Just looking at our schedule...

[Ima Alien]

and it seems to me like we have a larger number than usual of "cupcake" games.

Nicholls
Valparaiso
Eastern Illinois
Loyola(Md)
Tennessee Tech
North Carolina Central
Bellarmine

I could be wrong but isn't seven of this type of games more than we usually have? I don't remember exactly and don't have any schedules of previous years. As for myself, I would prefer more challenging games. What are your thoughts on this? Pardon if this has been discussed already. I don't visit this planet often enough.

 

[trueblujr]

Last year we played
Wright St.
Bucknell
Lipscomb
Jackson St.
WKU
Georgia St.
Colgate
Brown
So no, this isn't an unusual number. Probably a couple fewer to be honest.

 

[UKWildcats1987]

We always play 5 to 6 power games and 6 to 7 cupcake games ooc.

 

[BlueSince92]

I think you have a point.

I didn’t actually crunch all the numbers. But I did just do a quick run through comparing the Kenpom ratings for all those teams compared to our comparable warmup games from last year.

This year the average rating is around 300.

Last year it was better. Not eye-poppingly better but still worth noting. Average maybe 220 or 200.

Lowering risk of injury? We could hardly blame anybody for wanting to do that if that’s what it is.

Maybe wanting to give a much deeper team more time to gel together?

I don’t know but you’re right it is interesting.

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

The problem is.........4 of those are sub 300 ranked KP teams. Seven are 250th and below.

Our schedule isn't "bad" its just very top heavy.

And I'd really like to see those 300s replaced with 200s and the 200s replaced with 100s. Games will still be home. We'll still win them. And our resume would look better.

I don't think UK has schedule non conference smartly in ages. Granted some of that is conference tied. Like we have to face a SWAC team I believe since we have an agreement but still.

Thing is no one really cares as long as we have the marquee games. People have a very hard time judging teams the further down you go and they tend to just lump everything together. But there's a difference between 150 and 250 and a difference between 250 and 350 and its reflected in the numbers. Now granted it probably doesn't hurt the seeding all that much but still......I think having more competitive games is better.

 

[BlueSince92]

The problem is.........4 of those are sub 300 ranked KP teams. Seven are 250th and below.

This isn’t right.

Per current Kenpom numbers:

Nicholls 250
Valparaiso 288
Eastern Illinois 309
Loyola(Md) 298
Tennessee Tech 327
North Carolina Central 347
Bellarmine 321

@Ima Alien isn’t onto anything Earth shattering. But he is onto something.

 

[JMcClinton slaps like a grl]

If anything this Non-conference schedule is absolutely loaded. I have no concerns about the level of competition. One week we play UNC and then Gonzaga in like 4 days. Every week is a high profile game except during Thanksgiving.

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

This isn’t right.

Per current Kenpom numbers:

Nicholls 250
Valparaiso 288
Eastern Illinois 309
Loyola(Md) 298
Tennessee Tech 327
North Carolina Central 347
Bellarmine 321

@Ima Alien isn’t onto anything Earth shattering. But he is onto something.

Wait how isn't it right? Four of those are 300th and below and seven are 250th and below? lol.

 

[BlueSince92]

Wait how isn't it right? Four of those are 300th and below and seven are 250th and below? lol.

Maybe I wasn't understanding what you meant by "the problem." I thought you were saying that was a problem with his argument.

I thought by below 300 you were meaning 299 direction and by below 250th you were meaning 249th direction.

Apologies if I misunderstood your point.

Last year we had a zinger or two but the average was much closer to 200 or 220 among our cupcakes.

 

[TheAssignment9]

Other schools have shown that a cheat code to KenPom in the Non-conf can be just blowing the absolute doors off of very bad opponents, since margin of victory is taken into account.

So if all of those games can go similar to Valpo rather than Nichols, it gives a big lift to our Kenpom numbers (see UCONN and Houston historically as examples of this)

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

Maybe I wasn't understanding what you meant by "the problem." I thought you were saying that was a problem with his argument.

I thought by below 300 you were meaning 299 direction and by below 250th you were meaning 249th direction.

Apologies if I misunderstood your point.

Last year we had a zinger or two but the average was much closer to 200 or 220 among our cupcakes.

oh no I just meant that you probably want to avoid as many 300s as possible. I guess problem really isn't the right word I should have used. I don't think scheduling 300s is really going to drastically effect the resume vs say scheduling 200s.

Yeah I think in an ideal world you'd rather it be like last year where the average was as you said closer to 200. Then again with these teams on the bottom, I guess you are scheduling these and your never really sure where those teams are going to end up so maybe it's a bit more difficult than I figure.

 

[BlueSince92]

I guess you are scheduling these and your never really sure where those teams are going to end up so maybe it's a bit more difficult than I figure.

Yeah I had wondered about this too. If he actually tried to schedule the same strength though he actually won the lottery either this year, or last year, depending on what he was going for.

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

Other schools have shown that a cheat code to KenPom in the Non-conf can be just blowing the absolute doors off of very bad opponents, since margin of victory is taken into account.

So if all of those games can go similar to Valpo rather than Nichols, it gives a big lift to our Kenpom numbers (see UCONN and Houston historically as examples of this)

I don't know. I mean I hear people refer to this at times as "gaming the system" but in reality it's not really doing that.

Because like with Kenpom, let's say just for purposes (numbers are fake) but you are facing a 200th ranked team and another team is facing a 300th ranked team. It just means that you have to beat the 300th ranked team by more points to get the same efficiency margin gain. Maybe you have to beat the 200th ranked team by say 20 points and but the 300th ranked team by say 30 points. It seems logical to me.

The other thing is the margin of victory in Kenpom (and I believe in NET) does eventually get capped. So I'm not really sure there's an argument of oh just schedule 300th ranked teams, your projected to win by say 30 and you win those by 50. I'm not sure it really works that way.

For example UK beat Valpo........by 48 points .......and only gained 0.50 in Efficiency Margin. UK beat Nichols by 26 points and only gained 0.37 in EM.

The system is really easy, just do better than what is predicted. So if UK is projected to win by 20 and they win by 20 there's no gain. If UK is facing a tough team and projected to win by 2 and they win that by 20 = huge gains. The huge gains come from beating the projected scores consistently and by wide margins. Scheduling teams in the 300s just means you have to win by more and to be honest I'm not sure it helps because at some point teams eventually take their foot off the gas.

 

[Ima Alien]

I'm kind of surprised that we have in fact played that many cupcake teams in previous years. It just seemed more than usual to me. I do wish we didn't play teems so lowly ranked, though. I guess people would just rather see huge blowouts. Personally, I would rather see us play more competitive opponents. We might take an additional loss or two, but I believe it would prepare us better for the tournament.

Just my opinion, though. I don't have any real complaints with it.

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

I'm kind of surprised that we have in fact played that many cupcake teams in previous years. It just seemed more than usual to me. I do wish we didn't play teems so lowly ranked, though. I guess people would just rather see huge blowouts. Personally, I would rather see us play more competitive opponents. We might take an additional loss or two, but I believe it would prepare us better for the tournament.

Just my opinion, though. I don't have any real complaints with it.

I agree. And I do think for the most part people would prefer competitive games.

I guess having said that, there's not a major program in division 1 that doesn't at least schedule some of these games.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Got to have some cupcakes when you're playing 12 games against top 25 teams, not counting Purdue preseason and whatever juggernauts we face in the SEC Tourney. Could be looking at a legit 15 to 19 top 25 games before the season is over. In other words, a good 40 to 45% of all of our games this year could be against top 30ish teams.

I mean, seriously, we've never seen anything like this over the last two years, and some of your are nitpicking the cupcake portion of the schedule?

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

I'm kind of surprised that we have in fact played that many cupcake teams in previous years. It just seemed more than usual to me. I do wish we didn't play teems so lowly ranked, though. I guess people would just rather see huge blowouts. Personally, I would rather see us play more competitive opponents. We might take an additional loss or two, but I believe it would prepare us better for the tournament.

Just my opinion, though. I don't have any real complaints with it.

No disrespect to you, but a schedule of Purdue (preseason), Gonzaga, Florida x 2, St. John's, UNC, Indiana, Louisville, Michigan State, @Arkansas, Tennessee x2, @Alabama, and Auburn, plus SEC tourney requires more than a few cupcakes to fix schemes that aren't working, and treat those games like glorified practices.

You can't expect to fix issues when you don't have a downswing in the schedule.

 

[The_Answer1313_rivals]

Got to have some cupcakes when you're playing 12 games against top 25 teams, not counting Purdue preseason and whatever juggernauts we face in the SEC Tourney. Could be looking at a legit 15 to 19 top 25 games before the season is over. In other words, a good 40 to 45% of all of our games this year could be against top 30ish teams.

I mean, seriously, we've never seen anything like this over the last two years, and some of your are nitpicking the cupcake portion of the schedule?

The "nitpicking" is because you want a 1 seed. You want your SOS to be as good as possible for that 1 seed. If you are going to have all these marquee games then lose some of that because you scheduled a bunch of 300 rated teams instead of 200 rated teams, to me that doesn't really make a whole lot of sense.

I don't think anyone is saying it's a "huge" deal.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

The "nitpicking" is because you want a 1 seed. You want your SOS to be as good as possible for that 1 seed. If you are going to have all these marquee games then lose some of that because you scheduled a bunch of 300 rated teams instead of 200 rated teams, to me that doesn't really make a whole lot of sense.

I don't think anyone is saying it's a "huge" deal.

I'm not buying that argument. The cupcakes mean nothing to the #1 seed pursuit if Kentucky handles business in the SEC and wins the conference outright, or finishes #2 in the conference and dominates the pre-conference portion of the schedule.

 

[GoneFishin916]

and it seems to me like we have a larger number than usual of "cupcake" games.

Nicholls
Valparaiso
Eastern Illinois
Loyola(Md)
Tennessee Tech
North Carolina Central
Bellarmine

I could be wrong but isn't seven of this type of games more than we usually have? I don't remember exactly and don't have any schedules of previous years. As for myself, I would prefer more challenging games. What are your thoughts on this? Pardon if this has been discussed already. I don't visit this planet often enough.

Duke just finished a game at Army. They won by 55 points, outscoring Army 77-31 over the last 23 minutes. Teams are scoring 100+ with regularity now. NIL means more blowouts like tonight.