No. Look I watched 2 or 3 college basketball games a night. Im a HUGE college basketball fan, not so much the NBA but since I just recently moved here Im trying to get into the idea of cheering for a professional team (the Rox). But I can tell you right now, nobody has watched more UK games then me on this board. Teague is not nearly as good as Marshall. Take him off UK where half his assists were lobs to Davis or Jones, and he is a mid 2nd rounder at best, if he even declared at all this year. The only reason he did declare, was because next year UK has Ryan Harrow coming in from NC State. You want to talk about a PG, go watch his highlights on YouTube. He is nasty. If Harrow wasnt going to start over him next year, he would be back. Teague forces shots, has trouble seeing the floor, turns it over a **** TON (18 turnovers to 11 assists in his first 4 games, 11 assists to 8 turnovers in his last 4) and generally does stupid stuff on the court. He doesnt have range, yet he tries to shoot anyway. No. Marshall all day.
Because the team scored 22 more points then Baylor with him on the court, and 10 less with him on the bench? Good point.
It's a valid point. Acy was superior in every stat during that game, and you're best arguement is that MKG had a better +/-
What it comes down to the two is Beals jumper is money. And he is no slouch on defense. MKG is like hybrid Thabo. You need those kind of defensive stoppers but not that high.
What matters is that Kentucky won. MKG contributed far more to winning than Acy. This is similar to the NBA argument that non-star players can put up star numbers on bad teams. That doesn't mean he is a great player. See Mike James in Toronto.
Another weak argument that does nothing to explain why you think MKG so much better. You might as well say, "MKG is better because the mock draft told me so." Comparing Acy and MKG is in no way like talking about non-star players on a bad NBA team. I won't even try to figure out how you made that connection. It makes no sense.
Beal has far more offensive skill than MKG, and I think it will continue to be that way for their entire career. MKG is the better athlete and both guys should be good defenders at their position while MKG will be a more diverse defender because of his size and athleticism. If it came down to it, I would choose Beal because a coach can run plays for him where as MKG is more of the hustle guy who does great in transition/being set up.
How about hes way undersized, has a terrible jump shot that will get blocked all day at the next level, and he cant rebound? And MKG just turned old enough to buy a pack a smokes while Acy has been able to drink almost two full years.
Will people tell me the difference between Beal and Jimmer Fredette? Besides the fact that Beal is more athletic and can dunk? I think Beal is gonna bust.
Beal is bigger and can play off the ball. In fact that's probably what he's best at. Coming off screens. He also plays defense and is a terrific rebounder. As for Beal vs. MKG, I'd probably go with MKG, but I think you can't go wrong either way. Beal is very intriguing, but his (lack of) size worries me a bit. He does have some Eric Gordon in him, but he's not quite as explosive, nor as good a ball handler/creator. He's probably a better shooter and better at using screens, but he's isn't quite Ray Allen, though I can see where some of these 'experts' are coming from. He's a good/smart defender, although I'm not sure if he'll be able to guard the bigger guards in the NBA. He does a lot of things well though. So it comes down to what you'd rather have: A slightly lesser version of a Eric Gordan/Ray Allen mix or a high end version of Gerald Wallace.
