Voting Thread!!!

[J.Jennings]

You need to check your history. Dampier averaged 20 pts a game for his career, and Minniefield is the all-time assist leader by 100.

Well if it makes you feel better, my guards can score 50 to 60 a game but give up another 40 to 45, it's damned if you do or damned if you don't......

Another thing that probably influences voting is how long a player actually played at Kentucky. For some of the players that stayed here a few years or more, those players grew on us and became all time greats in our own minds, it's hard to get attached to one and dones even if they do have overall skillsets and what nots.


My biggest problem with team is whether or not i can keep D. Cousins from getting ticked off and tossed out of the game lol lol lol..

[teamchemistry15]

When i voted, i kept personal issuess to the side. With that being said,I appreciate the support but just so you know, i would scrape your garbage team off the court, it's weak. If my team is your worst team , then your team is worse than mine with the worse shooting point guards in the history of UK on your team. Issell would need to get on the John Calipari/Josh Harrellson treadmill program to run in today's game. With the 3 point shot and shot clock, just cant park down low in the paint and wait for the basketball.........

I have no personal issues with you. I've never met you in person so honestly, having an issue with you isn't worth my time. Now, this was a draft based on what the players did while at UK. You have four one and dones, a guy who was a very inconsistent role player, and a glaring hole at PG. In my opinion your team is the weakest. It isn't about matching up team vs team, it's about what they did at the University. Would Isselhave some issues in today's game? Probably. But guess what? He's the school's leading scorer.

[Joneslab]

The rosters are very tight but IMO J.Jennings has a very solid team.

The idea of Monk and Murray out there with Cousins in the middle would be DEVASTATING.

The lack of a true point guard knocks him down a slight notch, but Davender could score. That's a very good team. Monk and Murray playing together is almost absurd to think about.

The comment about one-and-dones means little because those players are just as could and in most cases better than most UK greats. Issel, for instance, never went to a Final Four.

This isn't a shot at teamchemistry15 because he's one of my favorite posters, but it's rather just a point of disagreement. Wildcatnation.net as a site tends to vastly undersell how good one-and-dones are and over-exaggerate how much one-and-dones hurt you.

[J.Jennings]

I have no personal issues with you. I've never met you in person so honestly, having an issue with you isn't worth my time. Now, this was a draft based on what the players did while at UK. You have four one and dones, a guy who was a very inconsistent role player, and a glaring hole at PG. In my opinion your team is the weakest. It isn't about matching up team vs team, it's about what they did at the University. Would Isselhave some issues in today's game? Probably. But guess what? He's the school's leading scorer.

My point guard could be Davender with Monk at the 2 and the 6'5 Murray at SF. Think about this, i had the top two scoring freshman ever at the University of Kentucky, ever. We also talked about the eye test prior too. Now correct me if i am wrong but Murray, Monk, and Cousins looked pretty damned good in my opinion while at Kentucky. Yes freshman with freshman mistakes but these kids became men in less than 6 months, not 3 to 4 years. If we are talking about what they did at Kentucky, Alex Groza lost like 8 games in 4 years with 2 titles and was known as a complete all around player except they didn't keep rebounds and assists stats back then, who else went 120-8 at Kentucky over a 4 year span?

With that being said, this draft is hard to judge as a whole because again, it's always about matchups game to game and team to team.

[J.Jennings]

The rosters are very tight but IMO J.Jennings has a very solid team.

The idea of Monk and Murray out there with Cousins in the middle would be DEVASTATING.

The lack of a true point guard knocks him down a slight notch, but Davender could score. That's a very good team. Monk and Murray playing together is almost absurd to think about.

The comment about one-and-dones means little because those players are just as could and in most cases better than most UK greats. Issel, for instance, never went to a Final Four.

This isn't a shot at teamchemistry15 because he's one of my favorite posters, but it's rather just a point of disagreement. Wildcatnation.net as a site tends to vastly undersell how good one-and-dones are and over-exaggerate how much one-and-dones hurt you.

And i'll be honest, i know this is what they did at Kentucky but the fact that Booker scored 70 points in a NBA game and the thought of a 4 year Ulis at Kentucky, your team was dangerous. Again, NBA doesn't matter but let's look at A. Walker. Do people even realize that A. Walker is known as a pioneer of the modern day game of basketball where big men have become hybrids stepping out and playing the perimeter on offense and shooting 3's? With the NBA rule changes , A. Walker was a trendsetter and part of the reason why the true big man has become a dying breed. I even watched a interview with D. Howard a month or so ago and he said he has to work on becoming a 3 point shooter just to stay in the league, it's crazy now...


As for one and done's, i don't like it but i understand it. I do miss the days of old following a player for a few years at Kentuky but with that comes a drop in talent level...

[catfaninin]

The rosters are very tight but IMO J.Jennings has a very solid team.

The idea of Monk and Murray out there with Cousins in the middle would be DEVASTATING.

The lack of a true point guard knocks him down a slight notch, but Davender could score. That's a very good team. Monk and Murray playing together is almost absurd to think about.

The comment about one-and-dones means little because those players are just as could and in most cases better than most UK greats. Issel, for instance, never went to a Final Four.

This isn't a shot at teamchemistry15 because he's one of my favorite posters, but it's rather just a point of disagreement. Wildcatnation.net as a site tends to vastly undersell how good one-and-dones are and over-exaggerate how much one-and-dones hurt you.

My disagreement to this would be that it was stated clearly at the beginning it was all about the UK career. This is why I chose not to be in the draft. I think the voting does not match with what was the intent.

Just a couple of examples Demarcus Cousins - Rick Robey and Eric Bledsoe - Jeff Shepard. I would say in both cases the better player is not the one who had the better UK career or who did the most for UK.

Obviously Monk, Murray and Cousins together would be unstoppable. But I based my voting not on what could happen but on what did happen.

[J.Jennings]

Well the best thing about all of this regardless is that we get to semi re live players of the past and great moments of UK basketball. It's all good at the end of the day, how many points would the great shooters of the 50's and 60's averaged with a 3 point line? So many variables, it's hard to really say who when or what. They say Bill Spivey was the freak of all centers back then but we will never know how he would compare to guys today....

[J.Jennings]

For the record, the team i wanted is not the team i got. It just kind of ended up that way and i had to take the best player available based on needs. WCS was not a great scorer but i thought to myself, how do i contain Davis,Towns, Issell, and so ? How do i take a little pessure off Cousins in the post?

[Joneslab]

Obviously Monk, Murray and Cousins together would be unstoppable. But I based my voting not on what could happen but on what did happen.

I'm afraid I don't know what you mean by "what did happen."

Are you arguing that Cousins was not a dominant player? Or Monk and Murray?

That they fell short of a Final Four says more about the team/field/draw.

Jeff Sheppard was great...but also on a very good team. These choices control for the team however. They are individual picks based on individual ability.

There seems to be an inherent bias in a player staying only one year. It doesn't matter if a player stayed four years or one: there are good players and there are not-so-good ones and there's a world in between. Staying only one year should not demerit how astronomically good some of these guys are.

[George]

The rosters are very tight but IMO J.Jennings has a very solid team.

The idea of Monk and Murray out there with Cousins in the middle would be DEVASTATING.

The lack of a true point guard knocks him down a slight notch, but Davender could score. That's a very good team. Monk and Murray playing together is almost absurd to think about.

The comment about one-and-dones means little because those players are just as could and in most cases better than most UK greats. Issel, for instance, never went to a Final Four.

This isn't a shot at teamchemistry15 because he's one of my favorite posters, but it's rather just a point of disagreement. Wildcatnation.net as a site tends to vastly undersell how good one-and-dones are and over-exaggerate how much one-and-dones hurt you.

Except for the fact that there's not a point guard to be found on his entire roster.

[Joneslab]

Except for the fact that there's not a point guard to be found on his entire roster.

Davender.

[catfaninin]

I'm afraid I don't know what you mean by "what did happen."

Are you arguing that Cousins was not a dominant player? Or Monk and Murray?

That they fell short of a Final Four says more about the team/field/draw.

Jeff Sheppard was great...but also on a very good team. These choices control for the team however. They are individual picks based on individual ability.

There seems to be an inherent bias in a player staying only one year. It doesn't matter if a player stayed four years or one: there are good players and there are not-so-good ones and there's a world in between. Staying only one year should not demerit how astronomically good some of these guys are.

What did happen in Sheppard's case was MOP of the tournament and a national championship. How dominant was he against Stanford?

I'm not in any way saying any of those guys weren't great players. They were.

I don't think staying only 1 year makes you not a good player. In fact quite the opposite. Obviously they are very good or they would stay longer. But when the criteria is what you did for/at UK then only staying 1 year has to work against you, unless your one year is Anthony Davis like. If the criteria were simply who was the better player it becomes a totally different discussion.

[George]

Davender.

Davender was a shooting guard.

[KevinHall]

Davender was a shooting guard.

He played mostly point his last two seasons. Chapman played the two.

[Joneslab]

I don't think staying only 1 year makes you not a good player. In fact quite the opposite. Obviously they are very good or they would stay longer. But when the criteria is what you did for/at UK then only staying 1 year has to work against you, unless your one year is Anthony Davis like. If the criteria were simply who was the better player it becomes a totally different discussion.

I understand the "what you did for UK" thing only a response to the question of whether people should take the NBA into account.

I don't pick my teams or vote with that in mind because it's way too subjective. You could argue that some average players did a ton for UK. I can pick out two radically different players--John Wall and Dan Issel--who both did such profound good for this program, but neither played in a FF.

I try to pick who I think are the best players possible. Sometimes those guys are the same players who did a ton for UK, but sometimes not.