Seofblue writer says Diallo is gone

[gracetoyou]

By that twisted logic Cal must be a magician. He keeps getting top ranked classes.

Yes inspite of negative recruiting! There's more negative recruiting against UK than any other college....just shows you how good Cal & staff are. Cal doesn't negative recruit & it's served us well.

If you're a member of HOB or some other premium board you should know that.

 

[AnarchoNeoLuddite]

My problem with the situation is Diallo should have declared and signed with a Agent right away. Then maybe we could have locked up another guard or transfer in his place. By waiting to the end he has basically screwed us from getting any type of replacement or a multi year player like Hawkins. If you are going to go Pro roll the dice but do not be selfish and hurt the program.

you mean say someone like Baker and Knox? guess you dun forgot about those guys. good looking out

 

[theGspot]

I’ll engage in your question, and then I’d ask you to at least try to answer the question I initially posed you as opposed to averting it.

There’s no doubt adding Diallo midseason would have been unprecedented for Kentucky (the entire situation is), but assuming that it would have created a negative is strange. While at UK, Cal has never added a player midseason. I’d have to check his Memphis/UMass days. Then again, how often does a top 10 kid have a chance like Diallo did to joining up at a school like Kentucky half-a-year early? Small sample size, although the sample size for Cal’s work with elite prospects is much larger – which goes back to the original question you evaded: can you think of a handful of times when an elite prospect played incompetently enough to cost UK a tournament game? I can think of perhaps two cases of that being the case, but even those would be a stretch.

Again, what is the debate centered around? It is centered around a mentality. Did Diallo intend to ever play at Kentucky? That question is the center of the entire argument. If he did intend to play, then there’s nothing to discuss. Perhaps his game evolved enough for him to make the leap due to practice development. One can’t fault this entire episode if that’s the case. But if Diallo was ready and able to contribute, and could have helped UK but chose not to (while at the same time knowing he would never play here), there is should be a discussion regarding his initial mentality. I’m not sure why such a question should be rebuked as illegitimate.

Having a full year to develop and coach them I'll agree Cal has a great track record. I think there have been a couple of instances where we tried to utilize a player in an incorrect fashion, i.e. Skal, which could have cost us some games and maybe further post season success. However, Cal is a great coach and I trust his judgement.

Secondly, as you've admitted this is the first time this has happened with Cal here, and if it had happened at other schools he's coached I would imagine it would have already been pointed out here. But, because there isn't a track record of him bringing in a player mid season and having success with it, I can't answer the question because there is no evidence to answer it with. I can say he has a really good track record of coaching players a full season and having success. Although, as is a token of Cal teams they tend to have their struggles the first half of the season and start to gel in February and hit their stride in March. And that's with a full years practice. So using your argument of his track record, what makes you think Diallo would be at that level of contributing in March having only joined the team in January, when Cal's own track record indicates his players take on avg of 6 - 8 months of practicing and playing together to click and be successful at that level?

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Where do you get that being drafted means you are ready to contribute right away, or player right away in the league. They draft on potential and what you can become. Even though they can't contribute now, the hope is that they develop into a really good player and you can keep them long term or trade them for another piece. Either way they give you value and you're preventing another team from getting him and the value that could come with him. You all seem to have this idea that being drafted means you're ready to play and contribute day one. That is simply not reality.

On the flipside, you make it seem like Diallo - who is in the 28 to 35 range of the present NBA draft, has elite, almost positional record-breaking athleticism, a 6’10” wing span (for a 6’6” guard), and was already projected as one of the ten best players in his recruiting class - can be found within some magical vacuum where his present abilities do not correspond with his potential.

Yes, the NBA drafts on potential, but that projection of potential is almost always a derivative of real measurements and real, ever-developing ability, even if that ability is presently raw. Diallo is a freak athlete who was hardly off the radar when he came to UK. He's already played in multiple summer tournaments and played quite effectively. Postulating some type of world where Diallo’s current ability never interacts with his potential is a strange position to take.

 

[theGspot]

Being able to run fast, jump high doesn't not make one a great player. Being able to shoot the ball, dribble the ball and having a solid basketball IQ are far more important tools. Tyler Ulis can't jump that high and isn't even the fastest guy on the court, however, he has other skills that teams and players need to be successful. You are stuck on this notion that being a good athlete automatically equates to good basketball player. That is simply not the case. I would advise going and reading up on Diallo and what scouts and analyst are saying about him. That all day he's got great athleticism and measurements but still lacks solid basketball skills and needs to develop them to be successful. Yet here you are convinced that since he can run fast or jump high he could have brought home a championship. You would think will all the great athletes we've had we sure would have a lot more championships if that were the case. Using that logic Jordan never should have lost.

 

[GonzoCat90]

How anyone cannot be left with a slight bad taste in their mouth is beyond me. Look, we all get it; this was the assumed and accepted risk (him leaving). I've tried several times to justify this and not get worked up over it but it's bothersome.

Not sure I'll ever be able to properly and accurately articulate why this seems wrong to me, but it does. The notion that a kid was invited to UK to essentially use our players and facilities to improve himself without ever suiting up in a game for us is a bad look. No matter how you slice it.

We all seem to be trying to justify it and "trust in Cal" as he drags us into this new and interesting era of college basketball. We tell ourselves, "this is just the way things are these days". But the reality is this wasn't right. This isn't right. We can't constantly use this holier than thou "whatever is best for the kid" reasoning as a crutch for anytime UK is essentially used or abused.

I wonder why even be called "Kentucky"? Why not just change our team name to NBA Prep team.

Nope, I don't like this at all and I don't mind to voice that stance on here.

Problem is, Cal wouldn't play him. That's worse than the alleged mind games being played by Diallo. Cal, in my opinion, is hell bent on setting some kind of record of number of draft picks in a season (or a period of years). Yes, we'll all be disappointed when the day comes that he moves on, will we really be okay trading draft picks for kids who can both play and WANT to be here ?

I hope folks take a look around and see who they're siding with.

 

[kyups01]

How anyone cannot be left with a slight bad taste in their mouth is beyond me. Look, we all get it; this was the assumed and accepted risk (him leaving). I've tried several times to justify this and not get worked up over it but it's bothersome.

Not sure I'll ever be able to properly and accurately articulate why this seems wrong to me, but it does. The notion that a kid was invited to UK to essentially use our players and facilities to improve himself without ever suiting up in a game for us is a bad look. No matter how you slice it.

We all seem to be trying to justify it and "trust in Cal" as he drags us into this new and interesting era of college basketball. We tell ourselves, "this is just the way things are these days". But the reality is this wasn't right. This isn't right. We can't constantly use this holier than thou "whatever is best for the kid" reasoning as a crutch for anytime UK is essentially used or abused.

I wonder why even be called "Kentucky"? Why not just change our team name to NBA Prep team.

Nope, I don't like this at all and I don't mind to voice that stance on here.

Perfectly said. But ill take it a step further and call the whole entire situation from top to bottom pure garbage!

 

[GonzoCat90]

What evidence do you have that he ever intended to play?

His words, Cal's words, the fact that both have done exactly what they told us publicly, and the reports that Cal took him with the understanding that he'd test the waters and return.

if he heard his stock was better than he expected, nothing we can do. Doesn't mean he planned it all along. We can be disappointed a good player leaves without dragging him through the mud. Nothing gained, nothing lost.

 

[lkc1234]

How anyone cannot be left with a slight bad taste in their mouth is beyond me. Look, we all get it; this was the assumed and accepted risk (him leaving). I've tried several times to justify this and not get worked up over it but it's bothersome.

Not sure I'll ever be able to properly and accurately articulate why this seems wrong to me, but it does. The notion that a kid was invited to UK to essentially use our players and facilities to improve himself without ever suiting up in a game for us is a bad look. No matter how you slice it.

We all seem to be trying to justify it and "trust in Cal" as he drags us into this new and interesting era of college basketball. We tell ourselves, "this is just the way things are these days". But the reality is this wasn't right. This isn't right. We can't constantly use this holier than thou "whatever is best for the kid" reasoning as a crutch for anytime UK is essentially used or abused.

I wonder why even be called "Kentucky"? Why not just change our team name to NBA Prep team.
Cal had nothing to lose with bringing in Diallo. He has enhanced his reputation as a coach that gets players ready for the NBA. If Diallo can be a first round selection with only practicing and not playing a game what does that message tell other recruits. Getting great players is why Kentucky is always in the discussion for final fours and titles. What is not to like if you are a Kentucky fan.
Nope, I don't like this at all and I don't mind to voice that stance on here.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Having a full year to develop and coach them I'll agree Cal has a great track record. I think there have been a couple of instances where we tried to utilize a player in an incorrect fashion, i.e. Skal, which could have cost us some games and maybe further post season success. However, Cal is a great coach and I trust his judgement.

Secondly, as you've admitted this is the first time this has happened with Cal here, and if it had happened at other schools he's coached I would imagine it would have already been pointed out here. But, because there isn't a track record of him bringing in a player mid season and having success with it, I can't answer the question because there is no evidence to answer it with. I can say he has a really good track record of coaching players a full season and having success. Although, as is a token of Cal teams they tend to have their struggles the first half of the season and start to gel in February and hit their stride in March. And that's with a full years practice. So using your argument of his track record, what makes you think Diallo would be at that level of contributing in March having only joined the team in January, when Cal's own track record indicates his players take on avg of 6 - 8 months of practicing and playing together to click and be successful at that level?

Good points in this post.

I will say this. Cal is about to coach the under 19 team. They won’t have a full 6 to 8 months to be ready to compete. He’ll have to get them ready is far less time than that. Yes, the competition will similarly be limited in terms of practice scale; however, I want to reiterate that my contention is that if Diallo goes pro this summer, I will forever question what he could have done for Kentucky in a minimal role of 8 top 15 minutes/game – as a defensive stopper. The evidence – based on his length and skill set – will be that UK could have used him in a smaller role. I know that won’t help some UK fans sleep easy at night, but it will be a favorable position to take in terms of reason, logic, and evidentiary instances of past success (for example, how well some Calipari freshmen play after a mere two months of development at UK).

Perhaps a better question is this: how many former top 10 Cal recruits were miserably bad for the first two months of their stint at UK or Memphis? That question creates more of a level playing field in this discussion. Those defending Diallo's decision not to play regardless of his initial motivations to play at UK or not (and likewise his presumed inability to contribute in a positive way) are simultaneously rejecting the evidence of positive contributions of former elite freshmen in their first 2-3 months at UK.

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

His words, Cal's words, the fact that both have done exactly what they told us publicly, and the reports that Cal took him with the understanding that he'd test the waters and return.

if he heard his stock was better than he expected, nothing we can do. Doesn't mean he planned it all along. We can be disappointed a good player leaves without dragging him through the mud. Nothing gained, nothing lost.

Not to mention that the default assumption is that players that commit to a school intend to play. There should be proof to the contrary to think otherwise. Certainly to state categorically that he never intended to play as some are doing.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

I dont blame him at all for going at the first moment he can. I do blame him for not contributing on the floor last year.

The deal is, as Cal stated, we get to enjoy them for a time while theyre helping our program, as they work towards making their dreams come true.

This time though, it was a one sided situation.

 

[Fawrules]

With the new rules Diallo had nothing to lose by testing the waters this season. It sucks if he indeed leaves, but it's hard to blame him if he's got someone telling him they'll take him in the 20's. Let's put our homerism aside for a moment and put ourselves in Diallo's shoes, you're an 18-year old kid and you're given the choice of making millions now, or going to school. If you're telling me that at least some of you wouldn't jump at that opportunity you're lying to yourself.

 

[GonzoCat90]

Well, I'm sorry for posting an opinion on a message board. I'll try to be better about not doing that again, or at least clear it with you first. Oh, and by the way, your post is only your opinion. Ya know, casting stones and such. We usually total along just fine here. Not sure why you got trigger over this. Half the board thinks the exact same thing aboit Diallo.

It isn't personal. And using half the board as validation, especially when many of them are folks who you never saw post before this, isn't the route I'd take.

We're all good, whether Diallo is back or not. But it's more than fair to challenge any opinion, especially if it's not based on tangible evidence. That's what this place is for. Otherwise we're all shouting into the wind.

 

[Aike]

College is a business. They may be what they're selling but it's to benefit themselves on selling this dream.

I work for a university. This is what we sell to kids as a means to make money and benefit us. You think we want a kid to go to another school and give them the money? You think we care about another kid's dream who didn't go to our school?

Don't mistaken the product a university sells for the actual motive.

None of us would care one iota about these people if they didn't play for Kentucky. We like basketball. That's what we care about. We care about what helps the success of the program. That's it.

I appreciate you displaying your true colors for everyone to see.

1. Works at a University that is only in it to profit off of kids.

2. Doesn't wish success for kids who go to other schools and profit someone else.

After reading your rants for the past two weeks, this doesn't surprise me in the least.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

His words, Cal's words, the fact that both have done exactly what they told us publicly, and the reports that Cal took him with the understanding that he'd test the waters and return.

if he heard his stock was better than he expected, nothing we can do. Doesn't mean he planned it all along. We can be disappointed a good player leaves without dragging him through the mud. Nothing gained, nothing lost.

Good post.

If Diallo’s motivations have changed due to development or NBA teams surprising his camp with positive reactions to his draft performance, there is literally no discussion to have on this issue. That scenario would be fair and one that any reasonable UK fan could get behind.

Conversely, if Diallo never intended to play here and Cal understood this mentality and agreed with it, there should be an objective questioning process that lingers and ultimately reaches the top of the mountain, centered on Calipari’s mentality and whether this will become a periodic aspect of UK’s future.

Would Cal be obligated to answer any of those questions? Obviously not. Would we likely ever hear the full story? Probably not. Even so, as fans, we would have the right to ask those questions because, at the very least, it would be one of the weirdest trajectories in the history of Kentucky basketball and one that would take some reasoning and discussion to iron-out.

 

[Fawrules]

I dont blame him at all for going at the first moment he can. I do blame him for not contributing on the floor last year.

The deal is, as Cal stated, we get to enjoy them for a time while theyre helping our program, as they work towards making their dreams come true.

This time though, it was a one sided situation.

I dont blame him at all for going at the first moment he can. I do blame him for not contributing on the floor last year.

The deal is, as Cal stated, we get to enjoy them for a time while theyre helping our program, as they work towards making their dreams come true.

This time though, it was a one sided situation.

That's more on Cal than Diallo. For better or worse, he's always looking out for his player's best interest. It hurts us on occasion, but on the other hand, it's downright hypocritical for some of us (My self included at times) to criticize rival coaches, like for example, ripping Coach K for exposing Giles by playing instead of just having him sit out this season, coaches like Roy holding players who are ready back for their own self-interest, while asking our own coach to do the exact same thing. Fandom's weird sometimes.

 

[Blue Decade]

Because he should of played. I hope he does well but when people say oh he had zero impact on anything is ridiculous. Well what if he played in the tournament? Definitely would of had some sort of impact.

Implicit in your point of view is an assumption that Coach Calipari doesn't know what he was doing. To people with no college athletics experience, looking in from the outside and 2nd guessing in hindsight, complicated things always look simple.

 

[KingOfBBN]

Implicit in your point of view is an assumption that Coach Calipari doesn't know what he was doing. To people with no college athletics experience, looking in from the outside and 2nd guessing in hindsight, complicated things always look simple.

Is it not ridiculous to always act like every result is a part of Cal's "master plan?"

 

[Aike]

Also, we won 14 games in a row down the stretch without him. But some fans wanted Cal to insert a guy in the middle of the season, and possibly upset team chemistry. And if it didn't work out, Cal and Diallo both would have been trashed. Lose/lose scenario.

That's an important point. Who's to say Diallo wouldn't have played if we struggled down the stretch? Just can't know.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Yes inspite of negative recruiting! There's more negative recruiting against UK than any other college....just shows you how good Cal & staff are. Cal doesn't negative recruit & it's served us well.

If you're a member of HOB or some other premium board you should know that.

Anyone knows that, you don't have to be a member of a premium board. Kids are pretty smart but you proved my point for me. Perhaps you should read the well thought out reasons Bamba had. It was all about Shaka and being comfortable in his program.

 

[theGspot]

Good points in this post.

I will say this. Cal is about to coach the under 19 team. They won’t have a full 6 to 8 months to be ready to compete. He’ll have to get them ready is far less time than that. Yes, the competition will similarly be limited in terms of practice scale; however, I want to reiterate that my contention is that if Diallo goes pro this summer, I will forever question what he could have done for Kentucky in a minimal role of 8 top 15 minutes/game – as a defensive stopper. The evidence – based on his length and skill set – will be that UK could have used him in a smaller role. I know that won’t help some UK fans sleep easy at night, but it will be a favorable position to take in terms of reason, logic, and evidentiary instances of past success (for example, how well some Calipari freshmen play after a mere two months of development at UK).

Perhaps a better question is this: how many former top 10 Cal recruits were miserably bad for the first two months of their stint at UK or Memphis? That question creates more of a level playing field in this discussion. Those defending Diallo's decision not to play regardless of his initial motivations to play at UK or not (and likewise his presumed inability to contribute in a positive way) are simultaneously rejecting the evidence of positive contributions of former elite freshmen in their first 2-3 months at UK.

Look at them in the first 2 months and again in the last 2 months. It's the development that takes place over that period that you're missing in your argument. You're only considering that he was really good or really bad, when I'm fact there is a ton of area in between the two. You also seem to be inflating his actual basketball skills to justify your argument. He could be doing well real, catching on and still not be at the level of solid contributor. Joining a team mid season, who have lived and practiced together for 6 months is a lot different than being here the whole time with them. They have had that time to develop and adjust to this level against each other for months in practice and then against NAIA and D-3/D-2 and very low d-1 schools. He did not get that. What evidence do you have of of other similarly ranked players doing his to base your assumptions off?

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

That's an important point. Who's to say Diallo wouldn't have played if we struggled down the stretch? Just can't know.

Not really, that makes it sound as if the only playing choice was in a critical moment in a close game. There were plenty of minutes he could have gotten without worrying about messing up team chemistry or anything else. This is getting ridiculous.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Look at them in the first 2 months and again in the last 2 months. It's the development that takes place over that period that you're missing in your argument. You're only considering that he was really good or really bad, when I'm fact there is a ton of area in between the two. You also seem to be inflating his actual basketball skills to justify your argument. He could be doing well real, catching on and still not be at the level of solid contributor. Joining a team mid season, who have lived and practiced together for 6 months is a lot different than being here the whole time with them. They have had that time to develop and adjust to this level against each other for months in practice and then against NAIA and D-3/D-2 and very low d-1 schools. He did not get that. What evidence do you have of of other similarly ranked players doing his to base your assumptions off?

Stokes

 

[Mojocat]

But to say he what no impact is ludicrous, good or bad. But he would of been a lot better than Briscoe.

That is your speculation, nothing more. I'm willing to buy that he's a better pro prospect than Briscoe - but even that right now is based solely on athleticism. He's never played a minute against college competition, so you have no idea how good he might have been.

I repeat again, Diallo's presence had no impact on anything. What you're saying is, well, it should have. But it didn't. And you're basing the "should have" on speculation. Wishful thinking.

 

[Blue Decade]

Is it not ridiculous to always act like every result is a part of Cal's "master plan?"

That isn't what I said, so you are reaching for some reason. I am just saying that Calipari knows what he is doing. Want evidence? Hall of Fame coach who has already won a NC. Finishes #1 or #2 in the nation in recruiting every year. Took our program from the inherited mess of Gillispie's flameout to an Elite Eight appearance in the space of 1 year. Better W-L record than Rupp. Looks like his "master plan" is working pretty well.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

UK doesn't win national titles that often. 4 in 60 years. Let's not act like calipari has brought uk down with his recruiting strategy.

A fair point; however, UConn, Florida, Duke, and UNC have collectively won 12 titles since 1999 – an average of three each over the last 19 years. Winning multiple championships, even in the OAD Era, is entirely plausible. UK historically has had only two periods of doing this in short spans, but UK should constantly be setting the bar as high as possible. Falling back on some type of historical trend, while factually accurate, acts as a way to deflect from what is tangibly possible. If Cal’s era at UK ends with one title, it will be a measurable disappointment.

That said, I think he leaves here with at least two titles. Cal is constantly evolving, and I see him procuring some of his best recruiting classes ever over the next five years.

 

[Aike]

Not really, that makes it sound as if the only playing choice was in a critical moment in a close game. There were plenty of minutes he could have gotten without worrying about messing up team chemistry or anything else. This is getting ridiculous.

It's ridiculous how much you want to argue about it.

You think if we had gone 9-5 in that stretch instead of 14-0, Diallo might not have felt more personal pressure to step up and contribute?

Ok then, believe that. I never stated it as fact. It's simply a thought on the situation. See, I don't go around representing as stone cold facts things that are only my thoughts and feelings.

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

A fair point; however, UConn, Florida, Duke, and UNC have collectively won 12 titles since 1999 – an average of three each over the last 19 years. Winning multiple championships, even in the OAD Era, is entirely plausible. UK historically has had only two periods of doing this in short spans, but UK should constantly be setting the bar as high as possible. Falling back on some type of historical trend, while factually accurate, acts as a way to deflect from what is tangibly possible. If Cal’s era at UK ends with one title, it will be a measurable disappointment.

That said, I think he leaves here with at least two titles. Cal is constantly evolving, and I see him procuring some of his best recruiting classes ever over the next five years.

But those schools have not won multiple titles using OADs. Not even close. In fact no school has won more than 1 title using that system, which didn't really exist before Cal came to UK.

I think I misunderstood your point, so my response probably doesn't apply. Disregard.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

It's ridiculous how much you want to argue about it.

You think if we had gone 9-5 in that stretch instead of 14-0, Diallo might not have felt more personal pressure to step up and contribute?

Ok then, believe that. I never stated it as fact. It's simply a thought on the situation. See, I don't go around representing as stone cold facts things that are only my thoughts and feelings.

You're here posting - again - but its ridiculous how much I want to argue about it? You could be right, its certainly plausible. It could have also worked well, that's also plausible.

 

[meteordealer]

Because it had zero impact on anything. We had an extra scholarship, he took it, sat on the bench for 2.5 months. The only way this matters at all is if by taking him we miss out on another kid. We got Knox. It's a nonevent.

Still waiting for someone to explain why this should make me mad.

If you paid a contractor to do work on your home and he skipped town with your money and never did one lick of work, you wouldn't be upset?

We gave this kid a scholarship to PLAY BASKETBALL for UK. He refused to set foot on the court.

 

[Aike]

You're here posting - again - but its ridiculous how much I want to argue about it? You could be right, its certainly plausible. It could have also worked well, that's also plausible.

I probably should have said it was a fair point, rather than an important one.

It isn't really important. But I think it's fair conjecture that there would have been more heat on Diallo to play if we had been struggling instead of winning every game.

 

[Blue Decade]

His words, Cal's words, the fact that both have done exactly what they told us publicly, and the reports that Cal took him with the understanding that he'd test the waters and return.

if he heard his stock was better than he expected, nothing we can do. Doesn't mean he planned it all along. We can be disappointed a good player leaves without dragging him through the mud. Nothing gained, nothing lost.

Exactly right.

 

[delk4three]

It's ridiculous how much you want to argue about it.

You think if we had gone 9-5 in that stretch instead of 14-0, Diallo might not have felt more personal pressure to step up and contribute?

Ok then, believe that. I never stated it as fact. It's simply a thought on the situation. See, I don't go around representing as stone cold facts things that are only my thoughts and feelings.

So you think we could of gone 9-5 the last 14 games if Diallo played at all? Really?

 

[theGspot]

Stokes

What did he win for them?

 

[TBCat]

Wait a minute, are posters on here thinking Cal wasn't in on this? Really?

You don't think he learned something from Skal? When Skal came out of high school and the AAU circuit he was projected as a top 5 pick. It was only after he "played" that he fell in the draft. Had Skal never played he would have been drafted in the top 5 on measurements and potential alone.

Don't think Cal learned something from this? Don't think he used this to advise Diallo. Diallo's measurements and potential is off the charts. Cal told him, look if you play at UK your stock can drop. Don't risk it kid, you can be a first rounder without ever playing a minute here at UK.

Yeah and it seems the NBA has learned from that as well otherwise Diallo would be projected top in this draft based on measurements alone. I still say it's very unlikely that he is a 1st rounder in this draft.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Look at them in the first 2 months and again in the last 2 months. It's the development that takes place over that period that you're missing in your argument. You're only considering that he was really good or really bad, when I'm fact there is a ton of area in between the two. You also seem to be inflating his actual basketball skills to justify your argument. He could be doing well real, catching on and still not be at the level of solid contributor. Joining a team mid season, who have lived and practiced together for 6 months is a lot different than being here the whole time with them. They have had that time to develop and adjust to this level against each other for months in practice and then against NAIA and D-3/D-2 and very low d-1 schools. He did not get that. What evidence do you have of of other similarly ranked players doing his to base your assumptions off?

What evidence do I have? Well, the quick adjustments of guys like Murray, Monk, Fox, MKG, Randle and others after a mere 2-3 months at UK. I’m not missing anything in my point. My point is that Diallo could have been a minimal contributor by late March for UK – as a defensive stopper for limited stretches of games. You’re referencing the mid-point and end point of a freshmen’s entire year of development. I’m referencing the beginning stages of former players, and how they managed to contribute on a large scale early on. Based on that level playing field, I don’t think it’s far-fetched at all to conclude that Diallo could have done on a minimal scale after 2-3 months, what other former top 10 guys actually did on a larger scale after 2-3 months; and yes, I do think it’s entirely plausible that such a contribution would have been positive, not negative.

Of course, if he returns to UK in a week, my present implications are understandably moot. It’s hard to gauge right now, because none of us really know Diallo’s mindset; but that’s also why we’re on a message board: speculation is the lifeblood of this place.

 

[Aike]

So you think we could of gone 9-5 the last 14 games if Diallo played at all? Really?

I'm not sure how you got that from my post.

 

[delk4three]

I'm not sure how you got that from my post.

You brought up the potential for a 9-5 record if Diallo had played the last 14 games, I didn't.

 

[Aike]

You brought up the potential for a 9-5 record if Diallo had played the last 14 games, I didn't.

You are misunderstanding my point. It was simply that had we been struggling down the stretch instead of winning every game, Diallo may have felt more compelled to play.

The record is inconsequential. Something worse than 14-0.