Nice little post here. Drink it in, folks. He almost starts making sense then goes off the rails again. Tsk, tsk.
I think there is something off with this team... There is a reason why Cal rushed to get transfers and the Juco. There is also a reason why Cal wanted Murray to reclassify to this year so badly. Because the players that were left at Kentucky aren't that great. Skal, Murray, and Ullis should be really good. But I'm not convinced about the rest. Kentucky won't have much of a bench at all. Hawkins is just not very good, there is a reason why Willis hasn't played for years, Poythress and Lee are pretty good, but there is also a reason why they haven't bolted for the NBA yet. Poythress is also injury-prone. Charles Matthews and Briscoe are wait-and-see for me. I am in no way saying that this team isn't any good, because they will be very good, I think. But I would slow down on the hype because yes, they are deep, but when you get to 7, 8, 9, and 10...those players aren't really that much better than Louisville's. They certainly aren't bad, but they aren't as good as they have been in the past. I will say though that this team has much more experience than UK's teams usually do. Still not much compared to many other teams, but more than they have in the past.
Really a lot of unknown for this UK team and this Louisville team. I feel like UK could be really, really good, but then there is some potential for it to be like that NIT year in 2013. I have no clue about Louisville, there is definitely some really elite talent and I think it's laughable how overlooked these freshmen are. A lot of people are sleeping on Louisville, Rick Pitino thrives in situations like that. This year could be a lot like our 2012 year.
His logic is undeniable, isn't it?
First he says, "the players that were left at Kentucky aren't that great."
Next he says, "Skal, Murray, and Ullis (sp) should be really good."
Later he says, "Poythress and Lee are pretty good."
Well, so far we have 5 players that are at least, by this guy's estimation, pretty good.
Later in this rambling he says, "I am in no way saying that this team isn't any good, because they will be very good, I think."
Lastly, he says that "there is some potential for it (UK this season) to be like that NIT year in 2013."
Now, just so we're clear, our team is not that great, some are really good, some are pretty good, the entire team will be very good, and also that it may be like the NIT team of 2013. Is that clear enough? So what exactly is this guy saying? Nothing. He wants to say that UK has a bad team, but apparently the more he considered the players on the team the more he convinced himself that's not true. But in order to attempt to be consistent, he came back to the idea of this being like the NIT team of 2013.
I delved into all this before, but I will just hit the highlights today. Idiots who compare this team with the NIT team are only considering 2 factors...
1. There is a JUCO transfer on the team this year and there was one in 2012-13.
2. UK had lost a bunch of players to the NBA the June before.
The differences between this team and 2012-13 are numerous. To mention a few...
1. The point guard situation in 2012-13 was a weakness from the word go. Compare Ryan Harrow with Tyler Ulis? No comparison.
2. We had nobody returning with significant experience that year.The other returnees this season are much better.
3. The recruits that season were more a bit more raw and we were forward/center heavy. This year is different.
4. One big thing UL fans forget is that the only reason UK went to the NIT that year was because Noel was lost for the year.
5. That season UK didn't have any player considered a consensus lottery pick, no transcendent player. This year we have 2, in my opinion.
