Self Fullfilling Prophecy
-
@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.
-
@JhawkAlum You said, “But as many have noted above, Self has his system and doesn’t stray away from it.”
If Self doesn’t want to stray from his system, in my opinion, he should be wildly if not singularly focused on recruiting players that fit his system. And he should not deviate. I’ve spent some time on that topic.
See, it’s not that Self being a system coach is all that much of a problem. I’m actually a fan of the high/low in concept. But if you’re going to be a strict system guy, you’ve got to have the pieces that work well in that game.
@ParisHawk - I think Self would love to see 5/11 each game. I’m sure he’s tried everything he can to pull them out of this funk. Talking about it. Not talking about it. Extra shooting practice. No shooting practice. Yoga. No Yoga. Heck, they might have even tried to bring in some after hours “slump busters.” I wouldn’t bet against it. Getting a guy or team out of a slump is very hard to do – it just happens naturally. Getting into a slump is much easier than getting out. As we all know, this slump is pretty much all mental right now. The guys are excellent shooters. It’s just getting through it. And many times the floodgates open. It could happen this weekend. If this team starts hitting threes, they can beat anyone. I have no doubt that they could beat Kentucky.
Before this bad ball thing started, I was hoping for this exact draw – to beat UK’s ass in the elite eight and deny this supposed greatest team ever a final four.
Right now, to be honest, I’m just hoping we beat WSU. For once, my expectations are lowered.
For those that aren’t up to date on the slump buster thing, here’s what I found on line Slump Buster
-
Wow- I never knew the slump buster remedy. I would be a great candidate to help these top women athletes-but alas, I married.
-
@JayHawkFanToo I read your context reply … the only reason context didn’t matter to me was because I was speaking of the reality of the numbers, and approach to the game. That was my tunnel vision. I was speaking of the fact of the matter, not the reason. The fact is, we score at very low rate at the rim. Much worse than any other 1 or 2 seed. And the fact is, we shoot a low rate of threes in comparison to that group. The point of that post was simply as it is, and as it has always been – logic dictates that when you are pretty bad scoring at the rim, that perhaps you try the three ball at a higher rate. Particularly when you were so good at it.
But, yes, UK’s height explains some of the discrepancy. In looking at numbers over the years, they are 4% over a normally excellent at the rim team (65%). I would suggest that their height advantage is worth just that – 4%. And that is definitely a big deal. Doesn’t sound like, but it is. I’m kind curious how we stack up against the other top seeds, as the other six outstripped us by quite a ways as well. We were the one major outlier. I did notice UVA was last among the group in three attempts and was 7th at the rim – but the at the rim % was still 62.1%.
-
I saw an interesting stat.
KU has had 174 shots blocked… or 10 more than any other team in the country. Has a lot to do with our 2pt%'s as the lack of size and elite athletic ability has hurt us.
KU has blocked 171 shots with no true shot blocker. Last year we got 196 swats with a shot blocker.
-
As far as the Greene debate. When he was making 3’s it seemed to up his game and made his defense tolerable. Now that both have fallen off the plate everything else has to.
So the defense plays him tighter so he’s not open as much as he’s used to. He’s a below average passer, ball handler, and those equate to a player who can’t drive the ball to the hoop effectively in D1. So he’s easily guarded and it’s now Mason’s or Graham’s or Selden’s job to be the aggressor to free him up again.
The thing that troubles me with BG is that no matter what Self does, sit him, suspend him you name it doesn’t seem to motivate him to get him to play at a higher level. We certainly didn’t see inspired ball in the Big 12 tourney from him after missing the Oklahoma game. He’s still yet to mature and not all can at 19-20 years old. I love BG and I hope he seriously takes his game to a new level this summer because he’s got a lot to work on.
You see basically every other team in the country not only be aggressive to get the easy shot inside, but also be aggressive to set up the 3 ball. Self doesn’t like that idea and he certainly doesn’t run offense for that.
Look at Oklahoma for example, Hield or Cousins will play 2 man game with a big, big screens they come off it or over it and pop. We’ve seen it countless times playing them. Or Pass to the big run to the screen then back behind it and pop. Pretty basic stuff that requires a big who can screen well and the shooters. We have the shooters but we’d rather be set shooters than aggressively seeking to shoot.
-
I totally understand your point on BG. Sometimes he gets beat like a drum on defense, but I’m telling you the boy can play. This might shock you but I can see the kid in the NBA. The kid can be deadly with his jump shot, and he has a swagger. That’s not something you can teach you either have it or you don’t
As for your comment or point that KU players would rather shoot a set three, rather than make one for themselves confuses me?
-
There isn’t much room to make your own three point shot unless you want (A) To shoot a contested shot or (B) take a three shot completely out of ones range.
-
I’m pretty sure HCBS has set the standard for this team as what is an acceptable three point shot.
-
I would assume that the majority of three shots taken are open or run out of a set play. NBA or college I’m not sure there is a difference.
-
Very few players on any level have the ability to create their own shot (a decent shot)(not just chucking it) from three land. There just isn’t much room to play with.
In some ways I agree with HCBS that the three is fools gold, but yet on the same token the three can be a game changer. Think of the great KU teams that fell to inferior teams because of the three shot. Syracuse, VCU, Bucknell. and others? A well placed three or a couple in a row can just change the game or put the final nail in the coffin.
I don’t know maybe I mistook your post? If I did please correct me. I’m all ears.
-
-
@BeddieKU23 That is interesting stat on our shots getting blocked. The convergence of two things 1) our continued efforts to score on the post feeds, and 2) the inability to get shots over long and athletic players. Our eyes did not lie.
-
I agree BG’s jumpshot could land him in the NBA but if he doesn’t improve the rest of his game tremendously he’s not a serious threat to make a roster. He’s still got 2 years to work at it so his time isn’t up by any means. And maybe a big part of his development is a great summer and a starting spot with extended minutes. It’s hard to be a dead eye shooter with 14-20 minutes a game consistently every game. We’ve seen his high’s and low’s and right now he’s in a low which could cost us the season if he doesn’t bring it these next few (hopeful) weeks.
As far as my point on the 3 point shot in general with this team. Your #1 and #2 points directly correlate to what Self deems as a good 3 point shot. Usually that is in the flow of the offense and not forced or a wasted possession. He’s likely to bench you if you throw up a 3 out of his realm of expectations. Maybe this team needs chaos and freedom to find its identity.#3 seems to have been lost in our offense. Pretty hard to run a set play 3 when we are dribble weaving for 20 seconds a possession. #4 not sure I agree, Oklahoma has 2 guys who can make and create their own shot consistently. And they run 2 man sets based on getting both open for open/contested 3’s. Why should it be any different that our guys can’t make guarded or open 3’s.
I watch a lot of College Basketball and I see a lot of offenses that are designed to open up shooters. Either with aggressive drives for kick outs, or having good passers. I think KU does neither above average. I think Self has drilled into their heads so much to try and pound it in that every time we drive to the hoop we become a one man offense. We’re the most blocked team in the nation, we have the worst 2 point field goal % in Self’s tenure here and the list goes on and on.
-
@BeddieKU23 - Your post is terrific.
First, you said, “Usually that is in the flow of the offense and not forced or a wasted possession. He’s likely to bench you if you throw up a 3 out of his realm of expectations.”
This nearly an undeniable truth.
Second, you said, “Pretty hard to run a set play 3 when we are dribble weaving for 20 seconds a possession.”
Again, perfect. Our four out/one in offense we ran Saturday is just that – the weave. There is nothing to it. Just weave, and look to attack. It was the right thing to do vs ISU, given our other decrepit offensive set, but ISU just “packed it in” as Self said, and we had no answer. Advantage Hoiberg in the second half Saturday.
Third, you said, “I watch a lot of College Basketball and I see a lot of offenses that are designed to open up shooters. Either with aggressive drives for kick outs, or having good passers. I think KU does neither above average.”
Once again, right on point. Did anyone watch Brigham Young/Ole Miss last night? Talk about offenses, and ball movement (particularly BYU). I’m warped, I know, but my greatest fantasy is taking our athletes and our quality of basketball players – which exceeds that at BYU or Ole Miss – and put them in that type of offensive system. All the while having them play the same defense that Self teaches.
This group of players playing that sort of offensive basketball? I can’t even imaging how high our ceiling would be right now.
