Seofblue writer says Diallo is gone

[Jakarii]

It's on seaofblue. A couple of writers on there giving their opinion on what they think Diallo will do based on what they are hearing or feel

Can you link this because I'm not finding it on either of Jason's twitter accounts & He usually links everything on twitter.

 

[theGspot]

So just to see if I understand the narrative we are going with. Diallo didn't play last semester because he was afraid he couldn't help as much as Dom Hawkins and Mulder. But still felt he was good enough to go thru "the draft process" to see where he stood and where he might need to improve. Decided to go thru " the process" but not really go thru the process of actually gaining any input on where he needs to improve. He's gonna work out for one team before deciding whether to stay in the draft or not. If he got a guarantee from that team he's probably gonna shut it down. Is that about right? Yea, I totally think he was only worried he might hurt team chemistry.

I mean if using incorrect facts to help generate an inaccurate narrative in your mind to come to a false conclusion to help justify your feelings on the matter is what helps, then by all means go for it. It doesn't really change reality or affect anyone else, so I say believe what you want if it helps you feel better about it.

 

[KingOfBBN]

Diallo didn't play this passed season because helping UK win a national championship means absolutely nothing to him. His only concern from Day 1 was his draft stock. Since that is the case, GTFO.

Amen to that. Good riddance to this guy.

 

[Aike]

Ahh. Ok. I stand corrected. Think all that input on where he needs to get better will help him a lot when he decides to come back to UK?

He is obviously going through the process in hopes of getting drafted.

If no one gives him the guarantee he's seeking, then I would assume the feedback he gets will be used as a guide as he prepares for next season.

 

[Mash 2.4]

I mean if using incorrect facts to help generate an inaccurate narrative in your mind to come to a false conclusion to help justify your feelings on the matter is what helps, then by all means go for it. It doesn't really change reality or affect anyone else, so I say believe what you want if it helps you feel better about it.

Thanks for your consent. He could have helped us win a championship and chose not to. There was no guarantee he would have made a difference but he could have. But you keep on thinking he was worried about team chemistry or not being as good as Dom or Mulder. Good luck to him in the pros. I mean that sincerely. Just don't expect some of us to jizz ourselves at the thought of him getting drafted #27 by the Brooklyn Nets without ever setting foot on the floor for UK.

 

[theGspot]

Thanks for your consent. He could have helped us win a championship and chose not to. There was no guarantee he would have made a difference but he could have. But you keep on thinking he was worried about team chemistry or not being as good as Dom or Mulder. Good luck to him in the pros. I mean that sincerely. Just don't expect some of us to jizz ourselves at the thought of him getting drafted #27 by the Brooklyn Nets without ever setting foot on the floor for UK.

Who said Mulder and Hawkins were better? Do you just make stuff up in your mind and run with it? I said he couldn't contribute more than we already had. Mulder was a defensive liability who we used to knock down a few shots here and there to help spread the floor. That's called a speciality. Can you find someone who has ever called Diallo a 3 point specialist? Hawkins was an experienced SR, great defender and had become a very reliable scorer and was also a superb athlete. He was also playing like an MVP in the last month of the season. Again, not sure how justify playing Diallo over that because he jumps real high.

He could have helped us win a championship
And chose not to, because he jumps real high and has long arms? Then you say there was no guarantee he could have helped us but he could have. He also could have hurt us. See how that works? Coulda, shoulda, woulda isn't factual, just speculation.

I mean if you jizz yourself over any draft pick that's probably a problem you might want to get checked out. I wouldn't jizz myself over anyone getting picked #1, let alone 27th.

 

[Mash 2.4]

Who said Mulder and Hawkins were better? Do you just make stuff up in your mind and run with it? I said he couldn't contribute more than we already had. Mulder was a defensive liability who we used to knock down a few shots here and there to help spread the floor. That's called a speciality. Can you find someone who has ever called Diallo a 3 point specialist? Hawkins was an experienced SR, great defender and had become a very reliable scorer and was also a superb athlete. He was also playing like an MVP in the last month of the season. Again, not sure how justify playing Diallo over that because he jumps real high.

He could have helped us win a championship
And chose not to, because he jumps real high and has long arms? Then you say there was no guarantee he could have helped us but he could have. He also could have hurt us. See how that works? Coulda, shoulda, woulda isn't factual, just speculation.

I mean if you jizz yourself over any draft pick that's probably a problem you might want to get checked out. I wouldn't jizz myself over anyone getting picked #1, let alone 27th.

You win. Good luck to the kid.

 

[AzubuikeandFitch]

The Diallo situation brings a whole new meaning to the Calipari saying, "We can't hide you."

 

[GonzoCat90]

As if you're not one-sided AF. Good God you're a hypocritical loser with very little real life experience.

Thankfully, the only side I'm on is to support our team, players, coaches and program. You should try it.

Or at least base your bitching and moaning in reality. Until then, I'd find a new hobby that didn't make me so miserable.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

I’ve been arguing that Diallo could have come in and contributed on a smaller level defensively. MKG did this within a few months; so did Noel; so did Davis; so did Jones; so did Teague and Ulis and Briscoe. To a lesser extent, so did the twins and Goodwin. Factor in a 6’10” wingspan and elite level athleticism and it’s not unimaginable that Diallo would have been among that group, as opposed to the Jamal Murray level of defense, or even the progressing but incompetent Charles Matthews level.

Again, you're not being at all factual or realistic here. MKG played hard and was already a well known defender. However, even he improved greatly over the full season. Not to mention the time he had on campus leading up to the season, all fall before the season started, and then he got to develop against very low level teams the first half of the season. Noel and Davis were both already known as great shot blockers, it's not like they came in and developed that skill. Also, lets not even compare Diallo to one of the greatest college players ever. That's just incredibly naive and ignorant. Shot blocking and rebounding is what had Noel ranked so high out of HS, because his offense was god awful if you remember. I have no idea where you're getting that the twins and Goodwin played good defense. They all got better over their careers here, but I would never say it was a huge strength of any of theirs. Even in the twins second year they struggled a lot. If my recollection serves me correctly, the twins did not show up on campus until a few days before classes started. Then when we had that slow start and struggled so much during the year, that was often cited as a reason. So, if missing just the summer can put players that far behind and take them until tourney time to catch up, why should Diallo be able to in 8 weeks, coming in mid-season, when his entire team and most of the rest of the country have had months and months of work to get to that level? Goodwin had the skills to be really good, but he just never seemed to put it all together here. Ulis, Teague and Briscoe were other players that were already mentioned as solid defenders in high school, but none came in as defensive stoppers ready to shut down the best players in the country in the NCAA tournament. None were even at that level after 8 weeks. They all developed over the course of a summer, fall, winter and spring to be able to do defend on that level.

Again, the scale of time is October to early January for those guys, and January to late March for Diallo. That’s a level playing field.

Not at all! What about the entire summer through September you fail to mention? What about getting to start out against cupcake teams the first half of the season? What about getting to play roughly 12 games before ever starting conference play? None of them were expected to come in and contribute starting in SEC play and be ready for tournament level play within 8 weeks. None! You're argument here is just completely nonfactual and incredibly unsupported.

You’ve been implying that he wouldn’t have helped at all. That’s a strange position to take, and one that’s all encompassing. Why are you so devoted to that line of thinking? Because you can’t imagine a kid being ready and still not playing? What if he was ready? Again, you’re apparently disconnecting potential from present readiness (even if that readiness is raw) and placing potential into some mystical vacuum where NBA scouts don’t even consider present level of skill. That’s never happened before when drafting a kid, and it won’t start with Diallo and this draft.

I've never implied that at all. I've implied that common sense should indicate a player who joins a top team mid season, with zero college experience, who's known as being extremely raw but incredibly athletic, who doesn't feel comfortable enough to play is not going to contribute enough to have the level of impact you're insinuating he could. Especially not when you're in the toughest part of your season, competing against other kids with more experience and a lot more practice time, whom have more solid basketball skills at this level. Could he? Sure, stranger things have totally happened. However, it is just not likely and there is zero precedent to base it off. You're trying to use players who practiced from summer, fall and winter and did camp cal as examples of how Cal develops players. Yet, none of them started in January and missed all the time mentioned and contributed. Literally, NONE! It just makes your argument completely invalid because it's apples to oranges. Also, the NBA drafts players on potential and athletic ability all the time. It's why they have a lot of bust over the years. Diallo definitely wont be the first, nor last. Why am I so devoted to common sense, logic and facts? Ummm, I guess I'm just wired differently like that.

Even if Diallo played, you get a raw 6’6” wing with incredible athleticism. We’ve seen Cal take that type of player and meld them into competent performers in shorter amounts of time historically. You don’t think it could have been done. That’s where we differ and will continue to differ in this discussion.

Really, who? And try to be factual and not just spin a narrative.

You clearly don’t think Calipari could have gotten Diallo on a contributive level within a few months. I disagree. Again, my point is only valid if Diallo stays in the draft. If he returns, there is a stronger case to be made that he was not quite ready to contribute from January through March last season. My point is also based on speculation. I have no idea for sure if Diallo was ready, and you have no idea that he wasn’t, so do your future credibility a favor and stop treating your opinion as if it’s the only possible reality.

1. A few UK guys have actually skipped the summer and contributed early on. Take another look at your research before you try to argue the opposite. Your point here is faulty the second you find even one player who skipped the summer but still contributed positively early on.
   
   
2. To address your last question, plenty of guys have contributed early on defensively. I used the word “competent” carefully. Prove my statement wrong, since you’re skeptical. You don’t think even Teague or Bledsoe were competent defenders by the mid December marks of their freshmen years? As for fast defensive adjustments, you said it wasn’t possible, and then changed the criteria once I offered you a half-dozen guys who played solid defense early on. You disparaged Goodwin and the twins, but what about Teague, Jones, MKG, Ulis, Briscoe? They were competent defenders early on, which is my point with Diallo. I’m arguing that he could have been. Again, even naming five or six guys who played well defensively early on negates your all-encompassing point. Were they competent early on? Yes. You’re arguing for a full season’s worth of defensive development. I’m not. I’m arguing that Diallo could have contributed on a lesser level within a few months. Why my point is hard to ascertain is mind-boggling. My argument leaves the door cracked. Yours shuts the thing without even a hint at an alternative viewpoint being possible.
   
   
3. The “precedent” to base my position off is that guys have, in fact, contributed after skipping most or nearly all of the summer. The twins did it. Murray did it. Others have done it. Now, defense was not their strength – that is true – but one of Diallo’s strengths is defense. Also, it’s not like he’s a one-dimensional player. Diallo is a slasher who could have also contributed offensively to some degree.
   
   
4. I’m not arguing that it would have been an absolute positive if Diallo played. You’re going to incredible lengths to disagree with my point, so I want to make sure, once more, that you actually understand it. If Diallo stays in the draft and that was his intention the entire time, I think it was strange that he didn’t play a single minute for Kentucky from a basketball standpoint (although I get it from a recruiting standpoint). I also think if he’s ready for the NBADL (a league that places Diallo among the top 700 players in the universe), he was certainly ready to contribute, even on a minimal level, at Kentucky.
   
   
5. Re-read my last statement and ask yourself if my overall point is really continuing this discussion. I think it’s fair. You’re riding a point into the ground, and one that I’m not even arguing.

 

[SilentsAreGolden]

To the contingent who wanted Diallo to play, why? We won 14 games in a row and lost by 2 to the eventual champs. If he played to an extent that would have mattered, it probably means Briscoe would see his PT significantly reduced. Don't you think that would have caused considerable turmoil? We were good enough to win it without Diallo, and I just don't think it was worth the risk by playing him.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Diallo and Stokes are 2 different situations. Stokes was a highly rated prospect that had the body and skills to be able to come in and contribute in the post immediately. He had solid basketball skills, but needed work on his body, endurance and motor. Which he did. UT also did not have other players that were likely to contribute more than him. And also, Stokes was mentally ready and confident enough with where he was at skill wise to contribute. It's not like they made a final four or won a championship with him. Which you all seem to think Diallo would have done for us because he jumps real high.

Are you that committed to appearing right that you’re actually trying to be the talent arbitrator when it comes to Stokes and why he contributed versus Diallo and why he wouldn’t? Someone proved your all-encompassing position wrong, and now you try to determine the difference in the two players by talking about physical readiness?


Bottom line: none of us really have a clue until an NBA team tells Diallo he’s one of the best 600-700 players in the universe by ponying up the cash and drafting him next month.


Also, your statement “because he jumps real high” is strange. Diallo is a top 10 player in his class. He’s proven himself – offensively, defensively, physically, etc. – against the best players in his class and has been deemed arguably the best shooting guard amongst his peers.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

To the contingent who wanted Diallo to play, why? We won 14 games in a row and lost by 2 to the eventual champs. If he played to an extent that would have mattered, it probably means Briscoe would see his PT significantly reduced. Don't you think that would have caused considerable turmoil? We were good enough to win it without Diallo, and I just don't think it was worth the risk by playing him.

I’m not sold on the idea that he should have played. My argument in the affirmative on Diallo playing is only based on whether or not he’s about to go pro. If he’s good enough to make the NBADL, he was good enough to contribute at UK. If he’s a year away, I get the reasons for him sitting out.


Plus, Diallo occasionally at the 3 (or even 4 in a creative lineup) and spelling the starters for 8 to 15 minutes/game wouldn’t have ruptured any sort of team chemistry. He likely would have taken Mulder’s spot minutes and on occasion saw minutes in the 20+ range. Again, this is all based on the assumption that he’s presently ready for the NBADL.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

I said that from day one but many said "no you're wrong, no player would ever do that, that makes no sense".

I always thought his plan was to come, get better, not play and help his stock by not showing his weaknesses in games.

If he doesn't get a first round gurentee or second round couple year gurentee he should absolutely come back imo, BUT if he doesn't I wouldn't fault him because he will get a bunch of chances to make a team due to his age and measurements. It sucks if you're a fan that really only cares about what a player can do for you're team, but I always root for any player to do what they feel is he best decision for them if it's leaving or coming back.

On another note the jazz have requested a workout but his representative (not saying it's his agent) hasn't responded

As UK fans, we actually do get it. More than any fan base in the universe, we understand what it means to get behind a kid who leaves early. Very few of us have remained at a place where we begrudge a player leaving early. Most of us get behind them. The Diallo situation is unprecedented, and it’s weird. If some of our fans need to vent it out on a message board, I’m not sure there’s much to rebuke. If fans take personal shots at Diallo, then yes, that should be disputed here.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

This is too spot on.

A high percentage of the posters who have moved their Diallo hatred to the fact he didn't play last year and help us win a Title, would have had steam coming out of their ears the first time Diallo contributed to a loss when we could have had Mulder in there shooting threes instead.

I’m presently not sold on any narrative. We likely won’t know the truth for a very long time, if at all. That said, Diallo to the NBA now will help UK in the long run. His returning will help UK in the long run as well. Diallo to UK was a good thing all-around, and for that, I look at it as a net win.


That said, yes, I’d still like to see him play at UK at some point, and if he goes pro now, I would have liked to see him on the court this most recent season. I’m not going to judge the young man without evidence of deceptive intent on his part, but I am a fan, and I like to watch great basketball players compete for Kentucky.

 

[Aike]

To the contingent who wanted Diallo to play, why? We won 14 games in a row and lost by 2 to the eventual champs. If he played to an extent that would have mattered, it probably means Briscoe would see his PT significantly reduced. Don't you think that would have caused considerable turmoil? We were good enough to win it without Diallo, and I just don't think it was worth the risk by playing him.

I was hoping to see him play when he first signed. As we got on our winning streak, I stopped caring whether he would play or not.

 

[theGspot]

You clearly don’t think Calipari could have gotten Diallo on a contributive level within a few months. I disagree. Again, my point is only valid if Diallo stays in the draft. If he returns, there is a stronger case to be made that he was not quite ready to contribute from January through March last season. My point is also based on speculation. I have no idea for sure if Diallo was ready, and you have no idea that he wasn’t, so do your future credibility a favor and stop treating your opinion as if it’s the only possible reality.

1. A few UK guys have actually skipped the summer and contributed early on. Take another look at your research before you try to argue the opposite. Your point here is faulty the second you find even one player who skipped the summer but still contributed positively early on.
   
   
2. To address your last question, plenty of guys have contributed early on defensively. I used the word “competent” carefully. Prove my statement wrong, since you’re skeptical. You don’t think even Teague or Bledsoe were competent defenders by the mid December marks of their freshmen years? As for fast defensive adjustments, you said it wasn’t possible, and then changed the criteria once I offered you a half-dozen guys who played solid defense early on. You disparaged Goodwin and the twins, but what about Teague, Jones, MKG, Ulis, Briscoe? They were competent defenders early on, which is my point with Diallo. I’m arguing that he could have been. Again, even naming five or six guys who played well defensively early on negates your all-encompassing point. Were they competent early on? Yes. You’re arguing for a full season’s worth of defensive development. I’m not. I’m arguing that Diallo could have contributed on a lesser level within a few months. Why my point is hard to ascertain is mind-boggling. My argument leaves the door cracked. Yours shuts the thing without even a hint at an alternative viewpoint being possible.
   
   
3. The “precedent” to base my position off is that guys have, in fact, contributed after skipping most or nearly all of the summer. The twins did it. Murray did it. Others have done it. Now, defense was not their strength – that is true – but one of Diallo’s strengths is defense. Also, it’s not like he’s a one-dimensional player. Diallo is a slasher who could have also contributed offensively to some degree.
   
   
4. I’m not arguing that it would have been an absolute positive if Diallo played. You’re going to incredible lengths to disagree with my point, so I want to make sure, once more, that you actually understand it. If Diallo stays in the draft and that was his intention the entire time, I think it was strange that he didn’t play a single minute for Kentucky from a basketball standpoint (although I get it from a recruiting standpoint). I also think if he’s ready for the NBADL (a league that places Diallo among the top 700 players in the universe), he was certainly ready to contribute, even on a minimal level, at Kentucky.
   
   
5. Re-read my last statement and ask yourself if my overall point is really continuing this discussion. I think it’s fair. You’re riding a point into the ground, and one that I’m not even arguing.

You clearly don’t think Calipari could have gotten Diallo on a contributive level within a few months. I disagree. Again, my point is only valid if Diallo stays in the draft. If he returns, there is a stronger case to be made that he was not quite ready to contribute from January through March last season. My point is also based on speculation. I have no idea for sure if Diallo was ready, and you have no idea that he wasn’t, so do your future credibility a favor and stop treating your opinion as if it’s the only possible reality.

No, I think Cal can get anyone ready within a "few months", but that's different than 8 weeks. Simple Math will help with this.

So you're saying if he does what you want then he wasn't ready, but if he does what he thinks is best for him than obviously he was ready? LOL, that makes perfect sense man.

You're right. I don't know for a fact. Which is why I don't get on a message board and belittle a teenager acting as if I do. Whether I know the facts or not it's still his choice. However, I do tend to put more stock in what comes from his own mouth and Cal's vs a message board.

Where did I say mine was the only one that mattered? Your's matters just as much, even if it is wrong. I just like to point out the lack of logic and evidence in yours. It's fun.

A few UK guys have actually skipped the summer and contributed early on. Take another look at your research before you try to argue the opposite. Your point here is faulty the second you find even one player who skipped the summer but still contributed positively early on.

Really, who? Also, coming in against the sisters of the poor and having a decent game is a lot different than coming in during conference or tournament play and contributing. If you'r not able to comprehend that then that's your issue.

To address your last question, plenty of guys have contributed early on defensively. I used the word “competent” carefully. Prove my statement wrong, since you’re skeptical. You don’t think even Teague or Bledsoe were competent defenders by the mid December marks of their freshmen years? As for fast defensive adjustments, you said it wasn’t possible, and then changed the criteria once I offered you a half-dozen guys who played solid defense early on. You disparaged Goodwin and the twins, but what about Teague, Jones, MKG, Ulis, Briscoe? They were competent defenders early on, which is my point with Diallo. I’m arguing that he could have been. Again, even naming five or six guys who played well defensively early on negates your all-encompassing point. Were they competent early on? Yes. You’re arguing for a full season’s worth of defensive development. I’m not. I’m arguing that Diallo could have contributed on a lesser level within a few months. Why my point is hard to ascertain is mind-boggling. My argument leaves the door cracked. Yours shuts the thing without even a hint at an alternative viewpoint being possible.

Lol, if you're the one making the statement, then you need to prove it correct. I've already provided ample proof of previous players you've mentioned you just either can't or wont comprehend it. Were they able to defend the sisters of the poor early on, sure! Would they have been able to be as successful against conference opponents and tournament teams after 8 weeks? NO! Of all the guys you mentioned MKG and maybe Briscoe were good defenders early. However, both were billed as being good defenders in HS. Was Diallo? Or, was he billed as having the potential of being because if his length and upside? The others you mentioned all learned to play "within a few months" Which I agree, "a few months" and Diallo could have as well. 8 weeks, not so much. You're arguing that kids who were already good defenders came to here and was a good defender. That really doesn't prove anything except they lived up to what they were already suppose to be. Your point isn't hard at all for me to understand. I totally agree Cal could have had Diallo ready with a "few months" of work, just not 8 weeks. I think maybe it's just you who is having trouble comprehending your own words. I can't help with that.

 

[theGspot]

The “precedent” to base my position off is that guys have, in fact, contributed after skipping most or nearly all of the summer. The twins did it. Murray did it. Others have done it. Now, defense was not their strength – that is true – but one of Diallo’s strengths is defense. Also, it’s not like he’s a one-dimensional player. Diallo is a slasher who could have also contributed offensively to some degree.

The twins didn't or we wouldn't have struggled all year and lost 10+ games ending up an 8 seed. They learned and clicked in march. Again, after a "few months"! Murray wasn't a good defender early on, but he could score a lot, which again, is what he was expected to be good at from the get got. Can you please provide a source as to where Diallo was referred to as a good defender, or where that was a strength. People believe he could be after some time because of his speed and length, but I haven't seen anyone say he's a great defender now, or even good really. Fox, Monk, Briscoe, Hawkins were all slashers. Having another is always a plus, but not sure how that fills a need we didn't already have.

I’m not arguing that it would have been an absolute positive if Diallo played. You’re going to incredible lengths to disagree with my point, so I want to make sure, once more, that you actually understand it. If Diallo stays in the draft and that was his intention the entire time, I think it was strange that he didn’t play a single minute for Kentucky from a basketball standpoint (although I get it from a recruiting standpoint). I also think if he’s ready for the NBADL (a league that places Diallo among the top 700 players in the universe), he was certainly ready to contribute, even on a minimal level, at Kentucky.

You are arguing at least somewhat that he could have been a positive contributor because you've mentioned that as a belief in several of your previous post. However, if you want to pretend not that's fine too. You can believe whatever you want, man. No harm in believing conspiracies and untruths, totally your life your choice. I just tend to live in a reality where NBA execs view the long term upside of a player instead of what or where they are in this moment. They spend large amounts of money taking risk on them in hopes of a strong return on investment. I totally understand your arguments, I'm just not totally sure you understand them as you're forgetting what you've said previously about him having a positive impact and not understanding the difference in 8 weeks and few months.

 

[theGspot]

Are you that committed to appearing right that you’re actually trying to be the talent arbitrator when it comes to Stokes and why he contributed versus Diallo and why he wouldn’t? Someone proved your all-encompassing position wrong, and now you try to determine the difference in the two players by talking about physical readiness?


Bottom line: none of us really have a clue until an NBA team tells Diallo he’s one of the best 600-700 players in the universe by ponying up the cash and drafting him next month.


Also, your statement “because he jumps real high” is strange. Diallo is a top 10 player in his class. He’s proven himself – offensively, defensively, physically, etc. – against the best players in his class and has been deemed arguably the best shooting guard amongst his peers.

The guy I provided those points to agreed, so it must just be you not getting it. Who proved it wrong. I must have missed that post. So one player can't be more physically ready than another player?

Um, you think he has proven himself offensively when his shot is a major concern of teams considering him? wow, okay! Again, I've only seen reports talking about how he has the tools to defend at a high level. No one has actually said he's a good defender yet.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

You clearly don’t think Calipari could have gotten Diallo on a contributive level within a few months. I disagree. Again, my point is only valid if Diallo stays in the draft. If he returns, there is a stronger case to be made that he was not quite ready to contribute from January through March last season. My point is also based on speculation. I have no idea for sure if Diallo was ready, and you have no idea that he wasn’t, so do your future credibility a favor and stop treating your opinion as if it’s the only possible reality.

No, I think Cal can get anyone ready within a "few months", but that's different than 8 weeks. Simple Math will help with this.

So you're saying if he does what you want then he wasn't ready, but if he does what he thinks is best for him than obviously he was ready? LOL, that makes perfect sense man.

You're right. I don't know for a fact. Which is why I don't get on a message board and belittle a teenager acting as if I do. Whether I know the facts or not it's still his choice. However, I do tend to put more stock in what comes from his own mouth and Cal's vs a message board.

Where did I say mine was the only one that mattered? Your's matters just as much, even if it is wrong. I just like to point out the lack of logic and evidence in yours. It's fun.

A few UK guys have actually skipped the summer and contributed early on. Take another look at your research before you try to argue the opposite. Your point here is faulty the second you find even one player who skipped the summer but still contributed positively early on.

Really, who? Also, coming in against the sisters of the poor and having a decent game is a lot different than coming in during conference or tournament play and contributing. If you'r not able to comprehend that then that's your issue.

To address your last question, plenty of guys have contributed early on defensively. I used the word “competent” carefully. Prove my statement wrong, since you’re skeptical. You don’t think even Teague or Bledsoe were competent defenders by the mid December marks of their freshmen years? As for fast defensive adjustments, you said it wasn’t possible, and then changed the criteria once I offered you a half-dozen guys who played solid defense early on. You disparaged Goodwin and the twins, but what about Teague, Jones, MKG, Ulis, Briscoe? They were competent defenders early on, which is my point with Diallo. I’m arguing that he could have been. Again, even naming five or six guys who played well defensively early on negates your all-encompassing point. Were they competent early on? Yes. You’re arguing for a full season’s worth of defensive development. I’m not. I’m arguing that Diallo could have contributed on a lesser level within a few months. Why my point is hard to ascertain is mind-boggling. My argument leaves the door cracked. Yours shuts the thing without even a hint at an alternative viewpoint being possible.

Lol, if you're the one making the statement, then you need to prove it correct. I've already provided ample proof of previous players you've mentioned you just either can't or wont comprehend it. Were they able to defend the sisters of the poor early on, sure! Would they have been able to be as successful against conference opponents and tournament teams after 8 weeks? NO! Of all the guys you mentioned MKG and maybe Briscoe were good defenders early. However, both were billed as being good defenders in HS. Was Diallo? Or, was he billed as having the potential of being because if his length and upside? The others you mentioned all learned to play "within a few months" Which I agree, "a few months" and Diallo could have as well. 8 weeks, not so much. You're arguing that kids who were already good defenders came to here and was a good defender. That really doesn't prove anything except they lived up to what they were already suppose to be. Your point isn't hard at all for me to understand. I totally agree Cal could have had Diallo ready with a "few months" of work, just not 8 weeks. I think maybe it's just you who is having trouble comprehending your own words. I can't help with that.

• Who said anything about Diallo being ready in 8 weeks? There’s four 1/2 weeks in January, 4 in February, and 2-3 in March to get ready for the real tournament games by week 3 and 4 of March. That’s 11-12 weeks to become a halfway competent contributor. Does 11-12 weeks suddenly not count as months? Only in the universe you rule where you’re apparently arbitrator on what determines a “few months.” It appears you’re original, all-encompassing position is caving a bit. You originally implied it wouldn’t be possible for a player to become a contributor quickly. Now you’re saying Cal could get a kid ready to contribute positively in a few months. So how long is a few months for you?
  
  
• Your point about defensive competence has little do with me proving anything, and everything to do with my thesis pertaining to competence and contribution. I’m not arguing that Diallo would have been Liggins incarnate after an 8 week stretch. I’ve been arguing that if he’s ready to be in the NBADL, he was ready to contribute at Kentucky on a beneficial level. Stop trying to box my argument in by extending my thesis to where it doesn’t exist.
  
  
• Diallo is billed a top 10 player in his class, the top shooting guard by most, and a very good defender. Did you miss that part? The idea that he could have contributed positively, even after 11-12 weeks, isn’t a stretch. You apparently think it is.
  
  
• For someone whose insulting me based on the “8 week” position, could you at least make sure that was what I actually argued? I didn’t. Now you look dishonest in your argument.
  
  
• 
  
  Not a good look for a guy clearly trying to make a name on a message board. Maybe you can add a few more condescending insults in your next post. I prefer that when in discussion. Always a sign that the other guy isn’t as sure as he once was regarding his position.
  

 

[Mash 2.4]

• Who said anything about Diallo being ready in 8 weeks? There’s four 1/2 weeks in January, 4 in February, and 2-3 in March to get ready for the real tournament games by week 3 and 4 of March. That’s 11-12 weeks to become a halfway competent contributor. Does 11-12 weeks suddenly not count as months? Only in the universe you rule where you’re apparently arbitrator on what determines a “few months.” It appears you’re original, all-encompassing position is caving a bit. You originally implied it wouldn’t be possible for a player to become a contributor quickly. Now you’re saying Cal could get a kid ready to contribute positively in a few months. So how long is a few months for you?
  
  
• Your point about defensive competence has little do with me proving anything, and everything to do with my thesis pertaining to competence and contribution. I’m not arguing that Diallo would have been Liggins incarnate after an 8 week stretch. I’ve been arguing that if he’s ready to be in the NBADL, he was ready to contribute at Kentucky on a beneficial level. Stop trying to box my argument in by extending my thesis to where it doesn’t exist.
  
  
• Diallo is billed a top 10 player in his class, the top shooting guard by most, and a very good defender. Did you miss that part? The idea that he could have contributed positively, even after 11-12 weeks, isn’t a stretch. You apparently think it is.
  
  
• For someone whose insulting me based on the “8 week” position, could you at least make sure that was what I actually argued? I didn’t. Now you look dishonest in your argument.
  
  
• 
  
  Not a good look for a guy clearly trying to make a name on a message board. Maybe you can add a few more condescending insults in your next post. I prefer that when in discussion. Always a sign that the other guy isn’t as sure as he once was regarding his position.

You're wasting time arguing with this guy.He's all knowing. No way Diallo could have possibly helped us last year. But let's hope he makes the NBA All-Rookie Team! Great for the program.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

The guy I provided those points to agreed, so it must just be you not getting it. Who proved it wrong. I must have missed that post. So one player can't be more physically ready than another player?

Um, you think he has proven himself offensively when his shot is a major concern of teams considering him? wow, okay! Again, I've only seen reports talking about how he has the tools to defend at a high level. No one has actually said he's a good defender yet.

You keep making assumptions about Diallo’s physical readiness.


Do you have any evidence that he’s no less physically ready than any other freshmen would be?


Your point appears to be that there’s no way Diallo was ready. Mine is that perhaps he was – not a stretch given his ability and athleticism. If he was, I think he should have played. I’m not totally certain that he was, however, as I believe the jury is still out on that. We’re all speculating from the audience, not behind the scenes. You seem to be making an argument as if you’re behind the scenes.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

The “precedent” to base my position off is that guys have, in fact, contributed after skipping most or nearly all of the summer. The twins did it. Murray did it. Others have done it. Now, defense was not their strength – that is true – but one of Diallo’s strengths is defense. Also, it’s not like he’s a one-dimensional player. Diallo is a slasher who could have also contributed offensively to some degree.

The twins didn't or we wouldn't have struggled all year and lost 10+ games ending up an 8 seed. They learned and clicked in march. Again, after a "few months"! Murray wasn't a good defender early on, but he could score a lot, which again, is what he was expected to be good at from the get got. Can you please provide a source as to where Diallo was referred to as a good defender, or where that was a strength. People believe he could be after some time because of his speed and length, but I haven't seen anyone say he's a great defender now, or even good really. Fox, Monk, Briscoe, Hawkins were all slashers. Having another is always a plus, but not sure how that fills a need we didn't already have.

I’m not arguing that it would have been an absolute positive if Diallo played. You’re going to incredible lengths to disagree with my point, so I want to make sure, once more, that you actually understand it. If Diallo stays in the draft and that was his intention the entire time, I think it was strange that he didn’t play a single minute for Kentucky from a basketball standpoint (although I get it from a recruiting standpoint). I also think if he’s ready for the NBADL (a league that places Diallo among the top 700 players in the universe), he was certainly ready to contribute, even on a minimal level, at Kentucky.

You are arguing at least somewhat that he could have been a positive contributor because you've mentioned that as a belief in several of your previous post. However, if you want to pretend not that's fine too. You can believe whatever you want, man. No harm in believing conspiracies and untruths, totally your life your choice. I just tend to live in a reality where NBA execs view the long term upside of a player instead of what or where they are in this moment. They spend large amounts of money taking risk on them in hopes of a strong return on investment. I totally understand your arguments, I'm just not totally sure you understand them as you're forgetting what you've said previously about him having a positive impact and not understanding the difference in 8 weeks and few months.

To your last point here, I don’t really know if Diallo absolutely would have been a positive benefit to UK last year, although I think that if the NBADL has a roster spot for him now, it’s probably safe bet that Diallo could have helped UK.


My position is still open to either narrative, because there’s no way to be certain at this point. Your position is apparently closed. For you, it seems like there’s no way Diallo could have helped. And why? Because, he didn’t play after all.


That position presumes to know the following as matter-of-fact:

1. Cal didn’t want Diallo to play.
   
   
2. Diallo wasn’t ready to play.
   
   
3. If an NBA team drafts Diallo, it will be because he further developed in the last 40 days to such an extent as to deem him draftable, or because the NBA team is drafting Diallo purely on potential - the second position being one that dislodges current skill from future potential.
   
   
4. Diallo wasn’t physically ready to contribute.
   
   
5. Calipari couldn’t have turned Diallo into a positive role player within 11-12 weeks.
   
   
   
   And of course, you know all these things. Your posts reek of your omnipotence on the situation.
   

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

You're wasting time arguing with this guy.He's all knowing. No way Diallo could have possibly helped us last year. But let's hope he makes the NBA All-Rookie Team! Great for the program.

@theGspot is undoubtedly typing away at his next Leo Tolstoy- length rebuttal against my posts.

He'll undoubtedly include some patronizing remarks aimed at my overall intelligence and comprehension abilities.

Can't wait for the next installment!

 

[theGspot]

• Who said anything about Diallo being ready in 8 weeks? There’s four 1/2 weeks in January, 4 in February, and 2-3 in March to get ready for the real tournament games by week 3 and 4 of March. That’s 11-12 weeks to become a halfway competent contributor. Does 11-12 weeks suddenly not count as months? Only in the universe you rule where you’re apparently arbitrator on what determines a “few months.” It appears you’re original, all-encompassing position is caving a bit. You originally implied it wouldn’t be possible for a player to become a contributor quickly. Now you’re saying Cal could get a kid ready to contribute positively in a few months. So how long is a few months for you?
  
  
• Your point about defensive competence has little do with me proving anything, and everything to do with my thesis pertaining to competence and contribution. I’m not arguing that Diallo would have been Liggins incarnate after an 8 week stretch. I’ve been arguing that if he’s ready to be in the NBADL, he was ready to contribute at Kentucky on a beneficial level. Stop trying to box my argument in by extending my thesis to where it doesn’t exist.
  
  
• Diallo is billed a top 10 player in his class, the top shooting guard by most, and a very good defender. Did you miss that part? The idea that he could have contributed positively, even after 11-12 weeks, isn’t a stretch. You apparently think it is.
  
  
• For someone whose insulting me based on the “8 week” position, could you at least make sure that was what I actually argued? I didn’t. Now you look dishonest in your argument.
  
  
• 
  
  Not a good look for a guy clearly trying to make a name on a message board. Maybe you can add a few more condescending insults in your next post. I prefer that when in discussion. Always a sign that the other guy isn’t as sure as he once was regarding his position.

Ohh my, you really are bad at this whole math thing and fact checking. He didn't even enroll until January 11th. Exactly 8 weeks from then we were in the middle of the SEC Tournament. That's exactly 2 months. Like exactly! So where you are getting this 11/12 weeks or a few months as you originally said is beyond me. I mean can you literally not just count the days and figure this out yourself? I also have no idea what world you live in that a month has 4 1/2 weeks in it. That would require a half day, as a week is 7 days so half a week would be 3 1/2 days. So how's my argument falling apart when it is factually correct, but you can't seem to figure out how to count 8 weeks and believe months can be 4.5 weeks?

Who said Diallo was ready for the D-league? I would imagine like most players he would go through summer training and summer league play and then transition into the D league if that is where they choose to send him. I doubt he would be the d-league MVP first week or anything. Common sense would indicate he would likely develop into a better player during that time, as the d does stand for developmental. No one is doing anything to your message board "thesis", you just seem to be really struggling to create a solid argument or defense for you rationale. Again, that's not my fault.

Diallo has never been billed as a shooter. Yes, the 2 spot is referred to by many as a shooting guard, but in reality scoring guard would be the more correct term in terms of Diallo. Shooting is known as his greatest weakness, which is mentioned by every scout that sees him. He's got the build to attack the rim and the incredible athletic ability to finish. That's quite a difference from a knock down shooter. Monk, Murray, Booker and Lamb are more of the shooting guard mold. However, NO I do not think he would or should have been ready to contribute after 8 weeks. Since the season was over well before he hit the 3 month mark I can't honestly say on that.

Dude, in not even convinced you know what you are arguing. You've gone from a few months, to 11 - 12 weeks to saying 8 weeks. My suggestion if you aren't going to research and be factual is to at least pick one and stick with it. At least then you look somewhat competent.

Who's trying to make a name for themselves. This is just a message board for a bunch of people with a lot of free time in their lives. Me included. You seem to think it holds some level of importance or significance. Maybe in your life it does, but I don't think arguing here is going to make much of a name for anyone.

 

[theGspot]

You keep making assumptions about Diallo’s physical readiness.


Do you have any evidence that he’s no less physically ready than any other freshmen would be?


Your point appears to be that there’s no way Diallo was ready. Mine is that perhaps he was – not a stretch given his ability and athleticism. If he was, I think he should have played. I’m not totally certain that he was, however, as I believe the jury is still out on that. We’re all speculating from the audience, not behind the scenes. You seem to be making an argument as if you’re behind the scenes.

Where did I argue he wasn't physically ready? The kid is a physical freak!! I said his basketball skills, basketball IQ and mental toughness likely weren't to that level yet. That's based on scouts, NBA execs and even his HS coaches comments. I'm just making an argument using facts and common sense.

 

[theGspot]

To your last point here, I don’t really know if Diallo absolutely would have been a positive benefit to UK last year, although I think that if the NBADL has a roster spot for him now, it’s probably safe bet that Diallo could have helped UK.


My position is still open to either narrative, because there’s no way to be certain at this point. Your position is apparently closed. For you, it seems like there’s no way Diallo could have helped. And why? Because, he didn’t play after all.


That position presumes to know the following as matter-of-fact:

1. Cal didn’t want Diallo to play.
   
   
2. Diallo wasn’t ready to play.
   
   
3. If an NBA team drafts Diallo, it will be because he further developed in the last 40 days to such an extent as to deem him draftable, or because the NBA team is drafting Diallo purely on potential - the second position being one that dislodges current skill from future potential.
   
   
4. Diallo wasn’t physically ready to contribute.
   
   
5. Calipari couldn’t have turned Diallo into a positive role player within 11-12 weeks.
   
   
   
   And of course, you know all these things. Your posts reek of your omnipotence on the situation.

No, I've never said any of those things. I don't know Cal's intentions at all. However, I do know that before committing the plan discussed was to sit this season out from games and develop in practice. Then if something changed Diallo would
approach him about playing. That was public knowledge.

I can't imagine many teenagers being in the biggest stage of their life so far, passing up that opportunity if they felt they were ready to make a positive contribution. Especially not a top
Competitor like this kid.

I've never said or assumed this. I'm sure Diallo did improve over the time here. Although, I highly doubt it was enough to contribute instantly on an NBA team or even a d league team. I think several teams would be willing to take a risk on him based purely on his athletic ability and projections, not based on where he is today. How many NBA teams do you think would want to draft a shooting guard who can't shoot? That would be pretty stupid. So obvisouly if they are considering drafting the kid it has to be based on other things.

I've never said nor thought he lacked the physical tools. I can't even began to fathom where you got that from any of my post.

If he was actually here a part of the team that long maybe, but as I broke down the calendar for you earlier he wasn't.

You can smell my post? That's pretty cool.

 

[theGspot]

@Son_Of_Saul
I run pretty fast and jump pretty high too. I also have pretty long limbs and a reach for my body size. I guess using your logic (or lack of) I should have been able to have a positive impact for UK in The tournament too.

 

[Mash 2.4]

@Son_Of_Saul
I run pretty fast and jump pretty high too. I also have pretty long limbs and a reach for my body size. I guess using your logic (or lack of) I should have been able to have a positive impact for UK in The tournament too.

Not SOS. But Were you top ten in your class? Cause those guys generally step right in and play big minutes here. If you were hell yea, suit up.

 

[theGspot]

I’m presently not sold on any narrative. We likely won’t know the truth for a very long time, if at all. That said, Diallo to the NBA now will help UK in the long run. His returning will help UK in the long run as well. Diallo to UK was a good thing all-around, and for that, I look at it as a net win.


That said, yes, I’d still like to see him play at UK at some point, and if he goes pro now, I would have liked to see him on the court this most recent season. I’m not going to judge the young man without evidence of deceptive intent on his part, but I am a fan, and I like to watch great basketball players compete for Kentucky.

This post here I can totally agree with!

 

[theGspot]

@Son_Of_Saul
I run pretty fast and jump pretty high too. I also have pretty long limbs and a reach for my body size. I guess using your logic (or lack of) I should have been able to have a positive impact for UK in The tournament too.

I don't know if they even had rankings then like they do today, but I was pretty good. Plus, like I said, I jump high and have long arms. That seems to be the main criteria for being able to contribute right away.

 

[KingOfBBN]

@theGspot is undoubtedly typing away at his next Leo Tolstoy- length rebuttal against my posts.

He'll undoubtedly include some patronizing remarks aimed at my overall intelligence and comprehension abilities.

Can't wait for the next installment!

I put him on ignore. He's not worth the time to continue arguing with. He's incapable of anything sinking in.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

@Son_Of_Saul
I run pretty fast and jump pretty high too. I also have pretty long limbs and a reach for my body size. I guess using your logic (or lack of) I should have been able to have a positive impact for UK in The tournament too.

Were you a top 10 player in your class with once in a decade positional vertical and length? Are you gauged as a present draft pick in the 25 to 35 range and ranked as the #1 shooting guard in your class?

Great comparison. Undoubtedly solidifies your argument…

 

[theGspot]

Were you a top 10 player in your class with once in a decade positional vertical and length? Are you gauged as a present draft pick in the 25 to 35 range and ranked as the #1 shooting guard in your class?

Great comparison. Undoubtedly solidifies your argument…

But you don't know that for a fact, right? Which is what you've said diminishes my argument!

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

But you don't know that for a fact, right? Which is what you've said diminishes my argument!

Even if he’s projected in the backend of the 2nd round, he’s still a top 10 kid in his class with otherworldly athleticism and near-record breaking combine numbers. Those last two elements are fact.

 

[theGspot]

Even if he’s projected in the backend of the 2nd round, he’s still a top 10 kid in his class with otherworldly athleticism and near-record breaking combine numbers. Those last two elements are fact.

Right! I've been saying that all along. Glad you finally agree.

 

[JFCats22]

He worked out for the Celtics, Bulls, Bucks, and Nets. Those are the ones that have been reported.

So that would be picks 1, 37, 16, 38, 17, 48, 22, 27, 57

I can't imagine him going 16/17 and he isn't leaving is he is 37, 38, 48 or 57.

So that only leaves the Nets at 22 and 27 as possible options (for teams he worked out for).

 

[Ryan Lemonds Diary]

I bet the majority of people complaining about how wrong it is for Diallo to leave and never play for UK are the same ones who complained about how Tubby couldn't recruit elite talent to UK. Do you honestly want to go back to the days of Sheray Thomas, Bobby Perry and Lukaz Orbzut? They are all nice guys but not going to win a title.

 

[KingOfBBN]

I bet the majority of people complaining about how wrong it is for Diallo to leave and never play for UK are the same ones who complained about how Tubby couldn't recruit elite talent to UK. Do you honestly want to go back to the days of Sheray Thomas, Bobby Perry and Lukaz Orbzut? They are all nice guys but not going to win a title.

No one gives a crap about one and done. The kid didn't play for us and very well could stay in the draft. That's the issue. No one has an issue with someone coming here and playing and then bouncing. Diallo didn't play.

 

[Ryan Lemonds Diary]

So would you have the same opinion if he had been injured before the season and didn't play?