By
Steve Kallas (posted by Rick Morris)
Well,
it was pretty clear that it was going to be virtually impossible, given their
extremely tough bracket, for the undefeated Wichita State Shockers to win the
National Championship. In fact, it was
hard to believe that they could get to the Final Four. To do so, they would have had to have beaten
Kentucky, an eight seed that should have been a four or a five (remember, they
lost to overall number one seed Florida by one in the SEC Championship game),
Louisville, a four seed that should have been a number one or two seed (probably
playing better than anyone in the country on selection Sunday) and the winner
of Michigan-Duke, the two and three seeds, respectively, in their region.
THE
PROBLEM FOR WICHITA STATE
Aside
from the competition, the Wichita State coach, Gregg Marshall, put his team in
a difficult position with his ill-advised “Wolves do not fret over the opinions
of sheep” quote when asked, before the tournament, if he was worried about the
criticism that his team had played a vey weak schedule.
It
almost made it hard to root for a team that, despite going 34-0 in the regular
season, hadn’t beaten a ranked team all season (they had a nice win over St.
Louis when St. Louis was an unranked team).
Their conference, the Missouri Valley Conference, was particularly weak
this year, with only Indiana State and Northern Iowa (in addition to undefeated
Wichita State) being over .500 in the conference.
So
it was a very fair statement to say that Wichita State was going to have a very
tough time advancing in the tournament.
SO
WHAT HAPPENED?
Well,
you know what happened. Kentucky played
the game of its young life (for this team) and beat Wichita State, 78-76, in
what can only be described as a great college basketball game.
In
a fascinating interview with Mike Francesa on WFAN on Tuesday, coach Marshall
still didn’t seem to quite get it. He said
that it was hard to have to “justify being 34-0 and a number one seed.”
What? Stop right there! This was the same guy who only
a week earlier said that “Wolves don’t fret over the opinions of sheep.” So it was his job to ignore all the
criticism.
But
was it really criticism? It says here
that the right-minded “sheep” simply pointed out the obvious; that is, that
Wichita State hadn’t beaten anyone really good all season. That’s not an opinion – that’s a statement of
fact. And even if it was criticism,
coaches and teams should be able to ignore that. That is one of the signs of a champion.
Still
not getting it, Marshall went on to tell Mike Francesa that “some of the
detractors even finally in our loss had come to the side and the realization that
hey, maybe this team was a great team.”
Well,
not exactly. Marshall seemed surprised
that Wichita State earned more national respect from losing to Kentucky than
from going 35-0. But that makes perfect
sense. Kentucky easily played their best
game of the year and is peaking at the right time (which is what you would
expect in modern-day college basketball with a very young team, which is what
Kentucky now seems to be every season). They
are, right now, playing as well as anybody in the country. So, of course Wichita State earned more
respect in their only defeat.
Why
is that a surprise?
BUT
WAIT, THERE’S MORE!
Mike
Francesa asked the right question when he asked the coach what he was looking
for on the final play. While Mike tried
to cover for the coach by saying that his point guard was shooting 46% from
three, the reality is that Fred Van Vleet, who had a great season but this day
would have a terrible shooting game (1-6 from the floor, 0-4 from three,
including the final shot), was probably the last guy you wanted to take the
final shot.
How
do we know this? Well, earlier in the
interview, Marshall said that Van Vleet couldn’t get in his “rhythm” because of
foul trouble. In addition, Marshall said
that Van Vleet, in trying to take a charge, which resulted in his third foul,
hit his head on the floor and “was a little woozy” during the game.
So
back to the final play. Option one,
according to the coach, was Cleanthony Early getting a back screen for “either
a lob or a post-up to tie the game.”
Coach Marshall then half threw his best player (an unconscious 12-17,
4-6 from three for a game-high 31 points) under the bus by saying Early “really
didn’t make a great cut” and “he was reluctant on his cut.” More on this in a
bit.
Option
two was Ron Baker on a screen into the corner.
Clearly Baker, who was 7-12 and also 4-6 from three for 20 points, was
the best second option. But Julius Randle, guarding the inbounder, dropped off
and essentially doubled Baker.
Option
three was Van Vleet, who got the ball, dribbled left, then dribbled right, had
a good look and threw up a brick that kind of hit the backboard and the side of
the rim at the same time.
Game
over.
WAS
THE WICHITA STATE COACH BEING DISINGENUOUS?
During
the interview, coach Gregg Marshall said that, because Cleanthony Early didn’t
cut hard to the basket, “his man, Willie Cauley-Stein, contested the shot.”
While
Cauley-Stein DID contest the shot (although Van Vleet got a good look), there’s
no chance that Cauley-Stein was guarding Early.
In fact, he was guarding #12, Darius Carter, who was just clogging the
middle to set a screen. James Young was
guarding Early from the get-go on the final play and stayed with him
throughout.
Did
the head coach of Wichita State not know that or was he being disingenuous?
Draw
your own conclusion.
A
BETTER FINAL PLAY?
Well,
it should have been the play, one way or another, to get the ball in Early’s
hands. Unconscious the whole game, the
best player on the floor, the hottest shooter, to send him 30 or 35 feet from
the in-bounder for a maybe lob or post-up was not the wisest choice. To be fair, on replay, it seemed that, for a
split-second, a lob might have worked if Early had gone all the way to the
basket. But with 3.2 seconds left, it
would have been better to get the ball in quickly to Early and let him work his
magic.
It
says here that it would have been better to send Carter for the lob, take the
seven- footer Cauley-Stein with him and then get the ball to Early for a three
or a drive. Again, to have your best
player and best shooter (on this day) run AWAY from the ball, which was
inbounded side-out from north of the top of the key, wasn’t a great plan.
WHY
DID WICHITA STATE LOSE?
Well
Mike Francesa was right that Kentucky hit a lot of big threes and they haven’t
made threes like that all year. They
were a stunning (for them) 8-18 from three.
It says here, however, that their excellent foul-shooting was not an
accident.
Again,
against number one overall-seed Florida, just a week earlier in the SEC
Championship, Kentucky came of age. In
that one-point loss to the number one team in the country, Kentucky was 21-26
from the free throw line (81%) and 5-6 down the stretch. Against Wichita State, then, you couldn’t be shocked
that they went 16-22 from the free throw line (73%) and 6-8 down the stretch.
So
why did Wichita State lose? Well, their
last three possessions were Tekele Cotton (a good player having a bad offensive
game – 1-4 from the field) missing a three with 1:10 left, Ron Baker banking in
a three (Kentucky also had a banked-in three earlier in the game) with 29
seconds left and Van Vleet missing a three at the buzzer.
No
shots from Early, easily their best player/shooter on this day.
SO
IS WICHITA STATE A “GREAT” TEAM?
Not
really. There are no great teams in this
tournament. In fact, there are rarely
great teams in college basketball anymore.
From the UCLA glory days of Alcindor and Walton, when freshman couldn’t
play (so they could get acclimated to college life), the college game has
transformed to a “one and done” scenario, where some top players only play in
their freshman year and then go on to the NBA (whether they are really ready or
not).
So
neither Wichita State nor Kentucky is a great college basketball team. They just don’t make them like they once did
in college basketball. But Wichita State and Kentucky did play a great college
basketball game.
One
final thought: there was video of coach
Gregg Marshall telling his team that they were the first team ever to start
35-0. While that is true, it seems to
miss the fact that all of those undefeated UCLA teams, usually 30-0, never
played 35 games. That’s just another
thing to remember when comparing then and now.
Wichita
State had a great season. They weren’t
the best team in the country and they had virtually no chance to win the
national title. They played great
against Kentucky and lost. They should
have been a number one seed and were awarded one by the selection
committee. But that same committee
killed them by giving them the toughest bracket in this year’s NCAA tournament.
@
COPYRIGHT 2014 BY STEVE KALLAS ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
