Best defense in SEC, almost worst offense

[cardvolfan]

Some have absolutely no clue about points per game or given up really is pretty irrelevant. If you’re going to use these numbers at least look at margin of victory. We’ve got experts making definitive statements about things they really don’t understand. Yet, they will die on that hill.

 

[Orangeslide]

We are still ahead of Bama on KenPom even with their offense and tougher schedule. Our offense isn’t as bad as their defense. We are 23rd in offensive efficiency.

Alabama never has played defense since Nate Oats arrival. They made a final 4 strictly on offense. KenPom doesn’t win NCAA tournament games but non scoring droughts of 4 minutes or longer will get you the exit ticket in a grind it out game on a neutral floor. Our defense is tough and gives us a punchers chance no matter who we play. Can we overcome when Chaz is off or being manhandled with no whistle in a tournament game? I believe the jury is still deliberating if we can. Our starters all have to look to attack the rim, get a whistle or draw and kick to open shooter and we need to shoot when we are open. That means you Igor and Mashack.

 

[Anti-shunshinepumper]

Alabama never has played defense since Nate Oats arrival. They made a final 4 strictly on offense.

Good post.....
The old saying " defense wins you championships" is really for football.
Theoretically in football an offensive doesn't have to score anything. If a defense holds the other team from scoring, and say gets you a safety, you will win the game.
In basketball, it's offensive that wins you championships. You just have to have a good enough defense.

 

[VolGee4]

Well, then the data that says we are not getting a lot of ppg ought to be taken into consideration then. Maybe our defensive will continue to make up for it in respect, maybe it won't. Time will tell.
I know one thing, it certainly doesn't look to be the case on the road.

PPG is a volume stat. Not efficiency. Our defensive output actually affects our offense because our opponent has to work harder at scoring, thus limiting possessions. That's why it isn't a good metric. So, we came full circle.

But, I get the feeling you know that and keep pushing your theory.

 

[VolGee4]

Alabama never has played defense since Nate Oats arrival. They made a final 4 strictly on offense. KenPom doesn’t win NCAA tournament games but non scoring droughts of 4 minutes or longer will get you the exit ticket in a grind it out game on a neutral floor. Our defense is tough and gives us a punchers chance no matter who we play. Can we overcome when Chaz is off or being manhandled with no whistle in a tournament game? I believe the jury is still deliberating if we can. Our starters all have to look to attack the rim, get a whistle or draw and kick to open shooter and we need to shoot when we are open. That means you Igor and Mashack.

Alabama lost 12 games last year because their defense wasn't good (gave up 99+ points 4 times). They had a 4 game stretch in the NCAAT, where they won games. In one, they beat Grand Canyon 72-61. Slower game where they had to make more stops.

KenPom is a predictive measure. Of course, you can't predict exact outcomes, otherwise, we would know who would win. But the data helps make an informed prediction.

I would agree that Barnes teams are always better on defense than offense (except 2018-2019), and some of his teams had offensive woes at times. But, in 2020-21, we were 85th in OE and lost in round 1. In 2021-22, we were 35th in OE, went 14-4 in the SEC, won the SECT and lost in round 2. In 2022-23, we were 64th in OE and went to the Sweet Sixteen. In 2023-24, we were 28th in OE and went to the Elite Eight. Aside from 2022-23, the better OE generally correlates with a better year because our DE has always been top 5.

This year, we are currently 22nd in OE. If we maintain that or just get into the top 20 along with maintaining a top 5 DE, then we will do well regardless of "4 minute scoring droughts." The offensive efficiency number itself will correlate to players scoring points when they need to. I wasn't even a math major, and this isn't a difficult concept.

 

[cardvolfan]

Alabama never has played defense since Nate Oats arrival. They made a final 4 strictly on offense. KenPom doesn’t win NCAA tournament games but non scoring droughts of 4 minutes or longer will get you the exit ticket in a grind it out game on a neutral floor. Our defense is tough and gives us a punchers chance no matter who we play. Can we overcome when Chaz is off or being manhandled with no whistle in a tournament game? I believe the jury is still deliberating if we can. Our starters all have to look to attack the rim, get a whistle or draw and kick to open shooter and we need to shoot when we are open. That means you Igor and Mashack.

Remember the 2023 tournament? Remember what happened with Brandon Miller and quite possibly the most talented team in the country? Remember that final game and how it unfolded? I suspect you would have to research a little to answer my questions. Regardless, Tennessee and Alabama went out in the same round and offense had a lot to do with both teams not advancing.

 

[Anti-shunshinepumper]

PPG is a volume stat. Not efficiency. Our defensive output actually affects our offense because our opponent has to work harder at scoring, thus limiting possessions.

Yes, but if our defense output falters ( aren't as efficient in a particular game) does that necessarily mean our ppg goes up that game?
Not necessarily. You could be on the road like in Flordia and the moment be too big for you, and you can't buy a bucket.
If your offense isn’t putting the round ball in the hole, guess what? It will affect your points in a game.

A team like Alabama does a really good job at putting that round ball in the hole, even against good defenses.
Alabama gets 90.2 on average.
Let's say we hold Alabama to 10 under their average on offense. They get 80. If Tennessee gets their average of 76.8, they lose.
It's why I said ideally we'd like to average close to 81.

That's why it isn't a good metric. So, we came full circle.

But, I get the feeling you know that and keep pushing your theory.

It's just a metric. One of many. I never said it was the end all be all of predicting games or evaluating teams.

 

[VolGee4]

Yes, but if our defense output falters ( aren't as efficient in a particular game) does that necessarily mean our ppg goes up that game?
Not necessarily. You could be on the road like in Flordia and the moment be too big for you, and you can't buy a bucket.
If your offense isn’t putting the round ball in the hole, guess what? It will affect your points in a game.

A team like Alabama does a really good job at putting that round ball in the hole, even against good defenses.
Alabama gets 90.2 on average.
Let's say we hold Alabama to 10 under their average on offense. They get 80. If Tennessee gets their average of 76.8, they lose.
It's why I said ideally we'd like to average close to 81.


It's just a metric. One of many. I never said it was the end all be all of predicting games or evaluating teams.

KenPom will adjust for Bama’s poor defense. Theoretically, we would score more than our average against a poor defense. But an average is just that, and one 43 point game will drastically bring it down. Advanced analytics- some folks still don’t get them.

 

[Col_Cathcart]

Alabama gets 90.2 on average.
Let's say we hold Alabama to 10 under their average on offense. They get 80. If Tennessee gets their average of 76.8, they lose.
It's why I said ideally we'd like to average close to 81.

Why would you expect our defensive efficiency to effect their offense but not expect their defensive efficiency to effect our offense. If you’re going to do one, you should do both.

Their defense is worse than the average we’ve played, so you would expect we would score more than our average against them (almost everyone else has).

 

[Anti-shunshinepumper]

KenPom will adjust for Bama’s poor defense. Theoretically, we would score more than our average against a poor defense. But an average is just that, and one 43 point game will drastically bring it down. Advanced analytics- some folks still don’t get them.

And like I said earlier in this thread, a 103 point game against an Austin Peay will drastically raise it.
That's why they take an Average of ALL the games you play to come up with ppg.
When you said you weren't a math major, I believe you.

I mean call me crazy or say I'm not too smart, there may be absolutely no correlation to low ppg and an a team like Tennessee that has had trouble putting the ball in the hoop.
Who knows, maybe it's just big ole fat coincidence that teams that play bad defense like Alabama and Kentucky give up a sh!t load of ppg.
Maybe I'm just imagining things, but somehow I doubt it.

 

[Anti-shunshinepumper]

Why would you expect our defensive efficiency to effect their offense but not expect their defensive efficiency to effect our offense. If you’re going to do one, you should do both.

Their defense is worse than the average we’ve played, so you would expect we would score more than our average against them (almost everyone else has).

Fair point. Maybe it does. I haven't made a prediction in that game one way or the other. My only point is more possessions a game doesn’t necessarily mean more points if your problem is hitting the shots.
Incidentally, if we get 10 points over our average ( 86.5) and they get their average ( 90.2) we still lose.
What we need to do is hold them to about 6-7 under their average and score 6-7 over our average.

 

[VolGee4]

Fair point. Maybe it does. I haven't made a prediction in that game one way or the other. My only point is more possessions a game doesn’t necessarily mean more points if your problem is hitting the shots.
Incidentally, if we get 10 points over our average ( 86.5) and they get their average ( 90.2) we still lose.
What we need to do is hold them to about 6-7 under their average and score 6-7 over our average.

Imagine that- how adjusted efficiencies are used for each opponent.

 

[VolGee4]

And like I said earlier in this thread, a 103 point game against an Austin Peay will drastically raise it.
That's why they take an Average of ALL the games you play to come up with ppg.
When you said you weren't a math major, I believe you.

I mean call me crazy or say I'm not too smart, there may be absolutely no correlation to low ppg and an a team like Tennessee that has had trouble putting the ball in the hoop.
Who knows, maybe it's just big ole fat coincidence that teams that play bad defense like Alabama and Kentucky give up a sh!t load of ppg.
Maybe I'm just imagining things, but somehow I doubt it.

The average is a terrible state these days. No other way to really say it.

 

[Anti-shunshinepumper]

Imagine that- how adjusted efficiencies are used for each opponent.

Still doesn't mean our offense is better than their defense. We going to have to be uber efficient against their offense when we play them and we still are going to have a hell of a game on offense to beat them. I don't like probably having to score 80 or more to beat them.

 

[Col_Cathcart]

Still doesn't mean our offense is better than their defense. We going to have to be uber efficient against their offense when we play them and we still are going to have a hell of a game on offense to beat them. I don't like probably having to score 80 or more to beat them.

Well that’s literally what netrtg is meant to address. We’re about 2 points per 100 possessions better so far. So it’s basically a wash which is what you would probably expect given everything else.

 

[Anti-shunshinepumper]

Well that’s literally what netrtg is meant to address. We’re about 2 points per 100 possessions better so far. So it’s basically a wash which is what you would probably expect given everything else.

Yeah, but like I was mentioning earlier getting a few more possessions doesn't mean we get more points. We still have that awful habbit of going cold and then colder. Especially if Chaz isn't hitting anything.

 

[Anti-shunshinepumper]

The average is a terrible state these days. No other way to really say it.

I don't know what you mean by that.
I can look at Duke's averages and tell immediately they are a balanced team. Which they are.

 

[Col_Cathcart]

Yeah, but like I was mentioning earlier getting a few more possessions doesn't mean we get more points. We still have that awful habbit of going cold and then colder. Especially if Chaz isn't hitting anything.

Well yeah. It’s averages. Doesn’t tell you anything about streakiness or what an individual possession will do. On average getting a couple extra possessions will get you a couple extra points. You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take as they say

 

[Anti-shunshinepumper]

Well yeah. It’s averages. Doesn’t tell you anything about streakiness or what an individual possession will do. On average getting a couple extra possessions will get you a couple extra points. You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take as they say

No I get all that, but if we play Bama and suddenly have a meaningful number of more possessions then it means our D hasn't been as efficient. We don't want that. Without us shooting some really good percentages, we'll have a tough time keeping up with them. I mean, they've shown ( 3 times ) they can easily get a hundred against SEC teams, and don't think anyone of us think we getting a hundred against another SEC more than once this year. If that.

 

[Col_Cathcart]

No I get all that, but if we play Bama and suddenly have a meaningful number of more possessions then it means our D hasn't been as efficient. We don't want that. Without us shooting some really good percentages, we'll have a tough time keeping up with them. I mean, they've shown ( 3 times ) they can easily get a hundred against SEC teams, and don't think anyone of us think we getting a hundred against another SEC more than once this year. If that.

If it happens it’ll probably happen against bama or Kentucky though

 

[Anti-shunshinepumper]

If it happens it’ll probably happen against bama or Kentucky though

Yeah, well, if I didn't agree with that than I wouldn't be very consistent now would I?

Problem is I just don't feel it happens, so hopefully we continue to lean on our excellent D to help compensate for our not so excellent offense.

I'm not exactly saying our D is carrying our offense. Riding on the back of the D's motorcycle would probably be more accurate of an analogy.
Except for a few games played, and then it would be the D pushing our O in a wheelchair

 

[Col_Cathcart]

Yeah, well, if I didn't agree with that than I wouldn't be very consistent now would I?

Problem is I just don't feel it happens, so hopefully we continue to lean on our excellent D to help compensate for our not so excellent offense.

I'm not exactly saying our D is carrying our offense. Riding on the back of the D's motorcycle would probably be more accurate of an analogy.
Except for a few games played, and then it would be the D pushing our O in a wheelchair

And the Florida game where the offense just stayed at home and the d was all alone

 

[BernardKingGOAT]

And Alabama destroyed Vandy tonight even with their bad defense.

So what?

 

[Tnphil]

So what?

Figure it out

 

[BernardKingGOAT]

Figure it out

Nothing to figure out. What's your equation here?