ADVERTISEMENT

Calipari's players verses All other former UK players

UK HEMINGWAY

Junior
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2005
2,858
2,241
113
Would Cal's best ten players be better than all UK players before Cal?
Anthony Davis, Cousins, Towns, Wall, MKG, Brandon Knight, Bledsoe, T Jones, Booker, Randle

Issel, Mashburn, Prince, Rondo, Walker, Mercer, Anderson, Walker, Turpin, Givens

I know I've left some names off the second list that are deserving but I'm only 43. What Cal has done in 6 years is crazy, I say his ten are better.
 
Would Cal's best ten players be better than all UK players before Cal?
Anthony Davis, Cousins, Towns, Wall, MKG, Brandon Knight, Bledsoe, T Jones, Booker, Randle

Issel, Mashburn, Prince, Rondo, Walker, Mercer, Anderson, Walker, Turpin, Givens

I know I've left some names off the second list that are deserving but I'm only 43. What Cal has done in 6 years is crazy, I say his ten are better.
if you took "the day they left UK"...the ten before Cal. If you want 3 years after they left...it would be close
 
So Bowie goes in place of Turpin? If so, I still think Cal's team beats the rest of the players' team at least 4 out of 5 times.
 
Could be mistaken but its close...Cal has had 19 first round draft picks since being here and UK basketball has 23 TOTAL first round draft picks pre Cal. Pretty amazing.
 
Cal team would be to much and way to athletic against the field. Davis,wall,Boogie,knight,bledsoe so on so fourth etc...etc....
 
Are we talking while they were here, or basing this on the player they ended up being? If we're basing it on the player they ended up being, it's hard to go against a team with Wall, Cousins, and Davis.
 
Would Cal's best ten players be better than all UK players before Cal?
Anthony Davis, Cousins, Towns, Wall, MKG, Brandon Knight, Bledsoe, T Jones, Booker, Randle

Issel, Mashburn, Prince, Rondo, Walker, Mercer, Anderson, Walker, Turpin, Givens

I know I've left some names off the second list that are deserving but I'm only 43. What Cal has done in 6 years is crazy, I say his ten are better.

Silliness. The second group would destroy these guys. We live in the now, so it's fun to think these guys are legendary. They are not legendary. Ok just re looked at the list, nope. They would be killed. I'm not so sure they could beat the 95-96 team.
 
Silliness. The second group would destroy these guys. We live in the now, so it's fun to think these guys are legendary. They are not legendary. Ok just re looked at the list, nope. They would be killed. I'm not so sure they could beat the 95-96 team.

You are crazy. The 96 team would not have a chance against that all Cal team. They would get destroyed....destroyed. No one UK team can compete with a starting 5 of Wall, Knight, MKG, Davis and Cousins. You put a 2nd 5 of maybe Noel, Towns, Young, Booker and Bledsoe...yeah, that team would struggle against the 96 team that lost to a UMASS team with one good player and MSU. SMH.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UK HEMINGWAY
You are crazy. The 96 team would not have a chance against that all Cal team. They would get destroyed....destroyed. No one UK team can compete with a starting 5 of Wall, Knight, MKG, Davis and Cousins. You put a 2nd 5 of maybe Noel, Towns, Young, Booker and Bledsoe...yeah, that team would struggle against the 96 team that lost to a UMASS team with one good player and MSU. SMH.

Sounds like you severely underestimate what the 96 team had.

Sagarin rated top team of all time. Not sayin just sayin...
 
Coach Cal has had 3 #1 picks @ UK. The only #1 picks at UK.

If we are talking about their peak...i don't think it'll be close.

If you are talking about @ UK, than field would win barely.
 
Coach Cal has had 3 #1 picks @ UK. The only #1 picks at UK.

If we are talking about their peak...i don't think it'll be close.

If you are talking about @ UK, than field would win barely.
Uh, the only time that should count is at UK.
 
You are crazy. The 96 team would not have a chance against that all Cal team. They would get destroyed....destroyed. No one UK team can compete with a starting 5 of Wall, Knight, MKG, Davis and Cousins. You put a 2nd 5 of maybe Noel, Towns, Young, Booker and Bledsoe...yeah, that team would struggle against the 96 team that lost to a UMASS team with one good player and MSU. SMH.

College performance only. Of that starting 5 who is stopping Issel, or Bowie, or Mashburn, or Rondo, or Walker? Davis is the only kid at 18 (college player) that could of hung with these 20 yr old seasoned college players. Wall is much much better as a pro, but made stupid 18 yr old decisions as a Freshman. Wall and Rondo? Really?
 
College performance only. Of that starting 5 who is stopping Issel, or Bowie, or Mashburn, or Rondo, or Walker? Davis is the only kid at 18 (college player) that could of hung with these 20 yr old seasoned college players. Wall is much much better as a pro, but made stupid 18 yr old decisions as a Freshman. Wall and Rondo? Really?
See, that's what I'm thinking. Cal's guys make great pros and were awesome in college too, some like Davis and MKG even enough to win a championship. But we're talking about experienced and more physically mature players. A junior Mashburn and seniors Delk and Issel etc. MKG as a freshman couldn't stop a junior Mashburn. A senior Delk would be more valuable than a freshman Knight all day long. Now even as a freshman, Davis was a freak. But I don't see the inexperience of that team matching up with players that would be reeeeaally close in pure talent but with an average of 2 more years on em. For that reason, I gotta take the field.

The fact that this is even a debate is a testament to the talent we've had in the last 6 years though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: .S&C.
I still say Cals players. Boogie and Davis would handle the field in the Paint. Throw in Towns and Jones as the back up at the 4 and 5. Wall, Knight, Bledsoe, as the guards its over.
 
Sounds like you severely underestimate what the 96 team had.

Sagarin rated top team of all time. Not sayin just sayin...
Do you have the actual number? Because the 2015 team has the highest Kenpom, BPI, and Massey rating of all time (none are particularly close), and also by far the highest Sagarin going back to the '99 season, before which doesn't seem to be available online.
 
Do you have the actual number? Because the 2015 team has the highest Kenpom, BPI, and Massey rating of all time (none are particularly close), and also by far the highest Sagarin going back to the '99 season, before which doesn't seem to be available online.

If it changed you could be right. I actually haven't looked at it in a long time. But I do know as of 2012 it was rated that high.
 
College performance only. Of that starting 5 who is stopping Issel, or Bowie, or Mashburn, or Rondo, or Walker? Davis is the only kid at 18 (college player) that could of hung with these 20 yr old seasoned college players. Wall is much much better as a pro, but made stupid 18 yr old decisions as a Freshman. Wall and Rondo? Really?

Yeah, 4 of those 5 guys were not on the 96 team. That was my beef with what you said. No way the 96 team's press works on Wall, Bledsoe, and Knight with a full season of practice. It amazes me at the level of delusion with the 96 team. Yes, they are great...but does anyone think a team with Wall, Knight, MKG, Davis and Cousins as its starting 5 (as frosh) would lose a game all season? Especially if we give them the 2nd 5 as their bench and platoon some.

We can agree to disagree. I think people are dreaming with their memories of 96. They are probably the best UK title team ever, but the above fantasy team, why it is just that (a fantasy), would crush the competition in a season.
 
In my opinion, the only way to answer this question fairly is to compare players while they were at UK based on how good they were in the era they played. Any time you bring up players pre 70's, it's too tough to debate. So, let's say we go 1970 - 2008 for pre Cal and base it on their time at UK. Here is my team:

Starters
C - Bowie - Junior (I would actually take his Soph year pre-injury)
F - Issel - Senior
F - Mashburn - Junior
G - Delk - Senior
G - Macy - Senior

Bench
C - Turpin - Senior
F - K. Walker - Senior
F - Mercer - Sophomore
G - Meeks - Junior
G - Rondo - Sophomore

I think that team, based on time at UK beats a Cal team, based on time at UK all day every day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IdaCat
I was looking at the team and Turpin would have more value on both ends. He was a big post factor. Have you ever seen his numbers? And, he was never injured.
1500 pts and 750 rebs and two time All-American. And avg blocking 50 shots a year. He was a force. And played 30 or more games every year. Shot 70% from the line also.
 
I think the Cal players' team has one huge advantage over the others team..DEFENSE. AD, MKG, Wall, Bledsoe, and Towns were elite defenders. This lineup right here would suffocate even the greatest players of all time. Imagine trying to score at the rim with AD and Towns...how about trying to drive past MKG, Wall or EB. Cal's players would have locked them down hard.
 
See, that's what I'm thinking. Cal's guys make great pros and were awesome in college too, some like Davis and MKG even enough to win a championship. But we're talking about experienced and more physically mature players. A junior Mashburn and seniors Delk and Issel etc. MKG as a freshman couldn't stop a junior Mashburn. A senior Delk would be more valuable than a freshman Knight all day long. Now even as a freshman, Davis was a freak. But I don't see the inexperience of that team matching up with players that would be reeeeaally close in pure talent but with an average of 2 more years on em. For that reason, I gotta take the field.

The fact that this is even a debate is a testament to the talent we've had in the last 6 years though.
MKG had no problem stopping great players of all years in his one year at UK.
 
See, that's what I'm thinking. Cal's guys make great pros and were awesome in college too, some like Davis and MKG even enough to win a championship. But we're talking about experienced and more physically mature players. A junior Mashburn and seniors Delk and Issel etc. MKG as a freshman couldn't stop a junior Mashburn. A senior Delk would be more valuable than a freshman Knight all day long. Now even as a freshman, Davis was a freak. But I don't see the inexperience of that team matching up with players that would be reeeeaally close in pure talent but with an average of 2 more years on em. For that reason, I gotta take the field.

The fact that this is even a debate is a testament to the talent we've had in the last 6 years though.

Nostalgia has already set in with younger people for cal teams as well. A junior in mashburn wouldn't be stopped by any freshman calipari players. A senior Delk? On a college court. Pff. Ok.
 
MKG had no problem stopping great players of all years in his one year at UK.

Nostalgia has already set in with younger people for cal teams as well. A junior in mashburn wouldn't be stopped by any freshman calipari players. A senior Delk? On a college court. Pff. Ok.
Bingo. MKG was awesome on D all year. But he never had to face anyone as good as Mashburn who would be 2 years more physically and mentally mature. I'm not saying he'd have his way with MKG but he wouldn't be able to totally contain him. Mash would get his 18-ish points for sure.
 
College performance is dumb to go on. It's all relative. If all of those guys pre-Cal were so great in college, why didn't they do more and achieve more than the guys during the Cal era?

The only real way to have a contextual discussion like this is if you rate the player as they are overall.

You then have to factor in today's athletes compared to those of 40 years ago. Dan Issel could not guard Anthony Davis.
 
Bingo. MKG was awesome on D all year. But he never had to face anyone as good as Mashburn who would be 2 years more physically and mentally mature. I'm not saying he'd have his way with MKG but he wouldn't be able to totally contain him. Mash would get his 18-ish points for sure.
I agree if it was one on one, but even if monster mash got around MKG...Davis and Towns are waiting...he might get his 18, but it would be on 18-20 shots.
 
In my opinion, the only way to answer this question fairly is to compare players while they were at UK based on how good they were in the era they played. Any time you bring up players pre 70's, it's too tough to debate. So, let's say we go 1970 - 2008 for pre Cal and base it on their time at UK. Here is my team:

Starters
C - Bowie - Junior (I would actually take his Soph year pre-injury)
F - Issel - Senior
F - Mashburn - Junior
G - Delk - Senior
G - Macy - Senior

Bench
C - Turpin - Senior
F - K. Walker - Senior
F - Mercer - Sophomore
G - Meeks - Junior
G - Rondo - Sophomore

I think that team, based on time at UK beats a Cal team, based on time at UK all day every day.

Absolutely agree. People have a tendency to hype the present and understate the past.
 
Absolutely agree. People have a tendency to hype the present and understate the past.
Young people do.

But old people have the opposite bias. How often do you hear an older person concede that any modern athlete/music/car/whatever can compete with what they enjoyed in their youth? Almost never.

Is that because everything in the world just started to suck randomly as Johnny turned 40? No, it's because of a cognitive bias.

Nobody is really able to be objective about this stuff in either direction.
 
Young people do.

But old people have the opposite bias. How often do you hear an older person concede that any modern athlete/music/car/whatever can compete with what they enjoyed in their youth? Almost never.

Is that because everything in the world just started to suck randomly as Johnny turned 40? No, it's because of a cognitive bias.

Nobody is really able to be objective about this stuff in either direction.

I promise my opinion on the matter is correct and without bias.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jkwo
The reason I think these discussions are silly is because I don't think it's a contest if you made everyone on both teams the 21-22 year old versions of themselves.
 
There is no way to come up with any kind of real answer to this question,the game is played differently now.Yes,the baskets are still 10' high and the court is 94' long but that is about where the similarities end.

If you look at the Notre Dame game this year you see a glimpse of a "throw back"team vs how basketball is played now at UK.They (the throw back guys)held their own.

Issel probably couldn't have guarded Davis or Towns,but they couldn't have guarded him either,,hell Jim Andrews could have scored 25 on either of them and Dirk Minnefield would have been tough on any guard in the Cal era

Players who were at or near the top of college basketball during the time that they played all were products of the game as it was played at that time.Russell,Chamberlain,Robertson or Baylor could have played the game in any era,on a lesser scale so could Issel, Bowie both Walkers and Mash just as can Davis,Towns Wall etc,etc...
 
ADVERTISEMENT