Gary Parish on 2011 season
Faux-hawk joins the ridiculously early preseason ranking party
by Hunter Campbell @ 5:48 pm. Filed under Blue Blooded Opinions
And not a moment too soon. As with most of these rankings, the Cats fall in the “I should probably rank them so KSR will link me but in reality I have no idea how good they’ll be” range between 12 and 20, with Parrish slotting them at #17. I’d like to find something to ridicule the hawked-one about, but considering I also have no idea how good we’ll be I’ll just say I agree with him, in the interest of world blogging peace and all. Here’s his take on the 2010-11 Cats:
It’s impossible not to slip when you lose five first-round picks in the same year, but John Calipari can endure the losses as well as anybody. He’ll enroll Brandon Knight and Enes Kanter and immediately have one of the nation’s strongest inside-outside duos (provided Kanter is cleared to participate as a freshman) and, by extension, one of the nation’s most intriguing teams.
He ranks Michigan State at the top based on the return of most of the core of last year’s Final Four team, most notably Kalin Lucas, and the addition of a stellar recruiting class featuring big man Adreian Payne. Duke falls in behind the Spartans at #2, with Purdue, Villanova and Kansas State rounding out his top five. As far as the SEC is concerned, Florida’s #10 ranking makes them the only conference team ahead of the Cats, with Tennessee the lone other representative at #25.
Other teams of note include Kansas at #12, Memphis, their #1 recruiting class and 11-year-old coach at #13, and North Carolina at #14. Washington is ranked 20th, based on Terrence Jones eventually playing for the Huskies, and Butler drops all the way from a lock for the preseason top 5 to #21 with the departure of Gordon Hayward to the NBA. They’ll crush Louisville in the opener at the bucket regardless.
So now you’ve learned everything you need to know about questionable hair stylings and next year’s best college basketball teams. And that’s all I have to say about that.
[Parrish's Top 25 (and one)]
[Comments (10)] [link]
Thursday, May 13, 2010
WildcatRick- ESPN-2011 season via WCN
Wildcat Nation Forums - Kentucky Wildcat Discussion and News > UK Basketball > Kentucky Basketball
Taking a look at 2011's top contenders
Welcome, SamKat.
You last visited: 05-09-2010 at 11:17 AM
Kentucky Basketball Celebrate the phenomenon that is Kentucky Wildcat Basketball.
#1 Yesterday, 08:44 PM
WildcatRick
Administrator Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Beaver Dam, Ky USA
Posts: 12,536
Taking a look at 2011's top contenders
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In these impermanent times, college basketball seasons can be made or broken by what happens in the spring. Specifically, which players keep their names in the NBA draft, and which pull out.
North Carolina all but won the 2009 national title in spring 2008, when all its key components opted to return to school. Kansas firmed up a successful 2009-10 season last spring, when Sherron Collins and Cole Aldrich decided to remain Jayhawks.
Speculation about next season started as soon as Gordon Hayward's shot bounced off the rim in Indianapolis on April 5. But only now do we have a fairly firm sense of who will be in uniform come Midnight Madness next October. (And even that remains open to late signings, grade situations and/or NCAA eligibility issues.)
This year's biggest two offseason winners are the top two in my list of 10 teams to watch in 2010-11, plus another baker's dozen that could make some major noise:
1. Purdue: Boilermakers fans had their hearts broken last February when Robbie Hummel blew out his knee, derailing a potential dream Final Four in nearby Indianapolis. But now maybe it's just a dream deferred a year. With JaJuan Johnson and E'Twaun Moore both pulling out of the draft and Hummel presumably mended by the fall, Purdue fans would be willing to make the longer commute to Houston if the need arises.
2. Duke: Kyle Singler's decision to return for his senior season puts the Blue Devils in prime contention for a repeat national title -- and Mike Krzyzewski knows a thing or two about repeating, having done it in 1991-92. If celebrated freshman guard Kyrie Irving can partially offset the loss of Jon Scheyer, and the two-headed Plumlee plan can do the same replacing Brian Zoubek, Duke should again dominate the ACC.
3. Michigan State: Let's get this out of the way now: The Spartans will struggle at various times next season. Accept that, and don't get off the bandwagon. Don't let it shake the belief that, no matter what, they'll make a push for the Final Four when all is said and done. To doubt Sparty is to ignore recent history under Tom Izzo.
4. Pittsburgh: The Panthers overachieved last season, winning 25 games with only a single senior playing a major role. Expect more next season from a program still trying to shatter the Elite Eight ceiling that has hovered above it in recent years. In a Big East that has lost a lot of sizzle, Pitt could be the clear preseason favorite.
5. Kansas: The Big 12 should once again be very good at the top next season. And even after losing three of its top four scorers, Kansas might be the best of the bunch. The Jayhawks return five key players from a 33-victory team that dominated the league, plus have some returning talent that couldn't break into the rotation last season. And then there's the addition of freshman stud Josh Selby to the mix.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kentucky: These young-and-talented Wildcats will resemble last season's young-and-talented Wildcats, with a couple of major distinctions. One, the freshmen studs aren't as good. Two, there is no veteran star like Patrick Patterson this time around.
ESPN
_____________________________________________________________________________
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.
'Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum'
"24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case. Coincidence? I think not." ~ Stephen Wright
WildcatRick
View Public Profile
Send a private message to WildcatRick
Send email to WildcatRick
Find all posts by WildcatRick
Add WildcatRick to Your Contacts
#2 Today, 01:05 AM
JWORLD
Senior Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Shelbyville,Kentucky
Posts: 5,769
I agree that as of right now, there's no Wall,there's no Cousins in tact for next year, and there sure in the hell isn't another Patrick Patterson about to come on board for this upcoming season.
However with Kanter,i felt like we landed the biggest prize out of the entire class of college basketball and i firmly beleive that based on what i have seen and from the skill set that he possesses for his size and toughness.
If we can somehow get Jones to come on board and another big, we may not start the season on top but come March, it's back to don't be on the Cats schedule come March part 2 for me.
Although another point guard would also help in the cause, i still think we could survive with Liggins,Lamb and Miller at the one if we absolutely had to..............
Key to our success is landing two more bigs at this point..........
JWORLD
View Public Profile
Send a private message to JWORLD
Send email to JWORLD
Find all posts by JWORLD
Add JWORLD to Your Contacts
#3 Today, 06:31 AM
SamKat
Junior Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Westerville, Ohio, USA
Posts: 2,298
You're the best, Rick! Thanks!
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:31 AM.
Taking a look at 2011's top contenders
Welcome, SamKat.
You last visited: 05-09-2010 at 11:17 AM
Kentucky Basketball Celebrate the phenomenon that is Kentucky Wildcat Basketball.
#1 Yesterday, 08:44 PM
WildcatRick
Administrator Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Beaver Dam, Ky USA
Posts: 12,536
Taking a look at 2011's top contenders
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In these impermanent times, college basketball seasons can be made or broken by what happens in the spring. Specifically, which players keep their names in the NBA draft, and which pull out.
North Carolina all but won the 2009 national title in spring 2008, when all its key components opted to return to school. Kansas firmed up a successful 2009-10 season last spring, when Sherron Collins and Cole Aldrich decided to remain Jayhawks.
Speculation about next season started as soon as Gordon Hayward's shot bounced off the rim in Indianapolis on April 5. But only now do we have a fairly firm sense of who will be in uniform come Midnight Madness next October. (And even that remains open to late signings, grade situations and/or NCAA eligibility issues.)
This year's biggest two offseason winners are the top two in my list of 10 teams to watch in 2010-11, plus another baker's dozen that could make some major noise:
1. Purdue: Boilermakers fans had their hearts broken last February when Robbie Hummel blew out his knee, derailing a potential dream Final Four in nearby Indianapolis. But now maybe it's just a dream deferred a year. With JaJuan Johnson and E'Twaun Moore both pulling out of the draft and Hummel presumably mended by the fall, Purdue fans would be willing to make the longer commute to Houston if the need arises.
2. Duke: Kyle Singler's decision to return for his senior season puts the Blue Devils in prime contention for a repeat national title -- and Mike Krzyzewski knows a thing or two about repeating, having done it in 1991-92. If celebrated freshman guard Kyrie Irving can partially offset the loss of Jon Scheyer, and the two-headed Plumlee plan can do the same replacing Brian Zoubek, Duke should again dominate the ACC.
3. Michigan State: Let's get this out of the way now: The Spartans will struggle at various times next season. Accept that, and don't get off the bandwagon. Don't let it shake the belief that, no matter what, they'll make a push for the Final Four when all is said and done. To doubt Sparty is to ignore recent history under Tom Izzo.
4. Pittsburgh: The Panthers overachieved last season, winning 25 games with only a single senior playing a major role. Expect more next season from a program still trying to shatter the Elite Eight ceiling that has hovered above it in recent years. In a Big East that has lost a lot of sizzle, Pitt could be the clear preseason favorite.
5. Kansas: The Big 12 should once again be very good at the top next season. And even after losing three of its top four scorers, Kansas might be the best of the bunch. The Jayhawks return five key players from a 33-victory team that dominated the league, plus have some returning talent that couldn't break into the rotation last season. And then there's the addition of freshman stud Josh Selby to the mix.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kentucky: These young-and-talented Wildcats will resemble last season's young-and-talented Wildcats, with a couple of major distinctions. One, the freshmen studs aren't as good. Two, there is no veteran star like Patrick Patterson this time around.
ESPN
_____________________________________________________________________________
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.
'Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum'
"24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case. Coincidence? I think not." ~ Stephen Wright
WildcatRick
View Public Profile
Send a private message to WildcatRick
Send email to WildcatRick
Find all posts by WildcatRick
Add WildcatRick to Your Contacts
#2 Today, 01:05 AM
JWORLD
Senior Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Shelbyville,Kentucky
Posts: 5,769
I agree that as of right now, there's no Wall,there's no Cousins in tact for next year, and there sure in the hell isn't another Patrick Patterson about to come on board for this upcoming season.
However with Kanter,i felt like we landed the biggest prize out of the entire class of college basketball and i firmly beleive that based on what i have seen and from the skill set that he possesses for his size and toughness.
If we can somehow get Jones to come on board and another big, we may not start the season on top but come March, it's back to don't be on the Cats schedule come March part 2 for me.
Although another point guard would also help in the cause, i still think we could survive with Liggins,Lamb and Miller at the one if we absolutely had to..............
Key to our success is landing two more bigs at this point..........
JWORLD
View Public Profile
Send a private message to JWORLD
Send email to JWORLD
Find all posts by JWORLD
Add JWORLD to Your Contacts
#3 Today, 06:31 AM
SamKat
Junior Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Westerville, Ohio, USA
Posts: 2,298
You're the best, Rick! Thanks!
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:31 AM.
Thanks Judi Cole! JWR re: Non Proliferation Treaty- o naivette
Security Policy by Bumper Sticker
By Mona Charen
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com
When I was a little girl, at the height of the Cold War, I used to wish, deeply and fervently, that nuclear weapons had never been invented. An accompanying fantasy placed me at the center of world events. Just as the two superpowers were preparing to launch a devastating exchange of nuclear weapons, I would step between the two. Seeing an innocent child, the hard-boiled men of the world would soften and reconsider their terrible course.
In other words, at the age of 7 or 8, I was a liberal. As I grew, I came to understand a) that it was not possible to put the nuclear genie back in the bottle, and b) that the way to safety lay not in arms control but in strength prudently pursued.
Liberal approaches to foreign policy continue to rely more on wishful thinking than on realism or maturity. But even in the context of liberalism, President Obama's recent policy declarations on the matter of nuclear weapons are juvenile and disturbing.
Speaking in Prague, the president declared, "I state clearly and with conviction America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons."
Has the president really thought this through? Here's a thought experiment: Imagine that all of the existing nuclear powers agreed that their weapons were more of a threat to "peace and security" than they were worth, and voluntarily destroyed them all. Would the world immediately become a safer place? No. It would become far more dangerous. The North Koreans would have lied about destroying their weapons, just as they lied repeatedly about building them for years. So one outcome might be that North Korea would instantly become a superpower. And surely the prospect of becoming nuclear-armed would be all the more enticing to the mullahs of Iran if they would have only North Korea in possession of similar weapons. Who would want to live in that world?
"I'm not naive," the president continued. "This goal will not be reached quickly ... But now we, too, must ignore the voices who tell us that the world cannot change. We have to insist, 'Yes, we can.'" That's security policy by bumper sticker.
The president followed up by signing a pact with Russia limiting warheads and launchers in April and is now planning to sign a new pact on civilian nuclear cooperation.
At the same time, the administration announced, in its Nuclear Posture Review, that the U.S. will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. "This revised assurance is intended to underscore the security benefits of adhering to and fully complying with the NPT and persuade non-nuclear weapon states party to the Treaty to work with the United States and other interested parties to adopt effective measures to strengthen the non-proliferation regime."
So as Iran closes in on a nuclear weapon — a result the administration has repeatedly declared to be "unacceptable" — the administration is getting really serious by ... setting a good example. That's right. Last week, the State Department revealed the number of nuclear weapons in our arsenal (it used to be classified). "We think it is in our national security interest to be as transparent as we can be about the nuclear program of the United States," Secretary Clinton explained. "We think that builds confidence." Ah, but whose confidence?
Underlying all of these naive gestures is the belief that it is weapons that threaten the peace, not their owners.
But not even naivete can explain the administration's infatuation with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Last week, Obama agreed to join the other four permanent members of the Security Council in a statement calling for a "nuclear free Middle East" and urging Israel, Pakistan, and India to submit to the treaty's terms.
This is a fatuous distraction from the main issue — Iran. It is also a transparent attempt to gang up on Israel (whose nuclear weapons, it is well known, serve only a defensive purpose). But above all, it ignores the glaring fact that the treaty has been a total failure. North Korea signed the treaty, flouted it, and then withdrew. India and Pakistan never signed it. Syria did, and Israel destroyed a secret nuclear reactor there in 2007. Iran signed it.
Speaking to the NPT Review Conference in New York on May 3, Obama said, "For four decades, the NPT has been the cornerstone of our collective efforts to prevent the proliferation of these weapons ... I therefore made it a priority of the United States to strengthen each of the treaty's key pillars."
In a child, naivete about world peace is understandable. In a leader, it is frightening.
By Mona Charen
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com
When I was a little girl, at the height of the Cold War, I used to wish, deeply and fervently, that nuclear weapons had never been invented. An accompanying fantasy placed me at the center of world events. Just as the two superpowers were preparing to launch a devastating exchange of nuclear weapons, I would step between the two. Seeing an innocent child, the hard-boiled men of the world would soften and reconsider their terrible course.
In other words, at the age of 7 or 8, I was a liberal. As I grew, I came to understand a) that it was not possible to put the nuclear genie back in the bottle, and b) that the way to safety lay not in arms control but in strength prudently pursued.
Liberal approaches to foreign policy continue to rely more on wishful thinking than on realism or maturity. But even in the context of liberalism, President Obama's recent policy declarations on the matter of nuclear weapons are juvenile and disturbing.
Speaking in Prague, the president declared, "I state clearly and with conviction America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons."
Has the president really thought this through? Here's a thought experiment: Imagine that all of the existing nuclear powers agreed that their weapons were more of a threat to "peace and security" than they were worth, and voluntarily destroyed them all. Would the world immediately become a safer place? No. It would become far more dangerous. The North Koreans would have lied about destroying their weapons, just as they lied repeatedly about building them for years. So one outcome might be that North Korea would instantly become a superpower. And surely the prospect of becoming nuclear-armed would be all the more enticing to the mullahs of Iran if they would have only North Korea in possession of similar weapons. Who would want to live in that world?
"I'm not naive," the president continued. "This goal will not be reached quickly ... But now we, too, must ignore the voices who tell us that the world cannot change. We have to insist, 'Yes, we can.'" That's security policy by bumper sticker.
The president followed up by signing a pact with Russia limiting warheads and launchers in April and is now planning to sign a new pact on civilian nuclear cooperation.
At the same time, the administration announced, in its Nuclear Posture Review, that the U.S. will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. "This revised assurance is intended to underscore the security benefits of adhering to and fully complying with the NPT and persuade non-nuclear weapon states party to the Treaty to work with the United States and other interested parties to adopt effective measures to strengthen the non-proliferation regime."
So as Iran closes in on a nuclear weapon — a result the administration has repeatedly declared to be "unacceptable" — the administration is getting really serious by ... setting a good example. That's right. Last week, the State Department revealed the number of nuclear weapons in our arsenal (it used to be classified). "We think it is in our national security interest to be as transparent as we can be about the nuclear program of the United States," Secretary Clinton explained. "We think that builds confidence." Ah, but whose confidence?
Underlying all of these naive gestures is the belief that it is weapons that threaten the peace, not their owners.
But not even naivete can explain the administration's infatuation with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Last week, Obama agreed to join the other four permanent members of the Security Council in a statement calling for a "nuclear free Middle East" and urging Israel, Pakistan, and India to submit to the treaty's terms.
This is a fatuous distraction from the main issue — Iran. It is also a transparent attempt to gang up on Israel (whose nuclear weapons, it is well known, serve only a defensive purpose). But above all, it ignores the glaring fact that the treaty has been a total failure. North Korea signed the treaty, flouted it, and then withdrew. India and Pakistan never signed it. Syria did, and Israel destroyed a secret nuclear reactor there in 2007. Iran signed it.
Speaking to the NPT Review Conference in New York on May 3, Obama said, "For four decades, the NPT has been the cornerstone of our collective efforts to prevent the proliferation of these weapons ... I therefore made it a priority of the United States to strengthen each of the treaty's key pillars."
In a child, naivete about world peace is understandable. In a leader, it is frightening.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)