I can play this game too. Cal never went to a Final Four until he was at a top program, which is true for most of the top coaches discussed in this thread. (And this, of course, presumes we are not counting vacated trips, which means Pitino has only been to 1 Final Four in 16 years at Louisville.)
If the one and done rule is overturned?
- Thread starter Cardinal Cash
- Start date
So you're saying Pitino is the only coach to take 3 different college programs to the final four and did it with no OADs.
I'm not sure. But it is worth mentioning that Cal has always been AGAINST the current one and done rule.
I agree with this. Justin Jackson as a Jr. was a substantially better player last year then every guy picked in front of him.
Here is a really good article explaining WHY these kids (many of them are just that - KIDS) want to make the jump as soon as possible. It's all about the bottom line. The quicker they can get in the league, the more money they make. The higher they go in, the more money they make from the start.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonb...round-rookie-salary-projections/#11f34729be15
Donovan Mitchell will make $5.7M in 2 years as the #13 pick. $5.7M is a lot of money, and frankly (and this is just a guess) that salary easily puts him in the top 1% of income earners in the country and he's like 20 years old.
There are 350 million people in the USA, and roughly 204 million are between 15 and 64 years old. (working age). That means Donovan is now making more money than 202 million working age people in the USA at 20 years old.
Is that bananas or what?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonb...round-rookie-salary-projections/#11f34729be15
Donovan Mitchell will make $5.7M in 2 years as the #13 pick. $5.7M is a lot of money, and frankly (and this is just a guess) that salary easily puts him in the top 1% of income earners in the country and he's like 20 years old.
There are 350 million people in the USA, and roughly 204 million are between 15 and 64 years old. (working age). That means Donovan is now making more money than 202 million working age people in the USA at 20 years old.
Is that bananas or what?
I would imagine he would rather the guys be able to go to the NBA straight out of high school based off of what he's stated in the past, but based off of his recruiting I would say he'd rather them have to stay 2 years.
You misinterpret the situation.
It's not the one and done that makes the wheels turn.
Cal sends the best players to the pros. He sends them at a higher rate than other schools.
If the top 3-5 guys go to the pros--the cream of the remaining crop will want UK--because that's their best shot at the pros. And when those guys all get drafted in the lottery--the next class will see that and want to play for him.
I might be misunderstanding what you're saying.
Are you saying, if HS players are allowed to enter the draft straight out of HS only 3-5 guys are going to try it?
I think you've got to be saying something other than this.
Why are you eliminating his first five years at Memphis in your analysis?
Is it because he went to 3 NITs and won 1 NCAA tournament game during that time frame?
Sorry bub, those seasons count in the review.
I said what he did at UMASS was great, even thought it wasn't really - I just gave that to him to avoid further argument. He was also lousy his first five years at Memphis. Add the UMASS teams and the first five Memphis teams together, and you've got an average resume.
You are aware UK was an elite school when Tubby was serving mediocre season sandwiches getting run out of town and Billy G was getting drunk on the job and not winning NCAA games, right?
If HS kids are allowed to go straight to the pros there will be no "other elite kids" to come to college. You said UK will replace the kids that go pro out of HS with other elite kids. Newsflash, there is no "next level" elite. There's elite, and then there's everybody else. So if elite HS players skip college, there are no immediate difference makers reaching college. It's just a pool of nice players. Not sure if you've noticed, but a lot of kids out of the "everybody else" group are trying the NBA as soon as they are eligible nowadays too.
Not sure I'm following the last part of the paragraph - how are kids that wouldn't be 1st rd picks going to be forced to stay in school? Is that going to be some kind of rule you're suggesting?
I simply asked a question. How does that mean that I'm looking for validation?
No, it's not off topic, just answer the question. Why are you avoiding the question? My question falls right in line with the topic. You're claiming it doesn't to avoid answering the question.
Look, I think RP is a he'll of a coach and if he wanted McDonald's all Americans he would go out and get them, but it's not his style. Very few coaches can handle rebuilding every year, they stick to their systems.
Rebuilding with freshmen every year is hard, harder than having veterans return every year. You don't have to admit that, but we all know it's true.
Last edited:
@ this guy.
I'm not on your witness stand.
You're a terrible poster and I'm not going to stray off topic with you.
Okay, but why am I a terrible poster? Is it because I asked a question that you don't want to answer? I guess it's just easier to insult me than answer my questions.
You have no insight. You're not witty. You're just not very interesting. You're boring ok? Just not a fun read. And you're insecure. Kind of delusional. Seem to live in a phone booth. You're here to argue but you don't bring a lot with you to the table.
You have the same tired point of view on all these topics that are either directly about UK or end up discussing UK.
Should I keep going. I don't think so. I'll stop here. You're just bad.
I'm sure you're a nice guy. I'll just slap you on ignore and you can get back to your same nothing posts. I'm sure you'll find somebody that wants to play with you guy.
Take care.
If we are talking about High schoolers that will try and go straight to the NBA I would say 5-10 will try to make the jump every year once it levels out, but the early years more will try. The question is, can high school players enter the draft pool and still go to college if they don't like their chances like college players.
You were looking for something or you wouldn't have said "why does that matter". When I explained below that post, why I posted what I did. To compare Calipari with upper echelon coaches prior to the so called OAD is a head scratcher. I can name several coaches that went to a final four, and/or a couple of elite 8's, and/or a handful of sweet sixteens prior to OAD(Hugh Durham, Rick Majerus, Mike Montgomery, Gene Keady, Lon Kruger, Eddie Sutton, Bob Huggins.. to name a few) I definitely wouldn't consider them on the same level of the upper tier. So why do you think Calipari was?
Adolph Rupp was the greatest coach ever. Joe B Hall was the greatest coach ever. Eddie Sutton was the greatest coach ever. Rick Pitino is the greatest coach ever. Tubby Smith is the greatest coach ever. Billy Gillespie was the greatest coach ever. John Calipari is the greatest coach ever. The Kentucky Wildcats are the greatest team ever.
There ya go. Now go back to Rupp's Rafters and talk amongst yourselves. You know, the rivals board that makes fun of a kid for flipping a vehicle. The place where 5% of posters know anything at all about basketball. Peace out.
We'll just need to see if there's a rule change, and then what it is.
I think the # of guys that would make the direct jump would be far greater than 5-10. Look at how many guys go early knowing they have little to no chance to get drafted as it is today?
If the NBA allows them to join the D- League there would be a ton of kids that would prefer that option over school.
So we'll just have to see if there is a rule change, and then what it is.
There's the difference between you and I. Donovan Mitchell is not one of my own.
He's a former Louisville player and we are on a UofL message board. That is why he was chosen as the example. I could have chosen the #1 pick to make my point. Maybe I should have.
I agree with you that the power schools will see little effect if they change the rule, they are going to get the best of who ever decides to go to college. I personally think the NBA should pay a better salary for the D league and let the kids who have no business in college learn on their dime. But politics will prevail.
Uh.. no. There are only approximately 450 NBA players. They
Once I have had a chance to look at the drawbacks to changing the rule similar to baseball, I think it's likely this will happen:
1) the NBA is proposing a G league where high school players will go. The NBA is not adding teams or rosters so the # of players that have a chance to make a NBA roster is not changing; only where they are coming from. The fear is that high schoolers or even middle schoolers will forsake the need to take algebra or other courses designed to get them to college in lieu of that dream of getting to the pros. The issue will be that if these HS kids flame out, which most likely will occur, these kids will have less to fall back on as oppose to kids who went to college for at least a year.
Yea it'll be the best thing ever. I can hardly wait. I didn't realize that was the most difficult way of coaching. I apologize, I feel so sorry for Coach Calipari having such a difficult road in coaching his team. I would have thought 17 lottery picks would have made things easier. Guess not, boy was I wrong. SMH. My life doesn't evolve around 18-22 year old kids, message boards, over paid coaches. I root for the University of Louisville programs. If they lose every game or win every game I can guarantee I'll still get up love my family, friends, and go to work the next day(God willing). None of this effects my life whatsoever. I just don't understand why people on message boards go to other teams sites and want to discuss about their team, coach, or player. To each their own I guess.
Still not off-topic. The discussion is how it would change college basketball, which includes how it would change Cal and UK, given that UK under Cal has the most OADs by far. I didn't bring that aspect of the conversation into the thread. Someone else did, but it is on topic. Someone posted that it would have a negative impact on Cal and UK because Cal has never won without OADs whereas other top coaches have. I provided an alternative explanation for the timing of Cal's success. Pretty simple.
Having a hard time following your talking points.
Bottom line, if the door is opened to a "G" league then a large number of players would skip college - the college product will not have "difference makers" as we see it today, and the emphasis of success for college programs could be more reliant on actual coaching than ever before. That doesn't necessarily favor "top" programs if they don't have "top" coaches.
It doesn't matter how many "spots" are available - kids are still going for the NBA now when it's obvious they aren't getting drafted.
It won't be as obvious who would get drafted if the gates open out of HS - less tape, less evidence of weaknesses identified. So more kids will go for it straight out of HS than many are thinking would in this thread.
I agree with your final point - if the kids go straight from HS, they will have less to fall back on.
Rule changes implemented won't have the kids best interests in mind. Rule changes will have the best interests of $ for the NBA and $ for colleges in mind.
If they want to follow the baseball blueprint then they should understand that college is still the best path to the pros. Over 43% of professional major leaguers played in college. A guy who throws 97-98 and can help a MLB in two or three years doesnt need to go to college and wear out his arm if he wants to make a living from playing sports. College is about winning games, pro sports is about making money.
That 43% wouldn't be the same for NBA players, but I wonder what it would be. A good % of MLB is from Latin countries where college might not have been an option. Also each MLB team has multi minor teams
that pay a livable wage and it's not that many teenagers in the leagues. Many are late 20's and still have hope. But college baseball is still doing as good as the past for the schools that emphasis it.
Talent will always follow the money. That's their definition of winning.
I think that kids get better information than they did 10 years ago, and you won't see teams take risks they took back then as well. So, you won't see double digit kids going pro before a year in college.
Regardless, Derrick Rose started it. And that's in part to kids having to go to college. But after that, everyone wants to play for the guy that gets 1/2 of his kids drafted. Multiple #1 draft picks. Kids see that and want to come to Kentucky. If the top 10 kids go pro out of high school, the best of the rest will want UK.
I think an interesting system we could implement is the academy system that is implemented for soccer. Aspiring young players do all of their schooling after a certain age and training with a pro team's farm system. It would probably kill college basketball though. However, it is a way to keep the kids learning and not trying to skate by in the remedial classes of the public school system until they can jump to the NBA. Not saying all of the public school system is remedial but there are some pretty weak curriculums out there.
I agree, someone said top 3-5 players would go, but I believe it could be more like 10-15, at least in the beginning. Let em go!
I'll address the 1st part of your post and leave your slobbering infomercial 2nd paragraph just stand - it's just too funny and perfect as it is.
Paragraph 1 - Better information? You mean like all the better information guys are getting these days and STILL turning pro early when they have not shot to get drafted? 73 underclassmen entered the draft this year. There aren't even 73 draft picks in the two rounds. So yeah, I'll say your premise that kids get better information is pretty much comical. Well, they may have access to the information - but they aren't using it.
Teams taking risks in the NBA? That's what the NBA draft is - a risk.
If the NBA pushes some D league/G league place for them to put these young pups on layaway you're going to see a lot more than under double digit kids turn pro straight out of HS.
I think it could be 20-35 if there is a D League/G League in the NBA for the kids to go.
Anytime. And that's one guy. At UMASS. A program he built in his on. Logical minds can't deny that that was good coaching.
People tend to get too caught up in a specific definition or a specific mindset on what constitutes a "good coach."
You're insane if you don't think Cal's a good coach.....Now, is Cal the best tactician? No. Does he develop players? Thats tough to say, most of the kids that come play for him are successful, even the kids that didn't live up to the hype. The Twins, Poythress, Skal, Teague, etc. However...newsflash guys...recruiting is part of coaching and he's the John Wooden of recruiting. Getting a group of guys that have never played together to play together and do it well....is coaching.
You're comparing apples to oranges when you compare what Cal does with what Rick does. Cal has the benefit of recruiting the elite of the elite and putting them in a system that best showcases their talent. Rick more or less has to take the best players he can get that fit his system...Rick recruits very well, but year in and year out Rick's best recruit would probably be Cal's 4th or 5th best recruit and that talent gap is why Cal always wins. Gorgui Dieng is one of my favorite players of all time but no amount of coaching is going to make him better than Anthony Davis. Most years Cal's Freshman come into college basketball better than ULs developed sophomores and juniors and because of that people assume he can't coach because he doesn't "develop" them. But they fail to discuss the difficulty of coaching freshman and the difficulty of dealing with a new roster every year.
Rick and Cal are both great coaches - they just aren't coaching the same way.
You're insane if you don't think Cal's a good coach.....Now, is Cal the best tactician? No. Does he develop players? Thats tough to say, most of the kids that come play for him are successful, even the kids that didn't live up to the hype. The Twins, Poythress, Skal, Teague, etc. However...newsflash guys...recruiting is part of coaching and he's the John Wooden of recruiting. Getting a group of guys that have never played together to play together and do it well....is coaching.
You're comparing apples to oranges when you compare what Cal does with what Rick does. Cal has the benefit of recruiting the elite of the elite and putting them in a system that best showcases their talent. Rick more or less has to take the best players he can get that fit his system...Rick recruits very well, but year in and year out Rick's best recruit would probably be Cal's 4th or 5th best recruit and that talent gap is why Cal always wins. Gorgui Dieng is one of my favorite players of all time but no amount of coaching is going to make him better than Anthony Davis. Most years Cal's Freshman come into college basketball better than ULs developed sophomores and juniors and because of that people assume he can't coach because he doesn't "develop" them. But they fail to discuss the difficulty of coaching freshman and the difficulty of dealing with a new roster every year.
Rick and Cal are both great coaches - they just aren't coaching the same way.
Seems to me most posting in this thread would rather talk about John Calipari instead of the NBA OAD rule and its future.
Fine.
I'll make one point about John Calipari and his "John Wooden of recruiting' reputation that so many of you want to gush over. In this case, it's not what he knows as a coach; it's who he knows. Take William Wesley out of the equation and the droves of OAD players lining up for Lexington evaporates.
Fine.
I'll make one point about John Calipari and his "John Wooden of recruiting' reputation that so many of you want to gush over. In this case, it's not what he knows as a coach; it's who he knows. Take William Wesley out of the equation and the droves of OAD players lining up for Lexington evaporates.
IDC if you call it theory or fact. It's true as far as I'm concerned. If you really feel I'm not being truthful, then YOU find the research showing that what I said isn't the truth. WWW is widely considered the most powerful man in college basketball, and he is CLOSE friends with John Calipari. WWW controls the AAU circuit thru his network of connections and HE decides who goes where. His best bud gets preferential treatment. Theory? IMO it's fact. Prove it wrong. The nerve of some of you UofK fans is off the charts raw. You're ON a UofL message board. I really don't give a shit what you think.
I'm late to this thread and don't care to go back and check...
If anyone has discussed the effects of such a change, there is little doubt IMO who it affects the most and that's LPT. I'm not saying good or bad because you don't know--too many variables in play. But it should impact them the most. Consider that::
“Elite program,” my a$$...
If anyone has discussed the effects of such a change, there is little doubt IMO who it affects the most and that's LPT. I'm not saying good or bad because you don't know--too many variables in play. But it should impact them the most. Consider that::
- A good recruit has to stay more than one year, but...
- Will that affect how many blue chippers Lite signs? Why would a 5-star kid sign with a team that has a full team of 5-stars returning?
- And won't that drive 5-star kids to other teams with better coaches?
- Compounded by the fact that there would be sixty or more Rivals 5-star kids playing college basketball in a given year (two full classes plus the carryovers).
- All of which will reduce LPT’s talent monopoly while they still have the same coach on the bench during games.
“Elite program,” my a$$...
