In all honesty, in the scheme of things, all message board topics are silly.
MKG or Mashburn?
- Thread starter JimboBBN
- Start date
No one said Mash wasn't, not sure why you would even ask?
MKG had a great motor and tremendous desire, a fantastic will to win. Doesn't mean Mash wasn't a winner in the least.
Stop being a troll, no one said he wasn't a winner. But like Wayne Turner, who wasn't the best player on the team but he knew winning. MKG was very talented but very similar to Turner in that they both won NCs.
We all love MKG and think the kid is a total badazz on the basketball court, but this isn't even a close race. Monster Mash was on another level when talking basketball talent. This thread wasn't fair for MGK. We would all take a kid with his heart and talent every year at Kentucky, but if you have to ask a question like this, you don't even understand what a talent Mashburn was at Kentucky. The dude is a 6'8 frontcourt type of body, a guards basketball handling and shooting touch and a forwards rebounding force all in one player. Mash is like a LeBron type of player before LeBron. When Mash came to Kentucky, we didn't have much talent on the roster, but it didn't matter. With Mash on the floor we had a chance at beating any team we faced. The dude put up crazy numbers for a long time in the NBA after Kentucky. Mash was the first big time player Kentucky landed after probation and I would hate to think about what might happened without Mash.The dude was also one of our best outside shooting options while playing at that size. We don't want to seem like we are bashing MKG, we're not. It is just a fact the kid was no where near the talent Mashburn showed at Kentucky. If you want to compare, Davis is the great player type that joins Mashburn's legacy at Kentucky. MKG was awesome, but not in those two players league.
If Bowie didn't get injured and got to play the game of basketball healthy, I think it's safe to say the dude would have been a really awesome talent to watch play. Even if Bowie never gets hurt, I can't say I would take him over Davis. Not sure Bowie would have been as talented as Davis. It is not a knock on Bowie, it's just a fact some people are just freaks and on another level when it comes to talent. Many seem to think Davis just suddenly developed a shooting touch and a desire to score while in the NBA. The truth is, Davis had this skillset while at Kentucky. If Kentucky wasn't so loaded with talent, Cal most likely allows Davis more of a scoring role. Cal didn't need Davis putting up big scoring stats. Davis was the best player every time he took the court at Kentucky and Cal knew with Davis inside, his shot blocking made every guard driving toward the rim fear going inside. Cal just needed Davis to control each game with his elite level defense and rebounding. If Cal allows Davis more scoring, it takes away touches from players he needed feeling confident once the tourney came. If Cal wanted 20 points per game from Davis, do any of you really think Davis couldn't score? You just don't develope a scoring skillset during draft time to opening day. The kid already had it, Cal just didn't think it was needed for Kentucky to win a national title.
Mashburn 100 out of 100 times and I adore MKG.
Mash was a complete player, had a sweet stroke and was a flat out beast in his era. There weren't a lot of guys his size who could handle the ball like that 25 years ago.
Mash was a complete player, had a sweet stroke and was a flat out beast in his era. There weren't a lot of guys his size who could handle the ball like that 25 years ago.
No offense taken man. Like I said, only reason I asked is because I never got to see Mash suit up for UK. But this thread has given me good reason to go watch some highlights.
I just want to say I appreciate @UK_fanatic and his fondness of MKG, as well as all of our players. He's a true fan.
We have been blessed with many great players and of course the best fan base in college basketball.
We have been blessed with many great players and of course the best fan base in college basketball.
"A withering display of basketball talent at both ends!" -- Dick Stockton (about 1993 Kentucky v Wake Forest)
I agree it's Mashburn, but man you guys are really really close to overstating the case. "It's not even close" - have seen that multiple times. I have to wonder if you are basing some of your thinking on the pro careers that each eventually had (and it's hard not to do that, I know). MKG was the number 2 overall pick in the draft as a freshman. And maybe that's what the OP mean - who is/was better period? If you're talking about just their time at UK, I'm not sure how you compare a 3 year player vs a 1 year player. Just using freshmen stats:
MKG: 31 minutes, 11.9 points, 7.4 rebounds, 49.1 FG, 25.5% threes, 74.5% FT on one of the best 3-5 teams in UK history, surrounded by a ton of talent.
Mash: 24 minutes, 12.9 points, 7.0 rebounds, 47.4% FG, 29.2% threes, 72.7% FT on a 22-6 team that ended the season ranked #9 in the AP but didn't have a lot of talent.
Taking their entire UK careers - and certainly taking their professional careers -- into account, yes Mash was better. But just looking at their freshman seasons MKG was just as clearly better.....
MKG: 31 minutes, 11.9 points, 7.4 rebounds, 49.1 FG, 25.5% threes, 74.5% FT on one of the best 3-5 teams in UK history, surrounded by a ton of talent.
Mash: 24 minutes, 12.9 points, 7.0 rebounds, 47.4% FG, 29.2% threes, 72.7% FT on a 22-6 team that ended the season ranked #9 in the AP but didn't have a lot of talent.
Taking their entire UK careers - and certainly taking their professional careers -- into account, yes Mash was better. But just looking at their freshman seasons MKG was just as clearly better.....
Mashburn was the central player the rest of team revolved around. He carried that offense. MKG was a role player amongst a team of other great players. MKG was great, but he had a different role than Mash. Mash was the player to carry a team on his back. MKG was never asked to do that.
NBA is different than college. But more importantly the NBA does not draft based (very much) on what you've done, but more-so on what they they think you will do in the next 3-5-7 years. They are looking for "up-side"; they want to find that next super-star. That is why you will see young players (FR) drafted ahead of experienced players (JR & SR) who are clearly much better now than the FR, but because that FR is super long or quick is considered the better "LONG TERM" prospect. As great as I think MKG was too, had he stayed another year, and played as good or better but still not developed a decent jump shot, he would have slipped in the draft as a SOPH. And even more as a JR.
Shooting & scoring are very different! I'd much rather have the guy who has 12 FGA (including 5 3pt-FGA) & 5 FTA to get 18 pts, than the guy who attempts 18 FGA (including 4 3pt-FGA) and 5 FTA to get 18 pts.
MKG was very good, likely one of the top 20 Wildcats in our storied unmatched history. But Mashburn was a top 3 Wildcat. That's no knock on MKG.
Mashburn had some very good rebounding performances too. 38 & 19 vs EKU, 30 & 14 vs UGA, 17 & 15 vs LSU, 21 & 15 vs Vandy, 17 & 15 vs UGA. His last 2 years he was the focal point of the offense, so I think rebounding took a back seat to scoring, otherwise I think we would have seen a bigger increase than 7.8 to 8.0 to 8.4 in his rebounding numbers.
Had he not gotten hurt, Bowie would be right there in the top 5, no doubt. Him and AD would be a really good battle.
Monster Mash all day, every single day and I'm a huge MKG fan. Just look at my avatar lol I think the better comparison/debate would be MKG/Mercer. If Mash didn't foul out in 1992 against Duke and in 1993 against the Fab 5, we just might be talking about back to back titles today.
Poe ... two things ...
First, upon reflection, I think you're right about Mash vs. MKG. I don't completely retreat from my support of MKG, but - again, upon reflection - Mash was such a compelling offensive player and a more-than-adequate defender that, as I said, I think you're right.
Secondly . . . I'm not "anti-Cal". I disagree with those of you who think that Cal is the best "basketball coach", as distinguished from "recruiter", in the country. I think Cal is an excellent - and perhaps the best in the country - coach of man-to-man defensive basketball. i think he is clearly without peer as a recruiter. But I think past U.K. classes under Cal have not been developed in their positions as they could have been, and as they should have been. But . . I realize that there are those who disagree with my assessment -- and all of y'all are certainly entitled to your opinions, and I hope and trust that I have not inappropriately denigrated any opinion about Cal's coaching that is contrary to mine. But I do want to say this, emphatically: For you to say that I am "anti-Cal" is simply not correct. I hope Cal wins every game as long as he is coaching at U.K. I am fundamentally a U.K. fan, and Cal is the head basketball coach at U.K., and I will cheer for his teams and will celebrate every success that Cal brings to U.K. basketball.
I respectfully request that you distinguish between my opinions about John Calipari's overall coaching ability and my status as a 60-year-plus hard-core U.K. basketball fan.
Best regards, Poe ...
Rip
First, upon reflection, I think you're right about Mash vs. MKG. I don't completely retreat from my support of MKG, but - again, upon reflection - Mash was such a compelling offensive player and a more-than-adequate defender that, as I said, I think you're right.
Secondly . . . I'm not "anti-Cal". I disagree with those of you who think that Cal is the best "basketball coach", as distinguished from "recruiter", in the country. I think Cal is an excellent - and perhaps the best in the country - coach of man-to-man defensive basketball. i think he is clearly without peer as a recruiter. But I think past U.K. classes under Cal have not been developed in their positions as they could have been, and as they should have been. But . . I realize that there are those who disagree with my assessment -- and all of y'all are certainly entitled to your opinions, and I hope and trust that I have not inappropriately denigrated any opinion about Cal's coaching that is contrary to mine. But I do want to say this, emphatically: For you to say that I am "anti-Cal" is simply not correct. I hope Cal wins every game as long as he is coaching at U.K. I am fundamentally a U.K. fan, and Cal is the head basketball coach at U.K., and I will cheer for his teams and will celebrate every success that Cal brings to U.K. basketball.
I respectfully request that you distinguish between my opinions about John Calipari's overall coaching ability and my status as a 60-year-plus hard-core U.K. basketball fan.
Best regards, Poe ...
Rip
For sure we got to see Mash blossom for 3 years so rightly so it's fresh in older fans's mind. All of Cal's freshmen usually do not reached their peak while at UK because of going to the pros. In the end it's an opinion, no right no wrong just people having an opinion. It's what we do.
MKG had a motor that didn't quit. The other players had to step up their game just to keep from getting embarrassed by his outstanding heart. This made everybody better, including AD. Without him there is no Championship that year. That being said, Mashburn is my favorite player that I watched play. I have been watching since 1975 and no one was a better all around player.
I have never doubted your fandom Rip.
But you are definitely on record complaining about Cal and the OAD, many times over.
If the anti label is too extreme I certainly did not intend to offend.
I appreciate your insights as a knowledgeable fan of the game and I don't disagree with some Cal issues - 2009 WVU, 2014 UConn, 2015 Wisconsin.
Chalk this up to a lack of my vocabulary brother.
It's always tough comparing a 3 and 4 year player vs a 1 year player. When these debates come up, I always solely compare their time at UK. Times have changed so much in college basketball, just over the 20 years from when Mashburn played until the time when MKG played. Due to all the top players leaving after 1 or 2 years, the level of competition has declined drastically since Mashburn's days.
I think the context of the OP's question would be their career at UK (1 yr vs 3 yr).
But I don't see how if you restrict to just the FR year you can honestly say MKG was clearly better (as a FR)? Numbers look pretty even to me. Sure I'll give MKG the unmeasureables/intangibles (DEF, etc...). But Mash also played less minutes. Comparing their per40min numbers you get:
MKG: 15.5 pts, 9.6 reb,
Mash: 21.5 pts, 11.7 reb.
Those numbers may offset the intangibles. So I think you have to call their FR seasons pretty close.
Long-time viewer of this board...first-time poster. I thought this one would be a good thread to jump in on. Most everyone has good, compelling arguments for both players, but personally I would have to vote for the Monster Mash on this one. I have been watching since the late 70s, and Mash is one of the top talents I have witnessed wearing the Big Blue. He had the ability to carry a team offensively as a freshman...only a handful of our players have had that dominant of a skill set. Not knocking MKG, he was an integral piece to our latest championship and had an unreal desire to lock-down anyone in front of him. However, for this discussion I just have to go with the kid from The Bronx. JMHO
No problem, Poe.
I fully recognize that I'm "on record" complaining about some of the stuff that Cal has done and said. But if I said something criticizing Cal with respect to OAD issues, then I must have had a little nip before taking to RR that night. I don't see how anyone can criticize Cal for the OAD situation. And, he plays it masterfully, for our benefit. I do, however ... looking for the right word, here ... "resent", I guess ... the fact (and I think this is the only reasonable conclusion - stated generously) that Cal gives equal importance to "putting U.K. players into the NBA" as he does to "winning NCAA Championships." I don't think I want to retreat from any of my comments about that. But I don't see that as a criticism of Cal's handling of the OAD situation. Not intended so, anyway.
Otherwise, my "choke points" with Cal are only a few: (a) "We don't watch film..." before the Wisconsin game; (b) never (IMHO, of course) optimally utilized that magnificent roster of 2014-15; (c) WCS was, IMHO, the best combination of size and athleticism that has ever appeared in a U.K. uniform in any sport -- and (again, IMHO) he never got better, offensively, from the time he arrived at U.K. to the time he left.
Now that we "know each other" a little better, Poe -- don't hesitate to call me out if I get too far off the mark.
Best to all. Go 'Cats !
I fully recognize that I'm "on record" complaining about some of the stuff that Cal has done and said. But if I said something criticizing Cal with respect to OAD issues, then I must have had a little nip before taking to RR that night. I don't see how anyone can criticize Cal for the OAD situation. And, he plays it masterfully, for our benefit. I do, however ... looking for the right word, here ... "resent", I guess ... the fact (and I think this is the only reasonable conclusion - stated generously) that Cal gives equal importance to "putting U.K. players into the NBA" as he does to "winning NCAA Championships." I don't think I want to retreat from any of my comments about that. But I don't see that as a criticism of Cal's handling of the OAD situation. Not intended so, anyway.
Otherwise, my "choke points" with Cal are only a few: (a) "We don't watch film..." before the Wisconsin game; (b) never (IMHO, of course) optimally utilized that magnificent roster of 2014-15; (c) WCS was, IMHO, the best combination of size and athleticism that has ever appeared in a U.K. uniform in any sport -- and (again, IMHO) he never got better, offensively, from the time he arrived at U.K. to the time he left.
Now that we "know each other" a little better, Poe -- don't hesitate to call me out if I get too far off the mark.
Best to all. Go 'Cats !
Excellent point and speaks even more highly for Mashburn who faced more veteran players while he was in college. I know what you and others say about comparing 1 year guys with those who were here 3/4 years but that's all we can do. Mash definitely was one of the very best to play at UK and I feel he was a more complete player than MKG (who I loved at UK). As for the Bowie/AD debate, we will never know. Bowie was fantastic and a tremendous talent but too injury prone and AD was here just the one season but, oh what a season! Have to give it to AD based on those facts as that is all we have to measure by.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
The Ukraine war. (Yes, we'll mind our manners)- Latest: WayneDougan
-
-
