How Should Cal Sub?

[Joneslab]

I'm not going to say "platoons" because it invariably leads people to debate what platoon actually means, but I'm interested just in the subbing.

For the longest time, I liked the long bench mostly because I really don't think there's a huge difference on this team between Guy #1 and Guy #8. And Guy #9 (Lee) can do some things.

But a dad on my son's basketball team hates the subbing because he says it breeds complacency. He argues that Cal should have ten guys fight for playing time, and the best five or six should get those minutes.

Matt Jones on KSR last night argued the opposite. He says that Cal should play it like he was doing earlier, and that by subbing guys in and out the way he's done in the two SEC games, he's limited Kentucky's effectiveness.

What say you? I'm not sure how I feel or even if the subbing has played a part in why Kentucky has slipped. But it is an interesting debate.

[GOCAT15]

I really liked the subbing 5 for 5 like he did at first, but mostly because I felt like we could wear down every team, and by the middle of the second half we would run away with it just due to being more fresh than the other team.

But there is a heavy flip-side to that, and that is when a guy is not playing well, or without much energy, Cal has no choice to yank him. And also when a player is shooting lights out, like say Booker has been, then it's hard to pull him out of the game and let a player go in for four minutes who can't make a shot.

I really think Cal wants to keep doing the "platoon" system, but lately the players have forced him to not allow it. It seems like he is letting the players decide who gets the most PT and I think he is also trying to get a feel for what the best five will be so he has an idea of who he wants on the court at the end of a game.

When all 10 guys are playing with high energy, we are unstoppable, mostly because our defense is so smothering, but for some reason the last two games only a couple guys seem to be real engaged on the defensive end.

[JFCats22]

Interesting question and one that my dad, brother, and I discussed yesterday.

I will leave it up to Cal as he knows way more about this team than we ever will. However, early on Cal said the platoon system allowed 10 guys who could all contribute to play as well as wear down teams by going 10 deep. I never really saw the wear down effect that I think Cal wanted.

Additionally with Alex out and Lee being VERY limited it really leaves 8 guys who are playing. Not sure how you do the platoon with 8. If WCS, Dakari, Andrew were all playing like they are capable of and should be I think the platoon system would still work. But, with those guys suddenly turning into very mediocre players the last 3 weeks I think Cal is scrambling to try to play whoever he thinks can contribute the most.

[KevinHall]

You can't have the true platoon system now since Poythress is out for the season. So that's out. IMO, Cal should pare it down to an eight man rotation. Lee just doesn't give you enough to play him more than 5 minutes a game most nights. You have enough flexibilty in the 8 man rotation in that there should be no complacency. By the end of the season I believe it would make the team all the better.

[Joneslab]

I never really saw the wear down effect that I think Cal wanted.

You didn't? We were running away from teams virtually every game in the last 10 minutes. With the exception of the couple of games where we jumped out to 30-point first-half leads, the +/- of the final 10 minutes of the game were extraordinary.

However, that could have been the sample size. You're talking about 8, 9 games maybe there. Possibly less. That could have been just something else and not a byproduct of the platoons. But just anecdotally I definitely think there was something happening late in games and teams looked totally different than Kentucky down the stretch.

I've always argued that depth is non-essential in college basketball. Really good teams can play six guys. The argument is always, "What if somebody gets injured?" Well, on most college basketball teams a key injury kills you anyway, depth or no depth.

This team is built differently. Like I said, I just don't see much of a difference between the top eight guys. I think the key is getting a couple of guys from both "platoons"--Andrew and Dakari most importantly--to simply play better.

[George]

I think we're at the point in the season when we can afford any consequences that might come from experimentation, making this the perfect time to adjust and find the most effective lineup(s). "Platooning" worked for a while, but it's quite possible - probable, even - that an ideal lineup or two is hidden somewhere in the roster. If we platoon, we can't find that lineup. We still have enough interchangeable parts for Cal to substitute at will.

[KevinHall]

You didn't? We were running away from teams virtually every game in the last 10 minutes. With the exception of the couple of games where we jumped out to 30-point first-half leads, the +/- of the final 10 minutes of the game were extraordinary.

However, that could have been the sample size. You're talking about 8, 9 games maybe there. Possibly less. That could have been just something else and not a byproduct of the platoons. But just anecdotally I definitely think there was something happening late in games and teams looked totally different than Kentucky down the stretch.

I've always argued that depth is non-essential in college basketball. Really good teams can play six guys. The argument is always, "What if somebody gets injured?" Well, on most college basketball teams a key injury kills you anyway, depth or no depth.

This team is built differently. Like I said, I just don't see much of a difference between the top eight guys. I think the key is getting a couple of guys from both "platoons"--Andrew and Dakari most importantly--to simply play better.

If you want to go way back, Wooden's UCLA teams rarely played more than 6 players. In the 1975 championship game he played all five starters the entire game. They never had problems wearing down.
I think if Cal goes with 8 UK is going to be just fine. I never thought he would stay with a ten man platoon the whole season anyway. Poythress getting injured made his decisoin a lot easier.

[UKBoo]

It's hard to argue that there is a major drop 1-9 Lee may not be as skilled as some of the others but he has leaping and running abilities that a Johnson or KAT doesn't have. So, who do you sit? You never know if you might have 10 points or three blocks sitting on the bench. I actually like the subbing pattern better now in some ways because you don't really have two set teams. On the other hand, Cal has threatened and has actually pulled five guys because one of them wasn't playing. That's a much bigger motivator than simply sitting one guy if he isn't playing well. The guy not only let himself down, and the team (which can be harder to see), you let these other four guys down and now they have to sit because of you.

I don't really think the subbing is the issue. It's the change in focus to "me" instead of "us". I am not sure what happened over the break but you don't hear anyone praising these guys for their team play of late. Whatever they are doing differently in practice needs to stop or be adjusted.

[kynut]

Personally, I liked the five in and five out subbing, with the occasional intermingling of a player from the other five when necessary. We were a much more lively, aggressive, and effective team when that was the system. All ten players seemed to like it too......it allowed them to play at full speed without worrying about pacing themselves and they knew exactly what the other four in their group was going to bring to the table and how they had to play together.

Then Alex went down and it messed up the sub pattern. Now we are all the way back to a more "conventional" substitution pattern using primarily 8 players and the team is floundering. Maybe floundering because the guys became overly accustomed to playing with their own group and are now having to relearn how to play with different players and maybe floundering because some of them are pacing themselves or maybe even because breaking up the two groups has encouraged some of them to play more for themselves instead of for their close-knit group. The competition between the two platoons was a thing of beauty, with each platoon trying to outdo the other. It led to some of the finest basketball any of us will ever see.

I'm thinking the team might be better off in the long run to insert Willis or Dom into one platoon and basically return to the previous substitution pattern to see if we can't recapture the effervescence and effectiveness of the previous five-in-five-out sub pattern.......shock the opponents, wear them down, and, every four minutes, give them a completely different set of obstacles to overcome. But, Cal is the coach, so I'll defer to him. Still, as a fan, I liked the other way better.

kynut

[Joneslab]

I agree with UKBoo that I think the team's attitude has changed and it probably doesn't have to do with subbing, but one thing I have noticed is that Lyles is the most skilled 4 on the team. Most of the time against that zone he's bringing Willie or Towns into the middle, and while Towns is a great passer for his size, neither of those guys has been consistently good about working against the zone. WCS has really struggled now that teams have packed it in so tight. He doesn't seem to know quite how to operate in the middle.

If I were going to make a change I'd maybe see what Lyles could do at the 4, which means you'll either have to put Booker at the 3 or start Ulis.

[JFCats22]

You didn't? We were running away from teams virtually every game in the last 10 minutes. With the exception of the couple of games where we jumped out to 30-point first-half leads, the +/- of the final 10 minutes of the game were extraordinary.

Season to date UK is +191 points in the first half, +166 in the second half...not sure where you see a wear down effect.

[Joneslab]

Season to date UK is +191 points in the first half, +166 in the second half...not sure where you see a wear down effect.

That doesn't tell us much because in so many of these games--like half--Kentucky's had the walk-ons in the game for the last five minutes.

The wearing down occurred right around the 12-minute mark or so. There was just this wilt when Kentucky would see its leads balloon. Didn't happen in the games where we jumped out to extraordinary leads--UCLA, Texas-Arlington--and didn't happen against Texas, where we hit an oddly Texas A&M skid with about 10 minutes left, but for the most part we were able to really squeeze a lot of teams out of games late.

You only amass an almost 30-point margin of victory stat by being a good second-half team.

[UKBoo]

Lyles is the most skilled 4-5 facing up and is sluggish as a three. I did like him at the high post against the zone. I definitely think there is some potential there regardless if he is at 3 or 4. I'd like to see the bigs develop a 7-15 baseline jumper to help spread those zones out a little more. All of them have shown improvement with face up jumpers, just not on the baseline.

Back to the sub pattern, I know I am not the first to say it but the team really does miss AP. While he wasn't always noticeable at the offensive end, his transition defense and rim protection on drives is sorely missed.

[RxRusty]

I like the 5 in 5 out system too, at least for the 1st half. Then sub according to matches, who's hot etc...
Few teams can do this. It's fun to watch. There's competition between platoons. Everybody seems happy.
It is so unusual to have a team where this is a possibility. It was working, why change now. You have another 10th man, actually 2, that you could use based on match ups.

[LogyCat]

I like the idea of "platooning" and using maybe Devin Booker and Trey Lyles spending time at the 3 on both platoons. I like the twins Willie and Karl for the blue and I think Booker and Lyles can be plugged into that one based on match ups, defense, and the hot hand. The second platoon can be the same as it was and maybe you can experiment some with Willis or Hawkins at the 2 or 3. FWIW I believe both of them can compete at a level that won't hurt you if used in the right spots. The platoon system in general demands hard play and accountability for your time out on the court. I believe it also made our team very close knit and less prone to outside criticism than trying to traditionally manage nine player's PT.

On a separate note we need to get the players, especially the twins, going hard to the basket and finishing through contact. GET OUT THE FOOTBALL PADS CAL!!!!