The Kim Caldwell System

#807
#807
My biggest concern with the Caldwell system from day 1 has been economics. With NIL being what it is, I see the most successful model possible being this:

-- Spend most of your resources on a "Big 3". You need 3 game changers that are elite on both sides of the ball. Ideally, you want a main ballhandler/floor-general type, a stud 6-1 to 6-3 wing shooter/slasher, and a rim-protecting rebounding-machine that can score in the paint.
-- After locking in your Big 3, you get bargain role players to surround them. You need 2 corner-3 shooters, 1 defensive specialist wing, a solid backup PG, and 2 rebounding paint defenders. All need to be solid on defense, none need to be great at offense, as they will be playing off the Big 3.
-- You use your timeouts and natural game stoppages to play your Big 3 about 35 minutes per game or until you have enough of a lead to pull them.

If you had a $5M NIL pot, you can spend $1M annual on each of the Big 3. Then, you have $2M left for the supporting cast, and it might be smart to only give real NIL money to the ones you actually expect to play meaningful minutes.

In the Caldwell system, with the same $5M, you need 12 high-level players who can all shoot, all defend baseline to baseline, all rebound, all play positionless defense, all are ball handlers. These players exist, but they are in high demand. Market value might be $1M each. You are at a disadvantage because your NIL pot has to stretch much farther than a team using the Big 3 model.

I love the Caldwell style system. I just believe at the SEC level there are many structural disadvantages that will cause it to fail. Efficient, smart half-court basketball paired with intelligent fast break and secondary break features appears to be the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo, th2421, brittannica and 5 others
#808
#808
37620VOL said:
My biggest concern with the Caldwell system from day 1 has been economics. With NIL being what it is, I see the most successful model possible being this:

-- Spend most of your resources on a "Big 3". You need 3 game changers that are elite on both sides of the ball. Ideally, you want a main ballhandler/floor-general type, a stud 6-1 to 6-3 wing shooter/slasher, and a rim-protecting rebounding-machine that can score in the paint.
-- After locking in your Big 3, you get bargain role players to surround them. You need 2 corner-3 shooters, 1 defensive specialist wing, a solid backup PG, and 2 rebounding paint defenders. All need to be solid on defense, none need to be great at offense, as they will be playing off the Big 3.
-- You use your timeouts and natural game stoppages to play your Big 3 about 35 minutes per game or until you have enough of a lead to pull them.

If you had a $5M NIL pot, you can spend $1M annual on each of the Big 3. Then, you have $2M left for the supporting cast, and it might be smart to only give real NIL money to the ones you actually expect to play meaningful minutes.

In the Caldwell system, with the same $5M, you need 12 high-level players who can all shoot, all defend baseline to baseline, all rebound, all play positionless defense, all are ball handlers. These players exist, but they are in high demand. Market value might be $1M each. You are at a disadvantage because your NIL pot has to stretch much farther than a team using the Big 3 model.

I love the Caldwell style system. I just believe at the SEC level there are many structural disadvantages that will cause it to fail. Efficient, smart half-court basketball paired with intelligent fast break and secondary break features appears to be the future.
Click to expand...
Adidas is a better NIL partner than Nike was. We can't recruit anyone else for next season except Okeke and maybe some other foreign player. So all the upgrades for this next year have to be portal. I don't know if we have a 5 million NIL pot but if we do no reason this next portal class should not be a huge success. It has to be or were coming back to a team that lacks in certain areas. No need to repeat what we need we all know and have been saying it since this season began.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo, LadyVolsDiehard and 37620VOL
#810
#810
I had reservations about the system since first hearing about it due to thinking it was just a run 'n' gun, little-half court offense or defense, heavy reliance upon the press. I have had to grudgingly admit that we have seen flashes of brilliance along with surprisingly strong play (and even wins) against some elite teams. Sadly, that success hasn't been sustained...sometimes within the same game...and the highs have been accompanied by puzzling lows. Injuries and/or lack of experience couldn't be used as excuses.

The overall problems I see are twofold. First, it seems that there's a lack of a holistic approach that makes sure that every phase of the game is covered. All coaches know that practice time is limited and that it's hard to cover everything. Emphasizing the press and outside shooting means that half-court defense and offense preparation suffer. We become one-dimensional. Not like Kellie's current, brave, overwhelmed Mizzou team who are getting massacred in SEC competition, but bad enough that we can lose to the bottom of our league. The SEC is just too strong to be able to coast in most games, and we can't just out-athletic other teams on most nights. We have to have answers when our preferred system isn't working.. We can't be so predictable, and there must be a Plan B and C.

The other major problem is that the system relies too heavily on having players with specific abilities and mindsets due to its unorthodox nature. It was easier at Glenville and Marshall because the talent level in those leagues was more equal. It could even take a weaker team and use the unorthodox style as an advantage because the opponents weren't sufficiently prepared or able to counteract it. At the highest levels, the best teams have the talent to overcome the advantages given by the system. Break the press and stop the three and you can control the game. And conditioning of top athletes negates the wear-them-down subbing that affects weaker teams with a thin bench.

I guess a third problem is recruitment. Most of Tennessee's best players could thrive playing a more traditional system, but it seems that lots of good players don't translate to Kim's system and reject it. Early playing time might seem attractive to rookies, but the star players needed to be elite want to stay on the court. The system might yield the occasional unicorn team, but it seems hard to sustain the type of elite players to be consistently successful over time.

The upshot that it seems that Kim will have to make her favorite elements an identity for her teams while adjusting into a hybrid approach. More like what we saw in Q2'against UCON this year.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo, mudcat1973, brittannica and 4 others
#811
#811
Volfan2012 said:
Adidas is a better NIL partner than Nike was. We can't recruit anyone else for next season except Okeke and maybe some other foreign player. So all the upgrades for this next year have to be portal. I don't know if we have a 5 million NIL pot but if we do no reason this next portal class should not be a huge success. It has to be or were coming back to a team that lacks in certain areas. No need to repeat what we need we all know and have been saying it since this season began.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to imply that we have a $5M NIL budget. It was just for purposes of the example.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volfan2012
#812
#812
I would allow her husband to coach with her for next year *IF* it led to implementing a Barnes-style system for the LVs. If it works, keep it rolling. If it fails, both are gone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volfan2012
#814
#814
37620VOL said:
I didn't mean to imply that we have a $5M NIL budget. It was just for purposes of the example.
Click to expand...
We need that much cause as of last season the top five seem to be going for a million or more. Seen a few suggestions and comments that Edwards was 1.25 million, but most of it was Adidas. The next 15 probably half a million up. You only need two or three like that to be really good if you know how to pick the rest of the players for the purposes needed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 37620VOL
#816
#816
Volstylexx said:
Tennessee’s issues go beyond Kim Caldwell. Rocky Top is no longer a prestige destination
Click to expand...
It is all based on what Danny wants to pay. He wasn't offering big money. I think he could have a lot of terrific coaches if he upped the total to 2 million. Trying to stay cheap is a huge factor in hiring anybody. Were not going to get any of the established coaches. There are coaches out there that are doing exceptional work that would come here for the right price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vols90, Smallvol#1, spojo13 and 2 others
#818
#818
Volstylexx said:
Tennessee’s issues go beyond Kim Caldwell. Rocky Top is no longer a prestige destination
Click to expand...


Excerpt:

There has yet to be a DI program in the modern era to maintain success after the retirement of a coaching legend. Stanford missed the tournament after Tara VanDerveer’s departure in 2024 and will likely do so again. Notre Dame has stalled in the Sweet 16 since Muffet McGraw left, as has Baylor after Kim Mulkey moved to LSU. Tennessee is in uncharted territory. Despite its self-perception as a power in women’s basketball, the market revealed last offseason that the Tennessee head coaching position was no longer a prestige job — because Tennessee was no longer a prestige program.

A perfunctory NCAA Tournament appearance is the likely endgame of the 2025-26 season. And it’s unclear what Tennessee can even do about it. The Lady Vols are chasing ghosts.

They have to retain Caldwell, despite an uninspiring basketball product and public comments that haven’t exactly earned her much goodwill from the alumnae. She’ll likely stay because she was the best coach who wanted to take this job, and it’s better to keep building than restart the clock.

It wasn’t supposed to be this bad this season. Caldwell’s first season in 2024-25 had some meaningful highs including a 13-game winning streak to start the year and an upset win over UConn, the Huskies’ most recent defeat.

But that roster is mostly gone, and the players Caldwell hand-picked to fit her system haven’t produced as expected. A top-10 recruiting class and highly-touted transfer Janiah Barker (from UCLA) have quite possibly the worst body language of any team in the country. Tennessee’s season began with a fall-from-ahead loss to NC State, a team that is currently unranked. The Lady Vols faceplanted in their big nonconference tests against UCLA and Louisville, losing by 22 and 24, respectively.

Their highly-anticipated rematch with the Huskies turned into a 30-point loss, the largest defeat in the history of the rivalry. The following week, they set a program record for futility, losing by 43 points to South Carolina and prompting Caldwell to call out her team for having a “lot of quit.”
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: brittannica and Volstylexx
#819
#819
VolFan_stuck_in_the_901 said:
Her husband is about as qualified to coach for her as KJH's was
Click to expand...
She could go to Barnes system without him if that is what she wanted to do. She would change her total concept on recruiting cause what she is doing now is finesse instead of power. She believes in rebounding and defense already she just does not have the roster than can do the job.
 
#821
#821
ANY System in ANY Sport ONLY works when you have the players BUY into IT!
Getting players in ANY Sport today to BUY into anything...........is the Difference Maker.
Her system like ANY system doesnt have a chance with the Players BUY in! IMHO!
 
#824
#824
1reVOLver said:
Excerpt:
Click to expand...
It may be desirable from that standpoint that they have a strong fanbase and facilities. But in terms of relevance? If you ask people on the streets to name the top women's basketball teams, the chances are that no one will answer Tennessee unless you're asking in Knoxville. They just aren't relevant anymore for the casual sports fan.

She whiffed on the portal and lost control of the upperclassmen. If anything, she should have sent a message to Barker, Cooper and Spearman that their body language and conduct was detrimental to the team and suspended them until they fixed their attitudes, W-L record be damned. What she ended up with was a bunch of players that clearly don't enjoy playing for her and with each other, and still the same crappy record she would have gotten had she sent a message to the upperclassman.

Honestly, the program is a literal dumpster fire right now until Kim learns to recruit for disposition as much as skill and how to motivate her players to get the best out of them. I have a hard time believing it's the system, since it worked so much better last year with a much less talented roster. Sure, they lost games, but they were always in them. This year's team does not have the same fight in them that they did last year, even with a couple of the players (Cooper, Spearman) were stallwarts from last year,
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo, vols90, Volstylexx and 1 other person
#825
#825
glv98 said:
Yesterday when Reagan Beers beat our whole team down the floor for an uncontested layup late in the game, I thought about the many times it was gloated around here that our super smart , modern system would have old fashioned players like her begging for mercy.

Bottom line: Those posters and these coaches have turned out to be wrong about everything.
Click to expand...
There's few and far between like Beers . I seen a young lady like her in highschool just as big if not bigger run the floor like that the whole game. My granddaughter thou not as big can run a camel in the ground. She would never get tired and ask out of a game. Your not going get major college basketball teams exhausted there's just too many stoppages.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo, vols90 and brittannica
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top