Cal's Offense and KenPom

[502 Wildcat]

Was just browsing around on KenPom. Decided to do an average over Cal's tenure, since past seasons are accessible on the site.

It's been a long day at work, so forgive me if my math is jacked, but according to my numbers over Cal's tenure we have an average end of season offensive efficiency ranking of 14.5.

I am not arguing that Cal is Steve Kerr in terms of offense, but reading the board you would think he is the worse offensive coach of all time. 14.5 is pretty solid.

 

[502 Wildcat]

For fun, I'll run these numbers on some other coaches over that time frame later this evening when I get more time and get my brain working at full strength again.

 

[CatOfDaVille]

Can you give some context to that 14.5 number? Like, where did Gonzaga end up this year, what was our highest and lowest number under Cal, what are other coaches' numbers?

I just don't know what that 14.5 is supposed to be telling me.

Edit: I was typing this when you posted your 2nd post.

 

[502 Wildcat]

Can you give some context to that 14.5 number? Like, where did Gonzaga end up this year, what was our highest and lowest number under Cal, what are other coaches' numbers?

I just don't know what that 14.5 is supposed to be telling me.

Edit: I was typing this when you posted your 2nd post.

I'll expand on it this evening and offer some other coaches' numbers. Not for argument, just for fun.

This number is a ranking of offensive efficiency. For example, this year we finished with an offensive efficiency ranking of 14, which means only 13 teams have a more efficient offense than us. By contrast, we finished with the 8th ranked defense.

 

[Hopediamond]

Was just browsing around on KenPom. Decided to do an average over Cal's tenure, since past seasons are accessible on the site.

It's been a long day at work, so forgive me if my math is jacked, but according to my numbers over Cal's tenure we have an average end of season offensive efficiency ranking of 14.5.

I am not arguing that Cal is Steve Kerr in terms of offense, but reading the board you would think he is the worse offensive coach of all time. 14.5 is pretty solid.

Dude bringing up facts only ruins everyone’s narrative. People don’t bring facts on this site....

 

[502 Wildcat]

I’m also going to look into the averages over the past 4 years (since we have “sucked” the past 4 years) and also look at each coaching staff change (Antigua leaving, Slice, Barbee/Justus) and see what we can learn from that as well.

 

[ManitouDan_anon]

Our regular season numbers may be fine .. it’s the tourney where sand gets in the gears .

 

[CatOfDaVille]

I'll expand on it this evening and offer some other coaches' numbers. Not for argument, just for fun.

This number is a ranking of offensive efficiency. For example, this year we finished with an offensive efficiency ranking of 14, which means only 13 teams have a more efficient offense than us. By contrast, we finished with the 8th ranked defense.

Gotcha. I didn't realize it was his average rank compared to other teams each year. I thought it was an index of sorts.

Looking forward to your update tonight.

 

[UKGrad93]

It would be nice if you could compare regular season vs tournament numbers (not available on the free site). The other part is pace of play. Our offense is usually efficient, but we slow the pace of play (number of possessions).

 

[richbrookstomato]

I would be interested to see what our NCAA Tournament Offensive Efficiency numbers were compared to the other programs that won the Title.

@Son_Of_Saul has a thread showing that we scored significantly less in our tournament losses than we did during the regular season since Cal has been coach. Even 10 points less in 2012 when we won it.

Why do our teams score less in the tournament than during the regular season? I realize we are playing better teams the further we go, but I find it odd that in EVERY tournament loss we score so much less. What about in the whole tournament during those 10 years?

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

We usually have a fairly efficient offense in terms of points per possession, but we do not have a great first shot offense. Much of our efficiency is due to a high free throw rate and a high offensive rebound rate.

 

[502 Wildcat]

I would be interested to see what our NCAA Tournament Offensive Efficiency numbers were compared to the other programs that won the Title.

@Son_Of_Saul has a thread showing that we scored significantly less in our tournament losses than we did during the regular season since Cal has been coach. Even 10 points less in 2012 when we won it.

Why do our teams score less in the tournament than during the regular season? I realize we are playing better teams the further we go, but I find it odd that in EVERY tournament loss we score so much less. What about in the whole tournament during those 10 years?

This takes into account the entire season, including tournament games. Seeing just the tournament numbers would be interesting, but the whole season is still a good analysis.

 

[502 Wildcat]

We usually have a fairly efficient offense in terms of points per possession, but we do not have a great first shot offense. Much of our efficiency is due to a high free throw rate and a high offensive rebound rate.

This season, which is one of Cal's best FT shooting teams. In years past I'd be willing to bet our FT shooting has actually hindered our efficiency numbers.

 

[Blue Bigfoot]

Our regular season numbers may be fine .. it’s the tourney where sand gets in the gears .

How many coaches do you think have won more Tourney games in the last 10 years than Calipari?

I'm not sure which perfectionist planet some of you are from on here.

 

[502 Wildcat]

A look at the numbers with each UK coaching staff change over Cal's tenure.

The Original Staff (Cal, Robic, Antigua, Strickland) 2009-2010
Offensive Ranking: 22nd
Defensive Ranking: 6th

2nd Staff (Cal, Robic, Antigua, Payne) - 2010-2011 to 2013-2014
Average Offensive Ranking: 15.5 (round: 16th)
Average Defensive Ranking: 35.75 (round: 36th)

3rd Staff (Cal, Robic, Payne, Slice) - 2014-2015
Offensive Ranking: 6th
Defensive Ranking: 1st

4th Staff (Cal, Robic, Payne, Barbee) - 2015-2016
Offensive Ranking: 5th
Defensive Ranking: 39th

Current Staff (Cal, Payne, Barbee, Justus) - 2016-2017 to Current
Average Offensive Ranking: 16.66 (round: 17th)
Average Defensive Ranking: 12.66 (round: 13th)

___________________________________________________________

Average Offense ranking for previous 4 years: 13.75 (round: 14th)
Average Defense ranking for previous 4 years: 19.25 (round: 19th)

Average Offense ranking for first 6 years under Cal: 15th
Average Defense ranking for first 6 years under Cal: 25th

Overall Calipari era average offensive ranking: 14.5 (round: 15th)
Overall Calipari era average defensive ranking: 22.70 (round 23rd)

____________________________________________________________

Calipari era highest offensive ranking: 2 (2011-2012)
Calipari era highest defensive ranking: 1 (2014-2015)

Calipari era lowest offensive ranking: 38 (2012-2013)
Calipari era lowest defensive ranking: 88 (2012-2013)

 

[502 Wildcat]

Obviously, the NIT season throws off the numbers, but it's very interesting to see how much we actually haven't "sucked" the past 4 years afterall. The statistics are quite similar, despite the slight drop off in recruiting.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

This season, which is one of Cal's best FT shooting teams. In years past I'd be willing to bet our FT shooting has actually hindered our efficiency numbers.

It's not just about the percentage you hit, it's the rate you get to the line. Even for a bad free throw shooting team (65%), a trip to the free throw line for two shots is worth 1.3 points per possession. That's as good as hitting 43.3% from three. We get fouled and shoot more free throws than most teams because of the way we attack the basket, and that contributes to higher efficiency numbers.

edit: We were 11th in the country this year in free throw rate (free throws per field goal attempt). Last year we were 3rd in the country. We were 9th this year in offensive rebound %.

 

[502 Wildcat]

It's not just about the percentage you hit, it's the rate you get to the line. Even for a bad free throw shooting team (65%), a trip to the free throw line for two shots is worth 1.3 points per possession. That's as good as hitting 43.3% from three. We get fouled and shoot more free throws than most teams because of the way we attack the basket, and that contributes to higher efficiency numbers.

edit: We were 11th in the country this year in free throw rate (free throws per field goal attempt). Last year we were 3rd in the country. We were 9th this year in offensive rebound %.

If we go to the line and miss the front end of a 1 and 1, or miss both on a shooting foul or double bonus, we go scoreless that possession, thus negatively impacting our offensive efficiency...no?

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

If we go to the line and miss the front end of a 1 and 1, or miss both on a shooting foul or double bonus, we go scoreless that possession, thus negatively impacting our offensive efficiency...no?

There aren't that many 1 and 1s in a game. Maximum of 6 but some of the 7th, 8th, and 9th fouls are going to be shooting fouls and you don't always get to 9 fouls. And going back to our generic bad free throw shooting team, a 65% free throw shooting team expects a still respectable 1.07 points per possession (worth the same as shooting 35.7% from three) on a 1-and-1 trip. But we're usually an average free throw shooting team - we shoot 68% to 72% most years. If you hit at an average 70% rate, a 2-shot trip is worth 1.4 points per possession and a 1-and-1 trip worth 1.19 points per possession.

This isn't something I'm making up, it is common knowledge in basketball analytics that getting to the free throw line is good for your offensive efficiency.

 

[shutzhund]

We usually have a fairly efficient offense in terms of points per possession, but we do not have a great first shot offense. Much of our efficiency is due to a high free throw rate and a high offensive rebound rate.

Nothing wrong with that.

 

[502 Wildcat]

There aren't that many 1 and 1s in a game. Maximum of 6 but some of the 7th, 8th, and 9th fouls are going to be shooting fouls and you don't always get to 9 fouls. And going back to our generic bad free throw shooting team, a 65% free throw shooting team expects a still respectable 1.07 points per possession (worth the same as shooting 35.7% from three) on a 1-and-1 trip. But we're usually an average free throw shooting team - we shoot 68% to 72% most years. If you hit at an average 70% rate, a 2-shot trip is worth 1.4 points per possession and a 1-and-1 trip worth 1.19 points per possession.

This isn't something I'm making up, it is common knowledge in basketball analytics that getting to the free throw line is good for your offensive efficiency.

No argument there, absolutely it does. Hopefully we keep getting there at a high rate.

I'm no analytics expert. I just wanted to share the KenPom numbers. Do with them what you will.

 

[CB3UK]

Missed FT opportunities seems to be a recurring theme in a lot of our losses. Ive always been interested to see what % our teams shot in losses compared to both wins, but more importantly, when simply compared to that teams given % that season. That seems like something that the intangible tournament differences shouldnt factor into, and would also be just as apt on reg season losses.

 

[ManitouDan_anon]

How many coaches do you think have won more Tourney games in the last 10 years than Calipari?

I'm not sure which perfectionist planet some of you are from on here.

Bigfoot , no perfectionist here . And I'm thrilled Cal signed for life , so skip that narrative with me . I love to talk UK hoops on a message board , and if discussing why we struggle with losses to inferior teams in the NCAAT doesn't bother you , then OK , just blindly root away .

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

No argument there, absolutely it does. Hopefully we keep getting there at a high rate.

I'm no analytics expert. I just wanted to share the KenPom numbers. Do with them what you will.

There's a lot of ways to score, just expanding on how we get to our fairly high rate (and where our relative weakness is)

 

[Cats_2010]

Was just browsing around on KenPom. Decided to do an average over Cal's tenure, since past seasons are accessible on the site.

It's been a long day at work, so forgive me if my math is jacked, but according to my numbers over Cal's tenure we have an average end of season offensive efficiency ranking of 14.5.

I am not arguing that Cal is Steve Kerr in terms of offense, but reading the board you would think he is the worse offensive coach of all time. 14.5 is pretty solid.

The problem is with Cal’s offense when it matters most not over the course of the season. Case in point. At Auburn 82 points, at home vs Auburn 80 points, in the dance vs Auburn 60 points (regulation).

 

[Blue Bigfoot]

Bigfoot , no perfectionist here . And I'm thrilled Cal signed for life , so skip that narrative with me . I love to talk UK hoops on a message board , and if discussing why we struggle with losses to inferior teams in the NCAAT doesn't bother you , then OK , just blindly root away .

That "inferior" team also beat both Tennessee & UNC by 20 points. How about we give them a little credit? Perspective, my man.

 

[502 Wildcat]

The problem is with Cal’s offense when it matters most not over the course of the season. Case in point. At Auburn 82 points, at home vs Auburn 80 points, in the dance vs Auburn 60 points (regulation).

What matters, looking at stats, is the big picture. Did you ever stop to think that Auburn is simply a good team that got hot in the tournament? It happens.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

How many coaches do you think have won more Tourney games in the last 10 years than Calipari?

I'm not sure which perfectionist planet some of you are from on here.

Very true, but I wonder how many of those coaches you're referencing have had 40+ NBA picks? The success our fans have come to expect isn't unreasonable given what we're seeing on our roster vs. what we're losing to in March.

Calling for slight reform also isn't "perfectionist." We need an offensive minded assistant and player retention.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

What matters, looking at stats, is the big picture. Did you ever stop to think that Auburn is simply a good team that got hot in the tournament? It happens.

Auburn is a great team with Okeke.

We should have beaten them Sunday. Painting them as extraordinarily hot without their top player is a flawed narrative. They were a different team without him Sunday, and it showed. We still couldn't capitalize.

Some folks tried to do the same thing last year with an injured KSU team. Sometimes we just have to admit we got outplayed by an inferior team. That's what happened Sunday.

 

[WildMoon]

Very true, but I wonder how many of those coaches you're referencing have had 40+ NBA picks? The success our fans have come to expect isn't unreasonable given what we're seeing on our roster vs. what we're losing to in March.

Calling for slight reform also isn't "perfectionist." We need an offensive minded assistant and player retention.

Just bad take.

People are obsessed about NBA and what they do in NBA too much.

Where's the evidence to support NBA talent as a freshman is equal to guarantee success?

In fact the evidence suggest other wise. Izzo, self, and K actually has shown that they can't provide any consistency with freshman talent. They seem to make final four when they DONT have the freshman super star. People forget self made final four last year without a freshman. Izzo struggled with some top *** talent freshman last couple years, and when they are gone he's back in final four..

This excludes top players like Simmons, ayton, Bamba, KD, and many major talented guys who failed to make it to final four.

So...why do people think that Cal's talented player should mean we shouldn't have lost?

Talent is a potential, and most of our players are not better than seniors and juniors of college .

 

[track42]

Auburn is a great team with Okeke.

We should have beaten them Sunday. Painting them as extraordinarily hot without their top player is a flawed narrative. They were a different team without him Sunday, and it showed. We still couldn't capitalize.

Some folks tried to do the same thing last year with an injured KSU team. Sometimes we just have to admit we got outplayed by an inferior team. That's what happened Sunday.

Auburn did not play that well against us at all.Our offense choked and we couldn't hit a 3 or a free throw.Our point guard play was pathetic.We can say Auburn and K state was so good but the truth is we didn't come to play in either game.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Just bad take.

People are obsessed about NBA and what they do in NBA too much.

Where's the evidence to support NBA talent as a freshman is equal to guarantee success?

In fact the evidence suggest other wise. Izzo, self, and K actually has shown that they can't provide any consistency with freshman talent. They seem to make final four when they DONT have the freshman super star. People forget self made final four last year without a freshman. Izzo struggled with some top *** talent freshman last couple years, and when they are gone he's back in final four..

This excludes top players like Simmons, ayton, Bamba, KD, and many major talented guys who failed to make it to final four.

So...why do people think that Cal's talented player should mean we shouldn't have lost?

Talent is a potential, and most of our players are not better than seniors and juniors of college .

Freshmen talent isn't all based on potential, otherwise Cal would change his paradigm. Most college teams win titles with an abundance of NBA talent on their roster.Cal has to get his NBA guys at a younger age than some other coaches because of his recruiting system. The alternative is that Cal scraps his entire paradigm. Is that what you're suggesting? You seem to be making the claim that top freshmen don't really have an advantage over non-NBA college veterans? Should Cal start landing more 3 and 4 stars who will stay in the program longer?

I'd take the conversation even further: would you suggest to me that guys like Wall, Randle, Knight, Towns, Knox, Fox, Monk, etc. were less talented than their opposition from a actuality level when they played at UK? Throw out "potential" and look merely at real time actuality when they played.


On a more direct level, make the case to me that KSU or Auburn had more talent than UK did from an actuality level.

Again, I'm not claiming we should win every game in March simply because we have more talent, but going to great lengths to downplay the losses we've sustained the last two years in the tournament through an argumentative level of "the talent is less or equal to the teams we've lost to because our talent is potential-based and not actuality-based" is erroneous, misleading, and deflective.

 

[yoshukai]

That "inferior" team also beat both Tennessee & UNC by 20 points. How about we give them a little credit? Perspective, my man.

Yeah , didn't matter at all that their best big man didn't play against us .

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Auburn did not play that well against us at all.Our offense choked and we couldn't hit a 3 or a free throw.Our point guard play was pathetic.We can say Auburn and K state was so good but the truth is we didn't come to play in either game.

This is a fair post and I'm not sure why it's so hard for some of our fans to admit.

Some keep building an Okeke-less Auburn team up to be the second coming of the 2018 Villanova Wildcats.

We got beat by a team we should have beaten. It happens. Life goes on.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

That "inferior" team also beat both Tennessee & UNC by 20 points. How about we give them a little credit? Perspective, my man.

No mention of Okeke in your post.

That's a curious oversight on your part.

 

[UKortho]

Our regular season numbers may be fine .. it’s the tourney where sand gets in the gears .

Yes. It seems like our second half offense is a lot worse too. Especially tight games, or when we have a small lead.

 

[UKortho]

No mention of Okeke in your post.

That's a curious oversight on your part.

That’s what really stands out. Beat them twice with the guy. Take his production away and we lose. Difficult to accept

 

[Blue Bigfoot]

No mention of Okeke in your post.

That's a curious oversight on your part.

And no mention of PJ not being 100% by all the whiners on this board either. How curious.

 

[Mojocat_rivals48469]

Auburn did not play that well against us at all.Our offense choked and we couldn't hit a 3 or a free throw.Our point guard play was pathetic.We can say Auburn and K state was so good but the truth is we didn't come to play in either game.

I listened to a podcast today from the Ringer about the Elite 8 games. Was interesting to hear the opinion of someone not close to the team, a couple of “national guys” (who aren’t trying to generate clicks with “hot takes”). Their summary of the UK game:

1. UK isn’t really that talented, overachieved this year, an Elite 8 is about what UK shouldn’t have hoped for.
2. Auburn is a really hot, dangerous team.
3. Virginia, in their telling, was really hoping for a Kentucky win, because they’d surely rather play Kentucky than Auburn. UK is a “conventional” team that presents no real issues for UVa, while Auburn, on the chance it might get hot and hit a bunch of 3s, conceivably might.

Anyway, there was no sense that we blew it against an inferior team. They acknowledged UK was around 8th at Pomeroy, Auburn is 11th, and UK was a slight betting favorite (2.5 points I believe). Because the jersey said Auburn, because we beat them by 27 earlier, years from now Kentuck fans will talk about this like it was a 2 losing to a 15. You get that sense reading this board.

 

[Mojocat_rivals48469]

The problem is with Cal’s offense when it matters most not over the course of the season. Case in point. At Auburn 82 points, at home vs Auburn 80 points, in the dance vs Auburn 60 points (regulation).

I’ve said elsewhere, that was obviously intentional. Auburn isn’t the same team they were in January and February. Kansas and Tennessee both tried to run with them last week, both got run out of the gym. We didn’t want a game in the 80s, we wanted to play in the 60s.

It astounds me that people won’t readily acknowledge this. Has nothing to do with our offense suddenly becoming impotent in the ncaa tournament.