Courtesy the Big 12 Conference.

What a weekend for Randy Mazey in his three-game debut as WVU baseball coach.

A 4-0 loss in the opener, even though the Mountaineers weren’t awful (three unearned runs after a two-out throwing error in a three-run inning, no runs and two hits in 3.1 innings from relief pitchers and the tying run at the plate in the ninth inning).

A 7-6 loss on a walk-off single, but a rally from three runs down early in the game, a two-out single to take the lead in the eighth and 12 base hits.

A 4-3 win in the finale with 13 more hits, solid pitching and, apparently, a flash of Mazey’s acumen.

One of the three players to sign the so-called commitment letter on signing day, Jacky Marcellus is now bound to WVU by way of Friday’s signed national letter of intent. Note the end there: WVU has 26 players in the recruiting class. The specifics were a little sheltered on signing day, but the whispers were WVU could permissibly get to 28.

You’ll remember Marcellus was one of the three who kinda-sorta signed on national signing day and that there wasn’t much to be said about his future except that, obviously, he wasn’t aboard on the big day.

That didn’t look good because all of those questions are supposed to be answered before signing day.

(Update! Bob Huggins was asked on today’s Big 12 teleconference about Kilicli’s perspective: “If Deniz has figured it out, I want him to come talk to me.”)

Interesting admission from WVU’s revived and suddenly vibrant big man: Part of Deniz Kilicli’s late-season uptick has to do with being at peace playing his game without debilitating fear of reprisal from officials.

He’s consistently posting up with power. He’s using his shoulder aggressively again and again. He’s stampeding across the lane to set up his hook shot. And he’s getting god shots and a lot of free throws.

This wasn’t the case before and he used to get in foul trouble or get into trouble trying to stay away from fouls. Both led to fewer minutes and a lesser impact than what he’s enjoyed the past three weeks.

Believe it or not, a guy who plays exclusively in the back court and for about 29 minutes per game hasn’t made a 3-pointer since Feb. 16, 2011.

That’d be Juwan Staten, who we must also remember didn’t play last season after transferring from Dayton, where he led the Atlantic 10 in assists and where he missed 22 of his 26 3-point attempts in 2010-11. But he was 1-for-1 that day against what was the league’s best 3-point defense as the Flyers rocked Charlotte behind Staten’s 13 points and four assists.

That’s a long drought for someone as present as as seemingly important as a point guard. I mean, he hasn’t accidentally made one at the end of a half or a shot clock. And he doesn’t really even try. I’ve been tracking this a while and the thought never seems to go through his mind. He eschews 3s in warmups, too.

The team trickles out of the locker room to the floor about 90 minutes before the game and works on things or messes around with stuff on their own time. Staten didn’t even come out today until the team started stretching. Then when it was time for pregame drills he was all layups and short jumpers even with the option to step or float back behind the line. That’s his game, though. He doesn’t break character.

He’s aware of the rut — I probably had something to do with that — just as he’s aware of his strengths and limitations.  Yet he and Kansas freshman Rio Adams are the only guards on scholarship in the Big 12 Conference who haven’t made a 3 this season — and Adams has played in seven fewer games and about one-seventh the amount of minutes.

It’s weird, unless you’re Staten.

“My whole life, I’ve never been a 3-point shooter,” he said. “If I’m wide open, I’ll take it.”

And there’s another quality assist from Staten, because it sets up an interesting debate. Can you be an optimal point guard without the threat of a 3-point shot?

“That’s a good question,” he said. “If you can find other ways to be effective in the games, I don’t really think 3-pointers are that important.”

Want some FGM+FTA stats? Follow me …

Welcome to the Friday Feedback, which waves goodbye. Again. Bill Bedenbaugh is off to Oklahoma University, a stunning turn of events because, golly, he hadn’t talked to anyone. I trust everyone saw through that one.

This was in the works for a while, attached to Bedenbaugh’s predecessor getting a job, and certainly didn’t start, develop and conclude within 36 hours. Consider, too, that it might have been played out a little bit to address things with recruits and prospects and to give Dana Holgorsen a little time to react and replace.

I wonder if he has a guy at the table by, say, Monday. He’s moved fast this offseason.

Then again, this one maybe sneaked up on him and it’s his most critical hire to date. A bad move could keep WVU on the lower half of the Big 12 for a while. Really, why did OU hire Bedenbaugh?

I heard last night the Mountaineers will go on a “national search” because it’s that big of a deal. Bedenbaugh was set to make $300,000 this season. His replacement might not get that — and it might be more, for all we know — but the funds are there to go all in and not have that be a limitation.

Will it be someone Dana has worked with or someone with state and WVU roots? Will it be an Air Raid guy who is familiar with the offense and its zone blocking schemes? Will it be someone who is a power running guy and can blend those schemes with that the Mountaineers do?

Answers soon.

Onto the Feeback. As always, comments appear as posted. In other words, keep calm and read on.

Jeff in Akron said:

To me, without specific details to the deal with IMG Raese’s comments appear to be a man trying to protect/save his company and its earnings future. Based on the timing it appears he has his own interests ahead of WVU’s.

It boils down to whether you trust Oliver Luck or John Raese. Since it would appear that the deal with IMG would reduce Mr. Raese and his company to only a single slice(maybe) of the pie that he once horded. To me the decision is an easy one on that point alone.

Raese vs. Luck in a battle of vision and integrity, doesn’t seem like much of a battle to me.

And then there’s this: Is Mr. Raese guaranteed that slice? Not necessarily. But is Raese guaranteed to do business with IMG College in the future? Also not necessarily. Remember, that’s his call. Does this seem like the reaction of a man who is about to be a business partner with the party he’s attacking? Wouldn’t be a wise decision to back away from WVU, but who knows how offended he is by what he’s alleging?

It’s difficult to whittle last night’s blowout loss down to a small number of instances that left an indelible mark. But I did. Seems to most that it’s far too late in the season for a good team, or at least improving one, to make the mistakes it made in the first games of the seasons.

Yet there was WVU, in game No. 24, turning the ball over 18 times. The season-high was 20 in the opener at Gonzaga. The Mountaineers had an alarming number of what they call live ball turnovers, which are the ones that happen in play and lead to the other team grabbing the miscue and running the other way.

Think Eron Harris spinning around at the top of the key and getting his pocket picked by Pierre Jackson for what would have been a dunk if not for some hustle by Harris and a foul — shallow praise, I know.

But there were two turnovers in particular that boggled the minds of many and they’ve been issues all season long.

Tried to warn you, but I get weird when I’m on the road for spots or stretches. Those plane rides and solo meals and hotel sequestrations send the wheels spinning and then things happen.

Certainly for a while now we’ve been trying to figure out WVU, who the Mountaineers are and what makes them tick. How and why do they win and lose? What’s the key to one and an explanation for the other?

There’s no easy answer. It’s not a static conversation. But I like statistics and numbers, probably a bit too much, and I value some and lean away from others.

Example: I think rebounding margin can be really overrated. Not to get too detailed, but very simply, if you have a very good shooting percentage, you have fewer chances to rebound the ball and outrebound an opponent — and you probably hold the lead a lot, which skews things further with opponents who have to shoot more to try to stay with you. And if you can’t shoot, you have more chances to create a misleading stat.

I also think the ways you measure efficient offenses means more to the outcome. Points-per-possession is a pretty valuable metric because it sort of combines shooting percentage, 3-pointers, turnovers and rebounding in one roundabout way.

So the more and more I looked at WVU’s season and statistics, I started to realize a few things that I thought were telling. The team was better when it scored more.

Shocking, I know, but try and follow me here.

Begin with today’s Big 12 minute.

Tough to answer that without the benefit of tonight’s game, but this is the beginning of the end. The past three games almost feel like the conclusion of the non-conference schedule and WVU closes with seven of the final eight games against teams in today’s RPI top 55.

The Mountaineers are 1-9 against the top 100, thanks to that white-knuckler against Eastern Kentucky.

Anyhow, Baylor is not unbeatable and the Bears have of late struggled. It’s certainly possible and WVU has one of three winning road records in Big 12 play — though that’s a touch misleading considering who those three wins are against, much the same as WVU’s five Big 12 wins are worth exploring.

But the Mountaineers are better, certainly offensively and probably even defensively, too. I just wonder how that projects to this next part of the schedule.

“They’ve got a couple guys now making more shots and playing a little more than they did earlier in the year,” Baylor Coach Scott Drew said. “Add that offense to a good defense and good rebounding team and that’s what gets you wins.

“Coach Huggins is always gong to have his guys ready and in position to win. Normally, that comes down to making shots.”

That was WVU’s fatal flaw earlier in the season. As recently as Jan. 27, the day before the loss to Kansas, the Mountaineers ranked 314th out of 345 teams in field-goal percentage (39.5) and 272nd in 3-point field-goal percentage (29.2) – and that was even an improvement upon previous numbers.

WVU is now at No. 291 in overall shooting percentage (40.1) and No. 268 in 3-point percentage (31.5). The Mountaineers shot a season-high 56.5 percent against Texas Tech, 46.2 against Texas (sixth-highest this season) and 51.2 percent against TCU.

They’ve also averaged seven 3-pointers per game in the past three games. WVU made seven 3s only five times in its first 20 games. Wins against Texas Tech (10-for-18) and TCU (7-for-10) saw the best two 3-point percentages of the season.

“We didn’t do that earlier in the year,” Huggins said.

So if you think WVU can win tonight, are you of that opinion because it’s your team or because your team is improving and thus able to keep this going?