UConn, Purdue, Houston - or The Field?

[kyjeff1]

Also, what about all those teams that were top 10 in offense and defense that got upset by teams that weren't even close to top 50 in either?
Where was Bradley, Bucknell, Saint Peters, VCU, Lehigh, Norfolk State, Northern Iowa etc… ranked in KP when they pulled their upsets?

 

[kyjeff1]

Jeff doesn't see his team on the list, so obviously it's a bad list. Cuz, y'know.....16 seeds.

You’re just butthurt because KU was getting upset almost every year there for a while.

I bet you still shart your trousers. at just the mention of Bucknell.

 

[IUfanBorden]

The point is, just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it can't. Eventually it will.

I'm not sure what VCU's numbers were when they reached the FF, but I can guarantee tgey weren't top 10 in anything.
Same with Butler, Illinois-Chicago, Miami etc…

It's funny, we see teams get to a FF that backed into the tournament and all the sudden, welook and their metrics are suddenly ranked in the 30's. It’s odd how that happens.

Thing with UK is, they CAN play defense, they just don’t do it for 40 minutes and get this, they don't have to. When you can score like that team can, you don't need to be 2015 UK to win.

"Reached" the FF.....Not, "won the title".

Reg season metrics vs end of the season metrics are different.

Yes UK can defend. They are just not consistent. It may not cost them. History says it probably will. And sure they can score.....Offense is lethal. But what happens when that lethal offense stalls? Can they get enough stops? Problem is, teams can score with UK, simply b/c they 're not every good defensively. I can see teams like UConn, PU, Houston, Tenn, MArq, AZ---being able to score enough AND get enough stops. UK hasn't really shown that.

Offensively, they are scary. Defensively though----not so much. Its why I don't trust them to get to a FF.

 

[IUfanBorden]

Also, what about all those teams that were top 10 in offense and defense that got upset by teams that weren't even close to top 50 in either?
Where was Bradley, Bucknell, Saint Peters, VCU, Lehigh, Norfolk State, Northern Iowa etc… ranked in KP when they pulled their upsets?

Again, you are citing ONE game, vs that of 6. WInning ONE game is more probable than winning 6, man.

 

[IUfanBorden]

You’re just butthurt because KU was getting upset almost every year there for a while.

I bet you still shart your trousers. at just the mention of Bucknell.

God damn, this list has you torn up.....


Wow.

 

[kyjeff1]

"Reached" the FF.....Not, "won the title".

Reg season metrics vs end of the season metrics are different.

Yes UK can defend. They are just not consistent. It may not cost them. History says it probably will. And sure they can score.....Offense is lethal. But what happens when that lethal offense stalls? Can they get enough stops? Problem is, teams can score with UK, simply b/c they 're not every good defensively. I can see teams like UConn, PU, Houston, Tenn, MArq, AZ---being able to score enough AND get enough stops. UK hasn't really shown that.

Offensively, they are scary. Defensively though----not so much. Its why I don't trust them to get to a FF.

If you can reach a FF, you can win the whole thing.

This isn’t about UK. While UK has a ton of weapons and a potent offense, they're too young and Cal isn't that guy anymore.

I think there are veteran teams out there that can ball out on a neutral court after maybe struggling in conference play. Kinda like UConn 2014.

 

[ExitFlagger]

The point is, just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it can't. Eventually it will.

I'm not sure what VCU's numbers were when they reached the FF, but I can guarantee tgey weren't top 10 in anything.
Same with Butler, Illinois-Chicago, Miami etc…

It's funny, we see teams get to a FF that backed into the tournament and all the sudden, welook and their metrics are suddenly ranked in the 30's. It’s odd how that happens.

Thing with UK is, they CAN play defense, they just don’t do it for 40 minutes and get this, they don't have to. When you can score like that team can, you don't need to be 2015 UK to win.

You've said many times that Kentucky's too young to win it all. Now you're triggered because they're not on this list? Maybe you should write Kenpom and tell him to change his algorithm. While you're at it, you should advise the team to start holding somebody under 100 pts. 😆

 

[kyjeff1]

Again, you are citing ONE game, vs that of 6. WInning ONE game is more probable than winning 6, man.

It’s not about the teams that won, it's about the teams that lost, even though they were top 20 in offensive and defensive efficiency.

I think matchups matter much more than what your efficiency numbers are.

 

[kyjeff1]

You've said many times that Kentucky's too young to win it all. Now you're triggered because they're not on this list? Maybe you should write Kenpom and tell him to change his algorithm. While you're at it, you should advise the team to start holding somebody under 100 pts. 😆

Post 126, second paragraph. Stop assuming. I was not talking about UK.
Relax your freaking hate boner.

 

[kyjeff1]

God damn, this list has you torn up.....


Wow.

No, I just like rubbing my taint on Exit's face.

 

[IUfanBorden]

No, I just like rubbing my taint on Exit's face.

COol…..Just leave your taint off me.

 

[IUfanBorden]

It’s not about the teams that won, it's about the teams that lost, even though they were top 20 in offensive and defensive efficiency.

I think matchups matter much more than what your efficiency numbers are.

Jeff winning one GAME opposed to 6, is much more probable. We are not talking about an anomaly here---16 beating a 1.....Or the 14/3 upset....or 15/2. Upsets are gonna happen. You are comparing apples to oranges, man.

Yes match-ups matter....But whats the odds of your team getting 6 straight favorable match-ups?

 

[IUfanBorden]

If you can reach a FF, you can win the whole thing.

This isn’t about UK. While UK has a ton of weapons and a potent offense, they're too young and Cal isn't that guy anymore.

I think there are veteran teams out there that can ball out on a neutral court after maybe struggling in conference play. Kinda like UConn 2014.

Sure you can....And eventually, it probably happens---Maybe. But I would not bet on it.

UK's youth doesn't worry me as much as their defense. Especially vs elite/good offenses, AND elite/good defense's. Teams like Houston, UConn, TENN, Purdue, etc....Teams that can slow UK for stretches, while still scoring. TENN is a prime example. UK scored 92.....But gave up 103. TENN was able to take advantage of UK "stalling", because they can really score the ball. UK can outscore most, but the above mentioned teams can not only score, they can defend. And that's a huge separation.

 

[kyjeff1]

Jeff winning one GAME opposed to 6, is much more probable. We are not talking about an anomaly here---16 beating a 1.....Or the 14/3 upset....or 15/2. Upsets are gonna happen. You are comparing apples to oranges, man.

Yes match-ups matter....But whats the odds of your team getting 6 straight favorable match-ups?

There are examples of teams, like VCU, like Butler, like Illinois-Chicago etc… that weren't top 30 in both yet made the FF.

 

[ExitFlagger]

Post 126, second paragraph. Stop assuming. I was not talking about UK.
Relax your freaking hate boner.

You just ranted about Kentucky's ability to defend, but I shouldn't assume that you're referring to Kentucky? 🤣

Why'd you have a problem with the list then?

 

[IUfanBorden]

There are examples of teams, like VCU, like Butler, like Illinois-Chicago etc… that weren't top 30 in both yet made the FF.

Jeff, it said "No team has WON the titles"---Not, "No team has made the FF." Lots of teams have done this.

 

[kyjeff1]

Sure you can....And eventually, it probably happens---Maybe. But I would not bet on it.

UK's youth doesn't worry me as much as their defense. Especially vs elite/good offenses, AND elite/good defense's. Teams like Houston, UConn, TENN, Purdue, etc....Teams that can slow UK for stretches, while still scoring. TENN is a prime example. UK scored 92.....But gave up 103. TENN was able to take advantage of UK "stalling", because they can really score the ball. UK can outscore most, but the above mentioned teams can not only score, they can defend. And that's a huge separation.

UK's defense is what it is BECAUSE of their youth. Their youth is the root of their issues.
This is the wrong year to be young.
This might be the oldest college basketball has ever been.

 

[ExitFlagger]

There are examples of teams, like VCU, like Butler, like Illinois-Chicago etc… that weren't top 30 in both yet made the FF.

What don't you get about 6 vs 4? And no, winning 4 doesn't mean you're capable of winning 6. Loyola Chicago would have lost to Villanova by 6,000 points if they'd reached the title game.

 

[kyjeff1]

You just ranted about Kentucky's ability to defend, but I shouldn't assume that you're referring to Kentucky? 🤣

Why'd you have a problem with the list then?

I defended UK, because you guys thought I was trying to pump up UK, I was just responding.

I didn’t have an issue with the list, I simply said, just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it can't. Everyone always said a 16 has never beat a one seed, well, it's happened twice now. The game is changing.

 

[kyjeff1]

What don't you get about 6 vs 4? And no, winning 4 doesn't mean you're capable of winning 6. Loyola Chicago would have lost to Villanova by 6,000 points if they'd reached the title game.

Again, just because those teams didn't win it all, doesn't mean it's not possible.

 

[IUfanBorden]

UK's defense is what it is BECAUSE of their youth. Their youth is the root of their issues.
This is the wrong year to be young.
This might be the oldest college basketball has ever been.

They have played 30 games, man. Being bad at defense isn't about youth anymore. Simply are who you are. I mean they score just fine for being young.

 

[ExitFlagger]

You’re just butthurt because KU was getting upset almost every year there for a while.

I bet you still shart your trousers. at just the mention of Bucknell.

KU hasn't had a big upset in over a decade. But yeah, a limping 3 seed getting Bucknelled 20 years ago triggers me to this day. Dammit, if only they'd survived that game and lost in the 2nd round instead!! 😆

Since you love to harp on past KU upsets, let me ask...if you had your choice of lists (looking at the last 2 decades), which would you choose?

St Peter's
9-16 record
Loss to 9 seed K-State (same as Northern Iowa)
NIT
NIT
UAB

or

Stanford
VCU (in Elite 8)
Northern Iowa
Bradley
Bucknell

 

[ExitFlagger]

I didn’t have an issue with the list, I simply said, just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it can't.

So you thought somebody was trying to indicate that it's not possible?

 

[ExitFlagger]

They have played 30 games, man. Being bad at defense isn't about youth anymore. Simply are who you are. I mean they score just fine for being young.

I can guarantee that if Self ever starts pulling in classes full of legit top 10 talents, paired with multiple good vets, I won't be whining about youth.

Weird that Calipari had a lot of really good defensive teams that were also very young in the past, eh?

 

[IUfanBorden]

I can guarantee that if Self ever starts pulling in classes full of legit top 10 talents, paired with multiple good vets, I won't be whining about youth.

Weird that Calipari had a lot of really good defensive teams that were really young in the past, eh?

Hes had ELITE defensive teams that were young.

They're not bad defensively because they are young...They are bad defensively because they have bad defensive players.

 

[ExitFlagger]

Hes had ELITE defensive teams that were young.

They're not bad defensively because they are young...They are bad defensively because they have bad defensive players.

Reeves is the worst among them, no? Maybe he just needs another 5 years in the system...

 

[kyjeff1]

They have played 30 games, man. Being bad at defense isn't about youth anymore. Simply are who you are. I mean they score just fine for being young.

Yeah, because you played college ball… eyeroll.

 

[kyjeff1]

KU hasn't had a big upset in over a decade. But yeah, a limping 3 seed getting Bucknelled 20 years ago triggers me to this day. Dammit, if only they'd survived that game and lost in the 2nd round instead!! 😆

Since you love to harp on past KU upsets, let me ask...if you had your choice of lists (looking at the last 2 decades), which would you choose?

St Peter's
9-16 record
Loss to 9 seed K-State (same as Northern Iowa)
NIT
NIT
UAB

or

Stanford
VCU (in Elite 8)
Northern Iowa
Bradley
Bucknell

NIT, NIT? Huh?

UAB? LMFAO. You can't cray about Bucknell being 20 years ago and bring up UAB. Haha.

Not only that, but UAB was a 9 seed. Bucknell was a 14 iirc. Bradley was at least a 13, maybe a 15.

 

[kyjeff1]

So you thought somebody was trying to indicate that it's not possible?

You said
"No team in the Kenpom era has won the title without being Top 40 in both defensive and offensive efficiency. These are the teams currently in that category:"

And I replied by giving an example of something that never happened, until it did. Pretty simple.

 

[IUfanBorden]

Yeah, because you played college ball… eyeroll.

WTF does that have to do with anything? I mean like you played? How do you know any difference?

And FTR, I played college baseball. SO I hava an idea.

 

[kyjeff1]

Hes had ELITE defensive teams that were young.

They're not bad defensively because they are young...They are bad defensively because they have bad defensive players.

Teaching elite defense is harder than teaching elite offense. These kids need more time.

Reeves and Ado were awful defenders last year, it carried through the entire season, this year, they are very good defenders.

It's youth, if these kids stayed another year, you would see a much improved team defensively. But hey, believe what you want,

 

[kyjeff1]

WTF does that have to do with anything? I mean like you played? How do you know any difference?

And FTR, I played college baseball. SO I hava an idea.

Oh yeah, baseball is exactly the same.
So you're telling me that these ultra athletic kids that have length are just terrible defenders and they'll never get better? Like, through experience, they'll never get better than they are now? Think about that.

 

[IUfanBorden]

Teaching elite defense is harder than teaching elite offense. These kids need more time.

Reeves and Ado were awful defenders last year, it carried through the entire season, this year, they are very good defenders.

It's youth, if these kids stayed another year, you would see a much improved team defensively. But hey, believe what you want,

What about the other teams Cal had , that were "young", but elite defensively---Or at least very good?

2010- 22nd. Led by Wall, Bledsoe, Cousins, Orton---who were fosh. Miller, Dodson and Liggins soph's
2012- 7th. Led by AD, MKG, Teague---Freshman. Wiltjer another freshman. Lamb and Jones were sophs
2014- 30th. Randle, YOung, Harrison's, Lee---Freshman. WCS was a soph..
2015--2nd. Ulis, KAT, Booker, Lyles---Freshman. Dkari soph.

Was teaching defense easier then----OR, did Cal just have better defensive players?

I could go on if ya like?

 

[IUfanBorden]

Oh yeah, baseball is exactly the same.
So you're telling me that these ultra athletic kids that have length are just terrible defenders and they'll never get better? Like, through experience, they'll never get better than they are now? Think about that.

Ummmm, tell me ya never played high level baseball, w/o telling me.

--Learning signals(offense and defense)
--Learning defensive rotations. assignment. Field coverages. WHo has the line...WHo covers second...
--Cut off value. Long cut---short cut....double cut. Where you go. Which base you have.
Adjusting to the speed of the game.
Adjusting to the pitching---I saw 85mph off speed shit in college---I rarely saw an 85mph FASTBALL in HS.

Yes I expect them to get better----And they have. But not by much. UK is about to play their 30th game---What have they not seen at the college level yet?

 

[kyjeff1]

What about the other teams Cal had , that were "young", but elite defensively---Or at least very good?

2010- 22nd. Led by Wall, Bledsoe, Cousins, Orton---who were fosh. Miller, Dodson and Liggins soph's
2012- 7th. Led by AD, MKG, Teague---Freshman. Wiltjer another freshman. Lamb and Jones were sophs
2014- 30th. Randle, YOung, Harrison's, Lee---Freshman. WCS was a soph..
2015--2nd. Ulis, KAT, Booker, Lyles---Freshman. Dkari soph.

Was teaching defense easier then----OR, did Cal just have better defensive players?

I could go on if ya like?

Each one of those teams had at least 1 transcendent talent and 2012 had a generational talent.

2012 had AD, Miller, T. Jones and 2nd year Lamb

2014 sucked, until the SECT. They couldn't guard anybody all year. But they had Randle and 2 big guards that landed the plane at the right time and got the right matchups in the tournament. They still couldn't guard dribble penetration.

2015 had most of the 2014 team return, but Booker and Ulis were unplayable in the Wiscy game, had to play the twins. Towns was transcendent.

2010 had juniors and seniors and 2 freaking transcendent guys (Cousins and Wall). Poythress, Miller, Liggins (incredible defender)

In 2014/15, Ulis was a below average defender. Decker abused him. He was defensive POY the very next year.

If Edwards and DJ were the players they were hyped up to be, this would be a much better team, but those 2 guys are nowhere close to lottery picks. Hell, they aren't even 2nd rounders now.

You can't compare transcendent talents to regular 5* kids. Heck, Sheppard was a 4*. The freshmen on this UK team are good, but they aren't transcendent.

 

[kyjeff1]

Ummmm, tell me ya never played high level baseball, w/o telling me.

--Learning signals(offense and defense)
--Learning defensive rotations. assignment. Field coverages. WHo has the line...WHo covers second...
--Cut off value. Long cut---short cut....double cut. Where you go. Which base you have.
Adjusting to the speed of the game.
Adjusting to the pitching---I saw 85mph off speed shit in college---I rarely saw an 85mph FASTBALL in HS.

Yes I expect them to get better----And they have. But not by much. UK is about to play their 30th game---What have they not seen at the college level yet?

Nope, but I had a hell of a HS career, a no hitter and a damn good bat.

I was better in track though. 110 high hurdles, 100m and 200m, so I switched.

Doesn't take a genius to know that there's a huge difference between a transcendent freshman and a regular 5*. UK 24 has really good kids, but nome are transcendent.

 

[IUfanBorden]

Doesn't take a genius to know that there's a huge difference between a transcendent freshman and a regular 5*. UK 24 has really good kids, but nome are transcendent.

Oh, wait.....so now its talent? Here I thought it was youth. Hmmmm...

What about the other teams?

 

[kyjeff1]

Oh, wait.....so now its talent? Here I thought it was youth. Hmmmm...

What about the other teams?

Wow. Seriously?

Okay, if you're going to be young, you better have some transcendent talent, transcendent/ generational kids are on another level. Yeah, they're young, but they're freaking transcendent.

This team doesn’t have that. Edwards was supposed to be great, but he's not. UK has really good freshmen, but they're not transcendent and they're damn sure not generational.

There's a difference between John Wall, AD, Towns, Fox, Monk, Randle type players and Sheppard, Dillingham, Edwards and DJ. A big difference.

 

[IUfanBorden]

Wow. Seriously?

Okay, if you're going to be young, you better have some transcendent talent, transcendent/ generational kids are on another level. Yeah, they're young, but they're freaking transcendent.

This team doesn’t have that. Edwards was supposed to be great, but he's not. UK has really good freshmen, but they're not transcendent and they're damn sure not generational.

There's a difference between John Wall, AD, Towns, Fox, Monk, Randle type players and Sheppard, Dillingham, Edwards and DJ. A big difference.

Yeah, seriously. You said YOUTH. I said, "talent"----Now you say "transcendent talent"---Which is it?

So what you are saying is, for UK to be good, elite defensively, Cal needs transcendent, generational type of talent?

Interesting.

You are proving my point, jeff. It not that they are YOUNG---its they are not good defensive players. AKA, as TALENT. They are very talented offensively----but not so much defensively.

 

[kyjeff1]

Yeah, seriously. You said YOUTH. I said, "talent"----Now you say "transcendent talent"---Which is it?

So what you are saying is, for UK to be good, elite defensively, Cal needs transcendent, generational type of talent?

Interesting.

You are proving my point, jeff. It not that they are YOUNG---its they are not good defensive players. AKA, as TALENT. They are very talented offensively----but not so much defensively.

You didn't say talent, you said they were bad defenders. Not only that, but you're wrong, the team does have talent, serious talent, problem is, the talent is too young and too inexperienced.

There's different levels of talent.

Bring these guys back and I guarantee you they would he elite defenders. They are too young and they need more time.