2 minutes ago, Bert said:

Allen's inconsistent shooting was part of his lack of playing time but his weakness on defense was the greatest reason for his lack of playing time.  In numerous games, the opponent would purposely target Allen for an obvious reason, the man Allen was guarding would own him.  So, unless Allen is scoring, he has to be taken out.

That could include a number of Ky players.

26 minutes ago, B-Ball-fan said:

I'm not saying any of that. You're the one who said that he didn't earn his playing time when he was in the game. Your claim, your burden of proof. Knowing that the kid can score the ball, his lack of playing time was a constant question within my circle, and other fan circles. When given the ball, he produced. 

He got more minutes for a handful of games after that MS regular season game, and adequately produced to some degree, and then for about the last 10 games it's been crickets with his playing time. Makes no sense. 

Clip after the Jan 2nd MS game. 

http://www.espn.com/video/clip?id=30640355

In the games I watched, often Allen did nothing on offense when he was in. If he isn't scoring, he is a negative. Maybe there is a reason Allen scored like he did against Miss. St. but not against other teams - matchups matter.

My point is this. Cal is going to do whatever he can to win. If Allen could help get a win, he would be out there. It is that simple.

4 hours ago, B-Ball-fan said:

You have to have plays designed to get your sharp shooter in a position to score, and when they did that with him they were successful. A good example of that would be the regular season Mississippi State game on Jan. 2. He can be in the game, but if they didn't utilize him in those games of which you speak, that's not on him because the kid can clearly score when he gets the ball in his hands, just look at his resume. 

The plays they ran today for him weren't anything new. They ran several of those plays throughout many games this year. He knocked them down today and looked real good moving without the ball.

Often times this year, he didn't.

Hard to believe its two years in a row that UK isn't playing on Friday of SEC Tournament Weekend.

13 hours ago, nikeman49 said:

That could include a number of Ky players.

While this may be true on some level, when Allen was on the court he was the worst of what UK had on the court, when you consider he is going to be guarding a wing or other person that can drive the ball. I more so saw teams putting him in situations where he had to guard away from the ball and he would just simply lose his man when they would cut.

We all get it, Allen has some promise as Kentucky kid. But the reality is he just isn't there yet from a complete game standpoint to be a focal point of the Kentucky team, nightly. He can easily develop into that; after-all, he is/was a Freshman!

I have asked this time and again, but from a coach's perspective you have to ask what two things is a player able to do well? We know Allen if open can knock down shots. But can he create his own shot? No. Is he a good ball handler? No. An elite passer? No. A good rebounder? No. Able to consistently guard his position? No. That is not a knock against the kid, that is just where he is in this stage of his young career, but many can't accept that. There is no substitute for getting buckets. So when he had the hot hand, Cal would play him. It was a razor thin margin of error. Now you can argue Cal should have developed him more, but I think that is where he really missed out due to his injury and weird COVID offseason which cut into his development. And you can argue Cal should have let him play more and not yank him after a missed shot (something I have been critical of him about many of times), but remember UK was not playing with house money this year.

But when you see comments that he is just as good as Brandon Boston, they are taking one element of his game. It simply isn't true. I would rather that crowd just say, "I am an Allen homer and would play him more because Boston doesn't give UK as much as we were lead to believe." And leave it at that. But again, if Allen had the hot hand, he had no issues going to him over Boston. But if he didn't, it really wasn't a question Cal was pondering.

Also keep in mind Allen had the misfortune of being on the team he was on. His warts could not be covered. Think of Kyle Wiltjer. His Freshman year Cal could give him a solid 15-20 minutes because the other guys around him could cover or able to find him with an open look. Allen didn't have that luxury.

 

2 hours ago, bugatti said:

While this may be true on some level, when Allen was on the court he was the worst of what UK had on the court, when you consider he is going to be guarding a wing or other person that can drive the ball. I more so saw teams putting him in situations where he had to guard away from the ball and he would just simply lose his man when they would cut.

We all get it, Allen has some promise as Kentucky kid. But the reality is he just isn't there yet from a complete game standpoint to be a focal point of the Kentucky team, nightly. He can easily develop into that; after-all, he is/was a Freshman!

I have asked this time and again, but from a coach's perspective you have to ask what two things is a player able to do well? We know Allen if open can knock down shots. But can he create his own shot? No. Is he a good ball handler? No. An elite passer? No. A good rebounder? No. Able to consistently guard his position? No. That is not a knock against the kid, that is just where he is in this stage of his young career, but many can't accept that. There is no substitute for getting buckets. So when he had the hot hand, Cal would play him. It was a razor thin margin of error. Now you can argue Cal should have developed him more, but I think that is where he really missed out due to his injury and weird COVID offseason which cut into his development. And you can argue Cal should have let him play more and not yank him after a missed shot (something I have been critical of him about many of times), but remember UK was not playing with house money this year.

But when you see comments that he is just as good as Brandon Boston, they are taking one element of his game. It simply isn't true. I would rather that crowd just say, "I am an Allen homer and would play him more because Boston doesn't give UK as much as we were lead to believe." And leave it at that. But again, if Allen had the hot hand, he had no issues going to him over Boston. But if he didn't, it really wasn't a question Cal was pondering.

Also keep in mind Allen had the misfortune of being on the team he was on. His warts could not be covered. Think of Kyle Wiltjer. His Freshman year Cal could give him a solid 15-20 minutes because the other guys around him could cover or able to find him with an open look. Allen didn't have that luxury.

 

Say what you want, Boston was not better at any of those things you asked about Allen, not one!  And I’m not an Allen homer, just straight up compare them and he’s not!

15 minutes ago, 16thBBall Fan said:

Say what you want, Boston was not better at any of those things you asked about Allen, not one!  And I’m not an Allen homer, just straight up compare them and he’s not!

This post does show you are a homer. Like it or not Boston was and is better at creating his own shot than Allen. Boston definitely was a better ball handler than Allen too. Also Boston was a better passer. So for you to say that Boston was not better than Allen in any of the areas he mentioned, is basically showing you are an Allen homer or at least a KY boy homer. If Allen wasn’t from Ky, you would probably even see that. 
 

 

Alabama is leading Mississippi State 39-12 just 16 minutes into the game.

8 minutes ago, 16thBBall Fan said:

Alabama is leading Mississippi State 39-12 just 16 minutes into the game.

Better them than UK.

44 minutes ago, futurecoach said:

This post does show you are a homer. Like it or not Boston was and is better at creating his own shot than Allen. Boston definitely was a better ball handler than Allen too. Also Boston was a better passer. So for you to say that Boston was not better than Allen in any of the areas he mentioned, is basically showing you are an Allen homer or at least a KY boy homer. If Allen wasn’t from Ky, you would probably even see that. 

Boston is the better player. However, I'm not sure this needs to be a Boston vs. Allen debate. There were things Allen brought to the table that the coaching staff didn't seem to value, didn't work to exhibit, or didn't have the other pieces to help elevate his ability. It often seemed Calipari was quicker to point out the flaws in Allen (which, to be fair, there were many) without making such quick judgments on Boston, Askew, Brooks, Sarr, etc. (of which there were also many). Ultimately, I believe Boston plays a style of basketball more familiar and coachable to John Calipari than does Allen. And because of that, Allen didn't get as many opportunities. A second season of both, hopefully playing off of each other at the same time, could be fun to see.

1 hour ago, futurecoach said:

This post does show you are a homer. Like it or not Boston was and is better at creating his own shot than Allen. Boston definitely was a better ball handler than Allen too. Also Boston was a better passer. So for you to say that Boston was not better than Allen in any of the areas he mentioned, is basically showing you are an Allen homer or at least a KY boy homer. If Allen wasn’t from Ky, you would probably even see that. 
 

 

I am not a homer, just straight up observation.  ANYBODY can create their own shot, I’m 62 and could go out there right now and create my own shot but would it be a good shot??  No, much like Boston who for the most part took a bunch of terrible shots when he tried to create his own shot.  As to passing and ball handling both were just terrible, really not much difference, both are terrible defensive players, I don’t know if Boston got a backside rotation that was his more than a couple of times all year and he was terrible trying to guide the ball.  Boston scored more points because he was given more playing time and a MUCH longer leash than what his production merited.  Now, if you want to say Boston is a much better athlete, ok, no argument, but a much better player, no, not in the eye test!

5 hours ago, gchs_uk9 said:

Boston is the better player. However, I'm not sure this needs to be a Boston vs. Allen debate. There were things Allen brought to the table that the coaching staff didn't seem to value, didn't work to exhibit, or didn't have the other pieces to help elevate his ability. It often seemed Calipari was quicker to point out the flaws in Allen (which, to be fair, there were many) without making such quick judgments on Boston, Askew, Brooks, Sarr, etc. (of which there were also many). Ultimately, I believe Boston plays a style of basketball more familiar and coachable to John Calipari than does Allen. And because of that, Allen didn't get as many opportunities. A second season of both, hopefully playing off of each other at the same time, could be fun to see.

I completely agree with what you say here. The only reason I brought up the Allen and Boston thing, because 16th said Boston was not better than Allen in any of the areas another poster said. Which is simply not true at all. 

4 hours ago, 16thBBall Fan said:

I am not a homer, just straight up observation.  ANYBODY can create their own shot, I’m 62 and could go out there right now and create my own shot but would it be a good shot??  No, much like Boston who for the most part took a bunch of terrible shots when he tried to create his own shot.  As to passing and ball handling both were just terrible, really not much difference, both are terrible defensive players, I don’t know if Boston got a backside rotation that was his more than a couple of times all year and he was terrible trying to guide the ball.  Boston scored more points because he was given more playing time and a MUCH longer leash than what his production merited.  Now, if you want to say Boston is a much better athlete, ok, no argument, but a much better player, no, not in the eye test!

Yes an observation of a homer, which makes bias play a big role in an opinion someone forms. To say Boston isn’t better in any of those areas is just flat out not true. Was Boston a good player this year? Not at all. Is he better currently in those areas that were mentioned absolutely. Which I would assume Cal also sees that too every single day. Not to mention scouts see that too, and why Boston is still looked at as a possible first round guy despite not playing great this year, because of those areas that you say Allen is better in, which isn’t true. 
 

With that said, I do completely agree Allen at times deserved a bigger leash than he got. That has always been an issue for me with Cal and his short leash for shooters. 

1 hour ago, futurecoach said:

Yes an observation of a homer, which makes bias play a big role in an opinion someone forms. To say Boston isn’t better in any of those areas is just flat out not true. Was Boston a good player this year? Not at all. Is he better currently in those areas that were mentioned absolutely. Which I would assume Cal also sees that too every single day. Not to mention scouts see that too, and why Boston is still looked at as a possible first round guy despite not playing great this year, because of those areas that you say Allen is better in, which isn’t true. 
 

With that said, I do completely agree Allen at times deserved a bigger leash than he got. That has always been an issue for me with Cal and his short leash for shooters. 

Nope, not bias, just a flat out observation from 39 years of coaching, I don’t care if a kid is from California or Lexington, if he deserves to play put him in.  SHOULD Boston have been a much better player than Allen this year?  From all the hype, yes.  WAS he, if you watch the games, no, he wasn’t.  For a guy that can create his own shot his shooting % was terrible, 35.5,  Boston was a much better passer?  39 asst in 25 games????  I watched teams target Boston defensively just as much as Allen, he couldn’t guard the ball at all, shoot, Bama just waited to see who he was guarding then they got the ball. A better ball handler??  probably.   If you’re much better than Allen you don’t take a goose egg when your team’s life is on the line!!

I also had 2 scouts say Todd May would be a first round draft choice

50 minutes ago, 16thBBall Fan said:

Nope, not bias, just a flat out observation from 39 years of coaching, I don’t care if a kid is from California or Lexington, if he deserves to play put him in.  SHOULD Boston have been a much better player than Allen this year?  From all the hype, yes.  WAS he, if you watch the games, no, he wasn’t.  For a guy that can create his own shot his shooting % was terrible, 35.5,  Boston was a much better passer?  39 asst in 25 games????  I watched teams target Boston defensively just as much as Allen, he couldn’t guard the ball at all, shoot, Bama just waited to see who he was guarding then they got the ball. A better ball handler??  probably.   If you’re much better than Allen you don’t take a goose egg when your team’s life is on the line!!

I also had 2 scouts say Todd May would be a first round draft choice

It’s ok to be wrong.