Former Cats disproving the myth...

[UFWildcat]

...that Tubby couldn't recruit.

I know, I know that Tubby's recruiting was far to inconsistent to make UK a major player in college basketball. It's not my intentions to start this thread as another Tubby debate. We've done that to ad nauseam.

But these former Cats (that Tubby fully recruited) are absolute man-childs in the NBA. Maybe Tubby didn't maximize their potential but they are great players.

Chuck Hayes - I've watched this guy a lot lately in the playoffs. What a work horse. He definitely outworks Yao Ming. He may not be a scoring threat but he is the ultimate team guy. Tough as nails and a tenacious competitor. I didn't realize that he took the starting job away from Juwan Howard. He deserves it!

Tayshaun Prince - This is guy is an absolute freak of nature. He has everything to his game. Defense, scorers mentality, three point shot. He would instantly make any team better. He is the Pistons unsung hero. He put so many daggers into Orlando during their playoff series. He is the silent assassin, and can guard any player!

I'm not even sure why I'm starting this thread. I guess I just felt the need to proclaim Hayes and Prince because they are truly something special right now.

I look for more former players of Smith to have a big impact in the NBA before their careers are over.

Rondo, Morris, Azubuike

"Now I'm done"

[Josh]

Not entirely sure, but did Tubby even recruit Tayshaun? I have always been told that Rick was the one that went after him. Someone enlighten me so I know for sure.

[TrueblueCATfan]

Not entirely sure, but did Tubby even recruit Tayshaun? I have always been told that Rick was the one that went after him. Someone enlighten me so I know for sure.

I believe Tubby recruited Prince..

[Josh]

I believe Tubby recruited Prince..
Just as I saw your post I was like, "there is something different about this." Our names aren't on top of our posts anymore. :D MUCH BETTER!

[TrueblueCATfan]

Just as I saw your post I was like, "there is something different about this." Our names aren't on top of our posts anymore. :D MUCH BETTER!

I just checked on the website..Prince played at UK from 99-02 so I am just guessing on him Being recruited by Tubby

[Littlemeyer]

Just as I saw your post I was like, "there is something different about this." Our names aren't on top of our posts anymore. :D MUCH BETTER!

:D I didn't notice it until I read this post. You're right; it IS better. Not sure why, really, but it is certainly easier on the eyes.

And yes, I'm 99.947% sure Tubby recruited Tayshaun entirely himself. Pitino may've initiated contact earlier in Tayshaun's career, but he was a senior in high school during Tubby's first year at Kentucky.

[Josh]

I just checked on the website..Prince played at UK from 99-02 so I am just guessing on him Being recruited by Tubby
I was hoping that it was Tubby but I just wasn't totally sure on it. I think he ended up being a pretty good player, don't you? :p

[TrueblueCATfan]

I was hoping that it was Tubby but I just wasn't totally sure on it. I think he ended up being a pretty good player, don't you? :p

yes he is......one of my favorite Wildcats

[Littlemeyer]

This is an old debate that could get ugly unless we're careful (:p ), but I believe the problem is that those guys should've been higher draft picks. Prince, based on his play thus far in the League, could've easily been a lottery pick. Hayes should've been a pick, rather than having to go the free agent route.

I hope this thread doesn't get ugly. I'm all for the "Let the past go" mantra, but it is possible to have civil discussion about Tubby or any past coach, IMO.

[Josh]

This is an old debate that could get ugly unless we're careful (:p ), but I believe the problem is that those guys should've been higher draft picks. Prince, based on his play thus far in the League, could've easily been a lottery pick. Hayes should've been a pick, rather than having to go the free agent route.

I hope this thread doesn't get ugly. I'm all for the "Let the past go" mantra, but it is possible to have civil discussion about Tubby or any past coach, IMO.
Oh I totally agree about Tay going higher.

Here is the 2002 NBA Draft. (http://www.nbadraft.net/2002.htm)

That was the year Yao went #1. Others in the draft were Drew Gooden and one of my favorite non-Wildcats in the NBA, Amare Stoudemire. You can look at the others in that draft who have really not done anything. In hindsight, Tayshaun could have been a top 5 pick in that draft. It's incredible who went above him.

[DCWildcat]

UF, no more Tubby threads!!

[BlueheartMattB]

Oh I totally agree about Tay going higher.

Here is the 2002 NBA Draft. (http://www.nbadraft.net/2002.htm)

That was the year Yao went #1. Others in the draft were Drew Gooden and one of my favorite non-Wildcats in the NBA, Amare Stoudemire. You can look at the others in that draft who have really not done anything. In hindsight, Tayshaun could have been a top 5 pick in that draft. It's incredible who went above him.

As much as I hate to say this, but I think Boozer was drafted low (2nd round pick). But the same with Tayshaun, low picks but look at the production they give to their teams compared to some of the guys drafted above them who I didn't even recognize half their names.

[crazzedcats22]

it's the same as the NFL draft, the high picks are either can't miss studs, or guys with tons of "potential." The most consistent, good players come in the later rounds.

[ProfJT]

I also think it is great that both of these guys were four year college players. The more that they succede, the better it looks for staying around for four years.

I wish them both all the success in the world. They were both great players at UK, and I'll not forget them.

[UFWildcat]

Oh I totally agree about Tay going higher.

Here is the 2002 NBA Draft. (http://www.nbadraft.net/2002.htm)

That was the year Yao went #1. Others in the draft were Drew Gooden and one of my favorite non-Wildcats in the NBA, Amare Stoudemire. You can look at the others in that draft who have really not done anything. In hindsight, Tayshaun could have been a top 5 pick in that draft. It's incredible who went above him.

Its crazy that so many teams passed on Prince.

He's a complete player. He would instantly make any team better if he ever got traded.

[UKcat]

O.K., to appease the Tubby hangers-on; let's just say, that he QUIT recruiting; along with most everything else.
Yes, he was a much better recruiter, coach, motivator, etc., at the beginning. By the time, he packed up and left, technically in December, he had quit being all of those things.
I am glad he is gone. period.

[DenCat]

I also think it is great that both of these guys were four year college players. The more that they succede, the better it looks for staying around for four years.

I wish them both all the success in the world. They were both great players at UK, and I'll not forget them.

I think a lot of people put too little stock with individuals playing 4 years in college. I think it gives them an advantage over players who leave early. For the most part they are more mature, better educated and a better all around player. They seem to have more patience with their game, which makes them a better TEAM player.

[phoenix]

O.K., to appease the Tubby hangers-on; let's just say, that he QUIT recruiting; along with most everything else.
Yes, he was a much better recruiter, coach, motivator, etc., at the beginning. By the time, he packed up and left, technically in December, he had quit being all of those things.
I am glad he is gone. period.

I guess we have to face the fact that some posters just hate Tubby, and are going to take every single opportunity to hijack a thread and bend it backwards. Like this poster and Littlemeyer have tried to do here.

By the time Tubby bashers started in on Tubby, technically, 10 years ago, the day he was hired, Tubby hadn't even won his first national championship. They haven't packed up their bags and left yet, but many of us are hoping.

Aside from that, hindsight is 20/20 for NBA coaches but obviously the Tubby bashers are blessed with foresite, and knew what all those GM's and coaches didn't know, even after they had a chance to look the recruits all up and down. It's Tubby's fault. It's Tubbys fault. And Rondo with his 20% 3 pt shot shoulda been another lottery pick. Yeah, it's Tubby's fault, it's Tubby's fault. And Chuck Hayes, an unexpected starter shoulda been drafted, even though he still doesn't have a jump shot, bottom rung hops, shoots only mediocre at the stripe, and can't deliver inside in traffic. Yeah, it's Tubby's fault, it's Tubby's fault. And Prince had his talent jumping out in the NBA so noticeably that he rode the bench almost his whole rookie season.

I imagine at some point all these guys will come forward and explain that they could have made twice the millions they are now making, if they would have just played for G.

[bluegrassking]

"By the time Tubby bashers started in on Tubby, technically, 10 years ago, the day he was hired, Tubby hadn't even won his first national championship. They haven't packed up their bags and left yet, but many of us are hoping."

In general terms this is a huge lie.

I think it can be fairly said that I was as hard on the Tubbster as any but I supported him for 8 years. I know some even more hardcore "bashers" and not a one was on his case prior to the Elite 8 game against Michigan State in 98. These people were rare. More came on board with Team Turmoil I.

I think you're really just misrepresenting the entire dynamic by saying folks were on his case from the very beginning (though I wish I were because they were right).

Phoenix, you are the master of the blanket accusation. That's a bad thing to be when you also desire to take "the moral high ground" because it's amoral, at best to make everyone the same. Doubley so, when it is my belief this blanket accusation is one of racisim.

You ought to be ashamed but of course you won't be because nothing means more than running down the fanbase of this program and scoring points on the internet.

[Littlemeyer]

I guess we have to face the fact that some posters just hate Tubby, and are going to take every single opportunity to hijack a thread and bend it backwards. Like this poster and Littlemeyer have tried to do here.


So...a dissenting opinion equates to hijacking a thread and bending it backwards? :confused:

There's a pattern developing. First, we hear "Let it go!". Fine. Then, a thread starts with Tubby as the topic (bait?). Everything is o.k. until somebody disagrees with the spirit of the thread. Then the "Tubby hater" label gets tossed out. Soon, expect to see some more "Let it go, people!" posts on this thread. But they'll just be directed to those of us who, in Phoenix's words, "hate" Tubby.

And Phoenix, I don't hate Tubby. Never did. Never will. I was as big a Tubby fan as there was on this site until late in this past season, when it became obvious to anyone watching that something wasn't right. Even then, I remained a fan of Tubby; but also a fan of change. Any kind of change. It just so happened that the change that occurred came at the top.

Phoenix, you must hate Chuck Hayes. Give the man some credit. He busted his butt in college and in the pros to get to where he is. "Can't deliver inside in traffic" :icon_rolleyes: LSU sure is glad he can't.

[phoenix]

"By the time Tubby bashers started in on Tubby, technically, 10 years ago, the day he was hired, Tubby hadn't even won his first national championship. They haven't packed up their bags and left yet, but many of us are hoping."

In general terms this is a huge lie.

I think it can be fairly said that I was as hard on the Tubbster as any but I supported him for 8 years. I know some even more hardcore "bashers" and not a one was on his case prior to the Elite 8 game against Michigan State in 98. These people were rare. More came on board with Team Turmoil I.

I think you're really just misrepresenting the entire dynamic by saying folks were on his case from the very beginning (though I wish I were because they were right).

Phoenix, you are the master of the blanket accusation. That's a bad thing to be when you also desire to take "the moral high ground" because it's amoral, at best to make everyone the same. Doubley so, when it is my belief this blanket accusation is one of racisim.

You ought to be ashamed but of course you won't be because nothing means more than running down the fanbase of this program and scoring points on the internet.

UKcat makes claims that are lies. If he had actually quit recruiting as he stated, why was Tubby wasting all that time communicating with these guys?

MY claim is fact. The early Tubby bashers were on him right away, and that is TRUTH, if you would even remotely suggest of think otherwise, you have led a sheltered life and probably not spent much time in KY talking basketball.

[phoenix]

So...a dissenting opinion equates to hijacking a thread and bending it backwards? :confused:

There's a pattern developing. First, we hear "Let it go!". Fine. Then, a thread starts with Tubby as the topic (bait?). Everything is o.k. until somebody disagrees with the spirit of the thread. Then the "Tubby hater" label gets tossed out. Soon, expect to see some more "Let it go, people!" posts on this thread. But they'll just be directed to those of us who, in Phoenix's words, "hate" Tubby.

And Phoenix, I don't hate Tubby. Never did. Never will. I was as big a Tubby fan as there was on this site until late in this past season, when it became obvious to anyone watching that something wasn't right. Even then, I remained a fan of Tubby; but also a fan of change. Any kind of change. It just so happened that the change that occurred came at the top.

Phoenix, you must hate Chuck Hayes. Give the man some credit. He busted his butt in college and in the pros to get to where he is. "Can't deliver inside in traffic" :icon_rolleyes: LSU sure is glad he can't.

Probably shouldn't have put you in there, but you did basically dredge an old argument up and put it on here and then claim you hoped it wouldn't get ugly. That was you wasn't it? That argument was not being discussed UNTIL you put it here.

I don't hate Chuck Hayes. Loved him and his play. His faults are his faults though and the fact that he succeeds in spite of his shortcomings shows just what a true competitor is all about. As for his inside delivery, I guess you can have that opinion, based on one play in one game, that brought home the game, but long term, Chuck isn't going to get it done going inside against competition unless he can get an angle or butt the guy out first. Its his hops. Nothing to be done about it. I'm hoping Chuck is well compensated and invests wisely, because I get the impression he is giving up his body to succeed in the pros. He isn't playing the same game some of the more athletically gifted players are playing. IF all those guys were playing at Chuck's level, they would be carrying somebody out on a stretcher every night.

[ukcatfan]

RE: Tubby's recruiting--a blind dog gets a bone every now and then.

[Littlemeyer]

Probably shouldn't have put you in there, but you did basically dredge an old argument up and put it on here and then claim you hoped it wouldn't get ugly. That was you wasn't it? That argument was not being discussed UNTIL you put it here.


The Chuck comment was probably uncalled for. :icon_smile: I know that you don't hate Chuck Hayes; no more than I hate Tubby Smith. Faults can be discussed without "hating" somebody or something. That was all I was trying to say.

I didn't dredge the argument up; UFWildcat did. And I do hope it doesn't get ugly. (Too late, perhaps? :cool: ) This could be a good discussion. If the "old argument" is wrong, prove it wrong. Don't just say I'm a Tubby hater. That is not conducive to civil discussion.

If you don't want to read about the negatives of Tubby Smith, the best thing to do would be to not read any thread about Tubby Smith. Every thread about Tubby Smith, from now until WCN is no more, will have positives and negatives in it. That's just the way it's going to be. Right or wrong, it is what it is.

[Littlemeyer]

RE: Tubby's recruiting--a blind dog gets a bone every now and then.

Another example of a post that does nothing to incite civil discussion.

[wildcatdon]

you have mentioned 2 people,hays and prince..tubby was here for 10 yrs..his recruiting sucked..jury is still out on rondo,buike and morris,but still thats only 5 guys for 10 yrs worth of recruiting...tubby set our program back yrs and i am very glad he is gone...

[UFWildcat]

you have mentioned 2 people,hays and prince..tubby was here for 10 yrs..his recruiting sucked..jury is still out on rondo,buike and morris,but still thats only 5 guys for 10 yrs worth of recruiting...tubby set our program back yrs and i am very glad he is gone...

Of course this argument was going to surface...

I don't look at things as so final...as so absolute if you will. 10 seasons at UK should mean this many (?) draft picks. What is the right number :shrug1:

I just know I see two very good players in the NBA who played for UK back in the day. They just happened to be recruited by Tubby Smith.

Do we need to go to the books and look up all the big time NBA performers (ones making a big impact currently) all the so called "elite" coaches have produced. Lets start with Billy Donovan...Uhhh...Jason Williams :shrug1:

This thread is more about Tay and Chuck, not Tubby. But Tubby will still always be around, won't he?

Tay and Chuck are animals right now. The others I believe are on the rise. They were recruited by Tubby. Thats all I'm saying.

And if you break it down, I don't think you will find a glaring disparity between impact players in the NBA recruited by Tubby and other "elite" coaches.

Of course, some will try and preach players that were big in college but didn't quite pan out in the NBA.

I'm all for good, solid discussion, not the same ole', tireless debate.

[matt colvin]

I'm all for good, solid discussion, not the same ole', tireless debate.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: To ya UFWildcat. Thank you for saying that. Refreshing.

[UKcat]

UKcat makes claims that are lies. If he had actually quit recruiting as he stated, why was Tubby wasting all that time communicating with these guys?

MY claim is fact. The early Tubby bashers were on him right away, and that is TRUTH, if you would even remotely suggest of think otherwise, you have led a sheltered life and probably not spent much time in KY talking basketball.

I make no claim; it is strictly my opinion; and truth to those who will admit it; your statement holds more truth than you might realize too; he was wasting his time.......and ours.

[crazzedcats22]

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: To ya UFWildcat. Thank you for saying that. Refreshing.

seriously, Tubby's gone, let all of these pointless discussions go with him. Let's focus on the current coach, the current players, the current recruits, and move on already!

[UKcat]

seriously, Tubby's gone, let all of these pointless discussions go with him. Let's focus on the current coach, the current players, the current recruits, and move on already!

I'll agree with that!!!!

By the way......I really LIKE your signature!

[UFWildcat]

seriously, Tubby's gone, let all of these pointless discussions go with him. Let's focus on the current coach, the current players, the current recruits, and move on already!

I respect this but I don't understand it.

What exactly are we to focus on? Getting the players ready? Constructing the lineup? Drawing up the plays?

This goes back to the "detrimental to the cause" debate. What are we trying to accomplish?

I'm sorry but I don't find it "pointless" :tongue3:

[TrueblueCATfan]

[QUOTE=UKcat;272346]I make no claim; it is strictly my opinion; and truth to those who will admit it; your statement holds more truth than you might realize too; he was wasting his time.......and ours

DONE

[UKcat]

sorry...... you're right; quote was deleted. You do the same; o.k.?

[Littlemeyer]

I respect this but I don't understand it.

What exactly are we to focus on? Getting the players ready? Constructing the lineup? Drawing up the plays?

This goes back to the "detrimental to the cause" debate. What are we trying to accomplish?

I'm sorry but I don't find it "pointless" :tongue3:

:thumbup: :thumbup: I agree with UFWildcat. I think it's enjoyable to discuss the pros and cons of Tubby Smith, just as much as we can discuss the pros and cons of Rupp, Hall, Sutton, Pitino, and now Gillispie. And the discussion can occur without the "Haters" and "Tubpologists" labels being strewn around.

I hope my mention of UFWildcat in an earlier post didn't convey that I'm "blaming" him for starting this discussion. That's not the case at all; he's one of my favorite posters on this board (despite his out-and-out love for all-things Florida ;) ). I'm glad he started this discussion; and I did hope for a civil discussion. And for the most part, that's what this has been.

:thumbup:

[crazzedcats22]

:thumbup: :thumbup: I agree with UFWildcat. I think it's enjoyable to discuss the pros and cons of Tubby Smith, just as much as we can discuss the pros and cons of Rupp, Hall, Sutton, Pitino, and now Gillispie. And the discussion can occur without the "Haters" and "Tubpologists" labels being strewn around.

I hope my mention of UFWildcat in an earlier post didn't convey that I'm "blaming" him for starting this discussion. That's not the case at all; he's one of my favorite posters on this board (despite his out-and-out love for all-things Florida ;) ). I'm glad he started this discussion; and I did hope for a civil discussion. And for the most part, that's what this has been.

:thumbup:

I agree that's it's worth discussing, what I am tired of is the "tubby sucks" "he left us with nothing" "we suck" etc.... Comments like those are POINTLESS and are a waste of time

[katfever]

LOL I find it hilarious Smith supporters want to move on yet keep posting threads involving Smith- ones that will get a response. Smith and his staff had no clue how to recruit effectively. To argue differently simply belies the players that have been on the roster. Billy G is showing us all how it is done- and he makes Smith's recruiting efforts look comical. Why do you people keep posting this stuff knowing the answers it will get? But hey, whatever floats your boat. lol

[UFWildcat]

LOL I find it hilarious Smith supporters want to move on yet keep posting threads involving Smith- ones that will get a response. Smith and his staff had no clue how to recruit effectively. To argue differently simply belies the players that have been on the roster. Billy G is showing us all how it is done- and he makes Smith's recruiting efforts look comical. Why do you people keep posting this stuff knowing the answers it will get? But hey, whatever floats your boat. lol

LOL I find it hilarious that you know everything. Got it all figured out. :shrug1:

[blueheretic]

Another example of a post that does nothing to incite civil discussion.


Littlemeyer, the ignore button does wonders for your enjoyment here. I've placed most of the legion in my list.

[blueheretic]

Katfever is correct.

The Smith Defense Legion states that they want to move on. Then they make posts about Smith. Then when the replies come in, they accuse anyone who does not post glowingly of CNRSmith of being haters or being obsessed or whatever.

Why not just NOT post them if moving on is what you truly wish. No one who was tired of Smith is going to suddenly become a believer in Smith just because he Cut and Ran from the Smith inflicted UK Basketball malaise.

It seems everytime one of you protests loudly about the posts about Smith, another of you starts posting about Smith. Then you complain about the Smith posts. Almost like it's some kind of Agenda. lol :shrug1:

[UFWildcat]

Katfever is correct.

The Smith Defense Legion states that they want to move on. Then they make posts about Smith. Then when the replies come in, they accuse anyone who does not post glowingly of CNRSmith of being haters or being obsessed or whatever.

Why not just NOT post them if moving on is what you truly wish. No one who was tired of Smith is going to suddenly become a believer in Smith just because he Cut and Ran from the Smith inflicted UK Basketball malaise.

It seems everytime one of you protests loudly about the posts about Smith, another of you starts posting about Smith. Then you complain about the Smith posts. Almost like it's some kind of Agenda. lol :shrug1:

You must be talking to me because I started the thread.

At what point did I accuse anyone of being a hater or being obsessed or whatever?

If one doesn't find it a legit discussion (pro or con), then that person should just leave it alone.

People have all kinds of different opinions...I welcome all responses, regardless if it agrees with mine.

Contrary to believe, I don't have an agenda here.

[UFWildcat]

And what is this "moving on" stuff I see.

What exactly are we moving on too?

[blueheretic]

The SDL purports a desire to stop discussing Smith. BUT they can't even follow their own lead.

[TrueblueCATfan]

Katfever is correct.

The Smith Defense Legion states that they want to move on. Then they make posts about Smith. Then when the replies come in, they accuse anyone who does not post glowingly of CNRSmith of being haters or being obsessed or whatever.

Why not just NOT post them if moving on is what you truly wish. No one who was tired of Smith is going to suddenly become a believer in Smith just because he Cut and Ran from the Smith inflicted UK Basketball malaise.

It seems everytime one of you protests loudly about the posts about Smith, another of you starts posting about Smith. Then you complain about the Smith posts. Almost like it's some kind of Agenda. lol :shrug1:

what is the Smith Legion Defense....you have more names for our former coach than anybody....can we start a contest???

[blueheretic]

The Smith Defense Legion is no more than my way of rounding all of those who can not let a remark about Orlando "Tubby" Smith be posted without going on and on about how Smith is being bashed or badly treated or that he is being unfairly treated or that his record was just groovy, etc, etc.

Nothing nefarious about it. And really. It's not a name for Smith. It's a name for a group of his acolytes.

It's not bad or good. It is just a manner of grouping and not having to name each person off one by one.

[TrueblueCATfan]

The Smith Defense Legion is no more than my way of rounding all of those who can not let a remark about Orlando "Tubby" Smith be posted without going on and on about how Smith is being bashed or badly treated or that he is being unfairly treated or that his record was just groovy, etc, etc.

Nothing nefarious about it. And really. It's not a name for Smith. It's a name for a group of his acolytes.

It's not bad or good. It is just a manner of grouping and not having to name each person off one by one.

well about the Pitino defense Legion then..........because some on her still defend him..don't count me in on that one......I will never defend him

[UFWildcat]

The SDL purports a desire to stop discussing Smith. BUT they can't even follow their own lead.

Again...when have I expressed a desire to stop discussing Smith.

Last time I checked this was a Kentucky Basketball forum.

Smith was a big part of it. (Good and Bad) His impact will still be felt for a little while.

Why should he not be open for discussion?

It has nothing to do with not being able to get over him. You honestly think I wanted things to continue the way they have been. I welcome all change for the better. I've been in H E double hockey stick lately.

Its obvious emotions will continue to fly high until Smith's tenure is well behind in the rearview mirror.

I would have loved to see the message boards after the '97 season.

[blueheretic]

well about the Pitino defense Legion then..........because some on her still defend him..don't count me in on that one......I will never defend him


That can be your lane. Run with it.

I don't see a valid comparison here. People bash Pitino and some refuse to even mention his name. Opting instead for silly acronyms and such. I haven't seen anyone crying that Pitino should not be spoken of or posted about on this forum. I see those kinds of posts only when there is a less than flattering post about Smith. Smith is treated by his acolytes as if he is a sacred cow whose name should not touch the lips of the unclean.

I think it's nonsense. Smiths followers are hyper-sensitive regarding their hero.

[katfever]

LOL I find it hilarious that you know everything. Got it all figured out. :shrug1: Hmmmm. I am not quite sure I know everything but I am quite sure I can see who Smith recruited onto his roster. And I have "figured out" that our current coach is a more effective and organized recruiter than Smith could ever think about being. It is not even close. BTW, I really do not care how many threads are about Smith. You can post them all day.

[blueheretic]

Again...when I have expressed a desire to stop discussing Smith.

Last time I checked this was a Kentucky Basketball forum.

Smith was a big part of it. (Good and Bad) His impact will still be felt for a little while.

Why should he not be open for discussion?

It has nothing to do with not being able to get over him. You honestly think I wanted things to continue the way they have been. I welcome all change for the better. I've been in H E double hockey stick lately.

Its obvious emotions will continue to fly high until Smith's tenure is well behind in the rearview mirror.

I would have loved to seen the message boards after the '97 season.

If I can read your post, then I don't consider you one of these people. Ihave all of the SDL on my ignore list. They make no real effort to be objective. They only want to read posts that state the greatness of the man who cut and ran. I'd rather not read their hagiography.

[blueheretic]

Hmmmm. I am not quite sure I know everything but I am quite sure I can see who Smith recruited onto his roster. And I have "figured out" that our current coach is a more effective and organized recruiter than Smith could ever think about being. It is not even close. BTW, I really do not care how many threads are about Smith. You can post them all day.

I agree.

[TrueblueCATfan]

If I can read your post, then I don't consider you one of these people. Ihave all of the SDL on my ignore list. They make no real effort to be objective. They only want to read posts that state the greatness of the man who cut and ran. I'd rather not read their hagiography.

wow BH .............I am not on your ignore list..........

[blueheretic]

wow BH .............I am not on your ignore list..........

I think you are a homer but you're ok in my book.

[TrueblueCATfan]

I think you are a homer but you're ok in my book.

A homer.....why because I supported Tubby while he was our coach..then I guess I will always be a homer

[blueheretic]

A homer.....why because I supported Tubby while he was our coach..then I guess I will always be a homer

Because you concentrate so much on the good that you sometimes seem to miss the seriousness of the problems and are willing to overlook them as in the case of Smith.

[TrueblueCATfan]

Because you concentrate so much on the good that you sometimes seem to miss the seriousness of the problems and are willing to overlook them as in the case of Smith.

that's fair..I am guilty of that..and yes I did overlook when it came to Tubby...but I was ready for a change....and this change is for the best

[UFWildcat]

Hmmmm. I am not quite sure I know everything but I am quite sure I can see who Smith recruited onto his roster. And I have "figured out" that our current coach is a more effective and organized recruiter than Smith could ever think about being. It is not even close. BTW, I really do not care how many threads are about Smith. You can post them all day.

I agree.

There is no comparison between Billy G's work ethic towards recruiting and Tubby's. He has magnified all of Tubby's shortcomings. That can not be debated.

I'm just watching the NBA playoffs and see former Cats making huge impacts.

Not defending Smith, just raising (IMO) valid points. :shrug1:

[ukcatfan]

Another example of a post that does nothing to incite civil discussion.

Littlemeyer
I am sorry that I am such a failure. I tried to bring back to life something that was dead--OTS RECRUTING.

[poodoo]

So...a dissenting opinion equates to hijacking a thread and bending it backwards? :confused:



And Phoenix, I don't hate Tubby. Never did. Never will. I was as big a Tubby fan as there was on this site until late in this past season, when it became obvious to anyone watching that something wasn't right. Even then, I remained a fan of Tubby; but also a fan of change. Any kind of change. It just so happened that the change that occurred came at the top.



I had not intended to respond on this thread. Having said that, I am doing so to DEFEND Littlemeyer against this comment. I think Littlemeyer is speaking from the heart and that he NEVER HATED our former coach. Too, I'm defending Littlemeyer just as I have defended others against LABELS. Further, of course, I'm sure phoenix doesn't "hate" Chuck Hayes, and I'm glad you guys got that all cleared up.

Also, as you yourself say within the thread, Littlemeyer, the labeling tends to make discussions no longer "civil." I hate the labels, BOTH ways, and always have.

In regard to the topic all I will say is that I LOVE watching former Cats in the NBA. I almost didn't even open the thread because I saw our former coach's name. While some of the topics COULD be legitimate and civil discussion, I am convinced that the emotions involved will not allow it to survive without its disintegration. GO CATS! GO BILLY G!

[blueheretic]

Of course this argument was going to surface...

I don't look at thinks as so final...as so absolute if you will. 10 seasons at UK should mean this many (?) draft picks. What is the right number :shrug1:

I just know I see two very good players in the NBA who played for UK back in the day. They just happened to be recruited by Tubby Smith.

Do we need to go to the books and look up all the big time NBA performers (ones making a big impact currently) all the so called "elite" coaches have produced. Lets start with Billy Donovan...Uhhh...Jason Williams :shrug1:

This thread is more about Tay and Chuck, not Tubby. But Tubby will still always be around, won't he?

Tay and Chuck are animals right now. The others I believe are on the rise. They were recruited by Tubby. Thats all I'm saying.

And if you break it down, I don't think you will find a glaring disparity between impact players in the NBA recruited by Tubby and other "elite" coaches.

Of course, some will try and preach players that were big in college but didn't quite pan out in the NBA.

I'm all for good, solid discussion, not the same ole', tireless debate.

You might want to do a little more research on players in the NBA. There was at least one Gator on Miamis roster when they won the championship. There are several UF players in the NBA. And most of them were drafted rather than having to gain entry through the backdoor.

Like it or not, the NBA Draft is one thing that will affect a recruits decision to come to a school. It's not the only thing. I bet it takes a higher priority over "fan negativity," though.

UNC and Roy Williams have had several high draft selections. That aids their recruiting infinitely.

The good players want to go somewhere that will aid their quest to get to the next level. It's just how it is in modern Collegiate basketball. You find ways to use that to your advantage.

There are no points for guys who have to go to the NBDL for a year or for guys who have to get ten day contracts to prove their worth. The up and coming recruits don't want to hear that.

That's why the argument that includes Hayes and Azibuike as UK players in the NBA is a double edged sword. Sure they are there. But how did they get there. Neither was drafted out of college. Hayes was a four year guy. He couldn't prove in the system that was ran at UK at that time that he was NBA ready. He had to prove it by earning a temp contract and playing hard during that time. He already had what it took. But was not allowed to showcase that in Smiths system. Same with Bogans. Same with Prince. Prince was much better than over half of those who were drafted ahead of him. Yet the system that Smith ran made Prince a low first round draft selection. Looking back, he should have been higher. It's a blessing in disguise, though. Had he gone higher, he may have wound up at Atlanta, Boston, or New York.

Part of the strategy for recruiting has to be the system. Another big part is getting guys ready (development) for the NBA and showcasing their skills and talents.

I know some want to bury their heads in the sand and say that they don't care about the NBA Draft. But that is detrimental to the cause.

You can showcase skills/talent and win. UNC does it all the time. Duke does it in a way that inflates draft status. Why can't UK?

[UFWildcat]

You might want to do a little more research on players in the NBA.

Here are the players in the NBA that the "elite" coaches have produced (recruited). The players in bold are the ones (IMO) that are making a significant impact right now.

Billy Donovan - Matt Bonner, Mike Miller, Udonis Haslem, Jason Williams, David Lee

Roy Williams - Nick Collison, Raef Lafrentz, Jacque Vaughn, Scott Pollard, Paul Pierce, Kirk Hinrich, Drew Gooden, Marvin Williams, Wayne Simien

(he didn't recruit Rashad McCants, David Noel, or Sean May)

Mike Krzyzewski - Daniel Ewing, Carlos Boozer, Mike Dunleavy, Grant Hill, JJ Redick, Corey Maggette, Shane Battier, Sheldon Williams, Elton Brand, Luol Deng, Chris Duhon, Dahntay Jones

Jim Calhoun - Ray Allen, Charlie Villanueva, Donyell Marshall, Emeka Okafor, Marcus Williams, Hilton Armstrong, Josh Boone, Rudy Gay, Richard Hamilton, Jake Voskuhl, Caron Butler, Ben Gordon

Tom Izzo - Jason Richardson, Maurice Ager, Shannon Brown, Alan Anderson, Paul Davis, Charlie Bell, Morris Peterson

Jim Boeheim - Jason Hart, Etan Thomas, Carmelo Anthony, Hakim Warrick

Gary Williams - Juan Dixon, Steve Blake, Steve Francis

Coach K and Calhoun are the best recruiters in my opinion. They consistently bring top talent in and that's why they have been at their positions for so long.

This has nothing to do with comparing the college game to the pro game. They are COMPLETELY different. Some players are good in college but just done have "it" to be effective in the NBA. I started this thread to show that; if one of the goals in recruiting is to make high school kids believe they can make it to the NBA some day, then Tubby can not be considered that far behind.

Compare the above player lines to Tubby's. I don't see much difference. :shrug1:

Tubby Smith - Keith Bogans, Randolph Morris, Chuck Hayes, Kelenna Azubuike, Rajon Rondo, Tayshaun Prince (recently had Fitch and Daniels)

Bottom Line: Tubby was far too inconsistent at recruiting to make UK a major player in college basketball, but in (IMO) people made it seem worse than it really was.



Disclaimer: (What!, UK fans blow things out of proportion? Not a chance...)

[blueheretic]

This has nothing to do with comparing the college game to the pro game. They are COMPLETELY different. Some players are good in college but just done have "it" to be effective in the NBA. I started this thread to show that; if one of the goals in recruiting is to make high school kids believe they can make it to the NBA some day, then Tubby can not be considered that far behind.

I think a major difference and something that some apparently choose to ignore is that Hayes went undrafted. Yet, proved that he could start in the NBA by personally showcasing his work ethic, skills and talent in the NBDL (for less than a season) and during a ten day NBA contract.

Four years at one of THE ELITE COLLEGE BASKETBALL PROGRAMS in the Nation were not enough to prove that he was an NBA Baller. WHY?

That is a mirror of Smith's recruiting. That's why he had such problems recruiting. He couldn't sell recruits to bring them in and his system did not sufficiently sell his athletes to the NBA. Rondo is proving to be a better player for Boston than Telfair. Prince has proven to have been a better player than most who were drafted before him. Even Bogans has proven to have been, if not better, then longer lasting than those in his Draft class. Is Reese Gaines still in the NBA? I don't even know. But I've not heard a peep out of him. What of his friend, Joseph Forte, who went in the Lottery (?) after his Sophmore season. Nowhere to be found in the NBA.

I don't think that the goal is to "make kids believe that they can make it to the NBA." I think the goal is to develop those stars and showcase their talents and skills in a way that places them in the best possible position in the Draft while utilizing those skills to position your TEAM for a Championship run.

Hayes has/had the skills and the talent. He has a nose and a knack for rebounding that a 7 footer like Morris hasn't been able to develop. Hayes has a toughness that sells big time. AND he can score against the Bigs. He showed that in College against some of the guys who were drafted in the Lottery. But those qualities weren't seen by the NBA execs and scouts until Hayes was at the NBDL and then in his contract. Again, WHY?

Morris himself is another casualty of Smiths inflexibility and inability to relate to Star athletes. Morris was not ready for the NBA. He, also, wasn't willing to face Smith to tell him that he was leaving early. Smith could not "sell" Morris on why he should stay in school to develop further. Morris had to learn that lesson the hard way and it hurt both Morris and UK along the way. The Morris situation is handled differently. Morris doesn't sit out half a season. UK has a different season. Smith could have won over his many (and growing) critics. Come to the present and rather than running off to Gopher land, Smith might have another Final Four to his credit, possibly a couple of Lottery Picks under his belt, possibly a championship. Ultimately giving him cache with the elite prospects in recruiting. But Smith would not put in the work to get the Elites nor would he be flexible enough to utilize the unique skills of Elite athletes outside of his system.

Why were all of Smiths future NBA'rs consistently under-rated? Why do so many have to backdoor the NBA. That is one of the major shortfalls of the Smith system and tenure. That is why he is in Gopherland now rather at UK. He is the first and only UK Coach since Rupp to leave for a lessor position elsewhere. He's the UK equivalent of Ron Jirsa or David Hobbs. He didn't get fired. He didn't stay around long enough to make it necessary.

(If you don't want to read this type of criticism of Smith. Don't! Or attempt to be objective and try leaving out the emotional cries and name calling. Thanks)

[UFWildcat]

I think a major difference and something that some apparently choose to ignore is that Hayes went undrafted. Yet, proved that he could start in the NBA by personally showcasing his work ethic, skills and talent in the NBDL (for less than a season) and during a ten day NBA contract.

I think this more of an issue with player development than recruiting. A blind man could see that Smith wasn't getting the maximum return on his players. But he still recruited them.

Players having gone undrafted?

I would tend to think that the scouts who are payed millions and millions of $ to evaluate talent were mistaken on this. Hayes had a magnificent career, are you implying he would of had a better one with a more effective coach. :shrug1: Who knows.

So lets take the other road. High drafts picks as listed above that haven't done anything in the NBA. Apparently these coaches sold them to NBA teams but the franchises weren't exactly getting what they thought they were.

Its a double edge sword that goes both ways.

[UFWildcat]

I don't think that the goal is to "make kids believe that they can make it to the NBA." I think the goal is to develop those stars and showcase their talents and skills in a way that places them in the best possible position in the Draft while utilizing those skills to position your TEAM for a Championship run.

No? You've stated many times that this is a strong selling point when trying to lure a recruit your way.

[blueheretic]

No? You've stated many times that this is a strong selling point when trying to lure a recruit your way.

No. Your statement sounds like you want the coach to lie, cheat or steal to get a recruit to come. "Make them believe" is different than utilizing a talent in a manner that highlights that recruit in a flexible system. The Draft is an important recruiting tool. If you are savvy enough to use it and if you have had success in getting players there.

Smith had six major recruits who out of high school looked like certain NBA ballers. Bogans, Stone, Prince, Crawford, Morris and Rondo. Bogans 2nd Round. Stone -- a big zero. Prince -- high 20s pick (23?), Rondo -- High 20s. Morris -- Undrafted. Luckily he learned his lesson and was able to come back and improve. Yes, Smith aided in this. Crawford -- we will never know since Smith left. But I think Gillispie will effect this kids life in a positive way.

Hayes was a high possibility. A question mark. So most thought. Some said that he was too short and had no outside shot. Hayes goes undrafted after a pretty remarkable career at UK. Why? I think it's because Smith sells his players short by prioritizing his system over his talent. I've read that Hayes now has a nice outside shot. Not a big three pointer but enough to score in the NBA. Did he just suddenly develop this in the NBDL? Is one half season in the NBA equal to or better than 4 years in the Smith BLD system?

You don't make kids believe that they can make it in or to the NBA. You develop them and utilize their talents so as to give them the best possible shot at getting drafted into the NBA. College for these kids is like College for every kid. They are attending to learn skills that will lead to a career. Not every kid. Some are good college players and know that college is the end of the line for them.

Guys like Cameron Mills and Ravi Moss. They are pretty much certain to never get into an NBA game without a guest pass or purchasing a ticket. Those are your role players.

The high talent that takes you to Championship games are attending college as a means of learning the skills to get to the next level. Just like every CSI student is attending college to learn skills to make a career in info systems or medical students learning the skills to become a doctor.

I don't understand why people don't see this or will not acknowledge it.

The NBA is to Elite Athletes what Google, Microsoft and Apple and Intel are to MIT students. And on and on.


Somehow people hold this against College Athletes but not against the Computer geeks, Doctors and Pharmaceutical Reps.


You attract the best by being the best. And you have to work for it and keep working for it. Either that or you slide.

It's not about making them think they can do something. It's about helping them do those things which will bring them success.

If attending MIT or the Wharton School of Business didn't get you in the doors of the Fortune 500, there would not be such intense competition to gain entry into those schools.

That's why Duke and UNC invites talent and UK under Smith was begging the few that he chose to spend his time recruiting.

[UFWildcat]

No. Your statement sounds like you want the coach to lie, cheat or steal to get a recruit to come. "Make them believe" is different than utilizing a talent in a manner that highlights that recruit in a flexible system.

Recruiting is a science that few master.

I believe it is a sales pitch, but in the sincerest form. It takes a special ability to be able to identify kids at such a young age that will be able to succeed at the highest level of college basketball. There is no lying, cheating or stealing going on here. You have to persuade this player to choose your school over the other guys. I don't think it's about promising the world, but under delivering (lying).

You say that it's not about making the player believe but "utilizing the talent in a manner that highlights that recruit in a flexible system." I think you're off base with this stance (at least in regards to my original post). I'm pretty sure the recruiting process has already passed by the time the player steps out on the floor for the first time. You're mixing up the recruiting process and then the act of actually performing on the court.

Nowhere in my argument have I gone against what you're saying about developing the player to have the best shot at getting drafted in the NBA. I say Tubby's recruiting isn't as bad as everyone made it out to be. That has nothing to do with a player's development, his utilization in the system, the plays run for him, or anything like that. If the player thought that this would have hindered him from going to the next level, then he would have never signed with Smith in the first place (which happened towards the end of Smith's tenure).

Once the player signs on the dotted line, the recruiting process is over (for that particular player). You're mixing things up. Only time will tell if that player is going to be a productive NBA talent.

Were these player's draft statuses hindered by the system that Tubby ran? Maybe, but that sounds like the "if" game to me.

"Its not about making them think they can do something. It's about helping them do those things which will bring them success."

Again, mixing things up. Making a kid "believe" is making him "believe" in your system. Once you do that you have won the recruit. Tubby always thought highly of his own system, so he wasn't lying to people. He just didn't run the most effective system.

[UFWildcat]

I've read that Hayes now has a nice outside shot. Not a big three pointer but enough to score in the NBA. Did he just suddenly develop this in the NBDL? Is one half season in the NBA equal to or better than 4 years in the Smith BLD system?

Ridiculous and outlandish statement.

[blueheretic]

Ridiculous and outlandish statement.


You do realize that those are question marks at the end of those "statements" don't you? When I was taking Freshman English at University, sentences that ended with question marks were called questions.

When did questions become statements? :shrug1:

I didn't know that English grammer had been so altered. ;)

Anyway, they are valid questions. Four years of the Tubby System/Coaching and not a whiff. A few months in the NBDL and a ten day contract and BOOM! Starter!

Explain that one to me and then tell me how Smith's system did not hurt draft status.

I think it is a process. From Recruiting to Graduation/Draft. One process. The beginning aids the end which in turn aids the beginning. Meaning that recruiting well aids the Draft outlook of the Coaches players which in turn aids recruiting. A flexible system in the middle of all this provides for and further aids the process as a whole.

That may confuse you since you didn't know that a "?" meant that the words which make up the sentence prior to said symbol form a question.

(this is meant to be a joke...so please don't get angry and huffy. :eek: )

[blueheretic]

Bottom Line: Tubby was far too inconsistent at recruiting to make UK a major player in college basketball, but in (IMO) people made it seem worse than it really was.



Disclaimer: (What!, UK fans blow things out of proportion? Not a chance...)

But really is there anything worse than UK being an afterthought in College Basketball.

Far too inconsistent...to make UK a major player in college basketball...

Is there anything further that need be said. The Prosecution rests it's case. The Defense made the case for me.

lol

So Smith was not that bad...but just bad enough that UK was not a player in College Basketball.

Did you type that with a straight face? (NOTE the :icon_question:. That was a query not a statement of fact of any sort. :shrug1:)

[UFWildcat]

You do realize that those are question marks at the end of those "statements" don't you? When I was taking Freshman English at University, sentences that ended with question marks were called questions.

When did questions become statements? :shrug1:

I didn't know that English grammer had been so altered. ;)

Anyway, they are valid questions. Four years of the Tubby System/Coaching and not a whiff. A few months in the NBDL and a ten day contract and BOOM! Starter!

Explain that one to me and then tell me how Smith's system did not hurt draft status.

I think it is a process. From Recruiting to Graduation/Draft. One process. The beginning aids the end which in turn aids the beginning. Meaning that recruiting well aids the Draft outlook of the Coaches players which in turn aids recruiting. A flexible system in the middle of all this provides for and further aids the process as a whole.

That may confuse you since you didn't know that a "?" meant that the words which make up the sentence prior to said symbol form a question.

(this is meant to be a joke...so please don't get angry and huffy. :eek: )

There's no such thing as stupid ?'s...just...never mind. Here we go with that name calling again. Almost. ;)

You refuse to buy into the notion that these NBA scouts could have possibly been wrong in the analysis of these players. Look up all the guys drafted before Tayshaun. They couldn't have been mistaken!

No, except you continue to blame everything remotely negative since '98 on your ultimate scapegoat, Orlando "Tubby" Smith. :shrug1:

[UFWildcat]

But really is there anything worse than UK being an afterthought in College Basketball.

Far too inconsistent...to make UK a major player in college basketball...

Is there anything further that need be said. The Prosecution rests it's case. The Defense made the case for me.

lol

So Smith was not that bad...but just bad enough that UK was not a player in College Basketball.

Did you type that with a straight face? (NOTE the :icon_question:. That was a query not a statement of fact of any sort. :shrug1:)

I've never defended Tubby on issues that are real and exist. Guess that's why I'm not in the Smith Defense Legion. :shrug1:

He was not the lush that some make him out to be.

My personal favorite
"I would think that a U.K. Coach who deserves having his banner raised in Rupp......would deserve it because of his accomplishments on the court.....Not his personality. Tubby took us from Great to Bad. He doesn't deserve it IMO".

Inconsistent?Yes, but not a complete failure.

[blueheretic]

You refuse to buy into the notion that these NBA scouts could have possibly been wrong in the analysis of these players. Look up all the guys drafted before Tayshaun. They couldn't have been mistaken!

No, except you continue to blame everything remotely negative since '98 on your ultimate scapegoat, Orlando "Tubby" Smith. :shrug1:

The thing is...I see it as the Coaches job to place his talent in such a position that the Scouts notice. Smith never seemed to understand the value of such "notice" or the merit of such an idea or his role in that process.

This hurt his guys which hurt Smith himself which ultimately hurt UK which led to his timely (for his sake) exodus.

I hear Bob Marley in the background.

[blueheretic]

I've never defended Tubby on issues that are real and exist. Guess that's why I'm not in the Smith Defense Legion. :shrug1:

He was not the lush that some make him out to be.

My personal favorite
"I would think that a U.K. Coach who deserves having his banner raised in Rupp......would deserve it because of his accomplishments on the court.....Not his personality. Tubby took us from Great to Bad. He doesn't deserve it IMO".

Inconsistent? Yes, but not a complete failure.

I beleive this. The bottom line of his tenure, the measure of his achievement is having taken UK from the Top of the Elite to barely a Top 40 Program. He did so willfully. Neglectfully, in my opinion. I don't think his cause was malign although I do believe that his heart left the program prior to last season. As well, I believe that he knew that he was leaving back in December after his initial contacts with UM.

I know many want to believe the best of Smith. Good for you. I see it differently. I'm used to it.

[UFWildcat]

The thing is...I see it as the Coaches job to place his talent in such a position that the Scouts notice.[

All drafted before Tayshaun: Dajuan Wagner, Chris Wilcox, Curtis Borchardt, Marcus Haislip...notice that Scouts! :tongue3:

All drafted period over Chuck: Joey Graham, Jason Maxiell, Danny Granger...notice that one too :tongue3:

[blueheretic]

All drafted before Tayshaun: Dajuan Wagner, Chris Wilcox, Curtis Borchardt, Marcus Haislip...notice that Scouts! :tongue3:

All drafted period over Chuck: Joey Graham, Jason Maxiell, Danny Granger...notice that one too :tongue3:


Maxiell, Wagner and Haislip prove my point. All in systems in College and with Coaches who allowed for their magnification and advertisement.

Smith is the Anti-Press Coach. They guy who won't let Frosh talk to the press in the age of the H.S. Phenom and AAU Stars.

These guys coming into college are arguably more paparazzi savvy than Smith himself.

[UFWildcat]

Maxiell, Wagner and Haislip prove my point. All in systems in College and with Coaches who allowed for their magnification and advertisement.

It sounds more like deception instead of magnification.

How can you commend a coach who advertises a player that isn't going to end up being effective in the NBA.

So your saying its alright to magnify and advertise players as something that they really aren't?

Its obvious that we have different opinions and I see no common ground in sight. But isn't that the fun of it? :icon_twisted:

[blueheretic]

It sounds more like deception instead of magnification.

How can you commend a coach who advertises a player that isn't going to end up being effective in the NBA.

So your saying its alright to magnify and advertise players as something that they really aren't?

Its obvious that we have different opinions and I see no common ground in sight. But isn't that the fun of it? :icon_twisted:

The NBA deserves it for pilfering the Top Talent of the NCAAs anyway. lol One redeeming factor of DUKE and Coach K is that they have a knack for fooling the NBA into paying huge sums of money for guys that aren't going to do JACK in the NBA except polish pine with body heat and friction.

But really, a Coach who can place his kids in the best possible chance for success inthe NBA Draft and then actually contributing with some bit of longevity in the NBA can actually build a reputation that could lend to recruiting.

Can you at least see the point in that?

[blueheretic]

Its obvious that we have different opinions and I see no common ground in sight. But isn't that the fun of it? :icon_twisted:

I agree. The friendly banter and parry of opinion on this site is great. And for those who can't handle that, I've got the ignore button. I no longer have to read people calling me a hater or telling me that I'm obsessed or insane. I just placed them all on the glorious ignore list. hahahahahahhahahahaha (that's my evil laugh). This place is so much more enjoyable since I did that.

[Littlemeyer]

I agree. The friendly banter and parry of opinion on this site is great. And for those who can't handle that, I've got the ignore button. I no longer have to read people calling me a hater or telling me that I'm obsessed or insane. I just placed them all on the glorious ignore list. hahahahahahhahahahaha (that's my evil laugh). This place is so much more enjoyable since I did that.

Just curious, Heretic, (but too tired...or lazy...to do the experiment myself)...if somebody were to quote a person who is on your ignore list, can you then read their post?

[phoenix]

Just curious, Heretic, (but too tired...or lazy...to do the experiment myself)...if somebody were to quote a person who is on your ignore list, can you then read their post?

Heretic reads all the posts on the threads he is arguing and managing.

How do you think he is able to pop up with "That ignore feature is a great little item" every time somebody posts on his thread that he pretends he is ignoring.

If it is a particularly contentious post to which he cannot stand NOT REPLYING, then he will claim somebody notified him about the post.:)

[jdeasy]

It sounds more like deception instead of magnification.

How can you commend a coach who advertises a player that isn't going to end up being effective in the NBA.

So your saying its alright to magnify and advertise players as something that they really aren't?

Its obvious that we have different opinions and I see no common ground in sight. But isn't that the fun of it? :icon_twisted:

tubby hurt players draft stock. That's why it became so difficult for him to recruit as time went by.

Bogans came to UK as a top 10 high school player with most projecting him to be in college for two years max. After 4 years of tubby development, he was a second round pick. Prince came to UK as a top 5 high school player. After 4 years of tubby development, he fell to the bottom of the first round and lesser players were taken ahead of him.

And, those are two of tubby's success stories. You want to talk about his failures?

It became UK's image under tubby that, if you were destined for the NBA, it would be short circuited by playing for tubby. It probably wasn't as bad as the image, but, the image was grounded in enough truth to make it stick in recruits minds.

The tubby defense league can argue it until they are minneysota gold in the face, they cannot change the basic truths about their idol.

[blueheretic]

Just curious, Heretic, (but too tired...or lazy...to do the experiment myself)...if somebody were to quote a person who is on your ignore list, can you then read their post?

Unfortunately, yes. But I've been training myself to scroll on by.

[UFWildcat]

The tubby defense league can argue it until they are minneysota gold in the face, they cannot change the basic truths about their idol.

Labeler, Name caller...Nah Nanny Boo Boo...

Sticks and stones my break my bones but words will never hurt me. :tongue3:

Let's try to be a bit more original next time.

[Caveman Catfan]

Great article today about Tay and his defensive abilities. Seems he was trained well for his current role. I am sure that Joe Dumars appreciates the skills Tay was taught in college.

[TrueblueCATfan]

Great article today about Tay and his defensive abilities. Seems he was trained well for his current role. I am sure that Joe Dumars appreciates the skills Tay was taught in college.

a big thumbs up for Tayshuan Prince and the coach who recruited him to be A CAT

[phoenix]

tubby hurt players draft stock. That's why it became so difficult for him to recruit as time went by.

Bogans came to UK as a top 10 high school player with most projecting him to be in college for two years max. After 4 years of tubby development, he was a second round pick. Prince came to UK as a top 5 high school player. After 4 years of tubby development, he fell to the bottom of the first round and lesser players were taken ahead of him.

And, those are two of tubby's success stories. You want to talk about his failures?

It became UK's image under tubby that, if you were destined for the NBA, it would be short circuited by playing for tubby. It probably wasn't as bad as the image, but, the image was grounded in enough truth to make it stick in recruits minds.

The tubby defense league can argue it until they are minneysota gold in the face, they cannot change the basic truths about their idol.

Total myth.

Their skills are their skills. Bogans has had plenty of opportunity to show what he has. What is Tubby supposed to do for these guys? Wasn't Bogans an all American? Isn't that a pretty good college career? He remains in the high turnover portion of the NBA players population. He is an NBA player. He is in the grit and hustle portion of players, not the gifted elite.

Tay also had plenty of opportunities to show what he had. They didn't stay off him for anything Tubby did or didn't do. 20 picks ahead of him and now you guys want to blame Tubby for him being low first round draft pick instead of a high first round draft pick? I'll bet 20 GM's wish they had the vision to see how the guy might fit in on a team. I think they had lots of question marks on him. I know it fits your agenda to claim it was all Tubby's fault, but I don't buy it.

Eric Daniels, Fitch, Hayes, and KAZ may all actually owe their shot in the NBA, somewhat to Tubby's coaching in that they were extremely well grounded in fundamentals. None of these guys are anything special in the way of physical capability, but they all got opportunities. Chuck stuck because he is Chuck. Claims are made for various coaches preparing and showcasing players for the NBA. Interesting enough, most of these guys weren't even recruited or offered by any of those guys. Wonder why? Talent is judged all the time as kids go from Optimist leagues all the way to the pros. Lots of guys don't do well on objective measures and might have personalities that hide their own light under a bushel at the same time.

As to the idea that Tubby held them back, that is pretty much revisionist history imo. When Tay went, even all the posters on this board were wondering what kind of career he was going to have. Bogans too. The Euro craze was big when they were going into the draft. The Euro success rate has now demonstrated that they may not be as much the answer as once thought. That fad is over. Guys are still going to compete with coaches perception of other players and perception of players upsides. Some of these one year wonders are going to dud out in the NBA with their big money contracts. Byars is projected second round draft. I really see this guy as a solid pro with a very nice career in front of him. Will he even get a guaranteed contract? Will it be Stallings fault if he doesn't? Will he have the drive to go forward if at first he doesn't make the team, such as KAZ and Hayes? In our case some of the posters jump on Tubby as the cause of these guys ending where they end. It sounds good to claim some of this stuff but I doubt it has much bearing.

Whose fault is it that Rondo's 3 pt shot is now at 20.6%??? Tubby's? Is that a first round draft choice statistic? My gosh, did Tubby's coaching help cover some of Rondo's flaws? :)

[pjquirk]

It does point out that we had players with the talent/skills/ability whatever you want to call it all through Tubby's tenure. The lack of those was a criticism of Tubby which I think the original poster was correct in saying was untrue. We had the players.

What is left to wonder is why with the NBA level talent/skills/ability/whatever, we had teams that didn't live up to their potential on a game by game basis. Note I said potential, not expectations. Two totally different things.

P.S.
Tubby did many great things while here and without his help some of the players who made the NBA may never have gotten there.

[BigBlue75]

The tubby defense league can argue it until they are minneysota gold in the face, they cannot change the basic truths about their idol.[/quote]

I've flat out HAD IT with the attitudes that pervade this post and others like it! There is NO SUCH THING as a "Tubby defense league" (which is nothing more than a thinly veiled slap at those of us who respect OTS for what he did while he was at UK). You and your cronies cannot name ONE PERSON who idolized our former coach. For what has to be the umpteenth time, there are those of us who supported TS while he was here (as if supporting the coach was a novel concept), but in case you hadn't noticed, he ain't here no more! Every thread that tries to discuss UK basketball and happens to mention Tubby's name is immediately taken over by those who have an axe to grind against him and are looking for ANY opportunity to belittle him, and to make things worse, those who do so try to make it appear as if the only reason the thread was started in the first place was to bait the Tubby haters. :mad:

The only "basic truth" in operation here is the fact that you and your cronies have a vendetta against our former coach and you can't accept the fact that he's not here for you to vent your wrath on. If you want to do that, go to the Minnesota boards and see how far you get! :thumbdn:

[phoenix]

It does point out that we had players with the talent/skills/ability whatever you want to call it all through Tubby's tenure. The lack of those was a criticism of Tubby which I think the original poster was correct in saying was untrue. We had the players.

What is left to wonder is why with the NBA level talent/skills/ability/whatever, we had teams that didn't live up to their potential on a game by game basis. Note I said potential, not expectations. Two totally different things.

P.S.
Tubby did many great things while here and without his help some of the players who made the NBA may never have gotten there.

Well, I don't agree with your thesis that they didn't live up to their potential. I thought they did for the most part. We are looking at 10 teams that made the round of 32 or better through that history. I only felt the 2006 team was somewhat lacking in living up to potential on a game by game basis. Most other teams either lived up to their potential or exceeded it. I don't think Tubby left very many games unwon for UK during his time. And those that were lost probably were balanced by games he grabbed.

[Will Lavender]

tubby hurt players draft stock. That's why it became so difficult for him to recruit as time went by.

Bogans came to UK as a top 10 high school player with most projecting him to be in college for two years max. After 4 years of tubby development, he was a second round pick. Prince came to UK as a top 5 high school player. After 4 years of tubby development, he fell to the bottom of the first round and lesser players were taken ahead of him.

And, those are two of tubby's success stories. You want to talk about his failures?

It became UK's image under tubby that, if you were destined for the NBA, it would be short circuited by playing for tubby. It probably wasn't as bad as the image, but, the image was grounded in enough truth to make it stick in recruits minds.

The tubby defense league can argue it until they are minneysota gold in the face, they cannot change the basic truths about their idol.

I don't see how Keith Bogans could be used as anything but a success story. Yes, these kids want to be drafted high; they want to make an immediate splash and get to the League. But Bogans is a kid who had a tremendous sophomore year, was able to test the waters, came back only because the draft was stacked with Euros, and then went on to become the fourth all-time leading scorer in the history of this program. Then he was drafted and has made millions in the league.

I don't see how that could be turned against Tubby in a recruiting battle.

Anyway, I somewhat agree with you that Tubby hamstrung some of his players, and that eventually hurt him in recruiting. But Tubby's main problem was more on a player/coach level and not on a basketball level, in my opinion. I mean, Tubby was a guy who couldn't remember his players' own names. I saw him at his clinic have to read off a sheet of paper to come up with his kids' names. I think that probably hurt him in the living rooms of these recruits. It doesn't help your cause if you're staring at a kid in the face and you can't recall his name.

[pjquirk]

Well, I don't agree with your thesis that they didn't live up to their potential. I thought they did for the most part. We are looking at 10 teams that made the round of 32 or better through that history. I only felt the 2006 team was somewhat lacking in living up to potential on a game by game basis. Most other teams either lived up to their potential or exceeded it. I don't think Tubby left very many games unwon for UK during his time. And those that were lost probably were balanced by games he grabbed.

You are right that in most years, our teams did play to potential most games, but I contend that in multiple years, they did not. Team turmoil, 05-06 and 06-07 come to mind. How many times those years did you know the team could perform so much better, but something just wasn't working?

[phoenix]

You are right that in most years, our teams did play to potential most games, but I contend that in multiple years, they did not. Team turmoil, 05-06 and 06-07 come to mind. How many times those years did you know the team could perform so much better, but something just wasn't working?

Not a whole lot frankly. If he'd had better recruits he would have had a better record. I felt the group with the turmoil was a group of kids with some bad apples, and bad chemistry. I don't think they underperformed as much as they never fit.

The 06 team, was lacking what should have been good leadership.

The 07 team? Maybe that was their potential. They were a group of guys I really liked, and evidently Tubby really liked them too, but realistically they were never a sweet 16 team and they played as well as they could is my guess. It was a team with only one go to player. No other player developed that knack of dependability, and we needed another go to player. Meeks was coming along. Joe was there sometimes in some games. What do you think we had in the way of potential that wasn't realized? 3 games maybe?
You can't get them all, and it is tough to get close games if you don't have go to guys. I don't think UK was down as much as the rest of the league was up this year. Maybe there was unrealized potential, but to argue it would take some iffy ideation imo.

In terms of unrealized potential, look at the NC team the year BEFORE they won the national championship. Cartload of unrealized potential on that team and the team before it. But I don't know that you can blame it on Williams as much as you can look at the players and say, they weren't ready.

It is always perplexing when I hear that Tubby didn't recruit and then in the same breath critics claim he held players back and could have won more with better coaching or system. It doesn't seem like critics could logically claim both because if he could have won more, he must have had the players, if he didn't have the players, how does he win more???

My general thought is that he didn't get good enough players to exceed much what he did while here.

[pjquirk]

Not a whole lot frankly. If he'd had better recruits he would have had a better record. I felt the group with the turmoil was a group of kids with some bad apples, and bad chemistry. I don't think they underperformed as much as they never fit.

It is always perplexing when I hear that Tubby didn't recruit and then in the same breath critics claim he held players back and could have won more with better coaching or system. It doesn't seem like critics could logically claim both because if he could have won more, he must have had the players, if he didn't have the players, how does he win more???

My general thought is that he didn't get good enough players to exceed much what he did while here.

I'll argree not to debate which teams underperformed. I'll also agree that you can't have it both ways that Tubby didn't get good players and that he didn't develop the buckets full of talent that he had to work with.

I just wanted to clarify my stance that we got the recruits for the most part as evidenced by the number of former players who got to the NBA. I'm of the opinion that if you can even debate in 3 or 4 out of 10 years that you didn't get a day in and out performance to a team's potential, that is far too often. Everyone understands a team here or there not fitting together, but as noted above, we won't get into whether is was 1, 2, 3 or 4 teams over the last 10 years that fell into that category. :)

Thanks for the discussion!

[jdeasy]

The tubby defense league can argue it until they are minneysota gold in the face, they cannot change the basic truths about their idol.

I've flat out HAD IT with the attitudes that pervade this post and others like it! There is NO SUCH THING as a "Tubby defense league" (which is nothing more than a thinly veiled slap at those of us who respect OTS for what he did while he was at UK). You and your cronies cannot name ONE PERSON who idolized our former coach. For what has to be the umpteenth time, there are those of us who supported TS while he was here (as if supporting the coach was a novel concept), but in case you hadn't noticed, he ain't here no more! Every thread that tries to discuss UK basketball and happens to mention Tubby's name is immediately taken over by those who have an axe to grind against him and are looking for ANY opportunity to belittle him, and to make things worse, those who do so try to make it appear as if the only reason the thread was started in the first place was to bait the Tubby haters. :mad:

The only "basic truth" in operation here is the fact that you and your cronies have a vendetta against our former coach and you can't accept the fact that he's not here for you to vent your wrath on. If you want to do that, go to the Minnesota boards and see how far you get! :thumbdn:[/QUOTE]

You are correct. I can't name just one. I can name several. There are more than one that's posted in this thread.

You can get as sick as you want. I was sick for 10 years about the enablers propping up a less than UK caliber coach.

[Will Lavender]

Follow-up on my above post.

Wasn't Bogans injured in the Chicago pre-draft camp between his sophomore and junior years? Maybe I'm mistaken?

[UFWildcat]

I don't see how Keith Bogans could be used as anything but a success story.

If your not a top 5 pick and you aren't winning the Championship each year, nothing is a success story to some. :shrug1:

[UFWildcat]

It does point out that we had players with the talent/skills/ability whatever you want to call it all through Tubby's tenure. The lack of those was a criticism of Tubby which I think the original poster was correct in saying was untrue. We had the players.

People! People! This poster has spoken like a true prophet! :thumbup:

This is all I'm trying to say.

You can blame Tubby for his play calling, game management, game planning, in game strategy, substitution ways, X's and O's...that's all fair game.

Heck, you can even get on his recruiting because it was inconsistent.

But to place Smith in the basement of the cellar of the Coach's Fraternity house is just being irrational.

We had good players, he recruited them.

People need to take a step back and really ponder the phrase...

"Hindsight is 20/20"...It could do wonders.

[poodoo]

Great article today about Tay and his defensive abilities. Seems he was trained well for his current role. I am sure that Joe Dumars appreciates the skills Tay was taught in college.

Nice post, Caveman. I read the same article. It made me smile as I read it, for it made me think back to Tay with fond memories and made me so proud (and, yes, the part about "character guys" like Tay, too). Further, it also made me think about how he had been taught defensive skills well in college, although those defensive skills are, admittedly, not always looked at as much by teams with high draft picks.

[poodoo]

P.S.
Tubby did many great things while here and without his help some of the players who made the NBA may never have gotten there.[/quote] by pjquirk
__________

Yes, your post is about our former coach and is on topic within the thread. Having said that I am not discussing our former coach anymore (except for defending his character, and I ignored even such an attack on a recruiting thread tonight, as I knew it was best merely to ignore it), I am certainly "sticking to" what I had said, but I do want to make a generalization here.

I have repeatedly posted that the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle. Well, the generalization I want to say here is that essentially ALL humans have good points and bad points about them, strengths and weaknesses. When I taught literature, there were heroes and villains in the fictional works we studied. As I see it, in real life humans try to put other humans into such categories. In contrast, personally, I think most humans (coaches, included) have both good points and bad points. To me, that's just real life, FWIW.

I apologize for interrupting the specific topic. Yet, as I had been reading the thread, that was the thought that had crossed my mind. No person or coach is perfect, but most have SOMETHING good about themselves. Naturally, I'm hoping Coach Gillispie (a coach I LOVE to discuss, and specifically his positives, but I understand the topic is not about Coach Gilispie) is close to perfect, and I love what I'm seeing so far. Most everyone, though, has SOMETHING good about him.

You, pjquirk, have shared something you feel was good about an individual. Any individual will likely also have something about himself that's not as praiseworthy. We very real humans within this real world, in contrast to the literature I taught, don't fit so neatly and precisely into categories of being heroes and villains. Then again, besides saying the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle, I've also repeatedly shared how I so detest categorization, or labeling. So, I guess my philosophy about life fits for both coaches and message boards (smiley face).

Sorry. Back to the discussion of the actual topic and specifics. GO CATS! GO BILLY G!

[pjquirk]

Poodoo is right on about the middle. We too often try to paint people with wide sweeping brushes when not at all near the whole picture. I hope my statement wasn't interpretted as thinking Coach Smith was perfect. I put the P.S. in because I thought my previous statements might have been taken the opposite way. Like Poodoo, I think the truth lies in the middle.

[scathendo]

fwiw i agree with blueheratic on all points....

"Eric Daniels, Fitch, Hayes, and KAZ may all actually owe their shot in the NBA, somewhat to Tubby's coaching in that they were extremely well grounded in fundamentals. None of these guys are anything special in the way of physical capability" phoenix

how can you say KAZ was not anything special in the way of physical capability?!?! that just blows me away. he was a huge scorer in high school ( like bogans ), he IS an amazing athlete with huge NBA potential. but don't take my word for it. just ask his current coach, don nelson, who is on record stating that he cannot believe KAZ was not a high draft pick. it took him 2 seasons in the NBDL to shake the OTS system out of his system but he eventually dominated and got his spot on an NBA team. in his and hayes case i would have to say that more credit goes to the players and their NBDL coaches than their college coach.

per the posted topic.... i agree that we had talented players sign on at UK during tubby's time. but when you go year after year watching sophmore year meltdowns (play tubby ball or sit) and players that come in 'world beaters' become 'also rans', eventually recruits and rival coaches are going to catch on. that's what happened to tubby's recruiting. it didn't start that way because we ARE kentucky. i don't think it's coincidence at all that we were not hearing at all from Oak Hill after Rajon then Tubby leaves and all of the sudden we get Legion on board and prospects for 2008 are suddenly interested in us again.

[scathendo]

I've flat out HAD IT with the attitudes that pervade this post and others like it! There is NO SUCH THING as a "Tubby defense league" (which is nothing more than a thinly veiled slap at those of us who respect OTS for what he did while he was at UK). You and your cronies cannot name ONE PERSON who idolized our former coach. For what has to be the umpteenth time, there are those of us who supported TS while he was here (as if supporting the coach was a novel concept), but in case you hadn't noticed, he ain't here no more! Every thread that tries to discuss UK basketball and happens to mention Tubby's name is immediately taken over by those who have an axe to grind against him and are looking for ANY opportunity to belittle him, and to make things worse, those who do so try to make it appear as if the only reason the thread was started in the first place was to bait the Tubby haters. :mad:

The only "basic truth" in operation here is the fact that you and your cronies have a vendetta against our former coach and you can't accept the fact that he's not here for you to vent your wrath on. If you want to do that, go to the Minnesota boards and see how far you get! :thumbdn:

You are correct. I can't name just one. I can name several. There are more than one that's posted in this thread.

You can get as sick as you want. I was sick for 10 years about the enablers propping up a less than UK caliber coach.[/QUOTE]

i've flat out had it with blind faith!

"Faith... must be enforced by reason.... When faith becomes blind it dies. " ~Mahatma Gandhi

i had faith in tubby at first but had to reasonably start to question wether or not to support him when i repeatedly saw the same problems over and over again.

faith - good; blind faith - not so good.

supporting the coach is not a novel idea. supporting him regardless of performance is absurd. i, for one not only accept that he's not at UK, i celebrate it. the point of the discussion is not to belittle, it's (as the originator of the post said) discuss the positives and negatives of coach who is part of our history.

you cannot say - there is no such thing as the "TDL" and then turn around and give your own name to the group..."those of us who respect OTS for what he did while he was at UK" or the 'TOUWROTSFWHDWHWAUK'. personlly i like 'TDL', it's easier to type.

[blueheretic]

Poodoo is right on about the middle. We too often try to paint people with wide sweeping brushes when not at all near the whole picture. I hope my statement wasn't interpretted as thinking Coach Smith was perfect. I put the P.S. in because I thought my previous statements might have been taken the opposite way. Like Poodoo, I think the truth lies in the middle.


The middle is not the correct path here. There is no middle ground.

Tubby Smith did have some great and some really good athletes/ballers while at UK. He also consistently had GLARING and EXPLOITABLE holes in his roster and offense was always a chore unless the defense was clicking perfectly as in the season wherein the 26 game winning streak/Undefeated SEC occured.

First, it was the PG spot. I don't care what anyone says. Saul Smith may have played his heart out. He may have racked up some really good assist numbers. But go back and watch. If Saul Smith was the high scorer or one of the high scorers in a given game, more often than not UK lost that game.

Then UK couldn't get a big man. Daniels did well in the middle during this time and Hayes was pretty good as well. But it was a hole that teams used against us. Especially as we had to rely on guys like Shag and Woo.

The Forward spots for the last few years. Terrible. Bobby Perry and Sheray Thomas. Perry had a good game or two but otherwise was inconsistent and any good coach/team exploited this weakness. Perry was the same as Saul. If he was a high scorer, more often than not UK LOST.

That's not to mention shooting. Smiths teams were always lacking shooters. Consistent shooters. Smith had the streakiest shooters. Why? Some of the guys who came here were good scorers and shooters. But Smith didn't practice offense and his shooters suffered because of that and the near exclusive imperative that Smith placed on Defense.

That emphasis on Defense in the all important and inflexible Smith system is what I believe hurt the "draftability" or draft status of Smiths players and that hurt his recruiting.

I believe what really hurt recruiting badly was Smiths seeming distaste for it. You can't hide feelings like that and I'm sure it rubbed some folks the wrong way. Smith enjoyed recruiting about as much as he enjoyed his press conferences. I'm sure that never affected recruiting.

So sure. Smith brought in some great guys. Nonetheless, he always had glaring holes in his teams. And he infamously missed out on some recruits that should have been the easiest sells of his career and passed on some recruits that could have turned his tenure at UK around.

Smith was the architect of his own demise. It was NOT fan negativity. It wasn't someones agenda against Smith. Smith did himself in.

Too many holes, too many projects, too many exploitable weaknesses, too few great shooting scorers, too many streaky scorers, too much emphasis on defensive aspects of a player and not enough emphasis on scoring ability, no organization, an obvious distate for recruiting, too many misses on local guys, too many misses on big time recruits that UK supposedly had "wrapped up," too inflexible and too faithful to a system that was unattractive to the elite recruits.

(And for those who are wondering to whom I refer when I use the term Smith Defense League or a variation thereof, look back at this thread. The people on this thread who ridicule, lecture and become indignant over any conversation of Smith are the very people of whom I speak when using said term. There is a difference of tone between the posts of say Will Lavender or UFWildcat and the indignation, scorn or ridicule of these other few posters. I haven't read them unless they were quoted as I have these very people blocked. But the responses are as predictable as they will claim mine to be. lol The "Ignore" feature is wonderful. Wunderbar!!!)

[phoenix]

I'll argree not to debate which teams underperformed. I'll also agree that you can't have it both ways that Tubby didn't get good players and that he didn't develop the buckets full of talent that he had to work with.

I just wanted to clarify my stance that we got the recruits for the most part as evidenced by the number of former players who got to the NBA. I'm of the opinion that if you can even debate in 3 or 4 out of 10 years that you didn't get a day in and out performance to a team's potential, that is far too often. Everyone understands a team here or there not fitting together, but as noted above, we won't get into whether is was 1, 2, 3 or 4 teams over the last 10 years that fell into that category. :)

Thanks for the discussion!

I think all teams have potential, and bad fits have limited potential. Check all other coaches and you will see that teams are uneven runners in the race, and don't always finish related to potential. My take, Tubby usually got most of what there was to get, his coaching was solid, and, he got more at least in close measure to where he might have gotten less.

[phoenix]

fwiw i agree with blueheratic on all points....


how can you say KAZ was not anything special in the way of physical capability?!?! that just blows me away. he was a huge scorer in high school ( like bogans ), he IS an amazing athlete with huge NBA potential. but don't take my word for it. just ask his current coach, don nelson, who is on record stating that he cannot believe KAZ was not a high draft pick. it took him 2 seasons in the NBDL to shake the OTS system out of his system but he eventually dominated and got his spot on an NBA team. in his and hayes case i would have to say that more credit goes to the players and their NBDL coaches than their college coach.

per the posted topic.... i agree that we had talented players sign on at UK during tubby's time. but when you go year after year watching sophmore year meltdowns (play tubby ball or sit) and players that come in 'world beaters' become 'also rans', eventually recruits and rival coaches are going to catch on. that's what happened to tubby's recruiting. it didn't start that way because we ARE kentucky. i don't think it's coincidence at all that we were not hearing at all from Oak Hill after Rajon then Tubby leaves and all of the sudden we get Legion on board and prospects for 2008 are suddenly interested in us again.

Well, hate to bust your bubble but college is absolutely filled with "HUGE SCORERS IN HIGH SCHOOL", most of them, nearly all, regress in that department somewhat, or quite a lot in college ball but sure, tell us Tubby did it, LOL. That aint news but it sounds like you aren't aware of it. KAZ had great athletic skills in college, but once again, put him against all NBA PLAYERS in the 6'4" to 6'6" range and he doesn't stand out. Put him into most draft classes, in his junior year, not his senior year, before he is ready, and that was the consensus on this board, and by commentators, and suddenly you have added 2+2 and gotten 5, thus it must be Tubby's fault. Don Nelson is speaking nice speak, and coach speak, about KAZ. When he starts him, that will be his final comment. Right now his real comment is bench time.

I will add two things about KAZ, his head wasn't fully in the game in college, imo, and not just because of the family thing either. The second thing was, and most will remember, "Looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane". I think the opportunity was there for KAZ to reach whatever level he wanted in college. He just hadn't focused yet. Glad he did.

As far as the posted topic and talented players, yeah we had some, but didn't have a complimentary set enough times to make use of it.

[scathendo]

which part of his coaching was solid????

-recruiting? no.
-player development? no.
-preparation? he himself said hobbs did the gameplanning.
-defense? sure, as long as we didn't play against teams with more than one good three point shooter. 10 years ago, not so common. now they are moving the line back because 11 year olds are knocking 'em down regularly.
-offense? i still don't know what kind of offense we were running and i've seen a ton of basketball.
-in bounds plays? horrible.
-media management? just aks the media people.
-academic performance? questionable - we missed sanctions on a 'margin of error' rider.
-relating to the fan base? only those who the jedi mind trick works on.

[scathendo]

Well, hate to bust your bubble but college is absolutely filled with "HUGE SCORERS IN HIGH SCHOOL", most of them, nearly all, regress in that department somewhat, or quite a lot in college ball but sure, tell us Tubby did it, LOL. That aint news but it sounds like you aren't aware of it. KAZ had great athletic skills in college, but once again, put him against all NBA PLAYERS in the 6'4" to 6'6" range and he doesn't stand out. Put him into most draft classes, in his junior year, not his senior year, before he is ready, and that was the consensus on this board, and by commentators, and suddenly you have added 2+2 and gotten 5, thus it must be Tubby's fault. Don Nelson is speaking nice speak, and coach speak, about KAZ. When he starts him, that will be his final comment. Right now his real comment is bench time.

I will add two things about KAZ, his head wasn't fully in the game in college, imo, and not just because of the family thing either. The second thing was, and most will remember, "Looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane". I think the opportunity was there for KAZ to reach whatever level he wanted in college. He just hadn't focused yet. Glad he did.

As far as the posted topic and talented players, yeah we had some, but didn't have a complimentary set enough times to make use of it.

1. i guess that's why he was the leading scorer in the NBDL
2. could it be that KAZ got so twisted by the tubby system that he lost his aggresiveness and confidence in his game.... see bogans, rajon, jasper etc etc etc.

yes i am telling you tubby did it LOL ....FWIW joe hall did it too... he had players like shidler afraid to shoot and if you ever saw shidler shoot that's a real shame...

[blueheretic]

1. i guess that's why he was the leading scorer in the NBDL
2. could it be that KAZ got so twisted by the tubby system that he lost his aggresiveness and confidence in his game.... see bogans, rajon, jasper etc etc etc.

yes i am telling you tubby did it LOL ....FWIW joe hall did it too... he had players like shidler afraid to shoot and if you ever saw shidler shoot that's a real shame...

No way. It could not have been Smith. Smith is to blame for nothing. It was all the fault of those players.

Why do we always hear about guys who couldn't buy a basket at UK going elsewhere and scoring in droves? Guys like Barbour up in Canada. Azibuike in the NBDL. Hayes at Houston. Even Magloire.

4 years in the Smith system takes you from McD AA to undraftable. But it's not Smiths fault. It's the player that the SDL blames.

This place cracks me up. Good post scathendo!

[Wildcatcrazy11]

The middle is not the correct path here. There is no middle ground.

Tubby Smith did have some great and some really good athletes/ballers while at UK. He also consistently had GLARING and EXPLOITABLE holes in his roster and offense was always a chore unless the defense was clicking perfectly as in the season wherein the 26 game winning streak/Undefeated SEC occured.

First, it was the PG spot. I don't care what anyone says. Saul Smith may have played his heart out. He may have racked up some really good assist numbers. But go back and watch. If Saul Smith was the high scorer or one of the high scorers in a given game, more often than not UK lost that game.

Then UK couldn't get a big man. Daniels did well in the middle during this time and Hayes was pretty good as well. But it was a hole that teams used against us. Especially as we had to rely on guys like Shag and Woo.

The Forward spots for the last few years. Terrible. Bobby Perry and Sheray Thomas. Perry had a good game or two but otherwise was inconsistent and any good coach/team exploited this weakness. Perry was the same as Saul. If he was a high scorer, more often than not UK LOST.

That's not to mention shooting. Smiths teams were always lacking shooters. Consistent shooters. Smith had the streakiest shooters. Why? Some of the guys who came here were good scorers and shooters. But Smith didn't practice offense and his shooters suffered because of that and the near exclusive imperative that Smith placed on Defense.

That emphasis on Defense in the all important and inflexible Smith system is what I believe hurt the "draftability" or draft status of Smiths players and that hurt his recruiting.

I believe what really hurt recruiting badly was Smiths seeming distaste for it. You can't hide feelings like that and I'm sure it rubbed some folks the wrong way. Smith enjoyed recruiting about as much as he enjoyed his press conferences. I'm sure that never affected recruiting.

So sure. Smith brought in some great guys. Nonetheless, he always had glaring holes in his teams. And he infamously missed out on some recruits that should have been the easiest sells of his career and passed on some recruits that could have turned his tenure at UK around.

Smith was the architect of his own demise. It was NOT fan negativity. It wasn't someones agenda against Smith. Smith did himself in.

Too many holes, too many projects, too many exploitable weaknesses, too few great shooting scorers, too many streaky scorers, too much emphasis on defensive aspects of a player and not enough emphasis on scoring ability, no organization, an obvious distate for recruiting, too many misses on local guys, too many misses on big time recruits that UK supposedly had "wrapped up," too inflexible and too faithful to a system that was unattractive to the elite recruits.

(And for those who are wondering to whom I refer when I use the term Smith Defense League or a variation thereof, look back at this thread. The people on this thread who ridicule, lecture and become indignant over any conversation of Smith are the very people of whom I speak when using said term. There is a difference of tone between the posts of say Will Lavender or UFWildcat and the indignation, scorn or ridicule of these other few posters. I haven't read them unless they were quoted as I have these very people blocked. But the responses are as predictable as they will claim mine to be. lol The "Ignore" feature is wonderful. Wunderbar!!!)

Heretic, your post makes me think that there definatly is a middle ground: Posters like yourself being on one end, and the "tubby defense league" being on the other. We have the power of hindsight to look back and see all the glaring defects, which there are many, in Smiths time here. However, IMO, his legacy will not be as you state. I only say this because there are posters on both sides of this arguement. Assuming that this board is a true representation of UK fans (which i believe it is), there are people on here who support what you say 100%, disagree with you 100% and group who are somewhere in the middle. It is my point then, that somewhere down the road this debate accross the fanbase will reach a point of equilibrium somewhere in the middle of both sides. We will see the defecs of his tenure along with the good things he accomplished. IMO there has to be a middle ground if we expect this debate to end anytime soon. You will hold your opinions with you for the rest of your life but in terms of the fanbase's opinion throughout history there will be a middle ground

[Wildcatcrazy11]

No way. It could not have been Smith. Smith is to blame for nothing. It was all the fault of those players.

Why do we always hear about guys who couldn't buy a basket at UK going elsewhere and scoring in droves? Guys like Barbour up in Canada. Azibuike in the NBDL. Hayes at Houston. Even Magloire.

4 years in the Smith system takes you from McD AA to undraftable. But it's not Smiths fault. It's the player that the SDL blames.

This place cracks me up. Good post scathendo!

...another example of an arguement that will someday have a middle ground of understandment amongst the nation. Smith will never go down as the man who turned every great player into an undraftable, and he will never go down as the man who excelled in developing players to their full draft potential.
Don't you both see that you are on the extreme of one side of this arguement? Nothing wrong with your opinion but can you see this?

[scathendo]

thanks BH.. btw what happened to your old avatar? i loved it! what was that thing? i do like the Alpha Brumage pic though

[scathendo]

i'm not sure about a middle ground of understandment but i do think there is usually the ' three sides to every story ' theory (mine/yours/truth).. of which i usually subscribe.... it may not have always been tubby and it may not have always been the players. but in this case, i submit the reputation and performance of the players pre and post tubby system. sometimes the extreme is the truth.

[blueheretic]

I think in the end (and I believe this now contrary to popular belief) that Smith will be seen as a good coach and a good man. People will forgive