Cats vs. Badgers -- Side-By-Side Stat Comparisons

[CatPhight_rivals65113]

Thru 38 games, stats show pretty much what most of us already know, a clear significant advantage for UK defensively, while Wisconsin tends to take better of the basketball better and commits fewer fouls.
Both teams shoot the ball exceptionally well.

The Cats have the luxury of a deeper, more talented bench which has resulted in the ability to draw more fouls than any team in the nation except for Arizona.

If the Cats take care of the ball and rebound well, we're comfortably in the Finals Monday night.


Field Goal Percentage
UK - 46.8 (38th NCAA)
UW - 48.2 +1.4 (17th NCAA)

Field Goal Percentage Defense
UK - 35.2 +7.4 (1st NCAA)
UW - 42.6 (153rd NCAA)

Free Throw Percentage
UK - 72.5 (64th NCAA)
UW - 76.4 +3.9% (11th NCAA)

Free Throw Attempts Per Game
UK - 24.6 +5.3 (2nd NCAA)
UW - 19.3 (77th NCAA)

3 Point Field Goal Percentage
UK - 34.7 (156th NCAA)
UW - 36.6 +1.9 (79th NCAA)

3 Point Field Goal Percentage Defense
UK - 26.7 -11.3 (2nd NCAA)
UW - 37.4 (306th NCAA)

Scoring Offense
UK - 74.6 +1.8 (28th NCAA)
UW - 72.8 (49th NCAA)

Scoring Defense
UK - 53.9 -4.1 (3rd NCAA)
UW - 57.8 (12th NCAA)

Scoring Margin
UK - 20.8 +5.8 (1st NCAA)
UW - 15.0 (6th NCAA)

Offensive Rebounds
UK - 12.76 +3.29 (27th NCAA)
UW - 9.47 (268th NCAA)

Defensive Rebounds
UK - 25.66 +1.74 (40th NCAA)
UW - 23.92 (154th NCAA)

Assists Per Game
UK - 14.4 +1.7 (54th NCAA)
UW - 12.7 (127th NCAA)

Blocks Per Game
UK - 6.9 +3.6 (2nd NCAA)
UW - 3.3 (197th NCAA)

Turnovers Per Game
UK - 10.6 (24th NCAA)
UW - 7.4 -3.2 (1st NCAA)

Fouls Per Game
UK - 16.97 (279th NCAA)
UW - 12.42 -4.55 (1st NCAA)







This post was edited on 4/1 12:46 PM by CatPhight

 

[yabbadabbadoo_rivals213851]

Originally posted by CatPhight:
Thru 38 games, stats show pretty much what most of us already know, a clear significant advantage for UK defensively, while Wisconsin tends to take better of the basketball better and commits fewer fouls.
Both teams shoot the ball exceptionally well.

The Cats have the luxury of a deeper, more talented bench which has resulted in the ability to draw more fouls than any team in the nation except for Arizona.

If the Cats take care of the ball and rebound well, we're comfortably in the Finals Monday night.


Field Goal Percentage
UK - 46.8 (38th NCAA)
UW - 48.2 + 1.4 (17th NCAA)

Field Goal Percentage Defense
UK - 35.2 + 7.4 (1st NCAA)
UW - 42.6 (153rd NCAA)

Free Throw Percentage
UK - 72.5 (64th NCAA)
UW - 76.4 +3.9% (11th NCAA)

Free Throw Attempts Per Game
UK - 24.6 + 5.3 (2nd NCAA)
UW - 19.3 (77th NCAA)

3 Point Field Goal Percentage
UK - 34.7 (156th NCAA)
UW - 36.6 + 1.9 (79th NCAA)

3 Point Field Goal Percentage Defense
UK - 26.7 + 11.3 (2nd NCAA)
UW - 37.4 (306th NCAA)

Scoring Offense
UK - 74.6 +1.8 (28th NCAA)
UW - 72.8 (49th NCAA)

Scoring Defense
UK - 53.9 - 4.1 (3rd NCAA)
UW - 57.8 (12th NCAA)

Scoring Margin
UK - 20.8 + 5.8 (1st NCAA)
UW - 15.0 (6th NCAA)

Offensive Rebounds
UK - 12.76 +3.29 (27th NCAA)
UW - 9.47 (268th NCAA)

Defensive Rebounds
UK - 25.66 +1.74 (40th NCAA)
UW - 23.92 (154th NCAA)

Assists Per Game
UK - 14.4 +1.7 (54th NCAA)
UW - 12.7 (127th NCAA)

Blocks Per Game
UK - 6.9 +3.6 (2nd NCAA)
UW - 3.3 (197th NCAA)

Turnovers Per Game
UK - 10.6 (24th NCAA)
UW - 7.4 -3.2 (1st NCAA)

Fouls Per Game
UK - 16.97 (279th NCAA)
UW - 12.42 - 4.55 (1st NCAA)



This post was edited on 4/1 12:38 PM by CatPhight

Most telling stat of those, to me, is the 3 point FG % defense. We are 2nd in the nation and they are 306th. If that holds serve, there is no way they beat us.

 

[spotter34]

Originally posted by yabbadabbadoo:

Most telling stat of those, to me, is the 3 point FG % defense. We are 2nd in the nation and they are 306th. If that holds serve, there is no way they beat us.

That caught my eye as well. They've allowed their opponents to shoot better from three than they do. That's strange considering they are a pretty big team.

 

[CatPhight_rivals65113]

Originally posted by spotter34:

Originally posted by yabbadabbadoo:

Most telling stat of those, to me, is the 3 point FG % defense. We are 2nd in the nation and they are 306th. If that holds serve, there is no way they beat us.

That caught my eye as well. They've allowed their opponents to shoot better from three than they do. That's strange considering they are a pretty big team.

Contrasted by Wisconsin's Elite 8 opponent Arizona who ranked 137th in the NCAA in 3 Point FG defense at a 33.5% clip.

The Badgers shot 12/18 (Dekker 5/6) for 66.7%, nearly doubling that percentage and over 30% of their own average. I don't see a repeat performance of that magnitude Saturday night.

 

[UKwizard]

Other than the end of the first half Zona played like a deer in the headlights because the moment was too big for them.

 

[TopCat16]

The most encouraging Stat there is rebounding.

 

[RegentBadger]

Not Surprising that Uk has the edge in virtually everything. One caution though is that UW plays at one of the slowest paces in all of CBB and that really skews some of these stats (61 possessions per game versus 66 for UK).

Looking at the adjusted numbers the edge is still clearly in UK's favor though it is a bit closer in some areas.

Source

 

[Crawfords Corner]

Thanks for the line Badger fan. Take care and good luck this weekend.

 

[Big_Blue79]

Originally posted by RegentBadger:
Not Surprising that Uk has the edge in virtually everything. One caution though is that UW plays at one of the slowest paces in all of CBB and that really skews some of these stats (61 possessions per game versus 66 for UK).

Looking at the adjusted numbers the edge is still clearly in UK's favor though it is a bit closer in some areas.

Source

Per game numbers are terrible when we have ample sources of better stats.

 

[larry the cable guy]

I suppose there is no danger of them having anyone in foul trouble since they avg only 12 per game.

 

[TigerPawsSC]

Originally posted by TopCat16:
The most encouraging Stat there is rebounding.

It shouldn't be. Raw numbers are inherently unreliable in college basketball and shouldn't be used by anyone who knows what they are talking about.

Considering that UK plays about 5 possessions per game than UW because of its faster offensive pace, there are going to be more rebounding opportunities in any given UK game. Rebounding rates are what matter.

UK is still a dominant club on the offensive glass, and I'd guess, with tempo factored in, they're still likely to be the favorite in rebounding against almost every opponent, but not to the extent that rate stats suggest.

Wisconsin allows its opponents 23.9% of their offensive misses. That's fourth best in the country at protecting the glass on that end. On the offensive end, Wisconsin gets 32% of its misses. That's 129th in the country.

By comparison, Kentucky allows its opponents to get 31.6% of their offensive misses. That's good for 204th in the country in defensive rebounding. Kentucky is a very strong offensive rebounding team, getting just south of 40% of their misses, good for 6th in the nation.

Ultimately the rebounding is probably a wash. It's strength on strength when UK is on offense, and it's UW's average offensive rebounding prowess against UK's poor defensive rebounding on the other end.

 

[TigerPawsSC]

Originally posted by spotter34:

Originally posted by yabbadabbadoo:

Most telling stat of those, to me, is the 3 point FG % defense. We are 2nd in the nation and they are 306th. If that holds serve, there is no way they beat us.

That caught my eye as well. They've allowed their opponents to shoot better from three than they do. That's strange considering they are a pretty big team.

For as long as Bo Ryan has been the coach, Wisconsin has consistently run teams off of the three-point line. Its three-point defense is not poor, per se, because the team does well what you need to do well, and that's not allow teams to shoot many three pointers. UW allows opponents to only take 26.3% of their shots from 3-point range, which is 6th best in the country. That's been very consistent over the last decade.

The prevailing theory on this - how UW can both run teams off of the 3-point line well and give up a higher percentage than average from behind the arc - is relatively simple. That is, when UW plays good defense in a possession, it typically eliminates the three-point option altogether, forcing a team to take a 2. That means in situations where players would normally take harder or contested three-point shots, they're getting no shots at all. The flip side of this is that the looks that teams do take tend to be more open. The shots that UW eliminates tend to be the shots that would have been less likely to go in anyway. So there's a higher percentage of makes, on less quantity.

Whether this is good or bad for UW typically depends on what happens after a guy is forced to pass on a tough 3. If that guy goes on to score, then it would have been better if UW had let him launch that tough 3. Good, smart basketball people tend to think that running people off of the three-point line is a pretty good way to reduce an opponent's effectiveness.

Ken Pomeroy explained it on ESPN.com in 2012, noting empirically that all teams have very little control over opponents' three-point shooting percentage from year to year. What they can control is how many another team gets off. Agree with it or not (it's just a theory, but a well-supported one), here's Pomeroy on the (very very good) UW defense from 2012:

A sizable component of their defensive success has come on the perimeter. Wisconsin has held opponents to 26.2 percent accuracy from beyond the arc, which is second-best nationally, and there is no doubt that has contributed to the overall statistical success of the defense. But the Badgers' defense is built for continued success not because of its 3-point percentage defense, but because the Badgers limit their opponents' 3-point attempts. This is because Wisconsin, or any other college basketball team, has surprisingly little control over their opponents' accuracy from long distance.

http://insider.espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/insider/story/_/id/7558058/the-wisconsin-badgers-excel-defense-reasons-not-expect-ncb

 

[HoboKat_rivals209814]

This theory:

Originally posted by TigerPawsSC:

The prevailing theory on this - how UW can both run teams off of the 3-point line well and give up a higher percentage than average from behind the arc - is relatively simple. That is, when UW plays good defense in a possession, it typically eliminates the three-point option altogether, forcing a team to take a 2. That means in situations where players would normally take harder or contested three-point shots, they're getting no shots at all. The flip side of this is that the looks that teams do take tend to be more open. The shots that UW eliminates tend to be the shots that would have been less likely to go in anyway. So there's a higher percentage of makes, on less quantity.

And this sentence, directly contradict each other:

Originally posted by TigerPawsSC:

Wisconsin, or any other college basketball team, has surprisingly little control over their opponents' accuracy from long distance.

Limiting the number of threes shouldnt have any impact on %, according to your kenpom quote.

 

[Lumpy 2]

^Pomeroy is really good at statistical analysis but his assertion that teams have little control over their opponents' accuracy from long distance is a dumb statement. On the season our opponents are 168- 629 attempts from 3 point range. One of the main reasons they have so many attempts is because it is so difficult to score inside against our defense and they resort to trying to score by shooting more 3's. A lot of those are low percentage shots because they have already realized they would have a hard time scoring inside.

Most of the teams that have given us trouble this year have quick guards who can get into the lane and either score or kick the ball out for open looks. If Jackson isn't able to contribute I'm not sure Wisconsin has a guard able to do that.

 

[CatDaddy4daWin]

This is because Wisconsin, or any other college basketball team, has surprisingly little control over their opponents' accuracy from long distance.

[/B]Oh get the F out of here with this, of course a defense can affect an opponent's accuracy. Don't worry, you'll find out Saturday.