Sviatoslav Mykhailiuk To KU
-
@HighEliteMajor So we lost to a #10 seed. Who cares? I don’t understand why you are so fixated on that. Everyone on this board was disappointed that they lost to Stanford. KU could very easily have been seeded at least a couple notches lower. I am only saying they didn’t play well enough during the course of the season to expect much better.
You’re right that they started with an impressive 7-0 run (four at AFH and one at TCU) in the conference. The last 13 games before the NCAA tourney, they went 8-5. That was not impressive at all. And it certainly wouldn’t cause most to expect them to make a decent tournament run.
-
@HighEliteMajor sucks anytime we lose! But Stanford was a tough matchup for us. If Tarik could have 6 fouls, we win. If we had the Embiid that I see now, we win a few more! He looks so much stronger, amazing me!
-
@KUSTEVE jethro, did you see CF play defense?
-
@JayHawkFanToo It is amazing to me how you can see into the future. Papapetrou was no different than a guy like Tyshawn Taylor. He would have to work to get to the NBA.
You seem to think that because their situations are apparently different, there is no way he’ll bolt after one year or before. You seem to discount that he might be homesick in a new culture. And you seem to discount the possibility that if he shows that he is a real player, that a Euro league team might offer him a nice deal. Heck, if he is so much better than Papapetrou, then he’d like command more money. Say, 3 years, 3 million? Or stay in college.
Again, I haven’t said it will happen. You just keep saying it won’t.
You point to Rubio as if it supports your argument, but Rubio did sign a deal.
And I do appreciate that you seem to be able to tell us without doubt that this kid never took any benefits beyond those permitted by the NCAA.
I just find that sort of apparent certainty comical, particularly when you give no credence to the risks. I understand and appreciate your argument, but it loses credibility when you present it as a certainty.
-
@Wigs2 No, actually, you said “I really do not understand why anyone is extremely disappointed with the way KU finished this year.”
Now you say, “So, we lost to a #10 seed. Who cares?” Well, seeding is a reflection of your performance during the season, and most times, the quality of team. And watching Stanford, they weren’t that good. Are we going to debate that? Are we going to debate that KU should have beaten Stanford with or without Embiid by 10 points? I’m sure we will.
It’s a way to rationalize the significant failure of our coaching staff in having this group ready to play in the NCAA. You cite the end of the season – that was a collapse too.
Your argument is that the way we played this season, apparently with Embiid, “wouldn’t cause most to expect” a decent tourney run.
Well, I don’t know, if you have the #1 and #2 (or #3) picks on your roster, you might. Maybe.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 I thought CF played average defense. Not as good as Mason (although I think Mason’s defensive reputation comes largely from one play, the block/strip of Nash at the end of the Okie St. game), but he showed good instincts & effort; he was almost always in the right place. I always watched both Mason & CF on defense, particularly when they subbed in for Tharpe. You could always immediately see the difference. Even when they got beat, it wasn’t as maddening because they didn’t have, as HEM would say, the “whipped puppy” look that Tharpe had.
-
@HighEliteMajor HEM, I 'm not going to deny that we could have or should have beaten Stanford. I just don’t get your point to keep harping on it for the past 9 weeks. It’s over. I expected the Hawks to beat Stanford but I certainly wasn’t surprised that they lost.
They were lucky to win at Texas Tech. Had to hold on against Okie State, when they almost blew a 17-point halftime lead.
Maybe you’re right that Self should be recruiting lower-ranked players who may (or may not) develop well enough to get them to another FF. Maybe the coaching staff should be fired for leading KU to only 2 FF championship games in the past 7 years. Maybe Zenger should be looking for a coach that wouldn’t produce such lofty expectations. Then you wouldn’t be so distraught at the end-of-the-season losses. I’ve been through a number of years like that. Seasons when KU had outstanding players but didn’t get into the NCAA tournament. I don’t really care to go back to those years.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 I keep hearing that meme and it makes me wonder if there isn’t something else behind it. It seems the only player that anyone is remotely worried about their defense is CF, and the entire fan base seems to be completely obsessed about it.
-
@HighEliteMajor I’ll grant there are non-zero chances that he will not be eligible next year OR there will be an extra transfer OR he will go back to Europe, but some of those risks cancel each other out. If he gets in a McLemore situation then why would anybody transfer? If he leaves after a year then transferring becomes less of a necessity.
How can you compare with Rubio? He never came to college. You have one example of a European who left after a year.
You have one example of a European who lost his eligibility.
I have one example of an American who chose Europe over college: Brandon Jennings. Should we be worried that our American recruits won’t come to KU?
You are now saying “a bit more risk”. Fine: a bit.
-
Again, if you are going to quote me at least do it correctly. Nothing I post is a certainty because none of us can predict the future; however, we can make educated guesses as to what could/might happen based on known facts and precedent.
Svi has already played for professional teams and has been exposed to big time basketball, and has had a a taste of American basketball as well, and knows what it takes to be away from home, By all accounts he comes from an well do do, accomplished family and he seems to have the same drive. So no, I don’t believe he will suddenly miss the homeland and run home. Again, I am not saying it will not happen, I am simply saying that based on his background and experiences it is unlikely.
Yes, Rubuio, the best prospect in Europe signed a contract but it was for SIX years with a $8.1 million buyout. Even the best prospect in Europe could not get a short term contract without a buyout. This is what I am talking about and you seem bound and determined to ignore. The Rubio contract was a wake up call to all European players with NBA aspirations. Do you really believe that if Svi is that good he will want to get stuck in a similar contract with huge buyout that would greatly delay his entry to the NBA, where the real money is? I don’t think so. Could it happen? Sure it could happen, but again, if he is as good as advertised, the odds are he will not. If he does not live up to the hype and does have the skill to be a NBA prospect, then he might well go back to Europe…as I previously indicated.
I have family and friends in Europe that follow basketball, and of course soccer, closely and the Kanter situation was well known over there, as it was the family that went looking (and getting) the money and there were plenty of reports/allegations on the subject and people that regularly follow basketball in Europe already knew this; the only surprising part is that Calipari thought he could get it pas the NCAA. On the other hand, there is no indication whatsoever, NONE, that Svi (or family) took any undue money. Again, I am not stating this as a fact that they did not, nobody really can, but there is no evidence that I could find that he did either.
I do find it comical that you, of all people, interpret my “opinions” as certainty so you can justify your own opinion. I certainly never claimed them to be facts, simply informed opinions and/or conjectures which is all we can offer anyway…after all this is what forums like this are for…right?
-
@JayHawkFanToo – I think Mykhailiuk wants to play in the NBA. He has most likely already has had contracts offers with the terms you talk of. I do believe that’s why he is here. Mykhailiuk doesn’t want to be stuck in a European contract delaying his aspirations to play in the NBA. I think the bigger question is Mykhailiuk choosing to play college ball at KU a game changer? Is this the beginning of top young European players coming to the states.
-
@KUSTEVE jethro, didn’t get the meme thing??? I think WE ALL are worried about everyone’s defense! We talked frequently about that this year!!!
-
@truehawk93-Not the new kid to RS, Greene to RS. Just a thought.
-
@globaljaybird If I were offered 100 to 1 odds regarding Greene’s taking a red shirt, I would not wager more than 50 cents. The only way I could envision that happening would be a serious pre-season injury. Things might change dramatically in the next five months, esp. with that one open scholarship dangling; but at this juncture, the only perimeter player whom I see as a possible red shirt is CF. Actually, I would like to see Conner in the program for five years. His game is dynamite, but body still demands tweaks.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 I wasn’t picking on you - I was picking on the idea that CF is a huge liability in any part of his game… even defense. The kid is smart as a whip, and he simply has the ability to change a game. I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts he has been out on that court everyday working on his deficiencies. I know, I know he’s short. He’s white. He would get creamed matching up against the Harrison twins…but I saw something in that kid in those tournament games I haven’t seen since Travis graduated - a gritty, tough as nails competitor that relished in the spotlight. I mean, we were getting our ass stomped by Stanford, and this freshman came off the bench, and almost pulled the game out for us. He was nothing short of amazing. Go back and watch his sequence near the end of the Stanford game. It’s really a work of art.
-
I believe you have right. I have no doubt he has offers to play in Europe but he is being smart and going for a chance to play in the NBA where the big money really is.
-
@HighEliteMajor Just an interesting quote, that almost all of Jayhawks would definitely believe every single season under BOTH Self and Roy: “…We lost to a #10 seed. We should have won that game going away…”
I think that idea in that quote is an abstraction: Most days, with most Jayhawk teams, and against most 10-seeds, we should win.
But dealing with that gametape analytically: we didnt have the tools to go inside against their collapsing zone, and with Embiid out (an ultra-elite big), and with BigBlack fouled out, it left us with 2 6’8 guys who had trouble finishing against the size and gameplan of Stanford. And they were seasoned vets (upperclassman-heavy Stanford team), able to execute their coach’s plan. Now look at KU: Once Black out we are small ball. With a dumbed-down offense, out of necessity, as 5mos isnt long enough to learn even half of the set offense. And our best recruit in the history of KU, Wiggins, cannot penetrate like he could in other games, and he got gameplanned as well (as you have cited his post-game quote…). Oh, and our most experienced ‘PG’ is sitting over there on the KU bench watching his headless team flounder. The team sees Embiid sitting. The team sees Wiggins failing. The team sees BigBlack foul out (another team leader)…So where was this team’s mojo/swagger/confidence? To me, what Frankamp did was too little, too late. That could never have been part of Self’s gameplan, because Connor had never done that all season. That performance by Frankamp simply didnt exist in all of KU’s season, until those last few minutes.
Self’s gameplan of inside-out high% looks simply couldnt get it done with half the horses sitting on the bench: Tharpe, Embiid, Black. Selden had knee surgery shortly after the season, so he is off the hook.
@nuleafjhawk nailed my sentiments about as accurately as Stanford nailed their gameplan: …"10 losses, really? With the exception of 3 or 4 games, we looked lackluster and very un-KU like all season long…. Same team needed a buzzer beater, loose ball putback by Wiggins to defeat TEXAS TECH in Lubbock. I think Stanford is a better team than the TubbieTechies, eh?
Stanford is exactly the type of senior-laden midmajor team to upset a name opponent, who brings a lackluster game, coupled with key players out. Yes, we should have beat them, but certain matchups, especially physicality-type matchups, were NOT our forte this past season. Nor were facing experienced defensive schemes being executed against our inexperience. That’s it.
All that softness and effort lackluster-ness is about to get fixed, bigtime…and so is going into battle with only 1/3rd of the usual Self-amount of repertoire and excellence of execution.
Thinking Self “slept” on this one is selling him ‘short’, and expecting too ‘long’ out of a wounded, depleted, inexperienced KU team. What else was he going to call, that he didnt in timeout after timeout? He cannot make Ellis and Traylor make the paint shots they missed. Those are the high% looks he wants. If Wiggins cant get his shot going, I dont think he is going to turn into this “high post passer” that the announcers kept talking about–why? Because Andrew Wiggins had never done that all season, and never played as a passing-high-post-4man ALL season. Yeah, I heard the announcers keep saying that, and it was a sound piece of strategy for some other team or some other game, but not with a guy who’s never done what they were proposing, and, I also highly doubted Self would ask Wiggins to try something he’d never asked him to try before, all season. The high% usage of Andrew Wiggins was to ask him to do what he did best all season (penetrate and pull-up-J’s and try to get to the FT line.) Our D was actually decent, and we only had 13 turnovers…our failure was on the offensive end by poor finishing, execution, and limited options/toolkit to begin with.
Maybe a different comparison helps my fellow Jayhawks as we try to contemplate and put this '13-14 season behind us: The 2011-12 National Runner Up Jayhawks (Withey/TRob/Releford/EJ/TT/KYo/Teahan) were a better “team” than the 2013-14 'Hawks. More W’s. More toughness. More swagger. More execution. More defense. More experience. More leadership. More plays at their disposal. More results. More heart. No injuries. No Mickey D’s. Almost no bench. Yes, they still lost in the end, but my god those guys put up a hell of a fight, every time out!
-
Doing these post-loss analytics, sometimes I get the idea to do a piece on “Anatomy of a KU Loss”, but I think it could be too depressing for some. Boy, who’d want to see that thread, Im not sure I do. To me, the losses sting just as hard as they do to other royalty program fans, especially if its a lower seed type ‘upset’…(UNI, VCU, Stanford…). But the answer of “why didnt we win” or “how’d they beat us” lies right there on the tape…
Most of the time, though, (to give a CliffNotes one-line summation): KU beats itself, usually in more than one major statistical category. So there is always hope, especially when a loss is countergrain to our usual tendencies. Unfortunately, the Stanford loss was simply a repeat of a much-too-often pattern of lackluster, limited play that is pretty much unique to the '13-14 season, due to several factors. Said another way: the Stanford loss showed or ‘exposed’ our “grain”.
It all gets better, you will all see…due to several factors at play. '14-15 will be fun.
-
@Wigs2 At times, I don’t think folks get my points here. My fault I guess. All I want, really, is coach Self to be flexible. To assess his talent and be willing to change course if necessary to compete in March. To be honest, isn’t he the exact kind of coach you’d want to coach against? You really would never have to worry about being surprised.
@JayHawkFanToo - When you are attacking the idea that there is more risk in taking on a European player, that seems pretty definitive to me. By saying there is not more risk, you are definitively saying that it’s just like a kid from the USA. The mere fact that the kid is coming from a completely different culture to the US, without having lived here before, is an increased risk of departure standing alone, correct? You can admit that, right? You admit that he could go to Europe for the money after one season. I admit, so could a US kid. There are just some reasonable items that increase the risk. That’s all. Now, when you say it’s unlikely … that’s hard for me to accept. Unlikely? We just don’t know: and I certainly wouldn’t say that it is likely the kid will leave. But from a logical standpoint, objectively less likely than Papapetrou? I can buy that. Your arguments clearly establish that. But, likewise, I would suggest that my arguments clearly establish an increased risk of bolting after one season than the normal KU player (just and increased risk), and thus the risk of collateral roster damage.
@Vailhawk - I referred to Rubio because @JayHawkFanToo did in his discussion. The example of Papapetrou, truly, is unimportant. The risk thing is simply looking at geography, culture, and options given the kid’s situation.
-
@ralster Now your going to get me into re-anaylzing how we dealt with Stanford’s zone. I can’t. I just can’t. I am really trying to let it go. But your point is well taken.
-
@HighEliteMajor nooooo!
-
Again, you are misrepresenting what I said. I did not “attack” the idea that here is more risk taking European players. In fact I did not address the subject of taking European players at large, other than to indicate that Rubio’s situation was a “wake up call” to all European, true NBA prospects; in fact, Enes Kanter, a true NBA prospect heeded the warning and chose to sit one year here rather than go back to Europe and a contract that would delay his entry to the NBA, right?. I simple addressed two individuals, Svi and Papapetru, and pointed out the differences between the two situations and my conclusion was that Papapetru would end up in Europe anyway, right? But Svi, by virtue of his much higher NBA potential was indeed a much lesser risk of bolting back to Europe, right?
Again, I did not say that European players are more or less likely to bolt; it depend on the individual circumstances, and in Svi’s case, I feel pretty confident that if he is as good as advertised he will stay 2 years, and if he is not, he may or may not go back to Europe, in which case it would not make that much of a difference as far as KU is concerned, right?
-
@JayHawkFanToo No, I’m sorry, you did. Your whole argument was why he wouldn’t bolt. Saying the money wouldn’t be worth it, speculating that he’d have to sign a long term deal (though Jennings of course signed a 3 year deal), claiming players learned from Rubio, suggesting because he’d been exposed to “big time” basketball and “knows what it takes to be away from home” he wouldn’t “suddenly miss his homeland and run home.”
My argument is the risk is greater because he is from Europe and played in a European pro league. You made an argument against that, while saying you don’t know. But no, it’s too hard to even simply concede that a kid playing in an overseas pro league might be a bit more of a risk to have taken something the NCAA might say is impermissible. That’s just arguing to argue because you want so bad to defend the signing.
But you CAN do both – you can very much support the signing, but also acknowledge the obvious risks generally inherent in signing an overseas player.
Maybe this will make it easier for you – there are more moving parts with a kid from overseas. More moving parts create more risk. Can you at least bring yourself to concede that?
-
@HighEliteMajor I’ll concede that there is in general a bit more risk in taking a European player than in taking an American player.
OK? I conceded.
Now can you bring yourself to concede something?
That is not the issue.
We are still talking about SM, right? If so, you have to compare the “risk” of taking him versus the “risk” of having a scholarship open. There is no American player Self passed on to take SM.
No question, you have mentioned some real risks, such as current players transferring. Good for you.
But this comparing of SM to a non-existent American recruit should stop: that comparison doesn’t apply here since we still have a scholarship open and no American recruit to give it to.
-
@ParisHawk That’s not what I’ve stated as my concern. My concern is that we take a kid that has an increased risk of leaving, and that kid can cause collateral damage to our roster by triggering a transfer – Greene, Mason, or CF. You also take away a scholarship for 2015 which could be a guy developing behind our solid perimeter (but that argument is a very weak one).
But I agree and concede 100%, in a vacuum, I’d sign this kid in a minute. There is no comparable player to sign now. In fact, he looks terrific – and if he stays two seasons or more, he could be the perfect recruit. In fact, but for coming from overseas, he probably is. I also concede that as @JayHawkFanToo has mentioned, and you might have as well, the risk analysis favors signing the kid.
Also, @ParisHawk – what is your avatar? Looks like Releford – in Europe?
-
@ralster – Wanted to highlight the shear brilliance of this quote from you above:
“Maybe a different comparison helps my fellow Jayhawks as we try to contemplate and put this '13-14 season behind us: The 2011-12 National Runner Up Jayhawks (Withey/TRob/Releford/EJ/TT/KYo/Teahan) were a better “team” than the 2013-14 'Hawks. More W’s. More toughness. More swagger. More execution. More defense. More experience. More leadership. More plays at their disposal. More results. More heart. No injuries. No Mickey D’s. Almost no bench. Yes, they still lost in the end, but my god those guys put up a hell of a fight, every time out!”
Here, here. Self’s best coaching job ever.
-
Again, I HAVE NOT commented on the risk of European players versus American players at large, so stop bringing this straw man argument.
I simply compared two players, Svi (a true NBA prospect) and Papapetreu (NOT an NBA prospect) and clearly and specifically pointed out the differences between them. IMHO, (that mean in “MY” humble opinion), Svi is not as big of a risk as another European player such as Papapetreu. We have many American players that have signed with KU and did not play a single official game (Doyle); how is that for a risk? How about Kanter, another European true NBA prospect? He did not bolt for Europe even when he was told he could not play at UK; he stayed and now he is getting a NBA paycheck…
Now, if you really want to extend the concept based on the facts at hand…European players that “ARE TRUE” NBA prospects (such as Svi) are more likely TO STAY here and pursue the NBA (and the big paycheck) instead of going back to Europe and delaying the payoff. European players that “ARE NOT TRUE” NBA prospects (such as Papapetreu) are more likely TO GO BACK to the Euro Leagues, since that is their final destination anyway and makes no sense playing college for no pay when they can go back to Europe and get started with their careers.
You cannot lump all European players in one group since their level of skill will influence the outcome. Looking at all European players as a group is the equivalent of saying that a 5-star top 5 American High School player (say Wiggins) has the same chance of staying at KU for 4 years than an low or unranked player (say Mason); the answer is clearly no.
It is really that simple; I am not sure what part is tripping you.
-
@HighEliteMajor the avatar is Releford at Versailles during the team’s European tour - photo from kusports.com. They came to Play in Paris and I was out of town!
-
@REHawk-That’s pretty enormous odds Re. At 100 to one for 50 cents, you might be a… nothing personal…but here’s your sign, chump…50 bucks is definitely worth a sitdown at the crap table, at least to me & my paltry lifestyle. So whatever the reasoning…Salute.
