Malik Newman

[ericd7633]

Reportedly is going to commit to Mississippi State. Huge get for Howland, and another big miss for Cal, if true. Kentucky lost 7 guys to the draft and only has commitments from 3 kids for 2015. They could be extremely thin next year. Ulis, Lee and Poythress are the only ones back who played substantial minutes. After Newman, there are only a couple high end recruits left: Ingram, Brown and Diallo, who all have Kentucky among their final schools, so they could potentially still be fine if they land one of those guys.

 

[UKnation87]

I'm thinking it could be a tough year for my Cats next year. Cal will still have tremendous talent with what's coming in and the few returning players, but to your point, will be very thin.

 

[ericd7633]

I'm thinking it could be a tough year for my Cats next year. Cal will still have tremendous talent with what's coming in and the few returning players, but to your point, will be very thin.

If he doesn't land any of the remaining 4 players that are highly rated Kentucky will basically be 6 deep next year with one of those guys coming off a torn ACL. Those 6 will be talented for sure, like you said, but just very thin.

I could see this being the starting lineup:

PG: Ulis
SG: Briscoe
SF: Poythress
PF: Lee
C: Skal

Off the bench: Matthews, Hawkins and Willis.

 

[dcZONAfan]

If he doesn't land any of the remaining 4 players that are highly rated Kentucky will basically be 6 deep next year with one of those guys coming off a torn ACL. Those 6 will be talented for sure, like you said, but just very thin.

I could see this being the starting lineup:

PG: Ulis
SG: Briscoe
SF: Poythress
PF: Lee
C: Skal

Off the bench: Matthews, Hawkins and Willis.

And Skal very well might not be eligible and be Enes Kanter 2.0

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

And Skal very well might not be eligible and be Enes Kanter 2.0

I know a couple of UK fans that are hoping that's the case. They'd rather him be Kanter 2.0 (never getting the opportunity to play) than have him be Rose 2.0 (playing the whole season only to have the NCAA change their mind after the fact)

My guess is he ends up sitting out about 10-12 game.

 

[UK Cowboy]

Skal will be eligible, he didn't receive compensation, Kanter did

I think Murray is going to reclassify and sign with UK, which would be a monster get, maybe the best guard in the class. Looks like they are getting Mulder for sure.

I think Diallo ends up at Saint Johns, Newman at Miss State, and Brown, who knows, maybe UCLA? I thinjk Maker ends up at UK or KU 2nd semester

If thats the way it went, UK would look like

Ulis
Briscoe
Murray
Poythress
Skal

Mulder
Matthews
Lee
Maker

Thats a top 5 team. While I think they miss out on Newman, Brown and Diallo, they are in the running for all three, and if Cal lands any of them, they are preseason #1

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

Skal will be eligible, he didn't receive compensation, Kanter did

Compensation or not, there is a ton of shady shit surrounding the kid. I wouldn't be so sure.

Skal Labissiere's Eligibility Issues Show Why the NCAA Needs to Make Nuanced Decisions - Forbes

 

[dcZONAfan]

Skal will be eligible, he didn't receive compensation, Kanter did

I think Murray is going to reclassify and sign with UK, which would be a monster get, maybe the best guard in the class. Looks like they are getting Mulder for sure.

I think Diallo ends up at Saint Johns, Newman at Miss State, and Brown, who knows, maybe UCLA? I thinjk Maker ends up at UK or KU 2nd semester

If thats the way it went, UK would look like

Ulis
Briscoe
Murray
Poythress
Skal

Mulder
Matthews
Lee
Maker

Thats a top 5 team. While I think they miss out on Newman, Brown and Diallo, they are in the running for all three, and if Cal lands any of them, they are preseason #1

I'm not familiar with Murray or Mulder....who are they I'm too lazy to google it.

 

[dcZONAfan]

Compensation or not, there is a ton of shady shit surrounding the kid. I wouldn't be so sure.

Skal Labissiere's Eligibility Issues Show Why the NCAA Needs to Make Nuanced Decisions - Forbes

Damn you Trolly...before reading that article I wanted Skal to be ineligible if only because of my dislike for UK Cowboy. Now I can't root against the kid if he's being exploited like that. I know Cal is the best person to help him make his dreams come true and that's all you can want for this young man.

Damn you and your details, Trolly!!

 

[UKnation87]

Damn you Trolly...before reading that article I wanted Skal to be ineligible if only because of my dislike for UK Cowboy. Now I can't root against the kid if he's being exploited like that. I know Cal is the best person to help him make his dreams come true and that's all you can want for this young man.

Damn you and your details, Trolly!!

Lol... this kid has been through some crap. I live in TN and the word down here is that he wasn't eligible to play in certain High School sanctioned games/tourny's because he transferred to the last school for "athletic purposes only".

I believe from an academic standpoint, this kid should be fine but you can bet your last dollar that Sandy Bell & UK will not let this kid see the floor if there's even a questions about it... much like the Kanter situation.

 

[UK Cowboy]

I'm not familiar with Murray or Mulder....who are they I'm too lazy to google it.

Sure, Jamal Murray is an 18 year old Jr, looks like he will reclassify after visit from Cal. He was the MVP of the Nike Hoops Summit with 30 points, which featured all of this year's top players. He's a 6'4" guard. Mulder is also 6'4'', plays for 34-2 Vincennes JC, is a great shooter and freak athlete

 

[UKnation87]

In the not so shocking news of the day... Newman officially picks Miss St.

 

[UK Cowboy]

In the not so shocking news of the day... Newman officially picks Miss St.

Yeah, he's been MSU for weeks

 

[Smart]

Based on the 1-3 games I've seen from all the elite prospects, I'm fully convinced that he is the best player in the class today. He's an incredible shooter, and he does it off the dribble. He is quick, he sees the court well, and he is an aggressive rebounder.

I feel that the HS Rankings are way too obsessed with size and long-term development (especially for one-and-dones). They rate guys like Myles Turner and Cliff Alexander over guys like D'Angelo Russell, Tyus Jones, and Tyler Ulis, and I can't for the life of me understand why. In what world did anyone think Turner would be a better college player than those much more polished guys?

 

[mr.hockey4242]

Based on the 1-3 games I've seen from all the elite prospects, I'm fully convinced that he is the best player in the class today. He's an incredible shooter, and he does it off the dribble. He is quick, he sees the court well, and he is an aggressive rebounder.

I feel that the HS Rankings are way too obsessed with size and long-term development (especially for one-and-dones). They rate guys like Myles Turner and Cliff Alexander over guys like D'Angelo Russell, Tyus Jones, and Tyler Ulis, and I can't for the life of me understand why. In what world did anyone think Turner would be a better college player than those much more polished guys?

Alexander was a goddamn joke. Cant believe he might be a lottery pick.

Your right though some of the guys they rate highly just make no sense. Sure a big like Okafor you can understand. But a all around player like Russell is a far better college get them offensively limited projects like Alexander. In college you don't have time to wait.

I've heard big things about Newman as well. I'm sure he will be a fun one to watch. Sadly I'll have to watch Miss State to see it lol.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

Well, what are the rankings actually ranking? Are they supposed to be projections? Are the based on potential? Or is it a ranking of how good they were in High School/AAU?

If they are projecting, are they projecting specifically for the college game, or are the just projecting in general?

From what I can tell it is a combination of High School performance, and general potential. To me it doesn't make much sense to try and narrow it down specifically to how they'll perform in college since you can't really know with any certainty (with a handful of exceptions) who will leave early.

It's not unlike the Polls. There is no definite criteria for the coaches/writer to use. Some vote based on potential, some by resume, others combine the two. The point being, you need to understand what the ranking represents.

Basing your expectations on a new player based on his recruiting ranking makes about as much sense as betting on college basketball based on the AP poll. You'll be disappointed by the first and bankrupt by the latter.

(no to mention how a player does is going to depend on the system the coach uses, if the player is sharing minutes with someone else, and plenty of other factors that recruiting ratings have absolutely way to account for)

 

[tducey]

Sounds like Kentucky will take a step back next year.

 

[Smart]

Well, what are the rankings actually ranking? Are they supposed to be projections? Are the based on potential? Or is it a ranking of how good they were in High School/AAU?

If they are projecting, are they projecting specifically for the college game, or are the just projecting in general?

From what I can tell it is a combination of High School performance, and general potential. To me it doesn't make much sense to try and narrow it down specifically to how they'll perform in college since you can't really know with any certainty (with a handful of exceptions) who will leave early.

It's not unlike the Polls. There is no definite criteria for the coaches/writer to use. Some vote based on potential, some by resume, others combine the two. The point being, you need to understand what the ranking represents.

Basing your expectations on a new player based on his recruiting ranking makes about as much sense as betting on college basketball based on the AP poll. You'll be disappointed by the first and bankrupt by the latter.

(no to mention how a player does is going to depend on the system the coach uses, if the player is sharing minutes with someone else, and plenty of other factors that recruiting ratings have absolutely way to account for)

I think it should be based on how good you expect them to be in college, with much greater emphasis on earlier years (because, like you said, it is tough to project who will go pro). Of course this has some issues, and you raise some of them, but its better than your system where fan bases go nuts over guys who have one subpar year and leave.

Nobody expects perfection, but there is no reason to blatantly favor average big men with possibly more NBA potential than polished guards who will play well from day one. There are enough NBA mocks for general potential that I don't know why college recruiting ranks would consider them.

 

[UK Cowboy]

Sounds like Kentucky will take a step back next year.

If by step back, not starting 38-0, I'd agree. They will have one of the 7-8 most talented teams in the country next year, without question. They will start

PG Ulis McD AA Soph
SG Briscoe McD AA Fr
SF Poythress McD AA Sr
PF Lee McD AA Jr
C Skal McD AA Fr(projected #1 overall draft pic)

They will have a top 50 recruit on the bench
They are likely to land Mulder who is a top JC
They are the front runners for Murray(reclassify) and Maker
They still have a chance on Brown and Diallo

When all is said and done...they'll be alright

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

I think it should be based on how good you expect them to be in college, with much greater emphasis on earlier years (because, like you said, it is tough to project who will go pro). Of course this has some issues, and you raise some of them, but its better than your system where fan bases go nuts over guys who have one subpar year and leave.

Nobody expects perfection, but there is no reason to blatantly favor average big men with possibly more NBA potential than polished guards who will play well from day one. There are enough NBA mocks for general potential that I don't know why college recruiting ranks would consider them.

Regardless of what criteria is used, they are still going to miss on a lot of guys. Changing the ratings is moot, until people understand what they are. So lets assume that everyone thinks they should represent how a player will perform in college... So we change the rankings to reflect that instead. Are they going to be any more accurate? No. (probably less so) and people are still going to put too much faith in them, and people are still going to complain and argue about them, so what have you accomplished by changing them? Nothing. So what's the point?

Ultimately the problem lies with the people using the ratings, not with the ratings themselves. (that's not to say the ratings don't have inherent problems too, but nothing that is fixable)