• May 31 | 8:30 p.m. PT

Bye, bye Billy

This time, Billy Donovan really did leave Florida.

After all the talk about Kentucky, and dalliances with the Memphis Grizzlies and Miami Heat, Donovan really did leave the mini-dynasty he built in Gainesville. (For a heap of money, too, at $5.5 million a year. What’s the ceiling on coaches’ salaries? Is there gonna be one?) And this was after he and school officials had finally worked out a contract extension. Supposedly.

So, like so many other college coaches before him — Mike Montgomery, Lon Krueger, Tim Floyd, John Calipari, Leonard Hamilton and, of course, Rick Pitino — Donovan took a chance in a league that’s foreign to most everything about the college game.

The amount of games more than double, especially with a deep playoff run. The travel is endless. Most players don’t worry about defense. Running set plays depends on the personnel a coach has and if the player actually listen. Agents are a headache. Fans aren’t as blindly supportive. The rules, the refs, the styles, tempo, everything’s different.

And one more thing: There are no coaches for life.

Maybe Donovan could break the trend. Maybe he is that rare mix of smarts, charisma, savvy and luck that succeeds in the NBA (having Dwight Howard will be a big boost, too.) Maybe all of that will be enough to be an NBA lifer/ex-college coach like P.J. Carlesimo or a qualified success like Larry Brown.

But say he doesn’t. Say the Magic don’t draft well, sign a couple of bum free agents and Donovan can’t produce a consistent winner. (All of which are likely.) It won’t make Donovan a failure, just a guy who didn’t get into the right situation.

And if he, like those other coaches, wants to come back to the college game, where does he land?

Consider these final destinations:

• Montgomery won 547 games in 26 seasons at Stanford and Montana, yet after being fired by Golden State midway through the 2005-06 season, he hasn’t gotten a college job.
• Kruger made winners out of Kansas State, Florida and Illinois, yet a failed stint with Atlanta resulted in his best option being UNLV, which was a far cry from its glory days under Jerry Tarkanian.
• Floyd was a pariah after his time with the Bulls and Hornets before replacing Henry Bibby at football-first USC.
• Hamilton’s job at Florida State may be better than his previous college gig at Miami, but neither are hoops powers.

Calipari has ensured Memphis’ rebirth as a hoops power, but it’s taken some time. Pitino is trying to do the same at once-proud Louisville — even reaching a Final Four — but the Cardinals are not a perennial power yet.

Is this what’s in store for Donovan? Landing at a once dominant hoops school and rebuilding it? Or will he have to settle for a football school that can pay a princely sum to turn its hoops program into a winner?

My guess is the latter. After all, it’s what Donovan does best.

• May 26 | 4:30 p.m. PT

2007-08 contenders emerge

Looks like Memphis and UCLA will have some competition after all.

Brandon Rush’s return to Kansas for his junior season may not make the Jayhawks a preseason No. 1, but it’ll certainly place them among the favorites. More on that in a bit.

After all, a lot of people (including me) expected Rush to stay in the NBA draft. He was a top 20 pick, but injured his right knee during a pick-up game in Kansas City, Mo. Rush told the Lawrence Journal-World that the injury wasn’t why he withdrew from the draft, but at this point, the only thing that matters is how severe the injury is. He called it a sprain, though tests next week will reveal more.

The J-W’s Tom Keegan thinks the injury could be a blessing in disguise, depending on how Rush fares as a junior. Rush was a crucial — if not the most important — component of KU’s Big 12 season and run to the NCAA Tournament’s Elite Eight (Julian Wright was the more honored player last season and was great in a second-round NBCAA Tournament win over Kentucky, but Rush was even better than Wright down the stretch, particularly a Sweet 16 victory over Southern Illinois and the loss to UCLA).

And now, he’ll be a pre-season player of the year candidate. (The other guys on the short list include UCLA’s Darren Collison, UNC’s Tyler Hansbrough, Georgetown’s Roy Hibbert, Tennessee’s Chris Lofton, Michigan State’s Drew Neitzel, USC’s Taj Gibson and Indiana’s D.J. White. And that’s just for guys I know will be in school next fall and doesn’t include freshmen studs like Derrick Rose and Eric Gordon.)

All of that means Kansas should be in the title hunt. (Official conformation on that sentence comes from none other than Jay Bilas.)

The others? Memphis (add a star like Rose to four returning starters and it should gives John Calipari enough to finally advance past the Elite Eight), UCLA (especially if the Bruins are seeded in the West region — again), Georgetown (losing Jeff Green hurts, but getting back Hibbert and smart point guard Jonathan Wallace is key) and the ever-loaded Tar Heels (Hansbrough, Ty Lawson, Wayne Ellington return) will probably be the top five teams, but maybe not in that order.

Others like USC (Gibson+Mayo=Pac-10 contender), Washington State (four starters return), Tennessee (never count out Bruce Pearl), Louisville (same goes for Pitino), Indiana (Big Ten champs) and Duke (grrrrr) should be in the hunt.

But there’s still three more weeks for underclassmen to change their minds about the NBA draft. And then I’ll do this all over again.

• May 24 | 7:15 p.m. PT

What to watch

Well, at least what I want to watch next fall: Kansas released its non-conference hoops schedule.

Interesting to note? Every team on there had a winning 2006-07 record. (A far cry from what my buddy Jeff ripped as one of the “wussiest schedules” last season.)

The Jayhawks’ biggest game has to be a road trip to USC, part of a home-and-home with the Trojans (KU won last season). If Brandon Rush does withdraw from the NBA draft — a longshot at this point — KU could be favored to win that game. Maybe. The Trojans won’t have Nick Young and Gabe Pruitt, both of whom bolted for the NBA, but they will have super soph Taj Gibson and that O.J. Mayo guy. I’m stoked.

Then again, games against Arizona, Georgia Tech and B.C. are pretty sweet, too. How long until practices begin?

• On the scheduling note, I guess Davidson wants to a) showcase stud sophomore Stephen Curry (for casual fans, he of the 30-point performance vs. Maryland in the NCAA Tournament) or just felt like playing the best teams in the state of North Carolina. Maybe both?

• ACC says no to more conference games.

• When I did center rankings, Roy Hibbert and Chris Daniels were still in the draft. Not so much anymore. Smart move by Hibbert to stay at Georgetown. Makes the center crop pretty slim, though.

• May 16 | 9:30 p.m. PT

Powering up

Ranking the best power forwards in the NBA draft isn’t a slam dunk at the top like the centers are. Al Horford, Joakim Noah and Brandan Wright are all great talents, but I’m not sure all of them will be great pros.

Then again, the crop at power forward is a little deeper than at center. So there may be guys out of the top 10 who can be NBA role players, but some of these guys are gonna be disappointments.

And, like any draft, be it NBA or NFL, if a good team picks up one of these guys, that player’s odds of being an impressive rookie increase dramatically. Say the Suns get the No. 4 overall pick. Anyone, be it Brandan Wright, Joakim Noah or even Josh McRoberts would thrive playing with Steve Nash.

So I’m trying to discount some of that. These rankings are my reflection of just how good someone would be on a typical NBA team where he has to create his own shot, play defense (NBA style, of course), run the court and adjust to different rules.

Again, I’m only ranking college players. Haven’t seen the foreign clubs in action. For the center rankings, click here.

1. Al Horford
I think he’s Karl Malone in the making. At 6-foot-9 and 235 pounds, he’s not the specimen Malone was — yet. But he attacks the boards, runs the floor well and his mid-range jumper gets better and better. He’ll be a solid player no matter what team drafts him.

2. Brandan Wright
Wright signed with an agent Wednesday, which means he’s in the draft to stay. He’s a slight 6-10, but with a 7-4 wingspan, Wright’s able smother defenders, though he’s quick enough to stay with anyone his size. You’ll read stuff about how he needs to put on weight, but that’s a little overblown. Wright’s more like Jazz forward Andrei Kirilenko — lithe, quick and long arms that frustrate defenders (truly, this would be the guy for the Suns). Scouts apparently worry about his intensity, but that’s nothing new for freshmen or NBA rookies. It’ll work out.

3. Joakim Noah
Here’s the thing with Noah: He’s got a non-stop motor, is as mobile a 7-footer as you’ll see and is willing to do the little things to help a team win (for more, check out Chad Ford’s blog on Noah and Corey Brewer). But that jumper — a side spinning disaster that he shoots from the left side of his head — should scare teams. Yeah, Shawn Marion’s jumper is ugly, but having a god-awful looking shot isn’t going to prolong an NBA career. And that jumper is the only reason he’s behind Wright, who’s a little shorter, but just as good defensively and has a better shot.

4. Josh McRoberts
Torn here, too. McRoberts’ offensive game isn’t as good as Jason Smith’s, but McRoberts is a great passer, better defensively and more physical — thanks to those big ol’ elbows. He’s another guy with an ugly jumper, but, like Noah, he does hit it fairly regularly. His foot speed stinks, but his future is as a banger down low who can pass out of double teams or hit the mid-range jumper.

5. Jason Smith
Smith’s a skilled 7-footer who is better offensively than defensively. He’s below McRoberts because the NBA is filled with skilled offensive players who like to play the perimeter, but not as many who are able to play underneath the basket when needed. And Smith isn’t so great offensively that it makes up for his defensive shortcomings. But hey, with the right team, he’ll thrive and people will wonder where he came from.

6. Nick Fazekas
This is probably too high. Fazekas is very skilled for a guy 6-11, has great stats (about 20 ppg and 10 rpg for the last 3 seasons), but also V-E-R-Y S-L-O-W. Afoot, that is. His basketball smarts? Fantastic. Outside jumper? Great. Passing? Super? But I have no idea how he’ll guard anyone, even in the NBA. I’m doubtful he has the speed to stay in front of other power forwards. Still, he’s the most skilled power forward available. That should count for something.

7. Glen Davis
Also torn about “Big Baby.” He was great in college, but anytime he plays against someone taller or more athletic, he struggles. Has the size and offensive game to stay in the NBA for 10 years, but that foot speed hurts.

8. Herbert Hill
Looks great in a uniform, but never impressed me while at Providence. Averaged a quiet 18.8 ppg and 8.8 rpg last season, but wasn’t the kind of player who made you go wow.

9. Carl Landry
Classic player of “why can’t he be 2-3 inches taller?” But the NBA’s starting to use more and more guys who are about 6-7 (like Leon Powe or Ike Diogu) provided they have the muscle and offensive game to contribute. Landry’s that kind of guy. Plus, he’s quicker than you think.

10. James Mays
If the Knicks can draft Renaldo Balkman in the first round last year and Balkman can actually turn out to be a decent player (check out his points per minute), Mays could do the same.

Also to consider? Jermareo Davidson (decent size, but where’s the mid-range jumper?), Ivan Radenovic (oh, here it is), Mario Boggan (grow!), Joseph Jones (if he stays in, he’ll land somewhere) and Ekene Ibekwe (the classic 6-9 guy who blocks shots and nothing else).

• May 10 | 9 p.m. PT

Scouting the draft

Rob Babcock’s been a full-time NBA scout/talent evaluator since 1987, working for the Denver Nuggets then the Minnesota Timberwolves and as a GM with Toronto from 2004-2006 (he’s also done part-time work for the Detroit Pistons, Cleveland Cavaliers, San Diego Clippers and Indiana Pacers before he was with the Nuggets).

Why does all that matter? Babcock has a lengthy, details piece about what he’s looking for in an NBA prospect, covering physical dimensions, athletic ability and basketball smarts and skills. It’s one of the more detailed things you’ll find and is worth a look here.

It looks like Babcock has even ranked everything by importance. Height being the most important physical characteristic, followed by weight and strength, speed and quickness, etc.

Mental characteristics start with court sense (it would seem to favor guards, but he qualifies it as simply understanding how to play the game and is “is the one area that is diminishing more than any other and we are having a hard time finding players that know how to play.” People have been saying that about the college game and NBA for years, with highlight reel dunks usually taking the blame), followed by ability to learn and team attitude.

After that Babcock talks a little about skills, what type of players are out there and then lists “10 things that turns me off.” (Don’t worry, they relate to hoops.)

It’s an interesting list of attributes, though I wonder how much each scout differs in his evolution of what’s the most important and in what order. Some attributes (like height, shooting ability, etc.) must be considered more important, but if a guy’s 7-1 compared to a guy who’s 6-10, what areas and by how much, does the 6-10 guy have to be better for him to be considered the better prospect?

The way people draft 7 footers, it’s a ton. Being tall erases a lot of issues with a guy’s overall game. Otherwise, there’s no reason for teams to consistently draft 7-footers. (Read: Sonics.)

(For the record, Babcock had a mixed two years selecting talent with Toronto. In the 2005 draft he tabbed Charlie Villanueva — which people ripped at first until Villanueva was runner-up as rookie of the year — and Joey Graham, but 2004 was awful. Rafael Araujo and Albert Miralles? Ouch.)

• May 9 | 9:30 p.m. PT

‘Has it really been 20 years?’

Read of the day comes via the 1987 Providence Friars, one of the first teams that figured out the potency of the three-point shot. (For full ramblings on the 3, click here.)

Rick Pitino, Billy Donovan and the rest of the ’87 squad will gather Saturday in Providence for a 20-year reunion of reaching the Final Four.

Background: Pitino was fresh off his first coaching job at Boston University. Now, of course, he’s become one of the most successful coaches in college coaching history, taking three teams to the Final Four and winning the 1996 title with Kentucky. Donovan has gone from hit-shooting guard to the hottest coach in the country, taking his Florida Gators to back-to-back titles (the first since Coach K did so with Duke.)

But all that stuff’s been covered. The AP story covers most of the main details: Pitino cracked the whip right away, forcing the team to get in shape (Donovan is called chubby), worked to become “the hardest-working team in America” and touches on the death of Pitino’s six-month-old son, Daniel, who suffered from congenital heart problems.

It’s great stuff. But if you have the time — carve out 10 minutes — read this piece by the Providence Journal’s Mike Stanton.

It goes into far more detail and has some great nuggets about the season and some interesting reminders about how things used to be. Take practice, for instance. Teams can only officially practice for 20 hours a week. Back then, not so much.

“There was no 20-hour rule then, limiting the weekly amount of time that college athletes could practice every week.
“We would’ve blown past 20 hours by Tuesday,” quips [Dave] Snedeker.
There were 5:30 a.m. workouts. Individual instruction drills. Three-hour practices in the afternoons.
If you screwed up in practice, you’d be sent downstairs to the Peterson Center to run laps, a coach screaming as female joggers and tennis players gawked. Earn too many “bricks” and you had to do six lay-ups with your opposite hand in 30 seconds, dribbling the length of the court each time.
Players particularly dreaded screwing up on a Thursday, known on campus as College Night, when PC students went out. If Pitino wasn’t happy, he’d bring them back at 11 p.m., spoiling their night out.”

I suppose there’s no better way to make your team into a runnin’ n gunnin’ force.

It also covers how every player got to Providence, a little on what they’re doing now and recounts their tournament run, which remains one of the best stories in NCAA Tournament history.

In all, good stuff.

With any luck, the 1988 title squad from Kansas can have a 20-year reunion and Gary Bedore can write up that piece.

• May 6 | 9:20 p.m. PT

Centers of attention

June 28 is coming up fast. Even more importantly, the last day for underclassmen to withdraw from the draft (June 18) is even closer.

Between now and then, I’ll offer up five position rankings for the draft — college players only. I leave scouting the foreign guys to Chad Ford. He has that market cornered.

One last note: if you haven’t already, check out Ray Glier’s mock draft and Ken Davis’ piece on how this could be the deepest and most talented draft of all time.

And on to the rankings. This week, the 10 best centers.

No. 1: Greg Oden
Duh. Ohio State’s 7-foot freshmen is gonna be the No. 1 overall pick because of his defensive ability, basketball smarts and promising offensive game. He has a decent jump hook and because of playing with his right hand (his good one) in a cast for the first half of the season, he’s adept at shooting with both hands.

No. 2: Roy Hibbert
The Hoyas’ Final Four game against Ohio State was supposed to be a preview of the draft’s two premier big men, but had both of ’em in foul trouble. The difference? Hibbert’s taller (7-2), a better passer than Oden and a little better offensively (better back-to-basket game, but Oden is more physical), but not the defensive game changer that Oden is. Plus, Hibbert isn’t as mobile. If Oden compares to Patrick Ewing, Hibbert would be Rik Smits.

No. 3: Spencer Hawes
The Washington freshman may be the best offensive center prospect (I like Hibbert’s low post game better, but Hawes has more moves), who can score down low or off the pick and roll. He’s a decent passer and OK rebounder (didn’t have to a lot this season because Jon Brockman cleaned the boards for the Huskies). He’s poor defensively, though. He averaged 1.7 blocks a game, but doesn’t hold his position well and doesn’t have much explosiveness.

No. 4: Sean Williams
If explosiveness is needed, Williams is the guy. He averaged 5 blocks a game for B.C. before being kicked off the team. (He reportedly flunked drug tests.) And that’s the rub. He may be an even better shot blocker than Oden. Depending on thje team, he’d be more valuable than any of the more polished players out there (like Hawes, Hibbert or Pittsburgh’s Aaron Gray.) And in the NBA, teams take gambles on players like this. The Trail Blazers used to love players like these.

No. 5: Kyle Visser
I like Visser better than Gray and Cal’s DeVon Hardin because he’s improved his offensive game by leaps and bounds (5 ppg as a junior; a team-high 17.0 this season) and has become a better rounder. He’s not as athletic as Williams and must improve his passing (didn’t pass much out of the low post because he was the best scoring option for Wake Forest), but does play hard.

No. 6: Aaron Gray
Not sold on Gray. He’s got everything you want in a center. He’s a 7-footer who can play with his back to the basket or his the short jumper, rebounds well and decent passer. But man, he’s overmatched when it comes to more athletic players his size. He doesn’t deal with double teams well and is slow footed. Add it all up and he’s a role player in the NBA.

No. 7: DeVon Hardin
A stress fracture in his right foot ended Hardin’s season in December, which is one of the reasons he’s below Gray. When healthy, he’s a good rebounder and shot blocker and scores off dunks and hustle plays. (Read: bad offensively.) I’m hoping he returns to school to work on his game.

No. 8 Darryl Watkins
Love the Syracuse senior’s size (6-11, 260 pounds), athleticism and hustle (nearly two blocks a game) and a decent rebounder (7.5 a game last season). But he has no offensive game. Not that it matters to get drafted, or to provide spot NBA minutes...

No. 9: Chris Richard
Probably too short (6-9) for teams to give him a serious look, but he’ll be a decent NBA player. Was invaluable as a back-up for Al Horford and Joakim Noah at Florida.

No. 10 Chris Daniels
Only got to see Daniels play against Wisconsin in the NCAA Tournament, but he was pretty good in that loss, going for 20 points. But if he’s 7 feet tall, why did he only 1.6 blocks and 6.7 rebounds a game for Texas A&M Corpus Christi? He should’ve worked over opponents like McNeese State and Nicholls State.

• May 3 | 2:20 p.m. PT

Going farther beyond the arc

But not for another year.

The NCAA men’s basketball rules committee will likely move the three-point line back a foot, from 19 feet, 9 inches to 20 feet, 9 inches starting in the 2008 season. The move was announced Thursday and barring any surprises, will be approved May 25.

It’s slightly longer than the international line (20-6), but still far short of the NBA’s 23-9 standard (though it does shrink to 22 feet at the corners. I don’t design the courts.) And the line will stay the same for women.

The committee hopes moving the line back will help stretch defenses, open up things for post players and alleviate the more physical style of play that has emerged in recent years. Also, ever since the shot began being used in 1987, people have wondered if it was too close.

“I like to say the day that it passed was the day we began discussing moving it back,” said committee chairman Larry Keating. “The basic percentages haven’t changed. I think it’s safe to say you might see some reversal on that (percentages) for men.”

Keating’s overstating things a bit, but not by much. The D-I average is 35 percent from beyond the arc and has been for about 15 years. But it started out better than 35 percent.

The line’s first initial year remains the top shooting percentage season. Indiana (which won the title behind sharp-shooting Steve Alford that season, yet the Hoosiers’ coach, Bobby Knight, wasn’t a huge fan of the three, saying before the title game that “I believe basketball should involve passing and a lot of other things than just coming down and throwing it in.” Funny how things work out.) made 130 of 256 (50.8 percent) three-point attempts that season and things have been downhill ever since. No team has made better than 45 percent since Indiana in 1994.

The 3’s were taken less frequently as first, too. Teams made an average of 3.5 and took 9.2 a game in ’87 (38.4 percent), which is the best on record. The next season, teams made 4.0 shots for every 10.4 (38.3 percent) and it went to 4.4 and 11.8 (37.8 percent) in 1989.

By 1995, teams were making 5.9 3s a game on 17.2 attempts (34.5 percent), which is what Keating’s referring to in terms of basic percentages.

The thing is, with the line going back a foot, that can only take those percentages down even more because teams won’t shoot fewer 3s. It’s just too potent a weapon and too ingrained in players’ games.

Teams have averaged more than 18 three-point attempts for the last six seasons, to say nothing of team like VMI, which attempted 1,383 three-pointers and made 442 of ’em this season, both records.

If you want to contend, you have to shoot the 3. The Gators averaged 7.4 made 3s a game (hitting 40 percent of the time). Ohio State also hit 7.4 a game. Georgetown made 6.4. UNC went for 5.6. You need that threat to stretch the defense.

And think of Florida hitting 10-of-18 3s against Ohio State. The Buckeyes (like every other team in the tournament) had no answer for Lee Humphrey (now the career record holder for Big Dance 3s), Taurean Green and Corey Brewer.

Taking the line back may open things up, but it won’t help percentages or decrease the number of 3s taken. What it’ll do is separate good three-point shooting teams from average ones more than ever.

In other words, if your team struggles from beyond the arc now, better hope your coach finds a shooter on the recruiting trail.

More Beyond the Arc: October | November | December | January | Feburary | March | April

MORE FROM COLLEGE BASKETBALL

College basketball Section Front

5 things to watch this week No. 5 Villanova takes care of Ole Miss Beyond the Arc: ’Nova ruled with killer ‘D’ Davis: Anything changing for ealy season tourneys? Bird, Magic inducted into college hall together UCLA extends Nikola Dragovic's suspension No caffeine needed by Memphis' energetic Pastner SCORES, SCHEDULES, STANDINGS, STATS Odds Matchups College basketball Section Front   Add College basketball headlines to your news reader: