Formula to beat UK

[Joneslab]

I agree with ukbob and others: there was no formula last night. Vandy tried something different, and because Dakari had an atrocious game they were able to keep it in single digits. (Almost all the transition threes they got were because he was having such a monumentally difficult time.) Generally there's no long-term success in something like that.

We were, however, confused by it from the jump. When the post game started to flail Cal tried to shoehorn the ball in there, and I don't think that's a mistake he'll make going forward assuming teams try and play us like that.

But generally I think man-to-man for 35+ minutes and pushing our guards way out is a recipe for disaster. I hope South Carolina goes that way Saturday.

 

[Ryan Lemonds Diary]

I recall several occasions where Dakari was trying to make post moves with 2-3 guys hanging all over him. If they didn't come from the perimeter player dropping down or the weak side defender coming over, they must have played 8 guys at a time.

 

[K-Town Kat]

Yeah I've read and heard a lot of formulas to beat Kentucky, but we haven't actually been beaten. We've faced many different styles and gameplans and had close calls, but won them all.

The bottom line is if Kentucky plays with energy and makes shots, we're nearly unbeatable. If we play poorly and our opponent lights it up, we could get beat, but it hasn't happened yet even with us playing poorly in some games
This post was edited on 1/21 10:14 AM by K-Town Kat

 

[meteordealer]

Originally posted by TNCatfanforever:
The op makes a great point. You can't beat UK with a zone. But also our big guys did not finish on offense. Johnson was really soft.

"GIGGITY!"

 

[throatpoker]

2+2 = jello

 

[ukdevildog]

x=opponent: y=UK

if x>y=win
if y>x=you lose

if x+variable (blind ref)= greater odds
if y u ask is = or < than or > than ()*&)(*#_Q_#*&(*&(++)= then who knows

"Have a nice day"

 

[Littlemoreaction Lessconversatio]

Well our bigs did play real soft but that is hardly the entire solution. The whole team was really soft. Sleepwalk defense. Stand around and pass pass pass on offense then someone makes an extremely weak one on one (or 1 on three) move late in the clock then give up the rebound or the 50/50 ball and then run to the other end while forgetting where the other teams shooters are. Vandy sucks and they came on our court and made us their b***ch even if we did win. It is just unbelievable how bi-polar this team is from one game to the next. I sat in front of my TV pretty much in shock the entire game. I'm glad many of you feel good about this one though.

 

[Joneslab]

Originally posted by Littlemoreaction Lessconversation:
It is just unbelievable how bi-polar this team is from one game to the next.

If they were that bipolar they wouldn't be undefeated.

When you get into conference play you see a lot of weird stuff. Especially if you're undefeated. These coaches are madly shuffling through things in an attempt to get Kentucky. Junk defenses, crowding the post, doubling down, playing straight up--generally when two teams play, you know what you're going to get. With Kentucky there's a whole lot of experimentation going on, and they're having to react to it on the fly.

The good news is that they're winning as they learn.

 

[anon_013cn8yrfncx2]

Originally posted by K-Town Kat:


Yeah I've read and heard a lot of formulas to beat Kentucky, but we haven't actually been beaten. We've faced many different styles and gameplans and had close calls, but won them all.

The bottom line is if Kentucky plays with energy and makes shots, we're nearly unbeatable. If we play poorly and our opponent lights it up, we could get beat, but it hasn't happened yet even with us playing poorly in some games

Be that as it may, what Stallings did is OBVIOUSLY the best approach. Our low post is the weakest part of the offense, punctuated by the fact that the low post guys are also poor FT shooters (KAT is ok). Just makes sense to guard the perimeter. Some of you can remember in times past when we would double the post against guys who were no threat at all and leave the outside wide open much to our detriment .. and all out of habit. Stallings is not some genius, it's almost basketball 101.

 

[Joneslab]

I'm not sure it's the best approach.

In fact I think once Kentucky adjusted to it I think they'd have no problems. Without the transition threes last night that's an easy win.

If we see that sort of thing again on Saturday I'm confident Kentucky can shred it. Last night it knocked them back a little--and Vandy's nondescript seven-footer did a great job.

I don't think it's a long-term solution to beating this team.

 

[SeattleKat]

Originally posted by no_neutrality:

Originally posted by K-Town Kat:



Yeah I've read and heard a lot of formulas to beat Kentucky, but we haven't actually been beaten. We've faced many different styles and gameplans and had close calls, but won them all.

The bottom line is if Kentucky plays with energy and makes shots, we're nearly unbeatable. If we play poorly and our opponent lights it up, we could get beat, but it hasn't happened yet even with us playing poorly in some games

Be that as it may, what Stallings did is OBVIOUSLY the best approach. Our low post is the weakest part of the offense, punctuated by the fact that the low post guys are also poor FT shooters (KAT is ok). Just makes sense to guard the perimeter. Some of you can remember in times past when we would double the post against guys who were no threat at all and leave the outside wide open much to our detriment .. and all out of habit. Stallings is not some genius, it's almost basketball 101.


^^THIS^^ It is Basketball 101.

The Alabama game was the exception, not the rule. When our post players play every game like they did in Tuscaloosa.......UK becomes almost unbeatable.

We are not there just yet......and I DO understand we are 18-0