Hey ESPN: head-to-head UK freshmen vs. Duke freshmen(#1 class)

[CatEye2010]

Points: UK 38 Duke 14
Rebounds UK 15 Duke 5
Assists UK 8 Duke 5
Steals UK 6 Duke 0
TO's UK 6 Duke 9

Numbers don't lie; except when ESPN is rating recruiting classes.

 

[Smashcat]

Points: UK 38 Duke 14
Rebounds UK 15 Duke 5
Assists UK 8 Duke 5
Steals UK 6 Duke 0
TO's UK 6 Duke 9

Numbers don't lie; except when ESPN is rating recruiting classes.

 

[UKvisitor]

Was thinking the same about how Duke's #1 class played against UK's #2 class. ESPN's ability to evaluate talent exposed to the rest of the world.

 

[Clark_MSC_Kent]

Didn't everyone have Duke's class #1? I know I posted on this yesterday, but these class rankings are stupid. Let Cal get who he wants and know that everything will be alright. But seriously, if you're going to knock ESPN, you gotta knock Scout, Rivals, 24/7, etc. They ALL had Duke's class above ours, but in the end, as previously mentioned, shows how much those clowns really know.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

Was thinking the same about how Duke's #1 class played against UK's #2 class. ESPN's ability to evaluate talent exposed to the rest of the world.

It's actually a much larger issue than just being incompetent. ESPN ranked the Duke players high, and gave them the #1 class.

BUT, when asked to pick the top100 college ball players, a list that has no bearing on a team ranking or pumping up another school, they sold on ALL Duke's players. Every single one. Ingram was the best at like 45. However, Kentucky's players all remained where they should, for the most part. It's weird that when, gun to their head, they all backed off Duke players.

I wish ESPN was JUST incompetent..

 

[BigAbe4UK]

Didn't everyone have Duke's class #1? I know I posted on this yesterday, but these class rankings are stupid. Let Cal get who he wants and know that everything will be alright. But seriously, if you're going to knock ESPN, you gotta knock Scout, Rivals, 24/7, etc. They ALL had Duke's class above ours, but in the end, as previously mentioned, shows how much those clowns really know.

No they didn't - I'm pretty sure that ESPN was the only outlet ranking Duke #1. It was quite obvious to anyone that looked at the classes objectively - that Dukes' was no where near what UK's is this year after we added Humphries and Murray. It's been quite the joke really. ESPN is almost always egregiously wrong with their top raking every year- just look at the joke that was the 2009 players rankings (ie. Cousins and Wall 4th and 5th)

 

[UKvisitor]

Last night, it looked as though K just rolled out the ball.

 

[WallMashKyBall]

When ESPN (and others) want to label Duke's class #1 when they don't even factor in Murray that's intentionally lying and misleading your readers and viewers.

 

[Rondoed]

I wonder if ESPN would count freshman Jamal Murray's stats since they don't count him?

 

[Cats192]

Didn't everyone have Duke's class #1? I know I posted on this yesterday, but these class rankings are stupid. Let Cal get who he wants and know that everything will be alright. But seriously, if you're going to knock ESPN, you gotta knock Scout, Rivals, 24/7, etc. They ALL had Duke's class above ours, but in the end, as previously mentioned, shows how much those clowns really know.

Just looked and Rivals has UK at #1 with the addition of Murray

 

[TnKat]

Points: UK 38 Duke 14
Rebounds UK 15 Duke 5
Assists UK 8 Duke 5
Steals UK 6 Duke 0
TO's UK 6 Duke 9

Numbers don't lie; except when ESPN is rating recruiting classes.

Good point, but I assume Kentucky's freshmen played a lot more minutes than the Duke freshmen. At any rate, no way would I trade our freshmen for the Dookies freshmen..

 

[TnKat]

Last night, it looked as though K just rolled out the ball.

ha ha ha...................I love it!!!