Bear Down Wildcats

Yeah, it's tough. Even Love, Westbrook, Collison and Mbah Moute lost two games. Though the conference will be weaker than back then.

gumby wrote:Yeah, it's tough. Even Love, Westbrook, Collison and Mbah Moute lost two games. Though the conference will be weaker than back then.

I can't think of very many teams being better, or even as good, as last year. We are one of those teams that are, obviously. I think Utah will be better...maybe Colorado is as good as they were...Stanford about the same? Who else? UW gonna be any better?

Oregon, Oregon St., uCla, ASU, Cal...they all trend down...Wazzu and USC may be slightly better, but will still suck.

Brutal year for the PAC upcoming. Brutal.

Olsondogg wrote:Brutal year for the PAC upcoming. Brutal.

Unless, of course, you are a Wildcat fan! The other teams just need to be strong enough to prepare us for a championship run.

ANGCatFan wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Brutal year for the PAC upcoming. Brutal.

Unless, of course, you are a Wildcat fan! The other teams just need to be strong enough to prepare us for a championship run.

I am not convinced they are strong enough for that.

Olsondogg wrote:

ANGCatFan wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Brutal year for the PAC upcoming. Brutal.

Unless, of course, you are a Wildcat fan! The other teams just need to be strong enough to prepare us for a championship run.

I am not convinced they are strong enough for that.

Then we need to steal Uconn's uniforms for the NCAA tourney.

Olsondogg wrote:

ANGCatFan wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Brutal year for the PAC upcoming. Brutal.

Unless, of course, you are a Wildcat fan! The other teams just need to be strong enough to prepare us for a championship run.

I am not convinced they are strong enough for that.

There's an argument to be made against this. Kentucky & Florida are both decent examples of teams who have gone through a weak conference schedule to win it all. I think it's easy to say that playing against the highest caliber talent will produce the best advancements for a team that is structured correctly - but it's not a necessity anymore is it?

I think - health & eligibility intact - this is poised to be Coach Miller's best team...and that's really saying something when you think about it.

I don't get into expectations because it's too easy to lose to a hot team in March - but I think this year may be an even better team (on paper) than last years. That's incredible.

yeah...next year:

better:
utah and maybe us

same:
stanford
colorado
uw
wsu (still terrible)
usc (still bad)

worse:
ucla
asu
oregon
oregon state
cal

ASUHATER! wrote:yeah...next year:

better:
utah and maybe us

same:
stanford
colorado
uw
wsu (still terrible)
usc (still bad)

worse:
ucla
asu
oregon
oregon state
cal

There will be at least one surprise team somewhere on that list. My money is on Washington.

USC will be way better next season than they were last. They're this season's Utah. Stanford will be better as well. Dwight Powell graduating is addition by subtraction.

Under-the-radar sophomores to watch
CL Brown, ESPN

Elliott Pitts, guard, Arizona. Even with the departure of Nick Johnson, the Wildcats will still have a crowded backcourt. Pitts proved to be a 3-point threat from off the bench last season, shooting 39 percent from deep. That and his 6-foot-5 frame could help him crack the rotation more next season.

http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketba ... s-to-watch

can't necessarily disagree. our starting 5 is phenomenal and our bench is a combo of "good and growing" and "completely unproven freshmen/transfers".

kentucky is stacked with top 40 blue chip players from #1-12 on their roster.

UK still only has one ball and 200 minutes. Who cares about the 9th, 10th, 11th and 12th player?

I imagine the UK bench does, and if they are that good not wanting to sit on the bench except in garbage time.

Merkin wrote:UK still only has one ball and 200 minutes. Who cares about the 9th, 10th, 11th and 12th player?

I imagine the UK bench does, and if they are that good not wanting to sit on the bench except in garbage time.

This all day. We go 8-9 deep this year easy...and it will be hard to give minutes to every player on the bench that wants mins.

yeah...there will be guys at the end of kentucky's bench that even as a sophomore or junior are getting 5 minutes a game when they were a top 30 player in their recruiting class.

the offseason is 230 days long. we're already 126 days into it! 106 days until the season opener. only 77 days until the red/blue game

ASUHATER! wrote:the offseason is 230 days long. we're already 126 days into it! 106 days until the season opener. only 77 days until the red/blue game

Shit Yeah.

Wait...so Pittsburgh is the 1 seed?? I thought for sure we'd be playing chaminade. We'll likely be the only top 15 team there.

I'd think SDSU is the 1 seed, since they would be the home team in all games (unless they play Chaminade). Is there any practical reason it matters though?

The best team in the tournament always gets the first round bye against chaminade. Should be Arizona

It is better for AZ to play a quality opponent (at least in name) for its resume.

prh wrote:I'd think SDSU is the 1 seed, since they would be the home team in all games (unless they play Chaminade). Is there any practical reason it matters though?

How is SDSU the Home Team in all games besides playing Chaminade?

ASUHATER! wrote:Wait...so Pittsburgh is the 1 seed?? I thought for sure we'd be playing chaminade. We'll likely be the only top 15 team there.

That just means more good wins for us. See the opportunity.

Happy with what we got.

Everyone else lives in fear.

ASUHATER! wrote:The best team in the tournament always gets the first round bye against chaminade. Should be Arizona

Maui seeded 1-8 through the 2008 tournament, and the next two years continued the best team opening vs Chaminade. Starting with the 2011 tourney, Chaminade hasn't opened with the best team.

3goggles wrote:How is SDSU the Home Team in all games besides playing Chaminade?

Image says that the bottom team is home unless playing Chaminade.

How many minutes per game will the group of York, Allen and Pitts get at the two? Let's say RHJ hasn't fixed his jumpshot. Let's say Stanley can't connect from three like we hope. Let's say McConnell is still set shooting bricks from distance. We need a shooter on the floor, right? I definitely see Stanley, RHJ, Ashley and Tarc in that starting five, but after tip-off, we probably see those guys doing a lot of rotating at the 3-5 positions, right? Just a thought, since we're getting closer to the season.

Let's not say.

It's already been said

We can say alot of things, doesn't mean we should.

Well said

thenewazcats wrote:How many minutes per game will the group of York, Allen and Pitts get at the two? Let's say RHJ hasn't fixed his jumpshot. Let's say Stanley can't connect from three like we hope. Let's say McConnell is still set shooting bricks from distance. We need a shooter on the floor, right? I definitely see Stanley, RHJ, Ashley and Tarc in that starting five, but after tip-off, we probably see those guys doing a lot of rotating at the 3-5 positions, right? Just a thought, since we're getting closer to the season.

If we enter the season with 3 starters morphing into incompetent shooters, whether York, Pitts or Allen emerges is irrelevant.

In the old vein too, the only thing you need is to create shots your dudes can make. You can have five guys who can't make anything other than a dunk, and you'll win if you create dunk opportunities on half your possessions.

We will be better offensively than last year's team, if all the returners improve even a little bit.

TJ will be better. Zeus will be better. Ashley was by far our most efficient offensive threat (3 point shooting, post-ups and FT's). RHJ has been working like crazy on his jump shot, and we know how relentless he is on the boards. SJ may be the most complete freshman to ever play at Arizona. And our bench (York, Pitts, Ristic, Victor, etc...) has to be better offensively than our bench last year (only lost Mayes).

If they can play team defense close to last year's club (NJ and AG were incredible defensive players. Not sure there's anyone on this year's team with their abilities.), this team may be the favorite to take it all come March.

Go CAts!!

Olsondogg wrote:

Late to the party on this tweet, but it really only starts to matter if a game of 12 on 12 breaks out.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

Late to the party on this tweet, but it really only starts to matter if a game of 12 on 12 breaks out.

KY is loaded with talent, but it will be very interesting to see how Calipari handles the egos of essentially 12 former high school all-stars looking for playing time. That will either be a nearly impossible team to beat, or it will be a train wreck.

midnightx wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

Late to the party on this tweet, but it really only starts to matter if a game of 12 on 12 breaks out.

KY is loaded with talent, but it will be very interesting to see how Calipari handles the egos of essentially 12 former high school all-stars looking for playing time. That will either be a nearly impossible team to beat, or it will be a train wreck.

How about Nolan Richardson's "40 minutes of hell" strategy with Arkansas during the 90s? Would tear a tiring opposition up.

The way I see it, Miller's got until February to get his rotations figured out (though it probably won't take that long), make sure everyone knows their role and "buys in," and get them to play with a chip on their shoulder. We need to be nasty.

Aside from that, our guys just need to stay healthy, practice their damn FTs, and respect every opponent.

B-Ash and TJ need to set the tone.

Pac title and a FF. Those are the benchmarks.

Awesome cover. My new desktop.

EOCT wrote:

midnightx wrote:KY is loaded with talent, but it will be very interesting to see how Calipari handles the egos of essentially 12 former high school all-stars looking for playing time. That will either be a nearly impossible team to beat, or it will be a train wreck.

How about Nolan Richardson's "40 minutes of hell" strategy with Arkansas during the 90s? Would tear a tiring opposition up.

I don't know how many off-seasons we speculate on a team doing this, and it never happens.

Only programs I've honestly ever seen try this are Monument Valley High School and a couple of Navajo girls programs and middle schools. The results didn't hold up.

If there is anything I think that could perhaps, maybe, take a small step back this y ear it would be the defense. But, I'd take a small step backwards in that area to take a giant step forward in the offense.

My impression of Cal's Kentucky Wildcats: Tons of talent but very little defense. They win mostly because they are better than everybody else at every position, not because they're a cohesive team. This is where Miller is head and shoulders above Cal.

This is our year! Go Cats!!

Catstatic wrote:My impression of Cal's Kentucky Wildcats: Tons of talent but very little defense. They win mostly because they are better than everybody else at every position, not because they're a cohesive team. This is where Miller is head and shoulders above Cal.

This is our year! Go Cats!!

This first paragraph nails it. They win based on having talented players, not playing great basketball. There is a difference.

Olsondogg wrote:

Catstatic wrote:My impression of Cal's Kentucky Wildcats: Tons of talent but very little defense. They win mostly because they are better than everybody else at every position, not because they're a cohesive team. This is where Miller is head and shoulders above Cal.

This is our year! Go Cats!!

This first paragraph nails it. They win based on having talented players, not playing great basketball. There is a difference.

I would still rather be really talented. There's a lot of time to develop cohesiveness.

Good thing we're really talented too. If I was looking for how to distinguish us from KY, I'd look to maturity, physical and emotional.

Kentucky doesn't have a single SF on roster. Going to be a lot of 3 guard sets for them.

ElGatoBlanco wrote:Kentucky doesn't have a single SF on roster. Going to be a lot of 3 guard sets for them.

They played Poythress at the 3 a lot last year. Which either tells you they have a SF or it proves your point.

Booker can rotate up pretty easily at 6'5. The bigger issue they have is working a rotation or crunch time team out of that glut of talent. They have tons of players, but if you don't have a decent rotation to revert to when the times get rough, it's much harder.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

ElGatoBlanco wrote:Kentucky doesn't have a single SF on roster. Going to be a lot of 3 guard sets for them.

They played Poythress at the 3 a lot last year. Which either tells you they have a SF or it proves your point.

Booker can rotate up pretty easily at 6'5. The bigger issue they have is working a rotation or crunch time team out of that glut of talent. They have tons of players, but if you don't have a decent rotation to revert to when the times get rough, it's much harder.

Lol I'd say it proves my point. If I'm Kentucky I definitely go with a Ullis, Harrison, Harrison, post, post lineup.

ElGatoBlanco wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

ElGatoBlanco wrote:Kentucky doesn't have a single SF on roster. Going to be a lot of 3 guard sets for them.

They played Poythress at the 3 a lot last year. Which either tells you they have a SF or it proves your point.

Booker can rotate up pretty easily at 6'5. The bigger issue they have is working a rotation or crunch time team out of that glut of talent. They have tons of players, but if you don't have a decent rotation to revert to when the times get rough, it's much harder.

Lol I'd say it proves my point. If I'm Kentucky I definitely go with a Ullis, Harrison, Harrison, post, post lineup.

I'd say that's a good crunch time lineup. I don't really love the Harrisons, but I like them better when neither has to play the point. They have plenty of flexibility b/c the Harrisons and Booker can all play the 3 if necessary. Working through rotations and getting people to share the ball would be big.

I bet KY would love for Ulis to turn into a true PG they can play in crunch time. Even during their run last year, it was ugly with the Harrisons trying to initiate the offense. That said, if they play hard on D, they will be really good. We talk about our length, but they have insane amounts of length and rim protection.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

Catstatic wrote:My impression of Cal's Kentucky Wildcats: Tons of talent but very little defense. They win mostly because they are better than everybody else at every position, not because they're a cohesive team. This is where Miller is head and shoulders above Cal.

This is our year! Go Cats!!

This first paragraph nails it. They win based on having talented players, not playing great basketball. There is a difference.

I would still rather be really talented. There's a lot of time to develop cohesiveness.

Good thing we're really talented too. If I was looking for how to distinguish us from KY, I'd look to maturity, physical and emotional.

Cal doesn't teach cohesiveness. The game I watched this weekend was indicative of every UK game I watch, whether it be in August or March: A bunch of talented players showcasing that talent.

Olsondogg wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:
This first paragraph nails it. They win based on having talented players, not playing great basketball. There is a difference.

I would still rather be really talented. There's a lot of time to develop cohesiveness.

Good thing we're really talented too. If I was looking for how to distinguish us from KY, I'd look to maturity, physical and emotional.

Cal doesn't teach cohesiveness. The game I watched this weekend was indicative of every UK game I watch, whether it be in August or March: A bunch of talented players showcasing that talent.

Actually, Cal has done a staggering job getting very talented guys to buy into the team concept. The man made DeMarcus Cousins look half sane. He's regularly had top 10 recruits in supporting roles and they accept it. Poythress was top ten and he basically didn't have a play run for him all year last year.

Cal gets a bad rap, but he puts together pretty cohesive teams for the talent level. Only the Noel year did it really blow up in his face.

Spaceman Spiff wrote: I'd say that's a good crunch time lineup. I don't really love the Harrisons, but I like them better when neither has to play the point. They have plenty of flexibility b/c the Harrisons and Booker can all play the 3 if necessary. Working through rotations and getting people to share the ball would be big.

I agree with you but man would I love to see one of those three try to cover RHJ.