"Misreading" or "Miscoaching" Meek's talent

by Blueobsessed on Jun 22, 2009 7:48 PM EDT Comment 28 comments

Could it be that having three coaches in four years caused Jodie to say enough is enough? Obviously the crowning blow came when Jodie told the opposition, "The coach told me not to shoot"! That level of frustration is not characterisitc of the stoic Jodie Meeks we have all come to love.

I want to suggest another possibility. Obviously, Meeks is NBA caliber, but I wonder if he really was groomed for the correct position. From day one at Kentucky, Jodie needed to have been told that his future at the next level was at the PG/LG position. Jasper had the size, speed, handle and leaping ability to play that position, but Jodie needed to develop the skill set for that position as well. It is unfair to our recruits who are really outstanding athletes, not to advise them about the next level. Let's consider some of our talented players:

Rondo had only one position he could play and that was PG. Although relatively small, his "hop", large hands and even longer wingspan are unreal for an athlete with his kind of speed.
Bradley may have been needed to play SG at UK, but he should have been groomed early on as a PG.
Crawford, at 6'5", should have been developed into a SG. Even on the collegiate level his size limited him.
Patterson should play SF and should develop a handle and an outside shot this year.
Morris should have been groomed as a PF, not a center. He may have had to play center, but he should have been groomed as a PF.

Anyone can find exceptions to my suggestions, but in the NBA SIZE DOES MATTER! They measure you before they ever watch you in a tryout. For all of Rondo's talent, he had to add muscle through the use of a personal trainer and sit for a year before taking the reins as a pro PG. Bradley is still trying to learn the game in Europe, but each year, the league will take bigger and faster PGs before selecting him. Crawford will play SG not SF in the NBA. Unfortunately, the SG position is a position that good defenders with larger wingspan and height (6'7") and can shoot find themselves.

It is a fact that for SG, Jodie is too small and will not get a great deal of looks unless he can shut people down defensively. At 6'4" he could be a fast PG, who can muscle a lot of smaller PGs. He has to develop that handle. Morris made the same mistake and chose not to return. if he had played one year next to Patterson, it would have made hime more marketable as a PF. Jodie needed to play this year with John Wall the number 1 draft pick of 2010 and Eric Bledsoe. It would have improved his skills much more quickly than sitting on the bench and playing the amount of time Morris currently plays in the NBA.

IMO Patterson has made the correct decision. He will play a year with Cousins and Orton and bang with 250 pounders everyday. He could even fill in some at SF so the two big men can play side by side. Patrick needs a year to gain more weight and strength. I hope he gets to 250 pounds. Then he will be nearing the size of one Cav SF. This year I hope Patterson gives up on playing PF and starts shooting the threes and drives to the basket. IMO SF is where his future lies.

In closing, I hope Coach Cal will help these star athletes get to the next level. Three coaches have seen Jodie as a SG. Any player who is 6'4" and only has only a 37" leap can play SG in the NBA, but it will be difficult. Any 6'8"-6'9" , 235 lb. player who wants to become an NBA PF also has a hard road ahead of him. Additionally, every year Jodie and Pat will be challenged by younger players both from across the nation and across the world. They need to be ready before they enter the NBA. The NBA does not pay for On the Job Training. They want instant success. What do you think?

1 recs | Comment 28 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Rondo Started At PG For 2 Years

Crawford played SG all 4 years at UK.

Bradley played PG as junior and senior at UK. He played both G positions backing up Rondo and Crawford as freshman and sophomore.

Rondo, Crawford, and Bradley were in the same class at UK.

Morris is a C period. He isn’t, wasn’t, never will be a PF anywhere.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jun 22, 2009 8:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Congratulations On the Effort

You make some worthy points and your analysis is most likely accurate, alas, you have begun from a false premise IMO, i.e. a college coach’s first obligation is to develop a player for the next step in that individual’s progression. In reality, of course, a college coach’s first priority — perhaps the only one — is to win as many games possible and do so within the confines laid down by the NCAA and his employer. if, during the process, the players develop their talent to better their later opportunities that then is a bonus (perhaps for their college team, perhaps not). As for Jodie Meeks I would beg to differ on his attributes to play the 1. Meeks is one of those individuals with great speed but without great quickness, his ball handling capabilities are average, his vision and court awareness, at least as displayed thus far, are not at the level required by NBA and his passing ability is suspect. It may be that those incompetencies are the result of lack of training at an early age and perhaps could be developed by professionals but I can’t imagine an NBA team attempting it. Concluding and without debating the abilities of Smith and Gillispie I would say that they concurred that Meeks at the 2 was best for UK and the player.

"The prosperity of commerce is now perceived and acknowledged by all enlightened statesmen to be the most useful as well as the most productive source of national wealth, and has accordingly become a primary object of its political cares."

--Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 12, 27 November 1787

by Wild Weasel on Jun 22, 2009 8:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

IMO Yes and No

Agree that the college coach has to groom his player to fit his needs to win games…and championships. But, as far as Meeks goes I’m certain an NBA team will be more than willing to work on his game … maybe not as a 1 but certainly as a 2. There are too many guards his size already in the NBA … although the prototypical 2 guard is in the 6-6/6-7 range, I think there is a trade off for speed and ball handling with size. Not every player can have size and athleticism like Lebron (6-8, 260) … I think Jodie has the ability to guard a bigger man on defense and the speed to score on offense. I’m looking forward to watching him play in the nba (hopefully with Atlanta)

by ukcris on Jun 22, 2009 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Great comments. It looks like Coach Cal will be bringing a different level of ballplayer to Kentucky . . .

If Wall (No. 1 HS player)is already being predicted to be the number one player in the 2010 draft and if Cousins (No. 2 HS player) has a skill set to play SF as stated elsewhere on ASOB, it looks like there lies the answer.

When KY recruited Jodie (No. 39) and Jasper (No. 38) and still had Morris and hoped to get Patterson, that looked like quite a team. Add Bradley and Crawford and wow. It just goes to show you very good college ball players don’t necessarily make good NBA players. IMO Jodie will be a “journeyman” NBA player, travelling from team to team. I think he could average low double figures but will never be a great SG unless he picks up some outstanding PG skills.

I love Jodie and wish him the best of luck in the NBA. I will really miss him.

by Blueobsessed on Jun 22, 2009 10:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Pitino Did Very Well With Lesser Rated Players At UK

He signed a few (only 5) McDonalds A-A yet won 81% of his games at UK.

Many of his players made the NBA but most were “journeymen” there. Few were All-Stars or All-NBA.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jun 23, 2009 6:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jodie

could be a very good shooting guard in the NBA or he could not. His game is very reminiscent of Ray Allen who doesnt necessarily have the greatest ball skill"s. I think it depends on the team and situation he finds himself in more than your desire for him to acquire “point guard” skills.

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Jun 23, 2009 9:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Forty, how many of those "journeymen" under Pitino stay all four years

I know Mashburn left early. What about the others?

by Blueobsessed on Jun 23, 2009 7:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Pitino Had 3 Early Departures

Mashburn, Walker, Mercer.

Tubby had 4 early departures – Nazr, Azubuike, Rondo, Morris.

Pitino’s 3 early departures > than Tubby’s 4.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jun 23, 2009 9:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wouldn't Marquise Estill be another Tubby early departure?

Technically he had another year of eligibility…..if he would have been eligible with grades.

If peeing your pants is cool, consider me Miles Davis.

by btcoop71 on Jun 23, 2009 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No

Estill didn’t have another year of eligibility because he didn’t graduate in 4 years.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jun 23, 2009 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yet to be seen

At this time I would say they are better but Buke and Rondo’s careers are still young and they have quite a bit of room for growth. Rondo already has a ring as well. Something walker didnt achieve until the twilight of his career.

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Jun 23, 2009 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So it seems that outstanding players rarely stay and that some of the old time

UK basketball records may stand for a very long time. Short of Rhondo, I still think many of our best players should have stayed a year longer to enhance their skills. I guess being so “blueobsessed” makes separation prior to graduation difficult for me. It is the proce of being a fan.

by Blueobsessed on Jun 23, 2009 6:36 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Rec'd

I’m not sure I agree with your assessment of how many of these players were utilized at UK (see Forty’s comment above) and I’m not sure I accept your premise that a player’s future role in the NBA should be the sole or primary factor in how they are used in college.

But there is some good thought put into this fanpost and that deserves a Rec’.

There is no gravity - the earth just sucks.

by JLeverenz on Jun 25, 2009 11:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Thanks J. This fanpost tries to approach the question, "What could have been" and also tries to debunk

the statements that “he is not quick enough to . . .” or "he doesn’t have a good enough handle to . . . ". Coach Cal has coached the MVP of the NBA so I think he should be helpful in developing the skill sets of these talented individuals so they will be multidimentional players at both the collegiate and professional levels. That is the reason they will be choosing to attend UK. . . . to improve their game. No graduate of UK should be labeled as “one-dimensional”.

Personally, I believe Jodie should have waited a year and gone higher than 41st. I do not buy the arguement that “he was about as high as he was going to be”.

by Blueobsessed on Jun 26, 2009 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

He May Not Have Been Drafted Next Year

2010 draft will be much stronger than 2009.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jun 26, 2009 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Forty I understand, but I just can't see that if he improved his skills.

I just can’t see a “new improved” Jodie having to follow the career path of Bradley, Crawford or Morris. Next year whether or not his stats fall, he would have been the leading scorer of a team that went deep into the tournament. Maybe he would be able to reach All American status and graduate well up in the scoring record book of UK. As it is he gets drafted 41st by a weak NBA team as insurance against Bogans’ free agency. Yes he will play with Jennings. Only time will tell if this was a wise move, but I am uneasy about Jodie’s decision.

by Blueobsessed on Jun 26, 2009 6:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm Not

He would still be a 6-3 (barefooted) or 6-4 (in shoes) guard with a great shooting touch.

Best to be drafted and start getting paid whenever you can.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jun 26, 2009 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So basically Jodie could never be as good other players his size?

Like Rose or Evans who are about his size? My point is that right now today they have PG skills that Jodie doesn’t. The difference between your view and mine is that I think he can learn those skills in college(he had better to survive in the pros) and you seem to think he may never have the physical ability to demonstrate those skills, so he had better take the money now and run. I am not too sure he has sold himself short.

by Blueobsessed on Jun 27, 2009 7:46 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

They ARE PG

Meeks isn’t.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jun 27, 2009 10:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

But those PGs are Jodie's size and developing PG skills would certainly help Jodie's marketablility..

by Blueobsessed on Jun 27, 2009 5:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Jodie Is Not A PG

He’s a SG.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jun 27, 2009 8:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Forty did not Evans start last year as a SG and then was moved to PG by Coach Cal.

This is the premise of this fanpost. Maybe Jodie needed that chance, Injuries and playing behind other PGs may have prevented it, but i come back to the point of two coaches either “misreadi” or "miscoach his talent. I just don’t know. Its a conundrum!

by Blueobsessed on Jun 27, 2009 11:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Evans Is A PG

Meeks isn’t. Wasn’t. Won’t be.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jun 27, 2009 11:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Meeks isnt and will never be a point guard

You dont just “develop” point guard skills.

He can work on his ball handling and passing but Meek’s but some things are innate about being a point guard. Court awareness and instinct play a large role in making a good point guard. Meeks is and will always be a two guard.

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Jun 28, 2009 3:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Its the old NATURE versus NURTURE arguement.

I say he can be taught (NURTURE) the PG skills he needs to make him a better SG (or even a PG) someday in the NBA. If not, I fear for his future. Wouldn’t be wonderful if he became another Rod Strickland. I wish Jodie all the luck, but the real work is ahead of him.

by Blueobsessed on Jun 29, 2009 3:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

He's A SG

Not a PG. That simple.

Strickland was a PG from Day 1 – HS, college, NBA.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jun 29, 2009 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

We disagree

He can become a better ball handler and even a better passer but that doesnt make him a point guard. It makes him a shooting guard that can dribble a little better than he used to and not turn the ball over in a crowd.

There is an instinctiveness that good point guards have and a floor vision the IMO cannot be taught. Jodie does not have the "floor vision necessarry to be a point guard IMO nor does he need to be a point guard to succeed in the NBA.

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Jun 29, 2009 3:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs