Just had lunch with Jack Givens. He talked about Kentucky basketball of course and said one of the most often asked questions was how the 78 team would have compared to today's players. Said the only team he would have concern about was 2015 team. Because they played together as a team and not a group of individuals with talent.
Jack Givens
- Thread starter LeonThe Camel
- Start date
Loved the Goose. So smooth. Beautiful left handed shot. Probably my 81 year old mothers favorite player ever. Also, maybe the best nickname ever for a UK player.
One of the best starting 5's in UK history. Givens, Macy, Claytor, Robey, Phillips. Plus the best 6th man in the country in James Lee.
One of the best starting 5's in UK history. Givens, Macy, Claytor, Robey, Phillips. Plus the best 6th man in the country in James Lee.
Funny thing, no one would ask him questions and the only other person to introduce himself was a Louisville fan. Everyone else was in shock or scared.
I expect the older players thinking they would be able to compete with the latest Kentucky teams, but I don't know if it's the case or not. Watching older college basketball games, one thing you notice right away is the size wasn't there like today. When your post players are 6'5 and can't jump over a phone book, it just makes you wonder how any of those guys would be able to play defense on guys like Davis or Cousins. How would any guard play defense on a guy as quick as John Wall? I know they probably shot the ball better back then, but when you can jump like Davis or can fly like Wall, you don't have to shoot the ball like Steph Curry. Its interesting to think about, but if I'm putting my money on the line, I'm going with which team had Davis. We didn't even see the Davis that could score the ball so easily and the Brow still controlled the game while at Kentucky. No offense to Jack, who was a great player to watch play the game himself.
The basketball IQ of the 78 title team was amazing. Comparison: Wisconsin 2 years ago...only our guys were long, strong, and could shoot. Yea, they would defeat our one-and-done teams (but ONLY in their one-and-done year).
The 96 team would run the 78 team out of the gym by the end of the game. It was just too deep and too talented. The 78 team would have caused some match-up problems inside with their size but the 96 team would have gotten off too many more shots with their quickness, length and defensive pressure. I am an old fart who watched the 78 championship game live. Great team but not good enough to beat 96, 2012 or 2015. Could have had a shot against most other UK teams though.
I think some people might be underestimating the grown men UK had down low in Robey, Lee, and Phillips. They would have been hard to deal with on the boards.
Yeah the 76 team only won the NIT. The 78 team were champs.
When I was a kid my father found Goose's wallet laying in our driveway beside the street. Dad called him to let him know so that he could come by and pick it up. When he arrived he asked my dad if he could do anything to show his appreciation and dad asked him for an autograph for me. Goose agreed, of course, and said he would mail a signed photo. I'm 43, check the mail every day, and nothing yet. Maybe one day...
Luckily you knew exactly what I meant so it didn't really matter that I accidentally put 76.
My favorite UK player . Amazing mid range game a lost art anymore . Hung 41 on the Dukies to win a title . I have been fortunate enough to have been around him a couple of occasions and was very impressed with the way he made everyone else feel at ease once they met him .
Yeah, I also agree that many, especially the younger fans who never saw any of those guys play, often underestimate their skills, IQ, and general abilities. Not saying they would dominate anyone today but feel they would be very competitive if given today's facilities and training advantages to help their development. Having said that, I do believe the 96 squad would have given them trouble with depth and speed, would have been an interesting match up.
A
anon_q409idbs5m40a
Guest
The '78 team was a great team that could play any style of game. If one compared them to the '96 team it would've come down to inside play, which was a huge advantage for the '78 team with Robey, Philliips and Lee. Before one compares different UK teams you have to remember that the '78 team played a "restricted"game due to the lack of the shot clock. A lot of teams slowed it down to keep it close so at first thought it would appear that the team was slow and couldn't play an up tempo game, which is totally false. Remember, the type of teams that gave the '96 champs problems were UMASS and Miss. State, both of which had big inside players with solid, but not flashy, guard play. An interesting matchup but the size and ability to handle the press would have been to the advantage of the '78 Cats. Additionally, who would've guarded Givens? He could hit from anywhere on the floor and had one of the best mid-range jump shots in college basketball.
I had Accounting with Givens and he never missed a class when the team was not traveling. I had a class with Mike Phillips and I am still waiting for him to show up.
that he is; a true gentleman
Had to honor of meeting him some years ago at a game at Rupp. Don't know if you all remember Kybballloveaffair? She had two sets of season tickets and she knew people - through her, I got to meet Mr. Givens. He and Kenny Walker are two of the classiest I've ever met around the UK basketball program.
A
anon_q409idbs5m40a
Guest
Givens was a great guy. Really personable and took time out to talk to students when they approached him. I used to see him in the Computer Lab during the '78 season and he was very friendly. Not arrogant or aloof and genuinely a nice guy. Had to be hard for him to get any homework done with everyone constantly bothering him.
Well, I guess individual comparisons are true, but Wall and Davis didn't play on the same team, and that is what the statement was, the 78 team versus another modern UK team, not the 78 team against a UK all-star team. You have to remember that Robey and Phillips gave that 78 team good size, and Robey was very mobile. As far as the Wall team, Joe B had enough size that he would have zoned the crap out of them, and WV showed how that turned out. I think that Goose was probably close, and I think they would beat any of Cal's teams except the 12 and the 15 teams, and those would be good games.
I saw Givens at Mike Linnigs Restaurant last summer.
I just wanted to say hello, and he treated me as if I were a long time friend.
I've never met a nicer guy...
I just wanted to say hello, and he treated me as if I were a long time friend.
I've never met a nicer guy...
He probably emailed it that same day. Check your spam folder.
I had the pleasure of sitting beside him on the floor at Rupp in '82 during the state high school Sweet Sixteen Tourney. We talked during the entire ballgame that I was watching, that of which I missed most of and didn't mind at all!! I was having the time of my life! I was watching basketball with "Goose" Givens! I remember the beat down he put on the dookies, we had fun talking about that! He has always been one of my all-time favorite cats. He had tremendous basketball knowledge, excellent court sense and a heck of a nice guy. We could use 5 more just like him!
Last time I had any tiny amount of respect at all for rearview mirror syndrome was about four years ago. Someone started a post asking how John Wall's vertical compared to former players'. Old timers came out of the woodwork and the absolute uniform consensus was Wall was okay for today's weak standards but his vertical really sucked compared to the good old heroes of yesteryear. Most of those judgements were summary: the only real discussion was how much did Rex really jump higher than Wall. Did he really jump the full 8 inches higher? Or was that only exaggeration---did he really only jump 4 to 6 inches higher?
This seemed extreme to me. I got really interested in the ultimate answer. If there really were supermen lurking in the era immediately before my time as a fan, I wanted to know the full measure of their awesomeness. So I could properly revere them. No joke. I take being a fan seriously. Always have.
It took me a lot of digging, but I was eventually able to find official measurements of both Rex Chapman's and John Wall's vertical leaps. Measured both as high school seniors and college freshmen for both of them.
John Wall's official vertical was --minimum-- 4 inches higher than Rex Chapman's.
Combine that with all the superhuman stories I've heard about Pistol Pete Maravich and all the tape I've had the luxury of being able to watch on him personally from his slow, clumsy, palming, ridiculous volume shooting college and NBA careers? Screw all that old-time thinking.
Face it, college basketball athleticism, endurance, sharpshooting, and anything along those lines have all been increasing on a very steady pace since at least 1980 with no slowing down. I've personally witnessed about 30 years worth of those changes, and I'm no longer vaguely interested in throwing out what I know and have seen for some nostalgic sloppy thinker's wet fantasies. Team defenses have improved, too. Now if you want to tell me old-time teams made better use of ball screens and motion offenses than today's teams, I will listen to you. I will be smart enough to know it makes a difference that you had smaller, slower players with less reach and worse reflexes running those offenses. But I'll still listen to you. If you want to tell me any tales of basketball Achilles apart from that, piss off. You're a moron.
I'll give Goose that his teams could probably have beaten 12-13 and last year at least on a lot of nights. And if he's realistic he'll be happy with that. Any of Cal's other teams, and goodness gracious the '96 team, would have made his squads look stupid. Really really stupid. He's more than welcome to talk trash. But so am I. And I don't even have a dog in this fight. I just happen to like realism.
This seemed extreme to me. I got really interested in the ultimate answer. If there really were supermen lurking in the era immediately before my time as a fan, I wanted to know the full measure of their awesomeness. So I could properly revere them. No joke. I take being a fan seriously. Always have.
It took me a lot of digging, but I was eventually able to find official measurements of both Rex Chapman's and John Wall's vertical leaps. Measured both as high school seniors and college freshmen for both of them.
John Wall's official vertical was --minimum-- 4 inches higher than Rex Chapman's.
Combine that with all the superhuman stories I've heard about Pistol Pete Maravich and all the tape I've had the luxury of being able to watch on him personally from his slow, clumsy, palming, ridiculous volume shooting college and NBA careers? Screw all that old-time thinking.
Face it, college basketball athleticism, endurance, sharpshooting, and anything along those lines have all been increasing on a very steady pace since at least 1980 with no slowing down. I've personally witnessed about 30 years worth of those changes, and I'm no longer vaguely interested in throwing out what I know and have seen for some nostalgic sloppy thinker's wet fantasies. Team defenses have improved, too. Now if you want to tell me old-time teams made better use of ball screens and motion offenses than today's teams, I will listen to you. I will be smart enough to know it makes a difference that you had smaller, slower players with less reach and worse reflexes running those offenses. But I'll still listen to you. If you want to tell me any tales of basketball Achilles apart from that, piss off. You're a moron.
I'll give Goose that his teams could probably have beaten 12-13 and last year at least on a lot of nights. And if he's realistic he'll be happy with that. Any of Cal's other teams, and goodness gracious the '96 team, would have made his squads look stupid. Really really stupid. He's more than welcome to talk trash. But so am I. And I don't even have a dog in this fight. I just happen to like realism.
Last edited:
It's hard to know who would win a game like that , with everyone in their prime. One thing is sure, those 70s teams were very strong in the fundamentals, dribbling, passing, shooting, defense, boxing out on rebounds, holding position, playing disciplined ball, making free throws, and playing as a team. Teams of today are bigger, longer, and more athletic. It would be hard to say. I don't know if I'd be able to just make a slam dunk case for either one. I'd love to see it, though.
I agree with much of what you say. Not all, but much. And I'm probably a good bit older than you. However, you lose credibility when you start calling people morons if they disagree with your view.
It's all subjective. Your eye test is different than someone else's eye test. While I certainly agree that today's players are stronger, more athletic and play much tougher defense, neither you nor anyone else can say with certainty that this team would beat that team because they are just bigger, stronger and faster. I know I've beaten much younger players one on one who were bigger stronger and faster simply by being smarter and more crafty. There are nuances to this game that don't always show up on a measurement sheet or stats pack.
Ask Lew Alcindor how he liked having Bill Walton hanging on him all game,
I do not see defense as the issue. It depends on which refs are calling the game. Today's athletes are sissy's in comparison.
I think he's forgotten.
jkjk, seriously though so your family was friends with him or what? Wallet in driveway and Dad knew his phone number. Why not just ask him now?
I don't even agree with all of what I say.
It's just a general rant that comes out sometimes when I've heard too much. The Goose, I must say, is one of the few who at least individually could hang with our average modern player under Cal.
A
anon_q409idbs5m40a
Guest
First of all, you have to play by the same rules. The '78 team didn't have the benefit of the three point line or shot clock, so it was a different game. Your point about fundamentals is 100% correct as they were probably one of the most fundamentally sound teams UK has ever had. None of the teams since then would "trash" them. Too strong inside, best PG in the nation at that time and could actually shoot FT's.
Always thought 78 was the best UK team I've seen. Most versatile. Run or half court. Deep. Athletic and tough. Experienced and smart. Good shooters and made Multiple defenses.
jkjk, seriously though so your family was friends with him or what? Wallet in driveway and Dad knew his phone number. Why not just ask him now?[/QUOTE]
Dad is gone now or I'd ask him, but we weren't friends or anything like that. He just found it laying there. Not sure how he reached him. Maybe something in the wallet?
Dad is gone now or I'd ask him, but we weren't friends or anything like that. He just found it laying there. Not sure how he reached him. Maybe something in the wallet?
Latest
-
01
KSR Football
Kentucky opens as slight underdog at South Carolina
-
02
KSR Volleyball
No. 3 Kentucky VB welcomes No. 7 Texas in top-10 showdown
-
03
KSR Football
KSR Today: Kentucky FB moves to 3-1, top-10 VB match in Lexington
-
04
KSR Football
Kentucky Offensive Line Lets the Running Backs Shine
-
05
KSR Football
Instant Takeaways: Kentucky fails to meet standard but still passes September test