Three types of posters...

[BlueBomb]

There are three types of posters, which one are you?

The kind that thinks players from the past are always better than current/future Cats. I tend to fit in this group. Sky Walker and Monster Mash are the greatest ever and don't try to tell me different!!

The kind that thinks the current crop or next year's recruits are better than players from the past. A post on Malik Monk is what caused me to post this. Apparently, he's the best ever...

Or the kind that can actually make fair judgments. Don't lie and tell me you belong here if you don't.

OK, so what say you?

 

[5iveStarRecruit]

I remember when majority of the board were labeling Malik Newman the best guard since John Wall when we were recruiting him lol. Lots of people fit into #2.

 

[.S&C.]

I think the notion that because some people display nostalgia in their thinking, that all of a sudden that means all newer players are just as good or better, is bs. It's a mixed bag.

Having said that baseball was better in the 90's, the NBA From the 80's and 90's was way way better, and the NFL has absolutely never changed. Same everything with half the league in jail.

 

[.S&C.]

I remember when majority of the board were labeling Malik Newman the best guard since John Wall when we were recruiting him lol. Lots of people fit into #2.

I'm guilty on Newman. I wanted him badly.

 

[5iveStarRecruit]

I'm guilty on Newman. I wanted him badly.

Yeah, he's been underwhelming so far.

He's been shooting them up at high volume, so it can just be bad variance. Needs to clean it up quick if he wants to be a 1 & done.

 

[CoachV182]

I think the notion that because some people display nostalgia in their thinking, that all of a sudden that means all newer players are just as good or better, is bs. It's a mixed bag.

Having said that baseball was better in the 90's, the NBA From the 80's and 90's was way way better, and the NFL has absolutely never changed. Same everything with half the league in jail.

Don't forget wrestling. Wrestling was much better in the 80's/90's.

 

[musrat59]

I'll take the fifth.

 

[basketballhead]

Dibs on the 6th

 

[kybassfan]

I tend to be agnostic where recruits are concerned. I think you don't really know how quickly they are going to develop till you get a chance to watch their progress against top tier D1 talent. Folks tend to gravitate to extremes. 17 - 19 year old kids tend to be all over the board.

 

[yabbadabbadoo]

I don't think you can accurately cross time periods when talking about players. Players today are obviously, as a group (always exceptions like James Blackmon), a little faster and a little more athletic than in years past. I do think, however, that somebody like a sophomore or junior Mashburn would have his way in todays game with the youth that exists.

 

[KYtotheCore]

I tend to fall in the category of athletes across eras. I have a more firm grasp on players from the 80's to now, simply because of my age. However, jut because I never saw Grevey or Issel play, I tend to believe what I hear about them from the people that have. The stats lists support what I'm told.

 

[WhiskeyCat]

Would like to say that I am in the fair judgement group but probably tend to lean towards past players being the greatest.

 

[Ugoff]

 

[LineSkiCat14]

I'll tell you which one I shy away from: Those who think future recruits will be better than what we had/have. Or more specifically, those who think there's no transition from HS to college. 99% of recruits are going to need time to adjust to the game, their stats will drop, their weaknesses, however minuscule they are, will be brought to light. It's nothing against them, it's just the next level of basketball.

You should never assume a recruit who has no college experience is just automatically better than the guy who has a year or two of experience (with probably a similar ranking no less).

 

[KentuckyRLD]

I have seen a lot of players over the years but ranking them from best to worst is a very difficult thing to do. However, there are a couple of things I know for sure. First Dan Issel is the best UK player ever. There may be a better one sometime in the future but so far, there has not been. Now don't start this well in the Pro's business since we are talking strictly about what they did in college. I also know that we have had some phenomenal players in the last few years, such as Mashburn and Davis. I like to think I can judge clearly the past players and the modern players. But UK fans need to realize that players like Issel and Spivey would be just as dominate today as they were when they played. And if you could take Mashburn and Davis back to the 60s and 70s they would be just as dominate.

 

[ORCAT]

I tend to fall in the category of athletes across eras. I have a more firm grasp on players from the 80's to now, simply because of my age. However, jut because I never saw Grevey or Issel play, I tend to believe what I hear about them from the people that have. The stats lists support what I'm told.

I'm with you on this but did see Grevey and Issel play and they could play today. Some on here, usually younger fans, think the old generation guys just couldn't keep up with today's athletes. I disagree. Give them the same type of training facilities and all the advantages today's athletes have to develop strength, skill, quickness, etc. and those top athletes could still compete today. Having said that, I love today's athletes and think many are fantastic in their own right so I guess I fall into the category of athletes across the eras, as you say. We've had great ones earlier, great ones not too long ago and great ones today. I try not to distinguish and just say they all were super athletes with tremendous basketball skills whether it be shooting, handling the ball, defense, rebounding or whatever.

 

[BourbonBalz]

I do not judge players based on when they played. I keep an open mind, to an extent. I don't think players from the 40's o 50's could compete that well today due to the increase in size, speed, and athleticism. I think players from the 70's could be just as good as today's players.

 

[docholiday51]

I try to be objective but how the game has changed over the years make it difficult.The players in the 70's,80'sand90's were more disciplined and executed better but players of today are so much bigger,faster and athletic that they can do stuff that players of yesterday couldn't .If the players of the past were young in today's world they could still probably play.Spivey,Nash,Issel or Mash if they were 20 years old today could play the game

Oh,by the way Jackie Fargo and Tojo could kick John Cena's a$$

 

[WildMoon]

I'm the third.

 

[Clive Gollings]

There's not really a debate that it was. Wrestling has been pretty awful since about 1899.

There you go.

 

[Big Foot 275]

Okay, I am an old fart and I will get the debate started once again.
Issel was all time leading scorer and rebounder so he was the best ever.
10th leading scorer in history of ABA/NBA combined.
If Davis had stayed 3 years and broke his records then Davis would be best ever.
Obviously no player of that caliber is ever going to stay for 3 years so in my opinion
Issel will never be surpassed.
I guess that's sounds like I am in the fair judgement group but my son argues with
me that don't give the newer players enough credit. He may be right but I'm not likely to change.
It's pretty nice as a UK fan to have all these great players to talk about.

Go Cats!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[IL Wildcat]

I think we'd all like to say we're in the 3rd category, but the truth is likely more #1 or #2. I think I lean more toward #2 when I'm not in my right mind, which is usually when I'm looking at a new team full of freshmen. I think it's wishful thinking as much as anything else. I want this kid to be better than anyone who has ever played, so that's how I think of him. I'm sure many of us have those kinds of crazy thoughts about Jamal Murray and Skal Labissiere right now.

But when I'm not trying to make an argument or on the defensive, I think I can look at it objectively. Talk to me AFTER the season and I can be objective in looking back, I think. But right now, we have Mugsy Bogues, Tony Parker, Chris Paul, and Tim Duncan all starting for UK. Haha!

 

[MWes11]

Fair Judgment group. Judgment Free Zone as well.

 

[preacherfan]

I think the notion that because some people display nostalgia in their thinking, that all of a sudden that means all newer players are just as good or better, is bs. It's a mixed bag.

Having said that baseball was better in the 90's, the NBA From the 80's and 90's was way way better, and the NFL has absolutely never changed. Same everything with half the league in jail.

In all seriousness, if you compare Pittsburgh's Iron Curtain to the defensive line of the worst NFL teams today, it would be no contest. The players today are SO much bigger, faster and stronger.

 

[caneintally]

I'll tell you which one I shy away from: Those who think future recruits will be better than what we had/have. Or more specifically, those who think there's no transition from HS to college. 99% of recruits are going to need time to adjust to the game, their stats will drop, their weaknesses, however minuscule they are, will be brought to light. It's nothing against them, it's just the next level of basketball.

You should never assume a recruit who has no college experience is just automatically better than the guy who has a year or two of experience (with probably a similar ranking no less).

THIS .

 

[Deli owl]

My son has a 3D poster

 

[Brando Mac]

I'm the type of poster that's just happy that it's even debatable that our players today are as good as some of our all-time greats, and that we're constantly landing and DEVELOPING great talent (see: Cal taking Towns who wasn't #1 in any of the 2014 class rankings, drastically improving him as a post player per his high school coach, and turning him into the unanimous #1 pick over long-time top pick favorite Okafor).

 

[UKBrassowTipIN]

I don't doubt older players could play and some could today and vice versa..I just think the game is bigger now than it ever has been...Afterall it's a global game now (the second biggest sport globally ) and people are learning parts of the game and put into higher competition earlier because there is a larger pool of players that are good. I just can't deal when people think there's absolutely no way anyone today could compete back in the day...as if there was just a period of time where people forgot how to play and everyone is starting over relearning the game.

 

[blubo]

Don't forget wrestling. Wrestling was much better in the 80's/90's.

even better back in the 60s & 70s; dick the bruiser, the shiek, handsome johnny baron, magnificenct maurice, cowboy bob ellis...........it was real back then. sometimes i think most of it is fake nowadays.

 

[BlueBomb]

Wow, when I posted this, I assumed there was going to be lots of name calling and what not. Good conversation.

 

[jedcat]

There's such a broad spectrum of age too. I'm 45, so I remember a little from the 70's (Macy for instance), but I do not have any first-hand watching experience of Issel, Dampier, Beard, etc. Younger fans would have even less of a sample size.

I think that has a lot to do with which category you would fit in.

 

[VAWildcat15]

It's easy to overrate players from the past because we've already seen their story play out and we know how it ends.

- When comparing against "last year's team" in any given year, people tend to talk about how that team looked in March/April and compare it against a team that has played three games together.

- When comparing against players from yesteryear (especially people who have been retired for a while), we are talking about people who have completed their careers and comparing them with guys who are only halfway done. Also, time can help soften purely personal reasons for disliking somebody (I think of Emmitt Smith much differently now that he isn't playing my Redskins several times a year).

For these reasons I fall solidly in group #3. I try to avoid making those comparisons as much as possible.

 

[FlCATFan]

The game has changed so much in the 60+ years that I've been a fan. For example: Rupp's Runts went 27 and 2. They were an exciting team to watch. But how would they fare against the 38 and 1 2015 version of the Cats? I'd pay a ton to see that game with both teams in their prime.

I will say this though. I'd take Louie Dampier as my 2 guard on this or any other UK team ever.

 

[Teachable Moe]

even better back in the 60s & 70s; dick the bruiser, the shiek, handsome johnny baron, magnificenct maurice, cowboy bob ellis...........it was real back then. sometimes i think most of it is fake nowadays.

What? No Gorgeous George or Bobo Brazil?

 

[poppycat]

I'll take the fifth.

Not all at once.........

 

[prossdog]

I'm going to go with fair judgment. In another thread where the OP asked for the best all time UK player at each position, I said the 3 it would be a sin to leave off were Davis, Mashburn, and Issel. I think my love for Long past, recent past, and present UK players is about equal.