The House of Blue

We don't need to recruit any less stud players but I would like to see some 3-4 year developmental type added to the mix. I think a great place to look would be Ky. You've absolutely got to develop some leadership and some guys in the program that do things the Cal way and can show guys how to do things year after year. The problem is you can't let these guys rot on the bench. In year 2 you have to start getting them in some games consistently. But I also think a great way to do this is to find transfers like we did with Harrow, 5th year transfers like we did with Mays, and even try going to the JUCO ranks. We should be able to attract the best of the best no matter where we look for players. We've always had the scholly's available to do this without sacrificing elite level freshman. Only thing is Cal must make sure he gets top notch character guys because its not easy to mix with high ego freshman.

This is the answer.

It's tough to have recruiting classes like we've got when there is a 4 year guy sitting on the bench waiting to take your minutes. It's not even something that should be discussed any more. This is how calipari is going to do it and if you don't like it you might as well not watch the team.

I think we get caught up in the hype about the next Lottery Pick and forget about these guys who could still be here next year. Would be great to see how they develop compared to next years class.

I made this very assertion when Cal was first brought in and was lambasted. The contrast with this years team as compared to last years team truly shows the importance of having some senior leadership. I suppose it is hard to bring in the strong 4* talent when they know they are going to be recruited over but you know Cal could pull it off.

How many borderline studs does the state of ky produce annually? It's not that often....

What about Shane Hall and Cameron Justice? Kentucky kids that would most likely love to wear the blue and white.

I haven't heard it from anyone directly connected to Calipari, but have been told by people in and around the program that he's probably not here for the long haul, especially if next year's team (2013-14) does what he thinks it will.

I don't think that's what folks are saying at all. Of course you don't stop trying to bring in the very best talent you can but the point many are trying to make is that there is always room in each class to add one or two kids that are not likely one and dones. The state of Kentucky (and I would include Huntington prep in WV) produces these on an annual basis. Kids that can be sold on coming in and being that defensive stopper or microwave off the bench that would be here 3 or 4 years so that you would have a returning core of 3 or 4 guys every year to give stability and experience at the very least in practice and be in the 7-8 man rotation when Cal brings in his 5-6 McD guys. It would take out a lot of the bumps in the roller coaster we're now on.

No because you are not grasping our point. We all know that Cal can develop most any top 40-50 player into an NBA coveted guy in a year or two. What we're saying is ADD one more each year that doesn't fit in the top 40-50 criteria. IOW, when he feels like he's gotten all the top guys he can ADD ONE MORE. It's not going to botch up his scholarship numbers as we are always going to lose more than one might project as you just said. He will always coach up the guys he has into being better than they are expect to be. Just look at the less heralded players he's had here. Just look at Polson for goodness sakes. The idea is that by doing what we suggest there is more chance that there will always be holdover players for future teams.

Problem is, when you have 8 #50+ players on your roster that only leaves 5 spots for elite talent.

That is what folks are saying ... that was the premise of the original post ... that Cal needs to change his philosophy and strategy with regard to the types of players he recruits, what he does with them, how he handles them with regard to the draft and how he replenishes the talent here.

A couple of points to consider ...

You mentioned the 'roller coaster ride that we're on' and the whole point of this thread is that some posters think there's a 'problem' or that 'something's not working' and 'needs to be fixed'. If you actually look at the results since Cal's been here ... we're in the middle of one of the three or four most successful and impressive runs in the history of UK basketball ... and in fact one of the best runs of any teams in college basketball history. Last year's team tied the all-time NCAA record for wins in a season and Cal's 3 years here have seen more wins over a 3-year period than any other program in college basketball history (second only to the 96-98 Wildcats). We have shown sustained improvement season after season and I, for one, am not writing the story of this season until it's over. You all know what is coming in next year and the prospects for the years after that. As of right now, I don't see anything needing 'fixing'.

Secondly, the idea of keeping several top 25-50 players around for 3-4 years as anchors to the revolving door of 5-6 elite players is just not how things are done in major college basketball ... either at UK or anywhere. Look back at the last 20 national champions and the typical number of contributors to any team is 7-8 ... which is exactly Cal's MO. It is rare to find any national champions like the 95-96 'Cats who have more than 7-8 players averaging more than 10 minutes a game. It just doesn't happen. As mentioned by someone else, what top-50 player in the nation is going to come here and play 8 minutes a game for 4 years when he can go to another school and play 25-30 minutes a game? You may get a Darius Miller, a Jon Hood or a Derek Willis who grew up a UK fan and wants to do that ... but those are the exceptions, not the rule.

This this this.