ADVERTISEMENT

The perception of talent since 2015

But have you noticed that some of these UK guys who are flourishing were not the focal point of Cal's UK teams. And the players that were the focal point on most cases are not doing as well??????
Seems like it is mostly our perimeter guys who outperform once they land in the nba and not the bigs. What does that say about the offensive system Cal runs here?
 
We can agree to disagree on Duke. Are you willing for UK to be lumped in with LSU and Arizona? I just want to know how far down this rabbit hole you're willing to go.

Why would I when it’s not necessary? Makes it an easy no. Also you seem to think cheating started in 2016 when there’s no evidence that’s the case, that just happened to be the year the FBI caught their mole on wire fraud.

Cal’s of course free to take the high road like Tubby did and refuse to kiss Nike’s ring or exploit other loopholes, but then he needs to learn how to retain players and run more efficient offenses. If he refuses to do either then he’s refusing to live up to his job expectations.
 
The league has been changing over the past decade and now it drafts much more on physical qualities that can be highly effective. But only when combined with experience. This means we expect to see guys leave here and be more successful there after a few years. It also means we expect to see less guys leave here and have great rookie seasons. I really don’t think a guy’s success in the league three years after college proves that Cal did his job here. It may actually prove he didn’t do his job. If his contract has even one sentence about making players successful down the road in the NBA then it’s a damned travesty but I’m pretty sure it doesn’t say anything like that.

Cal needs to bring in kids who can be effective in college during the time they’re in college because Cal coaches a college team. Effective. I don’t care a rat’s ass about stars next to name and I don’t care a rat’s ass about how well they do after they move on. Effective. In. College. I don’t want Cal to leave. I just want him to do his job. Or leave.
 
Why would I when it’s not necessary? Makes it an easy no. Also you seem to think cheating started in 2016 when there’s no evidence that’s the case, that just happened to be the year the FBI caught their mole on wire fraud.

Cal’s of course free to take the high road like Tubby did and refuse to kiss Nike’s ring or exploit other loopholes, but then he needs to learn how to retain players and run more efficient offenses. If he refuses to do either then he’s refusing to live up to his job expectations.
Convenient of you to expect our program to cheat their asses off without getting caught. I personally agree with you that there's a definite gray area that's been in play for years, but I wholeheartedly laugh at posters who admonish the staff for not getting the top 5 guys while insisting that we should do it the right way.....God forbid we were busted again for cheating. The same fans who are upset that we can't secure top talent will be the ones with pitchforks outside the coaches house.....
 
Convenient of you to expect our program to cheat their asses off without getting caught. I personally agree with you that there's a definite gray area that's been in play for years, but I wholeheartedly laugh at posters who admonish the staff for not getting the top 5 guys while insisting that we should do it the right way.....God forbid we were busted again for cheating. The same fans who are upset that we can't secure top talent will be the ones with pitchforks outside the coaches house.....

So you’ve apparently listened to zero I’ve said. If hiring parents and exploiting other loopholes is cheating to you then Cal’s 100% already a cheater. He just apparently stinks at it now or thinks he’s too fat a cat to roll like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KyFaninNC
No, OAD does not work, it never has.

Then you missed the 2012 UK team and the 2015 Duke team. And please spare me the they had upperclassmen. Of course they did. If your definition of OAD is having nothing but freshmen on the team, then we have no idea whether it works or not, because literally nobody has ever built that team.

The closest you can get would be UK in 2014. A team made of all freshmen and one sophomore contributor. That team out-performed 3 consecutive teams that were in the final four the year before, and returned a whole lot of their roster. And that was just to get to the final four. Then they did the same thing in the final four to reach the championship game. So I guess freshmen making plays down the stretch of 4 consecutive games in the tournament all gets thrown aside because they failed to do it again in the championship?? So they lost the championship because they were freshmen, then why did they win the other games?? More importantly, why didn't those other senior laden teams beat us along the way??

People that say OAD “doesn’t work” are really just stupid. There isn’t a system out there that you can go to that “just works” every year. We have seen teams win with a single draft pick, we have seen teams win with multiple draft picks, and even a combination. There isn’t a do this and you are guaranteed to be more likely to win a title strategy.

People will reference the OAD not working, but don't acknowledge that practically every team outside of UK and Duke tried to do it the other way. So say 62 out of 64 teams try to do it without using the OAD model, seems perfectly reasonable that they would win more titles, they have greater odds.

There is no hard and fast formula for winning titles. There are some that have a greater success rate than others. Strict OAD sure isn't that system. Truth is, there have been a few freshman lead teams that have won it, and they relied heavily on upperclassmen in the rotation. Us in 2012, Duke in 2015. The closest a mostly freshman team got was us in 2014. Now, you can look at teams with a few sure-fire NBA ready upperclassmen and a few solid/elite underclassmen seem to do very well (UNC, Villanova, Virginia, Louisville in 2013, Duke in 2010). Yeah, I'd say that formula has had the most success. It's just very difficult to get that kind of talented upperclassmen, these days.

The only formula for winning a championship is winning 6 games in a row on 3 consecutive weekends at the end of March, first of April. Every coach does it different. Some do it with shooting, some with big teams, some with small teams, some with defense, and some with defense. Just to prove how difficult it is to win a championship, there are 6 teams that have won multiple titles over the last 30 years. Duke - 5, UNC - 4, UConn - 4, UK - 3, Villinova - 2, and Florida - 2. Nobody has won back to back titles since Florida, and of the teams that won multiple titles, none won more than 2 in any 10 year period. So if there is a formula, then the best coaches in college basketball certainly haven't figured it out yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shadyCAT
Then you missed the 2012 UK team and the 2015 Duke team. And please spare me the they had upperclassmen. Of course they did. If your definition of OAD is having nothing but freshmen on the team, then we have no idea whether it works or not, because literally nobody has ever built that team.

The closest you can get would be UK in 2014. A team made of all freshmen and one sophomore contributor. That team out-performed 3 consecutive teams that were in the final four the year before, and returned a whole lot of their roster. And that was just to get to the final four. Then they did the same thing in the final four to reach the championship game. So I guess freshmen making plays down the stretch of 4 consecutive games in the tournament all gets thrown aside because they failed to do it again in the championship?? So they lost the championship because they were freshmen, then why did they win the other games?? More importantly, why didn't those other senior laden teams beat us along the way??



People will reference the OAD not working, but don't acknowledge that practically every team outside of UK and Duke tried to do it the other way. So say 62 out of 64 teams try to do it without using the OAD model, seems perfectly reasonable that they would win more titles, they have greater odds.



The only formula for winning a championship is winning 6 games in a row on 3 consecutive weekends at the end of March, first of April. Every coach does it different. Some do it with shooting, some with big teams, some with small teams, some with defense, and some with defense. Just to prove how difficult it is to win a championship, there are 6 teams that have won multiple titles over the last 30 years. Duke - 5, UNC - 4, UConn - 4, UK - 3, Villinova - 2, and Florida - 2. Nobody has won back to back titles since Florida, and of the teams that won multiple titles, none won more than 2 in any 10 year period. So if there is a formula, then the best coaches in college basketball certainly haven't figured it out yet.
Go back and read what I posted. You'll see that I said something similar. One thing as do say that's different, that shouldn't be in contention, is that strict OAD doesn't work. You must have contributions from upperclassmen. History shows that.
 
Please prepare a list of recruits that are good enough to play for UK, but that are not good enough to immediately go one and done. I’m sure the coaching staff would appreciate your input.
Bull shit response. You Cal slurpers always revert to this. Tell us who you would get. Tell us what coach you would get. Bullshit questions. My post was clear as day if you look at it without an agenda. We did just fine for years without a bunch of wannabe OAD. Recruit good solid basketball players without a focus on star ratings ga and develop them instead of kowtowing to the Boston’s of the world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: law1127
Was no one really buying players before? Honestly what really happened is UK went from Nike’s favored school to send recruits, to now Coach K eats their firsts and we get leftovers pretty please. It’s up to Cal to mend that relationship with Nike or find another way. Rumor had it they were upset we skipped the Nike tournament a few years ago, seems like Cal thought he was doing it all on his own and is too proud to admit he had help.

Nike cheats in ways that are absurdly 100% transparent, legal and within NCAA rules, like paying parents to run AAU programs. You act like us and Cal weren’t being “dragged through the mud” by the media already, so if it’s within rules and no punishments apply who cares what east coast haters say?

I have thought for years the opposite. It wasn’t Nike that got mad at us after the Phil Knight invitational it was Cal who was mad at Nike is why we didn’t play those games. Look at the recruits in 2017, the recruiting cycle during the tournament. Nike has been shown to have paid Bagley and Anton while Mo Bamba’s brother stated he was paid as well. I think Cal was upset that Nike had started buying players and he no longer could recruit like he did the first 5 years here.

Nothing else makes sense to me as to why things changed so much for us. Either Cal has a mole in the FBI so we stopped paying players and recruiting dipped, or we never were paying players and the bought players weren’t an option. I suppose there is the third option that Nike was paying them the whole time and steering them here, but I can’t imagine Cal knowing this and then saying no we are good we don’t want that anymore and refuse to play in a silly tournament.
 
I have thought for years the opposite. It wasn’t Nike that got mad at us after the Phil Knight invitational it was Cal who was mad at Nike is why we didn’t play those games. Look at the recruits in 2017, the recruiting cycle during the tournament. Nike has been shown to have paid Bagley and Anton while Mo Bamba’s brother stated he was paid as well. I think Cal was upset that Nike had started buying players and he no longer could recruit like he did the first 5 years here.

Nothing else makes sense to me as to why things changed so much for us. Either Cal has a mole in the FBI so we stopped paying players and recruiting dipped, or we never were paying players and the bought players weren’t an option. I suppose there is the third option that Nike was paying them the whole time and steering them here, but I can’t imagine Cal knowing this and then saying no we are good we don’t want that anymore and refuse to play in a silly tournament.

That’s an interesting theory although I’m not sure I buy it. In early to mid-2017 which is when I’d imagine Cal would have to have made that scheduling decision, a time when Bagley hadn’t committed to Puke. The pay to his family wasn’t known until 2018, but it had been going on for years, so I suppose if Cal had his ear to the ground he could’ve known before it became common knowledge.

However, what I don’t buy is if Cal is so pure and diligent in his purity re:Nike that he would hire Wagner at Memphis, associate with WWW or be oblivious to the two situations that got his final fours vacated. It doesn’t make sense for him to be both oblivious when shady stuff is going on at his own program yet so diligent as to skip the Nike tourney a year before Nike’s shadiness became common knowledge. Furthermore, what’s the ethical difference between him having Memphis pay Wagner’s father vs Nike paying Bagleys father?

Unless he’s changed his MO at UK. Which he is free to do, like I said, but he’d better adjust his tactics accordingly knowing he’ll be missing out on the top recruits. We don’t expect you to cheat to win here, we just expect you to win.
 
That’s an interesting theory although I’m not sure I buy it. In early to mid-2017 which is when I’d imagine Cal would have to have made that scheduling decision, a time when Bagley hadn’t committed to Puke. The pay to his family wasn’t known until 2018, but it had been going on for years, so I suppose if Cal had his ear to the ground he could’ve known before it became common knowledge.

However, what I don’t buy is if Cal is so pure and diligent in his purity re:Nike that he would hire Wagner at Memphis, associate with WWW or be oblivious to the two situations that got his final fours vacated. It doesn’t make sense for him to be both oblivious when shady stuff is going on at his own program yet so diligent as to skip the Nike tourney a year before Nike’s shadiness became common knowledge. Furthermore, what’s the ethical difference between him having Memphis pay Wagner’s father vs Nike paying Bagleys father?

Unless he’s changed his MO at UK. Which he is free to do, like I said, but he’d better adjust his tactics accordingly knowing he’ll be missing out on the top recruits. We don’t expect you to cheat to win here, we just expect you to win.

i would think most coaches know who is for sale and who isn’t. Didn’t Cal say a few times there are players he cannot recruit because of issues? The reason I have this theory is why on earth did our recruiting just change seemingly overnight? We went From getting anyone we wanted to always settling for our 2nd or third choice? In reality we will never know until maybe twenty years from now when they do a 30 for 30 on it after the statute of limitations is up on it or maybe a coach will do a tell all story on their death bed.
 
Then you missed the 2012 UK team and the 2015 Duke team. And please spare me the they had upperclassmen. Of course they did. If your definition of OAD is having nothing but freshmen on the team, then we have no idea whether it works or not, because literally nobody has ever built that team.

The closest you can get would be UK in 2014. A team made of all freshmen and one sophomore contributor. That team out-performed 3 consecutive teams that were in the final four the year before, and returned a whole lot of their roster. And that was just to get to the final four. Then they did the same thing in the final four to reach the championship game. So I guess freshmen making plays down the stretch of 4 consecutive games in the tournament all gets thrown aside because they failed to do it again in the championship?? So they lost the championship because they were freshmen, then why did they win the other games?? More importantly, why didn't those other senior laden teams beat us along the way??



People will reference the OAD not working, but don't acknowledge that practically every team outside of UK and Duke tried to do it the other way. So say 62 out of 64 teams try to do it without using the OAD model, seems perfectly reasonable that they would win more titles, they have greater odds.



The only formula for winning a championship is winning 6 games in a row on 3 consecutive weekends at the end of March, first of April. Every coach does it different. Some do it with shooting, some with big teams, some with small teams, some with defense, and some with defense. Just to prove how difficult it is to win a championship, there are 6 teams that have won multiple titles over the last 30 years. Duke - 5, UNC - 4, UConn - 4, UK - 3, Villinova - 2, and Florida - 2. Nobody has won back to back titles since Florida, and of the teams that won multiple titles, none won more than 2 in any 10 year period. So if there is a formula, then the best coaches in college basketball certainly haven't figured it out yet.
As for UK in 2012, that team was entirely unique and you should know this. It was not a typical OAD team. AD was a once in a generation player, Miller was NBA quality and the glue of the team as a senior and Jones/Lamb were only there because of an NBA lockout. If you're going to ignore the presence of Quinn Cook on 2015 Duke, a senior leader and starter, not to mention their floor general, I don't know what to tell you. He had 4 years of maturity and experience in Dukes system, so did Amile (3 years). Yes, surrounding OAD's with that type of support, experience, maturity and talent can get the job done. We don't do that.
 
That’s an interesting theory although I’m not sure I buy it. In early to mid-2017 which is when I’d imagine Cal would have to have made that scheduling decision, a time when Bagley hadn’t committed to Puke. The pay to his family wasn’t known until 2018, but it had been going on for years, so I suppose if Cal had his ear to the ground he could’ve known before it became common knowledge.

However, what I don’t buy is if Cal is so pure and diligent in his purity re:Nike that he would hire Wagner at Memphis, associate with WWW or be oblivious to the two situations that got his final fours vacated. It doesn’t make sense for him to be both oblivious when shady stuff is going on at his own program yet so diligent as to skip the Nike tourney a year before Nike’s shadiness became common knowledge. Furthermore, what’s the ethical difference between him having Memphis pay Wagner’s father vs Nike paying Bagleys father?

Unless he’s changed his MO at UK. Which he is free to do, like I said, but he’d better adjust his tactics accordingly knowing he’ll be missing out on the top recruits. We don’t expect you to cheat to win here, we just expect you to win.
Not to protect Cal here but Camby hooked up with the agent on his own, after going to UMass. Rose was cleared by the NCAA to play, what was Cal to do? You make it sound like he was nearly complicit.
 
the problem isn’t that they’re lacking talent. Of course many will be good after a few years of NBA training, coaching and millions in investment. The issue is relying on ALL freshman all season long and 6 games in a row.
And too, just the natural physical maturation, confidence and comfortableness that comes with age and experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FrankUnderwood
i would think most coaches know who is for sale and who isn’t. Didn’t Cal say a few times there are players he cannot recruit because of issues? The reason I have this theory is why on earth did our recruiting just change seemingly overnight? We went From getting anyone we wanted to always settling for our 2nd or third choice? In reality we will never know until maybe twenty years from now when they do a 30 for 30 on it after the statute of limitations is up on it or maybe a coach will do a tell all story on their death bed.

The biggest problem I have with your theory is Calipari being apparently so knowing and full of integrity to pass on Nike for paying a recruits father when he’d paid one himself. That makes zero sense to me, feel free to explain it.

You also don’t need your theory to explain our recruiting woes though, your theory just is an alternate explanation for why we skipped the Nike tournament. We could’ve very well done it just because Calipari doesn’t like non-conference tournaments, or many other reasons.
 
Being void of UK basketball the last week, have turned to the NBA to see how our guys are doing. What struck me is the high-level performance of the players who have been a part of our teams SINCE 2015.

Everyone always points to 2015 as the most talented team of the Cal era, but when looking at professional production of members of that squad, can we really say that anymore? Sure it was the best collection of RECRUITS in the 21st century, but were they really that talented? Karl and Devin are the only guys on that team who are making major impacts in the NBA. WCS has been a nice rotational guy, and Trey Lyles is barely averaging 2 ppg and holding onto his roster spot. Nobody else on that team, who should be in their basketball primes, is even on a roster only 5 years later.

If look at the statistics of Kentucky guys currently in the NBA, it's predominantly guys SINCE the 2015 squad. The 2017, 2018 and 2019 teams specifically. It feels like there has been a talent deficiency since 2015, but can we really say that?

2017: Bam and Fox are max-contract stars. Monk just dropped 36 last night. Hell, even Mulder has carved out a roster spot with Golden State.
2018: Shai is averaging 20 ppg all-star, Hami 12 ppg, PJ 12ppg and 7rpg, Knox and Vanderbilt aren't starters (6 ppg and 6 rpg), but have their roles carved out. Wenyen and Nick are even hanging onto rosters spots.
2019: Nick and PJ already disclosed above. Add Herro (17ppg), Keldon (15ppg) and Quickley (13 ppg).

I think you can make a good argument that Cal's teams in 2017 - 2019 were actually deeper with professional talent than his first five years. Early years were TOP heavy (AD, Cousins, Wall, Randle, Karl) but most of the starters on Cal's early teams never really had any longevity in the NBA.

I don't really have much of a punchline here (LOL), just found it somewhat fascinating. This board, myself included, highlights talent gaps for our "underachievement" since 2015, but the production on the professional level doesn't back that up. Maybe we don't give Cal enough credit for his early years? Produced historic levels of success with top recruits but not necessarily rosters full of NBA-staying power levels of talent. Conversely, the last three (tournament) years were major letdowns given how much talent was on the roster.

I just can't make sense of any of it. Go Cats!
Not to mention 16, jamal murray who has been a killer in the playoffs. Solid player for years to come
 
  • Like
Reactions: shadyCAT
The biggest problem I have with your theory is Calipari being apparently so knowing and full of integrity to pass on Nike for paying a recruits father when he’d paid one himself. That makes zero sense to me, feel free to explain it.

You also don’t need your theory to explain our recruiting woes though, your theory just is an alternate explanation for why we skipped the Nike tournament. We could’ve very well done it just because Calipari doesn’t like non-conference tournaments, or many other reasons.

At Memphis having one players dad is a lot different than not doing a single thing like that at kentucky in the entire time he has been here I would say. So in his coaching career he has hired on coach to get a player? That isn’t indicative that he would do this frequently to get recruits.

however before 2017 we would get every single recruit we offered it would seem, after 2017 we get our 2-3rd choice. This is why it makes no sense to me.

it seems to me you are implying that Cal will always and has always done shady stuff to get recruits, but my point is if he did that before than why did he stop? He has done it once in his career and didn’t need to even think about that at Kentucky until the big change happened and players started getting paid.

we are not talking about a players dad getting a job, that happened with Bagley yes, but also more shady stuff. Anton was paid over $100,000, Bamba’s brother said he got $100,000 I believe, we know the kid from Louisville got $100,000. Sure the Louisville kid is Addidas, but unless you are in the FBI than I don’t think you are silly enough to think these shoe companies were bidding against themselves.

I agree Cal hates nonconference tournaments and that could be it as well, but we will really never know the truth on anything until years later.
 
Bull shit response. You Cal slurpers always revert to this. Tell us who you would get. Tell us what coach you would get. Bullshit questions. My post was clear as day if you look at it without an agenda. We did just fine for years without a bunch of wannabe OAD. Recruit good solid basketball players without a focus on star ratings ga and develop them instead of kowtowing to the Boston’s of the world.
It's absolutely not a bullshit response. I mean it. And you're wrong in that I'm not a Cal apologist. In fact, I think there are lots of good coaches out there who could do as good a job or better than Cal does at UK. But I sure as hell don't want to pay him off to leave (that's a topic for 15 other threads).

However, I absolutely laugh at the concept that a coach (ANY COACH) should have the foresight to be able to identify high school players that are good enough to help their program win at a high level, but aren't good enough (or don't have the pervasive mindset?!?!) that they should go pro after a successful freshman season? The two are not mutually exclusive. If you bring in players that stick around for a few years, it's because they weren't good enough as freshman (and in effect UK probably had a bad season). If you bring in players that help us crush it as freshman, or even if they dramatically outperform their expectations (i.e. Herro), then absolutely they're going to go pro.

My request to have you identify a list of recruits that are good enough to play (and win) at UK without having the ability/want to go pro after 1 year was like asking you to deliver me a Unicorn. The game has changed, and they don't exist anymore. You longing for the days of getting players that want to stick around is laughable.

Those of you that would have Cal do a better job of encouraging borderline players to stay do have a point, but telling a self-entitled 18 year old kid that they're not good enough to go is not likely to do you any good.
 
It's absolutely not a bullshit response. I mean it. And you're wrong in that I'm not a Cal apologist. In fact, I think there are lots of good coaches out there who could do as good a job or better than Cal does at UK. But I sure as hell don't want to pay him off to leave (that's a topic for 15 other threads).

However, I absolutely laugh at the concept that a coach (ANY COACH) should have the foresight to be able to identify high school players that are good enough to help their program win at a high level, but aren't good enough (or don't have the pervasive mindset?!?!) that they should go pro after a successful freshman season? The two are not mutually exclusive. If you bring in players that stick around for a few years, it's because they weren't good enough as freshman (and in effect UK probably had a bad season). If you bring in players that help us crush it as freshman, or even if they dramatically outperform their expectations (i.e. Herro), then absolutely they're going to go pro.

My request to have you identify a list of recruits that are good enough to play (and win) at UK without having the ability/want to go pro after 1 year was like asking you to deliver me a Unicorn. The game has changed, and they don't exist anymore. You longing for the days of getting players that want to stick around is laughable.

Those of you that would have Cal do a better job of encouraging borderline players to stay do have a point, but telling a self-entitled 18 year old kid that they're not good enough to go is not likely to do you any good.
I get the sense that you and I probably agree on a lot of opinions about UK basketball. I’m not one of the folks that seem to be so blinded by Calipari “hate” they can’t really discuss anything basketball related separate from the desperate need to blame Calipari for all things in life. In fact, I think Calipari is an incredible coach. I – rightly or wrongly – just want to see him build his rosters differently. I believe that a roster building strategy of relying on 3-4 (or probably even 2) new OADs every season is an unnecessary tightrope to walk for success and hurts UK’s ability to be consistently good. Do you think building the roster with OADs is a good plan?
 
  • Like
Reactions: St.PatterSoN-54-
I get the sense that you and I probably agree on a lot of opinions about UK basketball. I’m not one of the folks that seem to be so blinded by Calipari “hate” they can’t really discuss anything basketball related separate from the desperate need to blame Calipari for all things in life. In fact, I think Calipari is an incredible coach. I – rightly or wrongly – just want to see him build his rosters differently. I believe that a roster building strategy of relying on 3-4 (or probably even 2) new OADs every season is an unnecessary tightrope to walk for success and hurts UK’s ability to be consistently good. Do you think building the roster with OADs is a good plan?
I totally agree that a mix of young talent and veteran players would be optimal, but I also understand when players like Herro and SGA blow up and absolutely need to leave. Easy for those types to surprise the staff, and by then they can’t be replaced. I do think Cal should do a better job of getting the borderline guys to come back, but that’s shouting into the wind when their handlers are telling them otherwise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: G-PIP
It's absolutely not a bullshit response. I mean it. And you're wrong in that I'm not a Cal apologist. In fact, I think there are lots of good coaches out there who could do as good a job or better than Cal does at UK. But I sure as hell don't want to pay him off to leave (that's a topic for 15 other threads).

However, I absolutely laugh at the concept that a coach (ANY COACH) should have the foresight to be able to identify high school players that are good enough to help their program win at a high level, but aren't good enough (or don't have the pervasive mindset?!?!) that they should go pro after a successful freshman season? The two are not mutually exclusive. If you bring in players that stick around for a few years, it's because they weren't good enough as freshman (and in effect UK probably had a bad season). If you bring in players that help us crush it as freshman, or even if they dramatically outperform their expectations (i.e. Herro), then absolutely they're going to go pro.

My request to have you identify a list of recruits that are good enough to play (and win) at UK without having the ability/want to go pro after 1 year was like asking you to deliver me a Unicorn. The game has changed, and they don't exist anymore. You longing for the days of getting players that want to stick around is laughable.

Those of you that would have Cal do a better job of encouraging borderline players to stay do have a point, but telling a self-entitled 18 year old kid that they're not good enough to go is not likely to do you any good.
But you don’t bring 5-8 of mediocre OAD and expect to win anything. You have to have a mix. We keep losing guys that don’t even get drafted, not counting the transfers. No way you can maintain a high level program that way
 
I totally agree that a mix of young talent and veteran players would be optimal, but I also understand when players like Herro and SGA blow up and absolutely need to leave. Easy for those types to surprise the staff, and by then they can’t be replaced. I do think Cal should do a better job of getting the borderline guys to come back, but that’s shouting into the wind when their handlers are telling them otherwise.
So how do other schools manage to get guys back?
 
So how do other schools manage to get guys back?
As I said earlier, Cal could do a better job of convincing borderline players to return. But then again, you’re so hellbent on firing our coach and running around calling prople Cal-slurpers that there probably isn’t much time left to work on reading comprehension.
 
OAD does work, just not the way Cal is recruiting right now. If you’re getting OADs you need the elite of the elite who are sure fire top picks. The problem is we’re not getting those guys anymore.
I’m not so sure . When coach k had the Zion team and Bagley team, he had the elite of the elite and he didn’t even get to the final four.
 
Being void of UK basketball the last week, have turned to the NBA to see how our guys are doing. What struck me is the high-level performance of the players who have been a part of our teams SINCE 2015.

Everyone always points to 2015 as the most talented team of the Cal era, but when looking at professional production of members of that squad, can we really say that anymore? Sure it was the best collection of RECRUITS in the 21st century, but were they really that talented? Karl and Devin are the only guys on that team who are making major impacts in the NBA. WCS has been a nice rotational guy, and Trey Lyles is barely averaging 2 ppg and holding onto his roster spot. Nobody else on that team, who should be in their basketball primes, is even on a roster only 5 years later.

If look at the statistics of Kentucky guys currently in the NBA, it's predominantly guys SINCE the 2015 squad. The 2017, 2018 and 2019 teams specifically. It feels like there has been a talent deficiency since 2015, but can we really say that?

2017: Bam and Fox are max-contract stars. Monk just dropped 36 last night. Hell, even Mulder has carved out a roster spot with Golden State.
2018: Shai is averaging 20 ppg all-star, Hami 12 ppg, PJ 12ppg and 7rpg, Knox and Vanderbilt aren't starters (6 ppg and 6 rpg), but have their roles carved out. Wenyen and Nick are even hanging onto rosters spots.
2019: Nick and PJ already disclosed above. Add Herro (17ppg), Keldon (15ppg) and Quickley (13 ppg).

I think you can make a good argument that Cal's teams in 2017 - 2019 were actually deeper with professional talent than his first five years. Early years were TOP heavy (AD, Cousins, Wall, Randle, Karl) but most of the starters on Cal's early teams never really had any longevity in the NBA.

I don't really have much of a punchline here (LOL), just found it somewhat fascinating. This board, myself included, highlights talent gaps for our "underachievement" since 2015, but the production on the professional level doesn't back that up. Maybe we don't give Cal enough credit for his early years? Produced historic levels of success with top recruits but not necessarily rosters full of NBA-staying power levels of talent. Conversely, the last three (tournament) years were major letdowns given how much talent was on the roster.

I just can't make sense of any of it. Go Cats!
Good analysis but I think you uttered the key words "Professional talent". The thing about the 15 team was they has all already shown themselves to be good high level college talents that year. Thats why that team has that aura about them. A lot of the other guys were Meh here and blossomed later.
 
I totally agree that a mix of young talent and veteran players would be optimal, but I also understand when players like Herro and SGA blow up and absolutely need to leave. Easy for those types to surprise the staff, and by then they can’t be replaced. I do think Cal should do a better job of getting the borderline guys to come back, but that’s shouting into the wind when their handlers are telling them otherwise.
I think you need to build the core of the roster every year with the most skilled and competitive high school recruits you can find regardless of NBA potential. That means a lot of 6'1" PGs, 6'3" SGs and tweener PFs. They'll lack some of the length and freakish athleticism of recruits ranked higher on potential, but they're better basketball players right now and will be much better college players as upperclassmen than the higher recruits were as freshmen (before they were drafted on all that potential/talent). And it's in that sophomore and junior years when you expect these guys I'm talking about to really start to shine. And when they do eventually leave, UK is usually going to have players with some experience to take their place. I'm not talking about recruiting scrubs here, either. Players like PJ Washington, Tyler Herro and Shai Alexander are examples of what I'm talking about, even though two of those guys developed quicker than expected and were 1st round draft picks. That will still happen if you recruited like I would like to see - which I think is happening with players like Hopkins, Hickman, Askew, Jackson and Ware.

I just don't think recruiting guys who have basically been predetermined to be OAD is the best way to build a roster at a powerhouse program - and I'm confident it's not the best way to get good shooting.
 
As I said earlier, Cal could do a better job of convincing borderline players to return. But then again, you’re so hellbent on firing our coach and running around calling prople Cal-slurpers that there probably isn’t much time left to work on reading comprehension.
FYI. I have never called for him to be fired because that next to impossible with that contract. I want him to quit. He has failed to put his best effort for his employer. So be a man and resign
 
  • Like
Reactions: Madcat62
This. I've said it before, and you're right.
Agreed. It’s really the most accurate and succinct way to frame this. Couple shots here and there and the success of ‘11 and ‘14 could have very easily been swapped with ‘17 and ‘19. Win or lose, the margins under Cal have been alarming small. Can’t imagine a team has played in as many close tournament games as we have the last 10 years.
 
Last edited:
At Memphis having one players dad is a lot different than not doing a single thing like that at kentucky in the entire time he has been here I would say. So in his coaching career he has hired on coach to get a player? That isn’t indicative that he would do this frequently to get recruits.

however before 2017 we would get every single recruit we offered it would seem, after 2017 we get our 2-3rd choice. This is why it makes no sense to me.

it seems to me you are implying that Cal will always and has always done shady stuff to get recruits, but my point is if he did that before than why did he stop? He has done it once in his career and didn’t need to even think about that at Kentucky until the big change happened and players started getting paid.

we are not talking about a players dad getting a job, that happened with Bagley yes, but also more shady stuff. Anton was paid over $100,000, Bamba’s brother said he got $100,000 I believe, we know the kid from Louisville got $100,000. Sure the Louisville kid is Addidas, but unless you are in the FBI than I don’t think you are silly enough to think these shoe companies were bidding against themselves.

I agree Cal hates nonconference tournaments and that could be it as well, but we will really never know the truth on anything until years later.

I have no idea how shady or pure Cal is kr was, one can only guess. My last guess would be your scenario though, one where his integrity is so high he’d skip the Nike tournament, spurning such a crucial relationship, because of stuff he’d done himself years earlier.

As far as Bagley’s brother, I just read that article and it sounded like his half-brother never mentioned Nike, only a guy paying for his living basically to courier influence. Furthermore, his brother was estranged and has since been murdered in a dispute with a neighbor. Dude had a colorful past and it’s possible Bamba cut him out of his life and this was his brothers way of trying to get back at him. Who knows? I don’t know who Anton is you keep mentioning either.

As far as Adidas goes, these guys were bidding against Nike, only Nike is doing it legally. They paid recruits parents six figures to run AAU circuits, why would they need to hand them bags of cash as well? Explain that to me - they’d just give the recruits parent a raise if they needed more money.
 
I have no idea how shady or pure Cal is kr was, one can only guess. My last guess would be your scenario though, one where his integrity is so high he’d skip the Nike tournament, spurning such a crucial relationship, because of stuff he’d done himself years earlier.

As far as Bagley’s brother, I just read that article and it sounded like his half-brother never mentioned Nike, only a guy paying for his living basically to courier influence. Furthermore, his brother was estranged and has since been murdered in a dispute with a neighbor. Dude had a colorful past and it’s possible Bamba cut him out of his life and this was his brothers way of trying to get back at him. Who knows? I don’t know who Anton is you keep mentioning either.

As far as Adidas goes, these guys were bidding against Nike, only Nike is doing it legally. They paid recruits parents six figures to run AAU circuits, why would they need to hand them bags of cash as well? Explain that to me - they’d just give the recruits parent a raise if they needed more money.

Ayton from Arizona my phone always autocorrects it to Anton. We are just going to have to agree to disagree here I suppose, that is what the internet and theories are for when we will never have the actual truth of any situation.

We are just too far off on what each other is trying to say I guess. Arizona, Kansas, Auburn, Oklahoma State, Louisville are not facing serious sanctions because Nike is playing within the rules. Nike played within the rules with Bagley and other recruits I’m sure but not in these cases that resulted in major violations. (Addidas also for that matter) this is my reason for thinking what I do. Why on earth If we were paying players before would we all the sudden stop?

also you keep mentioning that cal has shown he will do these things in the past and that is with Wagner and hiring someone as a coach and it happened once. That is not what I am saying at all I am speaking about the actual rules violations of a coach arranging payments for players.

I appreciate the convo though it is nice to discuss and throw stuff out there I just wish we could find the truth but the FBI completely dropped the ball on that one!
 
Being void of UK basketball the last week, have turned to the NBA to see how our guys are doing. What struck me is the high-level performance of the players who have been a part of our teams SINCE 2015.

Everyone always points to 2015 as the most talented team of the Cal era, but when looking at professional production of members of that squad, can we really say that anymore? Sure it was the best collection of RECRUITS in the 21st century, but were they really that talented? Karl and Devin are the only guys on that team who are making major impacts in the NBA. WCS has been a nice rotational guy, and Trey Lyles is barely averaging 2 ppg and holding onto his roster spot. Nobody else on that team, who should be in their basketball primes, is even on a roster only 5 years later.

If look at the statistics of Kentucky guys currently in the NBA, it's predominantly guys SINCE the 2015 squad. The 2017, 2018 and 2019 teams specifically. It feels like there has been a talent deficiency since 2015, but can we really say that?

2017: Bam and Fox are max-contract stars. Monk just dropped 36 last night. Hell, even Mulder has carved out a roster spot with Golden State.
2018: Shai is averaging 20 ppg all-star, Hami 12 ppg, PJ 12ppg and 7rpg, Knox and Vanderbilt aren't starters (6 ppg and 6 rpg), but have their roles carved out. Wenyen and Nick are even hanging onto rosters spots.
2019: Nick and PJ already disclosed above. Add Herro (17ppg), Keldon (15ppg) and Quickley (13 ppg).

I think you can make a good argument that Cal's teams in 2017 - 2019 were actually deeper with professional talent than his first five years. Early years were TOP heavy (AD, Cousins, Wall, Randle, Karl) but most of the starters on Cal's early teams never really had any longevity in the NBA.

I don't really have much of a punchline here (LOL), just found it somewhat fascinating. This board, myself included, highlights talent gaps for our "underachievement" since 2015, but the production on the professional level doesn't back that up. Maybe we don't give Cal enough credit for his early years? Produced historic levels of success with top recruits but not necessarily rosters full of NBA-staying power levels of talent. Conversely, the last three (tournament) years were major letdowns given how much talent was on the roster.

I just can't make sense of any of it. Go Cats!
the last 4 or 5 years cal has not got the top players he ha shad to settle for his second or third choice. and quite frankly i just don't care what they do in the nba.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KyFaninNC
ADVERTISEMENT