I'm a fan of lowering the clock. A shorter shot clock favors more talented teams because more possessions means more opportunities for the talent to win out.
The college women's clock is already at 30. I would guess the men's clock will be at 30 by 2020. Might as well go with it now.
I think Mason stays in the rotation because of something that @joeloveshawks said.
Simply put, if a game turns into a street fight, you have to have street fight guys on the floor to win that game. Mason is a street fight guy, same as Sherron was, same as Mario, and Darnell Jackson, and TRob and Tyshawn and several others. You have to have guys like that.
Right now, Mason, Traylor and Alexander are our only street fight guys. Maybe Graham as well. At least one NCAA tournament game turns into a street fight and when that happens, you better have those guys around to push back.
@jaybate 1.0
The way I rate players is dependent on two things. First, minimizing existing weaknesses and second, having at least one (preferably more) exceptional strengths.
Let's take a look at players that have been discussed by you, @drgnslayr and @JayHawkFanToo - McDermott, Early, Stauskas and Harris.
McDermott answered some questions about his athleticism, which I would have put as a weakness, but now is neutral. His defense is still questionable, but I agree that his basketball IQ will probably allow him to play above his physical ability. He's an exceptional scorer. The reason I think he falls is because his game reminds me a lot of Adam Morrison. Morrison never was able to become a good enough wing defender to play consistently in the NBA. I think that will scare a lot of the teams in the top 10 away because this draft is so deep you don't want to take a guy in the top 10 that can't make your rotation.
Early has many of the same concerns as McDermott. He's not as good a scorer, but I can see him contributing more as a rebounder. His defense needs to be decent, but I think that makes him a late lottery guy. I like him in either Denver or Phoenix because I think in an uptempo system he could really shine.
Stauskas is an exceptional shooter that handles the ball better than I initially gave him credit for. Because of this, I think he could play either guard spot and with his size (a legit 6-6) he can guard basically any perimeter spot, meaning even if he's not a good defender, he guards the least dangerous wing player on the opposing team.
I actually like Gary Harris better than most, but I don't like his size. He's 6-4 and he's not a Dwyane Wade type athlete. That's going to make it tough for him at the 2. I'm not comfortable with him playing the 1 and tweener guys struggle in the NBA (another thing that makes me less than bullish about McDermott). Still, he can play and other than size, doesn't have any real glaring weaknesses. He's at least adequate in every area, which I think makes him a lottery pick right on that edge between late lottery or late teens. He actually may be a guy that would benefit from being drafted later so he ends up on a team like Chicago or Dallas that isn't desperate for a young player to be a star, but can fit in as a contributor off the bench.
Also, Exum is an Australian teenager. A lot of people in the states aren't as familiar with him, but he's a pretty impressive player.
My concern with both Early and McDermott is that I am not certain either of them will ever be anything more than an average defensive player. McDermott looked good in the gym, but does that translate to the defensive end of the floor? And can he do that every night from November to April? Same with Early. Can he play at that level defensively for six straight months? I think that will cause both of them to slip a few spots.
After the Draft Lottery last night, I thought I'd take a swing at the lottery picks
Cleveland - Joel Embiid, Kansas
Milwaukee - Jabari Parker, Duke
Philadelphia - Andrew Wiggins, Kansas
Orlando - Julius Randle, Kentucky
Utah - Dante Exum, Australia
Boston - Noah Vonleh, Indiana (unless they deal Rondo, then they take Marcus Smart)
LA Lakers - Aaron Gordon, Arizona or Vonleh (unless they get Kevin Love, then they take Rodney Hood or TJ Warren) or Smart
Sacramento - TJ Warren, NC State or Smart if he's still there
Charlotte - James Young, Kentucky
Philadelphia - Gary Harris, Michigan State or Adreian Payne. It's also possible one of the foreign big guys comes off the board here if they want an interior force.
Denver - Adreian Payne, Michigan State or Cleanthony Early, Wichita State
Orlando - Nik Stauskas, Michigan
Minnesota - Doug McDermott, Creighton, or Payne if he's still out there
Phoenix - the player available between Hood, Early, James Young and PJ Hairston, North Carolina
Cleveland needs rim protection and Embiid can provide that. He can also help last year's #1 (Bennett) because he can defend the other team's best interior player.
Milwaukee needs a bit of everything, so they go with the most polished player in the draft in Parker. He immediately becomes a 17ppg scorer.
Philly has two picks so they can use one on the perimeter and the other inside if they choose. They go Wiggins here and then best player available at 10. Depending on how their board lines up, that could be one of about 3 or 4 guys.
Orlando also has two lottery picks and I think they will almost certainly go inside and outside. Randle is almost a definite here because he's the safest bet to be a good pro out of the next tier of players. That means they go with a guard at 12, which could be anybody in the Harris, Smart, Stauskas, Young group.
I think Utah goes Exum at 5 unless he's off the board, in which case this pick is a wild card.
Boston and LA are the other big wild cards because they will almost certainly be trying to wheel and deal before the draft, which could really change their team makeup and shake up the rest of the lottery.
Sacramento and Charlotte will both likely pick perimeter players since they already have PFs on their roster and other than Embiid, there's no true center ranked really high. They will be waiting to see what Boston and LA do.
The end of the lottery is all about getting the best available player on your board. I think guys like TJ Warren, Cleanthony Early and Gary Harris will make some teams really happy here.
Unlike college, NBA basketball teams and gameplans are built around the 2 or 3 best players on each team. The entire Heat gameplan is built around LeBron's unique skills, as well as Wade. Everyone understands this - LeBron, Wade, Spo, Riley, etc.
Look at the history of Pat Riley himself. When he was in LA, he ran the showtime Lakers because he had one of the best transition attacks ever with Magic, Worthy, and the rest. When he went to NY, he didn't take Showtime with him because he didn't have Showtime players. He built a defensive stalwart in NY around Ewing, Oakley, etc. In Miami, he built his attack around Tim Hardaway initially, then eventually Wade and Shaq. Now he has a team built around Wade and LeBron.
Because NBA teams are built around their stars, players have to understand how they fit into the scheme. Mario Chalmers is a starting caliber player in the NBA, but he is not a star. He is a fit in player. Once upon a time, Ray Allen was a star, but at this stage in his career he is a fit in player. I heard an interview with Chalmers once that said he felt like he should be the one taking the final shot in a game. I like the confidence, but the person who decides who gets to take the final shot is ultimately LeBron James because the best player has to make that read on the fly, same as Kobe has done, same as Jordan and Bird and Magic and all of the other greats before them have done. Chalmers has to understand his role on his team, which is what you see him being reminded of when James/ Wade are in his face about things.
After all, LeBron is more important to the Heat than Chalmers ever could be.
There is so much in play for the lottery that it's really tough to say what will happen. Add to that the fact that often times teams will move around a bit after the lottery is set, but before the draft and it's really anybody's guess.
The best scenario for Wiggins would be to end up on a team with a good PG that can get him the ball in scoring positions offensively. I think he will be fine defensively, but he will need some help at first on the offensive end. He would probably be better off as the second offensive option. I think that means teams like Cleveland, Phoenix, Denver, Minnesota and maybe Philadelphia could be good spots for him. I think Orlando, Milwaukee and Utah would be bad for him because they would be looking for him to come in and score 20+ a night.
For Embiid, he really needs to end up somewhere that won't expect too much from him offensively at first. It'd be nice if he could pair with a scoring post player. Sacramento wouldn't be bad. He and Anthony Davis would be an opponent's nightmare in New Orleans. He and Drummond would probably block everything in Detroit (if they could find him minutes in a crowded frontcourt). Minnesota and Phoenix also could be solid destinations.
Obviously, ending up in LA with the Lakers or Boston with a coach like Brad Stephens would be nice, too. I can't see a scenario where either would benefit from going to Utah or Milwaukee, mostly because there's just not much help there, and both of these guys would need some people around them since neither is a primary ball handler.
Its the subtle things you point out about being coached in the European system that I was referencing before. He's being coached by professional basketball coaches, not English teachers who have been to some clinics. I am by no means demeaning high school coaches. Most of them do a very good job considering that they are basically coaching because they love the game rather than coaching from a point of high expertise. But that also means those subtleties that you see in the vid @DoubleDD posted are things that most high school coaches don't have the time to work with their players on.
This is the major developmental flaw in the way basketball players develop in the USA vs Europe. This kid is 17 and has already had a couple of years of bona fide professional coaching exposure. Most American players don't get that type of experience until they get to college.
European players have a lot of options when it comes to the decision of staying in school or going back to their home country to play. For one, the pay in the EuroLeague is very good. The coaching is also very good. Neither is on the NBA level, but it is much better than anywhere else in the world that is not the NBA.
The other thing he has going for him is that he could come to KU for a year, then sign a two year contract with a European team. He gets U.S. exposure at KU, returns home (easier for him because there is no cultural shock to get over), earns a couple million playing in his home country and then, depending on who drafts him after his first year in Europe, he could decide to remain in Europe after his first contract is up, or come to the states to play in the NBA.
Agreed about Coach Spo. One other thing to consider at the NBA level - for coaches that are not involved in player personnel decisions, they have to align their strategy with the personnel acquisitions of the front office. By all accounts, Spo has designed the defense the Heat run - aggressive perimeter trapping, complex backside switching - based on the fact that he has two elite perimeter defenders in James and Wade, along with several mobile big men (Bosh, Birdman, Haslem, etc) at his disposal. Obviously, that same defense wouldn't work for a team like the Pacers because Hibbert isn't equipped to trap the ball 35 feet from the basket.
@drgnslayr simply put, a Coach cannot move away from the direction of the player personnel decision makers, otherwise he will be trying to fit square pegs into round holes and eventually he will be out of a job.
That's why you see so many coaches that also want personnel decision making power. It's tough to cook up the meal you want when someone else is buying your groceries.
This is a thorny topic, so I will try to shed some light on it.
Full disclosure, I am African American, but my children (if I eventually have any) will not be, as I am in an interracial marriage.
So on to the brass tacks of the issue.
One reason black athletes dominate basketball and football is based on availability. To play basketball, you need very few resources - same with football. You can get a game together if you hang a rim on a telephone pole and you have a ball. With football, if you have a little bit of empty space and a ball, you can have a game.
But that is not the chief reason. The chief reason is selection. Let's move away from racial discussion for a second and talk about culture.
In the country of India, the #1 sport is cricket. In the Dominican Republic, the #1 sport is baseball. If you have the hand eye coordination to be a good baseball player, you would probably make a good cricket player, too. The difference between which one you become good at has less then to do with your athletic gifts and more to do with where you grow up. If you grow up in Mumbai, you will be a cricket star. If you grow up in Santo Domingo, you will be a baseball star. Chances are if you grow up in Mumbai, you will never even play baseball, the same as if you grow up in Santo Domingo, you will never play cricket.
Does that mean that Dominicans are more athletic because they produce more major leaguers than India? Of course not. If you are athletic and you are Dominican, you play baseball. Are there Dominicans that could be good at other sports? Of course. But they start playing baseball young and develop from there. They play baseball because in the Dominican, playing baseball is the most noble pursuit. Mothers are proud of their shortstops in the DR like mothers are proud of doctors here in the US. Are American Asian kids good at math (as the stereotype suggests) because they are just "better with numbers" or is it because the expectation is that they will excel in math and science just like a Brazilian kid is expected to play soccer, and a Dominican should be able to play shortstop and a black kid from Chicago should have a jump shot.
Highly motivated people of any race can succeed. What they choose to succeed in will depend on availability and exposure. I started dribbling a basketball almost before I could even walk. I succeeded in the business world because I am highly motivated, and those types of people succeed. I know a guy that grew up in Mexico that was a soccer player growing up. Like myself, he succeeded in the business world because he's highly motivated and those types of people succeed. That's what makes Lebron and Kobe and Tom Brady and Peyton Manning and all the rest great athletes. They have the skills, but they also have the motivation. They would have succeeded as athletes or stock brokers or dentists or whatever. But they got exposed to sports, and that was where they found their passion.
I bet the competition between AWIII and Greene was pretty close. The thing was, even though that competition may have been close, the competition between those guys and Wiggins/Selden was probably not that close.
There are 80 wing minutes to go around. If Wiggins is getting 30 and Selden is getting 25, and Self has always shown that he will play 2 ball handlers together at least sometimes, that means 65 of those minutes are gone already and you have two guys battling for the 15 remaining minutes. AWIII was a close second in that battle last year.
He's seen the tape on Oubre. He's played against Selden. He's played against Greene. He knows he wasn't on Wiggins' level and probably won't be on Oubre's. He's also behind Selden. That means its him and Greene again for that main backup role on the wing. He knows that if he comes in 2nd again this year, he's back to playing 5mpg, which I am sure is not how he envisioned his college career playing out. Better to take your career on to another school with two years of eligibility than to redshirt at KU, then end up transferring and be in a position like Brady Heslip where you really only have a chance to play for three seasons.
Exactly. The earlier a kid is exposed to high quality coaching and high quality competition, the more they will develop.
This is the biggest reason that many countries have closed the gap on the US when it comes to basketball talent. In the US, there is a pretty solid chance that if you don't live in a town with a great HS coach, you probably will make it to your 18th birthday without having ever received consistent, high quality coaching. In Europe, that simply doesn't happen because you would have been placed on a club team at 14 or 15 and would have been coached by the same coaches that work with the EuroLeague players.
Look at how quickly Embiid developed this year. He was new enough to basketball that he hadn't developed bad habits from poor coaching as a taller kid when he was 12 or 13. That meant that once he got to KU and received quality instruction, they didn't have to spend three months un-teaching previously formed bad habits and instead just set about teaching a 7 foot athlete how to play. Sadly, most American kids never get that chance because they develop lots of bad habits either playing for poor coaches, or by dominating lesser competition.
Another thing to remember about foreign players is that they have often been exposed to more high level coaching with club teams, etc. than a lot of US kids, particularly in Europe. Most European players don't play for their school teams, but rather for elite club teams that are feeders to the EuroLeague. As a result, they are often much more able to grasp high level concepts than US kids that have only been exposed to high school coaches and the AAU circuit.
I agree completely that those guys listed above are gone. There's probably not going to be another Oscar Robertson, or Bob Cousy, or Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, etc. Those guys were all time greats. You see one of those guys once a generation, if you're lucky.
But I think guys now are actually getting to be more of a well rounded player. 25 years ago, nobody expected a PG to score, so lots of college PGs entered school absolutely not being able to shoot at all. Remember when Jason Kidd first arrived at Cal? He was a terrible shooter. He shot 29% from 3 as a freshman. Shot 36% as a sophomore. He never shot above 37% from 3 until 2007-08, his 14th year in the NBA!
But then, no one expected PGs to score. They were supposed to pass and set up the offense. Now, people have discovered that since they have the ball in their hands so much, PGs almost have to be able to score to be effective. Think about a guy like Doug Gottlieb. He was an awful shooter, couldn't score at all. I can say pretty confidently that he probably could not be a starting PG at a major school in this day and age because he would be an offensive liability.
The thing is, once you cross from the mid level to the elite level, any weaknesses get exposed. There's almost no margin for error at the top. Think about that 08 Final Four. Four #1 seeds, all legitimately talented top to bottom. Memphis basically overwhelmed UCLA and KU did the same to UNC because those two teams didn't have the athletes to match up. I remember watching those games and thinking to myself that the only player UCLA had that could have played at Memphis was Russell Westbrook, and that the only player UNC had that could have played at Kansas was Ty Lawson. Hansbrough, Love, Collison, Ellington, etc. all looked overmatched in those games, not because they weren't great college players, but because they didn't match up with more elite athletes. Kevin Love figured out how to be effective without elite athleticism, and has become an NBA star. Those other guys are all backups because they never figured out how to be well rounded without elite level athleticism.
So what does that have to do with the KU PG matchup? Well, Mason and Frankamp both have an uphill climb because they just don't have the elite level athleticism. Mason is more athletic than Conner, but he's also shorter. Conner is an excellent shooter, but he's not particularly strong or tall, so a bigger defender can snuff out his shot without being compromised by quickness. And this is where Graham fits in. If you want to trade blows with the best teams next year, you need a strong backcourt that can handle things physically, because UK has the Harrison twins and we all saw them basically bully Wichita State in the Round of 32 (and they didn't even play that well, honestly).
Being able to just be more physically imposing is huge because it means that your opponent can't take away certain options from you. Graham's size gives him that. Whether that translates to D1 remains to be seen, but his physical stature gives him a head start.
Here's one of the reasons that what Calipari has works.
Basketball is a very naked game. You know exactly where you stand in basketball because you cannot hide from the truth, especially when there's a lot of talent around.
Let's take Poythress. He wasn't ready after his freshman year. He struggled mightily. So he returned. He didn't start because Randle was better at the 4 and Young was better on the wing. He saw that every single day in practice. He didn't have Young's shooting or ballhandling ability. Cal doesn't have to tell him that - he can see it because the difference between an NBA caliber talent and someone that's a good college player is clear when its right in front of you day in and day out.
Same with Lee. Lee knows that he has to get stronger and better. Why? Because he probably spent a fair amount of time this year in practice with Julius Randle kicking his rear. That will keep you humble very easily.
Calipari knows that. His best recruiting tool is that you know where you stand as far as NBA preparation because you were practicing against lottery picks all year. Booker knows that the only way he can be a OAD is if he can take it to the Harrison's starting in October. Lee knows that if he wants to be the guy, he better be ready to handle Towns and Co. Dakari Johnson and Willie Cauley Stein know they will probably have better battles in practice than they will seen in 80% of their games. And this time next year, every single one of those guys will be better prepared for the NBA because of that. That's what Calipari can sell. And he can sell that even more if it goes to a TAD system.
That's a good schedule with some interesting challenges.
Rider will be a good game because it's nice to get a game in against a team that will probably be a tougher team from a smaller conference. Good experience game for us.
Temple and Georgetown should both be beneficial as those games will draw eyes on the east coast. Both should be KU wins, but both of those teams will probably be very solid.
I also like the UNLV matchup. That should be a good game in Lawrence.
Michigan State will be tough because Izzo is always tough, but I don't think they will have the horsepower next year. They will probably be a year away, but it will be a good test because you cannot beat Michigan State if you are soft.
Florida will be solid and they have some talent back - both Kasey Hill and Chris Walker stayed in Gainesville and they added three more top 50 recruits. I can imagine a drop off, but I don't think they fall off the map like they did before because Donovan was able to return some serious talent.
And then there's Kentucky. I will say right now, once the twins and Cauley-Stein came back, they became the team to beat for next year. Nobody returns as much talent as them - not even Wisconsin. They lose Randle but add two more interior players. They lose Young but add another very good wing player in Devin Booker. They have interior depth with Cauley-Stein, Lee, Poythress, Towns and Lyles. Foul trouble means literally zero to them up front because they have five legit players. In the backcourt its the twins, Ulis and Booker. Ulis is a good add because they have another ball handler that they can use to keep the pressure on. Devin Booker's dad should be familiar to us as well - former Mizzou star Melvin Booker. He's a shooter that should fit right in spreading the floor for UK. Kentucky has all the pieces.
I'm not just speaking to KU hoops. I was more addressing a college athletics problem. This is something that is present not just at the D1 level, but also at the D2 level, where the likelihood of a player going pro is so remote as to make it non-sensical to even dangle that possibility out there.
College athletic departments (not just KU, but all colleges) tend to steer athletes towards less demanding (and ultimately less rewarding) majors because it is easier to keep guys eligible that way. Even more accomplished students are encouraged to take less burdensome course loads because it "may interfere with their practice schedule."
This is a dirty little secret that the NCAA does not want to talk about. It is most rampant in football, because of the time commitment in both the fall (with the season) and spring (with spring practices), but it pops up in other areas as well.
Again, I'm not saying that everyone does this, but it happens because these student athletes are likely to trust their academic advisors, so if they are told that they shouldn't take certain courses, they will probably not pursue those courses unless they are absolutely adamant that they want to do that.
I agree with you, Lillard is a superstar.
Also, Tim Duncan has agreed that Damien Lillard is a superstar
I feel that you have to maximize the potential of each team in college basketball. There's just no guarantee that things will come together for that one great run in any four year span.
Let's take the White/ Greene question to the extreme.
Let's say that there is no Andrew Wiggins, that he chooses Florida State instead of Kansas. Andrew Wiggins was absolutely the best player on this KU team. So what happens if he's in Tallahassee instead of Lawrence?
Well, for one, you can forget about beating Duke early in the season. Wiggins play in the second half basically bailed us out as he guarded Parker and upped his offense down the stretch. So we lose a major marquee win if we don't have Wiggins. At best, we can say that we get 80% of Wiggins production from a White/ Greene combo. Neither was the rebounder or defender that Wiggins was. I think that ultimately costs us a win or two in addition to Duke.
That probably means no top 2 seed and it may change the Big 12 race, although I think KU still had enough to win the second thumb without Wiggins. That probably means we get bounced in the Round of 32 anyway, and possibly in the Round of 64 (remember, we would be a 4 or 5 seed, not a 2). And our offense could be even worse than it was because neither Greene nor White was a get your own shot guy. They would have needed drive and kick opportunities from Tharpe. We didn't get those. Our offense may have been a mess, especially once Embiid was banged up.
And then we have the question of whether a White/ Greene combo is good enough to draw Oubre and make him feel like KU is a potential title contender. No Wiggins changes the dynamic because you don't have a big time player on the wing and in addition you have the point guard questions that we are still trying to answer.
We had Tharpe here and hoped that he would develop. We made it to his junior year and found out that he did not have the skill to be the PG of an elite team. We put three years into him and discovered that his ceiling is as an effective PG off the bench. I'd rather have the upgrade in talent than discover that White can be effective at 17 mpg, but is overexposed at 24 mpg.
I would edit your statement just slightly - Talent > Seniority. It just so happens that the best talent is now OAD talent, or TAD talent.
I think it is important that KU gets these players now because the NBA will likely change the rule at the next CBA and move to a TAD rule. If that does happen, it likely will not happen before 2017 (when the current CBA is up for review). We can't be on the short end of talent between now and 2017. That just isn't acceptable.
@JayHawkFanToo brings up an interesting point regarding having your degree to fall back on. I would be in full support of this, but this is a problematic situation. It has been shown that athletes at major schools are often steered away from certain majors - biology, business, pre law, etc. and towards other majors - sports management, general studies, etc. in an effort to lessen the academic load on the athlete. I have a couple of friends that were D1 athletes (not at KU) that actually had to fight with their respective athletic departments to pursue their chosen majors. That's a problem. I don't have any evidence that this happens at KU, but I do know that it happens very literally everywhere else. A degree in "general studies" doesn't give you much to fall back on. Only if athletes are allowed to pursue a degree that will give them an opportunity to truly have something to fall back on.
If we were Wichita State (or even K-State) that rotation would be pretty nice. However, at KU, that rotation just isn't talented enough. That group doesn't have a single guy in it that I could envision a scenario where they play in the NBA one day. That's an "I hope this works out" type of rotation.
I think the tough thing about this battle is that each of these guys brings something different to the table, but ultimately it's going to depend on what the team needs. I think all of them could play, but only two will.
I would say that Graham has the edge as he appears to be the best equipped to be something of an above average defender. Mason is probably an average defender at best due to his size and Conner probably tops out at average as well due to his shortage of athleticism and strength.
The other thing to consider is which of these guys is likely to get other people good shots. That was where Tharpe fell short last year. We have plenty of scorers on this roster with Ellis, Alexander, Oubre, Selden, Greene, Mickelson, etc. What we need is someone that can get them all open looks.
Mason is more of a scoring PG. He penetrates to score (or draw fouls) for himself. He wasn't much of a passer off the dribble last season because he is looking to get to the rim for his own scoring opportunities. He can collapse a defense, but throughout the season last year he wasn't collapsing the defense to get other guys shots.
Conner is an undersized shooting guard that can handle the ball. He's really not a PG, although his handle is good enough to play there. The downside for him is that, like Mason, he doesn't really help get other guys open shots because his strength is spacing the floor with his shooting. He is a player that benefits from the penetration of others, rather than a player that helps others benefit off his drives.
Which brings us to Graham. In high school, he seemed to be a drive and dish or score type of player. That's more what this team needs than just a drive and score PG or a shooting PG. With all of the wing and post scorers, we need a passing PG and Graham seems most likely to fit that mold as we stand today.
I think it's an innovative idea, but basketball is different than baseball in a very key respect - baseball occurs in a vaccuum. That is not the case in basketball.
There are lots of guys that shoot high percentages, but if you put them on a different team, their percentages tumble. Why? Because in basketball, the types of shots you get will affect your percentages.
Grantland.com has done some excellent work on this (mostly Zach Lowe, who, even if you don't like the NBA, does some exceptional work on the stats side of basketball).
But let me take an example that fits well here. Let's look at Trevor Ariza, a solid role player for the Washington Wizards. The last 3 years he shot less than 42% from the field each year and 30%, 33% and 36% from the 3pt line. This year those numbers went to 46% from the field and 40% from three. Those are significant jumps. So why the low numbers the last three years prior to this season? Well, Ariza played for New Orleans for two years, then Washington last year. Those NO teams asked Ariza to create his own shot. He had to work off the dribble. As a result, he shot poorly, both from the field and from 3. His numbers nudged up last year with Washington before surging this season. Why? Well, last year he played part of the season with John Wall (Wall missed over a quarter of the season with injuries). This year he played the entire season with Wall. That means instead of creating his own shots off the dribble he got shots when others left him to help on Wall drives. That means lots of open threes in the corner and easy cuts to the basket.
So while I believe that looking for guys that can shoot a high percentage is a good idea, I think you also have to consider how they get their shots. I don't know much about the guys you listed, but it makes me wonder. Could Armand and Galloway have succeeded while needing to get their own shots as opposed to getting those shots off of kick outs from a great slasher drawing double teams? Are Armand and Galloway set shooters? Did they benefit from playing with strong post players? Get lots of open looks on kickouts from great slashers? Do those guys need multiple screens to get open to have that percentage? Can a guy like Watkins or Whittington set those screens to free up Armand and Galloway? If so, would taking them away from the basket cut into their shooting percentage because they aren't around the basket for easy put backs to boost their numbers?
What about floor spacing? Are Watkins and Whittington the type of players that basically just hang around the basket, because if that's the case all of a sudden you will have four people in the lane at all times (Watkins, Whittington and their defenders) meaning those drive and kick opportunities will diminish and there will always be help nearby when Watkins or Whittington goes to work inside.
I would bet that if you combined those five guys at least three of them would see their shooting percentages drop by at least 3 points because they would not be getting the same types of looks.
I think @jaybate 1.0 adds an interesting component as well. Often times these types of players are "hidden" on defense by guarding the other team's weakest offensive player. But if you find a bunch of guys that shoot the lights out and guard the weakest link on the other end, you will not have a viable defensive unit.
National championships are won in October. You get to lift the trophy in April, but titles are won in October in empty gyms shooting jumpers, and on lonely tracks running wind sprints, and on unforgiving hills doing lunges. They're won at 6am during Hell week and at 4pm in the weight room. You win championships with all the work you put in long before the Fieldhouse fills up for late night.
You win titles when nobody is looking, when your opponents are sleeping, when your competitors are resting, when your rivals are taking the day off.
You win titles with the work you put in when no one is there to applaud you, or congratulate you, or tell you how great you are and how hard you're working and how much the reward will be.
Titles are won inside the heart of every player on the team deciding in themselves that nothing matters more than winning - not individual accolades, not minutes, not shots, nothing.
Titles are won in October. It just takes six months to lift the trophy.
Every rotation has to have at least two guys that can be primary ball handlers, preferably three. You also have to have at least two guys that can carry the offense for several minutes at a time. You need a perimeter stopper and an interior stopper. You have to have at least one shooter. You cannot be without an energy guy to give you a shot in the heart every now and then. You have to play your best three two way players (offense and defense considered). And of course, you need three legitimate rebounders, including one perimeter guy.
I would go Graham, Selden, Oubre, Ellis, Alexander as starters with Frankamp, Mason, Traylor and Mickelson off the bench.
You have to have Frankamp's shooting off the bench and I like Mason as a change of pace PG. Selden, Oubre and Alexander will probably be our best three two way players (if healthy). Perry is our most talented scorer, but his defense gives me pause, which could cause him to lose minutes in the second half against better interior scorers. Traylor's energy is an absolute must, and Mickelson is a better alternative than Lucas IMHO. The one exception is if Lucas is a significantly better rebounder than Mickelson, since we already know that Alexander is a monster on the glass and both Selden and Oubre rebound well from the perimeter.
Greene and White seem to fall on the outside looking in, as Selden and Oubre are probably better two way players. Lucas is a less talented replacement for Mickelson (rebounding still to be seen). If Frankamp struggles, you could plug in the better of Greene or White, but you need at least some defensive presence from whoever gets that shooter spot.
Pace is determined by personnel.
For example, with a big guy like Withey or Aldrich, having a fast pace doesn't play to your personnel because you're just wearing them down by having your offense fly up and down the floor, and you aren't taking advantage of their size because you're pushing the ball up and down.
So the question when it comes to pace is does a faster pace fit this upcoming season's personnel. A quick scan of the perimeter guys says it probably does. For one, we have depth at the point if both Mason and Graham can handle primary ball handler duties. I think Frankamp probably slides more to the 2, especially with Graham here, as having a bigger PG to allow Frankamp to play on the wing while still not having to defend a bigger guy is probably ideal. Plus, that takes advantage of Frankamp's greatest skill, which is his shooting. Oubre and Selden can get out in transition, as can Greene and White.
What about the big guys? Well, Perry plays better in a set half court offense, but from watching Alexander, I think he is comfortable in transition. Traylor is definitely a transition player. Not sure yet on Mickelson, which ultimately may be the determining factor. If Mickelson isn't comfortable in transition, KU may be a selective running team (i.e., run when the Chicago bigs are in with Mason and any two wings, play more half court with Perry, Mickelson, Frankamp and Greene on the floor).
As for zone defense, I think KU should show a zone as at least a change of pace look. I was advocating this last year with the size and length KU had at it's disposal, and I would advocate a similar look this year. I don't think Oubre will be the individual defender that Wiggins was, but I think he will be very solid. I still think a 3-2 zone could be very effective with the likely starting group (Graham, Selden, Oubre, Ellis, Alexander) because of their size and length.
I think a 2-3 would be a fun look if KU decided to go smaller (something like Mason, Frankamp, Selden, Traylor, Mickelson). That would be a good look to maybe change the look the opposing offense was getting for a handful of possessions.
I agree with @konkeyDong 100% that we need to embrace attacking matchup advantages. This has been one of my major criticisms of Coach Self in that he lets lesser talented teams hang around because he lets them play their regular rotation rather than basically telling them "you can't play your two worst rotation players today because I will destroy them whenever they are in the game." That's the single biggest reason UK beat Wichita State. Had Marshall been able to play his regular rotation, he may have been able to have enough gas in the tank for a win. But Wessel (12 mpg in the season, 3 vs. UK) and Coleby (13 mpg regular season, 7 vs. UK) were basically eliminated from the rotation because Cal went right after them. Self let a Stanford team without a true PG beat him in the NCAA rather than pressing them to death with a small lineup and making their zone defend Wiggins as a 4 man in the high post.
Exploiting matchups will be the key to success, over and above everything else. When we have a size advantage, we dominate. However, the high low doesn't give us the advantage if we are better on the perimeter. Look at the Northern Iowa loss. Or Stanford. Or Bradley. What's the common thread between those teams? All had a 7 footer on their roster that was pretty solid, which eliminated our typical interior advantage. But in each of those games, our guards were better (sometimes substantially so). But in sticking with the high low, we negated our own advantage by taking the ball away from our advantage and moving it to where they could play us more evenly.
I think more kids are waiting to declare to see how recruiting shakes out. Not only a who's staying, who's going question with current players, but also with coaches, as well as where other top talent is headed.
These kids want to play with other talented players, but you can't know where guys are going to land this early in the process. Right now, only 15 of the top 60 players on ESPN's list have declared. On Scout, it's 25 of the top 100. On Rivals, 35 of the top 150 have committed.
Roughly three quarters of the top talent is still out there. Kids that are ranked lower are learning that declaring early isn't necessarily in their best interests as we have seen with instances of players not being able to get out of LOI's after a coaching change. I think lots of kids are taking that into account and waiting to see if the staff that is recruiting them will be around. Whether that is a continuing trend will be determined by the NBA age limit, conference realignment (if that gets churning again) and overall college job security.
Graham looks to be a very solid player, but I can understand why he took a while to get noticed.
He's not an eye popping athlete. He's your basic 6-2 or 6-3 guy. He doesn't blow your mind with his hops or speed. That doesn't mean he isn't a good athlete, but he's definitely not John Wall or Derrick Rose or somebody like that.
He's a good but not great shooter. We aren't talking about a Conner Frankamp type marksman here. He's a guy you can't leave open, but not an outright gunner.
His skills are solid across the board. Good, but not great size. Good but not astonishing handles. Good shooter. Good athlete. Good this, good that. I bet when he was at camps he was always the fourth or fifth best player in the pickup game. Good enough that you knew he wasn't the worst player out there, but not a standout. It takes time to get noticed when you always blend into the fabric.
That said, I think that makes him the perfect addition to this particular team. KU doesn't need a PG to come in and score 15 points a game and push the ball with blinding speed, break down the defense, etc. KU needs a PG that can play PG and just run the show. Alexander, Oubre, Ellis, Selden, etc. will take care of the flash. Graham just needs to run the team and defend out front. I think he can do that perfectly fine.
Not many players still out there uncommitted at this point.
Just a quick look down the Rivals150 has 5 guys that haven't committed yet - #64 4 star guard Elijah Stewart, #66 4 star guard Jared Terrell (also went to Brewster Academy), #117 3 star guard Larry Austin, #128 3 star center Idrissa Diallo (a 6-11 project at this point), and #130 3 star forward Andre Adams.
Scout introduces Shelton Mitchell at #75 (6-3 PG), who doesn't make Rivals top 150. They are much higher on Elijah Stewart, ranking him #40, but lower on Terrell, ranking him 78. ESPN has Stewart 94th and Terrell 79th. Mitchell is not ranked by ESPN.
Suffice it to say that there's not much left in the way of HS talent.
What does remain out there is a lot of transfers. Depending on how Self feels about his depth, he may want to sign a transfer that will redshirt this season to bolster next season's group. I can't figure who that player would be, but there are quite a few out there that may fit the bill.
Not just an issue of freshness, also an issue of exposure.
Teams prepare specifically for starters. Most college teams don't prepare specifically for reserves, which means a reserve doesn't have to go to his secondary skills. This is why guys can look great as reserves and have people clamoring for them getting more time, then struggle in an expanded role because they just don't have the secondary skills to back up their primary package.
This is also why I am very cautious about avoiding recruiting top level players. I don't mind OADs because you are pretty sure they can play. Guys ranked below 50 may develop like Tyshawn or may turn out more like Naadir. But you don't know until you are 2-3 years down the road.
The only way this works out well is if Graham is on the way. I just don't see Frankamp as a 25+ mpg player at this stage and I'm not sure Mason is ready for that role, either. If either is thrust into that role, we may be here this time next year complaining about their shortcomings.
@nuleafjhawk
It would give them another team in conference that had some national respect. Right now, the Big 12 is looked at as KU and the 9 dwarfs. Nobody has been consistently good enough to get national respect, so KU's dominance isn't really appreciated on a national scale.
Like I said, I wouldn't want them winning at KU's expense, but I would like to see the Big 12 do better in the tournament as a whole because right now they just don't do enough.
I think it would help KU if another Big12 team were to win a title. Obviously I don't want them to win at our expense, but a strong conference helps everyone. That said, I think OU, OSU and Texas are most likely, with Iowa State coming in after that.
Baylor is a perennial darkhorse because they get enough talent.
I can't see WVU, Tech, TCU or K-State ever having enough talent to actually win it all.
In addition to the things @Statmachine has pointed out, the evaluators also have a chance to go back and watch game tape of the players and determine final rankings. The preseason rankings are based on what happened last summer. The mid-season rankings are based on what happened early in the year. These final rankings take everything into account - how a player did in his high school season, how he played in all star games, etc.
Players are also re-evaluated at this point. A guy that maybe got onto the radar for having a big camp last summer and zooming up the rankings may get moved around if his play during the season didn't stand up to that lofty showing. A player that played poorly at a camp and fell in the rankings may move back up once the final rankings come out and his strong senior season is taken into account. Camps are a good evaluation tool because they pit guys against other likely college players. On the other hand, it's just one week and if a guy is sick, or banged up, or not shooting well or whatever, that may hurt his ranking temporarily even though he really just had a bad week.
I want Graham because we need another high ranked player in the backcourt.
As I've said in other areas, there are some guys ranked 50-100 that develop into very nice players. There are others that just never pan out. I think Mason will pan out as a good contributor for KU. I think Tharpe has maxed out as a good backup, but is probably overextended as a starter. Tharpe for 17 mpg is a very good player. Bump that to 26 and the warts show. I'm concerned that the same thing will be the case for both Mason and Frankamp. Mason seems like a poor man's Sherron Collins. A spark off the bench, but trying to play him heavy minutes every night will lead to lots of wild forays into the lane (and turnovers) along with just so so defense. With Conner, you would get a steadier hand, but probably more defensive struggles and a lack of penetration, possibly offset by his floor spacing. Each of the guys we have now have some issues that could become problems in extended minutes.
I'd like to land Graham because we really need a starter at the point that can play 25+ mpg. I'm not sure any of the guys we have now are that guy.
@truehawk93
My understanding is that the fine was the maximum amount allowed under the NBA bylaws and constitution.
I don't think that Calipari has been just shuttling guys off to the NBA. It seems that the guys he has had leave early have mostly enjoyed good careers.
Rose was an MVP and all-star before his string of injuries.
Tyreke Evans isn't an all star, but he's a good to very good player.
John Wall is an all star. Cousins averages close to a 20-10. Bledsoe has turned into a potential star. Patrick Patterson is a rotation player for a playoff team. Daniel Orton has been a disappointment in the NBA.
Brandon Knight is a starter and a solid player overall.
Anthony Davis is on the verge of being a superstar. Michael Kidd-Gilchrist is a starter for a playoff team, although he has struggled at times. Terrence Jones is a starter for a playoff team. Marquis Teague and Doron Lamb are bench players.
Noel didn't play at all this year. Archie Goodwin was a reserve.
It doesn't seem like he just throws guys into the NBA. Those guys have been, for the most part, ready to make the jump. I think the Orton decision was probably the one that Calipari regrets, and allowed him to inform Dakari Johnson better this year. I think he and Teague are the only ones I'd call mistakes. I thought Lamb was ready and I think Goodwin will be a good NBA player eventually.
If a player had said the things that Sterling said, they would be fined significantly, probably lose all of their personal sponsorships and may even have trouble getting a new contract with another team.
But Sterling owns the team. He has no contract. So if there are sponsorships lost, its the team that loses those, not Sterling personally.
And that's where this changes things. Follow the money trail. As I said earlier, once the major sponsors started bailing, I knew the sledgehammer was going to fall. A group just agreed to buy the Bucks (the Bucks!) for more than $550m. They aren't going to let some idiot spouting racist bs harm their half billion dollar investment. Over the last few years the Pistons, Warriors, Kings, Nets, Pelicans, and Bobcats have all been purchased. Those new owners spent a premium on their franchises. If Donald Sterling is going to cost the NBA brand sponsors, he has to go because those 7 franchises with new owners haven't even had a chance to recoup the value of their teams yet. If I have learned one thing about very rich people, it is that they absolutely do not tolerate anyone that devalues any of their assets.
That's the difference with Sterling. If this were a player, you could easily say that the player was fined X amount and suspended for the season or whatever, then leave it up to the individual teams about if they wanted to sign someone like that.
And I wouldn't exactly cry for Sterling. He will probably get about $800m reasons to quietly walk away from the NBA and the Clippers.
@JayhawkRock78
You are right, we did not leave the Big 8 for the Big 12, but UT, A&M, Baylor and Tech all left Rice, TCU, Houston, and SMU out in the cold. It took TCU 15 years to get back into a major conference. Rice has not recovered yet. SMU is just starting to recover. Houston has been up and down.
The Big 12 did not cost us anything, but it did cost those four schools that were left out quite a bit. We weren't the ones standing on the outside looking in the first time, but that doesn't mean that there weren't losers in that deal. Yes, we were very nearly losers the second time around, but it can't be ignored that someone lost the first time.
I don't think the Sterling situation will affect the change to the draft eligibility rules. They have to handle the Sterling situation soon. This isn't something that can sit idly. The Clippers have lost more than half a dozen major sponsors in the last 36 hours and if the NBA does not act, they could stand to lose some of those same sponsors. There is no way the other owners will allow inaction to cost the league major sponsorships like State Farm Insurance, Kia Motors, CarMax, RedBull, Amtrak, Yokohama Tires, Corona, Virgin America Airlines, and Sprint, all of whom have cut ties with the Clippers since yesterday morning.
Kia, Sprint, State Farm and CarMax are major NBA sponsors. I can't see the league's other 29 owners allowing there to even be a risk of losing those, which is why I think the punishment will be harsh and decisive.
I don't know what the NBA bylaws allow, but Silver will go as far as he can go to protect the overall NBA brand, particularly because the NBA is global now, and those types of racist remarks certainly will not sit well as the NBA looks to expand more into Africa and South America (along with Asian markets).
So the decision on this will be quick, decisive and definitive. You can take a sledgehammer to this because, well, those types of remarks deserve a sledgehammer approach.
The decision on the age limit is decidedly more nuanced and careful. Silver has the benefit of time. He can tweak this as time goes by if necessary. It's not like he only has one shot at getting the age limit right. He has another chance every couple of years.
He gets exactly one chance to get the Sterling response right, and that chance comes this afternoon. Mess that up, and he may not have another chance to get anything right.
You articulated my points better than I did!
Preparation in the NBA is key. For example, look at Memphis and Oklahoma City playing in the playoffs right now.
Tonight's matchup between those two teams will be the 18th game between them since November 2012 (just 18 months ago). 4 regular season games each season because they are in the same division, plus 5 games in last year's playoffs and 4 more so far this year going into tonight. That's familiarity. Gasol, Randolph, Conley, Prince, Allen, Davis, Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka, Collison, Jackson, Fisher, Sefolosha, have played in most of those games. The stuff that work in Game 3 of last year's playoffs has been analyzed and shut down by now.
In college, you see a team at most 4 times in a season. It's unlikely you would see a team more than 10 times in a 4 year career in college. All of the preparation is general because you are preparing to face general opponents - Texas today, TCU next Wednesday, West Virginia on Saturday, with generic players that don't necessarily have otherworldly skills. In the NBA you have OKC (and Durant) tonight in the regular season, Carmelo and the Knicks two days from now, on the road for Lebron and the Heat this weekend before swinging through and facing Atlanta and Charlotte on a back to back next week. And you have to prepare for every specific opponent because even though Durant, Carmelo and Lebron are all SF, they have different offensive games and if you try to use the same gameplan to stop all three chances are two of them shred you. In the playoffs, you see the same team over and over, so you have to adapt your gameplan every night. It's just a different preparation (and pressure) and I don't think Self's coaching style or skills play to that.
The only coach that has been successful at both consistently has been Larry Brown, and I can't figure out how he pulls that off.
I agree with @HighEliteMajor and @wissoxfan83 . I miss playing MU. It was one of the strongest and most passionate rivalries in all of college sports. It was on the level with OU-Texas, Florida-Georgia, Alabama-Auburn, USC-UCLA, Duke-UNC, etc. I think something is lost for KU by not having a big time rivalry like that (and no, K-State does not count).
Some of the best and most epic KU games were against MU. Who can forget that wild finish in KC in football when Reesing hit Meier for the game winner? There are at least a dozen classic basketball games in the last fifteen years. MU brought out the best in our players on the court/field and we brought out the best in them. Those were almost always great games and its unfortunate that we won't play them because they made the decision that was in their best financial interests.
That's the thing here. We talk about tradition and all of these things, but the truth is all of that went out the window when the Big 12 was formed in the first place. We can't begrudge schools for going to conferences that put them in the best financial position when that was the whole reason the Big 12 was created in the first place. It just so happened that 15 years later, the landscaped had changed. But I think games between KU and MU would be intense and passionate, and more than that, would give KU an even bigger stage, particularly in football, where they could get exposure in the SEC footprint by playing MU.
I would support playing MU, or Nebraska or Colorado, or A&M because it just makes competitive sense in both football and basketball. By playing them out of conference we could get exposure into a different region, which is important, especially when you're discussing national prominence.
I don't think Self jumps to the NBA. He has no NBA experience, either as a player, executive, coach or assistant. I think that puts him at a significant disadvantage to other candidates like Hoiberg.
I also think Self's style of coaching is more suited to the college game. He's more of a style coach than a matchup coach. The NBA is all about matchups and if you cannot exploit matchups that you have an advantage in, you will not last as an NBA coach. As we have criticized on this very board, that is probably Self's greatest weakness as a coach.
In the NBA, if you cannot stop a certain set, they will run that set over and over again until you either stop it or they score 1000 points on you. That's just the way it works. College coaches never do that. They may run something once or twice, but they won't run the exact same set over and over until the end of time just to show that you can't stop that set. It's rare for Self to keep feeding a player because the opposition just cannot guard that player.
I think the other thing that would keep Self out of the NBA is job security. If he were to get a job like OKC, they would probably keep him there for a few years, but if he didn't win within 2-3 years, there would be a lot of pressure on him. Durant and Westbrook are both 25. Ibaka is 24. If you go 3 more years without a title all of those guys will be closing in on 30. You aren't going to get much help in the draft because you will always be in the playoffs, so if you can't win with those guys, you are probably headed for a rebuild.
@icthawkfan316
I agree with you that most players are far and away the stars of their HS programs. That's where Perry's lack of AAU exposure hurts him, IMHO. Most guys get their reps with and against elite talent on the AAU circuit.
Perry didn't play a lot of AAU ball, but that also meant that he didn't play as much with and against other D1 caliber players.
Here's the other thing - look at a guy like Kelly Oubre. He played in Texas, but left his school in Texas to play at Findlay with Rashad Vaughn. Cliff Alexander played in the Chicago Public League, which routinely puts a more than a dozen players to the D1 level. You start looking on KU's roster and most of these guys played with elite players in HS. Those that didn't have them on their team played a lot of AAU ball. Even Conner played quite a bit with Pump and Run KC. Everyone except Perry, really. And I think that affects his decision making in game situations because most of his game exposure has been as the best player on his HS team (and the best player on the court), as opposed to being an equal player on a stacked AAU team against equal talent on the opposing side.
@HighEliteMajor
I feel like KU's success next year is directly tied to landing Graham, not because he is the most talented player, but because he fits the most pressing need.
KU has a high octane car with no driver right now. They have post scorers (Alexander, Ellis) athletic wings (Oubre, Selden) shooters (Greene, White, Frankamp) floor spacers (Mickelson) athletes (Traylor). They have everything you could want as a PG. Everything except a PG, actually.
If KU gets Graham, I think they could go deep in the tourney next year (depending on how he handles the college game of course). If not, they will probably be done by the Sweet 16 again.
Perry Ellis is not a bad guy or a cancerous type of teammate. I don't think that's what @konkeyDong was meaning when he wrote that at all.
As we have discussed on several threads before, Perry's major problem is how he was developed as a player. Much of his development was spent working on individual skills (shooting, ballhandling, etc). You watch Perry and realize that his individual skills are top notch.
However, basketball is a team game and Perry Ellis played a limited amount of team games. He wasn't hugely active on the AAU circuit. He played for his high school, but in this day and age, when Kansas is still stuck on ancient rules that limit a team to just 20 regular season games and limit how far teams can travel, many of Perry's games were not against teams that had elite interior players for him to face of with.
It's notable that of the D1 players taller than 6-5 from the state of Kansas over the last several years, Perry Ellis played less than 10 career games against those guys. He never faced Willie Cauley Stein. Never saw Semi Ojeleye. The Wichita area produced several D1 caliber guards, but Ellis was the only big guy. The NE portion of the state had several guys that were D1 caliber, but because of the way schedules and classes are, Ellis didn't see those guys.
Perry Ellis developed most of his game working on his individual skills, which is attributable to his personal work ethic and dedication, two tremendous character traits. However, he was not able to compliment this individual work with working with teammates to develop his interior passing skills, or defend against other skilled bigs. We can see those weaknesses in his game.
Look at the Morris twins for example. Because they always worked with each other, they are very adept interior passers. Same with both Pau and Marc Gasol. Tim Duncan developed into a great passer in the NBA working with David Robinson.
Unfortunately for Perry, when he has caught the ball in the post, generally his task has been to go get buckets. Juxtapose that with a guy like Jamari or Tarik, both of whom are less skilled than Perry overall, but were able to pass better, Jamari because he spent time playing with Anthony Davis on his Meanstreets AAU team, and Tarik because he played with other skilled bigs in HS and at Memphis.
I think Perry can (and will) develop into a refined passer. He has the ball skills and individual talent. He just has to get used to doing so at game speed.
@Virgil_Caine
I'm not sure what happens when a school does not renew your scholarship. I would hope they would be immediately eligible since they are transferring because their scholarships were not renewed.
I remember hearing an interview from an NBA player talking about injuries and they talked about how a certain injury limited them in what they could do, as @jaybate 1.0 described. Basically, they knew they could do everything in their offensive package, but certain things they could only do once because it put too much stress on the injury, so they would save those moves for when they really needed them, but otherwise would not use them at all.
I think that's what we saw from Selden. He would make a great, NBA caliber move, then disappear for the rest of the half. He could only shift into fifth gear once. The rest of the time he had to rumble along in second or third.
@ralster
Looks like Central Arkansas got a new coach that decided to clean house. He retained only one player eligible to return and is bringing in nine new scholarship players.