Context for How Good Oklahoma Is

[aceman509]

Seeing more people than I expected try to downplay the win by simply saying Oklahoma is 4-11 and at the bottom of the conference. This does not really do Oklahoma's quality level justice, so I wanted to pull some numbers and put it into context.

I used the Massey Composite Rankings (highly recommend) which take every sort of ranking you find out there, both computer and human, and then combine them to give an average ranking. I feel this is the best measure of how good a team is compared to everyone else in the country.

Oklahoma is currently 49th in the country, which is 14th in the SEC. Here is where they would stand in the other major conferences:

Big East: 5th
ACC: 6th
Big 12: 9th
Big Ten: 11th (note that the conference has 18 teams)

I also wanted to compare where Oklahoma would fall in previous years in the SEC. We all know the SEC has gotten a ton better, but this illustrates just how much. I pulled numbers from our 2 best teams of the last 15 years, and then 2019 and 2022 randomly to get a sense of evolution of the SEC overtime. Here is where Oklahoma would stand:

2012: 5th
2015: 7th
2019: 8th
2022: 9th

Are Oklahoma world beaters? Absolutely not. But in context, they are are middle of the road to above average SEC team from 10 years ago. We used to lose to teams like that on the road all the time.

 

[BIG BLUE GURU]

And they are a team desperate right now trying to stay in the NCAA tourney. We got their best shot on the road. That means something

 

[Creed Bratton]

Don't forget that Oklahoma has played 3 OOC games against teams that are currently ranked and in the top 2 in their league from the ACC (U of L), Big 10 (Michigan) and Big 12 (Arizona) and they are 3-0 against those ranked teams.

 

[ukwazoo]

They're very inconsistent. Can beat good teams and lose to bad ones.

 

[JohnnyGreen1975]

And they are a team desperate right now trying to stay in the NCAA tourney. We got their best shot on the road. That means something

Agree. Oklahoma desperately needed that game and played like it. It was a tournament style game. We are ready for those early mid-major games where teams will fight like this.

 

[blue cincy]

They're very inconsistent. Can beat good teams and lose to bad ones.

Sort of sounds like Kentucky. But not bad teams, just middling teams. We could win Saturday. It will depend on officiating and if our guys show up (which they have against the top teams), Alabama being the only top 10 to really know how to beat us. Hopefully Auburn is not on a heater Saturday. GO BIG BLUE!!!

 

[Creed Bratton]

Sort of sounds like Kentucky. But not bad teams, just middling teams. We could win Saturday. It will depend on officiating and if our guys show up (which they have against the top teams), Alabama being the only top 10 to really know how to beat us. Hopefully Auburn is not on a heater Saturday. GO BIG BLUE!!!

I agree that Bama is a matchup nightmare for us. Our guys do tend to show up when the bright lights are on though.

 

[blue cincy]

I agree that Bama is a matchup nightmare for us. Our guys do tend to show up when the bright lights are on though.

With a healthy Butler and Robinson it is a different game. Game 1 in Rupp is 2 plays late in the game from a different outcome.

 

[Dontworryboutit23]

Oklahoma is Ight. They weren’t very good. They have 2 good players, but overall they aren’t that good of a team. Still a good win by Kentucky.

 

[VAWildcat15]

Also I have to imagine Oklahoma’s computer metrics would look a lot better if they got to play a soft ACC schedule.

 

[jwphelps]

Seeing more people than I expected try to downplay the win by simply saying Oklahoma is 4-11 and at the bottom of the conference. This does not really do Oklahoma's quality level justice, so I wanted to pull some numbers and put it into context.

I used the Massey Composite Rankings (highly recommend) which take every sort of ranking you find out there, both computer and human, and then combine them to give an average ranking. I feel this is the best measure of how good a team is compared to everyone else in the country.

Oklahoma is currently 49th in the country, which is 14th in the SEC. Here is where they would stand in the other major conferences:

Big East: 5th
ACC: 6th
Big 12: 9th
Big Ten: 11th (note that the conference has 18 teams)

I also wanted to compare where Oklahoma would fall in previous years in the SEC. We all know the SEC has gotten a ton better, but this illustrates just how much. I pulled numbers from our 2 best teams of the last 15 years, and then 2019 and 2022 randomly to get a sense of evolution of the SEC overtime. Here is where Oklahoma would stand:

2012: 5th
2015: 7th
2019: 8th
2022: 9th

Are Oklahoma world beaters? Absolutely not. But in context, they are are middle of the road to above average SEC team from 10 years ago. We used to lose to teams like that on the road all the time.

OU beat some very good teams in their out of conference schedule, SEC is just that tough.

 

[ManitouDan]

2 good players and ?? I'm not buying they are that good . They are 13th in a 16 team league . We shall see how they play out . In 30 days come back to this thread and see .

 

[WeWant9]

2 good players and ?? I'm not buying they are that good . They are 13th in a 16 team league . We shall see how they play out . In 30 days come back to this thread and see .

How often is the 13th place team considered a bubble team? I don’t think OU is some world beater, but I agree with others that if they weren’t in the SEC they’d be doing pretty well and firmly in the tournament.

 

[BlueSince92]

Hmmmm.

Honestly I took them way more seriously when I thought of them as the third worst team in the SEC than when I tried to picture them as the sixth best team in the ACC.

Either way they clearly played out of their mind last night. It would be silly to devalue their performance or our victory based on their ranking and ratings.

Rankings and ratings only ever mean just so much and that is literally why we play the games. Sometimes you’re just the 1980 USA Olympic Hockey Team. Last night Oklahoma practically was—and we were better.

 

[aceman509]

Also I have to imagine Oklahoma’s computer metrics would look a lot better if they got to play a soft ACC schedule.

Any computer ranking thats worth anything, which is pretty much all of them used in this composite, adjust for opponent strength and pace. If you play a softer schedule then you're going to get punished if you aren't winning all of your games by double digits

 

[aceman509]

Hmmmm.

Honestly I took them way more seriously when I thought of them as the third worst team in the SEC than when I tried to picture them as the sixth best team in the ACC.

Either way they clearly played out of their mind last night. It would be silly to devalue their performance or our victory based on their ranking and ratings.

Rankings and ratings only ever mean just so much and that is literally why we play the games. Sometimes you’re just the 1980 USA Olympic Hockey Team. Last night Oklahoma practically was—and we were better.

ACC is weird because it is simultaneously better and worse than you think it is.

They have 3 pretty legit teams in Duke, Clemson and Louisville. Then a few bubbly quality teams in SMU, UNC, Wake and Pitt.

Where they really are awful is the bottom half though. 9 teams are ranked 98th or worse. South Carolina is ranked 90th and has 1 SEC win. So probably half the ACC would go winless or win 1 game if they played in the SEC. Truly awful.

 

[BlueSince92]

ACC is weird because it is simultaneously better and worse than you think it is.

They have 3 pretty legit teams in Duke, Clemson and Louisville. Then a few bubbly quality teams in SMU, UNC, Wake and Pitt.

Where they really are awful is the bottom half though. 9 teams are ranked 98th or worse. South Carolina is ranked 90th and has 1 SEC win. So probably half the ACC would go winless or win 1 game if they played in the SEC. Truly awful.

Auburn legit?

Hellaciously.

Auburn ACC?

Not so much.

 

[UKBB4Ever]

Those numbers make them look like who they are. A bad team.

They are a bad team in any conference and in any year.

 

[St.PatterSoN-54-]

But was it a quad 1 win?

 

[SemperFiCat]

IDK. People can try to talk up Oklahoma all they want in an attempt to sugar coat it. I didn't see a pretty darn good Oklahoma team. I saw a mediocre team that played desperate. I thought Kentucky just looked pretty terrible on both sides of the ball, and I don't think it had to do with how good Oklahoma is. Personally, outside of Oweh's heroics, I thought that was a bad Kentucky team I saw play a late February game. Zero Offensive flow, and everyone simply lost on Defense, still. Just my opinion. I was really liking this team, but I didn't get a warm and fuzzy about the guys last night.

 

[CondorCat]

Oklahoma is a legit Q1 win. They were 13-0 in their out-of-conference games with wins over Arizona, Michigan, and Louisville. Then they proceeded to lose their first four SEC games and never really got on track in the tough SEC.

 

[G-PIP]

I’ve got a friend who almost always says UK’s opponent “sucks” whether we win or lose. Usually this is based on little more than the fact that they lost a game somewhere along the line that they were favored in. He never played competitively, but like many in KY he played a lot of pickup and has watched UK religiously for decades. However, he doesn’t seem to have much of a clue as to any factors affecting a game, or at least he never expresses any. He just basically looks at whether UK won by more than they were favored. If so, still no credit – regardless of the situation, the energy or desperation of the other team, etc. - because that was what they were supposed to do. If UK loses or doesn’t cover the spread, then Pope/Calipari/etc. were “outcoached” and/or “this team sucks.” Morale of the story: my friend doesn’t appreciate the intricacies of the game and how hard it is to win against high major teams on the road or even at home. There are a lot of really good college players and high-level athletes out there. Some maybe one-dimensional and will never play professionally, but seriously impactful in their role. The difference in teams is generally that the best teams have more good players, but not necessarily the “best” player on a particular night. Any win against most Div. I opponents, and especially in the SEC this year, is an accomplishment to be praised if you have any kind of understanding of the game.

 

[gharding07]

Unfortunately they probably won't make the tournament. Their last 3 games are tough. This game was there last shot to get in

 

[JFCats22]

Any win in the SEC is a good win. However, UK is supposed to beat teams like Oklahoma. They have been a pretty solid team this season but they were not good last night at all.

We need to end the SEC season by getting healthy, beating LSU and Mizzou and playing Auburn tough. If that happens then I will start to believe this team is capable of doing something in March.

 

[yoshukai]

They're very inconsistent. Can beat good teams and lose to bad ones.

Us or them , lol

 

[Cobb4uk]

I’ve got a friend who almost always says UK’s opponent “sucks” whether we win or lose. Usually this is based on little more than the fact that they lost a game somewhere along the line that they were favored in. He never played competitively, but like many in KY he played a lot of pickup and has watched UK religiously for decades. However, he doesn’t seem to have much of a clue as to any factors affecting a game, or at least he never expresses any. He just basically looks at whether UK won by more than they were favored. If so, still no credit – regardless of the situation, the energy or desperation of the other team, etc. - because that was what they were supposed to do. If UK loses or doesn’t cover the spread, then Pope/Calipari/etc. were “outcoached” and/or “this team sucks.” Morale of the story: my friend doesn’t appreciate the intricacies of the game and how hard it is to win against high major teams on the road or even at home. There are a lot of really good college players and high-level athletes out there. Some maybe one-dimensional and will never play professionally, but seriously impactful in their role. The difference in teams is generally that the best teams have more good players, but not necessarily the “best” player on a particular night. Any win against most Div. I opponents, and especially in the SEC this year, is an accomplishment to be praised if you have any kind of understanding of the game.

Wow!! Your either an old timer who played years ago, or a former point guard, may be both. I support all your valuable points, thanks.