Correct me if I'm wrong, but you have a 50% chance of winning the first game and a 50% chance of winning the second, or a 25% chance overall.
Six NBA Draft choices
- Thread starter C1180
- Start date
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you have a 50% chance of winning the first game and a 50% chance of winning the second, or a 25% chance overall.
I didn't deflect. You did. I said you can disagree with Cals ideology and not be a hater. I have a feeling I was a UK student standing in line overnight in the frigging snow for good seats before you were even born.
There are 4 teams. 1 will win. That's 1/4......25%.......a quarter of the whole. I'm really not sure how to make this any simpler.
ya know...I doubt it. unless you were in line to see Rupp coach.
Off topic...those were the days, when the diehard students got the best seats...(sat right behind Dale Brown, he could hear every word we said, he laughed at us the whole game)...not the damn lotto stuff they went too. Not sure how they do it now
really this is kind of like "gamblers fallacy" of flipping a coin. Even if you flip a standard nickel 9 times and all 9 are heads...the tenth flip is still only 50/50
so is the players or the coach you have issues with? If it its the coach. Who do suggest that will bring the same talent, manage the egos and take UK to a "higher level"?
You think that the draft picks in 2010 and since have had zero effect on UK these last six seasons?
UK has become the school of choice for players whose main goal is get to the NBA as quick as possible. That goal and winning NCs for UK are not always the same. This gets UK some super talented players but they are not always super loyal to UK and often do not have the intense passion to succeed for UK.
The truth is 3 of the players that went early to the NBA this year from UK shouldn't have went but should have stayed in school but like I said the players that are coming to UK seem to think they are failures if they can not cut out to the NBA in one or two years. That is the type players UK is attracting.Other teams hang on to their second tier players for multiple years but at UK because of the type players that they are attracting. If a player cant get to the NBA when he sees all of those one and dones going then he make the mistake and goes when he shouldn't. That is the culture that has been created at UK.
The truth is 3 of the players that went early to the NBA this year from UK shouldn't have went but should have stayed in school but like I said the players that are coming to UK seem to think they are failures if they can not cut out to the NBA in one or two years. That is the type players UK is attracting.Other teams hang on to their second tier players for multiple years but at UK because of the type players that they are attracting. If a player cant get to the NBA when he sees all of those one and dones going then he make the mistake and goes when he shouldn't. That is the culture that has been created at UK.
This is a great post. I think those of us who question Cal's methods are often ridiculed because we bring up something that most all fans on this board know, but don't want to admit; Cal is stubborn to a fault.
Cal has the BEST players every year. Should a final four not be the expectation? If I have a bunch of 3 star players then my expectation is probably making the tournament right? Anything past that is icing on the cake. So if thats the expectation for just a bunch of 3-star kids, what should be the expectation for multiple, multiple Blue-chip 5-stars? Is it unreasonable to think they should make the elite eight/final four?
If I have the fastest car in the race, should I not win a bunch of races? If I have the fastest car in the race, and I don't win every race, whats the problem?
Cal is stubborn to a fault. Refuses to go zone against Uconn in the final in 2014. UL zoned Uconn that year and beat them by damn near 40. Won't watch game tape on Wisconsin? Really? Refused to call a timeout during a strand of 3 straight shot-clock violations. When we were putrid at free throws in the early years he would say "they'll make them when they have to". I love the guy but damn he can be stubborn.
NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE can complain about the success we are having. We are in the hunt EVERY year and its glorious. But Cal is certainly hovering around that thought of "did the least with the most talent" in terms of truly bringing home the goods.
Look everyone knows, you don't like Cal, fine I can live with that because he's not perfect but stfu, I'm tired of hearing your friggen mouth over and over.
The only issue I have with this is people confuse Best Players with 18 year olds with best potential or athletic ability.
I think you make a good point with this. Ill use Kennard for example. Kennard in my opinion was the best "basketball player" in the 2015 class. Has size, athleticism, decision-making, and can absolutely torch the nets. But I don't think he has the most upside or potential. I guess it depends on what you would rather have. Upside and potential don't really do a lot for you unless you are the NBA coach that has them around year 4-5 in the league.
Coach K goes out and gets "basketball players". Their skills are refined right now. They make "basketball plays" during games. They understand ball movement, flow, help-side, hard-hedging on a ball screen (which I love how Coach K teaches this), etc etc.
Until recently, Cal has always recruited high caliber "athletes" that can occasionally make shots. I think he has shifted his thinking a bit as it pertains to the college game and is trying to get a more refined player (as evidenced by last year's class). Last years class was the ultimate in my opinion. You had a bunch of great "basketball players". Coach K has always gone after great shooters who can occasionally make athletic plays while Cal has always coveted the great athlete that can occasionally make shots. Again, I think Cal has adapted and not a moment too soon.
For the record, I expect a lot out of this year's team. Not because we have lots of "athletes" but because we have some guys that are "basketball players". Tyler Ulis is refined and very skilled and I feel like Murray and Briscoe are as well. Skal is obviously very skilled. I think Matthews is a bit raw. Im looking forward to seeing what he can do. I just hope he can adapt his in-game adjustments the same way he has adapted his recruiting. Thats the measure of a great coach, changing with the times.
I don't need to explain myself to you. But since your ??????? makes me think I am making up stories. I have two degrees from UK and I am a lifetime member of the UK alumni association. My 20 year anniversary from graduate school is this fall. Anything else?
As concerned as you are; you must donate thousands to the k fund and UK.
Who knew, one good even get tickets for a basketball game from one of the community colleges
I'm done with you
Last edited:
You're acting like all he's done is bring in projects. It's always funny how much people overrate jump shooting. It's like anything else. As long as you're not horrible, if you do enough other things well, it will be made up in other areas. Cal goes for good overall players rather than building teams around three point shooting.
I could see where it might come across that way, but thats not what I meant. Take a guy like Archie Goodwin; what did Cal see in him? Was he a refined basketball player? Could he knock down shots? No, not at all. I think Cal saw a kid with tremendous athletic ability that was still raw and thought he could mold him into something. I don't blame Cal for going after a kid like this because he was a freak. He just didn't pan out for us at UK, and that being the case doesn't help Cal or UK. As a result, Cal hasn't recruited a kid like him since.
No, there isn't.
The only thing that musings like these reveal is how many people have been failed by the education system.
If you know the second thing about probability, you'd understand how unlikely it is for any one team to win 6 in a row against good competition - even if Cal had his team so sharp that he had a 90% chance to win every single game in the tournament, it still comes out to right around a 50% proposition that they take home the trophy.
This point would be at least arguable if there were a bunch of other coaches doing more with less (or as much with less). As it is, the one and only coach in all of D1 who has been equally or more successful than Cal since he has been at UK is Coach K. In case you've forgotten, K is arguably the greatest coach of all time, and every single roster he's had contains just as many AAs as Cal's do.
No coach in the history of college basketball has ever had a more successful first 6 years at a school than Cal has had at UK. Wrap your head around that fact.
If you don't include Roy and his non-existent classes,
And all of you stealthily "liking" and agreeing with these types of posts - just understand that it makes you look dumb. You guys are the figurative toothless hillbillies that they make fun of on sportscenter when they say the next guy shouldn't take the UK job because those idiots down in the bluegrass will find things to complain about no matter how successful the coach is.
Marvin Williams of UNC did it ages and ages ago. Shows your level of intelligence, coupled with your insane tubby comments in another thread.
I think Calipari is doing a great job at UK but he has not done such a great job that he is not open to criticism. He has faults and has made mistakes. I put him in the top five of college basketball coaches. over all but do not think he is a top five bench coach.
I do not see him as some Messiah of UK basketball that is above criticism. He is what he is and that is a really great recruiter but a just a bit above average bench coach. He has no doubt been good for UK basketball. He however isn't UK basketball. UK was elite before him and will be elite after he is gone.
I do not see him as some Messiah of UK basketball that is above criticism. He is what he is and that is a really great recruiter but a just a bit above average bench coach. He has no doubt been good for UK basketball. He however isn't UK basketball. UK was elite before him and will be elite after he is gone.
ya see, this post is why some other posters take offense.
You praise Cal, then you offer some good, constructive criticism.
But, you just can't stop there. Then you put words in others mouths "messiah", "not above criticism" and so on...
Why did you have to throw jabs in there? Isn't constructive criticism enough for you?
Haters or contrarians always like to say they are only offering constructive criticism, but just like this post; they still throw in the jabs.
Similar threads
