Self Fullfilling Prophecy
-
@Blown Not sure what stats you’re looking at -
Post Texas Tech, we have gone 32/122 from three, or 26.2%. Your numbers suggest that in 10 games we shot nearly as many three pointers as we did in the prior 24.
In the first 24 games, including Texas Tech, we were 166/406, or 40.8%. You need to double check your numbers.
We are now 198/528.
You cite “Big 12”, but this is irrelevant as the delineation is the Fool’s Gold comments and change in offensive strategy.
You cite Utah as a before and after on percentages, and I’m not sure why.
And so your premise is that our team was so tired, so gassed, that they just couldn’t shoot three pointers effectively anymore – while the rest of the college world kept draining them?
I wish I could even give a shred of credibility to that argument. I can’t.
And I guess I’m not seeing your claimed inverted relationship between post scoring and three point percentages. I know we scored at the rim at nearly 65% in 2012 and at 67% last season. But to your point, I in no way dispute the power of inside-out basketball. In fact, I’m a big fan of it when you have personnel to match.
Remember, regardless, other teams find ways to shoot threes and make them at high rates. And that’s not premised many times on post scoring. Many times, the threes and outside game create inside opportunities – ISU and WSU are good examples.
One question: So the first 25 games, we had appreciably different inside scoring than the last 9 games?
-
I was referencing the first tech game, which could be a mistake/misunderstanding on my part.
Self’s first fools gold comment was the UTAH game. Our percentage before that game, is the same as it was after. Actually slightly increased. So the fact that you think “fools gold” statements hurt their play is not credible.
They were 167/214 (I did double check and changed) up to and including the second Techgame, which was 2/3 into the season But my contention is that the decline is due to their losing their legs…
Shake it down any way you want to. This team is a 37-38% three point shooting team. I’ve demonstrated that above.
Are you of the opinion that Self has stated on multiple occasions that this team is tired and needs rest and that leg’s don’t affect jumpshots?
Could it be possible that after the second tech game Big 12 players were now seeing the hawks for a second time and scouted the 3pt shot defense better?
-
@drgnslayr that’s BS!! They drove the ball w/5 healthy athletes on the floor and our d stunk! Perry tried, but couldn’t produce. You really think Perry didn’t want the win as much? He did everything he could w/a bum leg. ISU is a great team. Did you listen to post game?
-
@HighEliteMajor said:
One question: So the first 25 games, we had appreciably different inside scoring than the last 9 games?
HEM why aren’t you giving credence to the fact that round robin scheduling and seeing a team twice can, and most likely does impact the scouting report defense?
The third time we played the teams–as I referenced in the “BIG 12 TOURNEY ONLY” data set above our 3pt % dropped all the way down to 25%. Bruce Webber showed the rest of the league how to guard the three successfully. In our second game against them we were 2/13. And the decline was on from there. Texas 1/8. WVU 015…and so on.
-
@HighEliteMajor I’m very proud to wear crimson and blue glasses, and I don’t care if you understand me. I don’t usually respond 'cause you are always right! Waste of time. Another reason I ignore you is because I avoid negative people. They tend to zap all the joy out of life. Notice that? Last week you said you had fun watching a game, I wanted to hug you!
️
As far as the “fools gold” comment, and you won’t care what I think, I believe that comment has zero to do w/our struggling long distance shooting. Zero!
-
@Blown I would tell you that I give zero credence to the balanced schedule thing. Seriously, every team has video on other teams, and many play others twice. So no, I don’t see that as a reason. Teams game plan, teams do lots of things. Coaches adjust. As I’ve said in other posts … including the Myth of Three Point Defense … coaches scheme get their looks. Other teams have been doing it all season long, and are still doing it. Again, I think we look at our little KU vacuum and think that this is the only possible way.
-
@Crimsonorblue22 My perspective on the comments and mentality of the fool’s gold deal is combined with our complete shift in offensive strategy. We all have our perspectives based on our experiences. My experiences come from, first hand, seeing how athletes are both positively and negatively affected by coaches. Folks sometimes forget that the players are still kids … they may be 18, but they are kids with all of the same insecurities as normal kids. If you’ve never experienced it, I would understand your skepticism. And, of course, it’s just my opinion.
I also understand how it is easier to go through a basketball season without critical thinking. Life is the same way. It’s much easier to accept what is given to you with a smile on your face. And it’s much easier not to challenge anything.
It’s not that I don’t understand that you are proud to wear your crimson and blue glasses. Blue pill, is blue pill. It’s a choice not to think critically.
I guess I just don’t understand the point of making snide little remarks about posters and topics, without coming to the table with any substance to challenge the thought process.
So you know, as a general rule, I typically choose to avoid folks without substance.
-
@HighEliteMajor I know you do! I have experienced it. You would be surprised.
-
@HighEliteMajor are you saying familiarity with an opponent has no bearing on performance?
-
@Blown Absolutely it does. Thats why the Big 12 is so hard to win. Each team has to play each other twice, scout each other and watch tape on each other many times. Whats that phrase about repetition?
-
@HighEliteMajor Though I do not agree with everything you are saying, especially the fact that you do not believe that familiarity (balanced scheduling) has “zero to do with it”, I did take some time and looked at your point objectively. Although it could be coincidence (I doubt it), after each fool’s gold comment, there was a steady decline. I think there are so many things going on with this team: fatigue, scouting, among other things, I have to agree with you that your point is of note.
-
March Madness voids all this complex thinking. Just take your theories and wad them up and throw them in the fireplace. They simply don’t matter. We should all know this by now. How many times has KU’s numbers been completely dominating? How many times have those numbers been proven wrong? In how many years?
I can recall at least two tourneys where KU’s numbers were exactly what some are wanting on this board, only to lose at some point in the tourney. No, the numbers don’t lie @HighEliteMajor, but those numbers only give you a picture. Then, when the teams get on the floor, it’s not the same team and we should know this at KU.
It’s simple: Who wants it more? Green is sparking, Selden is looking good, Ellis gets better (per his interview), and we can get some bench; We might just surprise a few people.
I think this tourney may provide some shocking surprises. This may be the year the numbers don’t quite support what will actually happen? Just some thoughts.
I know one thing: KU is not favored at all and frankly we are dubbed the weakest. In fact, Borzello and Eamon says the Midwest is “O.K.” apart from UK. Many have UK winning this thing and if @HighEliteMajor is correct, then let’s forgo the hassle of having a tourney this year and just give the NC to UK. They meet all @HighEliteMajor criteria.
-
@truehawk93 Excellent point truehawk.
While I agree with a lot of what you are saying HEM, I think what Self is trying to do is develop some sort of an inside game to complement the already existing perimeter game, though he could have said it in a much better way.
To what you said truehawk, you are absolutely right about pointing to our past losses in the tournament. In the past, we always seemed to finish the conference year strong, then fizzle out in the tourney. Personally, I like being overlooked and not having any expectations. As some have said here, if KU plays it right, they are probably the best equipped team to beat UK because they can spread the floor and have a stretch four.
Of course, in the end, it really is a crap shoot and is so hard to make a deep run every single year.
-
@drgnslayr We are just not quite dominate enough inside (as UK) to pound inside as in years past. Self needs to simply do some old fashioned coaching and really ‘scout’ these teams and decide what works best against each team. The old ‘pound it inside’ will not work against some of these teams. We all learned that last year against Stanford.
We’ve got to run plays that will open the floor, spread it, and go over the top. We’ll need to drive and dish. High screens are great, but rather than the predictable “pick and roll,” lets see some high ball screens for Oubre, Green, Selden, and maybe Mason. Self is too predictable.
Lastly, Ellis has got to be healthy PERIOD. If not, we’re done. I hate it, but ISU proved that. A healthy Ellis would’ve been a W.
-
@truehawk93 Hopefully he’ll do his best coaching in the tournament.
-
@truehawk93 said:
Ellis has got to be healthy PERIOD. If not, we’re done. I hate it, but ISU proved that. A healthy Ellis would’ve been a W.
I agree. But, every time I get negative and doomsdayish, I stop and think about who could beat ISU… There aren’t more than 12 teams as good as or better than ISU and we played them very close sans Cliff and with Ellis at 60%.
Ellis’s health will determine how far we get, but we might be able to get a game or two into this tourney with Ellis. That said, I’m pretty apprehensive about Wichita State, with or without Ellis. They are probably the worst ‘karma’ matchup we could have other than Illinois or Missouri (neither of which made the tournament).
-
@RedRooster Really! What’s Bill say in the huddle when we’re down 2 possessions with 30 seconds left? “Okay guys, lets go out there and get some of that Fool’s Gold!”
-
Very interesting stat I heard last night – one commentator said UK had shot 529 three pointers this season. That sounded familiar.
UK shot 529. Kansas 528.
UK scores at 69.3% at the rim. KU 56.5%.
-
@HighEliteMajor 69.3% include the second shots?
-
@HawksWin probably all dunks! Should be.
-
Average height of KU’s most used front line (Ellis, Traylor, Oubre, Alexander) - a generous 6’-7"
Average height of UK’s most used front line (Cauley-Stein, Towns, Lyles, Johnson) - a conservative 6’-11"+
Context, context, context…
-
@HawksWin Yes, it does.
And for what it is worth, this stat has nothing to do with context. The stat shows that we, by and large, have difficulty scoring at the rim. UK is tremendous at the rim.
Yet we shoot the same number of three pointers. When you have difficulty scoring at the rim, a random thought might be that other options should be exploited.
I do understand that some folks mightily resist that.
-
And for what it is worth, this stat has nothing to do with context. The stat shows that we, by and large, have difficulty scoring at the rim. UK is tremendous at the rim.
And you don’t think the 5" difference in height for the front lines makes a difference when scoring at the rim? wow and I mean WOW!
-
@HighEliteMajor So here’s my follow-up question. Since 69.3% includes the 2nd shots, am I safe to assume footers on KY team are effective as rebounders? What about second shots for KU 3s? We all agree that KU is not a rebounding team this year. Wow, we dropped as many 3s as UK, and UK scored 70% of the time while KU 57%! I don’t have the knowledge of the game as you or others, but based on those 2 numbers, KU shouldn’t bank on 3s against UK or anyone with footers/rebounders. Sorry HEM, but I can’t agree with you on dropping more 3s. It’d be like spending $10 on lotto to win $6.
-
@HawksWin One of the keys to beating UK is to get hot from three. That opens up the lane to drive and kick out for three point shots.
-
@drgnslayr I believe ISU led our league in 2pt FG%. Outside-In same effect as Inside-Out potentially. As has been mentioned, need to play to the current players/team’s strengths.
Inside game is probably a more consistent force and partly responsbile for Self’s better success (total picture) than his currrent coaching peers as far as consistency, and probably reason for the Conference win streak since it wins road games, but not sure that it has proven itself on the big stage getting to the winner’s circle in the final game.
-
@sfbahawk Even BG’s game has changed since the FG comment. He’s driving to the basket more than he ever did.
-
@DoubleDD Or adjust to the new environment.
-
@Bwag That’s good. You have to keep the defender honest. Forte from OSU as a very good 3 pt shooter also went to the basket more this year. It appears that Forte is also in a bit of a slump now.
-
@HawksWin If you are a poor rebounding team, then it is much better for you to change the normal rebounding dynamic. Most rebounds are close to the basket, thus that stat reflects interior rebounding more than anything.
The longer the shot, the longer the rebound (generally). So, if you are a poor rebounding team, a longer shot provides you a better opportunity for a rebound. The bounce of the ball is more random, the longer the shot.
Against UK, you’d rather have longer rebounds, as it will generally bounce farther away from the basket. So that, again, supports more three pointers.
@DinarHawk - For us to beat UK, we’d likely need a 12/23 from three type of night. We just aren’t beating them playing the game we’re playing now. But I think we could if we’re hot from three, and stretch their D, and create opportunities to get to the hoop.
-
@Bwag I’m not anti-BG … but he is a one-dimensional player in my book. Some may disagree, but I think Svi is better at literally every aspect of the game except for three point shooting. I would not play BG if his three gun isn’t a focus when he is in. Maybe others see that differently.
-
@HighEliteMajor You are correct that Svi is better at most things other than 3s. Removing Svi from the equation, that was exactly my point in a previous response to you. BG is out there to shoot 3s. When Self plays him at critical times such as the second half on Saturday, it is only because he has confidence that BG is the best 3 pt option. I am assuming that BG is not stupid and knows that he is not out there for his stellar defense. Therefore the infamous “fools gold” comments should not have a deleterious affect on his confidence as you have previously claimed.
-
@sfbahawk I understand that you disagree. You seem pretty confident that a coach cannot affect a shooter’s confidence level. Do you agree that a coach can help a shooter gain confidence? Do agree that confidence can help an athlete’s performance? Do agree that shooting the basketball involves a freedom of thought and mind? If you agree to the prior three questions, do you also agree that the converse is also true?
But I disagree with your premise. I do not think Self has Greene out there solely because of three point shooting. You and I may agree on the Svi comparison. I don’t think Self does. I do think that part of the reason why Greene is out there is because of the three point threat. Meaning, teams respecting that shot. I do think that Self sees Greene as being satisfactory in many areas, and I think he trusts Greene right now more than Svi.
I do understand your argument. But remember, my point is that the comments sent him into a spiral and changed the entire offensive dynamic – and hole from which he has not dug out.
-
@HighEliteMajor Don’t disagree in principle but not sure where Svi’s head is exactly at the moment. My only point about BG is that I don’t ever remember him driving like he has since Fools Gold comment. Happenstance or coached-value strategy?
BG is still a defensive liability too often. Made progress for a while but haven’t noticed him sustaining it.
Completely like your analysis and I think, like you, that leadership matters. Get the good with the bad.
I’m a big Thomas Kuhn fan and his explanations of how paradigms both make us successful in problem solving and also hinder us from even seeing reality differntly or the accumulating weight of counter evidence to our paradigm. We heard Self from his own mouth say this is best 3 point shooting team, but his paradigm for successful basketball caused him to not accept that reality and problem solve appropriately for it. He forced the team into an alternative approach resembling a poor dribble drive offense that relies on high FT% attempts and makes. When combined with stingy and effective defense, we broke the odds and won…when we had a breakdown of any sort in any part of the game, we didn’t.
I like that your point out the early record/late record…that’s the proof of the effectiveness in the change in offensive strategy. He was as effusive in his praise of “bad ball” as he was dismissive of the Outside-In game that had been showing success but was counter to his basketball paradigm for success.
Most paradigms aren’t changed until they suffer total collapse under the preponderance of counter-evidence weight. Here’s to hoping for an intervention for a great coach. Perhaps an Asst Coach change or someone that he respects can speak truth to him.
-
I don’t know why we’re even discussing this tourney. It appears UK has won already. They’re not going to lose, according to Myron and ESPN.
Did I miss the tourney?
-
@HighEliteMajor I’m a huge BG supporter. However, Svi is still adjusting and Green has a lot of experience. Svi’s day is coming. I just don’t think he can handle the pace of the tourney at this point. I hope Green gets hot. I mentioned Selden, Oubre, Green and Mason must heat up. We’ll need them all.
-
@JayHawkFanToo @HighEliteMajor HEM didn’t attribute success or non-success to anything in particular. It is what it is. Find another way if you’re not successful was his point.
Whether is nearly 7’ front line or Richard Scott at 6’6 or 7" putting his butt on bigger players and scoring anyway…it’s success or not.
-
The chart is interesting. To me it looks like we hit bottom and are headed up. Is the gambler gonna turn them lose or continue with bad ball? The good news BG last shot looked like earlier in the year.A very pretty swish!!! Go jayhawks!!! Back to lurking and enjoying this site. Thanks for all enjoyable comments and analysis.
-
There is an expression in boxing that says a good big man will beat a good smaller man every time. Likewise, given two “equally capable” front lines, one being 5 inches taller than the other, the taller front line will outperform the shorter front line at the rim every time. If capable height is not an advantage, why is there such a premium on capable tall players? If the shorter front line is equally good then teams, including KU, would be looking for good SF and not PFs and Centers. The entire knock on KU all season was that we did not have capable big men; UK on the other hand has several very capable tall players that are the true strength of the team…the twins are good but really not that good to make UK such favorite. This is a lot of the reason why UK’s numbers at the rims are better than KU’s.
-
@HighEliteMajor Of course a coach can affect a shooter’s confidence level. However, you obviously think that the comment a coach makes in a press conference regarding relying on 3 pt shots in general has more affect than other interactions between the coach and the player both in practice as well as in individual conversations. And that this is true regardless of the coach’s actions such as using the player during critical conversations. One thing that has never been pointed out is that none of us knows what is said or transpires during practice and in the locker room.
Having someone on the court as a threat means nothing if the opposing coach does not think that the threat will be used. That is only the case if that coach thinks that Self has confidence in Greene shooting and making the three. Why would Greene not think the same?
I find it very difficult to believe that Self trusts Greene more than Svi for defense, ball handling and passing. Other than Greene’s abilities at the three throw line, if he does I would be more inclined to agree with KUinLA about his coaching. Greene does have another year on Svi in the KU system, but one could hardly guess that from the way he plays. Svi currently has a higher “basketball IQ” given his international experience and innate abilities.
Both Wayne and Kelly have also been quite hot from three and have now cooled off. Is this also because they have lost confidence due to Self’s statement? I doubt that you would want to take that position since you and others have never thought highly about their abilities from three. This is especially true of Wayne.
Is Brannen the only one with such a fragile psyche? If so is that the person that you would want taking the shot at a critical moment such as down 2 to UK with 3 seconds left?
-
@JayHawkFanToo While I think that UK’s front line does give them an advantage, the current trend in the NBA is away from true centers and even from PFs who only bang the boards. There are only four or five true centers in the league and the PFs shoot threes. That is even more true in international ball.
-
@sfbahawk You agree that coaches can affect a shooter’s confidence. I assume because you did not disagree, that you do not disagree with the other questions posed.
To be sure, it’s not just the fool’s gold comment. It is the complete change in offensive strategy. The behind the scenes stuff, I believe, had probably more of an affect. The fool’s gold comment was the public declaration of what occurred behind the scenes.
And no, I don’t think it affected just Greene. The reason I believe that is because it was team wide. Our entire team’s three point shooting went in the tank. This affected our entire team. And that gives more credence to my theory (I believe).
I believe Self reached a breaking point with the three point stuff. It wasn’t so much the threes, but the inability to score inside. We know that kills him. It was part of the post-TT comments. All this boiled over in the TT press conference, where we had just blown TT out on the road – no small feat given what TT has done at home this season.
After TT, we saw a complete change in how we played offensive basketball. To drive his point home, I think Self made a three point shot edit – we’re going to score getting the ball to the hoop. The three point shot is only taken under certain conditions. And I think he laid out those conditions to the team. This changed the dynamic on the offensive end significantly.
The numbers do not lie regarding the large change in attempts. The numbers don’t lie regarding our incredible drop off in percentage made.
And you say “fragile psyche” as if that is what is required to have this happen. It’s not. Tough, mentally strong athletes can be affected all the time by coaches. Players psyches don’t have to be fragile to be thrown into a slump. Coaches can knock players and teams out of rhythm. Heck, problems with a girlfriend can do the same thing. If I learned that Brannen Greene was having major girlfriend issues that coincided with the downturn, I would rethink this. But acknowledging that a girlfriend issue could affect a player would be to acknowledge that my theory is plausible.
But I will say that the team wide downturn supports my theory even more.
There is little doubt in my mind that Self made a three point edict, given the numbers and style of play that followed the TT game. I notice you agreed that coaches can affect a shooter’s confidence level. Once you’ve made that leap, the rest is not difficult.
I’m not asking anyone to buy this theory as the gospel. I just think it is a very plausible explanation, and that the pieces fit. You can’t agree that it is a plausible explanation?
-
@HighEliteMajor Take your theory a step further.
-
Self made a three point edict.
-
The effects were as we all saw.
-
Then what? Did none of the coaches ever put two and two together and see the link between the edict and our offensive woes?
Even Alec Guiness in “Bridge on the River Kwai” finally wondered “What have I done?”
Is Self even more stubborn than a British colonel?
-
-
I think some of you are missing the point here. I can’t think of anybody that posts on KUBuckets thinks or feels KU should go full onslaught from three land. Yet dismissing the three bomb as fouls gold isn’t practical either.
Yes to live by the three is to die by the tree. Yet I propose that if a team becomes one-dimensional then that said team can die from that strength. The college game is different than the pro game in this one respect.
On most nights a school like KU is going to have:
-
More talent at every position, with few exceptions
-
Better coaching
-
And not least but last more experience. Not so much in age wise but playing in big High profile games.
Now none of these guarantees a win but it does help. Plus a HC like BS can run a system night after night and win games just by playing his system. If all else fails he’s got the talent to turn the tide.
The problem is playing a system also means you can die by that system. If anything the Mayor and Iowa st. proved that in the Big 12 conference championship game.
-
Don’t quit and give up against KU’s onslaught has it will happen.
-
Spread him out on defense, has they really have no rim protector, to fit the system of defense they play
-
Crowd as many guys in the paint as you can. (Remember how many times clones came running from the paint to contest the three shot?)
The recipe is there to beat KU.
Now not every team can accomplish the feat of beating KU like Iowa st. has done. However the system can be beaten, and this year KU’s system of play has shown it is quite vulnerable. As it doesn’t have the right personal to play it. This is why the argument of playing to your strength or tweaking the offense has come into play.
KU has some nice shooters, and as of to date HCBS has not taking advantage of that strength. He has been persistent on pounding the ball inside. This can’t be denied. Now we as fans can only speculate what the results would be if HCBS would at the very least vary his offense approach. Yet for the sake of the debate or discussion, we know what we are getting now. Bad Ball with the games coming down to the last few possessions. Not sure you a team can make a living doing that in the tournament.
But maybe I’m wrong. We shall see.
-
-
Don’t you think that other teams seeing KU light it up from 3 and preparing for it did not have the bigger effect? KU plays in tough conference with what ? 5 teams in the top 25?..and they DO have say in how the game plays out and they actually did.
Other than Graham and maybe Oubre, the other 3-point guns at KU are pretty much spot up shooters that will not create their own shot, Greene certainly is the best example, he will hit just about every time when he is in position and not guarded, but if there is defender near him he will either not take the shot or miss it. Mason and Perry will take 3 point shot only when wide open and Selden is probably the better shooter at using the screen to shoot over; just play a tight man-to-man and you take the 3 point away from KU. Compare this to ISU where all their shooters can actually create their shots, take them and make a fair percentage of them. This is precisely why Coach Self went back to playing inside. Just my opinion.
-
@JayHawkFanToo BG also said that his hip was bothering him and his legs didn’t feel right on his jump.
-
I agree and I have mentioned before that in the NBA the 4 and 5 are one and the same and what is now referred at the “stretch 4” has become popular. However, my point is that given two “EQUALLY” capable players, one being 5 inches taller than the other, the taller player will always have an advantage at the rim and better numbers.
My point was made to bring context to the comment that:
UK shot 529. Kansas 528.
UK scores at 69.3% at the rim. KU 56.5%.
And…
***And for what it is worth, this stat has nothing to do with context. The stat shows that we, by and large, have difficulty scoring at the rim. UK is tremendous at the rim. ***
Yes, UK has better numbers at the rim, but a lot of it has to do with the huge height advantage they have over KU and most every team they play; this is what I call context. Have you seen Towns or Cauley-Stein jump and grab offensive rebounds right over the defensive players? The fact that they are footers playing against much shorter defenders makes a huge difference; it does not hurt that they are elite players to boot.
-
@JayHawkFanToo I get your point, but I think you misunderstood my intention. I was questioning HEM’s theory, not substantiating it.
His theory is that Self caused the inflection in strategy and that the 3 point slump was collateral damage. I can imagine Self unwittingly causing a 3 point slump: I just can’t imagine him seeing the slump he caused and not doing anything about it.
I would very much like for HEM to surmise Self’s reaction to the slump: has he adjusted and how, or if not why not? I can’t believe he’s actually pleased to see our 3 point percentage stay in the toilet…
-
How many times have we heard Self say, “we have to hit some shots” during the halftime interview? But as many have noted above, Self has his system and doesn’t stray away from it.
In the past, open 3 pointers were created off double teaming bigs or driving the paint and dishing out. But the main difference isn’t the lack of perimeter players. We have a guy in Ellis that will get doubled most of the time when he’s attacking. It’s passing. Plain and simple.
Mason, Selden, or Oubre attack the lane only to use the floater or attempt to get fouled. Ellis gets double teamed and isn’t a skilled passer to get in to another big or find someone quickly to make the D scramble.
But this goes back to Self. No outside action. No plays to give shooters a chance unless it’s the final minute.
Self is one of the greats in coaching and we are all beyond blessed to have him as our coach. But one cannot honestly access this team and think Self did everything he could to capitalize on the type of talent he has.
-
Thanks for the correction…and assist; point taken.
