Kentucky's "Yo-Yo" tendency -- a pattern or just a series of coincidences

[MdWIldcat55]

I was looking at the season results so far, and spotted what seems like a pattern -- not perfect in its contours, but still discernible. It's a pattern of playing really well one game, then not so well the next time tested by a tough opponent.

Here's what I mean:
Kentucky beats Duke. Then after a few cupcakes, the Cats lose at Clemson in the next serious game.
Kentucky beats Gonzaga. Then the next game is a flat effort against Colgate, where the Cats are only up two at the half before winning by 11
Kentucky beats Louisville. Then gets spanked by Ohio State in the worst performance of the year.
Kentucky beats Florida. Then plays poorly losing to Georgia.

The pattern is interrupted here by two good efforts in a row, beating Mississippi State and Texas A&M. But then Alabama and Vanderbilt losses come back-to-back.
You could argue this fits the pattern - even in a loss the Cats played pretty well against Alabama, then came out flat and played poorly against Vanderbilt.
Kentucky is now coming off a huge emotional win over Tennessee...And Arkansas and Cal are coming to town.

So, is this enough evidence to conclude that this team gets to a high emotional pitch for a game, then has trouble sustaining it in the next game? Or is it just a coincidence? I hope either way the Cats are learning to muster that emotional intensity every game. After all, champions have to win six in a row.

 

[will1976]

I was looking at the season results so far, and spotted what seems like a pattern -- not perfect in its contours, but still discernible. It's a pattern of playing really well one game, then not so well the next time tested by a tough opponent.

Here's what I mean:
Kentucky beats Duke. Then after a few cupcakes, the Cats lose at Clemson in the next serious game.
Kentucky beats Gonzaga. Then the next game is a flat effort against Colgate, where the Cats are only up two at the half before winning by 11
Kentucky beats Louisville. Then gets spanked by Ohio State in the worst performance of the year.
Kentucky beats Florida. Then plays poorly losing to Georgia.

The pattern is interrupted here by two good efforts in a row, beating Mississippi State and Texas A&M. But then Alabama and Vanderbilt losses come back-to-back.
Kentucky is now coming off a huge emotional win over Tennessee...And Arkansas and Cal are coming to town.

So, is this enough evidence to conclude that this team gets to a high emotional pitch for a game, then has trouble sustaining it in the next game? Or is it just a coincidence? I hope either way the Cats are learning to muster that emotional intensity every game. After all, champions have to win six in a row.

Does it have something to do with the team unifying at the beginning of the season. Then experiencing the loss of pivotal players to injury to mess up that unity? Could be a part of the problem. Thankfully other Cats have stepped up!

 

[bucsrule8872]

I’ve said all season that it is going to be a roller coaster ride. You can’t get too high or too low on this team, given how it was assembled.

 

[kyboy1998]

I think it’s a byproduct of a thrown together, good/not great, team that faces a schedule with a lot of good teams on it.

You will win some and lose others.

 

[bluecoon1]

Mentioned it in another thread but it seems they lose a step playing unranked teams. Hard to see them beating theses top 25 schools (three were top 10 at the time) and dropping games or looking flat against lesser schools.

 

[St.PatterSoN-54-]

Just like most young AAU teams. We play to the level of our competition.

Veteran teams don't usually do that. But we'll continue to learn and grow.

 

[UKBB4Ever]

It's maddening because you would think all these experienced guys would be steady thru the season. Either good or bad. Hard to explain.

 

[JonathanW]

There is a LONG list of factors that affect the outcome of games. Most of which change from game to game, opponent to opponent. So there is a certain amount of randomness that in the outcome of games. This includes randomness inside the individual games in many things, including things like shooting %'s. And the variability that is created from that randomness shows in shooting %'s, probably 3pt shooting %'s as much if not more than 2pt shooting %'s. And the point differential is compounded by the fact that those 3's are worth 50% more points when made than are 2's. And guess what, we are shooting more 3's than we have in almost 30 years. So that alone probably increases the variability in our scoring and game outcomes.

 

[TucsonCat]

The difference between stars and role players.
Stars are good every night.
They produce regardless
Role players contributions are dependent on circumstances. Who's guarding them. Are they feeling it. Did they get a couple lucky bounces.

We built a team on the sixth man at BYU and the 3rd leading scorers at Oklahoma and Dayton. Capable of wild swings. Good news is, v we've seen there is a high ceiling.

 

[storm1507]

To me it's all about their effort. They tend to get up for big games and play hard (at least in the 2nd half). But, they tend to think they can just show up for the others. They've paid for that 4 times.

 

[buster3.0]

Tennessee couldn't hit the broad side of a barn last night. Yet, they kept shooting and bricking more and more threes (they took 45 attempts!). If they shot even 30% from three and say if UK shot just below a blazing 50%, the outcome would have been different.

This year's UK team is definitely a live or die by the three type of team. That means some nights you are going to win them and some nights you are going to lose them. Doesn't bode well for a long tournament run where one off shooting night will doom you.

 

[Bkocats]

It's maddening because you would think all these experienced guys would be steady thru the season. Either good or bad. Hard to explain.

I’d counter that they aren’t used to the type of success they are having, nor are they used to being in the fishbowl that comes with playing for Kentucky basketball

 

[UKBB4Ever]

I’d counter that they aren’t used to the type of success they are having, nor are they used to being in the fishbowl that comes with playing for Kentucky basketball

I would agree with that. No one is. I just thought it wouldn't be such a shock to 23 year olds that have played high level basketball already.

 

[BIG BLUE GURU]

Team name = Jekyll & Hyde

 

[Fox2monk]

I was looking at the season results so far, and spotted what seems like a pattern -- not perfect in its contours, but still discernible. It's a pattern of playing really well one game, then not so well the next time tested by a tough opponent.

Here's what I mean:
Kentucky beats Duke. Then after a few cupcakes, the Cats lose at Clemson in the next serious game.
Kentucky beats Gonzaga. Then the next game is a flat effort against Colgate, where the Cats are only up two at the half before winning by 11
Kentucky beats Louisville. Then gets spanked by Ohio State in the worst performance of the year.
Kentucky beats Florida. Then plays poorly losing to Georgia.

The pattern is interrupted here by two good efforts in a row, beating Mississippi State and Texas A&M. But then Alabama and Vanderbilt losses come back-to-back.
You could argue this fits the pattern - even in a loss the Cats played pretty well against Alabama, then came out flat and played poorly against Vanderbilt.
Kentucky is now coming off a huge emotional win over Tennessee...And Arkansas and Cal are coming to town.

So, is this enough evidence to conclude that this team gets to a high emotional pitch for a game, then has trouble sustaining it in the next game? Or is it just a coincidence? I hope either way the Cats are learning to muster that emotional intensity every game. After all, champions have to win six in a row.

I do think it’s an issue although recently injuries have played more of an issue. I think not even having Kerr has caused a lot of issues.

 

[Fox2monk]

Tennessee couldn't hit the broad side of a barn last night. Yet, they kept shooting and bricking more and more threes (they took 45 attempts!). If they shot even 30% from three and say if UK shot just below a blazing 50%, the outcome would have been different.

This year's UK team is definitely a live or die by the three type of team. That means some nights you are going to win them and some nights you are going to lose them. Doesn't bode well for a long tournament run where one off shooting night will doom you.

Maybe not but they have showed a remarkable ability to win pressure games and maybe the tournament will have them focused every night.

 

[CELTICAT]

Have been calling it rubber banding to myself but yes.

Team kind of reminds me of the ‘99 squad. They knew they had the goods when they locked in. Likewise this team probably tops out around the elite eight level.

 

[PhilipVU94]

I was looking at the season results so far, and spotted what seems like a pattern -- not perfect in its contours, but still discernible. It's a pattern of playing really well one game, then not so well the next time tested by a tough opponent.

Here's what I mean:
Kentucky beats Duke. Then after a few cupcakes, the Cats lose at Clemson in the next serious game.
Kentucky beats Gonzaga. Then the next game is a flat effort against Colgate, where the Cats are only up two at the half before winning by 11
Kentucky beats Louisville. Then gets spanked by Ohio State in the worst performance of the year.
Kentucky beats Florida. Then plays poorly losing to Georgia.

The pattern is interrupted here by two good efforts in a row, beating Mississippi State and Texas A&M. But then Alabama and Vanderbilt losses come back-to-back.
You could argue this fits the pattern - even in a loss the Cats played pretty well against Alabama, then came out flat and played poorly against Vanderbilt.
Kentucky is now coming off a huge emotional win over Tennessee...And Arkansas and Cal are coming to town.

So, is this enough evidence to conclude that this team gets to a high emotional pitch for a game, then has trouble sustaining it in the next game? Or is it just a coincidence? I hope either way the Cats are learning to muster that emotional intensity every game. After all, champions have to win six in a row.

I don't have a dog in the fight, but reviewing the data as an outside observer, I'm not convinced it's much different than anyone else's pattern. Forgive me putting on my skeptic's hat because it's a really interesting topic, even for this non-Kentucky fan.

So all teams have ups and downs. And depending on how you count Alabama, you either had 3 good games in a row or 2 and 2. Colgate is very bad, so that's fair to call it a bad game -- but then you have to call Lipscomb (29 pt win over a top-100 efficiency) a really good game, right? In other words you can't pick and choose non-"serious" games.

For other teams it could also be the tendency of schedules to alternate home and away, but road wins is one area where your season is impressive. And in the SEC this year no one is going to get any Jerry Stackhouse-caliber patsies to help build up a winning streak. So idk, just looks like the distribution I'd expect for the #17 efficiency team in an absolutely stacked conference.

 

[ORCAT]

Just like most young AAU teams. We play to the level of our competition.

Veteran teams don't usually do that. But we'll continue to learn and grow.

I get what you're saying but am focusing on the last part of your post. These guys are veterans though not together as a team for very long. As for continuing to learn and get better - well, we're running out of time for that as it's just about February and tournament time is just around the corner. I think the ongoing injuries we've had help to contribute to the inconsistency.

 

[BBNinSC]

Things have changed in college basketball. You will see 2 and 3 seeds with 10 losses in the tournament. Gone are the days with a core group of blue blood teams dominating their conference. I expect at least 3 of the #1 seeds to have 7 losses or more. There is a greater parity in the game that’s undermined somewhat by the lose and go home tournament format.

 

[Bkocats]

I don't have a dog in the fight, but reviewing the data as an outside observer, I'm not convinced it's much different than anyone else's pattern. Forgive me putting on my skeptic's hat because it's a really interesting topic, even for this non-Kentucky fan.

So all teams have ups and downs. And depending on how you count Alabama, you either had 3 good games in a row or 2 and 2. Colgate is very bad, so that's fair to call it a bad game -- but then you have to call Lipscomb (29 pt win over a top-100 efficiency) a really good game, right? In other words you can't pick and choose non-"serious" games.

For other teams it could also be the tendency of schedules to alternate home and away, but road wins is one area where your season is impressive. And in the SEC this year no one is going to get any Jerry Stackhouse-caliber patsies to help build up a winning streak. So idk, just looks like the distribution I'd expect for the #17 efficiency team in an absolutely stacked conference.

Excellent post
Thanks for the input

 

[fatguy87]

Losing by 20 points against Ohio State is the primary blemish. Losing by 10+ to Georgia is the other.

Other than those major dips, close losses on the road or against good teams aren't horrible. We'd be feeling much better about the team and would look better in metrics like Kenpom and Net if we lost to Ohio State and Georgia by a combined 8 points rather than 30+. If you are losing close games when playing at your worst, that necessarily means you still had a chance to win. Having a chance to win despite playing a bad game against good teams is a sign that you are pretty darn good.

 

[fatguy87]

Things have changed in college basketball. You will see 2 and 3 seeds with 10 losses in the tournament. Gone are the days with a core group of blue blood teams dominating their conference. I expect at least 3 of the #1 seeds to have 7 losses or more. There is a greater parity in the game that’s undermined somewhat by the lose and go home tournament format.

I think we are the team most likely to get a 2 or 3 seed and have 10 losses going into the tournament.

Out of the probable 1's, I'm not sure where Auburn and Duke will be getting 5-6 more losses. The ACC is dreadful while Auburn are favorites in all of their remaining games. Houston as well are decent favorites in all of their remaining games. Iowa State, Bama, and Florida may crest that 7 threshold though.

 

[hotelblue]

outside of a final four, we probably won’t have a tougher pair of opponents per week in the tournament than what we’re facing right now.

i’m not expecting a final four, but you have to reserve judgement until the sect. now that we have a coach who cares about it.

if we can’t get healthy it may not matter. it’s been a factor, the osu debacle aside. the more our guys get use to playing with eachother the better it should get.

 

[Cleatortoises]

I don't see a real pattern.
There was a little girl who had a little curl....