PDA

View Full Version : Larry Brown: 'I honestly believe Kentucky would make the NBA playoffs in the East'



Rivera
03-19-2015, 07:14 AM
These are the sorts of things that do a disservice to both college and pro basketball. It’s fine to compare players from different eras within the confines of their particular realm – wondering if Bill Walton could have pulled off a 21-of-22 shooting night in 2015, or just how many home runs Barry Bonds would have hit against 1960s pitching – but modern comparisons between current pro and college athletes seem gauche, tactless and designed only to draw attention to the voice making the comparisons.

Unluckily for us, SMU coach Larry Brown has never minded falling on the wrong side of tact, and has never shied from drawing attention to himself.

The former ABA and NBA coach, in making the media rounds prior to his Mustangs’ opening-round matchup against UCLA on Thursday, decided to be the latest to delve into the needless “how-would-Kentucky-do-in-the-NBA” nonsense:


Nobody needs this.

Coming from an NBA scribe who doesn’t watch nearly as much college basketball as I’d like to, as someone who has seen way more of the New York Knicks than I would like to (both the current 14-win version of the Knicks, and Larry Brown’s miserable 23-win Knicks team from 2006), I am more than secure in pointing out that the Eastern Conference is as bad as it has ever been, and that the Kentucky Wildcats are a devastatingly good college basketball team.

The 2014-15 Kentucky Wildcats would also be a devastatingly bad NBA team. They’d be perfect for the Eastern Conference, in fact.

The East is awful. Two teams, those Knicks and the infamous Philadelphia 76ers, are outright tanking the season. Two other teams, the struggling Orlando Magic and Detroit Pistons, are attempting to pick up the pieces left by the salted-crop work of the franchise’s previous general managers. The Brooklyn Nets are helmed by an owner and general manager who love to watch profits burn, the Indiana Pacers, Miami Heat and (to a far lesser extent) the Charlotte Hornets have been beset by injuries this season, and the Boston Celtics don’t mind taking their time through a long, loooong rebuilding effort.

The three teams that are tied for the seventh, eighth and ninth spots in the East are currently on pace for 38 wins. Kentucky could finish the season 40-0.


The Wildcats, as John Calipari pointed out just a few games into the team’s perfect regular season, would also be destroyed by any number of Eastern Conference teams. Even by the Knicks and Sixers, two squads made up almost entirely of 10th men.


Kentucky features four players who could be drafted in the lottery portion of June’s NBA draft, with seven overall players listed as being likely for selection in most mock drafts. The Wildcats are taller than most NBA teams. The team has won 34 consecutive games by an average of 20.9 points per contest, and by comparison the 72-win Chicago Bulls team of 1995-96 won by an average of "only" 12.3 points per game. This is an incredibly good basketball team whose status is more or less assured even if the squad is knocked off in an upset in the Elite Eight.

Such is the nature of one-and-out setups like the NCAA tournament. For the same reason that Kentucky could be upended by Notre Dame in a week and a half, the Kentucky Wildcats most certainly could take a game from any number of NBA Eastern or Western Conference lottery teams. Such is the nature of sport, and this is a huge part of the reason many of us who have ignored NCAA basketball all year will tune into March Madness. NCAA-niks who have ignored the NBA all season would do the same if Golden State and Oklahoma City had a one-game opening-round playoff series this April.

To wit:

"You can't beat them unless Kentucky really helps you, but that's what makes March Madness March Madness," Ole Miss coach Andy Kennedy said. "You don't have to beat them four out of seven. You just have to be the better team for three hours."
What Kentucky couldn’t do is take a seven-game series against any NBA team. Or a five- or three-game series. And it certainly couldn’t produce the mediocre record needed in order to win 46 percent of games in an 82-game season and make the playoffs out East.

Ignore this year’s NBA rookie class for further proof of evidence, as every rookie’s context in his initial year varies as he deals with disparate roles, franchises and injury woes. Look at the 2014-15 Minnesota Timberwolves for further proof, though.

This team has won just 21 percent of its games this season, good for last in its conference and just percentage points up on the Knicks overall. The Timberwolves feature the last two top overall picks in the NBA draft and two other recent lottery picks who have played very well in Shabazz Muhammad (us NBA folks are as surprised as you are) and Zach LaVine. The team ranks last in defensive efficiency this year and 25th in offense.


The Timberwolves also have lost twice to a somewhat older but far less heralded batch of hopeful NBA prospects from Philadelphia by a total of 17 points. The Timberwolves may feature a cadre of All-Stars and perhaps the NBA’s best two-way player in Andrew Wiggins five years from now and no active Sixer outside of Nerlens Noel may be making an NBA impact in 2020, but Philadelphia is older and arguably deeper than Minnesota. As all NBA teams are, in comparison to Kentucky.

As it is when discussing the greats of female sports, why do we have to denigrate both sides in order to make a stupid, basic-cable-TV-level “point?” Kentucky, despite the amateur impermanence of its future NBA stars, and despite not having yet played in the postseason, might already be a legendary NCAA team. Why is it that bored types like Larry Brown have to now rank the Wildcats amongst awful-at-worst or forgettable-at-best NBA teams? Why can’t we just let Kentucky be Kentucky?

When will we stop putting microphones in front of Larry Brown?

When he stops talking, one supposes. This might take a while.

- - - - - - -

Kelly Dwyer is an editor for Ball Don't Lie on Yahoo Sports. Have a tip? Email him at KDonhoops@yahoo.com or follow him on Twitter!







I know they could deff beat some NBA Teams. They have the size , speed and numerous NBA talent on that roster.

MonroeFAN
03-19-2015, 07:40 AM
Any cliff notes?

Burkey3472
03-19-2015, 07:43 AM
I heard that if they played the Knicks they would be a 14 point underdog. So no, they wouldn't make the playoffs in the East.

J_M_B
03-19-2015, 08:00 AM
Not even close.

Even the good rookies are below average in year 1 for the most part

valade16
03-19-2015, 08:50 AM
I think if all the players on this Kentucky team were in their NBA prime then yes most likely but as someone said, as rookies they aren't nearly as good as when they have a few years in the league. The talent is insane though, that's for sure.

2-ONE-5
03-19-2015, 08:56 AM
funny bcuz i dont even think KY would go undefeared in the ACC or Big 12

Corey
03-19-2015, 08:58 AM
The Harrisons would get ripped by any decent backcourt. Their offense wouldn't work. Subbing 3-5 players at once would never work for them. They dont have perimeter D that could stop a Lebron or other superstar iso player. A lot of players on the roster would get physically and mentally dominated.

They'd be a 10 win team.

Rivera
03-19-2015, 09:10 AM
Not even close.

Even the good rookies are below average in year 1 for the most part

Part of that is adjusting to life outside of basketball and adjusting to your new team and plays.

Coach cal might suck at X and Os but that dude can get his team up to play. There wouldn't be a team adjustment because they already know each other and the playbook

Any given night Kentucky can beat some Nba Teams. Throughout a season would be tougher. But one game. Kentucky would crush the Knicks. I rather have Karl towns and Cauley Stien over bargnani and Jason smith 10 times out of 10

jimm120
03-19-2015, 09:16 AM
No...how many times will this topic be brought up?

The nba has 95%of the top players in the world.

That Kentucky team has maybe 3 players that are top 500.

A team like Miami, that is struggling to get in, has wade,dragic, white side, beastly...all players that are on par or better than the Kentucky players.

HiphopRelated
03-19-2015, 09:21 AM
How many NBA players are even on the team?

valade16
03-19-2015, 09:31 AM
In regards to how many NBA players are on (or potentially on) Kentucky, the number is actually staggering.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/draft/mock-draft

As many as 5 players are projected to go in the 1st round (4 within the top 15-20 picks) and another 3 are expected to be drafted in the 2nd round.

This Kentucky team is actually loaded with NBA level talent.

HoopsDrive
03-19-2015, 09:52 AM
They can win a few games here and there against the bottom-feeders over the stretch of 82 games as anything is possible in sports. However, making the playoffs seems an impossible task. They'd all be rookies and have to adjust to the NBA schedule and all that. Not all those rookies are going to be NBA-level talent either, at least not from the get-go. It's just something that wouldn't happen, not over the course of 82 games. In a one-off though, they can certainly pull off an upset though.

rockets-fan
03-19-2015, 10:03 AM
In regards to how many NBA players are on (or potentially on) Kentucky, the number is actually staggering.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/draft/mock-draft

As many as 5 players are projected to go in the 1st round (4 within the top 15-20 picks) and another 3 are expected to be drafted in the 2nd round.

This Kentucky team is actually loaded with NBA level talent.

And how many former NBA lottery talents and picks have been busts?

I wish they would scrimmage against every NBA team just once so optimistic people could finally shut up. No way they beat an NBA team. Melo would light them up imo

IndyRealist
03-19-2015, 10:14 AM
In regards to how many NBA players are on (or potentially on) Kentucky, the number is actually staggering.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/draft/mock-draft

As many as 5 players are projected to go in the 1st round (4 within the top 15-20 picks) and another 3 are expected to be drafted in the 2nd round.

This Kentucky team is actually loaded with NBA level talent.
But they aren't developed physically, don't train for 8 hours a day, don't run an NBA system, don't play with a 24 second clock, and they have a bench full of players who won't make it out of their first NBA contract, if they get one at all.

The Knicks would destroy them 80 games out of 100.

I guess I'm the only one that thinks this is hyperbole. Larry Brown is not so much commenting on Kentucky as he is on how horrible the East is.

dhopisthename
03-19-2015, 10:19 AM
And how many former NBA lottery talents and picks have been busts?

I wish they would scrimmage against every NBA team just once so optimistic people could finally shut up. No way they beat an NBA team. Melo would light them up imo

exactly. I really wish this team would just play the sixers and after the sixers crushed them this debate would just end.

xnick5757
03-19-2015, 10:19 AM
What percentage of games could they win against say the 76ers?

I'd say 10%, 15 at most

xxplayerxx23
03-19-2015, 10:22 AM
Old man is crazy they would get destroyed. Hell the knicks just won a game against the Spurs, Alexy shved and bargs would look like NBA HOF in a game like that.

nandovelez
03-19-2015, 10:39 AM
They win 5-7 games in a nba schedule. Such a ridiculous statement.

nandovelez
03-19-2015, 10:40 AM
And only 5-7 because most teams would bench the starters when they play them.

Pierzynski4Prez
03-19-2015, 10:44 AM
Knicks (w/healthy Melo) vs Kentucky over 10 games, Knicks win 9 of them. Likely 10.

Knicks without Melo though vs Kentucky, Knicks win maybe 8 of them over 10 games.

flea
03-19-2015, 10:58 AM
I'm not sure they would make the playoffs, but I'll concede that Larry Brown knows way more about basketball than me. However the notion that the Wildcats would only beat God-awful teams like the Sixers and Knicks 10% of the time is ridiculous. Those teams are terrible and it's not like the Wildcats have a gimmicky system like Beilein where pro teams can simply outmuscle them.

They start 3 guys with more length and athleticism than almost every team. Their entire game is to ruin your day inside on offense and win with their defense. Hell the only reason the Sixers haven't lost every single game is that that is their exact formula: long athletes at every position and try to win with defense. The only difference is that Kentucky is better at it than them. There is literally no bad shot for them because they have better rebounders than every team at every position - and they have elite rebounders at the frontcourt positions.

Nerlens Noel would be a bench big on this Wildcats team: both when he was in college and now (and I say that with the utmost respect for his game). The Wildcats would probably be around 20-30 wins if they were in the East, I'd guess, because their shooting is as woeful as the Sixers. But we're talking about a team with 4, and potentially more, future lottery picks and as many as 9 guys who could crack an NBA roster (plus another who is out for the year). I'm not much on the Harrisons but 6'6 guards find jobs in the NBA.

Wrigheyes4MVP
03-19-2015, 11:03 AM
Maybe they would have a chance if they had a generational talent like say, a young Lebron on that team.

valade16
03-19-2015, 11:06 AM
And how many former NBA lottery talents and picks have been busts?

I wish they would scrimmage against every NBA team just once so optimistic people could finally shut up. No way they beat an NBA team. Melo would light them up imo


But they aren't developed physically, don't train for 8 hours a day, don't run an NBA system, don't play with a 24 second clock, and they have a bench full of players who won't make it out of their first NBA contract, if they get one at all.

The Knicks would destroy them 80 games out of 100.

I guess I'm the only one that thinks this is hyperbole. Larry Brown is not so much commenting on Kentucky as he is on how horrible the East is.

I agree which is why I said they maybe wouldn't do very good now but if these guys were years into the league they could do very well.

2-ONE-5
03-19-2015, 11:07 AM
I'm not sure they would make the playoffs, but I'll concede that Larry Brown knows way more about basketball than me. However the notion that the Wildcats would only beat God-awful teams like the Sixers and Knicks 10% of the time is ridiculous. Those teams are terrible and it's not like the Wildcats have a gimmicky system like Beilein where pro teams can simply outmuscle them.

They start 3 guys with more length and athleticism than almost every team. Their entire game is to ruin your day inside on offense and win with their defense. Hell the only reason the Sixers haven't lost every single game is that that is their exact formula: long athletes at every position and try to win with defense. The only difference is that Kentucky is better at it than them. There is literally no bad shot for them because they have better rebounders than every team at every position - and they have elite rebounders at the frontcourt positions.

Nerlens Noel would be a bench big on this Wildcats team: both when he was in college and now (and I say that with the utmost respect for his game). The Wildcats would probably be around 20-30 wins if they were in the East, I'd guess, because their shooting is as woeful as the Sixers. But we're talking about a team with 4, and potentially more, future lottery picks and as many as 9 guys who could crack an NBA roster (plus another who is out for the year). I'm not much on the Harrisons but 6'6 guards find jobs in the NBA.

lol you cant be serious about any of this

NYKnickFanatic
03-19-2015, 11:29 AM
I heard a few analysts say that they wouldn't even be able to beat the Knicks.

I doubt they make the playoffs.

RLundi
03-19-2015, 11:35 AM
Honestly, I don't think they'd win a single game. Grown men, larger, stronger, more skilled players would decimate them and run the table 48 minutes straight. They'd be shown absolutely no mercy. They'd be swept with the broom of annihilation.

flea
03-19-2015, 11:45 AM
Honestly, I don't think they'd win a single game. Grown men, larger, stronger, more skilled players would decimate them and run the table 48 minutes straight. They'd be shown absolutely no mercy. They'd be swept with the broom of annihilation.

There are maybe 4 or 5 centers as fast and strong as Cauley-Stein in the NBA. There are maybe 6 or 7 centers as skilled as Towns (and none of them are as athletic). Not saying they're sure things, but I'd be very surprised if they aren't rotation players in the NBA for the next 10 years. Towns has best center in the NBA potential. He's not quite as big as Cousins, but he's more athletic and has better instincts defensively.

Let's just put it back a few years with the Davis/Terrence Jones/MKG frontcourt. Is there anyone that thinks the Sixers and Knicks would beat that team 90% of the time? Didn't think so - this Kentucky team would beat that Kentucky team 90% of the time.

valade16
03-19-2015, 12:00 PM
Honestly, I don't think they'd win a single game. Grown men, larger, stronger, more skilled players would decimate them and run the table 48 minutes straight. They'd be shown absolutely no mercy. They'd be swept with the broom of annihilation.

Why do people keep saying "grown men" as if these college players are a completely separate species? You will be calling these same college players "grown men" in 200 days.

Where are all these "grown men"? Covington is 24. Sims is 24, Sampson is 21, Thompson is 23, Wroten is 21, Canaan is 23.

According to that logic Anthony Davis shouldn't possibly be this good because he is facing "grown men" and he is only 22.

Heck, someone posted on here that the Jazz's starting lineup wasn't even the oldest starting lineup in the state of Utah. So I am really failing to see how 21-24 year olds are grown men who would outmuscle and dominate guys who are 19-21...

Tony_Starks
03-19-2015, 12:36 PM
Truth

rockets-fan
03-19-2015, 12:47 PM
Why do people keep saying "grown men" as if these college players are a completely separate species? You will be calling these same college players "grown men" in 200 days.

Where are all these "grown men"? Covington is 24. Sims is 24, Sampson is 21, Thompson is 23, Wroten is 21, Canaan is 23.

According to that logic Anthony Davis shouldn't possibly be this good because he is facing "grown men" and he is only 22.

Heck, someone posted on here that the Jazz's starting lineup wasn't even the oldest starting lineup in the state of Utah. So I am really failing to see how 21-24 year olds are grown men who would outmuscle and dominate guys who are 19-21...

Age isn't want makes them grown men. It's the training that an NBA player has compared to the college athletes.

Come on people, yes Kentucky has an amazing front court but you also has to look at who they go against. Who do they play that's remotely close to Cousins, Howard, M.Gasol, Noah, even Jordan. Or PFs like Ibaka, LMA, Davis, Griffin, ect....

Now when talking about the Knicks, MELO would scotch them alone, sure they have a bad NBA roster but they are still in the league for a reason. I really can't wait for the day that a scrimmage happens do all this could be put to sleep.

KnicksorBust
03-19-2015, 12:52 PM
I don't think it's as crazy as everyone thinks. If you go back to the Florida team that had Joakim Noah, Al Horford, and Corey Brewer... at the time it would have been outrageous to think that a college team could compete with an NBA team but that team proved to have 2 NBA all-stars and a legit NBA rotation player on it. Are we sure we can't say the same thing about this Kentucky team?

rockets-fan
03-19-2015, 12:55 PM
I don't think it's as crazy as everyone thinks. If you go back to the Florida team that had Joakim Noah, Al Horford, and Corey Brewer... at the time it would have been outrageous to think that a college team could compete with an NBA team but that team proved to have 2 NBA all-stars and a legit NBA rotation player on it. Are we sure we can't say the same thing about this Kentucky team?

Yes they proved to have that AFTER training and practicing in the NBA level. As rookies, were they all stars and rotation players? NO. They were developed, by the NBA teams that drafted them.

Hawkeye15
03-19-2015, 12:59 PM
love it when these come up. The Wildcats would win 1 game in the NBA over the course of an 82 game season, simply by dumb luck.

NBA players are professional basketball players. Most of the bench warmers were studs in college.

Hawkeye15
03-19-2015, 01:02 PM
I don't think it's as crazy as everyone thinks. If you go back to the Florida team that had Joakim Noah, Al Horford, and Corey Brewer... at the time it would have been outrageous to think that a college team could compete with an NBA team but that team proved to have 2 NBA all-stars and a legit NBA rotation player on it. Are we sure we can't say the same thing about this Kentucky team?


they weren't NBA all all stars or a legit rotation player at that time, they were kids. That is the point.

nastynice
03-19-2015, 01:04 PM
They'd be a 10 win team.

If be legit shocked if they were even a 1 win team. Can't imagine a college team beating an nba team, outplay them for 48 minutes? Not gonna happen, even with all the lucky bounces in the world

flea
03-19-2015, 01:16 PM
they weren't NBA all all stars or a legit rotation player at that time, they were kids. That is the point.

No they weren't - both of them were top 20 centers the moment they stepped onto an NBA court. Horford unseated Pachulia almost immediately, starting all but 4 games his rookie year. And Pachulia is a fine NBA center still, a legit starter that gets underrated a lot. When he went to the Hawks he turned them into a respectable defense (Pachulia that is). Ask the Bucks fans about him if you don't believe me.

Noah started about half the season and was outplaying Ben Wallace by season's end. (He was a young over-the-hill then at 33.) They also weren't kids, at least no more than Rudy Gobert is a kid currently (who is also, IMO, a top 20 center already).

flea
03-19-2015, 01:26 PM
Both the Bulls that season and the Jazz this season were comfortable enough with their backup centers to trade their starters. They might not have been quite as good as they were going to become, but they were both very good. Anyone that can start on an NBA team, especially at a demanding position like center, is very good.

Tony_Starks
03-19-2015, 01:33 PM
I hate to break the news but not every single player in the league is there because they're a elite ball player. There are plenty of super average guys in the league because of the program they went to, the coach that endorsed them, their family pedigree, track record off the court.....all kind of politics. Just because Asik and Lin are in the league would they have been able to anything with Wall and Cousins when they were at Kentucky? HELL NO!

This notion that just because they're technically a team of "pros" they will automatically dominate is a total farce. The actual Dream Team, best team ever assembled, was getting ran out of the gym by a bunch of "college kids" because they were halfing it. Do you seriously think a program like Duke or Kentucky with superior coaching couldn't beat the Sixer's or TWolves of the world?

Shlumpledink
03-19-2015, 01:39 PM
What a thoughtful and well-reasoned argument.

It conflicts with something I had held to be true, so I am going to look for minor spelling or grammar errors so I can debunk it all

valade16
03-19-2015, 02:22 PM
Age isn't want makes them grown men. It's the training that an NBA player has compared to the college athletes.

Come on people, yes Kentucky has an amazing front court but you also has to look at who they go against. Who do they play that's remotely close to Cousins, Howard, M.Gasol, Noah, even Jordan. Or PFs like Ibaka, LMA, Davis, Griffin, ect....

Now when talking about the Knicks, MELO would scotch them alone, sure they have a bad NBA roster but they are still in the league for a reason. I really can't wait for the day that a scrimmage happens do all this could be put to sleep.

Who on the Knicks or 76ers is even remotely close to those players? Melo is hurt. You don't think Kentucky could stack up against the 76ers or Melo-less Knicks?

KnicksorBust
03-19-2015, 02:28 PM
Yes they proved to have that AFTER training and practicing in the NBA level. As rookies, were they all stars and rotation players? NO. They were developed, by the NBA teams that drafted them.


they weren't NBA all all stars or a legit rotation player at that time, they were kids. That is the point.

You have to bet your house on a basketball game and you have a choice of having a frontline of Lou Amundsen and Andrea Bargnani or Karl Towns and Willie Cauley-Stein. Who do you want?

KnicksorBust
03-19-2015, 02:28 PM
Yes they proved to have that AFTER training and practicing in the NBA level. As rookies, were they all stars and rotation players? NO. They were developed, by the NBA teams that drafted them.


Who on the Knicks or 76ers is even remotely close to those players? Melo is hurt. You don't think Kentucky could stack up against the 76ers or Melo-less Knicks?

It's almost like people don't realize the garbage lineups that teams have been putting out there recently.

KnicksorBust
03-19-2015, 02:29 PM
Yes they proved to have that AFTER training and practicing in the NBA level. As rookies, were they all stars and rotation players? NO. They were developed, by the NBA teams that drafted them.


I hate to break the news but not every single player in the league is there because they're a elite ball player. There are plenty of super average guys in the league because of the program they went to, the coach that endorsed them, their family pedigree, track record off the court.....all kind of politics. Just because Asik and Lin are in the league would they have been able to anything with Wall and Cousins when they were at Kentucky? HELL NO!

This notion that just because they're technically a team of "pros" they will automatically dominate is a total farce. The actual Dream Team, best team ever assembled, was getting ran out of the gym by a bunch of "college kids" because they were halfing it. Do you seriously think a program like Duke or Kentucky with superior coaching couldn't beat the Sixer's or TWolves of the world?

Exactly. It's also Coach K vs. Derek Fisher. Who has the edge there folks?

Sadds The Gr8
03-19-2015, 02:30 PM
Wouldn't even come close. They'd compete in some games but saying they'd make playoffs is stupid

nandovelez
03-19-2015, 02:33 PM
As hawkeye said most stars in college basketball end up being bench warmers. Jimmer, morrison, luke jackson, wayne simeon, pj tucker, sheldon williams. All big stars in college. Most end up bench players or even out of the league in a few years. Kentucky wins maybe 1-3 games in a nba schedule season

nandovelez
03-19-2015, 02:37 PM
And to the guy that brought up the dream team. Yea they lost but chuck basically threw that game he didnt even play jordan. He wanted them to taste defeat in scrimmage. The next day they played. the dream team beat them by 100 as coach k said

KnicksorBust
03-19-2015, 02:39 PM
Yes they proved to have that AFTER training and practicing in the NBA level. As rookies, were they all stars and rotation players? NO. They were developed, by the NBA teams that drafted them.


As hawkeye said most stars in college basketball end up being bench warmers. Jimmer, morrison, luke jackson, wayne simeon, pj tucker, sheldon williams. All big stars in college. Most end up bench players or even out of the league in a few years. Kentucky wins maybe 1-3 games in a nba schedule season

Do you think Kentucky has future bench warmers?

nandovelez
03-19-2015, 02:41 PM
Who knows they could be good and they could be bust. U never know till a few years from now but right now u cant say they beat nba teams

nandovelez
03-19-2015, 02:43 PM
The only two i really like are towns and cauley stine. But towns is the only one i can say has star potential

valade16
03-19-2015, 03:29 PM
Do you think Kentucky has future bench warmers?

Weren't the 2 most recent Kentucky uber prospects Anthony Davis and Nerlens Noel?

valade16
03-19-2015, 03:34 PM
I looked it up and the current NBA players who are from Kentucky since 2010 are:

Eric Bledsoe
DeMarcus Cousins
Anthony Davis
Archie Goodwin
Terrence Jones
Enes Kanter
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
Brandon Knight
Nerlens Noel
Patrick Patterson
Julius Randle
John Wall
James Young

If they were a team they might be the best team in the league:

John Wall - Brandon Knight
Eric Bledsoe - Archie Goodwin
MKG - Patrick Patterson
Anthony Davis - Terrence Jones
DeMarcus Cousins - Enes Kanter

Given that insane success rate do we really want to say these Kentucky guys will more than likely be bench players? Because given their what, 85% success rate I'd say they have a good shot at being legitimate contributors...

PurpleJesus
03-19-2015, 03:59 PM
nope.

He could revise this take to be "if this Kentucky team entered the league all together on the same roster, they would be making the playoffs in the East in 3 years."

phantasyyy
03-19-2015, 04:35 PM
Some of you guys are crazy.. theres no way they'd win a game against an nba team as others have state even scrubs in the nba were at one point stars of ther respectiv college/international team.

for ***** and giggles look at the stats some of thse "scrubs" posted in college

Knicks

Shane Larkin - 36.4mins 14.5pts/3.8reb/4.6ast 48% 40%3pt
Jason Smith - 30.2mins 16.8pts/10.1reb/1.9ast 58%
Tim Hardaway 34.8mins 14.5pts/4.7reb/2.4ast 44% 37%3pt
Quincy Acy 29.7mins 12pts/7.4reb/1ast 57%
Cole Aldrich 26.8mins 11.3pts/9.8reb/0.9ast 56%
Cleanthony Early 27.4mins 16.4pts/5.7reb/0.8 ast 48% 37%3pt
Galloway 36mins 17.7pts/4.3reb/1.6ast 44% 44%3pt
Louis Amundsen 28min 14.3pt/8.6reb/1.1ast 53%

now add in nba seasoning/experience and they would destroy college competition.

lol, please
03-19-2015, 04:38 PM
I agree with him, the East is just atrocious, good teams in the euro leagues would blast the Cavs in the first and second round.

TylerSL
03-19-2015, 04:41 PM
They absolutely would NOT make the playoffs, or even come remotely close. Best case scenario, they're as bad as the Knicks. Remember this is the NBA, where winning is everything as apposed to college where winning is a lot but college is more about developing as a person and improving to get to the next level. They are talented enough to probably steal a couple games but a college team cannot hang with an NBA squad.

TylerSL
03-19-2015, 04:46 PM
I agree with him, the East is just atrocious, good teams in the euro leagues would blast the Cavs in the first and second round.

It's ludicrous. Miami is at the bottom of the East so by your logic you're telling me that you believe Kentucky can run with Dragic, bang around with Whiteside, and deal with Dwyane Wade? It's just not happening.

Tony_Starks
03-19-2015, 05:23 PM
The whole "bench players in the NBA were stars in college" thing is another cliché that people don't really give thought to. I got news for you if you are a legit 6'8 to 7'0 with a moderate sense of coordination and have good coaching you can probably make the league and sit on someone's bench, if nothing else for your "potential." If you are a slow and stiff 6'6 or better kid with a absolutely wet automatic 3 that knows how to create space to get it off you can probably make league. If you go back and look at some of these vets college tape they weren't some kind of superstars, most of them just had a decisive size advantage and were in a system that capitalized on it.

There's a reason they get to the league in a totally different system and never see past the end of the bench.

RLundi
03-19-2015, 05:34 PM
Why do people keep saying "grown men" as if these college players are a completely separate species? You will be calling these same college players "grown men" in 200 days.

Where are all these "grown men"? Covington is 24. Sims is 24, Sampson is 21, Thompson is 23, Wroten is 21, Canaan is 23.

According to that logic Anthony Davis shouldn't possibly be this good because he is facing "grown men" and he is only 22.

Heck, someone posted on here that the Jazz's starting lineup wasn't even the oldest starting lineup in the state of Utah. So I am really failing to see how 21-24 year olds are grown men who would outmuscle and dominate guys who are 19-21...

Umm which 12-man roster is full of players 22 and under? And you're comparing a player that has played professional basketball for 2 years to a college player? Age doesn't necessarily make a player grown. Experience does. These players are not only young, but inexperienced and weaker.

Blitzace137
03-19-2015, 06:09 PM
Larry Brown must be out of his damn mind. Kentucky just lost to the Dominican team not to far back. Yes Kentucky has two solid prospects in Cauley Stein and KArl Anthony Towns. If the played the Knicks they would get waxed with or without Melo. I guarantee Bargnani would drop 50 and Shved would drop 30 and 15, plus Amundson would protect the paint. How many NBA players does Kentucky have? Knicks and Sixers have 15 Kentucky doesn't. They can't even beat the Knicks or Sixers to say they would make the playoffs in the east is complete blasphemy. They'd win 5-10 games tops.

Blitzace137
03-19-2015, 06:14 PM
I hate to break the news but not every single player in the league is there because they're a elite ball player. There are plenty of super average guys in the league because of the program they went to, the coach that endorsed them, their family pedigree, track record off the court.....all kind of politics. Just because Asik and Lin are in the league would they have been able to anything with Wall and Cousins when they were at Kentucky? HELL NO!

This notion that just because they're technically a team of "pros" they will automatically dominate is a total farce. The actual Dream Team, best team ever assembled, was getting ran out of the gym by a bunch of "college kids" because they were halfing it. Do you seriously think a program like Duke or Kentucky with superior coaching couldn't beat the Sixer's or TWolves of the world?

Stop man, John Wall was no where near the player he is now compared to when he was in Kentucky. Lin destroyed Wall in a summer league game right after the draft that season. That's rookie Lin, you don't think Lin right now could outplay rookie John Wall or at least keep up with him? Yea right? As for Asik just because he has no offensive game doesn't mean he's not an effective Center. Asik averages double digits in rebounds and is a top defensive Center. He would have no problem against rookie Noah.

KnicksorBust
03-19-2015, 06:28 PM
Weren't the 2 most recent Kentucky uber prospects Anthony Davis and Nerlens Noel?

Yeah honestly people are either drastically underrating the potential of Kentucky or drastically overrating the **** *** teams in the NBA this season.

PowerHouse
03-19-2015, 06:56 PM
This is beyond absurd. Build a team using the last guy off the bench from the 12 worst teams in the NBA and they would blow Kentucky out every time.

phantasyyy
03-19-2015, 06:59 PM
The whole "bench players in the NBA were stars in college" thing is another cliché that people don't really give thought to. I got news for you if you are a legit 6'8 to 7'0 with a moderate sense of coordination and have good coaching you can probably make the league and sit on someone's bench, if nothing else for your "potential." If you are a slow and stiff 6'6 or better kid with a absolutely wet automatic 3 that knows how to create space to get it off you can probably make league. If you go back and look at some of these vets college tape they weren't some kind of superstars, most of them just had a decisive size advantage and were in a system that capitalized on it.

There's a reason they get to the league in a totally different system and never see past the end of the bench.

I dont think you understand the fact that the NBA only has 30 x 15 = 450 NBA jobs available, so your suggestion that anyone 6'8-7" can make an nba team is blasphemous or the shooter theory. there is an growing pool of potential nba players every year added to previous draft classes and I can assure you that it takes more than height/coordination or a wet jumper to make the L..

SteveNash
03-19-2015, 07:11 PM
Kentucky wouldn't win a single game.

JEDean89
03-19-2015, 07:13 PM
You really think that the Wildcats could be the heat, pacers or hornets? not a chance in the world. Whiteside would obliterate them, dragic would carve the harrison twins up and Wade would drop 50ppg against them. You think that 19 year old boys can guard real men? when was the last time a guy came into the NBA and was instantly a star. Lillard, Davis, Griffin maybe... I think next year, when Towns, Caullie Stein and Lyles are getting pummeled by the NBA's bigs, people will realize that it's just march madness.

JV35
03-19-2015, 07:27 PM
I can see why SMU lost today. Brown is clueless.

Rivera
03-19-2015, 07:37 PM
This Kentucky team is good. Real good have depth and length.

My favorite coach Cals Kentucky team was the one who didn't win the NCAA. The

Wall/Bledsoe/Patterson / cousins team. They were really fun to watch

KnicksorBust
03-19-2015, 07:58 PM
This is beyond absurd. Build a team using the last guy off the bench from the 12 worst teams in the NBA and they would blow Kentucky out every time.

One of the best college teams of all-time doesn't have better than last guy off the bench talent? Doesn't make any sense.

Tony_Starks
03-19-2015, 07:59 PM
Jeremy Lin
Jimmer Fredette
Tayshaun Prince
Jason Smith
Bismack Biyombo


Raymond Felton
Jodie Meeks
Luke Babbit
Greg Steisma
Robert Sacre


So according to prevailing logic this team of professionals/ former "college stars" coached by any coach in the league could run circles around Kentucky.

Ask yourself a question: do you really believe that?

Blitzace137
03-19-2015, 08:41 PM
Jeremy Lin
Jimmer Fredette
Tayshaun Prince
Jason Smith
Bismack Biyombo


Raymond Felton
Jodie Meeks
Luke Babbit
Greg Steisma
Robert Sacre


So according to prevailing logic this team of professionals/ former "college stars" coached by any coach in the league could run circles around Kentucky.

Ask yourself a question: do you really believe that?

Yes, Felton and Lin would probably drop 40+ combined on Harrison brothers. Jodie Meeks would probably drop 11 threes if your playing by college rules.

Blitzace137
03-19-2015, 08:47 PM
Their are only 450 jobs available like the previous poster mentioned, complete blasphemy to think a college team can make the playoffs in the east. I mean look at the T-Wolves most of their players were injured for a long period. Pek, K-Mart, Rubio all out. So they started Wiggins, Mo Williams, Dieng, LaVine came off the bench three top prospects and they barely won 7 games with that group. Wiggins is a super prospect and Minny could still not pull off wins. So Kentucky is suppose to be a respectable team now if they played in the NBA? NO way.

PowerHouse
03-19-2015, 08:53 PM
One of the best college teams of all-time doesn't have better than last guy off the bench talent? Doesn't make any sense.

If you understand what Im saying it makes a world of sense. My team roster has 12 NBA pros on it all of whom are grown men with more years experience. KY has maybe 2 or 3 future NBA pros who for now are just 19 year old kids trying to learn the game up to the level of experience that my team already has.

If only this fantasy game could actually be played in reality you would see for yourself the hulk-smashing that Kentucky would get handed. Probably much worse than a varsity vs freshman blowout.

HeatFan
03-19-2015, 09:39 PM
Jeremy Lin
Jimmer Fredette
Tayshaun Prince
Jason Smith
Bismack Biyombo


Raymond Felton
Jodie Meeks
Luke Babbit
Greg Steisma
Robert Sacre


So according to prevailing logic this team of professionals/ former "college stars" coached by any coach in the league could run circles around Kentucky.

Ask yourself a question: do you really believe that?

you forgot Adam Morrison

Tony_Starks
03-19-2015, 09:43 PM
Jeremy Lin
Jimmer Fredette
Tayshaun Prince
Jason Smith
Bismack Biyombo


Raymond Felton
Jodie Meeks
Luke Babbit
Greg Steisma
Robert Sacre


So according to prevailing logic this team of professionals/ former "college stars" coached by any coach in the league could run circles around Kentucky.

Ask yourself a question: do you really believe that?

you forgot Adam Morrison

Man Morrison would catch a flashback and drop like 50 on Kentucky!

More-Than-Most
03-19-2015, 10:22 PM
In regards to how many NBA players are on (or potentially on) Kentucky, the number is actually staggering.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/draft/mock-draft

As many as 5 players are projected to go in the 1st round (4 within the top 15-20 picks) and another 3 are expected to be drafted in the 2nd round.

This Kentucky team is actually loaded with NBA level talent.

doesnt that hurt their value? Maybe just maybe some are not as good as projected because of how deep the team is... They are not loaded with NBA talent... They are loaded with talent... There is a reason that even the LBJ of the worlds come in the first year and are not insanely great... No way they would ever beat an nba team.

SlimKid
03-19-2015, 11:49 PM
My head hurts reading through the comments from people that actually believe Brown's asinine comment.

2-ONE-5
03-20-2015, 08:46 AM
This Kentucky team is good. Real good have depth and length.

My favorite coach Cals Kentucky team was the one who didn't win the NCAA. The

Wall/Bledsoe/Patterson / cousins team. They were really fun to watch

wasnt it Terrance Jones not Patterson? Either way that team is better than this current KY team

Rivera
03-20-2015, 09:09 AM
wasnt it Terrance Jones not Patterson? Either way that team is better than this current KY team

It was pat pat. He was a senior that year. Jones played after with Noel and Anthony Davis

valade16
03-20-2015, 09:44 AM
This is beyond absurd. Build a team using the last guy off the bench from the 12 worst teams in the NBA and they would blow Kentucky out every time.

Do you really believe this? You honestly think a team of:

Cleanthony Early, Travis Wear, Larry Drew, Chris Frazier, Sean Kilpatrick, Troy Daniels, Xavier Henry, Ryan Kelly, Devin Marble and Andrew Nicholson

would blow Kentucky out? Seriously?

valade16
03-20-2015, 09:50 AM
You really think that the Wildcats could be the heat, pacers or hornets? not a chance in the world. Whiteside would obliterate them, dragic would carve the harrison twins up and Wade would drop 50ppg against them. You think that 19 year old boys can guard real men? when was the last time a guy came into the NBA and was instantly a star. Lillard, Davis, Griffin maybe... I think next year, when Towns, Caullie Stein and Lyles are getting pummeled by the NBA's bigs, people will realize that it's just march madness.

So 19 year old college kids can't play in the NBA, how did Jabari Parker manage this season? He scored 12 PPG and was only 19.

Or how about Zach LaVine and Andrew Wiggins, both of whom are 20? How are they able to guard real men?

People have to quit acting like they are two separate species. They are all humans, and many are 2 years apart is age...

If what everyone here is thinking is true (that the last guy on an NBA bench would squash the best college players), why does any NBA team ever draft college players? If they are that much worse why would any NBA team want them?

NYSpirit1
03-20-2015, 10:07 AM
In regards to how many NBA players are on (or potentially on) Kentucky, the number is actually staggering.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/draft/mock-draft

As many as 5 players are projected to go in the 1st round (4 within the top 15-20 picks) and another 3 are expected to be drafted in the 2nd round.

This Kentucky team is actually loaded with NBA level talent.

This really is irrelevant. Any NBA would totally dominate them, especially one with veterans.

Are they capable of beating the Knicks, Wolves, Lakers and Sixers? Sure - no one is saying they couldn't be a 10-15 win team in the NBA. But playoffs? No chance ever.

Towns is really the only one that will make a major impact in the NBA next year. The rest will take a ton of time to develop.

2-ONE-5
03-20-2015, 10:09 AM
It was pat pat. He was a senior that year. Jones played after with Noel and Anthony Davis

ah youre right. i remember Patterson and jones both stayed longer than expected so they could try to win a title which was cool

valade16
03-20-2015, 10:32 AM
This really is irrelevant. Any NBA would totally dominate them, especially one with veterans.

Are they capable of beating the Knicks, Wolves, Lakers and Sixers? Sure - no one is saying they couldn't be a 10-15 win team in the NBA. But playoffs? No chance ever.

Towns is really the only one that will make a major impact in the NBA next year. The rest will take a ton of time to develop.

I agree with this. There is no way they make the playoffs in the East.

2-ONE-5
03-20-2015, 10:50 AM
10-15 wins is still ridiculous to think. just think of the NBA style, game length, and travel schedule compared to college.

dhopisthename
03-20-2015, 01:00 PM
It just baffles me so much that people think that they would even win 5 games. They start aaron harrison(likely won't be drafted) and andrew harrison(very late 2nd rounder/undrafted) and have guys like Tyler Ulis(undrafted), dakari Johnson(late first rounder), and marcus lee(undrafted) big time playing roles. nba teams would just destroy those guys every time on defense and force them to do way more then they can on offense. if you had a team that featured the very best college players then they might be able to win a few games, but they only have 4 of the top 20(which is very impressive) but not anywhere near good enough to win nba games.

Blitzace137
03-20-2015, 04:28 PM
So 19 year old college kids can't play in the NBA, how did Jabari Parker manage this season? He scored 12 PPG and was only 19.

Or how about Zach LaVine and Andrew Wiggins, both of whom are 20? How are they able to guard real men?

People have to quit acting like they are two separate species. They are all humans, and many are 2 years apart is age...

If what everyone here is thinking is true (that the last guy on an NBA bench would squash the best college players), why does any NBA team ever draft college players? If they are that much worse why would any NBA team want them?

The guys you mentioned are the best prospects college has to offer. Kentucky doesn't have 15 lottery prospects. Parker was a super prospect, even LaVine was a lottery pick.

Blitzace137
03-20-2015, 04:29 PM
Kentucky would win 5 games at most even 15 is a lot of wins, they wouldn't beat 15 NBA teams.

PowerHouse
03-20-2015, 04:33 PM
Do you really believe this? You honestly think a team of:

Cleanthony Early, Travis Wear, Larry Drew, Chris Frazier, Sean Kilpatrick, Troy Daniels, Xavier Henry, Ryan Kelly, Devin Marble and Andrew Nicholson

would blow Kentucky out? Seriously?

You need a couple more guys on that roster but yes, with ease.

NBA vets>19 yr old kids any day of the week.

valade16
03-20-2015, 04:57 PM
The guys you mentioned are the best prospects college has to offer. Kentucky doesn't have 15 lottery prospects. Parker was a super prospect, even LaVine was a lottery pick.

Kentucky has 4 players expected to go in the first 15 picks. 2 are expected to be high lottery picks, so why couldn't those guys play in the NBA (considering the NBA is about to draft them to play them in the NBA)?


You need a couple more guys on that roster but yes, with ease.

NBA vets>19 yr old kids any day of the week.

So again, if this is true, why does any NBA team draft or play rookies? If NBA players are that much better than these college kids no rookie should ever be drafted or play correct?

Heck, CleAnthony Early was a 2nd round pick just last season, so what makes him suddenly better than a top 5 pick this season? Did the half year he has spent in the NBA help his game that much?

Blitzace137
03-20-2015, 05:11 PM
[QUOTE=valade16;29751551]Kentucky has 4 players expected to go in the first 15 picks. 2 are expected to be high lottery picks, so why couldn't those guys play in the NBA (considering the NBA is about to draft them to play them in the NBA)? /QUOTE]

That's my point 4 of those guys will be first round picks, you need 8-9 players for a rotation in the NBA. No one is saying Towns and Stein can't play in the NBA but you need a full rotation of good talent to beat an NBA team.

Historically rookies are not good their first year. The league average PER is around 16 and there is only one rookie even close to that and that's Mirotic of the Bulls and he not even really a rookie.

I don't agree with the other poster saying you can take the last player on any team and they would crush Kentucky. They would probably match up well, kinda of like the rookie vs sophomore's in all-star weekend but Kentucky can't beat no NBA teams' more than 3 times in an 82 game season.

valade16
03-20-2015, 05:22 PM
That's my point 4 of those guys will be first round picks, you need 8-9 players for a rotation in the NBA. No one is saying Towns and Stein can't play in the NBA but you need a full rotation of good talent to beat an NBA team.

Historically rookies are not good their first year. The league average PER is around 16 and there is only one rookie even close to that and that's Mirotic of the Bulls and he not even really a rookie.

I don't agree with the other poster saying you can take the last player on any team and they would crush Kentucky. They would probably match up well, kinda of like the rookie vs sophomore's in all-star weekend but Kentucky can't beat no NBA teams' more than 3 times in an 82 game season.

I agree Kentucky would be heavy underdogs against actual NBA teams, but saying they would get squashed by the dregs of the NBA his too far. Heck, the Knicks just beat the Spurs and their team was essentially terrible. If the Knicks could eek out a win like that I see no reason why over the course of an 82 game NBA season Kentucky couldn't pull out a few wins.

Crackadalic
03-20-2015, 08:17 PM
Lol who cares how good they could be. As of right now your telling me a bunch of 19 year old kids who haven't develop a nba body can't compete with grown *** men?

Bucks
Miami
Boston
Indy
Hornets
Brooklyn

Gun to your head do you think they are better then those teams? If so i want to know what your smoking

PowerHouse
03-20-2015, 09:18 PM
So again, if this is true, why does any NBA team draft or play rookies? If NBA players are that much better than these college kids no rookie should ever be drafted or play correct?



What are you even talking about man? You completely lost sight of the case that we are supposed to be focused on which is this years KY team vs a team of NBA pros. Even last guy off the bench on any NBA team was a stud in college, and if you construct a team of all NBA pros, most of which are veterans vs another team of kids which has maybe 3-4 future NBA pros anthen you are literally talking a varsity vs freshman situation.

The NBA pros team would be superior in skill, experience, savvy, athleticism and bball IQ. But just the landslide difference in experience alone is enough to blow out a college team, even a great one like KY. They would know how to do all the little things to win while college kids are still learning.

Tony_Starks
03-21-2015, 02:25 AM
So again, if this is true, why does any NBA team draft or play rookies? If NBA players are that much better than these college kids no rookie should ever be drafted or play correct?



What are you even talking about man? You completely lost sight of the case that we are supposed to be focused on which is this years KY team vs a team of NBA pros. Even last guy off the bench on any NBA team was a stud in college, and if you construct a team of all NBA pros, most of which are veterans vs another team of kids which has maybe 3-4 future NBA pros anthen you are literally talking a varsity vs freshman situation.

The NBA pros team would be superior in skill, experience, savvy, athleticism and bball IQ. But just the landslide difference in experience alone is enough to blow out a college team, even a great one like KY. They would know how to do all the little things to win while college kids are still learning.


Every single bench rider in the league wasn't a "stud" in college man. Seriously. I promise you they weren't .

That's like saying everyone you see in a movie is a great actor just because of how hard it is to break through in the movie industry....

PowerHouse
03-21-2015, 02:48 AM
Every single bench rider in the league wasn't a "stud" in college man. Seriously. I promise you they weren't .

That's like saying everyone you see in a movie is a great actor just because of how hard it is to break through in the movie industry....

Comparing NBA to hollywood is probably the worst analogy I've ever heard. Okay since you're opinion of the word "stud" may differ from mine I'll say that all of them were at least very good players in college. How the hell else did they get to the NBA? Guys dont get invited to the highest level of professional basketball on their smiles and high-fives bro.

Tony_Starks
03-21-2015, 03:13 AM
Every single bench rider in the league wasn't a "stud" in college man. Seriously. I promise you they weren't .

That's like saying everyone you see in a movie is a great actor just because of how hard it is to break through in the movie industry....

Comparing NBA to hollywood is probably the worst analogy I've ever heard. Okay since you're opinion of the word "stud" may differ from mine I'll say that all of them were at least very good players in college. How the hell else did they get to the NBA? Guys dont get invited to the highest level of professional basketball on their smiles and high-fives bro.

Agree to disagree. Suffice to say theres a lot of politics that are involved in somebody being the 12th man on somebody's roster, its not strictly a skill thing...

I will however ask you one more question: does you really believe a scrub at the very end of a NBA bench is better than a future #1 draft pick simply on the strength that they are already in the NBA? That makes sense to you?

Blitzace137
03-21-2015, 04:08 AM
Agree to disagree. Suffice to say theres a lot of politics that are involved in somebody being the 12th man on somebody's roster, its not strictly a skill thing...

I will however ask you one more question: does you really believe a scrub at the very end of a NBA bench is better than a future #1 draft pick simply on the strength that they are already in the NBA? That makes sense to you?

Politics on who's the 12th man? no way maybe the 15th man on the roster occasionally. Like when the Knicks had J.R. Smiths brother on the roster. I don't think anyone here is saying the number one draft pick isn't better than the 15th man. The whole discussion was about whether a college team can beat an NBA team. I don't know why people started combining random players from different rosters? and ask if they can beat Kentucky.

slashsnake
03-21-2015, 07:21 AM
I agree Kentucky would be heavy underdogs against actual NBA teams, but saying they would get squashed by the dregs of the NBA his too far. Heck, the Knicks just beat the Spurs and their team was essentially terrible. If the Knicks could eek out a win like that I see no reason why over the course of an 82 game NBA season Kentucky couldn't pull out a few wins.

That's so tough in the NBA.. Take a look at the Hornets who can't make that seed.

Gerald Henderson All american, best player on Duke, led them to the ACC championship, and a sweet 16
Kemba Walker, Consensus All American, led his team to a national title.
Marvin Williams, freshman of the year, one of the best players on the UNC national championship squad
Cody Zeller, consensus All American, best player for Indiana
Kidd Gilchrist, consensus All American led Kentucky to a title
Lance Stephenson- McDonalds all American, best player on Kentucky as a freshman
Gary Neal- NCAA's top scorer
Brian Roberts, Cousy, Naismith, and Wooden nominee
Al Jefferson #4 highschool player in the nation (straight to NBA)
PJ Hairston- North Carolinas best scorer, McDonalds all american
Jeffery Taylor - 1st team all SEC, 2 time 2nd team all SEC, 3 time all SEC defensive first team,


All those guys are playing better than they were as rookies pretty much.


Take a look at the greatest talents on a team in NCAA history after the fact.

Antoine Walker (15 wins as a rookie)
Tony Delk
Walter McCarty
Derek Anderson
Ron Mercer
Mark Pope

That's the team with the best chance at the #1 in the lottery the next year f they were all rookies.

Christian Laettner (19 wins as a rookie)
Grant Hill (28 wins as a rookie)
Tyrone Hill
Bobby Hurley
Davis, Lang, Parks

1st overall pick the next year...


Larry Johnson (31 wins as a rookie)
Stacey Augmon
Greg Anthony
Elmore Spencer
George Ackles

1st overall pick

And look at if you just took the top picks in the draft. Not the best team, but the best talent.

2011 that's Kyrie, Derrick Williams, Enes Kanter, Tristan Thompson, Jonas Valaanciunas, Jan Vesely, Bismack Biyombo and Brandon Knight. How many games are you winning with that 8 man rotation?

Or do it with current rookies. Wiggins, Parker, Embiid, Gordon, Exum, Smart, Randle, Stauskas, Vonleh, Payton.

That isn't the best from one team, that's the best talent available from college and the rest of the world.

What do those rosters get you? 5 wins? 10?

What if you had the consensus 1st and 2nd team all americans on one roster

2013
Trey Burke
McDermott
Oladipo
Olynyk
Porter
McLemore
Plumlee
Smart
Withey
Zeller

That team in college is like the dream team. Your only worry is there is too much talent. That they won't play together. In the NBA.. that's a pretty weak roster.

Does the best 10 players in the entire NCAA get you 10 wins? How many does maybe 3-4 of the best get you then?

I just think it's a joke to say something like that.

Tony_Starks
03-21-2015, 10:19 AM
Agree to disagree. Suffice to say theres a lot of politics that are involved in somebody being the 12th man on somebody's roster, its not strictly a skill thing...

I will however ask you one more question: does you really believe a scrub at the very end of a NBA bench is better than a future #1 draft pick simply on the strength that they are already in the NBA? That makes sense to you?

Politics on who's the 12th man? no way maybe the 15th man on the roster occasionally. Like when the Knicks had J.R. Smiths brother on the roster. I don't think anyone here is saying the number one draft pick isn't better than the 15th man. The whole discussion was about whether a college team can beat an NBA team. I don't know why people started combining random players from different rosters? and ask if they can beat Kentucky.

People are basically saying literally anyone on a NBA team would kill college players because they had to be a star just to get to the pros at all. Like a team full of benchwarmers would have a distinct advantage over Kentucky. I'm saying that's not true.

As far as them beating regular teams Im extremely confident if Kentucky were to have a homestand of playing Philly, Knicks, Orlando, Lakers, TWolves, Hornets, Nets, Utah that they would be .500 at the end of it.

MrfadeawayJB
03-21-2015, 10:27 AM
Honestly after you get past lyles and towns, I don't see any outstanding NBA players on the team. IMO Cauley-Stein could start for maybe 5 teams rn, and the other guys are bench players at best.

goingfor28
03-21-2015, 10:31 AM
I'd probably take Kentucky over the current squad the Lakers are running out on a nightly basis honestly.

goingfor28
03-21-2015, 10:41 AM
This is beyond absurd. Build a team using the last guy off the bench from the 12 worst teams in the NBA and they would blow Kentucky out every time.
A team full of Byron Mullens/Austin Rivers type players wouldn't beat Kentucky.

Crackadalic
03-21-2015, 11:02 AM
People are basically saying literally anyone on a NBA team would kill college players because they had to be a star just to get to the pros at all. Like a team full of benchwarmers would have a distinct advantage over Kentucky. I'm saying that's not true.

As far as them beating regular teams Im extremely confident if Kentucky were to have a homestand of playing Philly, Knicks, Orlando, Lakers, TWolves, Hornets, Nets, Utah that they would be .500 at the end of it.

Your telling me Kentucky can beat

Orlando Payton/Victor/Tobias/Fry/Vucic
Wolves Rubio/Martin/Wiggins/Dieng/Pek
Hornets Kemba/Lance/MKG/MArvin/Al
Nets Williams/Jack/Johnson/Young/Lopez
Utah Burke/Exum/Hood/Favors/Rudy

Philly/Laker/Knicks maybe but even so they have actual nba players on the squad. J-rich on apost injury knee would tear up Kentucky by himself. Bargs who is a scrub would be a matchup nightmare for them

I get they have 4 future 1st round picks and one of them is a future perennial allstar but there not now

Look at Wiggins. Franchise talent but struggle a lot throughout the nba season. Hell even Durant got bullied a lot his rookie year even though he still scored 20 a game(on a low %)

And to think the can get past a team like the heat/bucks/pacers lol. Come on. Even the weakest year in the east and still don't have a shot in making it

valade16
03-21-2015, 01:06 PM
Who would you rather take on your team right now? Towns/Cauley or Alexy Shved and Robert Sacre?

According to everyone in here Schved and Sacre are better because they're in the NBA. Does anyone seriously believe that?

SLY WILLIAMS
03-21-2015, 02:28 PM
Its a hypothetical that can not be definitively answered. I'd be more curious about the 1981-82 NC team with Jordan, Worthy, and Perkins. Or one of the great UH teams with Hakeem and Drexler.

PowerHouse
03-21-2015, 03:00 PM
I will however ask you one more question: does you really believe a scrub at the very end of a NBA bench is better than a future #1 draft pick simply on the strength that they are already in the NBA? That makes sense to you?

Not usually, no. Maybe sometimes if that #1 pick turns out to be Greg Oden or Pervis Ellison. But Kentucky's roster isnt loaded with 12 #1 draft picks so I really dont see the point you're trying to make in relation to my original post.

Yanks All Day
03-21-2015, 04:23 PM
Kentucky honestly has 12 very good or great college players and only 2 starting-caliber NBA players. Karl-Anthony Towns and Willie Cauley-Stein are the only 2 players on Kentucky that are likely to be difference-makers for franchises on the pro level. Otherwise, Kentucky is a team full of elite college talent that are likely to be role players at the next level.

This is the same case every year. "Is the best college team better than the worst pro team," and the answer is still no. If they played a full seasons in the pros, Kentucky would win a handful of games. The 8th seed in the NBA will be one of Miami, Boston, Brooklyn, Indiana, and Charlotte. Let's just step back from the Kentucky hype for a minute and think about how they'd compete with those pro teams. Answer: they wouldn't.

I get it. Kentucky is big, strong, and athletic. They're full of elite college talent and they have two serious pro prospects. They also pulled out some late wins against bad SEC teams. They're a great team that played a bad conference and had the benefit of playing next to no one on their schedule. Outside of Kansas and Louisville, Kentucky really hasn't been put up against a great team. Kentucky is a great college team, but they're not a team full of generational talent. They absolutely would not be a playoff team in the East.

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if none of these players made a true impact in the pros, and if they actually played an 82 game pro schedule, I'd think they'd be 15-67.

Method28
03-21-2015, 05:23 PM
Tldr

valade16
03-21-2015, 05:40 PM
Kentucky honestly has 12 very good or great college players and only 2 starting-caliber NBA players. Karl-Anthony Towns and Willie Cauley-Stein are the only 2 players on Kentucky that are likely to be difference-makers for franchises on the pro level. Otherwise, Kentucky is a team full of elite college talent that are likely to be role players at the next level.

This is the same case every year. "Is the best college team better than the worst pro team," and the answer is still no. If they played a full seasons in the pros, Kentucky would win a handful of games. The 8th seed in the NBA will be one of Miami, Boston, Brooklyn, Indiana, and Charlotte. Let's just step back from the Kentucky hype for a minute and think about how they'd compete with those pro teams. Answer: they wouldn't.

I get it. Kentucky is big, strong, and athletic. They're full of elite college talent and they have two serious pro prospects. They also pulled out some late wins against bad SEC teams. They're a great team that played a bad conference and had the benefit of playing next to no one on their schedule. Outside of Kansas and Louisville, Kentucky really hasn't been put up against a great team. Kentucky is a great college team, but they're not a team full of generational talent. They absolutely would not be a playoff team in the East.

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if none of these players made a true impact in the pros, and if they actually played an 82 game pro schedule, I'd think they'd be 15-67.

To be clear, do you mean two prospects expected to be upper level pros or 2 professional prospects at all?

Because most draft pundits believe there are 7 players on the team that could be drafted this year and many believe 10 players on this team will eventually play in the pros.

Yanks All Day
03-21-2015, 07:14 PM
To be clear, do you mean two prospects expected to be upper level pros or 2 professional prospects at all?

Because most draft pundits believe there are 7 players on the team that could be drafted this year and many believe 10 players on this team will eventually play in the pros.

2 guys that will most likely be key contributors on a franchise.

They'll probably have as many as 4 first round picks, and probably about 7 or 8 drafted overall, but other than Towns and Cauley-Stein, they look like a team full of role players at best at the next level.

HiphopRelated
03-21-2015, 09:47 PM
Who would you rather take on your team right now? Towns/Cauley or Alexy Shved and Robert Sacre?

According to everyone in here Schved and Sacre are better because they're in the NBA. Does anyone seriously believe that?

What about the other players on the team?

because Kentucky has players that likely won't crack a dleague rotation

slashsnake
03-22-2015, 04:28 AM
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if none of these players made a true impact in the pros, and if they actually played an 82 game pro schedule, I'd think they'd be 15-67.

That's a LOT of wins if you ask me. Figure the Heat won 15 games in the East in 09 I think it was with two Naismith finalists, another guy who was the NCAA defensive player of the year, another guy who was an all American, 6 more all conference players from various conferences, a HS McDonald's all American who made it to the NCAA title game as a freshman, a HS McDonald's all American who skipped college, and an NCAA record breaking shot blocker. Those were the prime or just out of college guys, all playing as well, or better than their rookie seasons.

Throw in well past their primes... an NCAA player of the year, two time all american, another all American who led the NCAA in blocked shots, and another all american Naismith/Wooden finalist.

slashsnake
03-22-2015, 04:39 AM
I will however ask you one more question: does you really believe a scrub at the very end of a NBA bench is better than a future #1 draft pick simply on the strength that they are already in the NBA? That makes sense to you?

No, I think his point was the Pistons are a 24 win team.. Even with Jodie Meeks showing he is MUCH improved since his first year in the NBA.

Now does that mean Meeks is no longer the All-American who is arguably the greatest scorer that Kentucky has ever seen? Of course not, that is still the guy who is buried on the Pistons bench. It just means that dominating the NCAA isn't the same as dominating the NBA.

GoferKing_
03-22-2015, 07:13 AM
You be delusional Larry

85BearsDefense
03-22-2015, 10:41 AM
I agree with him, the East is just atrocious, good teams in the euro leagues would blast the Cavs in the first and second round.

Jesus you're dumb

Tony_Starks
03-22-2015, 12:26 PM
People are also seriously ignoring how lethal total team ball and superior coaching are as well. Look at what Atlanta is doing right now. Kentucky would basically be a light weight version of that.

And once again we are talking about a historically pathetic east where a few teams are literally competing to see who can lose the most games. Put a team that's talented, deep, sharing the ball, and going full bore every night and its totally plausible they make the playoffs.

NYJ - NYY
03-22-2015, 07:46 PM
Welp

tredigs
03-22-2015, 08:17 PM
They'd be laughed off the court more often than not, but they'd take 8 or 9 games. Playoffs? Stop it. How many players do they even have that could legitimately take starters minutes on a current NBA playoff team and not make them worse? Throw in their bench versus an NBA playoff bench and it's a wrap.

lol, please
03-22-2015, 08:23 PM
Welp
This lol.

NYJ - NYY
03-22-2015, 08:24 PM
This lol.

[emoji106]

Blitzace137
03-22-2015, 08:41 PM
People are also seriously ignoring how lethal total team ball and superior coaching are as well. Look at what Atlanta is doing right now. Kentucky would basically be a light weight version of that.

And once again we are talking about a historically pathetic east where a few teams are literally competing to see who can lose the most games. Put a team that's talented, deep, sharing the ball, and going full bore every night and its totally plausible they make the playoffs.

Their guards are below average NBA player, you know who they compared Andrew Harrison too?Javaris Crittenton lmao, they'd get destroyed by NBA wing players. Towns is already foul prone he's probably gonna be in foul trouble often his rookie season. They'd get destroyed on a nightly bases. Stop.

ewing
03-23-2015, 09:56 AM
Larry Brown likes attention. sometimes he says stupid things so people will pay attention to him

ewing
03-23-2015, 09:59 AM
Not usually, no. Maybe sometimes if that #1 pick turns out to be Greg Oden or Pervis Ellison. But Kentucky's roster isnt loaded with 12 #1 draft picks so I really dont see the point you're trying to make in relation to my original post.


both of those guys careers were destroyed by injury while KU gets destroyed by an NBA team, healthy Greg Oden and Healthy Pervis Ellison were good basketball players.

PowerHouse
03-23-2015, 03:13 PM
both of those guys careers were destroyed by injury while KU gets destroyed by an NBA team, healthy Greg Oden and Healthy Pervis Ellison were good basketball players.

Perv had maybe 1.5 good years in the league and healthy Oden was a sight rarely seen in the NBA, then at age 26 can no longer make it on a team. But honestly bringing up those guys was really just a throw in, a side-note. I agreed with him that a #1 pick is better than a benchwarmer, although extremely confused how comparing 1 guy to 1 guy had anything to do with the argument at hand which was team vs team.

ewing
03-23-2015, 03:46 PM
Perv had maybe 1.5 good years in the league and healthy Oden was a sight rarely seen in the NBA, then at age 26 can no longer make it on a team. But honestly bringing up those guys was really just a throw in, a side-note. I agreed with him that a #1 pick is better than a benchwarmer, although extremely confused how comparing 1 guy to 1 guy had anything to do with the argument at hand which was team vs team.


agreed

valade16
03-23-2015, 03:48 PM
Perv had maybe 1.5 good years in the league and healthy Oden was a sight rarely seen in the NBA, then at age 26 can no longer make it on a team. But honestly bringing up those guys was really just a throw in, a side-note. I agreed with him that a #1 pick is better than a benchwarmer, although extremely confused how comparing 1 guy to 1 guy had anything to do with the argument at hand which was team vs team.

I think we got sidetracked when people started to say things like "NBA vets>19 yr old kids any day of the week."

That is true in a general sense but there are absolutely 19 year old kids who can play with NBA Vets. Robert Sacre is an NBA vet. He would get whooped, absolutely whooped by Kentucky's frontcourt. Their age has nothing to do with that. The fact they are vastly superior players is the compelling factor there.

PowerHouse
03-23-2015, 05:09 PM
I think we got sidetracked when people started to say things like "NBA vets>19 yr old kids any day of the week."

That is true in a general sense but there are absolutely 19 year old kids who can play with NBA Vets. Robert Sacre is an NBA vet. He would get whooped, absolutely whooped by Kentucky's frontcourt. Their age has nothing to do with that. The fact they are vastly superior players is the compelling factor there.

Saying something true in a general sense is all I was aiming for there. I was a little surprised to see you take that general statement, run with it and twist it into something dissimilar from my point.

Obviously if you want to pick out the best player on Kentucky and the worst player on my veteran squad and throw them on the court together in a one-on-one setting, you may have an advantage there. But again, that has no relevance to a team vs team game.

valade16
03-24-2015, 09:23 AM
Saying something true in a general sense is all I was aiming for there. I was a little surprised to see you take that general statement, run with it and twist it into something dissimilar from my point.

Obviously if you want to pick out the best player on Kentucky and the worst player on my veteran squad and throw them on the court together in a one-on-one setting, you may have an advantage there. But again, that has no relevance to a team vs team game.

I think you could pick the best 3-4 players on Kentucky and they would be better than the best players you describe (i.e. the 12th player on every bench).

And if we're talking a team vs team game you are seriously overestimating the importance of continuity and coaching. Having a great coach like Calipari and a system and familiarity for Kentucky would be a huge advantage over the end of bench players who have never played together and have some scrub coach coaching them.

Regardless, there's no way Kentucky makes the playoffs in the East, they wouldn't even have a winning record if they just played 4 games against every non-playoff east team. But if they played in the league I think they could win some games.

rapjuicer06
03-24-2015, 11:32 AM
I hate when people, coaches or other people say this crap. They would get worked

PowerHouse
03-24-2015, 03:56 PM
I think you could pick the best 3-4 players on Kentucky and they would be better than the best players you describe (i.e. the 12th player on every bench).

And if we're talking a team vs team game you are seriously overestimating the importance of continuity and coaching. Having a great coach like Calipari and a system and familiarity for Kentucky would be a huge advantage over the end of bench players who have never played together and have some scrub coach coaching them.


Well thats interesting that you automatically assign me with a scrub coach. Thats something not discussed yet so thats a cool way to slide yourself a little advantage there. Something else not discussed yet is would it be college rules with the 35 sec clock and short 3 point line or NBA rules? If its NBA rules than that would be something KY has zero experience playing with and they could get flustered trying to adjust to it. If its college rules than my shooters would be like kids in a candy store.

You think I am over-looking coaching/continuity while I think you are doing the same for experience, bball IQ and savvy/executing the intangibles.

valade16
03-24-2015, 04:26 PM
Well thats interesting that you are automatically assigning me with a scrub coach. Thats something not discussed yet so thats a cool way to slide yourself a little extra advantage there. Something else not discussed yet is would it be college rules with the 35 sec clock and short 3 point line or NBA rules? If its NBA rules than that would be something KY has zero experience playing with and they could get flustered trying to adjust to it. If its college rules than my shooters would be like kids in a candy store.

You think I am over-looking coaching/continuity while I think you are doing the same for experience, bball IQ and savvy/executing the intangibles.

But how much of an advantage do they really have? The 12th guy at the end of every NBA bench probably averages 1-2 years of actually being in the NBA and has probably played less than 1,000 total minutes of NBA time. It's not a stretch to say that these Kentucky Wildcats have played more actual game minutes recently than these guys. Here are a few:

Travis Wear - 24 year old UDFA Rookie for the Knicks. 671 total minutes this season
CleAnthony Early - 23 year old 2nd Rd pick for the Knicks. 498 total minutes this season
Alexey Shved - 26 year old European for the Knicks. 3,200 minutes total (767 minutes this season)
Corey Jefferson - 24 year old 2nd Rd pick for the Nets. 567 total minutes this season
Tarik Black - 23 year old UDFA 2nd Rd pick for the Lakers. 851 total minutes career.
Robert Sacre - 25 year old 2nd Rd pick for the Lakers. 2,200 career minutes (909 this season).

In short, they are all guys drafted in the 2nd round that are just good enough to make an NBA roster but mainly provide small cap hits or non-guaranteed contracts for salary flexibility.

Here's the kicker: only 1 of those guys (CleAnthony Early) was even an All-American, and he was a 2nd team selection.

The more I think about it, the more I believe Kentucky would absolutely run roughshod over a team comprised of the 12th guy off the bench in the NBA. Kentucky's players are already more decorated than them and were better in college and are expected to have 7 of them drafted ahead of any of the end of bench guys currently in the NBA.

Saying the Wildcats would make the playoffs in the East is an asinine comment that is taking it too far, but saying the 12th men off an NBA bench would manhandle Kentucky is equally as preposterous and wrong.

flea
03-24-2015, 05:25 PM
Let's not get carried away and start calling Calipari a "great coach." There are at least 10, and probably 20-25, coaches as good or better than him in the NCAA. Being a talented recruiter is not the same as being talented coach.

ewing
03-25-2015, 11:44 AM
Let's not get carried away and start calling Calipari a "great coach." There are at least 10, and probably 20-25, coaches as good or better than him in the NCAA. Being a talented recruiter is not the same as being talented coach.

he doesn't coach ****, he is the best crooked recruiter in the business

flea
03-25-2015, 04:06 PM
he doesn't coach ****, he is the best crooked recruiter in the business

When I read somewhere that he banged out his offensive system on a napkin it told me all I needed to know about the dude. I'm sure he's a nice guy to tippy-top recruits and their families, and that he's a "motivator" (and all the other sorts of words people use to defend the Byron Scotts and Scott Brookses of the coaching world) but put him up against the class of the NCAA, nearly all of whom are superior to every NBA coach but maybe 2, and he doesn't hold a candle.

lol, please
04-05-2015, 12:40 AM
When I read somewhere that he banged out his offensive system on a napkin it told me all I needed to know about the dude. I'm sure he's a nice guy to tippy-top recruits and their families, and that he's a "motivator" (and all the other sorts of words people use to defend the Byron Scotts and Scott Brookses of the coaching world) but put him up against the class of the NCAA, nearly all of whom are superior to every NBA coach but maybe 2, and he doesn't hold a candle.
NCAA coaches are superior to NBA coaches? Why exactly?

ewing
04-05-2015, 12:44 AM
Let's not get carried away and start calling Calipari a "great coach." There are at least 10, and probably 20-25, coaches as good or better than him in the NCAA. Being a talented recruiter is not the same as being talented coach.

he is a *****

Hawkeye15
04-05-2015, 12:53 AM
Let's not get carried away and start calling Calipari a "great coach." There are at least 10, and probably 20-25, coaches as good or better than him in the NCAA. Being a talented recruiter is not the same as being talented coach.

but, its a HUGEEEEEEEEEE part of actually being a college coach.

To the point of this thread, as I always say, gtfo with this ****. The worst NBA team would cripple the best NCAA team. Especially since the one and done era. I might be willing to listen to this convo in 1992. Sure as **** not now.

ewing
04-05-2015, 01:01 AM
but, its a HUGEEEEEEEEEE part of actually being a college coach.

To the point of this thread, as I always say, gtfo with this ****. The worst NBA team would cripple the best NCAA team. Especially since the one and done era. I might be willing to listen to this convo in 1992. Sure as **** not now.

he is a *****

IBleedPurple
04-05-2015, 02:09 AM
Wisconsin, 2016 Eastern Conference #8 seed :rolleyes:

nastynice
04-05-2015, 04:45 AM
but, its a HUGEEEEEEEEEE part of actually being a college coach.

To the point of this thread, as I always say, gtfo with this ****. The worst NBA team would cripple the best NCAA team. Especially since the one and done era. I might be willing to listen to this convo in 1992. Sure as **** not now.

exactly. Think of it this way. Take the worst nba team and put them in a march madness bracket. Which nba team would not win it all? Sixers, Lakers, Knicks, Twolves would all absolutely steamroll their way right through the tournament. Can't even imagine any of the wins being only single digits at that.

lol, please
04-05-2015, 04:16 PM
exactly. Think of it this way. Take the worst nba team and put them in a march madness bracket. Which nba team would not win it all? Sixers, Lakers, Knicks, Twolves would all absolutely steamroll their way right through the tournament. Can't even imagine any of the wins being only single digits at that.
I agree with this. Good point.

FlashBolt
04-05-2015, 06:27 PM
Larry Brown has lost his mind. He's telling me that Kentucky would have a better chance than the Miami Heat?

nastynice
04-06-2015, 11:30 AM
now Larry Brown probably thinks Wisconsin would be able to win an nba title

Verbal Christ
04-06-2015, 11:48 AM
Kentucky was the NCAA equivalent to the GS Warriors? Hmmm

Hawkeye15
04-06-2015, 11:52 AM
he is a *****

well, yeah

Blitzace137
04-06-2015, 07:13 PM
Kentucky was the NCAA equivalent to the GS Warriors? Hmmm

No

nastynice
04-06-2015, 08:40 PM
No

yes, warriors are undefeated

LongIslandIcedZ
04-06-2015, 11:23 PM
They would go 0-82. Maybe 1-81.

lol, please
04-07-2015, 03:31 AM
They would go 0-82. Maybe 1-81.
1-81? Are you drunk? Who would they beat? Serious question.

FlashBolt
04-07-2015, 03:33 AM
The KNICKS would win the NCAA tournament. Larry Brown is a moron. Bargnani would be the best player in Kentucky.

LongIslandIcedZ
04-07-2015, 07:50 AM
They would go 0-82. Maybe 1-81.
1-81? Are you drunk? Who would they beat? Serious question.



Golden State

ewing
04-07-2015, 08:33 AM
yes, warriors are undefeated

maybe they would be if there toughest player wasn't a 6'7 PF :)

valade16
04-07-2015, 08:57 AM
The KNICKS would win the NCAA tournament. Larry Brown is a moron. Bargnani would be the best player in Kentucky.

No he most certainly would not. Cauley-Stein is better than Bargnani right now.

Hawkeye15
04-07-2015, 11:01 AM
1-81? Are you drunk? Who would they beat? Serious question.

oh Kentucky would stumble onto a win, I agree, a 1-81, 2-80 record. Some depleted cellar dweller would show up and just lay a clunker haha. But they would probably be looking at a -29 point differential and a 2 win season.

Hawkeye15
04-07-2015, 11:02 AM
No he most certainly would not. Cauley-Stein is better than Bargnani right now.

no, he isn't.

valade16
04-07-2015, 11:17 AM
no, he isn't.

I just don't buy a guy being better simply by virtue of being in the NBA. There are college players who are better than NBA players right now.

Hawkeye15
04-07-2015, 11:27 AM
I just don't buy a guy being better simply by virtue of being in the NBA. There are college players who are better than NBA players right now.

C-S is awful offensively, and would serve only as a rookie defender, which has a major limit to impact. Hell, all Wisconsin did was let him roam and guard everyone else.

I am not saying there aren't probably a handful of college players who could play NBA minutes right now, just saying I don't agree with that example.

valade16
04-07-2015, 11:33 AM
C-S is awful offensively, and would serve only as a rookie defender, which has a major limit to impact. Hell, all Wisconsin did was let him roam and guard everyone else.

I am not saying there aren't probably a handful of college players who could play NBA minutes right now, just saying I don't agree with that example.

That explains it lol. I meant Towns not Cauley-Stein lol. My apologies. I meant Karl-Anthony Towns is better right now than Bargnani. (damn hyphenated names getting me confused).

ewing
04-07-2015, 12:18 PM
That explains it lol. I meant Towns not Cauley-Stein lol. My apologies. I meant Karl-Anthony Towns is better right now than Bargnani. (damn hyphenated names getting me confused).


on the college level he wouldn't be. Bargs size and polish would make him unstoppable.

Hawkeye15
04-07-2015, 12:25 PM
That explains it lol. I meant Towns not Cauley-Stein lol. My apologies. I meant Karl-Anthony Towns is better right now than Bargnani. (damn hyphenated names getting me confused).

thing is, Bargs, as skilled as he is, would average 20 a game pretty easily in the NCAA's, if not more.

It's a physical maturity and skill level that is the difference. When you get to the NBA, it's your job. No more school, no more studying, your entire job is to get stronger, and better.

Its just such a physical difference, especially in the one and done era. If this was 1992, and we were talking about 22 year old Laettner, with Hurley, Hill, Davis, etc, all guys who could actually go buy a beer, it's slightly different.

valade16
04-07-2015, 12:36 PM
thing is, Bargs, as skilled as he is, would average 20 a game pretty easily in the NCAA's, if not more.

It's a physical maturity and skill level that is the difference. When you get to the NBA, it's your job. No more school, no more studying, your entire job is to get stronger, and better.

Its just such a physical difference, especially in the one and done era. If this was 1992, and we were talking about 22 year old Laettner, with Hurley, Hill, Davis, etc, all guys who could actually go buy a beer, it's slightly different.

I'm sure Bargnani would average 20+ as well. But again, the physical maturity is overblown in terms of an athletic standpoint. Towns is undoubedtly more athletic than Bargnani. So the biggest plus for Bargnani (physical development) isn't even a plus.

Andrew Wiggins is having a better season than Bargnani. All the advantages of playing the NBA for Bargnani didn't mean jack against the fact that Wiggins is simply a more talented and better player.

And keep in mind we are talking about Bargnani for the Knicks, easily the most accomplished player currently playing for the Knicks. If we get down to the dregs of the Knicks roster it really is no contest, Towns is a superior player to any player on the Knicks bench.

ewing
04-07-2015, 12:40 PM
I'm sure Bargnani would average 20+ as well. But again, the physical maturity is overblown in terms of an athletic standpoint. Towns is undoubedtly more athletic than Bargnani. So the biggest plus for Bargnani (physical development) isn't even a plus.

Andrew Wiggins is having a better season than Bargnani. All the advantages of playing the NBA for Bargnani didn't mean jack against the fact that Wiggins is simply a more talented and better player.

And keep in mind we are talking about Bargnani for the Knicks, easily the most accomplished player currently playing for the Knicks. If we get down to the dregs of the Knicks roster it really is no contest, Towns is a superior player to any player on the Knicks bench.

IMO Towns will be better NBA player the day he enters the league. College is a different game though. If you put Bargs on the college level he would dominate. Its just a different game

Chronz
04-07-2015, 01:43 PM
I'm sure Bargnani would average 20+ as well. But again, the physical maturity is overblown in terms of an athletic standpoint. Towns is undoubedtly more athletic than Bargnani. So the biggest plus for Bargnani (physical development) isn't even a plus.

Andrew Wiggins is having a better season than Bargnani. All the advantages of playing the NBA for Bargnani didn't mean jack against the fact that Wiggins is simply a more talented and better player.

And keep in mind we are talking about Bargnani for the Knicks, easily the most accomplished player currently playing for the Knicks. If we get down to the dregs of the Knicks roster it really is no contest, Towns is a superior player to any player on the Knicks bench.

There is something to be said for old man strength. Faced off against some HS ballers from Portland last night, guys were shredded, but they couldn't rip the ball from my hands or back me down in the post. Those guys look like fitness models but they lacked that fire in the *** hole.

Hawkeye15
04-07-2015, 02:09 PM
There is something to be said for old man strength. Faced off against some HS ballers from Portland last night, guys were shredded, but they couldn't rip the ball from my hands or back me down in the post. Those guys look like fitness models but they lacked that fire in the *** hole.

its called balance. Strength is great, but it means nothing if you don't have great balance, which comes with maturity.

Not to mention, none of those Kentucky players have ever seen the physicality, or pure skill level of NBA players. In the NBA, 9/10 times, if an individual makes a mistake, the other team takes advantage of it. College players waste too much energy, and don't have the intelligence of the game yet.

Now, they can learn it. Look at Wiggins. His first 28 games, he looked lost, and sucked the floor up. Since, he has shown he can play, and will be a good player. But to think any college player right now wouldn't struggle in the NBA for a while, just isn't true.

Chronz
04-07-2015, 02:19 PM
I dont pretend to understand the College game. Just wanted to tell the tale of my epic strength

Hawkeye15
04-07-2015, 02:26 PM
I dont pretend to understand the College game. Just wanted to tell the tale of my epic strength

oh it's true dude. When I was in college, I was in great shape. I couldn't move the out of shape old guys at the gym, no matter if I could bench 250, and was ripped.

****ing old man ball. Congrats Chronz, you are doing it now...

kozelkid
04-07-2015, 02:45 PM
its called balance. Strength is great, but it means nothing if you don't have great balance, which comes with maturity.

Not to mention, none of those Kentucky players have ever seen the physicality, or pure skill level of NBA players. In the NBA, 9/10 times, if an individual makes a mistake, the other team takes advantage of it. College players waste too much energy, and don't have the intelligence of the game yet.

Now, they can learn it. Look at Wiggins. His first 28 games, he looked lost, and sucked the floor up. Since, he has shown he can play, and will be a good player. But to think any college player right now wouldn't struggle in the NBA for a while, just isn't true.
Pretty much. Even just 5 months or so of an NBA regiment makes for a massive difference. Hell, it's why guys like Rose or Duncan got their ***** handed to them in their summer league debuts by no-name scrubs.

FlashBolt
04-07-2015, 05:23 PM
No he most certainly would not. Cauley-Stein is better than Bargnani right now.

Cauley-Stein? I think you're watching a different team than I have. Bargnani is an NBA scrub who the Knicks will gladly start over Towns because the transition to an NBA court is completely different. The shot clock poses different challenges and Bargnani has experience that these kids have no clue of. Even with college coaching, these guys come to the NBA and it really is a completely different scheme of things. That's silly to say Towns will be a better player than Bargnani right now. He certainly has the potential down the line but absolutely, Bargnani would be a first option on that team.

nastynice
04-07-2015, 11:34 PM
maybe they would be if there toughest player wasn't a 6'7 PF :)

hey!! shut it!

valade16
04-08-2015, 08:53 AM
Cauley-Stein? I think you're watching a different team than I have. Bargnani is an NBA scrub who the Knicks will gladly start over Towns because the transition to an NBA court is completely different. The shot clock poses different challenges and Bargnani has experience that these kids have no clue of. Even with college coaching, these guys come to the NBA and it really is a completely different scheme of things. That's silly to say Towns will be a better player than Bargnani right now. He certainly has the potential down the line but absolutely, Bargnani would be a first option on that team.

We all know Bargnani can score the basketball, unfortunately for Bargnani there is more to basketball than scoring. He can't pass. He can't rebound. He doesn't play defense and the next hustle play he does will be his first.

ewing
04-08-2015, 09:20 AM
we all know bargnani can score the basketball, unfortunately for bargnani there is more to basketball than scoring. He can't pass. He can't rebound. He doesn't play defense and the next hustle play he does will be his first.

his length would absolutely make him a presence defensively on the college level, he would also be a solid rebounder by default, and the statement that he cant pass is just false. We just saw wis nearly win a national title with a less talented team running everything through a frail versatile 6'10 pf with excellent ball skills and limited athleticism.

valade16
04-08-2015, 09:48 AM
his length would absolutely make him a presence defensively on the college level, he would also be a solid rebounder by default, and the statement that he cant pass is just false. We just saw wis nearly win a national title with a less talented team running everything through a frail versatile 6'10 pf with excellent ball skills and limited athleticism.

I disagree with all of those. His AST% for his career is 7%. His best season ever was 2.0 APG and he hovers around less than 1.5 APG per season. He is not a good passer. His length has literally never helped him be a good defender. He has terrible defensive effort and footwork. He is a straight turnstile in the post. He is a terrible defender. And his rebounding would become "solid" by default"? What does that mean? He would grab 7 boards in college instead of 6? He would still be a weak rebounder, especially for his size and position.

ewing
04-08-2015, 09:57 AM
I disagree with all of those. His AST% for his career is 7%. His best season ever was 2.0 APG and he hovers around less than 1.5 APG per season. He is not a good passer. His length has literally never helped him be a good defender. He has terrible defensive effort and footwork. He is a straight turnstile in the post. He is a terrible defender. And his rebounding would become "solid" by default"? What does that mean? He would grab 7 boards in college instead of 6? He would still be a weak rebounder, especially for his size and position.


IMO, his stats in the NBA tell you nothing about the impact he would have on the college level. Bargs was a #1 pick b/c of his skill set. that skill set would make him a dominate college player. Like i said in a prior post it is just a different game. His rebounding and effect on team rebounding for instance, would be very different in games where most teams have no one his size, the smaller guys are less athletic, and the pace of the game in general is much much slower. Did you see how much on an influence guys like Kaminski and Stainbrook were able to have arround the basket? how do those guys do as rim protectors in the NBA? Bargs in the middle makes a difference on the college level in terms of defense and rebounding. He would also effect the game as a passer. He is a skilled big with ball skills and decent vision who would be a mismatch.

valade16
04-08-2015, 10:14 AM
IMO, his stats in the NBA tell you nothing about the impact he would have on the college level. Bargs was a #1 pick b/c of his skill set. that skill set would make him a dominate college player. Like i said in a prior post it is just a different game. His rebounding and effect on team rebounding for instance, would be very different in games where most teams have no one his size, the smaller guys are less athletic, and the pace of the game in general is much much slower. Did you see how much on an influence guys like Kaminski and Stainbrook were able to have arround he basket? Bargs in the middle makes a difference on the college level in terms of defense and rebounding. He is a skilled big with ball skills and decent vision- he would draw so much attention that his passing like Kiminski's would make and impact.

I could agree with that. Bargnani in college would definitely be superior to him in the NBA.

Hawkeye15
04-08-2015, 10:21 AM
I could agree with that. Bargnani in college would definitely be superior to him in the NBA.

taller Wally Szczerbiak possibly, and he scored at will in the NCAA's.

valade16
04-08-2015, 10:33 AM
taller Wally Szczerbiak possibly, and he scored at will in the NCAA's.

I checked the highest single season PPG in college and I must say I was surprised at how few of the elite NCAA scorers ever actually became good scorers in the NBA

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/leaders/pts-per-g-player-season.html

Of all the scorers who ever averaged over 25.0 PPG only Steph Curry, Kevin Durant and J.J. Redick ever became good scorers in the NBA. If we include it to the top 100 seasons we add only Kevin Martin, Damian Lillard, Kemba Walker and Wally Szczerbiak.

Of course, we're talking about the inverse (a scoring NBA player going to the NCAA not a scoring NCAA player going to the NBA) but it was still interesting to see how few NCAA scorers ever actually go on to do great things in the NBA.

ewing
04-08-2015, 10:33 AM
taller Wally Szczerbiak possibly, and he scored at will in the NCAA's.

where you a wally fan or hater with the Wolves?

Hawkeye15
04-08-2015, 11:02 AM
where you a wally fan or hater with the Wolves?

I dabbled both ways...

FlashBolt
04-08-2015, 03:19 PM
We all know Bargnani can score the basketball, unfortunately for Bargnani there is more to basketball than scoring. He can't pass. He can't rebound. He doesn't play defense and the next hustle play he does will be his first.

That's in the NBA. In college, those numbers are going to be much different.

lol, please
04-08-2015, 03:57 PM
We all know Bargnani can score the basketball, unfortunately for Bargnani there is more to basketball than scoring. He can't pass. He can't rebound. He doesn't play defense and the next hustle play he does will be his first.
If there is more to basketball than scoring, why are Harden and Westbrook so highly regarded?

ISIAH_THOMAS
04-08-2015, 03:59 PM
Yeah no Larry! Kentucky would not get double digit wins in the NBA.

valade16
04-08-2015, 04:49 PM
If there is more to basketball than scoring, why are Harden and Westbrook so highly regarded?

Probably not the best joke considering Westbrook has a ridiculous number of triple doubles for the season, something that literally measures your ability to do multiple things well

Hawkeye15
04-08-2015, 04:52 PM
If there is more to basketball than scoring, why are Harden and Westbrook so highly regarded?

Because when they are on the floor, the offense is typically exponentially better

valade16
04-08-2015, 05:08 PM
To add to the absurdity of that joke, as was mentioned on here multiple times: the only players to average as many points, rebounds, assists and steals as Harden are Michael Jordan, Larry Bird and LeBron James.

FlashBolt
04-08-2015, 07:42 PM
To add to the absurdity of that joke, as was mentioned on here multiple times: the only players to average as many points, rebounds, assists and steals as Harden are Michael Jordan, Larry Bird and LeBron James.

*And Oscar Robertson if they recorded it.