lol what? If he's not the best he's the 2nd best golfer of all time. What in the world are you talking about?
AD will go down as the best who ever played at UK.
- Thread starter BigBlueFanGA
- Start date
lol what? If he's not the best he's the 2nd best golfer of all time. What in the world are you talking about?
He had the best season any Kentucky player has ever had. He is the greatest talent to ever play at UK. He has a strong chance to be the best pro Kentucky has ever had. All Issel has on him is that he played 3 seasons and in a generally less competitive era where gaudy stats were more common. Issel was our greatest. Davis is now.
For my part, I wasn't talking about UK stats. Those belong to Issel and probably always will.
I don't think it's that easy to write off, since he had a great pro career.
If you are making the qualifier that it is their UK career only, then yeah, it's Issel. I don't get why you would, since most of the time you're talking about a guy's full career, and that's what most people care about.
No UK player has ever had a season in the NBA like AD did last year. Not even close. And he's 22 years old. UK has never had a player who was legitimately in the discussion for being the best player on the planet. Anthony Davis is. You seem to be trying to downplay that like it's just people being focused on right now, but those are historical truths.
I guess someone else like that could come around in 10-15 years, but the odds are against it.
Well, I was talking about UK careers. I suppose you couldn't make an argument there and jumped to the NBA? Ok.
So let me get this straight, Davis' single year last year eclipses the career that Prince, Issel or any other UK player in the NBA? Hmmm.
Guess there's one in every crowd.
Yes. As far as the NBA is concerned, I think we'll have to watch Davis' career unfold. Certainly started the right way.
That's not what he said. You're belittling how good he is. He's not stating he's already had the best career, but one could say he's already the best player to have played here. Those are different things.
I think I was quite clear. I was drawing an analogy between Woods early career and Davis early career and the folly of crowning a GOAT based merely on very early success.
What part of "fabulous" gave you heart burn?
Where exactly did I belittle how good he is? That's utter BS. I'm merely stating that if we're going to compare careers, we give Davis time to have one.
People are justified in saying what they are saying about Davis, at least what I've seen in here.
Davis won every award, defensively and offensively, possible. He also won a NC and an Olympic gold medal. Once he wins an NBA title, his legacy is complete. Best ever at UK....imo
I believe this OP is saying if you were to list every basketball player that ever played for UK and said "OK which of these is the best basketball player....PERIOD" You would say "Anthony Davis", and then you would say "Anthony Davis is the best basketball player who also played at UK".
Its even debateable who has the best UK Career, if you want to talk in game statistics, the edge would probably go to Dan, if you talk about best career, meaning awards, achievements, etc. Then the answer is Davis.
IMO Anthony Davis and will always be the best basketball player who wore the UK Uniform. Even if you older guys or homers for player you grew up watching won't admit or realize it.
Its even debateable who has the best UK Career, if you want to talk in game statistics, the edge would probably go to Dan, if you talk about best career, meaning awards, achievements, etc. Then the answer is Davis.
IMO Anthony Davis and will always be the best basketball player who wore the UK Uniform. Even if you older guys or homers for player you grew up watching won't admit or realize it.
My post was aimed at the argument that Dan had better stats so ergo he was better . There are circumstances that cannot be compared between the two players that allowed Issel to accumulate the more gaudy numbers . But that in and of itself shouldn't determine the answer , besides the question posed has no parameters set and is pretty much open to interpretation however anyone sees fit . I took it as who will be associated or synonymous with UK and I'm confident the answer is Davis .
Thing is, for that kind of statement to hold up over time, you gotta have the stats to back it up. The hype will go away with time. Stats don't do that. Davis needs to have time to build up the numbers to back all this up. With him, we may not be talking just the best at UK. I think it trivializes what he may accomplish just by shrugging your shoulders and saying "I ain't seen no better". That's kinda like declaring a winner in a race when he hasn't finished yet.
You're analogy was really a poor one in my humble opinion. Trying to say we are giving too much praise to Anthony Davis and then using Tiger Woods, who you can still actually make an argument as the greatest golfer of all time, worst case scenario second best completely misses the mark on a good analogy. Maybe if you said "Whoa Whoa Whoa - slow down there fellas - this might be a little early. Remember when people were saying Ken Griffey Jr would be the greatest of all time - but then injuries and such relegated him to maybe only a top 20 talent." would have been a better analogy.
Not going "Whoa whoa whoa guys, slow down there a bit, remember when people were saying Tiger Woods would be the greatest of all time, and now he's only the 2nd greatest of all time?? Really missed the mark on that one fellas!"
It was just a really silly analogy. You might as well have said "Whoa whoa whoa guys, remember when early in his career people said Michael Jordan would be the GOAT? Well guess how silly that looks now, because you can make a reasonable argument that Wilt Chamberlain is the GOAT, and Michael Jordan is the second best of all time! Hah, see how silly you guys look!!!!11!"
Points per game has nothing to do with how great you were, many players affect games without hardly scoring.
Who else that played for UK accomplished:
National Champion
MVP of Final Four
(Naismith, Wooden, Etc.) National Player of the Year
Defensive Player of the Year
Freshman Player of the Year
Number 1 Draft Pick
a better question: Who else that played in NCAA that accomplished those let alone at UK...
Arguments exist for Wilt, Jabar, James and I could go on for the NBA GOAT. Maybe, probably its Jordan but I'd vote for James though he hasn't finished yet either. I know you are a Tiger Boi but folks will argue his position on the list as well.
I stand by my analogy.
One huge advantage AD has in all of this is the time period he played. A talent like his 20-25 years ago would not have even been 1st team All American. That's more of a slight to the college game today than AD himself. Think about guys like Bowie, who came in and were so damn talented. He couldn't even muster consenus 1st team All SEC as a freshman. That is how much the game has changed through the years. As I said earlier, AD is an amazing talent and if he continues the way he is going, between NCAA awards, multiple gold medals and NBA awards, it won't even be a debate as to who the most successful UK player of all time is.
AD has a way to go to claim this over Issel. The one thing he can claim though is he is the most talented player to ever play here.
FYI, In the NBA this year, and most don't know this, AD flirted with having the greatest single season PER in the history of the game. We are talking compared to the likes of Chamberlain, Jordan, and James. AD had the 11th highest PER of all time this year in the end. after falling off the last 3-4 weeks of the season.
FYI, In the NBA this year, and most don't know this, AD flirted with having the greatest single season PER in the history of the game. We are talking compared to the likes of Chamberlain, Jordan, and James. AD had the 11th highest PER of all time this year in the end. after falling off the last 3-4 weeks of the season.
You going to compare career rebounds, freethrows or any other stats? The Horse is on a few of those lists. I could only find Davis on one. Blocked shots (which in itself is amazing). You going to consider that Issel's supporting cast was much weaker than Davis? Of course, not, right? Those don't prove your point so you ignore that stuff.
Its this way, Davis posted the best single college season in history. Davis did not post the best college career in history (now some idiot will claim I said he sucked). He only had one year so its not a fair comparison.
Davis' NBA career is not in the books yet. You want to make him the best ever in your book? Go ahead. I want to watch him play first. I rather enjoy it.
I'm not a Tiger boi at all, I don't watch or even play golf, which really just further shows how silly your analogy was.
"Now now now guys, slow down a bit! People early on said the same thing about a guy that played [insert sport] but all he ended up doing was have one of the best runs of all time and made an entire sport mainstream so don't end up like those guys!
That's exactly what I mean, any statistics when it comes to scoring rebounding etc, has nothing to do with how good a player really was, the greatest players in just about any sport are looked at more based off what they accomplished. That is like saying since Karl Malone is 2nd in all time scoring and high up on the rebound margin that makes him 2 or 3rd best player ever, obviously he isn't because he never even won an NBA title. Jordan would not be considered the greatest all time if he did exactly what he did on the career stats but never won a ring....
If you want to say Issel is the best statistical basketball player at UK, then so be it you would be right, but that is irrelevant compared to the things AD won that Issel didn't.
If you take away Anthony Davis' NCAA championship he still has more career achievements in NCAA than Issel because only the supporting cast is what will give you championships. Not individual player awards.
Best ever from UK =/= best ever at UK
Although he did have one of the best seasons here as well.
Although he did have one of the best seasons here as well.
As I said to another poster, you want to trivialize Davis by declaring him Kentucky's best ever only three years into his career, go ahead. I want to watch him play first. I suspect Davis would tell you he doesn't need your handouts. He'll earn what he gets. I wonder how long it would take him to quit laughing if asked should he be considered the "best ever Kentucky player" if he quit right now.
As far as my analogy, I did refer to Woods as a "fabulous" golfer. I acknowledged his considerable skill though of late its been hiding. He was not, in fact, the greatest of all time. He was heralded as such by many after his first major. Let's don't turn Davis into Woods.
And work on your reading comprehension. I'll try to use smaller words as "fabulous" seems to be beyond you. That means REALLY REALLY good by the way.
So, I'm confused. Best ever is judged by some intangible quality that you alone can assess? Or its based on championships and if Davis doesn't win any, he'll suck in your book?
I've never seen such utter nonsense.
Keep trying to put words in my mouth, I could care less, but if your going to say so and so is the greatest because they grabbed the most rebounds, scored the most points, threw the most assists, then you would be naming players like John Stockton, Karl Malone, Bob Cousey, players like that as to compared to MJ, Bill Russell, Lebron James. Granted the names i said first are hall of famers but they arnt the best all time or top 5 based off their statistics. Dan is probably the second best player to come from UK as well as played at UK, but if you go to the original question of who was the best basketball player ever at UK then Davis>Issel because of what he accomplished @ UK.
Also if you had read my last post completely you would of noticed i basically said without the NATIONAL TITLE, AD would still be the better basketball player.
So let me get this straight. If we ignore the career statistics, discard the national title, don't consider the supporting cast, then it becomes clear that Davis has undisputedly earned the career GOAT for Kentucky basketball. You are basing this on those awards which are often selected by voting based on performance in a single year right? By sports writers or coaches. Those sports writers voting on awards for just that one year are casting the largest shadow for picking the greatest Kentucky basketball player ever?
Man, is Kentucky basketball really that shallow to you? Are we so trivial that talking heads would have such a large say in picking OUR best player ever?
Sorry, the legacy is bigger than that and I'm sorry you are too near sighted to see. As for Davis, I think I'll just wait for him to finish his race then consider what I expect to be a "fabulous" career. Maybe even the best career ever, regardless what the sports writer say.
I never said that Davis will have the best basketball career outside of UK basketball, I simply said he had the better basketball career while at UK. I also stand by what i said when i say that Anthony Davis is a better basketball player than Issel, You even put them both in their prime one on one Davis would win. Davis has handles like a point guard, can shoot the ball like a 2 guard because he used to be one, has the speed of a small forward, has the skills of a power forward which he mostly plays, and then of course the defensive ability of a center. Sorry but you can keep homering on Issel all you want, but nothing you will say or have been saying is telling me Issel is/was better.
Don't know if you can talk about homering and then say Davis has the handles of a PG and can shoot like a 2G....
Sorry, but no, certainly not the best UK career. Issel's UK career stats are heavier than Davis. Davis himself would agree with that. Nothing that happens in the NBA can ever change that.
Best player to come out of Kentucky's program, again for the 1000th time, jury is still out on that one. I hope it stays out for a long long time.
Don't cry though. You can believe what you like. I actually thought that last post sounded a bit like a five year old arguing that Godzilla could beat up King Kong. Pretty funny.
Anyone else find that comment about Davis' handles a little creepy? Your last name isn't Crean by any chance? EWWWWW.
Are you seriously old enough to be on here? I figured you were an old fart who homers on Dan Issel because you grew up watching him play and has the same "near sighted vision" you were explaining earlier. After this post i kind of feel I'm arguing with a 12 year old. Who knows, but i do know Anthony Davis can handle the rock, for you old folks that what "has handles" means. You can keep calling on people to back up what your saying all you want but you have yet to prove Dan Issel is a better basketball player than AD other than throwing out stat category. you do realize players players that don't have the supporting cast also have to do more work on the court such as taking shots, we all remember AD took the 5th most on the team that year. Keep to your stat books though they may come in handy in your 3rd grade math class.
Did you not see the video the OP posted? and you do remember he was a shooting guard before the growth spurt?
The post I quoted. The whole speech basically saying young people don't know any better.
He is a good ball handler and shooter for a power forward...that doesn't mean he can handle like a PG and shoot like a 2G. The 3 point shot, which is large for a 2G isn't part of ADs game yet, although I wouldn't be surprised if he makes it a part in the near future. He is 3-27 career on 3pfg...that isn't 2G shooting ability.
You feel like that because I'm treating you like a 12 year old which is giving you the benefit of the doubt after those last few posts. You've essentially told me I can't prove anything to you, a childish remark. You've also advised me that I can't prove anything "other than throwing out stat category". By the way, that should be "categories". I listed three as I recall. Grammar, young man. The very thought that we are supposed to objectively compare players separated by literally 2 generations without statistics is, well, ignorant, stupid, ridiculous or all of the above? Tough to say. For myself, I'll stick to my numbers. You engage in whatever fantasy and contrived vocabulary you like.
You define handles however works best for you. I'm not making any judgements. And I'm not "homering" on anybody. And PLEASE do not tell this old fart what that means as I'm pretty much language limited to the King's English, Red Neck and Deep Southern Drawl. I also have a dictionary and I'm afraid the youthful vernacular would just make me sick to my stomach. Now I know how Norman from "On Golden Pond" felt when confronted the phrase, "suck face".
You sure your last name isn't Crean?
You seem not to understand the context of Dan Issel's stats. Yes, they are incredibly impressive, but there are some HUGE mitigating factors surrounding them. Issel played in the highest scoring era of college basketball history, and he played on one of the highest scoring teams of that era. It was also an era when it was not uncommon for a coach to force-feed his best player, getting him a ton of shots. That's why you had Maravich going for 44 a game, Austin Carr putting up over 38 per game one year, and numerous other guys (Calvin Murphy, Elvin Hayes, John Mengelt, Johnny Neumann, and more) putting up statistics that would look completely absurd in the 2011-12 version of college basketball. If you want to go by sheer statistical volume, you'll come to the conclusion that all the best players in college basketball history played from approximately the mid 50's through the late 70's. Which somehow doesn't seem possible.
You need context. It's like comparing these 2 stat lines for baseball players:
player 1- .319 BA/ .362 OB/.589 SLG/44 home runs, 146 RBI's
player 2- .290 BA/.390 OB/.547 SLG/37 HR's, 119 RBI's
Player 1 looks better on paper. But in this case, player 1 was Vinnie Castilla, a 3rd baseman for the Rockies who put those numbers up in 1998, playing in a year when the average National League team scored 4.6 runs per game, and playing in a home ballpark that wildly inflated scoring. Castilla finished 11th in the MVP voting that year
Player 2 was Mike Schmidt in 1986, playing in a year when the average National League team scored 4.18 runs per game, and in a home ballpark that was relatively unfriendly to hitters. He won the MVP that year.
Anthony Davis played on a UK team that averaged 77.4 ppg, in games where UK and its opponents combined to take an average of 115.7 FG attempts, and 38.8 FT's. Issel's senior year, he played on a UK team that averaged 96.8 ppg, in games where UK and its opponents combined to take an average of 146.5 FG attempts, and 50.9 FT's.
Think about how that effects stats. Just take rebounding as an obvious example. In Issel's senior year, the average UK game featured 90.2 rebounds. Issel averaged 13.2, and was responsible for 14.6 % of all the rebounds in UK's games. Anthony Davis "only" averaged 10.4 rebounds. But the games he played in featured an average of 70.9 rebounds, and he was responsible for almost exactly the same percentage as Issel (actually, a tiny bit more). And think about AD's shotblocking. He personally blocked nearly 8% of the opposition's FG attempts. That means that around 1 in every 13 shots the other team attempted were rejected by Anthony Davis.
There was a reason that AD won POY, and it didn't have much to do with his pro potential. It had to do with what he accomplished on the court, in the context of the year he was playing in. Issel's accomplishments in his era were obviously great, and he was, if not POY, close to it. But you can't just point at some numbers that are bigger and say that wins the argument.
Last edited:
Wow, I thought he had a better shot than that from downtown. I bet that changes over the years given the workaholic he seems to be.
Similar threads
