Kentucky Basketball: Picking Through The Wreckage Of The UNC Game
by Glenn Logan on Dec 5, 2010 1:37 PM EST
in Kentucky Wildcats Basketball
Email
PrintThis morning, I got up with a hangover. Not a hangover from an excess of adult beverages, mind you, but a hangover from a game that the Kentucky Wildcats should have won. Lounging around the house for a few hours massaging my badly bruised fandom seemed like the best recovery method other than a Bloody Mary, which I rejected on "not on vacation" grounds. Ultimately, watching Charlie's Angels (the movie) again was my cure, which was worth suffering through the weak storyline, predictable dialogue and lame humor if only to watch Cameron Diaz dance in her delicates, and Drew Barrymore roll down a big hill in the altogether.
With that now in the rear view, it seems time to put the nose to the proverbial grindstone and employ time-tested forensic techniques in order to determine exactly what went wrong in the game against the North Carolina Tar Heels. I know, I know, we have gone over many of the more obvious problems in the game thread and postmortem, and rehashing those is not really productive. Instead, it should behoove us to compare our perceptions against statistics to see how accurate they were.
So the first thing we will be doing is examining the Four Factors to Winning, and see what those tell us, after the jump.
The Four Factors look like this:
Now, I confess to being a bit surprised when I saw this. For all the world, I thought we got killed on the offensive glass, but that simply was not so. Yes, the Tar Heels did beat us on the offensive boards, but it was not the utter domination first impression suggested. 19%-23% is simply not a drubbing in any sense of the word.
Why did it look so bad? Probably because there were a few more OR's available to the Tar Heels, and it just felt like Kentucky was not getting the job done. Another problem was that when UK did get an OR, they did not convert it, and the Tar Heels did. The Heels more than doubled UK's production in second-chance points, 11-5, despite only a 4% advantage in the OR% statistic. In other words, they were much more efficient with their OR's than UK.
No, the real culprit for this loss is pretty easy to see. UNC more than doubled UK's free throw rate percent, which means the number of free throws attempted per field goal attempt. North Carolina shot more than half a free throw for every field goal attempt, or converted into a better number, shot a free throw slightly more than once for every two shots they took. Kentucky shot free throws only once for every three shots they put up. Right there lies the roots of Kentucky's defeat. It was only as close as it was because Carolina was so ordinary in FT%, although they did shoot much better than they have been of late.
Another problem that Kentucky had was how well the Tar Heels took care of the basketball. UNC had been turning the ball over at over 22% per game. For instance, against the Vanderbilt Commodores, they turned the ball over on almost one possession in three. Against Kentucky, their TO% was less than half that.
This is a continuing problem for Kentucky. The 'Cats simply are not forcing enough turnovers in games, and that speaks volumes about their defense. Good teams, like the Duke Bllue Devils and the Ohio State Buckeyes are forcing around 25% or more turnovers versus their opponents. If UK had forced Carolina into those kind of turnovers, they would have likely won the game based on their points off turnover production. Smaller teams like Kentucky should be able to turn over bigger teams at a higher rate than this.
In the final analysis, the story of this game is a simple one. Kentucky did not play defense well enough to win, and Carolina got to the line an excessive amount. The offensive rebounding of UNC was a comparatively minor contributing factor. Failure to turn over the vulnerable UNC ballhandlers was, in my opinion, a bigger factor than the OR% difference. Fouls, ultimately, were what lost the game, both in terms of fouls to our big people and FTR%.
This is a good shooting, good ballhalding Kentucky team, but it has a long way to go defensively. Depending on DeAndre Liggins and Darius Miller for good defense on the primary scorers is fine, and it usually works, but the larger problem for this team is that they simply don't get after it on defense enough. Until they do, these kind of losses will keep cropping up.
68 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think
another factor to be considered was shot selection. In most cases you want to work the ball down low for a high percentage shot. However, when the other team has length and uses it well for blocking shots, the percentage of made attempts is going to fall and yesterday it fell dramatically. We were hitting well from the field and should have used that to spread the floor and keep them from packing in under the basket. Just another factor in the loss, in my opinion.
I woke up feeling BLUE this morning. It's gonna be a great day.
IMO that was the most obvious reason we lost
Per Roy Williams:
"We tried to use John on him, because John’s size would bother everybody," Williams said. "The first half, we didn’t double (Jones). Second half, if he got the ball against anyone other than John, we were going to double him in the post."
Jones was 0 for 7 from the floor in the second half before fouling out with 3:04 to play.
We played right into their only strength. If Jones had been told to stay on the perimeter and use his driving ability when available and use his outside and mid-range jump shot, he would more then likely had drawn quite a few fouls and been able to stay in the game a little longer. Making his FT’s is another story though.
Nick
We were hitting well from the field
but only in the first half. In the second half, FG % fell precipitously.
that is interesting...
i was thinking this team was better defensively at this point in the season than last years – ie, it was playing defense well enough for our defense to win a few games.
i guess on the FT – we can blame it on the refs (sarcasm font). that is not my opinion (or position) but it does highlight how the team did not play well enough to take the game out of the refs hands…
only one rule in my house - uk has to be your favorite college bball team
Overtime would have been a loss as well yesterday.
As the clock ticked down yesterday, my husband and I lamented that the game would have to be either won or lost in regulation – overtime was not an option as with the players that had fouled out as loss in OT would have been inevitable IMO. I just cant fathom a squad of Polson, Hood, Liggins, Poole, and Lamb beating that North Carolina team yesterday. Just really made me see the true “ugliness” of our lack of depth that will undoubtedly make overtime our enemy more often than the continued opportunity it is usually reagarded as.
It is not worth an intelligent man’s time to be in the majority. By definition, there are already enough people to do that.
by kentuckygirl0724 on Dec 5, 2010 3:21 PM EST reply actions
I agree
Depth is our weak point. We have 3 big men: Jones, Jorts, and Vargas. That is only 12 fouls to give before someone fouls out if you manage them perfectly. That is terriblly low for 2 positions, especially the ones that get the most fouls. And it is a huge drop off for Vargas at this point.
reeks
I know it reeks of desperations, but with Kanter still up in the air, couldn’t we look to the FB team for some depth (i.e. fouls) inside? I know both Tevan Eatmon-Nared (6’7" 280) and Collins Ukwu (6’5" 250) played on their HS basketball teams with some success. So did LaRod King, but he was more of a SF.
Just a thought.
i've been waiting for this moment all my life...but it's not quite right.
Hexapodia as the Key Insight
I was at the game and I suggest it was the way UK decided to play that spelled their doom, not their execution. And the same for the Heels.
Dean Smith charted in the late sixties that drawing a foul was the most effective play in basketball. Coach Smith’s analysis (he was a math major) showed that 1.0+ points per possession was good offense. Even most poor FT shooters make 50% (1 point per possession, for the numerically challenged) and 70% at the line is 1.4 points per possession, insanely good offense. Kentucky simply did not play the type of ball that resulted in fouls.
Zeller, in particular, took the ball to the hole, either getting a layup or a foul. Therein lies the reason that the Heels, who did not make a basket during the decisive ending minutes of the game, outscored the jump shooters of Kentucky. It was the differing offensive philosophies of the coaches.
Not so much philosphies ...
… as game choices.
For whatever reason, Kentucky made a conscious choice to run the pick and roll instead of the dribble drive. The pick and roll generates more open jump shots.
I don’t know why Calipari elected to abandon the DDM in favor of the pick and roll in this game. Kentucky has run the DDM effectively against lesser teams all year long, so it is a curious decision. That decision did make penetration more rare.
I would dispute that the choice “spelled their doom,” but it was new and different. This was the first game all year in which Kentucky ran the pick and roll in favor of the DDM. They have run the pick and roll all year, but not nearly as much as they did in this game. Again, it was a curious choice. UK is a much better shooting team than the Tar Heels, so perhaps it seemed a good idea. In retrospect, I wonder if he still thinks it was?
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
pick and roll versus DDM
given the length of UNC (as their shoot blocking showed) negates the main focus of the DMM – namely, to get the ball to the rim.
this particular UK team is very good at the mid range jumper, which is suited for the pick and roll.
that being said, it seems that TJ should have been allowed to take it to the hole.
only one rule in my house - uk has to be your favorite college bball team
by memphis wildcat on Dec 6, 2010 12:31 PM EST up reply actions
Ford
Just wondering. Why does a UNC fan post here 32 times and only 6 on his own site? I disagree with your premise also. UK lost the game because of Zeller. Our 2 big men would have played very little had Enis been in the game, which was Cal’s plan for the year. We will have to fight this problem for the rest of this year. You take Zeller out of the equation and it is a blowout! Congratulations on your win!
Happy Days are here again! Wildcat's have #1 recruiting class again!
Oldcat,
he posts here because it is so lonely over there. There were 8 posts on the game thread and none on the pregame. Maybe if he hangs around long enough he will start to like a darker shade of blue.
I woke up feeling BLUE this morning. It's gonna be a great day.
Ford Perfect
Well, I see someone left the barn door open again. I for one do not need your “analysis” of why we lost. It is perfectly obvious
to anyone with eyes why we lost a close game regardless of FT, FG, TO or 3 Pointers made. ASoB has always allowed our opponents to post here. But as I said, I personally, don’t need your take on the game.
Since you are a visitor please understand that I mean no disrespect. Just telling it like it is.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
I don't see why
we should be upset at all, in any way whatsoever, when a fan of the game of basketball posts a comment offering a respectful analysis of one game of basketball.
Do we have to be “vetted” before we can post here? Of course not.
The one thing that first attracted me to this site was the prevalence of intelligent commentary and not the all-to-common trash talking garbage that fills the typical sports blog and web sites. Please don’t try to insist that everyone here must conform to a world-view that matches yours. I firmly believe that there is ample room for fans from other teams to post here, especially when they are clearly not trolling and have intelligent comments to add to the discussion.
Thanks!
jeffy
I trust you can read. I said nothing about being upset. That is another ridiculous assumption. The post was not directed in disrespect and I believe that I stated that. I also stated that ASoB has always allowed our oppentents to comment here, did I not? Are you positive that you aren’t trolling? The, “Thanks”, doesn’t fool me. You’re welcome.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
:)
>> “I trust you can read.”
Is this another example of not showing disrespect??? Wow.
Could you just look back at what you actually wrote:
“But as I said, I personally, don’t need your take on the game.”
And you really think that this doesn’t display a lack of respect?!?!?!!?
Our opponents are allowed to comment here? Absolutely, you said that. But the rest of what you say puts the lie to that claim.
And then you infer that I am a troll! Golly gee whiz, but that does hurt. Ouch! Guess, I’d better go lick my wounds …
jeffy
To call someone’s statement a “LIE” is to call that person a liar. Poor, poor jeffy.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
a2d2
I have nothing to say.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
alwaysblue,
When an opposing fan posts his/her “analysis” here in our little corner of the BBN and does it in a respectable way, we can read it (or not if you choose) and comment. We shouldn’t bash them for posting their “take”. The BBN is knowledgeable about the game and 99% of us want to also be known as courteous fans. As long as they show respect, we should respect them in return.
If an opposing fan comes here and is disrespectful they know they will not be shown the welcome mat when they post a taunting comment. This type of thing is discouraged from existing here. But in cases such as this, we are encouraged not to talk to “ghosts”. Most know I am working on that. :-)
It is best to think before we comment and think long and hard about how we would feel if a comment we make were to be made at us instead of by us. Most people know (or have learned) that it is hard to read emotion in text. And when we have nothing to say, we should not say it.
Blue... there is no other color to Bleed !!!
a2d2
I have nothing to say.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
Analysis from a different
perspective keeps one from closing down the mind and running in tiny circles. I see nothing wrong with Ford Prefect presenting his point of view. In fact I think we should all go to Carolina March and post respectful points of our own. At least that way they would have some posts.
I woke up feeling BLUE this morning. It's gonna be a great day.
Welcome, Ford. Truly.
Thank you for the refresher on Dean. It’s something I remember reading long ago, and something I absolutely agree with. Bilas pointed this out quite a bit last year: “Dean Smith used to say that the line is the most efficient place on the court from which to score.”
It doesn’t take a math major. Shooting 50 percent from two-point range will win most games. And you can shoot the equivalent by making 33.3 percent of your threes. But many people don’t appreciate that you can also shoot the equivalent by making only 50 percent of your free throws! Most teams shoot much better than that. Indeed, if you could spend the entire game at the stripe shooting a disappointing 60 percent, you should jump at the chance. Not to mention your opponent’s foul trouble.
I would make two points. One game does not a coach’s philosophy make. And Cal’s philosophy is, in fact, about getting to the rim. Dean would approve.
Here’s the perverse thing, Ford. Jumps shots really worked for us the first 30 minutes. It was when we stopped taking them and started driving the ball inside, seemingly consistent with Dean’s philosophy, that killed our offensive production those last 8-10 mintues. Why? Simple really. We could not compete inside, and we could not get the whistles upon which Dean’s philosophy relies. So I agree. It was the way we decided to play the end of the game that spelled our doom. But not for the reason you suggest.
Dean’s philosophy was also about taking easier shots than your opponent. Sometimes that means not going to your opponent’s strength. And sometimes, when you’re in an unfriendly environment, you just don’t get the breaks. There’s not much any coach’s philosophy can do about that.
Added Benefits for a Foul
Down in Chapel Hill, we have taken to referring to early success with threes as a curse. Of course, the Heels have not had much long range success since Wayne Ellington left, but even the 2009 UNC team occasionally suffered from forgetting to go inside first. Hansbrough averaged being fouled eight times a game. That is a DQ for one and one-half opponents plus the 70% of free throws he made. Hard to match scoring threes, no matter how many. The odds are against beating an inside-oriented team with the long ball.
In addition to being a very efficient way to score, drawing fouls also can result in less playing time for your key opponents. I believe that 4 UK players had 5 fouls during Saturday’s game, but before they were disqualified, they had already spent some time on the bench. Both the UK offense and defense were made less effective by the accumulation of fouls.
And with reference to another poster’s comment, I post here from time to time because UK is an important part of basketball and I like basketball. I’m mostly a lurker, reading much more often than I post. The fans on ASOB are quick to see other possibilities than my conclusions and I appreciate their insights. Often I learn, perhaps sometimes I point out something of interest to the UK crowd, and I always enjoy the opinions of informed basketball fans.
As Mr. Spock was wont to say, “Grow long and prosper!”
by Ford Prefect on Dec 5, 2010 11:23 PM EST up reply actions
I believe that Spock said
“LIVE long and prosper.”
:D
KansasUKCat
Yes, I agree. Kinda childish too. But then it’s not bad to remain young at heart as LONG as one can. Sooner or later though, one has to grow up. I did at age 18. It’s a tough world out there.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
Ford Perfect
“Grow Long and prosper”. I know what you’re talking about. And I don’t believe it’s a typo either.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
KansasUKCat
Thanks man. Us old duffers have to get in a lick every now and then. Hee.Hee.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
Thanks, Alwaysblue, I treasure your understanding
An attempt at humor, obviously not appreciated (or apprehended, as a wag of my acquaintance was fond of saying) by all.
Ford Perfect
THANK YOU, my good fellow. I’m a very understanding person.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
Alwaysblue...
I know you don’t mean to come across as confrontational, but chalk me up as another that thinks you’re out of line with this comment.
Ford is a fan who likes in-depth basketball discussion and obviously can’t find it amongst fellow fans of his favorite team. ;-) Therefore, I completely understand why he would come here. He also presented his thoughts in a rational and non-confrontational manner, I welcome more fans like him.
Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."
UK1972
I have nothing to say.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
Bluehound
I have nothing to say.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
chirop1
I have nothing to say.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
Please stop.
If you have nothing to say, please say nothing.
Thanks.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
What struck me, looking at the boxscore
Was how very few minutes the Seventh man and onwards played for Kentucky. 6 people accounted for all 26 personal fouls, and outside of the main 6 players (who averaged 31 minutes, or just over 75% of possible playing time) you had 3 people play a combined 12 minutes and score all of 0 points.
North Carolina, on the other hand, had their best 6 play for 25 minutes, and had 9 players combining together for their 20 fouls.
That’s not bad depth, that’s horribly bad depth. That’s beyond atrociously bad depth. Kentucky’s starting 5 aren’t good enough to win most games when they only have 6 contributors, period. I know it’s been listed, too, but just to point out Gametracker summaries, of all of Kentucky’s players listed as Forwards (TJ, Vargas, Harrelson) went 5-21 (24%) from the field, 0-3 from 3, 3-6 from FT, 1 assist, 3 Turnovers, and 15 fouls. UNC’s four forwards went 18-34 (53%), 1-3, 17-23 (74%) FT, 3 Assist, 8 Turnovers, and 10 Fouls. When UNC’s forwards completely out-class your own, you know there’s trouble.
One game a year I kinda wouldn’t mind Kentucky winning… ;-)
______________________________________________
That's (333333jorkland)^2 and $$$$$immons to you, chump.
Yeah, we kinda new that.
I hear Cal is gonna have a BBQ soon, know any recruits that might want to come?
I woke up feeling BLUE this morning. It's gonna be a great day.
If we're going to jump straight from
“Wow, Kentucky, what’s up with this?” to “Let’s slide in a comment that adds nothing to the conversation and is only meant to make people irritated” then…
- I just punched my girlfriend in the eye. Luckily, Calipari is my judge so I’m good.
- The NIT called, they’re mad that you just let their premiere team beat you.
- LOL u can’t stop Kembo Walker.
- UMass called, they want their Final Four back. I hear Calipari’s been there once with Memphi— wait, no, nope, that’s gone too, isn’t it?
______________________________________________
That's (333333jorkland)^2 and $$$$$immons to you, chump.
I stand by my question.
Was just hoping you had some solutions.
I woke up feeling BLUE this morning. It's gonna be a great day.
Ok you two, don't make me pull this car over!
Then it comes to be that the soothing light at the end of your tunnel, is just a freight train coming your way...
@btcoop71
He started it!
And my feet hurt, I had to drive through Lexington over thanksgiving! ;-)
______________________________________________
That's (333333jorkland)^2 and $$$$$immons to you, chump.
The most appropriate response to this post?
LOL
"It breaks your heart. It is designed to break your heart. The game begins in the spring, when everything else begins again, and it blossoms in the summer, filling the afternoons and evenings, and then as soon as the chill rains come, it stops and leaves you to face the fall alone." A. Bartlett Giamatti
That's true.
Calipari’s the coach, and I trust his judgment on that, but we looked a bit weary in the second half. I think we need another guy to contribute at least 10 minutes per game. I’d hope it would be Jon Hood by now.
But I don’t see practice. We’ll just have to trust the coach to do the right thing there. I think we need at least one and arguably two more players to see at least 5 mpg, but Calipari has always played a short rotation.
A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan
You are right Glenn
Playing another guy or two would help. And you would think in would be Hood and Poole. But I get the feeling Cal doesn’t trust those two guys. Don’t know what is going on with Poole, but I have already stated my concerns about Hood. I just don’t think he is all that good.
Agreed
Most people say you should have about an 8 man rotation. Right now it’s a stretch to say UK has a 7-man one, and production from some of those starters is nothing close to what it needs to be for a championship-caliber team. I’ve heard you guys bemoaning Cal keeping some scholarships in his pocket for this most recent class, even before Kanter was deemed ineligible..?
______________________________________________
That's (333333jorkland)^2 and $$$$$immons to you, chump.
12
Calipari intended to have a 12 man roster.
He only has 10 but essentially only plays 7.
by FortyYearCatFan on Dec 6, 2010 8:26 AM EST up reply actions
And that 7th person
Against UNC, only played 9 minutes.
______________________________________________
That's (333333jorkland)^2 and $$$$$immons to you, chump.
Yep. And that depth, such as it is, will never gain any experience sitting on that bench. Great observation. Cal is still the man though and to be fair he has gone through a very understandable mind distracting experience during the last 8 days. I know we here at ASoB understand that and will not get down on Cal for what appeared to be a lack of concentration in this game.
Go Cal and the Big Blue Cats and the Big Blue Nation.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
Me thinks..
I miss D. Dodson more than I thought I would…
..Playing the Cats gives you an uneasy feeling..like looking in your rear view mirror and seeing a police car..
BlueOrion
I agree. He sure would have helped. However every decision we make in life cannot be correct. We are too fallible.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
God, I just realized.
I’m going to be preoccupied with Kanter again tomorrow. Did UK submit affidavits from Enes and his parents on the issue of knowledge? Will a Newton argument make any difference? Are the educational expenses the unforgivable sin? Will the reinstatement staff rule quickly?
I have to write a decision on an administrative appeal. Like the Reinstatement Committee, I have no jurisdiction to review new evidence. And I have to decide whether to affirm on the record before me or send the case back for further development of the evidence. If I’m not careful, I might absent-mindedly cite to the NCAA 2010-11 Division I Manual bylaws or Kanter v. NCAA.
This was not a turrible loss ( to quote the round mound of rebound)
however, when a team like Carolina suddenly does so many things better than they have done them all season, one does have some questions to present themselves. We brought on some of this, but everyone now knows that the key to beating us is to get us in foul trouble. We drop our heads when one of our big guns has to sit, and the rest of the team does not take up all of the slack. They gave it a good effort Saturday, but cme up short. I can live with it as long as it does not become a habit for this team. They have to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and move on.
I am now and forever shall be The Cat In The Hat....The Artist formerly known as ABC!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Dec 6, 2010 10:05 AM EST reply actions
It just showed our main weakness without Kanter....and that is the 5
Then it comes to be that the soothing light at the end of your tunnel, is just a freight train coming your way...
@btcoop71
Greg
Yep. The zebras sure know it too.
I love the Cats,
The Cats love me,
And both of us love,
The S....E....C.
yes, those gentlemen with their striped shirts
and their inadvertent whistles do tend to make it rough on a fella…..
I am now and forever shall be The Cat In The Hat....The Artist formerly known as ABC!
by Greg Alan Edwards on Dec 6, 2010 11:59 AM EST up reply actions
Cats Drop To #16
Highest ranked 2-loss team; UConn #6, Vols 13, UW and Gators ranked.
"I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes." Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776
A Telling Statistic
Harrellson has zero FT attempts.
"I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes." Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
[UPDATED 01/18/2012]
Related FanPosts on A Sea Of Blue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
