Thamel

[SWHuskyFan]

The problem that I have with the whole talent argument is that it ignores all the places where we have advantages. It's just not as simple as they're more talented than us. We were clearly quicker than them at 2 positions. We were a better shooting team. Our guys can clearly play better defense as a team and we had several better one on one defenders than UK.

UK also had several advantages, mostly with sheer size and some in general athletic ability. Just saying a team is more talented is like calling them better prospects which doesn't do much to help a team win a game today. If we played this game in 5 years, UK would have several more advantages. Being that we're playing in the present, all the extra basketball experience and acumen has to count on our side as well.

 

[Mr. French]

The problem that I have with the whole talent argument is that it ignores all the places where we have advantages. It's just not as simple as they're more talented than us. We were clearly quicker than them at 2 positions. We were a better shooting team. Our guys can clearly play better defense as a team and we had several better one on one defenders than UK.

UK also had several advantages, mostly with sheer size and some in general athletic ability. Just saying a team is more talented is like calling them better prospects which doesn't do much to help a team win a game today. If we played this game in 5 years, UK would have several more advantages. Being that we're playing in the present, all the extra basketball experience and acumen has to count on our side as well.

Thank you, and I think that's my general anger with the "talent" vs just sheer physicality thing...we were better basketball players in many aspects at many positions. I'm a 6'1 SG in my former life and I've played with and against guys that had all the measurables, that doesn't mean they were more talented basketball players, they were just quicker and stronger...

Our guys weren't just a "better team" which is the often misused argument. Many of our guys were, despite physically being lesser, were individually better players. That's where that lazy "talented" tag gets murky.

 

[Kembacity]

Everyone of the analysts on ESPN, CBS etc. aren't sure Uconn's the best basketball team in the country? They beat the only other team left standing. They are the BEST. Believe it! Who else do they have to beat? Another team that had won 30 straight since they last lost to who other than Uconn, or another #1 preseason ranked team, or another conference champion. Who else does Uconn need to beat for this team to earn some credibility?! Give these young men some credit for the hardwork they put in, the heart they showed, and the skill that led them to the championship. The only team left standing.

God are you 14? Im the biggest fan I know and I wouldn't call us the best team in the country this season. National champions, but that doesn't automatically equal the best there is. We outplayed and Ollie outcoached a handful of teams as good/better. Stop trying to pretend any factual or opinion based comment is a dig at UConn...

 

[The Funster]

Hi, we won the six games that mattered the most. That is all that matters.

 

[cohenzone]

Everyone of the analysts on ESPN, CBS etc. aren't sure Uconn's the best basketball team in the country? They beat the only other team left standing. They are the BEST. Believe it! Who else do they have to beat? Another team that had won 30 straight since they last lost to who other than Uconn, or another #1 preseason ranked team, or another conference champion. Who else does Uconn need to beat for this team to earn some credibility?! Give these young men some credit for the hardwork they put in, the heart they showed, and the skill that led them to the championship. The only team left standing.

Going into the tournament, I would have agreed that UConn wasn't the best team. But they became the best team, with several convincing wins over at least 2 teams that everyone and his Uncle Charlie were picking - Florida and MSU. The thing none of these guys can understand about this year and this tournament, is that 1)there was no team, including the suspect Wichita, so dominant that a loss would be a huge upset and 2)UConn played better basketball than any other team in the field. I usually don't pay much attention to the "experts", but I think the post-game analysis is totally insulting to UConn as if only UK was "at fault" for not winning, implying that UConn was a lucky beneficiary of some inexplicable off-night 4 other teams in a row before them (after St. Joe's ) just happened to have against the same great D. I guess they couldn't stand that UConn busted their dream story line of the UK frosh dancing to victory.

 

[Inyatkin]

Ok...I'll bite. Which of the Kentucky players will be NBA Stars?

So far, with all the one and dones, they have three players who may qualify. Anthony Davis is a no brainer. John Wall has been fantastic. Demarcus Cousins is very good as well.

I see no one on this year's UK team who are as good as any of those.

Randle is good, but I think he isn't big enough, nor have deep enough range or defensive skills, to effectively play the NBA 4 or 5, nor the ball handling ability to play the 3. He's a tweener. I think he can have a good, but not great, career.
The Harrisons lack elite athleticism. Sure, they're big, but they'll get abused by NBA 1s and 2s worse than by Napier and Boatright.
Willie Cauley-Stein and Poythress can be good bench players, but they aren't going to be stars. I'd wager Dakari Johnson won't be either.

Which leaves Young. He's their only hope, I think, to be an NBA star. But he's no sure bet like the three stars I named above.

Young has the best shot, but he's got to play both ways or else an NBA team won't be able to keep him on the court. He was clueless on defense most of yesterday.

 

[UConn9604]

In hindsight, I wonder if Thamel's intransigence on this is more an effort to protect his job, or to reconstruct truths in hindsight. I mean, he's an "expert" at Sports Illustrated who picked us to lose to St. Joe's, and get waxed by Florida, and then to get waxed by Kentucky.

There *must* have been some reason why his predictions were wrong, right? It couldn't possibly be that we were the best team.

 

[NHUConnfan]

I mean, c'mon guys. Nearly all of Kentucky's starters (counting Cauley-Stein in replacement of whatever-his-face-was) are going to be NBA pros. Bazz and Daniels are the ones with a chance at UConn with an outside shot to Boatright depending on how well he plays next year (Brimah and Nolan are still to young to tell).

The fact is, most of those Kentucky players can jump to the NBA next year. But they aren't going to do it with a championship ring...and in the end, THAT IS ALL THAT duck*ING MATTERS!

 

[uconnfan68]

While I do agree with you, there are slight digs all over at us, but let's remember the gist of the article: He is RIPPING Cal in a way that no one else does very often, and in a way that we as UConn fans and Squid haters agree with...

If you look at the comments, the UK fans are livid, and I can't say that I wouldn't be too if this was my team's coach. I hate Squid more than anyone, and I loved reading that article. Just focus on that, which is the main point of the article. It will feel much better.

Plus, his point in taking that small dig at our talent level is that in 5 years, if that UK team has 4-5 really good pros, and we have a bunch of journeyman, people are going to look at Squid the way we do at Rick Barnes or Ben Howland with those talent laden squads that came up short. That's really what he's getting at.

Thamel is a talking about another . I couldn't be happier that UK fans are pissed off.