Kentucky at South Carolina -- Statistical Comparison

Here is the statistical comparison between Kentucky and South Carolina.
A quick perusal of these stats will point you to a couple of conclusions. The first is that South Carolina is a much better ballhandling team than Kentucky. Turnovers have plagued the Cats all year long, but not the Gamecocks. In fact, the Gamecocks lead the SEC in fewest giveaways, and are 5th in the entire nation in that statistic. The Gamecocks have also been a good 2-point shooting team in conference, but not so great at the 3-pointer.
Kentucky, on the other hand, has superior 3-point shooting and overall defensive statistics. The Cats even get more rebounds than the Gamecocks, although it will be interesting to see how that holds up with Patterson consigned to the pine for the remainder of the season. The Gamecocks are one of the better free-throw shooting teams in the conference, and with Patterson on the bench, I expect our FT% to begin to slip somewhat, as we saw in the Tennessee game.
Overall, the Wildcats are slightly superior statistically to South Carolina. Kentucky has played a much tougher schedule, and has been more successful in the second half of the season. But the Gamecocks have some solid players, and every road game in the SEC is tough. Come to think of it, though, the Wildcats have made every game tough lately, but they come out on the winning end more often than not.
I'll have a more in-depth look at the game in my adversary analysis. For more on the South Carolina Gamecocks, you can take a visit to our SBNation brothers at Garnet and Black Attack.
Thanks again to Statsheet.com and Basketball State for the statistical data.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Statistic | All Games | Conference Games | ||||
| UK | USC | UK | USC | Delta (adjusted for all games played) | Comments | |
| Total Games | 27 | 28 | 14 | 14 | -1 | |
| Wins | 16 | 13 | 10 | 5 | 3 | |
| Losses | 11 | 15 | 4 | 9 | -4 | |
| Pct | 0.59 | 0.46 | 0.71 | 0.36 | 0.13 | |
| Field Goals Made | 644 | 772 | 312 | 363 | -100.43 | |
| Field Goals Attempted | 1380 | 1737 | 691 | 838 | -294.96 | |
| Field Goal Percentage | 0.47 | 0.44 | 0.45 | 0.43 | 0.02 | Advantage UK |
| Free Throws Made | 415 | 263 | 220 | 102 | 161.39 | |
| Free Throws Attempted | 554 | 373 | 297 | 153 | 194.32 | |
| Free Throw Percentage | 0.75 | 0.71 | 0.74 | 0.67 | 0.04 | Advantage UK |
| 3pt Field Goals Made | 153 | 224 | 71 | 112 | -63 | |
| 3pt Field Goals Attempted | 423 | 607 | 197 | 340 | -162.32 | |
| 3pt Field Goal Percentage | 0.36 | 0.37 | 0.36 | 0.33 | -0.01 | In conf, UK is better. |
| Points | 1856 | 2031 | 915 | 940 | -102.46 | |
| Points Per Game | 68.7 | 72.5 | 65.4 | 67.1 | -3.8 | USC scores more |
| Rebounds | 981 | 1037 | 509 | 463 | -18.96 | |
| Rebounds Per Game | 36.3 | 37 | 36.4 | 33.1 | -0.7 | We are not better than many in this stat. |
| Offensive Rebounds | 265 | 319 | 136 | 146 | -42.61 | |
| Offensive Rebounds Per Game | 9.8 | 11.4 | 9.7 | 10.4 | -1.6 | Advantage USC |
| Defensive Rebounds | 657 | 616 | 339 | 267 | 63 | |
| Defensive Rebounds Per Game | 24.3 | 22 | 24.2 | 19.1 | 2.3 | Advantage UK |
| Assists | 351 | 367 | 169 | 164 | -16 | |
| Assists Per Game | 13 | 13.1 | 12.1 | 11.7 | -0.1 | Call it even |
| Steals | 184 | 214 | 85 | 108 | -30 | |
| Steals Per Game | 6.8 | 7.6 | 6.1 | 7.7 | -0.8 | Advantage USC |
| Turnovers | 436 | 295 | 210 | 141 | 141 | |
| Turnovers Per Game | 16.1 | 10.5 | 15 | 10.1 | 5.6 | Advantage USC |
| Blocks | 127 | 104 | 67 | 42 | 23 | |
| Blocks Per Game | 4.7 | 3.7 | 4.8 | 3 | 1 | ADvantage UK |
| Fouls | 511 | 441 | 242 | 218 | 70 | |
| Fouls Per Game | 18.9 | 15.8 | 17.3 | 15.6 | 3.1 | UK's fouls are coming down. |
| Disqualifications | 15 | 7 | 6 | 4 | 8 | |
Game day is tomorrow. Go Cats!
0 recs |
11 comments
Comments
Correction...
I think you can see what I'm referring to. Anyways, let the best team win. I hope this game is as good as our last meeting. Of course, I also hope that we win this time around, although at this point the Gamecocks are only playing for pride. I hated to see your guy Patterson go out.
by Gameock Man on Mar 5, 2008 12:25 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks ...
by Truzenzuzex on Mar 5, 2008 6:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'll Be There Tonight
I think Cats W tonight by a few points.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 5, 2008 4:24 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hey Forty!
by hoopchi on Mar 5, 2008 9:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Defense
by TrickyD26 on Mar 5, 2008 9:49 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
He mentioned it on his radio show
He said they got out of the zone because they got beat on the back screen a couple of times.
by chirop1 on Mar 5, 2008 10:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Lawsuits against the haters?
I seriously doubt this type of suit would ever stand up (or that Adams would even bring suit), as coaches are public figures, meaning a much higher defamation standard. Still, interesting considering the bashing Tubby and BCG have gotten, and the websites devoted to their downfall.
by blbskue on Mar 5, 2008 11:17 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
This ...
Websites like fire[fillintheblank].com certainly can cross the line from free speech into civil liability. Of course, such suits are expensive, and judges are probably inclined to line up closer to allowing speech than prohibiting it unless the plaintiff can actually demonstrate harm, which is always a challenge in such cases. Simply saying, "He hurt my reputation" and citing case law is almost certain not to go anywhere.
Bottom line -- Bloggers should be careful, but no too careful. Keep the commentary to opinion, and you are almost always safe unless the opinion is demonstrably libelous by way of being false, and also something the defendant demonstrably did or should have known was false.
by Truzenzuzex on Mar 5, 2008 12:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Impressive
And I agree. A suit like that would most likely be frivolous. Further, the lawyer could get himself into a big pile of ethics doo doo making threats like that.
by blbskue on Mar 5, 2008 4:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A jailhouse lawyer, maybe ...
Nah, I've never been in trouble, but I was a witness in a rather lengthy federal investigation one time that taught me more about the law than I ever wanted to know.
After that, it just became more of a hobby and an interest of mine. I have also found that many lawyers know very little about the law, except in a very narrow area. That was truly a revelation, given that society treats professional lawyers a bit like they are versed in the dark arts or something.
:-)
by Truzenzuzex on Mar 5, 2008 6:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 











