Shocked Calhoun isn't on stage trying to steal away more of the spotlight from Ollie.

reclegend22;1602390 wrote:I'll let sportswizhurd make the final call, but this run tonight solidifies my belief that Napier > Kemba. Not the improbability of the run, but the sheer greatness of Napier. He wasn't perfect tonight, but over the course of the year, I'm not sure I've ever been more impressed by a player. Napier is just a straight-up, cold-blooded winner.

Not disagreeing, but you are selling Kemba way short, imo.

Kemba won 11 games in a row. What he did in NYC was equally as impressive that year. Shabazz his big shots, Kemba hit like 3 GW shots.

gut;1602385 wrote:Do you really think it would have mattered? UConn has been ridiculous from the FT line.

Hi, I watched the Wisconsin game.

GOONx19;1602392 wrote:Too drunk to edit. I respect K and obviously he's a good coach. Just not happy with the result. UConn played a great game, at least the guards.

It's cool. I was laying on the Uk hate pretty thick.

Disagree with everything you said, though, obviously, lol.

Now, Ollie has to win with his recruits while selling the AAC.

Laley23;1602394 wrote:Not disagreeing, but you are selling Kemba way short, imo.

Kemba won 11 games in a row. What he did in NYC was equally as impressive that year. Shabazz his big shots, Kemba hit like 3 GW shots.

As I said, the run 2011 UConn went on was more impressive. But, pound for pound as a player, I'll take Napier. He was every bit as good a scorer and IMO an even better playmaker. He also hit like 4 or 5 game deciding or buzzer beating shots this year, for good measure. Not all during the NCAA run, but still. I just like Napier more.

Laley23;1602391 wrote:Yes. Extend the game.

Normally I'd agree. But with how UConn shoots free throws I'm not sure the game theory really is in your favor. There has to be a decent chance of them missing free throws before extending the game tilts away from playing defense.

Connecticut with 4 national titles in the last 15 years. Has any other program since John Wooden's UCLA done that? That's fucking nuts, especially when you also consider that UConn has played in 4 NITs in that same period.

reclegend22;1602402 wrote:Connecticut with 4 national titles in the last 15 years. Has any other program since John Wooden's UCLA done that? That's fucking nuts, especially when you also consider that UConn has played in 4 NITs in that same period.

@JonesAngell: RT @D1scourse: Connecticut, Duke, Kentucky & UNC are the only programs in post-Wooden era w/4 men's hoops titles.

So I'm guessing no.

We've talked about it before, but how many go from UK? I'm going with 3 now.

Randle
Young
WCS

Harrison twins are the only question marks to me.

Prescott;1602397 wrote:Now, Ollie has to win with his recruits while selling the AAC.

Eventually, I think Connecticut will become the 16th member of the ACC. While their lack of a football history didn't help their cause, it's a widely held belief that Jim Calhoun's vociferous and antagonistic attitude toward Boston College after the Eagles left the Big East led to Boston College working to ensure the Huskies were blackballed from the conference. UConn was only a vote short, I believe, from a formal invite.

Now that the ACC has positioned itself as arguably the premier hoops conference moving forward, I could see UConn joining in the next few years.

wildcats20;1602403 wrote:@JonesAngell: RT @D1scourse: Connecticut, Duke, Kentucky & UNC are the only programs in post-Wooden era w/4 men's hoops titles.

So I'm guessing no.

In 15 years?

Yes, I am aware that others have four titles in the post-Wooden era.

Duke's four titles came almost 20 years apart. North Carolina's came 27 years apart. Kentucky's came more than 30 years apart.

Anti-climatic game. We'll see if any of UK guys let this stick with them and decide to make another run at it next year.

reclegend22;1602406 wrote:In 15 years?

Yes, I am aware that others have four titles in the post-Wooden era.

Indiana is the only other school with more than 4.

The answer is no, like I said.

wildcats20;1602413 wrote:Indiana is the only other school with more than 4.

The answer is no, like I said.

Misunderstood you. My mistake.

The more I consider it, the more I believe UConn, despite not getting really good on a national level until the early '90s, has cemented its legacy as the "seventh" blue blood. Traditionally, Kentucky, UCLA, Duke, North Carolina, Kansas and Indiana have been known as the Super Six programs. But upon closer examination, UConn now is tied for the fifth most NCAA titles all-time with Duke with four, trailing only UCLA, Kentucky, Indiana and North Carolina.

The success of the program can no longer be attributed to just Jim Calhoun. It's a blue blood, as painful as that is to admit as a Duke fan.

gut;1602400 wrote:Normally I'd agree. But with how UConn shoots free throws I'm not sure the game theory really is in your favor. There has to be a decent chance of them missing free throws before extending the game tilts away from playing defense.

Ok, so you get the stop and score. Now you are down by 1 or 2 with around 15 second left. They make both (because we are assuming they arent missing). You are down 3 or 4 with 13 seconds left. You hit a 3 to tie the game with 6 seconds left or are down by 1.

But, to me, making the 2 threes is just as unlikely as making 3-4 lay-ups with a UCONN miss at some point. Probably even better odds, imo.

Laley23;1602416 wrote:Ok, so you get the stop and score. Now you are down by 1 or 2 with around 15 second left. They make both (because we are assuming they arent missing). You are down 3 or 4 with 13 seconds left. You hit a 3 to tie the game with 6 seconds left or are down by 1.

But, to me, making the 2 threes is just as unlikely as making 3-4 lay-ups with a UCONN miss at some point. Probably even better odds, imo.

I'm not going to argue the game theory. It's a 2 possession game. You're going to need them to miss a free throw, but the more you put them on the line the more you have to makes 3's and hope they miss...you're better off taking the only opportunity you have to play defense here. A defensive stop is your absolute best chance to tie this up in the quickest way possible, assuming they're going to make their next 2 free throws.

If UConn would miss a free throw, even their next one...then you want to play for the defensive stop. You are unlikely to turn over their backcourt, and you are unlikely to gain much ground putting them on the line. Your BEST chance to cut this deficit is to play defense. Yes, conventional wisdom says to foul - UConn is the team where conventional wisdom is wrong.

We can split hairs...KY doesn't have a good option here. It wasn't a stupid call and I'm not really interested if the odds were slightly for or against the call. This is really a gray area - they're down more than 2-3, but less than 6-7...you foul a bad FT shooter otherwise you play defense.

reclegend22;1602415 wrote:Traditionally, Kentucky, UCLA, Duke, North Carolina, Kansas and Indiana ...

Ehhh, UCLA has had a few deep runs....but since Knight left IU has had maybe 2 good teams in the tourney. Yes, by the technical definition of a blue blood you are probably correct, but more like a blue blood that has lost everything.

gut;1602418 wrote:I'm not going to argue the game theory. It's a 2 possession game. You're going to need them to miss a free throw, but the more you put them on the line the more you have to makes 3's and hope they miss...you're better off taking the only opportunity you have to play defense here. A defensive stop is your absolute best chance to tie this up in the quickest way possible, assuming they're going to make their next 2 free throws.

If UConn would miss a free throw, even their next one...then you want to play for the defensive stop. You are unlikely to turn over their backcourt, and you are unlikely to gain much ground putting them on the line. Your BEST chance to cut this deficit is to play defense. Yes, conventional wisdom says to foul - UConn is the team where conventional wisdom is wrong.

We can split hairs...KY doesn't have a good option here. It wasn't a stupid call and I'm not really interested if the odds were slightly for or against the call.

Last Ill say on it.

But, my theory you dont take 3s, you take lay-ups.

If UCONN doesnt miss, your in the same position you are in anyway, just 3 possessions or so later.

Laley23;1602421 wrote:Last Ill say on it.

But, my theory you dont take 3s, you take lay-ups.

If UCONN doesnt miss, your in the same position you are in anyway, just 3 possessions or so later.

Thank you for not making this a debate my OCD can't leave.

We can agree UConn isn't going to miss many FT's.

If they miss the first, UK is down 4 and it's the same as a defensive stop. The defensive stop is more likely but beside the point.
If they make 1 or both, you're now down 5-6. You almost have to take a 3....and then hope they miss 1 or both. You aren't making up 4 points without hitting some 3's or a bunch of FT misses. You're ignoring UConn is like the worst team to employ this strategy against.

A defensive stop is you're only chance to send it to OT in two possessions without a missed FT. Which is more likely? That should really be the end of the debate.

Just repeat my edit you posted before I finished:
We can split hairs...KY doesn't have a good option here. It wasn't a stupid call and I'm not really interested if the odds were slightly for or against the call. This is really a gray area - they're down more than 2-3, but less than 6-7...you foul a bad FT shooter otherwise you play defense.

gut;1602420 wrote:Ehhh, UCLA has had a few deep runs....but since Knight left IU has had maybe 2 good teams in the tourney. Yes, by the technical definition of a blue blood you are probably correct, but more like a blue blood that has lost everything.

Davis took them to the finals but that was with BK's players, and when he got his guys in the flopped miserable.
Sampson and his teenage-girlish fetish with phone calls had some good teams but didnt do great from memory. Last year IU flopped with a very good team.

I agree though.....since BK they havent been consistantly good.

gut;1602420 wrote:Ehhh, UCLA has had a few deep runs....but since Knight left IU has had maybe 2 good teams in the tourney. Yes, by the technical definition of a blue blood you are probably correct, but more like a blue blood that has lost everything.

I was just speaking in a historical context.

Terry_Tate;1602404 wrote:We've talked about it before, but how many go from UK? I'm going with 3 now.

Randle
Young
WCS

Harrison twins are the only question marks to me.

Questions? They are all gone and then some including Poythress. Mark it down.