Wednesday, September 26, 2012


Forget the strikeouts; Self’s still landing top recruits

Switzerland's Stefan Petkovic, right, and Kansas University's Perry Ellis, battle in Fribourg, Switzerland, Tuesday, Aug. 7, 2012.

Switzerland's Stefan Petkovic, right, and Kansas University's Perry Ellis, battle in Fribourg, Switzerland, Tuesday, Aug. 7, 2012.


Every time a headline informs that Kansas University missed out on a highly rated basketball recruit, many local voices wonder, “Why can’t Bill Self and his staff get anybody anymore?”

It’s human nature to remember losses longer than victories, but a close inspection of the numbers reveals KU’s scoring rate for elite recruits has remained the same for the past quarter-century. That encompasses the reigns of Roy Williams, who spent 15 years on the job, and Bill Self, entering his 10th season heading the region’s dominant basketball program.

No measure perfectly captures a coach’s success in landing top recruits, but getting players who earn one of the 24 annual invitations to participate in the McDonald’s All-American game ranks as the best.

In his 15 recruiting seasons at Kansas, Williams landed 15 McDonald’s All-Americans who played for the Jayhawks: Darin Hancock, Calvin Rayford, Jacque Vaughn, Raef LaFrentz, Paul Pierce, Ryan Robertson, Lester Earl, Kenny Gregory, Eric Chenowith, Jeff Boschee, Nick Collison, Aaron Miles, Wayne Simien, J.R. Giddens and David Padgett (Chris Davis, an honoree in 1992, signed with KU, but failed to qualify).

In nine completed recruiting seasons at Kansas, Self has landed nine McDonald’s All-Americans: Mario Chalmers, Micah Downs, Julian Wright, Darrell Arthur, Sherron Collins, Cole Aldrich, Xavier Henry, Josh Selby and Perry Ellis.

So for both coaches, the ratio works out to exactly one hamburger All-American per season. Why then when Kansas misses on a recruit do the distraught voices seem louder than in the past? Easy. Recruiting is covered more intensely now than ever. Way back when, except in extreme cases, landing a recruit had a much better chance of drawing a headline than missing out on one. Now, both hits and misses make big news.

KU made it all the way to the NCAA title game last April without a McDonald’s All-American on the roster, but tracking the totals does make for an interesting way to gauge how realistic some are in reacting to recruiting news.

“Frustrated,” captures how many might feel about the current KU recruiting season, but if Self stopped right now — which he won’t, of course — chances are high one of his two committed recruits will earn McDonald’s All-American honors. ranks Brannen Greene, a 6-foot-7 forward from Forsyth, at No. 22 in the Class of 2013, and has Conner Frankamp, a 6-foot guard from Wichita, ranked 27th.

Yet, many probably won’t consider this year a success unless Self lands one of the nation’s top two recruits. Julius Randle, a 6-9 forward from Plano, Texas, teamed in high school with KU freshman Zach Peters. Jabari Parker, a 6-8 forward from Chicago Public League powerhouse Simien High, also includes Kansas on his long list.


bennybob 1 year, 6 months ago

Read the title, saw the author and immediately expected complete BS....wasn't surprised.

Theres an old saying "stats don't lie but liars use stats"

Mcd AAs/year isn't nearly as telling of recruiting success as overall class rankings.

By Keegans metric, all Self would have to do is land a one man recruiting class every season from here on out. As long as that one kid was an MCD AA we would have to consider him "recruiting at his historical level"

pure garabge.


AsadZ 1 year, 6 months ago

Konk, Its only Boot Camp but boy you are in mid season form


Konkis Dongington III 1 year, 6 months ago

  1. Shoe companies are pulling strings behind the curtain with recruiting

I'm not going to bother breaking this one down. Believe it or not, I agree with this statement whole-heartedly. We don't need any more proof of that than to look at the Shabazz Muhammed situation. I disagree with bennybob about the weight of the influence, but I agree that it exists. But, as I said the other day, you missed completely the point I was making, so I'll touch on that instead.

a) bennybob brought up Chris Walker as an example of a guy who was in the tank for a particular shoe company

b) benny was upset that although he was in the tank for our brand, he chose a Nike school

c) I pointed out to benny that Walker really liked Self, but he was extremely family driven, plus BD used his direct access to recruit harder than Self had a reasonable chance of doing, suggested that he could ask Walker himself about this on twitter as I had (I really, really wanted Walker to pick us)

d) I referred to Walker's commitment to UF as not being a conspiracy, ie, he didn't try to cover up some influence by Nike in his choice. Instead, he chose against his brand preference because of other considerations

e) You latched on to the notion of conspiracy and assumed I meant criminal conspiracy (not all conspiracies are necessarily criminal) and assumed that it was directed at your post about shoe companies

f) I told you you missed my point

g) You latched onto that instead of rereading my post or asking for clarification because you see it as empty rhetoric. It's not. You actually seem to have missed who I was talking to and about what.

h) I asked you to demonstrate how Nike influenced Chris Walker's decision when his Adidas fandom should have more closely aligned him with KU than UF.

i) You ignored this question

j) benny reacted with shock that I wasn't rude to him

k) I commented that I only mock stupid assertions and whining

l) You latched onto that and proceeded with the one man show

And so, here we are. You feel I don't foster conversation. I've given you plenty to work worth. Show your genius and tear me apart. Enjoy it. Also, feel free to correct anything you feel I mischaracterized. In the future I will continue to call things dumb when I think they are. I will continue to mock people that whine about the job Self is doing when he continues to meet or exceed expectations on the court (by which I mean, continue to handily win conference titles and contend for NCs, probably winning a few more). Long and short, I don't plan to change my behavior for you, but like I said, you appeared to be calling me out, or at very least trying to put a hand up my ass and speak as my voice, so if you want to debate or host a forum, here's something real to work with.

(No fiction. Some malice) >:-(


Konkis Dongington III 1 year, 6 months ago

d) Disagree. This is where your hypothesis really begins to break down for me. Why bring universities into this at all. Sports revenue at the university level mostly goes back into financing sports. If the amount of money being generated were enough to sustain the universities, why would they need the government at all? State universities are starving for more funding right now, so if they became flush with cash on account of TV contracts, that should make them more independant of the government, not less. But that's not the half of it. If these voting blocks are really interested in carrying the banner of the oligarchs, why waste time and money on the universities? Universities don't have a lot of sway at the federal level and seem to have even less with the states. They're beggers, interested in grant money for research and facilities. Why, all of the sudden, is the federal government going to listen to the board of regeants about highways and drilling projects? Can't the voters just make their appeals directly to the government? Your premise doesn't follow what preceeded it. This necessiates that I disagree with e).

f) Disagree. If Romney is interested in mineral exploration to drive down national debt, then he's a fool. Mineral projects tend to take 5 - 10 years to become productive, and the tax revenue generated by such projects would be a drop in the bucket compared to the current debt, let alone the debt ten years from now. Even if the revenue sources were significant, the Ryan plan (cited because Romney remains vague on specifics) calls for lowering corporate taxation, so they'd be reaping less money for their efforts. And if job growth from projects is supposed to supply the tax base, that still doesn't work. The deficit grew when the economy was good and when it was bad. When we did get a surplus that could have been used to pay down some debt, we spent it and more on tax cuts. The solution to the national debt is to increase revenue through tax reform and decrease entitlement benefits, but neither party will actually do that for fear of angering a consituency.

g) Disagree by all of the above.

My conclusion:

The truth table for the outcome of the presidential election and whether or not there's more conference realignment leaves you with exactly a 50% chance of your predictions coming true. In the event that conference realignment matches your prediction, you don't provide us much room to show causality given the wide margin of chance.

Further, even if these machinations had any weight, this plan is unnecessarily convoluted and runs a high rate of failure for little gain. If interests want to shape infrasture and drilling regionally, why not just funnel their money into PACs and lobbists and the great number of other tools that exist to directly ply what they want from the government teet? This is the kind of plot a Bond villian would use. It just doesn't have any grounding in the real world.


Konkis Dongington III 1 year, 6 months ago

a) No contest. With any multibillion dollar enterprise, there are a lot of parties interested in getting their beaks wet.

b) Disagree. So we do know that their are billionaires out their aligned with Obama and Romney. Probably the most famous are Soros on Obama's side and the Koch Bros. on Romney's. Still, I don't see how they're tied to this. Even if they were, it doesn't necessitate your conclusions. There could any number of more direct reasons that any entity might be tied to both conference realignment and politics.

c) Disagree. Although there exists some overlap in conference geography and political geography, the political geography has been in place for a long while and the conference realignment doesn't appear to be occuring on political lines. To begin with, the west coast and north east coast are solidly blue. The south is solidly red. The northern midwest is purple. The southern midwest is solidly red. Now there are places like Colorado that is bluish purple and aligned itself with a solidly blue conference. But Syracus and Pitt, a solid blue and a bluish purple state, moved to the ACC, a less blue conference than the one they came from. It occurs to me that when you're gerrymandering, you're generally trying to increase homogeny, not dilute it. The Mizzou example is even more bizzare in this context. If you reject football money as their motivator, how do you substitue this? Mizzou has more in common with its Midwestern neighbors than with the south in terms of mineral resources and infrastructure needs. It's not valuable as a right of way for an oil pipeline to the Gulf Coast. ATM makes some sense in that regard, but Mizzou? I'm not sold at all.


Konkis Dongington III 1 year, 6 months ago

  1. Conference realignment is being driven by powerful political interests bent on driving favorable government funding into their states


I'm going to go ahead and say that I find this argument particularly galling and ridiculous. Part of your criticism of me is that I bitterly mock my foes and call them names, yet you're unwilling to acknowledge that you do the same thing. You've called more than one poster that disagreed with you naive and took a condescending tone with dissenters in the past and in particular with this argument. And yet, you've taken umbrage at me now and in the past for pointing out when you do the exact same thing. And you go one to claim that when I point this out, I'm deflecting, although that's just deflecting. The gist of your complaint with me seems to be that I stand in judgement of others and that's your schtick. But that's not really what I think is galling and ridiculous about this episode. What I find galling is that this particular hypothesis of yours glosses over Occam's razor and common sense with a lot of handwaving and begging the question. Onward.

Your premises:

a) There are more forces behind conference realignment than football revenues for TV networks and universities

b) The specific forces are an unnamed cartel of oligarchs aligned with either President Obama or Govener Romney

c) The oligarchs want to use sports conferences to form voting blocks

d) The voting blocks will be used to pressure the universities through contributions, tv deals, and soft influence

e) The universtities will be used to pressure the state and federal legislatures to drive the infrastructure and mineral interests of the oligarchs to through their territories

f) Romney, being interested in using revenue from mineral exploration to drive down the national debt, would want more conference realignment

g) Obama would not (I'm not completely clear on why for this one, so feel free to fill in)

Your conclusion:

If Romney is elected, conference realignment will continue apace or accelerate. If Obama is elected, it will decelerate


Konkis Dongington III 1 year, 6 months ago

  1. The KU Pot Scandal could boil over at any moment

Your premises: a) One or more current or past KU men's basketball team members was involved with an alledged drug distribution ring in Kansas

b) The DA who leaked this information is interested in pursuing these ties

c) There is more to this scandal than what is known at this time

d) The only thing holding back this scandal is a media cover up

Your conclusion:

KU could be in the hotseat for another major scandal and it's only a matter of time.

My rebuttal:

a) Agree. We know from the information leaked that KU players were seen in contact with one of the defendants, but it's unclear if any of those KU players are currently on the roster.

b) Disagree. Nothing leaked indicated that KU players were dealing. The information indicates that they KU players were clients. It is highly unusual for drug cases to expand to clients when the dealers have already been made. The fact that the information was leaked might appear to indicate some interest in pursuit, but the information is/was already going to come out in open court if the recordings are/were used as evidence. It might have even been done as a heads up for Self.

c) Contested. Simply put, we have no way of knowing unless something comes out. Given that these cases will or have moved to trial, if there's more too it than what we know, it will inevitably come out. That said, if the DA wanted to make the strongest case possible, they'd move on targets well before any discovery period and certainly wouldn't want to leak information about the case while potential suspects are operating at large. I concede it's possible, but not probable.

d) Disagree. Given that there's little reason to assume that the DA is going after KU, and that there's equally little reason to think the NCAA will do anything (as they allow schools to set their own enforcement policies when it comes to drugs and did nothing about the pot use at Cuse), there doesn't appear to be anything for the media to hold back even if they were inclined to do so. Even if you consider the LJW in the tank for KU (and why not), that doesn't explain why ESPN or media outlets in territories that we compete to recruit wouldn't be all over this.

My conclusion:

I've never known a scandal that wasn't blown wide open unless it didn't have legs to begin with. Reporters live for scandals, even the ones that are supposedly in the tank for certain interests. Even if the LJW went media blackout there's no reason to believe that there's more to this scandal unless new arrests are made. It's been a few months since it broke and it's all but been forgotten at this point. That should tell you all you need to know.


Konkis Dongington III 1 year, 6 months ago

My argument:

a) Ellis wants to play the 3

b) Ellis picked Kansas despite having other opportunities (like an offer from Duke) that might better fulfill a)

c) Ellis didn't transfer when he found out Self plans to use him at the 4 for this season (and quite possibly the forseeable future)

d) Transferring and redshirting could hurt Ellis' draft prospects

e) Playing the 3 doesn't necessarily improve Ellis' draft prospects

My conclusion:

We aren't at risk of Ellis transferring to Duke or anywhere else. If Ellis really felt betrayed by Self, he'd probably have transfered already and if education or guaranteed positioning were important factors in his recruitment he would have accepted the offer from Duke or someone else in the first place. Transferring to Harvard seems an especially strange choice because one of your main draws is to make more money, but the Ivy League is a very weak television market and the conference hasn't put anyone in the draft for something like 20 years now. If Ellis went there, he'd have a greater chance of being overlooked or forgotten. All that said we've had lottery pick 3s that played the 4 for us. So have a lot of other teams. This isn't uncommon, so why is it better financially?


Konkis Dongington III 1 year, 6 months ago

My rebuttal:

a) Agree. Perry has said he will play the 3 in college. It's clearly his aspriation.

b) Disagree. This isn't true or at least isn't supported by your evidence. Self said that he'd like to use Ellis at the wing cause he's like a big guard. That's an aspriational statement, not a deterministic one. "I would like" isn't he same as "I will". Because you have no evidence that Self made a promise there's no reason to invoke c).

d) Agree. I don't know if they would or wouldn't, but the way Duke plays Ryan Kelly at the 4 is essentially like another small forward, so I think that would satisfy a) for Ellis either way.

e) Agree. Ellis was/is a 4.0 student that tutored other kids. He's smart and has great character to boot.

f) Disagree. Perry Ellis was offered by Duke but didn't accept them. If Duke was making the same offer that Self was vis a vis positioning, why would didn't Ellis take the offer from them then? Whatever the reasons, they weren't enough when he made up his mind.

g) No contest. I don't know that Self promised Marcus Morris or Julian Wright that they'd be 3s, but they were drafted for that purpose so I'm not going to argue the point. h) Disagree. If other talented players wanted to play at different positions badly enough to transfer, they could have. The more plausible reasons they didn't are either 1) it didn't matter much to them or at all or 2) even if it did matter, the cost of redshirting was too high for justifying transfer

i) Disagree. There are plenty of players that play the 4 in college that are subsequently drafted as 3s. There are players that are drafted very highly who are tweeners at there position. MKG is a perfect example. He's on the small side for an NBA 3, and too poor a jump shooter for an NBA 2. At UK he sometimes played on the wings and was sometimes the primary ball handler. The ambiguity in how best to use or develop him didn't prevent him from going #2 overall. If anything, demonstrating a lot of flexibility and a winning quality helped him jump TRob and Beal.

j) Agree.

k) Contest. I don't know the answer to this directly, but it seems awfully costly to take yourself out of the limelight for a year if getting the highest draft pick possible is your motivation. How many lotto picks in the past decade have been transfers, let alone transfers that did so in order to play a specific position? Do they represent a proportionally equal number of lotto picks (that is, are they lotto picks at the same rate as players that don't transfer)? Are they consistenly higher? I don't know the answers to those questions, but it is necessary to answer them in order to assert that transferring would be worth it to begin with.


Konkis Dongington III 1 year, 6 months ago

Well Jaybate, I was originally going to just shrug my shoulders and let this go, but since you are clearly trying to call me out, I feel I'd be leaving you dissatisfied if you didn't get your showdown moment. Here goes:

You're apparently upset because I'm dismissive of your hypotheses about seemingly everything and don't entertain your notions seriously. In your one man show about our relationship, you indicate that you believe that I don't understand the distinction between a priori hypothesizing and asserting beliefs, which is to say, that I don't get that you're merely raising possibilities versus making opinions. The flaw in that reasoning is that your hypothesizing invokes premises that can either be refuted by empirical evidence or at very least don't necessarily support your conclusions (not to mention eschew common sense at times), and you've demonstrated an unwillingness to support them with evidence. Instead, you'd rather get hung up on my rhetorical style than address my substance or simply restate your assumptions as being valid for no other reason than your say so. So in order to better break this down for you, here's a recap of the arguments you've made that I've engaged you on:

  1. Perry Ellis might transfer to Duke or Harvard in order to play the 3 (small forward)

Your premises:

a) Perry Ellis wants to play the 3

b) Self promised Perry that he could play the 3

c) Self reneged on that promise

d) Duke would play Ellis at the 3

e) Ellis is an exceptionally bright kid

f) Ellis is interested in a better education than he could get at KU

g) Other guys (specifically Marcus Morris and Julian Wright) Self promised to play the 3 but got stuck at the 4 didn't transfer

h) The reason the other bigs didn't transfer is because they weren't as smart as Ellis

i) Ellis would be a much, much higher lottery pick if he played the 3 in college

j) Higher lottery picks get more money

k) Redshirting wouldn't hurt Ellis' draft pick, or at least not enough that he wouldn't come out ahead versus positioning

Your conclusion:

We're at risk of Ellis transferring to Duke or Harvard so that he can play the small forward because he could get a better education and make more money in the NBA.


Konkis Dongington III 1 year, 6 months ago

For those that care, here's what Roddy Peters' coach had to say about his visit to Rutgers:

“He had a great visit,” DC Assault coach Damon Handon told “He really enjoyed hanging with Jerome [Seagears] and Wally [Judge]. He was impressed with the talent Rutgers has.”

Sounds appropriately underwhelmed. I still consider Peters a long shot because he'd be facing the choice of starting at Georgetown or Maryland (provided they don't get the Twins), and probably coming off the bench at Kansas, at least to begin the season. I don't know if Self is very serious about Peters or if the offer was just to test the waters, but he has no other visits scheduled, so there is a brief window of opportunity if Self wants him.


mikehawk 1 year, 6 months ago

I wonder what the blogs at Butler University look and sound like around recruiting?


HawkKlaw 1 year, 6 months ago

Thanks for this article, Keegan. It needed to be written.

We get a guy like Perrry Ellis and the board rats here say Self is in a recruiting slump? I don't think so! That kid is going to be a monster at KU. I don't know where he's ranked, but I couldn't care less. He's going to be a beast.

And Frankamp + Greene next season? Seriously. How can the board rats here say Self's in a recruiting slump when he lands recruits that good? It doesn't make any sense to me.

I personally think it's a lot of opinionated, entitled KU fan boys thinking that if Self doesn't land "their guy," he's not doing his job. Here's the thing: Self wins far too often to be criticized for this subjective b.s. There are a myriad of reasons that kids choose to play at other schools. Nobody lands 100% of the recruits that they target. That's just how it goes.Getting to play for Coach Self is one of the big positives of coming to KU. I've been saying it for a while, but here it is again: When you have a coach like Bill Self, who has proven every which way that he can win big and win often, you don't worry about the guys who went to UK or UNC or decided to stay home and play for NC State. You just move on and continue to rock chalk.

And even if the recruiting slump theory were true, which it absolutely isn't, does it even matter if your coach has proven that he can take a team with no McDAAs all the way to the championship game?

So here's my bold prediction for those of you that missed it the first few dozen times: KU is going to win a lot of games this year. And next year. And the year after that. So on and so forth.

Keep your head up and rock chalk, my friends.


Tony Bandle 1 year, 6 months ago

*When it comes to competing with Kentucky in recruiting, KANSAS would have to change it's name to KAN$A$ thanks!!!!

*Last time I checked, our recruiting class for 2013 was only #3...oh the horror!!!

*Damn, it looks like HCBS will average only 30 victories a year for ten years....damn that guy, can't recruit worth a S##T!!!


Jay Dogger 1 year, 6 months ago

We keep talking about ball handlers for next year but who are the ball handlers for this year?

Obviously EJ and Tharpe off the bench, but who are the next best? Will those two play together much? Ben doesn't sound like a ball handler. Releford was okay last year but it was mostly TT and EJ. Does White have handles?

Self may have to mold this team with fewer options to bring the ball up the court. And EJ may have a tougher job than most KU PGs. Hopefully the wings will learn how to bail him out when necessary.

I'm curious about what others think. I remember when this was a brief topic over the summer before the Euro trip.


ParisHawk 1 year, 6 months ago

I don't think Coach Self is satisfied with his recruiting.

Since the Championship year, he has wanted to "hit home runs in recruiting", to use his own phrase. The only "home runs", Xavier and Josh, did not work out quite as well as hoped.

Glass half full, glass half empty, ... We all want a full glass, especially Coach Self.

(By the way, could we stop with this "if only" business about last year's Final? With the same number of "ifs" the other way, we could have been blown out.)


Joe Ross 1 year, 6 months ago

Forget the strikeouts???

Factor out Xavier Henry, Perry Ellis, and Connor Frankamp (because all of these are Kansas products or, in the case of Henry, a product of a Kansas alum), and what you are left with in recent years is decent recruiting at a school who has the tradition and legacy to do much better. Those kids were all easy plucks and we just lost a home-grown Kansas product not more than an hour's radius from Lawrence!

Don't get me wrong. I'm pro-Self all the way! But Im not gonna pretend solely for the sake of behaving sycophantishly that our recruiting can't be shored up. Keegs...need a rewrite.


BC5 1 year, 6 months ago

I love our class for next year. We have two incredible players coming in and they would be the center piece of any program. We have a lot of young talent. And recruiting is far from over.


KGphoto 1 year, 6 months ago

"Why then when Kansas misses on a recruit do the distraught voices seem louder than in the past? Easy. "

Because we have a louder voice now. More forums, more posters. Twitter alone would be reason enough. Used to be we read the paper, had our coffee and went to work to mumble our concerns around the water cooler. Now we voice it 24/7 in a world-wide echo chamber! We banter real-time with guys in Hawaii, Europe, Bankok (and now Cairo too). More voices equals more volume. And when it comes to recruiting basketball players at KU, ours goes to eleven.


William Blake 1 year, 6 months ago

We've got 27 strikeouts to use per game. As long as we knock a few over the fence...

How can we talk baseball without mentioning chewing tobacco?

~ ~ ~ S P L A T ! ~ ~ ~

Meanwhile, back at the boot camp ranch:

"Run the stairs 5 more times then show me 100 pushups!"

~ ~ ~ S P L A T ! ~ ~ ~


jgkojak 1 year, 6 months ago

It seems to me many of the recruits we don't land go somewhere else because 1) They are guaranteed playing time - Bill Self makes you earn it 2) They are guaranteed a one and done free ride for a year - KU, unlike, say, Carolina, makes its players go to real classes 3) They think they're hot stuff and don't want anyone riding their ass to get better

I don't want players like the above.


wildjayhawk 1 year, 6 months ago

Jaybate is a stupid idiot that can't write an intelligent article.


Robin Smith 1 year, 6 months ago

"Bill Self don't know numbers - he knows talent." nuleafjhawk



Robin Smith 1 year, 6 months ago

Jaybate, you should find someone to do my work for me so I can take the time to read all you've written :P


jaybate 1 year, 6 months ago

"the jaybate interview with serial offline:"

jaybate: Welcome. Spell the word "a" for the board rats.

serialoffline: (silence)

jaybate: That concludes the interview with serial offline.

(Note: all fiction. No malice. Its iBoot Camp week.)


offline 1 year, 6 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.


jaybate 1 year, 6 months ago

Part 3

k: Everytime I say anything you take issue with.

j: (moderator shuffles papers) Ah here we are. You, kDong, were saying I make wild assumptions about realignment drivers and, if I recall, said a alias named bennybob was wrongly assuming conspiracies. Is that correct?

k: Its is factually accurate, but I...

j: ...completely misunderstood what you meant?

k: yes.

j: An assumption in a discourse is, unless otherwise qualified, something considered true by the assumer?

H: I don't understand what you're saying, but you have to be wrong. NEXT!

j: I try not to make assumptions that are not likely true. I try expressly to assert hypotheses, when I don't know what the truth is yet, but am searching for and formulating a possible explanation. This is quite distinct from an assumption. Do you understand this conceptual difference?

H: No. NEXT!

k: I do.

j: Then why do you argue from invalid assumptions, rather than from explicit hypotheses? Is it because that eliminates the need to think further about the facts, about how they fit with your assertions, or do not?

k: Yes.

j: Now, we are getting some where and I know the audience is very, very grateful to the panel members.

k: But what about bennybob reducing recruiting of Chris Walker to conspiracy?

j: I'm so glad you brought that up. Conspiracy refers to two or more persons cooperating secretly to commit a crime, correct?

k: I guess so.

j: Is the ShoeCo-Summer Game-Agency Complex a secret?

k: You completely misunderstand me.

j: But you didn't say anything.

k: You completely misunderstand what I don't say, too!


j: My point here is that if the Complex is not a secret, there is no reason to infer that its influence must be a conspiracy to commit a crime. Right?

k: You completely misunderstand.

j: Do I?

k: Do you what?

j: Misunderstand.

k: You just completely misunderstood how I used the word misunderstand.

j: I believe that this might be a good time for the Colloquium to take a break for coffee and doughnuts out in the lobby.

(Note: All fiction and no malice, regarding all three parts of this post. Its Boot Camp week.) :-)


jaybate 1 year, 6 months ago

Part 2

j: I would also like to add that as I age, I become increasingly guilty of suffering fools like you. For this I am extremely sorry to the audience and to the board members at, but as one ages, some of the gism goes out of ones work outs in the logonasium, and, well, one some times has to listen to the counsel of other wiser, better adjusted aliases on the board and zip it more often than in the old days.

H: I don't understand what you just said, but I don't like it one bit.

k: And you took too long to say it.

j: Hmmm. I'll try to get better.

k: No, you completely misunderstand what I said.

j: Okay, what did you just say?

k: I said you completely misunderstnad what I said.

j: Errm, uh, I meant before that.

k: You took too long to say it?

j: Yes. How should I have said instead?

k: You should have said, "I completely misunderstood what he said." And mean it.

j: Okay.


j: (moderator shuffles papers some more) Ah, here we go. This question is for either of you. What is the function of using undocumented assumptions, often apparently unlikely assumptions in argument?

k: You mean like you do, when you make these wild assumptions about things other than football revenues being drivers of realignment, and about "conspiracies" about recruiting?

j: No, that has to do with me. And I was asking about you. That is apparently a learned behavior of yours in argument. By this I mean you have probably learned, and been rewarded for, deflecting discussion from the Grand Canyon sized holes in your reasoning, and going on the offensive with assertions of other's stupidity and, uh, for mocking them.

k: You mean like you do?

j: There, you just did it again.

k: You completely misunderstand me.

H: Persons that sit closer to their computers are more accurate than those that sit farther from their computers. Everyone knows this. NEXT!

j: That would be an example of one of your ungrounded assumptions. Of a kind of a priori logic on your part.

H: You're so arrogant. NEXT!!!!

k: And you completely misunderstood what I said, too.

j: When?


jaybate 1 year, 6 months ago

jaybate News Service (ins):

Dateline: Invalid Assumption Institute at A Priori State College

Slug: Invalid, Sometimes Even A Priori Assumption Colloquium moderated by jaybate

jaybate: I want to thank the Invalid Sometimes Even A Priori Assumption Institute here at A Priori State College for asking me to moderate this colloquium. Panel members are aliases kDong and HawkKlaw. They have been invited to explain the effective use of invalid, sometimes even a priori assumptions in deductive reasoning in posts. Welcome, aliases.

kDong: You completely misunderstood every word I have ever written. I just want to make that clear at the start.

j: Thanks. That will no doubt help our audience.

HawkKlaw: And you have misunderstood everything I have ever posted here, too.

j: Well, now our audience should be fully clued in on this issue, so shall we proceed?

k: Not so fast. If you can avoid making stupid assertions and whining, I have no reason to mock you.

j: Well, I will try, but you know now you are, kDong. Whenever you disagree with someone, you say they misunderstand you, rather than accept their assertions, when they are accurate, or logically refute them when they are wrong. And...

k: But, completely misunderstand me again.

j: Be that as it may, kDong, isn't it also true that you impede discussion by pretending to be not only the judge of who decides which assertions are stupid, and without valid assumptions and sound logical I might add, most of the time, but also, self-tasked with administering the self-defined punishment of mockery. Isn't that true, kDong?

k: No, you completely misunderstand me and when you make these sorts of stupid assertions then I have to mock you for them.

j: I see. (moderator makes a few notes, shuffles papers and resumes) Then your approach to using invalid a priori assumptions in iDiscourse is to buffer and defend them with empty rhetorical devices like "you completely misunderstand me" and "If you can avoid making stupid assertions and whining, I have no reason to mock you"?

k: Exactly.

j: And so that preserves your own illusions that comfort you?

k: Yes.

j: Okay, now, I don't know about the audience, but I found that extremely informative and candid on your part.

H: You don't know anything, jaybate, and you are arrogant and say NEXT all the time. Well I can say NEXT too! NEXT!


Bob Forer 1 year, 6 months ago

Starting with Larry Brown's tenure thirty years ago, KU has enjoyed being coached by some of the best, if not the best, college coaches in the business. Coach Brown didn't like to recruit, but both Williams and Self have proven themselves as top recruiters. With KU's storied tradition against the backdrop of Allen Fieldhouse--the best college arena in the nation--KU will continue to remain at the top of the college basketball heap for years to come.

What I find especially amazing is that during this 30 year period, other comparable schools such as Duke, Kentucky, and North Carolina, have suffered down seasons. Not KU. The worst year for loses was 11. Of course, that was 1988 when Danny lead us to the National Championship.

KU doesn't rebuild. They reload.

We be fine.


REHawk 1 year, 6 months ago

Quality recruits coming to 2012 Late Night. What has happened to the 7' recruit out of Florida, the foreign kid who is just learning the game? I was away from these boards for a few days. Did another school sign that lad?


Bob Forer 1 year, 6 months ago

I don't think Lester Earl or Darin Hancock qualify as bona fide McDonald All-American "recruits." Earl transferred from LSU. Hancock was a juco transfer.


DCSven 1 year, 6 months ago

I appreciate the recruiting micro-nuance (the kid has an extra 4" vertical leap when he laces every other eyelet on his left shoe) from those who follow more closely than I, but seriously, two of the most highly touted, Selby and X-Henry, both bolted early and their careers would have benefited by staying and learning more from HCBS. If getting the higher rated players means we get their (or their family's) higher rated egos, I say give them the phone number to Calapari's car dealer and let Self be Self. He knows what works and more importantly how to work the talent he recruits. If some recruits can't see the value of working with HCBS has for their long-term potential that's about them, not KU. It's got to be a good fit both ways, and what we know is those who come win, graduate (if they choose), and succeed. Most importantly, their families become part of our family and that has never been more true than under the tremendous leadership HCBS has shown during many challenges over these past few years. No need for frustration here.


Larry Bauerle 1 year, 6 months ago

The only reason anyone knows now about the "misses" is because news agencies now follow every move these kids make from the time they are 13 years old. There have always been players going to other schools, and now with more parity in basketball, there are more. Looking at recent results, I'd say Coach Self is doing just fine.


BrodyR 1 year, 6 months ago

Actually I'm pretty sure Roy’s burger boys count should be 16. He was successful in landing 1991 Mc D's All-American Ben Jerome Davis (even though he transferred after a yr he was still recruited to our beloved Jayhawks by Roy).


Andy Tweedy 1 year, 6 months ago

Wasn't BEN Davis a McD All-American? I mean if we're listing Chris Davis, who never played for KU, wouldn't we list a guy who actually did play for us? That completely invalidates the article, proving that Roy Williams was vastly superior in every way to Bill Self! Before I get any kind of hell for writing that, I'm just kidding about the last point...


jaybate 1 year, 6 months ago

"2012 Finals: would KU have beaten UK, if:

a) Elijah had not needed knee surgery, hit 40-45% of his treys, taken 5 more trey attempts, and held his man to 5 fewer points;

b) Travis had been healthy, scored 5 more points and held Kidd-Gilchrist to 5 fewer?

Answer: yes. plus Elijah healthy would have stretched the D, which would have let TRob foul up UK's bigs one on one, so the game could then easily have turned into a route of UK.

I make this case now to show that Cal's and WWW's system only "worked" against a team without depth with two starters playing so injured as to be at 50-75% efficiency.

Self's experienced teams will beat Cal's inexperienced ones a majority of the time, even when the ShoeCo-Summer Game-Agency Complex loads Cal with 5-6 OADs.

Rock Chalk!


Ted Hume 1 year, 6 months ago

The only caveat I see with the list of nine McD's for Self is that 4 of them were on the title team- no surprise, of course, but it does have a way of = ultimate success in the game.

I do agree though, that recruiting hits and misses fluctuate without rhyme or reason like virtual particles in a vacuum


Bob Thompson 1 year, 6 months ago

Think about this. If you were wanting to get on a team, wouldn't you say that you wanted to play for the best team in the US (Kansas). Even if you didn't want to play at Kansas. That way, the lower level team would sign up up fast before Kansas got you. We may appear to be loosing some good players, but who's to say that they really wanted to come to KU in the first place.


newmedia 1 year, 6 months ago

The Jayhawks will do just fine as usual. Very thankful for the work everyone from the coaches to the team managers do to put a great team on the floor each season. Prefer not to have a team of "one and done's" each year regardless of what the people in Kentucky think...

Rock Chalk


cabmando 1 year, 6 months ago

Did everyone think Selby was THE TOP rated player in the country the year he arrived? We all did because of the hype of recruiting services. Hindsite says no, so does it really matter what number is attached to each player by a so called expert? I'll leave the evaluating to the head coach.


Ron Franklin 1 year, 6 months ago

I about lost my nuts and bolts when Roy left for UNC.

Since then, Self has proven he can get it done with whatever talent he does or doesn't have on the bench. If we ever have a run of sub 25-win seasons, that is when I'll start to be concerned.

Until then--I continue to enjoy all of the recruiting insight (especially what is brought here by the bloggers)--but I refuse to get my panties all bunched up over missing out on a kid here and there.


RCJGKU_Seve 1 year, 6 months ago

First time log.....HCBS apparently knows what he is doing. I want nothing to do with OAD's. He's been successful with Top 50 players and recruits for chemistry....he does have a recruiting plan trust me! FYI, Connor from lil ole Wichita where Perry came thee second coming of Pistol Pete. He is a better passer than a shooter and ya'll will love his pure he can get his own shot or deliver a pass off his dribble. Would love a couple more inches on him but then again thats some of his can he do what he does being that small?!?!?! He has proven it internationally and will also do so in da Phog! He will deliver without having to shoot and he has range like the legendary Pete....he will be a fine Jayhawk....mark my word!


nuleafjhawk 1 year, 6 months ago

Every time a headline informs that Kansas University missed out on a highly rated basketball recruit, many local voices wonder, “Why can’t Bill Self and his staff get anybody anymore?”

One of the things that baffles me more than anything else ( and LOTS of stuff baffles me! ) is the fact that people put so much faith in the ranking numbers.

You would think after a National Championship, a NC appearance last year, 8 straight - yes, EIGHT straight conference championships, that at least we ( Jayhawk Nation ) would start to get it.

The numbers mean SQUAT. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

We've had #1's and #2's that barely contributed (some would say not at all) and we've had very low (or unranked) players tear up the league.

The ONLY number that matters to me is how many W's we get.

Bill Self don't know numbers - he knows talent.


Commenting has been disabled for this item.