Friday, May 23, 2008

Mayer: Arthur’s KU days history


Not long ago there seemed to be about an 80 percent chance that Kansas basketball star Darrell Arthur would enter the June 26 NBA Draft. After that alleged grade-changing to keep him eligible in high school, a move that could have factored in his collegiate career, up that to 110 percent.

Arthur is not about to hang around fending off barbs about his academic status, especially when he goes on the road against the likes of Missouri and Kansas State. After being approved by the NCAA Clearinghouse, for two seasons he made grades good enough to let him star with a 2008 national collegiate championship. As a probable first-round draft pick with millions of dollars within his reach, he's not interested in any more "seasoning" or Phi Beta Kappa discussions.

There's even some evidence Darrell will be a lottery pick, 14th or better, ahead of teammate Brandon Rush. All the more reason Arthur is history. Because of the way the NCAA deals with low graduation rates, early outs like Darrell and Rush, and maybe Mario Chalmers, must finish a semester with acceptable academic standing - good enough that they can return. Which they can. That way KU isn't penalized in the scholarship department as it might be if a guy simply enrolled for his last semester but didn't turn a lick in the classrooms.

It tickled me that when the Arthur math grade charges were made, some in the Jayhawk Nation fretted that KU might have to surrender its national title.

No chance, not with people with connections like Lew Perkins and legal eagle Rick Evrard, one-time NCAA detective, on the prowl. KU knew nothing of any high school deal, and received a normal NCAA sanction. He starred here while making his grades, and anything involving his high school status is pre-KU.

Further, the NCAA isn't about to make KU surrender the title and forfeit any games in which Arthur played. Consider what a ghastly mess that could be. It would alter the Big 12 standings and titles, change the Final Four results and it might entail refunding and reassigning money that factored in the games with the Jayhawks.

Nothing like that is going to happen but just imagine what an Animal House scenario could result. The NCAA would look pretty inept for approving Arthur in the first place, huh?

Historically, the NCAA never has rescinded a title, and won't do so this year. However, some athletes representing St. Joseph's in 1961 (third place); Villanova (runner-up) and Western Kentucky (third) in 1971; and UCLA (second) in 1980 were later declared ineligible subsequent to the Final Four. Their teams' places in the standings were eventually vacated. A fellow named Larry Brown was coach of that 1980 UCLA team that lost in the title game to Louisville.

It's a daily mystery where Arthur and Rush will go in the NBA first-round draft and whether Chalmers will learn he's dropped to the second round and will return for his senior season.

Just as big a riddle is why the Chicago Bulls, with the No. 1 pick, are considering Memphis' Derrick Rose ahead of Kansas State's Michael Beasley. Have their scouts been on Mars?


Chris Shaw 11 years, 9 months ago

"Just as big a riddle is why the Chicago Bulls, with the No. 1 pick, are considering Memphis' Derrick Rose ahead of Kansas State's Michael Beasley. Have their scouts been on Mars?"I could not agree more with this statement from Mayer. Everybody in Chicago including Paxson and Reinsdorf are fools. Why on earth would the Bulls take Rose? I don't see it at all. Everyone in the NBA is now caught up in the next "Chris Paul" and "Deron Williams". Just like everyone was once caught up in Drafting the next "Kobe" and up until recently drafted on "Potential". If it wasn't for Bill Self going to the zone and then to that Box and 1, Rose would not have had the stat line he had in the Championship game. Right now in the NBA it's the Flavor of the week and Rose is fortuanate enough to be all the Flavors because of the success of Paul and Williams. I don't see it though.Rose is a great talent, but it does not fix the overall problem that the Bulls have had the last 4 seasons. A BIG MAN IN THE POST! NBA teams have figured out the Bulls and all opposing teams do against the bulls is "Pack it Outside". Yes, I did say "Pack it Outside"! Most people are familiar with "Packing it Down-Low" for a defensive scheme to stop a center or a scoring forward. You do not do that against the Bulls because their whole offense at the moment is drive and kick and they don't have the guards that usually can finish at the basket. That is why teams guard heavy out to the 3 point line against the Bulls because they know the Bulls are weak at finishing it to the rim. That is why the Bulls need to draft Beasley. They've been saying for the last 4 years that all the Bulls need is a Big Man and they can get over the hump. Well, they have a pretty good chance at a decent big man and now they want to draft another Guard? Does not make sense? Kirk Hinrich and company can get the job done, but in order to be successful in the NBA everybody knows you need a Big Man to win Championships!A big man opens up the entire inside for your team and right now opposing teams do not care about the inside against the Bulls. The NBA is so fickle because Chris Paul and Deron Williams are doing exactly what Kirk Hinrich did in his 3rd season. Draft Beasley and be done with it.

Joe Ross 11 years, 9 months ago

I agree with Mayer on the point about there being NO CHANCE to have a title rescinded. The NCAA, which approved Arthur in the first place, would have to strip it from us. That would be the day!Beasley is much better than Rose, and I dont take anything away fom Rose in saying that. Beasley is an "everywhere" player, and can play any position from 2-5. And he's GOOD everywhere at that. The only thing that may make Rose go first are team NEEDS versus overall skill. Even then, I think it's hard to justify passing up Beasley.

yates33333 11 years, 9 months ago

As a Bulls' fan of long standing, I hope they draft Beasley, but he will not fill their need for a center. He will help, but they need an aircraft carrier type center who can block shots.

11 years, 9 months ago

Good article. The point about team needs is an interesting one. Many say, if you have one of the top four of five picks in the NBA draft, you should take the best person available. Following that line of reasoning, the Bulls taking Beasley would be a no-brainer. I think the Bulls however, are more concerned about team needs and public relations in this draft. It will be fun to watch how it plays out.

justanotherfan 11 years, 9 months ago

I think the Bulls almost have to take Beasley in this draft for this reason. There is absolutely no other player in this draft that is even comparable to Beasley. Five years from now, no other forward in this draft class will be discussed on the same level as Beasley in all likelihood. However, it is not outside the realm of possibility that five years from now Jerryd Bayless or OJ Mayo or Eric Gordon is in the same ballpark skillwise as Derrick Rose. All four of those guys has the ability to be a high level point guard. I like Rose and think he's the best of that lot, but the gap between Rose and Bayless/Mayo/Gordon is not as great as the gap between Beasley and every other forward in this draft. I agree that Beasley does not have the back to the basket game that the Bulls covet. Looking at this draft, the only player that does is Kevin Love, and he may not translate to being a dominant inside scorer in the NBA simply because he isn't going to overpower the bigs in that league like he did in college. Simply put, the Bulls can't fulfill their greatest need, so their best option is to take the best overall player, and that is Beasley.On a side note, I think that in basketball, you should always take the best overall player, regardless of position. This isn't football, where you absolutely have to have offense and defense, and specific positions on each side of the ball. In basketball, you can put your best five on the floor together, even if that best five is two point guards, a swingman, and two power forwards, or three guards, a swingman and a true post, or whatever combination of five you can imagine. That is why Darrell should be a top 10 pick, why Rush should be a top 20 pick. They can play basketball and if you are drafting, you should pick the best available player, period.

Roadkill_Rob 11 years, 9 months ago

"Arthur is not about to hang around fending off barbs about his academic status, especially when he goes on the road against the likes of Missouri and Kansas State."Who cares about those schools...we'll beat them w/ or w/out Arthur. That shouldn't factor one bit in his decision....millions of dollars is the only thing that should factor in his decision.

Jaminrawk 11 years, 9 months ago

Honestly, I would take Rose over Beasley too. He has the potential to be the second best point guard in the NBA (besides Chris Paul) in just a few years. He may need to work on his jumper, but he is a big guard who does just about everything better than most. Beasley will probably be very good, but he reminds me of Derrick Coleman or Glenn Robinson too much.

jaybate 11 years, 9 months ago

tis4tim,When Kidd was in highschool, I was a big Kidd fan, but he has never become the player I thought he would be.Jason Kidd is one of the all time great triple double players. He is very gifted at strips. While these are admirable qualities that prompt teams to keep trading for him hoping he will finally find a good fit with the right team, I was rating him as a basketball player and a person.Jason Kidd has pretty much had personal problems where ever he has gone that hasvesurfaced either while he was there, or after he left.But even if he where a model citizen, which he is not, he has never been more than a solid distributing point guard, certainly rarely a dominant guard who took over big games against top teams. For all Kidd's triple doubles, he has never been a guard who could shut down the other teams top back court player and outscore him. He can't handle big guards like Kobe and he can't outscore them. And he rarely decisively outscores, or out dishes one of the top opposing 1 guards either, because he's never developed a reliable three point shot that top 1s have to honor.Now let's look at Kidd's teams and what he did for them.Kidd could not dominate at Cal.Kidd could not dominate at Dallas.Kidd could not dominate at Phoenix.Kidd could not dominate at New Jersey, though he could be an excellent play maker on a stacked team.Presently, Kidd cannot dominate at Dallas.Succinctly, Jason Kidd is a good point guard, who cannot dominate.Jason Kidd is a good point guard, who cannot win rings when he has the better team, as he had in New Jersey twice.Jason Kidd is also the kind of person and player that quickly wears out his welcome and which teams want too trade away to try to improve their chemistry.Jason Kidd is Jo Jo White without the 25 foot J and what he lacks is what keeps him from ever being more than a playmaker.Derrick Rose seems like he could aspire to the Jo Jo White level of the game, if he has the character. But does a guy who goes to play for Memphis and Calipari in the conference he played in have the character of a Jo Jo White.

Jaminrawk 11 years, 9 months ago

Plus, when is the last time you saw point guard reverse pump jam in traffic? When he did that against UCLA, I about fell off of my chair. Beasley isn't a leader. Rose became one in the tournament.

tis4tim 11 years, 9 months ago

The Bulls' possible draft snafu would be the Heat's gain. If Hinrich got shipped to Miami as has been speculated, the Heat could have have a pretty fast and versatile lineup of Hinrich, Wade, Marion, and Beasley, plus somebody like Earl Barron or Mark Blount (?) at center. They also have some young guards in Chris Quinn and Daequan Cook and some great young forwards in Dorrell Wright, Kasib Powell, and Udonis Haslem, who is coming off his best season yet. That could be a fun team to watch. Of course they also have Ricky Davis and White Chocolate. I guess you can't win 'em all.

Jaminrawk 11 years, 9 months ago

Sorry, meant Michigan State, not UCLA.

ralsterKUMed95 11 years, 9 months ago

And speaking about the draft, and also watching the NBA playoffs, is there anyone else out there who is surprised that 6'1" Rajon Rondo is a starter on an NBA team?????????? I remember him as a lackluster player at KY when KU whipped them twice--how does he make it to the NBA? I only raise this to ask the question: Why cant specifically 6'1" Chalmers and 6'1" Robinson make it on an NBA team. All they have ever done is make everyone around them better. Two more case-in-points (no pun intended) are Hinrich and J. Vaughn--begs the question: if they can make the NBA, what do we think about Chalmers and Robinson? Gentlemen, your thoughts?

Joe Ross 11 years, 9 months ago

jaybate...I agree with nearly all of your points except for Beasley's contribution at KSU. The man is legit. He not only got KSU to the tourney (for the first time since when???) but they also WON A GAME! Wow! Without him they wouldn't have broken the quarter-century streak we had going. Look, juggernaut Kansas only got beat three times all season. KState did it. And they did it when we were undeafeated with a head of steam going. Also, their 3rd place finish in the Big XII was their best EVER.I blame Frank Martin for not being able to utilize great talent. He's got Rickbarnesitis. The fact is, KState DID achieve as a team this year past what they have in a long time and the reason is Beasley. (Incidentally, you referenced Bill Walker as a wingman. I had to laugh cause that boy's head is messed up.) For the fact that they didn't achieve more I blame Frank Martin.

jaw7621 11 years, 9 months ago

I seen more than one mock draft that had Seattle taking Beasley. Can you imagine what Beasely and Durant would be to a team after a few years in the league? Scary.As for Mario and Russell in the league, I think they will defintely have good careers. Vaughn isn't even 6'1" and he's been a valuable-minutes bench guy on a championship team for awhile now. Hinrich, on the other hand is actually 6'3", so it's not as good of a comparison. Still, we've seen plenty of times that height is only one factor as a guard in the NBA. The list of 6' guards that have played well over the years is as long as my arm.

ralsterKUMed95 11 years, 9 months ago

Nice analysis, Jaybate. In terms of basketball skills, based only on 1 game, I liked CDR--almost equal to Rush, except maybe for defense. I really like and agree with the comments on Rush. In the KU-Memphis (and UNC F4) games, I saw Rush do ALL the things we all were waiting and hoping he would do: he crossed CDR at the 3pt line drove bye-bye and past him with his left hand, and finished with his 'trademark' running-floater, which he became quite deadly with (as compared to the UCLA loss last year). Rush finally became as ready for the NBA as we could hope--We and his family can now believe he will be in the NBA for a while. Good luck, and thanks for the memories, Mr. Rush! Truly will be a tough combination of size, skills to replace: the prototypical NBA 2guard, make no mistake.

jaybate 11 years, 9 months ago

Lebowski,You are usually right about these sorts of things (i.e., the overall strength of the draft, or overall quality of conferences, etc.), so I will withdraw the assertion that this IS a weak draft. But...Here is why I believe it MAY be a weak draft.I really think there is a tendancy with the one and done's and before them the straight to the pros guys to overrate them.The overrating showed up starkly in the high failure rate of the straight to college players, plus the relative infrequency of those players to become dominant NBA players.I think the same will be true of the one and done-ers. For every LeBron there will be many guys who are competant, but not dominant players. Some will be busts. KUs short guards handled Mayo. just as they handled Rose. I think they would have done the same with all the players you mentioned.I think the current draft may have been overhyped by the media.But time will tell.

jaybate 11 years, 9 months ago

I suspect Rose will be a similar kind of player to Kidd, though less of a rebounder, certainly not as good of a strip artist, but a vastly better trey shooter.It is his shooting and putting the ball on the deck that make NBA GMs and coaches fantasize. But he has never dominated games the way Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, Magic, or Kobe did, so he is not in that class of player...yet.Derrick Rose could not dominate KU's guards and KU had no guards that are likely to be lottery picks, maybe even none that will go in the first round.Derrick Rose will be a solid playmaking point guard in the NBA. He will have a long career just as Jason Kidd has had. Some day people will quote statistics about him. But likely as not he will wind up being a solid playmaking 1, not a guy who dominates games, especially big games, when facing a great opponent.

tis4tim 11 years, 9 months ago

Jaybate,You said: "Rose lacks the right stuff. Rose will have a career like Jason Kidd has had."Jason Kidd has only had what should amount to a Hall of Fame career. In 15 seasons, Kidd has averaged 14+ points, 9+ assists, and nearly 7 rebounds while playing 37+ minutes per game. He is an 8-time All-Star and 3rd on the list of career triple-doubles with 97.

Lance Hobson 11 years, 9 months ago

Chicago loves Hinrich, I doubt they would fall in love with Rose as much even if he is from Chitown. Beasley is the guy they want. The Bulls were looking great until this year, I suspect they'll be good next year with Hinrich running the show and Beasley down low.

jaybate 11 years, 9 months ago

Neither Rose, nor Beasley are quality persons, regardless of their quality talent. If they were, they wouldn't have gone to Memphis and KSU, respectively.Rose and Beasley are like Jason Kidd. All three are great talents who did not take the game seriously enough to want to go and play for great coaches, when they had the chance.Kidd could have played for Roy. Instead he went in the tank for a crooked chump at Cal.Rose could have gone anywhere. Self wanted him baaaaaad. I'm sure Roy, or Coach K, would have taken him. Almost every top coach would have.But he went to spend a year with Calipari. Calipari? I know. He started at KU and still suckles on LB. But Calipari is not the best he could have done, either for Coach, or a school. He just got plenty of minutes and a strong supporting cast. Yes, they went far, but no one can look at DRose and say he got better. He was the same player at the end as he was at the beginning. You don't go to play in Conference Lost in USA, if you want to get better. Face it. Rose got shut down by our small guards in the biggest game of his life. Our guards are not considered even low first rounders. Rose lacks the right stuff.Rose will have a career like Jason Kidd has had.Beasley?He was such a great player he could take a team with a future first rounder like Walker and turn it into a third place team in the B12.The NBA team that takes Beasley is getting a guy with the bona fides to take an NBA team exactly to the middle eschelon of the NBA--smoke or no smoke.Name me an NBA player at the 4 among the Final Four teams in the NBA playoffs who will NOT neutralize, or even beat the living daylights out of Michael Beasley.This is a weak draft.Among the non quality persons in the draft, I would take CD-R before either of them.Among the quality persons, I would take Brandon Rush over either of these guys and CD-R.People just aren't getting it: Brandon Rush is going to BETTER next year than this, because his knee is finally going to be fully recovered.Brandon Rush was almost as good as Rose, Beasley, and CD-R while he was rehabbing his knee for god's sakes.When his knee is 100%, he will almost certainly be the more vital NBA player.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.