Lunardi drops us to 4 seed with Purdue, Zona and TAMU
- Thread starter Smashcat
- Start date
4 or 5 is where we will land barring a loss to LSU IMO.
15 in Net rankings, 19 in KenPom, 4 is the appropriate seed for now. Better beat LSU and win a game in the SECT or we may end up a 5
4 or 5 is where team belongs and will end up IMO
If we beat LSU, and somehow beat Mizzou and win 2-3 SECT games I think we stay as a 3 seed. Realistically we will be a 4 or 5. If we don't win another game, I bet we drop to 6.
Win the next two and we are locked in as a 3…go 1-1 and its a 4 seed for the Cats!
Injuries kept us as a potential 3 seed with the wins we had. Going forward the committee, barring any other setbacks, will probably seed us according to that while still giving minor credence to the early wins and few big SEC wins we had.
Lose LSU, Mizzou, and the first SECT game and taking the absence of Robinson in to account, UK could be looking at a 6 seed, imo. Injuries have really seemingly derailed what could have been an exciting NCAAT for us.
Lose LSU, Mizzou, and the first SECT game and taking the absence of Robinson in to account, UK could be looking at a 6 seed, imo. Injuries have really seemingly derailed what could have been an exciting NCAAT for us.
Remember when so many people were saying a loss to Auburn would not hurt us in seeding ? Well I told you other teams could pass us up by winning. If we lose to Missouri it be same thing. That Texas Tech pushed us down to a 4 today which is why I hated to do it but was rooting for Kansas yesterday also I was sick when Michigan hit that 3 at the buzzer to beat Rutgers.
That's 2 teams we would still be above and we would still been on the 3 line for now.
That's 2 teams we would still be above and we would still been on the 3 line for now.
Last edited:
I’d say news of Robinson bumped us down a little which is fair. Still can get that 3 back though. Get a 2 with a ridiculous run.
We have more high level wins but they have the same amount of Q1 almost with 8 and they have a ton more Q2 wins and they have 4 less losses this is why I was pissed they won at buzzer vs Rutgers
I think people are dropping us extra spots because Robinson was announced out for the season.
Without Robinson the committee absolutely takes that into consideration now. 4 is definitely the ceiling.
Pope should have kept that in the dark until after the selection show.
Pope should have kept that in the dark until after the selection show.
Is there a reason UK couldn't? Maybe due to the surgery coming before then? I was saying the same thing yesterday as you though.
This is one instance of "I haven't seen him" and leave him on injury report the next 14 days might have been preferred for once.
5 is not where you want to be with the 12 seeds out there lurking.
The 5/12 is a lot tougher than the 4/13 historically
This guy still has Kentucky not only as a 3 seed but #9 overall he ranks 7th on matrix. Hope he is right.
https://hoopshd.com/ (ranked 7th out of 179 bracket veterans over the past 5 years),
SEED: TEAM (CONFERENCE)
1: Auburn (SEC)
1: Duke (ACC)
1: Alabama (SEC)
1: Houston (Big 12)
2: Florida (SEC)
2: Tennessee (SEC)
2: Michigan State (Big 10)
2: Wisconsin (Big 10)
3: Kentucky (SEC)
3: Iowa State (Big 12)
3: Texas A&M (SEC)
3: St. John’s (Big East)
4: Texas Tech (Big 12)
4: Michigan (Big 10)
4: Arizona (Big 12)
4: Purdue (Big 10)
https://hoopshd.com/ (ranked 7th out of 179 bracket veterans over the past 5 years),
SEED: TEAM (CONFERENCE)
1: Auburn (SEC)
1: Duke (ACC)
1: Alabama (SEC)
1: Houston (Big 12)
2: Florida (SEC)
2: Tennessee (SEC)
2: Michigan State (Big 10)
2: Wisconsin (Big 10)
3: Kentucky (SEC)
3: Iowa State (Big 12)
3: Texas A&M (SEC)
3: St. John’s (Big East)
4: Texas Tech (Big 12)
4: Michigan (Big 10)
4: Arizona (Big 12)
4: Purdue (Big 10)
Being behind IowaSt who just lost to #96 14-14 OKSt the other day is a joke.
We don't have a loss half as bad.
We don't have a loss half as bad.
Announcing Robinson out for the year probably costed you a seed line. It wasn’t the loss to Auburn—that was expected. The margin in the Auburn loss definitely didn’t help though
Was saying the same thing. They aren’t putting us above teams that are 100%.
Highly doubt they aren't taking the injuries into account.
We slipped to a 4 because that's pretty much where the metrics/resume suggest we should be.
We slipped to a 4 because that's pretty much where the metrics/resume suggest we should be.
I think Pope has done a tremendous job for a first year coach considering first year roster construction, injuries and depth of the league. Y’all are battling some very established cultures in the league - AU, Bama, UT, A&M, and even UF to an extent. I know it’s Kentucky, but if you can go .500 in your first year in THIS league, that’s a great first year.
I mean without Jax and a hobbled Butler the best case right now IMO to me is beat LSU, lose mizzou, win 1st SECT game lose 2nd. So 21-12.
That would probably put you right around a 4. People saying we're still a 3..I don't see it. A, 12 losses is 12 losses. B. There's gonna be a lot of SEC teams right around the 2-3 line so for simple bracketing rules I think we go to a 4. Add in Jaxs injury and sadly it wouldn't be unfair to drop us a line. We are not the same without him, and any committee member watching our games can tell Butler is nowhere near Butler either.
Oh if we beat Mizz and LSU, we will be a 3-seed. Winning at Mizz would be big and it would sort of stop the bleeding to end the regular season.
We MAY need to win one more in the SECT but I doubt it. Before auburn Bracket Matrix had us as the first 3-seed.
I do to. 4 is a good seed for a team that has lost 10 games thus far.
Lunardi has never been remotely accurate with seeding. I still think we are solid 3 seed. Win the SECT and we are a 2.
We have played 18 Quad 1 games and they have played 11. So we have played a lot better competition. When people combine Q1 and Q2 games it skews things a bit and makes them look better. We’ve played 20 to their 21, but all but 2 of our games have been Q1 while almost half of theirs is Q2.
That’s why I hate we they combine Q1 and Q2 games and act like that’s the whole story.
When you play 2/3 of your games against Q1 while everyone else is playing less than half their games against Q1 opponents, you are going to have less losses with a lesser team.
Loved when UofL fans try to compare us to them and say they’re combined Q1 and Q2 record is better. LOL! Of course they don’t want to compare how many Q1 games we have played compared to how many they have had.
Only Auburn has played as many Q1 games as we have. When the regular season is over, we will have 19 out of 31 games against Q1 teams. Auburn will have played 20. Bama will have 18.
Duke will have played 10 or 11. Think about that.
Wins and losses do not tell the whole story.
That’s why our SOS is #2.
Duke will have played 10 or 11. Think about that.
Wins and losses do not tell the whole story.
That’s why our SOS is #2.
Yeah, I get it, but I don't get it. Their conference schedule is a joke compared to ours and they have zero impressive wins.
I'm not very impressed with Q2 wins.
Hopefully they lose to Illinois today.
No reason why he could just say no comment on it until then. Cal for sure would have.
CMP needs to put all the chips on the table next Saturday for that Missouri game. Win that one and we're a 3.
Exactly. Q1 and Q2 games can be and most of the time are massively different.
Similar threads
