What's new
By:

Following potential 2012 draftees

Cyrone Torbin said:
I think Barnes is a lock for the top 5. I definitely don't see him having Superstar potential in the slightest, but he could be a perfect 2nd option type player. I guess it all depends how the lottery balls land and if the teams drafting need a big man like (Perry Jones, Drummond, Davis, Sullinger) over a wing like Barnes. I think the only wing player that has the potential to be heavily considered over Barnes is Miller because he appears to have Superstar potential.
Click to expand...

Gilchrist and Beal both deserve consideration over Barnes, imo. But until these guys start playing some ball, it's hard to make an argument either way.
 
spycam1 said:
Gilchrist and Beal both deserve consideration over Barnes, imo. But until these guys start playing some ball, it's hard to make an argument either way.
Click to expand...

True. Except Beal is more of a PG/SG whereas Miller, Gilchrist, and Barnes are SG/SF. CyTo likes to love anyone not UK, I figured that out long ago ..

I LOVE Beal as a 2G. As for the SF's, I think Barnes, Gillie, and Miller are all to close to tell until we see the season unfold. I could easily make the argument for any one of them .. but could also easily tear each one down. Let's play ball.
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
Gilchrist over Barnes? Maybe, but I don't think so.
Click to expand...

If I'm picking right now I go Barnes for sure. However, Barnes has never had a super reliable perimeter shot and Gillie is better at everything else (yes, everything).
Gillie has better defense .. x1,000,000.
Gillie is a better rebounder .. x1,000,000.
Gillie is Mr. Hustle .. x1,000,000.

Now .. I said I'd take Barnes as of now, but if MKG shows he can shoot it at close to the same efficiency as Barnes (he shot it 5% greater last year than Barnes, from 3), then I take him over Barnes. Gillie's intangibles are x1,000,000. Bank that.

Disclaimer: "x1,000,000 is not computed by any specific scientific formula, it is a hyperbolic number used to make a point.

Now, Cy, do not misquote me as saying Gillie is better than Barnes .. I'm simply saying it's not that far fetched .. not even close.
 
PKM said:
True. Except Beal is more of a PG/SG whereas Miller, Gilchrist, and Barnes are SG/SF. CyTo likes to love anyone not UK, I figured that out long ago ..

I LOVE Beal as a 2G. As for the SF's, I think Barnes, Gillie, and Miller are all to close to tell until we see the season unfold. I could easily make the argument for any one of them .. but could also easily tear each one down. Let's play ball.
Click to expand...

Agree with everything. Btw, when is Kentucky's first real game? And will it be televised?
 
spycam1 said:
Agree with everything. Btw, when is Kentucky's first real game? And will it be televised?
Click to expand...

First game that counts is November 11. It's not televised nationally, but every game will be streamed. The first nationally televised game is Nov. 15th against #13 Kansas played at Madison Square Garden.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDNcqqIWH9Q

Here's some recent footage/interview with Miller. He really seems to have improved in three of his weakest areas: muscle, shooting, and attitude (he's still very confident, but he seems to have balanced it out with a greater appreciation for the game.) Really like this kid's potential.

The main thing I worry about with Miller, and Barnes for that matter, is athleticism. They're both athletic, but don't have world class athleticism that superstars often have. Gilchrist on the other hand, does have elite level athleticism, and I don't think that should go overlooked.
 
spycam1 said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDNcqqIWH9Q

Here's some recent footage/interview with Miller. He really seems to have improved in three of his weakest areas: muscle, shooting, and attitude (he's still very confident, but he seems to have balanced it out with a greater appreciation for the game.) Really like this kid's potential.

The main thing I worry about with Miller, and Barnes for that matter, is athleticism. They're both athletic, but don't have world class athleticism that superstars often have. Gilchrist on the other hand, does have elite level athleticism, and I don't think that should go overlooked.
Click to expand...

There's nothing to worry about with any of their athleticism. Gillie is the most explosive, but all have enough to reach superstar level, imo.
Here are my main concerns for each;
Gillie - Perimeter shot
Barnes - Soft
Miller - Lazy/entitlement

Miller may have the greatest upside, though I think he'll never reach it.
Barnes lacks the killer instinct to be a #1 option .. though he can certainly be a second option.. which is just fine.
Gillie will reach his potential, even over succeed, but to reach superstar, he has to fix his perimeter shot.

Just my opinion.. I'm no expert at anything, just watch a LOT of basketball and been watching these kids for three years already.
 
What is funny with all this talk at SF no seems to mention t. jones. The guy could have the best year of all of them. What is his potential? He might be the most versital of them all. Don't get me wrong barnes would be awesome on the jazz and would fit the team make up very well. Gillie seems to be the defensive specialist the jazz could really use. Miller don't know a lot about him.

Then throw out there perry jones and my mind is going nuts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top