This 'Bama Loss Is A Recruiting Failure.
by TeamWeaver on Jan 19, 2011 8:31 PM EST
Email
Print
Though Ken and Glenn's game analyses place the blame on the players, I think I have to have the players' back in this loss to Alabama. I know, ultimately, they had the ball in their hands but it's the coach who is supposed to put them in the best position to win and Cal, in my opinion, did not. I hear tumultuous choruses of, "We played soft" and, "We made mistakes." Both true .... but not, in the final analysis, the reason we lost the game. This is like blaming the fact the wheel fell off on the mechanic without looking at the inadequate quality control and management failures that allowed and promoted the circumstances where it occurred.
This is what I saw in the game, admittedly one man's opinion. In the first half, we were being physically manhandled on the block and in the lane. The refs could have fouled out the entire 'Bama frontline. This is not unusual by any means. When you don't have the skilled talent on your side, one strategy, perhaps the best, is to compensate with aggression and physicality. It was quite evident in both Chapel Hill and Georgia. Calhoun admitted he did it as a way to take advantage of UK's inexperience.
However, universally, the refs don't call it for a variety of reasons, some conscious - some subconscious, ... it slows the game, ticks off the fans, enrages the fouling coach, drives the TV people crazy, seems petty, they don't want to determine the final outcome of the game, can lead to charges of favoritism, etc. ... as long as it doesn't get out of hand, "Let the boys play". As a result, particularly in the last 20 years, the game has become increasingly physical. Not that he invented it by any means, but Pitino uses fouling as a fundamental underpinning of his coaching philosophy - "They can't call them all." The reality is they WON'T call them all.
Unless egregious, most if not all fans, either because they were on the winning side or don't want to be viewed as a whiner, refuse to point to officiating as the major determining factor in a game. One of the stupidest things I've seen otherwise intelligent basketball fans do is to point to the fact that both teams got about the same number of fouls called to support an argument that a game was "fairly" officiated. If one team fouls 50 times and another fouls 30 times and both are called for 20 ... want to bet who won the game? And that is how the game we love is very often played.
At this point I want to put to rest the understandable impression that a reader might get that I am blaming this loss on the officiating. In fact, I believe Kentucky teams should be expected to go on the road and win despite the very predictable lack of a 'fair' whistle. I blame it on UK's lack of depth. In a game where the opposing team is physically carving out the paint as their territory you have to be able to contest that strategy. There are several ways to do it, one of which is to overcome it with good shooting. Another is to ride the officials al la Mike Krzyzewski. (Calipari has been ejected from exactly two games in his entire college coaching career - Cal riding officials is just not going to happen.)
All the rest of the strategies depend on having fouls to burn. Not that you are necessarily going to need them, as the contesting rough play underneath may not be called, but you have to be able to absorb any fouls that might be called as the officials seek to establish control. In the 'Bama game, we were generating great looks at the basket throughout the first half but for whatever reason the shots weren't falling. We have no fouls to give. Now what do we do?
Everyone says we played soft in the first half. I ask you, if you have been beat over the head in every game and practice, "Keep your head - play smart - don't commit stupid fouls - don't force anything - don't retaliate - if you get two fouls I've got to sit you - I've got no one to replace you with, etc. ..., what do we do? We can't contest physical play in the first half because if we get called there's no bench. Even if each team gets the same number of fouls called, it's a net victory for the deeper bench. Therefore, you back off and attempt to be patient looking for opportunities. We got great looks but many just didn't fall. Still, we were only 8 points down at the half.
In the second half, with no reason to hold anything back, we were more assertive and used up the fouls we saved in the first half taking it to the Alabama frontline. But we just ran out of time.
If we could have established an inside presence we would have been just fine. For those of you that say things like "Live by the 3, die by the 3," I point out that we shot 7 for 21 for 33%. It wasn't the lack of 3s that hurt us. We didn't get enough 2s. In my opinion, enough 2s would have come if we could have contested the paint in the first half. We couldn't because of the total lack of frontline bench depth. Roster is the responsibility of the coach. He can cuss the players all he wants, admittedly with cause, but this loss, imo, (amazing as it is to say about Calipari) was due to a recruiting failure.
85 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
well,
I appreciate the time you took to write this out and it is well written, but I don’t really agree with your thoughts here, and admittedly you did lose me a little when you got into the officials bit.
I think that depth is an issue, yes, and I also think that our post presence or lack thereof is a HUGE issue, but in that regard, Cal recruited fine, IMO. He recruited arguably the best big man that was available in this class and got him on campus. The only problem is that skilled body is sitting his behind on the bench and will never set foot on the court in real competition to help our cause.
I’m not sure if you think he didn’t recruit well enough in areas other than big men or perhaps you think he should have signed a couple more big men just for the sake of signing big men? More Vargas-types aren’t the answer as far as I’m concerned. I guess maybe just some more big bodies to burn fouls on is more to your point, that part wasn’t super clear to me, but true and incredibly skilled big men don’t grow on trees, sadly, and I’m not sure who else, even semi-skilled was even available for Cal to try and get?
As far as recruiting centers, I think Cal is doing fine. No, actually I think he is doing great. He’s gotten us two skilled ones in the last two years, in a time when they are hard to come by. You want to fault him for the fact that Enes is sitting on the bench, okay, but I say he still did well by getting him and signing him.
Thank you BSC.
First, I discussed the officiating issue as a means of identifying the need but inability to contest the paint area without bench depth. I’m sorry if it was confusing. I’m sure the argument could have been presented better.
For the most part, I’m saying he should have recruited more big men. I anticipated an argument that Calipari can’t be blamed for Enes not playing but despite 13 scholarships we only have 9 scholarship players and, realistically, even with Enes eligible we would have been only one injury away from this same exact scenario. Also, I don’t think it is unfair to point out that Calipari failed to get Enes eligible and, ultimately, Cal had no fallback for the bad decision by the NCAA nor the potentially devastating circumstance occasioned by probable injuries. In this’Bama game the lack of bench meant he had no ability to be aggressive in the paint.
Also, I agree, more "Vargas-types
Should have been...
Also, I agree, more “Vargas-types” are not the answer and I fault Cal specifically for Eloy being our only backup big man.
So what top 10 center that went somewhere else was he supposed to get with less than one year at UK.
When he left Memphis, he had to start over on the recruiting front, and everyone has the belief that Cal is the point guard guru; not the “center” guru. Also, by the time he realized that he would not have Orton, the only player with potential and size that was available was Vargas. True Vargas has not worked out, but it is not as if Calipari was alone in missing on him as he was highly rated by the services and Billy Donovan to a chance on him first.
If you want to say last night was Cal’s fault, I would consider that (don’t think that I would agree as I think he put them in a position to win, after all they were down 1, with the ball, on their own end of the court and ten seconds left). You lose me completely when you say Calipari’s bad recruiting caused last night and the difficulties of this season. Every coach usually gets 3-5 years to get their own style of players into a program and Cal is just in year 2.
WKLawdog ...
Who says any Kentucky recruit needed to be top-10? None of the guys who played for ‘Bama and beat us were top-10. I disagree that there were no players better than Vargus available for this year when Orton declared for the NBA. I’m sure Cal attempted to get them but was unsuccessful.
Are you suggesting the lack of bench depth didn’t contribute to the inability to assert ourselves in the paint during the first half as much or more than anything left undone by the players?
If not Calipari’s, whose responsibility is it if you have only 9 scholarship players on the team?
Few C Wanted To Play Behind Kanter
Most expected Enes to start for UK.
by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 19, 2011 10:37 PM EST up reply actions
Hi Forty
I agree probably no Top-10 center would have. But as suggested by WKLawdog, those weren’t probably available anyway.
According to the media, the consensus was that Enes would not play. But be that as it may, below top-10 centers wouldn’t have expected to start anyway pretty much anywhere they went. They would have seen their opportunity with Enes being a one and done.
They might have been conscience of the potential for Cal to recruit over them for next year and I don’t have any rebuttal to that.
TW
I’ll back off the top 10 center and just ask you which center or centers you would have had Cal recruit. If one looks at the recruiting lists, one finds there are not many centers at all available. Most big men (ala Jones) much prefer to play on the perimeter instead of the post. I’m told, in AAU ball, if a big man wants to touch the ball at all, he goes to the perimeter to get it; therefore, there is a dearth of big men who want to play in the paint. Would you have had Cal recruit Fab Melo (Syracuse)? He doesn’t even play there.
Yes, we would all like to have more depth, and 9 scholarship players leaves us thin this year. But in the recruiting season for last year, most, including the coaching staff, would have thought that Orton and Bledsoe would still be here to go along with the five he brought in. And Stacey Poole, who was talked about as 6-6 turns out to be 6-3. What else could Cal have done given what he knew at the time?
Jdogblue ...
WKLawdog used the term “Center,” my thought is not so narrow and includes all frontcourt players.
I don’t think Melo was available but if he had been maybe he would have been a solution…. And before you roll your eyes and shut down discussion, consider all we’re talking about is having a bench player that can contribute 5 fouls without being a distinct negative as Vargas is at this point.
Here are 4 Top-30 2010 frontcourt recruits from just the SEC who hadn’t committed anyplace when Orton declared for the draft in late March and who in my estimation would have been a significant improvement over Vargas to say nothing about an empty chair: Cothron (Auburn), Thorton (Georgia), Siakam (Vanderbilt), Carter (Alabama).
Remember back in the 99-00 season? Tubby had Magloire, Stone, Camara and Knight for his roster frontcourt. Jamaal was the starter but couldn’t stay in the game because he’d pick up 2 fouls too quickly. Tubby’s solution was to switch his starter to one of the other frontcourt players (he tried them all) to fight for initial presence in the paint, then take them out when they got their expected 2 fouls and put Magloire in with 5 fresh fouls to give.
Just one strategy we can not adopt with our current bench.
TW
I remember Cal was trying to get Cothron and Thornton and missed on both as they elected to sign where they are now.
Thinking back beyond the Tubby years, I remember when Joe Hall brought in Robey, Phillips, and Dan Hall in the same year. We were talking about 15 fouls in their freshman year back then. Hall followed up with Alecksinas (spelling?) and I believe one other 6-10 guy. Yes, I remember the 15 foul era, but I don’t remember Hall, Alecksinas, or the other guy ever making much of a contribution.
But I do now understand your point.
I am leaning toward agreeing with TW on this
For those following along on the game thread last night, I asked a question about walk-ons being allowed to make the team with scholarships available. The answers I got was yes. I was wondering when I asked why we didn’t find a couple of “bigs” somewhere on campus that played competitive ball to help with our inside game. As far as Cal recruiting Enes, I think Cal thought there might be a chance he could not be “available”. He had to think it. Enes was a gamble. One that didn’t pay off.
I think I recall memphiswildcat saying a short bench was Cal’s MO at Memphis, and Wooden “advised” him to concentrate on 7,8 or 9, I believe. But, that is not what we need this year. A little more lane presence would ease my wonderings with this team. I love them and all, but I am not seeing the fun within the team that I always look for. Maybe we are not the only ones seeing something missing.
Blue... there is no other color to Bleed !!!
Any kid that was big enough to be helpful and skillful enough to consider,
is already playing ball on scholarship somewhere. There is a reason that walk-ons are always 6-3 or shorter.
Thanks a2d2...
With regards to the Wooden advice – I believe it dealt not with roster size but player rotation. Cal had been playing 9-10 players per game and Wooden’s advice was to reduce the number of players who got minutes to around 7.
Yes, I recall that too. Now.. ;-) Thanks TW for keeping me straight.
Blue... there is no other color to Bleed !!!
Has anyone considered just what our situation would be this season ...
… if Josh hadn’t blossomed so unexpectedly. And certainly there are no two people more surprised than Josh and Cal.
Although I don't agree with the whole of the post, TW, you've stated your case
in a very even-handed manner.
Recruiting: You have to remember that Cal did not know D. Cousins, Bledsoe, and especially Orton were going pro until very, very late in the season. Too late to add a quality big man recruit, anyway. He did, though, make an effort to get T. Harris, who went to UT, and the kid (a forward) who ended up at NC State. Plus, he took a chance on an McDonald’s AA in Vargas, a gamble that right now looks like a bad bet (of course that can change), but blaming Cal for that, is in my mind, misplacing blame. The Kanter situation, he knew and everyone at UK knew was a long shot, but he went for the kid because he knew he was going to need help in the paint after the unexpected exodus.
What’s funny (and ironic), is that next year, Cal will have more talented bodies than he’ll know what to do with. And if the NBA has a lockout, he’ll have two squads worth of top 10 teams.
Even-handedly I say, "Thanks Ken." ;-)
Actually, Ken, I think you have just bolstered my argument, even if inadvertently. By the time conference play rolled around only Bledsoe and Orton were NBA surprises – Cousins’ stock had already risen to lottery status. Cal had already offered both Tobias Harris and C. J. Leslie (the forward that went to NC St.) attempting to land them prior to the end of non-conference play – I think it was even before the season started, certainly Vargas was. Vargas himself was always seen as something of a project too slow and overweight to contribute this season. Maybe he felt confident in his ability to sign one or both of Harris and Leslie, but, ultimately, he failed to sign either. By definition they constitute a ‘recruiting failure’ by Cal to provide just the frontline depth we are talking about.
Operating on different wavelengths
I think I misunderstood your use of the word “fail” – More on that in a second.
As far as Cuz is concerned, the timing of him rising to the top of the draft board is really inconsequential to this debate (as I now see it), but, my recollection is of him making that leap after the start of SEC play. But, I could be wrong.
If you mean by “fail” that Cal didn’t get a couple of guys he went after, then yes, he missed on Harris and Leslie (fail seems like an awfully strong word, one with a negative connation). But, to blame him for that is misguided, to say the least. He’s only the hottest recruiter in cb right now, but man, he isn’t going to get every player he goes after.
So true.
The fact that he got one of the three power forwards that he wanted is evidence of great recruiting ability. Think about it like this, Roy Williams has been trying to get a point guard ever since he passed on recruiting John Wall and Duke has been trying to get an athletic and talented big man since K missed on Patterson.
Timing ...
IIRC, in some mock drafts, Cousins was a lottery pick as early as mid-December. With no difficulty at all I found a link to a forum discussion at InsideHoops.com where he was already the predicted #1 pick in late December 2009.
Everybody (including Bledsoe and Orton) declared for the draft a couple days after the March 27 loss to WVU.
I’ll respond back about the more substantive issue later.
Wavelength vs Missed vs Failed
Ken, I don’t think we’re so far apart on the definition of what constitutes a ‘Miss’ or a ‘Failure’ as you seem to think. Your characterization of Cal’s whiffing on Harris and Leslie as a “miss” is absolutely correct. Not getting a particular recruit is definitely a miss in my mind.
IAs you suggest, in any given season a coach/program is never going to get all their top targets. For example, right now I believe Kentucky’s eight principal recruiting targets for 2012 (all top-30) are Archie Goodwin (G), Perry Ellis (F), Shabazz Muhammad (G), Kaleb Taczewski ©, Andre Drummond ©, Alex Murphy (F), L. J. Rose (G), and DaJuan Coleman ©. Even in this small group there are priorities and Cal is probably not going to get even all his top ‘wants,’ to say nothing about the whole list and anyone he doesn’t get is simply a ‘miss’.
Alternatively, as any recruiter’s ‘misses’ accumulate or the talent level of the actual ‘gets’ falls below some arbitrary level of expectation such that the team’s ability to successfully compete is adversely impacted, then I think the characterization of a recruiting performance begins to shade toward the term “Failure.” And when a recruiting performance leaves a gapping hole on the bench that significantly limits the options of the team in competition contributing directly to la loss suffered to a conference bottom feeder… then I believe the term “Failure” to be correctly descriptive and absolutely appropriate.
Where we may be on a different “wavelength” is where you appear to think I’m grading Cal’s ENTIRE 2010 recruiting performance as a “failure.” Let me assure you I’m totally delighted with Knight, Jones and Lamb and Cal himself for that matter. However, he’s got an area in which didn’t succeed and that area of ‘failure’ is pretty bad, imo. What’s more, I’m not the only one who thinks there’s a big problem. Cal knows he’s got a significant frontcourt talent issue not only this year but going forward, 5 of the 8 above 2012 recruiting targets are frontcourt.
Something you may not be aware of...
The NBA draft is in late June and we won’t know if there is going to be a lockout until late July or early August. Right now, only Jones is going for sure. But, given the issues of rookie compensation that are on the table right now, I think you can count on anybody who can go taking a flyer and then begging NCAA forgiveness if they are unsuccessful. We may not have the front loaded talent pool everyone’s anticipating.
Even so, next year we may well be in exactly the same position we’re in now. With Jones and Harrelson gone, Vargas will be the only returning frontline player. Gilchrist is a wing at 6’6" 190 lbs, Wiltjer at 6’9" will likely replace Terrrence at the 4 position but he is only 225lbs, and though Davis is 6’10" he’s only listed at 220 lbs and can hardly be considered a banger. Again we will not have any backup in the event of an injury or other problem.
Going pro
Based on some conversations I have had, I have serious doubts about Jones going pro, even if there an NBA lockout (but that’s certainly not a guarantee) Knight and Lamb are staying unless something really unexpected happens.
That leaves a roster next year of Knight, Lamb, Liggins, Miller, Vargas (if he stays at UK), Hood, Poole, Gilchrist, Davis, Wiltjer, and Teague, as of right now. I don’t care about their sizes, that’s an incredibly athletic, talent-laden roster. With the emphasis on athletic. A team with that type of talent doesn’t need a 6-10, 6-11 post player clogging up the middle. There have been too many great teams to recount that have won and won big with similar roster talent and size (albeit, with more experience). I am personally not worried about the lack of a “true” big man (there are so few of those today, anyway), especially offensively in the DDM. And defensively, Gilchrist and Davis have lengthy wing spans which makes them capable of guarding bigger players. The same is true with Knight and Teague. Cal will also have shooters galore, and I’ll take shooters (who can create their own shot) over a big man in the middle in the DDM every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
What’s kind of funny is that UK’s problem this year isn’t the lack of a big man in the middle. UK is one of the top off. rebounding teams in the country, and although people point to points in the paint as being a negative for UK, that’s simply not true. In their loss to UGA, UK outscored the Dogs by 10 in the paint, and in their loss to Bama the Cats were only outscored by 2. UConn killed them in the paint, but that was because UK’s defensive rotation was non-existent; an error in execution.
The three main problems this team has are youth (for the forseeable future, a puzzle Cal will have to continuously fight to solve), depth, and lack of toughness, which you don’t have to be big to have. Take Travis Ford for example. He’s 5-9 on a good day, but he’s as tough as they come (he inherited that from his father, I suppose). He didn’t get pushed around, and if he did, he pushed right back. Same with Winston Bennett at 6-7. Toughest SOB (on the court) you’ll ever meet. Mike Casey and Mike Pratt are other examples of players who refused to be bullied on the court. I’ll take players like that and, with a few shooters, whip everybodies behind. Cal’s the same way.
And that’s why he’s really not happy with his team, and hasn’t been for quite some time. But, it’s his team, and he’s ultimately responsible for getting them to play like he wants (easier said than done, sometimes).
“Banging” is a mentality, pure and simple. And if a player doesn’t possess that mentality, it has to be driven like a stake into them. Something Cal is currently laboriously trying to do. But, get three or four 6-7 to 6-9 guys who can score, and who take it personal when the opposition gets a rebound or loose ball (and are unafraid to put an elbow into someones midsection), along with some capable guard play, and that will be a tough team to beat. That’s Cals goal, here.
I do think, though, evidenced by his pursuit of an extremely talented Kanter, that if the right true big man comes along again, Cal will go after him. And the reason is the way Cuz played. Although he altered the offense a bit because of DC, when a big man with that type of talent comes along, I think you take advantage of it if you can. Because there are so few of those types of players out there.
Ok, I’m very long with this, I apologize.
by Ken Howlett on Jan 20, 2011 5:05 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Rec'd Ken
I learned a lot from your comment. But one question, will toughness bring swagger AND fun? :-)
Blue... there is no other color to Bleed !!!
it did last year...
ala cousins :)
only one rule in my house - uk has to be your favorite college bball team
by memphis wildcat on Jan 20, 2011 11:39 AM EST up reply actions
And Bledsoe and Wall
Neither was as visable as Cousins, but both had toughness and swagger.
After talking to a couple of the pro scouts at the LSU game,
I am not as worried about it either. They all can see the holes in Jones’ game. Knight impresses, but they are not sure about is lottery pick, or even first round status, not because they do not believe that he can do it, they just all think he will benefit a lot more from being in college actually running a team and not sitting on the bench behind a top NBA point guard.
Liggins is being looked at because he has become a defensive stopper who can penetrate and score.
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 20, 2011 8:00 AM EST up reply actions
If there isn't a lock out TJ will go pro no doubt
He is being projected (01-18-11) as the number six pick by NBADraft.Net and as number seven by Draftexpress.com – why would he stay if projected that high – he won’t and Cal will encourage him to go if he’s in the top ten picks. What would staying another year accomplish for him, maybe his stock would fall if he had to split his minutes against a loaded UK bench.
A man is nothing more than a summation of his scars!
I am no expert, just relaying what I was told. They all see a maturity issue, not with his attitude
but with his style of play. In a much different respect than DeMarcus ever had, because DeMarcus had no problems with sharing the ball or shot selection. Terrence does, not terribly bad, just not great yet either. He may very well be there by the end of the year, but as of right now, he is not.
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 20, 2011 9:27 AM EST up reply actions
Ha..
has immaturity ever stopped NBA teams from drafting talent?
not talking about immaturity of behavior.....
I am talking about an immature style of play….two very different things
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 20, 2011 2:29 PM EST up reply actions
Here is my thought on what the pro scouts may be seeing
They are looking at a small forward, 6’8" and who is long, who is super agile, can dribble the ball very well and can make a decent to good spot-up jump shot and can take it to the rim when its available. BUT he is being told to concentrate more playing the 4 and 5 spots rather then his normal fit as a 3 in the NBA. They arn’t seeing him play the position that they would be drafting him to play. Being this is the case, its hard for them to make an accurate evaluation of his true abilities…!
IMO, TJ is aware of what the pro scouts want to see and he tries doing that even though Cal has told him not to. He is resisting the role Cal has designated for him and they are having a battle of wills and both coming out on the short end of the stick. In time Cal probably will win out and the team as a whole will be better off. Saying that, I’m not sure that TJ will ever be happy playing Cal’s role and the team will suffer from it if he doesn’t adjust.
A man is nothing more than a summation of his scars!
Wow...i really wonder
if you are being realistic. I have not seen an NBA mock draft to this date that didn’t have Jones as a lottery pick. Also haven’t seen one that didn’t have Knight lower than around 18-19th. I see absolutely no way either of those guys will be back next year.
I do agree that Lamb will be back.
Like I said, I am just relaying what those pro scouts told me that were
in the press box……..I dont make the news, just report it…….lol
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 20, 2011 2:30 PM EST up reply actions
Well, there were scouts there from Indiana, Miami, Charlotte, Lakers,
and three others……I wont give up the scouts teams I talked to , but for what it’s worth, there you go
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 20, 2011 4:01 PM EST up reply actions
well,
the Lakers don’t need another SF, so I would say they probably wouldn’t be too high on Jones anyway, but Knight, well, they could surely use Knight! : )
Really, I think part of the problem, at least in the minds of the players is that there is no consensus #1 pick this year. There is no John Wall, there is no Blake Griffin, and so if you want to make the jump, it’s anybody’s game and they probably feel like they need to show whatever they can, whenever they can, you know, clamoring for the top-ish spot while they can? Basically, all the guys going this year have flaws or there would be a unanimous #1 and waiting until next year really isn’t going to help any as there will be a plethora of more talents coming down the pipeline.
Also, this might not be the best place to discuss this, but I’m on a roll here now, and I can’t help myself : ) but there is all this talk about the lock-out and to be honest, I’m not really sure how much that is going to deter players going pro who really really want to and I’ll tell you why. Well, actually Tom Ziller with SBNation NBA is going to tell you, but I’ll just give you the gist of what he said, and what I agree with. I ran across this article a while back, but I thought it was good.
Basically, I don’t think the lockout will have the effect a lot of people think it might because in the NBA players don’t really start raking in the big dollars until the second year anyway, so even if players declare this year and there is a lockout, they can still go overseas or something during the lockout to stay in shape and then when they return, well, they are already in the NBA system and can start negotiating that second contract. Does that make sense?
The way the NBA operates, making sense sometimes makes no sense.
They really do operate in a vacuum, so they are going to do whatever is going to make the league and the players the most money. And the only way they do that is by keeping the fans happy. So if they see a benefit in keeping things from coming to a lockout, they will do it. If they don’t, they wont.
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 22, 2011 9:26 AM EST up reply actions
The League and the Players' Union
are talking hard right now, sounding like they are each trying to scare the other into capitulating. However, they have five months plus to go, so I imagine they will make some progress. They have a history of a past lockout, and neither won in that scenario.
You’re right, the NBA and the players are self-interested. In fact, if they see college stars, they covet them and lure them with the big bucks (ala Wall and Cousins). There is so much more to life than money, but the majority don’t see it, especially if they’ve never had any. I like to say, “Money is only important if you don’t have any.” Unfortunately, that is the case with so many young college players. Patterson was an exception, and Knight may be also.
I have a question about this,
What’s kind of funny is that UK’s problem this year isn’t the lack of a big man in the middle. UK is one of the top off. rebounding teams in the country…
I’m one of those who do happen to think that our lack of a skilled big man in the middle is a problem. I think Cal recruited fine, don’t get me wrong there, but I do think that the players we have aren’t producing (I’m not going to name names, I don’t think I have to), and anyway from what I can tell from Pomeroy’s ranking is that we are 53rd in offensive rebounding. True, Josh is listed at 11 (which was a huge but pleasant surprise for me to read) but as a team, we are 53rd.
And, if we just stay within the SEC that number according to the OR number in the link above, well, that is behind the likes of Florida, Alabama, Tennessee and South Carolina.
First of all, did I read that right? I might not have, I admit that site is not super easy for me to interpret and numbers are not my best area, but are we in fact 53rd? and if so, I don’t really think that’s one of the top teams in the country and we are certainly not doing so hot within our own conference right now.
by BigSkyCat on Jan 20, 2011 6:11 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
you're reading it correctly
It should be noted that good offensive rebounding isn’t a requirement for a good offense. The most commonly cited team for this is Wisconsin. They are actually fairly solid this year, but the last two years they were very poor on the offensive boards and still managed to have a good offense.
Despite being 5th in the conference, Kentucky has the best offensive in the SEC and it’s not even really close. UK is 8th in KenPom’s adjusted Off and Vandy is second in the SEC ranked at 37th.
3 > 2, except for very large values of 2.
Thanks.
I understand what you are saying. I mean, obviously one way that OR wouldn’t really matter is if we shoot well enough from the field there won’t actually be any offensive rebounds to get. We obviously can’t get what isn’t available to us.
I just didn’t see where we were one of the top offensive rebounding teams in the country and clearly we aren’t right now. I don’t mean to say that our offense is doomed because of that, because surely and as you mention it isn’t, it was just an observation and I was curious about it.
Might not be tops by ranking, but fairly close by actual percentage
UK is currently tied with 4 other schools at 36.6% (I assume there is a difference at a smaller, not shown decimal place for the ranking) and the difference between being 53rd and – say – 27th is a measly 1 % point. That difference might be statistically significant, but I have a hard time believing it is practically significant.
In terms of actual performance the team looks a lot closer to being a top team than the ranking would indicate.
3 > 2, except for very large values of 2.
Ken
I see our problems next yr. very similar to this yr. Lots of ‘face the basket’ talent but no real inside presence. I’ve always been fearful of our inside game this yr. if we didn’t get Enes. Admittedly, Josh has been a pleasant surprise. With every loss, especially in the SEC, teams will gain more confidence that they can intimidate us and win the game inside.
by bigbill992001 on Jan 20, 2011 5:22 AM EST up reply actions
PS
I don’t see any of the guys coming in as bangers, either. IMO, bangers are born, not taught. TIME will tell. I certainly hope I’m wrong.
by bigbill992001 on Jan 20, 2011 5:28 AM EST up reply actions
a different analysis
What is a recruiting “failure” in one year could be a success in another (the next) year. Consider this: Calipari was more successful in his first year at UK than most would have predicted. And, last year was a sort of tipping point for his recruiting pitch in the (perhaps temporary) one and done context. Before coming to UK, he had had two very good point guards who went to the NBA, one with a sort of black mark by his name.
After having five players drafted, he was in a position to do what everybody said could not be done: to draft a team so strong that it would win a championship with only a year of coaching. But he had to make sure that team would have strength at the post positions. He knew he would get Mike Gilchrist. He didn’t know he would get Teague. But he decided he had to have Anthony Davis.
Cal probably could have gotten another post player, so to that extent TW is correct. But apparently he needed to look understocked at that position, with Jones, Gilchrist, and later Wiltjer in the mix for next year.
Why go for Kanter, then? Because he was the most certain to go pro – the least likely to play a second year. Anthony Davis might or might not have made all his calculations in terms of a potential lockout later this year. He might have looked at the members of this year’s team plus the upcoming class, and calculated his own chance to be one and done.
I think Cal did miscalculate with regard to Kanter. I think he believed that Kanter would be allowed to play after maybe ten games. That was perfect timing as far as he was concerned. With Kanter, he might have been looking at back to back championships in 2011 and 2012 (after which one and done may be eliminated by the NBA). But he still needed to make Gilchrist, Teague and especially Davis feel there was room for them.
Why did Cal get this wrong? I think he completely misinterpreted the NCAA’s position with regard to European and world basketball. European players coming here is a minor matter. The extension of the NBA’s marketing power over Europe and as far as China is something so big it cannot be talked about too freely.
It isn’t really that strange from a business standpoint. The NCAA’s remit is to promote the game – same as the NBA. The NCAA wants to squash the AAU – so leniency toward Kanter would have been ill-timed, since the problem with the AAU is precisely the same set of amateurism issues.
As regards the NBA: Turkey is a sales territory. Kanter had a contract with that league. Failure to show respect for those arrangements would have sent the wrong signal to all the Euro and World GMs who are wondering if they can coexist with and profit from some as-yet undefined cooperation between the NBA and other national and world leagues.
Summing up, I think we have a sharper sense of Cal’s limitations this month, after having been amazed by his capacities a number of times. The current context, and even the fashion in recruiting is all Cal. He may not be the best coach in America but he’s very good, easily good enough to win next year even if he loses two or three again.
If all the current freshmen return, Kentucky will be double stacked. They will have two Final Four teams on the roster. They will steamroller every other team. They may still lack a true center but they will have speed, shooting, ball handling and length.
we lose sight of something here folks.....
as UK fans we have a tendency to get a bad case of “Forest Disease” every now and then……you know, that point in time where you cannot see the forest for the trees?….In this case, we are lamenting something that is over and done with, and will in the end, after all of the smoke clears from all of the methane released and ignited by individuals who just love to see a fire, will amount to a tempest in a teacup. That Alabama game did nothing to hurt us for this year or any other.
We lost a game on the road in the SEC. Considering our depth, and the weaknesses this team has, it was no great surprise. We all got overly excited when Harrellson started having big games against weak teams. We all bought into the hype. well, guess what, Josh Harrellson ain’t Clark Kent with red and blue pajamas. Big deal. Eloy Vargas aint the second coming of Sam Bowie, OK, get over it. We were not going to get through this year’s schedule unscathed. We have basically 2/3 of the strength we had last year. The fact that this team shoots lights out has overcompensated for that a lot, but it still holds true.
And John Calipari has won over more people by recruiting Enes Kanter than ever before in his lifetime. We get the sympathy of every major broadcaster out there right now, from the aspect of the loss of Kanter. Everyone out there from coaches to the President of the NCAA knows we got the high hard one on the chin, and that kid suffered from their stupidity. Every young recruit out there right now, knows that John Calipari is going to tear down both Heaven and Hell to try and take care of his players if necessary. That kind of publicity you cannot buy. Do we need a big time big man? You better believe it. Are we going to get one this year? No. The problem is already being solved for next year, so let’s move on. We were not going to win it all this year folks. It kills me to say it, but it was not going to happen. The NCAA decided that for us back in November. Should we have hung our hopes for a championship on that young man’s eligibility? Maybe not. But all of the talk last summer seemed to indicate that it was a pretty shrewd move. We were all loving every minute of it when it was announced. John Calipari is a gambler folks, accept it. He made a bet and lost. He learned how the house plays the game, and when he gets the chance again, he will make a smarter bet, simple as that. I got no complaints. After the direction this program was headed in before he arrived has now been seen clearly and in retrospect, we are lucky he considered coming here.
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 20, 2011 7:56 AM EST reply actions
Greg
the problem is being solved for next yr.? Do we have someone in our sights? Please don’t say God’s Gift.
by bigbill992001 on Jan 21, 2011 5:27 AM EST up reply actions
Cal is looking at several solutions, one of which is a JC player from overseas
not sure about the name, and next year’s recruits are already going to hand him another #1 class…..I am not worried about the future.
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 21, 2011 8:23 AM EST up reply actions
and yeah, God's Gift would be his name, but he is not the only one.
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 21, 2011 8:48 AM EST up reply actions
Not Overseas
He plays Div 2 JuCo in upstate NY.
by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 21, 2011 11:21 AM EST up reply actions
but isnt he from Nigeria?
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 21, 2011 11:40 AM EST up reply actions
Agree with most of what you wrote
This team, with 10 players is one of the best in the country, but not in the top 10 at this point. It looks to me that this team’s fortunes rest with the play of Vargas and Miller, as other teams will try to get fouls called on the front line players, and UK cannot apply strong defensive pressure until the last 10 minutes of the game due to a shortage of players. However, all is not lost; KY basketball teams usually do worse in January than in any other month.
I wouldn’t call this a failure by any means. Remember that old saw that a racehorse’s blood lines cannot prevent an inability to beat a fat man running downhill.
and us fat guys know how to do downhill....believe me......
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 20, 2011 2:32 PM EST up reply actions
This gets Rec'd
It’s a good piece TeamWeaver and I enjoyed reading it as well as the excellent discussion it’s sparked.
Having said that, I tend to agree with Greg above – I think ~80% of what has been written about the team and how it’s perceived and evaluated by the fanbase has more to do with another road loss and less to do with recurring issues. The UK squad that lost to Alabama on Tuesday is the same squad that destroyed LSU 3 days earlier.
I’m not suggesting this team doesn’t have issues, I think you’ve elucidated the biggest one about as well as anyone has all season. But I don’t think the team is doomed because of a recruiting failure or that these problems are insurmountable.
To put it another way, I don’t think the lack of front-court depth is any more of a recruiting failure this year than the lack of a couple of excellent outside shooters was a failure last year.
3 > 2, except for very large values of 2.
Thank you, JLeverenz...
I realize that most perceptions/analyses of the team are formed on the win/loss bounce. However, I think of that in the same vein as I do those fans and media who only watch a game by following the ball – you miss a huge portion of the interesting and just as important stuff going on all over the court.
“The UK squad that lost to Alabama on Tuesday is the same squad that destroyed LSU 3 days earlier.”
Your point tends to bolster my argument. The thin bench is a fundamental flaw in our team that was certainly present at both (all) games as was the strategy of most all of our opponents this season – namely, contest the paint until forced to come out and guard the perimeter. As stated in my initial post, without frontcourt bench depth, Cal has only one available mitigator for the bench issue – good shooting.
Though both ‘Bama and LSU opened in a zone, in the LSU game Knight immediately opened with two 3’s and LSU missed their first 4 shots, with 15 minutes to go in the first half we were ahead 13-4 and LSU had already abandoned its zone. That’s how this team mitigates a thin frontcourt. The difference in the ‘Bama game is that Grant didn’t abandon his pack-the-paint strategy when LSU got down 10-4 and was only down 12-8 with 15 min to go in the half. In both games, our outside shooting cooled off in the bottom of the first half, the difference was that LSU had already abandoned their zone and was giving up points in the paint and Alabama hadn’t/wasn’t and at the end of the half we’re down 7.
Sorry, should be ...
The difference in the ‘Bama game is that Grant didn’t abandon his pack-the-paint strategy when LSU the Tide got down 10-4 and was only down 12-8 with 15 min to go in the half.
Only At UK
Would 3 straight # 1 rated recruiting classes result in discussion of recruiting failures?
Good discussion but still makes me ponder my ? above.
by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 20, 2011 3:35 PM EST reply actions
Perspective
is an appropriate place to put this.
Forty, thought you knew
We all have a case of catscratch fever, some more serious than others.
"SPORTS"--Not interested----"CATS"--Pull up a chair,I've got all night.
With all due respect
- classes don’t win Championships. Tubby can tell you that. His last one cost him his job. A #1 class with the wrong top player gets you frustrating losses. I don’t think Cal failed in his recruiting, but I really wish he could take a mulligan and pick up a freaking center.
Yes (Have To Skip A Space Between # And 1 For Some Reason)
The 2004 class had a very good 2005 season.
Not so good in 2006 or 2007 but not horrible.
But nothing cost Tubby anything. He left for another job by his choice.
by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 20, 2011 10:35 PM EST up reply actions
Agree to disagree with Tubby
I love the man and have always thought he was a great coach. Not the best coach for UK or for that matter in the SEC, but a great coach. His style of play is more fitted for the BigTen or is the Big18 now?
The reason I say that this class was his ruin is that from day 1 a lot of the “old money” in Lexington didn’t appreciate him as much as they should and I think he received more pressure than most. This class should have gone far with their talent and the current support players already there. Rondo was never allowed to play his way. Bradley and Crawford, who were great, were not consistent enough. And Morris never seemed to realize he was the most talented guy on the court weighing more than 200lbs. Throw in that Lofton, who Tubby passed on, lit us up every time we played UT. I think it was the beginning of his end. I could be wrong (don’t tell my wife), but it sure seemed like what was going on when I was there.
It Didn't Cost Him The Job
He changed jobs by choice.
His 12 year record in the SEC is one of the best in conference annals.
UK defeated UT (with Lofton) more often than not. Sometimes he scored a lot, other times not.
by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 21, 2011 6:47 AM EST up reply actions
UK Defeated UT In 5 Of 7 Games (2005-06-07 Seasons)
2/13/2007 (#20) Kentucky at Tennessee L 85 – 89
1/28/2007 Tennessee at Kentucky W 76 – 57
3/1/2006 Kentucky at (#11) Tennessee W 80 – 78
2/7/2006 (#11) Tennessee at Kentucky L 67 – 75
3/11/2005 (#4) Kentucky vs. Tennessee W 76 – 62 SEC Tournament
3/2/2005 Tennessee at (#3) Kentucky W 73 – 61
1/25/2005 (#7) Kentucky at Tennessee W 84 – 62
by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 21, 2011 6:50 AM EST up reply actions
yeah, whipping the Vols was never Tubby's problem
lol….he used them as a whipping post on more than one occasion……
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 21, 2011 8:24 AM EST up reply actions
Bradley and Crawford
both thrived under Gillispie.
(Sorry. Couldnt help it.) ;)
It is not worth an intelligent man’s time to be in the majority. By definition, there are already enough people to do that.
by kentuckygirl0724 on Jan 21, 2011 11:57 AM EST up reply actions
that's it Tink.....Never Surrender!!!
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 21, 2011 2:05 PM EST up reply actions
although Joe's recollection of his time under Gillespie
is not defined as “thriving” he admitted to having a few problems. He said they were worked out, but that it was definitely a difficult transition.
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 21, 2011 2:06 PM EST up reply actions
They Were Best As Srs
Both were very good as Jrs too.
by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 21, 2011 3:26 PM EST up reply actions
#1 Classes At UK
1971 class was NC runner-up in 1975.
1979 class never achieved its # 1 level.
1984 class didn’t either. But 1992 class was NC in 1996.
2004 achieved similar results to 1984 or 1979.
2009 didn’t win NC. 2010 probably won’t either.
2011? We’ll see what happens.
by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 20, 2011 10:37 PM EST up reply actions
Forty, I totally agree that I would rather have the #1 class every year
than letting those players go to our rivals, but it is important to make sure some of those guys stick around. These days, especially with Cal, they don’t stay very long. I realize last year was a fluke and that it won’t happen every year. I just hope Cal will start looking for more guys in the 50 – 100 range instead of trying to land 5 guys in the top 25 every year. And for goodness sake, recruit a few big men.
I cannot believe that this many people are convinced we have another 3-4 one and dones again this year
we have MAYBE 2…….MAYBE. This team is doing nothing to impress the scouts and there is an impending lockout…..you are all worried about nothing.
IF, and say that is a BIG IF, we lose Knight and Jones,
We return :
Miller, Poole, Hood, Polson, Lamb, Vargas, and Liggins. There are 4 starters in that group. Miller is growing, Poole will be fine by next year, and Lamb and Liggins are going to be stellar with another year under their belts. Add to that Twany Beckham, Michael Gilchrist, Anthony Davis and Marquis Teague, and it makes for a VERY powerful group.
And that assumes that Calipari does not get one or two more that he is looking at, including a JC player from overseas that UK is showing interest in.
God’s Gift Achiuwa and Braeden Anderson are just two of the kids that Calipari is looking at. And even with the distinct possibility that Vargas gets replaced by another JC recruit, it still leaves us pretty well rounded. I think that if Cal can get Vargas to commit to what he wants like he has Harrellson for next year, then he can be a serviceable backup, and we need to work to try to keep him and get him up to speed.
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 21, 2011 8:47 AM EST reply actions
Wiltjer
He’s been having a great Sr year. Look for him to move up to Top 10-15 range by April 2011.
by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 21, 2011 7:25 PM EST up reply actions
yeah, I completely forgot Wiltjer......good grief....my mind is going
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 22, 2011 9:22 AM EST up reply actions
Blame.
UK fans are obsessed with it following losses and even victories which were not deemed good enough. This young, undermanned team nearly won a game they had played their way out of and the Big Blue Nation can only see gloom and doom and set the stage for heads that must roll. Get a grip people. By the way, for what it is worth, Florida just barely beat Auburn at Auburn. SEC on the road is tough.
Young teams rarely play with the poise that UK fans demand because it is their “birthright” to have basketball perfection. Get over it. Cal is rebuilding a program that was down, has brought us back to national relevancy and will have a formidable roster for next year. This year is setting us up for that. Since when have UK fans demanded national championships from a second year coach, with one exception since he did it in his first year?
So Cal is a recruiting failure? Sorry, but the rest of the basketball world is rolling around laughing at us right now. We lost a SEC game on the road, it happens.
I woke up feeling BLUE this morning. It's gonna be a great day.
Linked this over at Wildcat Blue Nation.....
good discussion….worthy of anyone’s look.
I am and always shall be ABC, the Cat in the Hat!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Jan 22, 2011 9:23 AM EST reply actions
Thanks Greg...
I sincerely appreciate the compliment you pay the folks here at A Sea Of Blue by linking our posts and comments over on Wildcat Blue Nation.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
[UPDATED 01/18/2012]
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
