I was talking to a family member over the weekend and said I thought the 09-10 UK Wildcats could win a 7 game series against any UK team ever. I was wondering what other BGP people thought.

 

The only team that I think could cause problems would be the 95-96 National Champions. They had the talent to push 09-10, but the up-tempo pressing style might play into Wall & companys favor. If the game got tight I would give an edge to Pitino's team because of Pitino, but I don't think 96 could win 4 out of 7.

In a 7 game series the 1996 UK team would beat the 2010 team in 5 games. That team is probably top 3 in the history of the NCAA basketball (many people think they are the #1 team of all time). That team was loaded---Tony Delk, Antoine Walker, Walter McCarty, Derek Anderson, Ron Mercer, Mark Pope, Anthony Epps, Jeff Shepard, Wayne Turner, Jared Prickett, Allen Edwards, and Nazr Mohammed would be just too much for the '10 team to handle.

95-96 would drill 09-10.

No contest. 95-96 team was loaded from top to bottom.

I was talking to a family member over the weekend and said I thought the 09-10 UK Wildcats could win a 7 game series against any UK team ever. I was wondering what other BGP people thought.

 

The only team that I think could cause problems would be the 95-96 National Champions. They had the talent to push 09-10, but the up-tempo pressing style might play into Wall & companys favor. If the game got tight I would give an edge to Pitino's team because of Pitino, but I don't think 96 could win 4 out of 7.

 

09-10 didn't even win the national title. 95-96 team was one of the most dominant teams of all times. They are ranked as high as top 3 of all time teams.

Sorry, gotta hop on the bandwagon here. 95-96 was deeper and more experienced. The claim that the up-tempo pressing style would play into Wall & Company's favor seems crazy to me as well. Wall and company might get a few easy buckets here and there but I give '95-'96 the edge even in this aspect of the game. They thrived on the uptempo press. Fact is '95-'96 was very good and very experienced. Delk, McCarty, and Pope were all seniors. Anthony Epps (I may overglorify this guy, but a great game manager) was a junior and would make life tough for Wall and eat Bledsoe alive on defense. Walker, McCarty, Edwards, Sheppard, Mercer, Anderson, and even Turner would give all of '09-'10 fits. '09-'10 team would be in foul trouble early and often. Shooting wise, '95-'96 would own the three point line as well. Yes Wall and Cousins are studs and in the long run maybe the best players to have ever come through Kentucky (history will only tell) but they were freshmen who made too many mental errors and cheap fouls.

 

'95-'96 ultimately is better because they were deeper, had as much talent at least, and that talent was more experienced. '09-'10 may have a slight advantage in paint size wise, but not enough to counter balance '95-'96's shooting advantage especially outside the 3.

'96 would win in 5 games...'97 would beat them as well. I'd take my chances with '93 also. Who would guard Mash? The obvious weakness for '93 would be stopping Wall, but could just push the zone in and I think they would take 4 out of 7 for sure.

96 team wins the series. What's everyone think about the 78 team?

Make your case for 09-10, Cover!

Wow did not see this coming. I just don't think 95-96 could pressure a team with Wall and Bledsoe the whole game. The 95-96 team struggled with athletic big men (Marcus Camby) enter Cousins. On the boards I think the 09-10 team has an advantage. I do not see anyone who would match up with Wall since Epps & Delk were not great defensive players. Depth and coaching on the side of 95-96, but I do not think they could win 4 out of 7 games IMO. It seems like I am in the minority here though.

Wow did not see this coming. I just don't think 95-96 could pressure a team with Wall and Bledsoe the whole game. The 95-96 team struggled with athletic big men (Marcus Camby) enter Cousins. On the boards I think the 09-10 team has an advantage. I do not see anyone who would match up with Wall since Epps & Delk were not great defensive players. Depth and coaching on the side of 95-96, but I do not think they could win 4 out of 7 games IMO. It seems like I am in the minority here though.

 

Cousins is a good big man but not as athletic as Camby was.

 

Who would guard Walker, Mercer, Anderson and those athletic wings along with Delk in there? Last year's team with PPat and Cousins would not be able to keep up the pace that the 95-96 established.

Talk about loaded...the '09-10 UK team set a record with 5 guys drafted in the first round. I'm not saying they'd beat the '95-96 team, but whether they won a national title or not is irrelevant to me. Basketball is matchups, so I'm just theoretically looking at the two teams. The difference maker to me is what de-railed UK in the tournament last year. Shooting. Over the course of 7 games, the '95-96 would suffer far less in the way of extended droughts.

 

Wall is a huge advantage at point. Delk is the better 2, but I think Bledsoe could have done a solid job defending him. Derek Anderson at the 3 would be better than Miller/Liggins, although again, I like Liggins on ball defensive ability. Patterson is better than McCarty. Both Cousins and Walker would provide offensive mismatches.

 

Just based on sheer talent, UK has never had a team with as much as last year, the '95-96 team included. Plus, guys like Mercer and Turner weren't huge factors. They look better on paper in retrospect than what they actually contributed over the course of the season.

 

I think '95-96 would win, not because they were more loaded, but because they were a more complete team. They could have countered UK's advantage insided by collapsing on Cousins (like they did vs. Tim Duncan and Marcus Camby) and forced Bledsoe, Wall, and others to beat them from the perimeter. I don't think they could do it. On the flipside, Walker would be a tough matchup for either Cousins or Patterson with his ability to face up from outside and create off the dribble, and McCarty's ability to shoot 3's would draw them away from the basket. Either way, Cousins would be forced to defend to the three point line, not his strength, IMO.

 

I also believe the '95-96 squad would be better served to limit the full-court pressure and go with more of that stifling half-court pressure they used. Last year's UK team flourished in the open court in up-tempo situations, but struggled at times in the half-court. I thought the half-court pressure of the '95-96 squad was its best defense.

 

I don't, however, believe the '93 or '97 teams would beat last year's team. Last year's UK team was more talented than the Fab Five team that ended UK's run in '93.

 

I don't see this matchup as the runaway others do.

Excellent post 5wide. I agree with everything. I definitely think it would go 7 and could honestly go either way. If the 09-10 team wouldve had just 1 good shooter I would pick them in 5, because it would open up lanes and they would be wayyy too athletic for the 96 championship team. Its just a totally different game now, more on athletic ability rather than solid teams. The teamwork of the 96 team would probably win it for them.

If Kanter is ruled eligible at the appeals hearing we might be entering the 2011 Cats into this discussion. And I believe he will be ruled eligible. He and Jones would be unreal together in a game. :eek:

Cousins is a good big man but not as athletic as Camby was.

 

Who would guard Walker, Mercer, Anderson and those athletic wings along with Delk in there? Last year's team with PPat and Cousins would not be able to keep up the pace that the 95-96 established.

 

Patterson would be the matchup on Walker. Miller would have to guard Mercer. While Wall or Bledsoe would end up with Anderson. Most likley Bledsoe with Wall on Delk because of his greater size and shot contesting ability. Mercer would give some problems there as would Walker, but I do not think that anyone on the UK team could handle Wall or Cousins consistently all night. When Liggins came in he would be able to slow down Mercer (as would Miller IMO) who was not the primary scoring option in 95-96 that he was in 96-97. Patterson was not the athlete that Walker was, but he would be able to keep him from going off IMO. In a game all about matchups I think this one would be difficult for the 95-96 team, but that is just me.