Reed has to start.

[Rockfly78]

Are we seriously gonna have to talk about this every game?

You people are running out of stuff to gripe about. This will be the new “how many minutes for Ritchie”

 

[Fox2monk]

He proves his worthiness every game. He is this team's MVP.

Not hating but can we please pin one of these many threads about Reed as the official Reed should start. I mean there has to be like 20 of them now. I say why Fix what’s not broken. Him and Dilly play great together. Both get close to 30Mpg and it’s working great. Some guys play better starting, some play off the bench better. Why change what works?

 

[Fox2monk]

Are we seriously gonna have to talk about this every game?

You people are running out of stuff to gripe about. This will be the new “how many minutes for Ritchie”

Every game, as if he doesn’t play 30+ minutes a game. He’s not hidden, or being mistreated, or left behind. He’s amazing and everyone loves his role on the team. They play well with the rotations we have. I don’t think Reed cares one bit about starting.

 

[Fox2monk]

Exactly. I just don't get these Reed should start posters. We are averaging over 90 a game and both Sheppard and Dillingham bring amazing energy off the bench making it very difficult for opposing teams. The rotation is working great right now and posters like this OP want to mess with it. Was 96 points tonight not enough for you? Sorry, but I just get tired of these guys who have to complain no matter what. Sheppard and Dillingham both played more than 20 minutes in a blowout and accounted for 28 points, 8 rebounds and 12 assists plus providing immediate high energy off the bench. I prefer keeping things as they are, it's working great.

I agree and they get to come in when some starters may be tired if not subbed for and can go all out and dominate. It’s hard having that quality come into the game for the other team.

 

[CalCat57]

He proves his worthiness every game. He is this team's MVP.

No he doesn't have to start. He is doing very well coming off the bench. Let's don't screw it up.

 

[BBBLazing]

Who cares? No player on the team gets 40 mins and hes getting more or as much than any other gaurd. Why is this such an obsession if he gets rest 3 minutes in vs at the start? Oh no, he didn't get to give high fives under dark lights.

He's always on the floor at the end...when it matters

I think it works better when they come in and it just throws more on a team to deal with.

I agree with this. If someone cares about starting just to have everyone recognize they are one of the best five players, they are shallow and not a team player. Reed is in the game when it matters. It seems that Reed and Dillingham are both good with their roles, and actually embrace the idea of coming in and adding energy. I think it helps the team.

 

[bucsrule8872]

I think as long as we keep winning with the rotation as is, there is no need for a change.

We are undefeated with this rotation (since getting Wagner, Bradshaw, and Onyenso all into the rotation).

Don’t mess with success.

 

[Mike-McD]

This thread is amazing. It's literally infested with Cal supporters who swarmed it like iron filings to a magnet. It's obvious and makes sense because saying Sheppard should start is an indirect criticism of Calipari as a head coach and game manager. It literally questions his competence. As it should.

The reasons given to NOT start Sheppard by those who rushed here to shout down the OP and shut down the thread are:

1. Sheppard brings awesome energy off the bench. (That's a given reason NOT to start him)
2. He plays enough minutes so it doesn't matter.
3. He gets the third most minutes on the team. (He's the best player so 3rd most is some sort of achievement)
4. Sheppard doesn't WANT to start. (Is he the boss now? Does Edwards want to start? What about Wagner? Who is running this team?)
5. Multiple reasons of "He shouldn't start because I said so and you're stupid."
6. His parents don't care if he starts. (Got any proof of that? What coach worth his salt should give a hot hamster turd what the parents think?)
7. The one game he started, we lost. (This is a JOKE of an argument, and incredibly insulting, because it literally implies Sheppard is the reason we lost that game)
8. Shut up because people keep saying this over and over.
9. Other players like Edwards should start instead of Sheppard because they lack confidence. (??? I thought who started doesn't matter)
10. Who starts doesn't matter, but (same poster) other players may be affected negatively if THEY don't start
11. As long as we're winning, keep it that way. (Apply that to the UNCW game, right? Does that mean Sheppard should immediately start if we lose a game in the future?)

That's just the first page.

Why is this a controversy?

Because Cal is doing something unprecedented. Yes, over 20 years ago Morris Peterson didn't start, but that's how far back the cowbois have to go to justify this head-scratching coaching move. And don't even try using Quickley, who WAS starting as the season progressed. Sheppard is WAAAAY ahead of Quickley this same time of the season.

We start nearly every game either in the hole or in a stagnant puddle, and as soon as Sheppard comes in we go on a run. (All respect to Dilly who should probably be starting too) The fact that Cal continues to start a subpar lineup EVERY single game should be questioned and analyzed, and it should be done so repeatedly until he explains, with a REAL, honest answer, why he's doing it. There is no UNIVERSE where any other coach of any other team would keep a player like Sheppard on the bench to start a game. None of the reasons given here are legit, they're all bogus and obfuscate the real situation. Cal is protecting and favoring certain players because he believes their frail egos can't handle the "demotion" to the bench, so he's USING Sheppard to protect them in hopes that they will start playing up to the hype that HE created by pursuing them.

For those of you who are manufacturing these ridiculous, absurd reasons for Sheppard to sit on the bench, are you going to be content to see us in another KSU situation in the tournament, down 13-1 to start the game, and unable to dig ourselves out of it because Edwards needs his confidence builder for the day? Because that's exactly the kind of thing Cal is risking by playing these silly games with his lineup.

Exit question for all the "wE LoSt tO UnCw bEcAuSe oF sHePpArD" haters: Did Wagner score any points with Sheppard on the bench last night? If so, how many?

 

[BlueEmpire]

Cal will say after the game, "Reed was winded at the end. I played him too much. Gotta limit his minutes going forward."

I did see Reed calling to come out. He was gassed, missed that dunk.

 

[HCaulfield]

We're stilllllll doing this? I guess we're running out of things to bitch about.

Nah. 🙂

 

[BlueEmpire]

Are we seriously gonna have to talk about this every game?

You people are running out of stuff to gripe about. This will be the new “how many minutes for Ritchie”

Why? Why does he have to start?

 

[nickhorvathsuxazz]

I am so stinking sick of seeing these dumbazz threads...

 

[storm1507]

I was very pleased (not that it matters) with Cal's minute distribution from last night's game.

 

[the stat man]

He proves his worthiness every game. He is this team's MVP.

No he doesn’t

 

[JonathanW]

So your saying the other guards are so delicate they might crumble if they dont start, but it doesn’t matter who starts, got it.

No. I’m saying:
1) why f*ck with something that’s working;
and 2) it’s a proven fact some players perform better when they start, some perform better off the bench, while some it doesn’t matter. Maybe it would affect Wagner’s psyche, or Reeves. But hat does seem quite clear is that Sheppard and Dillingham are ok coming off the bench (so go back to #1)

Now some say, then bench Edwards and go more with 3 guards. I do understand that argument. However, 3 points on that:
1) rebounding and defense in the paint are our biggest weaknesses so playing 3 guards more doesn’t help that
2) offense is not this team’s problem, it is defense
3) for us to take that next step up, we need more contributions from some combination of Edwards, Bradshaw (and maybe Onyenso)

 

[UKortho]

This thread is amazing. It's literally infested with Cal supporters who swarmed it like iron filings to a magnet. It's obvious and makes sense because saying Sheppard should start is an indirect criticism of Calipari as a head coach and game manager. It literally questions his competence. As it should.

The reasons given to NOT start Sheppard by those who rushed here to shout down the OP and shut down the thread are:

1. Sheppard brings awesome energy off the bench. (That's a given reason NOT to start him)
2. He plays enough minutes so it doesn't matter.
3. He gets the third most minutes on the team. (He's the best player so 3rd most is some sort of achievement)
4. Sheppard doesn't WANT to start. (Is he the boss now? Does Edwards want to start? What about Wagner? Who is running this team?)
5. Multiple reasons of "He shouldn't start because I said so and you're stupid."
6. His parents don't care if he starts. (Got any proof of that? What coach worth his salt should give a hot hamster turd what the parents think?)
7. The one game he started, we lost. (This is a JOKE of an argument, and incredibly insulting, because it literally implies Sheppard is the reason we lost that game)
8. Shut up because people keep saying this over and over.
9. Other players like Edwards should start instead of Sheppard because they lack confidence. (??? I thought who started doesn't matter)
10. Who starts doesn't matter, but (same poster) other players may be affected negatively if THEY don't start
11. As long as we're winning, keep it that way. (Apply that to the UNCW game, right? Does that mean Sheppard should immediately start if we lose a game in the future?)

That's just the first page.

Why is this a controversy?

Because Cal is doing something unprecedented. Yes, over 20 years ago Morris Peterson didn't start, but that's how far back the cowbois have to go to justify this head-scratching coaching move. And don't even try using Quickley, who WAS starting as the season progressed. Sheppard is WAAAAY ahead of Quickley this same time of the season.

We start nearly every game either in the hole or in a stagnant puddle, and as soon as Sheppard comes in we go on a run. (All respect to Dilly who should probably be starting too) The fact that Cal continues to start a subpar lineup EVERY single game should be questioned and analyzed, and it should be done so repeatedly until he explains, with a REAL, honest answer, why he's doing it. There is no UNIVERSE where any other coach of any other team would keep a player like Sheppard on the bench to start a game. None of the reasons given here are legit, they're all bogus and obfuscate the real situation. Cal is protecting and favoring certain players because he believes their frail egos can't handle the "demotion" to the bench, so he's USING Sheppard to protect them in hopes that they will start playing up to the hype that HE created by pursuing them.

For those of you who are manufacturing these ridiculous, absurd reasons for Sheppard to sit on the bench, are you going to be content to see us in another KSU situation in the tournament, down 13-1 to start the game, and unable to dig ourselves out of it because Edwards needs his confidence builder for the day? Because that's exactly the kind of thing Cal is risking by playing these silly games with his lineup.

Exit question for all the "wE LoSt tO UnCw bEcAuSe oF sHePpArD" haters: Did Wagner score any points with Sheppard on the bench last night? If so, how many?

Number 3 is typical Cal coaching malpractice. It’s going to matter…and soon.

 

[CBBCrazy]

Why, why do we see this crap all the time. The team and all its players are important to our success. Reed and Dilly add a lot to this team filling the roles they play. When they come in we ramp it up to another level. Let it go louie, this team is fine with the rotation we have.

 

[Mike-McD]

No. I’m saying:
1) why f*ck with something that’s working;
and 2) it’s a proven fact some players perform better when they start, some perform better off the bench, while some it doesn’t matter. Maybe it would affect Wagner’s psyche, or Reeves. But hat does seem quite clear is that Sheppard and Dillingham are ok coming off the bench (so go back to #1)

Now some say, then bench Edwards and go more with 3 guards. I do understand that argument. However, 3 points on that:
1) rebounding and defense in the paint are our biggest weaknesses so playing 3 guards more doesn’t help that
2) offense is not this team’s problem, it is defense
3) for us to take that next step up, we need more contributions from some combination of Edwards, Bradshaw (and maybe Onyenso)

How can you say it's working? We get down to almost every team we play early, and then Shep comes in and rescues us. See NCAA tournament coming up for possible risks.

Your logic is laughable. It's a PROVEN FACT that some players perform better when they start? Apply that to Wagner. If he would play better off the bench, why start him? If this is the best he can play, why start him?

According to your laughable logic, playing Shep, Dilly, and Wagner at the same time hurts our rebounding and defense and should not be happening.

If defense is our problem, then why is Edwards starting? He can't rebound worth crap.

 

[JwUKFan11]

Guy is leading the country in 3pt percentage.

Idiots on RR: Change it up!

 

[Eagles_Ball]

Every possession counts in the tournament but we’ll spot the opponent a lead at the media timeout so that Edwards can start and be happy.

This. There’s no coincidence this team struggles out of the gate and then “gets going” when Reed and Rob come off the bench. It’s not who starts games, it’s who finishes them. That said, our starters are probably the fourth best lineup construction we have. That’s why we’re always behind at the first media timeout.

 

[UK90]

Are we seriously gonna have to talk about this every game?

Do you know when we’ll stop talking about it? When Edwards starts playing better or Sheppard starts playing worse.

But, until then, the fact that we ain’t starting what has clearly been our best lineup is something that’s naturally gonna invite conversation and debate.

 

[Mike-McD]

Guy is leading the country in 3pt percentage.

Idiots on RR: Change it up!

Yes because if he started he would instantly start clanging it off the rim. LOL SMH "idiots" coming from you

 

[UKortho]

All those griping about “another thread” should just bypass and quit moaning. It’s a legit topic.

 

[ORCAT]

I agree and they get to come in when some starters may be tired if not subbed for and can go all out and dominate. It’s hard having that quality come into the game for the other team.

Yes, that was my main point, it has to be very tough on other teams to see them and their energy coming off the bench when their starters are tired. Love the rotation the way it is right now. That, of course, could always change if need be down the road.

 

[Rockfly78]

Do you know when we’ll stop talking about it? When Edwards starts playing better or Sheppard starts playing worse.

But, until then, the fact that we ain’t starting what has clearly been our best lineup is something that’s naturally gonna invite conversation and debate.

You would find something else to cry about

 

[UKWildcats1987]

Just reading for the comments. Couldn't care less either way.

 

[UK-chulo]

If defense is our problem, then why is Edwards starting? He can't rebound worth crap.

His rebounding is on par with Reed’s.

 

[Cats192]

Every possession counts in the tournament but we’ll spot the opponent a lead at the media timeout so that Edwards can start and be happy.

You're missing the fact that Reed will only play a certain amount of minutes.

You're saying "We're going to lose the the 1st 4 minutes if Reed isn't in there. "
But are we not just as likely to lose the 4 minutes where Reed sits?

I'm totally fine starting Reed over Edwards. But if you believe we're going to lose a 4 minute stretch with Reed on the bench, you have to believe it still happens middle of the game.

 

[Cats192]

People bitch no matter how good we look

But the minutes!!!!!!

 

[Cats192]

The weekly: "Yeah, we won by double digits, but let's bi+ch about who starts or how many minutes they get" thread.

 

[Cats192]

All those griping about “another thread” should just bypass and quit moaning. It’s a legit topic.

Sure it is.

But how much more is there truly to discuss? It's the same circular argument over and over.

But hey, I'll jump in and say my piece.

 

[Mike-McD]

His rebounding is on par with Reed’s.

LOL more SMH...Edwards is a forward, by definition he SHOULD be outrebounding Reed, who is literally a point guard. Nice try, but an epic fail.

 

[Mike-McD]

You're missing the fact that Reed will only play a certain amount of minutes.

You're saying "We're going to lose the the 1st 4 minutes if Reed isn't in there. "
But are we not just as likely to lose the 4 minutes where Reed sits?

I'm totally fine starting Reed over Edwards. But if you believe we're going to lose a 4 minute stretch with Reed on the bench, you have to believe it still happens middle of the game.

This right there. You have zero business discussing basketball with anyone on any planet, because you know absolute zero about it. How we start games is critical. We've gotten down to numerous teams this year and had to claw our way back. In the tournament that phenomenon will be amplified. Starting the worst shooter on the team is automatically spotting the opponent a lead, if that opponent isn't a cupcake.

We were down 13-9 when Shep came into the game last night. To ILLINOIS STATE. Edwards had given up two quick threes. What happens when it's KU or UConn or Wisconsin? It might work out but historically it hasn't, and it's very risky, and Cal doesn't have a valid justification for monkeying around like this. He's playing favorites and you know it. All this other load of bull you guys are peddling is excuses and smoke.

 

[RondoBaller21]

Dillingham deserves to start if Reed does.

 

[Mike-McD]

Dillingham deserves to start if Reed does.

Agreed.

 

[RondoBaller21]

All those griping about “another thread” should just bypass and quit moaning. It’s a legit topic.

Not really.

 

[nascarforthedead]

This thread is amazing. It's literally infested with Cal supporters who swarmed it like iron filings to a magnet. It's obvious and makes sense because saying Sheppard should start is an indirect criticism of Calipari as a head coach and game manager. It literally questions his competence. As it should.

The reasons given to NOT start Sheppard by those who rushed here to shout down the OP and shut down the thread are:

1. Sheppard brings awesome energy off the bench. (That's a given reason NOT to start him)
2. He plays enough minutes so it doesn't matter.
3. He gets the third most minutes on the team. (He's the best player so 3rd most is some sort of achievement)
4. Sheppard doesn't WANT to start. (Is he the boss now? Does Edwards want to start? What about Wagner? Who is running this team?)
5. Multiple reasons of "He shouldn't start because I said so and you're stupid."
6. His parents don't care if he starts. (Got any proof of that? What coach worth his salt should give a hot hamster turd what the parents think?)
7. The one game he started, we lost. (This is a JOKE of an argument, and incredibly insulting, because it literally implies Sheppard is the reason we lost that game)
8. Shut up because people keep saying this over and over.
9. Other players like Edwards should start instead of Sheppard because they lack confidence. (??? I thought who started doesn't matter)
10. Who starts doesn't matter, but (same poster) other players may be affected negatively if THEY don't start
11. As long as we're winning, keep it that way. (Apply that to the UNCW game, right? Does that mean Sheppard should immediately start if we lose a game in the future?)

That's just the first page.

Why is this a controversy?

Because Cal is doing something unprecedented. Yes, over 20 years ago Morris Peterson didn't start, but that's how far back the cowbois have to go to justify this head-scratching coaching move. And don't even try using Quickley, who WAS starting as the season progressed. Sheppard is WAAAAY ahead of Quickley this same time of the season.

We start nearly every game either in the hole or in a stagnant puddle, and as soon as Sheppard comes in we go on a run. (All respect to Dilly who should probably be starting too) The fact that Cal continues to start a subpar lineup EVERY single game should be questioned and analyzed, and it should be done so repeatedly until he explains, with a REAL, honest answer, why he's doing it. There is no UNIVERSE where any other coach of any other team would keep a player like Sheppard on the bench to start a game. None of the reasons given here are legit, they're all bogus and obfuscate the real situation. Cal is protecting and favoring certain players because he believes their frail egos can't handle the "demotion" to the bench, so he's USING Sheppard to protect them in hopes that they will start playing up to the hype that HE created by pursuing them.

For those of you who are manufacturing these ridiculous, absurd reasons for Sheppard to sit on the bench, are you going to be content to see us in another KSU situation in the tournament, down 13-1 to start the game, and unable to dig ourselves out of it because Edwards needs his confidence builder for the day? Because that's exactly the kind of thing Cal is risking by playing these silly games with his lineup.

Exit question for all the "wE LoSt tO UnCw bEcAuSe oF sHePpArD" haters: Did Wagner score any points with Sheppard on the bench last night? If so, how many?

What a waste of time to write this and/or read this.

 

[JwUKFan11]

Yes because if he started he would instantly start clanging it off the rim. LOL SMH "idiots" coming from you

Being comfortable in what you’ve been doing is a good thing. Possibly throwing that off for what exactly? He plays just as much as the starters so I don’t see the advantage.

 

[TFCats11]

This thread is amazing. It's literally infested with Cal supporters who swarmed it like iron filings to a magnet. It's obvious and makes sense because saying Sheppard should start is an indirect criticism of Calipari as a head coach and game manager. It literally questions his competence. As it should.

The reasons given to NOT start Sheppard by those who rushed here to shout down the OP and shut down the thread are:

1. Sheppard brings awesome energy off the bench. (That's a given reason NOT to start him)
2. He plays enough minutes so it doesn't matter.
3. He gets the third most minutes on the team. (He's the best player so 3rd most is some sort of achievement)
4. Sheppard doesn't WANT to start. (Is he the boss now? Does Edwards want to start? What about Wagner? Who is running this team?)
5. Multiple reasons of "He shouldn't start because I said so and you're stupid."
6. His parents don't care if he starts. (Got any proof of that? What coach worth his salt should give a hot hamster turd what the parents think?)
7. The one game he started, we lost. (This is a JOKE of an argument, and incredibly insulting, because it literally implies Sheppard is the reason we lost that game)
8. Shut up because people keep saying this over and over.
9. Other players like Edwards should start instead of Sheppard because they lack confidence. (??? I thought who started doesn't matter)
10. Who starts doesn't matter, but (same poster) other players may be affected negatively if THEY don't start
11. As long as we're winning, keep it that way. (Apply that to the UNCW game, right? Does that mean Sheppard should immediately start if we lose a game in the future?)

That's just the first page.

Why is this a controversy?

Because Cal is doing something unprecedented. Yes, over 20 years ago Morris Peterson didn't start, but that's how far back the cowbois have to go to justify this head-scratching coaching move. And don't even try using Quickley, who WAS starting as the season progressed. Sheppard is WAAAAY ahead of Quickley this same time of the season.

We start nearly every game either in the hole or in a stagnant puddle, and as soon as Sheppard comes in we go on a run. (All respect to Dilly who should probably be starting too) The fact that Cal continues to start a subpar lineup EVERY single game should be questioned and analyzed, and it should be done so repeatedly until he explains, with a REAL, honest answer, why he's doing it. There is no UNIVERSE where any other coach of any other team would keep a player like Sheppard on the bench to start a game. None of the reasons given here are legit, they're all bogus and obfuscate the real situation. Cal is protecting and favoring certain players because he believes their frail egos can't handle the "demotion" to the bench, so he's USING Sheppard to protect them in hopes that they will start playing up to the hype that HE created by pursuing them.

For those of you who are manufacturing these ridiculous, absurd reasons for Sheppard to sit on the bench, are you going to be content to see us in another KSU situation in the tournament, down 13-1 to start the game, and unable to dig ourselves out of it because Edwards needs his confidence builder for the day? Because that's exactly the kind of thing Cal is risking by playing these silly games with his lineup.

Exit question for all the "wE LoSt tO UnCw bEcAuSe oF sHePpArD" haters: Did Wagner score any points with Sheppard on the bench last night? If so, how many?

Excellent post exposing the absurd “Wokeness” displayed by the Cal Stockholm Syndrome Brigade😭

 

[slford00]

Why, why do we see this crap all the time. The team and all its players are important to our success. Reed and Dilly add a lot to this team filling the roles they play. When they come in we ramp it up to another level. Let it go louie, this team is fine with the rotation we have.

"When they come in we ramp it up to another level" is literally the worst possible argument that could be made for why Reed and Rob shouldn't be starting.