Andy Katz with the hot take

[tcf15]

Andy Katz @ESPNAndyKatz
Calipari was the trend setter. Now everyone else is following. The new way to compete for a title. One and done.

Let's just ignore the fact that Wisconsin and Michigan State were in the Final Four, and, OH YEAH, UConn with seniors and juniors beat the "one-and-dones" for a title last year.

Strange take, as you don't normally see a hot take from Katz.

 

[nomar]

And if Wisconsin had managed to hang on:

Andy Katz @ESPNAndyKatz
UConn was the trend setter. Now everyone else is following. The new way to compete for a title. Develop players and win with veterans and chemistry.

 

[Matrim55]

And if Wisconsin had managed to hang on:

Andy Katz @ESPNAndyKatz
UConn was the trend setter. Now everyone else is following. The new way to compete for a title. Develop players and win with veterans and chemistry.

Yup. Though he probably would have brought it back to Louisville.

 

[SubbaBub]

Must be tough trying to draw 10 gallons a minute from a 4 gallon per minute well, huh Andy?

 

[Silk31]

With Katz so involved in the coverage of our program this makes little to no sense...shame on you Andy you are better than this

 

[superjohn]

He's just parroting what the national media likes to put out there. Duke had the number 1 center, point guard and small forward this year and Kentucky will always use the one and done system. If you get all the top one and done kids at their position chances are you will contend. The best team makeup will always be veteran studs with one or two one and done type talents mixed in.

 

[Inyatkin]

It's just such a made-up phenomenon. Are there programs that intentionally recruit worse players than they think they can get? No, everyone goes after the best who are at all likely to go to their school. It happens that the best players at the best schools are often, thanks to the rules, gone after one year. There's no strategy, it's trying to recruit the best talent. Who would've turned down Tyus Jones?

 

[Gringo]

You guys are being way to oversensitive here.

Katz said it's "the new way to compete for a title."

He didn't say it's the only way. If you haven't noticed having multiple one and done players on a team can be very successful. Doesn't mean you can't win with experienced players, but having top level talent helps.

 

[nomar]

You guys are being way to oversensitive here.

Katz said it's "the new way to compete for a title."

He didn't say it's the only way. If you haven't noticed having multiple one and done players on a team can be very successful. Doesn't mean you can't win with experienced players, but having top level talent helps.

I guess Katz slept through the 2002-03 season. It ain't new.

 

[Kitaman]

I also don't recall Louisville being loaded with one and dones.

 

[Gurleyman]

I don't think this is all that groundbreaking or a trend to be copied - Ohio State made a similar run at it with Oden and Conley in 2007 and reached the finals (Texas also had Durant-Augustin that year but bowed out early). Coaches try to get the top talent, and we are in an era where that often means one and done.

Perhaps Cal has magnified it by getting 4 likely one and dones instead of 2, but there are only maybe 7-10 recruits a year who are considered likely to jump after their freshman year, and sometimes those don't play out that way (Exhibit A being Harrison and Exhibit B being Harrison). It isn't like anyone can look at what Duke, Kansas and Kentucky have done and go find some untapped pool of one and done talent to try to follow the trend. The one and done guys are the guys already going to those places - maybe an outsider can sneak in and grab one here or there (SMU with Mudiay would have been an example), but they won't be following the trend by getting a whole class of them.

 

[msgordon]

theres nothing 'new' about it. any team in the country in any year would have taken okafor/winslow/jones/allen. if they didnt, it would only be if they somehow already had even better '1 and done' talent coming in

 

[Gringo]

I guess Katz slept through the 2002-03 season. It ain't new.

I disagree. Whether you guys want to admit it or not, Cal's model is new.

Of course there have been successful one and one players in the past. However, before Cal no one was stockpiling one and done talent on a yearly basis and reloading with a new team the following year. That is new. There is no chance you would have seen multiple one and dones on Duke 10 years ago. Now it will probably be commonplace.

 

[businesslawyer]

I don't think this is all that groundbreaking or a trend to be copied - Ohio State made a similar run at it with Oden and Conley in 2007 and reached the finals (Texas also had Durant-Augustin that year but bowed out early). Coaches try to get the top talent, and we are in an era where that often means one and done.

Perhaps Cal has magnified it by getting 4 likely one and dones instead of 2, but there are only maybe 7-10 recruits a year who are considered likely to jump after their freshman year, and sometimes those don't play out that way (Exhibit A being Harrison and Exhibit B being Harrison). It isn't like anyone can look at what Duke, Kansas and Kentucky have done and go find some untapped pool of one and done talent to try to follow the trend. The one and done guys are the guys already going to those places - maybe an outsider can sneak in and grab one here or there (SMU with Mudiay would have been an example), but they won't be following the trend by getting a whole class of them.

This is what makes Katz's post sort of silly. There are only ten or so of these players a year. This is not a strategy that everyone can follow because only two or three programs a year are going to sign more than one one-and-done in any given year.

 

[nomar]

I disagree. Whether you guys want to admit it or not, Cal's model is new.

Of course there have been successful one and one players in the past. However, before Cal no one was stockpiling one and done talent on a yearly basis and reloading with a new team the following year. That is new. There is no chance you would have seen multiple one and dones on Duke 10 years ago. Now it will probably be commonplace.

I hear you.

It's not like he was the first guy to say, "let me try to recruit the top 5 kids in every class." But he is the first guy that actually landed them year after year, and I guess by now you could say that massive turnover is his model.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

Andy Katz thinks "jettison" means "to fly on a jet." He says it every couple months. "It's the summer evaluation period so coaches are jettisoning around the country watching prospects."

 

[Gringo]

This is what makes Katz's post sort of silly. There are only ten or so of these players a year. This is not a strategy that everyone can follow because only two or three programs a year are going to sign more than one one-and-done in any given year.

True, but some of the bigger programs like Duke and Kansas probably could have done this before Kentucky, but did not. I think this year and going forward we're going to see a new strategy from Duke. Maybe it won't be the full Kentucky model, but it could be multiple one and dones couple with experienced players.

 

[dogpause]

I think the One-and-Done formula is seriously flawed. Sure, it can work if Coach K, one of the best teachers in sports, is the coach. And, if you're not only attracting top players, but top players who are also smart enough to take the accelerated class and master it. And, if you've got enough upperclassman to help indoctrinate the rookies and help pass down the ways of the system.

Calipari is trying to use brute force alone. You can't teach 10 new players each year, because it slows the learning process. Cal may have great regular season success, and he may even catch lightening in a bottle occasionally, but mostly the seasons will end in disappointment and disbelief.

 

[MDHusky]

Here's the model for winning National Championships: Follow the lead of Duke, UConn, North Carolina, Kentucky, and Florida.

Those 5 programs have won 17 out of the last 25 National Championships.

Rules changes have undoubtedly changed the game. Coaches are adapting their philosophy on how to put together a championship team.

I believe the UConn way of building a team is still a method that will lead to success. Our system requires 2-3 years for the team to reload, gain experience, add missing pieces, and figure out what it takes to win it all. That's puts us right on schedule for 2016/2017.

I don't think UConn should or could ever do what Kentucky or Duke is doing with their recruiting.

Getting a top 100 recruit to play at UConn is a hard sell except for the regional players from New England, NY, PA, and Maryland. But, it has certainly been pretty good for us with guys like Shabazz, Walker, Gordon, Rip, Donyell, Rudy!

Looking forward to seeing all of the pieces come together for UConn. Even though we are doomed, we might just find a way - and I think Jalen is the guy to lead us to #5.

 

[DogMania]

He makes it sound like it's easy to recruit a boatload of burger all Americans year in, year out. There just aren't many programs that are going to be able to recruit classes like what Kentucky and Duke did this past year. UConn is certainly not a destination that is going to be able to achieve that, at least not until we're in one of the Power 5 conferences, and even then it's not going to happen here. Nor am I interested in seeing that happen. I like getting a couple All-Americans, but I enjoy getting to know our players and enjoying watching them grow and develop for a few years before they move on, but that's just me.

 

[storrsroars]

You guys are being way to oversensitive here.

Katz said it's "the new way to compete for a title."

He didn't say it's the only way. If you haven't noticed having multiple one and done players on a team can be very successful. Doesn't mean you can't win with experienced players, but having top level talent helps.

Unless you're Bill Self.

 

[storrsroars]

I think the One-and-Done formula is seriously flawed. Sure, it can work if Coach K, one of the best teachers in sports, is the coach. And, if you're not only attracting top players, but top players who are also smart enough to take the accelerated class and master it. And, if you've got enough upperclassman to help indoctrinate the rookies and help pass down the ways of the system.

Calipari is trying to use brute force alone. You can't teach 10 new players each year, because it slows the learning process. Cal may have great regular season success, and he may even catch lightening in a bottle occasionally, but mostly the seasons will end in disappointment and disbelief.

The difference is that with 8 McD's AA's on the roster, K more often than not puts his best team on the floor. Squid's system limits minutes in the name of protecting/enhancing draft status. If Ulis is running the point more than the Harrisons, I think UK squeaks it out vs. Wisky. Ulis is the better PG - better vision, better passer. Harrisons are more like shooting guards.

 

[dogpause]

I don't think Calipari give a rat's ass about draft status. Nor does any other college coach for that matter.

 

[gtcam]

First, I despise the Squid and second, I am not a huge K fan
I wonder if people are really looking at this Duke victory in the same glasses IF Kensucky had won.
If Kensucky had won, more people would be saying the one and done thing is ridiculous, doesn't belong etc.
However as Duke wins, there is some chatter but nothing approaching the level had the Squid won.
Is there a real difference?
I look at the box score and Puke's freshmen scored, I think, about 60 of the 68 points
There is a huge chance that three of them will turn pro - JO, Winslow and Jones
Kensucky has Towns, Lyles and Booker
Is there a difference????
I remember K saying last March that the Squid is the master of the system - obviously K is a practicing student
NOT SAYING I would cry if UConn took a few 1 and dones but I do like to see development and growth

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

Calipari is trying to use brute force alone. You can't teach 10 new players each year, because it slows the learning process. Cal may have great regular season success, and he may even catch lightening in a bottle occasionally, but mostly the seasons will end in disappointment and disbelief.

I don't know that you can use a 38-1 season that ends with a loss in the Final Four to prove your point that a model isn't working, particularly when that same program has been to 4 of the last 5 final fours. Most people would say that Calipari's system is working pretty well. I think it would be better to just agree that winning a national championship is tough, you need to catch a couple breaks, and even teams that are dominant for virtually all of the season fall short. If you want to find a program to use as an indictment of the one and done model, I don't think Kentucky is your team.

I know, the foregoing makes me a Calipari lover or something like that.