Board Draft

[George]

FOC is up.

[Lighthouse]

I think you have to go with both what the player did for UK and overall talent.

You can't really use stats with some of these guys, obviously.

I also think eras have to be controlled for. A guy like Dampier--and I saw Dampier play in his forties--would have a hard time with somebody like Eric Bledsoe. But using the "what he did for UK" formula, Dampier is the better player.

You have to put them in their appropriate era to get a good read on what they meant for the program IMO.

Well said Will. Dampier had little trouble scoring at Kentucky or in the ABA because he was a pure shooter from about anywhere on the court. Defensively, he sometimes was a liability, but was stronger than he looked.

[KevinHall]

Well said Will. Dampier had little trouble scoring at Kentucky or in the ABA because he was a pure shooter from about anywhere on the court. Defensively, he sometimes was a liability, but was stronger than he looked.

I saw him play in person when he was on the Marathon Oil teams that would play the seniors. He was past 40 then but he could still light it up. I saw him and Kenny Walker have shoot out at one of those games. I'm sure both players had over 50 points. Mainly from outside shooting.

[J.Jennings]

I know we haven't discussed much in terms of evaluating teams when the draft ends, but are we basing assessment only on what's in the record books, or is the "what could have been" element a factor as well? I ask mainly because of the recent string of awesome freshmen that didn't have time to stuff their stats and win columns. Towns, for example, wouldn't be as valuable as we might think if we're only going on stats alone.

That is the whole point i was trying to make. In the modern era, our recent guys didn't stand a chance in the stats line for one year and out but imagine most of Cal's guys staying 4 years. Also take into the consideration of the stats sacrifices they made. Remember, Anthony Davis took the least amount of shots....

If this is based on UK averages and what they did, why would any of us take a player that didn't play prior to 2008 and stayed for 4 years????


When teams are finished and we vote on team vs. team, let's hope we are all actually realistic about matchup. Even the great Larry Bird talks about players now and how much more effective and freakish they are compared to his times. The game evolved, the players evolved, and something's in the milk now a days........

[catfaninin]

I think you have to go with both what the player did for UK and overall talent.

You can't really use stats with some of these guys, obviously.

I also think eras have to be controlled for. A guy like Dampier--and I saw Dampier play in his forties--would have a hard time with somebody like Eric Bledsoe. But using the "what he did for UK" formula, Dampier is the better player.

You have to put them in their appropriate era to get a good read on what they meant for the program IMO.

That's why the judging of this is going to be really interesting. I think people are going to give the advantage to the more recent players, which is why my team will struggle to win any games. Your example is a great one. I had the same thought process deciding between Jack Givens and Karl Towns. I thought it was meant to be what they did for UK so I went with Givens.

[George]

That is the whole point i was trying to make. In the modern era, our recent guys didn't stand a chance in the stats line for one year and out but imagine most of Cal's guys staying 4 years. Also take into the consideration of the stats sacrifices they made. Remember, Anthony Davis took the least amount of shots....

If this is based on UK averages and what they did, why would any of us take a player that didn't play prior to 2008 and stayed for 4 years????

Exactly. In that case the Pitino/Tubby eras would be your best bets because those players are the closest you can get to modern athleticism and training with a full collegiate career.

[J.Jennings]

I select Mike Casey.

I salute you. I had Casey on my list and i have noted in the past, Mr. Casey was my neighbor. A great man to say the least and this interstate exit out here on I-64 in Shelbyville cost this man a chance to not only play, but do very well in the NBA......

[Friendsofcoal]

A solid big man who did nothing but get better while with the Cats....Jamaal Magloire.

PG: Rondo
SG: Meeks
SF/PF: Randle
PF: Issel
C: Big Jam

[J.Jennings]

A solid big man who did nothing but get better while with the Cats....Jamaal Magloire.

PG: Rondo
SG: Meeks
SF/PF: Randle
PF: Issel
C: Big Jam

Man, you stole my guy lol lol lol.. If there is one guy that D. Cousins doesn't want to tangle with, it's Maglore. Maglore is Rodman like to totally get Cousins out of his game..

[Joneslab]

The draft order:
1) Lighthouse
2) Will Lavender
3) Friendsofcoal
4) Teamchemistry15
5) Kevinhall
6) Downes Van Zandt
7) Jworld
8) Spiritof96
9) Catfaninin
10) Matt Colvin
11) Uglyduckling

Teamchemistry up.

[J.Jennings]

Teamchemistry up.

Draft is moving right along today. I like it. Everyone is engage and on the hunt lol lol lol lol lol... I have a big decision to make with my next pick. I can gamble and take the next man up on top of my board or solidify a important piece.... Im just hoping to at least get two picks in today moving foward into tommorrow.

[Spiritof96]

I'm awake and trying to get over losing out on Randle. However, to round out my front line, I select a PF with a NC and runner-up on his slate. 6' 11" Rick Robey.

You stole my absolute sleeper get of the draft. I should have figured that you wouldn't have slept on the true greats from that era.

I have still got desirable options; but still... outstanding late round pick!

[teamchemistry15]

A few things: I can't take credit for the idea. I saw it on another board that I occasionally read but am not a member of. I thought it would be a nice shot of adrenaline that the board could use and it might be something we can do every summer. I'm glad it's working!

I was hoping to grab Magloire. So, I need to do research. I have a name in mind who played well before my time so I only know numbers. I'm going to dig a little and see if I can find a big man to fill out my starting five.

[justford]

I know we haven't discussed much in terms of evaluating teams when the draft ends, but are we basing assessment only on what's in the record books, or is the "what could have been" element a factor as well? I ask mainly because of the recent string of awesome freshmen that didn't have time to stuff their stats and win columns. Towns, for example, wouldn't be as valuable as we might think if we're only going on stats alone.

Many variables in evaluating these teams. One is stats while at UK which leads to the 4 yr players vs those that left early. Another variable that contributes to the stats is the three point line which was not in play for some of these players. Will be very interesting to see how this plays out (pun intended)

[teamchemistry15]

I need some more rebounding and a little rim protection. I'm taking the guy who finished top 10 in career blocks as well as played for two title teams. Nazr Mohammed. That gives me my starting five of:

PG: Wayne Turner
SG: Lamb
SF: Mashburn
PF: Patrick Patterson
C: Nazr Mohammed

I was tempted to take a guy from the Rupp era but I can't really make a case for those players because I only know the numbers on paper. Nazr was a main contributor on one of the better modern eras in college in the last 25 years.