Maybe so but that offense did rank 14th last year in offensive efficiency so they definitely were not bad.
Bottom line Pope has to do something about the defense
- Thread starter Dreklie
- Start date
Maybe so but that offense did rank 14th last year in offensive efficiency so they definitely were not bad.
The reason I pulled Vandy nd Louisville out to compare, is because both teams have new voaches and rosters built through tge portal, just like us.
I am not expecting a big defensive improvement, going from 84th to 50th isn't sometning monumental, but it at least puts our efficiency rating in the respectable range and might be good enough to win a 1 possession game against a team like Alabama.
But, we also have to consider, there aren't too many Alabama's and Florida's out there.
They weren't putting up the numbers this offense is and they didn't have anything close to the pieces this team has.
Some of this is due to the competition. I know the numbers tell you some if it and they do a good job of compensating for competition, but playing Florida Alabama and MSU with the pace of play that we play at, is really hard to compensate for. I think those 3 teams can destroy any teams defensive efficiency rating and we played them all in 2 weeks time.
I agree. Defensive basketball is mostly about sheer effort !
You would think Amari would be a shot-blocking machine. Alas. Same for Garrison. Alas. Carr simply lacks athleticism. Alas. Same for Almanor. Alas. I can't figure Robinson out. I can't figure out whether he just doesn't have the athleticism to play good defense. He doesn't seem to me to innately have the intensity it takes to be an above-average defender. Alas.
Oweh and Butler are the only two guys we have who can consistently provide lock-down defense. I think that has mostly to do with their innate intensity.
Nevertheless ... I think Coach Pope has gotten, and will continue to get, the best that each of his players is capable of giving.
Go 'Cats ! ! !
Just as part of the conversation, aren't there many things that go into the overall defensive numbers that make it difficult to compare schools?
Style of play is a big one.
Similar opponents would be another.
I think it entirely plausible that playing the number of top teams Kentucky has to cause the defensive number to be lower. Now does the team need to have less defensive lapses? Of course.. I think every coach would say that.
Is it worth slowing the game down on the offensive side to get those defensive numbers? That's really kind of a hard one. What would the won/loss rate be then?
With the players we have right now I tend to doubt there is a ton that can be done.
Style of play is a big one.
Similar opponents would be another.
I think it entirely plausible that playing the number of top teams Kentucky has to cause the defensive number to be lower. Now does the team need to have less defensive lapses? Of course.. I think every coach would say that.
Is it worth slowing the game down on the offensive side to get those defensive numbers? That's really kind of a hard one. What would the won/loss rate be then?
With the players we have right now I tend to doubt there is a ton that can be done.
The offensive efficiency and pace of opponent are considered in the algorithm
The numbers at least on Kenpom are adjusted for SOS.
So while UK has played a crazy number of good offensive teams, that really doesn’t explain the low defensive number.
We’ve given up 1.20 ppp in conference play. I like to look at that. What did u do in conference. Because all the other teams are playing one another as well. Similar competition. We are dead last through 5 SEC games.
Conversely we do have the best offense. So there’s that lol
But the two numbers net close to zero which suggests to me a .500 team in conference. Which kinda falls in line with a lot of the predictions I see in the other thread. 9, 10 wins.
Seems to me our defensive efficiency ratings take a dive after playing great offensive teams, but come up after we play teams that don’t have a great offense.
After the aTm game, our rating went up 10 spots, after the Alabama game, they tumbled.
So I do think the metrics do compensate for SOS, but I think they can only do so much, because these teams are too eratic.
For example, Alabama stunk at home against Ole Miss. I watched that game. They played terrible. 21 turnovers and scored a season low in points.
Well, guess what? We got a pissed off and locked in Alabama team last Saturday and they played 5 times better than they did on Tuesday. We got a much different Alabama team than Ole Miss got. That's not debatable.
Then, Ole Miss lost at Mississippi state, a team we handled in that same gym. So I have a hard time believing Ole Miss is just so much better than UK that they smothered Alabama on Tuesday. I'd wager Alabama just played poorly. It certainly looked like it. So Ole Miss' ratings improved, ours fell after playing the same opponent.
It doesn't help that we get everyone's best game. They seem to ratchet up the effort when they see those UK jerseys. The metrics cant possibly compensate for these things.
At the end of the day, the numbers are just what is done on average. So one can chalk it off and say oh maybe Alabama just had a very good offensive game after having a very poor one the previous time.
But this is why we can't deal with small samples here. You look at the entire thing.
We played 5 games in conference. We've given up 1.20 points per possession. That's dead last in SEC play. This includes not just the Alabama game but a game vs Florida where we've given up the most points per possession in the entire dataset which dates back all the way to 1997.
I like to compare what we did vs what others have done against the same teams. We gave up 1.31 to Alabama. That was their 4th best offensive output of the season. We gave up 1.40 to UF. Their best mark of the season. Gave up 1.26 to Ohio St. Their 4th best mark of the season and the top three were against scrub teams. In fact, the only high profile game we didn't give up a ton to was .........Duke.
At some point, you have to compare what we are doing vs what the other teams are doing and it's well maybe we just aren't good on defense.
There are only a handful of teams in the country that could beat us if we score 97 points and Bama just happens to be the best offensive team in the country so they are one of the handful. You guys out here acting like UVA lit us up for 102 points. 🤣
I think the concern is we aren't always going to put up 97 tho.
In our other three losses, we've score 69, 65 and 66. That's where the concern lies.
Good point but none of those teams scored anywhere near 102 points either.
See Answers post above. It's about points per possession and if we play a team that limits possessions, we're still in trouble against a good team. Houston would be a good example of this.
But with a bad defense, we better not go cold from the outside while giving up 1.30 ppp like we did Saturday, or 1.40 like we did in the Florida game.
Similar threads
