Watched a old game Clay co vs Ballard. Farmer vs Houston.

[motodog]

Dude was one of the best hs players in the state, then came up a game short of the final 4, as an intrical part of the most successful college bball program in history. Dale Brown would agree as well, he would have played at LAY if not UK. ......also, he played against Houston more than once. I watched him at the LIT

 

[TheThack]

Jon Hood, Josh Carrier or any other player of that caliber could produce in the scenario that Farmer benefited from.

Maybe they would, maybe not. I do not deal in speculation I deal in fact. Farmer scored 898 points in his four yeas, Carrier 110, Hood 95.

This ish is a joke and geography/heritage has everything to do with it.

No, geography/heritage has nothing to do with it. Farmer did what he did, produced what he produced whether he was from the mountains of eastern Kentucky or New York does not change that. Responses such as yours that attack the credibility of the person with whom you disagree rather than relevant information to advance your position are indicative of a weak argument.

He played by default because there weren’t any other options due to probation but you spin that into he played on good teams so therefore he was good. Absolute disingenuous bs and anybody half as smart as you portray yourself to be could figure that out.

Interesting dichotomy in your argument. On the one hand you have argued he only played and achieved what he did because he played on a poor team and the coach had no other opportunities. On the other hand, when I point out the last two years the teams were pretty good, best records in the SEC, just missing the final four, suddenly the quality of the team doesn't matter. Ironically, those two teams he had his best statistics. It seems to me if the team itself was good and his playing time increased, he was likely a pretty good player.

I bet good Farmer never leaves the bench on Pitinos teams when he got actual good players. This program would be destroyed if we relied on Farmer type players and yet they get great praise bestowed upon their untapped exploits. Jon Hood could jump out of the gym according to experts on this board but he rarely played and looked woefully behind athletically. Hood was also designated a sharp shooter by those that know the game and yet he couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn.

This is nothing more than speculation, not facts. We will never know what Farmer may have done on a different team but we do know what he and players like him (Pelfrey and Feldhaus) did their last two years. They rose to the occasion and performed well enough to not be destroyed as you speculated.

Farmer played because of probation and wouldn’t have otherwise, in a system that tried to compensate for a lack of talent by throwing up threes. That doesn’t make him good and he wasn’t.

I am not arguing why Farmer got to play at UK. That has no impact on whether he was a good college player or not when he left. What matters in that determination was his performance on the floor, during actual games when he had his opportunities. His first two years, he did not perform well. He was not a superstar ever, not a great player at the college level. No one has argued that. But he improved over his four years. As noted in my original post, he transformed his body and his game from his first year to his last. By my standards, in the games he played and the opportunities he had, he ultimately answered the bell and became a pretty good player based solely on his performance, stats and results. At the end of the day, I believe those are the things that should be the measuring stick.

 

[Xception]

Maybe they would, maybe not. I do not deal in speculation I deal in fact. Farmer scored 898 points in his four yeas, Carrier 110, Hood 95.



No, geography/heritage has nothing to do with it. Farmer did what he did, produced what he produced whether he was from the mountains of eastern Kentucky or New York does not change that. Responses such as yours that attack the credibility of the person with whom you disagree rather than relevant information to advance your position are indicative of a weak argument.



Interesting dichotomy in your argument. On the one hand you have argued he only played and achieved what he did because he played on a poor team and the coach had no other opportunities. On the other hand, when I point out the last two years the teams were pretty good, best records in the SEC, just missing the final four, suddenly the quality of the team doesn't matter. Ironically, those two teams he had his best statistics. It seems to me if the team itself was good and his playing time increased, he was likely a pretty good player.



This is nothing more than speculation, not facts. We will never know what Farmer may have done on a different team but we do know what he and players like him (Pelfrey and Feldhaus) did their last two years. They rose to the occasion and performed well enough to not be destroyed as you speculated.



I am not arguing why Farmer got to play at UK. That has no impact on whether he was a good college player or not when he left. What matters in that determination was his performance on the floor, during actual games when he had his opportunities. His first two years, he did not perform well. He was not a superstar ever, not a great player at the college level. No one has argued that. But he improved over his four years. As noted in my original post, he transformed his body and his game from his first year to his last. By my standards, in the games he played and the opportunities he had, he ultimately answered the bell and became a pretty good player based solely on his performance, stats and results. At the end of the day, I believe those are the things that should be the measuring stick.

Farmer played on a good team because of Mashburn primarily, that doesn’t make Farmer good. There are average to poor players on plenty of good teams. Pitinos system of pressing was new and teams hadn’t adjusted but it allowed the use of average players to be effective.

I’ve already stated this but you are disingenuous and won’t acknowledge that because it kills your argument, so keep dancing around that and pretend Farmer was good because of what the team did. The dichotomy is you pretending to be smart but not able to figure out the points I just referenced. I bet Farmer doesn’t approach 898 in the system and with the players that Hood has to play with, he never leaves the bench just like Hood .

I attack the person because you’re a dumbass who refuses to acknowledge legitimate points in lieu of stats bastardized by a system that nobody in college is effective with anymore. His stats are weak anyway, who knows why you tout them as proof. Amaze us again with your open thesaurus posting.

 

[Xception]

@TheThack I doubt I’ll be interested in reading anything else you’ll post given the slant you have towards locals, I’ll put you on ignore. You can discuss it with the mouth breathers I already ignore that I’m sure are outraged at me for not considering Richy the most bestest.

 

[TheThack]

Farmer played on a good team because of Mashburn primarily, that doesn’t make Farmer good. There are average to poor players on plenty of good teams. Pitinos system of pressing was new and teams hadn’t adjusted but it allowed the use of average players to be effective.

I’ve already stated this but you are disingenuous and won’t acknowledge that because it kills your argument, so keep dancing around that and pretend Farmer was good because of what the team did. The dichotomy is you pretending to be smart but not able to figure out the points I just referenced. I bet Farmer doesn’t approach 898 in the system and with the players that Hood has to play with, he never leaves the bench just like Hood .

I attack the person because you’re a dumbass who refuses to acknowledge legitimate points in lieu of stats bastardized by a system that nobody in college is effective with anymore. His stats are weak anyway, who knows why you tout them as proof. Amaze us again with your open thesaurus posting.

Make a legitimate point and I will acknowledge it.

Yes, Mashburn was the key ingredient that made UK a special team. However, he did not play alone.

Yes, we played a fast paced style that reflected an increase in the points scored. But Mashburn himself accounted for half that.

But regardless of the system used, that was the only system he had to play in. I could just as easily argue the style of play was not conducive to Farmer's talent. After all he was slow, overweight and not particularly athletic. All of which but him at a disadvantage in this system you say enhanced his game.

But back to facts, they are after all the real story. Farmer was one of 12-13 scholarship athletes on the 92 team, and he was the fourth leading scorer.

Funny how you never want to acknowledge the points I have made other than to dismiss as irrelevant but demand your point be addressed. But once again, you attack the poster with name calling. Note that I have not disparaged you personally, I have just presented facts and arguments that for some reason you seem unwilling to accept or acknowledge.

I see your arguments and your logic but they do nothing to counter Farmer's actual performances those last two years. He performed in the system in which he was placed and in my opinion did a pretty good job.

Your arguments and personal attacks do not influence what he did nor do they sway my opinion. And believe me, I have no desire to change yours. If you think he is not a good player that is your prerogative. However, when you try to force that opinion on me and others who disagree, I will not defer unless you bring a more convincing argument.

 

[TheThack]

@TheThack I doubt I’ll be interested in reading anything else you’ll post given the slant you have towards locals, I’ll put you on ignore. You can discuss it with the mouth breathers I already ignore that I’m sure are outraged at me for not considering Richy the most bestest.

Best of luck in your future discussions. I tried to stay on point and post factually without personal attacks as I have no anger or animosity with you or your opinion. As this is a board where fans post, discuss and when necessary defend their opinions, I was merely exercising that options as were you.

 

[UK90]

I gotta say, every time I read a Richie Farmer discussion, the "emperor has no clothes" parable springs to mind. And that's been the case for three friggin decades now.

There's one "region" of the state that SO dearly wanted that guy to become a UK legend that they were determined to make him into one even though he obviously didn't deserve it. And boy do they ever get angry when UK fans from other parts dare to poke a hole in their delusion by pointing out ..well, you know ...the actual truth. So we've been left in this weird situation where we're supposed to pretend a crappy player was something special just so we won't be attacked for daring to mention that this emperor is butt naked.

And three decades later, even after the guy's been proven to be a thieving con-man criminal, a lot of em are still clinging away to their delusion.

 

[TheThack]

I gotta say, every time I read a Richie Farmer discussion, the "emperor has no clothes" parable springs to mind. And that's been the case for three friggin decades now.

There's one "region" of the state that SO dearly wanted that guy to become a UK legend that they were determined to make him into one even though he obviously didn't deserve it. And boy do they ever get angry when UK fans from other parts dare to poke a hole in their delusion by pointing out ..well, you know ...the actual truth.

And three decades later, in 2018, even after the guy's been proven to be a thieving con-man criminal, they're still clinging away.

Where exactly am I "clinging" away to anything other than my opinion that he was a good player? Where have I tried to build him a legend? I mean, calling someone a good, not great player is not really a legend building endorsement.

Did I defend or even discuss his personal character? I believe the topic was whether or not he was a good player.

Did I say anything in my posts with anger, rage or hate? Did I call you or Xception names? Did I disparage people from any region in the state?

Where is the delusion in what I posted? I offered an opinion, supported it with evidence and facts. Did the fact my opinion differed from yours make it delusional? Did disagreeing with you make me a biased agenda driven poster incapable of independent thought?

So, I too am reflecting on the Emperor Wears No Cloths, however in my version Farmer is not the one in the lead role.

 

[jackcarlson]

I am glad that he has a jersey in the rafters. No other UK team EVER played with such heart!