship players on this roster. KU isn't good right now, but firing another coach means that we are hitting the reset button yet again, without even allowing Beaty a chance to recruit and get some talent into the program.

Barring a scandal, Beaty should be allowed at least three seasons, and I'd be inclined to give him as many as five years to try and right the ship. This program is in bad shape and needs a strong dose of consistency to have any chance of recovery.

@JayHawkFanToo

That assumes things remain static. If there were to be a rule change, that change would alter the landscape and I believe that juco schools would receive more help from ShoeCo for basketball.

The comparison above mentions moving towards a baseball model. In baseball, the top high school prospects follow one of three routes - straight to the pros, juco or major colleges. Those three paths are pursued in varying degrees, but typically the best players jump straight to the pros (minor leagues), the next best hedge their bets at the juco level, particularly if they didn't get the scholarship offer they wanted, and the rest go to major colleges.

The reason this happens is because if you go the juco route, you can be drafted upon graduation, whereas if you go the major college route, it's a three year wait. I've already covered the earnings difference for NBA players by comparing the careers of the #4 and #5 picks in the 1995 NBA draft. Just as a quick recap, Rasheed Wallace went 4th, Kevin Garnett went 5th. Wallace left UNC after just 2 years, turning 21 just two months before his first NBA season. Garnett went to the pros straight out of high school, turning 19 the spring before his first season. Those two years made a huge difference in the contract salaries. Both players received a huge jump in salary after their 3rd season, and basically enjoyed large contracts for the next decade. However, in 2012, at the age of 36, Garnett signed one more big contract, which he is playing out this season. In 2012, Wallace signed a small one year deal, then retired the next season as he approached his 39th birthday. Garnett will finish his career at 39 as well, but with one last big contract under his belt (and in his bank account). Yes, Garnett was a better player throughout his career than Wallace, but the fact remains that age was a significant factor in Garnett getting one last contract while Wallace retired.

I could certainly see a lot of players going to jucos (or even going to prep school for a year) rather than college so that they begin their NBA career at 18, 19 or 20 rather than 21, 22 or 23. Because the NBA caps the rookie salary scale, there is a huge incentive to get out of your rookie contract as young as possible so that you net one more big deal during your career than you would if you attended college for 3 or 4 years. That could be a $30m difference in earnings for a star. Even for a lesser player, that could be an 8 figure difference.

You say

The JuCo level of play would not prepare players to the next level or give them the exposure they need

You have to realize that this assumes that things stay the same. The level of juco play is what it is today because the best route to NBA currently is the four year school. However, if the rules change, that may also change. It won't take much for the talent level in juco to equal or surpass the talent at four year schools. If 30 of the top 50 prospects every year either go pro or go juco, the talent level in D1 will drop significantly. Remember, a power school like KU has started the following not ever-NBA talents over the last several seasons - Naadir Tharpe, Kevin Young, Tyrel Reed, Brady Morningstar, Russell Robinson, Christian Moody, etc. Just about every year, one of the five starters for one of the top programs in the nation is not an NBA talent, not even a potential fringe NBA player. Now, go back the last few years and eliminate the OAD players. In 2013-14, that means no Wiggins and Embiid (and maybe no Selden). Your 2013-14 starters are probably Tharpe, Selden, Greene or AWIII, Ellis and Black. That's a huge drop off. That lineup has one NBA backup in it (Black), and maybe two potential NBA backups (Selden and Greene). That is not a very high level of play. And if Selden opts for JuCo, or decides to make the jump to the NBA, it falls even further.

A rule change means the OADs are gone. That means that this year the following players are likely not playing college basketball - Ben Simmons, Skal Labissiere, Brandon Ingram, Jaylen Brown, Henry Ellenson, Diamond Stone, Cheick Diallo, Ivan Rabb, Caleb Swanigan, Malik Newman, Chase Jeter, Stephen Zimmerman, Jamal Murray.

The next list, you can probably say half of them are not at D1, either because they don't want to wait 3 years and opt for JuCo or overseas, or because they jumped to the NBA out of high school - Isaiah Briscoe, Dwayne Bacon, Jalen Brunson, PJ Dozier, Carlton Bragg, Deyonta Davis, Malachi Richardson Jalen Adams, Ray Smith, Derrick Jones, plus 2014 players Justin Jackson, Theo Pinson, Isaac Copeland, Melo Trimble, Chris McCullough and maybe a few others.

Imagine KU this year without Selden, Diallo, Bragg and Svi (stays overseas so that he is eligible for the NBA draft next year). That's four of our best 8 guys. The KU rotation is Mason, Graham, Greene, Ellis, Lucas, Traylor, Vick and Mickelson because remember, we can't just say, oh, well we get such and such to replace Diallo, because Rabb isn't in college either. That's a good college lineup, but that isn't a lineup that will have NBA scouts lining up at the doors. Maybe a send a guy to check out Greene, or see if Ellis or Mickelson can be backups, or to see if Vick is an NBA guy in 3 years, but I am not scouting that group heavily if I am an NBA guy.

And that's just taking the top layer off. If the attrition is worse than that, look out. There is a very real possibility more guys would test the waters and sign with JuCos late, or head to prep school in preparation for a jump the following year.

@JayHawkFanToo

The baseball model won't work for basketball. The larger schools aren't prepared for it. More importantly, the juco system isn't ready for it.

In baseball, top prospects that may not quite be ready for the pros go to jucos instead of four year schools because they can leave the juco earlier than they could leave a four year school (immediately upon graduation as opposed to after 3 years). Many times, this means that a kid can play just one year of college baseball at a juco and then re-enter the draft.

So what you would see is the top 8-15 players leaving straight from high school, but many of the next tier (guys ranked between 20-40) would head to jucos where they could leave after one or two seasons. Obviously, not everyone would do this, but many would, and the talent level in D1 would plummet. As the talent level fell, both from the attrition of guys going straight to the pros, and guys going to juco, there's a legitimate question about whether big time college basketball would even be a reasonable preparation for the NBA. There's already an enormous gap. If you shave off even 20 or 25 of those top players, that's a large dip in the overall talent pool.

I see no Brannen Greene in that photo.

Svi does look more solid, as does Graham. Vick always looks taller than 6-5 in pictures. I don't know if its the angle or what, but he looks more like 6-6 or better.

@wissoxfan83 said:

If BG shoots it all season instead of just the first half

Has anyone heard if BG is running yet? That is the early season subplot that is not getting enough attention. His health is a critical element for this team because he can space the floor in a unique way. He and Svi could really help stretch the defense and give Perry more room to operate on drives.

Brannen Greene may be the most important backup in America.

@BeddieKU23

Diallo is very important defensively, because he is the only KU big that I can envision being a standout defender. On the offensive end, Diallo is less skilled than Perry, Mick and probably behind Bragg as well, so his absence can be weathered on that end.

But when it comes to shot blocking and rebounding, I don't think KU has anyone that can replace Cheick. The fact that we can weather the storm on one end makes him less important to KU (IMHO) than Skal is to UK, because UK needs Skal to start and help on both ends. Maybe UK is okay defensively without Skal (depending on the health of Poythress), but I don't think UK has the depth to survive without him on both ends.

Still, the eligibility of both changes the fortunes of their respective teams. With them, they are both FF and national title ready. Without, literally everything else has to go right.

@Crimsonorblue22

If you are in or around the KC area, I would suggest a stop through the Negro League Baseball Museum. It is a trip you will not regret if you like history, baseball or both.

I have trouble calling this the game of the year until I know the eligibility situations for each team. If everyone is eligible, then absolutely, this game pits two national title contenders. If not, then it changes things because lacking a impact player probably knocks either of these teams off the national title short list.

Skal is more important to UK than Cheick is to KU, but Cheick's defense is the big difference to me between KU being on the short list and KU being a possible champ.

Something to consider

About 35% of firearm deaths are classified as a homicide. That means a little more than a third of gun deaths each year are potentially the result of a violent criminal act. So what's going on with the other 65%?

Well, about 62% of gun deaths each year are suicides. Think about that. Almost twice as many people die from firearms of their own hand than die from violent crime. In 2010, over half of all suicides in the US involved a firearm. That's incredibly sad on so many different levels.

The remainder of the deaths are the result of accidental shootings. That's only about 3%, but that's the most unnecessary of all. And to top it off, gun control laws directly influence this category the most. States with looser laws have more guns, and those states have accidental shooting rates about 9 times higher than the strictest states. That's sad. 8% of unintentional shootings feature a "shooter" under the age of 6. The other thing that has to be considered is that some shootings that many of us would call accidental are, for record keeping purposes, classified as homicides. This is because if, for instance, a child points a gun at another child and jokingly pulls the trigger, the intent to pull the trigger exists, making it a negligent homicide case rather than accidental (something more like if a person drops a gun onto the floor and it fires).

The other issue is how we perceive homicide in our minds as a society. When most people think homicide, they imagine an unknown gunman sticking somebody up in a dark alley. The reality is that many of these homicides are the result of domestic violence (the stats on that are especially troubling), "accidental" (negligent) shootings.

I'm not going to rant about what should be done because the divide on this issue is too wide to bridge in a simple online post. But I will say this - we need to get rational about what to do, because the majority of deaths by guns each year are not random gunman in the alley or guy breaking into your house. It's domestic violence, or a kid accidentally shooting their sibling, or suicide. When you see that side of gun deaths, it makes you think differently.

Maker will be a very good player. You just don't find guys with his combination of height, speed, agility and coordination. Kevin Durant and Kevin Garnett come to mind, not as far as basketball skills (both Durant and Garnett were further along), but in terms of athletic ability and fluidity.

The athletic fluidity uncaps Maker's potential in the same way that Andrew Wiggins' amazing athleticism uncapped his potential. Maker could be anything. Durant, Garnett, Jermaine O'Neal, a college Christian Laettner, Manute Bol, Isaiah Austin, Dirk Nowitzki, Anthony Davis - Maker could legitimately morph into a doppelganger of any one of those very different players.

As a basketball fan, I find that fascinating. I don't know that he will be an all time great. His actual ball skills are still behind his potential, but he has the tools to become something incredible. He's added bulk, so instead of being laughably skinny, he's now just skinny.

I don't know how he fits in with college basketball because it's not clear what type of player he is. Truthfully, nobody knows what type of player he is (or could be) at this point. I think that makes him a difficult fit in an established system because he's not really a post or wing. He's a hybrid that we haven't really seen before, and his development will probably be advanced if he's not forced to be either just yet.

Could he help KU? Certainly. He's talented and talent is always helpful.

Could KU help him - much thornier question.

@jaybate-1.0

Charlie Weis gutted the program for a handful of reasons.

1) There were some academic/behavior issues that needed to be cleaned out after Gill left. This is the case in almost every coaching change. Several players, usually between 5-15 will need to be moved out for various off the field issues. Weis took it to the extreme and booted nearly 20 guys.

1. Style - Weis wanted to run a pro-set offense, where Gill had been putting together a power run offense. By hiring a coach with a polar opposite approach and gameplan, particularly on the offensive side, Weis was given a team of square pegs for his gameplan of round holes.

2. Timing - being at the end of his career, Weis wasn't coming for an extended rebuild. He wanted to come to KU, get to a bowl within three years, then leave for a better job at a powerhouse. However, the KU job was a five year project by that time. It was probably a three or four year project when Gill took over, but his short stint added another year to that timeline because of the lost recruiting class after his firing.

Those factors meant that KU ended up with a lot of short term fixes, first to fill holes left by the departures, then to artificially prop up the team for what Weis hoped would be a quick reboot. Most of those short term fixes left last year. Additionally, many of Gill's strongest recruits finished their careers last year - it's forgotten that Gill's first class was a pretty solid group considering he came in late in the year. Tony Pierson, Dexter McDonald, Jacory Shepherd, Brandon Bourbon, Victor Simmons, Ben Heeney, Taylor Cox, Jimmay Mundine, Michael Reynolds, etc. That's a list of many of the productive players under Weis. All guys that played as freshmen and sophomores under Gill.

Other than transfers and juco guys, Weis didn't have those types of players. There ae currently over 40 transfers on the roster. There should never be more than 30 on a good roster because too many transfers means too many players graduating at the same time. There are just 16 sophomores on the roster. There are 37 juniors. That means that at the end of next year, 37 of the guys currently on the roster will exhaust their eligibility. You can only sign 25 guys per year. After next season, we will be down on personnel no matter how well Beaty recruits. That's on Weis for loading up on short term guys because he never intended to stay at KU past next season.

Given what we now know about the New England Patriots and Spygate ↗ I think a fair question to ask is this - how good a football coach is Charlie Weis?

Weis' grand success with the Patriots came from 2000-2004, the height of the Spygate era when the Pats allegedly had tapes of 40 games worth of defensive signals. Weis was calling plays while knowing what the defense was running.

It should be noted that Weis was not thought of as any offensive genius to this point in his coaching career. Weis had overseen some success, but nothing on the scale of what the Patriots accomplished during Spygate.

I guess what I'm saying is this - without the spying, is Charlie Weis even thought of as a candidate for the Notre Dame job? Does he even get an interview?

Looking back, knowing what we know now, I don't think Charlie Weis was the brilliant offensive mind that we were told he was. I think he was a average to slightly above average position coach that landed in a great situation in New England, gained a tactical advantage from the spying that was done and has used that to advance an otherwise average career.

Weis was a below average recruiter. We knew that when he was hired. But if it turns out that he was a fairly average tactician as well, that just so happened to have the best four years of his career when he knew what the defense was running 75% of the time, well, guess what folks, we were frauded. Simply put, KU and Notre Dame paid Charlie Weis over $50m over the last 10 years because Bill Belichick cheated.

@jaybate-1.0

I think the PG in the salmon top is Jeff Hawkins' wife, Heather. I think she is with the KU alumni association.

The goal for Beaty this year should be to identify which freshmen he has that can become legitimate Big XII contributors. Other than that, the more important things this season are happening at the high school level.

KU remains severely talent deficient, particularly on the defensive side of the ball, where we lack either speed, depth or both at each position group. It is critically important that KU get some depth this offseason. We can't compete with the kind of numbers that we have on the roster right now.

If KU can find 35-40 legitimate contributors this season and add a legitimate Power 5 recruiting class each of the next 2 years, they will have a chance to compete in 2017.

The problem with the Big 12 is that, other than KU, there hasn't been a consistently great team in the conference.

Oklahoma with Blake Griffin was the last truly great non-KU team. They were a 2 seed and went to the Elite Eight.

To get teams into the Final Four, you can't just have good teams. The Big 12 produces average to good teams in droves. That is why the Big 12 consistently puts 5-7 teams in the tournament. There are not many bad teams in the Big 12. You could argue that the Big 12 only has 3 below average teams this coming year (KSU, TTU and TCU). Even TCU could trickle towards average.

But who, other than KU, is potentially going to be great? ISU and OU will both be very good, but I would argue that both were better last year than they are likely to be this season. Texas and West Virginia are a step or so below that, and Baylor is probably a half step off Texas. Oklahoma State is halfway between Baylor and TCU.

If ISU or OU gets hot they could get to the Final Four. I doubt anybody else has the guns, though. I see a FF candidate (Kansas), a couple potential Sweet 16 teams (ISU, OU) and a bunch of likely tournament teams that probably don't get through the first weekend.

Top to bottom, the Big 12 is better than anybody. But come tournament time, only the top matters, and the top of the Big 12 is not elite beyond Kansas.

@clevelandjayhawk

Diallo affects both the ceiling and the floor for this team because of his skill set.

Defensively, Diallo should be good enough from day one that KU is assured of being a 25 win, top 2 seed. Without Diallo, KU is much softer in the middle, which could expose them to being a 3 or 4 seed if things break wrong. So the floor is raised if Diallo is cleared.

However, Diallo also raises the ceiling for this squad. If he can be effective offensively, the ceiling is absolutely national title.

@Texas-Hawk-10

I have said for years and will continue to say, the road to KU football success has three major keys.

1. Own the Kansas City recruiting circuit. KU must dominate this area. It is the only recruiting area where KU can even imagine an advantage due to proximity, so KU must dominate this area, from Blue Springs on the east to Basehor on the west, from Liberty up north to Gardner on the south. There is enough talent that comes from KC each year to grab a handful of recruits. Not a full class, but a solid group.

2. Re-start the Arrowhead game with Missouri to produce a national profile. KU football needs to be on national tv, in a marquee game every year. That can be the Mizzou game. The silly "they destroyed the history" crap needs to end and this needs to get done. Also, that game is probably worth $1m each year.

3. Find an identity and stick with it. I don't know what Beaty's long term plan is yet, but whatever it is, he deserves five years to see it through. KU hasn't stuck with a plan long enough for anything to work in the last half decade, and that leaves us here, with 60 scholarship players and one of the worst 10 programs in D1.

If KU does those things, they can become a solid 8 win team year in and year out, with a chance to win 10 or 11 games sometimes.

@jaybate-1.0

The scary thing is, Stephen Curry already does.

In his first six seasons in the NBA, Korver never shot better than 43%. He shot the following:

39%

40.5%

42%

43%

37.5%

38.6%

This is what Curry has done through six seasons:

43.7%

44.2%

45.5%

45.3%

42.4%

44.3%

Those are some seriously scary numbers given that jumpshooters seem to improve through their late 20's as they learn how to work off screens to get better looks.

Reggie Miller's first six seasons never saw him shoot 42% from three, followed by five consecutive seasons between 41% and 43%. Ray Allen's best two percentage seasons were as a 35 and 36 year old, when he shot around 45%. Korver's last six seasons have been the best of his career, never dipping below 41%, all the way up to the insane 53% you mentioned earlier.

To put it simply, Curry may be the man to break the 55% barrier as he nears his age 28 and 29 seasons in a few years.

@BeddieKU23

It's okay to have some guys that don't measure up, but you can't build your program around non-NBA talent if you want to win the big prize.

I love Frank and think he could certainly be the starting PG on a championship team. I think Perry can be a starter on a title team.

However, those guys need to be surrounded by at least two NBA caliber players to win a title. If Selden makes the leap we have all been waiting for, that's one. Diallo may be the second. Perhaps Bragg. But either way, there have to be 2 NBA caliber players to support our two very good college players for this team to win a title. If Selden or Diallo isn't up to the task, we probably fall short again come March.

@Crimsonorblue22

Tough to say. He was at KU so briefly, and spent much of that time with speculation that he would be fired. Even if he was strong with discipline, it's hard to imagine how he would have been effective since there were prominent alums lining up to buy out his contract half way through his first season.

Maybe he was too soft and would not have worked out regardless. But the speculation that he would be fired undercuts any potential for him to be effective as an enforcer. I'm not saying Gill did a good job at all. Just that keeping him probably would have been better than bringing in Weis for two years because we at least would have a full team of scholarship players. Beaty takes over a program in much worse shape than the one that Gill left.

@Kcmatt7

I agree that we have switched styles too much, but if you look back at Gill, his first recruiting class was heavy on three things - athletic defensive players, RBs and huge OLs. Gill signed several big offensive linemen in his first full class. He was going out and getting what he needed to run the style he wanted. But by firing him after his second season we were halfway through turning over the roster.

Once Weis ran off a bunch of Gill recruits and went Juco and couldn't keep guys, you end up here - 60 scholarship players.

Gill was trying to build something long term. He recruited almost all HS players. Weis was going for the quick fix to set up a jump back to the NFL. He went almost exclusively juco. We would have been better off to just keep Gill for a couple more years than to have hired Weis.

I just hope that with Beaty there is more patience. The only way to succeed is to recruit HS talent and build up the program from within. There were people that were calling for Gill's head after his first loss to an FCS team. Gill doubled down on that by taking the redshirt off James Sims, when Sims should have been held off until the next season when the team was stronger overall.

But by rushing to improve, KU wasted a lot of the freshman talent that was brought in, and then when the change occurred, there was no foundation. Hope they give Beaty time. He needs three full recruiting classes just to get numbers back where they should be.

You watch Kyle Korver this season for the Hawks and Korver didn't even have a light. If he caught on the perimeter, he was shooting. Korver took 600 shots last year. Three quarters (449) were threes. And that's from the NBA line. BG has that range.

The question is whether that is part of the game plan. Korver's effectiveness from three was such because he was shooting whenever he felt he had a shot. His teammates knew he would shoot whenever he had a shot, so they looked to get him shots. Heck, when you can get 1.47 points per attempt, you have to do it. A Kyle Korver three was basically the best shot in basketball other than a 3 on 1 break.

That's the value of the three ball, and BG can bring that value. He also has the ability to put it on the floor, but more than anything, he should make himself the most feared, most deadly accurate shooter in the country. BG can make KU unguardable. You cannot cover KU if you can't leave BG to help on the post or the drive.

Korver was so amazing last year with the amount of gravity he created offensively. His defender had to guard him even if the rest of the defense was breaking down because giving Korver an open look from three was worse than surrendering a dunk.

Having known several band directors and had quite a few friends that were drum majors in high school and college, I have trouble believing KSU's band director.

Once formation drawings are complete, they are generally passed out among a group - band director, section leaders, drum majors, etc. and everyone looks at the formations really quickly to see

1) if their members are in the correct places from formation to formation - you don't want some random trumpet player having to run 20 yards from one formation to the next.

2) if the movements cause any confusing crossings - you don't want a tuba player tripping over a trombonist

3) if the pictures look weird or inappropriate when rotated - remember, the image is meant to be viewed from one side, but the stadium goes all around. You don't want the people looking from either end or from the opposite side to see something crazy.

Once that is done, the band starts working on the actual formations to see if they can execute them while playing. At this point, if they couldn't get the ship to look right, they can still scrap it or change it in some way.

I am not mad about it, to be honest. It's a juvenile prank. But if you're going to do something like that when you should know it could be misinterpreted, you should own it instead of acting like you had no idea.

@wissoxfan83

I think that points to why the Big 12 title run isn't as big a national story as we would like it to be. KU is one of the best programs in the country over that stretch. There isn't another team in its conference that could make that case. If the list were stretched to 25, how many Big 12 teams would make the list?

I did some quick math and I can't find a Big 12 team with more than 15 points under the criteria outlined by the article. That probably means that, of the teams in the Big 12, only one or two others would make the list if expanded to 25. That's not exactly impressive.

I've consistently argued that it would help KU tremendously if Texas and Oklahoma started winning again. A weak Big 12 reflects poorly on KU and, unfortunately, KU can't do anything about it until other teams step up.

@Red.Rooster

The troops will reflect the mindset of the leader. If the leader is afraid, his charges will be afraid. If courageous, they will be courageous.

Self coaches differently in "big games." The 2008 and 2012 teams were special because those teams reflected the personality of the top players - 2008 reflected Mario's personality, 2012 reflected TRob and Tyshawn's fearlessness - rather than Self.

But Self can improve this. He's a good coach. I have no doubt that he could make the necessary adjustments if he recognizes that when he gets tight, that filters down.

This is Kansas, one of the top 5 college basketball programs of all time.

Of all time

ALL TIME

Pull any period, under basically any coach, and Kansas should rank in the top 5. It's Kansas. Where Naismith and Allen coached. Where Wilt and Dean Smith played. This is Kansas. A list like this basically has to list Kansas, Kentucky and North Carolina somewhere in the top 5 because those three programs are the three best programs of all time.

UNC has won national titles under three different coaches and been to Final Fours under at least four different coaches.

Kentucky has won national titles under four different coaches and been to Final fours under at least that many.

Kansas has won national titles under three different coaches and been to Final Fours under at least five different coaches.

These are programs. It's not about the coach. It's about Kansas.

I don't complain about Self (when I do) because he isn't a good coach. I complain about him because I don't just want Kansas basketball to be one of the best. I want Kansas basketball to be the best. Period. End of discussion.

That's why I criticize. I want the discussion of college basketball powers to begin with Kansas, be about Kansas in the middle and end with Kansas. To do that takes national titles. This years team has a chance to win one.

Let's do this.

@Texas-Hawk-10

I’m sorry, but Shaq is not the best pure center of the past 30 years. He was a one dimensional player who only knew how use his butt to move people of the way. He was an overrated defender who could basically be brick wall and extend his hands.

I think you are remembering old Shaq. Go back and look at Young Shaq, the player that came into the league and played that way until 2001 or so. Young Shaq was as mobile as peak Hakeem. He could run the floor and was so quick and agile around the rim that his power caught most players off guard. He had both speed and power.

I'll just leave this here.[link text](

Check out the lob he catches over Hakeem. His quickness there catches a very quick player off guard because Hakeem was gearing up for the power and was left helpless by the agility. Shaq had both as a young player, but did not keep his body in shape to maintain that athleticism as he got older and put on more weight.

@Makeshift

I base my evals off rankings and watching the guy play. I don't care where Frank was ranked. I watched him get to the rim at will, handle the basketball like it was on a string and score in bushels. He wasn't ranked because he was 5-10, but from a skill perspective, there was no question that he could play, and that he played tough.

My issue with Herard isn't that he isn't ranked high - it's that he has great physical characteristics, but lacks pure basketball skills. With big men, I want to see if they are fluid when they run, move, etc. Herard is not. Watch a guy of similar size that is/was ranked high, like a Jahlil Okafor, then watch Herard. Okafor has tremendous body control and moves gracefully, even though he's a giant of a man. Herard is much more deliberate and clunky in his movements on the floor. His post moves are rudimentary. Heck, compare Herard to his HS teammate (and 80 grade player) D'Jery Baptiste.

I also want to see big men with soft hands. I call it the oop test. Watch highlights of a big guy and see if he catches any lobs. If not, that's a telltale sign that he doesn't have good hands, or isn't coordinated enough to catch an alley oop and finish. I have not seen Herard catch a single oop, or have a tip jam. For a guy his size, that makes me worry about his coordination and hands.

It's just a matter of whether Herard can develop the coordination/ hands/ body control necessary to become a good player at the D1 level, or if he will continue to struggle with those things, which will limit him severely at the college level. Like I said before, I love his size, but the lack of basketball skills and athletic tools (coordination, explosive leaping ability, speed, catching ability, body control) is a concern.

Not sure Briles loses his job because there are conflicting reports out of Boise State about what was and was not said when the transfer happened.

Depending on what Briles knew and what he covered up, he may get fired, but Baylor suspended Ukwuachu once he got into trouble there, so Baylor did not cover up his deeds while in their program.

But the thing is, here is Boise State's statement about Ukwuachu ↗ . That's from last week. Boise is saying they didn't know about it, so Petersen saying he told Briles is inconsistent with what Boise says they even knew at the time Ukwuachu was dismissed. There is more truth to be uncovered out there, and that truth could cost lots of people at Baylor, Boise and maybe even Washington their jobs.

Looking at Schnider, he would not be one of my top choices.

His hands aren't that great, so his offensive utility will be limited by that.

He doesn't have a lot of interior moves (basically just dunks and a basic jump hook), so he can probably be defended by smaller guys fairly easily since his small arsenal of moves won't punish smaller guys if they are strong.

His highlights don't show a lot of defense, which is a concern. He's not a stiff, but he's not a young Tyson Chandler or Kevin Garnett out there, although few are.

Basically, the upside is that he is big and you can't make a small guy magically become his size. He's also very strong. The downside is that he doesn't yet have the skills to go along with that size and strength. He may take a year in college before he is really able to contribute. May need a redshirt to truly maximize his potential, which means he can't be the only big in his class because we probably can't rely on him in Year One.

@BeddieKU23

The parting gift from Weis dismissing many of Gill's recruits in favor of his juco guys is that we have very little upperclassmen talent. It will take at least two years of hard recruiting just to get back to below average from a talent standpoint because Weis absolutely gutted the program.

Beaty deserves a mulligan on this season and next season from a wins and losses perspective. He may not win 2 games in his first two seasons.