Im sorry but WHEN has WIlis ever been a deadeye shooter? Ive been watching for 3 years granted in limited minutes but a shooter is a shooter and ive yet to see him dead eye anything. Great fable is his shooting.
Calipari says he’s settled on his rotation
- Thread starter preacher_tom
- Start date
A dead eye shooter? His shot is not where near dead eye. Where do you get this?
When cal is talking about grabbing boards with both hands, he doesn't just mean the tall boards. He means grab the damn ball with both hands and bring it in with both hands. Willis continuously makes this mistake.
Willis also has pretty crappy defense as far as I'm concerned. At least it's nothing to write home about. He's also in the middle of his junior year. He's pretty much peaked. What you see it what you got.
That's not the case with Skal.
Btw, for the 20th time to this board, cal didn't recruit Wiltjer. Wiltjer committed out of nowhere, but he had the real stroke you're trying to say Willis has and he doesn't. There's a reason he gets more rope. Willis is what Willis is. A role player.
Don't ya love it?
He actually has an ugly stroke and misses most of his career. Without looking at percentages, I can only remember 1 three he's hit all year.
Dead eye? Maybe dead off?
Posts like this annoy the hell out of me. Honestly, do you really think Cal is trying to dream up excuses to avoid playing Willis? Why would he do that ....because of some evil agenda against the kid? I cannot understand the paranoid mindset behind posts like these.
If anything, I thought this was actually an encouraging statement by Cal toward Willis. It's the first time he's explicitly acknowledged that Willis is part of his rotation and not just a benchwarmer, BUT he's telling him what he needs to do to get better. Essentially he's saying "Son, I DO want to play you, but you need to rebound better and the better you rebound the more you'll play..." It was a statement designed to push him to become a better overall player, what's wrong with that?
Where the hell does this "deadeye shooter" nonsense come from? NO, he is NOT.
Willis' career three point percentage barely scrapes 30 percent, and from the field overall just a nudge over 40 percent. Hate to break it to ya, but those are NOT good career shooting percentages. Sorry, but you don't get to call a player a "deadeye shooter" until he first starts shooting a good percentage in actual games over a substantial period of time. And, sorry again, but there are no exceptions to that rule if the player happens to be a white guy from Kentucky.
Last edited:
What Cal says he sees right now is for public and team consumption, two or three games from now it may be different. If we are as much a work in progress as Cal and some on the board say on a regular basis then that is to be expected. If that weren't the case there would be little chance for getting better.
What we do know (as far as players go) is what we have seen so far
We have gotten more out of Lee and maybe Briscoe than we expected at this point. Hawkins probably fits here because of the UL game alone
We have gotten about what we expected out of AP, Tyler, Murray, Matthews, you could throw Willis in here as well simply because the expectation were pretty easy to meet for him
We have gotten less than we expected from Skal and Mulder. We got Murray late and if that had not happened then Mulder would be playing his role.
We have no idea where or if Humphries and Wynyard fit into any of this because they don't /haven't played
We are actually lucky to be where we are and the jury is still out on how things will shake out in the conference race. We could be a front runner or in a battle for 3rd or 4th place.
What we do know (as far as players go) is what we have seen so far
We have gotten more out of Lee and maybe Briscoe than we expected at this point. Hawkins probably fits here because of the UL game alone
We have gotten about what we expected out of AP, Tyler, Murray, Matthews, you could throw Willis in here as well simply because the expectation were pretty easy to meet for him
We have gotten less than we expected from Skal and Mulder. We got Murray late and if that had not happened then Mulder would be playing his role.
We have no idea where or if Humphries and Wynyard fit into any of this because they don't /haven't played
We are actually lucky to be where we are and the jury is still out on how things will shake out in the conference race. We could be a front runner or in a battle for 3rd or 4th place.
I like the rotation. The guys pushing for Mulder early on ignored the fact that they'd never seen him play within a system. If Hawkins can give you 35% from three, he negates everything Mulder does well because Dom can ball hawk on an elite level and he's not a liability within the offensive scheme.
This UK team is one of the more intriguing groups I can remember. It's going to be an interesting March.
This UK team is one of the more intriguing groups I can remember. It's going to be an interesting March.
The one thing I hate about Mulder is why recruit him? He's a shooter and isn't elite. Is he for practice? Practice shooting coordinator? Insurance?
Oh that's right. I think I knew that. Brain lapse.
Quotes from former and current players says he is a dead eye shooter. He hasn't shown in games much, but he doesn't get a whole lot of opportunity to get in the flow of the game. Wasn't Willis the one that hit an unGodly amount of threes in a row in practice?
Just for the record, Willis has hit 9 threes, which currently places him third among UK players this season (behind Murray (30) and Ulis (16)).
He is shooting the three at 32%. While that's not great, it actually places him 2nd on the team (behind Murray at 39%).
Link to 2015-16 UK Stats
Willis is a "decent" shooter. Certainly not the deadeye shooter people like some in this thread would have us believe.
I find it amusing the same poster who says Cal should not play Skal AT ALL bashes Cal for not playing a guy in Willis more...a guy who has never deserved much playing time over his career and has really not shown much overall to deserve more than a few minutes a game.
This is the first year I'd say Willis has deserved any playing time; by his own admission, he didn't do the work needed and his attitude pretty much sucked. Looks, so far, like he's working on it this year - it's a shame, because he does have decent talent; had he been working the whole time he'd be farther along. Just my opinion
Obviously part of assessing how deep a rotation/bench is, is subjective. Personally after looking at the numbers I would suggest that if a player is on the floor 20% of the time or more then he's an important contributor, regardless of whether he's formally in a rotation or not.
Keeping that in mind, below are the minute distributions of Calipari's teams for consideration. Not sure if this supports or refutes your claims. Obviously some of Calipari's teams he did use a short rotation, but that's not true of all his teams. I personally like to see deep benches, assuming that the players are able to contribute which isn't always the case.
2015-16 (6 players 50% or more; 8 players 20% or more)
2014-15 (7 players 50% or more; 9 players 20% or more) - Alex Poythress didn't make cut
2013-14 (5 players 50% or more; 7 players 20% or more)
2012-13 (7 players 50% or more; 8 players 20% or more)
2011-12 (6 players 50% or more; 7 players 20% or more)
2010-11 (6 players 50% or more; 6 players 20% or more)
2009-10 (5 players 50% or more; 9 players 20% or more)
Nice thanks for the graphs.Obviously part of assessing how deep a rotation/bench is, is subjective. Personally after looking at the numbers I would suggest that if a player is on the floor 20% of the time or more then he's an important contributor, regardless of whether he's formally in a rotation or not.
Keeping that in mind, below are the minute distributions of Calipari's teams for consideration. Not sure if this supports or refutes your claims. Obviously some of Calipari's teams he did use a short rotation, but that's not true of all his teams. I personally like to see deep benches, assuming that the players are able to contribute which isn't always the case.
2015-16 (6 players 50% or more; 8 players 20% or more)
2014-15 (7 players 50% or more; 9 players 20% or more) - Alex Poythress didn't make cut
2013-14 (5 players 50% or more; 7 players 20% or more)
2012-13 (7 players 50% or more; 8 players 20% or more)
2011-12 (6 players 50% or more; 7 players 20% or more)
2010-11 (6 players 50% or more; 6 players 20% or more)
2009-10 (5 players 50% or more; 9 players 20% or more)
My wording was pretty pitiful. Cal would prefer to go no more than 7 deep if he's able. If others are contributing then obviously it can change. I'm talking about late February / early March here; those numbers are going to take into account what I'd call "competitive play" for the entire roster. I wonder what those graphs would show if you only took samples from mid January/early February - on.
Also if you break down those graphs and add some thought to the numbers.
2009/10 - Patterson returned. Stevenson and Harris were returnees. He had a huge class coming in and that's why it went beyond 7 getting the main bulk.
2010/11 - 6 players essentially proved to be his mark. He could have gone deeper and didn't.
2011/12 - again, 7 deep. Honesty, he didn't really recruit wiltjer. In Cals mind he was aiming for even less than what played the bulk.
2012/13 - polson gets huge minutes. I don't believe for a second that was intended. Again, cal was aiming for 7 man rotations.
2013/14 - another 7 man rotation.
2014/15 even with the platoons the rotation dwindled down. Around 7 or 8 getting the bulk of minutes by March.
This year: someone isn't going to make the final rotation. They might play, depending on situations, but cal will not have an 8 or 9 man rotation on this team.
Cal prefers smaller rotations by crunch time.
2009/10 - Patterson returned. Stevenson and Harris were returnees. He had a huge class coming in and that's why it went beyond 7 getting the main bulk.
2010/11 - 6 players essentially proved to be his mark. He could have gone deeper and didn't.
2011/12 - again, 7 deep. Honesty, he didn't really recruit wiltjer. In Cals mind he was aiming for even less than what played the bulk.
2012/13 - polson gets huge minutes. I don't believe for a second that was intended. Again, cal was aiming for 7 man rotations.
2013/14 - another 7 man rotation.
2014/15 even with the platoons the rotation dwindled down. Around 7 or 8 getting the bulk of minutes by March.
This year: someone isn't going to make the final rotation. They might play, depending on situations, but cal will not have an 8 or 9 man rotation on this team.
Cal prefers smaller rotations by crunch time.
Last edited:
Which unfortunately played right into Wisconsin's hands. UK should have run that team off the court IMO.
UK played their best with full platoons (at a historically great level), and was still pretty great even with modified platoons. However the more Cal tinkered with the lineup and the shorter the bench got, the closer it brought UK back to the rest of the pack.
We had them gassed even with what we played. Imagine playing the platoons.......
I agree. I like deep benches. Didn't we play 9 deep loads of minutes in 96? Do you know if Sagarin still rates that team #1 all time? I used to have an article with all that data but I can't find it anymore.
Absolutely UK played a deep bench in 1996.
Looks a lot like 2014-15. The fact that these teams were two of the most dominant teams in college basketball history isn't a coincidence.
Agree with this, based on the make-up of this year's team Hawkins, Willis or Matthews is likely to be the odd man out. If Skal fails to pick up production(hopefully not the case) does he go to someone else for front court help?
Would love to see Humphries turn into Harrellson by February, but.....
I think we are going with what he's rolling with for better or worse. Mathews will continue to progress and Willis will see less and less. Hawkins has looked pretty bad save Louisville. He's a Kentucky kid so I'm not sure if hat was ability or adrenaline.
Ulis
Murray
Briscoe
Poythress
Lee
Skal
Matthews.
Willis could end seeing that 20% mark, but I'd bet not. the above will be what we roll with in March IMO. Could be wrong as well.
I would argue the opposite.
With a short rotation those on the inside know they can mess up without being yanked (there are plenty of examples of this under Calipari, including Jamal Murray this year).
Conversely those on the outside may not put in the effort if they don't think they have a legitimate chance of breaking into the lineup and eventually get disinterested and are no longer able to contribute in a significant way (see Marcus Lee late last season).
That's one area that I think Calipari could do much better at, i.e. being able to motivate both his stars AND his bench players. When he makes pronouncements like this where he says so-and-so is 'in the rotation' while others are 'out of the rotation' I don't think it helps him in keeping his players motivated correctly and able to contribute when called upon.
But at crunch time, even that team saw the rotation tightened. Some guys who got a lot of minutes in the regular season didn't see much clock in the Final Four. Wayne Turner never saw the floor in the championship game.
I know you like to be captain positive and you look at everything through blue colored glasses but you need to look at this with an open mind. First off, Skal didn't play that well in those first 5 games. He tore it up in the second half of the NJIT game but that's about it.
Secondly, he has yet to show up against true D1 talent. Scoring on NJIT is great and all but he has yet to do a dam thing against a real opponent. I want Skal to man up and do what we all know he can do but the stage is too big for him right now.
Last edited:
T
This proves you know nothing about Cal. He has only stated about 100 times that he prefers a 6 or 7 player rotation based on his experience that is the most effective way.
Last edited:
@caneintally, please read what Aike posted here. He is dead on. Just because 9 players get into the game doesn't mean it's a 9 man rotation. Cal, with the exception of last year, stays with a set 6 or 7 man rotation but foul trouble and matchup problems will cause Cal to put other guys in for spot minutes here or there.
Exactly, when Willis is open beyond the arch I want him to shoot but he passes up open shots alot. I don't get how someone can come away from his performances and say he jacks up too many shots.
It's probably true that Cal prefers 6 or 7 player rotation, but his 'most effective way' was when he platooned. The statistics bear this out.
FWIW, one thing about Cal is that he is often able to adapt to the talent that he has available to him. If that means that he plays a deeper bench than he normally does, then he will, as shown by the 2009-10 and 2014-15 teams.
I agree with tge numbers you provided but I'm just going iff what Cal has stated many, many times. I lived the platoon but Cal got heat for the platoon for some reason and when Poy went down he abandoned it.
Agreed.
With the platoons, our defense was performing at historically great levels. When we went away from them, we became far less effective.
We'll never know for sure who would have won, but I would have loved to have seen us throw wave after wave of guys at UW for 35 minutes and then had all our guys with fresh legs to close out the game.
