The Kim Caldwell System

#583
#583
She is not up to the task. Losing to a South Carolina team by almost 50 points when they only had 7 available players is embarrassing. No sympathy for someone that takes zero blame for anything and throws players under bus. Lady Vols budget is top 5 in their sport. No excuse to be this bad. It is KC’s job to have her team fighting and improving.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vols90
#585
#585
glv98 said:
I thnk Kim is trying to do tough love, which she believes in very deeply, but its coming across as petulance and obstinance. And has no apparent alternative presentation. I'd say she's getting some wise advice and counsel on that as we speak.t

She could start with the wise advice Dawn gave her. Kim seems to have mixed up what you say publicly and what you keep in the family.
Click to expand...
Yep she should have kept it in house she probably sees that now. Think she was upset as the fans for the way they have played in those blowouts. There's definitely things she has to work on herself hopefully she sees she can't wear down the top notch teams. Going have to start using subbing to prove her point of 100% effort.
 
  • Like
Reactions: th2421, glv98 and Volfan2012
#586
#586
vols90 said:
IF they beat them...I'm really not so sure. A&M beat Alabama last night and Mizzou will be hungry to beat us at home for their coach. If we play like we did against Miss St, then we lose those 2 games.
Click to expand...
Better hope we're shooting in the 40% range or they will quit giving 100% effort on defense. If they hit a bad streak other teams don't it will get ugly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vols90
#587
#587
johnnybravo said:
I've watched several games this year (not all), but from what I saw against Arkansas is that it seemed that the team ran much better on offense without Cooper. Not trying to stir up controversy, just my observation.
Click to expand...
Problem is you put Coop in a bad position. She shoulders all the blame. Sometimes she has to go one on one because the offense is chuck and go. Kim has a run and shoot offense. It can be explosive but she doesn't have anything else when turnovers and threes are not the game. Like what High low game does she have. Where is the motion offense when teams pressure. Where are overload plays when teams run zones. It's all run and gun. You can play that way but you have to have the other to when you can't overwhelm an opponent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Momto2, th2421, vols90 and 3 others
#588
#588
landscapingvol said:
System or not, I am beginning to question her overall ability to coach at this level
Click to expand...
I do think it could work but it has to be modified. It isn't a blanket fit. What works well for Arkansas doesn't quite work well for SC or UConn. Can you press them? Yes you can a periodically it will pay off but to depend on that working all the time with them will get you exposed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smallvol#1, th2421, brittannica and 1 other person
#589
#589
Every one of TN's wins this year would have been accomplished with a more traditional balanced “system.” And a couple of those wins wouldn't have been as close. But using a traditional system would also have put NC State and MS State in the win column in my opinion. The Lady Vols still would have lost to SC, UConn and UCLA. But the margins would have been smaller. And before you say “a loss is a loss, margins don't matter,” consider this: Michigan lost to #2 UCLA in a close game yesterday but went UP one spot in the AP poll. Tenn lost big to #3 SC and went DOWN three spots. And that difference in ranking could mean a drop to a #6 seed in the Tourney. Equally bad losses to any of the ranked teams they have yet to play could drop them as far as the dreaded #7 or #8 seed.

So let's recap: If my enlightened conjecture is correct, with its existing talent and a more traditionally effective system TN would have won two more games, avoided blowout losses, and be poised to continue to battle for a #4 seed.

Sure, if the Lady Vols had better shooters, players with higher basketball IQs, and exhibited better selfless teamwork then Kim's system would work much better. But, wait... if the Lady Vols had all those things they wouldn't need a gimmicky system to compete with the top teams, would they?

In short, in my opinion, the road tothe Final Four has never been traveled by a team using a one-trick gimmicky system and I think it is very unlikely that it will ever get the Lady Vols there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spojo13, Momto2, olddog and 10 others
#590
#590
VintageFan said:
Every one of TN's wins this year would have been accomplished with a more traditional balanced “system.” And a couple of those wins wouldn't have been as close. But using a traditional system would also have put NC State and MS State in the win column in my opinion. The Lady Vols still would have lost to SC, UConn and UCLA. But the margins would have been smaller. And before you say “a loss is a loss, margins don't matter,” consider this: Michigan lost to #2 UCLA in a close game yesterday but went UP one spot in the AP poll. Tenn lost big to #3 SC and went DOWN three spots. And that difference in ranking could mean a drop to a #6 seed in the Tourney. Equally bad losses to any of the ranked teams they have yet to play could drop them as far as the dreaded #7 or #8 seed.

So let's recap: If my enlightened conjecture is correct, with its existing talent and a more traditionally effective system TN would have won two more games, avoided blowout losses, and be poised to continue to battle for a #4 seed.

Sure, if the Lady Vols had better shooters, players with higher basketball IQs, and exhibited better selfless teamwork then Kim's system would work much better. But, wait... if the Lady Vols had all those things they wouldn't need a gimmicky system to compete with the top teams, would they?

In short, in my opinion, the road tothe Final Four has never been traveled by a team using a one-trick gimmicky system and I think it is very unlikely that it will ever get the Lady Vols there.
Click to expand...
Actually a lot of the wins have been accomplished more because of going to a balanced style more than the one she prefers. There have been games where starters pushed over 160 in playing time and we've won most of them. Two or three we really saw limited subbing. Not totally sure but our biggest losses have come when we did the most subbing and a lot of 5 for 5.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: th2421, vols90 and J-Dog 1313
#591
#591
And1 said:
I think Caldwell has boxed herself in to a Catch-22. She sells "freedom" to recruits and transfers, which basically equates to players being put in situations that don't play to their strengths. Apparently she thinks shooting 45 threes in a game is "freedom". But if she suddenly takes that "freedom" away, her selling point is now null and void and what is there left to sell about her system?
Click to expand...
I was actually thinking about this. When she pitches the team to recruits and portal kids, they get excited. Janiah came to us besides the $$$ but she said in the post game after Auburn, Kim and the staff sold her on the "freedom" how she desired to play. Being that she's a senior and had a regression year at UCLA in terms of production she needed a program that was gonna give her an opportunity to shine and not tweak her game too much for the W scouts. But that's the thing, as we've seen most of this season, kids like Janiah, Tay and Zee sure could benefit from tough and structured coaching. Look at the wrap sheets on 3 girls who played for seasoned coaches (Dawn, Close and Meier) prior - they wasn't playing all fast, loose and their attitudes were better! Another problem with going to a "freedom based system program" it's a RED FLAG to players that want structure and discipline and it gives the idea you might have no idea how to coach or you have holes in your coaching, especially when controlling your ship (Look at Kim this season, shes bite of more than could chew and she's a deer in headlights). Besides Oliviyah and Gabby, look at how many kids we missed out on in the class of 2026. Kids I thought would be great pieces for us but in the era of social media and parents coaching youngsters in their AAUs unless Caldwell gets this coaching thing down we could lose out on more kids in the future! Just saying.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: spojo13, th2421, vols90 and 1 other person
#592
#592
Volfan2012 said:
Actually a lot of the wins have been accomplished more because of going to a balanced style more than the one she prefers. There have been games where starters pushed over 160 in playing time and we've won most of them. Two or three we really saw limited subbing. Not totally sure but our biggest losses have some when we did the most subbing and a lot of 5 for 5.
Click to expand...
It looks like there is still a search for the sweet spot. GBO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: choochoovol and glv98
#593
#593
I think CKC is over her head at this time, but to coach at this level and get success will take time. She is not used to big time WBB, only depending on her Mid-major and D2 experience. I think the major problem is not being around other coaches, or even assistent coaches from big time programs. I don't know how much recruiting travel she does, but this is the opportunity to mix with these veteran coaches, get to know them, ask them for advice. In her past life, she would not have that chance as they would not be recruiting the same players. Another mistake, her staff. I don't know all the specifics, but she should have recruited some assistant coaches with the big time experience, coaches that actually may have helped her in her indoctrination to big time WBB. Her lack of experience is hindering her ability to adjust on the fly, because always winning at the mid-major level won't give you the challenges that she is getting now, especially if her staff also doesn't have the experience. Change should be made, if not CKC then at the assistant level. It also wouldn't hurt to have a disciplinarian on the staff to keep everyone in line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spojo13, Momto2, th2421 and 3 others
#594
#594
J-Dog 1313 said:
It looks like there is still a search for the sweet spot. GBO.
Click to expand...
I agree. And since it’s mid February, that’s a problem.

We were already told we have to concede November as a learning month. Which I don’t love, but was advertised to come with the package. Then she told us this yr she needs December as well.

Now it’s February, regular season winding down, legs getting tired, and into a monstrous stretch of schedule. And we’re still searching. This is the problem. If you haven’t found it yet, search somewhere else.,
StorrsCentral said:
I think CKC is over her head at this time, but to coach at this level and get success will take time. She is not used to big time WBB, only depending on her Mid-major and D2 experience. I think the major problem is not being around other coaches, or even assistent coaches from big time programs. I don't know how much recruiting travel she does, but this is the opportunity to mix with these veteran coaches, get to know them, ask them for advice. In her past life, she would not have that chance as they would not be recruiting the same players. Another mistake, her staff. I don't know all the specifics, but she should have recruited some assistant coaches with the big time experience, coaches that actually may have helped her in her indoctrination to big time WBB. Her lack of experience is hindering her ability to adjust on the fly, because always winning at the mid-major level won't give you the challenges that she is getting now, especially if her staff also doesn't have the experience. Change should be made, if not CKC then at the assistant level. It also wouldn't hurt to have a disciplinarian on the staff to keep everyone in line.
Click to expand...
Gabe and Roman are both veteran SEC coaches with long years of experience. Gabe was considered one of the top assistance in the league, and is definitely a top-notch recruiter. He’s being mentioned right now as a possibility for head coaching jobs. We don’t see much from them in the way of game coaching though, and I wonder what that dynamic is like. I don’t think there’s a problem with the assistance qualifications, but possibly with the way they’re being utilized.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Smallvol#1, spojo13, th2421 and 5 others
#595
#595
RetroVol said:
The real comparison of Kim's approach to other approaches has been where it counts -- on the floor. Yes, I know, D2. Then Marshall. Then last year at UT. But look at how Glenville State and Marshall did after she left. Overall, her record gives her credibility.

There's been a lot of commenting on this board this year that she would have done better with this year's roster with a more traditional approach. Anyone want to make that claim for last year's roster?

As for the analysis you suggest, if I understand it, I think you have to look at what happens when they take a three. Misses don't always lead to bad results. And, what kind of two? A layup or a jumper? Yeah, take all the layups you can get, and a chunk of ours come from steals off the press. But the 2 point jumper? Lowest efficiency shot in basketball. Take it only when absolutely necessary.

I think the claim that, "If we only took fewer threes, we would win more," is a tough argument to back up with data. On the other hand, the argument that we need to adjust who our primary three point shooters are is crystal clear.
Click to expand...
To do the analysis I suggested, it doesn’t matter what type of shot they are taking because I suggested using the same total number of shot attempts. /the shot attempts will be the same breakdown as they are currently taking because we are relying upon the same make percent. Compare their points per game just by changing the generic shot selection. —- You have tried to validate continuing to take the volume of threes by factoring in offense rebounds. The object is to have few offensive rebounds. The objective is to finish last in the league in offensive rebounds. Because when you make shots you don’t have offensive rebounds. I admire your effort to project the theory. But high offensive rebounds go together with losing teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: creekdipper
#596
#596
NeedOrange said:
To do the analysis I suggested, it doesn’t matter what type of shot they are taking because I suggested using the same total number of shot attempts. /the shot attempts will be the same breakdown as they are currently taking because we are relying upon the same make percent. Compare their points per game just by changing the generic shot selection. —- You have tried to validate continuing to take the volume of threes by factoring in offense rebounds. The object is to have few offensive rebounds. The objective is to finish last in the league in offensive rebounds. Because when you make shots you don’t have offensive rebounds. I admire your effort to project the theory. But high offensive rebounds go together with losing teams.
Click to expand...
Counting numbers yes. Off Reb %, not so much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: krichunaka
#597
#597
And1 said:
I think Caldwell has boxed herself in to a Catch-22. She sells "freedom" to recruits and transfers, which basically equates to players being put in situations that don't play to their strengths. Apparently she thinks shooting 45 threes in a game is "freedom". But if she suddenly takes that "freedom" away, her selling point is now null and void and what is there left to sell about her system?
Click to expand...
If she didn’t say that to them, and just stopped the mass substitutions, it would open her up to get better players. Tennessee will always get players no matter what. Her system hurts us in recruiting, it doesn’t help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: olddog, vols90, LadyVolsDiehard and 1 other person
#598
#598
StorrsCentral said:
I think CKC is over her head at this time, but to coach at this level and get success will take time. She is not used to big time WBB, only depending on her Mid-major and D2 experience. I think the major problem is not being around other coaches, or even assistent coaches from big time programs. I don't know how much recruiting travel she does, but this is the opportunity to mix with these veteran coaches, get to know them, ask them for advice. In her past life, she would not have that chance as they would not be recruiting the same players. Another mistake, her staff. I don't know all the specifics, but she should have recruited some assistant coaches with the big time experience, coaches that actually may have helped her in her indoctrination to big time WBB. Her lack of experience is hindering her ability to adjust on the fly, because always winning at the mid-major level won't give you the challenges that she is getting now, especially if her staff also doesn't have the experience. Change should be made, if not CKC then at the assistant level. It also wouldn't hurt to have a disciplinarian on the staff to keep everyone in line.
Click to expand...
Who cares what you think, take that BS back to Stoors and you with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LadyVolsDiehard
#599
#599
NeedOrange said:
To do the analysis I suggested, it doesn’t matter what type of shot they are taking because I suggested using the same total number of shot attempts. /the shot attempts will be the same breakdown as they are currently taking because we are relying upon the same make percent. Compare their points per game just by changing the generic shot selection. —- You have tried to validate continuing to take the volume of threes by factoring in offense rebounds. The object is to have few offensive rebounds. The objective is to finish last in the league in offensive rebounds. Because when you make shots you don’t have offensive rebounds. I admire your effort to project the theory. But high offensive rebounds go together with losing teams.
Click to expand...
This is simply not correct. Even the top shooting teams will miss half of their shots. Snagging as many of those missed shot rebounds as possible has always been a meaningful tool for teams to have in their bag.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VOLSanon, volsagain, 1reVOLver and 4 others
#600
#600
Danny White quote about why he chose Caldwell during her introductory press conference...

"What she said and how she said it. A lot about how she coaches her teams and connects with her players. Then also the style of play and the reasons behind it; it's very well thought out. The numbers and metrics, which made me want to talk to her, speak for themselves. It's pretty compelling."

...my how things have changed in such a short time...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smallvol#1, spojo13, mudcat1973 and 3 others
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top