The Annual Who Goes & Who Stays Thread (UPDATE: Everyone to Enter the Draft)

[JFCats22]

Richards leaving for draft and will not return to UK

[Dwight Schrute]

Not a surprise. A 4th year only has risk for him.

[40bill]

Not really a shock on any of these guys. Take your chance, see what happens. Thanks for some neat games.
good luck to all.

[Joneslab]

Fascinating career for Richards. Went from a UK pariah to an SEC player of the year candidate in one season.

I think he's going to really surprise people in the NBA. I believe he can play at that level.

[Joneslab]

Not really a shock on any of these guys.

Definitely not the last three.

I thought Hagans might return mainly because I'm not sure he's draftable at this point. But with his contentious relationship with Cal, and the fact that some other UK players have made some money without being drafted, it kind of makes sense with him.

E.J. is in the boat where he'd have to take a serious risk, but clearly UK is beyond the "If they're not first round locks then they shouldn't go." The players don't see it that way any longer, clearly.

[Joneslab]

Kyle Tucker says that he's getting a "vibe" from E.J. Montgomery that he's going to stay in the draft.

[JFCats22]

Kyle Tucker says that he's getting a "vibe" from E.J. Montgomery that he's going to stay in the draft.

The system is broken. For a mediocre/goodish team to lose 8 of 9 players and have 6 guys go to the draft and have only (likely) one a s first round pick is a huge problem.

if this were happening at UNC or Duke or KU we would be laughing at them and asking WTH is going on there.

[Blue Heaven]

Hate to see Nick go. He was really good this past season. He has had good moments before this season that a lot of people forget. Most notably his game at West Virginia his freshman year. They kept fouling him to put him on the line late in the 2nd half of that game. All he did was sink a cool 7-7 from the line to ice the victory. I saw something then. Good luck Nick.

[Joneslab]

The system is broken. For a mediocre/goodish team to lose 8 of 9 players and have 6 guys go to the draft and have only (likely) one a s first round pick is a huge problem.

if this were happening at UNC or Duke or KU we would be laughing at them and asking WTH is going on there.

Duke and Kansas still operate a little differently than UK, where they'll have three or four at the end of the rotation who are "system" guys who are not on any NBA radar at all or even in any discussion. You're always going to return them.

That may be what Cal needs to do (and won't do). Focus more on guys who are going to build and stick. Of course that's easier said than done. We've gotten a couple of those guys (Shai, Ulis, Booker) who ended up being one-and-dones. We also have been hit like everybody else with the transfer epidemic.

Carolina is a little different right at this present moment because they don't have the upper-tier talent those other programs do.

[Joneslab]

Also, something to remember is that we got some returners off the team two years ago that came back to have solid years. This year looks like it's one of those weird blips where we had four non-freshmen. It's very tough at Kentucky to keep freshmen past one year, let alone sophomores or juniors.

That said, Kentucky should be able to keep guys who are really in total danger mode of being drafted. That we can't signals to me one thing and one thing only, and it's this.

We can whine and moan all day, but it will always come back to getting to the NBA when it comes to Kentucky basketball right now. Always.

[lilproUK98]

I think people are overlooking the fact we already had 6 guys coming in. The pressure to perform and move on to the next level is high when you've got guys coming in that are fully capable of taking your spot. If we only had 3-4 recruits coming in you may have seen a couple stay. It's more of a numbers game in many ways.

The "one and done system" will soon be gone, we'll see what happens to the UK "system" then....

[Joneslab]

I think people are overlooking the fact we already had 6 guys coming in. The pressure to perform and move on to the next level is high when you've got guys coming in that are fully capable of taking your spot. If we only had 3-4 recruits coming in you may have seen a couple stay. It's more of a numbers game in many ways.

I agree.

But crazzed's overarching point can't be dismissed: is the system broken?

More to the point: can you win titles when you reset virtually the entire roster with the exception of one player?

I don't know the answer to that. It looks like unless the players coming in are really good, it's very hard to do.

Even if you return E.J. Montgomery and bring in Haarms, both those guys need to be radically different for UK to be really good next year. But if you were to return (for instance) Hagans and Montgomery, then at least you have three guys who returned to give you experience in this program. As it stands now we may just have one guy, and that guy was an end-of-the-rotation player.

So is the system broken? Have we become victimized by Calipari's early success? It sort of appears so...but I maintain that I have more hope for next year's team than this past year's team. I like the incoming players better.

Still the question remains can you win a title this way? I think it's fair for UK fans to ask that question. As wild and demanding--and, frankly, wrong--UK fans are about a lot of stuff, we are basketball knowledgeable and we can see that patching rosters together like this is sort of crazy. It's constantly playing with fire.

[JFCats22]

I agree.

But crazzed's overarching point can't be dismissed: is the system broken?

More to the point: can you win titles when you reset virtually the entire roster with the exception of one player?

I don't know the answer to that. It looks like unless the players coming in are really good, it's very hard to do.

Even if you return E.J. Montgomery and bring in Haarms, both those guys need to be radically different for UK to be really good next year. But if you were to return (for instance) Hagans and Montgomery, then at least you have three guys who returned to give you experience in this program. As it stands now we may just have one guy, and that guy was an end-of-the-rotation player.

So is the system broken? Have we become victimized by Calipari's early success? It sort of appears so...but I maintain that I have more hope for next year's team than this past year's team. I like the incoming players better.

Still the question remains can you win a title this way? I think it's fair for UK fans to ask that question. As wild and demanding--and, frankly, wrong--UK fans are about a lot of stuff, we are basketball knowledgeable and we can see that patching rosters together like this is sort of crazy. It's constantly playing with fire.

Yeah, great points. I posted this above but it's worth re-posting/discussing because I think it is true. I just don't think it's doable.

If Brooks is the only player returning, we will have lost:

94% of scoring
91.3% of rebounding
98.5% of assists
92.3% of steals
91.8% of blocks
92.7% of made Field Goals
96.8% of made 3 pointers
97.7% of made FTs

I don't care who you bring in, I simply do not believe you can have that sort of turnover/departure and compete for a Final Four/National Title the following season.

[lilproUK98]

I agree.

But crazzed's overarching point can't be dismissed: is the system broken?

More to the point: can you win titles when you reset virtually the entire roster with the exception of one player?

I don't know the answer to that. It looks like unless the players coming in are really good, it's very hard to do.

Even if you return E.J. Montgomery and bring in Haarms, both those guys need to be radically different for UK to be really good next year. But if you were to return (for instance) Hagans and Montgomery, then at least you have three guys who returned to give you experience in this program. As it stands now we may just have one guy, and that guy was an end-of-the-rotation player.

So is the system broken? Have we become victimized by Calipari's early success? It sort of appears so...but I maintain that I have more hope for next year's team than this past year's team. I like the incoming players better.

Still the question remains can you win a title this way? I think it's fair for UK fans to ask that question. As wild and demanding--and, frankly, wrong--UK fans are about a lot of stuff, we are basketball knowledgeable and we can see that patching rosters together like this is sort of crazy. It's constantly playing with fire.

My short answer is the most important thing is how do the pieces fit together, and do you have some experience. This past team eventually got to a point where the pieces fit pretty well (with Whitney leaving) and we had plenty of experience. The team came together and they had a chance at a FF. From there you never know.

So, if the pieces fit, no matter how they were put together, you have a chance for success. When you're bringing in transfers you have to plug in their #'s to the "returning stats" IMO. They have demonstrated production. This is why Mintz and possibly Haarms (and any other transfer are so important). Remember, the immediate eligibility for transfers rule is probably going to happen...

I like to look at teams individually and look at their pieces and how they fit and if they have experience and demonstrated success.
​​

[Matt Dillon]

Kyle Tucker says that he's getting a "vibe" from E.J. Montgomery that he's going to stay in the draft.

Apparently all that's lacking is E.J.'s statement to make it official. It seems Cal may have let the cat out of the bag.

https://www.aseaofblue.com/2020/4/14...-wildcats-news