Goal for Year - 3 Seed or Higher

[flappy]

I think it's a bit early to pop the champagne after Alabama - we still have more losses coming if Skal doesn't improve. That said, I think a realistic goal for this team at this point is to get at least a 3 seed. With a 3 seed, you play 14>6>2 (assuming no upsets). From the 4 seed, you play 13>5>1. That's a big difference. and it gets worse from there if you drop below 4.

Obviously, being a 1 is important too, but that's not happening.

 

[irishcat1965]

I think it's a bit early to pop the champagne after Alabama - we still have more losses coming if Skal doesn't improve. That said, I think a realistic goal for this team at this point is to get at least a 3 seed. With a 3 seed, you play 14>6>2 (assuming no upsets). From the 4 seed, you play 13>5>1. That's a big difference. and it gets worse from there if you drop below 4.

Obviously, being a 1 is important too, but that's not happening.

The only way UK is in the discussion for a 1 seed is to beat Kansas. And that is a very tall order considering how they are playing.

 

[Aike]

The only way UK is in the discussion for a 1 seed is to beat Kansas. And that is a very tall order considering how they are playing.

That isn't the only way, but it's the most likely path.

If we ran the table in the SEC and lost at Kansas, we could still be a 1. Possibly could lose another in the league and still get a 1.

 

[JerseyCat84_rivals57050]

Lunardi has us as a 3 seed for now.

 

[UKWildcats#8]

I don't really care if we are a 2, 3, or 4...if UK brings its A game they will be in the game vs. the 1 seed when they play them. None of these 1 seeds are anything amazing on a neutral court. Not like we'd have to beat UK, Duke, or Wisconsin from last year's tourney to make a Final Four. That said, again, the key is "UK has to come to play" a big if consistently for this bunch this season so far!

 

[flappy]

I don't really care if we are a 2, 3, or 4.

I don't know - I think KU, UNC, and Oklahoma are a level higher. I'd rather take my chances with the 2 seeds - and of course there's a progressively greater chance with each round that those 1s will drop out. I don't see a big difference b/w 2 and 3 for us. But I do see one either below 3 or as a 1 (which isn't happening)

 

[Aike]

I don't know - I think KU, UNC, and Oklahoma are a level higher. I'd rather take my chances with the 2 seeds - and of course there's a progressively greater chance with each round that those 1s will drop out. I don't see a big difference b/w 2 and 3 for us. But I do see one either below 3 or as a 1 (which isn't happening)

So, you signed up yesterday after our win just to say that we can't get a 1 seed? Sniff, sniff.

 

[kybassfan]

So, you signed up yesterday after our win just to say that we can't get a 1 seed? Sniff, sniff.

Noticed old flappy's post count is all the way up to 2.

 

[Aike]

Noticed old flappy's post count is all the way up to 2.

Usually birds go flappy flappy. Cardinals. Hawks.

Maybe just an unfortunate coincidence.

 

[mjj_2K]

You know, in some ways I think it's more advantageous to play a 1 seed earlier in the tournament. Common wisdom says no, but I think UK is in a pretty unique position.

If your goal is simply to have the best chance to advance as many rounds as possible, then yes, you want off the 1 seed's line. But let's face it- making the Elite 8 means very little for UK at this point in history. The goal for UK is to win the title, or at least make the FF. That being the case. I really think it might be better to get the 1 seed in the Sweet 16 as opposed to the Elite 8. You have more rest and more prep time, and I think there's just more pressure on the 1 in that round. If a 1 seed loses that game, they know it's a big disappointment. When you get to the Elite 8, with a FF trip right there for the taking, the pressure balances out more onto both teams.

Just a theory, and like everything else in the sport, very dependent on matchups.

 

[Brando Mac]

^Very true, that's exactly how it played out for our 2011 team that got a 4 seed and got hot at the right time.

 

[flappy]

We were also a missed 3 pointer away from losing that game - I'd rather just not play 1 seeds. Each round we can avoid playing them is a round where they may not even advance.

 

[caneintally]

We will be a 3 seed . I have no worries about that. I doubt we are a 1 seed but I feel the wheels would have to really fall off NOT to be a 2 or 3 seed. I think best case scenario we lose 2 more games but at the same time worst case we lose 4 so either way we will be a very high seed. IMO we lose at KU and at Texas A&M and end up a 2 seed in the East.

 

[Poetax]

So, you signed up yesterday after our win just to say that we can't get a 1 seed? Sniff, sniff.

Good read.

 

[Nubb16]

If we lose to Kansas and win out in the SEC from here on and win tournament I don't see how we dont make a great case for a one seed with 4 losses. However if we drop a few games on the road in sec plus losing to ku on the road wr could still be looking at a 2 to 4 seed.

I think we lose at ku. I hope it isn't a blood bath but this team has not shown me anything that makes me believe we win in Kansas. I was really glad to see us step it up at Bama but KU is a different game. I think we can get a 1 seed without beating Ku on the road though but we need to just about win out in sec or close to it.

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

I think it's too soon to tell. This team could take off.............other teams can rise and drop.

I'm not ready to rule out a 1 seed. It will be tough tho.

To me, I think more important than seeding might be getting two potential home games in the regionals. If we made it out of the first weekend, that would be huge IMO

 

[Aike]

I think it's too soon to tell. This team could take off.............other teams can rise and drop.

I'm not ready to rule out a 1 seed. It will be tough tho.

To me, I think more important than seeding might be getting two potential home games in the regionals. If we made it out of the first weekend, that would be huge IMO

It is too soon to tell.

As of now, you figure 1 Big 12 team gets a 1. Probably 1 Big 10 team. Then I guess 1 ACC and 1 Big East.

Kentucky, even with a strong finish, could find themselves on the 2 line.

Or the ACC could thrash each other to death. Or the Big East could.

It's just...lots of games to play. Winning takes care of everything.

 

[truebluewildcat_rivals34254]

As always, the easier road the better...especially this year...

We don't have the squad to win 3,4,5 dog fights in a row against the best teams at the point in the year when they are really clicking...

Simply not deep enough or consistent enough across the board...

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

It is too soon to tell.

As of now, you figure 1 Big 12 team gets a 1. Probably 1 Big 10 team. Then I guess 1 ACC and 1 Big East.

Kentucky, even with a strong finish, could find themselves on the 2 line.

Or the ACC could thrash each other to death. Or the Big East could.

It's just...lots of games to play. Winning takes care of everything.

Agreed.

Actually it wouldn't surprise me if Kansas and OK are on that 1 line. But again...........lots of basketball to be played.

 

[UKWildcats#8]

v

As always, the easier road the better...especially this year...

We don't have the squad to win 3,4,5 dog fights in a row against the best teams at the point in the year when they are really clicking...

Simply not deep enough or consistent enough across the board...

Gotta expect a lot of upsets in the tourney this year...it happened in 2014, just sadly not in our bracket (OF COURSE).

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

As always, the easier road the better...especially this year...

We don't have the squad to win 3,4,5 dog fights in a row against the best teams at the point in the year when they are really clicking...

Simply not deep enough or consistent enough across the board...

Not many teams do. Even last year...........I mean UK had a great team. They would have had to go through Notre Dame (ranked 9th in Kenpom), Wisconsin (ranked 3rd in KP) and Duke (ranked 4th)

It's tough to win many games in a row against good competition even when you do have superior talent

 

[Blue Decade]

I think it's a bit early to pop the champagne after Alabama - we still have more losses coming if Skal doesn't improve. That said, I think a realistic goal for this team at this point is to get at least a 3 seed. With a 3 seed, you play 14>6>2 (assuming no upsets). From the 4 seed, you play 13>5>1. That's a big difference. and it gets worse from there if you drop below 4.

Obviously, being a 1 is important too, but that's not happening.

Even if Labissiere does improve, we still have more losses coming. The goal is to get the highest possible seed, because that requires the best possible season and the most possible wins. But this team has flaws. It's hard not to laugh at how spoiled our fans have become.

 

[Aike]

Agreed.

Actually it wouldn't surprise me if Kansas and OK are on that 1 line. But again...........lots of basketball to be played.

Yeah if the season stopped today, that's true. My expectation is that only one of them will be left standing after conference play, but who knows.

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

And in the end it's how we are playing that matters in March IMO. You do want the easiest road possible but ultimately it's going to come down to whether or not this team gels at the end

In 2010 and 2015 we were 1 seeds.
In 2011 and 2014 we were 4 and 8 seeded teams

The bottom two advanced further than the top two.

 

[Jkwo_rivals113955]

I'd be just as happy with a 2 as if we'd gotten a 1. One path isn't appreciably more dangerous than the other in a year without elite squads at the top.

 

[Bkocats]

The only way UK is in the discussion for a 1 seed is to beat Kansas. And that is a very tall order considering how they are playing.

obviously, anything an happen- we could have a play out of minds night against KU.
But not only would we have to beat them - but also (IMO) win the SEC outright with no more than 2 losses and get to the SECT Champ game. Even then, it depends on what the other top teams have done.
The above is idealistic - and while I won't entirely dismiss it (stranger things have happened) it's not realistic at all, given what we've seen
I think if we can get a 3 seed we'll be ok - right now I see a Sweet 16 for this team, Elite 8 at best and that's only IF we play as we should the first two rounds. I'm less worried about "name" teams than I am the lower seeded ones.

 

[Jkwo_rivals113955]

And in the end it's how we are playing that matters in March IMO. You do want the easiest road possible but ultimately it's going to come down to whether or not this team gels at the end

In 2010 and 2015 we were 1 seeds.
In 2011 and 2014 we were 4 and 8 seeded teams

The bottom two advanced further than the top two.

?I know that anything short of the championship for '15 seemed like a let down, but they did make the Final Four. Same result as '11.

 

[Aike]

obviously, anything an happen- we could have a play out of minds night against KU.
But not only would we have to beat them - but also (IMO) win the SEC outright with no more than 2 losses and get to the SECT Champ game. Even then, it depends on what the other top teams have done.
The above is idealistic - and while I won't entirely dismiss it (stranger things have happened) it's not realistic at all, given what we've seen
I think if we can get a 3 seed we'll be ok - right now I see a Sweet 16 for this team, Elite 8 at best and that's only IF we play as we should the first two rounds. I'm less worried about "name" teams than I am the lower seeded ones.

I think winning at Kansas would carry more weight than that.

Win at Kansas and I think winning the SEC will be enough to get us in serious conversation for a 1.

League champ with neutral court win over Duke and road win at Kansas would be a tough resume to top.

Hope we get to find out.

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

?I know that anything short of the championship for '15 seemed like a let down, but they did make the Final Four. Same result as '11.

Oh don't get me wrong. Both 15 and 10 were GREAT years IMO. My point was simply that with Cal's teams always changing year to year that some teams it takes longer to gel together. But that doesn't mean they can't make some noise in the tourny.

So say this team ends up a 4 or 5 seed but is playing their best basketball in Feb/March.........well I would hate to be the 1 seed that has to play us........especially with the game potentially being in our backyard

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

Not only should a win vs Kansas but huge.......but they should factor it being AT Kansas. I don't think the committee puts nearly enough emphasis on road games.

To me watching Oklahoma Kansas.......yeah KU won. But it was on their home court. On a neutral site which is where March games will be played, Oklahoma wins that game.

I came away more impressive with OU than I was with KU despite KU winning

 

[Jkwo_rivals113955]

Oh don't get me wrong. Both 15 and 10 were GREAT years IMO. My point was simply that with Cal's teams always changing year to year that some teams it takes longer to gel together. But that doesn't mean they can't make some noise in the tourny.

So say this team ends up a 4 or 5 seed but is playing their best basketball in Feb/March.........well I would hate to be the 1 seed that has to play us........especially with the game potentially being in our backyard

Totally agree with you. Just pointing out that '15 and '11 had the same results.

It's also season contextual. What if, instead of playing '15 Wiscy and Duke for their Final Four matchups (2 of the top 10 Kenpom teams of the last decade), the '15 squad had to play that UCONN team and Butler from '11?

Ooooooh boy.

 

[Bkocats]

I think winning at Kansas would carry more weight than that.

Win at Kansas and I think winning the SEC will be enough to get us in serious conversation for a 1.

League champ with neutral court win over Duke and road win at Kansas would be a tough resume to top.

Hope we get to find out.

true enough - I was giving more weight to those losses than I probably should have, because they were particularly bad.
I hope we get to find out as well

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

Totally agree with you. Just pointing out that '15 and '11 had the same results.

It's also season contextual. What if, instead of playing '15 Wiscy and Duke for their Final Four matchups (2 of the top 10 Kenpom teams of the last decade), the '15 squad had to play that UCONN team and Butler from '11?

Ooooooh boy.

Totally agree about that too. This is truly a down year. Look at Kenpom. The top four teams last season all have higher rankings than the number 1 team from this season. Last season had a couple dominant teams..........this season not so much.

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

true enough - I was giving more weight to those losses than I probably should have, because they were particularly bad.
I hope we get to find out as well

UVA lost to George Washington (70th) and Virginia Tech (124th)
UNC lost to Texas (57th) and Northern Iowa (80th)
Miami FL lost to Northeastern (95th)
UL lost to Clemson (81st)
Purdue lost to Illinois (97th)

our losses were to UCLA (53rd), OSU (60th) and LSU (54th)

They are comparable. It's not like we are losing to teams ranked outside the top 100. I don't think our losses are as bad as people make them out to be

 

[Bkocats]

UVA lost to George Washington (70th) and Virginia Tech (124th)
UNC lost to Texas (57th) and Northern Iowa (80th)
Miami FL lost to Northeastern (95th)
UL lost to Clemson (81st)
Purdue lost to Illinois (97th)

our losses were to UCLA (53rd), OSU (60th) and LSU (54th)

They are comparable. It's not like we are losing to teams ranked outside the top 100. I don't think our losses are as bad as people make them out to be

Good point - and I do concede it.

Thank you and @Aike for your responses

 

[LineSkiCat14]

I think it's a bit early to pop the champagne after Alabama - we still have more losses coming if Skal doesn't improve. That said, I think a realistic goal for this team at this point is to get at least a 3 seed. With a 3 seed, you play 14>6>2 (assuming no upsets). From the 4 seed, you play 13>5>1. That's a big difference. and it gets worse from there if you drop below 4.

Obviously, being a 1 is important too, but that's not happening.

Hate to say it. But Skal gets benched, and we beat a 9-4 team on the road. Been saying this for years. It's more than just a stat line. It's attitude and mentality. Skal's has been non-existent. He's obviously not the entirety of Kentucky's problem, but I don't think it's a coincidence that when you bench a lackadaisical player, it only helps the bottom line.

So I think the opposite is true: We have more losses coming if we continue to give Skal 20+ minutes, with where he is at, currently.

I think he should get no more than 10 minutes/game until he shows why he deserves 15. Not to mention, he's more or less in the same mold of Lee.. we need Hump to start getting minutes, if we want to make a deep run, IMO. He's the center-type that we have, and only 1 of 2 big bodies we have down low. Cal should start getting him ready now.. Even just 5 and 8 by season's end would be a huge help.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

@The_Answer1313

You know bracketology really well, what was it you said a few weeks back about being a 3 or 4 (or better) seed that was very important? I think you still got favorable location at that level, but once you went to the 5th seed or worse, location was taken out? Could be wrong.

I'd say anything less than a 4 seed would be a disappointment. No reason we can't be a top16 seed.

Also have to keep in mind, there are no juggernauts this year. I think only 2 teams have a chance at a 2-3 loss season and that's Kansas and MSU, who BOTH have a long way to go to get that.

I think you could see the last #1 seed have 5-6 losses.

 

[kyjeff1]

We will be a 3 seed . I have no worries about that. I doubt we are a 1 seed but I feel the wheels would have to really fall off NOT to be a 2 or 3 seed. I think best case scenario we lose 2 more games but at the same time worst case we lose 4 so either way we will be a very high seed. IMO we lose at KU and at Texas A&M and end up a 2 seed in the East.

Just wondering when you will eventually learn to stop making bold predictions in your posts like you know for certain what's about to go down? You're wrong about 90% of the time.
"We are going to smoke LSU… "
"Ohio State doesn't have a prayer"
"There's no way we lose to Wisconsin".

Truth is we beat Alabama, so what, we aren't out of the woods yet. We could lose 5 or 6 more games in the SEC. Then what?

 

[Graves51]

Right now a 3 seed would be good for where we are. I believe we will have to keep Alex going at 12-15 points and 8-10 rebounds consistently to attain that. Marcus is not going to give us those numbers and forget Skal, maybe next year for him. Alex will be the key. Need to keep him involved. Priority!

 

[kyjeff1]

You know, in some ways I think it's more advantageous to play a 1 seed earlier in the tournament. Common wisdom says no, but I think UK is in a pretty unique position.

If your goal is simply to have the best chance to advance as many rounds as possible, then yes, you want off the 1 seed's line. But let's face it- making the Elite 8 means very little for UK at this point in history. The goal for UK is to win the title, or at least make the FF. That being the case. I really think it might be better to get the 1 seed in the Sweet 16 as opposed to the Elite 8. You have more rest and more prep time, and I think there's just more pressure on the 1 in that round. If a 1 seed loses that game, they know it's a big disappointment. When you get to the Elite 8, with a FF trip right there for the taking, the pressure balances out more onto both teams.

Just a theory, and like everything else in the sport, very dependent on matchups.

I'll take a 4 seed….. In Villanova's bracket. Give me the bracket they has last year anytime.
It just depends on who that 1 seed is.