We have one guy who starts for them, Bost. Our Sr. over their, I believe, Fr. We have one more who might, Moultrie. That's it. They are better at every other position including the bench slots. Our guys played a hell of a game last night, but that's a lot to overcome. As was pointed out it's the last three games, not last night, that are hurting us. If we play half as hard in those we win all three. As is we preobably have to win outto reach the bubble now.
Talent debate from last night....
- Thread starter shsdawg
- Start date
We have one guy who starts for them, Bost. Our Sr. over their, I believe, Fr. We have one more who might, Moultrie. That's it. They are better at every other position including the bench slots. Our guys played a hell of a game last night, but that's a lot to overcome. As was pointed out it's the last three games, not last night, that are hurting us. If we play half as hard in those we win all three. As is we preobably have to win outto reach the bubble now.
If they do they're not realistic. What you argued in the past was that we had only 3 starters who would start on any other SEC team. Clearly thats wrong. <div>
</div><div>KY is no. 1 in the nation. Of course, they are better at every position including bench spots. </div>
</div><div>KY is no. 1 in the nation. Of course, they are better at every position including bench spots. </div>
And would split time with Kidd-Gilchrist and Jones. Instead of averaging a double-double with 16.5 and 10.8, he'd be averaging about 10 points and 5 reb a game.
You do know he leads the SEC in rebounding and double doubles... He also will be a 1st round draft pick this year.
Thats the stupidity of the argument of "we are about as talented as UK".... That is such a loaded statement.
a basketball team that with 3-4 talented players is not as good as a team with 7-8 NBA'ers on their team.
Hell, look at their team. They got beat in the first half by a 6-3 PG, so in the second half, they alternate putting 6-7 guards on him and he cannot get off a shot.
a basketball team that with 3-4 talented players is not as good as a team with 7-8 NBA'ers on their team.
Hell, look at their team. They got beat in the first half by a 6-3 PG, so in the second half, they alternate putting 6-7 guards on him and he cannot get off a shot.
But with our talent should we not have beaten UGA, LSU, and Auburn, not to mention Akron.. Our starting 5 are way more talent than any of those teams.
Hood being out made a Huge difference in the 2nd half, that allowed MKG to be able to guard Bost, same thing the Bears did with Henry..
Hood being out made a Huge difference in the 2nd half, that allowed MKG to be able to guard Bost, same thing the Bears did with Henry..
worn down was the reason we were losing. You only need seven or eight good players that are in damn good shape to win in basketball and that is just<div>a fact. It is especially true if you are not playing 40 minutes of hell full press style ball which we are not.</div>
thats why we are losing to teams like that. the lack of depth all season has created a team that could not play the lowly teams like they should have.
and, that is not an excuse FOR stansbury. Its just a matter of fact. I, personally, think we should have had more growing pains during the early part of the season in order to salvage some legs for later in the season. I would have gladly traded 2 Akron loses rather than a 3 game swoon against LSU, AU and UGA
and, that is not an excuse FOR stansbury. Its just a matter of fact. I, personally, think we should have had more growing pains during the early part of the season in order to salvage some legs for later in the season. I would have gladly traded 2 Akron loses rather than a 3 game swoon against LSU, AU and UGA
Thats the issue. At the very least, they are twice as talented as us. Go down the lineup. Their 6 players are vastly more talented than our 6 players.
Its just a weak argument
Its just a weak argument
I got BLASTED last week for suggesting our talent wasn't much different than UK's. We're not that far apart talent wise. For sure no where near the difference in our record. I don't expect us to be a 1 loss team, but we now have a losing conferencerecord in a bad basketball conference.
The half being Sidney when he "wants to play". We are not as loaded like some would want youthink. If you look at our roster from top to bottom, we aredefinitelytop heavy.<div>
</div><div>I bet the 6th man for the upper half of SEC teams would either start for us or at the leastaverage30 minutes.</div>
</div><div>I bet the 6th man for the upper half of SEC teams would either start for us or at the leastaverage30 minutes.</div>
I don't care if UK plays 5, 8, or 10. We were dominating at the half because we played defense twice as hard as they did. The intensity (despite it being half court defense) was the highest it has been since Baylor and certainly was even greater than that. Basically, we played out of our minds in the first half and couldn't sustain it the 2nd. You can make that argument even if KY played the same or less amount of players. They played their usual solid game and turned up the energy at the end when it was time to put us away.
So our 8 players played with more intensity than their 8 players and for this reason we lost...Yep makes perfect sense!
Have you never raced anyone before, or at least watched someone race? Sometimes, people come out of the gates fast and slow down towards the end. It's not that tough of a concept to grasp. We came out swinging, got tired, and the better team won. Yeah, there were some things that could have been done better coaching-wise and execution-wise. But the general theme of the night is when couldn't keep up our 1st half intensity. It was a good shot against a great team, but wasn't enough.