BAD BALL©: Definition and Interpretative Analysis
-
@HighEliteMajor driving, shooting throws
-
I see substance to both your takes.
I wonder if there term skill might be obscuring things.
What if not only three point shooting, but attacking the basket shooting were skills?
What if we were pretty good at both?
What if that were the choice?
Then the choice might come down to a tabulation of which form of attack offered the most net benefits.
THREE POINT SHOOTING BASED ATTACK’S BENEFITS AND COSTS TEND TO BE:
BENEFITS ~0-50% makes (based on this year’s extremes) ~3 points for each make. ~an occasional foul and FTs ~more long rebounds for our good perimeter rebounders ~reduced offensive fouling on our best players ~less injury and wear and tear ~better trey shooting percentage in the first half of 2 in 3 day game sets.
COSTS ~100% to 50% misses ~More scoreless possessions most games ~greater dependence on perimeter rebounding, where our advantage tends to diminish as the opponent improves ~worse trey shooting percentage in the end of 2 in 3 sets and 3 in 6 sets.
NET BENEFIT INTERPRETATION
Three point shooting offers a much higher high and a much lower low, both because of the one point greater reward from a make and because of the much wider observed range of variance in percentage made. The effective shooting percentage, or effective points per attempt would offset some but not all of this variance, because of still lower low in observed three point shooting makes than 2 point shooting makes. The long rebounds exploit our good rebounding perimeter, but at a cost of in effect creating more stopped possessions for the opponent during the course of the game. These stopped possessions would be off set by more possessions where we scored three, but that edge would be diminished significantly simply by the opponent coming down and getting a 2 point basket, so that the advantage on that possession would tend to approach 1 point, and that one point the opponent could expect to tend to be made up on each possession that the 3 point shooting team missed entirely. In conclusion, the 3 point dependent attack, even with KU’s very good shooters, seems a structurally volatile form of attack that good defense would struggle compensating for at the low end, and hardly be needed at all at the high end of thee point shooting effectiveness. Reduced wear and tear and injury would be a very significant advantage late in the season. All of this is wrapped up in a dynamic of better three point performance early in sets of games and worse performance later in sets of games, which in effect contributes to volatility. Also, because trey shooters are a limited commodity, it may be difficult to long bench opponents and maintain a high level of three point accuracy.
ATTACK THE 2-POINT BASKET BASED BENEFITS AND COSTS TEND TO BE:
BENEFITS:
~30-55% makes ~Lots of FTAs for a good FT shooting team ~a significant number of short treys ~quick attainment of 1+1 means more FTs ~Clock stopping which disrupts opponents runs ~accrual of fouls on the opponent, which makes his best players have to play less aggressively on both ends. ~Mostly short rebounds that our weak big man rebounders and good perimeter rebounders can grab, either when our stretch 4 pulls one of their bigs out and our other big successfully blocks out their 5 leaving the rest of our rebounders in the advantage for the rebound. ~about as effective in both games in sets of 2 in 3
COSTS:
70%-45% misses ~dependence on a favorable whistle which is rare on the road when road wins are critical to winning titles. ~short rebounds that our bad rebounding short bigs cannot handle unless the attack carefully pulls one big away from the basket and blocks out the other. ~huge wear and tear, and significant injuries, especially late in the season. ~a tendency to give up early leads that can be a struggle to come back from ~a tendency for close games regardless of the opponent being good or bad.
NET BENEFIT INTERPRETATION:
The two point attack the basket offense is something that minimizes that size and athleticism advantages of most opponents, holds down opponent runs, and is relatively less volatile in percentage makes, accrues fouls at home, and to lesser extend on the road that force an opponent with greater size and athleticism even on an effective percentage basis. This reduced volatility comes at a price, however, of closer scores even against weak teams. This means there is less margin for error and so the significance of floor game statistics of TOs and Strips and blocks become greatly increased, and these become even more significant on the road, where the home whistle further reduces the number of FTs and this cascades into letting the home team play more aggressively for more minutes of any road game. That increased aggressiveness translates to making KU turn it over more, and possibly strip less. So: this 2 point attack the basket based offense is best at home, vulnerable on the road, not as volatile relative to trey based attacks, less variable between games in a 2 in 3 set, and conducive to long benching, where effective attackers are often (but not always and not necessarily with this KU team) less scarce than trey shooters.
CLOSING REMARKS:
I do not wish to weigh that one or the other of you are right, because you both make your cases better than I can, and this is not a black and white decision. And I believe the fact that Self has played some of both ways this season before making his decisive move into BAD BALL with a stretch 4 indicates that he felt there were strong arguments for playing it either of the ways you two propose. I think Self chose the approach that he thought solid defense could help the most. And I think Self chose the approach the offered the best potential for compensating for KU’s lack of size and skill in the front court, on off shooting nights. This does not mean that either of your approaches are wrong. It means Self was the boss, and after looking at both ways, and evaluating his sunk costs, and the costs of retraining, and which players he wanted to depend on most, he opted for Bad Ball with a Stretch 4, because it meant most dependence on Perry, Kelly and Frank. Playing three ball would likely have lead to increased dependence on Wayne and Brannen and Svi. And he decided if the call was close, and the bench was going shorten over time, and in big games in the Madness, on neutral courts, where the AWAY WHISTLE would be a diminished factor, Self would rather gamble on Perry, Kelly and Frank, and a less volatile attack that his Self Defense could be more of a difference maker.
-
@HighEliteMajor Michigan State has gone to multiple Final Fours. If I had to guess, Bill Self at one point had a massive man crush on Tom Izzo and he may still harbor those feelings. Last year I detected a serious Bill Self man crush on The Mayor and I think we see some of that influence with what @jaybate-1.0 is talking about here in this thread about the journey to Ellis and the stretch 4.
When Bill Self was talking about putting Selden at the point he wasn’t simply saying that Selden will play a traditional point guard like previous point guards at Kansas; Bill Self said that Selden could play the point like DeAndre Kane played the point last year for Hoiberg Ball. Instead of Selden playing much point he gave that role to Mason, a smaller scoring 2 with more skill that Selden in the painted area. Selden is still a strong facilitator on offense. Hoiberg’s team’s shoot a lot of threes though they know how to balance that with attacking the rim. Kansas has had trouble attacking the rim this year. I think jaybate is right that if KU can sustain this way of attacking the rim, which they will, Self can be much happier about spells of long range artillery barrages to open up lanes to attack the paint–when the shots from three start going down then this team will start looking more complete.
One of the great tournament games that this brings to mind is a game that Kansas lost though it was a wonderful college game of basketball: Michigan State defeats Kansas in the 2008-09 Sweet 16. What won out at the end? Michigan State was more aggressive, more confident, and most important they finished plays in the paint. Michigan State loves to have their guards put the rock on the floor and drive it to the paint and attack. Michigan State loves to pound you in the paint with their physicality. Michigan State loves to pry you open with three bombs by great shooters. Michigan State loves to play attacking, tenacious D which creates fast break offense. And all of that love sounds a whole lot like Kansas and Bill Self Ball.
-
@KJD I think “the mayor” has a man crush on Self!
️
-
@jaybate-1.0 I’m interested in your comment that Self has made a decisive move to Bad Ball. My impression over the past few games, esp. the last two, is that he has resorted to Bad Ball in the second half only after first trying “run our stuff” and that failing miserably and 3 point shots not falling (again, putting aside causation, e.g., whether being spooked, better defended or reversion to a mean). I thought his post-game comments after WVU were particularly telling - saying he told them to just constantly attack the rim.
Who knows what the approach will be at OU without Perry, Cliff and probably Wayne, but I’m still expecting him to choose to try to “run stuff” in the tournament against teams that won’t know us as well, but that he will have no hesitation about falling back on Bad Ball if it ain’t happening…
-
@DCHawker OU likes to zone it up too, maybe that will get our 3 game going!! They aren’t deep either, if we do attack, fouls will hurt them. They do shoot the ball really well. They also can’t seem to put 2 halfs together, see ISU and our game. It will be an interesting game, didn’t coach say something about having some fun w/our lineup?
-
@Crimsonorblue22 Not sure what his idea of a “fun” line-up is, but I would sure love to see Hunter, Svi and Devonte start - or at least get starter minutes - and just see what happens. Selden sit to rest the ankle and Frank get some rest period, just taking Devonte’s sub minutes.
-
@DCHawker maybe oubre at 4? I think he’ll try some different things.
-
@jaybate-1.0 @HighEliteMajor : Prior to BadBall (which can alternately be defined as ‘how to keep the game close until you can make that late run’), there was Self getting his competetivess stomped on repeatedly in the Big10 by Izzo. And before that was the ultimate ‘how to win a 55pt grinder’: SuttonBall.
Now Self can recruit better than Izzo + Sutton, thus his teams have a higher potential to realize IF the kids stay multiple years. He teaches it on both ends of the floor.
My tweak on the above angles on this thread is simply: when the ku offense breaks down (whatever the orig gameplan), then we resort to this badball/Izzoball/SuttonBall grinder because thats the predicament the ku team put themselves in. Consider it a designed-in philosophy…its there when we need it. And its systematized by indoctrinating that mindset into the team. Roy teams generally didnt have this “dirty gear”. IowaState does NOT. They shoot themselves out of games & lose when their 3gunners fail. KU goes 1-14, gets 18pts down…but is able win?
HEM talked about the “toughness” angle. Its cultivated. The same thing applied to the 08 Davidson game, and in the final 2min vs Memphis. But nothing, nor anything even at the system level can guarantee 100% wins.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 Yes! Mickelson, Svi, Graham, Greene and Oubre getting serious minutes together - not sure they can defend well enough, but I think they would be fun to watch - good passing and (potentially) shooting group.
-
“This drive away from three point shot was engineered by coach Self. You don’t make such a marked change without the boss man being on board, and directing traffic. It’s was not a natural matter of course.”
I believe you are right on the mark. This is “Self engineered.”
He may have gone as far as tell guys when to shoot 3s and when not to. If he is orchestrating that from the bench, it is a guarantee that they won’t hit the shots because they are focused on the bench commands, not on a flow out.
Go back to your DVRs and look over the past 4 or 5 games. Watch our guys lining up on the lane during a FT. They are all visually glued to the bench… waiting for commands. It is normal for guys to look over now and then… but to just stare at the bench is unnatural.
I don’t think it took much for Self to pull out of the 3-game. He only had to go to practice and re-install the hi/lo or some other derivative that doesn’t involve perimeter shooting. And then he barks out a few commands to feed the post and score from the post. In games, he just has to keep a short pull stick on the sidelines. He has been pulling guys out quickly… is it because they fail on defense or offense?
The “fools gold” comment was the beginning of the end. For a coach to criticize his team for shooting 50+% from 3 is simply mind-boggling. I guess the NBA all lives on fools gold, too.
I am every bit as critical as HEM is on this… except I’ve started to loosen up my view to accept what Self is doing. And I believe there is no way this team would have toughened up without dumping the 3. Everything we need to know is in that OU home game… and how this team went on cruise control after one hot half of 3s. Truth is… these kids go soft when anything comes too easy, or they don’t have their backs against the wall.
So I applaud what Self did… but won’t give him a standing ovation until he figures out how to re-install the 3 somewhere in March… and keep the guys playing tough even if they score a few easy points.
My one issue is that I feel Self wasn’t really honest with his approach. I’d rather he just shoot it straight from the hip. Let the Jayhawk Nation (and his team) know that he is abandoning the trey until his guys learn to play tough, including after easy points. He could have easily referenced the OU game and I think everyone would get it. He didn’t need to drag his own reputation down in order to have the same impact.
Now I’m focused on BAD BALL. I like the concept. Bring something even further out of norm than “Huggy ball.” No one expects this from the university that brought the game “institutional basketball.”
-
First of all, everyone is right to question my hypothesis of this team’s version of playing the game.
All I can do is be as clear about what I am hypothesizing as I can be.
In the spirit of clarity, what you watched both halves of the games you refer to was BAD BALL, as I define it.
BAD BALL, as I define, is playing to shrink the impact space on both offense and defense.
BAD BALL can be played in any offense, in any formation within that offense, and within any set of actions within that offense designed to shrink the impact space at the point of attack. By point of attack, I mean the point at which the shot is taken.
Bad Ball is not defined by attacking the rim, though rim attack is part of Bad Ball. It is attacking the opposing defender on the way to the rim to try to force the defender into defending in a way that negates his advantageous athleticism, height, weight and skill, in whatever combination he possesses them.
It is the opposite of trying to create greater impact space to make a play in.
It is shrinking the impact space in which to create an impact in.
Frank Mason can drive his defender into a tight situation from 19 feet out in the high low formation, or he can call four corners and start 25 feet out drive his defender into a tight situation. Wayne can drive from 24 feet out on the wing, or he can take a feed on a cut at 12 feet and drive into his man 8 feet from the basket, or he can come into the block and take a bounce pass and get in tight on his man and go to work. BAD BALL is about taking the ball in tight on your man, rather than playing for a fade curl, or a fade away jumper, or running screens to try to get wide open looks. You are trying to deny the opponent the use of his athleticism in hope of getting a basket and or a foul and some FTs.
BAD BALL is counterintuitive to a lot of persons, but if you have played pick up basketball and had to go against someone taller, stronger, and quicker that you , you quickly discover you only have two choices. Either you have keep your impact space super sized and shoot far far out and away from him, or not at all, or you have to in and get so close to him that his height and athleticism cannot run wild over you and make moves that get him to commit that allow you to get a shot off.
One of the reasons @drgnslayr has been so frustrated by this team is that it is playing something quite like what he used to play, because he was usually shorter at his position that his man, at least according to him. He was like all short guys. He learned to get in close on his man, where his defender had to commit, and he used a variety of fakes to force commitement that he could drive around, or shoot around, etc. Why @drgnslayr has been so frustrated is that KU’s players have not been using fakes. They have just been getting the ball crammed back in their faces. The appear not to know how to fake. I believe they have been being taught not to fake, but rather to take angles that draw contact. I believe the players do not fake for the same reason Self does not have the team running screens. Self WANTS our guys to get fouled, whenever they shoot. He wants all of their athleticism used to get a shot off AND get fouled.
I frankly don’t understand the logic of what Self is doing regarding not doing faking. @drgnslayr’s advocacy of fakes seems a great way to get a shot and a foul. My best guess is that Self thinks that longer, stronger, quicker, more skilled players can block fakes at this level without fouling. I am hardly qualified to take sides in this dispute. Both Self and @drgnslayr played college basketball in a similar era. Self now coaches it every day. @drgnslayr follows the game closely still and ought to know what can and cannot be accomplished with fakes. In today’s game you see very little faking. Maybe it could work, but isn’t being tried out of habituation. Or maybe there is something about today’s athleticism that makes faking ineffectual. I just don’t know, but in any case this is a bit of a digression into some of the arcanity of how BAD BALL might be played more effectively, rather than keeping focused on why what you saw in both halves of say the KU-WVU game WAS BAD BALL.
So: let me get back to the business of shrinking space as the defining characteristic of BAD BALL rather than what you do once you have shrunken it.
To wit…
You increase the impact space when you have superior height, weight, athleticism, and skill, because the more room you have to maneuver, the more opportunity you have to exploit your matchup advantage to the maximum. You want room to maneuver, if you are bigger and more athletic than the other guy.
You shrink the impact space, when you have inferior height, weight, athleticism, and skill, because the smaller the impact space is the less chance the superior defender has to use his superior athleticism to stop you without fouling you.
Defined and specified this way, you can “run the stuff” in any of the high low passing offense formations, including: 1-2-2, 1-3-1, 1-4, and 4-1. And you run ball movement passing, inside out, outside in, 3 man weaves, and 4 man weaves. In essence you can run what you saw being run in the first half of the WVU game attempting to create impact spaces that our offender then plays at point of attack by shrinking that space to deny the defender a stop with superior match up advantage and draw a foul.
What has confused board rats about the first half of the WVU game was how badly we executed. That first half is what BAD BALL looks like when we are “running the stuff” and executing BAD BALL poorly. We were executing poorly partly because we were having a mental let down from having won a share of the conference title the night before, and party because WVU’s full court pressure and half court zone were forcing us into turnovers and confusing us about how to get to a point of attack where our players could shrink the space and either score or draw fouls. That was occurring, because Huggie is a very good defensive coach that apparently understands what Self is having his players do.
Self reportedly challenged his players at half time, to play tougher defense (which involved getting further into–shrink–the impact spaces in the WVU screen oriented offense), and on offense to view every where on the floor in half court as point of attack and to try to drive the ball on WVU first, rather than “run the stuff.” Put another way, get into the formations we call, but then the minute you get the ball try to attack by driving it, or passing to someone who can.
But regardless of the half, and regardless of the different ways of attacking first and second half, the objective was Bad Ball. Shrink their impact space, whatever offense you are running, and on defense, stop just chasing them through the screen but shrink their impact space MORE once you get their.
I am not smart enough to know for sure, if what they did better defensively in the second half was responsible for WVU’s sharply reduced scoring. I know playing defense this way tends to muddy opposing offenses up, but does not always make them shoot worse. I suspect it did not make them shoot worse. WVU is a crappy shooting team that has been very streaky all season against most opponents. It is not at all unusual for WVU to suddenly not be able to score for extended periods. What KUs BAD BALL defense does, though is muddy the opponent’s offense up to the point that they HAVE to shoot it well, because they are not going to be able to use their athleticism on KU.
On offense, the adjustments from first half to second half worked very well, because WVU prides itself on playing aggressive, physical defense with a lot of contact. When KU started shrinking the impact space at point of attack everywhere on the floor and driving it, it created a steady flow of temptations for WVU’s thug ballers to hammer and smash KU players. It was a repeat of what Butcher Barnes Butcher Ballers did the second half in the KU-UT game. And when teams choose to play this rough on the road, against players endlessly driving into them and shooting, the home whistle over time favors the home team, and as the fouls accrue, the butcher ballers either have to play more conservatively, which they are not well trained to do, or they have to keep fouling. If they keep fouling, soon we have a huge edge in FTAs and they are in danger of fouling out.
This is my hypothesis of what KU is doing, and why it looks so different than simple grind ball in prior years.
It is an expansion of to all players on the floor for KU of what used to be done by just one or two players. It is teaching what Sherron Collins, and then Tyshawn Taylor, became so good at doing, on the drive to the rim, not just to the guards, but to the whole team. Shrink the impact space by getting way in tight on the opponent. Don’t try to get away from the opponent. This can be done at point of attack after the stuff is run, or by directly driving the ball into defender.
-
I think my definition of BAD BALL takes more of a Huggy attitude.
The idea is to intentionally play poorly in some areas to induce another team into bad habits… but play tough enough to not get blown out during the process. Later on… we start correcting certain areas of our game while buckling down even harder on defense. The opposition can’t recover in time to make a run. So we make the last run… enough to pull us into victory.
Huggy doesn’t play exactly like this… but he does (knowingly) give up some easy break points off his press to entice teams to play sped up ball on offense. We fell into this trap for parts of both games. Once a team plays sped up, it is hard to get them to ever return to their half court offense.
The key for us to win at BAD BALL is to practice on bouncing out of bad habits later in the game. Go from ineffective execution to effective execution. I guess that can (to some degree) be practiced.
It helps when a team KNOWS this is the strategy! They are less likely to lose confidence during the bad parts.
The ultimate goal of BAD BALL is to force the opposition to play a different game then what they intended. Make them play outside of their norm. No one we play is ready to do this.
The shot fake is a nice addition to this. As well as trying to draw charges. I’m not going to say “flop” because I don’t believe flops are necessary. Getting a team in foul trouble is one more way we can get them out of their norm.
Game pace is another aspect. Maybe it takes a few contrived fast breaks to open up the speed, while on other possessions using the entire shot clock. Alter pace and see what works.
“Both Self and @drgnslayr played college basketball in a similar era.”
I didn’t play college ball. I played in city leagues, on tournament teams, and a bit in Europe on what is referred to as “semi-pro”… meaning… I was giving a few bucks here and there, and had my expenses covered. In my peak, I would classify myself as a respectable D2 player (level). I was no where near the level of competitive ball Self played at. But “yes” we played in the same era.
-
Sorry about that. Some how I got it in my head you had walked on at KU and sat on the bench a year or so. My bad. I recalled most of your background as you describe it otherwise, but got that KU part dead wrong.
It will be interesting to learn definitively how this team actually does what it does.
It is quite remarkable however it is being achieved.
There wasn’t much big man talent to begin with this season, and now with injuries and suspensions there is hardly any at all that would start at many D1 majors, and with Ellis and Alexander out, none that would even make the rotations at other Elite programs.
And some how, the Okmulgee Kid has won a title in a power conference, when the rest of the coaches could not get it done. Imagine this team with Baylor’s, or Texas’, or OU’s bigs!!!
Or Embiid and Myles Turner.
Winning a title with the front court talent is easily the greatest coaching accomplishment of his career.
I know Perry is good, but at 6-7 (non KU inches), he would probably have been playing 3 other places, so in a way he doesn’t count as a true front court player.
Look at the rest of the bigs and tell me how he won a power conference title, except by inventing this ridiculously weird BAD BALL.
I mean Rick Barnes cannot even stay in contention with a full Nike stack.
And as good as Fred’s offense looked at times, in the end they were just a bunch of trey ballers balling hot and cold.
Even Lon Kruger, whom I hold in high esteem, as a Hartman Okie Baller, and someone about as sharp as Self, could not take significantly more talent (even if not the OADs), and send up with a better round robbin record.
AMAZING!
-
I think there are several B12 teams that could make a mark in March. ISU is predictable now to B12 teams because everyone played them twice. Same goes with WVU… but they are sure to do some damage in March. And ISU can go far if they can regain some swagger. Baylor? You just never know. I’m doubtful that Texas makes it to the prom… but they should. How would you like to be a #1 seed and draw Texas in your first game? Wouldn’t it be great to see Kentucky or Duke get them?
My question mark is with OU. They don’t seem to have an exact identity. Often… it’s just Buddy taking over. How does a team scout and prep against that?
I know we are weak in the post… but if I had to add one player from the B12 into the current KU mix, it would be Buddy. The guy can score anywhere on the floor and has the alpha-dog to take over when needed.
I’ll never understand why we didn’t recruit him hard. Major blunder.
-
There are always guys like Hield that blossom beyond expectations, especially for a coach like Kruger.
What was Hield ranked?
Kruger comes out of the Jack Hartman give me one great guard and some lugs and I will beat you.
Hartman was the greatest of all the Okie Baller disciples at one player-ing teams to death.
He always found a one dimensional complementary guard to go with a great guard, and then went lug-city in the front court. His lugs never passed eye tests, but they were always sound fundmentally. They could do something or other well.
When Hartman found a Walt Frazier, Mike Evans, he rode them till the cows came home. Heck, Hartman rode Kruger, and Kruger was just a good guard, not an all timer.
Lon absorbed the lesson.
He got lucky nabbing Mitch Richmond out of Moberly Juco and road Mitch like a jockey bolting out of the coaching gate.
Once the Madness starts, Hield’s touches and numbers will go way up.
Unlike the Eddie Ballers of the Okie Baller School, Hartman and Lon love to massively increase the touches for a guard they decide to ride.
Self is almost the opposite.
He will only ride a big man.
Even when he had Sherron, Sherron never really went much beyond 15 FGAs that first season he ran his own team. I would have given Sherron 20 FGAs down the stretch every game, and so would Hartman and Kruger.
But not Self he keeps it spread around, unless you are Simien, or Perry, on teams without much other firepower.
It is an interesting distinction.
And Self has won 11 straight titles.
And a ring.
-
“What was Hield ranked?”
I thought he was something like 88. But Self goes after plenty of guys in that range… most without the body and athleticism Buddy has. I know guys blossom later… but when we are taking chances on recruits down on the list, shouldn’t we at least consider their build and athleticism? It is hard to overlook his strengths, because they are showing before he even dribbles a ball.
I don’t know… I guess other coaches missed him, too. I just expect Self to be the “wizard” and catch the “diamonds in the rough.”
I don’t look at Self to change too much until the Mayor finally starts landing 5-star recruits. Kansas will be in trouble then…
-
@drgnslayr I hope you are right about B12 teams making a mark in the tournament. The league needs a good showing. One of the talking head roundtables the other day was focused on whether the B12 is overrated. They were making the point - and it is hard to disagree with - that while it is most certainly the toughest top to bottom - really no easy outs, esp. on the road - it’s difficult to identify likely FF candidates - including KU. Whether we get 6 or 7 in, I think all will be tough outs and the league will probably be seeded well, I’m not sure I see ISU, Baylor or OU - all probably seeded 3-6 and thus favorites - as slam dunks to get through the first weekend. Would love to see 4 in the sweet 16 and 2-3 in the elite 8 - and, of course, the Hawks in the FF.
-
I think the key for the B12 is to get a few teams into the Sweet 16. It would be great to see 3 make it. FF is such a crap shoot. But we stand a chance by having more in the Sweet 16.
It’s just hard to say. A team gets hot. Goes on a streak. Gets a few breaks.
I’m just saying we have an interesting resume this year. Teams with unique talents. Hard to prepare for. How many teams in the tourney face pressure like WVU dishes out? And the thinking is their rough style (hacking) will be allowed more in March. ISU… when they swagger… turn the game into a race. OU can play with anyone on any given night (or not). Baylor is streaky, and full of talent. KU? Just seems to find a way to win.
I like our chances of showing well this year (as a conference). Reaching the FF? I don’t have a clue.
I do agree it would be nice to see someone from our conference make it beyond the Sweet 16 besides KU (I mean… WITH KU!).
I like your B12 dream. I’d even go a step further and say it would be great to see 2 teams in the FF!
-
When it comes down to this team shooting 3’s or not, it’s back to the identity of the coach. Self wants what he wants, he knows what can win a given game. I believe he knows that we have the 3 point shooters but relying on it from game to game is unlikely to win as many games as we have so he’s doing things his way. I’m speculating, I’m guessing at the brain of the man behind #11 straight conference championships.
Do I think our 3 point shooting is as bad as it’s been the past few games, I don’t. I believe the key with most teams is momentum and when we make perimeter shots it makes the rest of the game come easier for us.
One of the biggest weakness of this team is passing. We are not an overly unselfish team that looks for the best shot on any given possession. We rely so much on Mason creating his own, Ellis driving and exploiting his defenders quickness to react to him. We’ve seen a lot lately of Mason taking shots without even passing, or driving to the hoop with no regard for a wrap around pass or a kick out to an open shooter. But I’m not mad at Mason because I know that he’s trying to shoulder so much while continuing to become the point guard Self wants him to be. He still wants to score and he’s damn good at it.
A lot of the good teams know their identity. Duke lives and die’s by the 3 with some post game because they have it this year. Next year they will still be chucking 3’s and making them. It’s just what Coach K knows wins games. Wisconsin shoots a lot of 3’s, their 7 footer is the best shooter on their team. A low possession team that makes a high % of shots and makes a good deal of 3’s is who they are. In conference, Iowa St is reliant on the 3. Oklahoma relies on the 3, West Virginia relies on the 3, Baylor relies on the 3. All these teams have built good programs competing with KU and they are all dependent on making perimeter shots.
So what’s holding back Self from transforming this team to combine the dominance of his Hi/Low and make shots outside. I think he’s bringing his team down to the competition by not realizing that the 3 point shot is an equalizer, a momentum changer, a dagger I can go on. We fought tooth and nail to win this championship and it won’t be any easier to win #12 next year even with a majority of this team likely to be back. Self has to adapt so that he can keep the edge and the competitive advantage over the rest of the conference. Will he is the bigger question and not one we will ever know until we see it. He had the personnel to make such a change but he couldn’t do it. We will live and die by Self’s way and that’s just how it is.
-
I really think that this “bad ball” discussion is some of the best analysis of the season.
@KJD said, “Hoiberg’s team’s shoot a lot of threes though they know how to balance that with attacking the rim. Kansas has had trouble attacking the rim this year. I think jaybate is right that if KU can sustain this way of attacking the rim, which they will, Self can be much happier about spells of long range artillery barrages to open up lanes to attack the paint–when the shots from three start going down then this team will start looking more complete.”
He’s dead right on Hoiberg’s offense.
But we shall soon see on Self’s approach. I am in the camp that — today possibly being the exception with Ellis out — Self has shut down the three ball game in favor of the attack the rim mentality. Not with the intent of running two rails of offense. I personally do not believe that Self is going to magically incorporate 18-20 threes into his game plan.
And, actually, I think that will now be hard to do. The “flip the switch” thing might not be that easy to do, as @DoubleDD mentioned.
That brings me to today. Today provides a great opportunity to get the three-ball back on track. With Ellis out, could Self embrace the three? He mentioned something about “tweaking” some things and having “fun.” In Self’s mind, that might involve the trivial or absurd – which is shooting the three like it’s going out of style.
If we could regain some of the pre-Fool’s Gold rant three point karma, that could be real plus heading into the NCAA tourney.
Here’s some wasted type-space: Why not play small today? Maybe that’s a “tweak” or “fun.” Put Oubre or Selden at the four spot. Play four out/one in – the same scheme Self used in the last 3:30 to beat OU the last time. Four out/one in is actually very supportive the drive and attack strategy. Watch ISU. Watch WSU. It opens the floor. And it fits our team. But anyway, I’ve wished for playing small for quite a while, right along with @drgnslayr. I’ve wished hard for four out/one in. It just doesn’t happen.
@jaybate-1.0 @drgnslayr Again, I think you both have nailed what Self is doing. I guess I will say this – there is no way in the world that I would utilize this team, and this team’s skill set, in this manner. And I think the last five games show exactly the win percentage, against good competition, that would be derived by this strategy over the course of the season: 3-2. But I’ve always said that there is more than one way to skin a cat. I see @ralster and @KJD referring to the MSU/Izzo model. Great example, as it relates to what might be in Self’s mind.
In our assessment of the propriety of this strategy, given what we’ve seen in the past five games, is there any real chance of this team winning four games in row in the NCAA tournament, playing the offensive game it has in the past five (four wins would get us to the final four)? I don’t see it.
On the other hand. Cliff or no Cliff – and remember, there were many times when Cliff didn’t play much anyway – wouldn’t a gunning attack from the perimeter give us a better chance to win four in a row? The evidence being our best stretches of offensive basketball this season. Heck, many games when we were shooting threes, we might shoot well one half and not so much the other. That’s how it works.
Heading into the WVU, game one thing was not debatable as @Jesse-Newell’s article pointed out article link, our offensive efficiency was much better when we shot more three pointers. We were shooting over 40% from three.
Here’s the biggest risk with our “bad ball” strategy – we’ll match up a against a long, athletic team. The kind this team will always struggle against. We’ll drive, miss, and we won’t get calls. Then, when we’re struggling, we might then start shooting threes. When they don’t go down, it will be the “threes” fault.
Offense is rhythm. It’s exactly why Self has said he wants an offensive identity established by conference season. When he said that, we just didn’t know he wanted an offensive strategy that was strictly within his box of acceptability. We had an identity. Self just didn’t like it.
But back to rhythm – it is exactly why we aren’t shooting well from three now. Self broke that rhythm. He affirmatively said no to the three. It creates apprehension. It creates a different dynamic. This cannot be understated.
When a coach says, “Dude, shoot it when your want to.” Or, a coach says, “Do not shoot the three outside of our normal offense, or if it’s before 15 on the shot clock, or if a defender can contest the shot.” — That is an example, but those sorts of things can affect a shooter’s effectiveness.
Self shut down the three. The numbers don’t lie.
Today, though, might give us a reprieve since we going to have “fun.”
-
My big question, concerning 3s… how can we shoot a bunch of 3s and go 50% and lose, while in another game go 0% and win?
I think it points to this young team getting lax when they score easy points.
If all of us could combine our thoughts into one path going forward… it would be to have a balanced offense (and sets enforcing that) and take what the defense gives. We wouldn’t be relying on the 3 or the 2… but relying on getting good looks and executing well.
And last… when we get several 3s, we stay focused and continue to play just as tough as when the 3s aren’t falling.
If we can get to this level of basketball, we will be successful in March.
-
Defense. We didn’t play good defense down the stretch the first meeting. The 2nd meeting we played poor defense the first half and then 2nd half we brought defensive intensity we haven’t seen consistently all year. And that goes to how young we are, and how certain things can motivate an entire team to play bigger than themselves. Is this team capable of that same fire on the road and on a neutral court? Well our recent sample of road games says no. We will see if that trend continues
-
Coach Self has set this season up very well. We are flying under the radar. We have to be the hardest team to scout. We have a Five Star Recruit in Alexander, that no one has really seen. We have bigs in Lucas and Mickelson, that rarely get minutes. Maybe they both can really ball. Can’t recall either of them going over 30 minutes in a game? We have excellent outside shooting, but will we use it? Perry Ellis is our go to man, I guess? Is he or isn’t he? Maybe it’s Frank Mason? Jamari Traylor can take over in stretches. Graham can take over in stretches, Selden Jr. can take over in stretches. Oubre can dominate in stretches. We have seen Svi knock down multiple 3 pointers and distribute great passes. The NCAA Tournament has a lot to do with scouting. This year, the Kansas Jayhawks are about as hard to scout as any team I have ever seen.
-
A team can get hot from three up to about 3-4 games, more often shooting shooting back to average every other game. So: I think a trey game would have the best chance of winning 3-4 games, but only IF we were coming off a bad stretch, which we will be. Anything beyond 3-4 games and the odds favor Bad Ball. And whenever there is a power outage from trey, odds favor Bad Ball. And this is why Self is playing this way. He samples the trey water ever game and if no one is hitting, then it is BAD BALL. If the guys start hitting treys the first half, you will see a 20 3pta game very shortly.
-
@HighEliteMajor This would be a great opportunity to try the smaller lineup. Only have 1 of Traylor, Mickelson, or Lucas in the game at one time. Try it for the whole game (or most anyway). Mason, Selden (or Graham), Greene (or Svi), Oubre, Traylor (or Lucas or Mickelson). Would be fun to see huh?
-
I’ve often wondered what the results would be if KU played this way. KU is pretty beat up for this OU game Maybe HCBS will have no choice but to play the 4 and 1.
