PDA

View Full Version : haters



Gonzdb8
02-23-2015, 04:27 AM
The chance that a Zags #1 seed could send Wisconsin to UKs bracket has massively ratcheted up the hate for us in Lexington. Locker room wall paper if i've ever seen it. I'm not saying that we deserve a #1, but some of these hayseeds clearly have not watched a single game we've played. I suspect for many of them our late start times conflict with the graveyard shift at the local Piggly Wiggly.

https://kentucky.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=1383&tid=210620800&mid=210620800&sid=888&style=2

gueastcoast
02-23-2015, 05:21 AM
That board was a trip. That such a successful and storied basketball program can have such an ign'ant fan base is remarkable.

Then again, I understand there's a fair amount of inbreeding present in that part of the world.

willandi
02-23-2015, 05:36 AM
I didn't bother to register to post there, but if I had, I would suggest that they take the next step to becoming rich! Hock everything they have and bet against the Zags. If they are really as certain as they say, it's a no brainer!

mcdiehard
02-23-2015, 06:02 AM
Like that manyhope they meet us in the FF or National Championship, as if somehow despite being overrated we could still buzz through 4 or 5 opponents first before getting crushed by UK

JPtheBeasta
02-23-2015, 06:21 AM
In the wise words of Taylor Swift*, I would suggest you shake it off ;]




*I believe this would also be endorsed by Matt Bouldin

LongIslandZagFan
02-23-2015, 06:45 AM
That board was a trip. That such a successful and storied basketball program can have such an ign'ant fan base is remarkable.

Then again, I understand there's a fair amount of inbreeding present in that part of the world.

They do manage to show a really questionable level of real basketball knowledge. I love the Mississippi State could run the WCC comments... the team that lost to South Carolina Upstate, St. Louis and Tulane? They'd likely lose to Pepperdine, BYU, Portland, and SMC let alone the Zags.

rennis
02-23-2015, 06:58 AM
They do manage to show a really questionable level of real basketball knowledge. I love the Mississippi State could run the WCC comments... the team that lost to South Carolina Upstate, St. Louis and Tulane? They'd likely lose to Pepperdine, BYU, Portland, and SMC let alone the Zags.

lol, exactly. And that Gonzaga is 27-1 against JV teams - with no mention of the OOC schedule that was played, and dominated, by GU. Those Kentucky fans are in their own little world over there. Poor things, they probably don't have much else to live for.

Birddog
02-23-2015, 07:03 AM
Just think how hard it is going to hit them if they lose to some "inferior" team in the NCAA Tournament. Schadenfreude will be permitted and encouraged if that occurs.

23dpg
02-23-2015, 07:19 AM
Wow, that is a tremendous amount of hate/ignorance/whiskey talk.

Chicken Ball
02-23-2015, 07:25 AM
Too bad. I'd love to see Wisconsin vs. Kentucky in the regionals. Best offense vs. the best defense in the country. Stength on strength: Kaminsky is the best post player on offense, Cauley-Stein the best post player on defense.

GonzagasaurusFlex
02-23-2015, 07:32 AM
Too bad. I'd love to see Wisconsin vs. Kentucky in the regionals. Best offense vs. the best defense in the country. Stength on strength: Kaminsky is the best post player on offense, Cauley-Stein the best post player on defense.

Great call Cauley-Stein is custom made to guard Kaminsky as he may be the only college player big enough to bang and D him up down low while also being quick enough to do same out to the 3-pt line. Kaminsky is so damn craft with his footwork though....that's a matchup I'd like to see too.

DixieZag
02-23-2015, 07:38 AM
This is going to get interesting.

Seems the rest of the country truly is convinced this is run of the mill overrated Zags team that might as well be rated 6th and get a 6 seed.

Lots of pressure on us, but I'm starting to think that not only does this team not wilt under pressure, but they might actually thrive under it, certainly seemed that way the other night.

Oh, and the only team in the country with more pressure on it than us, is that Kentucky team that they're so in awe of. Kentucky is as good a college team as anyone has seen in a long while, but they are also a very young team and one that will likely go in with more pressure on it than any team in recent memory. It will be interesting to see how they respond to getting down and having a crowd on them.

ZagLawGrad
02-23-2015, 07:42 AM
If the Zags can't get past a Sweet 16 this year, then the criticisms will continue, and frankly, would be hard to argue against.

CdAZagFan
02-23-2015, 07:43 AM
First off, my guess is that if Wisconsin is a 2 seed the committee would probably get them away from Kentucky's bracket. Secondly, I am now of the mind frame that if Duke and Wisconsin finish out strong, that GU will be a 2 seed regardless of how they finish out. GU will get a lot of attention through the WCC tourney, but then there is a two week window where the world forgets about the WCC and focuses on all the major schools. Stocks will rise for those Duke or Wisconsin during that period - just my thought.

sittingon50
02-23-2015, 07:52 AM
The chance that a Zags #1 seed could send Wisconsin to UKs bracket has massively ratcheted up the hate for us in Lexington. Locker room wall paper if i've ever seen it. I'm not saying that we deserve a #1, but some of these hayseeds clearly have not watched a single game we've played. I suspect for many of them our late start times conflict with the graveyard shift at the local Piggly Wiggly.

https://kentucky.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=1383&tid=210620800&mid=210620800&sid=888&style=2

How do you really feel, b8?

:lmao:

kitzbuel
02-23-2015, 08:07 AM
First off, my guess is that if Wisconsin is a 2 seed the committee would probably get them away from Kentucky's bracket. Secondly, I am now of the mind frame that if Duke and Wisconsin finish out strong, that GU will be a 2 seed regardless of how they finish out. GU will get a lot of attention through the WCC tourney, but then there is a two week window where the world forgets about the WCC and focuses on all the major schools. Stocks will rise for those Duke or Wisconsin during that period - just my thought.
Swapping positions with Wisconsin would not be a bad thing.

LongIslandZagFan
02-23-2015, 08:13 AM
That was the other thing... the likelihood of Wiscy ending up the weakest 2 seed borders on the single most moronic thing in that thread. They'd have to implode for that to happen.

raise the zag
02-23-2015, 08:19 AM
They keep referencing Ole Miss and Texas A&M as 2 teams who would beat the Zags on neutral court.

Interestingly, Georgio wooped up on both those schools and we beat Georgia by 12.

Also, FWIW, Kentucky beat Georgia by 11 AT HOME!

I know its tough to compare, yet still....non sense and ignorance by them.

Also, they keep fawning over how much better Wisconsin is than us and we play a "JV HS schedule".

Well, our OOC SOS was higher than Wisc's, not to mention, the Badgers have just 1, yet 1 more win vs RPI TOP-50 than the Zags.

Kentucky played UCLA at home.

We beat UCLA at their home.

We both played Texas...they won by 12, we won by 17.

Still interesting...

rennis
02-23-2015, 08:24 AM
^Agree with what you're saying, even though we both know the transitive property does not work in sports.

that said, the fact that no one on their board is doing ANY analysis of Gonzaga wins and losses and opponents shows how...daft most of those fans are.

sittingon50
02-23-2015, 08:40 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myhnAZFR1po

Zagregious
02-23-2015, 08:44 AM
^Agree with what you're saying, even though we both know the transitive property does not work in sports.

I choose to live by the transitive property. It gets us to the title game every year, in my mind. Please don't burst my bubble.

Worthington
02-23-2015, 09:09 AM
I feel like someone should inform them that the WCC has been barely behind the SEC in conference rankings the past few years... the ignorance on that board is just staggering.

TheZagPhish
02-23-2015, 09:12 AM
The hate is proportionate to the threat.

titopoet
02-23-2015, 09:26 AM
I love it. The complaining means how much fear GU generates. The fact is wildcats are fearful of playing Wisconsin in the elite 8. The stages of complainers. Low big 5 teams on the bubble, fearful GU will take away their place.
Then mid to higher teams don't like us because they are jealous of the seed GU is earning or the implication for their teams seed.

Now high seeds are complaining because of GU success means a tough draw for them. It will continue and this means how much the Zags are accomplishing.

Haters come the territory of success. When GU is very successful in this year's tournament, then watch the haters increase not decrease with potshots at various aspects that will have GU fans scratching their heads. Already there is a undercurrent forming about Pangos's hair. Hate is the flip side of jealousy.

Zagceo
02-23-2015, 09:32 AM
Badgers have no love for Zags no surprise


Not as long as Gonzaga continues to pummel everyone in that crap league theyre in, something the committee won't take into consideration unfortunately


You always hear about a team's "body of work" around selection time. Gonzaga may have the record but the selection committee can and does what it pleases in order to create the best matchups. If they think UW's more worthy of a 1 seed Gonzaga's record won't matter.

JPtheBeasta
02-23-2015, 09:38 AM
First off, my guess is that if Wisconsin is a 2 seed the committee would probably get them away from Kentucky's bracket. Secondly, I am now of the mind frame that if Duke and Wisconsin finish out strong, that GU will be a 2 seed regardless of how they finish out. GU will get a lot of attention through the WCC tourney, but then there is a two week window where the world forgets about the WCC and focuses on all the major schools. Stocks will rise for those Duke or Wisconsin during that period - just my thought.

I agree. It seems reasonable that the first #2 seed (ie the #5 team) would be given the courtesy of not having to face the overall #1 seed. Does anybody have a sense of precedent here? Does the selection committee take that into consideration?

To one of your other points, we can pray for a Wisconsin loss between then and now.

TexasZagFan
02-23-2015, 09:52 AM
They do manage to show a really questionable level of real basketball knowledge. I love the Mississippi State could run the WCC comments... the team that lost to South Carolina Upstate, St. Louis and Tulane? They'd likely lose to Pepperdine, BYU, Portland, and SMC let alone the Zags.

And the combined attendance at those four games would be less than the capacity of the Kennel.

ZagsGoZags
02-23-2015, 09:56 AM
How about this post in the Kentucky board?

"I completely agree - none of the teams, not even Auburn, are as bad as St. Mary's. I swear they looked like a high school team. Their big man's best "move" is an underhanded lunge shot that looks like something from a YMCA rec league. Their guards were little dudes that reminded me of our walk-ons (no offense to our guys). Auburn would have taken St. Mary's to the woodshed last night. Providence would stomp both teams. Put one of our worst SEC teams in the WCC and they'd be 27-1 also. I have to say that Virgina, Wisconsin, Villanova, and all other teams projected to be seeded 1-4 probably share in our sentiment about the Gonzaga slurp-fest and their atrocious schedule. "
.
.

I have said this many times before, and want to address this viewpoint to all fellow zags on the GUBoard who call the NCAA Tournament a crap-shoot, and that losses in the tournament don't define us.

There Is Only One Way To Prove Them Wrong (in their eyes and the eyes of the world, and in the eyes of realists). Go far in the Dance. Their view of us as not deserving elite team respect is borne out by our record of the last 6 years. We can polyanna the zags, and slurp our cool-aid on this board all we want, and whip ourselves up into calling them names, but as long as our record in the NCAA remains what it is, we might as well get used to it. The facts back them up.

Another irritation I have is that even if we go far in the tournament, like Final Four, it will be considered a fluke and luck. We will have to do it a few times to have the facts show that we are elite level. Butler and Wichita State are not elite level teams even though they have gone far a few times. I love my zags. I am crazy about Few and the fans, our players, the zag culture, and this wonderful board. I believe we have an elite level team this year, I hope it, I am a loyal, fanatically supportive fan even when we have our down years.

Belief and an optimistic attitude does not make a team elite. Only facts do. The one elite team we played this year beat us when the pressure was on and it was crunch time. If this is another 'Few in 32' year, they are right. The facts will show it. Of course I disagree with their exaggerations. We do not have to be an elite team for me to love our zags. But when the East Coast assumes we are not an elite team, the facts and the record back them up. Then we call them haters, and other names.

I hope, wish, believe, and want us to play for the National Championship this year.

zagfan99
02-23-2015, 10:01 AM
The chance that a Zags #1 seed could send Wisconsin to UKs bracket has massively ratcheted up the hate for us in Lexington. Locker room wall paper if i've ever seen it. I'm not saying that we deserve a #1, but some of these hayseeds clearly have not watched a single game we've played. I suspect for many of them our late start times conflict with the graveyard shift at the local Piggly Wiggly.

https://kentucky.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=1383&tid=210620800&mid=210620800&sid=888&style=2

Kentucky hasn't exactly played a barn burning schedule either. The SEC or the PAC-12 are usually the weakest of the power leagues. It's not like they are playing in the ACC or something.

How many close games has UK had against bubble teams? I'd be worried about facing Wisconsin if I was a UK fan.

rennis
02-23-2015, 10:02 AM
I think it's kind of comical that everyone is worried about Wisconsin, #2 seeds, the S Curve, etc.

NOTHING is guaranteed and don't be surprised if there are some wacky seedings this year. Think about Louisville as a 4 seed in 2013...

Mr Vulture
02-23-2015, 10:07 AM
Wisconsin is not going to be in Kentuckys region so not sure the point of all this...that is unless Wisconsin faded down the stretch. Barring something unforeseen, Kentucky will be the #1 seed in the tournament and therefore would have the 4th of the #2 seeds in their region.

coolhandzag
02-23-2015, 10:20 AM
How about this post in the Kentucky board?

"I completely agree - none of the teams, not even Auburn, are as bad as St. Mary's. I swear they looked like a high school team. Their big man's best "move" is an underhanded lunge shot that looks like something from a YMCA rec league. Their guards were little dudes that reminded me of our walk-ons (no offense to our guys). Auburn would have taken St. Mary's to the woodshed last night. Providence would stomp both teams. Put one of our worst SEC teams in the WCC and they'd be 27-1 also. I have to say that Virgina, Wisconsin, Villanova, and all other teams projected to be seeded 1-4 probably share in our sentiment about the Gonzaga slurp-fest and their atrocious schedule. "
.
.

I have said this many times before, and want to address this viewpoint to all fellow zags on the GUBoard who call the NCAA Tournament a crap-shoot, and that losses in the tournament don't define us.

There Is Only One Way To Prove Them Wrong (in their eyes and the eyes of the world, and in the eyes of realists). Go far in the Dance. Their view of us as not deserving elite team respect is borne out by our record of the last 6 years. We can polyanna the zags, and slurp our cool-aid on this board all we want, and whip ourselves up into calling them names, but as long as our record in the NCAA remains what it is, we might as well get used to it. The facts back them up.

Another irritation I have is that even if we go far in the tournament, like Final Four, it will be considered a fluke and luck. We will have to do it a few times to have the facts show that we are elite level. Butler and Wichita State are not elite level teams even though they have gone far a few times. I love my zags. I am crazy about Few and the fans, our players, the zag culture, and this wonderful board. I believe we have an elite level team this year, I hope it, I am a loyal, fanatically supportive fan even when we have our down years.

Belief and an optimistic attitude does not make a team elite. Only facts do. The one elite team we played this year beat us when the pressure was on and it was crunch time. If this is another 'Few in 32' year, they are right. The facts will show it. We do not have to be an elite team for me to love our zags. But when the East Coast assumes we are not an elite team, the facts and the record back them up. Then we call them haters, and other names.

I hope, wish, believe, and want us to play for the National Championship this year.

Kind of reminds me of what the BYU contingency though just prior to their first WCC season. There are a handful of really good teams. Kentucky is one. GU is another. Internet message boards are WIDE open for anyone to post damn near anything. This GU team has had a series of mild lulls this season. Not to many though, and not that deep. Potential has always been there. Is GU a #1 seed? Not up for me to decide. It truth is doesn't matter. Once into the round of 32 (God Willing) every team is tough.

BYU and SD are next.

Just out of curiosity do you really think that any of the Bluegrass state locals are completely clueless as to Calipari's track record. I paraphrase the esteemed Western Philosopher Papi Le Betard....."Best team money can buy." Is that true or not? I don't know. I do know Cal's track record though. Personal opinion. I don't believe KU has the emotional maturity to carry through the Final Four. It will not be a breeze through the bracket for anyone no one ever has, except for maybe 1990.

Rebound. Defend (shrink the heart of the 2-3). Execute. Selection Sunday will be here quick enough, and the rest will take care of itself.

Zagger
02-23-2015, 10:59 AM
All things considered ..... actions speak louder than words. I believe this Zag bunch has what it takes to do well - from here on out (2 home games this week, then the Vegas games and then the NCAA Tournament). To do well in the Dance the Zags are going to have to bring their "A" game and be ready for the higher level of competition / opponents' skills (shot blocking for one). We going to flat out have to play smart, pass well, help one another, get offensive as well as defensive rebounds and sink free throws. I loved what I saw from Wesley and Wiltjer late in the 2nd half @ St. Mary's - agressive positioning/rebounding. Hesitation on O or D isn't going to cut it. Mistakes will have to be few and far between. How the Zags play this week and in Vegas will be a good indication of how they'll perform in Seattle/Portland and beyond IMHO. If the Zags are going to play EXCELLENT ball in the NCAAs, AND go deep, I feel they'll need to practice EXCELLENT ball this week and in Vegas.

007Zag
02-23-2015, 11:40 AM
I really don't care about proving anything to anyone. I love my Zags and want to see them (especially this year's edition) succeed. I am very, very hungry for a repeat trip to the Elite Eight (and beyond!) but not because I want to prove we are "elite". No matter the outcome, I'm proud of the program and the way it represents our university. UK fans (and every other school for that matter) can think whatever they want; it doesn't matter to me one bit.

gonzagafan62
02-23-2015, 11:41 AM
I really don't care about proving anything to anyone. I love my Zags and want to see them (especially this year's edition) succeed. I am very, very hungry for a repeat trip to the Elite Eight (and beyond!) but not because I want to prove we are "elite". No matter the outcome, I'm proud of the program and the way it represents our university. UK fans (and every other school for that matter) can think whatever they want; it doesn't matter to me one bit.

+1

MDABE80
02-23-2015, 11:51 AM
Oh those KU posts are little boy bullchit posts. They want to avoid the BAdgers. Can't blame us for winning. Remember we're only 3 pt frombeing undefeated as well.
They have a certain "Divine right of kings" mentality. I do think, if we play defense and mkae some 3's, we could be close to them. Defense is key. Kevin would be harassed al night from those guards. He's a lot better this year. He smarter and a bit bigger. We defend and we can play with anybody . Honestly we need to get past the Swt 16. We can if we defend. UK
s fan base (in their minds) have already won the title and are undefeated. They don't want anybody tampering with tha scenario. We'll see about that.

Mr Vulture
02-23-2015, 11:52 AM
These people are delusional.....the SEC is horrible this year outside of Kentucky. Florida is way down, LSU is mediocre, Georgia already got beat by us....


How about this post in the Kentucky board?

"I completely agree - none of the teams, not even Auburn, are as bad as St. Mary's. I swear they looked like a high school team. Their big man's best "move" is an underhanded lunge shot that looks like something from a YMCA rec league. Their guards were little dudes that reminded me of our walk-ons (no offense to our guys). Auburn would have taken St. Mary's to the woodshed last night. Providence would stomp both teams. Put one of our worst SEC teams in the WCC and they'd be 27-1 also. I have to say that Virgina, Wisconsin, Villanova, and all other teams projected to be seeded 1-4 probably share in our sentiment about the Gonzaga slurp-fest and their atrocious schedule. "
.
.

I have said this many times before, and want to address this viewpoint to all fellow zags on the GUBoard who call the NCAA Tournament a crap-shoot, and that losses in the tournament don't define us.

There Is Only One Way To Prove Them Wrong (in their eyes and the eyes of the world, and in the eyes of realists). Go far in the Dance. Their view of us as not deserving elite team respect is borne out by our record of the last 6 years. We can polyanna the zags, and slurp our cool-aid on this board all we want, and whip ourselves up into calling them names, but as long as our record in the NCAA remains what it is, we might as well get used to it. The facts back them up.

Another irritation I have is that even if we go far in the tournament, like Final Four, it will be considered a fluke and luck. We will have to do it a few times to have the facts show that we are elite level. Butler and Wichita State are not elite level teams even though they have gone far a few times. I love my zags. I am crazy about Few and the fans, our players, the zag culture, and this wonderful board. I believe we have an elite level team this year, I hope it, I am a loyal, fanatically supportive fan even when we have our down years.

Belief and an optimistic attitude does not make a team elite. Only facts do. The one elite team we played this year beat us when the pressure was on and it was crunch time. If this is another 'Few in 32' year, they are right. The facts will show it. Of course I disagree with their exaggerations. We do not have to be an elite team for me to love our zags. But when the East Coast assumes we are not an elite team, the facts and the record back them up. Then we call them haters, and other names.

I hope, wish, believe, and want us to play for the National Championship this year.

NumberCruncher
02-23-2015, 11:53 AM
I think it's kind of comical that everyone is worried about Wisconsin, #2 seeds, the S Curve, etc.

NOTHING is guaranteed and don't be surprised if there are some wacky seedings this year. Think about Louisville as a 4 seed in 2013...

Louisville was the number one overall seed in 2013.

TheZagPhish
02-23-2015, 12:00 PM
They have a certain "Divine right of kings" mentality.

The Kool-Aid pours more like moonshine in Kentucky.

BULLDOG#1
02-23-2015, 12:05 PM
what a terrible board/thread they have over there.

The ignorance they display is laughable. Talk about elitist.

They have a great team, a huge fan base, and a charismatic coach. They are fielding a team with multiple NBAer's and they've run the table thus far. Good for them.

Where they completely differ from the zags is that they run a program that is predicated on the one-and-done talent coming in and trying to mesh all the kids together with the understanding that the best players will be gone the next year and that the next group of stars will be in at that time. While above the rim showcase dunks are fun to watch, it makes it hard to 'root' for the team year over year because they have new pieces all the time.

GU builds kids over multiple years (sr transfer Wesley noted) and really searches to get quality players and people. I believe Few gets the most out of the talent he has (not sure I could say the same with Calipari).

I am a home town zag fan and appreciate the staggering success this little school has had. It is remarkable. I do not believe any team should begrudge the zags for the ranking. For Kentucky to do so is just ignorant. If they lost a game to a low rpi team and then the zags jumped them in the rankings, then I could see them getting upset over it... but why do they even care? Wisconsin and Duke lost to lower rpi teams and it cost them in the rankings. The BEST any of these teams could do in the WCC is what the zags have already done (that's a fact). Any discussion on how the zags would do in the ACC or SEC is conjecture. I should hope the hoop experts use facts and not conjecture in ranking teams. If Wisconsin and Duke had won the games they were supposed to win, then they'd be ranked higher than the zags and there wouldn't be an issue. Only they did lose those games. Why ding the zags - It would be wrong to punish success.

After reading those posts on the Kentucky board, I do hope that someone comes along and knocks them off their high horse. I believe it will be a team like the zags. It seems unlikely that a team is going to out-athletic Kentucky (certainly not GU), but I do believe a team could 'fundamentally' outplay them. I would love to see good-old-fashion below the rim zags beat Kentucky by raining 3's, grabbing rebounds with fundamental positioning, and gain advantage with leadership and coaching. Far-fetched, I know... but what a joy that would be.

CDC84
02-23-2015, 12:06 PM
I completely agree - none of the teams, not even Auburn, are as bad as St. Mary's. I swear they looked like a high school team. Their big man's best "move" is an underhanded lunge shot that looks like something from a YMCA rec league. Their guards were little dudes that reminded me of our walk-ons (no offense to our guys). Auburn would have taken St. Mary's to the woodshed last night. Providence would stomp both teams. Put one of our worst SEC teams in the WCC and they'd be 27-1 also. I have to say that Virgina, Wisconsin, Villanova, and all other teams projected to be seeded 1-4 probably share in our sentiment about the Gonzaga slurp-fest and their atrocious schedule. "

This guy is so clueless it's ridiculous.

Brad Waldow is one of the only big men in division one ball who is averaging close to a double double every night (19.6 PPG, 9.2 RPG). You can't put up numbers like that at the D-1 level with the lack of skill that this guy thinks he has. During the second half against Gonzaga he showed that he could connect on hook shots with either hand. He's fantastic on the screen and roll, and unlike most most bigs at this level, he has fantastic touch around the basket. Karnowski and Sabonis - both physical defenders - had to bust their tails to hold him to his season average on Saturday night.

This guy's assessment of SMC's guards is off base. Aaron Bright is a graduate transfer who was the starting point guard at Stanford. Kerry Carter was first-team all-Western State Conference South Division selection juco player and a top 50 juco nationally. He's built like a truck. The front court features two high major transfers in Desmond Simmons (UW) and Garrett Jackson (USC). These guys are hardly walk on material. What they are is a lot more skilled than many of the bottom tier SEC teams who consist of great athletes but who are lacking in the skill department and who are still learning the game.

The larger question that this critic needs to ask himself is this: Is there a single Auburn player who would start in place of Pangos, Bell, Wesley, Karnowski, Wiltjer and Sabonis. That's GU's top 6. Despite KT Harrell and Antoine Mason's stats, there's now way I would take them ahead of Pangos and Bell. The Zags are one of the very few teams in the nation that have 6 guys who could score 20 on any night. They are a way better team than Auburn. So if GU can go on the road in the WCC as a top 5 team, play to crazy packed houses in gyms where you can hear everything, play against coaches who know everything about them, and struggle to win at times (17 down at SMC, winning by just two at Pepperdine), it only stands to reason that Auburn would have multiple WCC losses if faced with the same circumstances. I mean, this is a team that could only put 35 points on Tulsa at home.

zag944
02-23-2015, 12:14 PM
Spoiled as we've been the last 15-20 years, we really can't even be close to the UK fans mindset given their programs past and present. I don't think there is a whole ton of discussion here about potential elite 8 opponents that wouldn't be extinguished pretty quickly. Hell, if we made it to a 1 seed I don't even think too many here would be talking about the 8/9 winner after the game Southern gave us 2 years ago.

I try not to get too riled up by this kind of thing. Happy to be on the radar of perhaps the best program in the sport. Hopefully if we get a chance at some point, we can really make them notice.

CDC84
02-23-2015, 12:37 PM
Kenpom.com

SMC rank: #64
Offensive Efficiency: 56
Defensive Efficiency: 98

Auburn rank: #146
Offensive Efficiency: 124
Defensive Efficiency: 169

Oh yeah, the Tigers would just steamroll them in front of a packed house on senior night with Patty Mills in the building and a NCAA at large bid possibly on the line........

gonzagafan62
02-23-2015, 12:43 PM
Kenpom.com

SMC rank: #64
Offensive Efficiency: 56
Defensive Efficiency: 98

Auburn rank: #146
Offensive Efficiency: 124
Defensive Efficiency: 169

Oh yeah, the Tigers would just steamroll them in front of a packed house on senior night with Patty Mills in the building and a NCAA at large bid possibly on the line........

Tennessee is worse too. So is South Carolina and even Missouri is worse than all three of them...... Its unreal how mythical they make everything seem...

SEC is terrible, and has been for years.

LongIslandZagFan
02-23-2015, 12:43 PM
Kenpom.com

SMC rank: #64
Offensive Efficiency: 56
Defensive Efficiency: 98

Auburn rank: #146
Offensive Efficiency: 124
Defensive Efficiency: 169

Oh yeah, the Tigers would just steamroll them in front of a packed house on senior night with Patty Mills in the building and a NCAA at large bid possibly on the line........

You and your silly facts... ;)

USF
02-23-2015, 12:46 PM
There is no comparison between St. Mary's or Gonzaga and Kentucky. WCC athletes actually attend class and work toward degrees. 75% of the Kentucky roster is only in college because they aren't allowed to play in the NBA due to age restrictions. They are not really student athletes. It's an NBA farm team.

Their coach has left a wake of trouble everywhere he has gone. The only coach to have Final Four wins vacated at two different schools (Marcus Camby getting paid at UMASS and Derrick Rose's falsified SAT score at Memphis). It is only a matter of time before the NCAA comes calling.

They just have to target a few smaller, more defenseless schools first.

kitzbuel
02-23-2015, 12:56 PM
This guy is so clueless it's ridiculous.

Brad Waldow is one of the only big men in division one ball who is averaging close to a double double every night (19.6 PPG, 9.2 RPG). You can't put up numbers like that at the D-1 level with the lack of skill that this guy thinks he has. During the second half against Gonzaga he showed that he could connect on hook shots with either hand. He's fantastic on the (moving) screen and roll, and unlike most most bigs at this level, he has fantastic touch around the basket. Karnowski and Sabonis - both physical defenders - had to bust their tails to hold him to his season average on Saturday night.

This guy's assessment of SMC's guards is off base. Aaron Bright is a graduate transfer who was the starting point guard at Stanford. Kerry Carter was first-team all-Western State Conference South Division selection juco player and a top 50 juco nationally. He's built like a truck. The front court features two high major transfers in Desmond Simmons (UW) and Garrett Jackson (USC). These guys are hardly walk on material. What they are is a lot more skilled than many of the bottom tier SEC teams who consist of great athletes but who are lacking in the skill department and who are still learning the game.

The larger question that this critic needs to ask himself is this: Is there a single Auburn player who would start in place of Pangos, Bell, Wesley, Karnowski, Wiltjer and Sabonis. That's GU's top 6. Despite KT Harrell and Antoine Mason's stats, there's now way I would take them ahead of Pangos and Bell. The Zags are one of the very few teams in the nation that have 6 guys who could score 20 on any night. They are a way better team than Auburn. So if GU can go on the road in the WCC as a top 5 team, play to crazy packed houses in gyms where you can hear everything, play against coaches who know everything about them, and struggle to win at times (17 down at SMC, winning by just two at Pepperdine), it only stands to reason that Auburn would have multiple WCC losses if faced with the same circumstances. I mean, this is a team that could only put 35 points on Tulsa at home.

Fixed it for you.

CDC84
02-23-2015, 01:07 PM
Hey, he gets away with it :)

rennis
02-23-2015, 02:41 PM
Louisville was the number one overall seed in 2013.

Ugh, jeez, what I was thinking of!? Oh well, no time to explain - just throwing it out there that sometimes the seed lines get reeeeeeeal wacky.

Seattle Hoo
02-23-2015, 02:46 PM
There is no comparison between St. Mary's or Gonzaga and Kentucky. WCC athletes actually attend class and work toward degrees. 75% of the Kentucky roster is only in college because they aren't allowed to play in the NBA due to age restrictions. They are not really student athletes. It's an NBA farm team.

Their coach has left a wake of trouble everywhere he has gone. The only coach to have Final Four wins vacated at two different schools (Marcus Camby getting paid at UMASS and Derrick Rose's falsified SAT score at Memphis). It is only a matter of time before the NCAA comes calling.

They just have to target a few smaller, more defenseless schools first.

I think they're busy figuring out how they can get away without punishing UNCheat. When they're done with that, they will turn their attention to figuring out how to ignore Kentucky.

RenoZag
02-23-2015, 02:54 PM
Will go back and read anything referenced on the Kentucky or Wisconsin message boards when those teams are actually scheduled to play Gonzaga.

In the meantime, I can get all of the Gonzaga hate I can stand from Dons Central.

Beat San Diego !

willandi
02-23-2015, 03:54 PM
How do you really feel, b8?

:lmao:

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seahawks/marshawn-lynch-applies-to-trademark-im-just-here-so-i-wont-get-fined/

Just a heads up 50!

gonzagafan62
02-23-2015, 05:02 PM
Go INto tourney healthy. Give us a shot

zagamatic
02-23-2015, 05:33 PM
I'm watching the Kansas / Kansas state game and they just had Lunardi on who said this about the Zags: a lot of people have a hard time putting a team NOT FROM A POWER CONFERENCE on the 1 line. But if they actually watch the Zags play, they'd understand that the Zags actually are capable of getting to the Final 4

As for the incredibly ignorant Kentucky fans go......do they realize that we beat a healthy Georgia team on a neutral floor while losing our backup point guard as compared to Kentucky nearly getting beat AT KENTUCKY to a Georgia team that was without their top 3 scorers? They're right about the overrated part,but have that label attached to the wrong team.

Oregonzagnut
02-23-2015, 05:57 PM
Go INto tourney healthy. Give us a shot Our opponents go into tourney unhealthy or unlucky. Give us a shot too. :) I will take either to get a FF, and I don't see anyone at Gonzaga complaining about the Minnesota academic scandal days before our first round game WAAAY back.

Zagceo
02-23-2015, 07:31 PM
Our opponents go into tourney unhealthy or unlucky. Give us a shot too. :) I will take either to get a FF, and I don't see anyone at Gonzaga complaining about the Minnesota academic scandal days before our first round game WAAAY back.

Who says we lose with no scandal?

Mr Vulture
02-23-2015, 08:21 PM
I will say Kentucky is clearly #1 in the country but I will also say I'd lay out good $$$ that they don't win it all. They are beatable, particularly because they are very average offensively. If they run into a hot shooting team, they can lose. The SEC is a very mediocre conference.


I'm watching the Kansas / Kansas state game and they just had Lunardi on who said this about the Zags: a lot of people have a hard time putting a team NOT FROM A POWER CONFERENCE on the 1 line. But if they actually watch the Zags play, they'd understand that the Zags actually are capable of getting to the Final 4

As for the incredibly ignorant Kentucky fans go......do they realize that we beat a healthy Georgia team on a neutral floor while losing our backup point guard as compared to Kentucky nearly getting beat AT KENTUCKY to a Georgia team that was without their top 3 scorers? They're right about the overrated part,but have that label attached to the wrong team.

gonzagafan62
02-23-2015, 08:43 PM
I will say Kentucky is clearly #1 in the country but I will also say I'd lay out good $$$ that they don't win it all. They are beatable, particularly because they are very average offensively. If they run into a hot shooting team, they can lose. The SEC is a very mediocre conference.

The WCC is a very mediocre conference too. Anybody can lose to anyone on a given day. That's sports for you.

MickMick
02-24-2015, 06:04 AM
In my opinion, the 2009 UNC team, featuring the likes of Lawson, Green, Zeller, and Hansbrough was much better than the current UK squad.
UK is a great defensive team, but there are better college teams I have seen.

rennis
02-24-2015, 06:38 AM
In my opinion, the 2009 UNC team, featuring the likes of Lawson, Green, Zeller, and Hansbrough was much better than the current UK squad.
UK is a great defensive team, but there are better college teams I have seen.

UNC's experience and scoring abilities are significantly better, to me, than UK's 2015 squad. In terms of depth and athleticism, UK has that one in the bag. That would be a pretty fun game to watch!

Zagceo
02-24-2015, 09:20 AM
Found this thread in Badgernation board with a special edition of Lunardi's rundown


Top-line report

MIDWEST/Kentucky vs. WEST/Gonzaga (1 vs. 4)

EAST/Virginia vs. SOUTH/Duke (2 vs. 3)

It's time for one of those dreaded "blind résumé" comparisons, although it shouldn't take long to figure out which two teams we're talking about:

Category Team A Team B

W-L
27-1
25-2


Polls
3/2
5/4


RPI/SOS
8/76
6/23


Nonconference RPI/SOS
5/14
8/17


BPI
4
3


Top 50
4-1
6-1




Team A, of course, is Gonzaga. The Bulldogs are currently No. 4 overall on our seed list and are squatting atop the NCAA bracket as the fourth and final No. 1 seed.

Team B is Wisconsin. The Badgers are a single Duke or Gonzaga loss from ascending to the top line and would be no worse than 50/50 to reside there now given the perfectly reasonable arguments in their favor.

Ultimately, my job is to tell you what the NCAA selection committee would do given a specific set of circumstances (as opposed to advocating for my own voting preferences). And this case, for now, is simply too close to call.

Every argument against the Zags comes down to conference affiliation, even though that item is specifically excluded as selection or seeding criteria by the committee. Every argument in Wisconsin's favor starts by excluding from its résumé the Kaminsky-less loss at Rutgers, which is a very realistic and likely discussion item when the committee convenes in two and a half weeks.

So the logic problem in my mind goes something like this:

• The teams are essentially even in terms of good wins, analytics and the especially unhelpful (at least in this case) "eye test."

• Gonzaga's one loss (in overtime at Arizona) is less damaging in my eyes than Wisconsin losing by 10 at home to Duke.

• The additional loss for Wisconsin (without Kaminsky) can't be completely ignored, just as a comparable Gonzaga defeat -- at Santa Clara, let's say, without Kyle Wiltjer (http://sports.espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/56355/kyle-wiltjer) or Kevin Pangos (http://sports.espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/player/_/id/56798/kevin-pangos) -- would be a major black mark.

Put it all together and ask yourself this question: If Wisconsin had only one loss (in overtime at a top-10 team) and Gonzaga had two, including one at Santa Clara without its best player, would we even be having this conversation? Of course not, as no one would question Wisconsin's top line spot in that evaluation.

As a branding and reputation question, the Badgers are the choice. As a logic problem, it's still Gonzaga by the thinnest hair of your head. And that hair gets even thinner if Wisconsin or another No. 2 seed wins out and piles up a high number of NCAA-level wins in the process.

But those things haven't happened yet. So for another day, the Zags are a No. 1 seed as a matter of both fact and logic (confirmed in our latest tourney odds chart below).

Team Overall seed No. 1 odds

Kentucky
No. 1
95 percent


Virginia
No. 2
60 percent


Duke
No. 3
60 percent


Gonzaga
No. 4
50 percent


Wisconsin
No. 5
40 percent


Villanova
No. 6
35 percent


Arizona
No. 7
35 percent


Kansas
No. 8
20 percent


"Field"
5 percent

TheZagPhish
02-24-2015, 09:24 AM
We're currently number one seed squatters! That's awesome!

JPtheBeasta
02-24-2015, 09:31 AM
In my opinion, the 2009 UNC team, featuring the likes of Lawson, Green, Zeller, and Hansbrough was much better than the current UK squad.
UK is a great defensive team, but there are better college teams I have seen.

+1

Although I don't have the stats in front of me, I remember that UNC team being much better offensively.

Birddog
02-24-2015, 09:31 AM
We're currently number one seed squatters! That's awesome!

I actually think it's kinda funny and somewhat accurate. Zags are there until someone evicts them (provided they win out). I say we put a couch and fridge on the front porch while we're at it.

seasontixholder
02-24-2015, 09:50 AM
I've been biding my time with this thread, anticipating that the stereotypical slurs contained in the first two posts might be taken down. But, seeing that it has been live for over 24 hours, and has seen participation by an administrator and several moderators, I have concluded that the insults are officially within the comfort zone of the Bulldog community and represents its values.

Disappointed to say the least.

mgadfly
02-24-2015, 10:05 AM
I think the UNC team from 2009 was fantastic, but I'd still take this Kentucky team over them head to head. Kentucky slipped to #2 in defense nationally (Virginia's defense is historic as well this season) but is #8 offensively. North Carolina 2009 lost four games and was #1 offensively, but only #21 defensively.

PG: Ty Lawson vs Andrew Harrison
Lawson is superior in just about every way. He controlled games with his speed, quickness, ball-handling, and distribution. AND he was the most efficient scorer in the country. He was a considerably better on ball defender than Harrison and knew when to take risks. Andrew Harrison is a much bigger guard that may give outside shooters fits, but he isn't nearly the complete package Lawson was his junior season.

SG: Wayne Ellington vs Aaron Harrison
Ellington is a more efficient player that shot considerably better than Aaron Harrison. He was also a superior rebounder and passer. Harrison is a big guard that bothers perimeter players with his size. He is also much more active defensively and is more disruptive than Ellington. The advantage here goes to North Carolina, but for Kentucky's scheme Harrison is a very valuable piece of the puzzle.

SF: Danny Green vs Devin Booker
It is tough to beat Danny Green, but believe it or not, Devin Booker is the better shooting, more efficient option of the two. Green knocked down nearly 42% of his three-pointers in 2009, but Booker is shooting a Wiltjer-like 45% from range. On paper, Green is a much better defender and rebounder, but Booker isn't called on to rack up the same type of rebounding stats that Green was. I'd give the edge, slightly, to the senior Green, but not by the margin I expected.

PF: Deon Thompson vs Karl-Anthony Towns
This isn't even close. It is really an insult to mention Thompson in the same breath as Towns. KAT is a much more efficient offensive player, rebounder, defender, shot-blocker, passer, etc... than Thompson. MASSIVE advantage to Kentucky.

C: Tyler Hansbrough vs Willie Caulie-Stein
Hansbrough was an elite offensive player with a 124.0 O-Rating. Caulie-Stein has an impressive 117.3 O-Rating. Both worked the glass hard and have similar numbers (though a good argument could be made that TH had more opportunities considering Thompson didn't bother to rebound while WCS has less opportunities with KAT sucking up boards opposite him). But the biggest difference in their games is shot blocking. Hansbrough has a below-the-rim 1.1% block percentage. Good for, I'm assuming, 7 thousandth nationally or so. WCS has a 6.6 block %, 118th nationally. I'd give the edge to the bigger, much better defensively, WCS but recognize an argument could be made for the veteran scorer Hansbrough.

Bench: 27.4% of UNC's minutes went to the bench. 6'10" Ed Davis gave them size off the bench that blocked a lot of shots and was a Sabonis-like rebounder. That said, Bobby Frasor was their seventh man, and he was horrible. Meanwhile, Kentucky's bench includes 7-foot Dakari Johnson (statistically their best player), 6'10" Trey Lyles (putting up great numbers too), and efficient backup point guard Tyler Ullis. They account for 42% of the minutes (and would be more if Poythress wasn't out). Another massive edge to Kentucky.


I think Hansbrough would have been neutralized inside and Lawson wouldn't have been able to get to the rim and draw double teams (opening up all those great shooters). But that was a seasoned and experienced North Carolina squad with tons of shooting. It'd be a great game to watch. Still, Kentucky is impressive.

GoZags
02-24-2015, 10:12 AM
I've been biding my time with this thread, anticipating that the stereotypical slurs contained in the first two posts might be taken down. But, seeing that it has been live for over 24 hours, and has seen participation by an administrator and several moderators, I have concluded that the insults are officially within the comfort zone of the Bulldog community and represents its values.

Disappointed to say the least.

http://guboards.spokesmanreview.com/showthread.php?17050-Please-Read-GUBoards-Rules

BobZag
02-24-2015, 10:14 AM
Like James Franco says in "The Interview" --

"Haters gonna hate, Ain'ters gonna ain't."

:p



The chance that a Zags #1 seed could send Wisconsin to UKs bracket has massively ratcheted up the hate for us in Lexington. Locker room wall paper if i've ever seen it. I'm not saying that we deserve a #1, but some of these hayseeds clearly have not watched a single game we've played. I suspect for many of them our late start times conflict with the graveyard shift at the local Piggly Wiggly.

https://kentucky.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=1383&tid=210620800&mid=210620800&sid=888&style=2

jim77
02-24-2015, 10:33 AM
They'd harass KP alright...until Few decides that some good ole fashioned JP Batista picks are in order. Imagine chasing KP with you're hair on fire only to get picked by Karnowski. Pretty soon the pressing team would stop or learn to run with their head looking behind them....we haven't made a single team pay for their overly aggressive pressing..time for some ol school ball. Wish somebody had some video's of JP's bone crunching picks.

CDC84
02-24-2015, 10:36 AM
I think the UNC team from 2009 was fantastic, but I'd still take this Kentucky team over them head to head. Kentucky slipped to #2 in defense nationally (Virginia's defense is historic as well this season) but is #8 offensively. North Carolina 2009 lost four games and was #1 offensively, but only #21 defensively.

The biggest problem in this "fantasy" game could be Roy Williams. Would he be willing to zone? He didn't zone when UNC played at UK this year, and his team got hammered. He's one of these guys who tends to stick with one defense as a matter of pride. In order to beat UK this year, you either have to zone, or you have to play an elite pack line defense like Virginia plays. Kentucky this year is not a good halfcourt offensive team, despite what their offensive efficiency numbers say. So much of their scoring comes from offensive rebounds.

The other issue with this UK team is that the best team they have played, by far and away, is Kansas. The Jayhawks lack the size and other intangibles to beat UK. We really don't know how UK will respond when they finally have to face Virginia, Arizona or even Wisconsin. And we especially won't know how they will respond if they have face those teams with an undefeated record in the one and done format of the NCAA tourney. A 2009 UNC/2015 UK fantasy game is kind of hard to analyze right now. It might be easier at the end of the season.

Unlike some people on this board, I happen to believe that a truly elite offensive team will beat an elite defensive team almost every time so long as the elite offensive team plays "good" defense. It's just how basketball works. We have seen very, very few offenses in recent times as cohesive as that 2009 UNC team. It would be an interesting game.

jim77
02-24-2015, 10:43 AM
I think the UNC team from 2009 was fantastic, but I'd still take this Kentucky team over them head to head. Kentucky slipped to #2 in defense nationally (Virginia's defense is historic as well this season) but is #8 offensively. North Carolina 2009 lost four games and was #1 offensively, but only #21 defensively.

PG: Ty Lawson vs Andrew Harrison
Lawson is superior in just about every way. He controlled games with his speed, quickness, ball-handling, and distribution. AND he was the most efficient scorer in the country. He was a considerably better on ball defender than Harrison and knew when to take risks. Andrew Harrison is a much bigger guard that may give outside shooters fits, but he isn't nearly the complete package Lawson was his junior season.

SG: Wayne Ellington vs Aaron Harrison
Ellington is a more efficient player that shot considerably better than Aaron Harrison. He was also a superior rebounder and passer. Harrison is a big guard that bothers perimeter players with his size. He is also much more active defensively and is more disruptive than Ellington. The advantage here goes to North Carolina, but for Kentucky's scheme Harrison is a very valuable piece of the puzzle.

SF: Danny Green vs Devin Booker
It is tough to beat Danny Green, but believe it or not, Devin Booker is the better shooting, more efficient option of the two. Green knocked down nearly 42% of his three-pointers in 2009, but Booker is shooting a Wiltjer-like 45% from range. On paper, Green is a much better defender and rebounder, but Booker isn't called on to rack up the same type of rebounding stats that Green was. I'd give the edge, slightly, to the senior Green, but not by the margin I expected.

PF: Deon Thompson vs Karl-Anthony Towns
This isn't even close. It is really an insult to mention Thompson in the same breath as Towns. KAT is a much more efficient offensive player, rebounder, defender, shot-blocker, passer, etc... than Thompson. MASSIVE advantage to Kentucky.

C: Tyler Hansbrough vs Willie Caulie-Stein
Hansbrough was an elite offensive player with a 124.0 O-Rating. Caulie-Stein has an impressive 117.3 O-Rating. Both worked the glass hard and have similar numbers (though a good argument could be made that TH had more opportunities considering Thompson didn't bother to rebound while WCS has less opportunities with KAT sucking up boards opposite him). But the biggest difference in their games is shot blocking. Hansbrough has a below-the-rim 1.1% block percentage. Good for, I'm assuming, 7 thousandth nationally or so. WCS has a 6.6 block %, 118th nationally. I'd give the edge to the bigger, much better defensively, WCS but recognize an argument could be made for the veteran scorer Hansbrough.

Bench: 27.4% of UNC's minutes went to the bench. 6'10" Ed Davis gave them size off the bench that blocked a lot of shots and was a Sabonis-like rebounder. That said, Bobby Frasor was their seventh man, and he was horrible. Meanwhile, Kentucky's bench includes 7-foot Dakari Johnson (statistically their best player), 6'10" Trey Lyles (putting up great numbers too), and efficient backup point guard Tyler Ullis. They account for 42% of the minutes (and would be more if Poythress wasn't out). Another massive edge to Kentucky.


I think Hansbrough would have been neutralized inside and Lawson wouldn't have been able to get to the rim and draw double teams (opening up all those great shooters). But that was a seasoned and experienced North Carolina squad with tons of shooting. It'd be a great game to watch. Still, Kentucky is impressive.

Negative....the 2009 Tarheels are the better team...simply more BB IQ. I'd love to see VA play them and see if UK can win from the outside? You make UK play halfcourt ball....and you make them defend for 30 seconds....everytime....its their shooting skill versus yours. You simply limit their attempts like the Cavaliers are so good at doing.

Mr Vulture
02-24-2015, 10:45 AM
This is the point I've been trying to make for weeks. I don't like the odds of a Kentucky team should they enter the tournament still undefeated. That has not boded well historically with the last undefeated team to win the tournament being Indiana in 1976. In fact, the last undefeated team entering the tournament that made the final game was Indiana State in 1979. Also, I think that Kentucky, will be in trouble should they run into a hot shooting team. Not necessarily talking about the first weekend but after that. Their offensive limitations could hurt them badly against teams like GU, Wisconsin, and Duke that have size and can shoot the ball.


The biggest problem in this "fantasy" game could be Roy Williams. Would he be willing to zone? He didn't zone when UNC played at UK this year, and his team got hammered. He's one of these guys who tends to stick with one defense as a matter of pride. In order to beat UK this year, you either have to zone, or you have to play an elite pack line defense like Virginia plays. Kentucky this year is not a good halfcourt offensive team, despite what their offensive efficiency numbers say. So much of their scoring comes from offensive rebounds.

The other issue with this UK team is that the best team they have played, by far and away, is Kansas. The Jayhawks lack the size and other intangibles to beat UK. We really don't know how UK will respond when they finally have to face Virginia, Arizona or even Wisconsin. And we especially won't know how they will respond if they have face those teams with an undefeated record in the one and done format of the NCAA tourney. A 2009 UNC/2015 UK fantasy game is kind of hard to analyze right now. It might be easier at the end of the season.

Unlike some people on this board, I happen to believe that a truly elite offensive team will beat an elite defensive team almost every time so long as the elite offensive team plays "good" defense. It's just how basketball works. We have seen very, very few offenses in recent times as cohesive as that 2009 UNC team. It would be an interesting game.

jim77
02-24-2015, 10:47 AM
The biggest problem in this "fantasy" game could be Roy Williams. Would he be willing to zone? He didn't zone when UNC played at UK this year, and his team got hammered. He's one of these guys who tends to stick with one defense as a matter of pride. In order to beat UK this year, you either have to zone, or you have to play an elite pack line defense like Virginia plays. Kentucky this year is not a good halfcourt offensive team, despite what their offensive efficiency numbers say. So much of their scoring comes from offensive rebounds.

The other issue with this UK team is that the best team they have played, by far and away, is Kansas. The Jayhawks lack the size and other intangibles to beat UK. We really don't know how UK will respond when they finally have to face Virginia, Arizona or even Wisconsin. And we especially won't know how they will respond if they have face those teams with an undefeated record in the one and done format of the NCAA tourney. A 2009 UNC/2015 UK fantasy game is kind of hard to analyze right now. It might be easier at the end of the season.

Unlike some people on this board, I happen to believe that a truly elite offensive team will beat an elite defensive team almost every time so long as the elite offensive team plays "good" defense. It's just how basketball works. We have seen very, very few offenses in recent times as cohesive as that 2009 UNC team. It would be an interesting game.

Agreed

rennis
02-24-2015, 11:01 AM
If we really want to get cute, I think you could make the argument that this Kentucky team might be Calipari's best squad in Lexington, but that his 2008 Memphis team was better. They went into the tournament 33-1. They played great defense, but also put up 80ppg. I know they lost to Kansas in the championship game, but the game easily could have gone their way and we'd all be talking about them as one of the greatest teams of all time. Nonetheless they stomped everyone but Miss St. on their way through the tourney. Heck, they beat Michigan State, Texas, and UCLA by a combined 51 points. That was impressive.

I would put Rose, Douglas Roberts, and Dozier up against UK's best three players without hesitation. Memphis was ridiculous that year.

ValencyLovesZagsInAtlanta
02-24-2015, 11:15 AM
If we really want to get cute, I think you could make the argument that this Kentucky team might be Calipari's best squad in Lexington, but that his 2008 Memphis team was better. They went into the tournament 33-1. They played great defense, but also put up 80ppg. I know they lost to Kansas in the championship game, but the game easily could have gone their way and we'd all be talking about them as one of the greatest teams of all time. Nonetheless they stomped everyone but Miss St. on their way through the tourney. Heck, they beat Michigan State, Texas, and UCLA by a combined 51 points. That was impressive.

I would put Rose, Douglas Roberts, and Dozier up against UK's best three players without hesitation. Memphis was ridiculous that year.

The Anthony Davis led team was better in my opinion.

ValencyLovesZagsInAtlanta
02-24-2015, 11:26 AM
The biggest problem in this "fantasy" game could be Roy Williams. Would he be willing to zone? He didn't zone when UNC played at UK this year, and his team got hammered. He's one of these guys who tends to stick with one defense as a matter of pride. In order to beat UK this year, you either have to zone, or you have to play an elite pack line defense like Virginia plays. Kentucky this year is not a good halfcourt offensive team, despite what their offensive efficiency numbers say. So much of their scoring comes from offensive rebounds.

The other issue with this UK team is that the best team they have played, by far and away, is Kansas. The Jayhawks lack the size and other intangibles to beat UK. We really don't know how UK will respond when they finally have to face Virginia, Arizona or even Wisconsin. And we especially won't know how they will respond if they have face those teams with an undefeated record in the one and done format of the NCAA tourney. A 2009 UNC/2015 UK fantasy game is kind of hard to analyze right now. It might be easier at the end of the season.

Unlike some people on this board, I happen to believe that a truly elite offensive team will beat an elite defensive team almost every time so long as the elite offensive team plays "good" defense. It's just how basketball works. We have seen very, very few offenses in recent times as cohesive as that 2009 UNC team. It would be an interesting game.

Hi CDC,

Great defensive guards going straight man will be the recipe to beat Kentucky. I don't disagree that going zone can beat them with a poor shooting night. That can happen to any team. Booker can shoot though. When Harrison is pressured on the exterior the whole offense can be shut down. I like Ulis but without guards that can prevent the easy entry pass you will have problems. Last year they had James Young and the Harrison twins. The back court is not much better this year. I agree that Virginia would beat Kentucky with the Pack-line just like you mentioned. The Pack-Line is their signature D. Northern Iowa has even more depth than Virginia right now and is playing great defense. Jacobson is a great coach also after learning from last years mistakes. I think Northern Iowa loses 1 more game and gets a 4 or 5 seed. Hopefully they meet Kentucky. Kentucky will sleep walk through the first half. lol

Just chatting but this time of year is so much fun! Great post by the way. :)

RenoZag
02-24-2015, 11:39 AM
I've been biding my time with this thread, anticipating that the stereotypical slurs contained in the first two posts might be taken down. But, seeing that it has been live for over 24 hours, and has seen participation by an administrator and several moderators, I have concluded that the insults are officially within the comfort zone of the Bulldog community and represents its values.

Disappointed to say the least.

So writes the observer who:

declared black Nike uniforms were “aimed at suburban kids burdened with average IQs, insecurities and short tools;”

who defended the student’s taunting of DeAngelo Casto’s reading skills by saying he hadn’t “been hypersensitized by 25 years of Oprah and other thumbsuckers.,” and then suggested “We're on the verge of banning insults altogether in the favor of group hugs for opposing players;”

who claimed “it takes a real PC jackwagon to cringe about the Kennel Club.”

So why would you cringe about trash talking on an internet fan board ? Are you disappointed the OP's beat you to it ?

mgadfly
02-24-2015, 12:21 PM
Negative....the 2009 Tarheels are the better team...simply more BB IQ. I'd love to see VA play them and see if UK can win from the outside? You make UK play halfcourt ball....and you make them defend for 30 seconds....everytime....its their shooting skill versus yours. You simply limit their attempts like the Cavaliers are so good at doing.

I'm not sure that is as simple as it sounds, but less possessions is the way to keep it close.

I think GU matches up the best against Kentucky (offensive rebounding plus insane 3 point shooting) but I agree Virginia is the other team that can shorten the game, play great defense, and have a decent chance to knock them off.

I don't agree that BB IQ makes the 2009 Tarheels better. That was a fantastic team but they lacked height and shot blockers and their defensive efficiency numbers shows that. That said, the way they were playing in the tourney they could have beaten anyone.

I also agree that the mounting pressure of an undefeated season may get to the freshmen.

I don't like N. Iowa's chances at all (I've posted before that the weaknesses for Kentucky - giving up rebounds and 3 point shooting - does not match up well with N. Iowa's strengths. I like N. Iowa to make a run at the SW16, but they'd be much better suited to knocking off Virginia.

I'd rather see Baylor, Duke, SMU, Murray State, or Stanford. Teams that can shoot and spread a defense while getting tons of offensive rebounds. I'd even like to see Kansas get another shot at them. They were destroyed in that game, but I'm betting it'd be closer a second time around.

seacatfan
02-24-2015, 12:57 PM
In my opinion, the 2009 UNC team, featuring the likes of Lawson, Green, Zeller, and Hansbrough was much better than the current UK squad.
UK is a great defensive team, but there are better college teams I have seen.

I think Zeller was injured early that year, but you forgot their stud 2G Ellington. As much attention as Hansbrough got, it was really the two guards Lawson and Ellington that made that team go. They were an awesome pair of college guards. They also had Deon Thompson, wasn't a big scorer but I saw him light several teams up when they basically left him alone. Ed Davis was a decent backup big that provided some length.

seacatfan
02-24-2015, 01:05 PM
Agree it's hard (impossible?) to compare teams from different years. I know 2015 UK plays really good halfcourt D. How is their transition D? 2009 UNC scored a bunch of points on fast breaks, off both missed and made shots by their opponents. Lawson is probably the fastest guard dribbling the ball I've ever seen. Everybody that played UNC that year knew the Heels were going to push tempo and Lawson would try to drive straight to the rim, but hardly anybody stopped them from doing it.

seacatfan
02-24-2015, 01:08 PM
I saw a thread on a Duke message board today that was similar to the Kentucky thread referenced by the OP. 5 pages of spewing hate with only a couple of voices of reason speaking up.

KStyles
02-24-2015, 01:17 PM
Wisconsin is not going to be in Kentuckys region so not sure the point of all this...that is unless Wisconsin faded down the stretch. Barring something unforeseen, Kentucky will be the #1 seed in the tournament and therefore would have the 4th of the #2 seeds in their region.

The committee doesn't strictly follow their seed list in an s-curve when building the bracket. Overall #4 Gonzaga drew overall #8 Ohio State as their region's 2-seed in 2013.

ZagaZags
02-24-2015, 01:35 PM
I saw a thread on a Duke message board today that was similar to the Kentucky thread referenced by the OP. 5 pages of spewing hate with only a couple of voices of reason speaking up.

Do you have a link?

Mr Vulture
02-24-2015, 01:43 PM
I understand what you are saying but #8 Ohio State was in Gonzaga's region because there wasn't a higher seeded team (5-7) that was a West Coast team. Therefore, they sent the lowest of the 2's out to the West. The other 2 seeds were thus matched up geographically from there. In this years case, even in Gonzaga were a 2 seed, they would still seed them out West while Kentucky would likely be seeded in the Midwest or possibly South region. Thus, we wouldn't be seeing them until the Final Four at the earliest.


The committee doesn't strictly follow their seed list in an s-curve when building the bracket. Overall #4 Gonzaga drew overall #8 Ohio State as their region's 2-seed in 2013.

seacatfan
02-24-2015, 01:51 PM
Do you have a link?

http://duke.scout.com/forums/1386-tdd-hoops/13678584-i-ve-come-to-despise-gonzaga-rant?s=167

Try that. It's ugly. Don't say I didn't warn you.

Oops, need an account with Scout to be able to see this. Sorry, don't know a way around that.

Mr Vulture
02-24-2015, 02:53 PM
The funny thing to me is that this is a Duke board...one of the teams that underachieves in the tournament as much or more than any team in the country. They are going to be in for a rude awakening if they end up playing Gonzaga. As I've said, I personally can see the argument of a 2 seed for the Zags just as I can see the argument for a 1 seed. The problem is that these people have not watched the Zags play much if at all. They are forming their opinions on crap that has been spewed repeatedly on the internet about Gonzaga consistently underachieving in the tournament. The problem with that is that it is patently false. There has been only 2 times in the past 10 tournaments that Gonzaga lost to a lower seeded team. One was versus Davidson with Steph Curry and that was a 7/10 game played within 50 miles of the campus of Davidson. The other was two years ago versus Wichita State who made the Final Four and nearly beat Louisville who won it all.

seacatfan
02-24-2015, 03:04 PM
The main gist of the Duke board thread is they are concerned about GU "stealing" a #1 seed from someone else they think is more deserving. They do point out GU's lack of deep runs in the Tourney, while almost all of them are conveniently ignoring how many double digit seeds Duke has lost to in the Tourney in recent years. I guess their 4 Titles and umpteen Final 4's gives them some leeway, but they've definitely been underachieving big time lately.

ZagsGoZags
02-24-2015, 03:57 PM
The Duke and Kentucky boards show us little respect, condescend, and often speak from an elitist point of view.
Let's turn the tables
and see how we refer to our own bottom feeders, Pacific, Loyola, etc, and see if held by the same standard, some of our comments might look about the same. Pepperdine and St. Mary's could certainly present some stats-based arguments about how we are under rating them.
I think I am guilty of this myself.