I thought I knew how to approach this. When I first heard of Bobby Knight's allegations regarding the entire 2010 UK starting five not attending school the second semester that year, I laughed a bit at the absurdity of it. Then I thought about it, which got me aggravated at what an egregious asshole he is. Next thing I knew, Matt Jones tweeted that it is the goal of Kentucky Sports Radio to force an apology from ESPN on Knight’s behalf. Then I wondered, if KSR was focusing on Bob Knight, who would tend to the children and young adults that aren’t reading? That’s when blog ideas started churning through my head.
Initially, I thought there is no reason to force an ESPN apology regarding Bob Knight. For starters, the comments weren’t even made on ESPN, they were made at a speech in Indiana. Secondly, everyone knows Bob Knight is a grumpy bastard on a good day. My thought process was this: Bob Knight is not senile; he knows what he says. The question is, who heard him say it? If a UK fan heard it, they know it isn’t true, and just another example of “haters hating”. If a non-UK fan heard it, that means one of two things: either they are impartial to UK and don’t care about the remarks, but perhaps frown on the negative happenings of college basketball, OR, they already hate UK, so it doesn’t matter whether the negative remarks were true or not. Therefore, I concluded that his words have no lasting effect either way, with the possible exception of being used against the school in recruiting battles. But then, recruiting is a slimy business anyway, and it’s hard to separate bullshit from lies in a recruit’s living room. So I didn’t think any more about it, other than to think that UK fans shouldn’t worry about it too much, because who cares what Bob Knight says?
But then I started thinking about it again.
And I realized who was saying it. Bob Knight. Class A, USDA-certified steaming asshole. Thrower of chairs, kicker of shins, cusser of students in grocery aisles. As CBSSports.com columnist Gregg Doyel put it, “Bob Knight is a bad guy. Great coach. Valued education. Didn't cheat. But a bad guy.” Pretty much sums it up. It also isn’t the first time Knight has had misgivings about John Calipari-related items. Plus, he got his lunch eaten by UK for the last 10 years or so he was at Indiana. And he had his undefeated season ruined in ’75, causing him to hit Joe B. Hall in the back of the head. He has good reason not to like Kentucky. But he has never done anything so blatant as to outright slander the school.
Yes, he slandered UK.
We all know what slander is: a lie, usually spoken, with the intent of character defamation. This is opposed to libel, which is basically slander, but in a more permanent, tangible form, such as print or recorded audio. Bob Knight defamed the character of John Wall, which is bad enough. But his remarks also defamed Patrick Patterson, who gave his sweat and blood and tears to graduate in three years while being a stud on the basketball court. That’s when I started getting pissed. (Patrick Patterson didn't seem to care for it either). Being slanderous is easy. Just say this out loud: “Bob Knight molests orphan children.” Did anyone hear you? If so, you just slandered Bob Knight. Now, a libelous statement would be if I said
BOB KNIGHT MOLESTS ORPHAN CHILDREN.
See what I did there? That was libel, because we know he doesn’t molest orphan children (or do we?), just as we know that 100% of the 2010 starting lineup went to spring classes. Here, I’ll give you another example of libel:
BOB KNIGHT HAS A TINY PENIS, AND THUSLY FEELS COMPELLED TO RUN DOWN ANYONE WHO DOESN’T LIKE HIM.
Got the hang of it yet? Good. (Bear with me, I have a point in here somewhere). Now, would you like to read a non-slanderous statement?
BOB KNIGHT ONCE SHOT A FRIEND IN THE BACK, AND TRIED TO COVER IT UP. THAT'S THE KIND OF ASSHOLE HE IS.
I’ve pretty much always been of the thinking that peoples’ minds are going to be made up about something, and outside evidence won’t really affect their opinion; that is, if I think Bob Knight is a shitbird, his donating $50,000 to an orphanage (not that he did, but if he does, it's probably to hide the molestation) won’t change my opinion of him. Likewise, anyone who is looking for a reason to dislike Kentucky and Calipari will latch onto the first thing they can, not letting the fact that Calipari and his team washed the feet of underprivileged children in Detroit tell them otherwise. As Jerry Seinfeld (I think; it was either him or George Carlin) once said, “You can take away all the drugs in the world, and people would spin around on their lawns until they fell down and saw God.” That applies here, since we are dealing with reality vs. perception, through the eyes of a man who obviously needs some kind of medication to even his bitter, delusional ass out.
Still with me? Wow, I’m surprised. Now, after all that, here’s the deal: ESPN should either force an apology from Knight or send him packing, if for no other reason than it has to be a serious conflict of interest regarding the SEC TV contract for mouthy pricks such as himself to go around spewing derogatory nonsense. I’m glad Mitch Barnhart got in on the action, because that may help force the network’s hand. At best, Bob Knight is eaten up with petty jealousy, and can’t help himself trying to piss off Kentucky alumni and fans. At worst, he is a hypocrite and a coward, an old man trying to tear down one coach with nothing on his record, while building up another who is serving a suspension next season. He is a coward because, for starters, he won’t set foot in Rupp Arena, since he knows that would be the equivalent of walking into a lion's den wearing pork chop pants. And for this: someone on Twitter noted that Bob Knight has never said anything negative regarding UK unless he is in Indiana. This means he doesn’t have the enlarged guts to go with the enlarged asshole.
Here is my advice to Robert Montgomery Knight. Go away, while you are still at least somewhat relevant. Go away, and spend the remainder of your years shooting friends on hunting trips, and wondering why your eyebrows didn’t grow all the way across your eyes. You aren’t willing to say anything (truthfully) useful on TV, and apparently your speaking engagements reek of shenanigans and bullshit. As much as you have to offer the world, with your coaching intellect and storied past, you instead choose to continually take the low road by being a yellow-bellied coward, a hypocrite, and a shit stain on the silk underwear of life. Oh, and you are a pompous, arrogant asshole. Have I said that yet?
Bob Knight was once lauded for getting a high percentage of his students to finish classes. It’s just too bad that class isn’t a word he knows anything about these days.
April 18, 2011
April 04, 2011
LODI DODD-Y
I guess most of you have heard by now about the question asked of John Calipari at the Final Four, which went "How does it feel to coach in your first Final Four?" Once you quit slapping your knees at the overwhelming originality and humor of the question, you may have gotten pissed off. Well, the man responsible, Dennis Dodd of CBSSports.com, has written a post about it. He basically says he stands by the question. I decided to comment, since I'm trying to get out of writing an argumentative essay for an online class, and was somewhat proud of what I wrote. If you don't feel like reading the article, here is my comment:
I'm as big a Kentucky fan as any other, so I've heard pretty much every insult, slight, and "he said she said" there is to hear, especially regarding the ethics of John Calipari, and for that matter, the University itself. Honestly, I'm past the point of caring or getting upset at someone trying to ruffle the feathers of a particular fan base, be it for hits in an online column, or any other reason. In that regard, I have no problem with you asking, facetiously or not, Calipari about the vacated Final Fours. What bugs me is that you chose the most sophomoric, frat house, "that's what she said", beaten-like-a-dead-horse phrase about it, and tried to pass it off as professional journalism. Hell, I have a nephew in 6th grade who could've come up with the same thing. I get that you guys are paid to be a watchdog of sorts, and that's all fine and good. But I also thought you were paid to tell me something I didn't necessarily know before. In this case, you failed miserably. To me, that particular question, in that format at least, was the equivalent of an average Joe meeting someone whom they had always wanted to meet, just to ask them a burning question. Then, once they meet that person and have a chance to ask, they make a fart noise with their mouth and run off laughing, saying "Haha, I got you good!" It also makes me wonder what kinds of chuckleheads are writing the things I usually enjoy reading, because apparently enough of them agree with you for it to warrant a mention in this column. I guess what I'm trying to say is, if you are going to make a point, and aren't terribly concerned about taking the high road to make it, at least come up with something better than "How does it feel to coach in your first Final Four?" Surely there is a journalism degree somewhere in your office/den which proves you are capable.
I'm as big a Kentucky fan as any other, so I've heard pretty much every insult, slight, and "he said she said" there is to hear, especially regarding the ethics of John Calipari, and for that matter, the University itself. Honestly, I'm past the point of caring or getting upset at someone trying to ruffle the feathers of a particular fan base, be it for hits in an online column, or any other reason. In that regard, I have no problem with you asking, facetiously or not, Calipari about the vacated Final Fours. What bugs me is that you chose the most sophomoric, frat house, "that's what she said", beaten-like-a-dead-horse phrase about it, and tried to pass it off as professional journalism. Hell, I have a nephew in 6th grade who could've come up with the same thing. I get that you guys are paid to be a watchdog of sorts, and that's all fine and good. But I also thought you were paid to tell me something I didn't necessarily know before. In this case, you failed miserably. To me, that particular question, in that format at least, was the equivalent of an average Joe meeting someone whom they had always wanted to meet, just to ask them a burning question. Then, once they meet that person and have a chance to ask, they make a fart noise with their mouth and run off laughing, saying "Haha, I got you good!" It also makes me wonder what kinds of chuckleheads are writing the things I usually enjoy reading, because apparently enough of them agree with you for it to warrant a mention in this column. I guess what I'm trying to say is, if you are going to make a point, and aren't terribly concerned about taking the high road to make it, at least come up with something better than "How does it feel to coach in your first Final Four?" Surely there is a journalism degree somewhere in your office/den which proves you are capable.
March 26, 2011
THAT WAS FUN
Wow, what a game. A bit closer than I would've liked, and it should've been played in the Elite Eight or Final Four. But for a start to finish barnburner, it was hard to beat. Now, it's on the next one against UNC.
I figured Kentucky's defense would be solid, but damn, that was good. Josh Harrellson continues to force his way into our hearts, not unlike how one would enter a bathroom stall as halftime punishment. I honestly cannot get enough of watching Jorts play right now, and the line drive off of Jared Sullinger's chest added another chapter to his story, and probably sealed his legend at UK. The guy simply refuses to lose, and you can tell it has rubbed off on the rest of the team. I could think of different ways to say the same things over and over again, but it would get cheesy and run a bit long, so I'll sum it up with this: if UK wins it all, I am very likely to cry tears of joy and pride over how far Josh has come this season. I'm sure he realizes how proud he is making the BBN, but it is still hard to put into words. Hopefully I can find a way to sum it up in the next few days.
As for the rest of the team, I'm glad guys have finally decided to step up. I've never been happier to be wrong about something. Brandon Knight continues to amaze me; he has had a huge impact on every game UK has played in the tournament. Not too long ago, I felt pretty good about him returning to school for one more year, due to the likelihood of him being able to graduate as a sophomore. But with the way his play has skyrocketed, I couldn't blame him a bit for leaving after this year, as long as he gets fitted for a ring before he goes.
Now, about tomorrow's game. Early lines have the Cats favored by 1.5, but we all know that Cal is gonna be in his team's ear about the December loss in Chapel Hill. Carolina dominated Kentucky inside in that game, but that isn't gonna be the case this time. The only player I am worried about is John Henson, and that is because he is so long. The Harrellson-Zeller matchup will be a wash, and I believe team defense can keep Harrison Barnes in check. If UK keeps Henson contained, especially on the offensive glass, they win this game. Although, Kentucky's guard/wing play trumps Carolina's, so it may just come down to which team wants it more. Something tells me that team is Kentucky. Josh Harrellson will not let this team go home yet.
Cats by 6.
I figured Kentucky's defense would be solid, but damn, that was good. Josh Harrellson continues to force his way into our hearts, not unlike how one would enter a bathroom stall as halftime punishment. I honestly cannot get enough of watching Jorts play right now, and the line drive off of Jared Sullinger's chest added another chapter to his story, and probably sealed his legend at UK. The guy simply refuses to lose, and you can tell it has rubbed off on the rest of the team. I could think of different ways to say the same things over and over again, but it would get cheesy and run a bit long, so I'll sum it up with this: if UK wins it all, I am very likely to cry tears of joy and pride over how far Josh has come this season. I'm sure he realizes how proud he is making the BBN, but it is still hard to put into words. Hopefully I can find a way to sum it up in the next few days.
As for the rest of the team, I'm glad guys have finally decided to step up. I've never been happier to be wrong about something. Brandon Knight continues to amaze me; he has had a huge impact on every game UK has played in the tournament. Not too long ago, I felt pretty good about him returning to school for one more year, due to the likelihood of him being able to graduate as a sophomore. But with the way his play has skyrocketed, I couldn't blame him a bit for leaving after this year, as long as he gets fitted for a ring before he goes.
Now, about tomorrow's game. Early lines have the Cats favored by 1.5, but we all know that Cal is gonna be in his team's ear about the December loss in Chapel Hill. Carolina dominated Kentucky inside in that game, but that isn't gonna be the case this time. The only player I am worried about is John Henson, and that is because he is so long. The Harrellson-Zeller matchup will be a wash, and I believe team defense can keep Harrison Barnes in check. If UK keeps Henson contained, especially on the offensive glass, they win this game. Although, Kentucky's guard/wing play trumps Carolina's, so it may just come down to which team wants it more. Something tells me that team is Kentucky. Josh Harrellson will not let this team go home yet.
Cats by 6.
March 23, 2011
WE GOT THIS
I'm not worried about the Ohio State game. Yes, I just said that. It's only Wednesday, and already I've heard oodles and boodles of analysis regarding who will win this game and why, with reasons ranging from the players to the fans. I've even heard how Thad Matta is one of the classiest coaches in the game, but how classy is a guy who, in 2007, made a gimpy 42 year-old man carry them to the title game? Greg Oden still hasn't recovered. Here's something I haven't heard yet, and it's my reason why Kentucky will de-nut the Buckeyes: John Calipari.
You read that right. I think John "Roll The Ball Out" Calipari is the reason UK moves on to play Marquette (probably not, but the Big (L)East has to have something go their way, right?) and here's why: the man knows how to prepare his teams. I winced a little bit typing that, due to UK having lost six conference road games this season, but at that point he was still tinkering with the team's identity. Since the Arkansas loss, these guys are on a tear, and are as hot as any team still playing. Calipari is a great coach, but more than that/owing to that he is a brilliant salesman. He could talk the chicken off the bone. He could sell ice cubes to an Eskimo. He could motivate a team of 19 and 20 year olds to knock off the number one overall seed in the tournament. He is a master motivator, and he will have his team ready to play Friday night, especially because Kentucky is the underdog for once. Don't be surprised to see these guys come out angry.
However, that is not my main reason for this devout faith in John Calipari. This is: in 12 NCAA Tournament appearances prior to this season, a John Calipari-coached team has lost their first game of the weekend only four times. Of those four losses, two came against UK, one of these being the Final Four rematch in 1996, at the hands of a Kentucky team that God Himself would've needed overtime to beat. Of the remaining two, one of those was in 2009, when UK just so happened to have a coaching vacancy, a vacancy that would be filled by Calipari a mere 5 days after his team lost. That tells me his mind was on the UK job, whether it actually was or not. I'm not here to let facts get in the way. This leaves one loss, and it came in 2003 when 10-seed Arizona St. beat 7-seed Memphis in the first round. Want a caveat? That was Calipari's first NCAA team at Memphis, in his third season at the school. In fact, Cal's teams lost in this fashion twice. The other occasion was his first NCAA team at UMass.
What does that say? That says if a Calipari team has several days to prepare for a tournament opponent, they likely aren't going to lose. Now, add this little nugget into the mix: In 38 Sweet 16 appearances, UK is 28-10 overall. Coach Cal is 8-2 lifetime in the Sweet 16 himself. Add these together and you have a cumulative 35-12 record (I only counted last year's game once) in the Sweet 16.
Look for UK to come ready on Friday. They will hold OSU to under 40% 3-point shooting. I think Josh Harrellson and Eloy Vargas(!) can and will do a respectable job on Sullinger. Terrence Jones may have some defensive input there as well. On offense, I don't think the Cats will be as perimeter-oriented as everyone says, at least not early. I think they try to get Darius established early, and maybe get Doron a couple open looks as well. Brandon Knight may not have the game he had against West Virginia, but he will be a difference maker.
Cats by 5.
You read that right. I think John "Roll The Ball Out" Calipari is the reason UK moves on to play Marquette (probably not, but the Big (L)East has to have something go their way, right?) and here's why: the man knows how to prepare his teams. I winced a little bit typing that, due to UK having lost six conference road games this season, but at that point he was still tinkering with the team's identity. Since the Arkansas loss, these guys are on a tear, and are as hot as any team still playing. Calipari is a great coach, but more than that/owing to that he is a brilliant salesman. He could talk the chicken off the bone. He could sell ice cubes to an Eskimo. He could motivate a team of 19 and 20 year olds to knock off the number one overall seed in the tournament. He is a master motivator, and he will have his team ready to play Friday night, especially because Kentucky is the underdog for once. Don't be surprised to see these guys come out angry.
However, that is not my main reason for this devout faith in John Calipari. This is: in 12 NCAA Tournament appearances prior to this season, a John Calipari-coached team has lost their first game of the weekend only four times. Of those four losses, two came against UK, one of these being the Final Four rematch in 1996, at the hands of a Kentucky team that God Himself would've needed overtime to beat. Of the remaining two, one of those was in 2009, when UK just so happened to have a coaching vacancy, a vacancy that would be filled by Calipari a mere 5 days after his team lost. That tells me his mind was on the UK job, whether it actually was or not. I'm not here to let facts get in the way. This leaves one loss, and it came in 2003 when 10-seed Arizona St. beat 7-seed Memphis in the first round. Want a caveat? That was Calipari's first NCAA team at Memphis, in his third season at the school. In fact, Cal's teams lost in this fashion twice. The other occasion was his first NCAA team at UMass.
What does that say? That says if a Calipari team has several days to prepare for a tournament opponent, they likely aren't going to lose. Now, add this little nugget into the mix: In 38 Sweet 16 appearances, UK is 28-10 overall. Coach Cal is 8-2 lifetime in the Sweet 16 himself. Add these together and you have a cumulative 35-12 record (I only counted last year's game once) in the Sweet 16.
Look for UK to come ready on Friday. They will hold OSU to under 40% 3-point shooting. I think Josh Harrellson and Eloy Vargas(!) can and will do a respectable job on Sullinger. Terrence Jones may have some defensive input there as well. On offense, I don't think the Cats will be as perimeter-oriented as everyone says, at least not early. I think they try to get Darius established early, and maybe get Doron a couple open looks as well. Brandon Knight may not have the game he had against West Virginia, but he will be a difference maker.
Cats by 5.
February 24, 2011
UNLEADED
Last night sucked. Kentucky lost at Arkansas, the same way they lost at Vanderbilt, which was the same way they lost at Florida, which was the same way they lost at Ole Miss, and Alabama, and maybe Georgia, although Georgia wasn't really a bad loss, and neither was Florida or Vandy. The thing that sucks about it is how they lost, and how repetitive it's all getting to be.
I'm talking of course about the fact that Kentucky comes out flat, gets down big, makes a second half run, takes a late lead, and loses at the very end. Seven times this has happened, and seven times it's been hard to watch. For some reason, none of the losses really bothered me until last night. I don't know if it's because they probably pissed away a chance at a 2 seed in the SEC, or because Terrence Jones shat the bed for most of the game, or what, but the Arkansas loss struck a nerve, not just with me, but with a large chunk of the fanbase.
The team's defenders will say this a young team, and the detractors will say Calipari can't coach. I say that is all bullshit. For starters, if Cal is a bad coach, he wouldn't have been going for win number 500 last night. And for those of you who think this is a young team, you are wrong, at least for this time of year. There are only 3 games left in the regular season; these freshmen are much closer to being sophomores than freshmen. They are not young anymore. Hell, for that matter they aren't inexperienced either. You don't play seven road games that closely and not get some experience from it. What they aren't is clutch, as someone noted on Twitter. And more than anything, what they aren't is a well-led team. When I say that, I don't mean poorly-coached or undisciplined. I mean there is no one on this team who is capable of leading them on the floor.
Why does that matter? Consider the fact that most people thought last year's team would have this year's record, but last year's team only lost 2 road games all year. While there was arguably more talent, there was definitely more of a steadying presence. Part of that was John Wall being mature beyond his years, but the biggest part of that was Patrick Patterson. This team doesn't have that luxury, although Darius Miller and DeAndre Liggins certainly could/should be, if Liggins can quit crying and pissing his pants everytime he gets called for a foul. The freshmen, talented as they are, just don't have that quality about them. And they shouldn't necessarily have to, they are freshmen. While I would like to see Brandon Knight be that guy, he isn't. Again, it's not a bad thing if someone isn't a natural leader, as long as there is someone on the team who is. This team doesn't have one. And the fact they continue to lose close games on the road proves that, because a well-led team learns from their mistakes and corrects them. I haven't seen these guys do that once this year, which is why they won't make a run in the NCAA unless they get one hell of a draw, which they don't even get in good years. Why would they now?
I say all that to say this: everyone keeps mentioning next year's team, with its all-time recruiting class and deeper bench and more talent, as the team to beat. But, if none of the incoming freshmen have great leadership abilities, Kentucky could very well be in the same boat they are now. Granted, more talent and deeper bench means there is a smaller chance of being in a dogfight on the road, but it will happen at some point. How will that team respond? I have no clue, and won't until I see what happens. But until someone shows some stones, I am keeping my expectations tempered.
I'm talking of course about the fact that Kentucky comes out flat, gets down big, makes a second half run, takes a late lead, and loses at the very end. Seven times this has happened, and seven times it's been hard to watch. For some reason, none of the losses really bothered me until last night. I don't know if it's because they probably pissed away a chance at a 2 seed in the SEC, or because Terrence Jones shat the bed for most of the game, or what, but the Arkansas loss struck a nerve, not just with me, but with a large chunk of the fanbase.
The team's defenders will say this a young team, and the detractors will say Calipari can't coach. I say that is all bullshit. For starters, if Cal is a bad coach, he wouldn't have been going for win number 500 last night. And for those of you who think this is a young team, you are wrong, at least for this time of year. There are only 3 games left in the regular season; these freshmen are much closer to being sophomores than freshmen. They are not young anymore. Hell, for that matter they aren't inexperienced either. You don't play seven road games that closely and not get some experience from it. What they aren't is clutch, as someone noted on Twitter. And more than anything, what they aren't is a well-led team. When I say that, I don't mean poorly-coached or undisciplined. I mean there is no one on this team who is capable of leading them on the floor.
Why does that matter? Consider the fact that most people thought last year's team would have this year's record, but last year's team only lost 2 road games all year. While there was arguably more talent, there was definitely more of a steadying presence. Part of that was John Wall being mature beyond his years, but the biggest part of that was Patrick Patterson. This team doesn't have that luxury, although Darius Miller and DeAndre Liggins certainly could/should be, if Liggins can quit crying and pissing his pants everytime he gets called for a foul. The freshmen, talented as they are, just don't have that quality about them. And they shouldn't necessarily have to, they are freshmen. While I would like to see Brandon Knight be that guy, he isn't. Again, it's not a bad thing if someone isn't a natural leader, as long as there is someone on the team who is. This team doesn't have one. And the fact they continue to lose close games on the road proves that, because a well-led team learns from their mistakes and corrects them. I haven't seen these guys do that once this year, which is why they won't make a run in the NCAA unless they get one hell of a draw, which they don't even get in good years. Why would they now?
I say all that to say this: everyone keeps mentioning next year's team, with its all-time recruiting class and deeper bench and more talent, as the team to beat. But, if none of the incoming freshmen have great leadership abilities, Kentucky could very well be in the same boat they are now. Granted, more talent and deeper bench means there is a smaller chance of being in a dogfight on the road, but it will happen at some point. How will that team respond? I have no clue, and won't until I see what happens. But until someone shows some stones, I am keeping my expectations tempered.
January 17, 2011
BRING THE PAIN (1st Edition)
I hadn't planned on letting 2 months pass between posts, but it's hard to find time to write a lot when I don't get paid for it. On the other hand, it's hard to get paid for writing when I don't find a lot of time to do it. Dammit. Either way, I have a good idea. After LeBron James' dumbass tweet last week saying God hates Cleveland (maybe not in those words), followed by him backpedaling fast enough to make an All-Pro cornerback jealous, but preceded by his not having won a meaningful thing yet (and I'm not counting Olympic gold; that was Kevin Durant’s baby), I decided it is high time someone devised a way to judge if a superstar is worth paying any mind too. In other words, is their entertainment value negated by the stupidity they tend to ooze forth? Unfortunately for you, that someone is me. And, after several minutes’ worth of thought and for lack of a better term, I'm proud to give you the PAIN Ratio.
"WTF is PAIN Ratio?" I can hear you asking now. PAIN Ratio is the relationship between Positive Accomplishments and Idiotic Negativity. PAIN. Here's how this works: everything good a celebrity does (for sake of argument, I am sticking to athletes), they get points in the Positive column. This includes, but is not limited to: rings, MVP awards, scoring titles, donated kidneys, All-Star games, and general public perception of the athlete as a passable human being. Now, for every stupid thing an athlete does or says, they get points in the Negative column. This includes, but is not limited to: breaking up with your team on national television, possibly raping someone in Colorado, throwing teammates/coaches under the bus, getting arrested, gut-punching a homeless man, and general public perception of the athlete as a steaming asshole. The point totals for each column make the PAIN ratio, and the higher the number, the higher the chance the athlete may actually say something worthwhile from time to time. If the number falls below 2, the guy no longer matters. This is will be known as being a “PAIN In The Ass.”
Before I get into the points breakdown, let me clarify this: crazy people don’t count. Bill Simmons once wrote about “The Tyson Zone”, when celebrities reach a point where no one would be surprised at anything they did, like tattooing their face. This is a different system; Mike Tyson is crazy. This applies to athletes who make you say, “Geez, that guy is an asshole.” Like LeBron James. If Tyson picks up a VW in an intersection and flips it over, no one would blink an eyeball since the man is nuts. Likewise, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if LeBron bought an orphanage, shut it down, threw the children out on the street, and opened a store that sold nothing but his shoes and jerseys. He is proving himself to be a colossally arrogant prick.
Now, for the scoring system. This is the part I’ve struggled with. Obviously, it’s completely arbitrary at this point, so if anyone feels like giving feedback, I’d love to hear it. If this thing grows legs, I will make the necessary adjustments and update it as we go. I’m also sure that as soon as I post this, I will think of about 7 other things to add. For now, consider this Version 1.0. To start, I decided to score each item on a scale of 1-10, with the most positive/negative things receiving a 10 rating. You’ll notice each item on the Negative list is worth ten times more. I figure this helps compensate for the fact that media and fans obsess over the bad things people do. Here’s what I came up with:
POSITIVE
10 points- Finals MVP
9 points- MVP
8 points- All-Star/All-Pro teams
7 points- Scoring titles/stats leaders/ROY
6 points- Significant role on a championship team
5 points- Olympic participation
4 points- Outperforming hype
3 points- Living up to hype
2 points- Voluntary public service
1 point- Being considered a good ambassador to the sport
NEGATIVE
100 points- Accused of murder/manslaughter/rape
90 points- 2nd offense (or more) of particular crime
80 points- History of complaining/blaming others/quitting on team/2nd league suspension
70 points- League suspension
60 points- Arrest for different offense
50 points- Arrest; multiple kids by multiple women
40 points- Being an idiot on Twitter (henceforth known as being a "Twidiot" if no one has coined that term yet)
30 points- Publicly embarrassing someone/calling them out
20 points- Not living up to hype
10 points- Getting caught in a lie/bad PR
Somes notes about my train of thought here: for starters, you’ll notice I put a lot of emphasis on individual accolades. This is because we as a society, for the most part, would rather see our superstars at the center of the stage; that is why they are superstars. This also means that ultimate team guys, like ring-wearer extraordinaire Robert Horry, don’t usually generate enough press, good or bad, to dominate conversion. As for the negative side of things, it should be fairly self-explanatory. You’ll notice I put “accused of” regarding murder, manslaughter and rape, rather than “convicted of”. I’m not trying to be harsh, but these guys should know better than to put themselves in compromising positions in the first place. If you are in shape to get accused of murder, you made a damn bad decision somewhere that night. Also, no decimals, because that would be an endless discussion.
After this, I realized I needed a way to recognize patterns, such as repeat awards/offenses. So, if a guy wins multiple MVP awards, he gets recognition for the duration of his accomplishment. Likewise, if a guy has regular diarrhea of the mouth on his Twitter feed, he gets points there as well. It works like this: if something happens more than once, but not consecutively, then the point value is two times what the previous value was. In other words, if a dude gets the MVP, then another three years later, the second is worth 18 points, since the first MVP was worth 9. If he got a third MVP two years later, that one would count for 36 points. Got it? Now, if a guy wins multiple MVP awards in a row, each successive one is worth the point total of the first one squared. Therefore, the second MVP would be worth 81 points (9x9), and a third consecutive award would be worth 81 as well. And, for the hell of it, if a guy wins two consecutive MVPs, then a third one 2 years later, the third one counts for 81 points. On the other hand, if a guy gets accused of rape on two separate occasions, the second offense is worth 100 points, and each offense after that is 1000 more. This should offset the fact I’ve used the maximum point total for mere allegations.
Now that we’ve got that out of the way, let’s get to the nitty-gritty and see the PAIN Ratio in action. For the sake of time, I’m going with 3 people on the initial run: LeBron, Kobe, and Ben Roethlisberger. Here’s a look at the stats for each guy:
Bryant:
Rings (’00-’02, ’09-’10)= 150 points
Finals MVP(’09-’10)= 110 points
MVP(’08)= 9 points
Scoring titles (’06-’07)= 56 points
All-Star/All-NBA (12 times each)= 1328 points
Olympics (’08)= 5 points
Living up to and outperforming hype= 7 points
Being a good ambassador= 1 point
Arrest and rape accusation= 150 points
Tendency to pout in games= 160 points
Calling out Shaq for cheating= 30 points
Bad PR over rape arrest= 10 points
That’s 1666 good points to 350 bad points, for a PAIN Ratio of 4.8
James:
MVP (’09-’10)= 90 points
Rookie of the Year (’04)= 7 points
Scoring titles (’08)= 7 points
Olympics (’04, ’08)= 15 points
All-Star/All-NBA (6 times each)= 656 points
Public service= 2 points
Quitting on team in ’10 playoffs= 80 points
Being a Twidiot= 120 points
Not living up to hype (no rings yet)= 20 points
Bad PR= 110 points
“The Decision”= 30 points
That’s 777 good points to 360 bad points, for a PAIN Ratio of 2.2
Roethlisberger:
Rookie of the Year(’04)= 7 points
2 Rings (’05, ’08)= 18 points
Pro Bowl (’07)= 8 points
Living up to and outperforming hype= 7 points
Voluntary public service= 6 points
2 rape accusations= 200 points
Suspension= 70 points
Bad PR= 100 points
That’s 46 good points to 370 bad points. Damn. PAIN Ratio of .1 for Ben.
Obviously, Ben’s numbers are skewed on account of the rape accusations, so if he keeps it in his pants, he can get his number back up eventually. What hurts him is that, even though he is a proven winner, he doesn’t have eye-popping numbers to offset the dumb shit he tends to do. I may have to find a metric to get him back up to a respectable level, something like his career win percentage compared to the overall history of the franchise. In the meantime, we are all hoping he makes a strong recovery. As for Kobe, I think he proves my system to be at least somewhat fair. He has accolades out the ass, and just enough negative marks against him to make it interesting. A 4.8 seems perfectly reasonable to me. LeBron, on the other hand, needs to keep his damn mouth shut until he wins something. The All-Star games are the only thing carrying him right now, as a 2.2 rating makes him very close to being a PAIN In The Ass. A sizable chunk of the population already thinks he is anyway.
In a large nutshell, maybe a walnut shell or something, that is the PAIN Ratio. I’m hoping to get some feedback, on Twitter or in the comment section, if anyone so desires. When I came up with this, I created the scoring system without looking at anyone's stats; the fact that I had LeBron in mind with the cut-off point he nearly reached thrills me to no end. Now I’m curious what the 32 of you who are going to read this think.
"WTF is PAIN Ratio?" I can hear you asking now. PAIN Ratio is the relationship between Positive Accomplishments and Idiotic Negativity. PAIN. Here's how this works: everything good a celebrity does (for sake of argument, I am sticking to athletes), they get points in the Positive column. This includes, but is not limited to: rings, MVP awards, scoring titles, donated kidneys, All-Star games, and general public perception of the athlete as a passable human being. Now, for every stupid thing an athlete does or says, they get points in the Negative column. This includes, but is not limited to: breaking up with your team on national television, possibly raping someone in Colorado, throwing teammates/coaches under the bus, getting arrested, gut-punching a homeless man, and general public perception of the athlete as a steaming asshole. The point totals for each column make the PAIN ratio, and the higher the number, the higher the chance the athlete may actually say something worthwhile from time to time. If the number falls below 2, the guy no longer matters. This is will be known as being a “PAIN In The Ass.”
Before I get into the points breakdown, let me clarify this: crazy people don’t count. Bill Simmons once wrote about “The Tyson Zone”, when celebrities reach a point where no one would be surprised at anything they did, like tattooing their face. This is a different system; Mike Tyson is crazy. This applies to athletes who make you say, “Geez, that guy is an asshole.” Like LeBron James. If Tyson picks up a VW in an intersection and flips it over, no one would blink an eyeball since the man is nuts. Likewise, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if LeBron bought an orphanage, shut it down, threw the children out on the street, and opened a store that sold nothing but his shoes and jerseys. He is proving himself to be a colossally arrogant prick.
Now, for the scoring system. This is the part I’ve struggled with. Obviously, it’s completely arbitrary at this point, so if anyone feels like giving feedback, I’d love to hear it. If this thing grows legs, I will make the necessary adjustments and update it as we go. I’m also sure that as soon as I post this, I will think of about 7 other things to add. For now, consider this Version 1.0. To start, I decided to score each item on a scale of 1-10, with the most positive/negative things receiving a 10 rating. You’ll notice each item on the Negative list is worth ten times more. I figure this helps compensate for the fact that media and fans obsess over the bad things people do. Here’s what I came up with:
POSITIVE
10 points- Finals MVP
9 points- MVP
8 points- All-Star/All-Pro teams
7 points- Scoring titles/stats leaders/ROY
6 points- Significant role on a championship team
5 points- Olympic participation
4 points- Outperforming hype
3 points- Living up to hype
2 points- Voluntary public service
1 point- Being considered a good ambassador to the sport
NEGATIVE
100 points- Accused of murder/manslaughter/rape
90 points- 2nd offense (or more) of particular crime
80 points- History of complaining/blaming others/quitting on team/2nd league suspension
70 points- League suspension
60 points- Arrest for different offense
50 points- Arrest; multiple kids by multiple women
40 points- Being an idiot on Twitter (henceforth known as being a "Twidiot" if no one has coined that term yet)
30 points- Publicly embarrassing someone/calling them out
20 points- Not living up to hype
10 points- Getting caught in a lie/bad PR
Somes notes about my train of thought here: for starters, you’ll notice I put a lot of emphasis on individual accolades. This is because we as a society, for the most part, would rather see our superstars at the center of the stage; that is why they are superstars. This also means that ultimate team guys, like ring-wearer extraordinaire Robert Horry, don’t usually generate enough press, good or bad, to dominate conversion. As for the negative side of things, it should be fairly self-explanatory. You’ll notice I put “accused of” regarding murder, manslaughter and rape, rather than “convicted of”. I’m not trying to be harsh, but these guys should know better than to put themselves in compromising positions in the first place. If you are in shape to get accused of murder, you made a damn bad decision somewhere that night. Also, no decimals, because that would be an endless discussion.
After this, I realized I needed a way to recognize patterns, such as repeat awards/offenses. So, if a guy wins multiple MVP awards, he gets recognition for the duration of his accomplishment. Likewise, if a guy has regular diarrhea of the mouth on his Twitter feed, he gets points there as well. It works like this: if something happens more than once, but not consecutively, then the point value is two times what the previous value was. In other words, if a dude gets the MVP, then another three years later, the second is worth 18 points, since the first MVP was worth 9. If he got a third MVP two years later, that one would count for 36 points. Got it? Now, if a guy wins multiple MVP awards in a row, each successive one is worth the point total of the first one squared. Therefore, the second MVP would be worth 81 points (9x9), and a third consecutive award would be worth 81 as well. And, for the hell of it, if a guy wins two consecutive MVPs, then a third one 2 years later, the third one counts for 81 points. On the other hand, if a guy gets accused of rape on two separate occasions, the second offense is worth 100 points, and each offense after that is 1000 more. This should offset the fact I’ve used the maximum point total for mere allegations.
Now that we’ve got that out of the way, let’s get to the nitty-gritty and see the PAIN Ratio in action. For the sake of time, I’m going with 3 people on the initial run: LeBron, Kobe, and Ben Roethlisberger. Here’s a look at the stats for each guy:
Bryant:
Rings (’00-’02, ’09-’10)= 150 points
Finals MVP(’09-’10)= 110 points
MVP(’08)= 9 points
Scoring titles (’06-’07)= 56 points
All-Star/All-NBA (12 times each)= 1328 points
Olympics (’08)= 5 points
Living up to and outperforming hype= 7 points
Being a good ambassador= 1 point
Arrest and rape accusation= 150 points
Tendency to pout in games= 160 points
Calling out Shaq for cheating= 30 points
Bad PR over rape arrest= 10 points
That’s 1666 good points to 350 bad points, for a PAIN Ratio of 4.8
James:
MVP (’09-’10)= 90 points
Rookie of the Year (’04)= 7 points
Scoring titles (’08)= 7 points
Olympics (’04, ’08)= 15 points
All-Star/All-NBA (6 times each)= 656 points
Public service= 2 points
Quitting on team in ’10 playoffs= 80 points
Being a Twidiot= 120 points
Not living up to hype (no rings yet)= 20 points
Bad PR= 110 points
“The Decision”= 30 points
That’s 777 good points to 360 bad points, for a PAIN Ratio of 2.2
Roethlisberger:
Rookie of the Year(’04)= 7 points
2 Rings (’05, ’08)= 18 points
Pro Bowl (’07)= 8 points
Living up to and outperforming hype= 7 points
Voluntary public service= 6 points
2 rape accusations= 200 points
Suspension= 70 points
Bad PR= 100 points
That’s 46 good points to 370 bad points. Damn. PAIN Ratio of .1 for Ben.
Obviously, Ben’s numbers are skewed on account of the rape accusations, so if he keeps it in his pants, he can get his number back up eventually. What hurts him is that, even though he is a proven winner, he doesn’t have eye-popping numbers to offset the dumb shit he tends to do. I may have to find a metric to get him back up to a respectable level, something like his career win percentage compared to the overall history of the franchise. In the meantime, we are all hoping he makes a strong recovery. As for Kobe, I think he proves my system to be at least somewhat fair. He has accolades out the ass, and just enough negative marks against him to make it interesting. A 4.8 seems perfectly reasonable to me. LeBron, on the other hand, needs to keep his damn mouth shut until he wins something. The All-Star games are the only thing carrying him right now, as a 2.2 rating makes him very close to being a PAIN In The Ass. A sizable chunk of the population already thinks he is anyway.
In a large nutshell, maybe a walnut shell or something, that is the PAIN Ratio. I’m hoping to get some feedback, on Twitter or in the comment section, if anyone so desires. When I came up with this, I created the scoring system without looking at anyone's stats; the fact that I had LeBron in mind with the cut-off point he nearly reached thrills me to no end. Now I’m curious what the 32 of you who are going to read this think.
November 12, 2010
DO I KNOW YOU? YOU DON’T LOOK FAMILIAR
Before we delve into this hot mess, let me just say that the last time I did a UK Basketball preview, the team didn’t even make the NCAA tournament. (But I did make the final four of the KSR “Who Wants To Be A Blogger” competition, even though I didn’t win. It makes no difference now, looks like Matt Jones has got himself a nice little following over there. I’m sure he barely misses me, if at all.)
Now, you may have noticed there is a slight difference between that team and this year’s. For starters, the coach is sober. And the exact opposite of what Billy “Don’t Call Me Surly, I’m Just An Asshole” Gillispie was. The only problem with John Calipari is that he recruits players the NBA actually wants, so it looks like we are gonna have a rather large amount of personnel turnover every season. Nothing wrong with signing blue chippers all day long, but by doing that you sacrifice the family aspect of having tenured players. This will eventually be an issue, if for no other reason than a sizable group of nostalgic old-timers will get together and bitch about how, back in the day, players stayed more than one or two years. Makes no difference to me, but I do like seeing at least one or two upperclassmen to show the young guys how it’s done.
In my opinion, that is the biggest downfall for this edition of Wildcat basketball. Sure, there is less size, less depth, probably less talent, but more than anything, less of a veteran presence. Nothing against the older guys, but Patrick Patterson carried this team for two seasons (with help from Joe Crawford and Ramel Bradley for one of them), under very difficult circumstances. Last year’s freshmen knew they had to bring it, or the old man was gonna crack some skulls. This year? I’m not sure Darius Miller and DeAndre Liggins can bring out that sense of “have to” that Patterson did. Nothing against them, that’s just how I see it.
On the flip side, when it comes to postseason play, apparently the veteran presence isn’t necessary for a big run in the NCAA tournament. After all, as good as Patterson was, he had played in just as many tournament games as John Wall and Co. (And the NIT doesn’t count. Stick the NIT in your ass if you think it does.) Even with a severe lack of postseason experience on last year’s team, they made a nice Elite Eight run, before picking the worst time of the season to forget how to play basketball. Here’s the caveat: a grizzled veteran calms that team down and makes them play within themselves, instead of jacking up 3’s all night. Patterson wasn’t able to do that, because he hadn’t been there before.
Which gets me back to this year: even though Miller and Liggins don’t appear (to me) to be able to bring out the best in their teammates, they will have a few tournament games under their belts come NCAA time. In other words, I don’t see them being as dominant in the regular season, but I think they have a better chance for a Final Four. Ah, the hell with it. I don’t know what is going to happen, and neither do you. And yes, I’m aware that I contradicted myself numerous times in the preceding paragraphs. Get over it.
Something else I wonder about with Calipari: since he recruits studs, is there a chance that, in the near future, Kentucky won’t have anyone to honor on Senior Night? There is only one sophomore this year, Jon Hood, and I wouldn’t be shocked if he transferred. He just seems like a moody bastard to me.
But back to my original point, if I even got there to begin with: nobody knows anyone who plays for Kentucky this year. That’s where I come in. Instead of some gutless prediction of scores and final standings, I’m gonna give you an inkling of who the hell these guys are. Because I’m nothing if not here to provide a service, let’s get to it.
*NOTE: MAY OR MAY NOT ACTUALLY CONTAIN PERTINENT INFORMATION
THE FRESHMEN
Enes Kanter, #0, 6’11” C. By far the biggest question mark this year, Kanter takes this team from solid contender to one of several legitimate favorites. Stop me if you’ve heard this before. A lot of people expect him to miss a few games before gaining eligibility, a la Randolph Morris. The problem with that is Morris had a year of NCAA experience before he missed time, so it was just a matter of getting back in game shape. For all of Kanter’s upside and Turkish pro experience, the American game is a different animal. I can’t confidently say he can just come in and clean house. I’m sure he will; just don’t be surprised if he doesn’t. Trivia: The anagram for “Enes Kanter” is “enter snake”, which is several different kinds of awesome. I really hope he gets to play.
UPDATE: Well, shit. Since I finished this entry, Enes Kanter was denied eligibility by the NCAA, who are a bunch of flaming bastard assholes. Unless UK wins its appeal, nothing I just wrote about him is relevant. Not that it was anyway.
Stacey Poole, #2, 6’4” G. Poole was the first one of the 2010 class to commit, and has been overlooked ever since. Kind of understandable, I guess, since he only has four stars. The guy obviously sucks. If Calipari truly goes with a 7-man rotation, I don’t see Poole getting guaranteed minutes.
Terrence Jones, #3, 6’8’ F/C. I’m looking forward to seeing how this guy does this season. He is one of the many players on this year’s team who was pilfered from U-Dub. A lot of hell was raised over Jones’ initial commitment to Washington, but he waffled and decided to join the winning team. I’m sure Cam Newton is responsible. Jones is a lefty, and tall and quick, just like me (one out of three ain’t bad), and he has potential to be an exciting player, if he could just quit with those damn water bottles.
Jarrod Polson, #5, 6’1” G. Polson is a walk-on cum scholarship from Jessamine County, so he already has a place as a fan favorite. The fact he is a scrawny little white guy helps; just ask Colin Cowherd. Not sure what Polson’s dad does, but I’m sure he doesn’t make plans to rob banks. Colin Cowherd is also an asshole.
Brandon Knight, #12, 6’3” G. Brandon Knight is the stud of this year’s recruiting class. He graduated high school with a 4.2 GPA, can recite Shakespeare, and isn’t quite as quick as John Wall, which means he is still quicker than everyone else. He has played great in every game so far, from the Canadian trip to both exhibitions, and the team will ebb and flow with him.
Doron Lamb, #20, 6’4” G. Lamb is the sharpshooter for this year’s team, and he will be oft-needed. He has drawn a few comparisons to Jodie Meeks for his style and shooting ability, and is considered a mentor for 2015 stud Jarius Docile, who is rumored to be a UK lean. Lamb’s anagram is “Bold Roman”, which would be more fitting for Brandon Knight, what with the Shakespeare recitation and whatnot.
SOPHOMORE
Jon Hood, #4, 6’7” G. I’m not sure how much of a contributor Hood will be this year. If he can show consistent touch shooting the ball early on, he has a good shot of getting serious minutes. If he struggles out of the gate, he may be fighting for minutes with Stacey Poole.
JUNIORS
Darius Miller, #1, 6’7” F/G. Darius Miller is officially the veteran leader of this team, and I’m not sure that’s a good sign. He doesn’t show much vocal leadership, but I’ll be the first to admit good leaders don’t have to be vocal. What worries me about Miller is his inconsistent intensity; can he make his teammates want to be better? As far as his ability, Darius can be a 20-point scorer if he wants to be.
Eloy Vargas, #30, 6’11” F/C. Vargas is another player who has been overlooked all year, but I don’t see that being the case for long. A transfer from Florida, he is the team’s main inside presence after Enes Kanter. Eloy is sort of a question mark; he certainly has the size to be a factor, but whether or not he is will have a lot to do with Kentucky’s success this season.
DeAndre Liggins, #34, 6’6” G. After a very up-and-down first couple seasons, I look for Liggins to be the vocal leader of this team. He has found a nice little niche as an energy/dirty work guy, and with a team full of freshmen, that is a nice option to have. Liggins appears to be a little quicker than last year, and he will almost certainly get more minutes. He could end up being this year’s X-factor.
SENIOR
Josh Harrellson, #55, 6’10” F/C. Harrellson is a guy who normally wouldn’t see much action, but with a thin front line, Calipari may call his number quite often, especially given his veteran status. Not the most athletic of the big tall slow white guys you’ll see, but he may be a big help in the rebounding department this year. It will be interesting to see how Josh is utilized with a short bench.
So there it is. Eleven guys (10 if Kanter doesn’t play) who will carry the torch this season. I look for Knight, Miller, Jones, Liggins, and Kanter to start, with Vargas/Harrellson, Lamb, and Poole/Hood being the key reserves. And yes, that is pretty much the entire team, save Polson, who may get good minutes if the starters see early foul trouble. As for the schedule, it’s a bit tricky, with several BCS teams in the non-conference portion. An early trip to Maui will be a great test for a young team; they also have to go to Chapel Hill. I see 5-6 losses regular season, another SEC title, a 1-2 seed in the NCAA, and another Elite Eight. If Enes plays, they are a favorite to win it all.
This has been another installment of “Vaguely Worded Analysis That Offers No Insight Whatsoever”. I hope you enjoyed it, and remember: Don’t sweat the petty things, and don’t pet the sweaty things.
Now, you may have noticed there is a slight difference between that team and this year’s. For starters, the coach is sober. And the exact opposite of what Billy “Don’t Call Me Surly, I’m Just An Asshole” Gillispie was. The only problem with John Calipari is that he recruits players the NBA actually wants, so it looks like we are gonna have a rather large amount of personnel turnover every season. Nothing wrong with signing blue chippers all day long, but by doing that you sacrifice the family aspect of having tenured players. This will eventually be an issue, if for no other reason than a sizable group of nostalgic old-timers will get together and bitch about how, back in the day, players stayed more than one or two years. Makes no difference to me, but I do like seeing at least one or two upperclassmen to show the young guys how it’s done.
In my opinion, that is the biggest downfall for this edition of Wildcat basketball. Sure, there is less size, less depth, probably less talent, but more than anything, less of a veteran presence. Nothing against the older guys, but Patrick Patterson carried this team for two seasons (with help from Joe Crawford and Ramel Bradley for one of them), under very difficult circumstances. Last year’s freshmen knew they had to bring it, or the old man was gonna crack some skulls. This year? I’m not sure Darius Miller and DeAndre Liggins can bring out that sense of “have to” that Patterson did. Nothing against them, that’s just how I see it.
On the flip side, when it comes to postseason play, apparently the veteran presence isn’t necessary for a big run in the NCAA tournament. After all, as good as Patterson was, he had played in just as many tournament games as John Wall and Co. (And the NIT doesn’t count. Stick the NIT in your ass if you think it does.) Even with a severe lack of postseason experience on last year’s team, they made a nice Elite Eight run, before picking the worst time of the season to forget how to play basketball. Here’s the caveat: a grizzled veteran calms that team down and makes them play within themselves, instead of jacking up 3’s all night. Patterson wasn’t able to do that, because he hadn’t been there before.
Which gets me back to this year: even though Miller and Liggins don’t appear (to me) to be able to bring out the best in their teammates, they will have a few tournament games under their belts come NCAA time. In other words, I don’t see them being as dominant in the regular season, but I think they have a better chance for a Final Four. Ah, the hell with it. I don’t know what is going to happen, and neither do you. And yes, I’m aware that I contradicted myself numerous times in the preceding paragraphs. Get over it.
Something else I wonder about with Calipari: since he recruits studs, is there a chance that, in the near future, Kentucky won’t have anyone to honor on Senior Night? There is only one sophomore this year, Jon Hood, and I wouldn’t be shocked if he transferred. He just seems like a moody bastard to me.
But back to my original point, if I even got there to begin with: nobody knows anyone who plays for Kentucky this year. That’s where I come in. Instead of some gutless prediction of scores and final standings, I’m gonna give you an inkling of who the hell these guys are. Because I’m nothing if not here to provide a service, let’s get to it.
*NOTE: MAY OR MAY NOT ACTUALLY CONTAIN PERTINENT INFORMATION
THE FRESHMEN
Enes Kanter, #0, 6’11” C. By far the biggest question mark this year, Kanter takes this team from solid contender to one of several legitimate favorites. Stop me if you’ve heard this before. A lot of people expect him to miss a few games before gaining eligibility, a la Randolph Morris. The problem with that is Morris had a year of NCAA experience before he missed time, so it was just a matter of getting back in game shape. For all of Kanter’s upside and Turkish pro experience, the American game is a different animal. I can’t confidently say he can just come in and clean house. I’m sure he will; just don’t be surprised if he doesn’t. Trivia: The anagram for “Enes Kanter” is “enter snake”, which is several different kinds of awesome. I really hope he gets to play.
UPDATE: Well, shit. Since I finished this entry, Enes Kanter was denied eligibility by the NCAA, who are a bunch of flaming bastard assholes. Unless UK wins its appeal, nothing I just wrote about him is relevant. Not that it was anyway.
Stacey Poole, #2, 6’4” G. Poole was the first one of the 2010 class to commit, and has been overlooked ever since. Kind of understandable, I guess, since he only has four stars. The guy obviously sucks. If Calipari truly goes with a 7-man rotation, I don’t see Poole getting guaranteed minutes.
Terrence Jones, #3, 6’8’ F/C. I’m looking forward to seeing how this guy does this season. He is one of the many players on this year’s team who was pilfered from U-Dub. A lot of hell was raised over Jones’ initial commitment to Washington, but he waffled and decided to join the winning team. I’m sure Cam Newton is responsible. Jones is a lefty, and tall and quick, just like me (one out of three ain’t bad), and he has potential to be an exciting player, if he could just quit with those damn water bottles.
Jarrod Polson, #5, 6’1” G. Polson is a walk-on cum scholarship from Jessamine County, so he already has a place as a fan favorite. The fact he is a scrawny little white guy helps; just ask Colin Cowherd. Not sure what Polson’s dad does, but I’m sure he doesn’t make plans to rob banks. Colin Cowherd is also an asshole.
Brandon Knight, #12, 6’3” G. Brandon Knight is the stud of this year’s recruiting class. He graduated high school with a 4.2 GPA, can recite Shakespeare, and isn’t quite as quick as John Wall, which means he is still quicker than everyone else. He has played great in every game so far, from the Canadian trip to both exhibitions, and the team will ebb and flow with him.
Doron Lamb, #20, 6’4” G. Lamb is the sharpshooter for this year’s team, and he will be oft-needed. He has drawn a few comparisons to Jodie Meeks for his style and shooting ability, and is considered a mentor for 2015 stud Jarius Docile, who is rumored to be a UK lean. Lamb’s anagram is “Bold Roman”, which would be more fitting for Brandon Knight, what with the Shakespeare recitation and whatnot.
SOPHOMORE
Jon Hood, #4, 6’7” G. I’m not sure how much of a contributor Hood will be this year. If he can show consistent touch shooting the ball early on, he has a good shot of getting serious minutes. If he struggles out of the gate, he may be fighting for minutes with Stacey Poole.
JUNIORS
Darius Miller, #1, 6’7” F/G. Darius Miller is officially the veteran leader of this team, and I’m not sure that’s a good sign. He doesn’t show much vocal leadership, but I’ll be the first to admit good leaders don’t have to be vocal. What worries me about Miller is his inconsistent intensity; can he make his teammates want to be better? As far as his ability, Darius can be a 20-point scorer if he wants to be.
Eloy Vargas, #30, 6’11” F/C. Vargas is another player who has been overlooked all year, but I don’t see that being the case for long. A transfer from Florida, he is the team’s main inside presence after Enes Kanter. Eloy is sort of a question mark; he certainly has the size to be a factor, but whether or not he is will have a lot to do with Kentucky’s success this season.
DeAndre Liggins, #34, 6’6” G. After a very up-and-down first couple seasons, I look for Liggins to be the vocal leader of this team. He has found a nice little niche as an energy/dirty work guy, and with a team full of freshmen, that is a nice option to have. Liggins appears to be a little quicker than last year, and he will almost certainly get more minutes. He could end up being this year’s X-factor.
SENIOR
Josh Harrellson, #55, 6’10” F/C. Harrellson is a guy who normally wouldn’t see much action, but with a thin front line, Calipari may call his number quite often, especially given his veteran status. Not the most athletic of the big tall slow white guys you’ll see, but he may be a big help in the rebounding department this year. It will be interesting to see how Josh is utilized with a short bench.
So there it is. Eleven guys (10 if Kanter doesn’t play) who will carry the torch this season. I look for Knight, Miller, Jones, Liggins, and Kanter to start, with Vargas/Harrellson, Lamb, and Poole/Hood being the key reserves. And yes, that is pretty much the entire team, save Polson, who may get good minutes if the starters see early foul trouble. As for the schedule, it’s a bit tricky, with several BCS teams in the non-conference portion. An early trip to Maui will be a great test for a young team; they also have to go to Chapel Hill. I see 5-6 losses regular season, another SEC title, a 1-2 seed in the NCAA, and another Elite Eight. If Enes plays, they are a favorite to win it all.
This has been another installment of “Vaguely Worded Analysis That Offers No Insight Whatsoever”. I hope you enjoyed it, and remember: Don’t sweat the petty things, and don’t pet the sweaty things.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)