No more Kentucky...

#127
#127
BruinVol said:
Gonzaga is a different animal due to their schedule. The desperately need to find a way to play challenging games late in the season. It’s hard to think their model is the end all be all because they really don’t play anyone that is even remotely close to them after conference schedule starts.
Click to expand...

Stop using the Gonzaga schedule as a crutch. They played the literal toughest non-conference in the entire country last year and that was after games with Baylor and Tennessee had been cancelled. This “they don’t play anyone narrative” is just false.
 
#128
#128
Maxwell865 said:
Every NCAA Championship Game except for 2 since 1978 had a McDonald's All American on either roster. Only 6 of the winners since 1978 didn't have McDonalds AA on their team. This argument is dumb af. You don't deny players cause they are too good...
Click to expand...

how old were those Mcdonals AAs?

where those natty winners led by one and dones?

I’d like to see a list of the last 5 national title teams. Seems to me the one and done trend really started to turn sour about 5 years ago.
 
#129
#129
TheMookieMonster said:
Stop using the Gonzaga schedule as a crutch. They played the literal toughest non-conference in the entire country last year and that was after games with Baylor and Tennessee had been cancelled. This “they don’t play anyone narrative” is just false.
Click to expand...

they play as many hard teams as possible but let’s be honest playing teams before Christmas isnt the same as playing them late. They need to play toughest teams later and without changing conferences they really can’t
 
  • Like
Reactions: sechamp2012 and RockyTop865
#130
#130
OrangeVolMan said:
So you are basing your entire argument on one year. That’s like saying the roulette wheel hit 8 so I’m betting 8 every time. There are plenty of examples of teams with one and done players that won championships. That having been said, your original argument was you didn’t want to be Kentucky and we weren’t. We had two one and done players which is not the Kentucky model so your original point is null and void anyway.
Click to expand...

The trend is actually not going toward one and done players winning national titles.

2021: Baylor didn't have any one and dones
2019: Virginia didn't have any one and dones
2018: Villanova had 5 NBA players who were not one and done
2017: UNC had Tony Bradley, who was only one and done but didn't even start
2016: Villanova didn't have any one and dones
2015: Duke was most recent team with 2 major contributors that were one and done
2014: UConn didn't have any one and dones
2013: Louisville didn't have any one and dones
2012: UK had 3 one and dones, and it helped having the 1st overall pick

There is a trend here. While you have to take guys like Springer and Johnson and see what happens, it does appear that taking top 100 players that aren't one and done is the better model now to win titles. Even Duke and UK had some experience on its team in the years that they won, so it's important to at least have a mix. That is why you see Calipari working the transfer market the last 2 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sechamp2012
#131
#131
VolGee4 said:
The trend is actually not going toward one and done players winning national titles. Now, you can definitely categorize the number of one and dones on one team.

2021: Baylor didn't have any one and dones
2019: Virginia didn't have any one and dones
2018: Villanova had 5 NBA players who were not one and done
2017: UNC had Tony Bradley, who was only one and done but didn't even start
2016: Villanova didn't have any one and dones
2015: Duke was most recent team with 2 major contributors that were one and done
2014: UConn didn't have any one and dones
2013: Louisville didn't have any one and dones
2012: UK had 3 one and dones, and it helped having the 1st overall pick

There is a trend here. While you have to take guys like Springer and Johnson and see what happens, it does appear that taking top 100 players that aren't one and done is the better model now to win titles.
Click to expand...

there it is. That Sums up my OP. Well done
 
#132
#132
A team full of one-and-domes is no longer the best model. That is something everyone here agrees upon. But, you all will never convince me that adding an elite player like Kennedy Chandler into the mix of talented 3-4 year players wouldn’t make any team instantly better. There is no reason and no issue with sprinkling in trascendant talents if the rest of your roster is good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mr.checkerboards, Maxwell865 and walkenvol
#133
#133
TheMookieMonster said:
A team full of one-and-domes is no longer the best model. That is something everyone here agrees upon. But, you all will never convince me that adding an elite player like Kennedy Chandler into the mix of talented 3-4 year players wouldn’t make any team instantly better. There is no reason and no issue with sprinkling in trascendant talents if the rest of your roster is good.
Click to expand...

if he’s a role player all
Good.

If he’s the leader of the team we will be a disappointment
 
#134
#134
TheMookieMonster said:
A team full of one-and-domes is no longer the best model. That is something everyone here agrees upon. But, you all will never convince me that adding an elite player like Kennedy Chandler into the mix of talented 3-4 year players wouldn’t make any team instantly better. There is no reason and no issue with sprinkling in trascendant talents if the rest of your roster is good.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree, but in that list, Tyus Jones and Marquis Teague are the only examples of a team with a freshman PG that won a title, and they had experienced guards and elite big men around them.

Fans may not like it, but the model seems to be guards that were top 75 or so and have about 2 years of seasoning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BruinVol
#135
#135
BruinVol said:
if he’s a role player all
Good.

If he’s the leader of the team we will be a disappointment
Click to expand...

Good to know. I hope you do not reverse course and cheer for Kennedy win he is stacking up the wins here since he, by your standards, shouldn't come here.

I've listened to his interviews. I've watched him lead his high school to a national title appearance while being the clear vocal leader on that squad. He can do it here, and I fully anticipate him doing it here. But, he also won't be THE leader of the team. He will be a leader. You can have more than one. JJJ is the leader of this team and he said so himself after the NCAAT loss.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RockyTop865 and Maxwell865
#136
#136
TheMookieMonster said:
Good to know. I hope you do not reverse course and cheer for Kennedy win he is stacking up the wins here since he, by your standards, shouldn't come here.

I've listened to his interviews. I've watched him lead his high school to a national title appearance while being the clear vocal leader on that squad. He can do it here, and I fully anticipate him doing it here. But, he also won't be THE leader of the team. He will be a leader. You can have more than one. JJJ is the leader of this team and he said so himself after the NCAAT loss.
Click to expand...

you can call this one and done thinking dumb all you want but the evidence has been shown to you.


By leader I mean statistically the “leader”. If he’s the go to guy for the team next year when we need a basket we will have another similar year to this year. Frustrating
 
#137
#137
Carmello Anthony was one and done and led Syracuse to a NC, also. Just to add to that list
 
#138
#138
BruinVol said:
you can call this one and done thinking dumb all you want but the evidence has been shown to you.


By leader I mean statistically the “leader”. If he’s the go to guy for the team next year when we need a basket we will have another similar year to this year. Frustrating
Click to expand...

Define "statistically" the leader? Because no one expects Kennedy to lead us in PPG, RPG, etc. He is going to be the facilitator who can open the floor up for the rest of the team to make plays, something no one on last year's roster was capable of.

We added a playmaker/shooter in Justin Powell to be the perimeter threat. We're looking to add an inside presence to be a threat near the basket. This is a team sport. Kennedy isn't going to be asked to do it all. I'm not sure where you got that notion from, but it's wrong. He doesn't have to "statistically" lead the team in a bunch of different categories to make a huge impact on this roster.
 
#139
#139
TheMookieMonster said:
Define "statistically" the leader? Because no one expects Kennedy to lead us in PPG, RPG, etc. He is going to be the facilitator who can open the floor up for the rest of the team to make plays, something no one on last year's roster was capable of.

We added a playmaker/shooter in Justin Powell to be the perimeter threat. We're looking to add an inside presence to be a threat near the basket. This is a team sport. Kennedy isn't going to be asked to do it all. I'm not sure where you got that notion from, but it's wrong. He doesn't have to "statistically" lead the team in a bunch of different categories to make a huge impact on this roster.
Click to expand...

If Chandler puts up similar numbers to Keon and Springer we are in trouble.

He needs to be an 8-10pt guy. He can’t be a guy that gets 12-15 shots a game which was happening a lot at the end of the year with Keon and springer
 
#140
#140
BruinVol said:
If Chandler puts up similar numbers to Keon and Springer we are in trouble.

He needs to be an 8-10pt guy. He can’t be a guy that gets 12-15 shots a game which was happening a lot at the end of the year with Keon and springer
Click to expand...

Lol. This is just not true. Springer averaged 12.5 PPG with 4.2 - 9.1 shots per game according to ESPN Stats & Info. This notion that our star PG should average fewer points and fewer shots in a game is stupid. Do you not remember that we had one of the worst offenses in the SEC this past year? We aren't in trouble if Chandler gives us a Springer stat line. What a ridiculous notion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mr.checkerboards
#144
#144
zjcvols said:
Johnson and Springer are the best players on the team but sure.

The problem isn’t them. It’s the fact that from 2017-2019 we only got two decent players from those recruiting classes and we run an outdated offense.
Click to expand...
They run the variations of the same offenses Gonzaga, Kansas, and Mich State run. So it’s far from outdated. The recruits are fine. The weakest part of our program is the 3% of the fan base that have little basketball IQ whom would rather pile on criticism instead of sharing encouragement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HippieVol33
#145
#145
aWhiteLoftonChism said:
They run the variations of the same offenses Gonzaga, Kansas, and Mich State run. So it’s far from outdated. The recruits are fine. The weakest part of our program is the 3% that have little basketball IQ whom would rather pile on criticism instead of sharing encouragement.
Click to expand...

Go Vols go!
does that help?

shoot em thru the hoop boys!

Fight hard gentlemen!

We love you
 
  • Like
Reactions: LittleCat and aWhiteLoftonChism
#147
#147
Rob Lewis mentioned on the podcast today that Rick Barnes was “WELL AWARE” that Baylor won a championship starting juniors and seniors and not relying on highly ranked one and done kids. Says that Tennessee won’t turn away a Keon Johnson in the future but that they’re going to focus on what got the program to winning 30+ games.
 
#148
#148
bleedingTNorange said:
Rob Lewis mentioned on the podcast today that Rick Barnes was “WELL AWARE” that Baylor won a championship starting juniors and seniors and not relying on highly ranked one and done kids. Says that Tennessee won’t turn away a Keon Johnson in the future but that they’re going to focus on what got the program to winning 30+ games.
Click to expand...

Yes, Rick...that’s the problem 🙄🙄🙄
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top