Do we really know?

Is stevenson getting better?

A completely healthy team since the start of the season would have given us a W last night and we would be in the Top 25, IMO

I liked how Stevenson threw it down with some authority last night

Stevenson is definately getting better and I think everyone sees that. If we would have had Jasper and Meeks for the entire year, we would have had about 13 wins thus far, losing to UL, Houston, and UNC.

I don't think the record would be much different. If they would have beaten GW then they would have more than likely gotten two L's in New York. The talent on this team is just plainly not very good... They would have a few more W's but not many more.

Stevenson is definately getting better and I think everyone sees that. If we would have had Jasper and Meeks for the entire year, we would have had about 13 wins thus far, losing to UL, Houston, and UNC.

 

You think they'd have beaten IU? And if they beat GW, you think they'd have won out in New York?

Stevenson is definately getting better and I think everyone sees that. If we would have had Jasper and Meeks for the entire year, we would have had about 13 wins thus far, losing to UL, Houston, and UNC.

 

I would add IU. But UK would have a way better record if we had no injurys.

They would not have lost to G.W. San Diego, and UAB.

Im seeing some more authority out of stevenson.

Loss to Houston?? We played without PP.

I think we would be a two loss team. IMO

I don't think the record would be much different. If they would have beaten GW then they would have more than likely gotten two L's in New York. The talent on this team is just plainly not very good... They would have a few more W's but not many more.

 

I did not take NY into account.

I would have seen no problem in them losing 2 games in New York. Had they been healthy all year, they would not have lost to Miss State, UAB, Houston, GW, and San Diego. I would rather have a loss to UConn and to Oklahoma in New York than any of the above mentioned losses.

They would not have lost to G.W. San Diego, and UAB.

 

Everybody played in the G.W. game besides Jasper, and honestly I don't think he would have made that big a difference.

 

The UAB game, I will give you they may have won, but you really never know.

 

The San Diego game, everyone played. Jasper and Meeks didn't get that many shots but they both played over 12 minutes. I know they were hurt and everything, but San Diego just had UK's number, and so did G.W.

 

So I would say Kentucky could have won the UAB with them, but I don't know about the G.W. and San Diego games.

Everybody played in the G.W. game besides Jasper, and honestly I don't think he would have made that big a difference.

 

The UAB game, I will give you they may have won, but you really never know.

 

The San Diego game, everyone played. Jasper and Meeks didn't get that many shots but they both played over 12 minutes. I know they were hurt and everything, but San Diego just had UK's number, and so did G.W.

 

So I would say Kentucky could have won the UAB with them, but I don't know about the G.W. and San Diego games.

 

Everything you said was true, but wasn't really on topic with the thread. If Jasper and Meeks were both completely healthy like the topic states, they both would have played more in the GW and SD games. They likely would have won both of those games and many more but we'll never know. Injuries are part of the game.

I just hope we get a chance to find out!

I personally think they would have a shot at the post season w/ a full compliment, probably finishing 3rd/4th in the East.

I would have seen no problem in them losing 2 games in New York. Had they been healthy all year, they would not have lost to Miss State, UAB, Houston, GW, and San Diego. I would rather have a loss to UConn and to Oklahoma in New York than any of the above mentioned losses.

 

UCONN and Oklahoma are nothing special. They are both good teams, but a far cry away from the top.