Kentucky @ Louisville Game Thread.

[DA#23]

^ With Andrew, his billing was higher and that might be a bit of added pressure. Remember, at one time I think he was #3 or so in the class and was the best PG in what was billed as the deepest recruiting class in a while.

He was a big deal coming here.

[Lighthouse]

What's bad about being #1, 13-0, and have beaten SEVERAL top 20 teams in this short season?? Folks need to enjoy the BIG PICTURE and the special season that is unfolding.

Not a thing. You misunderstood my post. I was replying to another post.

[thughes]

Eh. Not a big deal IMO. They've been fine defensively for the most part. Louisville has one guard, Rozier, who's going to have a long career in the NBA. Very tough player. We rotated guys off him yesterday and forced him to a low percentage from the field. Jones played right into our hands, thus the 1 total assist. Teams have one assist because you bottle up all the passing lanes and just force them into one-on-one offense.

Picking on this team's defense is like critiquing the body of a supermodel.

Best comment I have ever read!

[George]

^ With Andrew, his billing was higher and that might be a bit of added pressure. Remember, at one time I think he was #3 or so in the class and was the best PG in what was billed as the deepest recruiting class in a while.

He was a big deal coming here.

Not to mention he might also feel like his job's on the line*, whereas you'd assume Aaron is pretty safe. Both he and Booker are getting theirs out of a fairly equal split.

*Hypothetically, anyway. After all, Cal's still platooning, right?

[DA#23]

Fake it until you make it.

I mean, yes, we're still platooning. Meh. We're still subbing more than Joe Opponent, and that's the point. A vastly different lineup should lead to a different feel of the game (perhaps mostly due to the PG) and causes the opponent to think more. And sweat more.

[KevinHall]

Looking at the boxscore the minutes played stood out. Lyles played 30 minutes. I believe this is the first time all season any one player has played 30 in a game. UL on the other hand had Harrel play 40 minutes. That's insane in a game like this. You have to get him out for a couple of minutes anyway. No wonder he really wasn't a big factor. UL also had three others with 35+ minutes. It's hard to win that way against a quality opponent. Especially UK who rotates in 9 players without missing a beat.
For all that Andrew did bad Saturday, and he was bad most of the game, he did hang in there and hit a huge three in the last five minutes. That just about put the game away. Aaron was fine most of they IMO. he did throw up a couple of bricks early but he hit some big threes in crucial spots. The last one was the dagger.
Ulis was spectacular. He's turning into a MVP of this team along with WCS of course. He showed tons of toughness with that cut. A lot of guys would have hid on the bench after that. But he came back even better. He also hits a couple of big three's.
Camp Cal has started. We should see even more improvement after 9 days of Camp Cal. The rest of the college basketball world shudders at the thought of this.

[GOCAT15]

It's no secret that the twins struggled yesterday, but is there anyone else on this team that you would rather have shooting a three at the end of a game then Aaron....nope.

Andrew and Tyler are a great combination, there will be games where Andrew is stronger and therefore better in certain situations, but if we're going up against small quick guards, Ulis is going
to be more crucial.

If we had Ulis last year, no way Uconn beats us. That's what I like about this season is that we have two completely different pg's that should cause havoc on any given night.

[Catsrock]

Easy now...what's wrong with critiquing the bodies of supermodels?

[Ratt]

An unintentional foul is still a foul. In fact, most fouls committed are unintentional. They are still fouls. The high elbows rule is meant to protect players from serious injury.......cuts, a broken jaw, broken teeth, or a fractured eye socket. Players need to do their elbow swinging below head level.......that's the rule. If they make contact above the shoulders with an elbow it's a foul....intentional or not. If the contact is deemed unintentional it doesn't have to be a flagrant 1........it should at least be a common foul though.

kynut

Actually - it's not a automatic foul. It's up to the official's discretion or the way I read it...

"Fans of men’s college basketball can expect to see enhanced protections for players with the ball for the upcoming 2013-14 season. The committee tweaked the rules regarding elbow contact above the shoulders.

A minimum of a flagrant 1 foul is no longer required when an official is responding to illegal elbow contact above the shoulders of an opponent. Now, officials also can call a common foul on any illegal elbow contact, which may result in no free throws and simply a throw-in to the offended team.

This rule change is a stark contrast to the former minimum flagrant 1 foul rule that has been in effect for three years, which awarded the offended player two free throws and the ball. Coaches felt that, sometimes, elbow contact did not merit such a harsh penalty. However, officials who deem elbow contact to be excessive, unnecessary, severe or extreme are encouraged to call a flagrant 1 or flagrant 2 foul."

HOWEVER - that wasn't a swinging of the elbows to clear out, it was simply a rip through above the head that just hit Ulys by accident and I think was a good no-call. I teach kids these rip through moves all the time. But anyway...


OH and as for the twins --- no matter what you guys say, I personally don't like them. I don't know if that makes me a bad UK fan or not but I don't care for them most of the time. I've not blindly liked every UK player. They have improved on defense. They can and have made some big shots. They can rebound well. But, the rest of their game is something I don't agree with or like. The piss-poor shooting. The stupid shots or out of control shots, the bad passes and turnovers - it just drives me nuts. Their both shooting less than 40% and Aaron is shooting under 30% from 3pt range and Andrew is just above 30%. Andrew has played better than Aaron and I will continue to cheer them. Their just not my cup of tea and I won't really miss them when they are gone.

[kynut]

^

I'll simply defer to Lighthouse's officiating report on the game in which he says there should have been a flagrant 1 foul called on the play in question even though the contact may have been unintentional. A flagrant 1 call has been made on all fouls of similar nature that I have seen. The officials could have also called a common foul but they chose to do nothing.

It's interesting to me that the UL player who committed the foul also attempted, on at least two occasions, to draw a similar flagrant foul when no contact at all was made. As a result, I, and millions of other fans, now have no respect for the honesty or integrity of that player. Who can say the foul he committed was not as intentional as the flops? It seems reasonable to assume that a player who cheats twice could also be guilty of cheating a third time.

kynut

[Joneslab]

Going back to Andrew.

I think he's just one of those players who's good at a lot of things, great at nothing. He's good for this team but I can't see him ever having an outstanding NBA career. Just doesn't have the spark in his game you see at that level. I think he'll make a roster and play for a few years but he is what he is: a good college player. And that's fine. In fact it's better than fine for this team because we need a guy like him with the talent we have. But when he starts trying to do too much, like Saturday, he can really hurt you because he doesn't have that otherwordly talent (like a John Wall) where he can make up for it in other areas.

I do think Aaron will have a good career if he finds the right situation. Clutch player, can get his own shot, strong--I can see him being a guy that contributes for a few years.

UK fans have always been off IMO about how good Aaron Harrison actually is, much like they were wrong about Meeks and Bledsoe and a few others.

[kynut]

I'm thinking that the way the twins are now rated in draft projections we may well see one or both back for yet another year. Not the worst thing that could happen to them and it would be great for next year's team. Thoughts anyone?

kynut

[Ratt]

Will - I think you hit it on the head.

[Lighthouse]

While I would always welcome current players back, and the twins are no different, I just can't stand a player, or an official, standing around and then pouting because things don't pan out the way they want. Maturity is what it's all about, and if that what the twins need to be better players, com on back!

[40bill]

I could well be wrong, but I seem to remember some concerns about the twins and their 'coachability' after they announced. I wrote it off to the old everyone hates UK syndrome. I guess there may have been something to it.
I would point out that the guys are at the dreaded 'tweener' size as well as build.....a little too bulky to be true guards and too short to be true forwards. Their futures largely depend on the attitude they bring to what they are willing to learn. Good luck to em. We definitely need those guys playing to the top of their abilities to reach what this team can.