🏀 KuBuckets Archive

@drgnslayr

Hudy is super qualified and a great strength and conditioning coach. There's no doubt about that. Her formal qualifications are top notch. I have no doubt that many teams would hire her if it came to that. She has probably fielded some offers. However, the individuals that are in those positions in the pros are also very skilled. Some have the formal background of Hudy. Others have years of experience. Some have both.

My point wasn't to try and discredit Hudy, but to say that pro team training staffs are generally top notch. The ones that aren't are pretty quickly replaced. Is Hudy better than some NBA strength and conditioning people. Most likely. She's the best in the college world, so I bet she's better than more than a handful of pro strength and conditioning coaches. Is she better than all of them? I doubt that. Would she be in the top 10? Maybe, but that's a tough call. I'd guess she's probably in the top half among the pro staffs, maybe top ten.

@JayHawkFanToo

I completely agree with your statements about injuries and their cumulative effect.

However, I think this adds to the OAD phenomenon. Xaiver is a good example of this. He's just 23 now. He's played parts of five NBA seasons. He's made about $9m in his career, which has been derailed by injury pretty much from the beginning. Let's say that he had stayed in college. His career may have played out similar to that of Robbie Hummel.

Hummel was banged up all through college. He had a couple of pretty devastating season ending injuries along the way. As a result, he was a 2nd round draft choice (remember, X was a lottery pick). Because X was a lottery pick, even though he missed significant time, he was able to get through his rookie deal and bank about $6.5m. Hummel has yet to make more than the league minimum in his two seasons, so he has banked less than a quarter of that (about $1.6m).

Some guys just aren't durable. They just can't stand up to the toll of the game. Hummel looks like one of those guys. Xavier may also be one of those guys. Brandon Rush looks like one of those guys. Health is, to some extent, a talent unto itself.

@drgnslayr

Hudy is very good, but I would hesitate to put her above the professional staff at the NBA level, let alone "far exceeds." Contracts in the NBA are guaranteed. They invest as much money as possible into keeping their athletes healthy because that is literally millions of dollars.

As for the contracts, the age you are on your first contract determines how old you will be when you sign your last contract.

Because of the way the NBA salary structure is, players are capped on how much money they can make during their first four years in the league. Those years can be age 19-22 or age 22-25. It doesn't matter. You are capped on the first four years of your contract by the rookie salary scale.

Let's look at a couple of guys who were drafted in the same year and compare Lamar Odom and Wally Szczerbiak. Odom went 4th in 1999 as a freshman. Szczerbiak went 6th as a senior. To make it fair, we will only compare them through their age 31 seasons (Szczerbiak retired after his age 31 season. Odom was not all that effective after his age 31 season. Odom made about $2m more through his first four years (when salaries are dictated by draft position). However, when the time came to sign the first big contract, Odom was 24 (he was an older freshman) while Szczerbiak was 26. As a result, Odom made $2m more the very next year, followed by $1.5m more, $1.5m more, $500k more, $500k more and $5ook more in the next several seasons. That's $6.5m more based largely on the fact that Odom was younger. After that, Szczerbiak was done. Odom played well for two more seasons (another $16m) before having two awful years and being waived this summer. Odom's age was worth about $20m (the higher salary in free agency, plus the extra years) even if we don't include the two awful years he played after his age 31 season (another $17m).

@drgnslayr

I've missed him, too. He made K-State better, which made the Big 12 better. Weber will turn K-State into a lower level power conference team, which doesn't help the conference or KU.

@JayHawkFanToo

Xavier can play in the NBA... if he can stay healthy. No one is going to give him a big contract, but he will continue to get opportunities as a minimum salary player until he can prove that he can stay healthy.

Glad for Tarik. He deserves a chance in the NBA. He will never be a star, but he could carve out a nice 8-10 year career if he continues to work hard.

@wrwlumpy

K-State starting to reap the rewards of the Bruce Weber era. They will start missing Frank Martin sometime next season, if they don't already.

@HighEliteMajor

Absolutely on the money here. Perry is a very good player, but not a go to guy. That is exactly right.

@JayHawkFanToo

When Woodberry was cast as a role player, he shined. He never shot worse than 47% from the field in his first three years. Never had more than 1.5 turnovers per game.

As a senior, his scoring went up to 15.5 a game. He was clearly the go to guy. But his efficiency suffered. Turnovers were up (over 2 per game, even with Jacque Vaughn at the point). shooting percentages were down (45% FG). He was still a good player, but not a go to player.

Perry is the same. He kills it against one on one defense. He's a heady passer and good ball handler. He is as fundamentally sound as they come. But he is not a go to scorer. Do you ever remember a time where you felt like Perry just took over for even six or seven minutes and dominated a game? Even when he has played really well, I can't remember a moment like that, and he's had some great games at KU.

As a go to player, Perry will always be underappreciated because we are expecting him to be something he is not. As a third option, Perry would be one of the best in the country, period.

1-3-1 works under a couple of circumstances.

1. If a team lacks ball handling. Basically any trap will work against teams that don't have ball handlers, but the 1-3-1 makes life especially difficult because you can't slip a big man into the middle of the floor to relieve the pressure.

2. If a team lacks good interior scoring. The 1-3-1 is vulnerable on the back line by nature of there being only one guy back there. Because of that, if a team has good scorers inside, the 1-3-1 becomes vulnerable because it can be attacked on that back line. However, if you don't have skill guys back there, they cannot exploit the single baseline defender. WSU was certainly hurt here.

3. If a team can't shoot from the perimeter. The 1-3-1 takes away the wings and top. You have to be able to hit from three in the corner to exploit the 1-3-1 because then you either make the 1 at the bottom pursue to the corner, or you stretch the wing defender all the way into the corner. Neither option is appealing because that stretches the defense in all sorts of strange ways.

4. If a team lacks backcourt size. The trap works well against smaller guards because they can get into trouble if they cannot see the release valves. I think this is what hurt WSU because Van Vleet isn't very big, but he is critical to WSU setting up their offense. The 1-3-1 took the ball out of his hands at times.

If KU were to run the 1-3-1 I would like to see them put Oubre at the top. His length would make life very difficult on the opposition. Selden and Mason would work nicely along the wings. I would put Alexander in the middle because he is the best rebounder and shot blocker, and then have Perry play at the bottom. Alexander's athleticism would help on the glass because he would not have early position. Mason and Selden are both good rebounders for their size. Kelly covers a lot of ground, so on a long rebound, he could recover on the perimeter to the shooters. This would be a fun experiment.

@HighEliteMajor

I think you nailed it here, especially with the playing small part. If either Ellis or Alexander isn't playing well, playing small at least puts our best players on the floor rather than going to some of our other bigs. We need to go small more often.

@wrwlumpy

I appreciate the compliments. Woodberry was my hero growing up. I thought he was awesome. The 1994 season really helped me understand basketball much better because until then I didn't understand the concept of a guy having a ceiling. Then I watched Woodberry (by far my favorite player) and saw that he just wasn't as good as Rex Walters had been the two years before, and it started making sense to me.

@Kip_McSmithers

Thanks Kip. That means Devonte can't play any more than 13 games if KU plays the max of 40. He's played 7 so far. Dicey situation there. I'm not sure what the right call is.

Perry should start. I have criticized Perry a fair amount on these boards, but not because I don't think he's a good player. Perry is obviously a very talented basketball player. He's just not the type of player you can lean on if your goal is to win a national title.

Put it to you in this light. Steve Woodberry was probably my favorite Jayhawk growing up. He could do a little bit of everything, just a solid all around player. He came off the bench for a couple Final Four teams as a sixth man. However, as a senior with no Adonis Jordan or Rex Walters, Woodberry became a starter. Steve Woodberry was a great guy to have on your team and he could be an important member of a great team. But if Steve Woodberry was your best player... well, the 1994 Hawks finished 3rd in the Big 8 and got a #4 seed. The teams from 1991 to 1993 were all 3 seeds or higher. Woodberry was good, but not good enough to be the best player.

In a lot of ways, Ellis is similar (and not just because they are both from Wichita). He's a good player. He's definitely good enough to start. Fundamentals are spot on. But if Perry is our best player, the Sweet 16 is our ceiling.

I don't look at KU basketball and wonder if we can win 20 games. This is Kansas. Of course we can win 20 games.

I don't look at KU basketball and wonder if we can win a conference title. This is Kansas. We've won 50 something conference titles in 100 some odd years of basketball.

I look at KU basketball and wonder what it takes to win it all. This is Kansas. That's the challenge. Not winning 20 some games. Not winning a conference title. Those are things we do just about every year. The national title is the goal that we chase.

Perry will be a great 4 year player at KU. His name should very well end up in the history books as one of the all time KU career leaders. But if this is about a national title (and it should be) then Perry should be a steady 3rd option the next two years while Kelly and Wayne and recruit X and recruit Y next year lead us as far as they can take us.

@wrwlumpy I don't think Devonte can use the redshirt. I would have to check the rules, but he may have already played too much to use the medical redshirt.

Merry Christmas to everyone on here. Enjoy the time with family and friends. There will be plenty to dissect about the Hawks next week.

This is all about adapting to the personnel that you have available.

College coaches have to be willing to adapt because you are not always guaranteed to have a specific group of players at your disposal.

Much was made of Calipari and his dribble drive motion offense when he was at Memphis. I would point out that, during his time at UK, Calipari has not run much dribble drive motion. Why? Well, if you had DeMarcus Cousins, Patrick Patterson, Terrence Jones, Anthony Davis, Nerlens Noel, Julius Randle and your choice of 7 footers as post options why on earth would you run a perimeter based offense? That's not a knock on the guards he has had. It's just a simple truth. He's had some great inside players and he has used that to his advantage.

Coach Self needs to do the same thing, except in reverse. Sure, when you have Wayne Simien, Darrell Arthur, Cole Aldrich, the Morris twins, and Thomas Robinson, pounding the ball inside is a great plan because you have talented, NBA caliber interior players to work with. Of KU's bigs that finished last season (not counting Embiid due to injury), only Perry might play in the NBA, and if he does, it will not be as a post player. Of the KU bigs this year besides Perry only Alexander will likely play in the NBA, and if he does, it will be due to his rebounding and energy, not because of his offensive post game.

But look on the perimeter. Frank has an outside shot at playing in the NBA. Wayne has as good a chance as Perry to play in the NBA. Brannen can if he ever decides to defend. Svi probably will. Kelly will.

I don't think its a requirement to compromise the basketball program. We have the pieces. It's just time to put square pegs in square holes and ignore the round holes this season because we just don't have any round pieces. Let's play to our strengths.

Is KU good - obviously yes.

Can KU be great? Yes, but in order to do that, it falls on Kelly and Wayne.

I'm just putting it out there. Kelly is the player with the highest ceiling on this team. If he emerges, this team could take off. You could see it a little bit on Monday in the loss. This team needed someone to grab the game by the throat and go off. Kelly is that guy. His talent says it. Time will tell if his personality says the same.

The key now is how Self reacts to this. The safe play is to go back to basics, pound the ball inside and hope that's enough. The riskier play (but with a greater payoff) is to walk into practice and tell Kelly that they are going to follow him into the fire from here on out. Yeah, it's scary to look into the eyes of a freshman that was barely in the rotation two weeks ago and say the season rides on him, but Kelly is the best talent on the team. With great power comes great responsibility.

The question is whether Self needs to rethink his recruiting. Recruiting elite wing players is nice, but only if you are going to play through your elite players. Recruiting elite wing players and then having them continuously throw the ball into the post is not the best use of talent. We can recruit a bunch of Brady Morningstar's to throw the ball into the post.

If Coach Self wants to always run his offense through the post, he should focus all of his energy on recruiting elite interior players. All of the efforts should be directed towards recruiting Rabb, Diallo, Swanigan and Zimmerman. There isn't much point in recruiting Jaylen Brown or Malik Newman if you aren't going to let them be who they are - elite perimeter scorers. Better to go land the bigs and fill in with lower rated perimeter players if necessary.

Either that, or we need to focus our offense on the perimeter because that is where our best players are. The lions share of shots should be going to Selden, Oubre, Mason, and Svi. Ellis and Alexander should get touches, but not at the expense of getting those four guys shots (and Brannen Greene if he is playing defense, too). It's time to unleash the guards and let them play.

@nuleafjhawk

The issue with this team is determining a best player and a style.

The most talented player on this team is Kelly Oubre.

The best leader is Wayne Selden Jr.

The guy with the ball and the cajones to take the big shots is Frank Mason III.

The guy we run the offense through is Perry Ellis.

The toughest guy is Cliff Alexander.

Do you see the problem here - we have five guys listed here, but we need one or two of them to step forward and be the main guy or guys.

Coach Self likes to work inside out, but his most talented players offensively are perimeter guys. That has been the case for the last three years (McLemore, Wiggins and now Oubre and Selden). It's time to just accept that fact and turn the perimeter guys lose. Lose the security blanket of a strong post game and let it fly from the outside.

@jaybate-1.0

Here's the thing. In NY, for instance, the Knicks are more popular than any college team. In LA, the Lakers are terrible and even still are more popular than any college team. The large markets already have basketball fans, but most of those fans are pro basketball fans.

So it actually makes more sense to have college teams that are strong in areas that don't have a pro team - i.e. places like Kansas, Kentucky - or historically strong programs - Duke, UNC, Indiana, UCLA, etc.

Most casual fans root for the underdogs because they don't have a rooting interest involved. They go crazy for Butler because they don't have a team they would normally root for. But casual fans are just that - casual fans. They don't follow regularly. The bulk of big college basketball fans are covered by the teams I listed above. They would watch those games because those games would involve the top teams.

@drgnslayr

Upsets are the major draw the first weekend. Everyone loved George Mason or Wichita State as they ran through the tournament, but that fades quickly. Remember when Gonzaga was a plucky upstart? Now they don't get the same treatment because they are consistently good. But most fans want to see the good teams duke it out. JMHO.

@JayHawkFanToo

I agree. The thing with stars is that they cannot relate to how other players see the game. They see things much faster and much clearer than others, so they expect their players to make plays that the players may not even be able to see.

That makes it difficult to transition from a great player with physical gifts that far surpass most to a great teacher. As you point out, the best coaches tend to be more middle of the road players than actual greats. If I had to pick a former KU player that would be a great coach I would bet on a guy like Michael Lee, who was a fairly average collegiate player, or a guy like Brady Morningstar or Tyrel Reed. They would tend to be able to relate to many more players because of their own personal skill level.

The question for all of these guys is whether or not they can recruit. Their X and O ability should be high since they have all been in the pros for so long, but the ability to recruit it so important in the college game that I just can't say a guy will be a good coach unless I believe in him as a recruiter, too.

@VailHawk

Any scenario that involves a KU national title gets my vote.

I looked at UK's remaining schedule and I have the following dates of potential losses based on the following assumptions.

1. They will not lose at home because they defend Rupp like we defend the Phog.
2. They will play worse against lesser opponents than they will against strong teams
3. It will get progressively harder to keep the streak going because the attention will get worse and worse as the season goes on.

December 27 @ #4 Louisville - rivalry game against a very good team with a tremendous player (Harrell) and coach (Pitino), plus a style that is just a headache to prepare for.

January 17 @ Alabama - second road game of the conference slate. Alabama isn't particularly good, but they are feisty and athletic. The crowd will probably be rowdy.

January 29 @ Missouri - weekday road games are always dangerous. Mizzou's crowd will show up for this one. Mizzou isn't very strong, but they plan to play small and shoot threes. If UK is vulnerable, it will be to a team that gets hot from three. Playing at home, Mizzou could be that team.

February 7 @ Florida - probably the most dangerous game on the slate. The only thing is, UK will be ready for Florida. There is zero chance they overlook the Gators, so this is more dependent on Donovan and his crew having his squad ready to go.

February 10 @ LSU - this is the sneaky dangerous game. LSU gave UK all sorts of problems last year. It's the game right after Florida, so UK, if they are still unbeaten, may let their guard down here. If I had to pick a game they lose, this would absolutely be my pick.

February 17 @ Tennessee - another rivalry game, so UK will probably be hyped up for it, but its on the road. If they have made it this far undefeated, the crowd at Thompson Boling will be ridiculous. Nothing like 24,000 people screaming at you.

March 3 @ Georgia - last road game of the season.

That's seven games that UK may lose in the regular season. That's not a lot of games, but its enough to safely say they won't be running the table. I can't see them getting through that Florida-LSU pair without dropping one of those games.

Nonetheless, this UK team is an all timer as far as talent. We will see if they are historic in their accomplishments as well.

@JayHawkFanToo

I guess my point is we may be approaching a time when college basketball is headed back to having the elite talent consolidated at just a few schools (5-10), with the second tier talent consolidated at a small pool (25-30 schools) and everyone else scrapping for third and fourth tier talent.

Imagine for a moment that all of the top 20 talent every year, except for maybe one or two players, commits to one of the following schools - Kansas, Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina Arizona, UCLA, Florida, Texas or Ohio State. That's 9 schools gobbling up basically every McD's AA every year, plus several other recruits in the top 50 to fill out their rosters.

Now imaging that every other player in the top 150 is gobbled up by the following schools - Oklahoma, Baylor, Oklahoma State, LSU, Tennessee, Arkansas, Washington, Oregon, Virginia, Georgetown, Syracuse, Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan State, Wichita State, VCU, Dayton, Indiana, Illinois, NC State, Stanford, Utah, New Mexico, Gonzaga, Memphis, Louisville and Cincinnati, plus maybe one or two others.

That would basically mean every player in the top 200 in every class would sign with one of about 35 or 40 programs. The other 300 D1 programs would be recruiting projects, or undersized guys, or guys that are too slow, athletic but unskilled, etc.

It's not out of the question that this could happen. Kansas, UNC and Duke would all most certainly put the resources into basketball to stay on pace with Kentucky. Arizona and UCLA would as well. Florida, Ohio State and Texas also have the resources to do that. That next list of schools have the resources to plug safely into that next tier, although they probably won't climb to the point of that first group.

And if the talent consolidates that means fewer upsets of the elite teams, which means more matchups in March between the best teams (and talent). I can't understand how that would be a bad thing.

The praise for Oubre makes sense to me. After all, just based on his physical skills, Oubre is one of the two or three most talented players on this team and one of the 35 or 40 most talented players in the country.

Mickelson is a good player, but not an elite type. That makes me believe that he will have games like yesterday, but probably won't be able to do that consistently.

I don't mind the talent stacking, honestly. Part of that is because I like watching elite players playing together, which is why I enjoy the NBA so much, particularly compared to college ball.

I want to see top notch guys playing together instead of seeing top players so spread out that lesser teams just double and triple team the greats.

Have you ever been to a high school game with only one elite player? Those games suck because most of the time the opposing team just sends double and triple teams at them and you end up in a sluggish game with no rhythm. I hate those games. I would much rather watch great players surrounded by other good and great players because then you have great teams.

Look back at the teams we consider great. The Celtics of the 60s with Russell, Cousy, Jones, White, etc. 7 and 8 HOF on the roster at a time. The Showtime Lakers with Magic, Kareem, James Worthy, etc. The Bird, McHale, Parish Celtics, with Danny Ainge and Bill Walton and Dennis Johnson. Loaded teams are more fun to watch because great players can be incredible when you have to play them honest.

Yeah, that may mean that only 15 or 20 teams in a given year are any good, but college basketball probably is at its best when there are a dozen or less teams on which the elite talent plays because that means E8 and F4 matchups that are absolutely epic. The kind of games you remember for years. The 08 F4 is special because you had 4 top notch teams with over 20 eventual pros matched up. Would it be as good if a Cinderella had made it instead? I doubt it.

For my taste, give me a loaded Duke and UNC and KU, Texas, Kentucky, Florida, UCLA, Arizona and maybe a couple others and see how those games turn out in the tournament.

If Kentucky is currently ruining college basketball, why didn't Wooden's Bruins ruin college ball? Those UCLA teams had as much of a talent stack as UK has currently.

Talent is cyclical. Kentucky is loaded this year, but the only reason they are this loaded is because they struggled just 2 years ago, missing the tournament and losing in the first round of the NIT. Had that team done better, there's no guarantee that Poythress (now injured) and Cauley - Stein stay until this year. No guarantee if Cauley - Stein is gone that Johnson and Lee both stay after last season. UK would still be good, but not like this.

The real question is whether the Shoe companies are able to steer players to that degree. Are the AAU coaches working with similarly affiliated college coaches? Maybe, although my experience is that coaches steer players to programs that will play them so that they (AAU coaches) can continue to recruit top notch local talent by pointing to how many players they have sent D1.

I wouldn't mind if KU was a talent destination. I know quite a few Yankees fans. They had no problem with the way baseball was set up when they dominated in the late 90s and early 2000s. Only recently has it bugged them, and I think that's more because of the losing than the rules.

If your team is on top, the rules are great. If not, well I bet UCLA fans feel kind of like we did earlier this season.

@nuleafjhawk

If we make another coaching change that soon, we are doomed for the next decade. No matter how bad Beaty is, he has to be at KU for the next four seasons barring something truly bizarre or tragic. A fifth year senior on this year's KU team may have been recruited by Mangino, retained by Gill and Weis and shook hands with Clint Bowen on senior day. There is almost a zero percent chance that a program with that much turnover could possibly succeed.

Beaty has to graduate a class of his own recruits. That's the only way we even have a chance to get out of this hole.

I'm more interested in the starters two years from now. Next year's starters are a transition year. the year after that is when we should start seeing an upgrade in talent and see more RS freshmen and sophomores on the depth chart. If that isn't happening, it means we aren't recruiting well enough because right now KU's talent level is pretty low by Big 12 standards.

PG minutes aren't like everybody else's minutes. PG minutes are the entire length of the floor for the entire time they are in the game because they handle the ball so much.

For example, let's say Perry inbounds the ball to Frank and Frank brings it up. Perry can casually jog up the floor and not worry about the defense or anything like that because he doesn't have the ball. Frank has to be engaged even against token pressure because you don't want to get too casual with your handle when you are bringing it up. Frank has to run back to the ball on rebounds to get the outlet. He has to push the ball on the break.

Other players can rest on the floor at certain times because they are off the ball or on the weakside. Because Frank is the PG (and guards the other teams PG most of the time) he doesn't have that luxury.

Self could experiment with putting Mason on a non-scoring wing defensively to lessen the burden on Frank. He could also have Selden or Svi bring the ball up when the other team is just playing half court defense. These would be ways to make Frank's minutes a little less taxing if he has to play 35+ minutes per game. UConn did that quite a bit last year with Napier and Boatright. Boatright brought the ball up quite a bit to let Napier stay on the floor, but play off the ball and earn a little rest. Boatright also guarded the other team's PG almost all of the time so Napier didn't have to put in so much work on that end. That allowed Napier to play 35+ minutes without wearing down because Boatright helped ease the burden in the middle of games.

KU will need to utilize similar tactics in the short term to avoid running Frank into the ground before conference season starts. A blowout or two wouldn't hurt, either.

That is an ugly list right there. Just a reminder of how fragile a pro sports career is. Thank goodness for guaranteed contracts.

@jaybate-1.0

You can be paid for any sport. However, once you get paid, you are not eligible in that sport. For instance, CJ played baseball for pay. That means he could not come back to college and play baseball, but if he wanted to play another sport (football, basketball, track, etc.) he could. It's the same for anyone. For instance, Bubba Starling is currently playing baseball in the Royals organization. If he decided next year to go back to college, he could play football or basketball (he was a HS star in both), but not baseball. You only lose your eligibility in the sport that you were paid to play.

However, it is my understanding (someone correct me if I am wrong) that you cannot accept endorsement money, regardless of sport, otherwise you lose all eligibility.

Once you start getting paid, you lose your eligibility. The D-League pays, so unless a player played in the D-League, but did not get paid, they would forfeit any remaining NCAA eligibility.

@KUinLA

Greene is a scorer. When he first signed, I thought he would be more of a shooter in college, but after watching him more carefully, he seems to be a scorer. Unfortunately, sometimes he stands around waiting for someone to get him the ball rather than working off the ball to get into scoring positions.

One of the things that I have always found amazing about great scorers is their ability to get easy shots when their other offense is not going well. I think back to Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant, who, at their athletic peaks, were two of the best offensive rebounders among perimeter players. I look at a guy like Dwyane Wade, who is an elite cutter. Those guys all had great off the dribble talent, but when the defense walled up against them, they could still score because they did work off the ball to get them offense.

Brannen is a tremendously talented shooter, and he can work off the bounce as well. However, he has to take that next step and either become a very good off the ball cutter or become a strong offensive rebounder so that his offense will come even when he isn't shooting the ball well.

I think Coach Self uses a strong post game as a security blanket. Think back to 2006. His best players were freshmen Rush, Chalmers and Wright. He made Wright a nominal power forward so that he could pound the ball into the post. That team got knocked out of the tournament in the first round. The next year, he landed a real PF in Darrell Arthur and went to the Elite Eight. The year after that - TITLE.

In 2009 and 2010 he repeated this. His best offensive players in 2009 were Sherron and a young Tyshawn. In 2010, his best offense came from Sherron, Tyshawn and freshman Xavier Henry. And yet, both of those teams fell short because he wanted to pound the ball inside to Cole Aldrich, who was a much better defensive player than offensively gifted.

In 2011 with the Morris twins and 2012 with Robinson, Elite Eight and Title Game. 2013 with Withey inside, but a legit NBA 2 guard in Ben McLemore on the perimeter, along with solid players like Releford and Johnson, KU lost in the Sweet 16. In 2014, with perhaps the best individual player he has had in his entire coaching career on the perimeter, loses in the round of 32 as we try to pound the ball inside to Perry Ellis, allowing Stanford to smother us with a zone.

When we have a great, NBA level talent in the post, Self wins - 2004 (Simien), 2007 and 2008 (Arthur), 2011 (Morris twins), 2012 (Robinson). When we don't, Self doesn't win. And it isn't a lack of talent. Wiggins (2014), McLemore (2013), Henry (2010), Rush and Chalmers (2006) are all NBA players. They were all plenty good enough to carry KU deep into the tournament. But the offensive gameplan focused on getting the ball to other guys.

I'm hoping this year breaks that streak just because the roster is tilted so heavily towards the perimeter in terms of talent. We haven't gone past the Sweet 16 with a perimeter heavy team since 1993 (Rex Walters, Adonis Jordan, Steve Woodberry, Darrin Hancock). And even then, the #2 scorer on that team was Eric Pauley.

I say unleash Selden, Greene, Svi and Oubre and let them carry us as far as they can. Some may be surprised at how far that actually is. After all, it's only 520 miles to Indianapolis.

@HighEliteMajor

You're right on the money here.

I have said for a while now that this team's greatest strength is it's wings. I will continue to beat the drum that four of our best 7 players are wing players. Not only that, I would say 4 of our 5 best offensive players are wing guys.

I know a lot of people on this site will hate me for saying this, but the best offense for our current personnel is the dribble drive motion. Can you imagine having Svi, Selden and Green all spaced around the floor with Mason and either Ellis or Alexander. That's playing to your personnel.

Ojeleye's brother played at K-State, so I wouldn't be too surprised if he ended up in purple. That said, part of the reason we have lost out on the Mo-Kan guys is that we have under-recruited many of their elite players for years. Early on, the Spiece guys reached out to KU to get some of their kids recruited and got a cold shoulder. Now that they have had some big time guys come through the program KU wants to get in but hasn't had much success. Also, there's a pretty heated AAU rivalry between that program and Pump N Run. KU has landed a lot of Pump N Run (Releford, Morningstar, Frankamp and I think Tyrel Reed were all Pump N Runs) guys but missed on the Spiece guys.

Injuries are always the wildcard. UK was more equipped to lose a big than a perimeter player. However, it doesn't change the fact that they are still deep and talented. Its a bad break for Poythress, who seemed to be a very hard worker. Its unfortunate that he may miss out on a very special season, especially since he was a part of the hugely disappointing season a couple years ago.

Big test today with UNC. I am curious to see how they adapt and if this makes them vulnerable.

I think it is simpler than all of that, honestly.

Who is the best recruiter in the Big 10 right now? I'd probably go with Thad Matta as tops in the conference. Second best would probably be Beilein at Michigan or Izzo at MSU. After that, I would argue that the Big 10 does not have another top recruiter in the conference. That's a killer.

Class of 2014, the B1G as a conference signed 8 top 50 recruits among 14 schools (or however many there are now). Class of 2013, 4. Class of 2012, 8. Class of 2011, 6. In that time, the B1G did not have a single top 10 recruit sign in conference. Think about that. 4 years and they haven't signed a single top 10 recruit. The last top 10 recruit to sign with a B1G school was Jared Sullinger with Ohio State. They went to the Final Four behind him.

When you are competing nationally, you have to have the horsepower and the B1G does not. They have a lot of teams trying to win with under the radar players, but you aren't going to find enough under the radar players to outfit an entire conference. They have 26 top 50 recruits in the last four years. KU, UK, UNC and Duke have signed 28 top 50 players in the last two years.

Jabari Parker out of Chicago went to Duke. Cliff Alexander came to KU. Jahlil Okafor is at Duke. Put those three guys in B1G uniforms and some power will shift. I bet Minnesota or Iowa would love to have Tyus Jones, but he's at Duke, too.Trey Lyles is from Indianapolis, but shunned the Hoosiers for Kentucky. Kevin Looney left the chill of Milwaukee for the sunshine and sand of LA at UCLA. And that's just guys they lost from their own footprint. They are also missing on guys outside their area.

If the B1G doesn't adapt with stronger recruiters, especially at Indiana, Illinois and Maryland, they will continue to fall behind nationally.

@bskeet

If that is true, I think that also may be a source of our March frustration. We can't take AFH into the tournament with us, so those 8-12 points that home court is worth to us evaporate at a moment when we need them most.

@Statmachine

"Luck" tends to even out over the course of the basketball season. That's one reason that it's nearly impossible to go undefeated in basketball. A couple bad bounces here or there will almost certainly cost you a game at some point.

KU needs to start getting into some convincing wins so that luck can break the other way and they still come out on top.

@KUSTEVE

I don't feel like I am Texas obsessed. They just present a matchup (size) that could give this particular team trouble. I think Iowa State is better than Texas, but we match up so well with ISU this year that I am not as worried about them.

I look at matchups and teams that can hammer away inside are going to give us trouble this season. Georgetown is a fringe NCAA team, but because they have some size, they can give us problems. Teams without size risk getting run off the floor by us because we have more perimeter talent, and if we can also batter you inside, we can really open things up on you.

Barnes probably will screw things up, but Texas has more talent than they have had since Durant/Augustin/James were there. This is the best Texas team in at least 4-5 years. This is probably the best OU team since they went to the Final Four in the early 2000's. And they both have size, which is something we lack for the first time since I can remember. It should be an interesting race, but I think we still win because we have AFH and nobody else does.

@DinarHawk

Agreed. The other thing that must be considered is that Texas has size that KU does not, so they match up with UK much better than we do. However, they cannot present as much size as UK does, so while they match up with UK better, we may be able to exploit them in different ways because they can't run big guy after big guy at us like UK did. The KU-Texas games will be very interesting this year, as will the games with OU (they also present some interesting matchups inside).

We knew that Georgetown would be physical and they were. I was glad to see that KU didn't fall into a passive pattern against a physical team.

Oubre is making strides. He is just too talented not to eventually come out on top. It has taken longer than most of us (especially me) expected, but I had to realize last night that we are just 8 games into the season. He hasn't found his shot yet, but if he finds his aggressiveness offensively things could pick up for him very, very quickly. And once they do, the fortunes of this KU team will rise with him.

@Wigs2

I don't want to venture too far into this, but your statement about responding to a burglary is incorrect. Officer Darren Wilson stated in his testimony that he was not aware of the call regarding the gas station when he encounter Michael Brown. The information about the burglary is irrelevant to his actions that day because in his own words he didn't even know about it at the time. Using that to justify his actions is improper because he did not have that knowledge at the time that he stopped Brown. He says he engaged him because he was walking in the street - not because he was a suspect in a crime.

This is important.

By missing out on a playoff team, the Big 12 lost out on about $6m, or about $400k per school after the participating team and the conference get their cut. That's not a small loss. $400k is enough to almost entirely fund a smaller program in the athletic department (tennis, golf, etc.).

This is almost entirely related to the teams being TCU and Baylor. If OU were involved, they would have gotten in. There's no way Ohio State would have leapfrogged a one loss Oklahoma. But the committee choosing between TCU, Ohio State or Baylor went with the brand name.

The Big 12 has to make a statement in the bowl games. TCU gets Ole Miss, an SEC team. TCU needs to put about 60 points on the board. Don't keep it close. Don't leave any doubt. Run it up as far as you can against the mighty SEC.

Baylor gets Michigan State. Oregon beat Michigan State by 19. That means Baylor needs to beat them by at least 24 to make sure everybody knows that they are a strong team.

West Virginia gets former Big 12 member (and current SEC member) A&M. WVU needs to get a win here. They don't have to score a million points, but they need to beat A&M.

Texas gets Arkansas and Texas absolutely must win. Other than TCU and Baylor, this is the matchup that the Big 12 most needs to do well in. Arkansas is a weaker SEC program. If Texas doesn't beat them (because Texas is a name program even though they are probably the 6th or 7th best team in the Big 12) the Big 12 looks bad. Horns must get the job done.

K-State faces UCLA again. This matchup is a very good matchup for the Cats. UCLA can't overwhelm them with talent, so they should be able to hang in and squeak out the W.

Oklahoma vs. Clemson, OU has to show up. Much like Texas, OU is the name school in football, so the Sooners have to demonstrate that they can take down a team from a weaker conference (ACC).

Oklahoma State and Washington's get together is a matchup of two teams with disappointing seasons. It'd be nice for OSU to win.

Heck, it would be great if the Big 12 went 7-0, but I doubt everybody wins. As long as TCU, Baylor, Texas and Oklahoma win, it can be considered a pretty solid bowl season. Either K-State or West Virginia notching a win would do wonders for the national perception. The most important thing (besides getting 4 or 5 wins) is to make sure that nobody gets blown out. And hope that the Big 10 does a collective thud in the bowls - Baylor can help that by destroying Michigan State.

@jaybate-1.0

I like your analysis on rim protection, but I would take it a step further.

Rim protection is about protecting the rim and the area around it, the same way that a wall protects a city or an army defends a castle. You're not just protecting the rim - you're protecting the area around it.

In the NBA, they have the "restricted area" where you cannot draw a charge. That space represents the most important 3 feet on a basketball court. If you win those three feet, you control the layups, the rebounds and the pace of the game. If you do not control those three feet, well, good luck trying to win.

You have to be able to protect those three feet. The easiest way is with an athletic big along the lines of Patrick Ewing. That makes things really easy because you can protect the rim with one guy.

If you don't have that, though, you can do so strategically through positioning and sound defensive rotations. This method is harder because if one guy is out of place or late, the rim is left woefully unprotected.

@JayhawkRock78

Unfortunately, this is where the out at 2am problem starts. Jamari may have been trying to break up a fight, but once the police show up, they just see a big guy in the middle of a scrum. That's not a good situation to be in.

I sincerely hope that Jamari has learned from what he has seen in his life that putting himself in that type of situation exposes him to risk for his own safety and his own credibility. Unfortunately, the spotlight shines brighter on him because he's a basketball player and people can always identify him, so he has to be even more careful.

We have to use Lucas and Alexander on Smith. Perry's finesse won't work on a guy that size, and will likely result in either lots of easy buckets or Perry getting into foul trouble. Neither of those outcomes is good for KU.

One of our wings - Selden, Greene, Svi, Oubre - needs to have a big game here. We can't dominate GU inside because they will be so physical with us. We can't depend on our smaller guards ability to slash. That will leave it up to the wings to do the damage. Self should think about playing three of his wing guys around Alexander with one of the PG's. Force GU to send a big away from the lane to open things up and let the Hawks use their speed/quickness advantage.

I have said for years that the Snyder model is not the way to sustained success because you aren't winning on the national stage.

Since starting at KSU, Snyder (going into this season) was 23-43 against ranked opponents. That's 20 games under .500. Against the top conference teams (OU, Texas, Nebraska, Colorado) Snyder's record is a combined 25-41. Against KU and Iowa State Snyder is a combined 38-8. His whole record is built on beating bad teams. 78-22 in non conference, but just 109-71-1 in league. He has been able to schedule 3-4 wins a year in non-con, which allows him to play slightly above .500 in league and put together lots of 8 and 9 win seasons.

For such a great coach, he's just 7-8 in bowls. That's not elite. Mack Brown was 13-8 in bowls and he has never been regarded as a coaching genius.

KU should aim higher. I hope Beaty is that guy.

@wissoxfan83

That made me smile.

Nothing good happens when you are out at 2 in the morning. Let's start with that. If you're out at that hour and things start to turn, no matter what race you are, things can go bad very quickly at that hour of the morning. So Jamari (or anyone else), being out at that time, needs to exercise some caution.

But let's think about Jamari. He grew up in a pretty rough Chicago neighborhood where I am almost positive that the police weren't always showing up to protect and serve the people living there. That's a fact just as much as what I wrote in the first paragraph.

The facts in the second paragraph do not nullify the facts in the first paragraph. Regardless of what neighborhood you grew up in, if you are out at 2 in the morning, trouble may find you so you need to be very careful.

But here's the kicker - the facts in the first paragraph do not nullify the second, either. Jamari has an ingrained distrust of law enforcement borne out of probably dozens of past encounters with law enforcement.

Back when I was in college I was stopped by police probably over a dozen times. In that time, I got 2 tickets. The other times they stopped me "just to see why I was on campus so late" (I had an on campus job that closed up at midnight or later) or "just to make sure I wasn't lost" or other vague reasons for stopping me so they could engage me and see inside my car. I once was pulled over for speeding (I wasn't, ticket was later thrown out of court) and, rather than asking me for my license and registration, the cop asked only if I had any weapons or drugs in the car - I responded by handing him my license and registration without another word. Thankfully, I grew up with a father that grew up in the south who taught me how to handle those situations in a way that made sure I got home every night. Did any of those situations make the news? Of course not because I wasn't an athlete and I didn't end up dead. But is it right to constantly stop certain individuals based purely on their appearance? Was that fair to me? Of course not, but because I hadn't been charged, ticketed or injured, I had no case against the officer even though the stop could be considered harassment because there was no crime being committed (or even suspected).

If you're Jamari, and that has been the situation throughout your life you don't trust cops. How can you when you have (probably) seen cops rough up friends or family for no real reason, but take their time when you're actually in danger? Aren't you worried that if you hand him your ID he will see that you're Jamari Traylor, figure out that you're a KU basketball player and decide to make life a little harder because he has all the power right now? This isn't me saying that Jamari is right, or even that I know what Jamari was thinking, but more that I am trying to shed light on what Jamari may have been considering when he decided not to give his ID to the cops. Does that make it right? No. But maybe there's an experience in Jamari's past that influenced that decision that none of us knows about because the Chicago streets where Jamari grew up are tough, and Jamari knows that sometimes the police aren't there to protect or serve you.

For basketball purposes, KU does not need to play either WSU or Mizzou. However, I think KU should consider playing Mizzou in basketball because KU needs to start playing Mizzou in football again.

For KU to become something other than an afterthought in football it needs a true rival and it needs a rivalry game that matters outside the state of Kansas. K-State is simply not good enough to be that rival. They aren't a national power and they don't have a national following. Mizzou doesn't have that, either, but that game matters outside Kansas. In my travels around the country I still run into people to this day that ask me who KU's main rival is now that Mizzou isn't on the schedule. A lot of people don't even think of K-State outside this region.

For that reason I think a Mizzou series would be beneficial to the KU brand.

For hoops, WSU only works if its a home and neutral site setup. Play them in Lawrence and in KC. They get the national stage, we get the normal gate. However, I doubt they would agree to this and I could imagine that it would not be feasible a lot of years. If the choice came down to playing Temple in Philly or WSU, I would rather have the Temple game. Same if there wasa was a chance to play somebody on the west coast. WSU doesn't open any doors for us, so playing them isn't a priority.

Wayne Selden showed why he is an NBA prospect. He's a true 2 guard in a league that doesn't have many true 2 guards anymore. He can defend, shoot and pass. Last night he put it all together.

Would like to see one of the Svi/Greene/Oubre trio be able to produce nightly. They have to get something from the 3 spot.

Alexander starting to come into his own. Look out. That's all I can say.

The only troubling thing was first half D. That was our issue last season and it showed up again last night. Something to monitor going forward.

Would have loved to see Bowen get the job. Beaty checks all of the boxes except that he does not have any head coaching experience. Other than that, he has ties to KU, is a strong recruiter, he's young and has some ties to success at KU.

I hope that he keeps Bowen around because Bowen's enthusiasm is critical for a program in the state that KU's is in.

@drgnslayr said:

@justanotherfan

Svi is a throw back to my era. All the guys I ever played with pretty much had his moves. He does have an exceptional rotation on his shot, and I give him the most credit for that. But his floor moves, seeing the game, anticipating the ball, using fakes... that was all status quo. It has been a complete joy to watch him move on the court!

I'm ready for the complete throw back guy. I'm waiting for the next Larry Bird to enroll at a college somewhere. Reasonable athlete, but not great. Not a huge vertical, a bit slow on his first step. Nothing looking right compared to the freakish athletes of today.... but... a guy averaging 28 ppg and dominating everyone in D1! Where is this player?

You're on the money here, Slayr

Svi's development has a lot to do with the Euro system and the differences in how European players are developed vs. US players.

In the US, players are always grouped according to age or grade. The thinking is that all players of the same age or grade should be developed at the same pace. That is not the European approach. In Europe, players are grouped by skill. If you have an exceptionally skilled 12 year old, he doesn't dominate 12 year olds, he plays with other kids of comparable skill. Svi has developed his game by playing against guys that forced him to round out his game with pump fakes, using either hand, etc. because he wasn't so far and away better than his competition. That's the best way to develop.

In Europe, that type of grouping starts very early, as soon as 10 or 11 in some cases. In the US, we don't start grouping by skill until the later part of high school. But that is after bad habits have already crept in.

Take a guy like Shaquille O'Neal, one of the greatest players of all time. When he was 13, he was already 6-8. When he was 11, he was well over 6 feet tall and could nearly dunk. Part of the reason that Shaq didn't develop a true jump hook and other interior moves until he was in the NBA was because all through junior high, high school and even college, he was able to just overpower most any opponent. He admits himself that he just overwhelmed most guys on his physical abilities until he got into the NBA.

But what if 13 year old Shaq, rather than dunking on 5-10 7th and 8th graders, had been playing against guys of comparable ability? Now he has to learn how to utilize post moves rather than pure power to get shots. He has to learn much earlier how to pass both facing the basket and with his back to the basket. Maybe he develops his ball handling ability more.

Yeah, that would have meant that Shaq probably would have started playing on his HS varsity when he was 12 or 13, but his development would have exploded as a result.

Not only that, his teammates would have developed as well. Without having Shaq behind them to basically cover up any defensive mistakes, they would have been forced to become more sound. Offensively, they would have learned to work without the mountain in the middle drawing double and triple teams, meaning they would learn to create offense around a team system rather than just dumping the ball inside and watching the overmatched opponent send help from all directions.

Or think about a guy like Carmelo Anthony. Everyone always says that Carmelo is a selfish, me-first scorer. But think about being 12 year old Carmelo Anthony on your U12 AAU team. You're the best player by far. You have the ability to see action before it happens, meaning you see your teammates breaking open before they even know they are breaking open. How many times do you pass the ball on that cut and see a teammate mishandle it or boot it out of bounds because they weren't ready before you determine that the team is better off if you just keep the ball and do your thing? Only when Carmelo has been surrounded by lots of high caliber talent (Team USA, mostly) have we seen him play the way I believe he would play if he had similarly skilled teammates. Otherwise, Carmelo turns into a ball stopping isolation force - basically 12 year old Carmelo wishing his U12 teammates saw the game as well as he does. That's where the team game falls off. The very best players need to play with elite teammates so that they can play a team game rather than going 1 on the world against overmatched opponents.

I think you undersell Larry Bird's talent. Bird wasn't an athletic freak by any means, but he was an above average athlete. You can't get to the NBA as a below average athlete. By NBA standards he was a below average athlete, but those standards would still make him a tremendous athlete at any other level. And what he lacked in speed he made up for with quickness (deceptively quick, with a killer shot release) and otherworldly body control. If you watch old Bird games, you will see someone that could square for his shot in any situation. Athleticism is more than jumping high and running fast. Body control is a huge part of that and Bird had that in spades.