Morning Newspaper for March 3rd
by Glenn Logan on Mar 3, 2009 9:29 AM EST
in Kentucky Wildcats News
Email
Print
Two big pieces of news this morning. One is that Ken's interview of Mike Casey predictably hit the Big Blue Nation like a thermonuclear bomb. We have had visits from places I've never even heard of checking it out, and there is a lot of commentary around about it.
The other big news is that A Sea of Blue has recently surpassed the 2 million visit threshold, and you can read more about that in the FanPost I wrote earlier.
Now, for the rest of the news.
Kentucky Basketball News
- Wildcats have lost their traditional swagger. Yeah, I think that's right. I truly hate to say it, but this team doesn't have a whole lot to swagger about these days.
- Marc Maggard has a really good blog post about Mike Case's comments. Now, I know that some of you aren't Maggard fans, but you really should take the time to read this. It's very solid work.
- This makes sense. In essence, this was a mistake that even veteran players could have made. It doesn't mean that Galloway and Stewart don't get criticized for a failure to communicate, but it wasn't just a lazy or foolish play. You wouldn't think that setting a bad screen would be more effective than setting a good one, but in this case, that's what happened. The ball screen completely failed to hinder Galloway, so he stayed with his man. Stewart anticipated the switch, and game over.
Seven times out of ten, Galloway gets contact and switches, and maybe the result is different. It's been that kind of season. - Ken Davis of NBC Sports says that the 'Cats need a big week this week, along with Notre Dame, Florida, and several others including the Golden Gophers.
- Jodie Meeks is not a lock for POY, according to this article. I think that's right -- there will be a strong movement, led by Bruce Pearl and others, to name the POY from the league's best team, LSU. Marcus Thornton and Tasmin Mitchell both have to be considered threats, and Devan Downey also has an argument.
- Joe Biddle goes off the deep end. Well, I suppose this is what you can expect from a Tennessee writer. I think that if Meeks and Patterson were both gone, as he says his sources suggest, we would all know that by now. Hard to imagine a columnist like him has better sources than Tipton, Vaught, John Clay or Mark Story.
I think we are seeing some wishful thinking here, and not a little schadenfreude at Kentucky's troubles. I do have real issues about the complaints Gillispie is "throwing his players under the bus." All coaches call out their players. Gillispie's just getting heat from guys like this because he is struggling, and an easy target. Kick 'em when they're down, Joe, that's the spirit. Oh, by the way ... save your advice about where to direct our anger. We know a thing or two about basketball in these parts. - John Clay blogs Ken's interview with Mike Casey.
- Billy Gillispie walks the line. The question is, where does it lead?
- Gillispie is sticking to his formula. Mainly, this is about man-to-man vs. zone. Some caller last night to the call-in show suggested that guarding the three-point shot is UK's weakness, and that a zone is the answer. I thought 'Cat fans were supposed to be knowledgeable about basketball? Maybe he was a Louisville plant or something. I hope so.
Most great coaches mix zone in with man-to-man to give teams different looks, and confuse them. Apparently, Gillispie thinks that's some kind of a gimmick. All I can say is that no matter what defense UK plays, they need to win. - Bluegrass State Basketball has thoughts on Mike Casey's comments.
- The Fake Gimel Martinez at KSR has this on the Casey interview, among other things. We are in agreement on the whole "calling out" thing, apparently.
- Winning in Rupp. From an LSU blogger.
Kentucky Football/Other News
- Vol Nation tries to cast SEC coaches as characters from The Godfather. Rich Brooks is cast as Bruno Tataglia, the pimp. Nice. He features Lane Kiffin as Michael Corleone.
Are you laughing? I am. - This guy from the Bleacher Report says he loves Rich Brooks' vocabulary.
- A roller-coaster season for UK Hoops. Question is, are they going up, or down right now?
NCAA Basketball News
NCAA Football News
- Ranking the coaches in the SEC. Brooks comes in a respectable 7th.
- Steve Spurrier replaces half his coaching staff. His son managed to make the cut, natch.
Other News of Interest
112 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Numbers > Will History Repeat?
Rupp 82% (W-L record). Hall 75% then Sutton 69% record.
Pitino 81. Tubby 76. Billy (so far) 62%.
I hope Gillispie improves into the 70% range.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 10:11 AM EST reply actions
I don't know about that
Kentucky teams of Eddie Sutton, Rick Pitino and, yes, Tubby Smith would have run through this league like Patton through the Germans.
But I think the 3 would be better than 8-6.
I Believe LAST YEAR'S UK Team Would Be 12-2 In SEC Right Now
This particular (2009) UK team is really struggling.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 10:18 AM EST up reply actions
i will not give Biddle the additional page view
but i guess he prefers a coach that throws the ENTIRE team under the bus.
by memphis wildcat on Mar 3, 2009 10:13 AM EST reply actions
Haha.
I was thinking the same thing. I should have written that down.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
Regarding Gillispie sticking to his principles
Coach Pelphrey has made it known many times that he is doing the same. He quoted Nolan Richardson as saying, “Give me ten players…..”
I don’t see why Gillispie should have to change his style. Give him ten players that can run his system and see what happens. He’s getting there is all I can say.
11 0 clock news
Aseaofblue made the new last night as the source for the mike casey interview. Way to go tru and ken.
DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!
Wow.
Ken gets all the credit. I didn’t do anything but keep my mouth shut. ;-)
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
Congratulations
Not only on the 2 million hits but also on Kens breaking story. It has given you well deserved attention and has certainly rocked the Wildcat Nation.
I wonder if facing your mortality causes your thought and opinions to be a little less circumspect.
...
I wonder if facing your mortality causes your thought and opinions to be a little less circumspect.
???
If Casey's Comments were positive
Congrats to Ken for the interview and the mention on the news! However, what might have happened had Mike Casey’s comments been positive about coach? Anyone doubt that dirty laundry makes news faster than clean? I wish this site would make the news for bebunking the stereotype that all of us Cats fans are …..well you know what makes headlines. Thanks to you and Ken for giving me this great outlet and resource
Zone observation
I think that claiming zone is a better defense against the 3 is incorrect. However, at the very least, isn’t running an occasional zone a way to give your players a breath on defense as well as confuse the opposition? A zone, especially a 2-3, seems like a less physically demanding defense than constant man-to-man.
Of course, Gillispie focuses on making sure his players are in tip-top conditioning, so in his mind (and maybe it’s true) the catch-your-breath factor of zone might be irrelevant for UK.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
--O.W.
I agree.
I think changing defenses is beneficial. Apparently Gillispie doesn’t think so. :-)
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
Who's To Say?
29 games into the season and as the LSU game so dramatically demonstrates the Cats still haven’t, despite countless hours of practice and instruction, mastered the man-to-man defense, what evidence exists that insinuates, let alone proves, that devoting some of those hours to learning the intricacies of a zone would have provided a net benefit?
Related observation
There are degrees of man-to-man, especially related to guarding guards and small forwards. There’s “in your jersey” that Gillispie seems to prefer, which is effective as hell if you can keep up with your man, but we’ve been burnt over and over. Then there’s “breathing room,” which may give more space for a shot, be it keeps the defender from getting burnt off the dribble (i.e., keeps the offensive player in front of you). Getting burnt off the dribble has seemed to lead to more 3’s against us than “breathing room” 3s, as these lead to kick-outs to open men AFTER the help collapses.
He utilized the “breathing room” version against Tennessee (in Rupp at least, I can’t remember the first game), and it worked beautifully. If he’s going to stick to man-to-man, maybe he could at least switch between these two types of man-to-man a little more. Related to above, it seems that the second version of man-to-man also gives the defender a little more rest than the first.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
--O.W.
Zone....
Playing a zone from time to time will also force opponents to use practice time preparing for it and when you give the opponent different looks it can make them pause and have to think about what they are going to do. How many times have you heard the announcer say so and so has switched to a zone (or insert any defense) and it has the offense confused? If only for a few possessions I think it is worth it.
With that being said a zone is a liability when defending the 3 and defensive rebounding. When you play a zone it is harder for the defending rebounders to locate a man and get a body on the to block out. So the two defensive areas that Uk struggles at (3 point defense and reboudning) will not get solved with a zone. As mentioned above the zone can still serve a purpose albeit a small one.
Slower Traffic Keep Right!
UM
The man to man worked against Tennessee cos they can’t throw the ball in the ocean. Defense is overrated in basketball. You have to score and we are very limited offensively. The college game has become very ugly in recent years because of the motto of recruiting athletes instead of basketball players. I’ll take a shooter over an athlete any day of the week because no matter how good your d is, a good shooter will always prevail.
Yes, defense is overrated. That's why Tennessee is rampaging through the conference
Oh wait…
I like important stuff just as much as the next guy, but please, for a little while, deliver us from meaning, baseball. That's your greatest glory, and we thank you for it very, very much. -- Craig Calcaterra
When UT had shooters, I.E. Chris Lofton
They beat our great defensive teams what, 3 out of four times before this year?
False
Kentucky defeated Tennessee 6 of 9 times in the years (2005-06-07-08) when Lofton played at UT.
Study up your Cat history, son!
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 3:00 PM EST up reply actions
3 out of last 4 before this year
I’m talking about 07-08, when Pearl and his offense and no defense arrived.
Regardless UK Defeated Tennessee WITH LOFTON 6 Of 9 Times
Matters not whether Pearl or Peterson coached UT.
Shooters ALONE don’t W basketball games. If they did, Loyola Marymount would have been NCAA champs 20 years ago.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 3:05 PM EST up reply actions
It's not regardless
UT’s style of play totally changed with Pearl and his style trumped our defensive style until this year when he lost his shooters. Nothing alone gets you to a title, but I’ll take a good offense in basketball over a good d any day. BTW, would Loyola have even made that run if they were just solid on d with nothing much on offense? Heck no.
Defense Wins Championships
Offense doesn’t.
Ask the great coaches of all time.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 3:39 PM EST up reply actions
That's so random and trite
That whole saying started in football, because in football you can keep a team from scoring. You can’t in basketball, you have to score. I know you’re big on Tubby but he couldn’t develop scorers and it cost us in the tourney. Look at DWade from Marquette, he killed our great defense by himself.
Look in the NBA. The suns were winning with great offense. They decided to go for a defensive scheme and now won’t even make the playoffs.
I think you're flawed with the NBA argument
The Suns were winning games but they sure as hell weren’t winning titles. Another prime example is the Dallas team that lost to a very sub-par Miami team that played solid defense. The Mavs started hot and then went cold when it mattered most.
The Celtics won last year on the strength of their team defense.
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
Plus
The same argument you make about the Suns holds true, in the opposite, for UCLA. Don’t make fun of my boy Steve Nash!!!! :)
Two Great Offenses
If two teams can score like Boston and Phoenix, which team wins? The team that plays the best defense. How many championships have the Spurs one? How many times has Michael Jordon, who we all know can score, been defensive player of the year? Also, are you saying UCLA played no defense on the way to their rings? I would bet you Coach Wooden would beg to differ.
Such As:
Ben Howland and Bo Ryan. How many championships do they have? Oh, yeah: Zero.
One Fewer Than Pitino
1 is not that > 0.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 5:10 PM EST up reply actions
But Princeton made a run with D
Every year in the NCAA tourney, you can see it with Cinderellas… they make a run as long as the shots are falling. But on that day when your offense isn’t there, the defense has to come through.
I would point out the 1996 Cats as an example. Their offense steamrolled teams on the way to the Final Four. In the championship against Syracuse, their offense struggled to get into a real rythm (with the exception of Delk and Mercer), but through some tough defensive stands, our boys brought home Ricky P’s only title.
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
But great D
Alone wouldn’t have gotten us to the title. You have to have both, and i feel offense is more important. Any team can beat any team(just look at VMI, Gardner Webb) when the shots are falling. You can’t say the same about defense, it doesn’t guarantee anything, but when you shoot over 50 percent from the field, you’re much more likely to win.
I think you're a lot more likely to win when you hold opponents to 30% shooting than when you both shoot 50%
But I will admit that I enjoy a good offensive scheme far more than teams that focus on defense. Honestly, I never understood why you couldn’t have both.
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
1996 And 97 UK Teams
Pitino’s best DEFENSIVE teams at UK.
Not his best offensive teams.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 3:48 PM EST up reply actions
You Only Rebound When DEFENSE Causes A Missed Shot
DEFENSE comes before rebounding.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 4:22 PM EST up reply actions
Not neccessarily
Half of our players miss wide open shots, not much D involved there. Miller wasn’t playing D the other night on Thornton when he let him come right down the lane and grab a board for a putback and a foul, the biggest play of that game.
To once and for all prove the importance of defense, Forty, lay on me Tubby’s winning percentage at UK when his team shot over 40 percent in games.
You sure like to argue everything....
yesterday it was the NIT, today offense/defense. What is going to be tomorrow – whether college players should be allowed to have facial hair?
Slower Traffic Keep Right!
I could respond to how illogical the whole "defense is overrated" concept is
But others have already made most of the points I would make, so won’t.
Except to say that if you look at the best NCAA teams over history, you’ll see that most of them were very good defensively. Many of them were also good offensively too, which goes to say that you need both to have a good team.
I like important stuff just as much as the next guy, but please, for a little while, deliver us from meaning, baseball. That's your greatest glory, and we thank you for it very, very much. -- Craig Calcaterra
Wow...
Defense is overrated…
I’m sorry, but I’m speechless.
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
Vehemently agree and disagree.
First, I’ve been calling for shooters all year. For the life of me, I can’t see why a college basketball player on scholarship can’t shoot/won’t take a mid-range jump shot. IMO, that’s primarily why scoring is down from the early/mid 70s. The fact that this downturn in scoring coincides with the ESPN era may or may not be relevant.
Second, defense is not, repeat not, overrated. It’s the only thing you can depend on. Shooting comes and goes (see Meeks this year)but you control the amount of effort you put into defense, and the payout on that effort is more sure than on offense. I agree that shooters are necessary (see above), but I know a lot of guys from my era and later (myself included) that could shoot the eyes out of the basket, but were unable to play college-level ball because of their lack of athleticism. If shooting was the be-all for playing college basketball, my career wouldn’t have been terminated when the freshman season ended in 65-66.
Just as baseball has its five primary skills, basketball has six key attributes, in my opinion: shooting, ballhandling (dribbling and passing),speed, quickness, rebounding, and defense. And, no, speed and quickness aren’t the same. In comparison to speed and quickness, the others are RELATIVELY unimportant. They can be taught. Speed and quickness can’t. If you’ve ever played in front of 10,000 people against a truly superior athlete, you’ll know what I mean. It’s embarassing.
No moral victories--it's all about Ws and Ls!!!
I'm not saying
You shouldn’t play defense at all, but a good offensive team is more likely to beat a good defensive team in basketball, especially when it comes to half court time in the tourney. You have to have skilled offensive players that can execute. Not to mention it’s a heck of a lot more interesting to watch a great offensive team that 50-45 ball games.
No Better Offensive Team Than Memphis In 2008
Kansas beat them with defense in NC game in 2008.
LOTS better offensive teams than UCLA in 2006-07-08.
No team but UCLA made FF each year in 2006-07-08.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 2:43 PM EST up reply actions
Memphis=great offensive team
Definitely subjective. Sure, your stats get lofty when playing against the mighty Conf. USA, but Memphis had no shooters. They had a solid point and a solid wing, that’s it. Great offensive teams don’t shoot that bad from the free throw line. Also, Kansas didn’t beat Memphis, Memphis beat themselves…Why? Cause they couldn’t shoot.
Even might Howland
Is under pressure to change his coaching style because people are saying you’re never going to win a championship without offense.
As my primary example... I give you...
The 2007-2008 North Carolina Tarheels!
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
It's a pointless argument
Neither defense or offense alone wins a championship, but offense is more important than defense in basketball and the lack of quality shooters around the country is showing in the poor play of college basketball in general.
settle this on the court?
In a few days, there will be 64 teams (okay 65) lined up to settle these matters.
According to Ken Pomeroy’s data:
three best offensive teams with mediocre defense (rank 51-100):
Marquette 9 54
California 13 69
Arizona 7 98
three best defensive teams with mediocre offense (rank 51-100):
Louisville 51 2
Purdue 63 3
Illinois 99 5
(team name followed by offensive ranking, defensive ranking)
Other than Marquette...
I’d take any of those second three to go further. And Marquette isn’t a good example now that they have lost James.
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
Purdue and Illinois
Won’t make the Sweet 16. Louisville always plays good D, but if you notice, they’re at their best when they’re hitting the outside shot. We learned that against them. Good stats though.
Both CAN Make Sweet 16 No Doubt
Purdue knocked the snot out of Mich St a couple weeks ago.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 4:23 PM EST up reply actions
Sorry,
I meant to finish up with, "There’s no reason we can’t have good athletes who can shoot!!!)
No moral victories--it's all about Ws and Ls!!!
I'd Like UK Players To Do Both
The late Tommy Kron, for example. Great at both ends of the court.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 3:21 PM EST up reply actions
More Newspaper
A bit more news and, of course commentary. Larry Vaught’s piece, Gillispie Blame, provides the opportunity to be informed and perhaps energized, and confirms the axiom no one’s perfect.
Usually — in fact I can’t think of another time to the contrary — I’m quite impressed and consequently complimentary of Vaught’s work but this time it appears to me that he is the quintessential fed-up fan rather than objective journalist. Not to say journalists aren’t allowed an opinion but where was this critical appraisal of Gillispie, his aptitude and methods earlier? And somehow Vaught’s late-coming recognition of the less than stellar team Gillispie inherited now gives him justification to cast a critical eye on recruiting, and in doing so he becomes the all too familiar and classic second-guesser. In his final moil he advises Gillispie to accept blame as he accepts accolades, a little effort at researching Gillispie’s past would reveal that that is always his modus operandi.
Well it’s not the first and most likely not the last time that I’ve had an object of my respect proven to have feet of clay. Speaking of clay, a suggestion for Mr. AM News, read John Clay’s piece on Green Cats and get a more accurate appraisal of the challenge presented to Coach Gillispie and his efforts to meet it.
I got ...
… very much the same impression from Vaught’s piece.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
Last Year's Team Would Kick The Snot Out Of This Year's Team
And Gillispie INHERITED the 2008 team but recruited most of the 2009 team himself.
Here’s a clue. Gillispie shares the blame for 2009 but not with the prior UK coach. His staff and his recruits have been subpar this season.
The Smith Spectre
It hovers over nearly every post, every subject in one way or another. Not always evident but like The Ghostbusters, with the right equipment — hidden-agenda detectors, history-revision spotters, malodorous-memory sniffers, fallacious-legacy finders — the apparition can be if not avoided at least parried by commonsense analysis.
I Haven't Seen Much Common Sense On UK Sideline In 2008 Or 2009
More last year than this year but not much EITHER year.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 5:11 PM EST up reply actions
offense vs. defense
I tend to agree that defense is more important. (Though in some ways it’s a nonsense argument — like is my left foot or my right foot more important to walking.) Is it perhaps that defense is something that can be taught, controlled, and executed more consistently than offense? Thus a good offense is more likely to “have a bad night” than a good defense?
In any case, a run-and-gun offense is a lot more fun to watch LOSE than a grind-it-out defense. Hmmmmmmmmm…….
Offense v Defense, Zone v Man-to-Man
Respectfully, none of this matters when it comes to explaining the spotty, inconsistent play of this year’s team. The explanation, quite simply, is that this year’s team has played without a viable point guard almost the entire year, and has instead relied heavily on a player who is deficient on both the offensive and defensive ends of the court. On the offensive end, our starting PG struggles to bring the ball up the court against fast, aggressive defenders, and is absolutlely no threat to drive the lane or create any offense (much less his own shot) off the dribble, leaving the other defenders free to stay with their man rather than having to worry about helping on the drive. On the defensive end, our starting PG is simply incapable of guarding faster, more athletic players, leaving us vulnerable and exposed to teams possessing good guards (like Miami, UNC, and South Carolina to name but a few). Call me crazy, but I am convinced that—with a quality point guard— this year’s team could have easily won the SEC and made a deep run in the tournament (NCAA that is). Alas, it was not meant to be… .
Here's an interesting PG comparison...
Collectively, our PG “committee” of Porter, Liggins, Galloway, and Slone are averaging a combined 11.9 points, 8.1 assists, and 1.9 steals per game this season, while our beloved former Cat, Mr. Rondo, is averaging—by himself—11.6 points, 8.5 assists, and 1.9 steals per game this season. Just imagine, for a moment, how good Patterson and Meeks could be with Rondo running the offense and passing them the ball.
A fan can dream, you know.
Damn... Tubby should have redshirted him. ;-)
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
Not That Different
Not saying that UK wouldn’t be better off with the college-Rondo — fact is just about anyone would be an improvement — but statistics:
Rondo in 68 games in the Blue and White averaged: 9.6 ppg, 4.2 apg, 2.2 t/opg (ratio 1.9:1), 2.3 spg, and playing 28 mpg (which must be considered in any meaningful comparison)
show there isn’t as much disparity as one might imagine. We all recognize and accept that Rondo was not a good shooter at UK but I was a bit surprised at just how inept: FG% 49.3, 3FG% 28.3, and FT% 57.7.
Rondo's D
Was awesome(don’t tell anybody else on here I said that)…but that great D didn’t really get us anywhere
It did during his freshman year when he set the steals record for UK
Rondo was a good on-ball defender… but he was a terror off the ball waiting to pounce on those passing lanes!
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
Assists/TO
Would have been a big improvement not to mention he could actually bring the ball up the court. Also, one would guess that his shooting would have also improved since it appears to be improving in the NBA. Kevin Garnett will agree with me on this I am sure, Rondo can do something that apparently no one on the current UK squad can as of yet do—Feed the post. While for Rondo’s sake I am glad he went to the NBA and got his ring, I would take him this year in a second!
I am always looking for examples of how statistics don’t tell the whole story. This is a great example.
daniel,
Which is it? “A good shooter will always prevail” or “neither defense or offense alone wins a championship”? Your second statement is a lot more palatable to most of us than the first, probably because it happens to be “more” true (degrees of truth is kinda like degrees of uniqueness :-)).
The fact is that good shooters have bad games. Good defense has bad plays, but seldom bad games.
I cannot agree with you more, though, on the point about the quality of shooters in today’s games(see my post earlier) I suggest our fans take a look through the individual shooting statistics in UK’s history to see that most of our great teams had several really good shooters (my definition: above 43-44% from the field). That observation applies after approximately 1960. For some reason, there was a major increase in shooting percentages during a fairly short period before and after that date. I’m not sure what the reason was, but I’m gonna think about it.
No moral victories--it's all about Ws and Ls!!!
The Loser In The 1966 NC Game Had MUCH Better Shooters
The winner had MUCH better defenders.
Ditto the 1970 Regional finals. Or 1975 NC game.
1978 NC game, too.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 5:13 PM EST up reply actions
The same game
A certain cat had like 40? Don’t confuse it, good defensive teams can have solid offensive players.
Givens Had 41
UK was the superior defensive team.
Like it was in 1996 and 1998 too.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 5:25 PM EST up reply actions
So you're saying
We would have won the title without Givens’ 41 based on defense? “Allen Iverson voice” Defense? Man, we’re not even talking about what goes on the scoreboard, we’re talking about defense. How the hell am I going to make my team better by playing defense?
Read What I Wrote
UK has the superior defesnive team in 1978, 1996, and 1998.
Michigan was better on defense in 1993. Georgetown better in 1984. UCLA better in 1975. Texas Western better in 1966.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 5:28 PM EST up reply actions
Iverson has how many rings?
How much better has he made Detroit? Allen Iverson is more proof that Defense wins championships.
One on one
A good shooter will prevail. How many times was Jordan stopped when it mattered? Same with Kobe. Those guys make shots with the best defenders on the planet hanging all over them.
I don't think that's a fair argument
1) Jordan and Kobe are on a whole other level.
2) The offensive player in one-on-one always has the advantage of knowing where the ball is going.
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
There's a big difference in "man on man" and "one on one"
Man on Man still allows for help defense from the other defenders. A true one on one situation is entirely different.
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
But to your argument
The best offensive player in the world will prevail against the best defense in the world. Jordan, Kobe, Shaq when he was younger.
Dan Dakich Stopped Him In March 1984
Michael Jordan had superior offensive skills.
The Bulls became 6-time NBA champions when MJ developed superior DEFENSIVE skills.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 5:26 PM EST up reply actions
I like the shooters oldcat
That’s what I took the most from Casey’s q and a yesterday. Kids can’t shoot anymore, one of the reasons you see so many foreign players in the NBA. They are better shooters and have better fundamentals, but many lack the athleticism for things such as rebounding.
I'm still waiting
I remember Tubby’s winning percentage was sky high when we shot over 40 percent, but mediocre when we didn’t. Can’t remember the exact number though. You can defend all day but if you can’t score, doesn’t matter
It's 50% (Not 40%) And True Of ANY Coach
The better stat is how many L when you give up over 50% FG shooting.
LOTS!
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 5:27 PM EST up reply actions
You can score all day
You can light up VMI for 103 points, but if you can’t defend….
Learn To Read And Comprehend
You L many games when your defense gives up 50% but W many games when your defense holds opponent to 40% range.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 5:30 PM EST up reply actions
If I
Shoot 50 percent against you, I win. If I shoot under that, I lose. You call that defense, I call it offense. I guess it’s just how you look at it. Speaking of 1998, remember when were getting torched by Duke and then we caught fire and came back and won? Offense baby, strokin’
LSU 73; KY 70
LSU 46.7% FG; KY 53.8%. Doesn’t follow either argument, does it?
No moral victories--it's all about Ws and Ls!!!
Nah
Great D against Duke. I was there IN PERSON to watch it. U were (probably) not.
by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 3, 2009 7:35 PM EST up reply actions
Congrats on 2 million hits.
Thanks Ken and Truz, ASofB is the undisputed king of the BB nation blogs! You guys keep post’n and we’ll keep hitt’n!!!
On Joe Biddle's comments
Tru, I was about to defend Joe without reading the article. I actually have loved his articles in the past. I read him often. He is a very good reporter. Out of all the Tennessee writers(Tennessean, Commercial Appeal, and Knox News) he is usually very accuarate and professional. With that said……….
That whole article ticked me off. Either two things here…………we need to be very afraid because he is usually right or he has a hatred of Kentucky basketball. I think its the latter. That article was not written as fact but as an emotion. It was so ludicrous. I am appalled and will tell him so in an email. I am highly offended by the lack of professionalism. If there is any truth to it though, I ache to think about what is going to happen to BBN.
I know it's hard ...
… but I think we have to trust our administrators to do the right thing, and our press to keep us informed. Biddle could have gotten his information from Bruce Pearl, for all I know. :-)
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
[UPDATED 01/18/2012]
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
