I'll be SHOCKED if Humphries plays anything less than 3 years in college. Many here are making him out to be a lot better than he is.
Humphries signed and on Campus Aug. 23.
- Thread starter MWes11
- Start date
Is it 19 and one year removed from high school or one of each? Humphries won't be 19 until Jan of 2017 I think it is? Trying to figure why his coach says he's a two year player regardless.
Agree with you on all points there, Tampa.
Wynyard red-shirting in December, and getting the practice time and conditioning in before the 2016-17 season will do tremendous benefits.
Can you imagine that more than 90% of U.S. college basketball programs could only dream about what Coach Cal has and is doing recruiting?
We are so fortunate to have him and our dedicated assistant coaches.
GO UK Wildcats
We are so fortunate to have him and our dedicated assistant coaches.
GO UK Wildcats
If you enroll in a US university, or graduate from a US high school, you lose the "international player" exemption from eligibility rules and fall under the rules for US players. You must turn 19 in the calendar year of the draft (or before) and be one year removed from high school. Humphries turns 19 in 2017, so he won't be eligible for the draft in 2016.
I believe that Mulder and Murray both at 6'5 could play the 3. If Coach Cal goes with the 3 guards then your going to have Ullis, Briscoe, and Murray and Murray being the best shooter would be the 3 with POY at the 4 and Skai. Then you have Lee, Humphries, Mulder, and Matthews off the bench. That is 8 strong players and Coach Cal loves to play with an 8 player rotation. Its going to be hard for Hawkins and Willis to see much playing time now with this 8 player rotation. For this looking as a down year after spring recruiting and striking out on Newman, Diallo, and Zimmerman Coach Cal has really picked it up this summer. We now have Murray and some experts are saying he is as good if not better than Andrew Wiggins and picking up Humphries which will be just as good as getting Zimmerman. This team is shaping up to have another outstanding season like last year and another possible run at the Final Four and National Championship.
Justise Winslow was 6'4.5 without shoes, and 222 pounds (according to the draft combine numbers), and he played the power forward. College is filled with teams that mostly use 3 guard lineups. If you're telling me that Mulder can't play the small forward (not the power forward, like Winslow played), then you're ignorant. Also, now you're going to say that we can't use Mulder at the 3, but we're going to use 3 guards at all times? Come on now. You're being dumb.
I think he plays more then Lee and Hump is a player . I think there will be times where he is at 5 , Skal at the 4 and Poy at the 3 when we want to go big as Cal loves to do .
Yeah exactly Rhavicc . Guys like Matthews and Mulder are the type that play SF for alot of college teams .
Some really negative UK posters on here say I'm too much of a Coach Cal apologist...well if he trots out Poythress, Lee and Skal in the starting line up I will have some things to say and it won't be what those posters think it will be. I do not think that will happen, but I'm just saying that would be another inept offensive line up in the front court like when we had Poy, WCS and young Towns starting to start last season with one good frosh who we knew would get pretty good on offens as the year went on, and two guys who were pretty useless at times on offense.
My point is...give me a 3rd stud guard starting over Lee. Nothing against Lee, I think he will play his role well for uss off the bench. I think Humphries will get some run as well. I love the bench of Lee, Mulder, Matthews and Humphries. Two veterans, and two frosh. I also like that we have a senior in Poy and a soph in Ulis in the starting line up to buffer our 3 young stud frosh.
My point is...give me a 3rd stud guard starting over Lee. Nothing against Lee, I think he will play his role well for uss off the bench. I think Humphries will get some run as well. I love the bench of Lee, Mulder, Matthews and Humphries. Two veterans, and two frosh. I also like that we have a senior in Poy and a soph in Ulis in the starting line up to buffer our 3 young stud frosh.
I won't fence with you about 1 inch of Winslow's stature. It is irrelevant to the point you are trying to make about comparing Winslow and Mulder. Duke and Kentucky run different systems. Calipari builds his teams to get the best out of his available players. Whereas Krzyzewski, also a fabulous coach, tends to recruit and plug in his players to a more rigid system. This season, we will see Calipari use 3 guards in a 3-2 DDMO type of offense most of the time, with Ulis usually at the point and Briscoe, Murray, and Mulder usually sharing time on the wings. But Winslow weighs more than 220 pounds. Mulder weighs 190 pounds, or more than 30 pounds less than Winslow. When measured without shoes, which is the standard you introduced, Mulder stands less than 6-4. Winslow is so much bigger and stronger that the comparison you tried to make is invalid. Mulder will be a good player for us, but he can't be used in the same way that a lottery pick more than 30 pounds heavier and stronger was used. This is a Captain Obvious type of point.
Don't think he'll contribute a whole lot this year - he's basically a very raw 17 year old kid, but if Humphries really dedicates himself to developing his body and working on his conditioning, he could be among the better big men in the country in 2016-17.
Getting him on campus this year so that we can work with him is a real coup. Harrelson would be a great mentor for this kid. Josh transformed his game and his future by working his azz off his senior year. If Isaac puts in that level of effort watch out.
By the way, I'd take this guy over any of UL's project bigs with no hesitation.
Getting him on campus this year so that we can work with him is a real coup. Harrelson would be a great mentor for this kid. Josh transformed his game and his future by working his azz off his senior year. If Isaac puts in that level of effort watch out.
By the way, I'd take this guy over any of UL's project bigs with no hesitation.
Most people are probably missing the significance of the comparison to Harrelson. I think the Harrelson comparison is being made by Calipari to start Humphries, a very young reclassifying player, in our program without the pressure of living up to Kentucky's 1 and done mantra. Calipari is saying that Humphries is a multi year player who will improve year over year while backing up other players at the beginning. That's the comparison. In reality, Harrelson became an NBA player but Humphries is a lot bigger and has more upside.
Business is picking up.
![[thumb2]](https://ct.yimg.com/mr/uploads/891/1684387.png "Thumbs Up 2 [thumb2]")
![[banana]](https://ct.yimg.com/mr/uploads/891/1682178.gif "banana [banana]")
Humphries is better than some think..He had 41pts 19 reb against Murray (25pts) and Canada in the FIBA U17,,He's also a great FT shooter..Averaged 19 and 11 to lead Aus.
Last edited:
Most on here are just quoting his coach who said he would probably be here for 2 years.
What 2 years has Calipari ran the same system at Kentucky? He's always adjusted to the players on his roster. And as it pertains to height for a POWER FORWARD, I would say that 6'4.5 is a helluva lot smaller than the average 6'8 - 6'10 PF in college. That seems more like 3.5 - 5.5 inches to me, not 1 inch. This year, hell, they're bringing in a SF that's 190# this year, and is rail thin. What, you're gonna ignore the fact that he's an elite athlete and shooter, and not play him at the position that he has always played because "he's not 220 pounds".
We do not have an MKG-type 3 man. Somebody on this d*** roster has to play the 3. There is no "1, 2, 2, 4, 5" in basketball. There will always have to be a 3, and Mulder fits the description better than anybody not named Charles Matthews on our roster, as a true 3. You really can't go wrong, they're all outstanding basketball players, and the NCAA is a 3 guard league for the most part.
Who did Duke even play at the 3 when Winslow moved to the 4? I bet it was Grayson Allen. I'm not telling you to stick Mulder at the 4, you dunce. I'm telling you to stick him at the 3.
I think what the one poster is trying to say is go with a 3 guard lineup where mulder guards the opponents 3 man
LOL! That's my point. In the words of Shakespeare, you protesteth too much. Most of the time Calipari will use a 3 guard DDMO with a lot of dribble penetration from the wing guards, Briscoe, Murray, Mulder. This fits our personnel. We will not have a true wing forward this year, and Poythress/Lee are the power forwards. Your comparison of Mulder to Justice Winslow is invalid. Mulder will be a good role player for us, maybe more than that, but can't be fairly compared to an NBA lottery pick who is 1-2 inches taller without shoes and 35 pounds bigger than he is. Completely different players, different roles. Obvious.
Last edited:
The risk/reward in a signing like this, this late, is pretty impressive. While this may turn into a year of shooting-first, second and third, good hands and size turn many of these shots into rebounds for the young Aussie and others. If he is capable of bringing just a portion of the U17 numbers to the UK table this season, that added bonus not only relieves pressure from other bigs but puts Kentucky into a whole new level of versatility and effectiveness on both sides of the court. We have noticed the offensive rebounding numbers for UK teams upon Cal's arrival. A lot of wins have followed. You don't have to be clairvoyant to imagine a continuing trend.
Yes, but in the same interview he says that he could play with 3 guards, but "it's not my druthers." Cal does not like to play small ball (unfortunately) and with the roster he has, he has two options: go small with a guard (Murray, Matthews, or Mulder) at the 3, or go big with Poy at the 3.
Right now, we should not take anything that Cal says to heart, because he doesn't know what he is going to do yet. He is just speculating like we are. He has an idea what will work best, but his idea might not be the same as ours. He might want to play Poy at the 4, but if the guards do not rebound or defend well at the 3 spot he might go back to Poy at the 3. We will have to wait and see.
I agree with your sentiment. By my count, haven't you mentioned *9* rotation players above though?
I think just about everyone on this board thinks this SHOULD be our starting lineup:
G Ulis
G Briscoe
G Murray
F Poythress
F Labissiere
It's our five most talented players (by rankings). It's probably the best offensive unit. It keeps Poy at the 4, where just about everyone on here thinks he belongs. It gives quality depth inside, since we can bring both Lee and Humphries off the bench inside. It gives us incredible ball handling and passing. It should be our best shooting lineup.
However, Cal puts a premium on two things that could suffer in that lineup: defense and rebounding.
The questions remain: 1. can one of the guards defend the 3 position? 2. Can the guards rebound well enough against bigger teams to keep us from being dominated on the boards?
Personally, I think number one is not an issue, because very few teams will play a 3 that is bigger than Murray and none will play one quicker and more athletic than Murray. Number two is about effort more than size, so we will see how that works out.
In the end, we can debate until we are blue in the face, but it all depends on what Cal wants to do. He has the keys to the car, we are just along for the ride. I know what lineup I want him to play, but if he doesn't want to play that way, he won't.
Cal is pretty smart, though. He will figure it out.
G Ulis
G Briscoe
G Murray
F Poythress
F Labissiere
It's our five most talented players (by rankings). It's probably the best offensive unit. It keeps Poy at the 4, where just about everyone on here thinks he belongs. It gives quality depth inside, since we can bring both Lee and Humphries off the bench inside. It gives us incredible ball handling and passing. It should be our best shooting lineup.
However, Cal puts a premium on two things that could suffer in that lineup: defense and rebounding.
The questions remain: 1. can one of the guards defend the 3 position? 2. Can the guards rebound well enough against bigger teams to keep us from being dominated on the boards?
Personally, I think number one is not an issue, because very few teams will play a 3 that is bigger than Murray and none will play one quicker and more athletic than Murray. Number two is about effort more than size, so we will see how that works out.
In the end, we can debate until we are blue in the face, but it all depends on what Cal wants to do. He has the keys to the car, we are just along for the ride. I know what lineup I want him to play, but if he doesn't want to play that way, he won't.
Cal is pretty smart, though. He will figure it out.
Yeah I heard that too. My guess is he's considering Mulder and Matthews as "wings" instead of guards. Or maybe he was referring to point guards that he'd rather not play together.
I think he realizes he has to decide between playing Poy at the 4 with three guards or Poy at the 4 and go big and is just thinking out loud during interviews. The coaching staff probably discusses this stuff as much or more than we do. I doubt they know what they are going to do just yet. They have an idea, but they won't know for sure until they get them on the court together.
Also, he wants the coaches on his schedule guessing as well. If he comes out and says, "I'm playing 3 guards" then everyone on the schedule starts game planning for 3 guards. Especially the SEC teams. Why give them any help? Keep them guessing.
Isaac seemed fatigued in the USA game from the previous OT game against Spain. I watched the Spain game and Isaac's skill level stood out. He has nice touch around the basket, shoots it well from the mid-range and blocked around 5 shots. He is also an excellent free-throw shooter. He shot around 80% from the line for the whole tournament. That's huge for a big guy who will draw a ton of fouls. On the college level I much prefer skilled big guys with average athleticism over athletic bigs with no skill.
^The 80% FT could be one of those factors that keeps him in games and earns him PT. Especially the last few minutes. If we are nursing a lead and we can put a big out there that the other team can't foul, then that bodes well. That might be the factor that puts him in over Lee.
Similar threads
