Can a basketball team have too much talent?

[Buffnik]

I'm thinking about Kentucky this morning and how Cal had 3 guys he expected to go to the NBA draft last year decide to come back for this season. That led to him experimenting with hockey-style "wave" substitutions.

Looking at all the other teams that went deep in the tournament (Elite 8 or beyond), we saw 8-man rotations and sometimes less.

As great as Kentucky was in the regular season, might they have been better off when playing against the best of the best in a high-pressure tournament to have 8 core guys who were used to a certain rotation pattern, who the "go to" guys were, and who would be on the court in crunch time?

On the other side, I think you could argue that a shortening of the Kentucky rotation due to injury is what made them vulnerable. If Alex Poythress hadn't gone down with the knee injury this year then Cal would have had that versatile 6'8" NBA small forward type in his lineup. That actually seemed be what the team was missing when I watched them. They looked like a collection of centers and combo guards (with one pure PG type in Ulis).

Too much talent for their own good?

 

[Buffnik]

As a follow up question, at the beginning of the year there was a lot of controversy and debate on Cal going with 2 lines and limited minutes for everyone as his strategy for managing this unprecedented roster... do we think it was a success now that they failed to win the title?

 

[Gramburglar]

No such thing as too much talent. As coach it is your job to play your best lineup, even if it means putting talent on the bench. 30+ wins and 1 defeat certainly is no failure for any team, albeit not ideal either.

 

[aik]

I know basketball is all about momentum but give me blue chips holding every scholarship. Any game. I'll like my chances plenty.

 

[Johnny Juzang]

As a follow up question, at the beginning of the year there was a lot of controversy and debate on Cal going with 2 lines and limited minutes for everyone as his strategy for managing this unprecedented roster... do we think it was a success now that they failed to win the title?

It definitely was a success. Cal got 10 potential NBA players to buy in - sharing minutes, scoring, and the spotlight. Because they're all uber talented, it isn't going to change their draft status or paycheck potential. I don't think Cal's a great game day coach, but he's damn good at big picture stuff. Players trust him with their future, and he doesn't let them down. I do think he should have shortened his bench in the tourney.

Losing one game against a team with at least two 1st round picks - one (Dekker) likely a lottery pick is no disgrace.

 

[NBDefektor]

Buffnik's polls about UK are kinda silly. This one, and then the one about could UK make the Eastern Conference playoffs a week back or so...The Junta get more cash money with more page hits, right?

 

[TDforTD]

To an extent, I'd say yes. It's always about your best 2-3 players, since there is only one ball. Kentucky should have worked through Towns the entire night. Dakari Johnson is apparently declaring for the draft despite giving probably the worst 8 minute performance I've ever seen from a draft prospect. Kentucky got him into favorable matchups against Wisconsin's smaller players and he didn't record a stat. WCS was a hole on offense, definitely reminded me of Dalembert. The Harrison bros played well enough but they showed some of their tunnel vision throughout the second half.

 

[MtnBuff]

They managed to make it through the entire season without a loss and almost get through the tourney as well.

One thing I noticed against Wisconsin is that they didn't seem to adjust as well as Wisconsin did to changes in the game. How much of this was the fact that despite buying in to what Cal was selling they weren't very good at adjusting their roles and their games in the same way as a bunch of quality team guys like Wisconsin had around their star players.

 

[CVilleBuff]

In college, the reality is it's often going to cause some (serious) chemistry issues if you're going 12 deep with Burger Boys. Shorter rotation is better in my opinion. Look at what Krzyzewski has usually done.

 

[Ruckus]

I'm thinking about Kentucky this morning and how Cal had 3 guys he expected to go to the NBA draft last year decide to come back for this season. That led to him experimenting with hockey-style "wave" substitutions.

Looking at all the other teams that went deep in the tournament (Elite 8 or beyond), we saw 8-man rotations and sometimes less.

As great as Kentucky was in the regular season, might they have been better off when playing against the best of the best in a high-pressure tournament to have 8 core guys who were used to a certain rotation pattern, who the "go to" guys were, and who would be on the court in crunch time?

On the other side, I think you could argue that a shortening of the Kentucky rotation due to injury is what made them vulnerable. If Alex Poythress hadn't gone down with the knee injury this year then Cal would have had that versatile 6'8" NBA small forward type in his lineup. That actually seemed be what the team was missing when I watched them. They looked like a collection of centers and combo guards (with one pure PG type in Ulis).

Too much talent for their own good?

It's kind of weird to argue they had too much talent and that's why they lost, while also arguing they were missing talent (your Alex Poythress point).

 

[Buffnik]

It's kind of weird to argue they had too much talent and that's why they lost, while also arguing they were missing talent (your Alex Poythress point).

I wasn't making an argument. Just throwing a lot of stuff out there to give something from both sides.

 

[Ruckus]

I wasn't making an argument. Just throwing a lot of stuff out there to give something from both sides.

Yeah, I see the "on the other side" you put in there. That's poor reading by me.

 

[Scotch]

Making the Final 4 can never be considered a failure, regardless of how much talent is on the roster. If anything it illustrates how hard it is to win a championship.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

In college, the reality is it's often going to cause some (serious) chemistry issues if you're going 12 deep with Burger Boys. Shorter rotation is better in my opinion. Look at what Krzyzewski has usually done.

38-1 and losing by single digits in the Final Four means chemistry issues? I would say it just meant UK didn't get some of the 50/50 balls/calls late in the game and they lost 1 game. Like the UK making the playoffs poll, let's not over think this.

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

In college, the reality is it's often going to cause some (serious) chemistry issues if you're going 12 deep with Burger Boys. Shorter rotation is better in my opinion. Look at what Krzyzewski has usually done.

I dunno. Coach K has had his share of nba-ready talent. It's not like dook is stocked with mvc level overachievers.

To his credit he does mesh the talent into his style of play.

 

[Buffnik]

I dunno. Coach K has had his share of nba-ready talent. It's not like dook is stocked with mvc level overachievers.

To his credit he does mesh the talent into his style of play.

That's not what CVille is saying. You definitely need some NBA talent to win it all. Duke's got it and consistently has it. But K's model is to have a "Big 3" of go-to guys and then to have roles for another 5 guys who get consistent minutes. Those other 5 may be 4* and 5* recruits, but he focuses on the cream of the cream with his system. Some of the 5 who are riding the pine may also be 4* and 5* prospects but K treats them the same in regard to minutes as he would a walk on who was the 10th best option on the team.

That's what stimulated this thread. Cal experimented with a different approach this season. Duke's got a similar talent level to Kentucky (9 McDonald's All-Americans) as well as having the best NBA prospect, but K stayed with his traditional approach to minutes.

 

[CVilleBuff]

38-1 and losing by single digits in the Final Four means chemistry issues? I would say it just meant UK didn't get some of the 50/50 balls/calls late in the game and they lost 1 game. Like the UK making the playoffs poll, let's not over think this.

Where did I specify Kentucky this year as my example? That's what I thought. However, since you want to go there, Calipari is widely regarded as a miracle worker for what he can do in getting guys to buy in. Miracle worker means most couldn't accomplish that. College basketball isn't a video game. Managing personalities is a huge deal and it will bring a coach down who can't manage accordingly. There reaches a point where the talent is realistically going to cause more trouble than it's worth as you move deep down the bench.