BIG BLUE FANS FOR

BASKETBALL

2006-07 Season Analytical Writings

14
Kentucky Gets Scheduling Break
Get Hoosiers in Rupp Instead of "Neutral" Freedom Hall
Cats Overcome Poor Rebounding and Many Turnover
With Outstanding Defense

Pre-Game Analysis:

Last Saturday afternoon, Tubby Smith's Kentucky Wildcats kept the score closer than many observers expected by slowing down the high powered North Carolina offense. The strategy was quite effective as it threw UNC off balance causing them to shoot the ball poorly, under 40% from the field. However, the strategy was not a winning one for the Cats, primarily because the Cats turned the ball over 22 times, and UNC owned the offensive boards sufficiently, +5 over the Cats.

UNC limited their own turnovers to 9 for the game. The turnover margin and offensive rebounding margin provided UNC 18 additional looks at the basket, over and above the looks that UK 's Cats could get. UNC used those “bonus” looks effectively to hand the Cats a 12 point defeat, their 3 rd in four games, leaving them winless against legitimately ranked competition.

In the aftermath of this humiliating game, Tubby Smith reeled into a personal tailspin. Not only is the strategy to play slower unacceptable to the Big Blue Nation [and the nation's top recruits], the Big Blue Nation is offended by any Cat plan to keep the score close. UK fans expect the Cats will be fully focused on winning the game, by as many points as possible, against all opponents.

Another national writer [ESPN Page 2, Bomani Jones] now admit the error of his thinking. Prior to the UNC game, he had blindly defended Tubby, and attacked the “wacko” UK fans about their unreasonable expectations. However, the UNC performance led Mr. Jones to jump from the “Tubb-tanic.” He said, “it seems clear after Saturday why Kentucky might need a change at the helm: lack of direction on offense, stagnant player development, sagging recruiting, and the program's diminished profile.” It appears that Mr. Jones may have read the Concerned Fans' Press Release last summer and filed some of the major points away until he could see for himself.

Tubby Smith's failures are exposed and are in full view. Additional members of the national press are willing to write and talk about them with each passing week. One can only wonder when the local press, those who have covered this basketball program for decades, will be willing to write and talk about the current state of affairs in such honest and candid terms.

On Tuesday, December 5, 2006 , Kentucky traveled to Louisville 's Freedom Hall for its annual “ Louisville ” home game against a weak UT Chattanooga team. Florida had man handled this team a couple of weeks ago by 49 points [93-44], yet Kentucky allowed UTC to remain within striking distance, 9 points [61-52] late in the second half before easing away at the end for a 16 point win. The turnovers, oh the turnovers, 20 of them continue to haunt this group of Cats. The offensive rebounding, oh the offensive rebounding, continues to be nothing short of Offensive as the Cats lost this key battle ground again, the 7 th time in 8 games. UK only won this battle against Mississippi Valley State in the second game of the season.

All of this leads to Saturday's annual grudge match between Kentucky and Indiana at Rupp Arena. First, these Cats should send a great big Christmas card to the folks down the road in Louisville for their refusal to resolve a “scheduling” conflict so UK-Indiana could occur at its customary, alternating neutral sites. A significant “home court advantage” will be the most important factor in favor of the Wildcats when they play the Hoosiers this year.

Indiana brings a 5-2 record into this game, with losses to Duke at Cameron by 3 and to an undefeated Butler team by 5 in Indianapolis . Pomeroy's efficiency based rankings currently place Indiana as the #18 ranked team, and Kentucky is the #64 ranked team. Pomeroy projects a 6-point Kentucky loss to Indiana [67-73] despite the Rupp environs. However, Pomeroy recognizes that this game could go either way, assigning probability of an Indiana win at 74%.

Kentucky averages a about 81 possessions per game while UK 's opponents have averaged just over 84 possessions per game. Indiana currently averages 83 possessions per game while their opponents average 79 possessions. This means that unlike Kentucky , Indiana has been winning their offensive rebounding battles by +4 per game while UK continues to struggle and is losing this battle by about 3 per game. With respect to turnovers, UK averages one turnover for each 4.8 possessions, and Indiana averages one turnover for each 5.2 possessions. However, UK does not force turnovers as frequently; one for each 5.9 opponent possessions while Indiana forces one turnover for each 4.6 opponent possessions. Indiana 's offensive efficiency has been 0.905 ppp and 75 points per game. Indiana 's defensive efficiency has been 0.745 ppp while holding opponents to 59 ppg. Their early NGE is 0.160 ppp.

Kentucky has posted poorer offensive efficiency at this stage of the season, at 0.885 ppp while scoring about 71.6 ppg. On defense, UKs efficiency now stands at 0.792 ppp on about 67 ppg, again poorer than the IU numbers to date. UK 's early season NGE stands at 0.093 ppp. The respective SOS values today are 0.6134 for Indiana and 0.5528 for UK .

Each Kentucky opponent except MVS has exposed the exact same Kentucky weaknesses. UK 's continues to have difficulty on the offensive boards and continues to commit turnovers at an ever increasing rate. Indiana stands to expose both of these weaknesses on Saturday.

I continue to watch three key performance measures this season; Pace, NGE, and Offensive Rebounding Differential.

•  The pace of the game: Despite the proclamations to the contrary, Kentucky has settled in to an average pace of about 81 possessions per game, but have been giving their opponents about 84 possessions per game. Indiana plays at about the same pace as UK , 83 to 79 possessions per game. In this game, it will be unusual if the pace is outside a range of 80 to 84 possessions for this game.

•  Net Game Efficiency: Kentucky 's early season NGE is falling, and currently stands at 0.093 ppp, which is below Tubby Smith's 9 year average at UK . The trend of declining NGE will continue following this game, because the winner, whether IU or UK will likely win by a slim margin. Given the likelihood that IU will enjoy several bonus possessions due to their superior offensive board work, and given the projected closeness of the final score, UK should post a small positive game NGE, of about 0.02 ppp. If UK can post a game NGE equivalent to its season average, 0.09 ppp or higher, UK given a good probability of securing its first win of this season against a legitimate foe at any venue. However, a Kentucky game NGE of 0.050 or less will be difficult for the Cats to overcome their turnover and offensive rebounding problems.

•  Offensive Rebounding: Kentucky has not gotten the job done this season on the offensive boards, averaging -3 through the first 8 games. Indiana has been strong in their offensive rebounding, and enter this game with a +3 advantage over their opponents. I expect UK to lose this battle again, with IU securing about 4 more offensive rebounds that the Cats for the game.

Last season, Indiana handed the Cats one of their most embarrassing loses in the history of the program, and certainly during the Tubby Smith era. They did this with a coach who was destined to resign before last season was complete. This lopsided outcome was a shock to all Cat fans, and probably most Hossier fans. This lopsided loss caused many UK fans, including this writer, to conclude that Tubby Smith was not the right coach for the Kentucky Wildcats. I doubt that IU will repeat the embarrassment this year, but I don't foreseen a UK dominance on Saturday either.   Indiana posted a record of 18-11 record last season before falling to Ohio State in the Big 10 Conference Tournament by 1 point. Indiana 's final RPI rank was #34 with a Strength of Schedule of 0.5810. At this early stage of this season, Indiana stands with a RPI rank of #30 with a SOS of 0.6134.

Based on this early performance data for Indiana and UK to date, which includes eight regular season games for UK and 8 regular season games for Indiana , I see Kentucky as a very slight, ½ point favorite in this game. The NGE Method predicts a 2-point Indiana victory over Kentucky , 69-67. The model projects about 80 possessions for UK and 84 possessions for Indiana . This analysis predicts a UK offensive efficiency of 0.841 ppp and a predicted defensive efficiency of 0.821 ppp.. The pre-game magic number is 69 points.

For Kentucky , Indiana is the second of three consecutive Saturday rivalry games, with a cupcake, Chattanooga , sandwiched between UNC and IU. For elite programs, that set their sights on March and April from the end of each prior season, games against teams that also play on a national stage are the marquee events. The remainder of the games are simply schedule fillers, to assure that ballyhooed 20 win season. For the true elite, games like this one against Indiana are the games that elite programs use to measure their work and their worth.

Tuesday night's game with Chattanooga was totally irrelevant to Kentucky 's big picture. Kentucky 's annual meeting with IU is completely relevant. Relevant to bragging rights, and relevant to a once proud basketball program that is struggling to demonstrate that they too remain relevant on the national stage.

First Half Summary:

Tubby stuck with his most recent starting lineup for this game, his third starting combo in the first 9 games. Tonight Jasper will start at the point, and join Bradley, Crawford, Perry, and Morris for a three guard configuration with the hopes of fewer turnovers. This lineup consists of one senior, three juniors, and a freshman.

Both teams started the game with cool shooting. UK started with a brief lead, 6-2, but IU took the lead just prior to the under 16 TV Timeout at 7-6. IU extended its lead to 16-9 before UK ran off 8 to regain the lead at 17-16 just after the under 8 TV timeout. The teams then struggled with their shooting, and exchanged baskets to the under 4 TV timeout with 2:20 to play in the half, with UK holding to a 1 point lead, 23-22. In the last 2 minutes of the half, UK made its first three point shot of the game and extended its lead to 4 points, 28-24, and IU made the last shot of the half, sending the teams to the locker room with UK clinging to a 2 point lead, 28-26.

Kentucky protected its possessions more effectively in the first half than they have in recent games, yet they did commit 7 turnovers as compared to 5 by IU at halftime.

Indiana won the overall battle of the boards in the first half, 21-18, and INDIANA won the battle of the offensive boards, 9-5. IU also used its offensive rebounds more effectively than Kentucky . Kentucky managed 4 second chance points from its 5 offensive rebounds while INDIANA converted it 9 offensive boards into 8 second chance points.

INDIANA had an offensive efficiency of only 0.581 ppp on its 31 first chance possessions and 0.889 ppp for its 9 second chance possessions. UK had 0.774 ppp on its 31 first chance possessions and 0.800 ppp on its 5 second chance possessions.

The free throw shooting in the first half was for UK was 5-10[50.0%] and INDIANA was only 3-5[60.0%] in the half. Field goal shooting for UK was a 11-24 overall [45.8%] and a poor 1-7 from long range [14.3%]. For INDIANA , their field goal shooting overall was poor, 11-33 [33.3%] and a poor 1-10 [10.0%] from long range. UK committed 7 turnovers in the half, one for every 5.1 possessions and INDIANA committed 5 turnovers for the half, one for every 8.0 possessions.

Halftime Magic Number Check-Up:

MAGIC NUMBER Tonight: First team to score its 56 th point will win today. To reach that score, Kentucky needs 28 points, while INDIANA needs 30 points. The first half pace is equivalent to 70 possessions for the game for UK and 80 possessions for INDIANA . Kentucky scored its 56 th point of the game on a Perry basket at the 2:30 mark and the score of 57-52.

Second Half Summary:

Kentucky opened the second half by hitting their first two shots and expanding their halftime lead to 32-26, forcing an early IU timeout at 18:58 in the game. The timeout helped stabilize the Hoosiers, and the two teams traded baskets to the under 16 TV timeout, with UK continuing to lead, 34-30.

Out of the timeout, Morris interfered with a missed three point attempt, for 3 IU points, and IU then dominated the remainder of this segment, forcing 3 UK turnovers, and outscoring them 9-2 to take a 39-36 lead, forcing a UK timeout with 12:38 to play.

Kentucky responded to the timeout pleadings, and reeled off 9 straight points, to regain the lead, and stretch it to 6 points, 45-39 with 10:31 to play. The teams traded scores and reached the under 8 TV timeout with UK leading by 6, 47-41.

Back to back 3's by IU tied the game at 47, forcing another UK timeout, with 6:12 to play. Morris responds with an old-fashioned 3-point play. After IU misses another three-point attempt, and gets another offensive rebound, IU takes another timeout with 5:21 to play. The teams go to the bench for the under 4 TV timeout with 3:50 to play with UK holding to a 2 point lead, 52-50, and Morris will have 2 free throws when play resumes.

It is Crunch Time for both of these teams.

In the final and decisive segment, UK stretched their lead to 5 points, 57-52 on a Perry Basket with 2:30 to play, and IU cut the lead to 3 with about a minute to play. UK missed a three late in the shot clock, and IU calls timeout with 28 seconds to play, down three, to plan their final strategy. UK 's perimeter defense forced a very bad 3-point attempt, and two Meeks free throws at 5.8 seconds to play closed out the scoring, with UK taking a 59-54 win over the Hoosiers.

Indiana won the rebounding battles during the game, 42-39. INDIANA controlled the offensive boards in the game, 22-10, for a +12 margin. Kentucky converted its 10 second chance opportunities into 9 second chance points and INDIANA used its 22 second chance opportunities to post just 14 second chance points.

INDIANA had an offensive efficiency of 0.615 ppp on its 65 first chance possessions and 0.636 ppp for its 22 second chance possessions. UK had an offensive efficiency of 0.758 ppp on its 66 first chance possessions and 0.900 ppp on its 10 second chance possessions.

UK grabbed an average 33.3% of its misses as offensive rebounds while INDIANA was able to convert 43.1% of its misses into bonus possessions with offensive rebounds.

UK shot the ball well from the free throw line tonight, converting 14-20 [70.0%] INDIANA was a little less effective from the free throw line tonight making 6-9 [66.7%]. Field goal shooting for UK was 22-49 overall [44.9%] and a pitiful 1-11 [9.1%] from long range. For INDIANA , their field goal shooting overall was very poor throughout the game, 22-72 [30.6%] and a weak 16.0% from long range, 4-25.

Kentucky committed 17 turnovers, for a turnover rate of 1 for every 4.5 possessions. INDIANA committed 11 turnovers, for a turnover rate of 1 for every 7.9 possessions.

Post Game Analysis:

As noted prior to this game, I was interested in three parameters from tonights opening game.

•  The pace of the game: Despite the proclamations to the contrary, Kentucky has settled in to an average pace of about 81 possessions per game, but have been giving their opponents about 84 possessions per game. Indiana plays at about the same pace as UK , 83 to 79 possessions per game. In this game, it will be unusual if the pace is outside a range of 80 to 84 possessions for this game. For the game, UK had 76 possessions to IU's 87 possessions.

•  Net Game Efficiency: Kentucky 's early season NGE is falling, and currently stands at 0.093 ppp, which is below Tubby Smith's 9 year average at UK . The trend of declining NGE will continue following this game, because the winner, whether IU or UK will likely win by a slim margin. Given the likelihood that IU will enjoy several bonus possessions due to their superior offensive board work, and given the projected closeness of the final score, UK should post a small positive game NGE, of about 0.02 ppp. If UK can post a game NGE equivalent to its season average, 0.09 ppp or higher, UK given a good probability of securing its first win of this season against a legitimate foe at any venue. However, a Kentucky game NGE of 0.050 or less will be difficult for the Cats to overcome their turnover and offensive rebounding problems. Kentucky posted an impressive NGE for this game, 0.177 points per possession over IU, but this game paints a very distorted picture due to the 12 offensive rebounding edge, and the extra possessions that IU had as a result, making the game a very close game rather than a 15 point UK win.

•  Offensive Rebounding: Kentucky has not gotten the job done this season on the offensive boards, averaging -3 through the first 8 games. Indiana has been strong in their offensive rebounding, and enter this game with a +3 advantage over their opponents. I expect UK to lose this battle again, with IU securing about 4 more offensive rebounds that the Cats for the game. IU controlled the boards today, posting a +12 offensive rebounding edge for the game.

Based on the actual offensive and defensive performance tonight, UK graded at “D+” and a rare “A” respectively as shown below:

Next Game On Schedule:

On December 16, 2006 , UK will play its tenth regular season game against Louisville at Freedom Hall. Based on this early performance data for Indiana and UK to date, which includes nine regular season games for UK and 8 regular season games [7 v D1 opposition] for Louisville, Louisville is a significant 8 point favorite, 75-67 in this game, based on the NGE Method. The model projects about 83 possessions for UK and 85 possessions for Louisville . This analysis predicts a UK offensive efficiency of 0.810 ppp and a predicted defensive efficiency of 0.887 ppp.. The pre-game magic number is 72 points.

These NGE analyses are dynamic and change day to day
prior to the game as the available database
expands with additional play. 

Submitted by Richard Cheeks

To Installment Fifteen

Go Back
To Installment Thirteen

Copyright 2006
SugarHill Communications of Kentucky
All Rights Reserved