Why was platooning in 2015 so bad for the program?

[Justwar]

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.

Recruiting was hurt definitely because guys wanted to play 30 minutes. The idea of sharing wasn't in there minds. But if Trey lyles wasn't the small forward, and it was poythress this conversation would be moot because if we won two titles and had a undefeated season, you'd have to be unsatisfiable person

 

[Indymycats]

It’s because it was given an official name that others could shoot holes into. Love it or not UK basketball gets attention as much as any other college basketball brand. Always has and always will. Leading up to the final four it was basically an infomercial on how to beat Kentucky from every single sports news organization. It truly was UK vs the world at that point. If there’s a way to negatively use anything against UK it will happen. That at the end of the day is the ultimate confirmation that UK is THE most prestigious college basketball program of all time.

 

[Jmeeks54thebest]

Y’all can blame the refs and dekker all you want. I was courtside with lotto tickets for that game with my family. Dekker was on one. The refs weren’t partial to us. I’ll give you that.

But what killed us that game was 3 straight shot clock violations. After the first one, you make an adjustment to your scheme. After the second one you start subbing responsible parties out.

But nothing changed. And the violations were relentless

 

[littlecreek]

Kentucky was the best team in the country (and maybe the best ever) when they were platooning. If a player doesn’t want to share minutes on a championship contender then that player is a “me first” player and Kentucky didn’t need them. If platoons kept players away from Kentucky then they weren’t needed.

 

[Justwar]

Kentucky was the best team in the country (and maybe the best ever) when they were platooning. If a player doesn’t want to share minutes on a championship contender then that player is a “me first” player and Kentucky didn’t need them. If platoons kept players away from Kentucky then they weren’t needed.

Are you cool with our record if it means we are getting the least me first guys?

 

[Saguaro Cat]

This was written just 1 month after the 2015 season.

https://www.on3.com/teams/kentucky-wildcats/news/so-what-happened-with-jaylen-brown/


At the end of the day, this much is clear. The platoon system killed Kentucky on the recruiting trail in the final weeks. What was a huge positive during the season, because it showcased how Calipari would take care of his kids and a group of players could sacrifice their individual interests for a collective goal, became a hammer that opposing coaches pounded UK with on the recruiting trail. One source told me, "Zimmerman, Newman, Diallo and Swanigan all four at some point probably had UK as their leader...and all four were barraged with the platoon talk all season." Even though Calipari told the recruits that the platoon thing was a one time deal and told parents that people should look at it as a positive (he takes care of all his kids), the worry about playing time being sacrificed made kids who were UK leans turn into open recruits

 

[bucsrule8872]

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.

I appreciate your opinion. You are very knowledgeable, but I disagree with you on this one.

I know a lot of coaches that dislike this philosophy. It does have its drawbacks.

If you only play your starting five together and your second five together day in and day out, then in a game when you have an injury/foul trouble, it is difficult to bring a kid in from your second five and try to mesh them with the other guys they aren’t use to playing with.

As a coach, I personally like to mix it up a bit, even if my 1-10 are pretty equal. The old “hockey line change” philosophy works in that instance, in small doses, IMHO.

So I respectfully disagree with you on this subject.

 

[littlecreek]

Are you cool with our record if it means we are getting the least me first guys?

I am cool with Kentucky winning and I don’t care if it’s platoons or not. If I have to choose between a “me first” vs a “team first” player and they are the same talent level, I will go with the “team first”, even if he’s a little less talented. He will care more about winning. And there are very talented team first guys out there. Just look at their reactions when the team loses vs me first players. Examples: Oscar, Bam, and Fox. Those guys were heartbroken.

 

[JPScott]

I appreciate your opinion. You are very knowledgeable, but I disagree with you on this one.

I know a lot of coaches that dislike this philosophy. It does have its drawbacks.

If you only play your starting five together and your second five together day in and day out, then in a game when you have an injury/foul trouble, it is difficult to bring a kid in from your second five and try to mesh them with the other guys they aren’t use to playing with.

As a coach, I personally like to mix it up a bit, even if my 1-10 are pretty equal. The old “hockey line change” philosophy works in that instance, in small doses, IMHO.

So I respectfully disagree with you on this subject.

Again depends on your team makeup and flexibility. In the case of the 2015 team he still had Dominique Hawkins and Derek Willis to provide quality depth. And it’s not like he ever 100% segregated the two squads anyway. Regardless, there’s still many more benefits than negatives in using platoons of some type. (And there’s many ways you can run a platoon.)

 

[bucsrule8872]

Again depends on your team makeup and flexibility. In the case of the 2015 team he still had Dominique Hawkins and Derek Willis to provide quality depth. And it’s not like he ever 100% segregated the two squads anyway. Regardless, there’s still many more benefits than negatives in using platoons of some type. (And there’s many ways you can run a platoon.)

Every coach has a different philosophy. As long as you can win with your philosophy, it doesn’t really matter.

 

[warddr]

I believe trying to force Skal to be a back to the basket big the next season when it was obvious that it would not work, and then continuing to play bigs and forwards in that fashion, ultimately hurt recruiting much more than platooning.

I never bought into platooning playing much of a factor and contributed it more to not playing the modern style of basketball and uninspired assistant hires more than anything else.

 

[AllBall]

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.

Kominsky (sp) owned WCS

 

[ArtLaibsGhost_rivals]

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.

Kids don't come here to win the title and they don't come here to build a great team. FIRST AND FOREMOST they come here for a year to get ready for the NBA. Playing 20 minutes a game doesn't cut it foremost of them and they aren't going to a school where they aren't the focal point. So yes platooning hurt our recruiting then as it would now. The really top kid isn't committed to winning a title in college anymore, look at Duke this year as perfect example.

 

[CB3UK]

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.

I love your posts and of course your site Jon, but I think you missed my joke by a hair

 

[JPScott]

I love your posts and of course your site Jon, but I think you missed my joke by a hair

Truth be told, especially on this site I'm not always 100% sure whether someone is joking or sarcastic or serious, or even what the point they were trying to make was. But that doesn't stop me from using what they said as a jumping off point to make my own observation or point.

 

[CB3UK]

Truth be told, especially on this site I'm not always 100% sure whether someone is joking or sarcastic or serious, or even what the point they were trying to make was. But that doesn't stop me from using what they said as a jumping off point to make my own observation or point.

Lol read the thread title. 20015. Then re-read my post

 

[JPScott]

Lol read the thread title. 20015. Then re-read my post

Yeah, I definitely missed that.

 

[KMKAT]

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.

I couldn't agree more, but Cal did not even attempt anything close to that.

 

[Bhad Rhabies]

38-1. top rated defense in kenpom history, final four, but John C will never platoon again, what a mistake platooning is.

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

38-1. top rated defense in kenpom history, final four, but John C will never platoon again, what a mistake platooning is.

This is why IMO there's two aspects to this.

From a team perspective, heck if Cal ever had a team like that again you certainly platoon. It would be dumb not to.

From a recruiting perspective tho it did probably hurt. There's no doubt teams used that against us. As to the extent of that effect had post 15 on recruiting who knows.

 

[Ryan Lemonds Hair]

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 said Dakari and Andrew went from late first round/early second to not being drafted which is a lie. They both were drafted in the second round. You were called out about it and now you are trying to turn it into a argument to cover up not knowing what you are talking about.

 

[Ryan Lemonds Hair]

I think platooning in 20015 was bad because it was far ahead of its time.

I didn't notice it either but I have corrected it.

 

[Ryan Lemonds Hair]

This was written just 1 month after the 2015 season.

https://www.on3.com/teams/kentucky-wildcats/news/so-what-happened-with-jaylen-brown/


At the end of the day, this much is clear. The platoon system killed Kentucky on the recruiting trail in the final weeks. What was a huge positive during the season, because it showcased how Calipari would take care of his kids and a group of players could sacrifice their individual interests for a collective goal, became a hammer that opposing coaches pounded UK with on the recruiting trail. One source told me, "Zimmerman, Newman, Diallo and Swanigan all four at some point probably had UK as their leader...and all four were barraged with the platoon talk all season." Even though Calipari told the recruits that the platoon thing was a one time deal and told parents that people should look at it as a positive (he takes care of all his kids), the worry about playing time being sacrificed made kids who were UK leans turn into open recruits

I could see coaches using that during the season but it looks like when the draft rolls around and 4 lottery picks and 6 guys overall hear their name called that would be a moot point. I mean if I could be a lottery pick and only have to play 20-25 MPG like Booker, Townes, Lyles and WCS why wouldn't you? Who would want to play 10-12 extra minutes for the same results? The more minutes also means more wear and tear on your body and more chances for injuries. It just seems to me that recruits, after watching the draft that year, would not have thought twice about playing time but then again I don't have agents and parents who think I am their gold mine in my ear so I am able to make logical decisions.

 

[Rick Honcho]

I'm among those who believe sheety head-coaching at UK has at least as much to do with the drop-off as the 2015 platoon system.

 

[JPScott]

From a recruiting perspective tho it did probably hurt. There's no doubt teams used that against us. As to the extent of that effect had post 15 on recruiting who knows.

My opinion on recruiting is I’ve been a fan of UK long enough to know that rival coaches and fans will use whatever they can to negatively recruit people away from UK to their own school. Happens every single year.

If it’s not platooning then it will be something else. If there’s nothing else they’ll invent a reason.

I’m certain other schools cited platooning in their recruiting pitches and that was likely a factor in some recruit’s decisions, but that wasn’t the only reason and those are the kind of selfish players you generally want to avoid anyway. Blaming platoons for your recruiting struggles was simply an excuse,

The day a UK coach goes away from doing what’s successful just because of what rival recruiters may say is a bad decision IMO. The frustrating thing to me is Calipari after the season was over blamed platooning and swore to never use it again, when the fact is he didn’t use it enough late in the season (maybe due to feedback from recruiting trail during season?) and it’s his going away from platooning which ultimately made UK vulnerable to being upset.

 

[JPScott]

38-1. top rated defense in kenpom history, final four, but John C will never platoon again, what a mistake platooning is.

Not only that but the last third of the season he really wasn’t platooning much, if at all. And as far as defensive efficiency, the more he went away from platooning, the worse the efficiency got, particularly defensively.

UK’s defensive efficiency was literally off the charts and unprecedented when they platooned, but the more they went away from it, the more their team efficiency declined and started to resemble a typical good Calipari team (still very good but not record breaking).

Again the frustrating thing to me is you could see it happening in slow motion as the season went along. And UK had hired a supposed “analytics person” in Joel Justus whose job it should have been to pick up in something like that! So frustrating!

 

[CELTICAT]

You said Dakari and Andrew went from late first round/early second to not being drafted which is a lie. They both were drafted in the second round. You were called out about it and now you are trying to turn it into a argument to cover up not knowing what you are talking about.

you are the one arguing against opposing programs seven summers ago. You're mad, still, that the negative recruiting was effective, even though you think it didn't hold water. You weren't on staff to counter what was being said, which is too bad, because obviously you really care.

 

[HeelVol]

Kids don't come here to win the title and they don't come here to build a great team. FIRST AND FOREMOST they come here for a year to get ready for the NBA. Playing 20 minutes a game doesn't cut it foremost of them and they aren't going to a school where they aren't the focal point. So yes platooning hurt our recruiting then as it would now. The really top kid isn't committed to winning a title in college anymore, look at Duke this year as perfect example.

Nail on the head.

Kentucky (i.e. Calipari) sold the NBA path, the pro fast track first. The overwhelming talent advantage would almost assure deep tourney runs as if was an afterthought, obvious output to all those inputs.

That's what affected recruiting, not simply the platoon system....When you get all those highly ranked recruits, stack a roster with future draft picks, but they don't get the trophy and not everyone is a 1st round pick. 39-1 for that roster is what affected recruiting.

Plus...

Duke. They took the UK OAD sales pitch but added the twist of recruiting friends on the AAU circuit who could team up. Tyus Jones and Okafor were great friends before Duke. Tatum and Giles. Zion and Barrett. Maybe there was some of that among UK recruiting classes but seemed like Duke's classes were extra tight (the highest ranked players).

If y'all think Kentucky's recruiting dropped off, it's still top 3 each and every year. That's not much of a drop off. Realistically, you can't expect to always get Anthony Davis and Towns every recruiting cycle. and with NIL and Gleague/Overtime Elite bypass college paths, the odds of getting those players drops.

But it seems there's a shift by Calipari to return to traditional recruiting to build a roster. Reed Shephard is not a OAD player but to a segment of surprised UK fans, Calipari actually did offer.

So when Reed arrives, he'll play as a freshman but I'd be surprised if he starts. Soph year, he gets more minutes/starts. Third year he starts and is irreplaceable. Will a top 10 recruit want to join UK if its obvious to all that Reed will be a starter for junior and senior years, even if said top 10 recruit is taller and more athletic? Would Calipari make Reed redshirt like Pitino did his dad? Doubt it. mainly because he wouldn't be put in that position. That top 10 recruit would look elsewhere for meaningful playing time. and Calipari recently signed some 3 and 4 stars and has some transfers who aren't on any mock drafts.

My perception of UK recruiting back in the early part of Calipari's UK tenure was that he would sign 5 top 20 recruits each and every year, and get deep into the tourney against an experienced but slightly lesser talented team (like UNC) every year, see 5 1st round draft picks each year....and repeat.

The 2015 platoon team almost got it done.

I wonder if this upcoming season's team wins the championship with seniors in Oscar and Sahvir, a junior in Toppin...will Calipari quiet the NBA talk a bit in exchange for chasing championships pitch.

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

The day a UK coach goes away from doing what’s successful just because of what rival recruiters may say is a bad decision IMO. The frustrating thing to me is Calipari after the season was over blamed platooning and swore to never use it again, when the fact is he didn’t use it enough late in the season (maybe due to feedback from recruiting trail during season?) and it’s his going away from platooning which ultimately made UK vulnerable to being upset.

I never really understood Cal's reasoning for saying he would never use it again. That team was the best team he's had while at UK IMO. No one could watch that team play and conclude that platooning wasn't a good thing.

As far as him going away from the platoon I think the plan all changed once Alex was out for the year. I think he still could (and should) have but I feel like once he went out is when we started shying away from it.

 

[HeelVol]

another thought....

isn't a platoon system signaling an entitlement mentality? I get saying that 10 players could be two starting 5s capable of winning the SEC, but certainly among those 10, there are a top 5. Those top 5 you chase a ring. for the non-starters and remaining bench players... We all know the NBA will find talent even if its not starting, even if its in Siberia, the NBA will find talent.

What's the worst that would happen if the 2015 team had a true rotation of 8 instead of 10? Would those 2 not playing regular 20 minutes...would they want to transfer? Who cares? They'd be gone anyways if they were happy. Either way, they're leaving the team after the season (transfer or draft).

UK is too prominent for 1 or 2 slightly unhappy players (who weren't good enough to be in the top 8 anyways) to cry to outsiders and bring down the program.

 

[JonathanW_rivals]

Was it used against us? I’m sure it was.

No I think it hurt us? No, I don’t think it was the biggest factor, but it may have contributed.
Why? 4 of those guys were lottery picks. Also, in the next 2 classes we added several top recruits, Skal, Murray, Briscoe, Fox, Bam, Monk, Gabriel.

I think the bigger factor was the shoe companies diverting recruits with $ to other certain schools because we didn’t want to “play ball”.

 

[JPScott]

I never really understood Cal's reasoning for saying he would never use it again. That team was the best team he's had while at UK IMO. No one could watch that team play and conclude that platooning wasn't a good thing.

As far as him going away from the platoon I think the plan all changed once Alex was out for the year. I think he still could (and should) have but I feel like once he went out is when we started shying away from it.

Certainly Alex Poythress getting injured was a major blow to the idea of platooning, but that's kind of a old wives tale that it stopped when he was injured. Alex only played 8 regulation games that season. I was tracking it for most of that season and even after his injury Calipari was still adhering to some form of platooning (sometimes by using Dominque Hawkins, sometimes by leaking over one player to play on the other squad etc.) and still being very effective and successful.

FWIW, my hope at the time was that Derek Willis (after his break-out in the Bahamas) would be ready to step into Alex's position so that pure platoons could be maintained, as I'm convinced the benefits of playing platoons far outweighs any negatives associated with a particular player's weaknesses. I said at the time that Derek Willis was the most important player on the 2015 team (because he could have maintained the platoon system even after Poythress went down) and still believe that today. Unfortunately he admitted he wasn't ready to step into the role, which is something I partly blame on the coach.

It was really only at the start of the SEC season when Cal first abandoned all semblence of platoons in the Ole Miss and Texas A&M games and UK struggled mightily (both games UK won in overtime). For the remainder of the season he stil used some form of platoon-type substitutions but not the entire game (or even an entire half) and the longer the season went, the more likely he started to make individual substitutions. Predictably, the more he did so, the less effective the team became statistically, although they were still winning.

 

[jrpross_rivals]

respective #1 pg and #1 center in their class. Do you think where they were drafted was a success?

I think for their actual talent level, yes it was. I think their evaluation by the scouts was quite the failure.

 

[CELTICAT]

I think for their actual talent level, yes it was. I think their evaluation by the scouts was quite the failure.

and we know that now. The question is why was negative recruiting effective 7 summers ago. Guys sacrificed and went from first rounders to 2nd rounders.

 

[revcort]

I think others have probably answered well on this, but here's my 2 cents...

It's mainly about recruiting and the way other coaches and recruiters would use platooning against UK more than anything. Elite recruits want minutes so they can pad their stats and raise their draft stock. So, if UK platooned every season, those recruits wouldn't get the same minutes. Opposing coaches and recruiters would make sure to emphasize this and make it out to be as big a negative as possible to use against UK.

Now, I think there is a counter to that line of reasoning- others have already mentioned the fact that platooning didn't hurt the stock of the guys at all. You could even argue it helped some of them- sometimes less is more you know. But the question is- will these guys stop to listen to that side of the pitch? That playing fewer minutes with other great players could lead to more wins and then everybody gets drafted. OR do they stop listening once you say "fewer minutes." The smart guys might stop to listen. But some lost interest as soon as you uttered the phrase "fewer minutes."

 

[Tapemaster8]

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.

It wasn’t!

 

[logiUK]

The egos of the players/recruits got in the way.

They can't be one and done's if they only play 20 minutes per game.

To hell with helping the team or university win championships! They's gotta get paid!

 

[JPScott]

The egos of the players/recruits got in the way.

They can't be one and done's if they only play 20 minutes per game.

To hell with helping the team or university win championships! They's gotta get paid!

Except it didn't, at least with the players on the team. Platoons worked when they were used. I don't know that there were any issues with playing time that caused a problem inside the team. The problem IMO was Cal went away from using platoons later in the season.

It likely caused issues with some recruits, but again I think the players already on the team were for the most part fine with it.

 

[*Fox2Monk*]

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.

What infuriated me till this day is not getting KAT the ball every time on those possessions. We played pass the perimeter east to west! Much like not getting Oscar the ball on the last possession last year. KAT was keeping UK in that game the second half.

 

[JonathanW_rivals]

Except it didn't, at least with the players on the team. Platoons worked when they were used. I don't know that there were any issues with playing time that caused a problem inside the team. The problem IMO was Cal went away from using platoons later in the season.

It likely caused issues with some recruits, but again I think the players already on the team were for the most part fine with it.

Exactly. "The Platoon" did not last much after the Poythress injury. So for over 1/2 the season we went with a 9-man rotation, but actually more like an 8-man, since Lee last 18 games averaged only 8.5mpg.