Are you that obtuse or just don't want to admit you're wrong. I can't count the number of times that commentators and coaches have said the first 5 of each half is crucial. If you don't have your best players on the floor during that time what's then its coaching stupidity. It's call building momentum. Out the other team in a while and force them to play from behind. Have you ever watched basketball?Just stop. Everyone knows your wrong but you.
Calipari played two top 10 picks, off the bench. And started future taco bell managers Justin Edwards & DJ Wagner
- Thread starter RunninRichie
- Start date
I mean it’s so stupid we’re getting this crap and people still don’t see it.
People, he just pulled this crap to cater to Wagner. Nobody would ever bench their starters in both halves like this. He’s not a genius who figured something out. He wanted his favorites played and didn’t want to adjust the lineup it’s the ONLY reason. We need to finally put this to bed good
Grief. Yea he lied to you lol.
Nah in this case I don’t care. Neither of those guys care one thing about Kentucky and played here only because of Calipari and his system of mercenaries. Some of his players did care years ago but now he just recruits mercenaries who couldn’t care less. Wagner follows him around like a puppy because no other coach would cater to him like that he doesn’t care about UK.
I get not wanting to trash all over players but this is a unique situation and I don’t think that’s what Rich is doing. There was just a point to be made here and sometimes message boards just come off that way.
But damn man Cal is so for at manipulating and selling. The guy has STILL convinced some of this bench nonsense with Dilly and Reed. lol you can’t make this up.
There are 2 problems with your line of thinking. One of which not starting BOTH of them also was a problem.
1) Rob had too many silly fouls. He was in foul trouble in I think it was 60% of our games. He simply couldn't have lasted 30 minutes. Also, with HOW Rob played (his energy level), I don't think we would have gotten the same Rob if he did play 30+ minutes. He was almost like my kids dog, 1000mpg for 5 min, then exhaused/dead on the floor the next 10min.
1b) Reed played 32-34mpg much of the season, so he really didn't need to play any more than that. So, with him all you can do is complain about WHEN his minutes came, not how many he got (which IMO is a trivial issue).
2) Let's say we had played the 3 R's 30 minutes per game together. We only had 1 other guard on the whole team. See point 1 above, those 30 min is all we would get out of Rob (if not already fouled out). And Reeves and Reed would/should be limited to about 4 min each. But there would be 10min of game left. So, you would play Wagner and Reeves for 4min, and Wagner and Reed for 4 min, and then I guess slide Edwards over to the 2 (yikes!!!!) and play Wagner and Edwards together for 2min. That's 8 min with just 1 shooter, and 2 min with 0 shooters. No thank you!
But yeah, I would have played those 3 together at least 20mpg, and had at least 2 of the 3 together the entire game.
Unreal. For people to continue to not understand there’s NO JUSTIFICATION to bench your two best players to start halves it’s insane. People talking about bench sparks and all of the nonsense it’s really insane if someone believes this. He did it to appease Wagner and Edwards and handlers not for sparks. No coach would do it and it’s an indictment in your intelligence if you actually believe there’s any coaches anywhere who would do it. Calipari is a liar, quit believing what he’s saying. This one should have been obvious to you. It’s embarrassing stop. This killed our momentum and lineup situations in still pissed about it lol.
I’m glad cal is getting torched over it too. He’s been hammered pretty hard as even the media knows how stupid it is.
1A - Rob had a lot of silly fouls maybe that would limit his time, but 30 should have been his goal
1B - was definitely the wrong times. Our numbers with the 3 Rs together prove that
2 - It's not just guards. You can slide Thiero and Edwards in at the 3, even Burks some. Wagner would be you 1/2 backup. 4 people pick up those minutes well and you never have just 1 shooter.
Bottom line is - we should have never had a moment without 2 of those 3 on the court barring foul trouble / injuries. They should have also been targeted to get as many minutes together as possible.
After blitzing Alabama, I can't understand why the starters and main lineup weren't Reeves, Reed, Rob, Edwards, and Z. I guess just more coaching Calpractice
Just read that Cal was furious at the fans for being on him not starting Sheppard and Dillingham. Said he was trying to 'bring everybody together' was the reason he would not start them. Was players not together?
DJ Wagner and Justin Edwards when they see ''runninrichie'' called them. ''Future taco bell managers''.
The eye test as well as all the metrics support the fact that reed, rob and reeves should've been on the floor together every minute that foul trouble/fatigue would allow. This was where Cal failed us this year and failed to maximize team results.
Don't knock Taco Bell management jobs. I hear Davante Adams is opening a second location in his home. I just retired from forty years in IT. I may apply for the job.
It's so funny how you guys change your mind on whether or not 5-star freshmen are how you win in college basketball to suit your contrived arguments. You really are hilarious.
I was 100% behind having at least 2 of the R’s in at all times. And all 3 as much as possible, AS LONG AS IT DIDN’T result in minutes with 0-1 of the R’s on the floor.
But let’s say Reed and Reeves play 34min, and Rob can stay out of foul trouble enough to somehow play 26. That is 94min. If you play all 3 together, the math just doesn’t support what you want. Actually the 3 would have to combine for 110 minutes, 37 for two and 36 for one, in order to play 30min with all 3 together and the other 10 with two of them. 36-37 is just too many minutes for anyone to average, and unless the foul limit was increased from 5 to 7 and I didn’t know then there is no way Rob could play 36.
Even playing all 3 for 20min, and 2 of them the other 20 would be tough. They would have to combine for 100min. That would require 35 from Reed and Reeves and 30 from Rob. Again, more often than not Rob is fouling out before 30min.
I’m sorry to use logic to ruin your fantasy.
Uh, I was told there would be no math?
Taco Bell thread
Reed went into the starting lineup for 5 games and we lost 4 of them. I’m not sure how anyone can look at that and say he should be penciled in as a starter. However, there is nothing that really indicated the outcome of any game would have been different based on who started.
Are you okay with the fact Mark Pape didn’t start his best player last year?
Well. They had 5 games where that happened, and we went 1-4. Among those losses were to UNCw and UF. Not really a solid indicator that would have been any more successful. In fact, that points to it being less successful.
What does it have to do with whether you watched them or not?
No one is saying that Cal doesn’t have responsibility, but you are absolving the players, mainly Reed, of any blame. Sure we do! Do you honestly think starting vs coming in with a lead was going to magically make Reed or Rob shoot better? Play better defense? Not make stupid turnovers?
You honestly believe there would have been a difference even though they would have still played roughly the around the exact same minutes? It’s very odd to come to that conclusion considering we were fine against Auburn, Bama and UT to finish out the regular season, but suddenly, not starting in the post season was the problem with their “Swag” and “chemistry”.
Can you provide any evidence the outcome of any of our games would have been different based on who started?
Also, why didn't Mark Pope start his best player last year? How do you feel about when it's him doing it and not just Cal?
Can I provide evidence? All the analytics say so. Look it up. Don't play stupid.
I know nothing about BYU players or team. So if you're curious look that up to...the analytics that is. Plus/minus. I'll wait.
We have plenty of evidence of what happened because he didn't start them each half. Slow starts, poor shooting, early deficits. But I guess you think that has zero effect on the outcome of the game. Are you really Cal? Is that you Cal?
Same logic. Has to be.
So show us your analytics that prove the outcome of our losses would be wins based on different starters. I'll be here waiting!
What do you need to know about BYU? It's easily evident Jackson was their best player and one of the best players in the big 12 and likely in the country. Yet, he was their 6th man. So, was Mark Pope wrong for bringing his best player off the bench? Don't be afraid to answer!
So, if this evidence that shows the outcome would have been different, it should he very easy for you to share, correct? Let's see it then!
How can I prove some that didn't happen. Look the numbers up yourself. They're easy to find. Or keep playing stupid. You're choice. There is plenty of evidence freely had. Can't argue with stupid. So I'll just stop trying with you. You clearly have no clue and cal can do no wrong. Guess I'll just add you to my ignore list 👋
You just said you could prove it because the statistics support it, but now you can't? Lulz.
If you're basing your belief that the outcome of any game or the season would have been different based on who started, surely you have some form of evidence that led you to that conclusion. Or was it the ole "eye test"?
The reason no evidence exist to support your theories is because they aren't accurate theories.
Cal did a lot wrong, but we didn't win or lose based off who started.
That's not what I said but keep making things up. Look up the plus minus numbers and see who's were best when in the line up. Then ask anyone who has ever played, coached or watched a game how important the first 5 minutes of each half are. Then ask yourself who should have been in the starting lineup based on that abundant facts and evidence. If you can't reach the same conclusion literally everyone else has then your just not very intelligent. But keep trying to tell everyone else they are wrong. It's complete denial with you. I'm done with you. You clearly have no interest in anything other than to trying say everyone else is wrong with no facts or evidence to support your argument. There's plenty to support mine. Ignored now. Bye
None of what you're listing proves the outcome of anyone game would have been different based on who started. Do you really think Reed and Rob would have magically played better against Oakland simply because they started? They would have started even, instead, they came into the game when we were leading.
They were able to blowout Bama, Auburn and beat UT handily without them starting, yet, you think we lost to Oakland and others because they didn't start? Lulz.
What's even worse, when Reed started, we went 1-4.
Also, I am still waiting on why you think it's okay Pope didn't start his best player. Your lack of answer is taken as support for his decision.
Are you not aware of what thread you are posting in? I have to explain less to my children.
Your anger should not be directed toward me. I have not said you don't need 5 stars.
Why do you think I'm angry? Why in the hell would I get angry over the internet? None of this is real and I don't care what you think. Me using pointed language just means I know words. You are confused by words, I get it. You're still confused over my original post which wasn't really that confusing. I was making a direct comment on the thread topic. Now I have absolutely explained more than I should have to. Are you grown? Why doesn't your brain work?
We had zero games where all 3 started which was the point being made and also zero games where all 3 were on the floor together a majority of the time. Cal kept 1 or 2 in there mostly but rarely all 3 together, less than 20% of minutes played. You have no rebuttal to this so you keep regurgitating the same Reed started 5 games mantra.
He did, I remember every time, and had that rub it in your face that I can smirk to go with it. People wonder why I still go hard on him lol. F that pathetic salesman.
Now that's a marine that just hit you 15 in the head and 15 center mass for 30 for 30 at 300 yards with open sights standing, unsupported.
I was done with him when he kept saying Wagner was featured in our best lineup, which is numerically false.
Well done soldier, outstanding.
There doesn't need to be a rebuttal and it clearly worked well as demonstrated against TN, BAMA, Auburn, Unc and so forth. The 3 guards played quite a bit when Wagner was out and we went 1-4.
Again, you all are simply regurgitating that the better offensive trio didn't start was why we lost games, but you can point to no evidence that suggests a different outcome had they started. Reed wasn't magically going to play better against TX am and Oakland because he started bs coming off the bench.
Oakland scored 80. We scored 76. Needed more defensive lineups, obviously.
Do yourself a favor. Look up our best offensive line-ups, then see how much we ran em.
Dude, just admit that you are stupid. Oakland was a force. Dayton only beat them by 20, and I only saw that because I was watching Koby Brea highlights.
Agreed, which is the exact opposite of the more Reed, Rob and Reeves. They are awful defensively.
Good article. Much better than pee-brained takes while hiding behind a PC... calling him a future fast food Mgr. Why should former players/coaches care about our fans? Then again, pretend UK fans love taking a crap here and making UK look bad, so it's par for the couse. Cowardly, but par.
www.nj.com
Tyrese Maxey will take Justin Edwards ‘under his wing’ with the Sixers
Tyrese Maxey will take Justin Edwards 'under his wing' with the Sixers
Last edited:
