Chocolate Thunder Flying, Robinzine crying
Teeth shaking, Glass breaking
Rump roasting, Bun Toasting
Wham Bam, Glassbreaker
I am Jam
RIP
justanotherfan
3643 posts
I tried to find my results, but I can't locate them and don't think I can replicate the results because I used Rivals and Scout when I did my previous comparison, but would now have to do Rivals and ESPN. I did a quick check of ESPN from 2007-2013 and it appears that ESPN rankings early on were not very reflective of long term success. There were some fairly significant crash and burns in there (Nolan Smith, Austin Freeman, Corey Fisher, Corey Stokes, Scotty Hopson). However, It seems that you are correct that there's a fairly large attrition rate in the ESPN rankings.
I agree that these guys were all essentially OAD's. So why is it that KU's OAD's have, by and large, not been as successful as OAD's that have attended other schools? Henry, Rush and Embiid have been sidetracked by injuries. You could throw Selby in that group as well.
What is it that allows other schools to produce OADs that are healthy and productive at the next level, while, by and large, KU's OADs struggle to stay healthy, let alone be productive?
That's why I take a critical view. I ask the question every year when it seems we have guys breaking down toward the end of the year. Run through the last several years - it seems like every year we have one of our main guys with a nagging leg injury in late February or early March. Knee lingerie as @jaybate-1.0 has called it. Something that we are doing is not working.
I have wondered if it's because I am too close. As a KU fan, I am very aware of every injury and shortcoming of KU players. Maybe if I followed other teams as closely I would see the same patterns, but it just seems like KU has had more problems than they should.
Some examples - Sherron Collins came to KU as an explosive leaper - recall the dunk he threw down off the backboard in the McD's AA game. I can't remember Sherron dunking at all after his sophomore year. Rush, Selby, Henry, Embiid have been covered ad nauseam. Selden was another super athletic player, but how many times have we seen that disappear as the season wore on. Frank was worn down and banged up from mid January on last year. Heck, we had a whole thread on Hudy a few months ago where I (and others) were very vocal about some of the injury issues we have had.
I just want to know what is happening to our guys that makes them turn from high flyers into X axis players.
I have heard lots of stories about Katrina and have some family friends that live just outside New Orleans and have been there since the late 90's. Basically, the perception of Katrina depends on what neighborhood you lived in. Some neighborhoods were completely devastated, never really received any help and, too this day, haven't really experienced much recovery. Unfortunately, most of those neighborhoods were some of the heavily African American neighborhoods, some of which still have not been repopulated. There was a very good article on fivethirtyeight ↗ just a couple of days ago that highlighted that.
I think that's where the differing stories come from. If you were white, or lived in a predominantly white neighborhood, the recovery that was seen was much different than if you were black or lived in a predominantly black neighborhood, some of which simply still have not recovered. It's telling that many African Americans simply never had the opportunity to move back, becoming refugees in their own country.
This mess is more of a political failing than a shortcoming on the part of people like @brooksmd 's wife, who did the best to help whoever they could during that disaster.
I don't have time right now, but I did a study a few years ago that basically determined that the chances that a player ranked in the top 15 in their class doesn't make it to the NBA is less than 10%. Top 25 was something like 80% chance of playing in the NBA. And most of those guys were in the NBA within 2 years of graduating from high school. I will try to find my results, update and post those tomorrow or Friday.
But these guys shouldn't end up as journeymen. They should end up as high level players - starters, stars, etc. Henry and Rush are journeymen. Wiggins is a star. McLemore is okay and Oubre is TBD. The question is whether KU is maximizing the development of their wing talent. I would argue that there is no proof that KU develops wings better than any other school. Big men were clearly developed under Manning. Now that he is gone, we need new data on that. But there isn't proof that Self has developed wing players at any stop in his coaching career. And the Selden issue is still there. By his ranking, he should be in the NBA right now because he hasn't missed time due to injury, but I think at this point we all wonder if he will ever be an NBA player.
Of those picks, only Wiggins has developed into an above average NBA player. Rush is an end of the bench guy (in part due to injuries). BMac is an average guy, maybe a rotation player, maybe a low end starter. Xavier is below average (in large part due to injuries). Oubre is to be determined. There is a serious question as to whether KU can actually develop wing talent and prepare them for the NBA.
Now let's look at where those guys were ranked coming out of high school according to Rivals and (ESPN).
Rush - 13
Henry - 8 (3)
McLemore - 34 (49)
Wiggins - 1 (1)
Oubre - 6 (11)
Other than McLemore, every single one of those guys should be an NBA player regardless of where they go to college. Or you could look at a guy on the current roster, the number 12 (13) ranked player in 2013 - Wayne Selden. Why isn't he an NBA player right now? That's really the question we need to be asking.
Anybody else notice that Svi is not wearing shoes, yet is taller than just about everybody?
Mickelson is clearly taller than Bragg and Diallo in the back row, and by more than just an inch. If Mickelson is 6-10, Bragg and Diallo are both 6-8, which seems accurate given that Perry appears to also be around that height. Coleby also looks like he's about that same size.
Jamari is a physical specimen, and he looks like he knows it.
Greene is noticeably absent here. He's got about seven more weeks of recovery. If he's delayed by even a week or two he won't be ready for the start of practice. Hope the rehab is going well.
I'm reading the way you are reading it. Shoes alone can't come to more than $1m. But with apparel, you can give an athlete tons of gear. This is why you see KU players constantly wearing new t-shirts, shorts, etc. when they are practicing or going to press conferences. They have tons of different stuff they get for free.
Take the hypothetical I tossed out earlier as far as each employee of the Athletic Department receiving $1000 in gear. A school like KU has at least 100 employees in the athletic department. That's 100 grand and we have not shod or clothed a single athlete.
Each student athlete is going to get close to a grand in apparel. At Nebraska, that's probably 600 or so athletes. So for (non game) apparel and shoes, you probably have close to half the yearly budget - $750,000 for shoes, $700,000 for non game apparel.
Then there's uniforms. I've seen uniform budgets in high school hit the half million mark with no problem. I wouldn't be surprised if a college spent well more than that, especially since they are going to have at least a couple sets of each uniform.
Yes. Because the athletic department staff (including administrative staff, student assistants, etc.) usually get some gear, the temptation is pretty high to sell that. That's why I included two pair of casual shoes - in almost every department, even the non field staff gets shoes and other gear (polos, jackets, etc.).
So let's say you're in the department and they just gave you 2 pair of $100 shoes, 3 $60 polos, a $200 jacket, a $150 track suit and a t-shirt with the school name and the sport for each team. All told, you have about $1000 in gear, most of which can't be bought in stores until much later this year. Maybe you keep a pair of shoes, a couple of the polos and the jacket. But you can sell that track suit for a hundred bucks easy. You can sell those shoes for at least $75. You can sell a few of the t-shirts and one of the polos and all told, you can probably pocket three or four hundred bucks.
The temptation to do that is high, especially for the staff that isn't really interested in keeping any of the gear for themselves. And then of course, because each team has to order extra shoes and other gear, there are always extras at the end of the year that end up... unaccounted for.
Most teams have to have all their gear on hand at the beginning of the year, so if a guy that you thought would use five pair of basketball shoes only uses three, hey, there's 2 extra pair of basketball shoes, top of the line and still in the box brand new. Same with track, and cross country, and football and every other sport. You could literally end up with tens of thousands of dollars of brand new apparel and equipment.
$3m shoe budget. Time for some math.
Nebraska has the following sports:
Football, Basketball (M&W), Baseball, Softball, Volleyball, Track and Field (M&W), Cross Country (M&W), Tennis (M&W), Golf (M&W), Soccer, Wrestling and Bowling.
The sports that don't require specific shoes for competition are Swimming and Diving, Gymnastics (M&W), Rifle and Beach Volleyball. All of those competitors likely get 2 pair of casual shoes to wear around campus, on trips, etc. That's probably 150 pair of shoes already, maybe 200 depending on how many coaches are involved. Everybody in the athletic department probably also gets a pair of shoes, so let's tack on another hundred pair. That's $30k right there, and we haven't touched any of their teams yet.
Football has 100 players and probably 30 coaches and managers. Each player will probably need 2 pair of cleats for the practice season and at least 6 pair of game cleats (perhaps more depending on the different grass/turf mix). Everybody will get the 2 pair of casual shoes. That's 260 pair of casual shoes and another 800 cleats (minimum). On top of having that, the football team will have at least another 100 or so pair of cleats that are unassigned in the equipment room in case there are problems. That's $26k in casual shoes. The cleats are probably more like $150 each and there will be some special orders for larger sizes, so the average cost is going to probably be more like $175 or so. That's closing in on $160k for football.
Men's and women's basketball are going to have 15 players, 4 or 5 coaches and 4 or 5 managers. Let's call it 25 people total per team, or 50. Each player will need 2 pair of practice shoes, a pair of track shoes for conditioning and at least 6 or 7 pair of game shoes. Let's call it 10 pair per player, or 300. Everybody gets 2 pair of casual shoes. That's another hundred shoes. The gamers will probably be $125 or so each, again with special orders for larger sizes probably driving the price to $140 each. Easily another $40 grand for the players, and another $10k for the casual shoes.
Cross country is going to be huge. They probably wear through 15 pair of shoes per runner, and there are 30 people on the team. Plus casual shoes for everybody, so that's 80 more pair. Running shoes are expensive, probably $150 each. Closing in on $70k, plus 8 grand for casual shoes.
Track is equally problematic. You have indoor and outdoor seasons, so that's 4-5 pair of shoes for each. There are 120 people total (M&W). $125 per pair, 10 pair per athlete. Easily $150k. Everybody, probably 150 people total, gets casual shoes, so that's 300 more pair, or $30k.
Let's take tennis and golf together. That's 30 more athletes and another 10 coaches/ managers. 80 pair of casual shoes. 5 pair of competition shoes for each athlete, probably averaging close to $150 because the golf shoes will be more expensive. Another 8 grand for casual shoes, and $22k for athletic shoes.
Baseball and softball have another 75 athletes total, You have to have 3 pair for when its cold and another 4 for when the weather warms. You've got another 20 coaches/managers. 190 pair of casual shoes, 19 grand. $125 per pair of cleats, or another $65k.
Finally, soccer, wrestling and bowling. Soccer is going to have 30 or so players, wrestling will have another 35 athletes and bowling will have 8-10. There will be at least another 30 coaches/managers for them, so there's another 210 casual shoes and we have $21k already. Soccer will shred through 7 or 8 pair each, plus need another 50 pair of unassigned backups. Wrestling will have 3 or 4 pair of wrestling shoes, plus track shoes for conditioning. bowling will have 2 pair of bowling shoes. That's 300 pair of shoes for soccer, 150 for wrestling and 20 for bowling. Call it $40k, $20k and $20k.
All told, I come up with about $750,000 for a year's worth of shoes. Given that there is also apparel included here (uniforms, workout gear, practice shirts, warm-up suits, sweat suits, coaches polos, managers t-shirts, sport specific equipment, etc.) that seems about right, or at least close.
Texas
At Iowa State
Kentucky
All in one week. That's as tough a stretch as probably anybody in the country will have. We will learn a lot about this team and whether they are ready for March in that stretch.
Really, that stretch is an NCAA tournament type of stretch. Texas, day off, ISU, then followed with Kentucky, which is the same as a Sweet 16, Elite Eight, National Semifinal (and similar caliber opponents). I'm circling that stretch now.
KU lacks D1 level athleticism at too many positions right now. Weis was terrible for recruiting. Beaty needs at least three years just to re-stock the program with some talent. If KU doesn't give Beaty at least five years, they will never be able to get out of this cycle.
There just isn't enough on field talent to be competitive right now. Too many holes to patch.
I think KU could be a decent team. Not championship caliber every year, but solid, qualifying for mid level bowls, etc.
I do not envy Kentucky. I respect the program, just like I respect Duke, UNC, UCLA, Indiana, etc. all who have some great hoops history.
I look at all of the programs around the country because I think it helps inform our discussions here.
For example, I am an attorney professionally. I am always paying attention to what other people in my profession are doing and what is successful for my own professional growth. Is there a way to do things better? What are the best techniques? What is successful?
I look at KU hoops the same way. UK has been successful the last few years and it's more than just pure talent acquisition. So I want to look closely at what they have been doing to go on this run, just like I looked closely at what UCLA was doing when they went to three straight Final Fours 10 years ago, and what Florida did to develop that back to back core.
If you aren't studying the success of your opponents, you are falling behind, whether in basketball or in any other profession.
I think the Crystal ball had him leaning away from KU for a while due in large part to that fact. These people read the body language of someone they have never met and use that to decide what they think that person will do in a major life decision.
That's like me watching you house hunt and basing my opinion of which house you pick on whether you were smiling when you stood in the kitchen at an open house. That's just me guessing at that point. I have no idea, so if you're considering 3 or 4 houses, I have about that good a chance of getting your pick right.
I know that his wife is American. I just supposed that he would play overseas for the rest of his career, then retire and move to the states. He's going to take a significant paycut (over a million bucks) to play in the U.S. That just seems like a lot, particularly when he can put that away pretty comfortably.
I figured if he wanted to come stateside for a couple of years he would have done that a few years ago, then used NBA on his resume to command more money overseas.
I'm happy for him and look forward to seeing him in the NBA. I just didn't really expect it because he's been so successful overseas.
Surprised Kaun is making the move. He's made a nice career for himself in Russia and the NBA can't really match the money he's currently making in Russia. Good for him, though.
Agreed. These crystal ball rankings are based on nothing more than rumors heard from people that overheard a conversation, or saw him laughing and joking on a visit, or other random interactions and reactions. The truth is that very few people outside most recruits most trusted confidants (parents, siblings, closest friends, coaches) truly know what is going on, and generally that is not where these "crystal balls" get their information.
We have to remember that for most of these players, they have no personal tie to anything that happened at KU more than 3-4 years ago. I doubt that Wayne Selden was sitting there watching the VCU game while he was in HS a vowing to exact revenge for the things that happened that day. He was being recruited by KU at the time, but hadn't even signed.
For us, it resonates because the game meant something at the time. For the current players, it probably doesn't mean that much. It is more important that they beat Texas than that they stick it to Shaka Smart for them, because most of them haven't had any connection to Smart.
If we find a weakness in a defense we don’t usually continue to attack that one point, unless it is back-to-the-basket scoring close to the rim. NBA ball feels very different. And you’ll see coaches calling a timeout because one guy on the other team scored 3 baskets in a row. They have to change things up to stop him immediately or the other team will continue to take those points.
This is brilliant and what I have been trying to say for a while. However, I think some players are capable of scoring against certain matchups very consistently in college. I also think it prevents a team from maybe leaving a one dimensional player on the floor against you.
Let's think back (painful as it is) to that Northern Iowa loss. Ali Fa-whatever killed us in that game. He had a spectacular game. Played 31 minutes, hit 4 threes and just generally burned us every time we tried to do something. UNI played some zone, but they played quite a bit of man. So who was Ali covering? For most of the day, it was either Henry or Taylor because they knew he couldn't handle Sherron. So please tell me why Tyshawn attempted 6 shots and five of them were threes? Ali had zero fouls in that game. ZERO. This guy played 31 minutes, killed us on the other end and at no point did we attack him on the defensive end? Really?
Ali deserves credit for playing as well as he did, but there's no way we should have let him stay on the court. Make them decide if he's worth playing 31 minutes for his offense while acting as a traffic cone on the other end. Don't let them hide a guy that could (and did) end up costing you the game. Punish him. Again, Henry and Taylor took a combined 12 shots (12!) and of those 12, nine were threes. That's not testing the suspect defense. That's letting them off the hook.
Tyshawn and Xavier couldn't have gotten into the paint at least a few times instead of firing threes? And if they did, doesn't that shift the outcome of that game, either by forcing Ali to the bench in favor of a better defender (and lesser offensive player) or by conceding some buckets for KU to keep their offense going. We lost by 2. If we can cost them a couple offensive possessions because Ali plays 25 minutes instead of 31, or Ali plays 31 but gives up a couple more good offensive possessions for us, we win that game (and maybe that clears the way for a title because that squad was loaded).
Not trolling at all. If you look through all my comments, you will see that I complain all the time that Self is inflexible with his schemes. That is my #1 criticism of him as coach. He does not adapt to his personnel and I think that has cost us a chance to win at least one national title (2010, when KU had as much talent as perhaps any year) and another bizarre flameout in 2014 when he should have pressed the heck out of a team with no PG.
Self won't press his match up advantages, which drives me bonkers, especially because when guys get going, he doesn't just keep going to them unless its in the post. The Oklahoma game at AFH this year is a perfect example. Oubre started that game out either 5-7 or 5-8, including like 4 threes. KU opened the second half by going into the post 4 straight possessions. Oubre went something like 8 minutes without attempting a shot at one point. I sat on my couch dumbfounded. Here's one of the best college coaches in the country and he's letting one of his three best players go without a shot for a basketball eternity even though:
1) that guy is scorching hot
and
2) his team is blowing a big lead
Things were thrown that night.
But I watch Cal and he goes to the hot hand over and over again. Against ND in the Elite Eight, ND tried to guard Towns with smaller guys and UK went to Towns on literally every single possession for at least six minutes in the second half. The only reason they stopped going to him was because they took him out to get a breather. Once he came back in, they went right back to him.
When have we ever seen Self look another coach in the eye and basically say "your guy can't cover my guy, and until you change the matchup that's where we are going?" I say never, which is how lesser teams can stay with KU. You eliminate inferior players by isolating them and then exploiting the matchup until either the matchup changes or you have overwhelming success.
KU has the benefit of being able to land some of the best talent in the country. As a result, someone has a huge matchup advantage every night for KU. You shouldn't go to that advantage when you're down 10 late in the game. That should be the gameplan.
All the X's and O's in the world don't mean a thing if I've got vintage Michael Jordan and you're guarding him with vintage Michael J. Fox. A good coach identifies that advantage and exploits it - repeatedly. I don't need to draw a bunch of stuff on a board. I need to but utter five simple words
"Get the ball to Michael"
Cal has his shortcomings, part of which is that he is sometimes too willing to change and make adjustments rather than playing to his team's strengths. I think at times he looks to let his talent take over instead of exploiting one matchup or playing to a specific strength.
Someone says Cal can't win with lower ranked guys. I post information showing that he has already done that at two other stops. Someone questions if he can turn low ranked players into NBA players. I post proof that he has done that.
And yet it's meh to you.
As I have said on this site many times, I am a basketball fan (NBA first, college second) that likes to look at the whole picture, not just my favorite teams. The whole picture says that John Calipari is one of the best coaches in the country (easily top 5, likely top 3) and it isn't just because he gets the best players. He won at UMass without top players, then got Camby and went to the Final Four. He won at Memphis without top players, then got Rose and went to the title game. He is basically in the Final Four every year at UK with top players (one Elite Eight loss, one complete flameout).
You say that many coaches could have bettered Cal's first round NIT exit. That's probably true. Many coaches probably could have done better than his low water mark with that team.
However, how many coaches go 35-3 with the Wall-Cousins group? How many can get the Brandon Knight squad to the FInal Four? How many win rings with the Davis group? How many take the Julius Randle group to the title game? How many get back to the Final Four and darn near run the table with last year's group?
I bet there are 10-15 coaches that could replicate the results of any one of those seasons with those teams. I bet there are 5-7 coaches that could replicate the results of 2 or 3 of those seasons.
I doubt there is anyone that could have done all of that other than Calipari, Billy Donovan and maybe Coach K. The rest of the college coaching world is too inflexible to take three completely different groups to E8, F4, Title (like Cal did in 2010, 2011, 2012), completely collapse in 2013, then go to back to back F4's again immediately afterwards.
KU has had a top 20 draft pick in each of the last 3 years on the wing. We have a single Sweet 16 to show for it. How many coaches have at least a couple Sweet 16's in that stretch with that talent?
KU had Rush, Chalmers, Wright, etc in 2006 and lost in the round of 64. How many coaches could get to at least the round of 32 with that talent?
KU had two lottery picks in 2010. Lost in the second round.
KU had three guys drafted in 2011, including 2 in the lottery. Lost in the Elite Eight.
That means that 2010 team had four NBA players, plus Sherron Collins on it. That squad lost to Northern Iowa? Really? How many coaches could get to the Sweet 16 or better with that group?
The 2014 team had Andrew Wiggins on it, and couldn't beat a Stanford team that did not have a PG on the roster.
Let me repeat that
The 2014 team had Andrew Wiggins on it, and couldn't beat a Stanford team that did not have a PG on the roster.
I have said this before, and I will say it again. If Cal has talent, you can't bet against him. You cannot say that about any other coach in Division 1 mens basketball.
Every coach has at least one season on their resume that's just a real clunker. Very few coaches can bookend their clunker season with a pair of Final Four's on either side.
Cal wins. He gets talent, he goes to the Final Four. That's his history. That sums up his resume.
We have already seen Cal coach with less than top flight talent. Lest we all forget, his UMass teams were pretty middling talent, and his Memphis teams were more or less the same, with a couple outliers (Rose, Dajuan Wagner, Shawne Williams, Darius Washington, Tyreke Evans).
Let's look at his guys from Memphis
Antonio Burks went from being an invited walk-on to a second round NBA draft pick.
Rodney Carney wasn't a high recruit out of high school, but was drafted 16th overall.
Joey Dorsey was basically unranked. He became a second round pick.
Chris Douglas-Roberts was the No. 75 ranked player in the country in his class. He also became a second round pick.
Robert Dozier was also unranked. He also became a second round pick.
That's five guys that weren't big time recruits that went on to be drafted in the NBA. Burks was a walk on! That says development to me.
That 2006-07 Memphis team was probably his best work as a coach. He had no big time recruits (Douglas-Roberts was the highest recruited player), but working with a pretty strong core of four year guys (Antonio Anderson, Jeremy Hunt, Doneal Mack, Joey Dorsey, Robert Dozier, Willie Kemp and Andre Allen all played 4 years at Memphis, while CDR left after his junior season) Cal went 33-4 and advanced to the Elite Eight. Look at that list of names again. That's no stack. That's not even a partial stack. That's just a regular college basketball team that happened to be really good. That basic core was the foundation of the team that went to the Final the next season.
Or we can dive deep into history and look at his pre Camby UMass teams. Some names - Lou Roe, Dana Dingle, Tony Barbee, Derek Kellogg - that's not a stack. That's just a regular team.
Cal has been good in the past with average talent. He's been incredible with top notch talent.
Ask this question - is there another Coach in the country that could have produced the results Cal has over the last 6 years given the talent that Cal has had? That would require 5 Elite 8's, 4 Final Fours, a title and another title game appearance, all while dealing with the expectations that people expect you to be at least that good? I'm going to say no. Cal has met amazingly high expectations with the talent he has had.
I would 100% agree that if someone goes home at night and beats their wife and kids, or does other evil things, that they are a scumbag. That is why I said Calipari is a heck of a basketball coach. I don't know enough of his personal life to say that he is anything more than that.
I think Rick Pitino is a heck of a coach, too. He cheated on his wife. That is a mark against his personal integrity and makes me view him differently as a man, but that doesn't make him a lesser coach.
When I judge sports figures, I judge them on their sports skills separately from their personal lives because I don't know them personally. Was Brett Favre a great QB. Sure. Was it horrible that he allegedly texted lewd pictures to a female reporter? Of course. That makes me view Brett Favre the man differently, but not Brett Favre the QB.
I don't know what most of these guys do when they go home at night. Some are probably outstanding, upstanding people. Others are probably not. Until it hits the media, we don't know. Some may just be better at keeping their dirt safely tucked away.
I don't have as much beef with Cal as most on this site because he said one of the most honest things a college coach can say when he said "he can stay here in school and help provide for my family, or go to the draft and provide for his own." I haven't heard many coaches be that open about the financial incentive for having players stay or go and that statement made me respect Cal when it comes to the interests of the players that he ultimately ends up coaching.
Say what you want about Calipari, he's a heck of a college basketball coach.
His record at Kentucky is outright incredible. He's won 83% of his games. Four Final Fours in six years. UK has been the team to beat every single year he has been there. Nobody else can make a claim like that over a period that long since the UCLA dynasty under Wooden. You know a team has been extremely successful when they are only a top 10 or 15 team and everybody calls it a down year. And even with that, I consider Cal the best tournament coach in the country, so come March, he will probably be a factor if his team is healthy.
I'm not saying KU should copy Cal, but there are things to be learned. Cal is probably the most flexible coach in the country as far as coaching based on the unique talents of his players, rather than trying to run a specific system. Everybody used to talk about the Dribble Drive Motion, but Cal put that system in so that he could recruit Derrick Rose. He wasn't running that before that time. He learned the system to take advantage of Rose's specific skillset. The fact that he followed that by having Tyreke Evans and John Wall didn't hurt. But you also notice that they weren't running the DDM when he had Anthony Davis, or Julius Randle, or last year with Karl Anthony Towns. They pounded the ball inside for those guys. Cal tailors his system every year to take advantage of his best players, whether that's a PG (Rose, Wall), a PF (Randle, Towns), or a once in a generation big man (Davis).
What could KU have been if they shaped their system around Andrew Wiggins, or Kelly Oubre, or Cliff Alexander, rather than trying to make those guys conform to a system? Not saying that Self isn't a great coach, because he is, but I do think he left a little on the table the last couple of years by not tailoring his system to the talent he had.
Good idea, but problematic. I typically travel with my wife, who I am a healthy 9 inches taller than (maybe more). Do I get the extra leg room, or do they penalize me because my travel companion is short? Do they split us up to make the heights work?
Let's say you're MoKan and you aren't sending kids to KU, but you are sending kids to Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, etc. Are you hurt because you aren't sending kids to one of the major schools, but are sending them to the rest? I say no. KU is hurt because they are missing on local talent. MoKan isn't hurt, because their players are still getting recruited by big time programs.
MoKan may miss out on a local kid that absolutely wants to go to KU, but that's not a guarantee. After all, I would bet that most kids that age haven't really picked a school, or, if they are a potential D1 recruit, they may not be certain that they will make it to the KU level, and if MoKan offers you a better chance to go to D1 at a lower school, isn't that the better choice?
There are a lot of moving parts here, but that's the general idea.
When it comes to shoes, it depends on the person.
For me, I always play basketball in Nikes because I have a history of ankle injuries that flare up/ reinjure when I don't wear Nike/ Jordan brand. However, I know a guy that is just the opposite that cannot wear Nikes to play in because they flare foot problems for him. I haven't even tried a pair of non-Nike/ Jordan Brand basketball shoes on in 10+ years. Just not worth the injury risk.
As for the AAU circuit, it's not just Nike or Adidas that has caused us problems locally. Coach Self does not have a good relationship with the MoKan Elite staff because he didn't pay a lot of attention to them when that program was first starting to grow. Self was very close to the Pump N Run squad and followed a lot of Pump players, even those that were not as marginal. As we all know, if a school like Kansas is recruiting you in basketball, or even just following you, that could mean scholarship offers at lesser schools. Many AAU teams will use coaches at major schools that they have good relationships with to get offers for their non-stars.
The typical scenario is that College Coach will be recruiting Star Player X on Team Whatever. Team Whatever has 2-3 guys that are going to go to major schools, but there are 10 guys on Team Whatever. For the coaches of Team Whatever, it looks good for their program if every single guy on that team gets a scholarship offer. They know 3 guys will get offers, but they need to figure out how to get the other 7. They have some juco coaches interested in their bottom 2 or 3 guys because it's pretty clear their bottom couple of guys aren't D1 recruits right now. But those guys in the middle are tough. If they can get College Coach to mention off the record to other coaches that he's also checking out Rotation Player 5, maybe Mid Major Coach that was thinking about asking Rotation Player 5 to walk on now decides to offer the kid a scholarship before too many other schools get interested. At the mid major level, offering first is a huge advantage in landing kids, so even just tipping the interest a little bit is enough to get a kid a couple of D1 offers.
As I understand it, Self did this for Pump N Run, but wasn't as helpful with MoKan Elite when he first arrived. As a result, now that MoKan has some serious talent, they are directing those kids elsewhere because Self didn't help them out as they were trying to grow. Helping an AAU team sign a kid to a mid major program, either by connecting them with a former assistant or a coaching friend (such as Self recommending a kid to Illinois State or SMU, or Gardner Webb when Michael Lee was there) is how you really build those relationships because getting those kids signed D1 is what helps the AAU coach recruit more (better) players, which in turn means more money for the program, higher profile, even better players, even more money, even higher profile, etc.
It could mean that he's done making visits and will choose between either Bama or KU after discussing it with his mother and coach. That probably means it's an either or choice with no other schools in the running, which is helpful for KU.
Maynor was a Jeff Capel (pre-Oklahoma) recruit. Sanders was a Grant recruit.
The three I was referring to for Smart were Daniels, Weber and Graham, if in fact Weber and Graham make it at some point.
Eric Maynor was a midmajor recruit from Fayetteville, NC that chose VCU over Tulane, East Tennessee State, Winthrop and Appalachian State. He was unranked by Rivals.
Larry Sanders was recruited by Virginia, but never officially offered a scholarship to come to Charlottesville. He was given an ESPN recruiting grade of 78 and was also unranked by Rivals. Generally, players ranking below 80 are fringe top 100 players (lowest top 100 grade is usually 80 or 81). As a comparison, Karvair Shepherd, who we have talked about at length on this site, was graded 84 in the final grades given by ESPN.
That leads me to believe that nobody thought either Maynor or Sanders would become an NBA player when they were coming out of HS. It's also notable that many thought Briante Weber would be a second round NBA pick prior to his horrific knee injury this season in which he tore his ACL, MCL and meniscus, and fellow VCU player Treveon Graham was also considered a possible second rounder this season. Neither was taken, though Graham played summer league with the Spurs, while Weber is still recovering from his injury. It is possible that two years from now Smart may have recruited 3 players that went on to the NBA.
Also consider this - how many players did Iowa State send to the NBA under Fred Hoiberg? Only Royce White. And that's in a system that is tailor made for the NBA.
These summer polls assume a lot of things. They have to assume that every team will be in their best possible form, absent information that suggests otherwise.
For example, they have to assume that Diallo will be eligible, Greene will be healthy, Graham will be healthy and that Selden plays like he did at the WUG. If that happens, KU is a national title contender.
But let's say that Diallo is ineligible, Selden reverts to his previous form and Greene's injury lingers. Is KU still a top 10 team? I don't think they are if that is the case. But I don't think all of those things happen, so they should be in the top 5 for now, understanding that if things go poorly, they could fall out of the top 15 very quickly.
Same with UK. If Briscoe plays like he did this summer, they are really, really good. If he stalls, they are just good. If Poythress doesn't come back to where he was, they take another step back. Add it all up and they could be elite again, or just another ranked team.
You could do that for just about every team in the poll right now, and find 2-3 perfectly reasonable reasons why they won't even be a top 15-20 team.
At VCU, Smart was not in a position to recruit NBA level talent, so it's hard to determine if his system can prepare you for the NBA. He was mostly getting players ranked outside the top 100. Maybe 2 or 3 guys outside the top 100 eventually make the pros in any given year, so the fact that he has even one of those as his players is actually quite a feather in his cap.
His system developed, at least in part, from the fact that he could not recruit a lot of pure talent, so he found a system that made his teams very competitive without tons of talent. It's much easier to adapt to having more talent at your disposal, as Smart currently has at Texas, than having less, as we have seen with Tubby Smith since he left Kentucky.
As for Anthony Grant, he made the mistake of taking a job at a school that has no built in basketball advantages. He moved to the SEC, but a job in that league that is a middle of the pack job. Kentucky, Florida, Tennessee and Arkansas are all better jobs than Alabama, and it would be hard to argue that South Carolina, Georgia, LSU, and Ole Miss aren't all on roughly equal footing. Grant is a good coach that went from equal footing (relative to his peers at VCU) to being a below average team in a major conference. That's a killer. But the fact that Billy Donovan hired him to coach at OKC speaks to Grant's overall coaching ability. Donovan wouldn't make that call unless he was sure Grant could help him keep his own job.
As for whether the system prepares them for the NBA, Smart's system requires the ability to defend the entire floor. While the NBA doesn't press, if you can't defend, you cannot play for Shaka Smart. So any player that plays for Smart will automatically check that box off as far as being able to guard a position.
Offensively, Smart's system isn't much different than any other college coach. He runs enough pick and roll that his offense can make a guard NBA ready. He doesn't emphasize post ups, but most college teams don't, so I don't see a real difference there.
With his conditioning program, that is preparation for the grind of the NBA with games every couple nights for five solid months.
Overall, I'd say his system is at least as good as most college programs, with the bonus that, at least defensively, a player can really show if they are a good individual defender in his system.
Ridley's minutes went from 16.4 as a freshman (when he could barely go three trips without needing to be replaced) to 25.6 as a sophomore, where he was pretending to be in shape, then 21.4 last year.
Honestly, there were still a lot of times last year where he just couldn't log minutes. The year before, he faked being in shape, but there were times where he wouldn't rotate on defense, or post up on offense simply because he was tired. I doubt that happens this year because Smart will have him in shape, or he simply won't play at all.
Ridley has been out of shape his entire career until the later part of last season. I think he can be mobile because he has shown some sneaky athleticism underneath all the baby fat.
He's not Larry Sanders (an ideal big man in Shaka's system) but Ridley has some potential. Either way, Texas will be conditioned and that alone will make them a stronger team than they have been.
As @Statmachine said, the upgrade in talent at his disposal should pay dividends in March because he has already shown that he can coach with less talent at his disposal.
To really discuss Shaka Smart, you have to dive into the facts to see whether what he does works or not.
2009-10 - beat Oklahoma (ranked) at home. No notable road wins, lost in the CAA tournament. Won the CBI in the postseason. Finished 27-9. 13-5 in the first half of the season, 14-4 in the second half, 8-2 in the last 10 games.
2010-11 - beat Wake Forest and UCLA on neutral floors. Lost to Tennessee on a neutral floor. Won at Wichita State. Finished 28-12 (Final Four) 15-5 in the first half of the season, 13-7 in the second half, 7-3 in the last 10. 11 seed in the NCAA tournament.
2011-12 - lost to Alabama, Georgia Tech and Seton Hall. No notable road wins, but did beat Northern Iowa in Bracketbusters. Finished 29-7 (round of 32). 13-5 in the first half, 16-2 in the second. 8-2 in the last 10. 12 seed in the tournament.
2012-13 - beat Alabama and Memphis, lost to Duke and Missouri (Memphis, Duke and Missouri were all ranked when they faced off). Also beat a ranked Butler squad. Finished 27-9. 15-3 in the first half, 12-6 down the stretch. 6-4 in the last 10. 5 seed in the tournament. Lost to the 4 seed to be eliminated in round of 32.
2013-14 - won at Virginia (ranked). lost to Georgetown and Florida State. Also beat Virginia Tech and Boston College. Split with a ranked St. Louis squad (both winning at home). Finished 26-9. 14-4 in the first half, 12-5 in the second. 6-4 in the last 10. Lost in the round of 64 as a 5 seed (OT).
2014-15 - beat Tennessee, Oregon and a ranked Northern Iowa squad. Lost to Virginia and Villanova (both ranked). Won at Cincinnati. Finished 26-10. 15-3 in the first half, 11-7 down the stretch. 17-3 before star guard Brionte Weber tore his ACL. 9-7 after that injury. Won A10 tournament. Lost in the round of 64 as a 7 seed (OT).
Honestly, that's a pretty solid resume. They are (as you would expect from a pressing team) very tough at home. I imagine that could carry over to Texas if they can get the crowd involved. Smart never had quality offensive depth at VCU. He should be able to have that at UT. Last year was the first time he got multiple top 100 players (landing 3) and it showed in that he had probably his strongest squad before losing his all conference guard and the engine of his defense.
So can what he does translate? I think so. Rick Pitino had success moving from Providence to Kentucky, eventually winning a national title. I'm not saying that Smart will do the same, but his system works and the move to Texas immediately improves the talent he is working with. His teams will constantly be matchup nightmares because he does not really recruit the slow, plodding players and his ball pressure puts a premium on switches and speed. In some ways, I anticipate that Texas will resemble the Iowa State teams that have given us trouble the last few years - lots of speed, threes and interchangeable parts.
Each possession has more value in a lower scoring game, but each possession also has a randomness factor, and that random chaos is much more prominent in a lower scoring game.
Take the KU vs Northern Iowa game from 2010. KU was far superior in true talent. for the game, KU took 54 shots and shot 44%, which was below their year on average of 48%. They lost the game by 2 points.
On the season, KU shot about 5 more shots from the field and about 6 more FTs than the 18 they shot that day.
If KU shoots their normal averages of shots that day (5 more FGA and 6 more FTs), that probably is worth another 8 points at a minimum (assuming KU makes 2 of the 5 FGs and 4 of 6 FTs from a team that shot 48% and 70% in those categories).
KU was beaten by a lesser team because they simply were not able to get the necessary 8 more possessions to win that game. Even if we assume that because KU was 2 over their season average in turnovers, they should still have been able to squeeze out 6 more possessions (4 FGA and 4 FTs) KU should still have been able to find at least 4 more points, enough for a win.
And then we have the random variance factor. Jordan Eglseder, UNI's center, shot 2-3 from 3 point range in that game. For his CAREER at UNI, he made a total of 15 threes. For that entire season, Eglseder made three 3 point baskets in twelve (TWELVE!!) attempts. UNI got six points on threes from a guy that was a 27% career three point shooter, and who had made just one three ALL SEASON. If KU plays at their normal pace there, that doesn't matter because the random chance that a guy hits a couple threes is washed away by the amount of possessions. But in a lower scoring game, his two threes meant a lot more than they should have.
I figured your comments were not meant to throw me under the bus. You have always kept the discourse respectful here. I just wanted to make sure it was understood that while I am supportive of Clay Young, KU walk on, I am not currently in support of Clay Young, KU rotation player. If, at some point Young develops into something more than a solid walk on, I am all for it, but right now I am glad to have him as a walk on.
I was never personally mad at either Morningstar or Teahan. Both of them overachieved relative to their skills. I was, however, upset with Coach Self for overplaying them and allowing other teams to unfairly exploit their weaknesses. That's not on them. That's on Self.
Not uncommon, but also not without problems. All of the guys listed below your comment (Teahan, Morningstar, Moody, Nooner) were in much the same spot as Young is now - very good high school players, but not really skilled enough to be rotation level players.
If a guy is a walk on, chances are it is because he has some limits on his game. Young's limits are that while he is skilled around the bucket with some ability to step away from the basket, he is, in a lot of ways, a 6-5 Perry Ellis with a little bit less overall polish.
That's not a knock, but if Perry is an undersized 4, what does that make Young. He is a very useful player at the juco level and could potentially have been a good player at the low major or D2 level.
He just doesn't have the size to be that at KU, but that doesn't mean he won't be a great contributor as a walk on, and that shouldn't diminish his experience as a KU player. He gets to live the dream of putting that Kansas across his chest and running into a packed Fieldhouse. Very few people have the basketball skills to come anywhere close to that, and for that alone, he should be commended.
He's a walk on, and a local Kansas kid at that (from Lansing, less than a 20 minute drive to campus). He's not being brought in to start, or be in the rotation, or even push for minutes. He is a walk on. He will play maybe 30 minutes a season if things go very well for him.
He was a very good high school player and a solid juco player before his injury. It's not like he has no skills whatsoever. No, he isn't a major D1 starter caliber player, but he already knows that. He's coming to KU because he wants to, and that shouldn't be criticized.
I think Cliff will be successful in the NBA. As @drgnslayr pointed out, Cliff has the physical ability to succeed in the NBA, something that 99.999% of the population just doesn't have. That alone puts him in a position where he could play in the NBA, something most people cannot say.
The other thing you have to realize with Cliff is that Cliff has a 7-3.5 wingspan. Wingspan is much more important than height in two critical NBA areas - blocked shots and offensive rebounds. As a result, Cliff's long arms mean that he has the same standing reach as Frank Kaminsky and a longer standing reach than current NBAers Anthony Randolph, Charlie Villanueva, Chris Bosh, Taj Gibson, and Michael Beasley, and a longer reach than 2015 draftees Karl Anthony Towns, Montrezl Harrell and others.
Suffice it to say that Cliff could be the steal of the (undrafted) draft.
There are three major academic hurdles that must be cleared to be eligible to play D1 sports.
The first is test scores. Those are pretty straight forward and easy to understand. The only issue comes if the test has been taken multiple times, or if there are questions about the legitimacy or authenticity of scores. If that isn't at issue, the test scores are easy to clear.
The second is HS GPA. This is a bit fuzzier because there is a wide variance in how different schools grade throughout the US. An A at one school might be a B or C somewhere else. Some teachers grade on a curve. Some do not. Some give extra credit, some do not. As a result, there is a lot of investigating that can take place when it comes to HS grades to make sure the grades given were legitimate and that the work was done. I believe this is where Traylor had problems.
The other difficulty when investigating HS grades comes when evaluating classes graded on a curve. While the athlete may reasonably have invited the extra examination of their grades, the other students in the class have not. However, there is no way to evaluate a curve unless you have all of the other work to evaluate it against. There have been accusations of schools manipulating curves to make (or keep) athletes eligible, but it is always difficult to prove because you have to pull other students' work in order to prove that.
The final hurdle is the stickiest. Required coursework. You can have the test scores and the requisite GPA, but you must also pass the NCAA mandated core curriculum. This is the area that tripped McLemore up.
Let's say for instance that you start off by attending a school that does its academic year based on quarters, as many schools here in the midwest and plains do. Then, midyear you move to a school that does it's academic year based on semesters. In the quarter system, the second quarter typically overlaps the Christmas holiday by a week or two. In semesters, obviously the semester ends at the holiday. As a result, some students may not get credit for a full load of classes.
Or let's say a student transfers and they have a class at one school called Freshman English. At their new school, there's a class called English 2, but the coursework is more or less the same as the work in Freshman English at their old school. They may not get credit for that class at their second school because it's a repeat.
If either of those things happen, a student may be one or two credits shy because their classes are considered repeats, or may not qualify for some other reason.If that is the case, summer school may be able to remedy that, depending on how many credits are lacking.
I think any good defensive team has a distinct advantage with the shorter shot clock because more shots will come with the clock running down. The actual type of defense doesn't matter - you can zone it like Syracuse or man up like Virginia, or press like Louisville - if you are sound, the shorter clock will play to your advantage.
I am curious to see how officials handle it. I would guess that many teams will try to draw fouls with the clock running down. I'd be curious to see if there are more bailout calls this season against the shot clock.
Kaminsky was a collegiate success and Alexander was a collegiate bust. However, there's probably a 25%-30% chance that Cliff has a better pro career than Frank if both guys stay healthy. There is a possibility that Frank turns into a 7-0 spot up shooter that is a below average defender, while Cliff turns into a starting caliber defender/ rebounder that can dunk and hit the 15 footer.
Obviously, that isn't the most likely scenario, but the pieces are in place for that to be a possibility.
Feeding the post is a two step process on the perimeter and a two step process on the block.
On the perimeter, your first job is to locate the target and create an angle. Basketball is really just 3D pool - there are all kinds of angles to get the ball where you want it to go, it's just a matter of being able to create those angles and then execute them.
Unfortunately, the job of creating an angle is a lost art because most perimeter players see the game moving so fast that they cannot see the angles developing within the folds of the game. I love watching a veteran like Andre Miller create angles for post passes. He's at a point in his career where he's lost about three steps, and he wasn't really all that quick to begin with, but it just makes what he does even more easy (and beautiful) to watch. You can see him surveying the defense and watch his thought process - I am going to stutter step, take one more dribble to my right with my right hand, fake like I am going to cross back over to the middle so I get my defender leaning, then throw the ball to my post man's left shoulder. It's almost like he is controlling all of the other players on the floor.
The second step once you have found your angle is to know what pass to deliver, which requires understanding how your post man has sealed his defender. There are entry passes and then there are scoring passes. An entry pass just gets the ball into the post. A scoring pass leads the recipient directly into their shot.
For instance, imagine a guy has his man sealed on the right block in a three quarter high spot (i.e. the defender is partially fronting the entry, with his right hand extended into the passing lane of the offensive players right shoulder). As a passer from the right wing you could a. throw a hook pass low and outside to the left hand, b. throw a chest pass to the outside left hand or c. fake the hook to change the defender's balance and then flip the ball over the top. That's three different entry options. All three get the ball into the post, but only one leads directly to a bucket, option c. If option c is delivered properly, the post man catches the ball turning directly to the basket which seals his defender behind him. If the ball is delivered on time and with the right amount of pace on it, the help defender won't make it in time and the pass will lead directly to an easy layup or dunk. But most players can't hit that pass. Instead, they just get the ball into the post, but without moving the defense to help the post man out.
But this isn't all on the perimeter guys. The post man has two jobs as well. The first is to get a good seal and create a target. I remember when I was learning how to feed the post that our coach stressed that the post man must give the guard either a hand (to show where he wanted to catch) or a point (to show where he wanted the ball thrown on a lob). If I was given neither a hand nor a point, I didn't have to throw the ball inside. Let's just say our post guys made sure to give us targets because those of us on the perimeter were not shy about going somewhere else with the ball if there was no target. I see a lot of interior guys today that will seal but then not present a target, or present a poor target. The thing that made Jahlil Okafor and Karl Anthony Towns stand out last year was that both were very good at creating a seal and giving a target, which helped make them very good interior scorers.
The second job for a big man is actually catching the ball. Part of the reason many big men can't give a good target is that they don't have good hands. Many struggle to catch the ball away from their body. Because of this, it is difficult to feed them because if they are even partially fronted, there is no angle to get them the ball because they cannot catch with just their hands.
I have seen coaches working with big guys by throwing different sized balls to them in the post - tennis ball, volleyball, football, basketball - just to get them better at catching the ball away from their body.
Ultimately, Flip Saunders is right that small ball offers post up chances because having guys that can post smaller guys and draw multiple defenders is extremely valuable and will always have a place in the game.
Every season is a crapshoot. The goal should be to be among the top 5-8 teams in the country. That puts you in the national title conversation.
After that, it's all about matchups, timing and a little bit of luck.
You could argue that it the Xavier team doesn't lose to UNI they probably win the title that year. Unfortunately, a once in a lifetime performance from UNI toppled KU. But then, that's the danger of a single elimination tournament. One bad game (or an opponents great game) could be enough to end it.
I am not a huge believer in 4 year guys if they are not along the lines of an Ellis or a Kaminsky. Mickelson and Traylor won't be big contributors if this KU team is as good as it can be. Those minutes should be going to Diallo and Bragg. If Mickelson and Traylor are getting those minutes, it probably means we aren't as good as we hoped. They may be significant in off the court roles or with intangibles, but for on court production, we need our best guys.
If I won a gold medal and went back to my hometown, I would absolutely wear it all over town, and would have no shame in doing so. Rock that.
This team will be a challenge for Bill Self, because this team will ask him to go outside what he likes to do in order to get the most out of them.
Self likes to play inside out, but this team (like the last two years) is probably more suited to play outside in. I think playing outside in makes Perry a better player because teams can't pack in their defense if the threat is constant from the perimeter. Diallo should be asked to score on non-post ups (i.e. drive and dish opportunities, offensive rebounds, etc.). He's not at a point right now where you can just toss the ball in to him on the block and he can score.
Meanwhile, you have lots of guys that can get buckets from the perimeter, starting with Wayne Selden and Frank Mason. Add in Devonte, Brannen, Svi and LG, and this squad has quite a few perimeter guys that can put the ball in the basket.
But the wild card is Bragg. Bragg seems to be a big guy that is better offensively when he faces up than he is with his back to the basket. Self can take advantage of this by putting him in the high post and clearing it out underneath to allow him to use his quickness/ athleticism to his advantage. Self has done that with Perry sometimes, but I think Bragg is actually more equipped to do that because he has more guard like skills and movements.
If he is comfortable staying in the Western part of Wyandotte County, there are some good complexes out that way that will give him some pretty good bang for his buck. Some of the places off 435 in Johnson County are also nice, but they are going to be a bit more pricey than the western Wyandotte places. I would recommend he check out a couple of places and see what he likes. Ultimately, picking a place to live is up to personal preference.
Not surprised KU is expected to draw Chaminade. KU figures to be the unofficial 1 seed of the tournament, so that makes sense. This tournament isn't officially seeded, but they still try to set it up so that the top 2 teams make the final.
The only change that I think may occur is the first round matchups on the other side of the bracket. Indiana and St. John's may flip in the 2/3 spots, or Vandy and Wake may flip in the 6/7 spots to switch those games, but I expect the bracket overall to break like Katz has reported.