Kentucky or Virginia

[HammerDown]

I'm looking at these top teams and I'm sorry, but Gonzaga doesn't belong.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

 

[HammerDown]

Was talking to a guy yesterday who insisted someone would beat Kentucky in the regular season. We looked at the schedule and I asked him who and he got quiet.

 

[gpm1976]

[MEDIA=twitter]567736043961454595[/MEDIA]

Was talking to a guy yesterday who insisted someone would beat Kentucky in the regular season. We looked at the schedule and I asked him who and he got quiet.

I agree, the regular season is a forgone conclusion, but I don't see them winning the whole thing. They'll have the biggest target on their back we've ever seen.. plus they don't seem to have anyone other than Booker who is truly an outside threat.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

This is why I don't necessarily see Kentucky winning the whole thing. Big and athletic, but their little mini-me guard (Ulis) is the only guy who can shoot.

I agree, the regular season is a forgone conclusion, but I don't see them winning the whole thing. They'll have the biggest target on their back we've ever seen.. plus they don't seem to have anyone other than Booker who is truly an outside threat.

lolwut?

 

[podsox]

duke has the offense to give Kentucky fits but their d has been pretty pathetic for most of the season. they did shut down my irish though

 

[gpm1976]

lolwut?

My bad. I watched a few games where Ulis hit some big shots. But I still don't think they go undefeated and win the whole thing.

 

[UK Cowboy]

Undefeated through the tourney would put them in the conversation for greatest team ever. Their biggest opponent will be the pressure that goes with that, and that anything less will have a lot of people saying they choked

 

[gpm1976]

Undefeated through the tourney would put them in the conversation for greatest team ever. Their biggest opponent will be the pressure that goes with that, and that anything less will have a lot of people saying they choked

I dunno, this is a good team, but I'm not sure they're better than UK's 2012 NC team... even if they go undefeated and win out.

 

[Codaxx]

I dunno, this is a good team, but I'm not sure they're better than UK's 2012 NC team... even if they go undefeated and win out.

-
They are better than that team. The real Kentucky argument is this team or Pitino's 95 team. I

 

[gpm1976]

-
They are better than that team. The real Kentucky argument is this team or Pitino's 95 team. I........

?????? Your post got cut off!

You would know better than I would. Your team this year has to be the deepest and one of the most athletic teams we've seen in a long time, but what about scoring? If Booker has an off game against a good team, then where are they? Who picks up the slack?

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

?????? Your post got cut off!

You would know better than I would. Your team this year has to be the deepest and one of the most athletic teams we've seen in a long time, but what about scoring? If Booker has an off game against a good team, then where are they? Who picks up the slack?

Talking to a lot of UK fans I think most would still put the 96 team as the best in the modern era. Several would put the 2010 squad ahead of the 2012 team too. Most think this team is better than all of those.

To answer your question among the Harrisons, Ulis, and Booker there is generally at least two players on the floor that are capable of scoring from deep. Both the Harrisons are also capable of penetrating and finishing, and Ulis is also capable of penetrating and dishing to the bigs.

And FWIW, on the CBS podcast the other day they made reference to the fact that UK has been ranked #1 wire to wire so far (and likely will be when the tournament starts) so I got curious and looked it up to see how many time it has happened before. The answer is 12. 7 of those teams went on to win it all.

Duke was the last team to do it and win it all. UNLV was the last one to go wire to wire and lose (to Duke no less) Indiana did it in 1976, and UCLA did it four times during their historic run. (I was surprised how many times during that run UCLA was not ranked #1)

The weird thing was the beginning of the 60's. in 1960 Cincy was #1 all season and OSU won. in 1961 and 1962 OSU was ranked #1 all season but Cincy won it all both seasons, then Cincy was ranked #1 all season in 63 but didn't win it that year. (they lost to Loyola in the NC game)

All told, the #1 team all season played in the NC game 11 of 12 years. So if history is any indicator and UK finishes the rest of the season without a loss, you'd be a fool to bet against them until the final game. (and even then it would be a bad bet, just not as bad)

 

[Codaxx]

Talking to a lot of UK fans I think most would still put the 96 team as the best in the modern era. Several would put the 2010 squad ahead of the 2012 team too. Most think this team is better than all of those.

To answer your question among the Harrisons, Ulis, and Booker there is generally at least two players on the floor that are capable of scoring from deep. Both the Harrisons are also capable of penetrating and finishing, and Ulis is also capable of penetrating and dishing to the bigs.

And FWIW, on the CBS podcast the other day they made reference to the fact that UK has been ranked #1 wire to wire so far (and likely will be when the tournament starts) so I got curious and looked it up to see how many time it has happened before. The answer is 12. 7 of those teams went on to win it all.

Duke was the last team to do it and win it all. UNLV was the last one to go wire to wire and lose (to Duke no less) Indiana did it in 1976, and UCLA did it four times during their historic run. (I was surprised how many times during that run UCLA was not ranked #1)

The weird thing was the beginning of the 60's. in 1960 Cincy was #1 all season and OSU won. in 1961 and 1962 OSU was ranked #1 all season but Cincy won it all both seasons, then Cincy was ranked #1 all season in 63 but didn't win it that year. (they lost to Loyola in the NC game)

All told, the #1 team all season played in the NC game 11 of 12 years. So if history is any indicator and UK finishes the rest of the season without a loss, you'd be a fool to bet against them until the final game. (and even then it would be a bad bet, just not as bad)

I have the current team as the most talented. 96 team as the best. That is mostly because of experience. They had the talent also, but it was a different time. I believe Delk and McCarty were seniors. (been a longtime, so I apologize if my memory if off). That just doesn't happen anymore

 

[UK Cowboy]

I have the current team as the most talented. 96 team as the best. That is mostly because of experience. They had the talent also, but it was a different time. I believe Delk and McCarty were seniors. (been a longtime, so I apologize if my memory if off). That just doesn't happen anymore

95-96 is the best I've seen. Nazr Mohammed, Tony Delk, Derek Anderson, Antoine Walker, Ron Mercer, Jeff Sheppard, Mark Pope and Wayne Turner.....

 

[Codaxx]

95-96 is the best I've seen. Nazr Mohammed, Tony Delk, Derek Anderson, Antoine Walker, Ron Mercer, Jeff Sheppard, Mark Pope and Wayne Turner.....

I believe Magloire was on the team, but redshirted. Team didn't need a future pro. I think the claim is 10 or 11 played in the NBA. It was an unreal team and that was in an era of much better ball

 

[gpm1976]

Talking to a lot of UK fans I think most would still put the 96 team as the best in the modern era. Several would put the 2010 squad ahead of the 2012 team too. Most think this team is better than all of those.

All told, the #1 team all season played in the NC game 11 of 12 years. So if history is any indicator and UK finishes the rest of the season without a loss, you'd be a fool to bet against them until the final game. (and even then it would be a bad bet, just not as bad)

It'll definitely be interesting. I wonder if the lack of competition in the SEC will be any factor in this. You have to think that of all conferences, the competition in the ACC should have them more prepared than all others. The rest of the conferences seem down this year to me.. the BIG for sure. I'm just trying to think of teams that could give UK fits, and there just aren't many.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

It'll definitely be interesting. I wonder if the lack of competition in the SEC will be any factor in this. You have to think that of all conferences, the competition in the ACC should have them more prepared than all others. The rest of the conferences seem down this year to me.. the BIG for sure. I'm just trying to think of teams that could give UK fits, and there just aren't many.

ESPN and CBS bracketology both have Power5 conferences looking like this:

B1G: 8
B12: 7
SEC: 6
ACC: 6
P12: 4

Are you worried about AZ not playing enough good teams? Are you worried about Virginia not playing enough good teams?

The "SEC is awful this year" simply isn't accurate. It's not as good as some of the other power 5 conferences but it is far from the dumpster fire that it has been in recent years. The Top of the ACC is obviously better than the top of the SEC, but the bottom is every bit the cakewalk it is in the SEC.

 

[gpm1976]

ESPN and CBS bracketology both have Power5 conferences looking like this:

B1G: 8
B12: 7
SEC: 6
ACC: 6
P12: 4

Are you worried about AZ not playing enough good teams? Are you worried about Virginia not playing enough good teams?

The "SEC is awful this year" simply isn't accurate. It's not as good as some of the other power 5 conferences but it is far from the dumpster fire that it has been in recent years. The Top of the ACC is obviously better than the top of the SEC, but the bottom is every bit the cakewalk it is in the SEC.

AZ maybe, because the PAC just isn't what it once was. But why do you mention Virginia? They're in the top conference.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

AZ maybe, because the PAC just isn't what it once was. But why do you mention Virginia? They're in the top conference.

Projected to get same number of teams in the tournament as the SEC.

Plus UVA got the most favorable schedule in the ACC they could ever hope for.

Duke Once
Notre Dame Once
UNC once

The only other good team in the ACC they play twice is UofL and they're likely to be a dumpster fire by the time UVA plays them a 2nd time.

But they get to play VT and WF twice each. (Both teams well under .500)

And with UofL on the skids, I would say the B12 is the best conference top to bottom right now. Not the ACC.

 

[gpm1976]

Projected to get same number of teams in the tournament as the SEC.

Plus UVA got the most favorable schedule in the ACC they could ever hope for.

Duke Once
Notre Dame Once
UNC once

The only other good team in the ACC they play twice is UofL and they're likely to be a dumpster fire by the time UVA plays them a 2nd time.

But they get to play VT and WF twice each. (Both teams well under .500)

And with UofL on the skids, I would say the B12 is the best conference top to bottom right now. Not the ACC.

I do see what you're saying. I guess it speaks for itself that the BIG, as down as they are this year, still beat the ACC in the challenge. If UofL had some shooting, I think they could be right up there... they're athletic enough. The ACC conf. tourney will interesting. If Duke and UVA meet up, do they both get 1 seeds? and who gets the 4th? Gonzaga has a higher rating, but Wisconsin plays a better schedule. At any rate, this season's been kind of a downer. I'm hoping UK goes undefeated.. it'll make the tourney that much more fun.