For Those Upset About WCS's Final Game Performance . . .

[kats23]

I agree 100% Willie has great talent and an even better upside, but a lot of onlookers see a player that takes off more than he shows up. The scouting on him must reveal a player with so much potential that the level of importance he places on his game is of minor importance to them because every authority has him picked to go before #10. I was personally very disappointed in the fact that he was so distraught after the loss to Wisconsin Saturday he showed up at the car store @ 9:00 AM Monday to order his new sports car while I was still in grief mode. No hate for Willie here, I love the kid, I was young once also. Hope he grows out of it, he can be one of the best ever.

They see a 7 footer who can run the floor like a guard, and guard anyone on the court. They see the mid range jumpers at workouts. They see potential. They see a player who they say will be motivated by money. Scouts and GM's cannot watch every game. That's why there are so many "busts" in the pros not just NBA. Stein is one of these guys if you pass on him and he winds up being a journeyman bc of his defensive skills and nothing more he won't be worth a top 10 pick. Valuable, but not lottery worthy. However, if he unlocks an offensive game, the sky is the limit.

It wouldn't surprise me if half the NBA GM's didn't watch his Final Four game. I've said it for a long time, I think the success of Stein comes down to Willie's "want to" for success. It wasn't always evident at UK but maybe with millions in the balance it will become that.

 

[brianpoe]

Your all wrong....Ulis in the game we win going away

On the offensive end maybe, but Jackson and even Koenig started bullying Tyler into the paint on defense.

 

[kybassfan]

Looks like the thread was derailed.

ICoach Cal is as much to blame for not making the championship game as anyone. In game adjustments were horrible for a high level D-1 coach in that game. I love the guy, but if I'm going to bash any player for not showing up, I'm gonna do the same thing with coach cal. They all had a part to play. The philosophy of "play our game worry about no one else" does NOT work at that point in the year. We were not playing Vandy, and that's the attitude we carried. We were always beatable. Tearing apart a down SEC never changed that. Cal overestimated our team and underestimated the final four. Also The Wisconsin game should teach everyone why the players need to be studying game tape. When I heard a Boob Ryan say his team was studying game tape until the end, I knew immediately we were probably in trouble. You cannot be OVER prepared. This myth is carried by lots of people who never played or coached at any level. But even if you could, I'd much rather be over-prepared than under-prepared. Any day of the week. That's my opinion on that.

And before it happens, IM OVER IT!!!!!! But should objective people get over it? - Or should the some of you come to terms with how we lost? Hmm.... "Everyone did fine we lost get over it" is one of the more annoying things you'll ever see on this board.

How is it that the so called self proclaimed "objective" people are always the ones doing the bashing. Objective is taking as gospel some anecdotal coach speak from Bo Ryan? You have quantitative proof that we were approaching the game like it was Vandy? Of course you don't, but then how is the absence of data supposed to be "objective"? I often find "arbitrarily critical" trying to hide behind "objective".

I've played. Lots. I know one of the most dangerous things you can do is drill, watch game film and work yourself into such a tizzy that you can't play your best. Part of the art of coaching is knowing when to take a step back. Of the teams in the final four, 3 teams screwed up. Only one team ever gets it right or gets lucky enough to get it right. So it goes, every single year.

You want to be objective? Then realize that the factors that go into winning and losing are far more complex than rumors of watching (or not) game film. Its more than just an arm chair jockey proclaiming a singular talent "took the night off".

So should the objective people get over it? Maybe the objective people have come to terms with how we lost, weeks ago.

 

[kywildcats4life]

WCS definitely took plays and even games off. He truly lacked the fire of a Julius Randle/Patrick Patterson type.

 

[TrustinCal]

No, he didn't.

First team All-American. Remember that.

You must have some super low expectations of your all Americans in final four games. Just sayin.

He was going against the National College Player of the Year and tasked to guarding two NBA first round picks on the perimeter. Did you forget that?
Sometimes you don't get calls, the ball bounces the other way, miss shots, etc. Willie didn't have a good night, but to think that he decided to take the Final Four game off is beyond dumb.

 

[Dreklie]

Pretty pumped knowing he took a large shat against Wisconsin and was a major reason we lost out on a title. Get mad or defend him if ya want, dude took games off, and it cost us.

 

[.S&C.]

He was going against the National College Player of the Year and tasked to guarding two NBA first round picks on the perimeter. Did you forget that?
Sometimes you don't get calls, the ball bounces the other way, miss shots, etc. Willie didn't have a good night, but to think that he decided to take the Final Four game off is beyond dumb.

I don't think he took the night off, and that's not what you said. You said he didn't play as bad as some make it out. What game did you watch? For an All American, it was about as bad a final four showing as you can get. I don't assign motives, but for whatever reason he wasn't in it. He is a junior on a john calipari team and future lottery. That was for a chance at a natty. You can coat that in sugar as thick as you like; his performance was south of acceptable. And it didn't have anything to do with "missed shots" or "bouncing balls" as you put it. Lol.

Man the depths some will go. I mean, now WCS played "not bad" against Wisconsin. Yesterday I was told Bookers defense "came along nicely". no Joke.

 

[TrustinCal]

If he took games off, then that's on Cal as much as it it is on WCS.

I don't think he took the night off, and that's not what you said. You said he didn't play as bad as some make it out. What game did you watch? For an All American, it was about as bad a final four showing as you can get. I don't assign motives, but for whatever reason he wasn't in it. He is a junior on a john calipari team and future lottery. That was for a chance at a natty. You can coat that in sugar as thin as you like; his performance was south of acceptable. And it didn't have anything to do with "missed shots" or "bouncing balls". Lol.

Man the depths some will go.

Actually bouncing balls do factor in. Play jumpshooting teams and it neutralizes any size advantage we had due to long rebounds. I'm mainly talking to the people who are saying he's taking games and weeks off. He had a bad game against great players. It happens, but there were things he did well. We lost the game. Get over it.

 

[.S&C.]

How is it that the so called self proclaimed "objective" people are always the ones doing the bashing. Objective is taking as gospel some anecdotal coach speak from Bo Ryan? You have quantitative proof that we were approaching the game like it was Vandy? Of course you don't, but then how is the absence of data supposed to be "objective"? I often find "arbitrarily critical" trying to hide behind "objective".

I've played. Lots. I know one of the most dangerous things you can do is drill, watch game film and work yourself into such a tizzy that you can't play your best. Part of the art of coaching is knowing when to take a step back. Of the teams in the final four, 3 teams screwed up. Only one team ever gets it right or gets lucky enough to get it right. So it goes, every single year.

You want to be objective? Then realize that the factors that go into winning and losing are far more complex than rumors of watching (or not) game film. Its more than just an arm chair jockey proclaiming a singular talent "took the night off".

So should the objective people get over it? Maybe the objective people have come to terms with how we lost, weeks ago.

Did you just get out of you second semester of community college or something. Take it to the science lab much? "Quantify" lol. I know it's a fun word to throw around but it usually loses its luster after your senior year.

Bo Ryan made some interesting points after the final four a it how hard his team prepared, in the gym and in film, for Kentucky. He even said this before the game. I believe that matters. you think our players hounding game tape of Wisconsin could've hurt? Please. You are just backing the issue because Cal proclaimed it. Well guess what? There's plenty of championship coaches that DONT agree with that, including the one that walked away with the trophy last year.

As far as willie takin the night off, I have no idea why he played chity. I've never stated he took the night off.

When I'm talking about objectivity, I'm referring to the segment of insufferable pumpers on this board that consistently scream for others to "get over it". I'm simply saying, who should get over it? There's two sides to that coin.

 

[.S&C.]

If he took games off, then that's on Cal as much as it it is on WCS.


Actually bouncing balls do factor in. Play jumpshooting teams and it neutralizes any size advantage we had due to long rebounds. I'm mainly talking to the people who are saying he's taking games and weeks off. He had a bad game against great players. It happens, but there were things he did well. We lost the game. Get over it.

Aaahhhhh yes. Get over it. Lol.

We lost because our preparation and game management were bad from the onset. The our best players didn't show up. You can believe whatever you want, and I'm sure you will. But bouncing balls and whatever else you want to say is nothing more than an excuse to cover for poor play and poor coaching strategies. Maybe get over that and stop defending the indefensible every other word.

I'll just step out how. We've got a couple of the pumpers out. No need in talking to blind men.

 

[kybassfan]

Did you just get out of you second semester of community college or something. Take it to the science lab much? "Quantify" lol. I know it's a fun word to throw around but it usually loses its luster after your senior year.

Bo Ryan made some interesting points after the final four a it how hard his team prepared, in the gym and in film, for Kentucky. He even said this before the game. I believe that matters. you think our players hounding game tape of Wisconsin could've hurt? Please. You are just backing the issue because Cal proclaimed it. Well guess what? There's plenty of championship coaches that DONT agree with that, including the one that walked away with the trophy last year.

As far as willie takin the night off, I have no idea why he played chity. I've never stated he took the night off.

When I'm talking about objectivity, I'm referring to the segment of insufferable pumpers on this board that consistently scream for others to "get over it". I'm simply saying, who should get over it? There's two sides to that coin.

So you use childish lables like "pumpers" and whining about words like quantify when you misuse the word "objective"? Ever think that you can't explain your subjective and unsubstantiated opinion about Steins play because he didn't play that bad? Go study the box score. You'll see the gap. Hint: free throws and three point attempts. What drove those? Starts with p. Oh wait, thats using numbers. No fair, too much like the science lab for you? Maybe you should have spent a bit more time there.

I think the only pumping going on here is the BS trying to blame a player for a loss that was more attributable to wisconsin's good play than KY's bad play. Cause, objectively, neither team played that bad when you look at the numbers. Still, blame Stein if it makes you feel better. I'm sure the millions that the NBA is about to drop on him will help him recover from your disappointment.

 

[kywildcats4life]

If he was supposed to be scared of Kaminsky, I really feel sorry for his future in the NBA. He should've made it a nightmare for ole Frank.

 

[.S&C.]

So you use childish lables like "pumpers" and whining about words like quantify when you misuse the word "objective"? Ever think that you can't explain your subjective and unsubstantiated opinion about Steins play because he didn't play that bad? Go study the box score. You'll see the gap. Hint: free throws and three point attempts. What drove those? Starts with p. Oh wait, thats using numbers. No fair, too much like the science lab for you? Maybe you should have spent a bit more time there.

I think the only pumping going on here is the BS trying to blame a player for a loss that was more attributable to wisconsin's good play than KY's bad play. Cause, objectively, neither team played that bad when you look at the numbers. Still, blame Stein if it makes you feel better. I'm sure the millions that the NBA is about to drop on him will help him recover from your disappointment.

I didn't see this earlier.

Pumpers is not a childish label. Over the last 5- 6 years this board has had a few handfuls of members come out and debate A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G that is said that isn't basically "nothing to see here, Cal is the body of christ, get over etc" and try and squash any conversation nearly immediately. Coming from someone like myself that was called a pumper for years on this board, it's pretty bad when I get sick of it.

Yea I used the word objective. Ya got me. I don't know what I was thinking. I just didn't think a sophomore in college was going to come around the corner and blast me for not setting a frequency table and compiling data. What you are saying about Willie is incorrect. He played the opposite of how we need our star All American to play. If you cannot see that, then I'm sure there's "crazy people" everywhere to you. I don't mean to be disrespectful either, I don't mind your post. I just DONT AGREE WITH YOU.

I've said from the start I think we had poor game preparation, and the team underperformed given the situation. I never overly bashed WCS and some of you are using it as a red herring to deflect from the point. I've actually sounded at times like I blame Cal for the loss more than the actual players if you've even been reading my post.

As far as my analysis, seeing as how Cal has such an unusual philosophy to game preparation, I guess I just don't understand why there's such aggressive fans toward that opinion. At the least, it's a reasonable counter. Lot's of great coaches completely disagree with his take on game preparation. It's been conventional wisdom for many years that its better to be over prepared than under prepared.

I love Cal. I think he's great, but I don't think he's perfect. And I don't believe anyone is above reproach.

 

[KopiKat]

Willie played a rotten game against the Badgers. Rotten. He was on the floor for 33 minutes. He took only four shots. He got ZERO (0) offensive rebounds. I'm sorry, if you're seven foot tall with that athleticism and you're on the floor for more than three-quarters of the game and you're hardly even shooting the ball then it's practically impossible to not come up with at least 2 or 3 offensive boards by accident unless you're mind is somewhere with Will Robinson and Dr. Smith.

We missed 28 shots and got 6 offensive rebounds (less than 25%)
Wisconsin missed 25 shots and got 12 offensive rebounds (basically half)

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

I'm not trying to be an Alabama homer - and my word, did they have some talent on that team - but watching WCS run the floor and shoot from the wing like that at his height, it has suddenly occurred to me that he is a hybrid of Robert Horry and Latrell Sprewell skill sets and body types. dammit, he is a serious prospect, and to think three 7 footers are going to go in front of him.

I'm glad you are liking what you see in WCS but I don't think you've seen enough of him if those are the 2 names that you compare him with. Take it from some of us that have watched every game of his for 3 seasons, thats nit a good comparison of WCS. Im not bashing your opinion at all, just trying to tell ya a bit more about him from us UK fans. Now, he may look good shooting open jumpshots in an empty gym but he is not any kind of hybrid of Robert Horry. It's alot different shooting in an empty gym compared to shooting in an NBA arena full of screaming fans and Horry was a master at clutch. Most all prospects will look really good during these types of workouts but that doesn't mean they can do the same when the big lights are turned on. I'm not sure where you are seeing the Spreewell comparison either but to each his own. I love WCS but I don't think he will ever be a focal point of any NBA offense. He may make strides and be efficient on the offensive end but his money will be made on the defensive end ala Tyson Chandler, IMO. Chandler has improved on offense but it is known what he brings to the table for his team's and that's a defensive stopper and rim protector and that's what I see Willie as in the league. Hooefully a little more also as I think he will be able to guard most all other positions as well. Now, he won't always be able to guard every position when he goes up against a team with certain personnel and certain players but I think he will be very versatile on the defensive end. I'd like to see him prove me wrong on the offensive end and hopefully he can with more coaching time than a college player can receive. Hopefully he lands with a team that has a great coaching staff that can develop his offensive game and turn it into a weapon. After seeing minimul progression during his career, I'm hesitate to think his offense will progress into a viable commodity for him. I truly hope I am wrong though.

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

I didn't see this earlier.

Pumpers is not a childish label. Over the last 5- 6 years this board has had a few handfuls of members come out and debate A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G that is said that isn't basically "nothing to see here, Cal is the body of christ, get over etc" and try and squash any conversation nearly immediately. Coming from someone like myself that was called a pumper for years on this board, it's pretty bad when I get sick of it.

Yea I used the word objective. Ya got me. I don't know what I was thinking. I just didn't think a sophomore in college was going to come around the corner and blast me for not setting a frequency table and compiling data. What you are saying about Willie is incorrect. He played the opposite of how we need our star All American to play. If you cannot see that, then I'm sure there's "crazy people" everywhere to you. I don't mean to be disrespectful either, I don't mind your post. I just DONT AGREE WITH YOU.

I've said from the start I think we had poor game preparation, and the team underperformed given the situation. I never overly bashed WCS and some of you are using it as a red herring to deflect from the point. I've actually sounded at times like I blame Cal for the loss more than the actual players if you've even been reading my post.

As far as my analysis, seeing as how Cal has such an unusual philosophy to game preparation, I guess I just don't understand why there's such aggressive fans toward that opinion. At the least, it's a reasonable counter. Lot's of great coaches completely disagree with his take on game preparation. It's been conventional wisdom for many years that its better to be over prepared than under prepared.

I love Cal. I think he's great, but I don't think he's perfect. And I don't believe anyone is above reproach.

I love Cal as well but I think you make a great point about his game preparation. I cannot believe that he doesnt have his teams watch game film. That just blew my mind when I heard him say that. Having been a coach, I have learned the value of watching game film as a tool to better your players and your team. Watching your own games to correct mistakes and watching opponent film as preparation are crucial components to being successful and increases your chances of beating a tough opponent, IMO. Being able to not only hear the coach talk about a players attributes and characteristics but to be able to see them in action and see your opponent's tendencies on film is crucial to game preparation. There are so many valuable reasons for your team to watch film as part of game preparation that I cannot understand why you wouldn't take advantage of that tool. Like I said, I love Cal and wouldn't trade him for the world but I wish he would change this one aspect of his coaching. I think it could really help his teams. It definitely can't hurt, so why not?

 

[kybassfan]

I didn't see this earlier.

Pumpers is not a childish label. Over the last 5- 6 years this board has had a few handfuls of members come out and debate A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G that is said that isn't basically "nothing to see here, Cal is the body of christ, get over etc" and try and squash any conversation nearly immediately. Coming from someone like myself that was called a pumper for years on this board, it's pretty bad when I get sick of it.

Yea I used the word objective. Ya got me. I don't know what I was thinking. I just didn't think a sophomore in college was going to come around the corner and blast me for not setting a frequency table and compiling data. What you are saying about Willie is incorrect. He played the opposite of how we need our star All American to play. If you cannot see that, then I'm sure there's "crazy people" everywhere to you. I don't mean to be disrespectful either, I don't mind your post. I just DONT AGREE WITH YOU.

I've said from the start I think we had poor game preparation, and the team underperformed given the situation. I never overly bashed WCS and some of you are using it as a red herring to deflect from the point. I've actually sounded at times like I blame Cal for the loss more than the actual players if you've even been reading my post.

As far as my analysis, seeing as how Cal has such an unusual philosophy to game preparation, I guess I just don't understand why there's such aggressive fans toward that opinion. At the least, it's a reasonable counter. Lot's of great coaches completely disagree with his take on game preparation. It's been conventional wisdom for many years that its better to be over prepared than under prepared.

I love Cal. I think he's great, but I don't think he's perfect. And I don't believe anyone is above reproach.

Well, let's see, where to start with that load of crap.

Lot's of coaches disagree with cal's prep. Ok. With lot's at your disposal, let's see links to two coach quotes mentioning him by name that are similarly qualified to comment, say making over 2 million a year. Don't want any of those sophomore coaches.

Also, since you find a label necessary and have the infinite wisdom to think others don't find it disrespectful, perhaps a label for those that crap all over the program because they can't deal with a loss is appropriate? I got it! Dumpers! We can stereotype your poor mouthing lot as dumpers. Reminds me, could y'all bring shovels next time? Much more and you'll have Rupp smelling like a horse barn. Gotta give credit where it's due. I never expected so much crap would stick to 38 - 1.

And you got me. I was a sophomore in college once. I'm guilty as sin. But it was 40 years ago. Just thought I'd toss that out there to illustrate your predilection for unsubstantiated commentary. Admit it, you don't really know what Cal does to prepare, right? You just parrot what he spews to the media.

To the poster that was mentioning offensive rebounds by Stein, you don't think his defensive assignment, often on the perimeter, had anything to do with that? You think that might have been the goal of the opposing team?

 

[bigbluelife]

All American? no way- they don't have games where they flatly don't show up.

 

[Pewee Cat]

He took the night off plain & simple. The fans care a lot more about wins as the players care more about future $$$$. He was going to be rich no matter what & I will never understand his performance in a game so meaning to the FANS

 

[ace on the river]

Cal cost us the game against whisky, anyone that thinks different doesn't know basketball. Krezchessjjkki showed how to beat whisky, ATTACK THE BASKET! dont sit back and dribble the whole f%$ing shot clock away. makes my blood boil just thinking about it

 

[ulismyman]

38-1.. i will take it anyday of the week and twice on Sunday

 

[kybassfan]

38-1.. i will take it anyday of the week and twice on Sunday

Amen!

 

[Hoskins91]

Not watching film is something we've always done. I don't know why it's just coming up after this year. He's even explained why he does it.

The stalling at the end of games is a legit criticism since it has almost cost us games in the past. Otherwise I have to question how much people are paying attention if they don't see why we do certain things.

 

[Hoskins91]

As for Willie, he played badly, plain and simple. He probably isn't an All-American if he played for another team. He wasn't even our best player.

 

[Blue Decade]

Dude has an enormous amount of potential. But he took games off at UK. That's the truth.

It is the truth, but what's done is done. Time to move forward.

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

To the poster that was mentioning offensive rebounds by Stein, you don't think his defensive assignment, often on the perimeter, had anything to do with that? You think that might have been the goal of the opposing team?

Come on now, you don't believe that do you? While i respect your opinion, I haven't agreed with much you've said in the thread but this deserves a response. First off, Willie's defensive assignment could not have effected his offensive rebounds, that's just not possible because he would be going for defensive rebounds after his assignments shot. Second, that is not a legit reason for his poor rebounding performance. He had guarded alot more on the perimeter during other games and still managed to rebound. Rebounding is all about effort. That's its, just effomi. That's what made Rodman such a great rebounder. He just wanted it more than anyone else and he went and got the ball. Rebounding is just simply effort. If you think Willie played his hardest during that game, maybe these words will change your mind. This always stuck out to me when I heard these words........

“I mean, that’s going to probably eat at me for the rest of my life, just to know that I have so much more that I could have given and changed the outcome of the game,” Cauley-Stein said. “But I just didn’t do it and that’s probably going to kill me on the inside.”

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

Not watching film is something we've always done. I don't know why it's just coming up after this year. He's even explained why he does it.

The stalling at the end of games is a legit criticism since it has almost cost us games in the past. Otherwise I have to question how much people are paying attention if they don't see why we do certain things.

I didn't hear anyone calling that exact play stall ball the week prior against Notre Dame. Oh, it was just great strategy then. It's called riding your bull and Towns was our bull. Why would Cal instruct his players to stall in that situation during that game? Doesn't make sense. In the past, I'd agree that it has happened but not in that game. It was simply poor execution and nothing more.

 

[TrustinCal]

Come on now, you don't believe that do you? While i respect your opinion, I haven't agreed with much you've said in the thread but this deserves a response. First off, Willie's defensive assignment could not have effected his offensive rebounds, that's just not possible because he would be going for defensive rebounds after his assignments shot. Second, that is not a legit reason for his poor rebounding performance. He had guarded alot more on the perimeter during other games and still managed to rebound. Rebounding is all about effort. That's its, just effomi. That's what made Rodman such a great rebounder. He just wanted it more than anyone else and he went and got the ball. Rebounding is just simply effort. If you think Willie played his hardest during that game, maybe these words will change your mind. This always stuck out to me when I heard these words........

“I mean, that’s going to probably eat at me for the rest of my life, just to know that I have so much more that I could have given and changed the outcome of the game,” Cauley-Stein said. “But I just didn’t do it and that’s probably going to kill me on the inside.”

Have you ever played organized basketball in your life? When you guard someone on the perimeter the first thing you do when a shot goes up is box out your man, not go for rebound. It's basically one of the first things you learn in basketball.

Anybody on our team could have said the quote WCS did and it would have applied. Nobody is saying WCS played awesome, but the hate the kid is getting is getting out of hand based on his actual performance that night.

 

[kyjeff1]

Have you ever played organized basketball in your life? When you guard someone on the perimeter the first thing you do when a shot goes up is box out your man, not go for rebound. It's basically one of the first things you learn in basketball.

Anybody on our team could have said the quote WCS did and it would have applied. Nobody is saying WCS played awesome, but the hate the kid is getting is getting out of hand based on his actual performance that night.

Yeah well the problem with this is WCS wasn't boxing out his man either. You're making excuses because you hate seeing UK fans criticize a UK player but it's true, he played with 50% effort. When the ball went up he stood there flat footed almost every time. It makes me sick to watch that game and watch WCS stand around like the game was in the bag. If our guys play hard like they want it there was nobody in CBB that could stay within 10 points but they didn't do that and the one guy that really stuck out to most of us is WCS because it was so obvious. You would have a point if WCS held his man in check but that didn't happen, he got dominated.
How does a 7' athletic freak like WCS come away with ZERO offensive rebounds? There's only one way to explain that…. Lack of effort. Spin it however you want, the rest of us watched the game without our blue colored glasses on.

 

[Clive Gollings]

While some will remember WCS to this one game, I'll always remember him as someone in a OAD era came back twice. Represented UK in a very repsectable way on and off the court, added to our long list of All Americans and proved every KU fan wrong about his potential.

Yeah, I'm happy he came here and will follow his career in the pros.

 

[Hoskins91]

I didn't hear anyone calling that exact play stall ball the week prior against Notre Dame. Oh, it was just great strategy then. It's called riding your bull and Towns was our bull. Why would Cal instruct his players to stall in that situation during that game? Doesn't make sense. In the past, I'd agree that it has happened but not in that game. It was simply poor execution and nothing more.

We weren't stalling in the Notre Dame game. We were trailing the whole time. When we got the lead at the end in the Wisconsin game we started taking the air out of the ball. Whether that was his decision or the players deciding to not do what he wanted, I guess we'll never actually know. I'm just basing this on past evidence.

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

Have you ever played organized basketball in your life? When you guard someone on the perimeter the first thing you do when a shot goes up is box out your man, not go for rebound. It's basically one of the first things you learn in basketball.

Anybody on our team could have said the quote WCS did and it would have applied. Nobody is saying WCS played awesome, but the hate the kid is getting is getting out of hand based on his actual performance that night.

Let me bow down to the Guru of everything basketball. Yes, I have played organized basketball and have coached and officiated organized ball at a high level but it doesn't take John Wooden to see what you cannot. OK, let me explain this is clear terms for you.......playing defense on the perimeter does not effect a players offensive rebounds. Because your not on offense Mr. Guru, you are on defense. So, it could only effect his defensive rebounds.
With that said, what is your excuse for his lack of offensive rebounds, Mr. Guru? I have never been one to bash players for the sake of trying to find an excuse. That's just not me. But I can see without blue tinted glasses on constantly and I try to call it how I see it. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, its probably a duck.
What point are you trying to make when you say that all the players could have said that? Cause that's irrelevant, it doesn't change the facts about the game and Willie. It doesn't change the fact that didn't have a good game. Even Willie has said that he didn't give his all and you're still arguing the point.

 

[kybassfan]

Come on now, you don't believe that do you? While i respect your opinion, I haven't agreed with much you've said in the thread but this deserves a response. First off, Willie's defensive assignment could not have effected his offensive rebounds, that's just not possible because he would be going for defensive rebounds after his assignments shot. Second, that is not a legit reason for his poor rebounding performance. He had guarded alot more on the perimeter during other games and still managed to rebound. Rebounding is all about effort. That's its, just effomi. That's what made Rodman such a great rebounder. He just wanted it more than anyone else and he went and got the ball. Rebounding is just simply effort. If you think Willie played his hardest during that game, maybe these words will change your mind. This always stuck out to me when I heard these words........

“I mean, that’s going to probably eat at me for the rest of my life, just to know that I have so much more that I could have given and changed the outcome of the game,” Cauley-Stein said. “But I just didn’t do it and that’s probably going to kill me on the inside.”

My apologies, stupid comment on my part. I was whole helluva more concerned over poor defensive rebounding on the part of the team than offensive rebounds. I read offensive boards and thought defense. Wisconsin was extremely sound fundamentally, so they blocked out well on defense. That kept us off the offensive boards.

I do have to take issue with your claim that rebounding is simply effort. It is largely technique. It is as fundamental a skill as shooting or passing. This is why we see so many athletic ball players get hammered on the boards by teams with good skills and execution. It's also why highly skilled and athletic bigs are so impressive. I'll mention Noel and Chuck Hayes as fine examples of this regarding rebounding. Agreed that effort plays a role, however, not nearly so much as technique.

Regarding Stein's comment, what did you expect him to say? I think most any high caliber athlete will walk away from a defeat thinking they could have done more. Our entire team likely walked away from that loss thinking they could have done something better or different. It's the nature of competition. I will NEVER believe that Stein or anyone else decide they were going give less than their best going into that game. Just did not happen.

 

[UKgreatinmyveins]

Sad to see people trash our own player and not just wish him well.He was here for three years and was nothing but classy the whole time and always

They arent trashing, just stating the truth....

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

My apologies, stupid comment on my part. I was whole helluva more concerned over poor defensive rebounding on the part of the team than offensive rebounds. I read offensive boards and thought defense. Wisconsin was extremely sound fundamentally, so they blocked out well on defense. That kept us off the offensive boards.

I do have to take issue with your claim that rebounding is simply effort. It is largely technique. It is as fundamental a skill as shooting or passing. This is why we see so many athletic ball players get hammered on the boards by teams with good skills and execution. It's also why highly skilled and athletic bigs are so impressive. I'll mention Noel and Chuck Hayes as fine examples of this regarding rebounding. Agreed that effort plays a role, however, not nearly so much as technique.

Regarding Stein's comment, what did you expect him to say? I think most any high caliber athlete will walk away from a defeat thinking they could have done more. Our entire team likely walked away from that loss thinking they could have done something better or different. It's the nature of competition. I will NEVER believe that Stein or anyone else decide they were going give less than their best going into that game. Just did not.

I can respect those points. Yes, rebounding does take some technique but its basic techniques that anyone on the court can do if they put in the effort to do so. Obviously, there is some technique required just as with every skill in basketball but it is basic stuff that all players can do quite easily. It's not near as difficult a skill to master such as a shooting or passing and is not a comparison. To become accomplished at shooting and passing, it requires countless hours of technique practice over and over again. That is not required to learn rebounding technique as it is simple and more a matter of just using size. There is always a player who has an advantage going for a rebound and its always the player with the inside position. If a player cannot equal out the advantage with heighth and size, you must try to out work the other player to get the ball, especially on the offensive glass when a player is put to the disadvantage.
I will give you this, technique is more valuable on defensive rebounding but effort is still the most crucial aspect (along with size but a player can't control that so its not a measurable aspect ) to become a consistently great rebounder. Many times a player can get a rebound on offense or defense, simply by putting in the effort.
So, I would say that effort, size, and then technique are the keys to consistently getting rebounds but that's just my opinion. You are obviously entitled to disagree.
Lastly, about the comment, I did not expect to hear him say that. You act as though these are typical comments and they are not. Listen, I love WCS and always wil, I waited for 2 hours just to get his autograph but that doesn't mean that I won't call a spade a spade when it fits. I can't remember ever hearing a player his caliber say that he will be haunted because he knows he had so much more to give during a game. That is not a typical response from a player. I'm sorry but its not.

 

[Hoskins91]

I can respect those points. Yes, rebounding does take some technique but its basic techniques that anyone on the court can do if they put in the effort to do so. Obviously, there is some technique required as there is with every skill in basketball but it is basic stuff that all players can do quite easily. It's not near as difficult a skill to master such as a shooting technique or passing. To become accomplished at shooting and passing, it requires countless hours of technique practice over and over again. That is not required to learn rebounding technique as it is as fundamental to the core. There is always a player who has an advantage going for a rebound and its always the player with the inside position. If a player cannot equal the advantage with heighth and size, you must try to out work the other player to get the ball, especially on the offensive glass.
I will give you this, technique is more valuable on defensive rebounding but effort is the most crucial aspect (along with size but a player can't control that so its not a measurable aspect ) to become a consistently great rebounder and many many times a player can get a rebound on offense or defense, simply by putting in the effort.
So, I would say that effort, size, and then technique are the keys to consistently getting rebounds but that's just my opinion. You are obviously entitled to disagree.
Lastly, as a competitor, I would say that I laid it all on the line and left everything I had on the court. I would not say that I could've given more and that will always bother me. I would never say that I could've given more. I didn't get the feeling that even he thought he left everything on the court. I expected to hear something else than what he said, incan tell you that.

Of course you would.

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

Of course you would.

Of course I would ..............what?

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

We weren't stalling in the Notre Dame game. We were trailing the whole time. When we got the lead at the end in the Wisconsin game we started taking the air out of the ball. Whether that was his decision or the players deciding to not do what he wanted, I guess we'll never actually know. I'm just basing this on past evidence.

I don't think a 2 or 4 point lead would ever be enough for any team or player to deliberately play stall ball with that much time remaining. Makes ZERO sense. Why can't it be simply poor execution during those few possessions? Try just using logic.

 

[kybassfan]

I can respect those points. Yes, rebounding does take some technique but its basic techniques that anyone on the court can do if they put in the effort to do so. Obviously, there is some technique required just as with every skill in basketball but it is basic stuff that all players can do quite easily. It's not near as difficult a skill to master such as a shooting or passing and is not a comparison. To become accomplished at shooting and passing, it requires countless hours of technique practice over and over again. That is not required to learn rebounding technique as it is simple and more a matter of just using size. There is always a player who has an advantage going for a rebound and its always the player with the inside position. If a player cannot equal out the advantage with heighth and size, you must try to out work the other player to get the ball, especially on the offensive glass when a player is put to the disadvantage.
I will give you this, technique is more valuable on defensive rebounding but effort is still the most crucial aspect (along with size but a player can't control that so its not a measurable aspect ) to become a consistently great rebounder. Many times a player can get a rebound on offense or defense, simply by putting in the effort.
So, I would say that effort, size, and then technique are the keys to consistently getting rebounds but that's just my opinion. You are obviously entitled to disagree.
Lastly, about the comment, I did not expect to hear him say that. You act as though these are typical comments and they are not. Listen, I love WCS and always wil, I waited for 2 hours just to get his autograph but that doesn't mean that I won't call a spade a spade when it fits. I can't remember ever hearing a player his caliber say that he will be haunted because he knows he had so much more to give during a game. That is not a typical response from a player. I'm sorry but its not.

After a loss, I don't know that I've ever heard an extremely high caliber player simply admit defeat and say there was nothing else they could do. In almost every case they would jump at the chance to have a rematch. Different strategies, different effort on different parts of the game, etc lead to different outcomes in these rematches. This is a tacit acknowledgement to the belief that they could have done better. Further, Stein is a player that says largely what's on the tip of his tongue. Because of this, I refuse to believe that he made any conscious decision to play "less than his best". I do believe he thinks he can do better (and he's probably right). So yeah, I expected to hear him say that in one form or another. I would have been shocked if he had said, "that was my best, I got nothing more to offer".

 

[.S&C.]

Well, let's see, where to start with that load of crap.

Lot's of coaches disagree with cal's prep. Ok. With lot's at your disposal, let's see links to two coach quotes mentioning him by name that are similarly qualified to comment, say making over 2 million a year. Don't want any of those sophomore coaches.

Also, since you find a label necessary and have the infinite wisdom to think others don't find it disrespectful, perhaps a label for those that crap all over the program because they can't deal with a loss is appropriate? I got it! Dumpers! We can stereotype your poor mouthing lot as dumpers. Reminds me, could y'all bring shovels next time? Much more and you'll have Rupp smelling like a horse barn. Gotta give credit where it's due. I never expected so much crap would stick to 38 - 1.

And you got me. I was a sophomore in college once. I'm guilty as sin. But it was 40 years ago. Just thought I'd toss that out there to illustrate your predilection for unsubstantiated commentary. Admit it, you don't really know what Cal does to prepare, right? You just parrot what he spews to the media.

To the poster that was mentioning offensive rebounds by Stein, you don't think his defensive assignment, often on the perimeter, had anything to do with that? You think that might have been the goal of the opposing team?

I don't know what every single coach thinks about it in America, but most high level organized sport at any level not watching opposing game tape, is rare. In championships and final four games, it's rather unheard of. Not every coach is going to spend countless time he doesn't have on it, but they are going to review. And Cal himself said the players watched zero game tape. So yea, I know exactly how he prepares toward the sitiatuation in this conversation. What in the world are you talking about? He said it, and that wasn't "coach speak"; so you're just swerving out of bounds now.

Even where I coach in Shelby Co. our players are watching lots of opposing game film. It's normal and it always has been. Did you play sports in high school or college? if so, you know game preparation sometimes took hours and hours if not weeks depending on the team and situation. I would've been lost without game prep at times when I played.

I find it a bit rich that you are debating the notion that Calipari is unconventional here. The man is nothing but unconventional. How long have you actually followed him? 6 years seems to be the resounding figure around these parts. Now you just sound idiotic by suggesting I find articles where other coaches in the fraternity are openly criticizing his coaching methods, So I'll leave that aside. If you cannot see where it's unconventional, then I'm not sure anyone could argue anything else to you. You're set in stone.

If you want to debate whether film is overused or helps/ not, it's a stupid debate, but OK. However, you want to essentially debate whether or not it's unconventional to not use it in that case, or try and say he might have just been using coach speak, and I'm out. You are going to piggy cal's side of it, and if he came out and said he was changing that aspect and his teams were going to start watching more film, you'd just piggy that as well.

Also you're wrong about players not saying they gave everything they had. Lots of players will say they played their best, but someone out bested them. It's a correlation to harder work, and it is said. It doesnt mean his best can't get better as it's all relative. I too think the words he used is a window into how he felt about the game. The proof is right there in the game.