Kentucky's not a bad team

by Gatorpilot on Jan 21, 2008 9:26 AM EST

Now that I've had a good 36 hours or so to get over the rivalry-oriented stuff I can look at Kentucky again with total objectivity. I re-watched the UF-UK game and realized this team has improved approximately 100% since the start of conference play. They do lots of things really well, primarily on the defensive side of the ball. Despite my criticisms of Gillispie's exclusive man coverage (did I see a couple of zone looks from UK in that game?) it does seem to be working. Kentucky has been holding the score down, and the Gators only made it to 80 points due to OT and FTs.

Turnovers are obviously still a big problem. Ramel Bradley only had three of them in this game but even though 15 is an improvement over the average of 17, it's hard to win when you give the other team so many opportunities. I believe the turnover problem will remain as an inherent flaw in this team but will be mitigated as these kids get more comfortable in Gillispie's system (and there's evidence of that happening already.) I think the average could drop a bit more, maybe down to 12-13 a game.

Offensively, the team's biggest challenge is learning how to feed the ball to Patterson. On the occasions they were successful in that endeavor, Patterson had opportunities against Florida but was again intimidated by a bigger defender who was blocking his shots. This kid is really a superb player and is simply going through a bit of a freshman slump. He also needs to learn that you can't just go straight to the rim like he did in high school. I'm betting that some of his slump is due to sharp scouting by the opposing coaches. Florida correctly deduced how to frustrate the big guy. Patterson is too good not to figure this out, and will probably do so in the next few games. He'll be a holy terror when he does.

Perry Stevenson didn't have one of his better games but he was really good against Vandy. He seems to play a role similar to UF's Dan Werner -- kind of a key cog that comes up with rebounds, denies the pass to the post, that sort of thing, although Werner has been doing it more consistently. Stevenson needs to keep providing his team with second chances on offense and sealing off the low post on defense.

Joe Crawford had a bad shooting night, and I do think Florida defended him really well; but how many of those treys went down and rimmed back out? He was just a couple of shots away from winning the game for UK.

This team would blow GW, UAB and San Diego out of the water. They won't have that opportunity this year, of course, but they're vastly improved from just a few months ago.

Obviously, Meeks and Jasper being out this whole time has really hurt the 'Cats. They need those guys ready to contribute. This will be a more complete team in all areas of offense and defense when they return. The pressure on Patrick Patterson will be vastly reduced as both are legitimate threats from beyond the arc, which is going to make things a lot tougher for defenders. As it stands, opponents simply need to guard P-Pat, Bradley and Crawford because the other guys on the floor can't score.

I see a team that is figuring things out and moving puzzle pieces around. They are NOT a bad team and they're not getting worse. They are getting better. They've come up against some really good competition and they didn't win those games, but there are a lot of logical reasons for that.

One more thing. These guys don't pack it in. They fight tooth and nail to the buzzer. As a fan, you've always got to appreciate that.

Winning the SEC tourney is not an unrealistic goal, in my opinion. It would seem from afar that Tennessee is a lock to win it, but Kentucky will probably be a better team by that point and you never know when the Vols will slump.

Anyway, this all comes from (as you know) the mouth of a Gator so I don't suffer from the "my own team has more warts than any other" syndrome that affects fans who are talking about their own team. I really think you're on to something with this group and Gillispie is definitely on the right track.

0 recs | Comment 4 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

"Bad team" ...

is a relative term in basketball, and is probably way too general. Kentucky is not a successful team right now. You correctly identified many of our strengths and weaknesses above, but there are a couple of things I would quibble with.

First of all, turnovers. In our most recent effort, Florida had one less turnover than Kentucky, and Kentucky got up 9 more shots than Florida, mostly due to fouls. Turnovers do not hurt you when they are even or nearly so, unless your opponent scores way more than you do. In this case, UK had 14 points off Florida turnovers, and Florida had nine. So turnovers, in the instant game, were not a problem.

What was a problem was us allowing Florida to get so many good shots. This came mostly to a poor defensive effort, not hustle-wise, but basketball wise. UK was switching on Florida screens and getting mismatched. They did better later when they began fighting through screens, and that is how you have to play the high pick and roll. You can't switch on screens except as a last resort, unless you have a bunch of 6-7 leapers on the floor, all at the same time. Very few teams can play a high pick and roll with switches like that and not get beat off mismatches.

Another problem was that UK failed to deny Calathes the ball. They did better late in the second half, but you have to do it the whole game. Finally, they allowed too much dribble penetration, a chronic problem for Kentucky this year. This always leads to either a dunk or a good look from three.

Your perception is correct about the zone look. Gillispie went to what looked like some kind of junk defense late in the first half and midway through the second. He didn't use it long at all. My recollection is that we were in that when Paterson and Harris wound up guarding a Florida guard just above the left elbow, and the result was a Florida layup.

Kentucky right now is competing hard, but not smart. They are still feeling their way, and the only thing that is having an impact on our opponents is the fact that we are getting after them hard, if sometimes looking very stupid in the process. Still, no one can deny that the Cats have not made positive progress. Perhaps a healthy Jasper and Meeks will be the missing ingredient to turn these close losses into victories. But unless they can find the secret for turning effort into success, we will remain an unsuccessful team.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 21, 2008 1:15 PM EST 0 recs

Good thoughts...

Good insights. For what it's worth, I don't think any team which Florida's played has really been successful in denying Calathes the ball or stopping him when it's in his hands. He's got a nice combination of size, game awareness, and agility that makes him pretty hard to guard despite the fact that he's not the most athletic guy out there. My dad is comparing him to Larry Bird. Bird is my favorite player of all time and I think Calathes has a loooooooong way to go before he can live up to that kind of billing, but I have to admit there's a lot of "Bird-like" stuff in him.

Regarding the turnovers, there was a stretch early in the game where Kentucky gave Florida a bunch of free opportunities. Florida didn't capitalize on many of them, but they were not the kind of turnovers a coach is apt to easily forgive. Florida turns the ball over due to a combination of youth and learning how to play college ball together; I view it as a different issue for our team. Anyway, I was referring to the holistic issue of turnovers from Kentucky, not so much how turnovers won or lost the game for the 'Cats against Florida.

I noticed Kentucky switching on the screens early in the game but I must have missed the adjustment because it seemed liked Florida was getting some good looks most of the night off of those. I'll have to go back and look at that again. That's another area Florida tends to be a tough matchup: we have several wing guys ranging from 6'7 to 6'9 who can really shoot a nice trey. Chandler Parsons, Adam Allen, Dan Werner and of course Calathes. Switch or no switch, someone's going to get a good look above a Kentucky defender more often than not.

Since 2006, we've been a team which has been really good at the high pick 'n roll. We used it really well against Rondo as I recall, who always seemed to plow right into Chris Richard time and time again. I guess that's an example of what Gillispie considers to be a symptom of "not talking" between teammates.

I just have a gut feeling (and it's not a pleasant gut feeling because I want my Gators to have a chance to win the SEC this year, no matter how far-fetched that may be) that Kentucky is pretty close to figuring out the rest of the details and will be a good SEC team come tourney-time.

"UK is going to beat UF twice this year. UF's amazingly soft schedule is going to come back to haunt them." --BeatUL

by Gatorpilot on Jan 21, 2008 1:57 PM EST 0 recs

Properly defending ...

a good pick and roll is very difficult. Why do you think Karl Malone and John Stockton ran it almost exclusively?

The key to defending it is not waiting for it to develop. You have to make sure you see the ball and play off the ballhandler. The first thing to do is block the ballhandler from using the screen, and force a direction change. If you can't do that, fight over the screen -- only about 40-50% of screens are properly set and can pick of a defender without a foul.

You can switch and go under the screen, but that leaves a mismatch. This is what happened to Kentucky. A way to make this work is called "jumping" the screen, where the screen defender jumps in front of the guard, while the guard defender switches and stays in front of the screener. You still wind up with a mismatch, but it usually forces the guard to pick up his dribble to avoid an offensive foul, or switch directions, which defeats the screen.

On the 25% of the time pick does work and the strong side wing is well spaced, the weak side wing must rotate down and the weak side basket defender must rotate into the lane to stop the drive or take the charge. this opens up ball reversal to the weak side or, if the strong side wing rotates, a three from the corner.

The thing is, it's a tough pass back to the weak side if the roll man goes to the basket and his defender goes with him. You have to practice this rotation a lot, and the weak side or strong side wing must cheat before the ballhandler gets around the pick. If you wait till he clears the pick, the result will be a layup by the guard or a dunk by the weak side big.

Once a ballhandler is committed to the pick, he must always turn tight and into the lane to be effective, putting his man a step behind. On high ball screens the Gators ran on Rondo, all you have to do is call out the screen so the defender knows where it is. We didn't do that, and Rondo got flattened a bunch of times. This happens because players lose sight of the ball. You can't properly play the pick and roll or the high ball screen if you don't know where the ball is. Losing sight of the ball is a big problem that Gillispie has harped on a lot with this bunch. They run down the floor and watch their man, but you have to keep one eye on the ball.

What Kentucky does a lot is the "hedge", where the big man guarding the screener steps out and forces the guard away from the basket. This leaves his man open, but since he is usually not a three point threat and it's hard to enter the post from 20 feet away, it prevents the pick and roll from developing before the "hedge" man can recover.

The last thing you can do is trap the ballhandler, but you must trap hard. If you don't, the open man gets the ball and scores.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 21, 2008 5:07 PM EST up 0 recs