Lee will contribute..

[ia.ukfan]

Cal doesn't redshirt, but Lee should have last season, IMHO.

Then Cal would not have felt compelled to "platoon". He could have rotated his 8 draft guys(then 7 once Poy was injured or insert Ulis as number 8). Would have tightened up the rotation and we wouldn't have played guys out of position as much. It would have given the top 8(then 7) more minutes.

Doesn't really matter now, but I think it would have helped last season.

Just thinking out loud.

If he would have redshirted he simply goes pro as a redshirt sophomore instead of a junior most likely. Its hypothetically possible he stays four years, but I couldn't see a situation where he stays five years (i.e. redshirt senior). If Lee gets 20+ minutes this year it would seem likely he will declare for the draft.

If anyone should have been redshirted I'd argue Hawkins or Willis, but as you stated, Cal doesn't do it so its a mute point.

 

[CUT-NETS]

Lee's leash was short because he had made continuous mental errors AND a there was a bevy of depth better than him at his position.

Who was better than Young? Young could also outplay his mistakes with his skills, none of which are comparable to Lee.

Comparing the two doesn't hold water.

Just don't think its that simple and basic. I think thats what we as fans want to think because its logical and doesn't suggest anything else at work here. I watched all the games. I don't recall Lee's mental errors costing us baskets over and over. Did he get lost occasionally? Yes. I recall him struggling defending under the basket out of bounds plays. But i don't ever recall this costing us multiple baskets.

Frankly I think it's naive to not at least consider that Cal gives a longer leash to his NBA bound players.

Another note: Go back and watch Archie Goodwin's games. How many times did he drive out of control to the basket only to throw up some wild shot that never came close to going in? How many times did you say "what the hell is he doing" that season? Did Cal take him out? Nope. His excuse was, "well i didn't have anyone to put in for him". You didn't? Hell, put in a walk on. Any other program is going to yank Archie and make him sit for a LONG time, maybe his whole freshmen season. But Cal couldn't do that because his recruiting pitch to Archie was "I can get you drafted". Archie isn't going to get drafted if he's wasting away on the bench. That kid should have rotted on the bench for his mistakes that year. Anywhere else and he's sitting and sitting and sitting. But not at UK. You can't tell me that kid deserved to play through those mistakes. And you can't say "well i didn't have anyone else". How often do we see great coaches yank an entire starting 5 (Coach K does this, Roy Williams) and put in 5 guys at the end of the bench just to prove a point? Cal could have yanked Archie for ANYONE. The kid killed us multiple times. I thought he was the worst player on the floor several times. But he kept right on playing. He had NBA aspirations, and thats what Cal promised him. "I can't hide you".

 

[anon_9qtxg60vqzy0y]

I agree actually. Not knowing where to be on offense or defense is a mistake of the highest offense for coaches. However, a turnover is a turnover, and those walks and blocked shots from Dakari still resulted in a lost possession.

But I think its more than that with Lee. This may open up a can of worms but Im going to say it anyway; part of me wonders if Lee's playing time compared to Dakari's wasn't directly correlated with Lee's aspirations for the NBA. Dakari was a kid that considered being a one and done. He had high aspirations of being in the NBA. Lee was a volleyball player, a free spirit, marching to the beat of his own drum. Sometimes I feel like Cal gave Dakari a longer leash because of his dream to be in the NBA, even if at times he wasn't as good as Lee.

Conspiracy theorists abound! Dude, I've read some dumb posts on this board. Your post ranks right up there with the dumbest of the dumb. Were you complaining 2 years ago when Dakari single-handedly put us in the position to beat Louisville in the Sweet 16? Aaron's heroics overshadowed Dakari's play but if we hadn't had Dakari that night, we go home. You're too busy picking apart Cal's coaching techniques than actually watching the game unfold. If you possessed any basketball knowledge at all, you would understand why Cal plays certain players more than others. He knows his players a little better than we as fans do. He recruited them, he coaches them in practice so he knows which player gives us the best shot to win. Get a grip. Playing players to further his agenda over winning? That's good stuff man.

 

[brianpoe]

Just don't think its that simple and basic. I think thats what we as fans want to think because its logical and doesn't suggest anything else at work here. I watched all the games. I don't recall Lee's mental errors costing us baskets over and over. Did he get lost occasionally? Yes. I recall him struggling defending under the basket out of bounds plays. But i don't ever recall this costing us multiple baskets.

Frankly I think it's naive to not at least consider that Cal gives a longer leash to his NBA bound players.

I think it is more along the lines...all coaches give longer leashes to the better players.

 

[CUT-NETS]

I think it is more along the lines...all coaches give longer leashes to the better players.

Added the below after you quoted my post;

Another note: Go back and watch Archie Goodwin's games. How many times did he drive out of control to the basket only to throw up some wild shot that never came close to going in? How many times did you say "what the hell is he doing" that season? Did Cal take him out? Nope. His excuse was, "well i didn't have anyone to put in for him". You didn't? Hell, put in a walk on. Any other program is going to yank Archie and make him sit for a LONG time, maybe his whole freshmen season. But Cal couldn't do that because his recruiting pitch to Archie was "I can get you drafted". Archie isn't going to get drafted if he's wasting away on the bench. That kid should have rotted on the bench for his mistakes that year. Anywhere else and he's sitting and sitting and sitting. But not at UK. You can't tell me that kid deserved to play through those mistakes. And you can't say "well i didn't have anyone else". How often do we see great coaches yank an entire starting 5 (Coach K does this, Roy Williams) and put in 5 guys at the end of the bench just to prove a point? Cal could have yanked Archie for ANYONE. The kid killed us multiple times. I thought he was the worst player on the floor several times. But he kept right on playing. He had NBA aspirations, and thats what Cal promised him. "I can't hide you".

Was Archie a "better player"? Im not sure about that. Freak athlete? Yes. But better basketball player? I don't think so. He is fighting for an NBA spot right now.

 

[brianpoe]

Added the below after you quoted my post;

Another note: Go back and watch Archie Goodwin's games. How many times did he drive out of control to the basket only to throw up some wild shot that never came close to going in? How many times did you say "what the hell is he doing" that season? Did Cal take him out? Nope. His excuse was, "well i didn't have anyone to put in for him". You didn't? Hell, put in a walk on. Any other program is going to yank Archie and make him sit for a LONG time, maybe his whole freshmen season. But Cal couldn't do that because his recruiting pitch to Archie was "I can get you drafted". Archie isn't going to get drafted if he's wasting away on the bench. That kid should have rotted on the bench for his mistakes that year. Anywhere else and he's sitting and sitting and sitting. But not at UK. You can't tell me that kid deserved to play through those mistakes. And you can't say "well i didn't have anyone else". How often do we see great coaches yank an entire starting 5 (Coach K does this, Roy Williams) and put in 5 guys at the end of the bench just to prove a point? Cal could have yanked Archie for ANYONE. The kid killed us multiple times. I thought he was the worst player on the floor several times. But he kept right on playing. He had NBA aspirations, and thats what Cal promised him. "I can't hide you".

Wait, you don't know why Cal didn't bench Archie? You are ok with one of our walk-ons? We had zero depth, that is why he said I can't hide you.

Your argument is making less sense. Some of Archie's play may have hurt us, but a walk-on would have killed us.

Comparing Young and Lee and now the zero depth 2013 with Archie and a walk-on?

I'm trying here, you can do better than this.

 

[CUT-NETS]

I think it is more along the lines...all coaches give longer leashes to the better players.

I think its more and I guess thats where we'll have to just agree to disagree. Cal's latest "Manifesto" said "Who wants to be next"? This is in reference to "Who wants to be the next guy get drafted into the NBA".

He can't keep that promise by sitting a kid when he makes mistakes. I know its tough to think about and we don't want it to be true. We want to think that Cal is always doing whatever is best for "UK" and the program at all times. But he himself has admitted that he cares more about the kids. If thats the case do you think he would have a problem with playing a kid after multiple mistakes to help them pursue their NBA dreams, even at the detriment of the team? I don't. He's going to play his kids with NBA aspirations because thats what he has promised and thats what he has built here.

Say again, if you can't see that a kid with NBA aspirations gets a longer leash then you are simply being naive. Its not just because they are the best players.

 

[CUT-NETS]

Wait, you don't know why Cal didn't bench Archie? You are ok with one of our walk-ons? We had zero depth, that is why he said I can't hide you.

Your argument is making less sense. Some of Archie's play may have hurt us, but a walk-on would have killed us.

Comparing Young and Lee and now the zero depth 2013 with Archie and a walk-on?

I'm trying here, you can do better than this.

We went to the NIT that year! Who cares!!? What would it have mattered?

Maybe a walk on coming in would have taught Archie a valuable lesson. Maybe Archie would have thought "man I can't drive out of control to the basket anymore". Thats the whole point. The bench is for teaching a lesson. A walk on would have come in and hustled. Hell, imagine if Polson comes in. He's likely to not hurt you at all. Archie was HURTING US. Yet he played right through it. Yes I would have been damn fine with one of our walk ons in order to teach Archie a lesson and get him to correct his mistakes. Are you kidding? No, id rather have Archie just drive wildly into the lane and throw crap shots 90mph off the bottom of the rim or the backboard. Thats really helping the team. Say again, we went to the NIT and lost to Robert Morris. I guess if a walk-on would have gotten some minutes in place of Archie (because of his mistakes) we would have not even made the NIT? Oh well. I don't know.

 

[brianpoe]

I think its more and I guess thats where we'll have to just agree to disagree. Cal's latest "Manifesto" said "Who wants to be next"? This is in reference to "Who wants to be the next guy get drafted into the NBA".

He can't keep that promise by sitting a kid when he makes mistakes. I know its tough to think about and we don't want it to be true. We want to think that Cal is always doing whatever is best for "UK" and the program at all times. But he himself has admitted that he cares more about the kids. If thats the case do you think he would have a problem with playing a kid after multiple mistakes to help them pursue their NBA dreams, even at the detriment of the team? I don't. He's going to play his kids with NBA aspirations because thats what he has promised and thats what he has built here.

Say again, if you can't see that a kid with NBA aspirations gets a longer leash then you are simply being naive. Its not just because they are the best players.

I'm sorry Cuts, the ones with a better chance for the NBA are almost always the better players.

We have spent years watching you crap on Cal, you always seem to come up with something. Only you and Ulismyman think Lee was given the shaft in regards to playing time, despite the fact he gets lost on both ends and cannot shoot or dribble or that he has had a ton of talent in front of him.

Lee is a great kid with a lot of energy and hustle but it is not hard to see where he needs to get better and why he played the minutes he did.

 

[brianpoe]

We went to the NIT that year! Who cares!!? What would it have mattered?

Maybe a walk on coming in would have taught Archie a valuable lesson. Maybe Archie would have thought "man I can't drive out of control to the basket anymore". Thats the whole point. The bench is for teaching a lesson. A walk on would have come in and hustled. Hell, imagine if Polson comes in. He's likely to not hurt you at all. Archie was HURTING US. Yet he played right through it. Yes I would have been damn fine with one of our walk ons in order to teach Archie a lesson and get him to correct his mistakes. Are you kidding? No, id rather have Archie just drive wildly into the lane and throw crap shots 90mph off the bottom of the rim or the backboard. Thats really helping the team. Say again, we went to the NIT and lost to Robert Morris. I guess if a walk-on would have gotten some minutes in place of Archie (because of his mistakes) we would have not even made the NIT? Oh well. I don't know.

You think Cal was playing for the NIT all season? He had to play Archie in order for Archie to get better, sitting him for Brian Long would not have made Archie better, there is no true competition in that move. UK would have done worse and Archie probably would be upset.

You really have no idea how a basketball team works do you?

 

[CUT-NETS]

I'm sorry Cuts, the ones with a better chance for the NBA are almost always the better players.

We have spent years watching you crap on Cal, you always seem to come up with something. Only you and Ulismyman think Lee was given the shaft in regards to playing time, despite the fact he gets lost on both ends and cannot shoot or dribble or that he has had a ton of talent in front of him.

Lee is a great kid with a lot of energy and hustle but it is not hard to see where he needs to get better and why he played the minutes he did.

I think deep down you know that some of what I am saying is true, but like most, you don't want to admit it. You hate to think that Cal would care more about the success of the kids than he does the success of the program.

Im sorry but Cal is about getting these kids to the league. Helping families for generations. He's already proven he's not going to risk their NBA aspirations by benching them. Not gonna happen. Archie Goodwin should have been planted on the bench next to Cal until he figured out how to fix his mistakes. James Young should have taken a seat after every bad post entry pass until he learned that he needed to fix that. Thats how basketball "typically" works. Thats how a "team" works.

Cal has built this think out of "come here and I will get you to the league. I promise I will get you to the league". If kid comes in and gets benched, he's not getting to the league = Cal breaking his promise.

You think Cal was playing for the NIT all season? He had to play Archie in order for Archie to get better, sitting him for Brian Long would not have made Archie better, there is no true competition in that move. UK would have done worse and Archie probably would be upset.

You really have no idea how a basketball team works do you?

Did Archie get better? Did he stop throwing shots off the backboard? No. Sitting Archie for Brian Long would have sent a message to Archie "hey you better quit screwing around".

Archie would have been upset? Coach Cal, is that you? Who freaking cares man. This is UK basketball, not the university of Archie Goodwin. If he gets upset maybe he should quit throwing shots off the backboard.

Brian you and I have had great discussions and debates on here and I enjoy it, but maybe its you that truly doesn't know how a basketball team works. I totally understand that with frosh that you only have for a year you have to let them play through their mistakes. I get that. But that team with Archie was STRUGGLING. When do you reach the point where you say "hey, they need to play through their mistakes, but this kid is killing us right now"?

 

[CUT-NETS]

You think Cal was playing for the NIT all season? He had to play Archie in order for Archie to get to the NBA, sitting him for Brian Long would not have made Archie better, there is no true competition in that move. UK would have done worse and Archie probably would be upset.

You really have no idea how a basketball team works do you?

Fixed that for you.

 

[brianpoe]

Fixed that for you.

Whatever Cuts, you haven't liked Cal for so long that you reach for crazy theories.

First you say Cal plays players even if it is detrimental to the team and yet you would sit them if it were equally detrimental.

Let's discuss something other than your absurd obsession of hating on Coach.

 

[ulismyman]

Cutnets makes good points about that team anyway.....polson should have been playing for Harrow..but i digress

 

[moe#8]

I really think Lee will help out a bunch this year. We are going to have a very good team this year, and may hang another banner.

 

[CUT-NETS]

Whatever Cuts, you haven't liked Cal for so long that you reach for crazy theories.

First you say Cal plays players even if it is detrimental to the team and yet you would sit them if it were equally detrimental.

Let's discuss something other than your absurd obsession of hating on Coach.

I mean I don't see how you just don't find that plausible at all.

Coach Cal latest "Manifesto": "So to all the recruits and their families out there; who wants to be next"

What do you think he's talking about there?

Let me help you. He's talking about the NBA Brian. Who wants to be the next to get drafted, make millions, change their families lives. This is his recruiting pitch. "You want to get drafted and make millions? You come to UK". He has not hidden from that.

So if that is his pitch, if that is his "PROMISE" how is he going to accomplish that if a kid comes in and doesn't play because of making mistakes? How is he going to fulfill this promise? You think he told Murray to come here and work hard and "maybe" he will start, and "maybe" he will play well enough to get drafted in the first round? Hell no. He told Murray "you come here and Im going to start you out on the perimeter. Im not platooning anymore so there will be plenty of minutes. If you come in and work hard I "promise" you I will get you drafted in the first round and more than likely a lottery pick". You think even if Murray comes in and is a turnover machine and shooting 25% from the field that he's going to sit Murray after making him that promise? You think he's going to put in Hawkins for Murray. After making his family that promise? Think about it. If UK plays 10 scrimmages and Hawkins puts up the same numbers as Murray in all 10 scrimmages when given the same minutes which player is Cal going to play? The kid with NBA aspirations.

"I can't hide you here" aka "you are going to play. don't worry about making mistakes, you will play. So if you make mistakes its going to expose you because Im going to play you. So you better play well or you will get exposed. I can't hide you because I won't hide you. This is my promise."

 

[CUT-NETS]

Whatever Cuts, you haven't liked Cal for so long that you reach for crazy theories.

First you say Cal plays players even if it is detrimental to the team and yet you would sit them if it were equally detrimental.

Let's discuss something other than your absurd obsession of hating on Coach.

This line right here gives you away completely. This is the line that tells me you see what Im saying. You hate it, and don't want to admit it, but you see it. Its the same thing as losing an argument with a friend when you're a kid and saying "whatever man, you're stupid anyway".

You don't have to say, "i agree with you Cut" because that bolded line tells me what I already knew. You are a sharp guy Brian, I know you at least somewhat understood and could see what Im talking about.

 

[anon_9qtxg60vqzy0y]

Was Archie a "better player"? He is fighting for an NBA spot right now.

Do you realize what you just said about Archie? Think long and hard about it. You're ragging on Archie using an example of "he's fighting for an NBA spot now". I would love to be in consideration for fighting for an NBA spot making 2 million plus like Archie makes at the ripe old age of 20. So you think the NBA is like the YMCA where they choose players at random? No, they have professional player personnel departments within each organization evaluating talent. The Phoenix Suns apparently thought Archie was a good enough player for them to take him in the first round. Yet you're wondering why Cal played Archie over players who are now currently looking or just starting jobs in the outside world because they weren't talented enough to play in the NBA or overseas? Hey man we get it, you don't like Cal. That's cool. Just don't make yourself look ignorant in the process. It's a bad look.

 

[fatguy87]

Per minute, Lee has been productive. That's why I think he'll be good, maybe even a quiet great next season.

Lee's offensive rebounding is outstanding, shoots a high FG%, and has shown potential as a rim protector. Defensive rebounding and free throw shooting haven't been strengths, but no player is perfect. He showed some potential as a passer this season, evidence of some growth since his first season.

Other than put pack dunks, Lee isn't go to astound and wow. He won't put up a gaudy PPG total, but he has a real chance to be an outstanding big by just doing what frontcourt players are supposed to do.

 

[kybassfan]

Some of you guys have short memories. I recall Lee picking up the pieces when Cauley-Stein went down to a foot injury year before last. The potential is there. Cal has said the potential is there. He's played behind some stellar talent. Now is his time to shine.

Cal will give him his chance.

 

[shutzhund]

excellent point jason