I have heard multiple people say platooning is a big part of the reason for the fall off in recruiting after 2015. They say that opposing coaches have used it against us and that Cal will never do it again. It also seems Cal has even made statements as such. My question is what was so bad about it? I mean that team almost did something nobody else has been able to do, go 40-0, all while putting 4 players in the lottery and getting 6 drafted overall that season. It didn't seem to hurt anyone's draft status and the team had a special season. I just don't see what negative came from it that opposing coaches could convince kids it was a bad deal and that Cal would change his recruiting strategy to not load up on so many top kids.
Why was platooning in 2015 so bad for the program?
- Thread starter Ryan Lemonds Hair
- Start date
Getting only 20 minutes per game and yanked in and out regularly ain’t exactly what 5 star aspiring one and dones are looking for.
That was just a unique situation where we had such utterly insane depth of talent that Cal had to try something different to try to get them all minutes. He’ll never do it again.
That was just a unique situation where we had such utterly insane depth of talent that Cal had to try something different to try to get them all minutes. He’ll never do it again.
I think if they had gone 40-0, it would be a different story. Remember Cal thanking the parents of the players throughout the season? That really ought to answer your question.
instead, they came up short, and several guys had to come off the bench (my baby a starter). Harrisons and Dakari went from late first rounders/second rounders as freshmen to out of the draft altogether.
instead, they came up short, and several guys had to come off the bench (my baby a starter). Harrisons and Dakari went from late first rounders/second rounders as freshmen to out of the draft altogether.
It was a good idea. It was just eighteen thousand years behind the times.
Andrew and Dakari both went in the 2nd round. Aaron was the only one who didn't get drafted and that was as much to do with his lack of athleticism as anything. He played as many minutes as anyone and an additional 8-10 wouldn't have made a difference in his draft stock.
Platooning was no problem at all. But at the end of games we need to play the best 5. Which we didn't do. Playing slow at the end with the lead, playing not to lose, Is imo what cost us that championship. We were by far the best team in the country.
From a team perspective it wasn't. We flat out dominated teams and I feel a large part of that was simply wearing teams down to death.
Our recruiting did take a hit after that. Maybe Cal wasn't right when he said that good players want to play with other good players and that time on the court doesn't matter. Recruits want to play on good teams with good players but they mostly still want to make sure they get their numbers.
As to what type of effect that had post 15 recruiting and how much of us not grabbing the big guys was due to other circumstances who knows tho.
Our recruiting did take a hit after that. Maybe Cal wasn't right when he said that good players want to play with other good players and that time on the court doesn't matter. Recruits want to play on good teams with good players but they mostly still want to make sure they get their numbers.
As to what type of effect that had post 15 recruiting and how much of us not grabbing the big guys was due to other circumstances who knows tho.
We were the best team in the country.
I don't know I would say "by far" tho. I think when Alex went down, the gap got a bit smaller and we were never as dominant.
If we were the best team by far, we would have been favored by more points against Wisconsin than we were. The true is Wisconsin and Duke were very good that season.
Had Cal went with 2 separate teams and kept groups of 5 together for set durations, it would have been received better IMO. With that, we should have pressed the whole game and pushed the pace of the game. Run them out for
respective #1 pg and #1 center in their class. Do you think where they were drafted was a success?
The platooning was a bit wrecked when Poythress got hurt. He was UK's best rebounder at that point and it just shook things a bit. Ultimate glue guy and had a clear role that season.
But yeah, to others' point, getting 20 mins per game doesn't cut it for the stars who want to be the focus.
But yeah, to others' point, getting 20 mins per game doesn't cut it for the stars who want to be the focus.
UK dominated when they platooned (even after Poythress went down) and they played less well the more they went away from platooning. Still good, just not dominant.
At the end of the season UK wasn’t really platooning past the first 10 minutes, if that. No one should blame platooning on the loss to Wisconsin, if anything it’s the opposite as Cal by shortening the rotation played down Into Wisconsin’s strength (which was their starting five).
It's difficult to define success. As the top-ranked recruits, probably not. But if you look at their NBA career, they were drafted right about where they should have been.
The only player that maybe had a gripe for being "held back" was Devin Booker. But he was ice cold the back-half of the season. He was given plenty of time to get his shot back and it just never came back.
My dream was that Cal would create two separate teams, one that pushed the pace and pressed (with Ulis, Booker, Lee etc.) while the other physically punished the other team (with the Harrison twins, Dakari etc.).
They could have completely different styles and run different plays etc. (He could have assigned two different assistant coaches to work with each squad.)
It would have forced the opposing team to prepare for literally two different squads with different styles, and have to adjust continually back and forth throughout the course of the game.
Virtually unbeatable if they had done that.
And we didn't have anyone who could stop Sam Dekker. That's why we needed Poythress so badly.
Also, a certain rooferee didn't help either.
I think the problem was if we went 3 guards neither ulis or booker could guard air against wisconsin so we still would have lost the game. Just would have gave up more points.
What killed us more than the platooning was WCS disappearing act, the shot clock violation that wasnt called and Decker’s miracle step back 3.
Dekker was a problem, but again by UK shortening the rotation they ended up allowing Wisconsin to dictate the pace and play their game. Platoons would have allowed UK to press the pace and wear down Wisconsin's relatively shallow starting five and bench.
As it was, even with the shortened benches from both teams, Wisconsin was exhausted at the end of the game. But UK wasn't able to take advantage because they were exhausted too.
I know some people like to claim that NCAA games you can get away with using a short bench because there's so many timeouts etc., but just watch, those games are exhausting to the players when literally every play has so much pressure on them.
Fully agree. Ole Vitale was out there screaming on tv for Cal to shorten the rotation and he got what he wanted, his beloved Dookies winning a championship.
you’re not wrong at all, but if the question is why/how was it used to hurt our recruiting, my point answers that
I'm not so sure it was...it's just a nice sticky point for people to complain why Cal isn't reeling in recruits anymore.
$$$ is the single reason why Cal lost his mojo... other programs beat us to the NIL game and payed under the table. Or they didn't mind hiring an uncle to seal the deal.
$$$ is the single reason why Cal lost his mojo... other programs beat us to the NIL game and payed under the table. Or they didn't mind hiring an uncle to seal the deal.
Even with all that, if Harrison just hits a dagger 3 on any one of those 3 ridiculously bad possessions for UK that ended in a shot clock violation I think we hang on as we go up 7 in that scenario.
Great post. You make some really good points in your posts in this thread.
I loved the platoon at the time, but I sometimes wonder if that team would have benefitted from playing a normal rotation all season, instead of the first 5 guys always playing together and not getting use to playing with any of the second 5 until almost March when Cal started mixing it up a bit?
With a 9 man rotation, we are looking at Lee riding the pine? Some of the others would maybe get a few less minutes, while others would get a few more?
I wonder if Cal would have gone with 3 guards starting with Booker looking like the best guard on the roster? How would a whole season of the Twins and Booker starting with Ulis off the bench look? I never really liked Lyles at the 3 spot. He would have been better suited as a stretch 4.
So I would have liked to seen something like this all year:
G Harrsion(20)/Ulis(20)
G Harrsion(30)/Harrison(10)
G Booker(20)/Poythress(20)
F Cauley-Stein(25)/Lyles(15)
F Towns(25)/Johnson(15)
And when Poythress gets hurt, split his minutes up and run an 8-man rotation.
G Harrsion(20)/Ulis(20)
G Harrsion(30)/Harrison(10)
G Booker(30)/Lyles(10)
F Cauley-Stein(25)/Lyles(15)
F Towns(25)/Johnson(15)
With a 9 man rotation, we are looking at Lee riding the pine? Some of the others would maybe get a few less minutes, while others would get a few more?
I wonder if Cal would have gone with 3 guards starting with Booker looking like the best guard on the roster? How would a whole season of the Twins and Booker starting with Ulis off the bench look? I never really liked Lyles at the 3 spot. He would have been better suited as a stretch 4.
So I would have liked to seen something like this all year:
G Harrsion(20)/Ulis(20)
G Harrsion(30)/Harrison(10)
G Booker(20)/Poythress(20)
F Cauley-Stein(25)/Lyles(15)
F Towns(25)/Johnson(15)
And when Poythress gets hurt, split his minutes up and run an 8-man rotation.
G Harrsion(20)/Ulis(20)
G Harrsion(30)/Harrison(10)
G Booker(30)/Lyles(10)
F Cauley-Stein(25)/Lyles(15)
F Towns(25)/Johnson(15)
It killed us on the recruiting front because Cal told the Towns/Lyles/Booker/Ulis class that we were losing 6 or 7 from the Randle team. We ended up returning the twins, Johnson, WCS, and Poythress.
Lyles and those guys took it like champs, but other recruits realized they couldn't trust Cal's promises of playing time. It hurt us with Zimmerman, Brown, Newman, Diallo, etc.
I don't think it hurt recruiting at all. I think recruiting dipped because of a few things. There was a change in basketball culture where kids wanted to go somewhere and be the sole standout. Other schools really ramped up their pursuit of said kids. Even more schools leveraged shoe company relationships to help them (including duke and Nike).
The final piece is the fact that Justus just wasn't that good. So you had all those changing parts at the same time we had a weak recruiter.
The final piece is the fact that Justus just wasn't that good. So you had all those changing parts at the same time we had a weak recruiter.
Booker, Hero, Shai and Quickley all exceeded their draft expectations. So do you think Harrison and Dakari hurt us but the other 4 guys haven't helped balance that back out?
We dipped from 2015 because there was no where to go but down. The confluence of fortune with the volume of quality returning players and incoming talent is extreme in rarity. Mean regression and improvement by our competition in the recruiting sphere of top prospects fueled the decline in the subsequent seasons.
It really wasn't. It actually worked really well. The problem was that Cal was doing it at the same time as he was filling their heads with this straight to the NBA stuff. The kids he was recruiting were being told they didn't have to be patient. They can have it now. If you are trying to get to the NBA now, then patience isn't what you are looking for and other schools were starting to use it against us. He should have leaned into the Kentucky experience instead of the one and done stuff.
And Booker went first round way higher than many projected.
Come on..>Dakari was always a big man with little explosiveness and no range outside of 5 feet from basket. Harrison twins a bit harder call but eye opening athleticism either nor elite shooters.
Why we don't employ a more platooning or at least deeper rotation is a poor idea by Cal. One thing that can differentiate UK from other teams is our 9-10 man we should be able to get a better talent than another teams 9-10 man. Depth is something that can win you games thru a long season and you can pare it down come tourney time....but he's tried it once and scrapped it.
Just a gimmick used by other coaches, the reply would be look at how many got drafted high, I would say recruiting dropped off when Orlando left, who knows.
Yep. It was always likely that we wouldn't keep up that pace in recruiting.
wtf do guys from 2018, 2019, and 2020 have to do with negative recruiting in 2015?
like I get it, you’re a UK homer and you don’t approve of the argument, because you like UK. Yet, there was a drop off and you’re asking why. It’s here in the thread.
you’re mad at bill self, and Ben Howland and Johnny Jones seven years ago and arguing against me in 2022. I don’t care what your counter argument is, those guys made hay against the platoon 7 years ago
I think platooning in 20015 was bad because it was far ahead of its time.
Cal tightened up like a bulls *** in fly season once the SEC started. Didn’t platoon as he had been and the results showed. We had trouble scoring and did not wear other teams down with our depth. He went completely away from it and we paid the price in the final 4. It’s called chicken **** coaching or coaching not to lose.
Platooning is not done very often, largely because it requires a number of factors, primarily great depth, but it's been done many times in the past and generally when used it tends to be successful in that teams are able to play at a higher level of effectiveness than they otherwise would.
Even Rupp used platoons at times in the late 30's and early 40's (they sometimes were known was the "Wrecking Crew") which he would insert at times during the game, albeit not in a formally structured substitution pattern like was seen in 2015 for a time.
To me, if a coach has the right ingredients to run platoon and chooses not to, then it's coaching malpractice. Those who value "small rotations" don't seem to realize or appreciate that platoons are the essence of a small rotation, just without the negatives of fatigue and foul trouble.
The funny thing is though, the platoon basically stopped in December with the Poythress injury. Before that, we were running ten deep with two starting 5s but when Alex went down it forced Cal to start to play matchups and minutes started to yo yo depending on how a guy was playing. The platoon didn’t fail, playing 9 deep did.
Latest
-
01
KSR Football Recruiting
Kentucky Football is Recruiting Texas During A&M Road Trip
-
02
KSR Basketball
J Batt talks jersey patch, progress on practice facility: 'Kentucky basketball broadly deserves the very best'
-
03
KSR Football
SEC Availability Report: Kentucky will be without DL Jamarrion Harkless vs. Texas A&M
-
04
KSR Cats in the NBA
A former Kentucky MBB staff member is now the Cleveland Cavaliers GM
-
05
KSR Basketball
Big Blue Madness tickets sold out in less than 30 minutes