IU and UK fans. It's time.
- Thread starter lurkeraspect84
- Start date
I can squeeze in a quick post now and then, but digging up every prospect that KU's staff has pursued is asking a little much right now. LOL.
I said players a notch below that level too. Cousins, Towns, Booker, Randle, James Young, Teague, Gilchrist, Knight, Fox, Adebayo, etc. Nobody's prioritizing lower-rated recruits over those guys. Obviously you don't want a roster full of extremely raw 5 stars that will bail after a year, but K/Calipari teams had plenty of players who were ready to contribute, with just a few exceptions. And usually at least a few key vets, to go with a bunch of other top 50-100 recruits who sat at the end of the bench. Those are the same types of dudes that start at programs like KU and Michigan St. They're not at the end of the bench because they suck or can't be developed. They were at the end of the bench because the guys I mentioned (and many others) were really good.
That's not accurate (off the top of my head, Duke had three in '22), but it was around 2016 that Calipari stopped getting the really elite OADs and had to "settle" for fringe top 10 to top 25 recruits (and top transfers). And many of those Duke/Kentucky OAD teams barely missed the final four. They could've easily won a rematch a few days later if there were a series like the NBA.
Again, as you admitted, Calipari hasn't done better with veteran teams. And who's to say that other coaches wouldn't have cleaned up with his OAD-heavy teams? I can tell you I would have definitely traded rosters with several of those teams. The lack of final four teams in that span probably has a lot more to do with Calipari than the roster construction.
Last edited:
Williamson had an off-game against Sparty, finishing with 24 points, 14 rebounds, three steals, and three blocks.
I’m sure you can understand that taking a few minutes to type a paragraph is a far cry from compiling a list of hundreds of recruits. 😆
Also depends on the time of day.
No, it's still not a good idea. It's not how I would ever attempt to run a program. The way Cal is running UK, is what you would do if your #1 goal was getting kids drafted. If his goal was to win titles, he wouldn't start from scratch every year with his rosters, would you?
I'll give Cal credit for what he did the first half of his UK tenure, but that was never sustainable and it damn sure isn’t working in today’s game. The transfer portal and NIL put further distance on it.
When you look at the makeup of the teams doing the most winning right now, it's very obvious that the correct method is: "get old and stay old"
Cal can't win in today’s game no matter what roster he has. Hopefully he proves me wrong.
I took a few minutes to go through the 2023 class to see who offered each kid.
Kansas offered:
#4 Matas Buzelis (from Kansas)
#5 Ron Holland
#9 Mgbako
#14 Evans
#25 Jackson (signed)
But Self appears to be all over the map. He also offered scholarships to a lot of dudes ranked in the 30's, 40's, 50's, 80's, 90's, 100's, 190's and NR.
It looks like he mainly goes after guys that are staying in college, but also a few heavy hitters that can make an impact right away.
I doubt he wants 5 or 6 one-and-dones based on the net he puts out.
Kansas offered:
#4 Matas Buzelis (from Kansas)
#5 Ron Holland
#9 Mgbako
#14 Evans
#25 Jackson (signed)
But Self appears to be all over the map. He also offered scholarships to a lot of dudes ranked in the 30's, 40's, 50's, 80's, 90's, 100's, 190's and NR.
It looks like he mainly goes after guys that are staying in college, but also a few heavy hitters that can make an impact right away.
I doubt he wants 5 or 6 one-and-dones based on the net he puts out.
With the transfer portal and NIL, the odds of landing the classes that K and Cal were landing 10 years ago, is over.
Cal has a good class this year, but take a gander at next years class. It's not looking good.
The top tier kids are spreading out now.
Also, look at the last 7 years, those highly talented duke and UK teams didn’t win anything of note.
I'm not up for celebrating Elite 8 appearances. In a lot of cases, you don't play anyone all that great until the E8, especially with all the upsets we've been seeing.
MSU had the size needed to bother duke. Their older, more experienced players helped too. But duke was a shell of itself in that tournament. They got really lucky in both games prior to the MSU game. They just needed one more light jab to the chin.
I think you misunderstood his laughing Gif. He wasn't laughing at you, he was laughing at the fact that you can squeeze in a quick post now and then.
There's no reason not to expect players like Edwards/Wagner/Bradshaw to be really good college players by the end of the season. I can guarantee that everyone who recruited them expected them to be major contributors. Then you have two really solid vets with plenty of experience. Reeves might be an AA candidate this year. Plus several more guys with potential.
It's not quite the "ideal" roster, but it's not that far from it either. Just a little more experience in a few areas, but 95% of coaches would trade places.
Again, if they fail to at least be an elite 8 type team, I think it falls on Calipari way more than roster construction.
We don't have a basis for comparison. Just because guys like Drew, Self, Bennett and Hurley have won recently with veteran teams full of lower-rated players doesn't mean they wouldn't succeed with the rosters that K and Calipari have had.
Self's '22 roster was not what he would have put together in an ideal situation. He was forced to recruit a bunch of local dudes that weren't even on the radar of most major conference teams. In fact, he's rarely ever had his "ideal" roster. 2008 and maybe 1-2 other years at most. The rest are teams that he pieced together with a lot of plan Bs and Cs. He's consistently missed on his top targets over the years, especially during the investigation.
Kansas 2023 Basketball Offers
So he cast a wide net and went after about 10 five stars, whiffing on every one. Mostly guys that went to Kentucky and Duke. And this is during an uptick in recruiting. Isn't that proving my point?
Problem is, all us UK fans, go through this crap every year where we buy into the hype of these HS kids.
Yeah, theoretically Edwards and DJ should be really good, but by the time most freshment figure it out, you have lost too many games to get a high seed in the tournament.
I just think college basketball has morphed into a veterans game and in order for you to win with young guys, they need to he special.
Who knows, maybe Wagner, Edwards and Bradshaw are at another level. Edwards is projected to be the #1 pick and the other 2 are lottery picks, but I've seen that movie too many times now.
I'm glad Cal got Reeves back and thanks to Huggins getting a DUI, he nabbed Tre Mitchell, so he has some veterans, but Cal also needs to change. I think he's too narcissistic to change, but again, I hope I'm wrong.
He did bring in an NBA offensive coach.
A lot of ppl forget the role Robic played. His father's passing away changed everything.
Seems like he's been putting more effort into the lower rated guys and hoping he gets one or two blue chips, which is what I was saying.
Idk why he would change what he's doing, it seems to be working.
You don't think Cal is going to hand the keys to the offense to Welch do you?
It’s Cal's way or no way.
He might eventually put more effort into landing lower-rated players by the end of the process, but that's by necessity. Is it wiser to invest most of your energy/time/resources in a player that you know is a longshot, or a player that you have a strong chance of landing?
He pursued half the players in the top 20. Trust me, those are the guys he prioritizes most. He just doesn't land many of them. And he almost never gets a top 10 recruit, despite pursuing them hard. Bidunga is the first since 2016. Self would take about any 5 star he could get, unless the player's clearly overrated, too much of a prima donna, or doesn't fit what he wants to do.
He's done a good job with what he's had, but '21 was rough by his standards. Worst team he's ever had. '19 wasn't that much better, at least after they lost Azubuike and Vick. Duke and Kentucky fans would off themselves if they had a stretch of recruiting like Self's from 19-21. You guys wouldn't have been excited to land a single one of those dudes.
In the spring, Self said he wanted to take KU to a "whole other level." With the infractions case finally wrapping up, plus a solid NIL program, he knows that he's going to finally start getting the dudes he wants again. And he's starting to.
Last edited:
I'm not talking about Cal. I'm talking about the most talented players in the country. There's not a coach in the United States that would turn down a top 5 kid. You're trying to make a completely different argument; never once did I say to build your roster with one and dones. But if you think any coach is turning down Zion Williamson or Anthony Davis, then I don't know what to tell you.
It's too early to worry about next year's class. Just look at this offseason. He landed about 5 good players at the last minute. It doesn't make sense that he'd fall off the map after pulling in the #1 class this year.
Duke has a loaded class too. Just like last year. I guess I don't see why you're expecting anything to change. This is Calipari's best class in years.
Duke/Kentucky are still pulling in the top freshman classes. The difference has been that recent classes haven't been as strong as years past. Not sure how this one compares but I can guarantee that just about any coach would love to have Edwards/Wagner/Bradshaw/Dillingham on their roster. Plus vets like Reeves and Mitchell. If you think Cal will blow it, that's one thing. But many coaches would love to trade. If Calipari were still having the success he had up to 2017, this team would probably be top 5 preseason.
Last edited:
Why do so many people throw out AD, Zion and Durant when talking about top 5 or 10 recruits?
AD, KD, Zion and Carmello Anthony are not your run of the mill top 5 kids, those guys are generational talents and yeah, there isn't a single coach that would turn down the opportunity to add them to their roster.
Heck, for the most part, the top 5-8 kids in each class, are legit, so if you have a chance to add 1 or two, jeez, you do it.
There are several problems with what Cal has been doing at UK. Some have been rectified by the transfer portal, but some still exist.
1) At UK, the culture is all about next level. Players come to UK with that mindset. Then, Cal loses most of his team each year, so he has to reload.
2) You end up in a position where you now have to replace all your top players every year, this is not sustainable
3) When Cal had WWW and Antigua, recruiting was great. Those guys left and Cal got lazy. He ended up with 2nd tier 5* kids while Duke cleaned his clock (Antigua is back on staff and recruiting has stabilized. K retiring has helped too)
4) when you have to replace your entire starting 5, you better get at least one or 2 of those top 5 recruits and hope 1 of them is special. But the issue is, you have to use 2nd tier 5*, or 4* kids to fill those other starting positions. Well, they aren't skilled enough for that. The transfer portal definitely helps here, but those players aren't making up for Cal's shortcomings as a coach (nobody is right now).
Cal had Oscar for 2 years and Reeves for 1. Oscar was a NPOY winner after year 1 and was almost as dominant in year 2. Cal managed 1 tournament win in 2 years, no SEC titles and only a couple SECT wins. That’s terrible.
I have zero faith in Calipari, but I hope he makes me eat my words. I want to like the guy.
Final note: Brandon Boston and Terrence Clarke ( RIP) were both top 5 recruits. They were a very far cry from AD, KD znd Zion. High school kids are too incredible.
There are only a few legit talents in each class, once you get past the top 5, you're looking at kids that typically aren't capable of stepping on a college court and competing against seasoned juniors and seniors. That’s the issue.
You see UK is pre season ranked 16th. But look at the talent and size on the roster. This team has the projected #1 overall draft pick + 2 lottery picks, + Antonio Reeves + Tre Mitchell + Big Z + a 'HOF' coach and they're rated 16th???
I firmly believe the pollsters are in the same boat with most UK fans: "been fooled too many times, it's time to prove you're a top 5-10 team, no more getting thd benefit if the doubt"
That's what I'm saying. I think Calipari's the reason for their ranking. Some might think this freshman class is weak too. I've heard a few people say that. Doesn't seem that weak to me though.
I think it's the opposite for KU. Pollsters are giving them the benefit of the doubt. They've got plenty of experience and some nice pieces, but their overall athleticism is pretty average and shooting is questionable. Especially after dismissing Morris.
Funny thing is, every year we hear how great the next class is and how the previous class was so down. But then we get to the next class and we're all excited about the new 'presents under the tree' then we start hearing about how this class is "down", "but the next class… . ohhh the next class is sooo legit!"
We have heard for several years now that the '23 class is the best we have seen in years, well, now that it's here, it's all the sudden 'a weak class'.
I'm so burned out on one-and-done. I'm ready for Cal to move on and take this NBA farm team culture with him
Not really . Lot of coaches recruit their system---not the rankings. Wright won multiple titles w/o TOp 5 kids---You dont think he can "get" that type of player? UVA won a title w/o a Top 5-10 kid....Baylor.....UConn....
You really think those guys were turning their nose up at top 5-10 recruits? Come on, man. No one would. Unless the player's clearly overrated or a terrible fit.
Besides, shoe reps were steering most of them to the biggest brands.
Turning their nose, and understanding what works, is totally different. How many BIG, Top 5 players, even Top 10, have contributed to Selfs two natty's? I know the answer. Look at both of Villanova's title teams...Baylors title team...UVA's title team?
There are other ways to win, without stockpiling Top 5-10 kids. Its been proven time and time again.
And NO, I dont think are turning their noses---If A top 5 kid wnated to go to somewhere---not just interested, but wanted to go there----I dont think any coach is saying no. But thats not the reality of this discussion
I’m right there with you. I’d almost rather not be excited and be surprised than buying into the hype and 1st to 2nd round loss every year. I’ve definitely been cautious with my enthusiasm.
Most top 10 kids have demands. Cal is willing to make those promises.
The coaches aren't turning their noses up, it's the players. Most coaches won't promise minutes, cars, money, room on the plane for their encourage etc…
Brandon Boston had a damn camera crew following him around. Cal allowed it.
These kids today are not easy to deal with.
Like I said, give me the kid that wants to play for the name on the front and develop in a system.
Oh they exist, they're easy to find, just check the final 4 every year, those rosters are loaded with them.
This is what I have been saying for years.
I would sing a totally different tune if we were seeing top 5-10 one-and-done kids in the final 4 every year, but that just isn’t the case. The teams doing all the winning, are the ones with 3 and 4 star juniors and seniors. It’s not even debatable.
Good coaches recruit and develop players to fit their system and they don't make promises. You earn what you get.
It's just not working and the part that bothers me the most, is Cal is fine with it, because he’s getting what he wants.
I am in my 60's and enjoyed watching the players come back every year and improve as we all got to watch them. You could always recall their names, and really missed them when they were gone, it just meant more. We could talk among ourselves at work about what the next season might be. When most of team leave every year, there is really nothing to predict and talk about but what the new recruits might be. 🤷♀️
But you said Wright could've had those guys if he wanted them. So he never wanted any of them? Even the obvious stars? Come on.
Self's '08 team was his highest-rated roster and his best team to date. Couple top 10ish guys, several top 25.
Of course there are other ways to win, but that doesn't mean these coaches are willingly choosing that path. Like I've said, Self whiffed on his top targets consistently even before the FBI probe. Sprinkle in a few top 10 recruits for these coaches every year, and the results wouldn't be worse. They'd be that much better.
You think Duke and Kentucky became OAD factories because other top coaches chose to build differently? They became OAD factories because they were the only programs that had their pick of the litter. Everyone else was choosing from the leftovers.
And I'm not saying that Wright/Self/whoever would have built their teams exactly the same way as Calipari. I think they would have wanted more experience on some of those rosters. But their rosters would have looked a lot different over the years if they'd gotten everybody they targeted.
Again, there's a double standard applied here. You're saying that Wright's way was a huge success for producing two titles in 20 years, while also saying that the OAD-heavy teams failed because they only produced two titles in 16 tourneys. Not to mention the OAD teams get closer on average. Before his first title, Wright failed to get past the 2nd round 7 years in a row. Then lost in the 2nd as a 1 seed the following year.
I just think this whole argument is silly. OAD-heavy teams can and do win big. Great coaches can also win big without OADs. Both can be true. What's not true is that OAD teams fail at a higher rate. Having at least a few elite freshmen on the roster will boost anyone's chances. Experience ain't gonna make you taller or turn you into a freak athlete.
UK/Duke won two titles in 16 NCAAT's----Non, OAD led teams won the other 14. But because Duke and UKs two titles made up 13% of titles won, and is then compared to UCLA, means the OAD model is better....Its such an asinine argument. How can you say OAD teams do not fail at a higher rate, when well, they actually do? There has not been a OAD led team in the FF since..................
2015. Yet your argument is, OAD is better, and fails less?
Really?
I think coaches like Wright, Self, Drew, build their rosters differently. They do not persue munltiple Top 5, 10 kids. Do I think there is purpose to this? Absolutely. And its whay their programs have been so strong.
Ummmmm, you are leaving out some important info here....I didnt just use Wright...I included Baylor.....And UVA.....And Kansas.....And UConn. I didnt say JUST Wright's way. Yes, that would be a double standard. And you know this.
But nice try.
That's basically saying that you expect to see Duke and/or Kentucky in the final four every year. And by your own admission, one of those teams has had an underwhelming coach. That same coach did far better with OAD-heavy teams than with recent teams full of vets.
You have to understand that you're comparing two programs to........everybody else. Of course the odds are in favor of the field. Even if you have one of the greatest rosters of all time and are undefeated going into the tourney, the odds are still heavily in favor of the field. Even the most dominant teams are generally given a 15-20% chance to win it all. Choose two good programs that aren't OAD factories. Do you expect one of them to be in the final four every year?
Look at 2014 Kentucky. All freshmen with a couple sophomores sprinkled in. No generational talents. Went into the tourney as a freaking 8 seed and they were a play or two away from a nat'l title. With, by your admission, a mediocre coach. His old teams haven't even come close.
The numbers don't lie. OAD-heavy teams have a high rate of success. What do you think was the key to Calipari's success early on? Do you think it's just coincidence that his success started to fade when he stopped getting as many top 5-10 recruits?
Last edited:
2014 UK was also a play or two away from losing early.
78-76 over WSU---Missed three at buzzer. Buzzer beaters vs UM and Wisconsin. Its not like they steamed rolled folks, brother.
OAD teams have a lot of success. and that success is big. I read a nice article on the OAD, and the success those teams had, is better,. There has been 12 teams with 3 or more OADs.....5 made the FF----2 won tthe title. 9 made the Elite 8. But its also a broken pattern. Are we saying the OAD is the best path to deep NCAAT runs-----------OR to winning a title? These are different arguments. Deep runs? Sure. I can get on board with that. But at the end of the day, the goal is to win, when you recruit like that---You are building for a title. And that model has only produced two titles. And look, not all OAD are of equla value. That 2012 UK team had a generational type of tlent...2015 Duke didnt have a generational type, but they had 5, really good frosh, with some very good upperclassmen. There to is a difference.
I can see both sides. But it takes more than just a OAD, or two---And it takes having some help; which both title teams did.
OAD is very good when your OAD's are very good---and just your average OAD kid(s). And Cals dominant run was due to getting Top 5-10 kids, and multiple of them. But aside from 2012, including 2011/14, none of those teams were teams you felt was surefire title teams---especially 2011/2014. Same with Duke.
