ADVERTISEMENT

So, what are some legitimate reasons that Livingston should be starting over Reeves at SF?

G-PIP

Senior
Mar 14, 2014
4,344
4,395
113
I don’t think that this team is good enough to give points or possessions away to SEC opponents. On the other hand, and for the same reason, I think they also have to play hard and play good defense to win even at home. So, what are the Pros & Cons?

The difference between Reeves and Livingston in regard to points and how they affect the rest of the offense is pretty big in Reeves favor in my opinion. Does Livingston have such a defensive or rebounding advantage that he makes the team better starting at the SF spot? I don’t see it, but I’m open to learn what I might be missing.

Moreover, I actually suspect (not confident, but believe) that Thiero backing up @ SF and Livingston backing up @ PF is the best rotation, along with Wheeler backing up @ PG. Then I think I like Ware backing up @ Center. For all the talk about Onyenso’s shot blocking ability he gets off the floor way too late. I don’t know if he has been told to stay put longer or is just slow off the floor (which I don’t think is the case), but he is not a feared rim protector at this young stage of his college career. So, I would go probably prefer Collins @ Center over Onyenso in the right defensive matchups.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EliteBlue
Reeves was recruited to come here and score. He cannot score without minutes.
The other guy said he's getting more minutes and that's what matters.

Your response is that he can't score without minutes.

Doesn't make a lot of sense...
 
Reeves was recruited to come here and score. He cannot score without minutes.
Reeves played 28 minutes. Livingston played 13.

5-AD334-F6-DDB0-4-C08-A262-11-B904722-BA8.jpg
 
Doesn't really matter as long as Reeves gets his. He's well known as a volume shooter, and of course they need more minutes to be effective.

However, one reason Livingston is getting so much PT should be obvious to all of us - NBA showcasing. Cal appears to finally be getting his NBA future stars PT, but also starting to win games for Kentucky. Let's hope that continues. Livingston is one of my favorite players, he's just put in the wrong spot every game.
 
Last edited:
Dies starting Livingston over Reeves help Livingston's draft status. That could be a reason.
 
Reeves played 28 minutes.
I understand. How many possessions did the most efficient lineup get together? I just heard that lineup only got 4 offensive possessions together in the 1st half - AND scored on 3 of those. I'm repeating after the radio, so maybe that's wrong. But it just sounds important to me - especially for a team that I don't think is a world beater to start with - that it puts its best foot forward as much as possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TODASAURUS
Minutes is what matters, NOT starting.
But we are also seeing that minutes for a particular 5 together also matter. So maybe we should consider a Platoon (w/ Oscar and Wallace getting a few more minutes outside the platoon).

But to the OP question, my only GUESS is that Cal thinks it would have a negative impact on Livingston's confidence and thus his play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: G-PIP
Some players like to start and some don’t. That might be the case with these two.

My sons Rec team was undefeated until today, my son started instead of coming off the bench and they lost. Both kids are pretty even in their stats every game. The kid that usually starts in front of him was scoreless off the bench, while my son played his normal game and had his normal points and rebounds. Now keep in mind they rotate them evenly and so my son had to sit the 4th quarter with the game on the line. The coaches probably should have kept the rotation the same instead of monkeying with what was working. It doesn’t bother my son when he doesn’t start. He would rather be in when the game is on the line at the end.

Moral of the story, some guys need that confidence boost they get from starting and others don’t. I don’t think it matters to Reeves, but I think it’s important to Livingston to start.
 
Minutes and starting are two different things. He played 29 minutes, how many more do you want him to play?
That’s a good point. I think guys can be played too many minutes and hurt team efficiency. But two things I think about on that point here: (1) I don’t see a really good backup option for Reeves that I’m comfortable seeing playing that position a lot; and (2) It matters for this team with a slim margin of error that the best lineup play together as many minutes as possible.
 
Some players like to start and some don’t. That might be the case with these two.

My sons Rec team was undefeated until today, my son started instead of coming off the bench and they lost. Both kids are pretty even in their stats every game. The kid that usually starts in front of him was scoreless off the bench, while my son played his normal game and had his normal points and rebounds. Now keep in mind they rotate them evenly and so my son had to sit the 4th quarter with the game on the line. The coaches probably should have kept the rotation the same instead of monkeying with what was working. It doesn’t bother my son when he doesn’t start. He would rather be in when the game is on the line at the end.

Moral of the story, some guys need that confidence boost they get from starting and others don’t. I don’t think it matters to Reeves, but I think it’s important to Livingston to start.
Nice response. Good stuff. I still don't agree that it's good for this team, but I understand that reasoning and appreciate it.
 
I think Cal likes to set a more physical defensive tone to start the game, and he thinks he gets that with Livingston. Then after a few body blows, Reeves come in with a flurry of punches.

Whether that’s right or wrong, I think it’s what’s happening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TFCats11 and G-PIP
It would be one thing if the starting lineup was productive. It's just not. UK hadn't scored for the opening 3+ minutes today, and looked horrible on offense. So, pray tell, if "every possession matters" as coaches always preach, why wouldn't you want your best lineup out there to start the game instead of allowing the other team to gain some confidence/momentum as you start slowly and often get in a hole as your best offensive weapon sits on the bench waiting for his turn? It's a fair, reasonable question given UK's offensive woes. They've been down double digits in the opening 10 minutes of every single game on the road this year, including Gonzaga. You don't think that impacts the outcome and/or how you play the rest of the game to try to catch up? It's not just about who finishes the game. It's about who plays throughout the game at the appropriate times and in the best combinations. Calipari hasn't figured out what his best lineup is or the appropriate time to play the right people 19 games into the season.
 
I would like to think that it depends on the opponent but I know that's not the case because Calipari is stubborn as a mule and doesn't scout opponents.

Today, for example, against a physical team, I could see maybe starting Livingston over Reeves for that reason. Any other time, I don't see why you would start Livingston over him.

I could see a lineup with Toppin coming off the bench of Wallace, CJ, Reeves, Livingston, and Oscar starting but Calipari definitely won't do that lol.
 
Because Reeves is killing it off the bench as the first guy in! He’s impactful and very effective.

Don’t mess with it
 
ADVERTISEMENT