gohusk
Well-Known Member
UK played against 2 national teams (with NBA pros) and a pro team. They won 5 of 6. That actually happened.
The Sixers are still likely better than those teams, and still likely win in most situations, but it isn't nearly the huge gap, and foregone conclusion that you make it out to be.
Still waiting for you to look at the Sixers roster and tell me who on there was all conference. Oh, wait.. you abandoned that strategy because you actually looked and realized what a goddamned dumpster fire their roster is. You keep speaking of "NBA" talent, but the fact remains there are only 2 or 3 guys on that team that would make any other NBA roster.
In terms of a college/pro matchup they are the best scenario (even though they only have the 3rd worst record) because they don't have a single person on the roster that is unstoppable. (like the Knicks) and they have no real experience to speak of.
Look, I get that most of the really shitty teams in the NBA are leaps and bounds better than the best college team every year. They are bigger, faster, stronger and better at pretty much every position, and the bench.
But this isn't a generalization we're speaking of, it is a very specific instance that you don't seem willing to address. We're talking about the 2nd tallest team in basketball. (not in college, in basketball. Only 1 NBA team is bigger) We're talking about a college team with nearly unprecedented depth, and we're talking about a team that has 7-8 players (maybe more) projected to go in the draft over the next few years.
Compare that to the Sixers who are remarkably bad, and not just coincidentally. They're trying to suck so they can continue to stockpile draft picks. The have a grand total of one actual veteran, a couple of guys with 4 and 6 years experience, and the entire rest of the team is brand, spanking, new.
You keep trying to make this "college vs NBA" and that misses the point. This UK team is not like any other college team, arguably ever, and this Sixers team is not like any other NBA team. It's the perfect storm for a college/pro matchup (and I still give the edge to the shitty, shitty, shitty, pro team) but you continue to act as if there is absolutely no chance UK could even be competitive, and I think that is way overestimating how shitty the Sixers are.
You have repeatedly refused to talk about actual matchups and actual players, and actual teams, instead you just parrot "NBA" over and over and over again, as if that is going to work.
Do you have an actual argument based on the actual matchup? Is there something you can contribute that doesn't rely on some vague NBA generality that doesn't actually apply to the Sixers? Can you actually bring yourself to bake an intelligent post on the subject, or can I bet on you to come back and go "NBA! NBA! NBA!" some more? (just kidding, I know that's what you're going to do)
Not like any other team ever? Teams in the 80's were much more loaded because players didn't leave as early as they do now.
And talking match-up? You're the clown who's avoiding the match-ups. How does the UK backcourt beat a trapping/pressing NBA defense? What happens when they have to go to the bench? What happens when the UK post players figure out that just backing people in isn't going to work? What's going to happen when they can't cheat anymore looking for the blocked shot on defense? I've asked you numerous times to answer any of these things and all I get is "this is Kentucky, this is Kentucky, blah, blah, blah". But keep spewing your nonsense that a team with maybe 5 NBA-level talent players could beat a NBA team.