ADVERTISEMENT

Penn’s Jordan Dingle hits portal…23 ppg

Goodbye Antonio Reeves
Not the case at all. Also if you are going to play a more modern style, guys like Reeves/Dingle can easily coexist with everyone. If you are going to try and land a 7'1 guy who can post up-need have shooters around him if you play that way. Spacing is the key and look at UConn. had 2 elite College posts (Clingan is an elite NBA prospect as well) and surrounded them with several shooters/guards/wings. They had Alleyne leave Va Tech starting spot to come off bench...Joey Calcaterra did same from his school....Diarra at A&M left to come off bench...but you have to commit to playing a style that embraces the players.

So really it's about whether the staff/Cal are willing to change. This is where a guy like John Welch would really help coming from NBA background and tweaking their offense.
 
The 55.5% is from 2-only. Was 46.4% overall.
He's not a PG, and we don't need that, so no problem.

The 3pt % could be a little higher, but he's improved that each year, and maybe he can improve it even more like Grady did.

If we do not get Reeves back he might be a good fit.
How do you feel about the Lawrence kid from vandy and Kentucky potential interest
 
I mean we had Mintz, Sestina, etc that were happy to come here and play 15-20 min In an experienced veteran role. Maybe he would too, looking at his highlights he doesn’t look like a 30 min star at a high Div 1 school, so maybe he wants to be a role player at a big program?
Yes, but Sestina and Mintz didn't average 23 points a game at their previous schools. Dingle would have to battle for playing time in the backcourt with two shoot-first point guards that were top of the 2023 class and the reigning SEC 6th MOY. Not to mention he would also be playing with the top SF in the class.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fox2monk
Not the case at all. Also if you are going to play a more modern style, guys like Reeves/Dingle can easily coexist with everyone. If you are going to try and land a 7'1 guy who can post up-need have shooters around him if you play that way. Spacing is the key and look at UConn. had 2 elite College posts (Clingan is an elite NBA prospect as well) and surrounded them with several shooters/guards/wings. They had Alleyne leave Va Tech starting spot to come off bench...Joey Calcaterra did same from his school....Diarra at A&M left to come off bench...but you have to commit to playing a style that embraces the players.

So really it's about whether the staff/Cal are willing to change. This is where a guy like John Welch would really help coming from NBA background and tweaking their offense.


What the chances of Welsh coming? Or any new offensive guy for that matter?
 
I don't get the "we don't have room for this player or that player" when almost none of the guys supposedly on the roster for next season have played a minute at UK yet. If you believe that a player won't come to UK because he thinks he won't be given a fair chance to compete, then ok I understand why he wouldn't come to UK. But if you tell me some of the top Portal guys are afraid of FAIR competition against incoming freshmen, I have a hard time believing that and if it's true you wouldn't want them anyway. As a general (almost universal) rule, in my opinion, the freshmen are just not good enough to be guaranteed a starting spot at the best college program in the country - unless UK plays in a developmental league now.

I'm not saying Dingle will be better than any of the freshmen or Reeves. I haven't even seen him play. But this mindset that it's just a given that freshmen (5-star or otherwise) are given starting positions based on high school recruiting service rankings makes no sense. It feels like euphoria based assumptions to me, or the product of the "Cal always does ___" narratives.
 
Very true. And EVERY TEAM loses games they don't shoot well, unless they have a very good defense. And EVERY TEAM has games they don't shoot well. Go look at the NCAA-T, I bet every upset the loser did not shoot well.
This is an excellent point. To win that tournament, you must endure at least one game where the offense does not perform. You have to survive that game or games. Defense is the only means to do that. Defense, first, always.
 
I want him, but unless Reeves stays in the draft there is no room for this guy, am I wrong?
It has nothing to do with Reeves, but this guy isn’t going anywhere to be the 6th or 7th guy off the bench. And Cal’s 5* freshmen weren’t either!

We can just stop any discussion that concerns a transfer for the 1,2,3 spots. Cal hasn’t even blinked towards a transfer for those positions for a reason.
 
I don't get the "we don't have room for this player or that player" when almost none of the guys supposedly on the roster for next season have played a minute at UK yet. If you believe that a player won't come to UK because he thinks he won't be given a fair chance to compete, then ok I understand why he wouldn't come to UK. But if you tell me some of the top Portal guys are afraid of FAIR competition against incoming freshmen, I have a hard time believing that and if it's true you wouldn't want them anyway. As a general (almost universal) rule, in my opinion, the freshmen are just not good enough to be guaranteed a starting spot at the best college program in the country - unless UK plays in a developmental league now.

I'm not saying Dingle will be better than any of the freshmen or Reeves. I haven't even seen him play. But this mindset that it's just a given that freshmen (5-star or otherwise) are given starting positions based on high school recruiting service rankings makes no sense. It feels like euphoria based assumptions to me, or the product of the "Cal always does ___" narratives.
neither do I.......everyone acts like Reeves is the next coming of Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant, He is an average player at best. He probably had as many bad games as he did good ones last year. There is absolutely no reason not to add another shooter, be it this kid or the kid from Vandy. There are going to be injuries, foul trouble and games where the freshmen struggle big time. Yet everyone is talking about how great the Wagner and Dillingham duo will be. They will be abused by the quick SEC guards. The only person that doesn't see this glaring weakness in shooters is the over paid coach & staff. Yet the average fan has ranted about this for several years
 
Then the outcome is very simple. We simply lose the games we don’t shoot well. That will be 8 - 12 games a year. Minimum. Play defense, or lose, often. You need guys that can play solid defense every day and generate some offense. I’d rather lose 3 games and average 65 than lose 12 games and average 80.

The other team still has to make shots, and that's no given even if we play no defense.

We don't need to be some elite defensive team to win.. we can be serviceable and we should be more than fine. It's not like what we've been doing is working.

And it would not be a 12 to 3 sort of thing. You put shooters on the floor and guys who can create offense, and it won't be that sort of disparity, I can tell you that.
 
Not the case at all. Also if you are going to play a more modern style, guys like Reeves/Dingle can easily coexist with everyone. If you are going to try and land a 7'1 guy who can post up-need have shooters around him if you play that way. Spacing is the key and look at UConn. had 2 elite College posts (Clingan is an elite NBA prospect as well) and surrounded them with several shooters/guards/wings. They had Alleyne leave Va Tech starting spot to come off bench...Joey Calcaterra did same from his school....Diarra at A&M left to come off bench...but you have to commit to playing a style that embraces the players.

So really it's about whether the staff/Cal are willing to change. This is where a guy like John Welch would really help coming from NBA background and tweaking their offense.
You are missing the point. There are only so many minutes (120) at the 1-3 spots.
Wagner 28-32
Dillingham 26-30
Edwards 28-32
That's 82-94 there, leaving only 26-38.
Reeves 20-26, Sheppard 4-8.
Now you have 0-14 left for Dingle. The #2 scorer in the country will want at least 20mpg.
 
You are missing the point. There are only so many minutes (120) at the 1-3 spots.
Wagner 28-32
Dillingham 26-30
Edwards 28-32
That's 82-94 there, leaving only 26-38.
Reeves 20-26, Sheppard 4-8.
Now you have 0-14 left for Dingle. The #2 scorer in the country will want at least 20mpg.
Maybe the starters playing so much is why they have been beat down,injured and and terrible in the tourney for several seasons now.
 
I don't get the "we don't have room for this player or that player" when almost none of the guys supposedly on the roster for next season have played a minute at UK yet. If you believe that a player won't come to UK because he thinks he won't be given a fair chance to compete, then ok I understand why he wouldn't come to UK. But if you tell me some of the top Portal guys are afraid of FAIR competition against incoming freshmen, I have a hard time believing that and if it's true you wouldn't want them anyway. As a general (almost universal) rule, in my opinion, the freshmen are just not good enough to be guaranteed a starting spot at the best college program in the country - unless UK plays in a developmental league now.

I'm not saying Dingle will be better than any of the freshmen or Reeves. I haven't even seen him play. But this mindset that it's just a given that freshmen (5-star or otherwise) are given starting positions based on high school recruiting service rankings makes no sense. It feels like euphoria based assumptions to me, or the product of the "Cal always does ___" narratives.
It's not about guarantees, or even starting spots. Not even about who will be better.
It is about projected or likely minutes.

We have 4 guys expected to earn 20-32 mpg at 3 spots. You could make a case for 2 more (Sheppard & Theiro) to get a little run, say combined 10-15mpg. To add another guy who would be expecting at least 20mpg, there just aren't the minutes unless 1 of them ain't playing or 1-2 of them play A LOT LESS than expected.

And I am not one of those who always think 5* players will start or play a lot. I correctly called Collins not contributing much (when everyone else thought he would). I correctly called Boston overrated bust before he ever walked on campus. I correctly predicted Whitney to struggle. And I fear Bradshaw may struggle too (as a FR). But I think Edwards will be our best FR since probably Fox/Monk/Bam. And I think Wagner and Dillingham can at least be as good as Tyty, Maxey & Wallace.

Sure, we would gladly take Dingle. But would he want to come if there is a big chance his minutes could be anywhere from 10-24 mpg? When there are lots of good schools with bigger holes, and he could believe he would be in the 20-30 mpg range.
 
I think we need to look at this as we are also going to have a handful of minutes at the 4 spot to spell Bradshaw.

I picture Bradshaw playing 25 MPG at the 4 spot, and maybe 5 MPG at the 5.

So we have 40 MPG at the 1/2/3 spots, and 15 MPG at the 4 that can be used.

135 MPG divided by 5 players

Dillingham
Wagner
Reeves
Edwards
Transfer (Dingle or Lawrence) or Livingston

135 MPG divided by 5 players = around 27 MPG each
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cowtown Cat
Maybe the starters playing so much is why they have been beat down,injured and and terrible in the tourney for several seasons now.
That is a reasonable question.
But, very few teams have their best 3-4 players playing < 30mpg. Very very few.
And we've not had anyone play a ton of minutes since Ulis and Murray did in 2016, except Maxey and he stayed healthy.

Fredrick- came in with a checkered injury history
Wallace- was dinged up some last year, but I wouldn't say "injured", and he said he had back issues in HS. He player 32.1mpg
Wheeler- quitter, not injured, coincidentally when he started playing significantly less

Grady- played 32.9mpg, in his case you might be right (maybe) because his foot injury happened right about the time 2 other guards injuries had him playing 36-40mpg for a few games
Wheeler- 31.2mpg, but his injuries running into uncalled screens, clearly not overuse related
Tyty- 29.2mpg

Clarke- 28.6mpg

Vanderbilt- 17mpg

Poythress- 20mpg playing in the platoon
 
I think we need to look at this as we are also going to have a handful of minutes at the 4 spot to spell Bradshaw.

I picture Bradshaw playing 25 MPG at the 4 spot, and maybe 5 MPG at the 5.

So we have 40 MPG at the 1/2/3 spots, and 15 MPG at the 4 that can be used.

135 MPG divided by 5 players

Dillingham
Wagner
Reeves
Edwards
Transfer (Dingle or Lawrence) or Livingston

135 MPG divided by 5 players = around 27 MPG each
Edwards is not a 4.
And in no way will Dillingham, Wagner, Dingle or Reeves play any 4!!!
Not to mention you have Sheppard at 0, even if just mop up minutes, he should get 2-4 minimum.

Livingston is different from Dingle, because he can play some 4.
I'm not sure who Lawrence is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rockford
Edwards is not a 4.
And in no way will Dillingham, Wagner, Dingle or Reeves play any 4!!!
Not to mention you have Sheppard at 0, even if just mop up minutes, he should get 2-4 minimum.

Livingston is different from Dingle, because he can play some 4.
I'm not sure who Lawrence is.

We don't need Edwards to be a 4.

We could play 4 guards.

Draymond Green isn't a Center but I watch him play tons of minutes at the 5 for GSW.

We need to evolve the way we view traditional lineups and player combinations- stop thinking that we need a 4 man and a 5 man on the floor all the time.

We need 5 dudes who can play, and can rebound and defend well enough to get the job done.

Dillingham
Wagner
Reeves
Edwards
Oscar/Dickinson is a lethal lineup.

And we're talking about 10-15 MPG, not the entire thing.

And if Sheppard earns 0 minutes, then he earns 0 minutes. If you can go and add Dingle or Lawrence, you do it 10 times out of 10, who TF cares if that means Sheppard isn't in the rotation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: G-PIP
Reeves isn’t back yet, so the staff has to have backup options, and dillingham there is boom/bust scenarios, and rarely anywhere dingle Jumps up to that school will have guards, UConn had 5 solid guards on their team this year, no reason Kentucky can’t either
There actually is a reason why Kentucky can't do what UConn did with positions and min. One very big and very expensive reason.
 
We don't need Edwards to be a 4.

We could play 4 guards.

Draymond Green isn't a Center but I watch him play tons of minutes at the 5 for GSW.

We need to evolve the way we view traditional lineups and player combinations- stop thinking that we need a 4 man and a 5 man on the floor all the time.

We need 5 dudes who can play, and can rebound well enough to get the job done.

Dillingham
Wagner
Reeves
Edwards
Oscar/Dickinson is a lethal lineup.
Bradshaw disagrees
 
Not the case at all. Also if you are going to play a more modern style, guys like Reeves/Dingle can easily coexist with everyone. If you are going to try and land a 7'1 guy who can post up-need have shooters around him if you play that way. Spacing is the key and look at UConn. had 2 elite College posts (Clingan is an elite NBA prospect as well) and surrounded them with several shooters/guards/wings. They had Alleyne leave Va Tech starting spot to come off bench...Joey Calcaterra did same from his school....Diarra at A&M left to come off bench...but you have to commit to playing a style that embraces the players.

So really it's about whether the staff/Cal are willing to change. This is where a guy like John Welch would really help coming from NBA background and tweaking their offense.
Rumor has it Welch and Chuck Martin are the front-runners. Personally, I favor Welch bc he adds a fresh offensive perspective. However, Cal has previous ties with Martin at Memphis and we know how that typically goes.

Also, I heard Pilgrim mention the previous long time videographer/scout Andrew Ortelli took a job at Temple. Any scuttlebutt on who potentially fills that staff position?
 
Rumor has it Welch and Chuck Martin are the front-runners. Personally, I favor Welch bc he adds a fresh offensive perspective. However, Cal has previous ties with Martin at Memphis and we know how that typically goes.

Also, I heard Pilgrim mention the previous long time videographer/scout Andrew Ortelli took a job at Temple. Any scuttlebutt on who potentially fills that staff position?
There are multiple openings on the staff right now (hopefully Bruiser Flint is added to that list). Welch makes sense for the Robic role and he's well respected in the Basketball world and has worked in NBA a long time. He'd be the best hire Cal's had in some time because he'd bring outside concepts and knows basketball inside/out at the highest level. So he'd help with spacing, ball movement, defensive tweaks and the overall framework of the program.

Martin is someone I'd pass on. Too familiar with Cal. Have enough of those guys already on staff and recruiting is strong with Antigua/Coleman.

No idea bout Ortelli's spot. I've been told some things about Pilgrim and his cohost saying Kentucky has to drastically improve their scouting but then praising Ortelli. Didn't Pilgriim laud how detailed Kentucky was prepared going into the Bahamas games against goblin teams? Or was that just because he was granted access? Either way, here's how most scouting reports go--the team is given all the info needed to address what opponents do/don't do well. Some player(s) ignore the scout and just play how they want and it makes coaches look bad. Until you've coached, you'd never believe how lost a player can get/ignore simple instructions. Doesn't matter if you are coaching, Pros, College guys, HS kids, guys who are smart, guys who aren't....they all **** up the scout more often than not. Kentucky's decline has nothing to do with not being prepared and everything to do with not having enough talent (both skill wise and depth wise) and enabling mid players to get away with far too much.
 
I don't get the "we don't have room for this player or that player" when almost none of the guys supposedly on the roster for next season have played a minute at UK yet. If you believe that a player won't come to UK because he thinks he won't be given a fair chance to compete, then ok I understand why he wouldn't come to UK. But if you tell me some of the top Portal guys are afraid of FAIR competition against incoming freshmen, I have a hard time believing that and if it's true you wouldn't want them anyway. As a general (almost universal) rule, in my opinion, the freshmen are just not good enough to be guaranteed a starting spot at the best college program in the country - unless UK plays in a developmental league now.

I'm not saying Dingle will be better than any of the freshmen or Reeves. I haven't even seen him play. But this mindset that it's just a given that freshmen (5-star or otherwise) are given starting positions based on high school recruiting service rankings makes no sense. It feels like euphoria based assumptions to me, or the product of the "Cal always does ___" narratives.
Well said
 
There are multiple openings on the staff right now (hopefully Bruiser Flint is added to that list). Welch makes sense for the Robic role and he's well respected in the Basketball world and has worked in NBA a long time. He'd be the best hire Cal's had in some time because he'd bring outside concepts and knows basketball inside/out at the highest level. So he'd help with spacing, ball movement, defensive tweaks and the overall framework of the program.

Martin is someone I'd pass on. Too familiar with Cal. Have enough of those guys already on staff and recruiting is strong with Antigua/Coleman.

No idea bout Ortelli's spot. I've been told some things about Pilgrim and his cohost saying Kentucky has to drastically improve their scouting but then praising Ortelli. Didn't Pilgriim laud how detailed Kentucky was prepared going into the Bahamas games against goblin teams? Or was that just because he was granted access? Either way, here's how most scouting reports go--the team is given all the info needed to address what opponents do/don't do well. Some player(s) ignore the scout and just play how they want and it makes coaches look bad. Until you've coached, you'd never believe how lost a player can get/ignore simple instructions. Doesn't matter if you are coaching, Pros, College guys, HS kids, guys who are smart, guys who aren't....they all **** up the scout more often than not. Kentucky's decline has nothing to do with not being prepared and everything to do with not having enough talent (both skill wise and depth wise) and enabling mid players to get away with far too much.
Perfect example, James young against Wichita state in the tournament. He said he broke the huddle forgot the play and just decided to shoot it and we won!
 
I don't get the "we don't have room for this player or that player" when almost none of the guys supposedly on the roster for next season have played a minute at UK yet. If you believe that a player won't come to UK because he thinks he won't be given a fair chance to compete, then ok I understand why he wouldn't come to UK. But if you tell me some of the top Portal guys are afraid of FAIR competition against incoming freshmen, I have a hard time believing that and if it's true you wouldn't want them anyway. As a general (almost universal) rule, in my opinion, the freshmen are just not good enough to be guaranteed a starting spot at the best college program in the country - unless UK plays in a developmental league now.

I'm not saying Dingle will be better than any of the freshmen or Reeves. I haven't even seen him play. But this mindset that it's just a given that freshmen (5-star or otherwise) are given starting positions based on high school recruiting service rankings makes no sense. It feels like euphoria based assumptions to me, or the product of the "Cal always does ___" narratives.
It’s the Kentucky fan way. I agree with you for the record. Let’s go stack a roster and let the minutes work out based on performance.
 
Perfect example, James young against Wichita state in the tournament. He said he broke the huddle forgot the play and just decided to shoot it and we won!
Watch an NBA game when 3 or 4 players scream or look at the one guy who breaks down and does what they were told NOT to do. It happens all the time. Personally I've watched my boss tell our team "I want you to get to the basket early and open things up for drive/kick and get 3pt shots that way" and then watch they hoist 5 straight 3's without driving and kicking because "we felt the flow". Tell guys in huddle "We're picking up 55A" which for us is fullcourt man to man and ask each guy "You do know that means we're playing full court man" "YES COACH" and then huddle breaks and every player goes into the frontcourt and we have to yell and wave them up. Our team has won our conference 6 of the last 8 years so it's not like we stink. Just life of a coach at all levels. We don't get to fine them. We don't get recruit over them. We just bench guys. That works but they'll revert to going braindead at some point.
 
These type of comments continue to crack me up.

Of course WE want him and every good player here.

The question is, why would Dingle want to come to a team where there is 3 guards ahead of him on the depth chart? The leading scorer in the country expects to play 30+ minutes per game and be a central part of wherever he goes.

Who of Wagner, Dillingham, and Reeves is Cal not going to play to get Dingle PT?
And that is exactly why Cal won’t go after either one, even though they are bigger and better than 2 unproven freshmen. He promised minutes to the youngsters. We all know that.
 
The other team still has to make shots, and that's no given even if we play no defense.

We don't need to be some elite defensive team to win.. we can be serviceable and we should be more than fine. It's not like what we've been doing is working.

And it would not be a 12 to 3 sort of thing. You put shooters on the floor and guys who can create offense, and it won't be that sort of disparity, I can tell you that.
Our team has to be able to win scoring under 65 a game. Maybe under 60. Opposing coaches will see to that. The adage ‘live by the three, die by the three’ is true. So is the corollary, play defense or die. It’s just how college basketball works. If you are ok losing 10 - 15 games a year, jack threes. If they go in for 40 minutes, you probably win. But they won’t. Ask Alabama or Auburn.
 
I see the interest from the side of Kentucky.

I don’t see the interest from the side of Dingle.

We have 3 McDonnies and a 14 ppg returning scorer at the guard spots.

That doesn’t look attractive to a transfer IMHO
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cowtown Cat
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT