Hump absent from team viewing

[KA4Prez]

that one time, one good thing happened...so its going to happen all the time in every instance kind of logic.

No.

These guys have a history of performing for Cal after being around a few years.

Darius Miller did it
DeAndre Liggins did it
Josh Harrelson did it
Derek Willis did it
Dominique Hawkins did it

All of those guys were the typical multi-year recruit.

Charles Matthews would've been the same, had he stayed. Humphries is in the same mold and would be valuable to have next year.

 

[YourPublicEnemy]

that one time, one good thing happened...so its going to happen all the time in every instance kind of logic.

Oh, okay, so when you speculate, it's "logic." I brought up a scenario of a guy who didn't receive a lot of clock but then became very viable when needed. It wasn't a prediction.

We need upperclassmen.

 

[spotter34]

He has potential to be a contributor but he's not a difference maker. As for being a contributor, I don't think that's aligned with his goals. From the sounds of it, he'd rather have a more vital role and/or get paid while doing it. My guess is that he's heading back to Australia.

Could be but a contributor at Kentucky usually ends up getting drafted. He'll never be on any team where he is featured. He just doesn't have that ability. But he does have the potential to be a guy in any league where he can hold his own in the paint and knock down open jumpers. Anytime a team has to account for you defensively then you have a skill that is desired, especially at 7 foot.

 

[BostonCat2001]

No.

These guys have a history of performing for Cal after being around a few years.

Darius Miller did it
DeAndre Liggins did it
Josh Harrelson did it
Derek Willis did it
Dominique Hawkins did it

All of those guys were the typical multi-year recruit.

Charles Matthews would've been the same, had he stayed. Humphries is in the same mold and would be valuable to have next year.

dont know why you are lumping in miller and liggins. liggins was once a 5 star kid. but yet...keep believin

 

[ganner918]

that one time, one good thing happened...so its going to happen all the time in every instance kind of logic.

Our fans (at least a segment of them that seems to love vocallizing it online) consistently bash players. We whine about guys not staying, and the guys who do stay and develop get mercilessly bashed. KA4Prez just mentioned other 3-4 year players who developed over time. Willis took all KINDS of ish here the last couple of years. "Wasted scholarship." Dom was bashed - should never play. Miller was bashed - remember the "disappearius" nickname? Harrellson was written off. Hell there were people on here cheering for Briscoe to leave because they didn't want him

 

[BostonCat2001]

Oh, okay, so when you speculate, it's "logic." I brought up a scenario of a guy who didn't receive a lot of clock but then became very viable when needed. It wasn't a prediction.

We need upperclassmen.

no...we need guys that can play.

 

[Bkocats]

I might be mistaken, but I think BostonCat2001 is a female. He/she can correct me if I'm wrong.

and why would you think that?

 

[KA4Prez]

dont know why you are lumping in miller and liggins. liggins was once a 5 star kid. but yet...keep believin

Liggins and Miller were on another level, but they got markedly better as upperclassman. There's a sliding scale on these things and the point of my post was that there is a history of guys improving a lot under Cal. I mean, big jumps in contribution. Are you denying that Humphries would fit into this category?

 

[JonathanW]

dont know why you are lumping in miller and liggins. liggins was once a 5 star kid. but yet...keep believin

Humphries was as good as any of those others coming in. I don't give a crap about how many stars a player at one point may have had. Liggins was athletic, but not very skilled when he enrolled at UK. Those all (including Miller & Liggins) were not even considered as possible OAD players, that is why they are all grouped together.

 

[CatColumbia]

We need "contributors." I think we can all agree that having role players, especially ones with numerous NCAA Tournament games played is not a bad thing. Nobody expects Humphries to be a star, but it's crazy to say him leaving isn't a loss.

Yes we need contributors but this isn't about "We", it's about him and he probably feels like he could be doing more elsewhere. Let's not forget he's thousands of miles away from home and riding the pine and being recruited over probably isn't very appealing and in his best interest. If we do land Bamba, I don't know how he's even going to see the floor. The biggest contributors that have stuck it out during the Cal era are local products (Miller, Willis and Hawkins) because they at least played close to family. Case is different for the Humphries', Matthews of the world.

 

[BostonCat2001]

Liggins and Miller were on another level, but they got markedly better as upperclassman. There's a sliding scale on these things and the point of my post was that there is a history of guys improving a lot under Cal. I mean, big jumps in contribution. Are you denying that Humphries would fit into this category?

players always improve, its a given. doesnt really matter who the coach is. guys are older playing against younger guys. but that isnt what i'm getting at.

marcus lee left...he did WAY more than humphries when he was here. small uproar/concern when he did. but for some reason humphries might leave and people are freaking out.

and they are freaking out not because we are losing humphries but because we might not get bamba.

what happens with all this outrage over humphries leaving if BAM stays and/or we get bamba?

 

[KA4Prez]

Yes we need contributors but this isn't about "We", it's about him and he probably feels like he could be doing more elsewhere. Let's not forget he's thousands of miles away from home and riding the pine and being recruited over probably isn't very appealing and in his best interest. If we do land Bamba, I don't know how he's even going to see the floor. The biggest contributors that have stuck it out during the Cal era are local products (Miller, Willis and Hawkins) because they at least played close to family. Case is different for the Humphries', Matthews of the world.

The discussion isn't about what's best for Humphries. Nobody on here is going to bash him if he chooses to leave for the better of himself and family.

The debate is people trying to say he's not a loss and minimizing what he could contribute.

 

[docholiday51]

and why would you think that?

You are a master of the "wonder what she really meant post"I am in awe

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

If we don't get Bamba, we might need him. And I guess you think he couldn't possibly improve?

Boston is in love with himself. No need in trying to correct him, he already thought of everything you could possibly say and it didn't change his mind. In fact it probably proved we're all even dumber than he anticipated. It's been this way for a decade. Personally, I'd take a decent 7 footer with experience and the ability to go for 10/10.

 

[Big_Blue79]

"We interrupt our non-stop stream of Savage Garden for some breaking sports news..."

Give it up man. I've tried and tried to convince posters that Humphries has the potential to be a real contributor. He was supposed to be a freshmen this past season. He's still learning the game. He has a nice spot up mid range shot that would benefit Bam, Bamba, or Richards next season. But he stinks. Just 3 and 3. Next!

He's so young for his classification. He would be missed if he left; every title contender needs solid contributors off the bench and veteran leadership.

 

[KA4Prez]

players always improve, its a given. doesnt really matter who the coach is. guys are older playing against younger guys. but that isnt what i'm getting at.

marcus lee left...he did WAY more than humphries when he was here. small uproar/concern when he did. but for some reason humphries might leave and people are freaking out.

and they are freaking out not because we are losing humphries but because we might not get bamba.

what happens with all this outrage over humphries leaving if BAM stays and/or we get bamba?

The situation and timing of Lee's departure was a lot different than Humphries would be. Last year's team had 5 guys who saw the floor the year before, plus 2 lottery picks, 2 other 5-star recruits and the #1 center. Depth was not going to be a problem, Marcus Lee or not.

This year loses 3 Seniors, 3 have already hired agents, another has entered the draft and there are 2 other players (Gabriel and SKJ) who we haven't hard any confirmation are staying. It makes Isaac Humphries a little more important.

 

[CoachV182]

He has potential to be a contributor but he's not a difference maker. As for being a contributor, I don't think that's aligned with his goals. From the sounds of it, he'd rather have a more vital role and/or get paid while doing it. My guess is that he's heading back to Australia.

Contributors can be difference makers. See Marcus Lee against Michigan a few years back...

 

[JonathanW]

people always leave out his fouls when they do this...why is that?

You really do hate being proven WRONG don't you. You criticized his scoring and rebounding, so I point out that statistics prove you are wrong (backed by data). So then you pull "fouls" out of your ass. Did you want me to address every possible stat? Yes fouls have been a problem for Humphries, but one that he has improved, and so there is reason to believe it would continue to get better. Hump averaged 6.6 fouls per-30-min as a FR; last year that dropped to 5.5. The worst foul rates by UK frontcourt players in the past 8 years have averaged: Gabriel 4.1, Cousins 4.1, Towns 4.2, Lee 4.2, Johnson 4.3, Poythress 4.6, Orton 5.3, Humphries 5.5, Labissiere 5.7, Humphries 6.6

 

[Cardsstink]

You really do hate being proven WRONG don't you. You criticized his scoring and rebounding, so I point out that statistics prove you are wrong (backed by data). So then you pull "fouls" out of your ass. Did you want me to address every possible stat? Yes fouls have been a problem for Humphries, but one that he has improved, and so there is reason to believe it would continue to get better. Hump averaged 6.6 fouls per-30-min as a FR; last year that dropped to 5.5. The worst foul rates by UK frontcourt players in the past 8 years have averaged: Gabriel 4.1, Cousins 4.1, Towns 4.2, Lee 4.2, Johnson 4.3, Poythress 4.6, Orton 5.3, Humphries 5.5, Labissiere 5.7, Humphries 6.6

He says alot of UK fans are dumb and then he relentlessly bashes UK players, the dumbest thing a "fan" can do. It's pathetic beyond explanation.

 

[kb22stang]

Give it up man. I've tried and tried to convince posters that Humphries has the potential to be a real contributor. He was supposed to be a freshmen this past season. He's still learning the game. He has a nice spot up mid range shot that would benefit Bam, Bamba, or Richards next season. But he stinks. Just 3 and 3. Next!

Hump could be a very solid big in college, but tell me how he fits what Cal does? Like K Wilt, he seems to be a guy who simply doesn't fit how Cal likes to play.

 

[spotter34]

Hump could be a very solid big in college, but tell me how he fits what Cal does? Like K Wilt, he seems to be a guy who simply doesn't fit how Cal likes to play.

Well first of all I wouldn't put him in the same boat as Wiltjer. I'd compare him more to Josh Harrelson. When Josh got here all we heard about was what a great perimeter shooter he was. Cal convinced him to work his butt off getting on the glass and being a garbage man and if he had the opportunity to take a shot he would, but he became one of the hardest working players Cal has had. We were all surprised that Cal even allowed him to stay when he took the job.

Hump needs to make that type of transformation to his game. Quit with the Euro big man stuff and get down and dirty underneath. If he can do that then I think he could have the same success as Harrelson.

As for Wiltjer, you're right. He didn't fit in with Cal's style, especially defensively. I think he could have stuck with it and became as good as Willis defensively but Derek still got taken to school more than a few times most games, but he started doing a better job of help defense and rebounding, something Wiltjer could have done also. But that wasn't a bad move to go to Gonzaga, for him.

 

[BostonCat2001]

The situation and timing of Lee's departure was a lot different than Humphries would be. Last year's team had 5 guys who saw the floor the year before, plus 2 lottery picks, 2 other 5-star recruits and the #1 center. Depth was not going to be a problem, Marcus Lee or not.

This year loses 3 Seniors, 3 have already hired agents, another has entered the draft and there are 2 other players (Gabriel and SKJ) who we haven't hard any confirmation are staying. It makes Isaac Humphries a little more important.

proves my point. its not really about humphries, its about the situation. people are freaked out about being short handed, not about losing a great player. if its a great player...shouldnt matter the situation/timing.

 

[harlancatfan]

Give it up man. I've tried and tried to convince posters that Humphries has the potential to be a real contributor. He was supposed to be a freshmen this past season. He's still learning the game. He has a nice spot up mid range shot that would benefit Bam, Bamba, or Richards next season. But he stinks. Just 3 and 3. Next!

I feel like this is one of the huge problems in our program right now; we cant get players like this to return. Its crushing us and if you question that then I just dont understand.

 

[spotter34]

I feel like this is one of the huge problems in our program right now; we cant get players like this to return. Its crushing us and if you question that then I just dont understand.

You must have jumped in in the middle of my posts. I'm all for Hump coming back, and SKJ, Gabriel, and Wynyard. I love it when players return.

 

[harlancatfan]

You must have jumped in in the middle of my posts. I'm all for Hump coming back, and SKJ, Gabriel, and Wynyard. I love it when players return.

Me to, I sure hope he comes back as it would be exciting to see his junior season.

 

[spotter34]

Me to, I sure hope he comes back as it would be exciting to see his junior season.

I don't know about exciting, how exciting can a 7 foot white Australian dude be, but I do think he would be a valuable contributor.

 

[LeonThe Camel]

players always improve, its a given. doesnt really matter who the coach is. guys are older playing against younger guys. but that isnt what i'm getting at.

marcus lee left...he did WAY more than humphries when he was here. small uproar/concern when he did. but for some reason humphries might leave and people are freaking out.

and they are freaking out not because we are losing humphries but because we might not get bamba.

what happens with all this outrage over humphries leaving if BAM stays and/or we get bamba?

Everyone will say it was for the best for him go get some playing time. Fans are selfish.

They want the players they want, they want to win and they want to be right.

 

[harlancatfan]

I don't know about exciting, how exciting can a 7 foot white Australian dude be, but I do think he would be a valuable contributor.

I enjoy watching the few players I can develop and grow over 3 or 4 years. I have always thought Hump could be a really nice player for us one day.

 

[drbubba]

I would think a guy from rivals knows more than you. I sure hope we get him though.

lol. the guys at rivals are usually in the dark. fake news social media nerds....much like myself...but at least I've kissed a girl.

 

[kb22stang]

Well first of all I wouldn't put him in the same boat as Wiltjer. I'd compare him more to Josh Harrelson. When Josh got here all we heard about was what a great perimeter shooter he was. Cal convinced him to work his butt off getting on the glass and being a garbage man and if he had the opportunity to take a shot he would, but he became one of the hardest working players Cal has had. We were all surprised that Cal even allowed him to stay when he took the job.

Hump needs to make that type of transformation to his game. Quit with the Euro big man stuff and get down and dirty underneath. If he can do that then I think he could have the same success as Harrelson.

As for Wiltjer, you're right. He didn't fit in with Cal's style, especially defensively. I think he could have stuck with it and became as good as Willis defensively but Derek still got taken to school more than a few times most games, but he started doing a better job of help defense and rebounding, something Wiltjer could have done also. But that wasn't a bad move to go to Gonzaga, for him.

I don't see how you convince Cal to play Hump big minutes when he's not going to be able to switch on ball screens.

 

[Chuckinden]

He gone....

 

[spotter34]

I don't see how you convince Cal to play Hump big minutes when he's not going to be able to switch on ball screens.

Well Harrelson ended up adjusting to that pretty successfully but we played the ball screens differently then. I don't know why we don't play the ball screens that way anymore. The post would hedge hard on the ball handler causing him to have to bow out around the hedge and giving our guard time to get around the screen and get back in front of the ball-handler and our post (the one who hedged) never left his defender and stayed with him. If we still defended it that way Humphries wouldn't be left on an island guarding a guard. I think Cal bought into switching everything up top when he had AD, Noel, WCS, Towns, and Lyles who were capable of staying with some of those smaller players.