22-23 Non-con Schedule

[twocoach]

For the record, I've never once bitched about "not being able to develop new/young guys"

I don't mean you specifically as I don't have any sort of weird list or ability to recall who bitches about what for the most part. I just see the value to these games and what it provides. Others may simply have a preference to watch KU play every game against as tough and entertaining an opponent as possible, damn the consequences. To each their own.

[Cascadia]

Well, we disagree here. I don't think these games provide any value other than the first 2 or 3. i.e. I'm fine with 2-3 home cupcakes in the first 5 games. After that, they're useless. Nothing more than free wins to pad the stats.

[CrimsonNBlue]

After that, they're useless. Nothing more than ticket revenue to help pay for football, et al.

FYP.


My main gripe isn't that they are useless per se to develop bench players (or any other reason), it's that Self so rarely uses them effectively to do so. So many examples of being up 25+ and starters don't come out until after last media timeout and/or playing 32+ minutes--year in, year out.

[Cascadia]

After that, they're useless. Nothing more than ticket revenue to help pay for football, et al.

FYP.


My main gripe isn't that they are useless per se to develop bench players (or any other reason), it's that Self so rarely uses them effectively to do so. So many examples of being up 25+ and starters don't come out until after last media timeout and/or playing 32+ minutes--year in, year out.

Haha, fair fix.


Also agree with your assessment. Self very rarely gives the guys 8-11 any real run during these games.

[ousdahl]

I guess that begs the question of how much development depends on in-game playing time specifically

[CrimsonNBlue]

I guess that begs the question of how much development depends on in-game playing time specifically

Sure, but there really isn't an objective answer.

I think in-game can answer some questions and you can learn some things about players. I have come across players in AAU, HS, small college ball that are great in practice and the nerves get to them in games, and then guys that dog it in practice but are assassins on the court. I don't see why it would be so much different at the D-1 level.

[NDballer13]

After that, they're useless. Nothing more than ticket revenue to help pay for football, et al.

FYP.


My main gripe isn't that they are useless per se to develop bench players (or any other reason), it's that Self so rarely uses them effectively to do so. So many examples of being up 25+ and starters don't come out until after last media timeout and/or playing 32+ minutes--year in, year out.

My main arguement for that would be that Self and staff are using those extra 4-6 minutes as an extension of practice for the starters. It's nice to try a few things against a different team, playing a different style, compared to running something over and over again in practice against the same guys. Especially when the defense is clued in as to what the end goal is.

[Deleted User 863]

We've also has NPOY candidates in a handful of years recently. Only playing them 20min in easy games hurts their stats. Not sure how much that comes into play, but I imagine it's considered.

[CrimsonNBlue]

After that, they're useless. Nothing more than ticket revenue to help pay for football, et al.

FYP.


My main gripe isn't that they are useless per se to develop bench players (or any other reason), it's that Self so rarely uses them effectively to do so. So many examples of being up 25+ and starters don't come out until after last media timeout and/or playing 32+ minutes--year in, year out.

My main arguement for that would be that Self and staff are using those extra 4-6 minutes as an extension of practice for the starters. It's nice to try a few things against a different team, playing a different style, compared to running something over and over again in practice against the same guys. Especially when the defense is clued in as to what the end goal is.

Sure, that's a part of it. Although, we don't put in a bunch of stuff until December when non-con is pretty much done.

There's also the times he gets pissy and throws the starters back in after it looks like their night is over. That's just his m.o., teaching intensity, more than developing bench. I think it has helped him a bunch and also hurt him at times.

[NDballer13]

FYP.


My main gripe isn't that they are useless per se to develop bench players (or any other reason), it's that Self so rarely uses them effectively to do so. So many examples of being up 25+ and starters don't come out until after last media timeout and/or playing 32+ minutes--year in, year out.

My main arguement for that would be that Self and staff are using those extra 4-6 minutes as an extension of practice for the starters. It's nice to try a few things against a different team, playing a different style, compared to running something over and over again in practice against the same guys. Especially when the defense is clued in as to what the end goal is.

Sure, that's a part of it. Although, we don't put in a bunch of stuff until December when non-con is pretty much done.

There's also the times he gets pissy and throws the starters back in after it looks like their night is over. That's just his m.o., teaching intensity, more than developing bench. I think it has helped him a bunch and also hurt him at times.

Could that also be a reason a lot of stuff isn't put in until non-con is pretty much done? He's using those games to get an idea of what sets work against what and who to use? Then once semester break hits they can really get into the meat of it.

[twocoach]

I suppose Self could pull a few more starters a few minutes earlier but honestly, I like bench guys getting some run with a few starters. You'll rarely have a scenario in the tourney where you need the entire bench in together.

Bench players who played more than 3 minutes in what I'd consider "buy" games last year:

Tarleton State:
Pettiford - 17 minutes
JCL - 12 minutes
Lightfoot - 9 minutes
Yesefu - 8 minutes
Adams - 7 minutes

Stony Brook:
Pettiford - 20 minutes
Yesefu - 16 minutes
JCL - 15 minutes
Clemence - 12 minutes
Lightfoot - 11 minutes
Adams - 6 minutes

North Texas:
Wilson came off the bench (Remy started) and played 18 minutes
Lightfoot - 14 minutes
Pettiford - 11 minutes
Clemence - 10 minutes
Yesefu - 8 minutes
Adams - 4 minutes

Iona (not a scrub team and the game was decently close):
Lightfoot - 15 minutes
Wilson came off the bench (Remy started) and played 12 minutes
Yesefu - 12 minutes
Pettiford - 11 minutes
Adams - 9 minutes

UTEP:
Wilson came off the bench (Remy started) and played 21 minutes
Lightfoot - 13 minutes
Yesefu - 10 minutes
JCL - 10 minutes
Clemence - 7 minutes
Adams - 6 minutes

Mizzou (thrown in because it amuses me to consider the Mizzou match a "scrub game"):
Wilson came off the bench (Remy started) and played 18 minutes
Lightfoot - 12 minutes
Yesefu - 8 minutes
Clemence - 7 minutes
Adams - 6 minutes

[twocoach]

After that, they're useless. Nothing more than ticket revenue to help pay for football, et al.

FYP.


My main gripe isn't that they are useless per se to develop bench players (or any other reason), it's that Self so rarely uses them effectively to do so. So many examples of being up 25+ and starters don't come out until after last media timeout and/or playing 32+ minutes--year in, year out.

My main arguement for that would be that Self and staff are using those extra 4-6 minutes as an extension of practice for the starters. It's nice to try a few things against a different team, playing a different style, compared to running something over and over again in practice against the same guys. Especially when the defense is clued in as to what the end goal is.

And my main argument for it is that the best way to have bench guys be ready for a tourney situation is to give each one of them some run here and there with the starters. You cannot bring the entire bench in together and sit all the starters as they will never have reps that matter with that lineup so what's the point in practicing it?

McCormack's minutes in the scrub games I mentioned prior were:
23 vs. Tarleton
15 vs Stony Brook
13 vs North Texas
14 vs. Iona
17 vs UTEP
21 vs. Mizzou

He was clearly giving guys like Mitch, Adams and Clemence some run with the starters.

[twocoach]

My main arguement for that would be that Self and staff are using those extra 4-6 minutes as an extension of practice for the starters. It's nice to try a few things against a different team, playing a different style, compared to running something over and over again in practice against the same guys. Especially when the defense is clued in as to what the end goal is.

Sure, that's a part of it. Although, we don't put in a bunch of stuff until December when non-con is pretty much done.

There's also the times he gets pissy and throws the starters back in after it looks like their night is over. That's just his m.o., teaching intensity, more than developing bench. I think it has helped him a bunch and also hurt him at times.

Could that also be a reason a lot of stuff isn't put in until non-con is pretty much done? He's using those games to get an idea of what sets work against what and who to use? Then once semester break hits they can really get into the meat of it.

I think it's a little of that but more about time. They get unlimited amounts of practice during semester break after finals in early December so lots of additional stuff gets polished well enough to put it in at that time.

[CrimsonNBlue]

FYP.


My main gripe isn't that they are useless per se to develop bench players (or any other reason), it's that Self so rarely uses them effectively to do so. So many examples of being up 25+ and starters don't come out until after last media timeout and/or playing 32+ minutes--year in, year out.

My main arguement for that would be that Self and staff are using those extra 4-6 minutes as an extension of practice for the starters. It's nice to try a few things against a different team, playing a different style, compared to running something over and over again in practice against the same guys. Especially when the defense is clued in as to what the end goal is.

And my main argument for it is that the best way to have bench guys be ready for a tourney situation is to give each one of them some run here and there with the starters. You cannot bring the entire bench in together and sit all the starters as they will never have reps that matter with that lineup so what's the point in practicing it?

McCormack's minutes in the scrub games I mentioned prior were:
23 vs. Tarleton
15 vs Stony Brook
13 vs North Texas
14 vs. Iona
17 vs UTEP
21 vs. Mizzou

He was clearly giving guys like Mitch, Adams and Clemence some run with the starters.

Dave was also very much Bad/Non-con Dave early on last season.


I agree with your assessment, though. I'd like 9-10 guys to play by halftime in these buy games.

[pdub]

I'll also say there is something in team building in having a few blowout looses early.
You don't want to pile up games against top 50 Kenpom opponents as you could litter your non con with L's.
If you're a proven squad with a ton returning, if you can, you lean towards that but not fully, and then the opposite when you don't have much starting minutes coming back.

I'm all for games against NDSU's, teams that are favorites to win their conference.

We have Duke.
We have the Battle 4 Atlantis which could include a combo of Dayton, USC, Wisconsin and Tennessee.
We have Indiana.
Seton Hall.

Plenty of Quad 1, Quad 2 games there.

[NDballer13]

FYP.


My main gripe isn't that they are useless per se to develop bench players (or any other reason), it's that Self so rarely uses them effectively to do so. So many examples of being up 25+ and starters don't come out until after last media timeout and/or playing 32+ minutes--year in, year out.

My main arguement for that would be that Self and staff are using those extra 4-6 minutes as an extension of practice for the starters. It's nice to try a few things against a different team, playing a different style, compared to running something over and over again in practice against the same guys. Especially when the defense is clued in as to what the end goal is.

And my main argument for it is that the best way to have bench guys be ready for a tourney situation is to give each one of them some run here and there with the starters. You cannot bring the entire bench in together and sit all the starters as they will never have reps that matter with that lineup so what's the point in practicing it?

McCormack's minutes in the scrub games I mentioned prior were:
23 vs. Tarleton
15 vs Stony Brook
13 vs North Texas
14 vs. Iona
17 vs UTEP
21 vs. Mizzou

He was clearly giving guys like Mitch, Adams and Clemence some run with the starters.

We're kind of saying the same thing, I think, in regards to the buy games. I worded it more like he's figuring out what sets and plays work, but you could also say the same for finding rotations and combinations. I'm with you that it doesn't do guys like Adams and Clemence much good to get more time on the court if all those minutes are with other guys fighting for minutes and/or out of the rotation.

You could see it in the conference season last year. How many times did KU come out hot, build a nice lead within the first 10 or so minutes, only to come back from a timeout and see 3 or 4 new players in the game? Disrupting the whole rhythm and all of a sudden that 20-9 lead is down to 24-19 in 3 minutes and it's time for Ochai and CB to check back in.

I've never been a fan of subbing out more than 2 guys at a time anyway. You can keep some for of continuity going if the majority of your lineup stays the same. Those are the types of situations and combinations you can work on in a December blow out.

[UnholyLivingDead]

[Cascadia]

[CrimsonNBlue]

We’re getting worked up over an Ivy Leaguer buy-game?

[Cascadia]

lol, whose getting worked up? Just think these games are