Welcome to the Friday Feedback, which asks a provocative question today: Does West Virginia hold the wild card in the NCAA Tournament? Or is it a joker? Either way, Devin Ebanks is a card and however he turns is quite possibly how the Mountaineers turn the rest of the way.

It’s too much of a reach to say Ebanks is the wild card. Certainly there are other touted players on touted teams who in their performance hold the fate of their teams. Good teams that go far will have contributions from good players who lead their teams far.

But just as sure, Ebanks is as integral to any top team as anyone else. You saw it late last year when, right about this time, he hit his stride and the Mountaineers marched in step. This year? Well, his last two games are encouraging.

It’s too easy to look at win/loss splits. Plus, the chances are high his team will win if he plays well. But it’s how he gets to the good games and impacts wins that stands out. Remember, this is a guy who has no plays run for him and uses instinct and movement to put up his numbers.

And what of those numbers? 

Check out his play in the five losses: 9.8 PPG, 6.2 RPG (2.0 Off RPG), 1.2 SPG, 13-5 assist-turnover ratio, 20-for-48 FG (41.7 %), 6-for-14 FT.

Fair numbers, though not terribly active for a player who, again, gets a lot of his stats on activity.

In the 13 wins in which he’s played? Try 12.7 PPG, 9.4 RPG (3.9 Off RPG), 1.4 SPG, 43-42 assist turnover ratio (weird), 76-for-165 FG (46.1 %), 50-59 FT.

More points, of course, because of more shots and baskets, but he gets those because of rebounds and trips made to the free-throw line. Talent isn’t the question and down scoring isn’t often a matter of missing shots. It’s the number of shots he doesn’t take or rebounds he doesn’t get. It never seems to be about getting Ebanks involved as much as it’s about Ebanks being involved.

That’s been the thing about Ebanks frequently this season. Unquestionably gifted, he’s been in and out at different points in different games. In a way, he’s the personification of WVU’s inability to play a complete game.

Yet the last two games, he’s looked entirely interested from start to finish and maybe never more than Wednesday’s win at Providence. Afterward, Dave Hickman asked Bob Huggins about the assertiveness of Ebanks virtually from beginning to end and to answer Huggins stepped to the side to take a playful poke at the great Justin Jackson.

Huggins: Yeah, Justin was lobbying in the paper for him to start before the second half.  I told him that he would please Justin if he would come out and play in the first half as well. And he was all for that. He wants to do everything he can to make sure Justin’s happy.
Jackson: He listened.
Huggins: He doesn’t listen to me. He listens to you.
(Pause)
Hickman: Thanks. That helps me a lot.
Huggins: I bet. Just don’t put a picture of Justin in the paper, whatever you do.

Maybe that was all joking, but I wouldn’t discount the possibility Ebanks is or has been made aware of the way he’s been discussed lately.

Three more notes: Well done on the Huggins v. Stewart commentary. Intelligent, civil, another fine representation of what happens here. I’m not going to touch it. It stands on its own. 

Second, Huggins addressed the 500-pound gorilla.

Eventually, Huggins said that as the Friars rallied his players were looking for help from the officials against the pressure.

“They’re not going to help you. They’re not on your team. They’re not looking to help you,” Huggins said. “You’ve got to play through it. Sometimes we don’t do that and I thought we did that a little bit to start the second half.

“They came out and pressured a little bit and were more physical and we were standing around waiting for the whistle to blow instead of being more assertive. You’ve got to be more assertive. The truth of the matter is at the end of the game, you better be more assertive or you’re going to lose the ball game.”

Third, it looks like no Jeremy Hazell for tomorrow’s game and that’d be a relief for the Mountaineers. If he plays, he’ll be affected.

Onto the Feedback. As always, comments appear as posted. In other words, be careful what you wish for.

hershy112 said:

I think Ebanks read the blog earlier this week and all the comments about his offense, haha.

I doubt it. He talked to me after the game.

Sam said:

Tantalizing scenario: Devin Ebanks awakens in the same way that Joe Alexander did at this point in his season three years ago. Tantalizing thought.

I’ll go a step further. Entirely possible scenario.

p.i. reed said:

The way this team plays really scares me for the NCAA tourney.

I hear that, but if you’ve survived the regular season and the Big East Tournament, you should be able to stomach the NCAA Tournament. That is, if you still have stomach lining.

NCMountaineer said:

Is it bad that 11 point leads with 1:19 to go in the game don’t feel safe anymore?

Well, would you rather feel safe with this team up 11 with 1:19 to go even though you know what might happen?

StraightOuttaNorthCentral said:

Seems to me that other teams, both in the BE and the potential top seeds, should be very wary of what could happen if this team starts putting things together. Not too likely to happen, but if it did, watch out.

It’s all about matchups. Providence doesn’t match up with WVU … but thought it could and decided to ditch zone defense in favor of man. The Mountaineers pulverized the Friars inside. Whoops. Villanova, meanwhile, spread out and sped past WVU. It’s cliché, but it’s really sometimes the luck of the draw.

The Artist Formerly Known as EER96 said:

Was anyone else hoping Huggs gave up the pull-over for Lent?

Yes, but only because I prefer my Huggins in a turtleneck and sweater vest.

Josh24601 said:

The way the NCAA game is today, I have no idea how anyone is expected to defend one-on-one a guard who ducks his head determined to dribble to the basket.

It’s sometimes indefensible. And, sadly, it often depends on who’s on the whistle. There came a point Wednesday night when I turned to Hickman and Jackson and said, “I bet I know what happens. … Curry tucks his head and goes at the rim and ends up at the line.” It happened. I was pissed. Last five minutes were brutal.

The 25314 said:

Considering where the program was under Alexis Basil (whose name in some circles is still a can’t-miss punch line), “incredible” might be an understatement on the job Mike Carey has done.

I remember once, I believe in Basil’s last year, when WVU was playing host to Rutgers in the regular-season finale and for some reason late in the game the Mountaineers pulled their best players and ended up losing a game that was fairly close. Turns out Basil was under the impression her team had just qualified for the Big East Tournament based on results of other games that day and was locked into the final spot win or lose. That wasn’t the case at all. I can’t imagine how people would react today.

rekterx said:

I am thinking that Mike Carey could probably have a job coaching men somewhere for at least as much as he is paid at WVU to caoch the women. He was, after all, a successful men’s coach before he came to WVU. But so far Mike has stayed the course and he is reaping the benefits. But will this native son stay home?

I think that’s one of the great unasked questions around the Coliseum. For me, I can’t see Carey leaving here for another women’s job. Now, having accomplished what he’s accomplished here and with women instead of men, I wonder if he’s curious what he can do in the men’s game again. I don’t know, but I just wonder. That said, there are no seniors on this team.

Erinn said:

Watched at Kegler’s last night. I know, I know. I should have watched at the Coliseum.

With the Mountaineers up by one point with nine seconds left, there was a timeout called. Guess what song came on the Kegler’s jukebox.

” …Pack it up. Pack it in. Let me begin.”

It was a glorious occurrence.

(Ahem)

Country Roads said:

Mike
If I remember correctly, didn’t you note earlier this season that WVU fans don’t really know what a top-5 or top-10 basketball team looks like? Or something to that effect? I think we’re seeing that play out. People seem to be flipping out over our recent losses as if the season was an unequivocal failure, yet the polls show us in basically the exact same place we started. To me, the hysteria proves your point.

I did say that, thank you, and you probably make a good point. Sometimes when you get close to the top, you don’t understand why you aren’t at the top and you forgot what it was like to get there.

Sam said:

Country Roads,

Umm – how many top ten teams can’t shoot and don’t have a point guard? It isn’t that we’re stupid. It’s that we recognize that this isn’t a top ten team.

Valid comeback.

GCWVU said:

Very interesting, although I can’t say I’m surprised. The NBA Draft focuses so much on potential these days and it’s clear Ebanks has lots of room to grow and get better. You can’t teach the length that he has which makes him so much more effective on defense. Two N’s in Glenn as well.

Two Ns. I should have known that.

Sam said:

Ebanks won’t make an NBA roster. He’ll be a second round pick. It’d be insanity to leave.

He’d make a roster.

Chris in DC said:

Whoever is telling Ebanks that he’s ready for the NBA is lying to him. He’s neither physically or mentally ready for the grind that is the NBA. His defense is still lagging and his offense has not made the improvement that we all had hoped for after last year’s BE tourney. Devin needs to show that he can lead the team and take over a game before he even thinks of leaving. In my opinion, he’s at least another year away IF he works hard…

Well, trust he’s being advised by more than “Yes Men.” I’m sure there are some involved, but Huggins is really careful about who he lets around his players. I mean, really careful. And he’s is going to get a honest evaluation and he’ll shoot straight with Ebanks, who still has to make up his own mind. As for proving things, I don’t think that’s necessarily true. In many cases for many players, sure, but Devin’s different. He’s not a leading scorer kind of guy and he wouldn’t be asked to do that in the NBA. That, by the way, lowers his NBA ceiling, which then doesn’t make him a top six, top eight, top 10 pick. Perhaps that changes the way you think about this ordeal.

Mack said:

I don’t know what world everyone lives in where they get the idea that in order to be a first round pick you have to actually be ready to step in and play. That hasn’t been the case for a long time.

Bingo, but that may be about to change with the future of the NBA’s collective bargaining agreement. Then, maybe the NBA will need to be more careful with who it picked and and how they’re paid.

Dave said:

The college and pro game are very different so a comparison of whether or not a kid is “ready” based on his college game is irrelevant. Not only is the game different from a skillset perspective, but the needs of an NBA team are different … how many “great” Duke players from their Final Four teams were good/great NBA players and vice-versa, how many great NBA players were also great team-oriented college players? Ebanks is being asked to fit into a team philosophy right now, not an NBA role.

I think that like Alexander, he needs another year in the ultra-competitve Big East. Alexander, right now, is an after-thought even though he was a lottery pick.

Good points, but the concerning thing about Ebanks is this: What’s he great at? You have to be great at something at that next level. Alexander, for example, could score. Ebanks isn’t a great shooter. He doesn’t always dribble cleanly to the basket. His length won’t be as great an advantage in the NBA, which when combined with his slight stature, could compromise his rebounding and defense. That said, scouts really, really like him. He definitely offers something at that level.

Country Roads said:

Just curious—if the folks telling Ebanks that he is ready to turn pro included Huggs and NBA scouts from several different teams, would that make anyone second-guess his or her own opinion? My personal belief is that Ebanks doesn’t look like he’s NBA ready, but if Huggs (and/or a few NBA scouts) thinks he is, I’m going to trust Huggs’ opinion over my own. I’m not saying that Huggs is necessarily right, I’m just saying that he’s far more qualified than I am to render an opinion in this case.

Exactly. I’ll share this: A Western Conference team has seen Ebanks three times — and that’s only the instances I’m aware of. Anaheim, Notre Dame, Providence. How’s that for a sample? Anyhow, he was more or less blown away by Ebanks against the Friars and was scribbling positive things throughout the first half.

Foul Shot said:

Ebanks hoists up a lot of bricks.
So offensively, I would have to question if the guy is ready.
Rebounding and defense show a lot of promise.
The $$ have to be tempting to any kid.
I would guess he will leave.
Hopefully he is not a bust like Joe and Adam Morrison.

Remove Ebanks — or anyone, for that matter — from this situation. I’m really bummed out that the future of players who may never even make it in the NBA is being influenced and accelerated by the grom forecast of the financial future there.

SheikYbuti said:

Foul Shot’s paragraph structure has inspired me to compose something I’ll call “Ebanks Haiku”:

Limited scorer
Rebounding virtuoso
Truck’s jaw is solid

I don’t get it … but enjoy the weekend!