I think that is pretty consistent across the board for OADs, especially guards. Cunningham will probably be the #1 pick and was 6-20 in his final game. Freshmen tend to be more fatigued in the tourney than older players. Fatigued players tend not to shoot well.
So, this topic has headed down a road that has been debated over and over again, and that's fine. However, I feel like I have to point out the obvious again is that every year that UK has failed to win a title in its entire history, it is usually because their most dependable player or players did not play well.
Only until Cal came to UK did we mostly depend on elite (or OAD) freshmen to lead us to an opportunity to play for a title, so of course if we fail to win, it's a higher probability it was because a freshman had a poor game.
There seems to be a lot of finger pointing at freshmen not being able to win titles and excuse making, and that is fine. However, please explain to me why 60-70 other UK teams not led by freshmen didn't win titles. Explain to me why every year there are 350+ plus teams that do not rely on freshmen that fail to win tournaments.
Great players have off nights, no matter their class. Over the last 20 seasons, I think we have seen enough instances where freshmen have led their teams to play for and win a championship to say that it absolutely can be done.
I do have to say that I am a little surprised to see Keith jump on the other side of the debate, and that's fine, but as I always say when these conversations come up is that there are multiple ways to build a team to win a title, but it is absolutely important that you have some balance to which I think we all agree.
I just fundamentally reject any notion that one way is better than another or if A happens then B will be a result. I recognize trends and probabilities, but also realize that there are no absolutes. When you boil it all down, to be in the best position to win a title, you generally have to have the best team, or among the best, and that also means the best players. Generally speaking, the best players go on to have professional careers. I don't care about their class, their level of experience, or whatever.
One thing that I am totally confident in is that unless the top 100+ players do not play college basketball, then we will never again see a team win a title where there are no professional players on the team. We WILL see everything else in between.
2010 Duke
2013 UL
2016 Nova
2017 UNC
2018 Nova
2019 Virginia
Unsure Shabazz Napier was an elite player in 2014 either
Darryl
Whats the definition of elite though? I consider anyone who goes to the nba or all conference as a college guy pretty good. Key to winning titles still are players who can play in the nba.
Whats the definition of elite though? I consider anyone who goes to the nba or all conference as a college guy pretty good. Key to winning titles still are players who can play in the nba.
Well, we have multiple players on this team that have been all-conference (Including Wheeler, whom many UK fans feels is awful) or will play in the NBA.
Stu, I don’t think I’ve changed my stance. It takes talent to win, but late in the tourney you need a veteran who can step up at crucial times. My idea of a veteran is a sophomore or better.
I like the direction Cal is pointing toward in recruiting. Recruit the best HS kids possible, fill in any gaps with transfers. Of the four transfers Cal took for next season only Grady is definitely not going to return. That’s going to build continuity. I also like that of the HS guys Cal is now recruiting he is looking at guys who can shoot the ball.
Whats the definition of elite though? I consider anyone who goes to the nba or all conference as a college guy pretty good. Key to winning titles still are players who can play in the nba.
Good question and I agree with your thoughts. The last two guys that stood out to me that fit your criteria and that I felt like could just go get us a bucket at crunch time were PJ the second half or 2/3 of his soph year and Quickley as a soph once we got into conference play.
Whats the definition of elite though? I consider anyone who goes to the nba or all conference as a college guy pretty good. Key to winning titles still are players who can play in the nba.
Lots of different definitions will be given for elite. The measuring stick of three guys who will one day play in the NBA still seems to hold up to scrutiny for teams that win NCAA titles. Look at the recent UNC team to win it, they had three guys play in the NBA. Not all three were drafted and not all three finished their college careers in the title game.
Good question and I agree with your thoughts. The last two guys that stood out to me that fit your criteria and that I felt like could just go get us a bucket at crunch time were PJ the second half or 2/3 of his soph year and Quickley as a soph once we got into conference play.
I think that IQ team could have made a nice tourney run. They had a lot of characteristics you look for in a tourney winner.
Well, we have multiple players on this team that have been all-conference (Including Wheeler, whom many UK fans feels is awful) or will play in the NBA.
Darryl
I need to see savhir around better players or how cal hides him on defense. He's not a nba guy though. Washington I feel is a lock to be a nba player and I expect Collins to be. The rest have large flaws in there game that makes it difficult to project. Team goes as far as a Washington goes imo because he's the only guy you can project to create off the dribble in the clutch and score.
I need to see savhir around better players or how cal hides him on defense. He's not a nba guy though. Washington I feel is a lock to be a nba player and I expect Collins to be. The rest have large flaws in there game that makes it difficult to project. Team goes as far as a Washington goes imo because he's the only guy you can project to create off the dribble in the clutch and score.
Lots depends on how much guys are able to improve the weak areas of their games. No one predicted IQ’s rise, or PJ’s improvements. The lost offseason a year ago kept guys like Brooks from making big jumps last season.
Wheeler reminds me a bit of Khalid El-Amin, UConn pg on their ‘99 title team. Both 5-10, both on the stocky side. Defensively Wheeler can get up into the offensive player and make it difficult to move. Offensively he wards off defenders by getting under them and into their body, then using his speed to get by them. He appears adept at creating space to get off his shot in the lane. His steal numbers are on par with Hagans and Ulis, as are his assist numbers. I like his court vision, he sees things developing and delivers the ball at the right time.
I need to see savhir around better players or how cal hides him on defense. He's not a nba guy though. Washington I feel is a lock to be a nba player and I expect Collins to be. The rest have large flaws in there game that makes it difficult to project. Team goes as far as a Washington goes imo because he's the only guy you can project to create off the dribble in the clutch and score.
I’m anxious to see Washington in action; I only caught part of one of his games, but he seems like a nice fit for Cal’s lead guard role. I’m surprised you didn’t include Toppin as a NBA guy. I see him as having one of the highest ceilings of anyone on the roster if his perimeter shot develops. Jmho
I think that IQ team could have made a nice tourney run. They had a lot of characteristics you look for in a tourney winner.
Looking back it’s kind of hard to believe that squad had Brooks and Juzang adding some punch off the bunch to compliment the core. If Hagans got his head right and committed to his role, we’d been one heckuva tough out the way that group was coming together.
Stu, I don’t think I’ve changed my stance. It takes talent to win, but late in the tourney you need a veteran who can step up at crucial times. My idea of a veteran is a sophomore or better.
I like the direction Cal is pointing toward in recruiting. Recruit the best HS kids possible, fill in any gaps with transfers. Of the four transfers Cal took for next season only Grady is definitely not going to return. That’s going to build continuity. I also like that of the HS guys Cal is now recruiting he is looking at guys who can shoot the ball.
Thanks for clarifying. I was missing your point a bit. How I would reconcile what you said here and what I think is that you need a playmaker, who is not necessarily your star, to be able to step up and make plays.
That can be any person of any class, but having Lamb, who was there the previous year, gives everyone the confidence that if you’re not having it at one end, someone’s got your back and you can concentrate on other areas.
for all their potential, young players, even really good ones, tend to be more one dimensional. More predictable. True of Cal's players and any other. Teams in tourneys, who will have really good individual defenders and good team defense, can scheme them.
More experienced players can adapt better, and more experienced teams can adapt to teams clamping down on that player.
Articles by Category
KSR Twitter Feed
vBulletin Message