As I wrote awhile back, the offensive future of the team could well be a variation off the hi-lo, which is a 1-triangle-1 set, basically a 3 corner offense with Naa driving into the center of the triangle, instead of Dean's old 4 corner. Black stays low block, except to set high picks and clear out for guys to drive. It won't be spread quite as wide as as the old four corners, but they are going to move the ball and make them stretch and slide for 4-5 passes, maybe 6-8.
Perry will be almost as mobile as Selden and Wigs. The triangle will rotate, too. All three will wind up on a block from time to time.
Posted 9 October 2013, 8:57 a.m.
n) the stacking system is imprecise because there are a lot of uncontrollable variables like university politics, coaching abiliities, injuries, etc.;
o) the stacking system is trying to create high profile programs that the public knows will have the great players, so that there is no need to for the public to have to go searching for them;
p) when the stacking system stacks the program, and the program just cannot turn the corner, then another school is substituted and the stacking continues at the new program;
q) there is much less tolerance for failure at programs outside the major media markets and outside the Eastern time zone (if they stack you, you've got to produce within a couple of years, or it is bye-bye).
The above is the essense of what I am talking about. It is really just about the same as the NBA. The NBA has a draft that spreads all the lesser talent evenly around the league. But the rules of the draft are usually broken, when a great player comes along. Long term, all truly great NBA players are massaged into the top media markets, because that is what is best for promoting the NBA. Now, the NBA cannot help it if certain franchises, like say, the NY Knicks, have such dysfunctional ownership that that ownership cannot be trusted to win with great talent. So: there are exceptions about certain high profile franchises not gettting a great player from time to time. But there are almost no exceptions about the greatest players always winding up in crucially important media markets for the L.
In D1 the last 10 years, the greatest talents wind up on talented, high profile teams and locations. You just don't see a Larry Bird playing at an Indiana State anymore.
The system is efficient.
Hope this helps.
Posted 8 October 2013, 4:19 p.m.
My hypothesis here is that:
a) A duopoly of ShoeCos drives this system;
b) they use AAU teams to aggregate high school talent as Nike talent, or Adidas talent;
c) their brand aggregated AAU teams feed D1;
d) they have two objectives:
1) spread their lesser branded talent around as many markets as they can to promote their ShoeCo brand in those markets;
2) place potential super talents with schools and coaches that can give their Q ratings and recognizability ratings (call it R ratings for shore) the biggest bounce possible in one season of D1 exposure;
e) regularly stack certain programs with talent to keep the program high profile each year, so all that has to be hyped is the super talent and not the place he plays at;
f) Nike, the ordinate member of the duopoly keeps a larger number of programs it stacks each year, because it has a much bigger feeder system and more athletes to promote;
g) Adidas, the subordinate member of the duopoly keeps a smaller number of programs that it stacks with talent each year, because it has a smaller AAU feeder system and fewer top athletes to promote;
h) each year, when a team is stacked with high end talent, it has to perform well in order to promote that high end talent (i.e., to maximize the bounce on Q and R ratings of the players involved);
i) when the team meets or exceeds expectations then it gets stacked again;
j) when the team falls sharply below expectations, the coach is given a year or two to get it going again by continuing to stack his team, albeit not with the most favorable stack;
k) Howland at UCLA was stacked repeatedly when he first got their and got to the Final Four three straight times, so when he began to falter, they kept stacking him for a couple years, but finally they said he could not get it done and so they stacked him up just enough that a high quality replacement would be ready step aboard, and then they began stacking the replacement;
l) they are much more determined to stack a place like UCLA, because it is in a huge media market and if they can get the right coach in place, then a place like UCLA offers a much bigger bounce on the Q and R ratings that does a place like KU;
m) UCLA is like Boardwalk and Park Place in Monopoly; you want to stack it because when you hit it right it offers the biggest pay off;
Posted 8 October 2013, 4:17 p.m.
Thanks to ALL that replied! Impressive insights on most everyone's part. Thanks. Slayr, thanks for bringing it.
Posted 8 October 2013, 3:42 p.m.
All are likely overthinking the foreground. In the foreground it is sign the best pieces the background permits, red shirt whoever wants to, and run the rest. Try to find them slots in the Okie Baller Mafia, but run them. This how it is. You can't say who will be run till you know who he signs. He will run anyone. If he found 13 guys better than Wiggins, he would run Wiggins.
The background is what biases outcomes. How many OADs is Self going to be allowed by the SHOECO duopoly? Recently they have stacked unc, ucla, uk, Duke, Baylor and Zona. Cal and Self seem most at the teat now. Self will take as many as they permit him. For awhile they permitted him nothing but sloppy seconds from imploding programs. Now he is at the table. Cal may have been being punished with Wiggins. Cal fell into the NIT with a stacked deck. The SHOECO duopoly, and the media-gaming complex lost big on that bet. They probably hedged their bets with Self this time. Cal was given another stacked deck, but not the next Lebron to go with it. Discipline. Cal has to get her done this year, or they move onto the next best option to stack. Self has won with less, so he is getting his shot. If he fails, they move to the next option. I don't believe for a second in the invisible hand of a market this tightly constrained. I believe the SHOECO duopoly has to be making clear which menu of teams is acceptable to the top 10 players. Different players pick differently from the menu, but I believe the menu is set. This is essentially like standing in line at the Fed bailout window. There is a pecking order of who gets bail outs. Friends come first. Then persons you want to make friends with. The trouble makers get cut off. Etc.
HC's are working to get to the head of the stacking line. This ain't conspiracy. This is real kick politik in my opinion.
Posted 8 October 2013, 10:11 a.m.
EJ's difficulties in Poland remind that Tyrel and Brady came home quickly and Sherron has seemed not to stick over there. I am wondering if a trend is emerging? Or has Europe always been a tougher option than it seemed.
Do you think the reputed deep depression in Europe is having a bad effect on Europe as an option for American basketball players?
Posted 8 October 2013, 4:23 a.m.
no problema. we are all winging it here. somethings always get lost in translation.
if journalism is history in a hurry, then blogging is journalism in an eye blink. :-)
Posted 7 October 2013, 4:18 p.m.
It is only a year, so you don't want to waste time with the public searching around for where your potential super players are. You want them right where the public knows they will be every year. UK and KU work well, because being from these markets, the superstar does not develop any brand negatives for eventual placement in the major media markets of the NBA. For instance, a super player at St. Johns would have a strong positive with the Knicks and Nets, but would pack a negative to be overcome with the Lakers.
KU and UK are neutral ground as far as branding go, yet they are nearly certain to get the players into the big dance, and the coaches are good enough that they will often go far.
Nothing is certain. UK can have injuries and wind up in the NIT. KU can get upsight by a mid major in the first round.
But the idea is to get your super player up high on the shelf in a familiar location, so the media shopper knows how to turn right to him in the store.
Posted 7 October 2013, 3:54 p.m.
Self does not ever want to go to another national final carrying a knife to a gun fight. Period.
Self did not work his butt off all these years to rise from ORU, to Tulsa, to Illinois, to KU in order to be outgunned in talent. Hell, he could have stayed at ORU had he wanted to be outgunned for talent.
Cal and Self and all the coaches are playing a game of who can monopolize, duopolize, or oligopolize the talent.
Bottom line the ShoeCos are better off with two university brands to tie their top starts and shoe lines to.
This is a business in which two things are constantly being developed and promoted: a super player, and a shoe brand.
Shoe Brands you can promote by having teams in every university that is near a major media market wear your shoe brands. This lends itself to building up relationships with as many universities as possible to market your shoes as broadly as possible.
Super players are being developed for the next level: the pros.
Super players need to be placed for one year in the most recognizable and dependably successful program you can find. You want to find one, or two, teams and coaches that you can park you potential super players with year in and year out, so the public begins to know where the super players are that will super promote your brands.
KU has a lot of advantages that make it worth stacking with talent and one glaring disadvantage. It is one of the winningest program the last 25 years and the winningest the last ten. It is the cradle of the game. Naismith court is here. The rules are here. Its the greatest program in the history of the game. It is the heart of America. All strategists understand you have to control the center. It is in the midwestern time zone, and if the nobs at the B12 ever get their shizz together and add an eastern time zone division, then KU will have a presense in the eastern time zone.
The big neg on KU is that it serves a small media market relative to the big eastern teams. But here's the thing: it doesn't help being in the eastern time zone, if your program isn't a consistent winner. Further, if KU markets itself as Americas team, then when it meets UK the networks and gamblers get to pull both the eastern and midwestern and even the conservative parts of mountain and western time zones.
So: the game is to stack UK and stack KU with the 10 of the top 20 players, and always the Number 1, every year so that the potential super players are getting the maximum branding bounce for the year they are in college.
Posted 7 October 2013, 3:53 p.m.
Well, maybe not in the 21st Century, but back in the 1970s, when I was at KU, some big games were camped out for. Frat houses pitched a tent, or a group of lawn chairs, and students were rotated round the clock for up to a day and a half to ensure getting in to the bleachers behind both benches.
Posted 7 October 2013, 3:31 p.m.