Yeah. I'll say it... It's getting old.
- Thread starter SemperFiCat
- Start date
"Everybody" wants to play immediately? So did Willis and Hawkins somehow miss that memo that "everybody" shouldn't be willing to wait?
This is the line I don't get, and it's a narrative that has grown lately on the board (what else can people do, in light of the idea that UK is likely to lose a slew of guys to transfer and the 2nd round?). Some apologists for "it is the way it is" have yet to show evidence for such generalities being specifically factual. We know for a fact that all quality players aren't willing to wait? SKJ and Matthews are representative of the whole?
I do agree with a point brought up earlier in the thread: UK fans merely want more wins. Watching the close calls largely doesn't calm the storm, it stirs its winds even more. We've been close, even in the last two years. Fans obviously seem open to taking the next step toward success, as opposed to following the line of thinking that Gonzo keeps espousing: "Well, it could be worse, and it hasn't really been better anywhere else, so be content." 32+ NBA players, at some point, whispers the question of "why hasn't UK won a second title?" People claim that Cal's created the monster, and that's mostly true, but it's still a reality that shouldn't be dismissed just because it lacks a recent historical parallel. This many good players should produce a second title at some point. These are historic chances UK is getting, and instead of saying, "Well, at least we're not that program over there", a question that often lingers is, "did we just miss out on a historic opportunity...again?"
My line of thinking: "It's been an incredible ride, but how can the program tinker with a few minor elements to take the final step from a narrative of "UK is in the hunt 80% of the time," to "UK actually finished the job when it was supposed to?" And yes, UK was favored in 5 of its last 7 tournament losses. How can we finish the deal in those games? What would it take?
Last edited:
Idk.if you all have an inside joke or are friends on here but @SemperFiCat is a legit fan. He is just upset as are many that we can't even keep the woodchopper on a roster for longer than two years.
Willis and Harkins weren’t the type of players that you need to win it all, as that proved out. They were also from Kentucky, which made them staying unique as opposed to more talented out of state players.
I'm not addressing the need for these types of players to be the main part of a title team but rather, the type of guys to help steady a team when it's breaking to fragments on the biggest stage. Hawkins helped UK get through the 2nd round two years ago when the team was struggling. A guy like that can be the difference in a game decided by inches.
Obviously, you won't always have to count on a player like that for an entire tournament run, but once in a while, his presence on the court is the difference. Miller was that guy in 2012. As noted, Hawkins helped UK advance in 2017.
To argue the opposite leaves the contrarian with one of two options:
#1. Hope that Cal starts landing transcendent freshmen again and that those transcendent players can lead UK to a title.
#2. Assume that the current level of recruiting (2nd tier, not top 5 players) is sufficient enough to win a national title.
Both options also assume that veteran leadership has suddenly become irrelevant, and yet we see that every title in the Cal at UK Era has featured a team with critical veterans players in the main rotation, even the two "OAD teams" of Kentucky 2012 and Duke 2015.
So yes, this sudden outlook (a shifting goalpost if there ever was one) that veterans aren't necessary leaves proponents of that outlook with the two options stated above.
Luck, health, fair officiating, or a best of seven series. Some combination of those would do it.
Until then it's college basketball. It's unpredictable and the tournament is even more so. When you're a program like Kentucky, that randomness means you often are the one upset.
We're emotionally connected so we agonize and analyze, but it's a game of numbers and chaos. All of the hypotheticals in the world don't actually translate to the court.
We've got some of the best coaches of all time making more money than anyone has ever made and outright cheating to land players and there's still no one who can make themselves immune.
Not if all it takes to assert what you're trying to prove is a tiny sample of anecdotal evidence.
Marcus Lee, a completely inexperienced freshman who ultimately transferred out, saved us in a far more significant way than either of your examples.
Likewise, where was Derek Willis last year when we needed him?
Simple: you get the best players that gives you the best chance. Cal is doing that and will continue. end of discussion.
That was a couple weeks ago. And I apologized. I apologized, but if you wanna keep making it a person thing, that's on you.
...it was literally in this thread. Like a couple hours ago. Are you on that Rick James diet of having too much fun?
Hawkins showed up in last year's tournament, so there's that. Still, I'm arguing for something of a blend, with the system being obviously top-heavy with younger elite players (even the 2012 and 2015 clearly exhibited this blend).
In fact, there has never been a national champion in the history of the sport to have featured a team with all freshmen/sophomore rotation players.
Is that a tiny sample size of anecdotal evidence - the entire history of college basketball?
Friend, I didn't 'come at you' in this thread. And if you think I did, I apologize. ...and don't choke on your tears.
We made the 14 title game with freshman carrying the load and did nothing with upperclassmen in Willis and Hawkins their junior and senior year. I would have taken more talented one and dones to go with Fox, Bam and Monk over Hawkins and Willis.
We're always good. Just making sure you weren't grinding your feet on Eddie Murphy's couch.
There is a reason Call has been to the S16, E8, and FF this many times. TALENT you mofos. Of course he needs to win games, but getting there each year gives you a better chance that once every 4 years waiting on less talented kids to develop. Who cares that you "didn't get to know the kids". hell, with some of you, the more you know, the more you bi%ch and complain about them.
No, because it's largely irrelevant to what's happening now. Statistically, freshmen couldn't even play for the majority of that history.
What we're talking about is the last 6-7 years, with two teams even trying it. Pretty loosely, you can say it resulted in a title twice, with injuries stopping a third and maybe even a fourth, though I have no interest in hashing out the arbitrary technicalities of those years.
It's an ever-changing standard to be met. First it was a team led by freshmen. Then that happened a couple of times. Now it's becoming a team of ONLY freshmen or whatever people want to argue today.
To claim that whatever the standard is today is impossible or unreachable when it's already had to be changed in such a short time frame seems a bit thick and dramatic. But you'll have folks cling to it until it happens or the rules change, either of which could happen within five years, if not sooner.
UK had a real transcendent player on the 2014 team. It also had a pretty decent sophomore who was the difference in the Wisconsin game.
Further, my argument is not an either/or.
I'm advocating for a blend, and not even a blend featuring an even mixture. I think it's clear teams can win titles with a top-heavy paradigm of freshmen dominated teams, with a few upperclassmen role players offering stability and experience.
That's not to say that a freshmen team filled with transcendent players and no rotation veterans can't win the title (although it's never been done). I actually think a team of that type of player could, in fact, get it done. But that's not the type of player UK is presently getting.
If anything, UK is shifting the paradigm of getting younger (reclassifications) players who are not in the top 5 of their class.
Do you think UK can win a title with that formula? I'm actually curious about your thoughts on this.
Fair point about the sample size and the changing landscape, although I'm highly skeptical that a team filled with reclassified players and non-transcendent players is much better than a group of very solid junior/seniors who have actually learned a system together. We just saw what a team of 2nd tier, non-transcendent guys looks like. It looks like 26-11 with a decent uptick toward the end of the season, but a complete reversion to equilibrium when it mattered most.
Also, people are arguing "only freshmen or whatever people want to argue today" because that's what the apologists for the present direction are dictating as the only terms of realistic outlook.
Most of what I've seen from some, including you, the last few weeks, is an argument that presents how it's largely naïve to try to imagine guys like Gabriel/Washington/Green wanting to stay around the program when equally good talent is on the way. Thus, the "only freshmen" option is the one left by your own implications of what is possible at Kentucky.
It's an implication that some of you have settled in on. I'm merely meeting that narrative on the grounds of your choosing.
If I've misread your position, please let me know. Am I right in thinking that you're advocating for UK basically not being able to keep kids around for more than a year or two? If that's the case, doesn't that espouse the "only freshmen" criteria from your own basis of argument, since eliminating the choice of having rotation upperclassmen leaves UK's title hopes with but that one option, the freshmen and perhaps one or two sophomores option?
But I think it is Cal's pitch to the players that make them in a hurry. Cal is pitching to these guys that he will get them to the NBA faster/picked higher than anyone else...He nourishes those sugarplums of the NBA in their heads. Hell, the locker room, the Craft Center are all decorated head to toe with the NBA murals of former players. They can't get away from it. He also seems more loyal to the new crop of freshman than the kid who is still there as a soph or jr therefore they know (feel) that he will make room for the new freshman hot shot to shine over the upper classman who may be equal in production but doesn't have the chance to be a lottery pick. There is no sense of having paid your dues equating to more playing time all other things being equal. Cal is going to try and showcase talent sometimes without regard to results.
I didn't take the OPs comments as wanting to fire Cal. Just some of us are old and nostalgic and miss having players around more than one or two years.
Really? Two instate guys who managed to stick around 4 years...so once every decade or so when the state produces someone good enough for Cal to recruit we might get someone who sticks around. Geeze, I'm surprised you didn't bring up Jon Hood.
I haven't read through the 7 pages of this thread yet...but I just wanted to throw this GIF in here...it probably has nothing to do with the thread topic...but who knows, after 7 pages...maybe it does now...
If you don't know what it's from, well, just shoot yourself.
If you don't know what it's from, well, just shoot yourself.
so you are saying their is a difference in renting a player for 1,2,3 or 4 years
it is still renting a player
i care about UK basketball having success on the court
the OAD era with Cal has provided that at the highest rate since Rupp
BTW how old are you?
When Cal first go here, most everyone bought into the OAD deal because we had come of the end of Tubby's era and the disaster known as BCG. His first three years were dynamite, so everyone bought into the OAD or at least supported it because we were winning big. I think the Kentucky fans have been very supportive of the roster turnovers but if you're going to run your program that way, and make $8M per year, you can't be putting teams on the court (like last years) and then lose everyone, especially those who may not even get drafted and whine "we're young" every time you lose a tough game. We all will support the team that's there, but the constant turnover of players, who aren't even Lottery picks is wearing on some of the fans.
Perception is the reality of most. Who knows for sure?I just believe he wants to win, but he's not going to turn away the best players. Perhaps if would do us all good to walk a mile or two in each other's shoes.
so if you are 39 you basically started really following UK sometime around the end of the Pitino era
so are you wanting more 4 year players like you have followed most of your life as a UK fan?
that would basically be the Tubby and BCG years
UK has won on average a championship every 13 or so years
only two coaches have won 2 since Cal has been at UK, UK/Cal have 1
it is not like you have one coach that has a system that is just racking up championships
please do not take this as an insult, but i think your expectations need to be tempered some
we all want more championships, but the best team does not always win (BBN feels that pain)
fans constantly complained last year that our team was the lowest basketball IQ team they have ever seen wear a UK uniform
now those same fans are crying because those players are leaving
i think a lot of our fans just love to complain
I don’t know and honestly nobody does, every class assembled is a gamble that almost never pays off the ultimate prize and when it does luck is too big a factor. When somebody does win it too many consider that a formula for how it’s done and it’s not the only way it can be done. With a small amount of luck we could easily have won 3 or 4 during Cals tenure. Had that small amount of plays went in our favor then Cals formula would be considered supreme but that small difference somehow swings him all the way to that’s not working.
That boom or bust mentality leaves zero room for anything but a title and is folly considering the random format of the tournament. Never mind the bias of draw or refs, Cals formula is working but just hasn’t caught the breaks needed to fully capitalize except for 12.
Another thing is every class doesn’t have the star freshman needed to pull it off. If you get lucky and have a Jones, Lamb return then your set but those are rare and not something you can routinely reproduce. I don’t think the multi year Willis and Hawkins level players are good enough to get you there either.
When Cal retires there will be plenty of multi year players at UK, I believe some of you will enjoy that a lot less than you think.
Ummm your right. But Cal is not hanging banners. Instead we are hanging draft status and what a kid is doing on a pro team, that he has been on longer then he was here. At some point it starts feeling fake and forced. I never got to know Wall. But i bet the DC area and fans know him pretty well. We really going to sit here and say a kid who was here for 8 months loves this program? BS. The kid loves Cal. At some point we will be on the outside looking in. This will not end well. Just saying. We fire Cal or move on. You think any of those 8month rentals will still support BBN? Hell no. So we can keep playing this game. But if we ever decide Cal is done here. Guess what. All those 1 and dones in the pros are gone with him. Now if we keep Cal here for as long as he wants to be. No problem. All gravy. Just saying to some of you questioning Cal and if we should keep this path. Better think about all those studs who still help recruit and push UK. All will leave with Cal. Go ask Memphis. Do we want kids here who bleed blue? Or talented kids who put us on prome time every game we have? Because i'm telling you. Those kids who bleed blue. Don't come close to those talented young men who come here for Cal and only cal. And the quickest path to the nba. Don't blur the line BBN.
Where was Derek ? Prob getting some pine time for allowing his man to score 2 points , or some other small issue that everyone else on the team got away with . He was Cals whipping boy . We all know it
Before Cal we had .. what? 3 titles in half a century? So... i guess we’ve... always been well below “Kentucky standards ?”
People are starting to open their eyes. Great post. Cal could have had an unstoppable dynasty. He could have been in discussion as the G.O.A.T. we gotta get culture changed.
Good point. I'd say most that are having problems right now with Cal is not who he recruits, but how he recruits and lays it out to the player. I only bring this up because Fox actually told what was said. We want great players but let's be honest, everyone we recruit breaks their neck trying to leave.
And being honest, every guy just is not ready. We just need years of guys coming back that need to come back and when you see kids would rather risk their future rolling the dice of being picked when they are not even close to being even a 2ND round pick....something is wrong.
