1 hour ago, gchs_uk9 said:

But the winners are making modifications. They’re expanding, modernizing. Kentucky’s offense doesn’t look different today than it did in 2010, other than the players aren’t as good this year. I’m not necessarily complaining about Calipari, he clearly knows what he’s doing. I’m just not convinced he values shooters. We’re told every year that guys “are long and athletic and SHOULD become a good shooter.” I’m a selfish Kentucky fan, yes, but I’d like to see a few more good shooters in August instead of their first year in the NBA. 

In the last five years Virginia won a title, and their offense isn’t anything like the small ball quick offenses. North Carolina in 2017 won the title, playing the same type of lineups Roy has always played with having two big guys on the floor at the same time. 2015 Duke won the title with a stud center, and Winslow down low. Then you have had your years with Nova winning it with their open small lineup style. Both ways are still winning it. 
 

With that said I would love to see Cal give shooters more of a chance too. He has recruited some, but doesn’t really give them a chance to get in the flow of a game. Since he takes them out as soon as they make one mistake. Which drives me nuts, and I do hope he changes his way with that. He has done that with Allen so far this year and I hate it. 
 

With that said, you mention you want to see more good shooters here now in August, and not by the time they get to the NBA. Who at UK was a bad shooter at UK, then became a good shooter in the NBA their rookie year? 

3 hours ago, futurecoach said:

In the last five years Virginia won a title, and their offense isn’t anything like the small ball quick offenses. North Carolina in 2017 won the title, playing the same type of lineups Roy has always played with having two big guys on the floor at the same time. 2015 Duke won the title with a stud center, and Winslow down low. Then you have had your years with Nova winning it with their open small lineup style. Both ways are still winning it.

I'm going to respond, but let me first say I think you and I are in pretty close agreement in everything in this thread. Don't want this to come across as an argument - it is the complete opposite.

You stated that the last five national champions all played various styles and that is correct. My initial comment wasn't so much asking for a faster style (though that is more appealing), but rather that Calipari had to adjust his style to incorporate more three-point shooting. Lets look at the three-point shooting statistics for the last five national champions and compare them to Kentucky from the same season:

2015

• Duke (7.9 made three-pointers per game; 39.9% from three-point range)
• Kentucky (5.2 made three-pointers per game; 34.9% from three-point range)

2016

• Villanova (8.7 made; 36.2% from three)
• Kentucky (6.8 made; 36.6% from three)

2017

• North Carolina (7.1 made; 35.5% from three)
• Kentucky (7.0 made; 35.3% from three)

2018

• Villanova (11.6 made; 40.1% from three)
• Kentucky (5.3 made; 35.7% from three)

2019

• Virginia (8.4 made; 39.5% from three)
• Kentucky (5.8 made; 35.4% from three)

 

Each example shows the national champion scoring significantly more points from three-point shooting than Kentucky, with the exception of North Carolina in 2017, who based on two games with Kentucky was almost two dead even teams. And it isn't that Kentucky is necessarily a more efficient shooting team either, as only once did Kentucky have a better three-point shooting percentage (and that was a mere 0.4%).

From three-point range, Duke averaged 8.1 points per game more than Kentucky in 2015, Villanova 5.7 more points in 2016, Villanova 18.9 more points in 2018, and Virginia 7.8 more points in 2019.

The question begs, how much better would Kentucky's teams have been if you tack anywhere from 5.7 to 18.9 points per game onto their totals in any of those seasons? Calipari has done a masterful job at Kentucky. They are always in the hunt, never lose early in the NCAA tournament, and are a tough draw for anyone. Imagine how much better they could be if they emphasized three-point shooting? I'd guess there would be at least one more banner hanging in Rupp Arena.

4 hours ago, futurecoach said:

With that said, you mention you want to see more good shooters here now in August, and not by the time they get to the NBA. Who at UK was a bad shooter at UK, then became a good shooter in the NBA their rookie year? 

Valid question and best described as a misspeak on my part. That comment was more in reference to Calipari annually talking about how he anticipated certain players would become a good shooter, but Kentucky doesn't always get to see it because the player either goes to the NBA or transfers. I would much prefer a recruited shooter who fans didn't have to spend an entire season hoping they would make shots.

9 minutes ago, gchs_uk9 said:

I'm going to respond, but let me first say I think you and I are in pretty close agreement in everything in this thread. Don't want this to come across as an argument - it is the complete opposite.

You stated that the last five national champions all played various styles and that is correct. My initial comment wasn't so much asking for a faster style (though that is more appealing), but rather that Calipari had to adjust his style to incorporate more three-point shooting. Lets look at the three-point shooting statistics for the last five national champions and compare them to Kentucky from the same season:

2015

• Duke (7.9 made three-pointers per game; 39.9% from three-point range)
• Kentucky (5.2 made three-pointers per game; 34.9% from three-point range)

2016

• Villanova (8.7 made; 36.2% from three)
• Kentucky (6.8 made; 36.6% from three)

2017

• North Carolina (7.1 made; 35.5% from three)
• Kentucky (7.0 made; 35.3% from three)

2018

• Villanova (11.6 made; 40.1% from three)
• Kentucky (5.3 made; 35.7% from three)

2019

• Virginia (8.4 made; 39.5% from three)
• Kentucky (5.8 made; 35.4% from three)

 

Each example shows the national champion scoring significantly more points from three-point shooting than Kentucky, with the exception of North Carolina in 2017, who based on two games with Kentucky was almost two dead even teams. And it isn't that Kentucky is necessarily a more efficient shooting team either, as only once did Kentucky have a better three-point shooting percentage (and that was a mere 0.4%).

From three-point range, Duke averaged 8.1 points per game more than Kentucky in 2015, Villanova 5.7 more points in 2016, Villanova 18.9 more points in 2018, and Virginia 7.8 more points in 2019.

The question begs, how much better would Kentucky's teams have been if you tack anywhere from 5.7 to 18.9 points per game onto their totals in any of those seasons? Calipari has done a masterful job at Kentucky. They are always in the hunt, never lose early in the NCAA tournament, and are a tough draw for anyone. Imagine how much better they could be if they emphasized three-point shooting? I'd guess there would be at least one more banner hanging in Rupp Arena.

 

7 minutes ago, gchs_uk9 said:

Valid question and best described as a misspeak on my part. That comment was more in reference to Calipari annually talking about how he anticipated certain players would become a good shooter, but Kentucky doesn't always get to see it because the player either goes to the NBA or transfers. I would much prefer a recruited shooter who fans didn't have to spend an entire season hoping they would make shots.

I definitely would love to see more shooters. Which he seems to recruit a shooter in each class lately. However, he just for some reason always has a very short leash on his shooters. If they make one mistake they are out of the game. Which I completely hate when he does that. 

Allen has made more than one mistake before he comes out.  He had 3 TO's in about 6 minutes of playing and can not guard anyone.  Right now I think he is playing too many people and playing them too long.  Cal does have a short leash on shooters, he is more of a drive shoot FT's, live off of transition, offensive glass guy.  Game has changed and he has not unfortunately.  Some coaches have their window close on their style and his has in my opinion.  I still believe this team will figure somethings out but the gap between them and a team like Gonzaga/Baylor are really wide.

The point guard play is bad with the turnovers and all  but so is the shooting. I saw one stat where Clark and Boston were 0-19 in two games from behind the arc. 
I realize this Covid shortened preseason has had limited practices and wiped out exhibition games. For a young team that causes problems. But for right now they don’t even look like they’re running any offense, and their defense was not good vs Ga Tech. The one 6’8 forward scored on Sarr about anytime he had the ball. They have a long way to go. And I’m not sure he will be able to find a quality PG this year like he did with Alexander two years ago a month or so into the season. From what I’ve seen so far he doesn’t have any candidates.