Gosh mj, your sure being tough on old Cut Nets. Maybe you should tell it like it is, and quit "apple polishing: it.
OLD STOLL FIELD GUY!
If UL gets Mulder
- Thread starter CUT-NETS
- Start date
- Status
Gosh mj, your sure being tough on old Cut Nets. Maybe you should tell it like it is, and quit "apple polishing: it.
OLD STOLL FIELD GUY!
You are totally missing what has happened in this thread. Im not at all advocating for more playing time for Mulder. I don't care if he ever sniffs the floor at UK. The question was whether or not he could help UL. I think he probably could have. Many on here assume since he doesn't play at all for UK that he couldn't possibly help UL. Thats ludicrous given the constant bashing of UL. I think he probably could help UL because quite frankly they could use him where as UK is doing just fine without.
UL is obviously a pretty good team as they are currently ranked in the top 20 with a win over Duke at home today. Mulder, despite not playing for UK, is a good player, otherwise Calipari wouldn't have given him a scholarship. So knowing that 2+2=4, Mulder would help UL no doubt. If they are already a good team, adding a good player can only make them better. Thus the original premise of my thread is still very sound (granted now UL will not be playing in the tournament, but no one knew that at the time)
Last edited:
I remember some of the venom directed toward Tubby. I also remember being at the '98 Final in San Antonio and a small portion of the UK crowd turning their backs when the trophy was awarded and they announced Tubby's name. So we got jerks. But it ain't a sizable crowd.
How many of that Louisville team will be there next year? I think a couple of parents are going move some of that team back home. Paying for hookers was never in the Letter of Intent.
LOL he's helping us in practice. He's providing our guards with a decent opponent every day in practice.
And he wouldnt even play for UL......... He'd be behind Snider, Lewis, Lee and Mitchell.
And he wouldnt even play for UL......... He'd be behind Snider, Lewis, Lee and Mitchell.
Last edited:
You are arguing two different things and you don't even know it. God you are dumb
I sure hope so, and I hope VJ King wakes up and smells the coffee beans as well. Kid has no business going to UL
UL has cheated to get players. Pimptino's entire success except for his 2005 final four has been built on cheating. Any other discussion is irrelevant when it come to UL.
You said we are doing fine without him. We arent without him. He's helping in practice.
Then I just made a point that he wouldnt even be playing for UL either.
I mean I could argue and debate you but its too easy. You already admitted defeat when you said you thought Mulder was better than what he is. It would be like crushing a baby. And you call me dumb?
Last edited:
Have no idea what story change is there. I don't think you do either. Not surprising.
Most everyone can become serviceable or playable in collegiate level that has been given scholarship.
It all depends on how they compete off the court that matters.
Top coaches just do a better job motivating them that allows them to develop their capability.
If Mulder wants to play, he has to practice like his team is depended on him to win every game.
It all depends on how they compete off the court that matters.
Top coaches just do a better job motivating them that allows them to develop their capability.
If Mulder wants to play, he has to practice like his team is depended on him to win every game.
I'd say it was most definitely between "If UL gets Mulder look out" and "The question was whether he could of helped UL"
Because everyone makes a thread saying LOOK OUT...... we got Johnny David. psychology isnt your friend right now.
Honestly when it comes to Mulder, I believe it comes down to this. Every 1 or 2 year player that comes into a team gets one shot early. If you are a shooter, you better shoot well, or you're going to sit. It was said that Mulder didn't shoot well early in the practices so even though in his career he was a noted shooter it wasn't happening. Like with Briscoe, he was a good free throw shooter in high school but struggled now in college. Mulder could get it together, maybe next year, and be a contributor like Willis has become.
Nobody said anything about advocating for playing time. Perhaps you're the one taking it out of context? It could be read in two ways I suppose. There's your way of reading it, which is "he's so bad right now that he couldn't possibly help Louisville since he can't help us", which I haven't seen at all, and there's "Well, he hasn't helped us at all during games, hell, maybe he couldn't even help Louisville, and they're an inferior team to Kentucky overall"
Context means everything, you're choosing to read it in a way that creates controversy though, and I'm not sure where you even came up with your argument. Mulder has a lot of offensive talent, he lacks defensive intensity right now though, and that's why he isn't playing. Again, I don't know what Louisville's needs are, and I dunno if Rick would cave in to sacrificing man-to-man defense, but Calipari doesn't. Maybe he would help Louisville, maybe not, but that would be entirely up to Pitino.
Cal took a shot by offering a JUCO and bringing him in, but the kid hasn't made the adjustment yet. Will he? Not sure. Does he have the ability? Absolutely. Time will tell.
He started the thread trying to praise Pitino......... and now he's arguing to try and say Pitino would of been better than Cal with Mulder. You see a pattern with Cut Nets right?
I think Calipari is the superior coach to Pitino, but I think Mulder would have equally been a non-factor at Louisville as he is here. Has nothing to do with Kentucky being superior to Louisville, it has everything to do with Mulder not playing at a high enough level defensively to log significant minutes for either team. That's my opinion, I could be wrong, perhaps Rick would utilize him more at Louisville because Mulder does rebound the ball, he is a good shooter, and he's very quick and athletic, but I do not feel that Mulder would progress better as a player at Louisville than he would at Kentucky.
No psychology isn't your friend right now. To truly know that my thread was wrong, as was the intent of re-visiting this thread, Mulder would have had to signed with UL. If UL got Mulder, and they sucked, then all could laugh at my thread. The fact that my thread was brought back up in some attempt to disprove my OP is the dumbest thing Ive ever heard of. How is this thread from many months ago relevant at all? Especially since Mulder didn't go to UL. That would be like me saying if the city of Louisville gets an NBA team then lookout because the community will flourish. And then months later when they still haven't gotten the team and the community isn't flourishing someone re-hashing this thread and saying "ha!" Ha for what? They didn't get the team? How do we know what would have happened. In other words, brining this thread back up is like trying to say "I told you so" but there isn't anything to say "I told you so about". If I said "UL is going to get Mulder" then I could see bringing it back up because they didn't get him. Just stupid.
How have I been proven wrong? I said "If UL gets Mulder then look out". UL did not get Mulder, so we have no idea what would have happened.
Cut to present day when this thread was "revisited" we started discussing if Mulder could have helped UL. Many said no based on what little actual in-game playing time he has received here. So the thread took on a whole new meaning and topic quite frankly from that point on.
Again, you are barking up the wrong tree.
In response to the OP, and the OP alone, Mulder would have equally been a non-factor because of his lack of defense. He's not some world beater of a player, otherwise he would have been on the court, so I disagree with the notion that we would have had to watch out for UofL if they were to get Mulder.
There is no "well if he can't do it at Kentucky, he can't do it at Louisville", because Kentucky is a superior team pretty much annually. I just don't feel like he's lived up to the requirements to see the court at either school, and once again, it's because of his defense.
This is a fair take in regard to the Original Post of this thread because it addresses the original idea which was "If UL gets Mulder then lookout" in other words my opinion at that time was that adding Mulder, along with what UL already had, would make them a very good team. Your opinion, if Im understanding it, is that you don't think he could have helped them much (or made them really good) because he doesn't defend well enough. I can respect that opinion because it addresses the original discussion.
When @W2R re-visited this thread he said "Good call". Thats the dumbest thing Ive ever heard of. Good call on what? I made no concrete prediction. I said "If". Had I said "UL is going to get Mulder and be very good" then yes the joke would be 100% on me. But I said "If" UL gets Mulder, lookout. Which at the time I believed he could really help them out. Despite being unable to participate in post season play, I do think UL is a very good team. Given the parity this year, I think they would have as good a shot as anyone in the tournament if they were able to play in it. There are about 10 teams that can win this thing. Yes I felt like Mulder could help them. They didn't get Mulder, so we will never know. Thus, there is no "Good call" to be made. We don't know the answer. We can speculate, but we will never know.
There is absolutely zero change in what he's saying 10 months apart. You just aren't smart enough to see it.
You should agree with his opinion instead of just respect it. Because Rhavicc is right.
Last edited:
yes there is a change. He went from proclaiming Mulder is of the caliber to warrant "Look out" to "maybe he could help" that is a change. But nice try.
Last edited:
No where in a Cut's post does he say "maybe he could help a little." Not only that, but you're taking the "look out" part out of context.
You're so hell bent on trying to make him look bad that you stoop to lying, taking things out of context and flat out making things up.
You might have an argument in some of the other threads but this one you're way off.
You're so hell bent on trying to make him look bad that you stoop to lying, taking things out of context and flat out making things up.
You might have an argument in some of the other threads but this one you're way off.
By the way Cut Nets.......... where was your post saying Look out , UK signed Mulder? Did you ever make a post praising Mulder on that same level from the moment he signed until the fall before we saw what he was like?
You always come to the defense of your fellow trolls? I mean we already have you pegged as a novelty account because of the stupid things you say. Also I wouldnt want you defending me if I was Cut Nets because of how bad it looks to be defended by the guy Matt Jones called out on the radio for being a fool.
- Status
Similar threads
