Cats under the radar

by -Zoso- on Jan 17, 2009 12:30 PM EST Comment 27 comments

In his final season at Texas A&M,the Aggies were a balanced team,ranking in the top ten in both offense and defense(ken pom 6th offense and 10th defense effeciency).As of now,UK is not ranked that high,but look at these numbers nationally-

Offense

3rd FT % 5th FG % 8th Points per game 10th assists

Defense

3rd Blocked shots 4th defensive rebounds 11th FG %

With NBA prospects Meeks and Patterson,would you think a team with these numbers would be unranked?Also,if the NCAA tourney was entirely based on the RPI(which it is not) UK would not get in,they currently rank 68.This team has Darkhorse written all over it.

0 recs | Comment 27 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Agreed.

I’ve watched a lot of ranked teams this year and I keeping thinking to myself that Kentucky is not that far away from playing with anyone in the country. I keep wondering why we are not garnering more attention but the fact that we have not beat anyone ranked is probably the reason. I would not want to face this Kentucky team come March no matter my ranking.

Xbox Live Gamertag: hoopchi

by hoopchi on Jan 17, 2009 9:30 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I Don't Think Many Want To Play UK In January

The team that beat Tennessee this week is playing as well as anyone, certainly Top 10.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 17, 2009 9:47 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Not so sure about top 10

I agree that they are playing very well, but they certainly aren’t playing top ten basketball. I think a poor defensive team in UT and Meeks’ 54 inflated the quality of their play as a team on that night.

by DeadHeadCat on Jan 17, 2009 10:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Just The Way They Played Vs Tennessee

That was Top 10 worthy effort.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 17, 2009 11:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

When one player scores 54 points...

it is difficult to justify saying that it was a good “team effort.” I know someone had to pass Jodie the ball and/or get offensive boards to get the ball back to him, but I believe that if you subtracted Meeks from the equation, it would have been a much closer game, and maybe even a loss. Aside from Meeks’ 54, the only other even remotely impressive individual statistic is Patterson’s 12 rebounds.

The rest of the team shot poorly from the field (don’t want to do any math, just look), shot 66% from the FT line, etc.

by mrmondaynite on Jan 18, 2009 10:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

UK has ZERO quality wins. That says it all.

'..when they bring a knife, you bring a gun...that's the Chicago way..'

by HozeKing on Jan 18, 2009 11:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That's just wrong.

Tennessee was a quality win. Kansas state and West Virginia also.

That’s a baiting comment. Don’t do that. If you want to debate quality wins, do so with examples, not just blanket statements that are fact-challenged and designed to elicit a tart response.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 18, 2009 11:21 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Zero. I respectfully disagree

The win @ Tennessee is definitely a quality win.

We also beat West Virginia (by double digits) on a neutral court.

Both are quality wins.

GBB!!!

by OGETARTS on Jan 18, 2009 11:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Zero...?

I will agree that UK does not have the quality wins that Loserville has, but “zero”..?

Kansas St & West Virginia (neutral) both quality wins…
Vanderbilt (home) quality win…
Tennessee (road) quality win…

C’mon Hoze….

Steelers fan 1st! UK is my 2nd love.

by vinceuk1 on Jan 18, 2009 11:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What do you require for a quality win, Hoze?

by mrmondaynite on Jan 18, 2009 11:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Tru, a little touchy today?

…I think to be completely fair, Tennessee can be considered a quality win, but that happened after the most recent poll.

No way can Vandy be considered a quality win at home. West Virgina will be in the bottom half of the Big East…if one considers that a quality win, then that is one heck of a compliment to that conference. Kansas State won’t make the Top 25 at all this year, so I can’t see how that is a quality win either.

'..when they bring a knife, you bring a gun...that's the Chicago way..'

by HozeKing on Jan 18, 2009 3:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Kansas State

I just double checked on what I said above with current standings….

Kansas State is last in the Big 12 with an 0-3 conference record …not a quality win.

WVU is currently in the second half of the Big East with a 2-2 record and only beating South Florida and Seton Hall….I don’t see that as a quality win either.

Vandy is last in the division with the only win against Georgia…and we now know how weak they are.

Again, I think that the win at Tennessee was fantastic, but I don’t think one quality win should automatically get you into the Top 25. What will get them into the Top 25 is the fact that they are clearly the best team in a major conference…there is no shame in that.

'..when they bring a knife, you bring a gun...that's the Chicago way..'

by HozeKing on Jan 18, 2009 3:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

They are all ...

… quality wins, in my opinion.

For example, WVU is currently ranked #12 by Pomeroy, and they were highly ranked when we played them. Quality win. Kansas state #32. Quality win. Vanderbilt, #62. That’s marginal now, but at the time, the were a top 50 team, which I consider a quality win. If Vandy winds up out of the top 60 or so, I’d have to re-evaluate that. Tennessee, #36. Quality win.

UK won’t get the opportunity to play many highly ranked teams, so their definition of quality will be rather lower than a team in the Big East and ACC. It’s possible that a team in the Big East could lose ten or twelve games and have more “quality” wins than UK by a résumé definition.

Keep in mind, also, that quality wins are only one measure — perhaps a more important measure, within a specific band, would be road wins. U of L has only two road wins period, only one of which is a quality win (a one-pointer against Villanova, currently ranked #29 by Pomeroy). In fact, U of L doesn’t have a single neutral court victory to its name, and their only convincing road win was at USF, the # 95 ranked team. They have lost to inferior teams twice on a neutral court, and Kentucky has only lost one game to an inferior team all year.

In the end, team quality analysis is not as simple as you would make it. That’s my story, anyway.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 18, 2009 4:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I hear you...

…but ‘my’ definition is a little different. That is I think one really needs to re-evaluate teams they beat at the beginning of the year.

The best example is Kansas State (now this may change as the year goes on). At first it did look like a quality win but that was all due to ‘preaseason rankings’…I really think one has to give it a re-look as the season unfolds. I maintain that the Kansas State win wasn’t that big a deal because they have proven themselves not to be that good as evidenced by their 0-3 current Big 12 record.

Also, at the end of the day (…‘and I hate that kind of language’…) I think we will see the same with WVU. I just don’t think they are that good and that will be proven.

Also, it just occurred to me that the VMI loss doesn’t look that bad given ‘my’ theory. I have certainly have seen that expressed time and time again and rightly so. Therefore, it you buy into the VMI argument I think you have to reconsider WVU and KSU as being quality wins.

'..when they bring a knife, you bring a gun...that's the Chicago way..'

by HozeKing on Jan 18, 2009 4:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Kansas State ...

Is 0-3, but they have lost to a top-5 team at home, Kansas on the road and at an under-appreciated Nebraska squad. They will get better.

West Virginia is a solid club that would be counted a quality win by any reasonable definition. They have more road wins than Louisville has by far, and no bad losses at all, although the blowout by Marquette was not a good game for them, even though it was on the road.

VMI is a bad loss, period. They are ranked 175th, and play in a weak conference. It may not be as bad as Gardener Webb, but it is still a very bad loss by any objective measure.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 18, 2009 5:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

but when one player has 54 points on 22 shots....

that’s a little different. Jodie Meeks is going to take 17-25 shots a game. It wasn’t like he was ball hogging, he was just highly accurate. Had he not been such a threat, there would have been more opportunities for putbacks, second shots, etc. They played a great team game, they just didn’t have many offensive opportunities because the ball was coming mostly through the bottom of the net. Ramon Harris was 3-3, Stevenson was 3-6, Miller was 3-6 and Porter was 2-4. I’ll take 50% FG every night. Only Patterson shot less than 50. Plus the team was 18 of 20 from the free throw line… which I’m pretty sure is better than 66%.

I need a Sea of Blue because I am surrounded by Tennessee orange!

by sleepytimetea on Jan 19, 2009 12:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Kentucky is no longer under the radar.

You aren’t under the radar when 4 or 5 comments are made about your team during games in which your team is not a participant. UK is most definitely on the radar — not necessarily as a final four threat, but as a team that could do damage in the tournament.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 18, 2009 11:22 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Sweet 16 MINIMUM

Absent injuries, UK should be Sweet 16 lock this year.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 18, 2009 11:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I happily agree with you for once, Forty.

by mrmondaynite on Jan 18, 2009 11:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sweet Sixteen MINIMUM

I share this prediction as well. I would like to sress the word “MINIMUM.” I totally believe that this UK team is more than capable of surpasing that.

by kentuckygirl0724 on Jan 18, 2009 8:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No Doubt

Kentucky averages 6 Sweet 16 per decade (1939 through 2008). That’s AVERAGE at UK.

Last year was way below average. The 2 prior years were below average, too.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 18, 2009 8:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think Sweet Sixteen ...

… is a reasonable projection right now. We could do a little better if we continue to get improved play from the point guard position. If suddenly a third reliable scorer appears, it would really enhance our chances.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 19, 2009 7:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sweet 16 and beyond

I agree that this team is capable of winning two games in the tourney. If we go beyond that will depend on the match-up.

Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."

by chirop1 on Jan 19, 2009 9:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

but when one player has 54 points on 22 shots

that’s a little different. Jodie Meeks is going to take 17-25 shots a game. It wasn’t like he was ball hogging, he was just highly accurate. Had he not been such a threat, there would have been more opportunities for putbacks, second shots, etc. That is a good team effort, they just didn’t have many offensive opportunities because the ball was coming mostly through the bottom of the net. Ramon Harris was 3-3, Stevenson was 3-6, Miller was 3-6 and Porter was 2-4. I’ll take 50% FG every night. Only Patterson shot less than 50. Plus the team was 18 of 20 from the free throw line… which I’m pretty sure is better than 66.

I need a Sea of Blue because I am surrounded by Tennessee orange!

by sleepytimetea on Jan 19, 2009 12:01 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

this was meant as a reply to mrmondaynite several posts up!

Sorry for the lack of knowhow around here!

I need a Sea of Blue because I am surrounded by Tennessee orange!

by sleepytimetea on Jan 19, 2009 1:06 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Don't sweat it. :-)

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 19, 2009 7:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Kind of Under the Radar...

It would seem that those nimrods that are called voters seem to think we are not deserving of being on the radar. I simply do not get the rankings this year. There are many teams with three and four losses that are still in the top 25, who maybe shouldn’t be.

Please tell me how Syracuse is a top ten team? They are getting plastered by a Pitt team that lost to Louisville, who dealt UK a 3 point buzzer beater loss.

UK lost the game vs. Louisville, we all know that. But Louisville is playing great basketball and having played within 3 points of the #1 team in the Big East, and then throttling what was believed to be the best team in the SEC-how is this team not a top 25 team?

Who has Florida beaten? Unranked Arkansas, who beat Texas and Oklahoma and still is considered mediocre at best. I just don’t get it.

What I do know is that I don’t care if we ever get into the top 25. Because come tourney time I would not want to have to play a team that can play D the way we do and who can rely on two horses to take over, or even just one like Jodie did. This is a dangerous team in the making. I see a 14-2 SEC record at worst.

by JKA14 on Jan 19, 2009 8:51 PM EST reply actions 0 recs