a well deserved

loss. this is the worst KU defensive team in my memory. If Self had anyone who could shoot, Vick and Grimes would never be in the game at the end. Turn their heads, leave the guy open for a three (or foul the guy airballing a three), shade him to the wrong side so the guy can make an easy drive to the basket...it really is painful to watch these guys. Garrett is the pleasant exception, but he can't guard everyone. And of course, there is no inside defense at all. Lawson tries, but is just outmanned down low on d. I think this group is going to have to scramble big time to get to 12-6 in the conference. Sigh ...ugly, ugly game.

I would agree. When you have, as a team, 6 assists and 18 turnovers you are not playing good basketball.

We have numerous flaws, but the one that truly mystifies me is how we can have two guards that literally cannot 'create' on offense. Dotson is a good player, a surprisingly good shooter, but he doesn't get his teammates the ball in a position to score. Grimes is not starting quality. And Garret is by far the best guard we have, but he is not the point guard. Why?

And let's not forget Vick. Hot/cold and unreliable. The ever-predictable "get the ball and the wing and dribble with no intention of doing anything so maybe I'll chuck up a 3" mindset has got to go.

I at least have hope for Dotson and Grimes. And now that Garrett is playing better on offense, I have no complaints there. But I'm willing to call Vick's senior year a official bust at this point.

I struggle to characterize Vick's and this team's season thus far. I assumed we would generally be better than we are, that Grimes and Dotson would provide way more offense, and that Vick would play a nice role this year. If that were the case, his better than expected three point shooting could be characterized as a success, despite his below par dribbling, decision making and turnovers.

However, on a team where there is no clear leader, and little indication of leadership tendencies ready to come forth from anyone, Vick has become that leader by default. At least he's trying to lead, which is more than I can say about anyone else. If he must be the leader, then yes, he's a bust, but it's because he never should be in the leader's role. He should be an assassin shooter, not a ballhandler, rebounder, defender or leader.

Lawson fills up the stat sheet but provides no leadership to the team. And he doesn't ignite runs, emotion, or mojo. No one else does much other than try to remember their job, and occasionally shoot when there are no other options.

Let's see who, if anyone, steps up to lead this team. I couldn't predict who that person is right now, or if there is anyone that can fill that role. Bizarre.

Agree. Great point on leadership, AZ.

I'll go at it from a slightly different angle: with time winding down and the game on the line, who's hands do you want the ball to be in?

In recent history, we've had a bunch of guys who you felt were going to make the right decision: Frank, Devonte, Svi, Malik. Even go back to Perry Ellis, Landon Lucas....they were all guys who you trusted that if you got them the ball, they wouldn't make a mistake...even if the shot didn't go down.

I don't know that there's "that guy" on our team right now. Sure, if you can get Lawson the ball in the paint with no double-team, but aside from that specific scenario, what else do we have? Vick's certainly not that guy, and after 4 years, he should be. Dotson? Maybe, but he's still a work in progress. I think he WILL be that guy as early as next year. Grimes could also become that guy, but isn't there now.

I'm almost tempted to say Garrett. He's not going to make a bad decision, but it's going to take me another couple games to see him continue his recent offensive uptick before he'd get my vote.

Sadly, had Self called timeout at WVU and tried to draw something up, I really don't believe that he can fully trust any of the current starters to get it right. That's new territory for us.

Here are my two cents on the leadership issue and who should have the ball at the end.

Interestingly, we have had or heard these discussions in prior years. I personally see DL as having the best potential. Yes, he is rather quiet, but he seems to be very well spoken at the press conferences and able to express what needs to be said. With LV, you never know what he is going to give, if anything, besides a giggle.

As far as who should have the ball in crunch-time situations, I believe it would be between DL and MG. The choice would depend on the matchup they have. It seemed to me that against WV, DL was not able to get around his man, who was a little quicker than the average big man. (#1 - forget his name) Otherwise, he has a pretty good first step and is usually able to get to the rack. A good option might be to bring him out to the free throw line and give him the option of taking the mid-range jumper as opposed to taking it to the hole. At least he gives a couple of options. With MG, because he does a pretty good job of driving to the basket, he is a good option if he is matched up well for that. Otherwise, I am not real confident in any of his shooting beyond 3 ft.

Great question - who is our crunch time go to guy.

Almost has to be Garrett, and I can't believe I'm saying that. We have little success at the outside game, or even getting open outside shots, and in crunch time I suspect Lawson will struggle to receive the ball down low, likely being double teamed at that point.

Garrett is solid with the ball, has proven he can finish at the rim, and seems mentally tough.

Add to it that most teams will never double team him, but rather stay with Lawson or others who may be better scorers.

I would have Garrett drive, go to the rim, and see what happens. He could kick out to Vick, who I would trust to launch a set three. Or he could score or get fouled. The big downside is that should he get fouled, then the game rests on his very suspect free throw shooting.

No great option, and when we're all looking to the least talented offensive player, we have issues.