Calipari stating multiple times that "The platoon thing cost us in recruiting". Who did it cost us?

[EclipsingYou]

We have all heard Calipari say that he will never platoon again due to it hurting his recruiting. Well, which players do you think we missed out on because of it? He must be referring to the 2015 class that was right after going 38-1. Jaylen Brown? Brandon Ingram? Malik Newman? Cheick Diallo? Stephen Zimmerman? Luke Kennard? Caleb Swanigan?

I know that with Skal's less than expected contribution (Before blowing up in the NBA. One year too late. Bastard! Ha!) that the heavens opened and Murray landed at Rupp's front door preventing that season from being the worst in Cal's tenure, if I were to guess. The year when Noel got hurt and UK went to the NIT was bad, but if not for Noel's injury that still would have been a tournament team without a doubt. Nothing more than a S16 team, but certainly better than the NIT. I am not so sure about 2015 without Murray...

So, if the platoon hurt our recruiting and cost us players, which players do you think that Calipari is most referring to?

I know that most had UK favored for Brown, Newman, Diallo, and Zimmerman at times. Kennard grew up a UK fan, SUPPOSEDLY (EXTREMLY doubt this commonly made statement. Nobody that grew up a UK fan could EVER go to Duke to play basketball. Period.)

UK ended up with a class including: Skal, Briscoe, Murray, Matthews, and Mulder.

How do you think the 2015 class would have looked if not for "platooning having cost us players" as repeatedly stated by Coach Calipari?

It has always been a topic that I wonder about and what players that comment is based upon.

What do you guys think?

 

[bucsrule8872]

Brown, Zimmerman, Diallo, and Newman were the guys that most believe were swayed by negative recruiting to steer clear of UK and the platoon.

The only one out of those guys that was a huge miss was Brown.

 

[UKWildcats#8]

We have all heard Calipari say that he will never platoon again due to it hurting his recruiting. Well, which players do you think we missed out on because of it? He must be referring to the 2015 class that was right after going 38-1. Jaylen Brown? Brandon Ingram? Malik Newman? Cheick Diallo? Stephen Zimmerman? Luke Kennard? Caleb Swanigan?

I know that with Skal's less than expected contribution (Before blowing up in the NBA. One year too late. Bastard! Ha!) that the heavens opened and Murray landed at Rupp's front door preventing that season from being the worst in Cal's tenure, if I were to guess. The year when Noel got hurt and UK went to the NIT was bad, but if not for Noel's injury that still would have been a tournament team without a doubt. Nothing more than a S16 team, but certainly better than the NIT. I am not so sure about 2015 without Murray...

So, if the platoon hurt our recruiting and cost us players, which players do you think that Calipari is most referring to?

I know that most had UK favored for Brown, Newman, Diallo, and Zimmerman at times. Kennard grew up a UK fan, SUPPOSEDLY (EXTREMLY doubt this commonly made statement. Nobody that grew up a UK fan could EVER go to Duke to play basketball. Period.)

UK ended up with a class including: Skal, Briscoe, Murray, Matthews, and Mulder.

How do you think the 2015 class would have looked if not for "platooning having cost us players" as repeatedly stated by Coach Calipari?

It has always been a topic that I wonder about and what players that comment is based upon.

What do you guys think?

We needed to sign more players. Idk who it cost us but we needed more

 

[bucsrule8872]

It might have been a blessing in disguise. We might have ended up with Newman instead of Murray. Ouch!

 

[ganner918]

Brown, Zimmerman, Diallo, and Newman were the guys that most believe were swayed by negative recruiting to steer clear of UK and the platoon.

The only one out of those guys that was a huge miss was Brown.

A 10 point, 9 rebound, 2 block 7-footer (Zimmerman) would have been incredibly valuable for that team.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

It's probably a combination of negative recruiting from Self/K along with me-first players worried about touches.

I don't think any player on the 2015 team would do it differently. WHo was hurt by splitting up the minutes? And had it not been for the NCAA screwing us and helping Duke.. that 2015 team might have become immortal, and every single one of those players would have been apart of the greatest team to ever play college basketball.

 

[bucsrule8872]

A 10 point, 9 rebound, 2 block 7-footer (Zimmerman) would have been incredibly valuable for that team.

Good point. That was a definite need for us that season.

 

[JPScott]

While I'm sure those recruits were negatively recruited due to the platoons, the thing that is often overlooked is that rival schools will negatively recruit no matter the situation.

If it's not the platoons it would have been something else.

The situation UK was in in 2014-15 was ideally set up to platoon, even after Alex Pothress got injured. It was a shame Cal went away from it towards the end of the season, as IMO doing so cost UK a title.

It would be an even bigger shame if Cal refuses to try it again in the future (assuming UK's fortunate enough to find themselves in a similar situation.)

 

[weatherbird]

Brown, Zimmerman, Diallo, and Newman were the guys that most believe were swayed by negative recruiting to steer clear of UK and the platoon.

The only one out of those guys that was a huge miss was Brown.

This is likely correct on the surface, and some of them or their parents even said as much. And of that 6 man class (humphries also), 3 of them were late signees that weren't even recruited during the year. So it is safe to assume that it did hurt that class, but I also wonder if Cal didn't have to do a little repairing of some relationships with players in the class after that. Cal may have saved a couple of recruits that were swayed by the system, but he was able to recover.

 

[Smashcat]

I wish he'd still platoon when possible. By the end of the 38-1 season he'd abandoned the platoon and was a reason we didn't win it all imo.

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

We have all heard Calipari say that he will never platoon again due to it hurting his recruiting. Well, which players do you think we missed out on because of it? He must be referring to the 2015 class that was right after going 38-1. Jaylen Brown? Brandon Ingram? Malik Newman? Cheick Diallo? Stephen Zimmerman? Luke Kennard? Caleb Swanigan?

I know that with Skal's less than expected contribution (Before blowing up in the NBA. One year too late. Bastard! Ha!) that the heavens opened and Murray landed at Rupp's front door preventing that season from being the worst in Cal's tenure, if I were to guess. The year when Noel got hurt and UK went to the NIT was bad, but if not for Noel's injury that still would have been a tournament team without a doubt. Nothing more than a S16 team, but certainly better than the NIT. I am not so sure about 2015 without Murray...

So, if the platoon hurt our recruiting and cost us players, which players do you think that Calipari is most referring to?

I know that most had UK favored for Brown, Newman, Diallo, and Zimmerman at times. Kennard grew up a UK fan, SUPPOSEDLY (EXTREMLY doubt this commonly made statement. Nobody that grew up a UK fan could EVER go to Duke to play basketball. Period.)

UK ended up with a class including: Skal, Briscoe, Murray, Matthews, and Mulder.

How do you think the 2015 class would have looked if not for "platooning having cost us players" as repeatedly stated by Coach Calipari?

It has always been a topic that I wonder about and what players that comment is based upon.

What do you guys think?

Kennard did not grow up a UK. His family has some UK fan within but Luke himself did not. Just sayin.

 

[WildcatfaninOhio]

I bet it cost us some shooters. We never seem to have enough of those.

 

[GonzoCat90]

I always assumed it was Zimmerman. He felt like a lock, mom was very vocal and public, openly supported and cheered for UK and Cal, and then ended up at UNLV which suggests touches and minutes were a priority.

 

[wildcatsboston1984]

If we missed out on anyone, we clearly missed out on stupid players then.

 

[Poetax]

We have all heard Calipari say that he will never platoon again due to it hurting his recruiting. Well, which players do you think we missed out on because of it? He must be referring to the 2015 class that was right after going 38-1. Jaylen Brown? Brandon Ingram? Malik Newman? Cheick Diallo? Stephen Zimmerman? Luke Kennard? Caleb Swanigan?

I know that with Skal's less than expected contribution (Before blowing up in the NBA. One year too late. Bastard! Ha!) that the heavens opened and Murray landed at Rupp's front door preventing that season from being the worst in Cal's tenure, if I were to guess. The year when Noel got hurt and UK went to the NIT was bad, but if not for Noel's injury that still would have been a tournament team without a doubt. Nothing more than a S16 team, but certainly better than the NIT. I am not so sure about 2015 without Murray...

So, if the platoon hurt our recruiting and cost us players, which players do you think that Calipari is most referring to?

I know that most had UK favored for Brown, Newman, Diallo, and Zimmerman at times. Kennard grew up a UK fan, SUPPOSEDLY (EXTREMLY doubt this commonly made statement. Nobody that grew up a UK fan could EVER go to Duke to play basketball. Period.)

UK ended up with a class including: Skal, Briscoe, Murray, Matthews, and Mulder.

How do you think the 2015 class would have looked if not for "platooning having cost us players" as repeatedly stated by Coach Calipari?

It has always been a topic that I wonder about and what players that comment is based upon.

What do you guys think?

My thoughts are the platooning was great until Alex went down, after that it was helter skelter on lineups with one player playing on both teams and later scaled down to just substituting. If we would have won the NC, nobody would have given the platoon system another thought as far as the recruits go. JMO

 

[Poetax]

I always assumed it was Zimmerman. He felt like a lock, mom was very vocal and public, openly supported and cheered for UK and Cal, and then ended up at UNLV which suggests touches and minutes were a priority.

I thought the home court advantage hurt us there.

 

[GonzoCat90]

I thought the home court advantage hurt us there.

It's totally possible it did. I'm just speculating. But to me it seemed like he was very UK early and then when mom bought the platoon hate from other coaches, he stayed home at the safe landing spot that would promise minutes.

I also think that 2015 class as a whole was terrible talent wise and full of kids who were worried they'd be buried if they weren't one and done, which was where most of the negative recruiting came from.

 

[Cindog28]

What did it cost us?

 

[JwUKFan11]

Newman is in the NBA if he chooses UK, instead he'll begin his 3rd college season.

 

[JPScott]

My thoughts are the platooning was great until Alex went down, after that it was helter skelter on lineups with one player playing on both teams and later scaled down to just substituting.

The way I read this is platooning worked great, until we stopped platooning.

This, BTW is pretty much how I see it, and the statistics support this. In terms of statistical domination, UK dominated when they platooned (even after Poythress went down) but the more Calipari went away from platoons, the worse UK performed.

If one goes back over the season and looks at how they substituted there's almost a perfect correlation between how much platooning UK did in the game and how badly they dominated their opponent.

 

[Poetax]

The way I read this is platooning worked great, until we stopped platooning.

This, BTW is pretty much how I see it, and the statistics support this. In terms of statistical domination, UK dominated when they platooned (even after Poythress went down) but the more Calipari went away from platoons, the worse UK performed.

If one goes back over the season and looks at how they substituted there's almost a perfect correlation between how much platooning UK did in the game and how badly they dominated their opponent.

I thought Alex was a big piece of the puzzle finally, and when he went down, I thought our defense suffered, and he was finally being a better offensive threat. But JP we must be wrong, platooning seems to be a bad word, lol.

 

[Aike]

Did Cal actually ever say that he wouldn't platoon again because it hurt recruiting? I'd like to see that quote instead of relying on memory.

 

[morgousky]

The reason it hurt us is because believe it or not, players and families dont keep up the way fans do. We know that Cal prefers a lineup of 6-7 guys rotating max. We know we only platooned because of a rare situation. They don't, and guys like Self and Capel used it as evidence to negatively recruit. That's why Cal won't do it again. Log jams scare recruits, it doesn't matter what the truth is.

 

[JonathanW]

It might have been a blessing in disguise. We might have ended up with Newman instead of Murray. Ouch!

Calipari correctly (and I agreed at the time) stopped recruiting Newman. He was a volume scorer (dime-a-dozen) that wanted his 35mpg & 15-20 shots/gm. No thanks!

 

[weatherbird]

The way I read this is platooning worked great, until we stopped platooning.

This, BTW is pretty much how I see it, and the statistics support this. In terms of statistical domination, UK dominated when they platooned (even after Poythress went down) but the more Calipari went away from platoons, the worse UK performed.

If one goes back over the season and looks at how they substituted there's almost a perfect correlation between how much platooning UK did in the game and how badly they dominated their opponent.

While the statistics likely indicate exactly what you are saying, it is hard to determine which actually came first. Did we stop dominating because we stopped platooning, or did we stop platooning because we stopped dominating? It's easy to keep platooning when you are dominating, but when the games start getting a little tight, are you going to platoon, or play your best players the majority of the minutes. As much as we loved the platoons as fans, we have to admit that there weren't really 10 players of the same talent. Even the original platoons had a couple of weak links. Lee was never really on the same level as the others, and even Dakari was a little behind. In order to keep platooning after Alex went down, you would have either had to add Willis or Hawkins to the first team (thus making them weaker but still better than the second team), or move one guy up, and have the second platoon consist of 3 players behind the rest, which would have looked like this: Ulis, Booker, Willis (who could never play the 3) or Hawkins (which would hampered the offense of this group), Lee, and Dakari.

I am of the opinion that Cal would have continued the platoon for almost the entire season if Alex doesn't get hurt. I think he still would have went away from it in the tournament. Alex was the key to that team becoming immortal. He provided a defensive presence that they simply couldn't replace. Also, pressing and wearing teams down works in the regular season, but not really in the tournament. That is simply because of the breaks during the game, and the stakes of the game. During the regular season, teams will give up. In postseason, they fight til the final horn as it represents what could be the final game of the season.

 

[JonathanW]

Did Cal actually ever say that he wouldn't platoon again because it hurt recruiting? I'd like to see that quote instead of relying on memory.

I agree. I've heard people claim this, but haven't ever seen him quoted saying that.
In reality, the "platoon" ended with the Poythress injury, and by the end of the season we were down to a pretty common 8 man rotation (Lee was getting only marginal minutes).

 

[JonathanW]

While the statistics likely indicate exactly what you are saying, it is hard to determine which actually came first. Did we stop dominating because we stopped platooning, or did we stop platooning because we stopped dominating? It's easy to keep platooning when you are dominating, but when the games start getting a little tight, are you going to platoon, or play your best players the majority of the minutes. As much as we loved the platoons as fans, we have to admit that there weren't really 10 players of the same talent. Even the original platoons had a couple of weak links. Lee was never really on the same level as the others, and even Dakari was a little behind. In order to keep platooning after Alex went down, you would have either had to add Willis or Hawkins to the first team (thus making them weaker but still better than the second team), or move one guy up, and have the second platoon consist of 3 players behind the rest, which would have looked like this: Ulis, Booker, Willis (who could never play the 3) or Hawkins (which would hampered the offense of this group), Lee, and Dakari.

I am of the opinion that Cal would have continued the platoon for almost the entire season if Alex doesn't get hurt. I think he still would have went away from it in the tournament. Alex was the key to that team becoming immortal. He provided a defensive presence that they simply couldn't replace. Also, pressing and wearing teams down works in the regular season, but not really in the tournament. That is simply because of the breaks during the game, and the stakes of the game. During the regular season, teams will give up. In postseason, they fight til the final horn as it represents what could be the final game of the season.

The dominating stopped once we stopped platooning, but the platooning stopped because of the Poythress injury. Before his injury there was little difference from 1-9, and #10 was adequate. But when we dropped to 8 good players, then there was no need to reach for 9 & 10. That team was HISTORICALLY GREAT on the defensive end until the Poythress injury, with opponents (even good ones) shooting around 27%. That isn't all on Poythress (he wasn't The Glove), but it was largely due to the Platoon, simply wearing out teams, we have 5 fresh guys out there for 40 minutes; but also our length.

 

[Aike]

I agree. I've heard people claim this, but haven't ever seen him quoted saying that.
In reality, the "platoon" ended with the Poythress injury, and by the end of the season we were down to a pretty common 8 man rotation (Lee was getting only marginal minutes).

He did say that he would answer "No" to ever platooning again. But I never heard him specifically attribute that to recruiting.

But I also think he would platoon again if he had the perfect storm of a roster. He would just let the players decide that's what they wanted.

 

[Poetax]

While the statistics likely indicate exactly what you are saying, it is hard to determine which actually came first. Did we stop dominating because we stopped platooning, or did we stop platooning because we stopped dominating? It's easy to keep platooning when you are dominating, but when the games start getting a little tight, are you going to platoon, or play your best players the majority of the minutes. As much as we loved the platoons as fans, we have to admit that there weren't really 10 players of the same talent. Even the original platoons had a couple of weak links. Lee was never really on the same level as the others, and even Dakari was a little behind. In order to keep platooning after Alex went down, you would have either had to add Willis or Hawkins to the first team (thus making them weaker but still better than the second team), or move one guy up, and have the second platoon consist of 3 players behind the rest, which would have looked like this: Ulis, Booker, Willis (who could never play the 3) or Hawkins (which would hampered the offense of this group), Lee, and Dakari.

I am of the opinion that Cal would have continued the platoon for almost the entire season if Alex doesn't get hurt. I think he still would have went away from it in the tournament. Alex was the key to that team becoming immortal. He provided a defensive presence that they simply couldn't replace. Also, pressing and wearing teams down works in the regular season, but not really in the tournament. That is simply because of the breaks during the game, and the stakes of the game. During the regular season, teams will give up. In postseason, they fight til the final horn as it represents what could be the final game of the season.

You have to admit an argument for less domination happened after Alex went down. It will probably be discussed until the end of time but it was a great team with two great starting fives for awhile.

 

[Poetax]

He did say that he would answer "No" to ever platooning again. But I never heard him specifically attribute that to recruiting.

But I also think he would platoon again if he had the perfect storm of a roster. He would just let the players decide that's what they wanted.

Me too, Cal isn't stupid, it won't happen this year but next year??????

 

[gossie21]

I thought the home court advantage hurt us there.

There was some family connection with Dave Rice and he basically said his job was gone if they didn't pick UNLV. He didn't last the season anyways.

 

[bucsrule8872]

I loved the platoon as well, but I often wonder now if we would have been better off if the Twins left and we didn't have to platoon.

We would have still had four lottery picks in our starting lineup. Plus, Ulis was as good or better at PG than Andrew. No offense to the Twins, but their return forced Cal to have to play a platoon or leave one or two great players rotting on the bench.

Without the Twins, we would still have:

Starters

G Ulis
G Booker
F Lyles (assuming Poythress still gets hurt)
F Cauley-Stein
F Towns

Bench

F Johnson
F Lee
G Hawkins
F Willis

That team probably loses 5-6 games before hitting its stride in March. WCS, Johnson, and Lee give us experience. I think given more minutes, Hawkins would have been a solid backup as a Soph. Willis plays and with reps is more comfortable and provides 3 point shooting.

I think Booker shoots like Murray and Monk down the stretch with no Aaron to defer to. Ulis becomes a great PG one year early. The dominant frontcourt remains unchanged.

That's a Final Four team and might have cut down the nets. No 40-0 expectations. No undefeated season weighing on them.

Would have been interesting.

 

[Wallins creek Cat]

I wish he'd still platoon when possible. By the end of the 38-1 season he'd abandoned the platoon and was a reason we didn't win it all imo.

I think it was the Poythress injury that stopped the platooning as well as prob cost us the 40 record. IMHO

 

[truebluewildcat]

If the cost of 38-1 with a special team of selfless and exceptional talents is a couple "stars" in the next couple of classes, I'll gladly pay that every time...

I don't recall any of those guys who went else where doing anything spectacular.

Let's stick with what we have in the bank for sure...38-1....

I will say Cal has had some head scratchers since then. Skal was way over hyped and though he may turn out to be a nice pro, experimenting with him for a year just didn't pan out nor was it worth what perhaps his signing cost us.

IB was oversold from day one. Over hyped as a recruit and over played during his career which maybe cost the development and contribution of Hawk who should've started over IB.

Not sure what Wenyen is going to turn out to be. Time will tell, but right now he is looking like a wish in one hand prospect similar to Skal and IB...good chance he just won't turn out like Cal had hoped...

 

[JonathanW]

He did say that he would answer "No" to ever platooning again. But I never heard him specifically attribute that to recruiting.

But I also think he would platoon again if he had the perfect storm of a roster. He would just let the players decide that's what they wanted.

I loved the Platoon, but I agree, it would take the perfect storm. Which I think that team was (until mid-Dec). Team with 10 good players, and no (or maybe 1) great players.
Lightning unlikely to strike twice!

 

[Nubb16]

Thomas Bryant. His mother was openly negative of platoons and it was used as a negative tool by coaches

 

[bucsrule8872]

If the cost of 38-1 with a special team of selfless and exceptional talents is a couple "stars" in the next couple of classes, I'll gladly pay that every time...

I don't recall any of those guys who went else where doing anything spectacular.

Let's stick with what we have in the bank for sure...38-1....

I will say Cal has had some head scratchers since then. Skal was way over hyped and though he may turn out to be a nice pro, experimenting with him for a year just didn't pan out nor was it worth what perhaps his signing cost us.

IB was oversold from day one. Over hyped as a recruit and over played during his career which maybe cost the development and contribution of Hawk who should've started over IB.

Not sure what Wenyen is going to turn out to be. Time will tell, but right now he is looking like a wish in one hand prospect similar to Skal and IB...good chance he just won't turn out like Cal had hoped...

Gabriel had his ups and downs, but we have to remember that he was a starter during a large stretch of the season.

Also, based on the composite rankings, he was a top 15 recruit in a absolutely loaded class. In fact, based on those rankings, he is the second best player returning from that class, behind Bridges.

Gabriel is not ever going to be a scoring machine, but he has the tools to be a good defender, rebounder, and stretch 4. 31% from 3 as a Freshman is not bad. If he improves just four or five percent and he is a good perimeter weapon.

I'm not ready to put the "bust" label on Gabriel just yet. Chances are, he progresses at a "normal" rate. Same with Killeya-Jones. They should both be a little better as Sophs.

 

[caneintally]

Thomas Bryant. His mother was openly negative of platoons and it was used as a negative tool by coaches

Yes he was another one it def hurt getting . I think in hind sight Zimmerman was always going to stay close to home but we could of gotten Diallo , Newman and possibly Bryant without platooning. Brown would never go to UK as he wanted to be different . But in the end who knows.

 

[BoxterS]

While I'm sure those recruits were negatively recruited due to the platoons, the thing that is often overlooked is that rival schools will negatively recruit no matter the situation.

If it's not the platoons it would have been something else.

The situation UK was in in 2014-15 was ideally set up to platoon, even after Alex Pothress got injured. It was a shame Cal went away from it towards the end of the season, as IMO doing so cost UK a title.

It would be an even bigger shame if Cal refuses to try it again in the future (assuming UK's fortunate enough to find themselves in a similar situation.)

I think UK could be in a similar situation next year. Cal needs a few of these incoming freshmen to stick around for another year, and it would be huge to have Gabriel or SKJ for a junior year. Add those players to a star-studded recruiting class and Cal could have something special.

I'm going the route of Smooth and predicting that Baker will be a huge fan favorite and end up being more than a key player in the next couple of seasons. We're all dazzled by athletes like Diallo, but it's guys like Baker that hit the shots ah-lah Doron Lamb.

 

[weatherbird]

I loved the platoon as well, but I often wonder now if we would have been better off if the Twins left and we didn't have to platoon.

We would have still had four lottery picks in our starting lineup. Plus, Ulis was as good or better at PG than Andrew. No offense to the Twins, but their return forced Cal to have to play a platoon or leave one or two great players rotting on the bench.

Without the Twins, we would still have:

Starters

G Ulis
G Booker
F Lyles (assuming Poythress still gets hurt)
F Cauley-Stein
F Towns

Bench

F Johnson
F Lee
G Hawkins
F Willis

That team probably loses 5-6 games before hitting its stride in March. WCS, Johnson, and Lee give us experience. I think given more minutes, Hawkins would have been a solid backup as a Soph. Willis plays and with reps is more comfortable and provides 3 point shooting.

I think Booker shoots like Murray and Monk down the stretch with no Aaron to defer to. Ulis becomes a great PG one year early. The dominant frontcourt remains unchanged.

That's a Final Four team and might have cut down the nets. No 40-0 expectations. No undefeated season weighing on them.

Would have been interesting.

The problem is that Ulis and Booker got continually abused on defense, and is why they did not play a lot against Wisconsin. Part of what made that team so special was the ability to switch everything, except when Ulis was on the floor. You need the twins to be able to do that. While I agree that Ulis and Booker wer better on the offensive end than the twins, there would have been a significant drop on the defensive end. Also, Cal has proven that he will trim his rotation to 6 guys if he has to. Willis and Hawkins likely don't get much more clock, regardless of whether the twins are on that team or not. And as we saw, when he quit platooning, Lee basically quit playing very much, which would be unaffected by the absence of the twins. Also, Booker had plenty of opportunities at the end of the season, he just went cold. Not sure increased playing time would have helped that, it was all mental.