Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Indy 500: 'Greatest Spectacle In Racing' Set For Sunday

Kentucky Basketball: Perceptions vs. Reality for the Wildcats

Kentucky is known for their defense, but their offense is extremely efficient as well.

There is a notion going around, and justifiably so, that Kentucky has the best defense in the land. Subjectively, we could argue about that all day, but objectively Kentucky currently has the 5th best adjusted defensive efficiency in the nation.

What's getting overlooked is the outstanding offensive efficiency that Kentucky is generating. Ken Pomeroy's adjusted numbers show Kentucky weighing in at #3 nationally in that measurement, with two players, Anthony Davis and Doron Lamb having national top ten offensive ratings (a measure of personal offensive efficiency).

Basketball Prospectus has this interesting piece by John Gasaway up today looking at each conference and team performances to date, summarized with record, pace, OE, DE, and EM (efficiency margin, which is your scoring margin), all considering only conference play.

Kentucky is scoring 1.19 points/possession in league games, and allowing 0.92 points/possession. That leaves a scoring margin of 0.27 points/possession, as Gasaway puts it, a "ridiculous" number for a major conference member. For comparison, Ohio St., who happens to have the best defense in the land considering all games and a better defensive efficiency than UK considering only conference games (where teams are presumed to get their toughest top-to-bottom challenges), the offensive efficiency they are putting up is only 1.10 P/Pos while allowing 0.89, a margin of only 0.22 -- still awesome, but well behind the Wildcats.

Star-divide

To be fair, there is no doubt that the Big Ten is better top to bottom, so Kentucky can't get too comfortable with their position from a statistical point of view. But I find it pretty interesting that many people assume Syracuse to be the main threat to Kentucky should we all be so fortunate as to make it to a Final Four. I think that's largely because Syracuse has a style somewhat similar to Kentucky offensively, and is a very athletic team.

But Syracuse's numbers don't back up that perception. The Big East is widely considered weaker this year than the Big Ten (and barely stronger than the SEC), and Syracuse's 1.12 OE and 0.95 DE (EM 0.17) don't seem to be in the same rare air with Kentucky and Ohio St. so far, and I think it's really notable that neither of the others have a offensive efficiency as high as Kentucky, a team that's been lauded mostly for defense.

Look, there could be a number of teams that can beat UK on a given night. Vanderbilt came closer than most UK fans would like to admit on Saturday to completing a big comeback and hanging a loss on the Wildcats. With that said, I have a lot of confidence in the 'Cats right now, as I think most Kentucky fans do.

When it comes to finishing off the season, the odds of UK running the table in the SEC aren't overwhelming -- Log5 sets them at about 53% using Ken Pomeroy's numbers. The odds of UK running the table through the SEC tournament are a bit more daunting at 35%, according to one of Ken's tweets from the other day.

Is Kentucky the favorite to win it all? In many minds, sure, but there is still quite a bit of basketball to be played, and an unexpected loss or two could go a long way toward mitigating all the optimism of the Big Blue Nation and outright awe of some college basketball pundits.

When it comes to being in New Orleans on March 31st, if Kentucky wants to still be dancing, they'd better focus on getting better. They can never be too good, that's for sure.

Comment 39 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Vegas Championship Odds

Cats far and away favorite at 2:1. OSU 5:1, UNC, ’Cuse, KU 8:1, MSU 12:1

"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." - George Orwell

by Wild Weasel on Feb 14, 2012 3:31 PM EST reply actions  

WW - Where are you getting your odds?

I see …

Kentucky 3/1
Duke 12/1
Kansas 9/1
Michigan State 15/1
Missouri 10/1
North Carolina 15/2
Ohio State 5/1
Syracuse 13/2

Here >>> (Link)

by TeamWeaver on Feb 14, 2012 5:54 PM EST up reply actions  

Here

Link

"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." - George Orwell

by Wild Weasel on Feb 14, 2012 6:01 PM EST up reply actions  

Now those odds are odd

UL and Texas as 10-1 with Duke and Syracuse next – wow.

I think the odds maker that WW found makes much more sense.

A man is nothing more than a summation of his scars!

by KansasUKCat on Feb 15, 2012 4:08 AM EST up reply actions  

I agree they are odd, in fact these odds resemble what they had at the beginning of the year....

Because, these were the odds before the season started and had been updated a month or so ago with UK at 3-1 and UNC around 5-1. I am not sure why they would have swapped them back to the original odds. In fact, I kept questioning these “updated” odds even after I posted it.

Slower Traffic Keep Right!

by SevenRings on Feb 15, 2012 11:42 AM EST up reply actions  

Cats Defense

It might not be the best in the nation over the course of the entire season, but I don’t know if anybody can lock down like these guys can.

by UKFanStuckInDC on Feb 14, 2012 3:32 PM EST reply actions  

Yeah, that's the subjective part.

There are times when this defense is absolutely impenetrable.

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

by Glenn Logan on Feb 14, 2012 5:26 PM EST up reply actions  

The problem with defensive stats ...

is that it is very difficult to track/measure what doesn’t happen, i.e., impact on opponent offense, and that imo is why Ohio State scales out ahead of Kentucky on Defense.

by TeamWeaver on Feb 14, 2012 5:51 PM EST up reply actions  

We are Kentucky......we make our own reality.......

We care not for the burdens of the common man…..

I am now and shall forever be the Cat in The Hat, The Artist Formerly Known As ABC!!!

by Greg Alan Edwards on Feb 14, 2012 5:06 PM EST reply actions  

Just Wait Coach Cal Always Has Always had Something He Didnt Wanna Show Till Tourney Time .....

I Believe By Tourney Time
Anthony Davis Will Be Knocking Down That Tre At The Top Of The Key
Where He Gets The Hand Offs And He Is Wide Open , Coach Cal Groomed Josh Harellson & Patrick Patterson to Take That Shoot With Confidence So I Would Believe He Can Get A Former Guard To Take & Make It Easily .

by RIP SEAN TAYLOR 21 on Feb 14, 2012 5:21 PM EST reply actions  

The offense is the promising part

Everyone loves to quote “Defense wins championships” but in basketball the truth is you need to have a great offense. UK is great at both, but the edge in offense is more important than a corresponding edge in defense.

Statistics is the part of mathematics that God didn't invent. - Ethan Smith

by JLeverenz on Feb 14, 2012 5:47 PM EST reply actions  

JL, I love you,man

(and I’m not after your Bud Light), but I respectfully disagree. Offenses all run cold occasionally as in the WVU game two years ago, but a good defense is at the discretion of the players. If they want to hustle, the defense will be there. Sometimes the more you try the worse you shoot.

I really don’t want to get into a long discussion, but the “truth” in this matter is, like beauty, in the eye of the beholder.

Two things don't last: dogs chasing cars and pros putting for pars.

by oldcat'69 on Feb 14, 2012 6:12 PM EST via mobile up reply actions  

The last 8 NCAA champs (and Final Four participants) run counter to that though

All of them were good on both ends of the floor, but the champs were all better on offense than they were on defense.

Defense is great at keeping teams in games, but at some point you have to score points to win.

Statistics is the part of mathematics that God didn't invent. - Ethan Smith

by JLeverenz on Feb 14, 2012 6:18 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm not denying

that you have to score some points; as a matter of fact, I’m big on being able to put the ball in the hole (see my profile), but I don’t recall last year’s Final Four being an offensive display worth watching.

Two things don't last: dogs chasing cars and pros putting for pars.

by oldcat'69 on Feb 14, 2012 7:03 PM EST via mobile up reply actions  

Thus great defense gives you the opportunity

to stay in the game so that your offense can win it even on an off night.

Making waves in a sea of blue.

by kywineman on Feb 14, 2012 8:59 PM EST up reply actions  

Certainly true

And I don’t want to sound like I’m discounting the importance of defense – it’s clearly important to be able to stop your opponent. But the last several NCAA Champs (and most of the teams in the Final Four) have been better on offense than defense – not much, but better.

Really it’s a false choice – you need both to win. But I figured I could get a discussion going with someone ;-)

Statistics is the part of mathematics that God didn't invent. - Ethan Smith

by JLeverenz on Feb 14, 2012 9:11 PM EST up reply actions  

Need both?

I think we are 5th and 3rd in the nation in offense and defense efficiency if I read, you and Glenn and Ken Pomeroy correctly. Sounds like we are right good on both ends of the court. (OSU also does pretty good there – they may end up being the ones we gotta get past).

by sweasyf on Feb 14, 2012 9:13 PM EST up reply actions  

yup

So really the whole argument for UK (and Ohio St too really) is pretty academic – they are both great at offense and defense. On defense the actual difference between being ranked 5th and 1st right now is about 5 points per 100 possession or roughly 6%.

Statistics is the part of mathematics that God didn't invent. - Ethan Smith

by JLeverenz on Feb 14, 2012 9:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Stats aren't reality.

They’re some strange residual of it. The debris of reality. Often misused and misunderstood. We believe in them far too much.

Subjectivity is not a bad thing. It’s not inherently untrustworthy. I would argue that our perception of reality is often closer to the mark.

“But subjectivity is objective.”
“Not in a rational scheme of perception.”
“Perception is irrational. It implies imminence.”
“But judgment of any system of phenomena exists in any rational, metaphysical or epistemological contradiction to an abstracted empirical concept such as being, or to be, or to occur in the thing itself, or of the thing itself.”
“Yeah, I’ve said that many times.”

by Wheatgerm on Feb 14, 2012 6:54 PM EST reply actions  

The one irrefutable

stat is the comparison of scores at the end of the game.

Two things don't last: dogs chasing cars and pros putting for pars.

by oldcat'69 on Feb 14, 2012 7:06 PM EST via mobile up reply actions  

There ya a go!

God Bless Our Troops............Especially Our Snipers!

by bigbill992001 on Feb 14, 2012 7:49 PM EST up reply actions  

oops......too quick on the trigger

There ya go!

God Bless Our Troops............Especially Our Snipers!

by bigbill992001 on Feb 14, 2012 7:49 PM EST up reply actions  

That's the only stat

and in a one-loss and yer outta here tourney, that stat can be real fickle and subject to an off shooting night, a couple of guys with the flu or whatever.

(But we have as good a chance this year, as I remember since Bibby went “nutty” on us.)

by sweasyf on Feb 14, 2012 9:16 PM EST up reply actions  

well, they *are* reality, I mean those things did happen

They just aren’t all of reality ;-)

Statistics is the part of mathematics that God didn't invent. - Ethan Smith

by JLeverenz on Feb 14, 2012 9:25 PM EST up reply actions  

Agreed

The best example of stats not telling the whole story is pitching wins in baseball. You might have a guy win 15 games one year and think he had a good year, nevermind the high WHIP or ERA or low BABIP against.

Dayman, Fighter of the Nightman, Champion of the Sun

@btcoop71

by btcoop71 on Feb 14, 2012 11:22 PM EST up reply actions  

Stats are undeniable reality.

What they are not is the entirety of it. There is nothing strange or residual about them — they are measurements of physical reality, without the context.

Your argument, however is not without merit, although what you are talking about is not so much perception, but the context that the statistics cannot present. All statistics are irrefutable, in the sense that they are cold, undeniable facts. Statistics, especially at the level of the ones presented above, are absolutely solid in every way. They are, in their essence, scientific truths.

Where we go wrong is divining their meaning, but the statistics themselves, assuming they are collected properly and analyzed with proven mathematical techniques, are as real as it gets. Attacking them serves no purpose.

Attack the conclusions all you want, but leave the stats alone. They are innocent bystanders. :-)

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

by Glenn Logan on Feb 15, 2012 6:26 AM EST up reply actions  

There are no "innocent bystanders" when you are discussing #8......lol

I am now and shall forever be the Cat in The Hat, The Artist Formerly Known As ABC!!!

by Greg Alan Edwards on Feb 15, 2012 8:37 AM EST up reply actions  

SOS ... do any of these Offensive / Defensive statistics take in to account the Strength of Schedule??

Obviously, we have played some very good teams; but, that cupcake part of the early season really dropped our SOS … in the stats I have seen we are somewhere around 20 or 25th in the country.

I think our defense is one of the best if not THE the best in the country ..

by ukcris on Feb 14, 2012 7:13 PM EST reply actions  

KenPom does

Basically adding/subtracting the “average” from each result to arrive at the “adjusted” mark. I’m not sure that’s the best way to do it in theory, but it works for him.

There’s also an adjustment for where the game was played and how recent it was – more recent games get more weight.

Statistics is the part of mathematics that God didn't invent. - Ethan Smith

by JLeverenz on Feb 14, 2012 9:19 PM EST up reply actions  

Bottom line. Whoever plays the best against their individual opponents for six straight games will be National Champions. I want that to be the Kentucky Wildcats. As does all of BBN.

Also in passing, at the beginning of the season, AD’s toughness and endurance was a question mark. However in recent games (brawls) he has shown tremendous staying power.

This makes me think of an old Timex watch commercial: “Timex (AD) takes a licking but keeps on ticking.” Seriously. LOL

by bigboyblue on Feb 14, 2012 7:47 PM EST reply actions  

Countdown To Madness

ESPN’s Jason King looks at many possibilities including this Final Four: UK, UNC, Syracuse and MSU.

"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." - George Orwell

by Wild Weasel on Feb 14, 2012 10:10 PM EST reply actions  

Given the frequency of upsets,

unlikely, but wouldn’t that be something!!!!!

Two things don't last: dogs chasing cars and pros putting for pars.

by oldcat'69 on Feb 15, 2012 5:40 PM EST via mobile up reply actions  

2011 Final Four.

Projections are great, it is fun, and makes for great discussion.

However, in last year’s Final Four, there were no #1 or #2 seeds. An 8 seed, for only the second time in two decades, was in the title game.

As far as the defense vs offense discussion, which wins games…look at the scores from last year. Butler vs VCU: 70-62. UConn vs UK: 56-55. The title game UConn 53, Butler 41. Not exactly an offensive show.

No one, absolutely no one could shoot the ball. Offense puts the folks in the stands…….defense wins when the offense doesn’t “click.”

"Adapt, Improvise, and Overcome." Gunny Highway, "Heartbreak Ridge"

by seattlekat on Feb 15, 2012 8:32 AM EST reply actions  

Seems to me that the bigger question right now is seeding...

The problem with statistics is that they often just highlight the obvious. I work the numbers when I go to the race track, but the speed ratings I calculate do a poor job of separating the very good horses, but a pretty good job at spotting the under-rated glue pots who have a shot at the money. I think we all know that this UK team easily has the potential to go 6-0 in the tourney. The key is the trip that they’ll have to make in order to get to the Big Easy.

I think the two more relevant questions right now are: (1) how many losses can the Cats withstand and still expect a #1 seed? My guess is at least two, maybe three. and (2) how many losses can the Cats withstand and still expect a #1 in the Catlanta region? Again, I’d say two (assuming one happens in the SEC tourney) before they’re shipped out west.

I have a friend who constantly fixates on poll rankings. I’m a happy #2 or #3 if it means we get a #1 in the Atlanta bracket.

11 12 32 34 3/28/92 Kentucky's Pride

by BeachBubbaTex on Feb 15, 2012 9:36 AM EST reply actions  

Yeah, I could care less about the ranking, altough #1 is nice.

Just give me that one seed.

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

by Glenn Logan on Feb 15, 2012 10:09 AM EST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

An exciting community-driven SBNation blog, by and for fans of the Kentucky Wildcats.

Community Guidelines
[UPDATED 01/18/2012]

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Eko_world_small
Coach Cal and His Love for Hair Flare
323_small
N.Y. Times/Pete Thamel / FLW Tour- Nerlens Noel Open
323_small
In Cal We Trust?
Small
Show 'Em The Money
323_small
Richie Farmer: Unforgettable Or Not?
Eko_world_small
Huge Problem for UK FANS
Img_0019_small
Not of general interest.
323_small
The King Is Dead, Long Live The King!
Grover_avatar_small
Reds Fans Upset UK to be Honored at Tonight's Game
Small
Recruiting In 1960's > Limit Was 25 Scholarships

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Twitter Widget -- Follow me!


Managing Editor

Tru_small Glenn Logan

Editor

Derby_024_small BigSkyCat

Fl_family_photo_small Ken Howlett

Author

Small JLeverenz

Justified-olyphant_small jc25

P1000195_small a2d2

Img_0019_small Alex Scutchfield