Edwards and Wagner In Latest Mock Draft

[Kentucky_SportsX]

Edwards projected 1st
Wagner projected 6th

I’m really hoping both of these guys can live up to the hype, if they do then I think we will have a very good season.

 

[stuway]

Starting to think Edward's is gonna be something we haven't seen here in a while. Hope I'm right. We need a few of these freshman to be legit special and we could make a hell of a run

 

[G-PIP]

I’m confident that Wagner and Edwards will be good players. I think all the incoming freshmen, including the non-5stars, will be good players. It’s just a matter of how much of that potential is gotten to in one year at UK. But I actually believe that Wagner and Edwards will be better freshmen than one should typically expect from even top ten ranked recruits. I think that if you put Wagner and Edwards on a team with an All-American/All-conference type of 2G that’s good enough to be the 1st option on offense, a solid proven PF that’s a willing rebounder and can space the floor (i.e., maybe Mitchell fits that bill) and a Center that can defend, hold his own down low and score in the post a little and I think you have a Contender.

But if you ask Wagner and Edwards (and this would apply to any freshmen) to be your primary offensive weapons as freshmen, then I think the Contender status falls apart. It seems to me that some expect 5-star freshmen to come in and dominate at the college level – basically envisioning what those players may be as pros and thinking they’ll be that as freshmen. I believe it’s unfair, and sets up disappointment even when the players actually have very good seasons by freshmen standards. Projected NBA draft positions mean zero/nothing/nada, and actual draft positions don’t mean much more in regard to the impact a freshman is expected to have on winning in college. In my opinion, the “hype” based on this or recruiting rankings is created by fans who delude themselves into thinking this kind of stuff equates with the players ability to impact winning now, instead of merely being what it is – forecasting (or guessing) as to future potential.

To me, relying on freshmen to carry your offense or starting more than 1 or 2 freshmen is like betting a specific number at the Roulette Wheel. I don’t understand why you would do it if you don’t have to. Maybe this season Reeves and Mitchell are enough. Maybe Onyenso & Bradshaw can provide enough at the Center spot. I hope so. I don’t expect UK to win a title every season, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think they should be in the conversation most years and I think the SEC title should always go through Lexington, as they say.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Edwards projected 1st
Wagner projected 6th

I’m really hoping both of these guys can live up to the hype, if they do then I think we will have a very good season.

If Edwards goes #1 in the draft, we'll be cruising to a Final Four most likely.

Cal's teams with #1 picks:

2008: 38-2, runner-up
2010: 35-3, Elite Eight
2012: 38-2, national champion
2015: 38-1, Final Four

That's an average of over 37 wins per season.

 

[BlueBomb]

Edwards projected 1st
Wagner projected 6th

I’m really hoping both of these guys can live up to the hype, if they do then I think we will have a very good season.

Two of the top six players in the draft. Maybe five in the first round. Cal logic says the NBA draft will once again be one of the greatest days in the history of the program. But for some reason, I feel this is a 10 loss team.

 

[Lempface]

I’m confident that Wagner and Edwards will be good players. I think all the incoming freshmen, including the non-5stars, will be good players. It’s just a matter of how much of that potential is gotten to in one year at UK. But I actually believe that Wagner and Edwards will be better freshmen than one should typically expect from even top ten ranked recruits. I think that if you put Wagner and Edwards on a team with an All-American/All-conference type of 2G that’s good enough to be the 1st option on offense, a solid proven PF that’s a willing rebounder and can space the floor (i.e., maybe Mitchell fits that bill) and a Center that can defend, hold his own down low and score in the post a little and I think you have a Contender.

But if you ask Wagner and Edwards (and this would apply to any freshmen) to be your primary offensive weapons as freshmen, then I think the Contender status falls apart. It seems to me that some expect 5-star freshmen to come in and dominate at the college level – basically envisioning what those players may be as pros and thinking they’ll be that as freshmen. I believe it’s unfair, and sets up disappointment even when the players actually have very good seasons by freshmen standards. Projected NBA draft positions mean zero/nothing/nada, and actual draft positions don’t mean much more in regard to the impact a freshman is expected to have on winning in college. In my opinion, the “hype” based on this or recruiting rankings is created by fans who delude themselves into thinking this kind of stuff equates with the players ability to impact winning now, instead of merely being what it is – forecasting (or guessing) as to future potential.

To me, relying on freshmen to carry your offense or starting more than 1 or 2 freshmen is like betting a specific number at the Roulette Wheel. I don’t understand why you would do it if you don’t have to. Maybe this season Reeves and Mitchell are enough. Maybe Onyenso & Bradshaw can provide enough at the Center spot. I hope so. I don’t expect UK to win a title every season, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think they should be in the conversation most years and I think the SEC title should always go through Lexington, as they say.

Brandon Miller just came in and won NPOY as a freshman though. It can happen.

Derp!

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Two of the top six players in the draft. Maybe five in the first round. Cal logic says the NBA draft will once again be one of the greatest days in the history of the program. But for some reason, I feel this is a 10 loss team.

If those guys go #1 and #6, it means we probably did a bit better than a 10 loss team. I'm with you though, I think this team loses 10 games. If Cal added a guy like Jesse Edwards, I'd feel good about our chances, but the 5 spot looks to be a massive weakness for this team.

On an optimistic level, if Edwards turns into Jayson Tatum (Duke version) and Wagner produces like SGA did as a freshman at UK, we could be one of the better teams in the nation. Time will tell.

 

[The_Answer1313]

I’m confident that Wagner and Edwards will be good players. I think all the incoming freshmen, including the non-5stars, will be good players. It’s just a matter of how much of that potential is gotten to in one year at UK. But I actually believe that Wagner and Edwards will be better freshmen than one should typically expect from even top ten ranked recruits. I think that if you put Wagner and Edwards on a team with an All-American/All-conference type of 2G that’s good enough to be the 1st option on offense, a solid proven PF that’s a willing rebounder and can space the floor (i.e., maybe Mitchell fits that bill) and a Center that can defend, hold his own down low and score in the post a little and I think you have a Contender.

But if you ask Wagner and Edwards (and this would apply to any freshmen) to be your primary offensive weapons as freshmen, then I think the Contender status falls apart. It seems to me that some expect 5-star freshmen to come in and dominate at the college level – basically envisioning what those players may be as pros and thinking they’ll be that as freshmen. I believe it’s unfair, and sets up disappointment even when the players actually have very good seasons by freshmen standards. Projected NBA draft positions mean zero/nothing/nada, and actual draft positions don’t mean much more in regard to the impact a freshman is expected to have on winning in college. In my opinion, the “hype” based on this or recruiting rankings is created by fans who delude themselves into thinking this kind of stuff equates with the players ability to impact winning now, instead of merely being what it is – forecasting (or guessing) as to future potential.

To me, relying on freshmen to carry your offense or starting more than 1 or 2 freshmen is like betting a specific number at the Roulette Wheel. I don’t understand why you would do it if you don’t have to. Maybe this season Reeves and Mitchell are enough. Maybe Onyenso & Bradshaw can provide enough at the Center spot. I hope so. I don’t expect UK to win a title every season, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think they should be in the conversation most years and I think the SEC title should always go through Lexington, as they say.

While I do believe it puts a huge burden on incoming freshman to be that focal point and primary option and that it might take time even if they DO end up being that for this team, at the same rate the only title we won in this era was in 2012, which was dominated by freshman and two year guys be the main focal point. In other words, it could still work out in the end.

 

[The_Answer1313]

If those guys go #1 and #6, it means we probably did a bit better than a 10 loss team. I'm with you though, I think this team loses 10 games. If Cal added a guy like Jesse Edwards, I'd feel good about our chances, but the 5 spot looks to be a massive weakness for this team.

On an optimistic level, if Edwards turns into Jayson Tatum (Duke version) and Wagner produces like SGA did as a freshman at UK, we could be one of the better teams in the nation. Time will tell.

I agree. If these guys go 1 and 6, it's hard to imagine a scenario where we didn't have a good/very good season.
Once again this will just depend on the incoming freshman and whether or not they live up to the hype I guess.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

While I do believe it puts a huge burden on incoming freshman to be that focal point and primary option and that it might take time even if they DO end up being that for this team, at the same rate the only title we won in this era was in 2012, which was dominated by freshman and two year guys be the main focal point. In other words, it could still work out in the end.

It could happen, but we've also had some teams with multiple future max contract guys who didn't even make the Final Four (2010 with Wall/Boogie; 2017 with Fox/Bam). I think a lot of it will come down to how good Bradshaw is in year one.

We had perhaps the greatest backcourt in UK history in 2016 and we didn't even make the Sweet Sixteen because our frontline was massively incompetent. That frontcourt had Poythress, Lee, Humphries, Willis, and Skal. Going into the season, I think a lot of our fans would have taken them over Bradshaw, Onyenso, and Mitchell.

We have many question marks in our frontline. I'm cautionary about this upcoming squad's ability to get the job done, especially with Bradshaw's pack of jackals circling around the program.

 

[Cats192]

I’m confident that Wagner and Edwards will be good players. I think all the incoming freshmen, including the non-5stars, will be good players. It’s just a matter of how much of that potential is gotten to in one year at UK. But I actually believe that Wagner and Edwards will be better freshmen than one should typically expect from even top ten ranked recruits. I think that if you put Wagner and Edwards on a team with an All-American/All-conference type of 2G that’s good enough to be the 1st option on offense, a solid proven PF that’s a willing rebounder and can space the floor (i.e., maybe Mitchell fits that bill) and a Center that can defend, hold his own down low and score in the post a little and I think you have a Contender.

But if you ask Wagner and Edwards (and this would apply to any freshmen) to be your primary offensive weapons as freshmen, then I think the Contender status falls apart. It seems to me that some expect 5-star freshmen to come in and dominate at the college level – basically envisioning what those players may be as pros and thinking they’ll be that as freshmen. I believe it’s unfair, and sets up disappointment even when the players actually have very good seasons by freshmen standards. Projected NBA draft positions mean zero/nothing/nada, and actual draft positions don’t mean much more in regard to the impact a freshman is expected to have on winning in college. In my opinion, the “hype” based on this or recruiting rankings is created by fans who delude themselves into thinking this kind of stuff equates with the players ability to impact winning now, instead of merely being what it is – forecasting (or guessing) as to future potential.

To me, relying on freshmen to carry your offense or starting more than 1 or 2 freshmen is like betting a specific number at the Roulette Wheel. I don’t understand why you would do it if you don’t have to. Maybe this season Reeves and Mitchell are enough. Maybe Onyenso & Bradshaw can provide enough at the Center spot. I hope so. I don’t expect UK to win a title every season, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think they should be in the conversation most years and I think the SEC title should always go through Lexington, as they say.

Didn't Alabama rely on Brandon Miller?
Didin't Jalen Suggs run the Gonzaga offense?

I think we're at our best if DJ, Edwards, Dillingham, etc. are creating the offense. I think you don't want them to be in a situation to HAVE to be the offense.

And that's why Reeves coming back means so much.

I think he can give us a lot offense while these guys grow into that role.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Didn't Alabama rely on Brandon Miller?
Didin't Jalen Suggs run the Gonzaga offense?

I think we're at our best if DJ, Edwards, Dillingham, etc. are creating the offense. I think you don't want them to be in a situation to HAVE to be the offense.

And that's why Reeves coming back means so much.

I think he can give us a lot offense while these guys grow into that role.

Great point. Reeves and Mitchell are capable of giving Kentucky a combined 30 points/game if needed. Obviously we want Thiero and Onyenso to take the next step and provide some competence in year #2. That would give UK four solid veterans to buy some time for the freshmen as they develop.

Edwards has a higher long term ceiling than Brandon Miller did, and I could see a scenario where he's giving us around 13 to 15 points/game by season's end. If Edwards plays like a #1 pick, he's obviously in that same realm of Miller-like production.

My projection:

Edwards - 13 ppg
Wagner - 13 ppg
Reeves - 12 ppg
Bradshaw - 10 ppg
Mitchell - 10 ppg
Dillingham - 8 ppg
Onyenso - 6 ppg
Thiero - 4ppg
Sheppard - 3ppg

Rest of the team combined (/Hart/Burks/maybe Cyril) - 3ppg

 

[HerrosHeroes]

And yet there is still talk that Duke will surpass this class…..

 

[The_Answer1313]

It could happen, but we've also had some teams with multiple future max contract guys who didn't even make the Final Four (2010 with Wall/Boogie; 2017 with Fox/Bam). I think a lot of it will come down to how good Bradshaw is in year one.

We had perhaps the greatest backcourt in UK history in 2016 and we didn't even make the Sweet Sixteen because our frontline was massively incompetent. That frontcourt had Poythress, Lee, Humphries, Willis, and Skal. Going into the season, I think a lot of our fans would have taken them over Bradshaw, Onyenso, and Mitchell.

We have many question marks in our frontline. I'm cautionary about this upcoming squad's ability to get the job done, especially with Bradshaw's pack of jackals circling around the program.

Yeah I think I'm going to do what I always do with these teams and just wait.

One of two things is going to happen with these games in Canada. Either we are going to come out on fire and everyone will massively overhype this squad only to probably be let down when the actual season occurs. Or the team won't look good and people will think the sky is falling.

I'm skeptical of this team presently constructed. But it wouldn't shock me either if we were good/very good.

 

[Kentucky_SportsX]

Also two more Cats are projected top 20 along with Edwards and Wagner

Dillingham projected 18th
Bradshaw projected 20th

I believe Dillingham will go higher especially if he can live up to his hype, he’s a very exciting player and elite at finishing at the rim. Reminds me of Kyrie the way he handles the ball and finishes. I think Cal is probably going to have a heart attack watching him break some ankles lol

 

[dl51344]

I’m confident that Wagner and Edwards will be good players. I think all the incoming freshmen, including the non-5stars, will be good players. It’s just a matter of how much of that potential is gotten to in one year at UK. But I actually believe that Wagner and Edwards will be better freshmen than one should typically expect from even top ten ranked recruits. I think that if you put Wagner and Edwards on a team with an All-American/All-conference type of 2G that’s good enough to be the 1st option on offense, a solid proven PF that’s a willing rebounder and can space the floor (i.e., maybe Mitchell fits that bill) and a Center that can defend, hold his own down low and score in the post a little and I think you have a Contender.

But if you ask Wagner and Edwards (and this would apply to any freshmen) to be your primary offensive weapons as freshmen, then I think the Contender status falls apart. It seems to me that some expect 5-star freshmen to come in and dominate at the college level – basically envisioning what those players may be as pros and thinking they’ll be that as freshmen. I believe it’s unfair, and sets up disappointment even when the players actually have very good seasons by freshmen standards. Projected NBA draft positions mean zero/nothing/nada, and actual draft positions don’t mean much more in regard to the impact a freshman is expected to have on winning in college. In my opinion, the “hype” based on this or recruiting rankings is created by fans who delude themselves into thinking this kind of stuff equates with the players ability to impact winning now, instead of merely being what it is – forecasting (or guessing) as to future potential.

To me, relying on freshmen to carry your offense or starting more than 1 or 2 freshmen is like betting a specific number at the Roulette Wheel. I don’t understand why you would do it if you don’t have to. Maybe this season Reeves and Mitchell are enough. Maybe Onyenso & Bradshaw can provide enough at the Center spot. I hope so. I don’t expect UK to win a title every season, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think they should be in the conversation most years and I think the SEC title should always go through Lexington, as they say.

This is spot on.

 

[bucsrule8872]

Great point. Reeves and Mitchell are capable of giving Kentucky a combined 30 points/game if needed. Obviously we want Thiero and Onyenso to take the next step and provide some competence in year #2. That would give UK four solid veterans to buy some time for the freshmen as they develop.

Edwards has a higher long term ceiling than Brandon Miller did, and I could see a scenario where he's giving us around 13 to 15 points/game by season's end. If Edwards plays like a #1 pick, he's obviously in that same realm of Miller-like production.

My projection:

Edwards - 13 ppg
Wagner - 13 ppg
Reeves - 12 ppg
Bradshaw - 10 ppg
Mitchell - 10 ppg
Dillingham - 8 ppg
Onyenso - 6 ppg
Thiero - 4ppg
Sheppard - 3ppg

Rest of the team combined (/Hart/Burks/maybe Cyril) - 3ppg

If this team averages 80+ppg as you suggest, we should be pretty good.

There won’t be many teams in college bball that can score 80ppg. We play anywhere close to the defense we are capable of playing, we will be very hard to beat if we score over 80 a game.

 

[G-PIP]

While I do believe it puts a huge burden on incoming freshman to be that focal point and primary option and that it might take time even if they DO end up being that for this team, at the same rate the only title we won in this era was in 2012, which was dominated by freshman and two year guys be the main focal point. In other words, it could still work out in the end.

It could. And I certainly hope it does. But I know that you know that just because something happened once does not suggest that it is the most likely thing to happen again. That would be a logical fallacy which I think they call outcome bias (i.e., focusing on the outcome without due regard for the circumstances).

Plus, I think we would agree that Lamb, Jones and Miller were a really good foundation and played a huge role in the success of the 2012 team. In fact, I think they were the stability in the offense all season. Moreover, having a freshman at PG made that team more vulnerable than it should have been. Waiting on Teague to become good enough at PG not to torpedo that team’s chances created quite a bit of anxiety. He eventually got there, but to me that was an example of a gamble that maybe wasn’t necessary using some foresight and planning.

But again, I’m not saying it’s impossible that a heavily freshman dominated team couldn’t win it all. Duke kind of pulled it off once too (with a Senior offensive star in Quinn Cook, and another Junior 3pt. marksman in Rasheed Sulaimon), and the Fab Four had a good run in the early 90s. I’m just saying that it’s an unnecessary gamble for the best program in CBB to make, and freshmen generally (practically always?) are not good enough to carry a contending team offensively.

 

[G-PIP]

Didn't Alabama rely on Brandon Miller?
Didin't Jalen Suggs run the Gonzaga offense?

I think we're at our best if DJ, Edwards, Dillingham, etc. are creating the offense. I think you don't want them to be in a situation to HAVE to be the offense.

And that's why Reeves coming back means so much.

I think he can give us a lot offense while these guys grow into that role.

Hey, I hope you’re right. I agree with a number of things you stated. But I don’t believe that it’s even remotely likely that this team will be a title contender, and the primary reason I believe that is the reliance on freshman – not these particular freshmen (who I really like as players), but ANY freshmen.

Miller and Suggs had a lot of upperclassmen to help carry the load. Now, AL did rely a lot on Miller, but he also had a rough March and AL went home at the hands of a bunch of old “nobodies” from SDSU.

If I’m wrong, ok. A wise man once said: “Show me a man who never admits he’s wrong and I’ll show you a man who is foolish. For he will never learn from his mistakes or grow in wisdom.” I’m far from always right, and just trying to climb above foolish.

 

[The_Answer1313]

It could. And I certainly hope it does. But I know that you know that just because something happened once does not suggest that it is the most likely thing to happen again. That would be a logical fallacy which I think they call outcome bias (i.e., focusing on the outcome without due regard for the circumstances).

Plus, I think we would agree that Lamb, Jones and Miller were a really good foundation and played a huge role in the success of the 2012 team. In fact, I think they were the stability in the offense all season. Moreover, having a freshman at PG made that team more vulnerable than it should have been. Waiting on Teague to become good enough at PG not to torpedo that team’s chances created quite a bit of anxiety. He eventually got there, but to me that was an example of a gamble that maybe wasn’t necessary using some foresight and planning.

But again, I’m not saying it’s impossible that a heavily freshman dominated team couldn’t win it all. Duke kind of pulled it off once too (with a Senior offensive star in Quinn Cook, and another Junior 3pt. marksman in Rasheed Sulaimon), and the Fab Four had a good run in the early 90s. I’m just saying that it’s an unnecessary gamble for the best program in CBB to make, and freshmen generally (practically always?) are not good enough to carry a contending team offensively.

No I agree. Just because something happened one time doesn't make it likely to happen again.

But I believe people suffer from a similar thing. They will say "well how many freshman teams go on and win the whole thing"........not a whole lot. But they fail to consider the fact that there's simply not many teams in college basketball in a given year that choose to start mostly freshman to begin with.

I'm of the mindset that if you have talented players, you have talented players. It might take freshman a little longer to click and they might bolt to the NBA before it even happens. That's a risk playing this game that Cal plays I feel. But to me when I look at our teams over the past decade and I look at the good ones vs the not so good ones, it all boils back down to talent. 2012 didn't matter a whole much we were led by underclassmen because the team was just so good. 2015 was also dominated by underclassmen.

I think when Cal said if it's between talent and experience I'm taking talent all day long. I agree with this. I feel like the main difference pre 2016 and post 2015 has been just that. Now people will argue we still had enough talent in recent history and that's fine, but I think most would recognize it wasn't like pre 16 levels.

Ideally you'd want both right. Experience players that are also super talented. In reality, we don't seem to get that often. So IMO the next thing to take is talented freshman. Because I don't think having mediocre players come back to school for another year really helps us get anywhere we want to get to.

if these incoming freshman are as good as people think they are (and that really remains to be seen), then I think it has a decent shot at a good year.

 

[Cats192]

Hey, I hope you’re right. I agree with a number of things you stated. But I don’t believe that it’s even remotely likely that this team will be a title contender, and the primary reason I believe that is the reliance on freshman – not these particular freshmen (who I really like as players), but ANY freshmen.

Miller and Suggs had a lot of upperclassmen to help carry the load. Now, AL did rely a lot on Miller, but he also had a rough March and AL went home at the hands of a bunch of old “nobodies” from SDSU.

If I’m wrong, ok. A wise man once said: “Show me a man who never admits he’s wrong and I’ll show you a man who is foolish. For he will never learn from his mistakes or grow in wisdom.” I’m far from always right, and just trying to climb above foolish.

I think we're about to find out.

I think due to the extra covid years--college basketball has been a lot older. And those old guys are joining up rather than staying spread out. That means the talent has been condensed towards the middle. Some smaller schools aren't as good--but all of the power 5 schools are at a higher talent level than usual.

Freshmen wise--we haven't seen talent like this since the Karl Towns/Twins team. Can you put together multiple lottery pick level freshman and make a Final 4 run? We're about to find out. But I think this is easily the most talented group we've had here since PJ Washington's 2nd team.

 

[G-PIP]

But I believe people suffer from a similar thing. They will say "well how many freshman teams go on and win the whole thing"........not a whole lot. But they fail to consider the fact that there's simply not many teams in college basketball in a given year that choose to start mostly freshman to begin with.

Valid point. Plus, let me say, you're a darn fine poster. I might disagree with you on a point or two (e.g., value of 5-star freshmen for one year in college), but I suspect if I disagreed with you too much, I'd be wrong more than I already am.

 

[The_Answer1313]

Valid point. Plus, let me say, you're a darn fine poster. I might disagree with you on a point or two (e.g., value of 5-star freshmen for one year in college), but I suspect if I disagreed with you too much, I'd be wrong more than I already am.

Thanks I enjoy reading your posts as well.

And who knows, I mean at the end of the day we are all just guessing about what it going to happen.

My baseball team the Mets, 400 million dollar payroll, 101 wins last season is sitting at 36-44.
The Reds on the other hand, first place in the NL Central at this point.

To me, it's what makes sports great. We all sit around this board and make predictions but at the end of the day we are all more likely wrong than right lol.

 

[docholiday51]

If we have the 1st, 6th, 18th and 20th pick in the draft and don't make the EE Cal should quit and give his salary back to UK