UK 2012 vs. UK 2010- Boogie says...

[Randy Parker]

2010 was more talented.

 

2012 was the better "Team."

 

This.

 

But 1996 is better than both.

[LIPTON BASH]

This.

 

But 1996 is better than both.

 

I still believe 2010 is the most talented UK team of my lifetime.

[bugatti]

Is this 2010 today vs 2012 today I'm taking 2010. And if they played today 2010 would destroy them.

 

If it is 2010 in 2010 vs 2012 in 2012 I'm taking 2010.

Without a doubt.

[DragonFire]

I still believe 2010 is the most talented UK team of my lifetime.

 

Everyone has a right to be wrong.

[MJAlltheWay24]

2010 was more talented.

 

2012 was the better "Team."

 

100%

[NKY Bandit]

Boogie also talked about how hard they compete against each other (Wall/Bledsoe/Cousins). Simmons said it looked like they hated each other when they play and Boogie said it just shows how much they all want to win and they continue to be great friends.

[LOOGY]

Look at all the NBA money that 2010 team has now :eek:

 

That team had so much talent but had a weakness outside which is why it didn't make the final 4. The 2012 didn't have a weakness, therefore I'd take 2012.

[futurecoach]

If we are talking about the 2010 team when they were in college against the 2012 team when they were in college then I take 2012. The 2010 had more talent and if you look position by position year 2010 is greater in more areas. However the fact is they didn't play together as a team as well as the 2012 team, they didn't shoot free throws as well, and they didn't shoot the 3 ball as consistent. The 2012 team could run with the 2010 team if they had to, and could play a half court game. The 2012 team only really struggled with teams who were fast pace and could shoot the three. 2010 was fast paced but couldn't shoot that well. If they were hitting from the outside consistently that game, then 2010 probably would win. The 2010 struggled with teams who could make it a half court game and could shoot the ball and the 2012 team could do exactly that.

[JokersWild24]

**

 

Whether the game is played under college or pro rules matters.

 

Despite the 2010 team having more talent (e.g., Patrick Patterson being the #4, Orton the #5 and Liggins the #6 in terms of NBA talent), the 2012 team is more well-rounded (especially if we're talking a college game where you can actually play a true zone).

 

 

If they played a 7 game series, the 2010 team would have the biggest blowout win.

 

More talent and a higher ceiling if each team is playing at their very best. When you think of 2010, you immediately think of a 1-21 shooting game against West Virginia that defines the season, but that's probably as bad as they could have played. Dodson was a fairly an average or below "shooter" (compared to other specialist shooters like Lamb), but between him, Miller, and even Bledsoe or Wall, you weren't really going to expect lots of nights like the one we saw.

 

 

If both play a 1 and off at the top of their games, the 2010 team just has too much talent. Teague and Lamb are two guys who'll have trouble sticking around the NBA, Wall and Bledsoe are two max-contract guys. You can throw three different bodies at Davis and try to be as physical as possible with him in using Cousins, Orton, and Patterson. 2010 has the luxury of feeding Cousins and hoping he can get Davis in foul trouble, which would completely change the complexion of the 2012 team. On the flip side, though there's a big drop off from Cousins to Orton, but despite that, the 2010s could survive Cousins getting in foul trouble and running offense through Wall and Bledsoe while letting Orton (or even Patterson) still protect the rim. Things like that are luxuries the 2012s doesn't really have.

 

 

The defensive backcourt of 2010 is very, very underrated when people have this conversation. Who shuts down who defensively, 2010's combos of Wall, Bledsoe, and even Liggins, or 2012's combos of Teague, Lamb, MKG, and Miller. Again, seeing Davis get in foul trouble means the 2012s are shot, but it's going to be asking a lot of Davis to both guard Cousins and help off of on a Wall or Bledsoe drive. The match ups are probably Wall-MKG and Bledsoe-Teague/Lamb, and I don't like the 2012s chances of stopping penetration and spreading Davis too thin or seeing him get in foul trouble.

 

 

MKG would likely be a non-factor on offense. Most of MKG's points came on hustle plays or getting a rebound and taking off in transition. He's not a scorer in the NBA because you can't do that there. As much as I love MKG, him trying to get a rebound and race over the top of Wall and Bledsoe for layups probably means you're going to see at least a few of his shots pinned and going back the other way. Matching up, you have to play MKG to guard Wall or Bledsoe, but if you are expecting much offensive output from MKG against the 2010 team, you might be in for a looooonnnnnggggg day.

 

Considering what I've just said about MKG, the fact that Lamb could be taken out of the game easily enough, and 2012's scoring punch is going to be very reliant on Davis. Not saying he couldn't do it, but remember, he's the guy who took the 4th or 5th most shots on that year's team and isn't the offensive player he is now. Picking 2012 means you pin your hopes on Teague playing pretty well in a tough matchup against Wall or Bledsoe and that Jones is able to score well against Patterson. To me, that's just as much of a "what if" as any bad shooting arguments you make for 2010.

Edited July 17, 2014 by JokersWild24

[JokersWild24]

If I had to pick one to coach, here's why I'd take the 2010's and what I'd try to do:

 

Defense:

 

I'd try and use Wall and Bledsoe to really pressure the 2012s guard combo of Teague and Lamb, which I am not really sure they'd have been capable of handling. I'll like my chances in trying to use my guards to turn the 2012s over (or at least push them out of their comfort zone and have them start the offense further out than they'd like). If you are turning over their guards, then you likely have transition baskets where Davis is too far out of the play to make a difference. Even if you can't turn them over, I'd think you could put enough pressure on them to force MKG, Jones, or Davis into having to come out and help handle. MKG isn't really a ball handler, and if I'm the 2010s, I'll take my chances with Jones being able to torch me.

 

 

Offense:

 

First, I'd try to run some offense through Cousins and hope that Davis gets in foul trouble. If not or Cousins isn't effective, then adjusting from there. As much as everyone makes of Davis' inside-outside game, Cousins isn't bad in that respect either. If I'm the 2010 coach, I know I could try an adjustment where I go hi-lo with Cousins-Patterson, and force Jones to either try and contain Patterson on the inside without lots of help or alternatively that Jones would be going to the free throw line with Cousins. Cousins is skilled enough to make you pay if you ask Jones to guard him in the 12'-15' range and leaving Davis on Patterson is playing into the 2010s hands anyway.

 

But to have Davis chase Cousins high means you've taken him away from the rim and there's still a decent chance that Cousins (who I feel is an underrated passer) is able to pick you apart with Patterson pinning down Jones and Lamb trying to chase back cuts from Wall and Bledsoe (and, again, with Davis further from the rim).

 

Even if running the offense through Cousins as mentioned above is wholly ineffective, you can still go to Plan B and make your primary offensive objective to be getting penetration from Wall or Bledsoe. There's a good chance this happens given their match ups. The biggest question is: who does Lamb guard?, and that's not even getting into your asking Teague to give up a lot of size/strength to Wall or Bledsoe and keep them out of the lane either.

 

I'm not a huge Miller fan, but I don't think the 2012s would want Lamb chasing him. Miller is smart enough to put Lamb on his back, work his way down, then find a way to be effective, whether it's shooting over him or probing the defense and seeing where they'll send help from and attacking that.

 

If we're talking Lamb's trying to stop Liggins' penetration and dumping down to a big or kicking out (or even skipping or reversing the ball) when help comes, then that's a chance I'll live with as a 2010.

 

If it's Dodson/Lamb, and Dodson is in the game for a long stretch at all, then it's only for one reason-- he's making his shot. That means he's actually being effective at stretching the floor and you're playing 4-on-4 with Lamb and Miller canceling one another out, and 1 piece of puzzle on help defense has been solved.

 

Considering the number of ways you can go with it and that it's going to be extremely difficult to stop the 2010's penetration regardless of how you go about it (whether it's MKG-Wall, Teague-Bledsoe, Lamb-Miller/Liggins/Dodson), then you're probably going to see lots of opportunities for the 2010s to get to the rim. From there, Davis will have to help off to prevent an easy two. Davis' help off means he's left Cousins open for a dump down and the only thing really standing between a 6'11, 260 pound man and a dunk that will punish the goal support is 5 feet and whatever help is coming from Terrence Jones.

 

The last thing the 2012s would want to do is take out Teague (their only real PG on a team who struggled without him) and/or Lamb (their only pure shooter unless you want Wiltjer trying to chase Patterson or one of the perimeter 2010s). In hypothetical world, putting 2012 Darius Miller on 2010 Darius Miller/Liggins/Dodson means that their effectiveness is limited, but it also means that you are without one of the following: the team's only effective PG, the team's only shooter who could play many minutes against the 2010s, or MKG (whose probably the guy you are asking to contain Wall and without which you're leaving the Wall/Bledsoe duties up to Teague/Lamb).

[PurplePride92]

The 2012 team HAD to be more of a team for success because that is what was needed to win. The 2010 didn't have to play more as a team because they were more talented than everyone else they played. The 2012 team playing more as a team doesn't prove anything to me in regards to defeating the 2010 team.

 

The 2010 Duke team played more as a team than the 2010 UK team but I bet you all would pick 2010 UK to defeat 2010 National Champion Duke. Wouldn't you?

[PurplePride92]

If I had to pick one to coach, here's why I'd take the 2010's and what I'd try to do:

 

Defense:

 

I'd try and use Wall and Bledsoe to really pressure the 2012s guard combo of Teague and Lamb, which I am not really sure they'd have been capable of handling. I'll like my chances in trying to use my guards to turn the 2012s over (or at least push them out of their comfort zone and have them start the offense further out than they'd like). If you are turning over their guards, then you likely have transition baskets where Davis is too far out of the play to make a difference. Even if you can't turn them over, I'd think you could put enough pressure on them to force MKG, Jones, or Davis into having to come out and help handle. MKG isn't really a ball handler, and if I'm the 2010s, I'll take my chances with Jones being able to torch me.

 

 

 

 

Teague and Lamb would have major major issues offensively against Wall and Bledsoe. Major issues.

[JokersWild24]

The 2012 team HAD to be more of a team for success because that is what was needed to win. The 2010 didn't have to play more as a team because they were more talented than everyone else they played. The 2012 team playing more as a team doesn't prove anything to me in regards to defeating the 2010 team.

 

The 2010 Duke team played more as a team than the 2010 UK team but I bet you all would pick 2010 UK to defeat 2010 National Champion Duke. Wouldn't you?

 

 

I'd pick them for sure. I thought they were better. They had a bad game at the wrong time against West Virginia. That happens, best team doesn't always win.

 

Take some upsets in the NCAA Tournament. Phi Slamma Jamma. Villanova beating Georgetown. Coppin State over South Carolina. Princeton beating UCLA. Play those games 10 times and I know who I like 9 of those.

 

2010 is one of the best teams not to win an NCAA title, and you'll have a hard time convincing me otherwise. As their profiles in the league only grows, history will start supporting that even more. A record set for most first rounders drafted. Cousins, Wall, and Bledsoe will all be max deal guys and cornerstones of their franchises.

 

Patterson, Orton, and Liggins are all in the league 4 (going on 5) years later. Patterson got a nice contract with Toronto. Orton's biggest question marks since coming into the league regard the health of his knee. Liggins has always found a way to stick around, often on good teams.

 

Miller was around the league for long enough. Harrellson wasn't the player he was the next season, but he has been in the league for awhile as well. That's a total of 8 guys that played in the NBA, three of which are/were some of the top talents in the league.

 

As much as people want to praise 96 Kentucky (and rightfully so), then I don't get how you can say 96 is one of the best ever but 2010 isn't even in the discussion with them.

 

If pointing to their collegiate record, the two teams are similar, save the national title (but the '96 Cats didn't win the SEC). If talking about NBA talent, though the number of players on each team who were drafted or played in the NBA is equal, I'll take a franchise with Wall, Bledsoe, Patterson, and Cousins over one with Delk, Anderson, Mercer, and Walker and feel really good about it.

 

 

The kind of talent on the 2010 Kentucky team is transcendent. You legitimately like them as an NBA team if you could add average starters and role player or two, and they are only four years in. TO illustrate what I'm talking about, let's use Atlanta and Charlotte, two of the worst playoff teams in an awful East, and take the worst of their starters to fill in gaps.

 

 

 

In the NBA, how far does a team with starters of Wall, Bledsoe, Patterson, and Cousins go if you give them 3 average Hawks in Kyle Korver, DeMaree Carroll, and Mike Scott? What if you give them Gary Neal, Chris Douglas-Roberts, and Josh McRoberts?

 

Those teams might not win championships, but I think they come much closer than most any team that missed the playoffs and the Hawks or Bobcats teams who made it. I'd also think it's safe to say they probably go further the Wizards, Raptors, or Bulls as well.

 

Find another college team in any other sport that you can say with a straight face that you'd take them, fill in 1/5th of the starting talent and a bench with average players on the worst playoff squads, and still be able to beat most of the league and over 25% of the teams that did qualify for the playoffs, and then we'll talk.

[JokersWild24]

Teague and Lamb would have major major issues offensively against Wall and Bledsoe. Major issues.

 

 

To say Teague and Lamb would only have major major issues against Wall and Bledsoe and only repeat it again once is an insult to major issues.

 

Offensively or defensively, 2012 couldn't hold 2010.

 

Love MKG, but as I said earlier (TL:DR), I don't see him grabbing a rebound, taking off down the floor with Wall or Bledsoe already a few steps out in front, and going all the way for one of the transition baskets that he got so often in college. I'd imagine we'd see 1 or 2 of those volleyballed and/or taken the other way for 2.

 

If we're talking head-to-head, too many matchup problems for 2012 to try and compete with 2010.

[Hatz]

**

 

Whether the game is played under college or pro rules matters.

 

Despite the 2010 team having more talent (e.g., Patrick Patterson being the #4, Orton the #5 and Liggins the #6 in terms of NBA talent), the 2012 team is more well-rounded (especially if we're talking a college game where you can actually play a true zone).

 

 

If they played a 7 game series, the 2010 team would have the biggest blowout win.

 

More talent and a higher ceiling if each team is playing at their very best. When you think of 2010, you immediately think of a 1-21 shooting game against West Virginia that defines the season, but that's probably as bad as they could have played. Dodson was a fairly an average or below "shooter" (compared to other specialist shooters like Lamb), but between him, Miller, and even Bledsoe or Wall, you weren't really going to expect lots of nights like the one we saw.

 

 

If both play a 1 and off at the top of their games, the 2010 team just has too much talent. Teague and Lamb are two guys who'll have trouble sticking around the NBA, Wall and Bledsoe are two max-contract guys. You can throw three different bodies at Davis and try to be as physical as possible with him in using Cousins, Orton, and Patterson. 2010 has the luxury of feeding Cousins and hoping he can get Davis in foul trouble, which would completely change the complexion of the 2012 team. On the flip side, though there's a big drop off from Cousins to Orton, but despite that, the 2010s could survive Cousins getting in foul trouble and running offense through Wall and Bledsoe while letting Orton (or even Patterson) still protect the rim. Things like that are luxuries the 2012s doesn't really have.

 

 

The defensive backcourt of 2010 is very, very underrated when people have this conversation. Who shuts down who defensively, 2010's combos of Wall, Bledsoe, and even Liggins, or 2012's combos of Teague, Lamb, MKG, and Miller. Again, seeing Davis get in foul trouble means the 2012s are shot, but it's going to be asking a lot of Davis to both guard Cousins and help off of on a Wall or Bledsoe drive. The match ups are probably Wall-MKG and Bledsoe-Teague/Lamb, and I don't like the 2012s chances of stopping penetration and spreading Davis too thin or seeing him get in foul trouble.

 

 

MKG would likely be a non-factor on offense. Most of MKG's points came on hustle plays or getting a rebound and taking off in transition. He's not a scorer in the NBA because you can't do that there. As much as I love MKG, him trying to get a rebound and race over the top of Wall and Bledsoe for layups probably means you're going to see at least a few of his shots pinned and going back the other way. Matching up, you have to play MKG to guard Wall or Bledsoe, but if you are expecting much offensive output from MKG against the 2010 team, you might be in for a looooonnnnnggggg day.

 

Considering what I've just said about MKG, the fact that Lamb could be taken out of the game easily enough, and 2012's scoring punch is going to be very reliant on Davis. Not saying he couldn't do it, but remember, he's the guy who took the 4th or 5th most shots on that year's team and isn't the offensive player he is now. Picking 2012 means you pin your hopes on Teague playing pretty well in a tough matchup against Wall or Bledsoe and that Jones is able to score well against Patterson. To me, that's just as much of a "what if" as any bad shooting arguments you make for 2010.

 

 

So what does the 2010 team do with Terrence Jones? He's the forgotten man in this equation. Rim protector. Scorer. Defender. 2012 set a TEAM record for blocked shots in the history of the NCAA.