THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: What will Missouri need to do in order to beat Memphis this Thursday in the Sweet 16?

BERNIE MIKLASZ
Play its most consistent 40 minutes of the season. The Tigers cannot afford another poor half. They must also win the turnover battle, do a better job of defensive rebounding and get back on defense on the transition. The Tigers might want to test Memphis with a zone defense because Memphis likes to break teams down on the dribble and Mizzou struggled in man defense in the second half vs. Marquette.

BILL COATS
Guard the perimeter with a vengeance, tighten up inside and not get beaten as much off the dribble as the Tigers did in the second half vs. Marquette. Limit Memphis’ offensive rebounding, and have an excellent shooting night so that MU can set up its pressure. Nothing to it, eh?

KATHLEEN NELSON
J.T. Tiller and Zaire Taylor need to stay out of foul trouble, which is easier said than done. Maybe it’s just coincidence that Taylor had 2 and 1 fouls, respectively, when he provided last-minute heroics against Texas and Kansas, driving the lane for game-winners. Maybe it’s not coincidence. Taylor had four fouls against Marquette and seemed relatively invisible. Memphis has the reputation as the best defensive team left in the tournament — reputation being the operative word — so the more steady ball-handlers on the court, the better.

MIKE SMITH
Just show up. Although to be safe, it might help to appeal to Leo Lyons’ manhood on the defensive end. He’s playing defense about as tightly as Mizzou’s defensive backs did against KU’s receivers. Mizzou will win this one by 15.

THE WATERCOOLER

THE SHOWDOWN: Break down this Sunday’s Missouri-Kansas matchup in Lawrence and tell us who wins and why.

BERNIE MIKLASZ
This will be a difficult setting for the Mizzou Tigers. The team is obviously playing with a lot of confidence these days, and that will help the cause. This should be a terrific game: a renewal of a wonderful rivalry that will showcase two ascending teams. I have to give the edge to KU. The Jayhawks haven’t lost at home in a long time, and Allen Fieldhouse is one of the most imposing and impressive settings in college basketball. The young Tigers are almost ready to snatch a game at KU, but not quite yet. The Jayhawks should have won in Columbia but discovered that this was a different kind of Mizzou team: one that won’t back down. It’s almost as if KU, accustomed to so many recent surrenders by MU basketball, was caught off guard by Mizzou’s resilient comeback. I don’t think that will happen this time. Kansas won’t be surprised by MU’s aggression. And KU’s floor leader, Sherron Collins, will finish strong. He faded down the stretch in the first encounter.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 82, Missouri 76.

JEFF GORDON
Missouri is rolling. The Tigers have 11 guys playing with confidence. Their kids aren’t kids anymore. It’s easy to build a scenario where they upset the Jayhawks on the road. If they take care of the basketball and hit their shots, they can use their superior depth to beat anybody anywhere. But . . . Bill Self is a great coach, KU will be jacked up at home and the Jayhawks will hit their shots this time. The Jayhawks had a chance to blow the Tigers off the court in Columbia and they blew their opportunity. Sunday, the shots go down.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 91, Missouri 84

VAHE GREGORIAN
The game figures to have a totally different complexion than the first. The Jayhawks won’t commit 27 turnovers again, the Tigers won’t be held to 16 points in the first half and MU also won’t be able to overcome repeated double-digit deficits again. If KU gets up big early, the Tigers will keep playing but KU will stiffarm them away and win comfortably. If MU keeps it close in the first half, the ending should be similar to the sizzling one in Columbia. I think the Tigers are too good at this stage to let it get out of control and should be another great game.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 73, Missouri 70

DAN O’NEILL
It’s an interesting game to analyze based on the crazy last meeting, which Missouri won 62-60 at Mizzou Arena. On one hand, Missouri was fortunate to win at home, benefiting from a late Kansas meltdown. On the other hand, Missouri won despite playing poorly for two-thirds of the game. Soooo … if the Tigers play well from the get-go this time, what happens? Here are some factors:

• Good start: Hard to believe the Tigers won last time after scoring just 16 points in the first half — they trailed 30-16. Hard to believe they could have a similar start this time and still be in the building for the second half.

• Missouri’s defense: It caused 27 Kansas turnovers in the last meeting, and it will have to be at its chaos-creating best to disrupt the Jayhawks and quiet the Allen Fieldhouse crowd. Missouri had 13 steals in the last game, they will need at least that many this time.

• 3-point shooting: MU leads the Big 12 in 3-point shooting defense, and that will be important. Like many teams, KU tends to struggle offensively without 3-point injections. The Jayhawks were just 2 of 15 from the arch last time. Meanwhile, Missouri was 2 of 14, and it must do better, must get Matt Lawrence (0 for 2) more involved.

• Rebounding: Missouri was outrebounded 48-28 last time — yikes! A lot of that had to do with shooting the ball poorly. The Tigers were 7 of 29 from the field during the first half in the last game.
• Free Throws: The first meeting, Mizzou was 1 for 4 from the line in the first half, 17 of 23 in the second. The Tigers have to hope DeMarre Carroll can wear out a path to the line this time.

• Sherron Collins: KU’s excellent guard is coming off a 26-point performance against Oklahoma and is fourth in the Big 12 in scoring average (18.3). Hear that J.T. Tiller? That’s your man.

Both teams have momentum, with KU coming off a big win at Oklahoma and Missouri riding a seven-game streak. But winning at Kansas will be a tall order for the Tigers.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 87, Missouri 79

TOM TIMMERMANN
First off, show of hands: How many people expected the Mizzou basketball team to be ranked higher than the football team? Mizzou won the last meeting because Kansas came apart down the stretch, and still, if one or two iffy calls had gone the other way, the Jayhawks would have won in Columbia. KU, no doubt rattled by what the Tigers threw at them, committed gobs of turnovers. They’ll be better composed in Lawrence. If KU hangs on to the ball, that will be a major difference.

Normally, I say pick against the team coming off a big win, like KU’s at No. 3 Oklahoma. But, 1) almost a week has passed since that game; 2) Oklahoma didn’t have Blake Griffin, so that takes some of the luster off the win; and 3) what the Jayhawks have been hearing around campus all week hasn’t been, “good job against Oklahoma,” it’s been, “Beat Missouri.” I think Sherron Collins will do better than the 9 points he had last time and Tyshawn Taylor will do better than his 11.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 64, Missouri 56

KATHLEEN NELSON
Two factors work against Missouri. The Tigers will need a more consistent performance than the spotty effort they mustered in beating the Jayhawks in Columbia. In addition, KU’s tough at home.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 82, Missouri 78

MIKE SMITH
Coach Self will sell this one to his players as being the equivalent of a national championship game. Feeding off the fan frenzy, the Jayhawks will respond accordingly. And if I’m Self, or any other coach with a physical post man like Aldrich, I pound it inside against Mizzou for 40 minutes. Lyons will back off soon as he sees that’s the strategy, saddling Carroll with the impossible task of singlehandedly stopping the inside game. Translation: He’ll foul out.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 69, Missouri 57.

****

MIDDAY NEWS AND THOUGHTS

MANNY REJECTS TWO-YEAR, $45 MILLION OFFER: You saw my thoughts yesterday that Manny Ramirez would be crazy to turn down the Dodgers offer. Still, it appears his agent Scott Boras has done just that. And I’m not the only one who thinks he’s nuts. Bill Plaschke of the Los Angeles Times writes today: “This week, by every stretch of the wildest imagination, the Dodgers made Manny Ramirez a no-lose proposition. By rejecting it Thursday, Ramirez has officially lost it. He’s lost his dignity. He’s lost his perspective. He’s lost his marbles.”

Plaschke also has some pointed words for Boras. You should check out his column today.

REDSKINS AT IT AGAIN: Redskins owner Dan Snyder desperately wants to win. He just hasn’t figured out yet that throwing money around isn’t always the way to get it done (See: New York Yankees.) Still, Snyder pulled out the wallet Thursday night and kept it out until the wee hours Friday in an attempt to build a winner in Washington.

First, Snyder ponied up a six-year, $54 million deal ($22.5 million guaranteed) to retain DeAngelo Hall. The deal made Hall one of the league’s highest paid cornerbacks. But at that point Snyder was just getting started, because as soon as free agency opened around midnight, he signed DT Albert Haynesworth to a seven-year, $100 million deal ($41 million guaranteed.)

It’s not Snyder spending money that I find surprising … it’s just how he spent it. Hall was actually cut by the Raiders last season after eight games. Cut. By the Raiders. He ended up with Washington and finished the season on a high note. But a $54 million high note? I don’t know. As to Haynesworth hitting the free-agent jackpot … I know he was one of the most coveted free agents on the market this year, but do you really spend $100 million on an interior defensive lineman?

Snyder has swung and missed on many big-name free agents in the past, but who knows, maybe this is the year he gets it right. Time will tell if it was money well spent.

****

SOMETHING TO PONDER

WEDNESDAY ROUND 2 REDUX:
WILL TKACHUK BE A HALL OF FAMER?

My friend Kevin Wheeler, who hosts “Sports Open Line” on KMOX, stated his case earlier this week in this space for why he thought St. Louis Blues forward Keith Tkachuk is unquestionably a Hall of Famer. Not everyone agreed. In the spirit of debate, Kevin went back to work and offers up the following to support his case:

FROM KEVIN: After giving this subject a little more thought, because I’m a sports guy and that’s what I do, I decided to do a little more research on the subject of Keith Tkachuk and the Hall of Fame. The raw numbers I presented in Wednesday’s Round Two were pretty compelling, but what I found when I dug a little deeper was even better.

With a little extra time on my hands I sat down and compared Tkachuk to Hall of Famers Glenn Anderson, Bernie Federko, Dale Hawerchuk, Joe Mullen and Peter Stastny. What I looked at was the number of goals each scored per game compared to the number of goals scored per game overall in the NHL during their respective careers.

Even the least-experienced hockey fans recognize the fact that offense in the NHL is not what it used to be. Goals are harder than ever to come by, even after a bunch of rules changes, but I don’t think people truly understand how much scoring has decreased over the last 15 years.

Here’s how Tkachuk’s goals per game rate stacks up against the aforementioned Hall of Famers:

Goals per game
Tkachuk - 0.47
Anderson - 0.44
Hawerchuk - 0.44
Federko - 0.37
Mullen - 0.47
Stastny - 0.46

Tkachuk scores more per game than anyone on that list except Mullen, which kind of surprised me. Even in an era where fewer goals are being scored on a nightly basis, Walt’s scoring rate compares favorably with five guys who were no-brainers for the Hall.

I also looked the points per game rate:

Points per game
Tkachuk - 0.93
Anderson - 0.97
Hawerchuk - 1.19
Federko - 1.13
Mullen - 1.00
Stastny - 1.27

He’s at the bottom of the barrel here but within a whisker of Anderson and Mullen.

The numbers below signify the average goals scored per game in the NHL from the first year each player stepped into the league until the day they retired.

Total goals scored per game
Tkachuk era - 5.51
Anderson era - 7.28
Hawerchuk era - 7.25
Federko era - 7.48
Mullen era - 7.17
Stastny era - 7.35

In other words, there were roughly 25% more goals scored during the careers of the five Hall of Famers than there were during Tkachuk’s career.

Tkachuk has played in the NHL equivalent of baseball’s “Dead Ball Era” yet he still scores goals at the same rate as Hall of Famers who played in the high-flying offensive years.

Voters may or may not consider these kinds of facts when the time comes, preferring to fall back on lazy critiques that are more about the teams Tkachuk has played for than on what he’s accomplished as an individual, but they should at least do the amount of digging I was able to do between the 2nd and 3rd period of the Blues-Stars game Thursday night.

Nothing can “prove” that Tkachuk will he in the Hall someday because voters are human and humans can be a little goofy, but I think his case is outstanding even if has yet to play for a team good enough to win the Stanley Cup.

****

STAT OF THE DAY

548 — Most career homers hit by a player who played his entire career for only one franchise. Philadelphia’s Mike Schmidt leads the list. Here’s the top 20, along with their HR totals and the team they played for:

1. Mike Schmidt, 548, PHI
2. Mickey Mantle, 536, NYY
3. Ted Williams, 521, BOS
4, Ernie Banks, 512, CHC
5. Mel Ott, 511, NYG
6. Lou Gehrig, 493, NYY
7. Willie Stargell, 475, PIT
8. STAN MUSIAL, 475, STL
9. Carl Yastrzemski, 452, BOS
10. Jeff Bagwell, 449, HOU
11. Cal Ripken, 431, BAL
12. Chipper Jones, 408, ATL
13. Al Kaline, 399, DET
14. Johnny Bench, 389, CIN
15. Jim Rice, 382, BOS
16. Joe DiMaggio, 361, NYY
17. ALBERT PUJOLS, 319, STL
18. George Brett, 317, KC
19. Todd Helton, 310, COL
20. Edgar Martinez, 309, SEA

(SOURCE: Baseballreference.com)

THE WATERCOOLER:

QUESTION: Back in December Illinois beat Missouri, 75-59. Mizzou now has climbed to No. 11 in the AP rankings with a 22-4 record while Illinois is ranked No. 18 with a 21-5 record. Which of these two teams do you see making a stronger and longer run in the NCAA tournament and why?

Bryan Burwell:
At this point it is going to come down to how they are seeded, and right now Mizzou has the advantage. The Tigers are a No. 3 seed according to most bracketologists, while the Illini will likely get a 5 or 6 seed.

Bernie Miklasz:
This is a tough question to answer. On one hand, Illinois is getting prepared for the NCAA Tournament by competing in a better conference. (According to Jerry Palm of CollegeRPI.com, the Big Ten is ranked second and the Big 12 is fourth.) That should help. Missouri is taking advantage of a down season in the Big 12. But I think the Tigers are built to deliver a bigger payoff in the NCAA Tournament. Illinois tends to be a more consistent performer (except for that recent horrible performance at Wisconsin.) And Mizzou is a high-risk, high-reward team for NCAA prospectors. It all depends on the matchup. If Mizzou encounters a couple of teams in the first two rounds who aren’t used to going up against a pressure-oriented, up-tempo opponent, the Tigers will roll into the Sweet 16. If the Tigers run into a couple of teams who have average or worse depth, they’ll race into the Sweet 16. But if the Tigers face an unflappable team that can calmly handle the press and pass the ball smartly to set up high-percentage shots, then it could be one-and-done for MU. When I bet on horses, I always like that 6-1 shot that has an intriguing upside; a horse that is capable of running its best race at the right time. And that would describe Missouri as an NCAA Tournament entrant.

Stu Durando:
Instead of predicting who will go farther without the aid of a bracket, I will just say that both teams play a style that has proved conducive to a good tournament run and they rely on similar attributes: stingy defense and unselfish offense. Missouri is No. 2 nationally and Illinois No. 5 in assists. Illinois is No. 3 in scoring defense and Missouri No. 2 in steals. At this point their seedings would be similar, supposedly making their paths through the tournament comparable in difficulty. About the only advantage I find right now is that the Illini have played what is considered a more difficult schedule (neither played a strong non-conference schedule) by most of the computer rankings and play in the higher rated conference.

Vahe Gregorian:
Trite as it sounds, it’s all about matchups. Mizzou, for example, can be very disruptive defensively but on occasion can be had in the half-court. Another caution light: no MU player ever has appeared in an NCAA Tournament game. But like Illinois, the Tigers are on trajectory for a seeding between 3 and 5 and find ways to win. Count each in for one tourney win and a shot at the Sweet 16.

Reid Laymance:
Al McGuire used to say that a team needed an “aircraft carrier” and veteran leadership at guard to make it in the NCAA Tournament. (He probably said it more colorfully than that, too, but we digress.)

So does DeMarre Carroll play big enough and are J.T. Tiller and Zaire Taylor poised enough to carry Missouri out of the first week? There are times that Carroll hangs out on the perimeter a bit much for my taste but there’s no discounting his effort nor that of the entire team as it has bought into the defense-first philosophy of Mike Anderson.

It may be a cop out, but it’s all about the matchup. A disciplined team that won’t be bothered by the Missouri pressure and has a force in the middle could end it for the Tigers. Just who that team is, we’re not sure yet.

As for the Illini, they looked like they had it all together when they took Missouri apart back in December. But only scoring 36 against Minnesota makes one wonder bit.

And neither team has proven they can win on the road yet.

I think both teams can get out of the first weekend but I’m not booking a lot of hotel rooms for either team in Detroit just yet.

Kathleen Nelson:
On the one hand, the game in December is irrelevant. If the tournament started today, Missouri would be more likely to make a run. They’re healthy and have found good chemistry. On the other, maintaining the delicate balance for the next six weeks will be tough.

Tom Timmermann:
Talk about two teams that are hard to choose between. Missouri is 14th at RPIratings.com. Illinois is 15th. One of my favorite stats is points per possession. It’s better than points per game or points allowed per game, because it takes into consideration the tempo teams play at. So which team has the lower points allowed per possession? They’re effectively tied at .85. As much as I’d like to say Illinois has the type of team that’s better suited for a deep run into the postseason, the PPP numbers disagree. It’s going to come down to seedings and right now, my pal Joe Lunardi over at ESPN.com figures Mizzou as a 3 seed, Illinois as a 5. If that’s the case, the Tigers will make it to the second weekend.