All of these great players he has coming in, they better be more prepared than the great Skai was. It's funny how Calipari gets credit for the sure fire one and dones, yet the players are the ones being bashed when they need more developing.
Uh huh. And you guys do the exact opposite..
According to you guys, every player who gets better under Cal did it all by himself (from elite super stars like davis and towns to guys that no one expected to be so successful like bledsoe, harrellson, miller, liggins, willis, ulis, booker, wcs, etc) and the couple guys who stuck around, earned playing time, but just didn't develop much(skal, lee to a degree, poythress to a degree) are 100% Cal's fault and would've been awesome under anyone else.
All fault to Cal and all success to the players. That's no more objective than what UK fans do. In fact, it's even less objective, considering your argument revolves around the contention that 18 year olds know more about what is required for long term basketball success than does a 50 something year old coach whose peers (slightly more informed and objective than fans of a rival school on a message board) decided to vote him into the HOF.
When you look at the 5 stars in a given class and chart their progress, you see a huge chunk of them fade into obscurity, and there are certain programs where that is way less likely to happen. two things become abundantly clear:
1. UK fans who think Cal is the only coach who gets excellent results out of five stars on average are mistaken "if you're a five star OF COURSE you need to go to UK". False.
2. UL fans who claim that Cal gets poor (or average) results as far as progressing these kids' abilities are grossly mistaken. The general pool of 5 stars have a way, way lower chance of every making something of themselves than does the pool of kids who play for K or Cal or Izzo.
Even someone like Bill Self, a certain future HOFer who is a total recruit magnet.. only averages around 1 less 5 star per roster than Cal and K, has way, way more flops.. In the last 2 years, he's had 4 different 5 stars as bad as skal, who is Cal's worst by far.
Yet playing for Self still gives you waaay better odds than just pulling randomly from the entire pool of five stars... The
majority of whom would be considered failures under Cal (not a top level college player in first two years and/or don't stick in the league). Again.. This describes only a small handful of Cal's guys, but the majority of 5 stars in general.
