Vick out, Lightfoot in

Just saw a news headline flash across my iPad that said “Coach Self says Lightfoot to replace Vick in the starting lineup for the long-term.”

I actually spent about 3 hours yesterday dissecting Vicks possession by possession play in the Oklahoma game. I captured some video and spliced it all together. I have not had time since to upload. It is remarkable how consistently he was out of position, lacking hustle and weak he was. I have one clip where he literally gets completely shoved out of position under the basket by Cameron McGusty on OU’s offensive glass. Vick clearly needs to add some lower body bulk. But that is secondary. There were several clips where he simply abandoned his position in a critical moment or was more of an observer than a participant. No passion or hustle. I am not trying to bash him. Like HawkErrant, I desperately want him to do well. But equally I desperately want him to not hurt this team. I believe it was hairyhawk who came a little bit to his defense saying we don’t know the whole story. I agree sort of. I am not trying to bash his integrity or want-to I am simply assessing his performance and it is lacking hustle and he is making very poor decisions about positioning and he is getting his but kicked physically. There may be 10,000 legitimate reasons why but the results are still the same. He is hurting the team. I guarantee you there are some extremely legitimate reasons why I would hurt the team if i suited up, mainly I am old, slow and lack talent. I would have as much “want-to” as anyone I would simply lack the “can-do”. So Vick may possess all the “want-to” in the world but right now he is lacking the “can-do”.

A month ago, I might have suggested that HCBS get drug tested for such a decision. Today, I'd be curious what's in Vick's system.

We're adding size and hustle with this move. We're giving up potential athleticism and potential quickness....none of which has mattered much.

I'd like to hear more commentary on this, but the pressing question becomes, "If Lightfoot is starting, who comes in off the bench when Dok needs to sit?"

Obviously Vick could come in to his old spot and Lightfoot could move over. I'm secretly wondering (hoping actually) that maybe...just maybe...DeSousa is getting to the point where he's interchangeable with Lightfoot in the post. Dok is clearly the primary option at the 5, but it would be very nice if DeSousa was coming up to where Lightfoot is at the 5, which 1.) allows Lightfoot to play a more natural position at the 4, and 2.) allows for us to play some high-low with both Ligthfoot and Dok in at the same time.

Timing is also interesting as we have (on paper anyway) one of our "easier" games coming up with TCU coming to AFH with one of their top players out with an injury. As good a time as any to try something new.

Hoping Vick pulls his head out of wherever it is and gets back on track.

HCBS quote from the Star, "Mitch certainly deserves the opportunity to play. He, Svi (Mykhailiuk) and Devonté Graham try harder than anybody else."

As a KU grad, I can count to 5 and that's 3 names. Of the 2 missing names I don't think Dok is in any doghouse. What about the other missing name?

One more quote from HCBS, " “He actually tries to rebound. He actually tries to block a shot. He'll actually run a guy down in transition and try to make a play."

Ouch. While not specifically calling out Vick, when you say what the guy's replacement isn't going to do, that says quite a bit.

Wonder if the two of them had some kind of blow up. Wouldn't shock me.

I am a Dok fan ( I am a fan of each and every Jayhawk). But as I was charting plays, there were more than a few times that Dok either did not aggressively jump or did not use his rather significant girth to effectively block out. The jumping part was especially frustrating to watch. If I have time I will try to put together a montage of Dok’s plays where he is less than 100% on rebounding. It may be his timing is very bad, it may be he is conserving energy, heck I don’t know. But when you go posession by possession you see the things that you miss during the game. Dok clearly can do more. But as I said, he may be tired or something. But without question there is room for improvement, especially in rebounding.

Trying not to foul? Just another option. I'd like to see your analysis because I agree that a guy with his size should be getting more than he is.

So let it be written, so shall it be done.

RC

Yul Brynner ever wear a closed shirt in a movie?

Westworld
Magnificent 7

Well..for sure something is up with Vick. We can all take guesses but the answer is HCBS has layed down the law. I saw the video of Vick moving away from the basket and then standing flat footed at the 3 point line on 2 OSU rebounds. Just unacceptable. Hopefully the young man responds positively to this and can again be a contributor.

I too am interested in seeing what the lineup wil look like tomorrow. Is it two bigs? That could be interesting.

BTW...Bay that would be my second all time favorite movie quote. Love it. Brynner was, and always will be Ramses.

This was addressed in an LJW article from yesterday evening

www2.kusports.com/weblogs/smithology/201...ike-hasnt-played-up/

I was hoping maybe the flu was running through the locker room.

HOF HCBS would not have reacted publicly like this if it was illness. Somebody either got dumped or figured out that they won't get drafted or is homesick or hates his roommate or ....any of the thousand other things a 20 year old elite athlete can be vexed by. And though LV is under the bus at the moment it seems like more than one somebody.

This bunch has the feel of a 4/5 seed that makes a first weekend NCAA exit. With Tech playing well and WV snapping out of their funk we will probably not back into a slice to continue the streak. So it goes.

I imagine one more listless effort and HOF HCBS will be saying in public what he really thinks.

At least Billy got an Italy trip and we have Olympics to bridge the gap until baseball.

We are going to be the longest of long shots to make the final four. But I am not quite ready to give up on the big 12. We still sit in decent shape. We still control our own fate and despite the really bad game against OSU and the LaGerald Vick stuff, we are still a decent team with a great coach. I actually think putting in Lightfoot might be a net positive. Vick has done nothing and if we only get decent rebounding from Mitch we will be better off. And LaGerald may yet see the light. We know he has some latent potential somewhere in there. As for the 2nd weekend of the tourney that is going to be a crap shoot. We very well could be a 3 seed and if something implodes a 4 seed. I think a 2 seed is most likely at this point. But in Round 2 we will be facing a top 25 team and that will be a tester. On the other hand, we have the kind of team that could make a run, albeit that is more hope than probability. Don’t give up yet. We have two seniors who are mostly holding things together.

Goodness sake....baseball...Olympics? While I realize just how big NOT winning this Big 12 title would be, lets take a look at some history as to how “non #1” have done. First and foremost to me is the team NO ONE talks about when mentioning NCs. Sure there’s Puke, UK and Roy’s academic acheivers but how about the cons as in...UConn. A 7 seed in ‘14 and a 3 seed in ‘11 and they end up winning both. Strangely enough they played an 8 seed in both NC games. Also read...doesn’t matter how you get there, just get in. Of course there was also some rag tag 6 seed in ‘88 that won. Then as bad as I hate to even think about it, let alone bring it up, there was a 4 seed in ‘97 who had no problems beating 1 seeds. As always the ‘Nova boys of ‘85 have to be brought up too. Long story short, yes, being a 1 or 2 is pretty favorable but no guarantee. How has being that 1 or 2 seed treated KU in the last decade and a half? Just sayin....NOT winning the Big 12 and NOT being at least a 2 seed aren’t things to hang on a wall or from a rafter. They also are not bonafide predictions of early exits in March. Like George Michael said...”you gotta have faith”. Too far? Yeah, you’re probably right.

The one thing all Final Four teams have in common is they won four games in a row against decent teams. If they started with a bad seed it is usually because of a poor December, not a listless February.

I do feel for current students who are in school during horrid football and so so hoops.

Next year horrid football but excellent hoops?

If you adjust Lightfoot and Vick's numbers by minutes played, we're not giving up much. In the last 5 games:

>Vick has averaged 31.6 minutes to Lightfoot's 15.4 minutes, so it's almost a perfect 2:1 ratio (makes the math easy ).

>Vick: 2.8-7.6 (36.8%) shooting percentage. Lightfoot 1.4-2.2 (63.6%) shooting percentage. Advantage Lightfoot.

>Points per minute: Vick: 0.22. Lightfoot: 0.19. Advantage Vick (by .03ppm). Projecting that into 30 minutes, Vick is at 6.64 points and Lightfoot would be at 5.84 points. -1 net points per game.

>Rebounds per minute: Vick: 0.11. Lightfoot: 0.18. Per 30 minutes, Vick: 3.2 boards, Lightfoot 5.5 boards. +2 boards per game.

>Turnovers per minute: Vick: 0.06. Lightfoot: 0.01. Per 30 minutes: Vick 1.9 turnovers, Lightfoot 0.3 turnovers. -1.6 TO's net.

>Fouls per minute: Vick: 0.08. Lightfoot: 0.13. Per 30 minutes: Vick 2.7 fouls, Lightfoot 3.9 fouls. +1 fouls net.


Soooooooooooo to sum up: Based on the last 5 games, and assuming 30 minutes of playing time, we
>Give up about 1 point
>Gain 2 rebounds
>Have 1.5 fewer turnovers
>Pick up 1 more foul

That's without adding the intangible stuff like "energy" or "hustle". Despite losing about 1 point of offense, the decreased turnovers and additional rebounding could make up for it.

I'd love to see Mitch come out tonight and get 8-10 points and a half dozen rebounds. As it stands, statistically we're not losing much (if anything).