When I look at next year's roster, I get just as excited about what I don't see as what I do see.
Look at the roster as it stands now (obviously, we're going to add more players, but since we don't know who they might be, we can only analyze what we have.
G: Ulis
G: Briscoe
G: Matthews
F: Poythress
F: Labissiere
__________
F: Lee
F: Willis
G: Hawkins
1) There's a tendency to look at this team, shrug your shoulders, and say "Where is the size?" "Where is the scoring?" I look at the same team, though, and see something I like: Speed. I think that this team may score more in transition than any UK team since the '12 squad. With two point guards on the floor to distribute, the speed advantage we have at PF (with either Poy or Lee) could be very beneficial. Matthews (who I believe is wholly unappreciated) is also a slashing, electric above the rim finisher. Labissiere is certainly more athletic than most plodding centers, and if you put a smaller guy on him to counter that athleticism, he'll make you pay with his face up game.
2) When not in transition, I have a feeling we're going to see a lot of pick and roll / pick and pop situations with Ulis / Briscoe and Labissiere. Ulis' ability the knock down the jumper and/or drive and kick is a perfect compliment to Labissiere's ability to either a) rise and score on the mid-range jumper or b) roll to the hoop for lobs. This deliberate style of play on the half court would be an ideal counter-balance the fun and gun transition game, a necessary concession for a team that is very athletic, but lacks overall depth.
3) When I look at the roster, I love that I don't see any "me first" types. Instead, I see a collection of gritty, team-oriented players who, by and large, play with a high motor. The past two years, we have all been frustrated at one time or another with the Harrison twins' body language and Cauley-Stein's off and on desire to be dominant. While these three players certainly contributed a great deal to the program, their inconsistent attitudes could sometimes be maddening. If the image of Aaron Harrison crying over a non-call leaves a bad taste in your mouth, just replace it with the image of a thin bead of blood trickling down Ulis' temple.
4) If we concede that this is the kind of team Kentucky will field next year, what recruits best fit the blueprint? I certainly like Diallo's motor and think that he would flourish in the transition game. I wonder about his actual ball skills, but I'll take that if I get his size, athleticism, and willingness to go full-throttle at all times. Newman and Brown are electric scorers and have the kind of athleticism that we need, but I worry that they may "need" to get "their shots" every game. That may not be a fair assessment of Newman and Brown, but it's one that manages to keep popping up. Ingram is a shooter and fills a position (SF) of need, but will his lack of bulk and athleticism (at least compared to the man-child that is Brown) hinder his production? Maker seems to be the most logical choice, since we need a body in the post and he is the best left on the table, but there are those who think he is too soft to be a true post player--if he even makes it to college.
Thoughts?
Look at the roster as it stands now (obviously, we're going to add more players, but since we don't know who they might be, we can only analyze what we have.
G: Ulis
G: Briscoe
G: Matthews
F: Poythress
F: Labissiere
__________
F: Lee
F: Willis
G: Hawkins
1) There's a tendency to look at this team, shrug your shoulders, and say "Where is the size?" "Where is the scoring?" I look at the same team, though, and see something I like: Speed. I think that this team may score more in transition than any UK team since the '12 squad. With two point guards on the floor to distribute, the speed advantage we have at PF (with either Poy or Lee) could be very beneficial. Matthews (who I believe is wholly unappreciated) is also a slashing, electric above the rim finisher. Labissiere is certainly more athletic than most plodding centers, and if you put a smaller guy on him to counter that athleticism, he'll make you pay with his face up game.
2) When not in transition, I have a feeling we're going to see a lot of pick and roll / pick and pop situations with Ulis / Briscoe and Labissiere. Ulis' ability the knock down the jumper and/or drive and kick is a perfect compliment to Labissiere's ability to either a) rise and score on the mid-range jumper or b) roll to the hoop for lobs. This deliberate style of play on the half court would be an ideal counter-balance the fun and gun transition game, a necessary concession for a team that is very athletic, but lacks overall depth.
3) When I look at the roster, I love that I don't see any "me first" types. Instead, I see a collection of gritty, team-oriented players who, by and large, play with a high motor. The past two years, we have all been frustrated at one time or another with the Harrison twins' body language and Cauley-Stein's off and on desire to be dominant. While these three players certainly contributed a great deal to the program, their inconsistent attitudes could sometimes be maddening. If the image of Aaron Harrison crying over a non-call leaves a bad taste in your mouth, just replace it with the image of a thin bead of blood trickling down Ulis' temple.
4) If we concede that this is the kind of team Kentucky will field next year, what recruits best fit the blueprint? I certainly like Diallo's motor and think that he would flourish in the transition game. I wonder about his actual ball skills, but I'll take that if I get his size, athleticism, and willingness to go full-throttle at all times. Newman and Brown are electric scorers and have the kind of athleticism that we need, but I worry that they may "need" to get "their shots" every game. That may not be a fair assessment of Newman and Brown, but it's one that manages to keep popping up. Ingram is a shooter and fills a position (SF) of need, but will his lack of bulk and athleticism (at least compared to the man-child that is Brown) hinder his production? Maker seems to be the most logical choice, since we need a body in the post and he is the best left on the table, but there are those who think he is too soft to be a true post player--if he even makes it to college.
Thoughts?
