We made the sweet 16 and would've had an excellent chance to go deeper had Butler, Robinson, and Carr not been injured.
Duke
- Thread starter GoneFishin916
- Start date
Wrong. It isn’t the only thing we are behind on. And we can talk all about that later.
Did you know this:
For final four teams dating back to 2016 season, only 22 starters on final four teams were even 5* rated? 27 players were freaking 3 stars. 46 were entirely Unranked. 81 were 4 star players. You were more than 3 times likelier to be an entirely unknown player than a five star if you played in the final four. We need to move past myths at some point.
What matters is what happens on the floor and keeping the right people in the program. I can’t keep you from believing in what you want, but the high school recruiting thing is beyond dead.
so u think im incorrect for thinking we would be better with more talented players?
because the recruiting is an issue before coaching is an issue, many of our losses last year were bc we lacked DUDES
They didn’t score 100 and didn’t cover the spread. Missed it by 8 points, OP clearly a troll.
But if you miss out on the high schoolers you really need to get your top portal targets and Pope missed on many of those this season..
“Kentucky is the notre dame of college basketball”.
said rival fans every time we slip a bit. Kentucky cannot become Indiana because we’ll eventually find the right guy like always. If it’s not mark we usually hit big on the next. It would likely be Oats. Kentucky isn’t Indiana because we demand it and this program is the only show in the state. There’s too much emotion and money riding on this brand. Indiana is in a state with many other leagues and teams. Kentucky isn’t.
Many Coaches want the fame that comes with coaching here. Only Alabama football is similar, where the coaches at these schools are bigger than the governor.
Becoming Indiana isn’t even close to my concern because it cannot happen. There are reasons why Indiana fell. They literally chose to keep it clean and lose, it’s basically been admitted it’s why they don’t hire anyone with baggage. They were tarnished by the knight era then Sampson. They’re afraid to compete at that kind of level - it’s a decision made by all involved at Indiana. It’s why they never would hire Pearl which was the obvious choice for them being he won championships at Southern Indiana and would have absolutely taken it. Look at their hires, clean image guys. They want to distance themselves from the era of Knight so they go with what they go with.
Kentucky will never do that. We might slip and hire a Gillispie but when that happens, we follow it with a Calipari.
The men in charge of this program want to win, the boosters want to win. We can’t be perfect, but we always come through.Kentucky basketball if far more important to the state than Indiana is to theirs. We are the only program who has sustained from the 40’s on. Last season would have been one of Indiana best in the last 30 years lol. Think about our program and consider those facts. We demand too much and it means too much for Indiana to happen here.
No. Talent is important. Salivating over the freshman is what I’m referring to. You’re just as likely to get an elite player as you are a Skal or a DJ Wagner etc. And I didn’t make up the facts. No one has won a title with a OAD freshman leading them in ten years. Why build on something that isn’t producing the highest levelso u think im incorrect for thinking we would be better with more talented players?
of results if you can build on something proven to work? It would make no sense outside of our own emotional proclivities and preferences
That’s also not true. None of those championship teams had top portal classes either. What matters is continuity, coaching and scouting regardless of where you get talent but it needs to stay
im not saying just freshman, portal talent is important too, and we missed on many of those targets too
I'm talking about Pope's top targets not their ranking.
We don’t know all the internals and none of what I’m saying applies to just Pope. Understand that some misses are hits if your goal is continuity. It doesn’t mean it will work here with Pope but we can’t fix a nosebleed with duct tape
Who cares who he misses on if we don’t know everything. How do we know what he missed on? Because of Jacob Polacheck? lol. He’s gonna miss on guys but that’s not what will make or break this. We will easily get enough talent. It’s what can Pope do with it?
Who said anything about this roster? I’m talking as a program. If you go look at a lot of the teams that did return dudes and win titles they didn’t set the world on fire the year before. Don’t believe me? I’ll give you examples. What I would hope is we can slow down for just a second and give this thing a chance to actually breathe, actually develop. And I’m not preaching. I’m as guilty as anyone else. But we aren’t looking at the big picture. We want it right now and that’s not how championships are built, I’m sorry it just isnt
I guess we just have to agree to disagree. I do think lack of talent is part of the problem this season and it's not all on coaching. I really think He believed Oweh would be a breakout star this season and he built the team around him. I loved Oweh last season but that might have been his top game and he's sort of peaked and coming back down to earth a bit.
I’m fully ok with agreeing to disagree. I’ve always liked ya cornbread even when others were rough on you. I think we run to “talent” as the answer for everything. Even when faced with a mountain of facts to the contrary, it’s still always “talent” because of emotional bias
Continuity with seasoned players who know the system is what is going to win the championship. Duke and Kentucky have had mega young talent and top classes going back to 2010 (UK) and around 2015 (Duke). They have 2 championships COMBINED with it and that’s due to also having older guys.Neither have played for a championships in OVER a DECADE.
It’s okay to land some of those players but it’s not what people make this out to be. Especially since the game is much older now.
Mark is trying to build a roster of continuity that learns to play together under his system. It could take a few seasons or it might not work at all. But the recipe to do this is exactly what he’s aiming for.
It’s okay to land some of those players but it’s not what people make this out to be. Especially since the game is much older now.
Mark is trying to build a roster of continuity that learns to play together under his system. It could take a few seasons or it might not work at all. But the recipe to do this is exactly what he’s aiming for.
so is all the teams dominating this szn with elite talent "emotional" or luck or what
wanting wilson instead of mo is "emotional"
im not following
We are in the early stages of the season. See how it shakes out in the tournament and then we can use that to better say. I still expect UConn or Houston or Purdue or someone like that will win the title because of a bunch of old dudes
so to get this straight your ignoring what unc and dukes been doing?
what about us? we are old so we should be way better right
One of the reasons we beat Duke was their reliance on freshmen - particularly at the end. The reason they lost in the F4 was their reliance on freshmen - again, particularly at the end. Now, I give you that those were very talented freshmen and making the F4 is a great accomplishment - but freshmen failed them then and against us and other times during the season with mistakes really good upperclassmen would not have likely made.
And how you can say "we fizzled out early" without acknowledging we: (1) lost PG1, PG2, and PG3 (who himself wasn't even an average ball-handler or close to a Div. I quality PG); (2) then PG1 came back playing with one arm - not because he was healthy, but because we had no Guard who could get the ball up the court (which he could at least do even with one arm); (3) we lost our starting SG; and (4) our starting key PF was a hobbled and looked like he maybe should be on a cane half the time. We didn't "fizzle out" - that was an incredible finish for a mash unit.
The only thing we can do as fans is support the team and if the top recruits don’t want to come to UK then it is what it is
No. We have very little continuity. When I was saying old dudes I meant people that have been in the program. How am I ignoring UNC or Duke if I literally gave you every single starter from every final four team since the 2016 season? You’re isolating the teams you want to hyperfixate on. I’m saying screw that—-here’s the whole swath of data. I have no regard for any type of player —- I’m for what wins
UK may have had overwhelming talent, but we only had the best team twice during Calipari's tenure. Until talent ripens into the best college players - i.e., those that have the biggest impact on winning - it really doesn't mean much in regard to winning. And I don't think even having more of the best players (almost always upperclassmen) always guarantees having the best team. I believe how the pieces fit matters.
When did he get known for that?
Was it against Alabama in the SEC last season? Or against Tennessee in the S16game?
Or against UL and Mich St this season?
Is not even showing up “maximizing talent”?
But it doesn’t matter about Duke. NIL will cause them to not play hard, right?
That’s our excuse. Should work for them too.
i mean we took a team that had NO business wearing kentucky unis to the s16
Good post. I agree with it. Continuity is very important, if not critical. I realize it's very early in the season, but continuity, while a great objective, is very hard to achieve in this portalized college game.
We will lose Oweh and Aberdeen, for sure, with the possibility of JQ going pro. Do most here feel like any of the others will leave for NBA, G-League or other schools for PT and/or NIL$$$ ?? Will the appearance of being "recruited over" be an issue for those who are eligible to come back ?? I don't know, but you cannot help but wonder ...
Last edited:
This is correct. That’s why most of the national champions had at least four players on their teams averaging double digits.
Every national championship team since 1985 has at least two starters who were rotation players from the previous season. Every national champion other than two (12 UK and 15 Duke) had at least three.
Also, every champ except one in the KenPom era was top 25 in offense and defensive efficiency.
In short, you HAVE to have continuity.
You have to have a cohesive engine that is even better than its parts.
You HAVE to be able to get it done on both ends of the floor.
Also, having at least one NBA player helps, even if it’s just a late first round draft pick.
Those are all reasonable assumptions based on extensive research.
We were not the best team in 2010. I love that team but we just weren’t. Kansas got upset but that team was the best almost all year long imo
Edit: Went back to check. In 2010 season, Kansas was #1 in AP 15 out of the 19 weeks, including the final poll. Unless you’re a Kentucky or Duke fan, it’d be hard to argue they weren’t the best team that year imo
Last edited:
I DEFINITELY agree that it is almost impossible to win it all being a one-dimensional team ... you simply HAVE to be able to play both ends of the floor.
I'm sure Garrison sees the writing on the wall and leaves,if Pope brings in a stud guard because he can't count on injured Lowe he might leave,with a foreign guy like Jelly you never know if he might return home,I would think JJ and Moreno stay plus CC.
You may be right about "talent" during those years. I don't know and won't argue the point about talent because I don't think talent = best players currently; and I don't think talent = best team. And I absolutely don't believe top ranked high schooler or highest projected draft pick = best college player.
I cannot say that will happen, but I can certainly see it happening. It is not unreasonable to think it might ...
Is it possible to have continuity by those who aren't one-and-dones when you recruit one-and-dones ??? Is this a legitimate REAL conundrum ??
Last edited:
Continuity was part of the reason I wanted to see MM get as many minutes as possible. I don’t think BG is likely to be here next year based on things I’ve heard him say in interviews. He has consistently said “I’m on a two year plan.” I’m happy to see Moreno get more development time now and next year he can potentially be one of your best players. Is he our next Robey? Probably not but a man can dream 
Well, we had Wall, Cousins, Bledsoe, Patterson, Orton, Liggins, Darius Miller, and Dodson. If we weren’t the best team, we should have been.
The bottom line is, we had tons of crazy talent numerous years. Just ask Calipari. All he talked about was how many of his players went to the NBA.
Last edited:
I havn't read the entire thread yet so I hope I'm not repeating anybody else's thoughts but...screw duke and screw Scheyer.
I think that cuts to the point though. Theoretically, a team led by John Wall should never be inferior to a team led by Sherron Collins. This is the very thing I point to. Duke had Jon Scheyer, Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler. None of these guys were close to as talented as Wall, Cousins, Bledsoe etc. But pure talent is not the determining factor in championships. It is “A FACTOR” but not “THE FACTOR”.