ADVERTISEMENT

Why not Dajuan Wagner?

Son_Of_Saul

All-American
Gold Member
Dec 7, 2007
42,498
85,493
113
Instead of Bruiser...

Former Cal guy.

Former elite point guard.

Knows the AU terrain due to his son.

Can sell recruits on Cal's loyalty factor.

His son is the top high school player in America, and bringing in pops guarantees one year Dajuan Jr. at Kentucky.

On the other hand, maybe Cal already knows Jr. is a lock?

DgVEQRRWAAADVjT.jpg
 
Instead of Bruiser...

Former Cal guy.

Former elite point guard.

Knows the AU terrain due to his son.

Can sell recruits on Cal's loyalty factor.

His son is the top high school player in America, and bringing in pops guarantees one year Dajuan Jr. at Kentucky.

On the other hand, maybe Cal already knows Jr. is a lock?

DgVEQRRWAAADVjT.jpg
I think Cal knows how to navigate through this.
 
Instead of Bruiser...

Former Cal guy.

Former elite point guard.

Knows the AU terrain due to his son.

Can sell recruits on Cal's loyalty factor.

His son is the top high school player in America, and bringing in pops guarantees one year Dajuan Jr. at Kentucky.

On the other hand, maybe Cal already knows Jr. is a lock?

DgVEQRRWAAADVjT.jpg
Why not? Why not? Why not? Why not self ban yourself?
 
Saul If it were me, I’d have a staff with Antigua, Robic (dugout mom), Justus, and a Kentucky guy with a good pedigree.

Since it’s not me, we have Bruiser Flint and Tony Barbee.

These are some of differences in how I’d run this program and how Cal runs this program.

Take your pick.
 
Why not? Why not? Why not? Why not self ban yourself?

The fun part about you is that you literally have no idea who you're writing to at any given moment.

You lump all posters you disagree with into one monolithic entity. Are you even aware of who I am and the fact that you've literally agreed with me dozens of times in the past?

All of that noted, I do look forward to your snarky posts. They always make me laugh because they're so predictable.
 
The fun part about you is that you literally have no idea who you're writing to at any given moment.

You lump all posters you disagree with into one monolithic entity. Are you even aware of who I am and the fact that you've literally agreed with me dozens of times in the past?

All of that noted, I do look forward to your snarky posts. They always make me laugh because they're so predictable.

In KL’s defense, I’d take 40K per year to be Cal’s butler.
 
Reggie Hanson was a former player with a good pedigree. We even had our “Heart” award named after him. Reggie allegedly tried to make a pass at Brandan Wright’s mother, which Brandan Wright’s father was nonplussed about to put it mildly.

The former player fascination is a bit weird. Lots of your favorites from days gone by aren’t awesome people IRL.
 
I was wondering the same about Wagner (But in addition to)

But if you are going with Wagner, I would have preferred someone with NBA career, meaning Marcus Camby.

But I would take both.

Of course, they could add more to the staff, right?
 
Last edited:
So speculation only matters if it proves true?

Might as well shut down about 95% of our predictions on this message board then.
I'm not sure you understand what speculation means. What is speculation about it? You are suggesting Cal give the job to someone else instead of bruiser. You are essentially advocating for it. That is not even close to speculation bud.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EdgeHD and kl40504
Did Dajuan ever go back and get his degree? That is a requirement for all assistant coaches.... at least it usually is. I know that was one of the things that helped Calipari land Dajuan at Memphis. Calipari was able to hire Milt Wagner as an assistant while he finished up his degree. Cal kept Milt on staff for four years after Dajuan left for the NBA.
 
Reggie Hanson was a former player with a good pedigree. We even had our “Heart” award named after him. Reggie allegedly tried to make a pass at Brandan Wright’s mother, which Brandan Wright’s father was nonplussed about to put it mildly.

The former player fascination is a bit weird. Lots of your favorites from days gone by aren’t awesome people IRL.
It’s good for several reasons if you can do it. Cal really hasn’t tried, so we don’t know if any of them would be a good fit or not.

It’s not weird, that’s a rafters thing to say. Most top programs have always had former players on staff for a reason. Duke, UNC, Kansas, all have former
guys on staff. Kentucky has usually done the same.
 
Did Dajuan ever go back and get his degree? That is a requirement for all assistant coaches.... at least it usually is. I know that was one of the things that helped Calipari land Dajuan at Memphis. Calipari was able to hire Milt Wagner as an assistant while he finished up his degree. Cal kept Milt on staff for four years after Dajuan left for the NBA.

i believe that’s a requirement for head coaches.
 
i believe that’s a requirement for head coaches.
I'm not sure. I always thought it applied to assistants as well. I had thought that was the main reason UofL couldn't hire Milt back during that recruitment, but Memphis didn't have the same requirement. You could be correct.
 
Saul If it were me, I’d have a staff with Antigua, Robic (dugout mom), Justus, and a Kentucky guy with a good pedigree.

Since it’s not me, we have Bruiser Flint and Tony Barbee.

These are some of differences in how I’d run this program and how Cal runs this program.

Take your pick.

Antigua obviously is no longer an option at UK. However, I believe we are nearing the day where one of Cals former UK players could wind up on sideline with him.
 
I'm not sure. I always thought it applied to assistants as well. I had thought that was the main reason UofL couldn't hire Milt back during that recruitment, but Memphis didn't have the same requirement. You could be correct.

It’s not required of assistant coaches to my
Knowledge. There’s been many assistant coaches with no degree. I didn’t really think it was demanded anywhere honestly but maybe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ky grandpa
I'm not sure you understand what speculation means. What is speculation about it? You are suggesting Cal give the job to someone else instead of bruiser. You are essentially advocating for it. That is not even close to speculation bud.

I was responding to your narrow point that people had guessed about potential coaches in the past, only for it to not prove true in the end. Your point was that speculation about such matters is essentially futile. My point on the broader level is that the lifeblood of a message board is speculation/critique/debate. If you're going to be consistent with your argument, you need to go around and also condescendingly mock any notion of speculation that looks even remotely unlikely to actually happen or any critique that you disagree with.

Some posters here get off on that type of discourse. Maybe you're one of them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: morgousky
I was responding to your narrow point that people had guessed about potential coaches in the past, only for it to not prove true in the end. Your point was that speculation about such matters is essentially futile. My point on the broader level is that the lifeblood of a message board is speculation/critique/debate. If you're going to be consistent with your argument, you need to go around and also condescendingly mock any notion of speculation that looks even remotely unlikely to actually happen or any critique that you disagree with.

Some posters here get off on that type of discourse. Maybe you're one of them.
Lol, what?

I stated people had guessed about coaches in the past only to prove untrue? Really? Can you reference where I said this?

I did state people came on here and bashed the pick and stated dissapointment and their preference of someone else. Again, that wouldn't fit the definition of speculation. Not even close really. Since the likely replacement was reported on about a week ago, there really wouldn't even be a need for speculation in this thread. Particularly considering the thread was created well after Bruiser was already announced. So again, how would that be speculation? [winking]

Why would I go around yelling at people who speculate things? That is their right. It's not what you are doing however. You are just bitching about the person that was hired and advocating for the reasons it should have been someone more preferable to your liking. That doesn't equal speculation. Not even close.

Take a step back, catch a deep breath, calm down and collect yourself. It's all going to be okay big guy.
 
Lol, what?

I stated people had guessed about coaches in the past only to prove untrue? Really? Can you reference where I said this?

I did state people came on here and bashed the pick and stated dissapointment and their preference of someone else. Again, that wouldn't fit the definition of speculation. Not even close really. Since the likely replacement was reported on about a week ago, there really wouldn't even be a need for speculation in this thread. Particularly considering the thread was created well after Bruiser was already announced. So again, how would that be speculation? [winking]

Why would I go around yelling at people who speculate things? That is their right. It's not what you are doing however. You are just bitching about the person that was hired and advocating for the reasons it should have been someone more preferable to your liking. That doesn't equal speculation. Not even close.

Take a step back, catch a deep breath, calm down and collect yourself. It's all going to be okay big guy.

So true. It's not speculation if I critique. But my other point is that critiquing the Flint hire by mentioning the Wagner potential hire can generate a conversation about both the Flint hire and potential future hires. It can also add conversation about future hires. But you're right in regard to the fact that I should have been more clear about that when I wrote back to you.

But I get it. You're not interested in seeing the lack of dialectical depth in my initial responses to you or my overall position. You're in this thread for other reasons.

We have had hundreds just like you. Most of them don't last long because their bedside manner is generally repellant to long-standing posters who tend to use respect within their dialectical process. Your consistently condescending tone says you may not be interested in that.
 
Last edited:
So true. It's not speculation if I critique. But my other point is that critiquing the Flint hire by mentioning the Wagner potential hire can generate a conversation about both the Flint hire and potential future hires. It can also add conversation about future hires. But you're right in regard to the fact that I should have been more clear about that when I wrote back to you.

But I get it. You're not interested in me seeing the lack of dialectical depth in my initial responses to you or my overall position. You're in this thread for other reasons.

We have had hundreds just like you. Most of them don't last long because their bedside manner is generally repellant to respectable posters who tend to use respect within their dialectical process. Your consistently condescending tone says you may not be interested in that.
Nowhere in your initial post are speculations present other than to whether DJ may or may not be a lock. Which really isn't even speculation, it's just a maybe/maybe not. You listed 5 facts about Wagner and essentially stated that was your preferred higher over Bruiser. That is called advocating.

The post was irrelevant because the decision had already been made and wasn't going to be changed. So that is what I commented about. You got upset because someone stated the obvious you weren't prepared to accept. Then you tried to claim it was just speculation when nothing in the statement was really speculative.

However, it is a bit ironic that you have since speculated about me and my intent on this forum.
So now we can definitely say speculation exist.

You can get my tone from reading? Sounds more like you might be speculating my tone! [winking]
 
Nowhere in your initial post are speculations present other than to whether DJ may or may not be a lock. Which really isn't even speculation, it's just a maybe/maybe not. You listed 5 facts about Wagner and essentially stated that was your preferred higher over Bruiser. That is called advocating.

The post was irrelevant because the decision had already been made and wasn't going to be changed. So that is what I commented about. You got upset because someone stated the obvious you weren't prepared to accept. Then you tried to claim it was just speculation when nothing in the statement was really speculative.

However, it is a bit ironic that you have since speculated about me and my intent on this forum.
So now we can definitely say speculation exist.

You can get my tone from reading? Sounds more like you might be speculating my tone! [winking]

You still making the same point for the third time, even after I conceded that I should have been more clear in my response to you? Yep. Says a lot about your intent in this thread. Now go ahead and make the same point for the 4th time...
 
  • Like
Reactions: morgousky
You still making the same point for the third time, even after I conceded that I should have been more clear in my response to you? Yep. Says a lot about your intent in this thread. Now go ahead and make the same point for the 4th time...
Lol, I relayed the facts again because you seem confused by them. I believe if I relay them enough, you might actually absorb them.

My intent was to call out your ingorance and lack of logic. Appears it worked, being that you're now saying you have conceded I was correct and all.
 
G
So true. It's not speculation if I critique. But my other point is that critiquing the Flint hire by mentioning the Wagner potential hire can generate a conversation about both the Flint hire and potential future hires. It can also add conversation about future hires. But you're right in regard to the fact that I should have been more clear about that when I wrote back to you.

But I get it. You're not interested in seeing the lack of dialectical depth in my initial responses to you or my overall position. You're in this thread for other reasons.

We have had hundreds just like you. Most of them don't last long because their bedside manner is generally repellant to long-standing posters who tend to use respect within their dialectical process. Your consistently condescending tone says you may not be interested in that.
What?
 
Masiello would disagree.
Masiello claims he thought he had his degree from UK, UofL never followed up on it. Obviously that became an issue when Masiello was tabbed to be the Manhatten head coach.

It sounds like most people believe it's not a requirement. For some reason I had remembered that was a hold up for UofL to hire Milt Wagner as an assistant coach. Looking back at Cal's coaching staffs it looks like most had degrees, although Rod Strickland's bio states he got his degree in 2013.... which was after he was an assistant on the initial staff in 2009/10.
 
Lol, I relayed the facts again because you seem confused by them. I believe if I relay them enough, you might actually absorb them.

My intent was to call out your ingorance and lack of logic. Appears it worked, being that you're now saying you have conceded I was correct and all.

The world is in complete overhaul mode and you're relishing in a semantical concession on a message board?

Yep. You must be new here![laughing]
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT