UK has improved in many areas since game 1. There shot selection is getting tons better, they are making a drastically larger effort to get Morris touches on almost every trip down court, they are slowly but surely starting to make smarter decisions and take care of the ball better, and lastly there defense has improved tremendously since the beginning of the year.

 

 

They've been forcing the ball to Morris all year. Taking care of the ball against teams in the top 100 vs. the top 10 is my biggest question.

I like where UK is at right now. They are getting better, against lesser opponents or not. With a young team, it is important to get confidence and winning against whoever it may be gives you confidence. I like what the freshman are doing and the fact they aren't getting thrown to the fire.

 

I expect Crawford and Bradley to get more consistent in their shooting because of Morris's domination in the post. I would like to see Jasper get more agressive on the offensive end. He has the athletism even though he doesn't shoot well to get to the rim and finish.

 

The biggest improvements I see are with attitudes. The chemistry seems to be getting better and better and the Cats seem to be playing hard. They don't win with flashyness, but they are starting to win. Friday night will be an important game the whole UK program and especially Tubby.

I like how the other 82 percent just doesn't bother posting anymore. U of L is horrible and played worse than horrible against KY. Santa Clara is a joke. To say the freshman are getting better is a joke. Better against Santa Clara than UNC? Wow thanks captain obvious. Is Jasper better than he was against UCLA? Meeks played well against U of L, but does one game against sub-par competition mean you've improved? Morris has been getting the ball as much as possible since day one. UK's defense is OK, but their offense relies heavily on the 3-point shot and Randolph Morris being on the floor. They still dribble way too much, the still have stupid TO's, Morris will be in foul trouble at some point and time this year. With the way the scholarships were changed a few years ago there is a ton of parity. U of L is as bad as they've been or worse than they've been since Pitino has taken over. They're terrible. I don't know much about Santa Clara other than they're a 15 seed in the tourney every year and they are mid-major, but they shouldn't play KY at KY anywhere within 25 points. KY is in a better position than they were last year and I think they can compete with some top 10 teams, but saying they have gotten better after playing a few top 100 teams in a row is a joke. Beat someone in the top ten and we'll talk about being better but right now we're 0-3 against UCLA, UNC, and Memphis and if we played those 3 teams again we'd lose at least 2 of the games and probably all 3.

...Oh My....:lol:

 

So every team, that is not in the top 10 is "terrible" or "a joke"? You don't know much about a team, yet they still should be beaten by UK, at home by more than 25....?

 

Are teams allowed to improve, during the course of the season and from game to game, or must they be Top 10 teams automatically. Programs will lose games, look great one night and not good the next. Some will play in streaks and some peak early, while others be inconsistent.

 

The constant analysis by some, referring to players are horrible, terrible, jokes, pathetic, couldn't start in my rec league, etc....is why some don't post in certain threads anymore. It loses any meaning and detracts from the valuable input by posters.

 

As for UK improvements, yes some are playing better, some are not and playing time is differing now, than when the season first started. That's what a coach does, he adjusts his lineup to whom is playing well either defensively, offensively or both. If everyone played well, every single game they would only need 3-4 players on the bench, to give them rest breaks.

 

Be more objectionable and the game of college basketball has changed, from where it was years ago....teams are getting better, systems are better and on any given night, you just never know who will win.

 

:thumb:

Here's what I think never gets better. Offense. Tubby believes in a stationary post player and his offensive sets are designed this way. RM is a very good post player but does not mean that he needs to go and occupy a block while the ball is dribbled or passed around the perimeter. If he stays in the paint and a wing cuts and receives the ball this creates a situation where the guy guarding the post can guard the guy with ball and the guy on the block because they are 4 ft apart. In 98 and with Daniels we had no stationary post player and those teams excelled. I agree that RM needs to touch it as much as possible in the low post but we don't have to limit his movement. When was the last time you saw him be the benefit of a screen? UCLA did this to us over and over. We have no spacing and no lanes because we always have one guy in the middle of the floor. He never moves.

...Oh My....:lol:

 

So every team, that is not in the top 10 is "terrible" or "a joke"? You don't know much about a team, yet they still should be beaten by UK, at home by more than 25....?

 

Are teams allowed to improve, during the course of the season and from game to game, or must they be Top 10 teams automatically. Programs will lose games, look great one night and not good the next. Some will play in streaks and some peak early, while others be inconsistent.

 

The constant analysis by some, referring to players are horrible, terrible, jokes, pathetic, couldn't start in my rec league, etc....is why some don't post in certain threads anymore. It loses any meaning and detracts from the valuable input by posters.

 

As for UK improvements, yes some are playing better, some are not and playing time is differing now, than when the season first started. That's what a coach does, he adjusts his lineup to whom is playing well either defensively, offensively or both. If everyone played well, every single game they would only need 3-4 players on the bench, to give them rest breaks.

 

Be more objectionable and the game of college basketball has changed, from where it was years ago....teams are getting better, systems are better and on any given night, you just never know who will win.

 

:thumb:

:thumb:

Here's what I think never gets better. Offense. Tubby believes in a stationary post player and his offensive sets are designed this way. RM is a very good post player but does not mean that he needs to go and occupy a block while the ball is dribbled or passed around the perimeter. If he stays in the paint and a wing cuts and receives the ball this creates a situation where the guy guarding the post can guard the guy with ball and the guy on the block because they are 4 ft apart. In 98 and with Daniels we had no stationary post player and those teams excelled. I agree that RM needs to touch it as much as possible in the low post but we don't have to limit his movement. When was the last time you saw him be the benefit of a screen? UCLA did this to us over and over. We have no spacing and no lanes because we always have one guy in the middle of the floor. He never moves.

UK is basically running a lot of 4 out 1 in stuff. I have seen this work on many levels and it is probably the best way for our offense to operate. We dont have the passers that Daniels and Hayes were to run a high low type of set and let them be out on the floor handling the ball as well. Morris is playing a lot of minutes when he is not fouling, and I believe Tubby may be looking to limit his movement so he can stay in the game. If you saw him at the end of the Santa Clara game, he was worn out. Barely posting, waving off wings looking to make the post entry. He did play a lot this game and had a lot of touches, and he still wasnt moving a whole lot. I know those big guys laying on you can take a toll on you, and maybe that is a reason he was so tired.

If we run a straight motion type offense or flex or something along those lines, what good does it do to have Randolph stepping out and having other guys flashing to the post? Who besides maybe Jasper with his height would benefit us in posting up. The only advantages I can see of moving Randolph out is opening up back door lanes and back screens, but in college basketball, how often do those really work?

...Oh My....:lol:

 

So every team, that is not in the top 10 is "terrible" or "a joke"? You don't know much about a team, yet they still should be beaten by UK, at home by more than 25....?

 

Are teams allowed to improve, during the course of the season and from game to game, or must they be Top 10 teams automatically. Programs will lose games, look great one night and not good the next. Some will play in streaks and some peak early, while others be inconsistent.

 

The constant analysis by some, referring to players are horrible, terrible, jokes, pathetic, couldn't start in my rec league, etc....is why some don't post in certain threads anymore. It loses any meaning and detracts from the valuable input by posters.

 

As for UK improvements, yes some are playing better, some are not and playing time is differing now, than when the season first started. That's what a coach does, he adjusts his lineup to whom is playing well either defensively, offensively or both. If everyone played well, every single game they would only need 3-4 players on the bench, to give them rest breaks.

 

Be more objectionable and the game of college basketball has changed, from where it was years ago....teams are getting better, systems are better and on any given night, you just never know who will win.

 

:thumb:

Very well said Strike3. The team has shown improvement in some areas. The 2 places I see little improvement is in the turnovers and rebounding. It has to get better when we go into the SEC or it's going to be a long season for sure.

I like where UK is at right now. They are getting better, against lesser opponents or not. With a young team, it is important to get confidence and winning against whoever it may be gives you confidence. I like what the freshman are doing and the fact they aren't getting thrown to the fire.

 

I expect Crawford and Bradley to get more consistent in their shooting because of Morris's domination in the post. I would like to see Jasper get more agressive on the offensive end. He has the athletism even though he doesn't shoot well to get to the rim and finish.

 

The biggest improvements I see are with attitudes. The chemistry seems to be getting better and better and the Cats seem to be playing hard. They don't win with flashyness, but they are starting to win. Friday night will be an important game the whole UK program and especially Tubby.

 

 

I agree with this post. Confidence and PT for the freshman are important. I also think the chemistry is much better and if Crawford can become consistent I think the CATS can be tough.

...Oh My....:lol:

 

So every team, that is not in the top 10 is "terrible" or "a joke"? You don't know much about a team, yet they still should be beaten by UK, at home by more than 25....?

 

Are teams allowed to improve, during the course of the season and from game to game, or must they be Top 10 teams automatically. Programs will lose games, look great one night and not good the next. Some will play in streaks and some peak early, while others be inconsistent.

 

The constant analysis by some, referring to players are horrible, terrible, jokes, pathetic, couldn't start in my rec league, etc....is why some don't post in certain threads anymore. It loses any meaning and detracts from the valuable input by posters.

 

As for UK improvements, yes some are playing better, some are not and playing time is differing now, than when the season first started. That's what a coach does, he adjusts his lineup to whom is playing well either defensively, offensively or both. If everyone played well, every single game they would only need 3-4 players on the bench, to give them rest breaks.

 

Be more objectionable and the game of college basketball has changed, from where it was years ago....teams are getting better, systems are better and on any given night, you just never know who will win.

 

:thumb:

 

People were claiming the defense is better and the freshman are better and they are moving the ball better...... and against U of L and Santa Clara it's going to be better than UNC, UCLA, or Memphis. Claiming the defense was good against U of L was an outlandish statement with no truth. I guarantee Tubby didn't say, "Let them shoot 3s and don't contest them" and to insinuate that that was the game plan is absurd.

People were claiming the defense is better and the freshman are better and they are moving the ball better...... and against U of L and Santa Clara it's going to be better than UNC, UCLA, or Memphis. Claiming the defense was good against U of L was an outlandish statement with no truth. I guarantee Tubby didn't say, "Let them shoot 3s and don't contest them" and to insinuate that that was the game plan is absurd.

I understand what you are saying, but it was not as if UL came into the game torching teams from behind the arc and just had an off night. If they cannot make them, why try and contest them as much as one would try to eliminate penetration, etc.

He doesn't have to step out 20 feet, just 12-15. There are times because of the stagnation that he catches it that far anyway. Differences of opinion will always be and that's what makes the world go round. Would it be too much to ask however to try and set him a screen instead of relying on his ability to score on his own. Sooner or later people will realize that he catches and turns left every time.