I really like Askew. However I'll save my excitement until I've seen him play a college game... especially at the beginning of the season. Between him and Mintz. Ones never seen a minute of college basketball and one has.
Tom Leach RE: Askew
- Thread starter Crankdatmustard
- Start date
I'll wait and see.Some always hype these kids too much and turn on them when they struggle.
Im thinking Mintz wins the job but would be ecstatic if Askew is good enough to beat him out
was recruited and reclassed to come play point guard. When he’s on the court he’s running the offense and isn’t a gunner that just happens to have the ball in his hands every possession.
By this argument, didn't UK recruit Mints to come to UK and run the offense? Didn't he transfer so he could play on the ball as opposed to the off guard?
We lost IQ and then immediately added Mintz. I'll bet you can fill in the blanks from there.
I don't need to fill in the blanks. I read about the recruitment. And if you recall the talk was to have IQ move to the point if he stayed to demonstrate to the NBA he could handle that role.
Did I talk with Cal personally? No. Did you? If so, enlighten us and I will stand corrected. If not... well we are all entitled to an opinion informed by what we see, hear, observe and learn from a multitude of sources. Did you form your opinion based on discussion with the coaching staff or did you form your opinion based on your observations as I did mine?
Anthony Epps wasn't all that athletic if I remember correctly and he seemed to do ok.
Pretty vague on what he had to say... Point guard is a guard last I checked. I gave no indication on whether he would start or not I said he came here to play on the ball not as the off guard. So what exactly did Cal say would be his role?
combo guard off the bench. Spells Askew, Clarke, and Boston as needed. Starts if there’s an injury or drug test flu.
So a combo guard (which means he plays point and off guard) and the first thing you noted was that he spells Askew who is the point guard apparent. So it seems to me like Cal agrees that he is a point guard too. Thanks for confirming!
So a combo guard (which means he plays point and off guard) and the first thing you noted was that he spells Askew who is the point guard apparent. So it seems to me like Cal agrees that he is a point guard too. Thanks for confirming!
see my previous post about what a combo guard is. He’ll spend time at all three perimeter positions. He wasn’t even starting at point guard at Creighton when he got injured. You’ll notice I’m not calling him a shooting guard or wing or anything else. He does all of the above but isn’t a starter and doesn’t excel at any one of those positions.
Cal recruited Mintz because of a fit. He was ranked as an ok grad transfer...but a really good one. If Cal was worried about getting a starting point guard...there were 3-4 better options than Mintz. Mintz wasn't scared to come off the bench and wasn't demanding play time like others.
And it's not "oh Cal didn't want a scoring point to take shots, he wanted someone to come in and run the offense" No...because Mintz isn't a true point. Mintz was brought in as a good scoring option, experienced leader, and insurance in case Askew fails. He's a great 6th or 7th man.
If Cal brought in Mintz to start point...that means he really does not think highly of Askew....or he whiffed. Cal ALWAYS tries to get the best talent at every position...ESPECIALLY point guard. Cal wouldn't be satisfied with Mintz as his option to start PG. He had Quade and Quickley and still pushed for Ashton to re-class.
Cal doesn't bring in guys like Mintz to start.
And notice I never said he would or would not start. Nor did I not say he could not play the other positions as based on what I read (here and other places too) he did play those other positions. I also never said whether or not he excelled at any. My contention was and remains that he came here primarily to play with the ball in his hands at point. Ask yourself this question. Which ability is the primary reason he was recruited to come here, his ability to play on the ball at point or his ability to play the off guard slot? My guess is, his ability to play point was the more important benefit as we already have other options at the wings.
He was going to be coming off the bench at Creighton. Coming off the bench here with a freshman point in front of him is a bigger role...with the small chance to start. And it's Kentucky.
Mintz is also coming off an injury and won’t have played in well over a year.
Edit- not being combative man, just discussing so please don’t get angry lol. Sometimes you have a tendency to type in all caps or get kind of agitated.
Last edited:
Absolutely. They HAVE to play elite level imo or at least be playing elite level by December for us to have a real shot. I’m still somewhat worried about our PG spot (askew is great but he’s a reclass and not an Uber elite so it could take him a year or so to get super comfortable). Mintz will be solid but I’m not confident to believe he can be an elite PG to lead a brand new team of guys to the promised land. Lastly, still worried about our 5 spot.
Regardless I’m excited for next year!
Cal starts freshmen point guards. As @HoptownCat93 has pointed out, it’s about his fit. He’s versatile and a solid defender. He’s not a point guard.
Man where are you getting this take from?
Nothing personal, ive just seen it mentioned twice and want to see where I missed something.
From what the stats show, Mintz LED THE BIG EAST in ast/to ratios his sophomore year and had a SLIGHT uptick in turnovers his junior year, the year you say he moved OFF the ball.
Somethings not adding up?
2016-2017: 1.8 ast/1.2 turns
2017-2018: 3.1/1.1
2018-2019:3.2/2.2
Askew is a 5 star PG and will be helped by his ability to shoot but he is also a re-class who has shown problems handling the ball under pressure from athletes with quickness.
Mintz is a grown man, Cal will not just hand Devin the keys.
There will be a BATTLE for that spot and in the end probably play similar minutes.
Last edited:
He is going to be exciting for sure, by all accounts he seems to be unselfish.
Askew, Clarke, and Mintz will all get run at PG next season.
There is no reason to think Cal wouldn't start Askew for a reason pertaining to "isn't ready," "is young," or "needs seasoning." That has never mattered in the past. Cal seemed perfectly fine starting Whitney despite him being a bad player. How is he going to be any less ready on day 1 than Askew?
There is no reason to think Cal wouldn't start Askew for a reason pertaining to "isn't ready," "is young," or "needs seasoning." That has never mattered in the past. Cal seemed perfectly fine starting Whitney despite him being a bad player. How is he going to be any less ready on day 1 than Askew?
LOL. I may type a word or a short phrase in all caps for emphasis, but it really isn't a stylistic signature of mine. Now, aggressively ridiculing people I see as trolling is. That's certainly a bad habit of mine. But you, certainly, aren't running that risk. So, go in peace.
https://www.bluejayunderground.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5404
I detected 0 sour grapes.
-good off ball defense
-good shooter
-takes terrible shots
-hardworker
-good character
-plays hero ball
-got less efficient once his role expanded
-not the best decision maker
A bad shot is just as bad as a turnover, but doesn’t show up on the stat sheet.
I can also go into his numbers from Creighton and it showed he was one of their lowing performing players on the roster.
clarke and boston are going to make his job easier and i mean he is going to get shots where he doesn’t have to create much. this team will be so different than last year. maxey and hagans could get past the first man at will. askew is not that way. he’s not going to get the corner against most sec pg’s. so i don’t see him initiating a ddo. more like a methodical half court like what the fab five used with jalen rose. he could use his height to pass and let the more athletic wings do the driving and the cutting. he’ll be able to post up smaller guards but will have to learn to always back away to pass and not get charges in the process. otherwise i think he isn’t a big threat to suite even with a pick.
i think his scoring and not necessarily his 3 point shooting (i think he’s just a scorer) overall will be what we need mostly. his decision making will be the key. if clarke is as good a decision maker and penetrates better he may play the role of initiating thr offense imo. other than that i see us running something different for this first time in a long time. maybe a high low or a triangle, which is really a 1 man ddo where you put boston and clarke always in one of two places that they get familiar with, to take their man. we are going from one of our quickest teams to one of our lankiest.
will be interesting to see how cal can set up a transition game without the overall quickness compared to last year when our guards could intercept passes with their quickness. we have imo what amounts to be a fantastic half court trapping team and that seems like a reach. i’m trying to imagine what our defense would look like by the end of next year and it’s hard to see.
i think his scoring and not necessarily his 3 point shooting (i think he’s just a scorer) overall will be what we need mostly. his decision making will be the key. if clarke is as good a decision maker and penetrates better he may play the role of initiating thr offense imo. other than that i see us running something different for this first time in a long time. maybe a high low or a triangle, which is really a 1 man ddo where you put boston and clarke always in one of two places that they get familiar with, to take their man. we are going from one of our quickest teams to one of our lankiest.
will be interesting to see how cal can set up a transition game without the overall quickness compared to last year when our guards could intercept passes with their quickness. we have imo what amounts to be a fantastic half court trapping team and that seems like a reach. i’m trying to imagine what our defense would look like by the end of next year and it’s hard to see.
Did I say in either post that he was coming here to start? No. Did I offer an opinion on whether he should start or come off the bench? Again, no. In fact, the very first sentence of my second post that you quoted referenced that I had made no comment on whether he would start or not, yet your entire response is as if I indicated he was coming here as a starter.
You said he was a bad ball handler? That was what I was responding to.
Aside from that shouldn't most of his issues you listed will be mitigated by the fact he quite clearly won't be THE MAN here?
Per the discussion you've linked it would seem most of his problems stemmed from feeling he had to play role of the closer. That won't be his role here whether he starts or not.
Last edited:
Why is it you keep throwing the straw man argument out there about starting? Why not stick to what the discussion is about and what I actually said instead of trying to take me to task for something I never once claimed. If you want to say that Mintz is not a point guard then that is your opinion. But as I have noted, and asked you, would Cal have recruited him if he could not play the point? Did not Mintz claim he wanted to transfer because he was not happy with the role that he would have at Creighton playing off the ball? I understand he may not be a pure point only. I understand that he has ability to play both and perhaps not excel at either. But from everything I have read and seen he came here primarily to provide time at the point guard position. Even in your own recounting of the discussion you had at length with Cal the very first thing you noted was he said to spell Askew. Or are we in disagreement that Askew is intended to be our point guard too?
Last edited:
The thread is about Askew, and how he will start at point guard. He will do this because he's the only point guard on the roster (and he's apparently very good). You brought up Mintz. No one knows what your point is. Mintz will play significant minutes, and will spell Askew among others. I don't know why you're struggling with that.
This isn’t saying he isn’t good, because he’s definitely good enough to play for Kentucky.
Well yeah, but then last year when he was out....the team became a top 10 team with the other guards now playing the bigger roles.
The production and efficiency numbers indicated that when he played more minutes, his team did not do as well. It seems he tried to take on too large of a role due to youth. But once he was out of the way, the younger players flourished. He was instrumental in their development for sure and made them better by his presence, but all numbers, rankings, and thoughts by their fans indicate he wasn’t great when he was leading the team.
Ok, he agrees with us. Mintz is going to be the backup guard off the bench! Will play on or off the ball depending on the situation.
Askew will be the point guard.
lol "last year when he was out.."?
How is that fair? He also led that very team in scoring in their summer league play. Is it not more likely, the whole team probably just got better over a year (shocker) rather than they got better after he got hurt lol.
Also, back to ball handling. Askew has had trouble with athletic defenders. Obviously he should grow through this, but how quickly?
We discussed this in a thread a couple weeks back and I remember Cotown cat was in there but I'm not sure if you saw so I'll repost.
I don't think Devin has been penciled in at the 1.
I brought up Mintz? Wrong again. FYI, the discussion grew from its original premise of Askew being the starter to include other items as threads almost always do. But for the record, my first post in this thread was number 47 on the second page. Mintz was brought up in post 4, you mentioned him yourself in post 7. In total prior to my response, 15 posts mentioned Mintz by name, you included. Five others responded to posts about him without actually mentioning his name but were in reference to a comment about him.
So he is mentioned multiple times well prior to my first comment, but yet I brought him up. In fact, my specific response was to you when you described that Askew "was recruited and reclassed to come play point guard. When he’s on the court he’s running the offense and isn’t a gunner that just happens to have the ball in his hands every possession." And guess what, you made that very comment in reference to someone saying that Askew was a combo guard after someone else said that Mintz was a combo guard. So not only did I not bring Mintz up, you had already discussed him with others. My initial comment merely used your post about Askew being recruited and re-classed as an analogy to what happened with Mintz, since he did the grad transfer thing and was recruited to play the point also.
For whatever reason you continue in your attempt to change the focus from what I said to peripheral items I never discussed in an attempt to cloud the issue. That is a common deflection tactic used when your own points fail to successfully counter those of the person with whom you disagree.
