Kansas vs. Kentucky: who ya got? [Archive] - Message Board Basketball Forum

Grinder

05-20-2009, 08:31 PM

dab0yech0

05-20-2009, 09:00 PM

If Meeks returns, definitely Kentucky. Calipari has arguably the most talented roster in college basketball, its now a matter of getting everyone on the same page and playing together.

Posterize246

05-20-2009, 09:04 PM

These two teams look absolutely stacked and I would love to see an early matchup between these two. Without seeing them play any game together, who do you think is better?

Kansas:
Sherron Collins, Brady Morningstar, Xavier Henry, Marcus Morris, Markieff Morris, Cole Aldrich, Tyshawn Taylor

Kentucky:
John Wall, Eric Bledsoe, Darnell Dodson, Patrick Patterson, DeMarcus Cousins, Daniel Orton, DeAndre Liggins, Jon Hood, and possibly Jodie Meeks

I see Kentuck as the strongest team if these guys are able to click, especially if Jodie Meeks returns. John Wall in the dribble drive offense paired with Jodie Meeks scoring ability to go along with three great big men in Orton, Patterson, and Cousins along with depth in the backcourt with Bledsoea and Liggins seems like a very complete team.
Kansas. Already a Sweet 16 team and didn't lose anyone. And now they've added Xavier Henry who will be a starter. And someone not really mentioned is Elijah Johnson, a 5* PG that they also signed. Sherron Collins, Cole Aldrich both have that championship experience under their belt. Aldrich is a load in the post that needs to be double teamed. When you put him in the middle of Kansas' sharpshooters (Morningstar who doesn't miss, Henry, Reed, and an improving Collins) they're gonna be tough to stop. And I have no idea how good CJ Henry is, but he's just been cleared to play next season.

More on Johnson, have you seen this guys FREAKISH athleticism? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IrwMMWunhg Good God.

I think Kentucky's going to be the best in the SEC easily, but they're not as good as Kansas. They're relying too much on their freshmen talent. 4 of their top 6 talents are freshmen (if Meeks doesn' comet back, then it's 4 of their top 5).

Kansas>Kentucky right now.

wang4three

05-20-2009, 09:24 PM

^What he said.

IlliniFan

05-20-2009, 09:50 PM

Kentucky is stacked beyond belief. They had great talent even though they had a subpar year. Liggins was a top 30 recruit, and Darius Miller was a top 50 recruit. Both should be improving greatly from their freshman to sophomore years. Add that to this freshman class, and Patterson. :eek: Ridiculous.

Grinder

05-21-2009, 02:16 AM

Kansas. Already a Sweet 16 team and didn't lose anyone. And now they've added Xavier Henry who will be a starter. And someone not really mentioned is Elijah Johnson, a 5* PG that they also signed. Sherron Collins, Cole Aldrich both have that championship experience under their belt. Aldrich is a load in the post that needs to be double teamed. When you put him in the middle of Kansas' sharpshooters (Morningstar who doesn't miss, Henry, Reed, and an improving Collins) they're gonna be tough to stop. And I have no idea how good CJ Henry is, but he's just been cleared to play next season.

More on Johnson, have you seen this guys FREAKISH athleticism? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IrwMMWunhg Good God.

I think Kentucky's going to be the best in the SEC easily, but they're not as good as Kansas. They're relying too much on their freshmen talent. 4 of their top 6 talents are freshmen (if Meeks doesn' comet back, then it's 4 of their top 5).

Kansas>Kentucky right now.

To be honest, I'm not really familliar with any of Kansas' recruits apart from Robinson so I can't comment on that. That Johnson dunk was sick though.

I'm not sold completely on Collins' ability to final 4 team but we shall see. I feel like experience is not that important when you have talents like Wall and Cousins mixed in with guys with a few years under their belts in Meeks and Patterson.

i seen hippos

05-21-2009, 02:44 AM

No matter how much I think about it, I can't decide definitely on who I'd want between Collins/Aldrich and Meeks/Patterson.

I have a slight lean towards Collins/Aldrich, but it's really tough.

Csmooove23

05-21-2009, 10:14 AM

Yea if meeks comes back it's a wrap they would beat em

i seen hippos

05-21-2009, 05:00 PM

Yea if meeks comes back it's a wrap they would beat em

:oldlol:

DwadeOverLebron

05-21-2009, 07:20 PM

Kansas. Already a Sweet 16 team and didn't lose anyone. And now they've added Xavier Henry who will be a starter. And someone not really mentioned is Elijah Johnson, a 5* PG that they also signed. Sherron Collins, Cole Aldrich both have that championship experience under their belt. Aldrich is a load in the post that needs to be double teamed. When you put him in the middle of Kansas' sharpshooters (Morningstar who doesn't miss, Henry, Reed, and an improving Collins) they're gonna be tough to stop. And I have no idea how good CJ Henry is, but he's just been cleared to play next season.

More on Johnson, have you seen this guys FREAKISH athleticism? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IrwMMWunhg Good God.

I think Kentucky's going to be the best in the SEC easily, but they're not as good as Kansas. They're relying too much on their freshmen talent. 4 of their top 6 talents are freshmen (if Meeks doesn' comet back, then it's 4 of their top 5).

Kansas>Kentucky right now.

^nice post dude

yeah on paper UK's STACKED! if they played before conference play KU>UK

if they meet in march UK>KU and ill set the line as a PK

elijiah johnson! WOW! i had no idea!

i seen hippos

05-21-2009, 07:24 PM

^nice post dude

yeah on paper UK's STACKED! if they played before conference play KU>UK

if they meet in march UK>KU and ill set the line as a PK

elijiah johnson! WOW! i had no idea!

The experience of Kansas has to factor in somewhere. Some of those players won a title and were even bigger pieces last year in a sweet 16 run.

DwadeOverLebron

05-21-2009, 08:06 PM

yeah this is a tough one... on paper UK looks better, and i'm just a huggge fan of john walls but i've always loved KU since the jauque vaughn days so i think if they played early on in the season KU's experience (theres your factor) will be huge and they will pull out the "W"

but if they met in march (i hope they do) im leaning slightly in favor of UK becuz i think it will be such a close game and john wall should be coming into his own at that point, i like KU alot tho, but i gotta give the slight edge to UK in this scenerio

DeuceWallaces

05-21-2009, 09:36 PM

I think UK will be better off without Meeks. He's a chucker who can't handle top defenders.

i seen hippos

05-22-2009, 02:36 AM

ypy cbdodw

Csmooove23

05-22-2009, 10:05 AM

Meeks was a big reason they won as many as they did and he is a top scorer

DeuceWallaces

05-22-2009, 12:30 PM

Being the highest scorer on a bad team in the worst conference doesn't really mean much.

DwadeOverLebron

05-22-2009, 01:39 PM

well with cal at the helms i don't see meeks taking out of control chucking shots, and with john wall at the point, and with their front court... meeks might actually see alot of open looks... it's not chucking if it goes in the basket consistently... so we shall see what happens

i seen hippos

05-22-2009, 02:22 PM

You would think Meeks would not have to work as hard to get his now. He also won't need to take as many shots. I think Cal will help him for sure.

A.M.G.

05-22-2009, 02:32 PM

I would take Kansas at this point. They're more experienced, have a superior coach in Bil Self who most of them have been under for years and have won a championship with, and pretty close in talent level despite Kentucky's ridiculous recruiting class. Sherron Collins is an excellent college PG with experience, scoring ability and leadership. Cole Aldrich will probably be the top big man in the country (who else is there? Greg Monroe? Derrick Favors as a 1'n'done freshman? I just don't see anyone being better). Xavier Henry adds a third star on the wings to the mix, with many, many talented and experienced role players backing them up (the Morris brothers, Morningstar, Jeff Withey, Mario Little, etc, etc). Their recruiting class of Henry, Thomas Robinson, and Elijah Johnson (and whatever else) is a top class as well.

Kentucky will undoubtedly be stacked, but they will be relying a lot more on freshman talent. I'm just not sure how well or how quickly players like John Wall, Jodie Meeks, Liggins or Dodson presumably at SF, Patrick Patterson, and DeMarcus Cousins will gel together in a new system under a coach none of them have ever played for. Yes, Derrick Rose led Memphis to the title game as a freshman, but the rest of that Memphis roster was experienced and indoctrinated in Calipari's system. And what happens with guys like Eric Bledsoe and Daniel Orton, are these five star recruits going to be happy playing off the bench their freshman season?

When it comes down to it, there are far fewer questions to be asked with Kansas, and far less likelihood that things won't work out. There are just a whole bunch of ifs for Kentucky. Both teams undoubtedly have the talent to win a national championship, but I would pick the more experienced and cohesive Kansas team unless things work better than I expect at UK. Not that it's a huge margin though, with John Wall on board.

But what other teams are legit contenders next year? MSU, I suppose, they only really lost Goran Suton from a team that made the finals, and Tom Izzo is a great coach. Texas, Oklahoma, and UNC all have monster recruiting classes and good returning talent and will stay strong, but probably aren't legit contenders. I thought Syracuse would have a decent chance if they retained Jonny Flynn, Eric Devendorf, Andy Rautins, Paul Harris, Rick Jackson and Arinze Onuakum, but Flynn and Harris are going pro. Teams like UCLA (Collison, Holiday, Shipp, Aboya), Louisville (Clark, Terrence Williams), Arizona (Hill, Budinger), Duke (Henderson) and Villanova (Cunningham, Reynolds) are losing a lot of their best talent to the NBA and graduation, and aren't bringing in recruiting classes comparable to UK and KU (well maybe Nova is). So basically it will probably come down to UK and KU either in the Final Four or the Championship Game, based on talent alone.

Rekindled

05-22-2009, 04:31 PM

you guys are crazy. john wall would single handedly put UK on top. john wall would be the no.1 or no.2 pick RIGHT NOW if he had enter this year's draft.

i seen hippos

05-22-2009, 04:33 PM

^ lol

UConnCeltics

05-22-2009, 05:11 PM

you guys are crazy. john wall would single handedly put UK on top. john wall would be the no.1 or no.2 pick RIGHT NOW if he had enter this year's draft.
No he wouldn't. He wouldn't even be top 3. Blake Griffin, Ricky Rubio, and Hasheem Thabeet are all better than Wall right now.

DwadeOverLebron

05-22-2009, 05:40 PM

you guys are crazy. john wall would single handedly put UK on top. john wall would be the no.1 or no.2 pick RIGHT NOW if he had enter this year's draft.

im not sure if your kidding or not... but you are half correct tho... john wall most certainley would NOT put UK on top over KU NO WAY JOSE! but he would've been a top 3 pick in this years draft... i think in my personal opinion based on his no ceiling potential, he wouldn't have been picked ahead of griffen but i would take him over rubio or thabeet anyday any minute and any millisecond

TheGame414

05-23-2009, 02:56 AM

Meeks was a big reason they won as many as they did and he is a top scorer
And it may be the case that if he's your best player- or at least your leading scorer- you won't be that great.

How many national champions have had a shot-needy guy like that at shooting guard that wasn't a lottery-type talent?

Anyway, I agree with those that said Kansas, for most of the same reasons cited. They return a Top 10 team essentially intact. Their best two players are a senior and a junior, and they add the one piece they were missing last year: a good-sized wing player who can score at will. Unlike Kentucky, they aren't building around blue-chip freshmen, they're just counting on a couple of them- Henry and Robinson; none of their other newcomers are likely to be in the rotation- to fill roles and fit in.

Even with Patrick Patterson back- I'm assuming Meeks stays in the draft- Kentucky is going to be relying heavily on several freshmen in their rotation. Now, granted, they're excellent freshmen, but how many title contenders in recent years have so heavily relied on that many freshmen?

Ohio State is the one that comes to mind. Kentucky's could very well match the two top-four picks that OSU had in that year's freshman class with Oden and Conley, but for now I'm going to assume they're the exception. Even though Derrick Rose and Kevin Love were the best players on their teams, for example, they were still joining stacked veteran teams that were returning all or most of 30-win teams from the previous season.

Almost every year a chunk of doofus fans get overexcited about a team adding a bunch of freshmen, and almost every year a team full of really good, if not superelite, guys that stuck around long enough to be veterans but are still bound for the NBA Draft end up winning it all. (That didn't really happen this year because the 2008 class wasn't that great.)

That's Kansas. They may not win it all, but they're unquestionably the team to beat. It shouldn't really be all that debatable unless Meeks comes back- that would at least put Kentucky on the same plane as Kansas in having a senior/junior standout duo- and even still I'm not sure it's a debate.

DeuceWallaces

05-23-2009, 03:16 AM

I'm not saying UK is better, but they're not building around a freshman. There's no question they're building around Patterson who is anything but an inexperienced freshman.

TheGame414

05-25-2009, 01:01 AM

Yeah, but a big chunk of their rotation will be freshmen. No matter how talented they are, they're freshmen. You look at national champions throughout history, an overwhelming number of them were teams that return most- if not all- of a veteran nucleus from a team that was very good the year before.

I mean, Kansas could not seemingly meet national championship criteria more perfectly for next year (granted, these are rough criteria that not every champion meets every single one of, but just about every champion will meet most of it and measure up to the list as a collective):

-Top 10 in offensive and defensive efficiency: check. They did it this year, I think.

- Return all or most of a veteran nucleus from a good team: big check.

- Elite point guard: check.

- Wing scorer: check.

- Top-flight big man: check.

- Have returning players who were good enough to consider the previous year's NBA draft: check.

-Similarly, at least three future pros: check.

- A coach that's been there before: check.

- Get at least 40-43% of your scoring from the power forward and center positions: not a sure thing, but Aldrich is good for 15+ a game. If Robinson and the Morris brothers can combine for at least 18 a game, they'll meet it.

Kansas could not be an easier pick for the preseason No. 1 and the national title favorite no matter how many talented freshmen Kentucky has. They should be considered nearly as big of a favorite next year as UNC was this year.

srv_fan

05-25-2009, 06:59 PM

I agree with what TheGame said, and on top of that I question whether Meeks is going to buy into being just another guy rather than the team superstar. Wall will have have the ball in his hands most of the time, and if he doesn't, it should be down with Patterson and the two freshman bigs. I think Meeks will get a lot of open spotup jumpers based off Wall's penetration and defenses collapsing on Kentucky's monstrous frontcourt, but he's not going to have the Kobe-like freedom to put up shots he did last year. That is a very hard transition to make, and as already pointed out, if he's not shooting he doesn't contribute much of anything else.

Kansas by a mile, IMO.

JellyBean

05-25-2009, 07:02 PM

If it is early in the college season, I will take Kentucky. If it is later in the season, I will pick the Jayhawks.

HaNdLe ThE RoCk

05-26-2009, 05:01 PM

Kentucky

Csmooove23

05-26-2009, 06:10 PM

UK all day kansas just can't match up

i seen hippos

05-26-2009, 06:49 PM

UK all day kansas just can't match up

It's as if you've already expressed your one line opinion......:no:

TheGame414

05-27-2009, 02:31 AM

Those that are picking Kentucky, I'd really like to know why. Is it that illlustrious history of teams with a bunch of freshmen in their rotation winning national championships? Is it the unsuccessful nucleus returning from the previous season that likely features only one proven veteran? Is it the long track record of coaches winning it all in their first year at a school?

Quite simply, what are you guys basing that opinion on? You have a Top 10 team returning intact, the best point guard/center combo in college basketball- two guys that are a senior and junior, at that- and they're adding a big-time freshman of their own that fills the one weakness they had last year, the lack of a wing scorer.

I just don't understand this sentiment for Kentucky, even if Meeks returns.

TheGame414

05-27-2009, 01:56 PM

If it is early in the college season, I will take Kentucky. If it is later in the season, I will pick the Jayhawks.
This doesn't make any sense, either. If Kentucky ends up winning it all- and they have so much talent I certainly wouldn't discount it, though it seems quite unlikely- it would be later in the season that they'd be peaking, with so many young guys.

Kansas is the team returning intact with veteran stars; they'll be ready to roll from Day One next season and would probably crush Kentucky if they played on a neutral court in November or early December.

Efunk7

06-10-2009, 02:11 AM

I don't think it was mentioned either that jeff withey will be eligible, so that gives kansas even more frontcourt depth...

jhawkin

07-29-2009, 01:37 AM

I am bias but Kansas has two of the top 10 players in the nation and Tyshawn Taylor gained valuable experience leading the USA this summer in winning the FIBA U19 tournament which we haven't won since 1991. Would be great to see UK and KU in the finals...........ROck CHalk

rosonviyavong

07-29-2009, 01:46 AM

Kansas baby

jhawkin

08-01-2009, 09:12 AM

omg I didnt know that much about johnson omg he's super athletic thanks for the post i dont think College basketball understands what Kansas has this year....The best team don't always win but I tell ya THE JAYHAWKS will definitely be there come MARCH..........rock chalk

TheGame414

08-02-2009, 02:54 AM

Quit typing like an 11-year old girl.

Unless, of course, you ARE an 11-year old girl. In which case....I'd still like you to quit typing like an 11-year old girl.

sixerfan3511

08-02-2009, 04:27 AM

i got Villanova

jhawkin

08-02-2009, 11:13 AM

DwadeOverLebron

08-02-2009, 02:07 PM

haha nerd...

TheGame414

08-03-2009, 12:15 AM

Hey game do yo got anything better to do than rip me? 11 year old girls nowadays type better than any of us so that is probably an upgrade. If you dont like drunk replies then go to a non drinking site....or just plain get a life you nerd.......
I'm willing to bet few people post here drunk more often than me. You just can't tell.

Yes, I have plenty of better things to do, and I do them. Ripping your nonsensical typing took up about 15 seconds, or approximately 1/5760th of my day.

And from that you've extrapolated that I'm a)a nerd and b)need to get a life.

Terrific.

jphipps83

08-03-2009, 07:57 AM

Based solely on talent, you have to give the nod to UK. That being said, I think it'll be difficult with UK relying so heavily on freshmen, even if those freshmen are NBA caliber right now. Therefore, I think KU will end up going farther in the NCAA tournament based on experience and the ability to play together. Nobody knows for sure how UK will gel together, especially dealing with players that are jumping to the NBA after this season. :hammertime:

UConnCeltics

08-03-2009, 08:51 AM

I'd like to see Kansas win, they are a true college team. I say this because the teams at the top are supposed to have good upperclassmen, and some talented sophomores and freshman, which they have. Kentucky on the other hand has a bunch of players collecting their paychecks to play under Calipari and WWWes and are probably more focused on leaving for the NBA more than their college season.

Batman

08-03-2009, 10:56 AM

which school has john wall?

Posterize246

08-03-2009, 11:56 AM

which school has john wall?
Temple

sixerfan3511

08-03-2009, 01:07 PM

Temple

hahaha u wish

Snoop_Cat

08-03-2009, 01:10 PM

On pure talent, I'd say Kentucky is reasonably better. However, I am a BIG time supporter of the "experience in big games" card (See case: Mo Williams), and Kansas is a proven winning team that didn't have any significant changes except Xavier Henry and if he blows, you can simply replace him and still be a very good team whereas UK is completely unproven and full of guys just looking to raise their stock.

TheGame414

08-04-2009, 03:31 PM

TheGame414

08-04-2009, 03:32 PM

which school has john wall?
Which school had Derrick Rose?

The one that lost to a team of juniors and seniors in the national championship game.

jhawkin

08-06-2009, 02:06 PM

anyone who uses the word "extrapolate" is a nerd and I'm not using it.....Even though I do agree with some of your posts..

WrongIslander

11-09-2009, 01:55 AM

anyone who uses the word "extrapolate" is a nerd and I'm not using it.....Even though I do agree with some of your posts..

Educated = nerd?

Well in that case everyone of your heroes you follow in this sport is a nerd as they are all college athletes who while playing are gaining an education to better themselves off the court as well as on it.

Oh and Kansas, not only because I support them but because when you have that much EXPERIENCED talent you should always be considered favourites. UK could do it but it would be a shock if they did.

DeuceWallaces

11-09-2009, 02:12 PM

Which school had Derrick Rose?

The one that lost to a team of juniors and seniors in the national championship game.

Come one. Their loss was hardly a function of inexperience. It was free throw shooting, and none of them have gotten much better in the NBA. Poor coaching might have also played a part.

TheGame414

11-09-2009, 07:35 PM

Agreed. But bringing up John Wall like he's the end-all, be-all to winning a national championship is silly.

Nine of the last 11 national champions have been led by NBA-bound upperclassmen who'd played together for 2-3 years, not megastar freshmen. The two that weren't were extenuating circumstances; Carmelo Anthony was arguably the greatest freshman ever, and the '06 Florida team, led by sophomores who hadn't played a whole lot, had three eventual Top 10 picks and benefitted from a weak season in which the three teams who fit a national championship-type profile- UConn, Texas and Duke- all were upset before the Final Four.

So if you're asking me to give my reasoning for who I think will win the national championship, I'm not going to go with the supertalented freshmen no matter how supertalented they are, because I'm not going to use the exception to the rule as my rationale. Barring injury or total collapse, I believe Kansas will win the national title.

DeuceWallaces

11-09-2009, 08:16 PM

Didn't Melo win a championship the past eleven years? Was Syracuse not led by a super freshman? Haven't "superfreshmen" been largely absent in that time frame because the NBA age limit is a recent development? Therefore, teams loaded with the most recent batch of super freshmen don't necessarily apply.

I see a lot of holes in your theory.

And I'm not a Wall or Cal nut rider, just saying no one should be so emphatic about their chances either way. There's really not a whole lot for either side to stand on.

AlThornton

11-16-2009, 09:36 PM

Keep in mind Memphis had CDR, Robert Dozier, and Joey Dorsey who went to the elite 8 the past 2 season before Derrick Rose joined them. Experience is huge..........

Kentucky is not going to the National Championship game Ill put money on it. John Wall might turn out to be god himself but ill keep with the odds of Kentucky making the Sweet 16 and thats it.

TheGame414

11-18-2009, 12:34 AM

Didn't Melo win a championship the past eleven years? Was Syracuse not led by a super freshman?
Yep. And it was the exception that proves the rule. That you had to pick out the one instance where it didn't happen in that span proves that it almost always does happen.

I'll take my chances that most freshmen- maybe any other freshman we'll see for decades- isn't Carmelo Anthony.

Haven't "superfreshmen" been largely absent in that time frame because the NBA age limit is a recent development? Therefore, teams loaded with the most recent batch of super freshmen don't necessarily apply.
In the 2007 Final Four, Ohio State had two one-and-done freshman among the top four picks- and a third who was also a first-rounder- and got their doors blown off by a Florida team loaded with upperclassmen.

We've had three full seasons now of one-and-dones, and though some have come close, none have won a title yet. Three years of them. Many have joined teams that were already good the year before: Oden/Conley, Gordon, Rose, Love, etc.

Is it a huge sample size? Not really. But it's not a tiny one, either. how many of these guys that are, in theory and for the most part in reality, the most talented players in the college game, have there been? 30 or so? I don't feel like looking it up but I'd have to guess it's 25-30.

No national champions among those supertalented players yet in the one-and-done era.

Will we see it happen? Almost certainly. (Note: unless Xavier Henry averages like 18-20 a game or something, that's kind of a different case, considering he joined a Top 10 team that returned intact and is probably only going to be the No. 3 guy on that team. That's not really what we're talking about here.) Probably within a few years.

But that won't change that the best way to win a championship is with a veteran-but-talented team that's played together for 2-3 years.

I see a lot of holes in your theory.I think the results back me up. Even in the one-and-done era the basic championship-winning formula hasn't changed. The same type of teams that were winning championships prior to 2006 are still winning championships. Teams led by three- and four-year future pros.

I never said my "theory" (a curious word choice because, again, the results clearly back me up) was absolute, or that a team led by freshmen that doesn't fit this formula couldn't win. Clearly they can. As you said, we saw Melo do it six years ago. With so many talented one-and-done guys, as long as they keep this rule the way it is we're bound to see it happen eventually.

But I'm betting it remains the exception to the rule.

Teams build like '10 Kansas, '09 UNC, '08 Kansas, '07 Florida, '05 UNC, '04 UConn, '02 Maryland, '01 Duke, '00 MSU (you're not noticing a trend here?) will continue to win the majority of national championships.
And I'm not a Wall or Cal nut rider, just saying no one should be so emphatic about their chances either way. There's really not a whole lot for either side to stand on.[/QUOTE]

Posterize246

03-21-2010, 01:21 PM

Kansas ended up being a serious letdown.

Kiddlovesnets

03-21-2010, 01:29 PM

Kansas is done already...

DeuceWallaces

03-21-2010, 01:32 PM

Yep. And it was the exception that proves the rule. That you had to pick out the one instance where it didn't happen in that span proves that it almost always does happen.

I'll take my chances that most freshmen- maybe any other freshman we'll see for decades- isn't Carmelo Anthony.

In the 2007 Final Four, Ohio State had two one-and-done freshman among the top four picks- and a third who was also a first-rounder- and got their doors blown off by a Florida team loaded with upperclassmen.

We've had three full seasons now of one-and-dones, and though some have come close, none have won a title yet. Three years of them. Many have joined teams that were already good the year before: Oden/Conley, Gordon, Rose, Love, etc.

Is it a huge sample size? Not really. But it's not a tiny one, either. how many of these guys that are, in theory and for the most part in reality, the most talented players in the college game, have there been? 30 or so? I don't feel like looking it up but I'd have to guess it's 25-30.

No national champions among those supertalented players yet in the one-and-done era.

Will we see it happen? Almost certainly. (Note: unless Xavier Henry averages like 18-20 a game or something, that's kind of a different case, considering he joined a Top 10 team that returned intact and is probably only going to be the No. 3 guy on that team. That's not really what we're talking about here.) Probably within a few years.

But that won't change that the best way to win a championship is with a veteran-but-talented team that's played together for 2-3 years.

I think the results back me up. Even in the one-and-done era the basic championship-winning formula hasn't changed. The same type of teams that were winning championships prior to 2006 are still winning championships. Teams led by three- and four-year future pros.

I never said my "theory" (a curious word choice because, again, the results clearly back me up) was absolute, or that a team led by freshmen that doesn't fit this formula couldn't win. Clearly they can. As you said, we saw Melo do it six years ago. With so many talented one-and-done guys, as long as they keep this rule the way it is we're bound to see it happen eventually.

But I'm betting it remains the exception to the rule.

Teams build like '10 Kansas, '09 UNC, '08 Kansas, '07 Florida, '05 UNC, '04 UConn, '02 Maryland, '01 Duke, '00 MSU (you're not noticing a trend here?) will continue to win the majority of national championships.
And I'm not a Wall or Cal nut rider, just saying no one should be so emphatic about their chances either way. There's really not a whole lot for either side to stand on.[/QUOTE]

Your experienced team was a big let down.

TheGame414

03-21-2010, 01:53 PM

Yep. They sure were. In a one-and-done tournament sometimes the logic doesn't apply at all.

Do you want me to go through and have me point out all the times I said that nothing I was saying was absolute, that a team led by freshmen can win it all? Sticking with a track record means that sometimes you'll be wrong, but you're minimizing your chances of it. Until freshmen-led teams winning the national title becomes the norm instead of the exception, nothing I've said really changes.

Kentucky winning this year would do little to change the overall trend, and last I checked they're only in the Sweet 16 so far.

Kiddlovesnets

03-21-2010, 01:54 PM

This thread should be changed into Kentucky vs Syracuse now...

UConnCeltics

03-21-2010, 02:04 PM

Why? This thread is almost a year old.

Grinder

05-22-2010, 02:41 PM

Bump for this year. Hopefully we'll actually see this matchup this time around.

Kentucky:
Brandon Knight/Jarrod Polson
Doron Lamb/Stacey Poole/Jon Hood
Darius Miller/DeAndre Liggins/Darnell Dodson
Terrence Jones/Josh Harrelson
Enes Kanter/Eloy Vargas

Kansas
Josh Selby/Elijah Johnson
Tyshawn Taylor/Renaldo Woolridge
Brady Morningstar/Tyrell Reed
Marcus Morris/Thomas Robinson
Markieff Morris/Jeff Withey

Kansas is so loaded in the back court that they'll probably have to go to a 3 guard lineup. I'd say Kansas is probably a better team with Kentucky more talented, but not by much.