Banchero final 6

[bigblue1971]

Roach is 20/Chandler is 21

Yes Roach will be back at Duke in 21 as a sophomore unless he bolts for the G league.

 

[JFCats22]

I have no dog in this fight but did Boston have a list? Seems like he visited UK and committed out of the blue(haha no pun intended)

EDIT-someone already mentioned Boston but dont think anyone clarified if he had a list.

Yep, he had a list. Just like every other recruit does.

https://kentuckysportsradio.com/mai...j-boston-cuts-list-to-four-includes-kentucky/

 

[Baller Cal]

Yep, he had a list. Just like every other recruit does.

https://kentuckysportsradio.com/mai...j-boston-cuts-list-to-four-includes-kentucky/

You know good and well that the point was recruits dragging out and cutting their list down to 6 and then 3, etc. You're just butthurt because I bring up you trashing our players'. Poor baby.

 

[RunninRichie]

I have no dog in this fight but did Boston have a list? Seems like he visited UK and committed out of the blue(haha no pun intended)

EDIT-someone already mentioned Boston but dont think anyone clarified if he had a list.

Boston always wanted to come here since 8th grade when he took a unofficial visit with his team to UK and met cal, duke never had a shot lol

 

[arenk]

Washington, Gonzaga or Arizona...kid is not leaving the west coast.

I guess that settles it. You better break this news to Cal and save him the time and effort!

 

[HagginHall1999]

Lots of back and forth.

I get what Baller Cal is saying.

Boston and Clarke may have had lists but they committed/signed shortly after official visits. Boston committed the day after visit to UK. Clarke signed a month after his.

Banchero took his official visit like 6 months ago.

 

[EastCoastYoungCat]

FWIW Banchero doesn’t strike me as the type of west coast kid that undoubtedly stay on the west coast.

 

[LowCountryCat]

He said we fare better with kids who don't cut their list. I asked for an example. Explain how I twisted his words or built a straw man.

It’s obvious by your comment that the words that you claim he said he did not say. His opinion may be incorrect, but you literally erected a strawman by mischaracterizing his comment. If you give him the benefit of the doubt, you can understand what he was trying to say. Instead, you parsed his words and tried to make him look like a jerk.

 

[DeerTurkHunter1]

Yes Roach will be back at Duke in 21 as a sophomore unless he bolts for the G league.

So he ain't a one and done? I assumed he wasn't a multiple year player.

 

[GonzoCat90]

It’s obvious by your comment that the words that you claim he said he did not say. His opinion may be incorrect, but you literally erected a strawman by mischaracterizing his comment. If you give him the benefit of the doubt, you can understand what he was trying to say. Instead, you parsed his words and tried to make him look like a jerk.

I asked him for an example and he attacked. He made himself look like a jerk.

 

[LowCountryCat]

I asked him for an example and he attacked. He made himself look like a jerk.

Again, false. You really are too lazy to go back and read the exchange. Amazing.

 

[GonzoCat90]

Again, false. You really are too lazy to go back and read the exchange. Amazing.

You've repeated yourself but haven't explained anything. Can you? Or am I wasting my time?

 

[Baller Cal]

It’s obvious by your comment that the words that you claim he said he did not say. His opinion may be incorrect, but you literally erected a strawman by mischaracterizing his comment. If you give him the benefit of the doubt, you can understand what he was trying to say. Instead, you parsed his words and tried to make him look like a jerk.

Thanks. Other saw it as well. Like I said, he's not worth anyone's time and is acting like a child. Let him keep making a fool of himself if he so chooses, lol.

 

[KyFaninNC]

I was going to say the same thing. What is Washington offering these kids for them to be an option for so many of these blue chippers? They landed two studs last year and did nothing with them. They stunk. But here they are again.

The coach they have is less than mediocre, why would you go there?

Kids now realize if they are top five, they can go anywhere and still be drafted. Some on here need to face reality. After 2015 and Cal’s disaster with the U19 team, his recruiting has suffered. Whether it is Nike, money or whatever, but it has suffered.

 

[kyjeff1]

Kids now realize if they are top five, they can go anywhere and still be drafted. Some on here need to face reality. After 2015 and Cal’s disaster with the U19 team, his recruiting has suffered. Whether it is Nike, money or whatever, but it has suffered.

I get that, but at least Cal has had success, what has the coach at Washington accomplished? Hell, what has Washington University accomplished? Look at the awful job the coaches at Washington did just last year with McDandiels and Stewart.

If Cal's accomplishments are going to be erased over a couple shot clock violations in 2015 and the U19 thing, when are all these other coaches' failures going to come back to haunt them?

Coach K didn’t even make the FF with one of the most loaded rosters I've ever seen, but Nike still pushes players their way.

What I'm saying is, nobody does more for the player than Cal does, so why are so many players snubbing him? I don't get it.

 

[LowCountryCat]

You've repeated yourself but haven't explained anything. Can you? Or am I wasting my time?

You’re wasting everyone’s time. Best you cut your losses. I’m sure you’ll get another opportunity to misrepresent somebody later on.

 

[Poetax]

I really don't understand why kids keep listing/picking Washington. They never win anything.

I will give him that I believe his mom and dad went there so he knows the school, the staff, the players and he loves that he has a connection with them. Honestly for him not to have them on the list would be strange in his scenario.

 

[GonzoCat90]

You’re wasting everyone’s time. Best you cut your losses. I’m sure you’ll get another opportunity to misrepresent somebody later on.

So you can't explain how we went from this

Right, and I'm asking for examples of what you're talking about. I can't think of a kid who committed anywhere that didn't have a list of some sort.

Maybe Wiltjer? Who else are you thinking of?

To this?

I'm talking about lists that were CUT, and I immediately gave you two examples from the last freaking week, lmao. You know that, but you are trying to change the subject since I gave you two examples quickly and you didn't like that. I've seen you in action, so I'll move on since you aren't worth anyone's time.

With nothing in between? And you can't tell me what I misrepresented?

Again, if asking for evidence of your point is impossible, maybe you don't have a point.

 

[YaySports]

I know theres talk of the package w him and Chandler but I have a feeling Zona is a legit player. He added them late to his list and then they made the cut a handful of weeks later. Their women are hot but their basketball is hot garbage

 

[kyups01]

I have not never gotten the vibe that Brachero is as interested in UK as they are him..dont think we ever land him.

 

[LowCountryCat]

So you can't explain how we went from this



To this?



With nothing in between? And you can't tell me what I misrepresented?

Again, if asking for evidence of your point is impossible, maybe you don't have a point.

You left out comments, deliberately? Now you're being dishonest.

 

[GonzoCat90]

You left out comments, deliberately? Now you're being dishonest.

Those are literally one after the other. Feel free to post the ones I skipped along with your explanation that I've asked for multiple times.

Or don't. Because you can't. I'll keep that in mind for future reference.

 

[LowCountryCat]

What is our success rate when a kid "cuts his list" and has us on it instead of just committing to UK without a list? Seems like it's a terrible success rate, but who knows.

It's fairly clear even this early that he's frustrated with the whole 'list cutting' process, and wondering how we do in those situations. He doesn't say, for example, "and also how well we do with those who just commit to UK without a list." He might not have phrased it to your satisfaction but a) his intent is borne out as the discussion unfolds and b) this is hardly a legit reason for you to attack him.

Can you list any examples?

Vague, open-ended answer.

Weren't there 2 in the last 7 days, lol? Just a simple question. Asking me to give examples of a question I'm asking doesn't make much since.

He's obviously not clear about your intentions because of your vague, open-ended answer. So he tries to clarify.

I'm talking about players who commit and don't have a list.

He didn't specify this in his original comment. You are erecting a straw man here. You're demanding that he back up an argument that he didn't make. He was originally focused on the list cutting, not the players who commit without a list.

I said cutting the list, meaning it's drawn out. Seems like we get most of ours very early without much drama and when it's drawn out, it doesn't bode well. I could be completely wrong, hence I asked the question as I don't know.

And here he clarifies, he's focused on the drawn out list cutting process. He even offers you an olive branch by acknowledging he could be incorrect, hoping you'll engage him in the topic finally.

Right, and I'm asking for examples of what you're talking about. I can't think of a kid who committed anywhere that didn't have a list of some sort.

Maybe Wiltjer? Who else are you thinking of?

But of course, like a dog with a bone, you growl and hold on tight to the original straw man of "TEH PLAYERZ WHO COMMIT IMMEDIATELY LOL" which isn't what he's asking.

I'm talking about lists that were CUT, and I immediately gave you two examples from the last freaking week, lmao. You know that, but you are trying to change the subject since I gave you two examples quickly and you didn't like that. I've seen you in action, so I'll move on since you aren't worth anyone's time.

And again, he tries to steer you back on track to what he's trying to talk about, but he's getting frustrated because he senses you are just badgering him, which in fact you are.

I am asking you for examples of "us doing better with kids who don't cut their lists." That's what you said.

Actually, that's NOT WHAT HE SAID, he said "What is our success rate when a kid "cuts his list" and has us on it instead of just committing to UK without a list?" Which is quite different, and even despite your attempts to put words in his mouth and reframe the argument he tried to clarify with you anyway. Now you're just being an ahole. Well, assuming you're not just stupid. But I'm trying manfully to give you the benefit of the doubt.

Thousands of kids commit every year that cut their list, obviously you can name an infinite number that we don't get. Kids like Brown and Green have us listed even if we don't recruit them.

And here you resort to sarcastic mockery, showing your ass and demonstrating that you just want to be a prick.

So again, I'm asking for you to list the kids we have landed that didn't cut their list to make you claim that you think we do better with them. Can you give a single one or do you just want to be shitty and petulant for no reason?

And here you demand he answer your straw man again, while using a passive/aggressive tactic by accusing him of being s***ty and petulant, despite the fact that you attacked and badgered him.

Hey, I tried.

At least it shut that nonsense down quick.

And here you high-five with another commenter, dunking on the guy you accused of attacking you, and revealing that your original intent was not in good faith, but instead to mock and silence your 'opponent,' which also confirms the existence of the 'straw man' strategy.

This is the entire conversation, not the abridged/selectively edited version you tried to put out. You'd make a good Joe Biden though.

 

[Baller Cal]

It's fairly clear even this early that he's frustrated with the whole 'list cutting' process, and wondering how we do in those situations. He doesn't say, for example, "and also how well we do with those who just commit to UK without a list." He might not have phrased it to your satisfaction but a) his intent is borne out as the discussion unfolds and b) this is hardly a legit reason for you to attack him.
Vague, open-ended answer.
He's obviously not clear about your intentions because of your vague, open-ended answer. So he tries to clarify.
He didn't specify this in his original comment. You are erecting a straw man here. You're demanding that he back up an argument that he didn't make. He was originally focused on the list cutting, not the players who commit without a list.
And here he clarifies, he's focused on the drawn out list cutting process. He even offers you an olive branch by acknowledging he could be incorrect, hoping you'll engage him in the topic finally.


But of course, like a dog with a bone, you growl and hold on tight to the original straw man of "TEH PLAYERZ WHO COMMIT IMMEDIATELY LOL" which isn't what he's asking.
And again, he tries to steer you back on track to what he's trying to talk about, but he's getting frustrated because he senses you are just badgering him, which in fact you are.
Actually, that's NOT WHAT HE SAID, he said "What is our success rate when a kid "cuts his list" and has us on it instead of just committing to UK without a list?" Which is quite different, and even despite your attempts to put words in his mouth and reframe the argument he tried to clarify with you anyway. Now you're just being an ahole. Well, assuming you're not just stupid. But I'm trying manfully to give you the benefit of the doubt.
And here you resort to sarcastic mockery, showing your ass and demonstrating that you just want to be a prick.
And here you demand he answer your straw man again, while using a passive/aggressive tactic by accusing him of being s***ty and petulant, despite the fact that you attacked and badgered him.
And here you high-five with another commenter, dunking on the guy you accused of attacking you, and revealing that your original intent was not in good faith, but instead to mock and silence your 'opponent,' which also confirms the existence of the 'straw man' strategy.

This is the entire conversation, not the abridged/selectively edited version you tried to put out. You'd make a good Joe Biden though.

You get it. Like I told him the other day just before putting him on ignore, Ive seen him in action and he’s not worth anyone’s time. I haven’t read a word that he’s typed since.

 

[FrankUnderwood]

That’s what I got from the post at least. I didn’t see a hint of trying to even get defensive about it either but idk.

Yeah... quarantine has people bored and feisty it seems lol.

 

[GonzoCat90]

It's fairly clear even this early that he's frustrated with the whole 'list cutting' process, and wondering how we do in those situations. He doesn't say, for example, "and also how well we do with those who just commit to UK without a list." He might not have phrased it to your satisfaction but a) his intent is borne out as the discussion unfolds and b) this is hardly a legit reason for you to attack him.
Vague, open-ended answer.
He's obviously not clear about your intentions because of your vague, open-ended answer. So he tries to clarify.
He didn't specify this in his original comment. You are erecting a straw man here. You're demanding that he back up an argument that he didn't make. He was originally focused on the list cutting, not the players who commit without a list.
And here he clarifies, he's focused on the drawn out list cutting process. He even offers you an olive branch by acknowledging he could be incorrect, hoping you'll engage him in the topic finally.


But of course, like a dog with a bone, you growl and hold on tight to the original straw man of "TEH PLAYERZ WHO COMMIT IMMEDIATELY LOL" which isn't what he's asking.
And again, he tries to steer you back on track to what he's trying to talk about, but he's getting frustrated because he senses you are just badgering him, which in fact you are.
Actually, that's NOT WHAT HE SAID, he said "What is our success rate when a kid "cuts his list" and has us on it instead of just committing to UK without a list?" Which is quite different, and even despite your attempts to put words in his mouth and reframe the argument he tried to clarify with you anyway. Now you're just being an ahole. Well, assuming you're not just stupid. But I'm trying manfully to give you the benefit of the doubt.
And here you resort to sarcastic mockery, showing your ass and demonstrating that you just want to be a prick.
And here you demand he answer your straw man again, while using a passive/aggressive tactic by accusing him of being s***ty and petulant, despite the fact that you attacked and badgered him.
And here you high-five with another commenter, dunking on the guy you accused of attacking you, and revealing that your original intent was not in good faith, but instead to mock and silence your 'opponent,' which also confirms the existence of the 'straw man' strategy.

This is the entire conversation, not the abridged/selectively edited version you tried to put out. You'd make a good Joe Biden though.

It's interesting that his meaning can be different from what he said and make perfect sense but me asking him for examples is vague and open ended.

He said we fare better with kids who don't cut their list. I asked for examples. He gave me two kids no one thought were choosing Kentucky that committed elsewhere.

I even gave him an example of a kid that fit his criteria in Wiltjer. In no other place do you give examples by listing negative instances. But instead of addressing that he suddenly decided I'm not worth the time. So yes, I got confrontational in return.

Other people who aren't terrible understood and attempted to have a conversation on both sides. None of them had any issues with anyone. Probably a coincidence.

His initial theory was faulty and I believed asking for examples would point that out. Instead, you're here fighting his battles for him and making dumb political jabs. And it remains an inaccurate point that he can't defend.

Maybe go back to bullying Cane and let people speak for themselves if they can.

 

[kl40504]

So he ain't a one and done? I assumed he wasn't a multiple year player.

I think he will be one of the two.

 

[LowCountryCat]

It's interesting that his meaning can be different from what he said and make perfect sense but me asking him for examples is vague and open ended.

He said we fare better with kids who don't cut their list. I asked for examples. He gave me two kids no one thought were choosing Kentucky that committed elsewhere.

I even gave him an example of a kid that fit his criteria in Wiltjer. In no other place do you give examples by listing negative instances. But instead of addressing that he suddenly decided I'm not worth the time. So yes, I got confrontational in return.

Other people who aren't terrible understood and attempted to have a conversation on both sides. None of them had any issues with anyone. Probably a coincidence.

His initial theory was faulty and I believed asking for examples would point that out. Instead, you're here fighting his battles for him and making dumb political jabs. And it remains an inaccurate point that he can't defend.

Maybe go back to bullying Cane and let people speak for themselves if they can.

You got that backwards, bruh. YOU'RE the bully in this case. You saw a mark, you took him down, and then you bragged about it while dancing on his grave. Face it, your vaunted status on this board just took a severe hit. Nobody likes a bully, especially a weaselly passive-aggressive victim-card-wielding one. You might not agree with his opinion, but you were too stupid to understand what he was saying despite his repeated attempts to explain, so you showed your ass by steamrolling him with hostility thinly veiled by logical fallacies disguised as cute legerdemain.

I used to think you were cool, but now I know you're just a d**k. I also know that you'll respond with some macho Internet Warrior version of "who cares what YOU think" but the bad news, champ, is that your words are out there for everyone else to see, and you doubling down as well as posturing that WEAK SAUCE explanation and even WEAKER attempt to tell me to 'shut up' only makes you look worse.

 

[LowCountryCat]

You get it. Like I told him the other day just before putting him on ignore, Ive seen him in action and he’s not worth anyone’s time. I haven’t read a word that he’s typed since.

Most people gloss over comments and then quick reply. You took the time to try to explain and he still didn't get it. He's either obtuse or just plain mean.

 

[LowCountryCat]

He was pretty adamant and childish about what he said. If he wanted to correct or soften it, he could have. He decided not to, so I'll assume he meant what he said.

So you chose to use a false choice of "either he kisses my ass or else my assumption is correct" (which is internet troll 101) but HE'S the childish one?

 

[GonzoCat90]

You got that backwards, bruh. YOU'RE the bully in this case. You saw a mark, you took him down, and then you bragged about it while dancing on his grave. Face it, your vaunted status on this board just took a severe hit. Nobody likes a bully, especially a weaselly passive-aggressive victim-card-wielding one. You might not agree with his opinion, but you were too stupid to understand what he was saying despite his repeated attempts to explain, so you showed your ass by steamrolling him with hostility thinly veiled by logical fallacies disguised as cute legerdemain.

I used to think you were cool, but now I know you're just a d**k. I also know that you'll respond with some macho Internet Warrior version of "who cares what YOU think" but the bad news, champ, is that your words are out there for everyone else to see, and you doubling down as well as posturing that WEAK SAUCE explanation and even WEAKER attempt to tell me to 'shut up' only makes you look worse.

Lol wow.

My vaunted status? We're on the internet "bruh." No one has vaunted status.

Seriously. Read what you just typed. I hope you have the self awareness to be embarrassed of how emotional and outrageous that is.

Better to vent at me than bullying Cane, I guess. Whenever you start feeling low just tag me and let it all out.

I'd say more, but sounds like you've got me all figured out. My worry is it's because you've spent so much time thinking about it. I'm sorry you don't think I'm cool anymore. I'm just thankful you didn't randomly capitalize five or six more words. That would have hurt my feelings.

 

[LowCountryCat]

Lol wow.

My vaunted status? We're on the internet "bruh." No one has vaunted status.

Seriously. Read what you just typed. I hope you have the self awareness to be embarrassed of how emotional and outrageous that is.

Better to vent at me than bullying Cane, I guess. Whenever you start feeling low just tag me and let it all out.

I'd say more, but sounds like you've got me all figured out. My worry is it's because you've spent so much time thinking about it. I'm sorry you don't think I'm cool anymore. I'm just thankful you didn't randomly capitalize five or six more words. That would have hurt my feelings.

There's the 'passive' in passive aggressive. You double down on your bullying by using condescension. Sorry, pal, it doesn't faze me at all, nor does your pathetic attempt to misdirect. And I'm sure you don't really 'worry' about me in any way whatsoever. But I notice that you really didn't refute anything I pointed out, so in solidarity with your own logic, I'll assume that you acknowledged that I was right about all of it.

Another dishonest and weak reply. Keep it up!

 

[Baller Cal]

Most people gloss over comments and then quick reply. You took the time to try to explain and he still didn't get it. He's either obtuse or just plain mean.

He got butthurt that I rattled off two guys that cut their lists and didn't choose us from the last WEEK, so he quickly started playing the "gotcha" card. He knew what I meant from the get-go. He's not worth yours or anyone's time, but I really appreciate you.

 

[GonzoCat90]

There's the 'passive' in passive aggressive. You double down on your bullying by using condescension. Sorry, pal, it doesn't faze me at all, nor does your pathetic attempt to misdirect. And I'm sure you don't really 'worry' about me in any way whatsoever. But I notice that you really didn't refute anything I pointed out, so in solidarity with your own logic, I'll assume that you acknowledged that I was right about all of it.

Another dishonest and weak reply. Keep it up!

You're right. I had no rebuttal for ALL MY WEAK SAUCE BRO. I'm owned. This is why you don't think I'm cool anymore. I bet everyone in your Psych100 class couldn't wait for what you had to say next.

(Also it's not condescension, it's second hand embarrassment and pity. I don't have the heart to be mean to someone that sad.)

 

[UK90]

Sorry, pal, it doesn't faze me at all

Are you sure about that?

Your tone belies your words.

 

[LowCountryCat]

You're right. I had no rebuttal for ALL MY WEAK SAUCE BRO. I'm owned. This is why you don't think I'm cool anymore. I bet everyone in your Psych100 class couldn't wait for what you had to say next.

(Also it's not condescension, it's second hand embarrassment and pity. I don't have the heart to be mean to someone that sad.)

BS... All anyone has to do is read your comments to baller Cal and they know that you just lied again. You can try to diminish me, but you’re the one who’s been diminished. Live with that.

 

[LowCountryCat]

Are you sure about that?

Your tone belies your words.

Anyone with an IQ above room temperature knows that trying to interpret tone in the written word, especially on the Internet, is a very tricky thing. My guess is that you are no exception.

 

[GonzoCat90]

BS... All anyone has to do is read your comments to baller Cal and they know that you just lied again. You can try to diminish me, but you’re the one who’s been diminished. Live with that.

Okay which longtime poster is this the troll account for? You got me lol. Well done.

 

[Bill Withers]

Busting out several of the accounts in this thread. Nice

 

[GonzoCat90]

Anyone with an IQ above room temperature knows that trying to interpret tone in the written word, especially on the Internet, is a very tricky thing. My guess is that you are no exception.

Oh snap @UK90 you GOT SERVED SON! You can't come back from that. DIMINISHED BRUH. Diminished.