Upset Alert! Buffalo leads Kentucky! | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Upset Alert! Buffalo leads Kentucky!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Matrim55 said:
Perfect example of why people need to relax about recruiting stuff. Being able to get top talent is just one part of putting together a great team.
  • Cal is a GREAT recruiter - probably the best since Wooden.
  • Cal is a mediocre-to-poor in-game coach
  • Cal is an awful developer of talent - the Harrisons, WCS, Poythress, Johnson & Lee have all seen their stock fall since going to Lexington
Getting the type of talent UK lands gives a huge margin for error, and they'll almost always be a tournament factor because of it. But "talent" alone isn't enough (save for a once-in-a-generation player like Davis), as both Calhoun & KO have shown.
Expand ...

That they trailed at the half in a game they ended up winning by twenty on November 16 is a "perfect example" of why people need to relax about recruiting? That's insane. Your whole post is insane. People literally seem incapable of rational thought when it comes to Kentucky.
 
Incidentally, the platoon system is asinine. It's great PR, which is why, I suppose, he's touting it, because it gets people talking. But it's going to be completely unworkable when they start playing decent teams.
 
UcannUconn said:
Karl townes must love getting like 4 touches all game for 3 points... this is going to blow up in cals face.
Expand ...
I think it may, but not because Towns won't get enough play. He was in foul trouble, and in fact fouled out. That's why he played 10 minutes.
 
Matrim55 said:
Perfect example of why people need to relax about recruiting stuff. Being able to get top talent is just one part of putting together a great team.
  • Cal is a GREAT recruiter - probably the best since Wooden.
  • Cal is a mediocre-to-poor in-game coach
  • Cal is an awful developer of talent - the Harrisons, WCS, Poythress, Johnson & Lee have all seen their stock fall since going to Lexington
Getting the type of talent UK lands gives a huge margin for error, and they'll almost always be a tournament factor because of it. But "talent" alone isn't enough (save for a once-in-a-generation player like Davis), as both Calhoun & KO have shown.
Expand ...

There are about a dozen guys playing in the NBA right now who would disagree with that, and not all of them were sure-fire pros upon arrival.

For all the talk about the talent Kentucky usually accumulates, this is still a sport where experience and continuity go a long way towards dictating success, and he has rarely had those ingredients. Like it or not, the guy is a good coach in addition to being a phenomenal recruiter - there's a reason his teams are generally much better in March than they are in November. I have as much or more respect for him as a developer of talent than I do somebody like K.
 
champs99and04 said:
Like it or not, the guy is a good coach in addition to being a phenomenal recruiter - there's a reason his teams are generally much better in March than they are in November. I have as much or more respect for him as a developer of talent than I do somebody like K.
Expand ...

It pains me to admit this but the potential ceiling for that club in March/April is terrifying.
 
.-.
Matrim55 said:
Perfect example of why people need to relax about recruiting stuff. Being able to get top talent is just one part of putting together a great team.
  • Cal is a GREAT recruiter - probably the best since Wooden.
  • Cal is a mediocre-to-poor in-game coach
  • Cal is an awful developer of talent - the Harrisons, WCS, Poythress, Johnson & Lee have all seen their stock fall since going to Lexington
Getting the type of talent UK lands gives a huge margin for error, and they'll almost always be a tournament factor because of it. But "talent" alone isn't enough (save for a once-in-a-generation player like Davis), as both Calhoun & KO have shown.
Expand ...

Wooden a "recruiter"?? Not suite sure about that - great coach? yeah but who was he recruiting against and who else had Sam the Car Dealer closing the deal?:rolleyes:
 
I really don't see more than two guys leaving UK for the NBA this year. The platoon system is bringing all their stock down. Towns looks like a borderline lottery player and thats it.
 
Lee would be out of control good at another school. Give him some QT and he'd be growing into his game rapidly. He should have left last year immediately and transferred, same with Poythress 2 years ago. This guy could care less about anyone and would rather just bring in the next group of studs!
 
BigErnMcCracken said:
It pains me to admit this but the potential ceiling for that club in March/April is terrifying.
Expand ...

They have an extremely high ceiling. For some reason, I have a lurking suspicion that Ullis will take over Andrew Harrison's starting role by the end of the season. He just seems like a much better fit with the current roster.
 
The one thing that will hold them back is chemistry if anything at all. There will be sulking if he decides on more minutes for certain players in certain positions. They are kids, they are kids with higher expectations. They are kids who's parents expect more too.....there will be trouble there so can they take the dissension which will eventually rear its ugly head?
 
.-.
champs99and04 said:
There are about a dozen guys playing in the NBA right now who would disagree with that, and not all of them were sure-fire pros upon arrival.
Expand ...
You're riding the Wall/Davis/MKG wave. All those guys went where they were supposed to.

There's also:

Teague, the No. 7 talent in the class, went No. 29
Jones, the No. 8 talent in his class, went No. 18
Lamb, a top 20 talent in his class, went No. 42
Noel, the No. 1 talent in his class, went No. 6
Poythress, a top 10 talent in his class, is projected as a 2nd-rounder
Goodwin, a top 15 talent in his class, went No. 29
Randle, the No. 2 talent in his class, went No. 7
Andrew Harrison, a top 10 talent in his class, is projected as a borderline first-rounder
Aaron Harrison, a top 10 talent in his class, is projected as a second-rounder
Young, a top 10 talent in his class, fell outside the lottery
Johnson & Lee were considered top 20 talents, but are now looked at as borderline first-rounders

The only guys who substantially increased their stock under Cal are Bledsoe and, it seems, Cauley-Stein. And other than Davis, the guys he's put into the league - Cousins, Wall, Knight and MKG especially - all have the same exact flaws that were on display when they got to Lexington.

He is a brilliant recruiter. But he does not develop his talent, and most kids who go to UK cost themselves millions by doing so.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pj
champs99and04 said:
There are about a dozen guys playing in the NBA right now who would disagree with that, and not all of them were sure-fire pros upon arrival.

For all the talk about the talent Kentucky usually accumulates, this is still a sport where experience and continuity go a long way towards dictating success, .
Expand ...

I'm not disagreeing with your other points but on this point experience goes a long way for winning the big one but overwhelming talent tends to be very succesful in basketball- see Fab 5. And he has had an over-abundance of sick talent.
 
Matrim55 said:
You're riding the Wall/Davis/MKG wave. All those guys went where they were supposed to.

There's also:

Teague, the No. 7 talent in the class, went No. 29
Jones, the No. 8 talent in his class, went No. 18
Lamb, a top 20 talent in his class, went No. 42
Noel, the No. 1 talent in his class, went No. 6
Poythress, a top 10 talent in his class, is projected as a 2nd-rounder
Goodwin, a top 15 talent in his class, went No. 29
Randle, the No. 2 talent in his class, went No. 7
Andrew Harrison, a top 10 talent in his class, is projected as a borderline first-rounder
Aaron Harrison, a top 10 talent in his class, is projected as a second-rounder
Young, a top 10 talent in his class, fell outside the lottery
Johnson & Lee were considered top 20 talents, but are now looked at as borderline first-rounders

The only guys who substantially increased their stock under Cal are Bledsoe and, it seems, Cauley-Stein. And other than Davis, the guys he's put into the league - Cousins, Wall, Knight and MKG especially - all have the same exact flaws that were on display when they got to Lexington.

He is a brilliant recruiter. But he does not develop his talent, and most kids who go to UK cost themselves millions by doing so.
Expand ...
Noel would have been the #1 pick were he healthy.

Also, the players who were Top 10 talent going a little below their high school ranking is a little misleading: they're HS ranking is only against other high schoolers, not against college or foreign players.

Also, sometimes a player is misranked in high school. We've had them at UConn, and certainly Teague is a clear example of that in college. I also suspect the Harrison twins are. I just have no idea how they were considered Top 10. They have a good feel for the game, but lack speed and athleticism, and only get what they do through their size...which is easily negated at the NBA level.
 
Matrim55 said:
You're riding the Wall/Davis/MKG wave. All those guys went where they were supposed to.

There's also:

Teague, the No. 7 talent in the class, went No. 29
Jones, the No. 8 talent in his class, went No. 18
Lamb, a top 20 talent in his class, went No. 42
Noel, the No. 1 talent in his class, went No. 6
Poythress, a top 10 talent in his class, is projected as a 2nd-rounder
Goodwin, a top 15 talent in his class, went No. 29
Randle, the No. 2 talent in his class, went No. 7
Andrew Harrison, a top 10 talent in his class, is projected as a borderline first-rounder
Aaron Harrison, a top 10 talent in his class, is projected as a second-rounder
Young, a top 10 talent in his class, fell outside the lottery
Johnson & Lee were considered top 20 talents, but are now looked at as borderline first-rounders

The only guys who substantially increased their stock under Cal are Bledsoe and, it seems, Cauley-Stein. And other than Davis, the guys he's put into the league - Cousins, Wall, Knight and MKG especially - all have the same exact flaws that were on display when they got to Lexington.

He is a brilliant recruiter. But he does not develop his talent, and most kids who go to UK cost themselves millions by doing so.
Expand ...

I definitely don't think you can view recruiting rankings and draft placements as anything other than a frail correlation. Teague being the #7 recruit in his class does not automatically make him the #7 pick in the subsequent draft. To secure a spot in the top ten, you have to either be so athletically and physically gifted that scouts overlook the gap in production, or, you have to consistently outplay juniors and seniors who are closer to grown men than high schoolers. Additionally, if Calipari is hauling in five projected first rounders a year, it's unreasonable to expect them to all fulfill those expectations, there only being one ball and all that.

Don't get me wrong, I think a lot of these kids who commit to Kentucky hoping to play 15-20 minutes when a comparable program is offering them more are crazy. I also don't want to make it seem like Cal is the greatest thing since sliced bread - he has his flaws as a coach, and I don't think he's as good at developing talent as somebody like Calhoun.

But c'mon. Some of the examples you listed above are simply unfair. Marquise Teague was a disaster early in his freshman year - by March, he was playing like a veteran. Doron Lamb wasn't an especially appealing NBA prospect coming out of high school. Nerlens Noel was a lock to go #1 before he blew out his knee - that's hardly Cal's fault. I'll grant you Poythress and Goodwin - the Johnson/Lee pairing I'll file under the "can't play four centers at once" category, and the Harrison twins I frankly don't think are that talented. They were overhyped from the jump.

I also think you short-change him on some of his unheralded prospects. It's not like he was the recruiter he is now before he got to UK, and he still constructed great teams. D-Rose was a great prospect, but nobody expected him to go #1. Chris-Douglas Roberts and Joey Dorsey were, to my knowledge, marginal recruits who are still playing in the NBA. Tyreke Evans went, what #5? Then there's Brandon Knight, a kid who was a wreck early in his freshman year and recovered to be drafted #8 overall. Not many had him pegged as a one-and-done. Josh Harrelson was found on the unwanted list when Cal turned him into an NBA guy. Patrick Patterson was taken in a lottery after stagnating under Gillipse.

I don't think Cal is a good developer of talent because of what he did with Wall, Cousins, Randle and Davis. Those guys were going to be studs regardless. He's an average x's and o's coach, a very good developer of team continuity, and a hell of a recruiter. But you just don't jump two levels as a team from November to March unless some of the guys on your team are improving dramatically throughout the year.
 
champs99and04 said:
I definitely don't think you can view recruiting rankings and draft placements as anything other than a frail correlation. Teague being the #7 recruit in his class does not automatically make him the #7 pick in the subsequent draft. To secure a spot in the top ten, you have to either be so athletically and physically gifted that scouts overlook the gap in production, or, you have to consistently outplay juniors and seniors who are closer to grown men than high schoolers.
Expand ...
Great post in general - I'm happy to see this debated rationally and am willing to admit that I may be overstating things (though I still don't think I am, but hey - that's debate).

However, Teague was regarded in mock drafts by ESPN & DraftExpress to be a mid-lottery pick as late as December of his freshman year. With the Harrisons, it was until February of their freshman year.

While there are myriad reasons all three of those players - and many of Cal's other recruits - have fallen in the rankings, the fact is that the vast majority of players don't improve their stock under his tutelage, and I'm not entirely comfortable blaming that on 1) the kids themselves, and 2) bad scouting. YMMV.
 
Matrim55 said:
Great post in general - I'm happy to see this debated rationally and am willing to admit that I may be overstating things (though I still don't think I am, but hey - that's debate).

However, Teague was regarded in mock drafts by ESPN & DraftExpress to be a mid-lottery pick as late as December of his freshman year. With the Harrisons, it was until February of their freshman year.

While there are myriad reasons all three of those players - and many of Cal's other recruits - have fallen in the rankings, the fact is that the vast majority of players don't improve their stock under his tutelage, and I'm not entirely comfortable blaming that on 1) the kids themselves, and 2) bad scouting. YMMV.
Expand ...

Fair enough. To the extent that Cal has had a fair amount of misses relative to other schools may be a product of the volume of top players he recruits. I know Drummond and Daniels are prospects other fan bases hold against us, but I'm not sure that's fair. Daniels, especially, was over-ranked coming out of high school, and Drummond was so poorly coached in high school that the staff basically had to re-work his entire approach to the game.
 
.-.
upstater said:
Buffalo's Will Regan went to Christian Laettner's high school, transferred to UB from Virginia. He used to practice in the Laettner Gymnasium, which the locals refer to as the "Laet" gym, since Christian pledged money for it but after some investment deals went south, he never actually ponied up.
Expand ...

Nice. Confirms everything we thought about Laettner
 
TRest said:
They are angling us out of a spot in the Big 10. I'm not kidding.
Expand ...

This would only have any probability if:

A. I thought they could drive Cable at TWC in NY State ... and have any pull in NYC. Buffalo - the State University of NY - has more traction moving towards the Toronto sprawl than Metropolitan Manhattan.
B. SUNY central takes care of Albany, Binghamton & Stony Brook as well. It's never going to have a $2b campaign through the legislature.
C. The AD can elevate sports ... They'll still be significantly a tier down.

No. I don't know their highest & best landing. They can get higher than the MAC
 
Is this discussion really necessary? Cal is a user. He uses schools, he uses players to make himself rich and successful. We know what went on at UMass and Memphis. He just has a bigger stage, now and a better brand behind him.

Where is his Caron Butler, his Hilton Armstrong, his Kevin Ollie. Guys he made not just better, but a lot better. To the point where NBA teams want them on the roster for reason above and beyond their ability.

The post that he is costing these kids millions is right on. These kids are making the league anyway if they are at all legit. Cal isn't doing anything for them other than maybe keeping them eligible and sending a few bucks their way.

They may win, they may not, but they certainly won't reach their full potential.
 
Matrim55 said:
You're riding the Wall/Davis/MKG wave. All those guys went where they were supposed to.

There's also:

Teague, the No. 7 talent in the class, went No. 29
Jones, the No. 8 talent in his class, went No. 18
Lamb, a top 20 talent in his class, went No. 42
Noel, the No. 1 talent in his class, went No. 6
Poythress, a top 10 talent in his class, is projected as a 2nd-rounder
Goodwin, a top 15 talent in his class, went No. 29
Randle, the No. 2 talent in his class, went No. 7
Andrew Harrison, a top 10 talent in his class, is projected as a borderline first-rounder
Aaron Harrison, a top 10 talent in his class, is projected as a second-rounder
Young, a top 10 talent in his class, fell outside the lottery
Johnson & Lee were considered top 20 talents, but are now looked at as borderline first-rounders

The only guys who substantially increased their stock under Cal are Bledsoe and, it seems, Cauley-Stein. And other than Davis, the guys he's put into the league - Cousins, Wall, Knight and MKG especially - all have the same exact flaws that were on display when they got to Lexington.

He is a brilliant recruiter. But he does not develop his talent, and most kids who go to UK cost themselves millions by doing so.
Expand ...

This is right on. About 23% of NBA draft picks come from outside the US (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?page=wilbon-110624) so if your high school ranking is N, your NBA draft slot should be 100/77*N or 1.3N -- that is, Teague at #7 out of high school should go #9 in the NBA draft (1.3*7). It is a red herring to think that college adds more competitors -- every player passes precisely once through both the high school rating process and the NBA draft.

Now, you should expect some mean reversion from highly ranked high school players, and some late bloomers, but against that you have to balance Cal's recruiting strategy. His whole pitch is built around making NBA stars and he is specifically focusing his recruitment on the players with the best NBA prospects (size, athleticism). Other coaches are recruiting for college success. So you should expect Cal's players to move up in the NBA draft compared to their high school ratings, since high school ratings are focused more on college than NBA success.

The reality is that Cal has not developed players significantly and has not raised their NBA prospects.
 
Pudge said:
This would only have any probability if:

A. I thought they could drive Cable at TWC in NY State ... and have any pull in NYC. Buffalo - the State University of NY - has more traction moving towards the Toronto sprawl than Metropolitan Manhattan.
B. SUNY central takes care of Albany, Binghamton & Stony Brook as well. It's never going to have a $2b campaign through the legislature.
C. The AD can elevate sports ... They'll still be significantly a tier down.

No. I don't know their highest & best landing. They can get higher than the MAC
Expand ...
UB would be a great way for the B1G to penetrate the Toronto-Hamilton markets, but would UB step up in hockey?
 
Pudge said:
Nice. Confirms everything we thought about Laettner
Expand ...
That school should hire Rod Sellers to come pound Laettners head into the ground until Chrissy coughs up the dough.

Later the incompetent local sheriff can suspend Rod a year after the fact.
 
.-.
SubbaBub said:
Is this discussion really necessary? Cal is a user. He uses schools, he uses players to make himself rich and successful. We know what went on at UMass and Memphis. He just has a bigger stage, now and a better brand behind him.

Where is his Caron Butler, his Hilton Armstrong, his Kevin Ollie. Guys he made not just better, but a lot better. To the point where NBA teams want them on the roster for reason above and beyond their ability.

The post that he is costing these kids millions is right on. These kids are making the league anyway if they are at all legit. Cal isn't doing anything for them other than maybe keeping them eligible and sending a few bucks their way.

They may win, they may not, but they certainly won't reach their full potential.
Expand ...

It amazes me that posts like these get likes. It just sounds like the rantings of a butt-hurt teenager. There's literally nothing in that post but your emotional vomit.

Hilton's in Turkey, by the way.
 
Matrim55 said:
the fact is that the vast majority of players don't improve their stock under his tutelage, and I'm not entirely comfortable blaming that on 1) the kids themselves, and 2) bad scouting. YMMV.
Expand ...

It's beyond disingenuous to call it a "fact" that the "vast majority" of his guys don't improve their stock. There's just no basis to say that. Are there kids who get squeezed for playing time / attention / etc. and don't pan out as expected? Of course, just like at every other program. Are there kids who are clearly over-valued coming out of high school? Sure, just like every other school (UConn included). This notion that Calipari can't develop kids is just something that people say because they resent the recruiting classes he gets, plain and simple.
 
Time will tell, BigErn. I think we're going to see some dissatisfied young men among his current crop of players and recruits. Recruiting one-and-dones worked well when he was getting his first groups and there were no quality upperclassmen competitors, but now he's starting to fill his roster with the upperclassmen who weren't able to leave early and there will be tension between them and the newcomers eager to be one-and-dones. Both groups still have NBA dreams. There aren't minutes for all of them. And if he's not developing them in practice, then their draft stock is going to fall.

Maybe he's an excellent developer and players can make the NBA even if they don't play, the way Matt Cassel made the NFL even though he didn't play at USC behind Carson Palmer and Matt Leinart. I doubt it, but if he is, then you'll be proven right.
 
BigErnMcCracken said:
It's beyond disingenuous to call it a "fact" that the "vast majority" of his guys don't improve their stock. There's just no basis to say that. Are there kids who get squeezed for playing time / attention / etc. and don't pan out as expected? Of course, just like at every other program. Are there kids who are clearly over-valued coming out of high school? Sure, just like every other school (UConn included). This notion that Calipari can't develop kids is just something that people say because they resent the recruiting classes he gets, plain and simple.
Expand ...

Getting 5 top 10 recruits on campus is impressive whether it is done legitimately or not. And Cal is a two time loser in the legitimacy dept.

A monkey should be able to win college games on that alone. A good coach would make them better. The numbers on Cal aren't good here. Boeheim has a similar problem.
 
pj said:
This is right on. About 23% of NBA draft picks come from outside the US (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?page=wilbon-110624) so if your high school ranking is N, your NBA draft slot should be 100/77*N or 1.3N -- that is, Teague at #7 out of high school should go #9 in the NBA draft (1.3*7). It is a red herring to think that college adds more competitors -- every player passes precisely once through both the high school rating process and the NBA draft.

Now, you should expect some mean reversion from highly ranked high school players, and some late bloomers, but against that you have to balance Cal's recruiting strategy. His whole pitch is built around making NBA stars and he is specifically focusing his recruitment on the players with the best NBA prospects (size, athleticism). Other coaches are recruiting for college success. So you should expect Cal's players to move up in the NBA draft compared to their high school ratings, since high school ratings are focused more on college than NBA success.

The reality is that Cal has not developed players significantly and has not raised their NBA prospects.
Expand ...

Those are my exact thoughts, verbalized better than I could have. Discussion over. Cal is an awful coach and developer, that's really the rations conclusion. He gets so much pub and love no one seems to address this except knowledgeable fans. He's a media and public darling. I have no clue why. He's probably my #1 most despised sports figure eight now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,215
Messages
4,557,564
Members
10,442
Latest member
StatsMan


Top Bottom