Keegan on Self's decision to play Lucas

Read the article in the paper this morning, and thought the same thing, NotO. Excellent job of knowing, dealing with and motivating his people. Self is one of -- if not THE -- best at what he does.

RE your posts, NotO and LasJayhawk, one thing that I really like about this board--and that differentiates it nicely from the gazillion others out there, most of which are quite putrid and uncivil--is this:

We don't tend to litigate the past, we don't tend to brag about ourselves based on perfect 20/20 hindsight, and we don't tend to smear others for merely voicing their opinion--given that contexts and times change in the course of a season, and/or across seasons.

I think that the "I apologize" thread started by Senex a couple weeks ago was sufficient to get at how most of us on the board felt, as the season progressed in a more favorable direction after a super rough patch in the early going of conference play.

Anyone can go back and pull out this or that thread or post and have fun rubbing someone's nose in it. In fact, I could do that with both of you, with material from this very season (whether it pertains to us playing "4 against 5" on offense with Lucas or being very pessimistic about the trajectory of our season, to the point of wondering whether we were "lost" or "merely adrift" and thus in the equivalent position of "re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic or Lusitania.")

The point is, our season WAS very much adrift after the WVU, OSU, and ISU losses. At that point in time, Self even admits he had zero clue what to do about our rotation at the interior slots. And even though I personally liked Lucas in his role of defensive-oriented rebounder, none of us were predicting his sudden turnaround as a legit threat near the rim sufficient to open up Perry's game more (which is what we were needing all along to round out our otherwise decently balanced offensive attack).

In that context, the post I wrote in response to Senex's "mea culpa" post is still apt, and I believe it best captures the more nuanced nature of this odd, unsettling, then cautiously reinvigorating, and now highly exciting and optimistic season that we've experienced:

www.rockchalk.com/index.php/forum/basketball/1181-i-apologize

Senex, that's a great post. Thanks.

Nothing is stated without context, however, and if we look back on it, that was a pretty dark, uncertain period when you voiced those concerns:

* KU had just limped to 3 straight road losses (@ WVU, OSU, and ISU). Even worse, we got our rears handed to us in each one, and weren't even competitive or showing signs of fight or life.

* On top of that, recall that back then Coach was still rotating tons of players in and out, essentially because he, too, was unsure of the best combinations on the floor at that point in time.

* Mason was exceptionally beat up and looked like he was running out of gas, far/far/far from the finish line.

* Devonte was playing well, but had not yet encountered the kind of breakout night he later did in Norman, where he realized that HE could be "the man" on a given night, as needed and as warranted.

* Perhaps most importantly, the light bulb had not begun to go off for Landen (on the offensive end), which led to questions as to how in the heck we were going to grow and reach a higher potential since all any opponent had to do was double-team Perry (knowing there was no other threat down low). The negative cascade effects of that problem (KU playing 4 on 5 when on offense) were clear for all to see.

* The above problem led me (personally) to my biggest concern, and probably the loudest critique of Self I have ever offered in a given season: namely, that in the absence of offensive evolution by Landen and Jamari, we would've been better off having invested more in the development (and playing time) of our athletic freshmen (Diallo and Bragg). It got to the point where I pushed that line pretty hard, even going so far as to say that I felt our ultimate post-season success was contingent on their development. ("Free Diallo and Bragg," etc. etc.)

But then, the script flipped. We saw our first glimmer of the "new KU," I submit, in the TCU game, which I mentioned at the time. I felt that there was a very evident glimmer of truly turning the corner in that game. After that, with Self having firmly named Landen the starter at Center, Lucas's confidence and efficiency on the offensive end took off, and it seemed to inject even greater life into his pre-existing strong suits (rebounding, defense, screening, etc.). This then cascaded into less double-teams on Perry, which opened up spacing inside and created all sorts of new efficiencies and capacity for our offense--including the ripple effects out to our guards. On top of that, Frank re-discovered his energy and legs, and returned to form as the "bulldog" floor general he was before. Devonte hit the gold mine on the biggest of stages in the biggest of games, essentially for the conference crown (i.e., for any hope KU had of getting it) versus OU. Suddenly, we had one of the most formidable backcourts in the land. Once Lucas bloomed and Self filled the gaping hole at the 5 spot, he was able to settle into a much more comfortable, smooth, and efficient rotation off the bench--led by Jamari inside, and Brannen/Svi outside. He made the tough but (in hindsight, correct!) decision that Diallo and Bragg weren't quite seasoned and cool enough under pressure to thrive and contribute in the exceptionally tough, closely-matched gauntlet of Big 12 games that stared KU in the face at that time.

The rest, as they say, is history. And my critiques of Self on the freshmen PT front turned out to be premature and off-base. It took the light going off for Landen offensively (something I don't think anyone on this board saw, to be fair*), but it doesn't matter. Self (and his core four) saw that potential, injected renewed faith and confidence in Lucas, and then everyone else stepped up to perform their role and perform it well. We also learned, in the process, how much of a true "team" we have here, and how on any given night a different person can essentially hitch the wagon to his post and be the lead driver, with others falling in with helpful and essential contributions.

Bottom line: Self is a master, and we are all couch potatoes. Intensive, passionate, caring, semi-intelligent, and KU card-carrying couch potatoes--but couch potatoes nonetheless. He gets paid the big bucks to figure out really tough puzzles (and how to fit everything together, not only in the here and now but 3 steps ahead). And in the final analysis, what might have once seemed as his most tenuous or fitful coaching performance in any season at KU (as voiced by so many on this board, myself most definitely included) now is suddenly looking more like it could be one of his finest hours.

Crazy stuff, no?

It's often been said in the past, and so it must be said again: "In Self We Trust."

(But hey, Coach, let's finish what we've started in April--deal?)

_______________________________________

* Footnote: RE Lucas, like Corpus, I asserted from the get-go on here that he is very effective at his role (defense, rebounding, screening, being where he's supposed to be in the flow of the offense). As a result, I didn't critique him much, given that he was simply functioning in the bounded role he had been asked to perform. [By contrast, I was much more critical of Jamari--not as a person, but in terms of his more erratic "one good play, two bad plays" style on the court.] Little did I know, however, that I would completely miss the boat on Landen's takeoff (on offense--both as a legit occasional scoring option and as a more assertive offensive rebounder and putback artist) once he was firmly inserted into the starting role. Given what we had all seen in Lucas up until that time--a relatively flat-footed big who didn't seem to have much jump and had shown a bad tendency to brick rim shots, not dunk, and put the ball on the floor in traffic--I don't think ANYONE on this board rightly saw that profound and remarkable turnaround coming. If you did, please point to the thread and post from back before it happened, as we will all crown you an Oracle.

I could go back all the way to posts of mine surrounding the first Texas game (right before ISU) to underscore my hope at that time that Self's insertion of Lucas and Traylor in more powerful roles would pay off. I could submit my ecstatic take on Jamari's game at TCU and how I felt at that time--VERY early in our season turnaround--that there were glimpses of a major KU surge in the making, if one looked closely enough. I could resubmit numerous posts in the games immediately after that--arguably before 99% of the board and certainly the mainstream media began to chime in--regarding Landen's metamorphosis into a more complete player, and KU's ascension as a result of same (the missing piece, as it were). And so on and so forth...

But I won't. I'll just leave it at this: I hope that this board doesn't suddenly and irreversibly decline into the morass that defines so many other boards...where people begin to make a game out of selectively going back and quoting a given poster in order to "smear his nose in it a little," and where honest, objective, interesting discourse around the season is treated as some sort of contest in which there have to be "winners" and "losers" among the board members--as if it's a game about "right" vs. "wrong" factions, etc.

I know that probably wasn't the intent of this thread, but there was another one like it (which went largely unresponded to) just a few days ago, and it's just not healthy. Nor is it entirely accurate, in that it chooses to ignore (or simply misses) a LOT of nuanced posts and perspectives along the way.

One final note: please produce the post where someone on here called for Self's head. I don't ever recall having seen that, and I dare say that it would've gone over like a lead balloon--even in the darkest of days of despair on this board.

Okay, I'm now putting on the kevlar. Fire away.

Thanks, LasJay. No offense taken, and no offense intended.

Focusing on the ties that bind...

I thought NotO's posting of Keegan's article to be appropriate, and as the one who made reference to The System of Doctor Tarr and Professor Feather, I take full ownership of my comments and feelings at that point in the season. I can say that most of us were down in the dumps and did not see any bright light other than that of an oncoming train in the tunnel. What we were feeling and expressing was not at all unnatural or unusual, and for the most part we were still much more civil in our discussions than posters on other sites.

I think all of us that made them have gladly admitted since that our Cassandra calls turned out to be false prophesies.

I can only speak for myself, but I know I would prefer that we focus on celebrating the past month and anticipating the next 30 days, and not on picking on the scabs left behind, or on those doing -- unintentionally or not -- the picking.

I even questioned posting this comment, as it may continue the discussion of us and not of KUMBB, but I do so in hope of helping close this discourse and opening more positive ones.

Thank you, and
ROCK CHALK JAYHAWK KU!

RE the subject line (your question), count me firmly in the latter category: he's a revisionist. I've followed him for years, and it's pretty clear he's not the brightest bulb on the tree. He was the originator of the initial piece, as you noted, in which Self looked to be handing over the keys to the players. (And he, like so many, was implicitly if not explicitly quite perplexed at the time) Just about any sports fan with some time in the trenches would raise a red flag on that score, seeing as how that tactic rarely works out. Hence the board's reaction at that time... (And not just this board, but the overwhelming majority of the Flock, as registered in their sentiments online--which I like to track rather closely, going well beyond this forum)

I recall one of your primary critiques of the board was that many were reading too much into it--that perhaps Self hadn't actually turned over the decision to the players. Well, if Keegan is to be believed, then it turns out that he had done so. What is more nuanced, though, as you correctly point out, is that Self had an underlying motive in doing so, and actually had his own decision in mind--waiting to be validated by the core four. When they responded in a validating way, instead of him saying it was his choice, he empowered them with "ownership" of the decision. Obviously that was a brilliant thing to do, in hindsight, not only in that they then had to go out and prove the worth of the decision (as a collective unit), but also because it immediately conveyed a TON of confidence (from not just Self but the teammates) in Landen Lucas. That theoretically had to have put some serious wind in his sails, and with empirical hindsight (actual play on the court), it's clear it did.

What I find most interesting of all about this entire episode with Self, the players, and the turnaround of the team is the following:

The entire season pivoted on Landen Lucas seizing the torch and running with it in the most effective of ways.

In other words, this decision, as you rightly note, could've gone very badly...or not. It was, given what everyone had seen up to that point, a bit of a roll of the dice. But the key to it working out was not only Self, who in the back of his mind and in his gut had the absolute right instinct--that Lucas could do it...it was most assuredly, and most importantly, LANDEN who made it work. Landen took the confidence that Self and his more experienced teammates conveyed in him, took the belief that they had in him, and turned it into gold. He upped his game big-time. And the rest, as they say, is history. 11 straight wins and a dominating close-out to win the toughest league in the land.

If Lucas had failed to step up and execute the way he did, we wouldn't be having this discussion--or it most certainly would look quite different. Self wouldn't have been validated by the decision, there would still potentially be critiques of how he dealt with the core four and the decision on the 5 spot, and so on...

With that in mind, I tip my hat first to Self, for having the correct gut instincts (not surprisingly, since he's the genius and knows his guys and the game by far better than most in the land)... I then credit the core four for knowing in their guts who the best fit would be at the 5, and who would best help the team reach its higher upside... And lastly, and most importantly, I credit Landen, for believing in himself and not taking his alleged "ceiling" as a given--but instead, breaking through the latter with incredible aplomb to help the Hawks coalesce into the much more formidable force they are today.

It's a wonderful story, and one of the most fascinating turns in a season that I think any of us can recall with a KU team.

_________________

As for the Board and the back and forth on the above (originally and up to today), I think we've all said enough, and can commonly agree that there is valuable perspective to be found in all corners, that there's a lot of nuance that is worth remembering (in the most optimistic and pessimistic of perspectives at certain points in time), and that we're all in this together--pulling mightily for our beloved Hawks to soar to the highest altitudes.

My apologies to you and LasJay for taking umbrage with the post yesterday (and the other one like it from a week ago or whenever, which admittedly is what made yesterday's stick in my craw). I'm hoping that we can all enjoy what lies ahead, while basking in a truly remarkable KU turnaround and finish to the regular season.

Rock Chalk...

RCJHKU!