Espn: Replacing Kentucky's Seven Departures
- Thread starter Smashcat
- Start date
He calls our roster "normal" lol. Is it normal to have 3 top 15 players with multiple reurning 5 star players?
I guess only a hand full of teams are normal.
I guess only a hand full of teams are normal.
Yeah, I really didn't get that article. Between the talent and the experience of this team, I put them right on par with the best of our teams since Cal has been here.
Yes there are questions, but when an article has one of Them as whether Alex Poythress will be able to thrive in the 4 spot, I kind of question the intelligence of the rest of the article.
Last edited:
Pretty ordinary effort by this writer. He locked on to a somewhat specious theme -- Kentucky's return to the pack -- then stretched or shrunk the elements of the piece to make it all fit. He wrote to fit his kicker, as journalists call the last line.
He did a fair job of assessing some of the Cats' talent. Add Mulder, Mathews, Humphries to the players he detailed and that's hardly 'normal' talent.
He did a fair job of assessing some of the Cats' talent. Add Mulder, Mathews, Humphries to the players he detailed and that's hardly 'normal' talent.
Skal replaces Towns. Humphries adds depth and replaces Dakari.
Poy plus an improved Lee replaces WCS. Then add Wynyard for depth.
Murray replaces Lyles.
Mulder replaces Booker, and I think that will be closer to a 1-to-1 replacement than most realize, plus Charles Matthews for depth.
Briscoe replaces Aaron Harrison.
A more experienced Ulis playing 30+ mpg to replace Andrew Harrison, plus two guys in Briscoe and Murray that can spell him.
What I see is a team that won't be as good defensely upfront, but will be better offensively across the board. it's blasphemy I know, but give this team a couple of weeks to play together and develop chemistry, and I think they could be as good as last year's team...if not better.
Poy plus an improved Lee replaces WCS. Then add Wynyard for depth.
Murray replaces Lyles.
Mulder replaces Booker, and I think that will be closer to a 1-to-1 replacement than most realize, plus Charles Matthews for depth.
Briscoe replaces Aaron Harrison.
A more experienced Ulis playing 30+ mpg to replace Andrew Harrison, plus two guys in Briscoe and Murray that can spell him.
What I see is a team that won't be as good defensely upfront, but will be better offensively across the board. it's blasphemy I know, but give this team a couple of weeks to play together and develop chemistry, and I think they could be as good as last year's team...if not better.
I see he went with the company line that Duke has the number 1 recruiting class. I told you guys, the national sports media wants the casual fan to believe that Kentucky has an equal on the recruiting trail. Kansas and Duke have been putting together great classes the whole time Calipari has been here, but Coach Cal has been and still is far and away the best recruiter in college basketball.
I didn't read the article, only the reply's in this thread. However, I really can't say I agree with this. No way are we going to be better than last years team. We may be offensively more efficient and flow better but we are not going to be a better team. I hope we end the season better but I just don't see this team doing better than 38-1.
I'm not saying the record will be better - this team is going to face some stiffer challenges early, but I really think we could grow into a much better offensive team by the end of the year. As awesome as last year's team was defensively, our offensive woes finished us off in the end. After all the hype about what a historically great defensive team we were, when it was all said and done, two of the best OFFENSIVE teams in the country met for the national championship.
Imagine having a Jamal Murray or Briscoe at our disposal at the end of the Wisconsin game.
This team may not win 38 games but they still have a chance to do something that last years team did not. With Murray and Ulis running the show, we will be the favorite come March. I loved the Harrison Twins but I just feel more confident with Ulis and Murray. Briscoe is a better player than either of the twins as well. It doesn't mean the twins are bad, Ulis, Briscoe, and Murray are all simply better players.
Last edited:
Just wait until January when UK is sitting at #1 in the nation. I mean, face it guys, this team will be compared to last year's team, and losses will be magnified.
In the end, where are we in April? That's ALL that matters.
The difference to me between this coming year and last year is that there are six clear cut starter level guys that will get most of the minutes while the rest of the players are role players who should know their role. Last year there were nearly 10 equal guys who all deserved to start.
Having less players with just as much talent should make the team more cohesive, since the top six know they will be getting 20+ minutes per game and will get to gel as a unit.
Sure, having all that talent created unreal depth last year, but you can still only put five on the floor at a time. Duke and Wisconsin had less depth, but it didn't matter, especially in the tourney with all the TV time outs.
This year we will still have the five most talented players out on the floor for most of the game.
Who else will start five 5-stars and will bring another 5-star off the bench? Nobody, unless I am mistaken.
Having less players with just as much talent should make the team more cohesive, since the top six know they will be getting 20+ minutes per game and will get to gel as a unit.
Sure, having all that talent created unreal depth last year, but you can still only put five on the floor at a time. Duke and Wisconsin had less depth, but it didn't matter, especially in the tourney with all the TV time outs.
This year we will still have the five most talented players out on the floor for most of the game.
Who else will start five 5-stars and will bring another 5-star off the bench? Nobody, unless I am mistaken.
I don't find anything wrong with the article. We are counting on Murray, Skal, Briscoe, Humphries, etc. who have never played one day of college ball. Are they talented? Of course? But, exactly how they will perform under pressure, as a team, well that has to be seen. North Carolina and Maryland have starters returning whom have proven themselves on the court.
But, as bad as this may sound, I think although last years team had great Pro potential players, guys like Dakari, often hurt as much as helped, Booker lost his touch at the end of the season, and the Harrison's saved us the year before but cost us against Wisconsin. I think Ulis often looked better leading the team but I truly believe Cal had pressure to play the Harrisons. I don't think this team will be as talented, or perhaps play as dominant in many games, yet I think they have an excellent chance at a National Championship.
But, as bad as this may sound, I think although last years team had great Pro potential players, guys like Dakari, often hurt as much as helped, Booker lost his touch at the end of the season, and the Harrison's saved us the year before but cost us against Wisconsin. I think Ulis often looked better leading the team but I truly believe Cal had pressure to play the Harrisons. I don't think this team will be as talented, or perhaps play as dominant in many games, yet I think they have an excellent chance at a National Championship.
I honestly believe that we would have still made the Final Four with a team of Ulis, Booker, Lyles, WCS, and Towns starting with Lee and Hawkins off the bench (and Cal would have probably found another good player or two that he could throw in there as well like maybe Gill-Caesar).
There would have been little pressure on that team and they would have still won 30+ games.
They would have been a more cohesive with Ulis and Booker playing 35+ minutes per game together instead of splitting time with the Twins.
Sometimes more turns out to be less, especially with the added pressure of such high expectations.
The pressure won't be nearly as high for this coming season, unless they somehow enter the NCAA tourney unblemished, which I don't think will happen.
There would have been little pressure on that team and they would have still won 30+ games.
They would have been a more cohesive with Ulis and Booker playing 35+ minutes per game together instead of splitting time with the Twins.
Sometimes more turns out to be less, especially with the added pressure of such high expectations.
The pressure won't be nearly as high for this coming season, unless they somehow enter the NCAA tourney unblemished, which I don't think will happen.
We have been in the same predicament every year that Cal has been here. Mixing a batch of talented newcomers with a handful of vets.
The only year we looked "normal" was 2012-13. So the premise of the article is weak on it's face.
Based on what Cal has done these past 6 years, our expectation should be that next year's team will perform at an elite level.
Throw in the weak stuff about Duke finishing with the #1 class (did ESPN ever update their rankings?), and the article wasn't much more than a hack job. Wishful thinking.
No, the Harrison's kept us in that game plain and simple. Andrew was 5\11 with 13 points and 4 assists while Aaron was 5\10 with 12 points. Both had more rebounds than Lyles. I can see blaming the Harrison's is still fashionable, just like I said it would be. The only player to outscore either in that game was Towns. People, please quit blaming these kids for crap. Its went on for 2 years even though they got us to the title game in 2014 and saved our bacon numerous times last year.
Last year's team was a top 3 UK team of all time. By the advanced metrics, it was the best performing regular season team in all of CBB since '96.
Let's pump the breaks just a little bit on that.
Last years team had the #5 adjusted offense in the country and was second only to the 2012 UK team in Cal's tenure at Kentucky.
I think he meant normal based on rotation. UK will play seven to eight guys like most teams and have a mixture of experience and new talent.
Now our seven to eight will be better than other team's seven to eight. I also think the writer acknowledges that but he wasn't talking about normal from a talent stand point as UK has the most talented team, like every year but 2012-2013.
Now our seven to eight will be better than other team's seven to eight. I also think the writer acknowledges that but he wasn't talking about normal from a talent stand point as UK has the most talented team, like every year but 2012-2013.
...And we still didn't have anybody who could put the ball in the freakin' basket in the last few minutes against Wisconsin. As great as last year's team was, there were times our offense struggled because we lacked one thing - a scorer.
It was a guy with that get-buckets mentality that ended up saving Duke's arse against Wisconsin (Allen), and I think we'll have two guys this year in Murray and Briscoe that can be that guy.
Again, I'm not saying this year's team will be better than last years, but I think we'll be better offensively, and I think we cd be more fun to watch.
KAT could've got some baskets. How many clutch shots did Aaron hit in the 2014 tournament? You're basing an offensive analysis of a team on a few minutes at the end of a final four game.
Has Humphries committed or qualified to reclassify yet? I think it was supposed to be a week or so ago it would be announced? I figured to see a post about it but haven't.
Exactly. We had like 7-8 different guys drop at least 15 in a game.
The heck is he talking about, no scorers? We just had a bad stretch against a good team against which we had been up late.
It sucks that it happened right then, but we don't have to change history to rationalize what happened. Great teams lose sometimes - and they lost to another great one. Out of 10 games, Wisconsin was gonna win at least 3-4, and they won that one.
It's not overly complicated.
I can't believe I'm having to argue the point that UK's offense wasn't all that last year. Did you guys actually watch any games?
Also, a scorer is a guy who can get hot and drop 30 on you on any given night. He doesn't need a set offense. Give him the ball and he will get buckets. If you watched Jamal Murray in the Nike Hoops Summit - that is a scorer. D'Angelo Russel is a scorer. Of the guys were recruiting this year, Markelle Fultz is a scorer.
Despite rarely playing, Greyson Allen scored more points in one random blow-out game for Duke last year than any of our guys did all year. Aaron Harrison may have been a clutch shooter, but he was not a scorer.
Also, a scorer is a guy who can get hot and drop 30 on you on any given night. He doesn't need a set offense. Give him the ball and he will get buckets. If you watched Jamal Murray in the Nike Hoops Summit - that is a scorer. D'Angelo Russel is a scorer. Of the guys were recruiting this year, Markelle Fultz is a scorer.
Despite rarely playing, Greyson Allen scored more points in one random blow-out game for Duke last year than any of our guys did all year. Aaron Harrison may have been a clutch shooter, but he was not a scorer.
It's all 20/20 at this point. Our shooters were slumping, we faced a Wisconsin team out for blood, missing our best weapon against them in Poy... Just wrong squad at the wrong time. Maybe 10 MCDAA's just isn't a good formula: No real cohesion in the team, Booker and Aaron lost their touch midway through the season. The only player to really get it going was KAT.
Also, let's not look pas the bracket shenanigans. If Duke had any other jersey on, they play harder teams (greatly enhancing the chance of adding to their recent list of upsets), and have to meet up with Wisconsin before their title game. The non-sense that was Duke's bracket made everyone elses (including Wisconsins) a bit more difficult.
If Booker and Aaron hit just 10% more of their 3's and the brackets are even, we are 40-0 and still probably celebrating. Probably what hurts the most.. just how close we were. Heck, Duke having an even bracket might have been all we needed.
Also, let's not look pas the bracket shenanigans. If Duke had any other jersey on, they play harder teams (greatly enhancing the chance of adding to their recent list of upsets), and have to meet up with Wisconsin before their title game. The non-sense that was Duke's bracket made everyone elses (including Wisconsins) a bit more difficult.
If Booker and Aaron hit just 10% more of their 3's and the brackets are even, we are 40-0 and still probably celebrating. Probably what hurts the most.. just how close we were. Heck, Duke having an even bracket might have been all we needed.
All I know is that I'm excited about our team next year - and the fact that after losing SEVEN of our best players, then completely striking out on the senior class this Spring, Cal can pull:
1. An under-rated JUCO in Mulder who is going to SERIOUSLY surprise people;
2. An under-the-radar big man in Humphries who as a sophomore is going to end up being one of the best centers in the country considering the weak 2016 class of bigs, and;
3. A guy in Jamal Murray who will end up being a Top 4 draft pick, and who could be the most exciting player at Kentucky since John Wall.
That's pretty amazing stuff, and if anyone doubts after this year that Cal is the freakin' man, I feel sorry for you.
1. An under-rated JUCO in Mulder who is going to SERIOUSLY surprise people;
2. An under-the-radar big man in Humphries who as a sophomore is going to end up being one of the best centers in the country considering the weak 2016 class of bigs, and;
3. A guy in Jamal Murray who will end up being a Top 4 draft pick, and who could be the most exciting player at Kentucky since John Wall.
That's pretty amazing stuff, and if anyone doubts after this year that Cal is the freakin' man, I feel sorry for you.
I think Murray is slotted in at SF by a lot of people. He might not play there, but it's not a crazy suggestion.
So you have to invent a totally arbitrary definition of scorer, because it's the only thing that works after you claim that a team with 8 players (9 before Poy went down) who could drop 15+ in a night (more on a less balanced roster) is bad at scoring.
And then, you mix in the unrelated notion that people who disagree with you on this must doubt Cal.
Which is ridiculous - I've been one of the most vehement Cal defenders on this board (which is incredibly sad, because he shouldn't have needed it).
Because we disagree with you that
a. last year's uber-balanced, legendarily good team was poor at scoring
or
b. it's reasonable to anticipate this year's team getting to the tourney undefeated
..we must then not believe in Cal? That's an insane stretch, friend.
That is a pathetic bench...so I'll just have to agree to disagree on that team beating a Notre Dame for example to get to the Final Four.
C'mon dude - what do you want me to say? I think this year's team is going to be very exciting - not as good as last year's team, but they don't have to be - because I think college basketball is going to be a little down overall compared to last year.
I'm not entirely sure what we're arguing about.
He committed a few weeks ago, kinda under the table, but he still has to work to make his reclassification official before he can announce it. We'll probably hear something around the end of August.
Cal made it to the Final Four playing basically six guys in 2011 (Knight, Lamb, Miller, Jones, Harrellson, and Liggins). Depth is overrated. One or two good bench players are all you really need.
Depth is a good insurance policy.. That's pretty much the main positive. We were able to lose Poythress, who would be the best player on 80% of the rest of the teams, and a top 3 player on 99% of the other teams, and still win 38 games. We could have lost another 3-4 players and still be a solid seed in the tournament.
That's what depth does. Doesn't necessarily make you better, it just provides a safety net.
That's what depth does. Doesn't necessarily make you better, it just provides a safety net.
An injury to the wrong guy and depth doesn't matter.
We lose KAT last season, we don't make the Final Four, IMHO.
There was no one who could have replaced Noel in 2013. Depth wouldn't save that season as far as I am concerned.
This year if we lose Murray or Labissiere, then I don't care who is behind them, we can't replace them, IMHO.
Superstars are irreplaceable. No amount of depth can cover for losing a superstar.
