Your Thoughts on Platooning Now

[KYtotheCore]

I know kids started choosing a multitude of schools after our platooning season, probably due to other coaches saying "Why would you want to split your playing time?". That team was arguably one of the best teams to play, and almost made history.

Now that the dust has settled, do you think Cal could approach his recruiting style to these young kids pointing to that season as being one of the most successful, not only team-wise, but also for the individual players themselves? Make the approach of how everything worked out great using the platoon system? You can be a member of a special super-team.

 

[JonathanW]

I still think it was the best choice possible for that team, at least up until Poythress injury. After that you could make a case for simply an 8-man rotation.

 

[mebeblue2]

the platoon system worked out great for that team

 

[WeWant9]

I loved the platoon system, and it was just a great fit for that team. I think it gave an edge to the Cats against other teams/coaches, as they were basically playing a game against two different teams and we always had rested legs ready to come in. Now, to do the platoon effective you need 10 guys that are willing and skilled enough to pull it off; which we had that year. 9 of the 10 are in the NBA/DLeague, which is crazy to think about. I'm not sure well see a whole collection of talent like that again.

 

[JasonS.]

It worked pretty well -- and was awfully fun -- against inferior teams. But worth noting we didn't really platoon at all when it mattered.

Cal basically played 7 guys against Notre Dame and Wisconsin ... which were the two best teams we played all year in 2014-15.

 

[hotelblue]

yep. the platooning pretty much stopped with the poythress injury. watch the unc game and that's how we did it the rest of the way. lee and johnson played less. lyles and ulis played more. so we rotated four bigs counting lyles, and the four guards.

I still think it was the best choice possible for that team, at least up until Poythress injury. After that you could make a case for simply an 8-man rotation.

 

[docholiday51]

I still think it was the best choice possible for that team, at least up until Poythress injury. After that you could make a case for simply an 8-man rotation.

If Alex doesn't get hurt we are probably 40-0 and are celebrating a team for the ages(and as a side note Coach K is so mad his back hurts,but he can't say anything about it)

 

[hotelblue]

It worked pretty well -- and was awfully fun -- against inferior teams. But worth noting we didn't really platoon at all when it mattered.

Cal basically played 7 guys against Notre Dame and Wisconsin ... which were the two best teams we played all year in 2014-15.

we platooned ku and ucla and hadn't found our offense. both are historic although regular season wins. cal didn't say "tanks coming over the hill" when we were full strength for no reason. he said that at the end of the champions classic on prime time. and no one could refute it. espn had a running narrative of our blue team and white team. poythress (the guy that played center for us on the road against ku) got injured and the whole thing changed.

but it's not a system to work towards necessarily. we happened to have had five players (not counting wcs) return from a final four the previous year with hawkins, harrison (2), lee and johnson. and our b team would be run by ulis. it was just a special special circumstance and cal knew right away what to do. or at least he had his "all need to eat" speech ready before the season/bbn.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

We only platooned for a part of the season...people act like we did it for all 40 games, not the case at all.

There is no looking back and second guessing, because why would you second-guess a coaching method that won the most games in the regular season in the history of the effing sport.

 

[hotelblue]

We only platooned for a part of the season...people act like we did it for all 40 games, not the case at all.

There is no looking back and second guessing, because why would you second-guess a coaching method that won the most games in the regular season in the history of the effing sport.

no one here is guessing. how can there be second guessing? no one is trying to change the past. the system itself is the subject. you also are ignoring the very obvious moment in time that the platooning stopped. it would have continued, mass substituting like '96 cats style. not 7 players.

 

[JPScott]

It worked pretty well -- and was awfully fun -- against inferior teams. But worth noting we didn't really platoon at all when it mattered.

Cal basically played 7 guys against Notre Dame and Wisconsin ... which were the two best teams we played all year in 2014-15.

Yes, UK didn't really platoon towards the end of the year and barely beat Notre Dame and lost to Wisconsin. They also nearly got beat in the middle of the season against Ole Miss and Texas A&M, both games in which Cal largely went away from platooning.

For those paying attention, it was pretty obvious that the more closely UK stayed with a full platoon system, the better they performed, even after Poythress' injury. The stats bear that out.

BTW, The counterargument to saying we didn't platoon 'when it mattered' is that while platooning, the games didn't matter because UK destroyed their opponents.

 

[JPScott]

We only platooned for a part of the season...people act like we did it for all 40 games, not the case at all.

There is no looking back and second guessing, because why would you second-guess a coaching method that won the most games in the regular season in the history of the effing sport.

There were basically three distinct phases to the season in terms of substitution patterns. The first third I'll call full platoons, where Cal basically used two different squads.

The second third, after Poythress' injury, was more modified platoons. Sometimes he'd insert Dominique Hawkins in, sometimes he'd have have someone overlap between groups etc. but overall he still retained some platoon structure for much of the game.

The final third of the season was more mix and match. Cal may have started with platoons for one or two rotations but soon enough he'd start substituting at will.

As I mentioned before, it's pretty clear looking at the stats that the more Cal went away from structured platoons, the worse the team as a whole played.

As for second guessing, I'm certainly guilty as charged. I was trying my best at the time to advocate for platoons, under the theory that the system was perfect for that team and the whole was greater than the sum of its parts. IMO, it clearly was a mistake to go away from it, even after Alex's injury. I still stand by that today.

My only hope is that if UK is once again blessed enough to be in such a situation again where platoons make sense, that Cal isn't so stubborn to make the same mistake twice.

 

[JonathanW]

If Alex doesn't get hurt we are probably 40-0 and are celebrating a team for the ages(and as a side note Coach K is so mad his back hurts,but he can't say anything about it)

That team was Historically great on the defensive end the first 10 or so games (until the Poythress injury) holding teams below 30%, even good teams such as KU. After his injury, they were good defensively, but not great (teams shot 10% better). It wasn't his presence alone that made the difference, but he allowed them to play in a way with the platooning that fostered great defense (no saving yourself for later when you are coming out in 4 minutes). I think with him healthy I'm 95% certain we go 40-0.

 

[Cowtown Cat]

That team was Historically great on the defensive end the first 10 or so games (until the Poythress injury) holding teams below 30%, even good teams such as KU. After his injury, they were good defensively, but not great (teams shot 10% better). It wasn't his presence alone that made the difference, but he allowed them to play in a way with the platooning that fostered great defense (no saving yourself for later when you are coming out in 4 minutes). I think with him healthy I'm 95% certain we go 40-0.

Poythress was the guy that covered up defensive mistakes. A really good weak side defensive guy. Imagine having a front line of Poythress, KAT and WCS for the entire season. No way that team loses in the tourney, IMO. That's an insane front line. It all changed after he got hurt. Booker's hot shooting made up for the injury for awhile. After Booker went cold and Poythress got hurt, they were all of a sudden beatable against other top teams that year. Poythress would have been the answer against Wisconsin because he could guard the 3, 4 and 5 at an elite level. A hybrid defensive forward, so to speak. Wisconsin had a matchup advantage with Dekker the whole game. Booker wasn't big enough and Lyles and WCS couldn't stop him off the bounce. Hell, if Dekker doesn't go cold against Duke, they win the title game comfortably, IMO. Duke didn't shut him down, he just simply couldn't get his shots to fall.

I would love to see another platoon system at UK. If someone has ten 5 star players, why not? I've heard people say that team would have been better with a tight 7-8 man rotation. I think the platoon was great until Poythress went down.

 

[Cowtown Cat]

There were basically three distinct phases to the season in terms of substitution patterns. The first third I'll call full platoons, where Cal basically used two different squads.

The second third, after Poythress' injury, was more modified platoons. Sometimes he'd insert Dominique Hawkins in, sometimes he'd have have someone overlap between groups etc. but overall he still retained some platoon structure for much of the game.

The final third of the season was more mix and match. Cal may have started with platoons for one or two rotations but soon enough he'd start substituting at will.

As I mentioned before, it's pretty clear looking at the stats that the more Cal went away from structured platoons, the worse the team as a whole played.

As for second guessing, I'm certainly guilty as charged. I was trying my best at the time to advocate for platoons, under the theory that the system was perfect for that team and the whole was greater than the sum of its parts. IMO, it clearly was a mistake to go away from it, even after Alex's injury. I still stand by that today.

My only hope is that if UK is once again blessed enough to be in such a situation again where platoons make sense, that Cal isn't so stubborn to make the same mistake twice.

Agreed. Just wondering, who would you have went with as the tenth guy, Hawkins or Willis?

 

[KYtotheCore]

My whole point is why not start recruiting to build a platoon team and point to it's success in the past? Show how dividing minutes can work toward the individual's goal, as well as team success.

 

[hotelblue]

My whole point is why not start recruiting to build a platoon team and point to it's success in the past? Show how dividing minutes can work toward the individual's goal, as well as team success.

because if you recruit to build a platoon and a few guys decide to come back then you have fifteen macdonald's all-americans. the players coming in plus the players coming back have to decide it. cal said he didn't plan it. i don't think he ever will. that doesn't mean it won't happen again. if any thing he proved he can work with it. but it's not normal and hardly possible recruiting that. it starts with the players is what cal says, and that's what we have to go on. and it's been consistent.

 

[JBnTN]

There were basically three distinct phases to the season in terms of substitution patterns. The first third I'll call full platoons, where Cal basically used two different squads.

The second third, after Poythress' injury, was more modified platoons. Sometimes he'd insert Dominique Hawkins in, sometimes he'd have have someone overlap between groups etc. but overall he still retained some platoon structure for much of the game.

The final third of the season was more mix and match. Cal may have started with platoons for one or two rotations but soon enough he'd start substituting at will.

As I mentioned before, it's pretty clear looking at the stats that the more Cal went away from structured platoons, the worse the team as a whole played.

As for second guessing, I'm certainly guilty as charged. I was trying my best at the time to advocate for platoons, under the theory that the system was perfect for that team and the whole was greater than the sum of its parts. IMO, it clearly was a mistake to go away from it, even after Alex's injury. I still stand by that today.

My only hope is that if UK is once again blessed enough to be in such a situation again where platoons make sense, that Cal isn't so stubborn to make the same mistake twice.

I doubt if I'll see another UK team that loaded. They were destroying good teams before Poy went down. Practices were like D-league games and it made each player play harder longer. We leveled off post-Poy and teams closed the gap somewhat as we subbed less. IMO we were ten points better when platooning and would've romped to the title had we kept it up. As we slowed down, lesser opponents stayed around longer, until the inevitable occurred.

 

[Willy4UK]

Dunno. What does Coach K think about it?

 

[drbubba]

yep. the platooning pretty much stopped with the poythress injury. watch the unc game and that's how we did it the rest of the way. lee and johnson played less. lyles and ulis played more. so we rotated four bigs counting lyles, and the four guards.

If we still had Marcus Lee and Charles Matthews we might have had 2platoons for the firstpart of the season.

 

[BlueSince92]

When we were all healthy it seemed to me that platooning was a big advantage in terms of both game plan and players getting to showcase their skills.

We did go away from platooning before Poythress got injured--in the Texas game we struggled early so we stopped platooning and didn't really restart it that game. While we did struggle early platooning, we also struggled at least as much after platooning and wound up gutting that game out on toughness alone. To my eyes we were actually less effective in that game when not platooning, though I don't blame Cal wanting to steer for more familiar waters once we got our noses bloodied.

After Poythress went down we just didn't have a single lineup where everyone was really playing their natural position, much less two lineups. So platooning wasn't a question anymore of a less balanced squad spelling a more balanced squad, bringing fresh legs, perimeter firepower, and stronger on-ball defense with it to compensate for the imbalance and then cut and run before the other team found a way to exploit that weakness. All we could do was rotate guys in and out of our weak spot to make our unbalanced squad kill you with numbers.

I'm all for both platooning and recruiting to platoon if and when we ever have the option. The truth is it clearly gives you more star power as a player, not less. Any kid that doesn't see that has asshole tendencies. All the same, asshole tendencies are a common mark of youth, and in this form they're not gonna make me dislike a kid. They come here to become men. You've got your Walls and your MKGs but I don't expect that kind of nobility from every kid coming in. But if Cal ever can (or ever wants to) actually make the idea as popular as it should be, I'm 100% behind it.

 

[bucsrule8872]

I would like to see Cal do a modified version of the platoon. Five in, five out at the beginning of the game, then play the best 5-7 the rest of the half. Then do the same thing to start the second half. It would help limit guys minutes so that they can stay fresh for March and it would help some of the role players get some experience in case we need them due to injury or fatigue down the stretch.

I doubt Cal does anything remotely like a platoon again for a while.

Maybe his final season before he retires he can bring it back for one last shot at 40-0?

 

[SCChucktownCat]

I know kids started choosing a multitude of schools after our platooning season, probably due to other coaches saying "Why would you want to split your playing time?". That team was arguably one of the best teams to play, and almost made history.

Now that the dust has settled, do you think Cal could approach his recruiting style to these young kids pointing to that season as being one of the most successful, not only team-wise, but also for the individual players themselves? Make the approach of how everything worked out great using the platoon system? You can be a member of a special super-team.

Why can't Tod Lanter be in the group picture?

 

[FishersCatfan1]

On a side note, those uni's are sweet looking. Much better than the pics of the new ones

 

[d2atTech]

I still think it was the best choice possible for that team, at least up until Poythress injury. After that you could make a case for simply an 8-man rotation.

i think if poy hadn't gotten injured, we would have had the greatest team in history and number nine as well.

 

[Jakarii]

Possibly BUT other coaches will say "look at what platooning did for the twins and Dakari draft stock, they were the top players at their position coming out of H.S". Whether they are right or wrong you know another coach will use it and some kids will eat that up because team success is great for fans and good for kids but individual success that leads to the NBA is much greater in the kids mind

I know kids started choosing a multitude of schools after our platooning season, probably due to other coaches saying "Why would you want to split your playing time?". That team was arguably one of the best teams to play, and almost made history.

Now that the dust has settled, do you think Cal could approach his recruiting style to these young kids pointing to that season as being one of the most successful, not only team-wise, but also for the individual players themselves? Make the approach of how everything worked out great using the platoon system? You can be a member of a special super-team.

 

[KYtotheCore]

Possibly BUT other coaches will say "look at what platooning did for the twins and Dakari draft stock, they were the top players at their position coming out of H.S". Whether they are right or wrong you know another coach will use it and some kids will eat that up because team success is great for fans and good for kids but individual success that leads to the NBA is much greater in the kids mind

I cant argue with any of what you said. I think they all were given equal chances to shine though too.

 

[brianpoe]

Agreed. Just wondering, who would you have went with as the tenth guy, Hawkins or Willis?

Both/either, whatever the situation called for.

I think we would have performed better had we kept the platoons and Dom and Derek would have been better for last year's squad with the experience.

 

[JPScott]

Possibly BUT other coaches will say "look at what platooning did for the twins and Dakari draft stock, they were the top players at their position coming out of H.S". Whether they are right or wrong you know another coach will use it and some kids will eat that up because team success is great for fans and good for kids but individual success that leads to the NBA is much greater in the kids mind

The thing that people need to recognize is that no matter what UK does or how well they do it, a rival coach will always try to spin it in a negative way in order to try to gain a recruiting advantage. It doesn't matter if UK won all their games by 50 and went undefeated, rival coaches will come up with some negative thing to say, even if it makes no logical sense.

Given that, IMO UK should do what's in their best interests and shouldn't change their style just because someone somewhere might say something negative.

In the case of that particular season, I'm certain that opposing coaches tried to make light of platooning to try to sway recruits away from UK. Again, rival coaches are going to use whatever they can to sway recruits from UK and to their school, so that's completely expected.

What was unexpected, IMO, is the way Calipari seemed to get spooked mid-season and ended up going away from what IMO was best for UK's success. In the end it was a combination of recruiting pressures plus the fact that Cal seems to be more comfortable micromanaging the substitutions (and also reducing his effective rotation).

Once Poythress went down, it gave him an opening to be a little more hands-on in terms of substituting. And you could see it gradually getting further and further away from structured platoons the longer the season went on. It was like an itch that he couldn't stop scratching.

 

[JPScott]

That team was Historically great on the defensive end the first 10 or so games (until the Poythress injury) holding teams below 30%, even good teams such as KU. After his injury, they were good defensively, but not great (teams shot 10% better). It wasn't his presence alone that made the difference, but he allowed them to play in a way with the platooning that fostered great defense (no saving yourself for later when you are coming out in 4 minutes). I think with him healthy I'm 95% certain we go 40-0.

I still think it was the best choice possible for that team, at least up until Poythress injury. After that you could make a case for simply an 8-man rotation.

Completely agree with the info about UK being a historically great team early on, with much of that seen defensively. And even after Poythress' injury they were still playing at a very high level, that is until they stopped platooning.

As far as 'making a case' for an 8-man rotation, I know a lot of people advocated for that given that Cal has had success with that in the past, and seemingly that is what he is more comfortable with, but history suggests that Cal playing an 8-man rotation, his teams have a definite ceiling in terms of how efficiently they can play.

If you compare all of Cal's teams at UK, he had a number of outstanding teams. But even his 2012 National Championship team only played to a certain level above its competition. The 2014-15 team was performing at a completely different level that had rarely, if ever, been seen before in the history of college basketball, and in a space well beyond what any other Calipari team had ever operated.

Unfortunately for UK, the more that he went away from platoons and more towards a less structured and shorter rotation, the more that UK team started to perform like some of Cal's other teams. (Some of his better teams to be sure, but still at a lower level.) It was completely predictable.

Unfortunately, by the stretch run many people still assumed UK to be a juggernaut, based on what they did earlier in the season to go along with their undefeated record, but they weren't performing anywhere close to how they performed earlier in the season (with a few exceptions such as vs. West Virginia where they clearly had extra special motivation).

In the end, they caught stung, something which I think was completely avoidable.

 

[JPScott]

My whole point is why not start recruiting to build a platoon team and point to it's success in the past? Show how dividing minutes can work toward the individual's goal, as well as team success.

As far as UK's recruiting philosophy, I've always thought that UK should always strive to have every one of their scholarship players be contributors to the team. i.e. no wasted scholarships and everyone has a legitimate opportunity to be in the rotation. This generally leads to teams that are deep and talented, and IMO those types of teams are generally successful at UK, and can weather adversity (such as injuries etc.) and still be competitive.

Given that, if a player accepts a scholarship to be on the UK team, I expect them to be able and willing to come in and contribute, regardless of how they were ranked in high school, and regardless of where they sit on the depth chart.

Of course it usually doesn't work out that way. Some players it takes time to develop. Some players have teammates that are so much better than them that it's hard to justify giving them playing time.

In the case of the 2014-15 team, it was extremely unique:

1. First and foremost, they had two legitimate and high level point guards in Andrew Harrison and Tyler Ulis.
2. Just as importantly, the team was extremely unselfish and willing to sacrifice for the good of the team.
3. Third, they not only had depth but depth in the right places and had the versatility that they legitimately could field two complete squads.
4. Fourth, although they obviously weren't all at the same talent level, the level they were at at the time was close enough that there wasn't a single individual who absolutely needed to be on the floor at all times. i.e. Someone like an Anthony Davis or John Wall. (I know some people may try to point to Karl Towns based on what he's done in the NBA but as a freshman at UK, he was still learning to play at a high level and in fact, due to foul and to a lesser extent conditioning issues, he would not have been as effective playing 30+ minutes as he was playing 20+ minutes.

Very few college teams have 10+ players who can contribute at a high level. Of those, there's a tiny percentage that check off the boxes above. That team was extremely rare and was IMO a perfect candidate for platooning. And it certainly worked when they used it.

Whether UK ever finds themselves in that position again, I don't know. I do think they should continue to strive to have a deep and versatile bench, which is an essential step. But after that, there's a lot of the right circumstances that need to be in place. It's not a given that the stars will align like they did in 2014-15.

I don't think one can recruit at the level UK recruits with the intention of platooning (at a lower collegiate level probably). But if they ever find themselves in a situation again where platooning would be effective, then I certainly hope they recognize it and are smart enough to use it for all it's worth.

 

[JPScott]

Agreed. Just wondering, who would you have went with as the tenth guy, Hawkins or Willis?

At the time that Poythress went down, my hope (and what I stated at the time) was that Derek Willis would have stepped into the rotation. He had already demonstrated in the Bahamas that he had the capability. Obviously Willis wouldn't have provided the type of defense that Alex did but he would have provided his own skill set which I think would be beneficial to the team in its own way.

As it turned out, Willis wasn't mentally prepared to do that, which I think is a great missed opportunity on his (and the team's) part. I said it at the time and still maintain today that the most important player in terms of the 2014-15 team's success was Derek Willis.

Dominique Hawkins was used at times in the platoons after Poythress went down and in those games, the team played very well. Unfortunately, Hawkins got injured during the season as well and that (moreso than Poythress' injury) sealed the fate of the platoon system.

To your question, given UK's personnel at the time, I would have preferably played Willis and if he clearly wasn't ready then Hawkins whenever possible. Certainly against Wisconsin I think UK wins going away if he had platooned with Hawkins. The Wisconsin guards were clearly dragging with 5 minutes left to go in the game as it was, but UK wasn't able to capitalize because they themselves were winded as well.

If UK had Hawkins hounding Wisconsin's guards 94-feet and not letting them initiate their offense as easily as they did, followed by Ulis doing the same for the entire game (and staying fresh the entire time thanks to the substitution pattern), I think UK inevitably turns the game into a rout.

FWIW, I blame Willis for not being ready to step in when his opportunity came, but I also blame Cal somewhat for not doing enough to make it happen. Obviously I don't know the details but the impression I got was that Cal seemed much more concerned at the look of giving a player like Willis playing time that he didn't feel he deserved, as much as trying to build up and developing his bench to fill a hole in the lineup, and in doing so maintaining a system that was most effective for the team as a whole.

There were a lot of skeptics at the time that Willis would ever contribute in a UK uniform. As we saw in the Bahamas and now know based on this past season, Willis did have the capability, he just wasn't always in the right frame of mind to contribute. Unfortunately, it seems that he was about a year too late in coming around, otherwise UK would be sitting at 9 titles IMO.

 

[hotelblue]

^ interesting. i hadn't followed your narrative on that. i'm a big fan of willis. people don't say much on this but he has extremely "quick hands" for a defender. whenever he gets in the game he finds ways to get his hand on the ball. i noticed it in '15 anyway. his quick release threes are the real prize of course.

 

[cawoodsct]

I liked it when Cal had a rule, i think it was 6 points and out on D for each unit, that you could play as a unit until those points were given up. We were locking people down when we did that and it really emphasized D even more than he already tries to do.

 

[BleedinBlue85]

Possibly BUT other coaches will say "look at what platooning did for the twins and Dakari draft stock, they were the top players at their position coming out of H.S". Whether they are right or wrong you know another coach will use it and some kids will eat that up because team success is great for fans and good for kids but individual success that leads to the NBA is much greater in the kids mind

Any player lacking elite athleticism will have a hard time staying in the top 10. The Harrisons and Dakari definately lacked a bit from that stand point. Once I first seen them play I knew they would never be lotto picks. Poy is the only great athlete that I have seen have his draft stock plummet under Cal.