OT: Kentucky Loses 7(!!!?!?!) Players to NBA Draft
http://espn.go.com/nba/draft2015/story/_/id/12655548/kentucky-wildcats-…
This makes Wisconsin's win over them all the more remarkable, methinks.
Except Cal is a bad in-game coach
He's great at recruiting, great at managing players, pretty good at instilling a system. But, you're right, bad as an in-game coach. The last few minutes of the Wisconsin game were brutal for him.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Part of me wants the NCAA to just get rid of all the "rules" related to recruiting and student athlete pay/benefits. They're barely enforced (except when it's convenient), and Michigan has the money to pay athletes pretty well.
It would be a lot more honest that way.
This is objectively untrue. Lots of coaches operate in a consequence-free environment and the idea that Kentucky is somehow consequences-freer than other places is ludicrous. Charles Barkley has talked about trying to get Dirk Nowitzki paid to come to Auburn 20 years ago. Calipari has become an great recruiter -- rivaled only by Krzyzewski, who has the huge advantage of coaching Team USA -- and he's a good basketball coach. He won a title and has been to multiple Final Fours. QED.
But Mr. Spicyweiner is right. He made some really boneheaded decisions in the Wisconsin game. Slowed the game down too early, misused timeouts, etc.
Bo seemed reluctant to make any adjustments during the NCG, while Cal had to juggle two starting rosters all season and didn't lose until the last game of his season. I'd call it a push.
Let's hope that Kentucky loses John Calipari to the NBA too!
For the most part, this is an outlier unique to Kentucky. Yes, alot of teams lose a player or even two early to the NBA, but Kentucky is the only program really built on it. Don't miss the forest for that one large tree.
I don't completely disagree with you but in general it is becoming quite common for guys to leave after their freshman or sophomore year. Look how many we have lost. As soon as a guy starts to get good you can't look forward to watching them anymore because they will more than likely leave for the NBA. Besides, losing one guy in basketball is like losing 4-5 guys in football.
I am totally cool with someone like Caris or Trey or GRIII wanting to make the jump and go to the next level for personal reasons but forgive me if it makes the sport a little less enjoyable for me.
where guys go the free agent rout for more money or a better team.
I'd watch on weekends and recognize the stars from the previous years' tournaments. Then the tournament would come and it would be just great not only for the games themselves (which are still good and exciting), but also the development of the players and their personalities. Now by the time you get to become familiar with a good player he goes pro. No more Mullins and St. John's, Hubbard and Michigan, Ewing at Georgetown, or Carroll at Purdue. Not to say these kids don't have every right to go make their money, but the game is nowhere near as good from a fan's standpoint.
Exactly. And here's the thing, not only does the college game suffer but any NBA fan will tell you that NBA basketball has also suffered heavily from this influx of underclass entries.
the game is nowhere near as good from a fan's standpoint.
Maybe there's something to this. Or maybe, just maybe, you're being nostalgic in your memory of prior NCAA basketball. Players today are many factors better than players 20 and 30 years ago.
You ask high school kids if they like college basketball and they idolize it. I think a lot of the complaining about sports, in general, comes with getting older and not being as invested in it anymore.
I think you missed the point. College fandom is not about watching the best players in their respective sports. We have the pros for that. So clearly, the level of play is not as big a factor.
His assertion was that watching the progression of these kids added a level of depth to the fan experience, not that the level of competition was higher.
incoming freshmen are much better than they were 20-30 years ago. but i think most of the ncaa champions of the 80s would beat the champions of recent years.
imo, those jordan teams, ewing teams, even 89 UM team would consistently beat the best teams of today. even the fab 5 teams would crush the 2013 UM team that made the finals.
but the fab 5 team doesn't fit into the mold of those othe teams you're referring to because they were all young. Fab 5 team was essentially like Kentucky this year.
I don't think the Fab Five would've crushed that team at all. It would've been a very close game. I would even give the edge to 2013 team.
who would you have guard howard or rose with that 2013 team? fab 5 would crush them in the paint. and jimmy king could do an adequate job on burke; not shut him down but contain him.
Great post JMD.
IMO, it was also more exciting to see college players you've followed for 3 or 4 years make the jump to the pros. You "knew" the players, had more attachment to them and, at least I did, had more of an interest in seeing how they'd do at the pro level. I felt I had more of a rooting interest then.
More like 4 guys to the NBA and 3 guys to the D-League. The Harrison Twins and Dhakari Johnson are not NBA ready, imo.
should get drafted. His per-40 numbers are right there with other big guys who are projected in the lottery. Should go mid-2nd; although you're right that he'll probably see some D-League time, there isn't really the same negative connotation to playing in the D-League as there was five years ago.
but I will be surprised if Booker is a lottery pick.
He'll be fringe lottery. He's a great shooter and is the prototypical NBA shooting guard size.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Except the NBA doesn't suck now... Just b/c the era of hero ball is ending with Kobe Bryant doesn't mean the NBA is bad. It's a lot more strategic and efficient than ever before...
When I watch the NBA now (rarely), it takes me some time to figure out what's going on. Clearly it is being played at an extremely high level of sophistication. Even the refereeing looks strange (much different than the last Piston's championship when I last paid attention), but everyone seems to generally know what a charge/block, travel, and illegal pick looks like (or doesn't look like). The problem is a social one. I just can't stand the way many many of the players act on and off the court, it turns me off so I don't watch.
April 10th, 2015 at 10:35 AM ^
The first part of this post is right on (won't comment on the last part b/c I'm not entirely sure what the reference is to). NBA ball right now, with some exceptions (OKC most prominently, but also Cleveland, both of which still rely to a significant extent on iso ball and 2-man games) is being played with incredible levels of offensive and defensive sophistication.
Watch the Spurs, Warriors, Hawks, any teams that have bought into post-Dantoni pace and space offenses, and you'll routinely see teams running 5-6 pick and rolls a possession at the same time there's a ton of off the ball movement to get shooters open and defenses unsettled. If you watch a significant amount of NBA, college is hard to watch just because the offenses are so static, with a lot of 3 out, 2 in sets and guys just rotating the ball around the perimeter before jacking up a shot. (Belein actually gets about as close as any college coach to running an NBA type offense).
The Warriors are a blast to watch. Terrific team, exciting offense, surprisingly tough D. Doesn't hurt they have the 2 best shooters in the league.
On top of that, the atmosphere at Oracle is fantastic.
Most fun I've had watching NBA since Jordan.
In 4 years, and I don't miss it one bit.
It's just because there is no Jordan, Bird, Johnson, Ewing, Hakeem, Isiah, Sir Charles, Young Shaq, etc.
The game was played a lot different back then...it was wide open with high scoring, but also had hard ass tough fouls and physical play. It also probably had more of the NBAs all-time greats than any other time, ever.
Everyone knows 1984 - 1994 was the golden era of NBA basketball. That will never be topped, but it also hasn't been this way for over TWENTY YEARS --- so why complain about it?
IMO, the NBA is better now than it was 5 years ago, which is important. But that doesn't make it good or anywhere close to the Golden Era.
Regardless - adding Devin Booker isn't going to change how good/bad the NBA is or may be.
It goes in spurts, it was really good in 2013 I thought, and it wasn't just because Michigan was good (because remember we won the B1G by like 3 games in 2014). In 2013 the competition was so good not only in the B1G...but wasn't that the year Duke played that crazy game at Syracuse with the insane crowd?
The NCAA even outside of Michigan was magical that year.
The point is that was just a bright year for the sport in terms of talent and talented TEAMS. The TEAMS that year were all really good.
This year, we had 4 elite teams, IMO - UK, Duke, Wisconsin and Arizona...5 if you count UVA pre-Justin Anderson's injury.
That's it. Even look at the B1G this year, it was awful. Especially compared to 2013.
Now some things DO need to change. All you need are 5 TOs. Although I hate the advance the ball rule, no, you need to earn the right to get the ball to halfcourt.
28 second shot clock.
5 timeouts and a 28 second shot clock will improve the game right away, there will be no push back and they're no brainers.
---------------as for the draft---------------
I personally think you should be able to enter the draft whenever you want if you're out of HS. The kicker - don't sign an agent (or take money/endorsements) - if you want to be eligible to return to college. If you're NOT drafted, you can come back. If you're drafted at any point in any round...you're done.
Now you're not worrying as much about this 1 and done fake school b/s - the only think you're doing is you're creating a bunch of paperwork for some poor secretary who has to file all the names because Spike Albrecht and Andrew Dakich keep turning pro and then coming back to college just to be funny. The NCAA makes enough money to compensate that person handsomely.
I can certainly see how giving each team five timeouts per game instead of the current five timeouts per game is a no-brainer and will improve the game right away.
I'm just trying to think about everyone.
I was thinking they got 6 for some reason...that's non-TV games, which I don't know if anyone does anymore.
Anyone...take one away. 2 full, 2 30's.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:40 AM ^
They can keep the 5 time outs if they allow a TO called before one of the media timeouts (which happen every 4 minutes) to substitute for the media timeout. That would stop the awful pattern of TO called at 16:10, 20 seconds of game action, dead ball, media timeout, that totally and unnecessarily kills the flow of the game.
Don't see it happening because it would hurt the ad revenue, but it would dramatically improve the flow of games and stop some of the overcoaching that plagues college bball.
There's no such thing in D1 any more, but drive over to Hope or Calvin during basketball season and see how fast two 20-minute halves fly by when there aren't any media timeouts.
D3 is all I watch in person these days. And high school. Coaches' timeouts don't bother me at all--they happen when the game flow demands them. But there's something about having the flow stopped by an outside force that irritates me, to the point that I've stopped going to D1 games altogether.
An all-around bad post.
Is this worst-case scenario for our Jaylen Brown chances?
That's what some idiots said about Harbaugh, as if saying that would make it hurt less if he had not come. They didn't know shit then, you don't know shit now, and I don't know shit either. Let him have his hope, that's what sports are about.
You know this for a fact? Interesting, because Sam Webb has said otherwise as recently as yesterday.
You don't think Beilein's thoughts on our chances have changed since Brown started showing interest?
he has wasted all this time recruiting him when he could have just asked you!
Which shows you that Brown's interest in Michigan is genuine.
Wheatley was recruiting him and not Harbaugh.
#logic
But wait, Falcon came and Wheatley was recruiting HIM and not Harbaugh.
Truth is, both were coming and there were other things that got Weber to flip back to OSU. But it's easier for someone (like me) to be a little closer to the Weber situation so that's not as easy to just make some false claim and have someone not call you out.
Brown is in Georgia and no one on this board knows what he's going to do and many people DO just have blind hope. So making a bold statement isn't nearly as easy to disprove if it indeed does go how you say it does. But it's a pretty easy thing to say..because if you're wrong, no one cares because we got the #1 player in the country - if you're right, you still could've been wrong and he WAS coming to Michigan, but no one on MGoBlog would ever know that for fact so you can still act like you knew all along.
But you don't.
Because there is no way for you to be proven wrong if he doesn't come.
Such a shortsided message board prediction.
The chances of him ever saying "I was going to Michigan, 100%, but..." are zero, so you can be a hard ass with the prediction, "dude," and no one can call you on it.
Truth is, like I have no fucking idea.