UCLA vs Kentucky Game Thread.

[Joneslab]

I hope I'm wrong on both of these accounts, but I don't believe Cal's recruiting is at the level it needs to be for a title level team to come together.

Everybody we put on the floor is a five-star McDonald's All-American.

I agree that you need at least one of those top five players...but you don't have to have them. North Carolina almost won back-to-back titles without a single one.

I get a little curiosity over Cal's recruiting, but let's not make these players out to be no-names who can't carry a team. All these guys are elite players.

As far as making stupid decisions...I've never seen a college basketball player yet who didn't make a stupid decision now and then. They're college players. We start five freshmen. That's expected.

As far as basketball IQ and making the right play, I'd put this group about in the middle of Cal's teams. Where they lack is athletic explosiveness at certain positions and having that one ungodly player who can take the game over--although that's slowly changing with Shai.

[UK8STL11]

The focusing on the team part could be just because, ya know, freshmen laden teams like this need more attention.

He had other freshman laden teams and still did all of the other stuff.

[UK8STL11]

A lot of people are talking about Cal's inability to land the premier, top tier talent in each class. Here's the past 5 seasons and how many top 5 guys each school got (from 247 Sports composite rankings and then RSCI after it), includes 2018 class:

Duke - 7 (8 in RSCI)
Kansas - 3 (2)
Arizona - 2 (2)
UK - 2 (2) Skal and KAT
Cal - 2 (1)
UNC - 1 (0)
Oregon - 1 (1)
Mizzou - 1 (1)
Texas - 1 (1)
Alabama - 1 (0)
LSU - 1 (1)
Washington - 1 (1)
UCLA - 1 (1)

[Dwight Schrute]

He had other freshman laden teams and still did all of the other stuff.

Not to parrot his talking points but this was about as raw of a basketball team as he's had here, at least since 2013.

[Joneslab]

A lot of people are talking about Cal's inability to land the premier, top tier talent in each class.

Seven of the last eight Naismith winners weren't in that top tier.

[Dwight Schrute]

Seven of the last eight Naismith winners weren't in that top tier.

How many of those were freshmen?

[Joneslab]

How many of those were freshmen?

Just one. Which is my point about this team.

Kentucky fans feel like there's something broken when a freshman goes out there and doesn't light it up. My thought is that if you project that player outward to when he's 21, 22 years old, then he could potentially become the type who can lead you to a title.

This may be the situation Kentucky is in. A guy like PJ Washington as a 20-year-old...that guy will be radically different than he is now. Quade has baller written all over him, but he's slight, not strong, and not as crafty as he will be. Not sure if we'll have Shai but Shai is dominating games now. Project that to next year. We may have another Tyler Ulis.

So this may be where Cal is going. It could be a design. Or it might just be a byproduct of the recruiting landscape.

But you can win championships with these kinds of players. These guys are only flawed in the context of other UK players. Mostly they are good, solid freshmen who could grow into players who are capable of winning titles in the way of these grown-men teams we've seen at other places.

[Dwight Schrute]

Just one. Which is my point about this team.

Kentucky fans feel like there's something broken when a freshman goes out there and doesn't light it up. My thought is that if you project that player outward to when he's 21, 22 years old, then he could potentially become the type who can lead you to a title.

This may be the situation Kentucky is in. A guy like PJ Washington as a 20-year-old...that guy will be radically different than he is now. Quade has baller written all over him, but he's slight, not strong, and not as crafty as he will be. Not sure if we'll have Shai but Shai is dominating games now. Project that to next year. We may have another Tyler Ulis.

So this may be where Cal is going. It could be a design. Or it might just be a byproduct of the recruiting landscape.

But you can win championships with these kinds of players. These guys are only flawed in the context of other UK players. Mostly they are good, solid freshmen who could grow into players who are capable of winning titles in the way of these grown-men teams we've seen at other places.

I hope so, but Cal doesn't have a strong track record here of developing players out to 20, 21 years old. His MO has been to get them in and send them out. How many has he had here that have truly been guys that have 2-3 year guys who went on to have actual pro careers? Ulis? Willie Cauley-Stein? Terrence Jones? Seems like it's been much more common for those guys who came in as freshmen and didn't have 1st round types of seasons to transfer out.

All I'm saying is that we're in uncharted territory with Cal.

[Joneslab]

There haven't been a lot of returners with Cal, so the sample size is small.

Of those who did return, three (Lamb, Jones, Miller) won titles, with one (Miller) making himself into a solid pro. Two more (Liggins and Jorts) became different players entirely than they'd been before Cal. Two more (Ulis and Cauley-Stein) became first-team All-Americans. Two more (the Harrisons) started for a hellaciously good team.

You may get a Poythress or a Briscoe in there, but the odds are good that that isn't going to happen.

[Jload]

My comments about SKJ seemed to have drawn quite a bit of derision, that’s fine but I stand behind the comment. Kentucky should be able to recruit guys in the pivot that are better than Jones period, he contributed nothing last year and has been spotty at BEST this season, I,m sure he’s a great kid but UK ought to be able to do better.. So yeah he is a wasted scholly in that sense.

[Joneslab]

My comments about SKJ seemed to have drawn quite a bit of derision, that’s fine but I stand behind the comment. Kentucky should be able to recruit guys in the pivot that are better than Jones period, he contributed nothing last year and has been spotty at BEST this season, I,m sure he’s a great kid but UK ought to be able to do better.. So yeah he is a wasted scholly in that sense.

Last year he was the youngest player in college basketball.

He's the age of a normal freshman now. He's also having to learn to play center.

I agree that there were better players out there. Obviously. I mean that goes up all the way through this roster. In fact on most UK teams I've ever seen there are players out there Kentucky could have gotten who were better. Only with the John Walls, Davises, Cousins and so on can you say that Kentucky got the absolute best. Sometimes we get the guy thought of as the best and there are a bunch of guys out there who are better. That's just how it is at this level.

But to say that a guy doesn't deserve his scholarship...that's a slap in the face of a guy who I think has done a pretty good job this season, and is essential as the year goes on because we can't count on Nick Richards every night as we've seen.

[George]

My comments about SKJ seemed to have drawn quite a bit of derision, that’s fine but I stand behind the comment. Kentucky should be able to recruit guys in the pivot that are better than Jones period, he contributed nothing last year and has been spotty at BEST this season, I,m sure he’s a great kid but UK ought to be able to do better.. So yeah he is a wasted scholly in that sense.

But by that logic, isn’t any player who isn’t the best at his position therefore a wasted scholarship?

And I hate to break it to you, but if you want better than SKJ, you’re going to have to accept that Calipari culture. Cal isn’t the only one playing that game these days.

[Jload]

While Cal isn’t only one playing the one and done some folks aren’t and are having as much or more success doing it “old school”. UNC, Villanova, Gonzaga, Whichita State, just to name a few. My point is that the Cal Method while highly successful isn’t the only road to success, I personally like the more traditional method of compiling teams but hey what do I know.

[Lighthouse]

While Cal isn’t only one playing the one and done some folks aren’t and are having as much or more success doing it “old school”. UNC, Villanova, Gonzaga, Whichita State, just to name a few. My point is that the Cal Method while highly successful isn’t the only road to success, I personally like the more traditional method of compiling teams but hey what do I know.

So your main beef is, you don't approve of the one-and-done, and has little to do with SKJ. OK, we get it.

[Joneslab]

I'm still not sure how Killeya-Jones came into this. Also not sure why it's the UCLA game thread where it's being discussed. Because it's a game we lost?

Seems like if you are clamoring for a more traditional program you would want players to stick around. That's how these programs build--they take guys who sometimes aren't world-beaters at 18 and develop them. That's one of the reasons I hope Sacha sticks with it.