His success at Gonzaga is proof that he was under appreciated at UK.
My bad if if topic has been brought up before on here.
My bad if if topic has been brought up before on here.
Kyle Wiltjer
- Thread starter Majestic Red
- Start date
He has won a title at UK. He is on now on #1 seed team at Gonzaga. All his press comments about UK after his transfer are positive. His videos in YouTube with WBA or White Boy Academy are legendary. He just pumped out a 45 point outing. UK is undefeated this season on an historic run.
Gotta see how this spin is negative.
Gotta see how this spin is negative.
Fair enough. on your points. Maybe my memories are skewed because he was same team with the likes of Anthony Davis and Michael K-G.
Derek Willis is a good kid from a great family. Has stated he's got no plans to transfer and is putting the blame on himself that he hasn't worked on his game long enough. True, he would get a lot of PT at a far less talented UL team but had indicated he would prefer to stay blue.
Then he should stay.
It will get him seats to games in the future, and he will sell a lot of insurance to fans.
LMAO. It just comes down to what the kid wants. Fans and opinions are secondary. I wish all players good journeys should they voluntarily transfer.
Zipp you have guys who would start for just
About any team in the country coming off
The bench and playing less mins . What's your point?
Kyle was a out of shape Soph, who.could not play
Man to man D.
To his credit, he took a year off, got in shape, and
Transferred to a team that was better suited for
His type of play.
Willis gets the exact amount of mins that would
Come to any player on his level that played on this
Team.
Willis is only a soph. Next year he will see the floor
More. Give the kid his Jun and SN year before
Putting him in the washed up pile.
About any team in the country coming off
The bench and playing less mins . What's your point?
Kyle was a out of shape Soph, who.could not play
Man to man D.
To his credit, he took a year off, got in shape, and
Transferred to a team that was better suited for
His type of play.
Willis gets the exact amount of mins that would
Come to any player on his level that played on this
Team.
Willis is only a soph. Next year he will see the floor
More. Give the kid his Jun and SN year before
Putting him in the washed up pile.
I don't think he was under appreciated at UK. He was a key reserve on a championship team his freshman year, was SEC 6th Man of the Year his sophomore year. Highly recruited and valuable.
However, in the end, he felt he needed a change. Not all relationships are built to last. He would never be the focal point of the offense. His offense was good, his defense suspect. Felt he needed a change of venue to get his body and game where he wanted, and to go to a school to showcase his talents.
Seems he found a good home at Gonzaga. UK clearly has not suffered. Looks like a Win-Win situation. That happens at many schools, there is nothing unique about this situation. Not even sure why it's a topic on this board.
However, in the end, he felt he needed a change. Not all relationships are built to last. He would never be the focal point of the offense. His offense was good, his defense suspect. Felt he needed a change of venue to get his body and game where he wanted, and to go to a school to showcase his talents.
Seems he found a good home at Gonzaga. UK clearly has not suffered. Looks like a Win-Win situation. That happens at many schools, there is nothing unique about this situation. Not even sure why it's a topic on this board.
What a crock of sh!t. I'm sure Derek was thrilled while at the end of the bench to see Willie Cauley Stein shooting a 3 pointer with 5 minutes left while UKay was up 30 on pitiful Auburn. Nice of the Squid to let Willis in for the last 2 minutes in a game that they once led 30-4 in the first half.
Great choice indeed Derek!
Bottom line... Pitino Lite makes a pact with most of the kids he brings in to play them regardless of their performance. He can do that because he plays against subpar teams on most nites. He calls it a "platoon"; I call it making good on an agreement.
And when they play one of the few decent teams on their schedule, that platoon BS goes out the window. For obvious reason--he can't have a kid out there wasting opportunities when he's playing Duke.
Unfortunately, the Derek Willises and Dominique Hawkinses of this world aren't good enough coming in to receive a contract to play. So they sit at the end of the bench waiting for a rash of injuries or their senior years to come along. It doesn't matter if they're better than the guys playing ahead of them. They didn't get a contract.
And Wiltjer is/was a little better than Willis and Hawkins, but not good enough to make a platoon. Not the first or second one anyway...
And when they play one of the few decent teams on their schedule, that platoon BS goes out the window. For obvious reason--he can't have a kid out there wasting opportunities when he's playing Duke.
Unfortunately, the Derek Willises and Dominique Hawkinses of this world aren't good enough coming in to receive a contract to play. So they sit at the end of the bench waiting for a rash of injuries or their senior years to come along. It doesn't matter if they're better than the guys playing ahead of them. They didn't get a contract.
And Wiltjer is/was a little better than Willis and Hawkins, but not good enough to make a platoon. Not the first or second one anyway...
Well...this escalated quickly...
To answer the OP's question...fans loved Kyle and wish him the best, I wouldn't call him under-appreciated. Everyone knew he could put up numbers, same way guys on this team could score a lot more if they play 35 min a game. I think it was a win-win for both; he got to go to a place to get more PT and be one of the first couple scoring options on the team.
His commitment was very odd, I don't think he even visited campus and came from west coast.
To answer the OP's question...fans loved Kyle and wish him the best, I wouldn't call him under-appreciated. Everyone knew he could put up numbers, same way guys on this team could score a lot more if they play 35 min a game. I think it was a win-win for both; he got to go to a place to get more PT and be one of the first couple scoring options on the team.
His commitment was very odd, I don't think he even visited campus and came from west coast.
Zipp, you seem hung up on the platoon system. Cal said at the beginning of the year that he was trying it, but it was not set in stone. He said he would rotate, but is also not afraid to play the hot hand. I think your hatred of UK clouds your vision... if he was always platooning, you would criticize him... he if was playing a traditional 1st/2nd/3rd string rotation you would be critical.
As for contracts, no, sorry...those don't exist. None of us can say for sure what is said behind closed doors... but publicly, Cal has always stated nothing is guaranteed and all PT must be earned. Cal is a player's first kind of coach, that much is true... it may be why he recruits so well... they relate to him.
I can understand dislike of UK and Cal... but let's at least be honest.
As for contracts, no, sorry...those don't exist. None of us can say for sure what is said behind closed doors... but publicly, Cal has always stated nothing is guaranteed and all PT must be earned. Cal is a player's first kind of coach, that much is true... it may be why he recruits so well... they relate to him.
I can understand dislike of UK and Cal... but let's at least be honest.
I heard the same stuff you did. He said he was platooning kids because he had so many (failed OAD) kids come back from last year. That hadn't happened before at LPT, so he had to make up something, not unlike the mysterious but undefined "tweak". And it was said to keep the kids happy expecting to come to LPT, get showcased, and move quickly onto the NBA.
He had to convince them that they will get minutes by default, everyone gets a turn to play. It would have sounded like 4th grade or YMCA basketball had he said that, so he used the term "platoon". And Kool Aid drinking players and fans simply gulped it down. Now, of course, when LPT plays the few competitive games on its schedule, that platoon bull$hit goes out the window. No one's really surprised since he made it up in the first place.
And I don't hate anyone, takes too much effort. I'm really a lover who loves revealing and discussing the truth.
"Elite program", my a$$...
This post was edited on 2/23 7:53 PM by zipp
He had to convince them that they will get minutes by default, everyone gets a turn to play. It would have sounded like 4th grade or YMCA basketball had he said that, so he used the term "platoon". And Kool Aid drinking players and fans simply gulped it down. Now, of course, when LPT plays the few competitive games on its schedule, that platoon bull$hit goes out the window. No one's really surprised since he made it up in the first place.
And I don't hate anyone, takes too much effort. I'm really a lover who loves revealing and discussing the truth.
"Elite program", my a$$...
This post was edited on 2/23 7:53 PM by zipp
Don't let em get to you Zipp. We're about to make our come back any minute now..................................any minute now........................any..................minute.....................now. GO CARDS
Originally posted by Imurlouisvilleman:
Don't let em get to you Zipp. We're about to make our come back any minute now..................................any minute now........................any..................minute.....................now. GO CARDSI never doubted you!!
"Elite program", my a$$...
Here's the typical break down of changes to mark "modern era" of the NCAA tourney:
1939-1950: 8 teams
1951-1952: 16 teams
1953-1974: varied between 22 and 25 teams
1975-1978: 32 teams
1979: 40 teams
1980-1982: 48 teams
The 2 main fundamental changes:
Prior to 1975 there were no at-large teams.
Prior to 1950, the NIT Tourney was more prestigious and teams either opted for the NIT over the NCAA, or they could play in both in the same year as the NIT was played first and the NCAA was an afterthought, but you could play in both if invited. However, in the 1950s the NCAA ruled that no team could compete in both tournaments, in effect indicating that if a team were eligible for the NCAA tournament, it had better play in it.
Draw your line in the sand in 1950 or 1975.
1939-1950: 8 teams
1951-1952: 16 teams
1953-1974: varied between 22 and 25 teams
1975-1978: 32 teams
1979: 40 teams
1980-1982: 48 teams
The 2 main fundamental changes:
Prior to 1975 there were no at-large teams.
Prior to 1950, the NIT Tourney was more prestigious and teams either opted for the NIT over the NCAA, or they could play in both in the same year as the NIT was played first and the NCAA was an afterthought, but you could play in both if invited. However, in the 1950s the NCAA ruled that no team could compete in both tournaments, in effect indicating that if a team were eligible for the NCAA tournament, it had better play in it.
Draw your line in the sand in 1950 or 1975.
Originally posted by Porky Pigskin:
I know it's fun to rag UK fans about bringing up titles from long ago. That said, I wondered whether UK was really one of the elite programs in modern times. Here's research going back 20 seasons.
The most dominant programs of the past 20 seasons:
UCONN: 4 titles and 5 Final Fours.
Kentucky: 3 titles and 6 Final Fours.
North Carolina: 2 titles and 6 Final Fours.
Duke: 2 titles and 4 Final Fours.
Florida: 2 titles and 4 Final Fours.
Michigan State: 1 title and 6 Final Fours.
Kansas: 1 title and 4 Final Fours.
As you can clearly see, Kentucky has been among the nation's elite programs during this time frame. There were some lean years during the latter part of Tubby Smith's tenure and the two seasons under Gillispie, but then again one can easily find a stat or two to discredit other top programs during this time frame. For instance, Duke has 1 Final Four in the past 10 seasons. UNC failed to make the NCAA Tournament in 2002, 2003 and 2010 and hasn't sniffed a Final Four in six seasons.
Most NCAA Tournament victories in the past 20 seasons:
Kentucky: 52
Kansas: 45
North Carolina: 43
Duke: 43
UCONN: 43
Michigan State: 42
Florida: 35
Most dominant program the last 3 years:
Total Wins
Louisville: 96
Kentucky: 88
NCAA Tourney Results
Louisville: FF, NC, S16
Kentucky: NC, nit, FF
I had wondered about this.
I know it's fun to rag UK fans about bringing up titles from long ago. That said, I wondered whether UK was really one of the elite programs in modern times. Here's research going back 20 seasons.
The most dominant programs of the past 20 seasons:
UCONN: 4 titles and 5 Final Fours.
Kentucky: 3 titles and 6 Final Fours.
North Carolina: 2 titles and 6 Final Fours.
Duke: 2 titles and 4 Final Fours.
Florida: 2 titles and 4 Final Fours.
Michigan State: 1 title and 6 Final Fours.
Kansas: 1 title and 4 Final Fours.
As you can clearly see, Kentucky has been among the nation's elite programs during this time frame. There were some lean years during the latter part of Tubby Smith's tenure and the two seasons under Gillispie, but then again one can easily find a stat or two to discredit other top programs during this time frame. For instance, Duke has 1 Final Four in the past 10 seasons. UNC failed to make the NCAA Tournament in 2002, 2003 and 2010 and hasn't sniffed a Final Four in six seasons.
Most NCAA Tournament victories in the past 20 seasons:
Kentucky: 52
Kansas: 45
North Carolina: 43
Duke: 43
UCONN: 43
Michigan State: 42
Florida: 35
Most dominant program the last 3 years:
Total Wins
Louisville: 96
Kentucky: 88
NCAA Tourney Results
Louisville: FF, NC, S16
Kentucky: NC, nit, FF
I had wondered about this.
Look at you, you can create an arbitrary time frame. Interesting that you only include the past 3 completed seasons. You leave out 2010-2011 and the current season. Curious choice. If we use the past 4 full seasons and the current season, it looks more like this:
Total Wins
Louisville: 141
Kentucky: 144
NCAA Tourney Results
Louisville: 64, FF, NC, S16, ??
Kentucky: FF, NC, nit, FF, ??
Obviously, both teams are doing very well. The more you tweak the numbers, the better you can make a statistic look. As Mark Twain said, "There are three types of lies: lies, d***** lies, and statistics."
My bad, I actually totally agree with the the post about '50 and '75. My post was mostly just pointing out how you can basically get any outcome you feel like as long as you use the right numbers.
The entire country and sports world see UL and UK on the same level. In fact, most people, whether east coast or west coast, see UL hoops as the gold standard for winning games and holding true integrity and sportsmanship on and off the court. Kids in every state know more about UL than any other program any where. All those wins came against the best. The only thing I can not understand is the losing record to UK over those years. I know, I know, UK owns the refs. L1C4 is the mantra that is universally understood.
"The entire country and sports world see UL and UK on the same level. In fact, most people, whether east coast or west coast, see UL hoops as the gold standard for winning games and holding true integrity and sportsmanship on and off the court. Kids in every state know more about UL than any other program any where. All those wins came against the best. The only thing I can not understand is the losing record to UK over those years. I know, I know, UK owns the refs. L1C4 is the mantra that is universally understood."
Delusion level: Master
Delusion level: Master
Dude, I am not a poser. I am a UK fan and that was stated. But this is the point that was trying to be made here with the numbers gimmick. So I typed it out. Though I was being sarcastic to the hilt, UL has done an impressive job getting the W's as in comparison to other top programs such as Duke, UNC, and Kansas over the same recent time frame
This post was edited on 2/25 3:05 PM by KeepingItReal74
