March 23, 20197 yr Wow!!! What a game. For those who really understand the game of basketball, today was proof that it is not about “talent” or having the horses when it comes to winning. It is really about developing basketball skills and playing together. Kentucky knows they were given all that they could handle. Wofford’s best shooter did not hit a 3 and it was still a 6 point game. UK would not recruit any of those kids and yet it was an incredibly competitive game. It is the same at the high school level. Even if you do not have the most athletes, through great coaching andhard work and developing basket ball skills(especially shooting skills) you can win at any school. Just a thought
March 24, 20197 yr Author No. No implication at all. I have just read on this website in the 2 years I have been on here that it all about”talent”. I think most people equate talent to athleticism. Just trying to say that even if you don’t have the biggest, fastest or strongest, does not mean that you cannot win. Especially at the high school level. It is also about basketball skills and team play. Just an observation.
March 24, 20197 yr Just wait and see whose in the Final Four, chances are it will be 4 of the perennial powers. If Ky played Wofford a best of 7 series it would probably be 4-0 or 4-1, anything can happen in a one game matchup.
March 24, 20197 yr I think most people equate talent to athleticism. I would fall into this category. Are usually the most talented players are also the most athletic players.
March 24, 20197 yr No. No implication at all. I have just read on this website in the 2 years I have been on here that it all about”talent”. I think most people equate talent to athleticism. Just trying to say that even if you don’t have the biggest, fastest or strongest, does not mean that you cannot win. Especially at the high school level. It is also about basketball skills and team play. Just an observation. Kentucky won, largely because the guy with all the “skill” went 0-12 from 3. Strange time to make this case.
March 24, 20197 yr Author That was my point. Even though he was 0 for 10, others on his team stepped up. It was a six point game and yet UK would not have recruited one player who plays for Wofford. Wofford was not near as athletic but were able to compete because they could defend, and set screens, and rebound, and overall shoot the ball, and play together.
March 24, 20197 yr That was my point. Even though he was 0 for 10, others on his team stepped up. It was a six point game and yet UK would not have recruited one player who plays for Wofford. Wofford was not near as athletic but were able to compete because they could defend, and set screens, and rebound, and overall shoot the ball, and play together. I am still missing the true point of this thread? When teams with less talent play together, they can occasionally beat teams with more talent? I think most would agree, it will occasionally happen. Weird point to make when the team with less talent lost. And even more so, this UK team typically plays very well together. I have no problem with the fact that UK didn't recruit any of Wofford's players. I will take Kentucky's tournament success over the last ten years compared to Wofford's.
March 24, 20197 yr That was my point. Even though he was 0 for 10, others on his team stepped up. It was a six point game and yet UK would not have recruited one player who plays for Wofford. Wofford was not near as athletic but were able to compete because they could defend, and set screens, and rebound, and overall shoot the ball, and play together. They lost.
March 24, 20197 yr These teams play 10 times, Kentucky wins 8 times minimum. Talent, you always go with talent.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.