Jones saying he's hearing Gabriel may be gone soon

[TankedCat]

I was talking about the year before when they lost to USC in the second round.

so the takeaway is neither team can get it done with a transient roster. Astute observation on your part


"
One of the most peculiar aspects of college basketball also happens to be one of its most prominent features. Duke and Kentucky are programs everyone talks about, and teams that, almost without exception, recruit better than any other "brands" nationally.

Yet, to a certain extent, the Blue Devils and the Wildcats appear to be trapped under a one-and-done ceiling on performance. Past national champions such as Duke in 2014-15 and K entucky in 2011-12 were great not only because of their one-and-done stars but also because of their veterans.

Veterans are increasingly hard to find on recent rosters led by Mike Krzyzewski and John Calipari. In the one-and-done era, no team has ever earned a No. 1 seed in the NCAA tournament with a roster that returned fewer than 30 percent of its possession minutes from the previous season. Duke has now come in under that 30 percent threshold in two of the last three seasons. Kentucky has done so every year since its undefeated run to the 2015 Final Four."................

Whether your preferred example is the Kentucky team that won the 2012 national title (while returning 53 percent of its possession minutes from the previous season), the Duke team that won it all in the 2015 tournament (42 percent) or even the UK team that came up just short that same season (60), these were all rosters that were more experienced than what we've seen from the two programs over the last three seasons.

It raises the possibility of whether success at recruiting one-and-done-track talent might be too much of a good thing. The very trait that defines Duke and Kentucky -- the ability to land the best talent -- is turning out to be imperfectly correlated to the ultimate objective, putting the best team on the floor.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...3175288/duke-kentucky-limits-one-done-rosters

 

[seccats04]

Really

#KentuckyEffect ring a bell?

 

[catman111]

How much would one make in the G league or overseas? It just seems minimal and a college education would potentially earn equal amounts or more.

Unless you’re going to be first round, it doesn’t make sense to go.

 

[irishcat1965]

so the takeaway is neither team can get it done with a transient roster. Astute observation on your part


"
One of the most peculiar aspects of college basketball also happens to be one of its most prominent features. Duke and Kentucky are programs everyone talks about, and teams that, almost without exception, recruit better than any other "brands" nationally.

Yet, to a certain extent, the Blue Devils and the Wildcats appear to be trapped under a one-and-done ceiling on performance. Past national champions such as Duke in 2014-15 and K entucky in 2011-12 were great not only because of their one-and-done stars but also because of their veterans.

Veterans are increasingly hard to find on recent rosters led by Mike Krzyzewski and John Calipari. In the one-and-done era, no team has ever earned a No. 1 seed in the NCAA tournament with a roster that returned fewer than 30 percent of its possession minutes from the previous season. Duke has now come in under that 30 percent threshold in two of the last three seasons. Kentucky has done so every year since its undefeated run to the 2015 Final Four."................

Whether your preferred example is the Kentucky team that won the 2012 national title (while returning 53 percent of its possession minutes from the previous season), the Duke team that won it all in the 2015 tournament (42 percent) or even the UK team that came up just short that same season (60), these were all rosters that were more experienced than what we've seen from the two programs over the last three seasons.

It raises the possibility of whether success at recruiting one-and-done-track talent might be too much of a good thing. The very trait that defines Duke and Kentucky -- the ability to land the best talent -- is turning out to be imperfectly correlated to the ultimate objective, putting the best team on the floor.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...3175288/duke-kentucky-limits-one-done-rosters

Actually the astute observation on my part is no matter who you have on your roster, doesnt translate necessarily to a title. Freshmen or seniors. Michigan State and Virginia. Gonzaga. Kansas. Etc. all had key veterans on their teams. None won the title. UK 1959-2018 except for four years in which the vast majority of the UK teams had juniors and seniors. Cal’s OAD model has only been in effect at UK for 9 years. One title. The other 106 years of UK basketball produced 7 titles. That’s a title every 15 years with using upperclassmen.

 

[ck-2]

Four of our championships came in a ten year span. Then two more in a three year span. Then you have the 78 and 2012 champs.
It averages out to every fifteen years but in reality six of the eight championships were in a short span and came in bunches. I think the continuity of keeping a team together lead to that.

 

[BlueCatnTn]

We went from 78 to 96 between titles. During those years, we had mostly experienced teams, at least a couple of juniors or seniors every year. We complained then that we weren't recruiting good enough. Now that we are, we're complaining we're losing them too soon. Problem with getting a few 3 and 4 year guys along with 3 or 4 OAD guys is, what 3 or 4 star guy wants to sit for 2 years and watch in hopes of possibly playing by the time they're jrs or srs. It's more likely they get recruited over and never sees the floor more than spot minutes here and there. The only reason we had a few experienced players like Hawkins, Miller and Willis, were because they were home grown kids, who cared about the name on the front of there jersey. We need to recruit those top of the line Ky kids that bleed blue, but, unfortunately, our state doesn't always produce SEC caliber players that fit that mold. And, even those kids more often then not, would prefer to actually play somewhere else than sit for 2 or 3 years at there dream school. I don't fault Cal at all with his recruiting style. At least his teams are going to be more talented than most every year. If we go with lesser talented teams, you open the door for the rest of the SEC who don't have the ability to recruit at the same level that UK does. Experience or not, I guarantee, once you start recruiting at a lesser level, you'll be looking at many more years of double digit losses and early exits from the NCAA tournament. Cal's recruiting isn't the issue. The NBA rule is. If things are going to change, the NCAA needs to put a 2 year minimum requirement in place, like FB does at 3.. That would force the NBAs hand to either wait an extra year or get rid of the OAD rule altogether. Cal and UK will, if that happened, still get the best of the best that don't go right out of HS. I also think if kids were to opt for the draft directly out of HS and not get drafted, be allowed to still be recruited for college. That'd be a win, win for everyone.

 

[Ryan Lemonds Diary]

Okay, you named one. Where are the others?
Beverly may not have wanted to come to UK where he would have to wait 3 years to get a shot. Heck, he may not even get a shot at that point.
Are there any others?
Cal did bring in Hawkins and Willis, so its not like he isn't trying to.
I just haven't heard of any Kentucky kids that were good enough to come to UK and contribute.

Read my other post where I named 6-8 KY High School players who have contributed at D-1 schools just in the last 4-5 years.

 

[Bobcat94]

The NBA wasn't gonna draft Briscoe or Humphries either. And I'm pretty sure both guys knew that. But they left anyways.

The rules have changed. "Won't be drafted" no longer ensures won't leave. Some would rather have an overseas or G-League salary than no salary at all.

I harped on that fact to until I seen what their contract was for last year. Briscoe made $850,000 and Humphries made $750,000. You can't blame kids for doing hat and still have the option to come back anytime and finish their degree on UK's dime. It's a no lose situation.

 

[kyjeff1]

Read my other post where I named 6-8 KY High School players who have contributed at D-1 schools just in the last 4-5 years.

I did, but none of them are going to get any click at UK. They have to want to ride the pine for 2 years before they get a shot.
Those guys can go to places like Pitt, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State or Louisville (you know, lower tier programs) and play right away.
Hawkins and Miller could have been star players had they gone to lower tiered programs, but they chose to sacrifice to play for UK.
I do agree with you though, but I totally understand why these kids go elsewhere.
We just need a Kentucky kid to develop into the next AD or John Wall.

 

[FrankUnderwood]

I harped on that fact to until I seen what their contract was for last year. Briscoe made $850,000 and Humphries made $750,000. You can't blame kids for doing hat and still have the option to come back anytime and finish their degree on UK's dime. It's a no lose situation.

Dang, i didn’t know Briscoe made that much. Is that per year ? If so, even after taxes he’s clearing 1 million in 2 years... which is pretty good $ Lol

 

[kyjeff1]

We likely won’t win another title in the next ten years regardless of the methods we use. They don’t happen that often.

That shouldn't be the case for UK. Not when UK has a HOF coach and that coach gets the talent that he has been getting.
I've said for a while now that we are missing the boat, because if Cal was able to retain any of the talent that has left early, we would be a 1 seed almost every year with a legit shot at winning the whole thing.
I'm not saying UK should be winning titles at the same clip as Alabama football, but with our coaching, facilities, fan support and talent, we should be able to match what UNC has done or better.
They've won 3 titles since 05, I realize Cal hasn't been here that long, but we've had our chances (actually, we had a damn good team in 05 too). Should have won in 2010, 15 and probably 14 although I'm happy we got to the title game in 14, that was a good accomplishment.
So had we won in 10 and 15, we would all feel like we have gotten the most out of our talent, coaching and opportunities.
We have all the ingredients to be on an epic title run, but it's not happening and we can blame early departures for that. I'm not talking about the John Wall's or AD's, I'm talking about the Teague's, Lamb's, Briscoe's, Orton's, Goodwin's, Knox's, Skal's etc.

 

[kyjeff1]

I harped on that fact to until I seen what their contract was for last year. Briscoe made $850,000 and Humphries made $750,000. You can't blame kids for doing hat and still have the option to come back anytime and finish their degree on UK's dime. It's a no lose situation.

I'm not surprised at the amount of money they are making, but that's not the point. UK is losing those types of players every year, but that's not happening anywhere else. Those types of players are staying in school everywhere else.
Heck, Michigan State managed to keep Bridges one more year, he was a high first round lock after his freshman year.
Duke kept Allen for 4 years somehow.
That Donte Divincienzo kid at Villanova would be gone here at UK, but he's coming back to Nova next year.
Graham stayed at KU for 4 years.
That's a heck of an advantage for those schools that we never seem to have.

 

[Aike]

so the takeaway is neither team can get it done with a transient roster. Astute observation on your part


"
One of the most peculiar aspects of college basketball also happens to be one of its most prominent features. Duke and Kentucky are programs everyone talks about, and teams that, almost without exception, recruit better than any other "brands" nationally.

Yet, to a certain extent, the Blue Devils and the Wildcats appear to be trapped under a one-and-done ceiling on performance. Past national champions such as Duke in 2014-15 and K entucky in 2011-12 were great not only because of their one-and-done stars but also because of their veterans.

Veterans are increasingly hard to find on recent rosters led by Mike Krzyzewski and John Calipari. In the one-and-done era, no team has ever earned a No. 1 seed in the NCAA tournament with a roster that returned fewer than 30 percent of its possession minutes from the previous season. Duke has now come in under that 30 percent threshold in two of the last three seasons. Kentucky has done so every year since its undefeated run to the 2015 Final Four."................

Whether your preferred example is the Kentucky team that won the 2012 national title (while returning 53 percent of its possession minutes from the previous season), the Duke team that won it all in the 2015 tournament (42 percent) or even the UK team that came up just short that same season (60), these were all rosters that were more experienced than what we've seen from the two programs over the last three seasons.

It raises the possibility of whether success at recruiting one-and-done-track talent might be too much of a good thing. The very trait that defines Duke and Kentucky -- the ability to land the best talent -- is turning out to be imperfectly correlated to the ultimate objective, putting the best team on the floor.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...3175288/duke-kentucky-limits-one-done-rosters

I think your quote here has it partly right. It isn’t that you can’t put the best team on the floor, though. It’s that you struggle early and have trouble getting a one seed.

The champion is a 1 seed 60% of the time. Even if you’re one of the best 4 teams in the country heading into the tournament, it’s extremely difficult to win it all starting as a 4/5 (or worse).

It makes for some exciting games, but coasting into the Sweet 16 or even Elite 8 is what you really want and need.

 

[Blue Decade]

I think Cal has got to change this way of thinking by our players.

This narrative is absolutely ridiculous. This is America, the land of opportunity and free choice. How would you suggest Calipari should “change this way of thinking by our players”? Should he fit our players with a mind control device? Should he pay them to stay? And what about players at other schools who don’t stay at those other places for 4 years? Should Calipari call them too? Calipari did not write the NBA rules. Wenyen Gabriel can do whatever he wants. I don’t happen to believe Gabriel ought to leave at those point. But it isn’t up to me. Or you. Or Calipari.

 

[GonzoCat90]

I'm not surprised at the amount of money they are making, but that's not the point. UK is losing those types of players every year, but that's not happening anywhere else. Those types of players are staying in school everywhere else.
Heck, Michigan State managed to keep Bridges one more year, he was a high first round lock after his freshman year.
Duke kept Allen for 4 years somehow.
That Donte Divincienzo kid at Villanova would be gone here at UK, but he's coming back to Nova next year.
Graham stayed at KU for 4 years.
That's a heck of an advantage for those schools that we never seem to have.

Duke has lost like 10 transfers in the time Cal has been here and has seen Jackson and Duval leave to be second round picks in back to back years.

KU lost Cliff Alexander to the second round, has kicked numerous guys off the team, had Preston declared ineligible, and appears set to vacate games and have to sit/lose De Sousa.

Michigan State hasn't won a title since I was in fourth grade and is involved in what might be a bigger scandal than the FBI stuff. Not to mention they lost Deyonta Davis to the second round after his freshman season.

Until three years ago, Nova was a tournament laughingstock that was always over-seeded and upset early.

No one who is complaining about our roster turnover would be happy doing it any of those other ways either. You guys just focus on their successes.

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

This narrative is absolutely ridiculous. This is America, the land of opportunity and free choice. How would you suggest Calipari should “change this way of thinking by our players”? Should he fit our players with a mind control device? Should he pay them to stay? And what about players at other schools who don’t stay at this places for 4 years? Should Calipari call them too? Calipari did not write the NBA rules. Wenyen Gabriel can do whatever he wants. I don’t happen to believe Gabriel ought to leave at those point. But it isn’t up to me. Or you. Or Calipari.

Well, we know he told Ulis "don't come here if you plan on staying 4 yrs". We don't know if he has told others that, but it's certainly possible. It's hard to know if things like that are part and parcel of his successful pitches, or if scaling back statements like that would hurt. If he can get these players without stuff like that, I would certainly prefer it. I do think it adds to the environment that creates the mindset if you are at UK longer than 2 seasons, you are a failure.

 

[TankedCat]

Actually the astute observation on my part is no matter who you have on your roster, doesnt translate necessarily to a title. Freshmen or seniors. Michigan State and Virginia. Gonzaga. Kansas. Etc. all had key veterans on their teams. None won the title. UK 1959-2018 except for four years in which the vast majority of the UK teams had juniors and seniors. Cal’s OAD model has only been in effect at UK for 9 years. One title. The other 106 years of UK basketball produced 7 titles. That’s a title every 15 years with using upperclassmen.

we won't have 6 mores years of OAD to prove your theory

 

[W_Heisenberg]

How much would one make in the G league or overseas? It just seems minimal and a college education would potentially earn equal amounts or more.

Unless you’re going to be first round, it doesn’t make sense to go.

G-league pays $35K a year plus travel and expenses...most jobs coming out of college pay that or less with undergrad degree. Their pay only goes up from there, in addition to the chance of making a NBA team and quickly improving their games but focusing on that 100% of their time. So actually leaving makes sense for guys who will likely never be a first-rounder.

Overseas can be pretty good, definitely six figures annually.

 

[TankedCat]

I think your quote here has it partly right. It isn’t that you can’t put the best team on the floor, though. It’s that you struggle early and have trouble getting a one seed.

The champion is a 1 seed 60% of the time. Even if you’re one of the best 4 teams in the country heading into the tournament, it’s extremely difficult to win it all starting as a 4/5 (or worse).

It makes for some exciting games, but coasting into the Sweet 16 or even Elite 8 is what you really want and need.

I think more importantly, the idea that a freshmen led team is capable of putting together 6 straight tournament level wins against increasingly better competition is the really problem. Its a crap shoot when you have a composed veteran team, but to expect that these guys will excel in an environment they've never encountered before on the biggest stage of their life is just asking too much. Cal keeps talking about we're young - but the only solution to that is getting experience and understanding what it takes to win in a final four setting. Its not going to happen when you return guys averaging a handful of minutes and you don't even know if they'll be out on the floor as a starter next year.

 

[irishcat1965]

we won't have 6 mores years of OAD to prove your theory

It won’t matter. All teams will have the new NCAA transfer rule to deal with so players will leave on an annual basis from every team in every league.

 

[TankedCat]

I get that Cal can't stop a player from chasing money but to act like Cal hasn't played the central and pivotal role in developing this culture at UK is just stating a lie. I don't see how anyone can say that Cal, who pushes a players first mantra and come to UK to achieve your NBA dreams narrative is blameless in this.

Cal has had a hand in creating a culture at UK where
1. NBA level talent has to go, its not in your best interest to return to UK. Chase the money
2. We recruit one and dones, not 3 and dones
3. You will get recruited over if you are a returning player

now as a fan, you ( no one in particular) may be fine with that as you believe this process gives us the best chance to win and creates an exciting brand of basketball

but I would suggest you are an apologist detached from reality if you say Cal has no hand in us seeing kids make decisions to leave UK when their alternatives don't appear to be locked into the NBA. And Cal doesn't get a free pass just because he says "I think you should stay" while he is on a plane flying to recruit a kid to replace you. Not true for every kid that leaves, and its certainly happening at other programs. But Cal and UK can't be ground zero for the one and done, and then deflect all that isn't right about it as a process.

 

[Bluegrassking]

How much would one make in the G league or overseas? It just seems minimal and a college education would potentially earn equal amounts or more.

Unless you’re going to be first round, it doesn’t make sense to go.

Dude, Hump made like 3/4 of a million this season. That's outstanding based of his little bit of production.
How long does it take the average state college undergrad to make that kind of bread?

 

[irishcat1965]

I get that Cal can't stop a player from chasing money but to act like Cal hasn't played the central and pivotal role in developing this culture at UK is just stating a lie. I don't see how anyone can say that Cal, who pushes a players first mantra and come to UK to achieve your NBA dreams narrative is blameless in this.

Cal has had a hand in creating a culture at UK where
1. NBA level talent has to go, its not in your best interest to return to UK. Chase the money
2. We recruit one and dones, not 3 and dones
3. You will get recruited over if you are a returning player

now as a fan, you ( no one in particular) may be fine with that as you believe this process gives us the best chance to win and creates an exciting brand of basketball

but I would suggest you are an apologist detached from reality if you say Cal has no hand in us seeing kids make decisions to leave UK when their alternatives don't appear to be locked into the NBA. And Cal doesn't get a free pass just because he says "I think you should stay" while he is on a plane flying to recruit a kid to replace you. Not true for every kid that leaves, and its certainly happening at other programs. But Cal and UK can't be ground zero for the one and done, and then deflect all that isn't right about it as a process.

The vast majority of NCAA schools can’t recruit like UK and Duke. So naturally they aren’t going to have that issue. But I don’t think Cal has to apologize for anything. Nor do the fans who have enjoyed his success at UK.

 

[TankedCat]

its not about apologizing, its about not creating this false narrative that UK has no choice in this process and that Cal has no control in the mass exodus each year.

He creates the mass exodus each year with his recruiting choices and player management.

Again, there may be fans that are fine with that, and I have no problem with it, all I ask is that they don't act like this is an unstoppable train and UK is along for the ride.

 

[kyjeff1]

Duke has lost like 10 transfers in the time Cal has been here and has seen Jackson and Duval leave to be second round picks in back to back years.

KU lost Cliff Alexander to the second round, has kicked numerous guys off the team, had Preston declared ineligible, and appears set to vacate games and have to sit/lose De Sousa.

Michigan State hasn't won a title since I was in fourth grade and is involved in what might be a bigger scandal than the FBI stuff. Not to mention they lost Deyonta Davis to the second round after his freshman season.

Until three years ago, Nova was a tournament laughingstock that was always over-seeded and upset early.

No one who is complaining about our roster turnover would be happy doing it any of those other ways either. You guys just focus on their successes.

Those other programs certainly have holes, but they are retaining players that would leave if they.played for UK.

Also, we have Calipari, they don't.

I get it, coach K is supposed to be the best coach ever, but Cal gets more out of his young talent than K does. Plus, K always seems to have really good veterans (Allen, Jefferson, Matt Jones, Plummlee, Plummlee, Plummlee etc… ). Cal has rarely had veterans that talented. Had some in 2012, look what happened.

Izzo is a joke and has been for a long time. Losing to 15 seeded Middle Tennessee State in 2016 and to Syracuse last season with the rosters he had, is very telling. Cal would have done so much more with those two teams. They were stacked with really good veteran players with a nice mix of top freshmen but it didn't matter, Izzo never adjusted and sat there and watched his teams choke away.

Yeah, KU has lost some guys, but they've also retained guys like Graham and Mason. Give Cal that kind of veteran talent and see what happens.

 

[irishcat1965]

its not about apologizing, its about not creating this false narrative that UK has no choice in this process and that Cal has no control in the mass exodus each year.

He creates the mass exodus each year with his recruiting choices and player management.

Again, there may be fans that are fine with that, and I have no problem with it, all I ask is that they don't act like this is an unstoppable train and UK is along for the ride.

I have no problem with Cal recruiting over players. You bring in the best talent you can. If a player feels he can’t compete and leaves, so be it. That’s how the real world works.

 

[Aike]

I think more importantly, the idea that a freshmen led team is capable of putting together 6 straight tournament level wins against increasingly better competition is the really problem. Its a crap shoot when you have a composed veteran team, but to expect that these guys will excel in an environment they've never encountered before on the biggest stage of their life is just asking too much. Cal keeps talking about we're young - but the only solution to that is getting experience and understanding what it takes to win in a final four setting. Its not going to happen when you return guys averaging a handful of minutes and you don't even know if they'll be out on the floor as a starter next year.

We will just have to agree to disagree. I’ve watched a whole bunch of freshmen led teams win a whole bunch of big tournament games.

The problem is with the math. Majority of titles are won by 1 seeds for 2 reasons. One, they are usually the best teams. Two, they play worse teams.

When you are a 1 seed, you are 99% to win the first game and often 80% or so to win the second. Contrast that with a 4/5 seed, who may be something like 66% to win game 1 and 50/50 on game 2.

So the one seed is close to 80% to get to the Sweet 16. The 4/5 is more like 33%. Hard to overcome those odds, and it has little if anything to do with youth.

Where youth figures in is that losing games early puts you behind the 8 ball and in line for that 4/5.

 

[Aike]

Dude, Hump made like 3/4 of a million this season. That's outstanding based of his little bit of production.
How long does it take the average state college undergrad to make that kind of bread?

Do you have a link to his salary?

 

[GonzoCat90]

Those other programs certainly have holes, but they are retaining players that would leave if they.played for UK.

Also, we have Calipari, they don't.

I get it, coach K is supposed to be the best coach ever, but Cal gets more out of his young talent than K does. Plus, K always seems to have really good veterans (Allen, Jefferson, Matt Jones, Plummlee, Plummlee, Plummlee etc… ). Cal has rarely had veterans that talented. Had some in 2012, look what happened.

Izzo is a joke and has been for a long time. Losing to 15 seeded Middle Tennessee State in 2016 and to Syracuse last season with the rosters he had, is very telling. Cal would have done so much more with those two teams. They were stacked with really good veteran players with a nice mix of top freshmen but it didn't matter, Izzo never adjusted and sat there and watched his teams choke away.

Yeah, KU has lost some guys, but they've also retained guys like Graham and Mason. Give Cal that kind of veteran talent and see what happens.

Maybe, but UK is also getting players those programs would never get and therefore winning more games more consistently and going deeper in the tournament on average.

I don't think anyone would argue that it wouldn't be better to have had a senior KAT, Ulis, Booker and Lyles this year. But when that's impossible, you have to make choices, and you have to be prepared for the landscape of college basketball, which is that you don't know who is leaving at any time.

If Cal doesn't recruit Ashton Hagans and Quade/SGA both leave, we have one PG on the roster. You basically just have to have all your bases covered.

We get better players, so we lose more players, but what's happening isn't just a Kentucky thing. There's no coincidence that the teams who recruit the best are losing the most players.

Cal isn't forcing guys out at Duke or Arizona. He isn't making Zhaire Smith leave Texas Tech after one season as a former three star. He isn't making Tony Carr leave Penn State to potentially go undrafted.

 

[FrankUnderwood]

Nah, this one is a fake that just joined today.

Dollars to donuts it’s 43toeat77... he routinely got verbally abused for his imbecilic takes on here so I really hope it’s him and that he’s back for good.
He’s like the dumber (but not as short ) version of Keyser

 

[BBUK]

Dollars to donuts it’s 43toeat77... he routinely got verbally abused for his imbecilic takes on here so I really hope it’s him and that he’s back for good.
He’s like the dumber (but not as short ) version of Keyser

Come on Frank...you're so doggone'd wishy washy....Why?

 

[FrankUnderwood]

Come on Frank...you're so doggone'd wishy washy....Why?

Gender dysphoria

 

[BBUK]

Gender dysphoria

Hey Maine, you can get perma-banned for stating stuff like that on this site!

 

[TankedCat]

I have no problem with Cal recruiting over players. You bring in the best talent you can. If a player feels he can’t compete and leaves, so be it. That’s how the real world works.

that's not players first.....at all

 

[TankedCat]

We will just have to agree to disagree. I’ve watched a whole bunch of freshmen led teams win a whole bunch of big tournament games.

The problem is with the math. Majority of titles are won by 1 seeds for 2 reasons. One, they are usually the best teams. Two, they play worse teams.

When you are a 1 seed, you are 99% to win the first game and often 80% or so to win the second. Contrast that with a 4/5 seed, who may be something like 66% to win game 1 and 50/50 on game 2.

So the one seed is close to 80% to get to the Sweet 16. The 4/5 is more like 33%. Hard to overcome those odds, and it has little if anything to do with youth.

Where youth figures in is that losing games early puts you behind the 8 ball and in line for that 4/5.

I"m not disagreeing with you, but even as a 1 or 2 seed, I think its much higher risk to expect an inexperienced team - as in no tourney experience to pull off six wins, much less 4

 

[irishcat1965]

that's not players first.....at all

Yeah it is. The best players rise to the top. As Cal says, this isn’t communism.

 

[kyjeff1]

Maybe, but UK is also getting players those programs would never get and therefore winning more games more consistently and going deeper in the tournament on average.

I don't think anyone would argue that it wouldn't be better to have had a senior KAT, Ulis, Booker and Lyles this year. But when that's impossible, you have to make choices, and you have to be prepared for the landscape of college basketball, which is that you don't know who is leaving at any time.

If Cal doesn't recruit Ashton Hagans and Quade/SGA both leave, we have one PG on the roster. You basically just have to have all your bases covered.

We get better players, so we lose more players, but what's happening isn't just a Kentucky thing. There's no coincidence that the teams who recruit the best are losing the most players.

Cal isn't forcing guys out at Duke or Arizona. He isn't making Zhaire Smith leave Texas Tech after one season as a former three star. He isn't making Tony Carr leave Penn State to potentially go undrafted.

I agree, it's definitely not just a Kentucky thing, it happens at every other school.
However, it doesn't happen anywhere near as often at any other school not named Duke anywhere near as often.
I'm not asking the Wall/AD/Townes/Cuz type players to come back for a 2nd or third year. I'm asking to get back the players that 99% of the other schools outout there get back. I mean, look at the players UNC consistently gets back.
Give Cal a few really good veterans (PJ, Vando, Gabriel, Lamb, Teague, Orton, Briscoe etc… ) and mix them in with some stud 5* freshmen and you're looking at 2010/12/15/17/ type teams every year. But we keep losing guys that would rather play in the D league or overseas after their sophomore season.
It's a culture that isn't going to win titles and it seems to be changing for the worst. Just wait until that transfer rule gets changed.

 

[kb22stang]

Ok. It's whiney to not want to lose more than 6 people off this year's team? We are in Bizarro World.

no doubt, we have guys transfering, leaving for Europe and G League and yet we're supposed to be like "yay, look at the new freshman coming in next year" until the board collectively bashes them for playing like freshman.

 

[Ryan Lemonds Diary]

I did, but none of them are going to get any click at UK. They have to want to ride the pine for 2 years before they get a shot.
Those guys can go to places like Pitt, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State or Louisville (you know, lower tier programs) and play right away.
Hawkins and Miller could have been star players had they gone to lower tiered programs, but they chose to sacrifice to play for UK.
I do agree with you though, but I totally understand why these kids go elsewhere.
We just need a Kentucky kid to develop into the next AD or John Wall.

I think there are kids like Miller and Hawkins out there but it doesn't seem like Cal is giving them a chance. They are looking at a couple of kids for next year but nobody from KY has received a scholarship offer in 5 years since Hawk and Willis. You can't tell me not one kid from KY could have came here and played in the last 5 years.

 

[Aike]

I"m not disagreeing with you, but even as a 1 or 2 seed, I think its much higher risk to expect an inexperienced team - as in no tourney experience to pull off six wins, much less 4

I know you think that. And intuitively, I get it. But we don’t seem to have much trouble winning tourney games with young players.

But you can only draw against a stacked deck so many times.