If you learn basketball and stop thinking you know a lot it’s real easy to see why we could’ve been a final 4 team. I believe Quickley would’ve flourished in the tournament but we could’ve easily got knocked off too.
Why do people talk of the 2019-20 team so glowingly?
- Thread starter UkMccurdy
- Start date
People talk about the 2019-2020 team glowingly because it's one of the great "what ifs" in UK basketball lore and because we've done jacksquat in the NCAA tourney lately (i.e., since 2015).
We crashed out of the tournament in very disappointing ways the two years prior, especially the 2018 tourney against a garbage KState program with our bracket as the #2 seed completely collapsing around us and a golden path to the Final Four. 2019 we lost to Auburn, a team we'd beaten thrice during the season.
Since then, our postseason failures have been even worse. So yeah, the fanbase is grasping for something positive, and the 2019-2020 season sticks out.
We crashed out of the tournament in very disappointing ways the two years prior, especially the 2018 tourney against a garbage KState program with our bracket as the #2 seed completely collapsing around us and a golden path to the Final Four. 2019 we lost to Auburn, a team we'd beaten thrice during the season.
Since then, our postseason failures have been even worse. So yeah, the fanbase is grasping for something positive, and the 2019-2020 season sticks out.
LOL what ? we were projected the 1st 2 seed or the last 1 seed. wtf are u talking about lol. That team was talked about the last month of the season as one of 2-3 best teams at the moment. FSU was another one as well .
March is typically ruled by guards. We had two of the best, plus Richards. They would have had a chance.
I do agree that we were being talked about as a 2 seed if we could win the SEC-T or possibly even if we made it to the SEC-T final. There was absolutely no talk of us being a 4-seed. I mean I guess if we lost our opening-SEC-T game by 20+.
Were we "THE FAVORITE" to win it? No!!
But we were in that list of 6-8 teams that was thought could cut down the nets.
Answer literally posted the last bracket matrix of 2020 and i think something like 90/97 brackets had us as a 4 seed.
Again, the SEC was down so we weren’t able to rack up a bunch of marquee wins despite running away with the conference and we had that nasty evansville loss, which was probably dropping us an entire seed line.
Now what i will say is there is a strong correlation between final rank and seed and it’s rare you see a top 10 ranked team get lower than a 3 seed. So who knows. The committee kind of does w/e they want sometimes. They use precedent when it benefits them. Unfortunately at that time 7/10 of the committee members were either ACC afilliated or formerly acc affiliated. Which is how the acc got 3 1 seeds the year prior. They weren’t going to do us any favors and barnhardt isn’t the guy to stand up to that. So even if we won the SEC tourney, which hasn’t seemed to make a difference for years, we were probably a 3 seed at best.
Again, the SEC was down so we weren’t able to rack up a bunch of marquee wins despite running away with the conference and we had that nasty evansville loss, which was probably dropping us an entire seed line.
Now what i will say is there is a strong correlation between final rank and seed and it’s rare you see a top 10 ranked team get lower than a 3 seed. So who knows. The committee kind of does w/e they want sometimes. They use precedent when it benefits them. Unfortunately at that time 7/10 of the committee members were either ACC afilliated or formerly acc affiliated. Which is how the acc got 3 1 seeds the year prior. They weren’t going to do us any favors and barnhardt isn’t the guy to stand up to that. So even if we won the SEC tourney, which hasn’t seemed to make a difference for years, we were probably a 3 seed at best.
For me it all came down to Maxey. He was special and special players do special things in March.
I think people have short memories here.
No one had us a 1 seed. Very few had us a 2.
Yet another site. 60 computer rankings overall 17th.
Last edited:
No way we were going to be a 4 seed unless maybe we lost in the 1st round of the SEC tournament. ESPN had us as a 2. And they never give UK any praise.
Regardless of seed given tho, I just don't see how this team was contending for a national title IMO.
I mean Kenpom had us ranked 29th.
It's a team that could have made a run no doubt, but we weren't going into that thing as one of the favorites as some would suggest here.
When you have 60 independent computer models and 97 humans basically saying similar things.
But I don't know. When it comes to that 2020 team I really don't look at it in any light to be honest. We don't know what would have happened and the outcome of that season could have vastly changed how anyone felt about it. I look at it kind of indifferently, not too positive but not negative either. We had losses to Evansville and Utah that season. We did have good wins vs Michigan St and UL tho.
I mean Kenpom had us ranked 29th.
It's a team that could have made a run no doubt, but we weren't going into that thing as one of the favorites as some would suggest here.
When you have 60 independent computer models and 97 humans basically saying similar things.
But I don't know. When it comes to that 2020 team I really don't look at it in any light to be honest. We don't know what would have happened and the outcome of that season could have vastly changed how anyone felt about it. I look at it kind of indifferently, not too positive but not negative either. We had losses to Evansville and Utah that season. We did have good wins vs Michigan St and UL tho.
Every computerized ranking (like KenPom) considers early season games. Many weight games in Nov the same as games in early March, which is a big mistake. That Evansville loss was when Cal was still playing AND STARTING Whitney, who while athletic had about as much basketball skill as most of us on this board. I'm not saying you should ignore early season games, but you should weight later season games more due to lineup changes, injuries, players maturing, rotations, chemistry, etc... And I speak on this with knowledge as someone who years ago created a statistically based computer ranking system that was reported with others like KenPom and Sagarin (I only stopped due to time it took getting the data). The Utah loss while was bad, they made 15-27 3's while we went 2-17, WTF (39pt difference when we lost by 3), even a blind squirel finds an acorn occasionally. But the polls and computer systems couldn't get past that Evansville game 4 months earlier playing Whitney 25min (not that 1 player should have made a difference).
That 2020 team certainly passed the eye test. They say you win in the NCAA-T with guards. And we had those, including the SEC-POY (Quickley) and All-SEC 2nd-Team Maxey. That roster in March had made 80.9% of their FTs during the season. And we had a rim-protecting post player whom was also 1st-Team All-SEC. And 2 of our guys were also SEC All-Defense players. We had only lost 3 games since before Christmas.
Good computer models do weight recent data higher than earlier in the season.
Also Kenpom tends to match up very well with Vegas lines. The fact of the matter is that on neutral courts we would have been underdogs vs quite a bit of teams. That doesn't really jive with the "this team was one of the contenders theory".
Obviously we can't go back in time to see how this plays out, but there's really nothing to suggest that team wasn't more than a Sweet 16 team.
Sure we shot 80% from the line. Which is great. And we got to the line often that season. But we only ranked 123rd in Effective FG%, 122nd in Turnover% and 81st in offensive rebounding %. We didn't really do anything particularly good on offense other than that.
Furthermore, the defense finished 52nd in defensive efficiency. We had a barely top 25 offense (24th overall) and just outside the top 50 in defense. Again that's not title contending numbers.
This team simply didn't have the resume to warrant a 2 seed and didn't have the numbers over the course of a season to suggest they were a contending team. Honestly the more I look at this, the more I feel like giving us a 4 would have been generous.
It’s not at all. That wasn’t a dominant team. 25-6 but a margin of victory of only 8 points per game. We won a ton of close games so we had been living dangerously all season and had losses to evansville, utah and a bad tennessee team in rupp to prove it.
The main thing I remember about the 2019-20 team is that Tyrese Maxey came off the bench and scored 26 points in his first college game, and Calipari put him back on the bench for the next game. Maxey averaged 14 ppg under Calipari at UK. He's averaging 25.8 ppg for the Sixers this year.
Shocking that a player might get better as he gets older, right?
Your problem, like a lot of fans on here, is you put your whole life savings on November games, etc and think these things matter. Also what's the strength of the SEC have to do with anything...are claiming ever year UK has won or made the final four it's bc the league was murderers row? The SEC was hot garbage in 2011 for instance
It's all about who gets on a hot streak at the end of the year a lot of times. All your other measurements are nonsense
Did you even watch that team? I don't care about the numbers. We played like ass halfway through the year and were playing well at the right time. We definitely passed the eye test and would have been a 2 or 3. They were a fun team to watch.
They don't give 2 seeds based on the last few games of a season. It's based on entire resume. If you play like ass halfway through a season, you aren't getting a 2 seed most likely.
A 3 seed? Yeah sure maybe. I mean we were the top 4 in the bracket thing so of course it's possible we would have ended up with a 3. But that's still a far cry from being considered a main title contender.
Another thing is the SEC was incredibly weak that year.
Other than UK, you had Auburn a projected 5, LSU a projected 8, and Florida a projected 9 that was probably going to make the field.
It was pretty much Auburn and UK and then a bunch of mediocre to awful teams. And despite that, UK only outscored their opponents in SEC play by 0.08 points per possession.
For a team that some think played well down the stretch, the scores certainly didn't indicate that at all.
Other than UK, you had Auburn a projected 5, LSU a projected 8, and Florida a projected 9 that was probably going to make the field.
It was pretty much Auburn and UK and then a bunch of mediocre to awful teams. And despite that, UK only outscored their opponents in SEC play by 0.08 points per possession.
For a team that some think played well down the stretch, the scores certainly didn't indicate that at all.
Wow man.
I love how experts like you chime in and tell me who I am.
Thanks for clearing it up 😂
I’m wondering if people think more highly of that team bc they are projecting a bit. Maxey has become a star, so sometimes it’s commonplace to think that would have been the reality had he played in March.
Just a thought.
Good discussion and arguments back and forth… have enjoyed the takes!
Just a thought.
Good discussion and arguments back and forth… have enjoyed the takes!
She was looking pretty dumb
With a finger and a thumb
In the shape of an L on her forehead
"last few games"?
We lost only 3 games after Christmas, that was 2 and a half months, about 20 games. We would have had a 3 at worst. 2 if we made it to the SEC-T finals. 4 was not happening unless we lost opening SEC-T game.
We didn't win convincingly tho.
All you have to do is look at previous teams who were considered title contenders and their margin of victory.
Anyways I've provided enough to make my argument valid. The only thing you've mentioned was the eye test. Your eyes have played tricks on you.
That was a good team. Not a great one.
Cal's hyped that team with the proverbial "I had a title team" crap, which is the same thing Kansas did, and Kansas was better than us that season, too. One could argue that 31-2 Gonzaga, 26-4 Baylor, 30-2 San Diego St, and 29-2 Dayton weren't too bad either. In fact, there were 7 teams ranked higher than Kentucky at the end of the season. We would have been a 2 seed
Cal's apologists, who only seem to emerge after the 2 or 3 big wins we get these days, have been laying claim to the "title that never was" with that team because it's all they, or Cal, have to hold onto in recent years.
Cal's apologists, who only seem to emerge after the 2 or 3 big wins we get these days, have been laying claim to the "title that never was" with that team because it's all they, or Cal, have to hold onto in recent years.
They started to gel toward the end of the season. That team could’ve done damage in the tournament!
We finished the year by losing at home to Tennessee, winning a miracle at Florida, and dealing with disarray from the Hagans situation.
I too have done some statistical modeling, and what I’ve found is that the entire season’s body of work has roughly the same predictive power for tournament results as the last 10 games.
Obviously there are exceptions, of teams just getting hot or healthy at the right time. But honestly, we weren’t that in 2020.
Of course we could have won it all. But we wouldn’t have been close to a favorite, without a strong SEC tournament finish and a really lucky draw.
I too have done some statistical modeling, and what I’ve found is that the entire season’s body of work has roughly the same predictive power for tournament results as the last 10 games.
Obviously there are exceptions, of teams just getting hot or healthy at the right time. But honestly, we weren’t that in 2020.
Of course we could have won it all. But we wouldn’t have been close to a favorite, without a strong SEC tournament finish and a really lucky draw.
You’ve not provided crap.
Said you can’t go by winning “the last few games”, so I proved we didn’t only win the last few games, that it was 2 and a half months. You now claim “we didn’t win big enough “ 😂🤣😂🤣. All anyone cares about is wins vs losses, “just win baby”. Final score doesn’t matter (except in computer models). Us losing in OT to SPU, so 1 pt from a win, doesn’t not make that one our worst losses ever. What matters most is W or L!
And I gave many more reasons than just the eye test. In summary our best in country backcourt, our SEC-POY with 2nd-team all-SEC backcourt mate, our other 1st team all-SEC rim protector, our historically good FT shooting. Our top 7 or 8 ranking as a P5 school.
Nobody has said that team would have won a title, or should have won the title, or even were “the favorite “ to win the title. All anyone has said (positive) is that we liked our chances and that we would have been one of the (6 to 10) favorites to win it.
lol you first made a claim that we were a 2 seed. I posted a link to 97 major bracketologists the majority of which did not agree with your statement.
You then said we were a title contender and one of the favorites and I posted efficiency stats and other numbers to show that we weren't.
You keep saying we were a top team but provided nothing from anyone other than you that says we were.
Just look at the comments here. Most felt it was a good but not great team. It's ok to disagree. We'll never actually know but you are in the minority here.
I see where he's getting that tho. Because normally before a tournament begins you can pick 8 teams and be reasonable confident that the title is coming from one of those eight teams.
But I just completely disagree we were one of those eight teams that season. I think others disagree as well.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
In honor of Caneintally, the ultimate roster projection for 2024-2025.- Latest: Dontworryboutit23
-
-
-
-
