Jump to content

Connecticut 60 Kentucky 54


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 267
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I absolutely don't blame this loss on officiating, but I completely agree Hatz. That call was huge. I'm not sure if it tied it or would have put them down one, but it was a huge play that the Cats needed. Really could have sent the ball game in a different direction.

 

Really wish they would've went with a no call on that one.

 

2nd block foul against Wisconsin's point guard that could have been a charge in the 1st half was huge in that semifinal game. Always plays like that in the tourney and UK was on the fortunate end for every game with the calls but the finals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read through this entire thread because I've been a little down since the championship game loss, but I think I know how most of the discussion and analysis has gone without reading through all of it.

 

UK did not lose the game because of the quickness or experience of UConn's guards. UK did not lose the game because they were outplayed. UK did not lose the game because of bad officiating (although they did get some terrible calls just as they were gaining momentum, particularly on Poythress), UK did not get out coached, UK did not lose because of turnovers.

 

UK lost this game because they couldn't make free throws. A team absolutely can't go 13-24 from the free throw line, with several bonus misses, and win a close game. It cost the Cats another championship in 1997 (Nazr was 0-6 vs Arizona in an overtime loss in the title game). It hurt them in their 1 point loss to UConn in the 2011 FF, Jones was 0-5 with several bonus misses. It cost Cal's 2008 Memphis team a national title.

A free throw is a 15 foot gift shot with no one allowed to guard you. UK's 2 opponents in the Final Four went a combined 29-30 from the foul line. But Kentucky misses 11 in the game for all the marbles. I don't know how much they practice free throws or teach technique, but it is a very important part of practice and should be emphasized.

 

If they'd made a reasonable percentage of their free throws, they would have hung #9 banner in Rupp's rafters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read through this entire thread because I've been a little down since the championship game loss, but I think I know how most of the discussion and analysis has gone without reading through all of it.

 

UK did not lose the game because of the quickness or experience of UConn's guards. UK did not lose the game because they were outplayed. UK did not lose the game because of bad officiating (although they did get some terrible calls just as they were gaining momentum, particularly on Poythress), UK did not get out coached, UK did not lose because of turnovers.

 

UK lost this game because they couldn't make free throws. A team absolutely can't go 13-24 from the free throw line, with several bonus misses, and win a close game. It cost the Cats another championship in 1997 (Nazr was 0-6 vs Arizona in an overtime loss in the title game). It hurt them in their 1 point loss to UConn in the 2011 FF, Jones was 0-5 with several bonus misses. It cost Cal's 2008 Memphis team a national title.

A free throw is a 15 foot gift shot with no one allowed to guard you. UK's 2 opponents in the Final Four went a combined 29-30 from the foul line. But Kentucky misses 11 in the game for all the marbles. I don't know how much they practice free throws or teach technique, but it is a very important part of practice and should be emphasized.

 

If they'd made a reasonable percentage of their free throws, they would have hung #9 banner in Rupp's rafters.

 

I think that's an overly simplistic way to look at the loss. Was it a factor?? Yes, no doubt. But to say that's the sole reason doesn't give UConn the credit they deserved. It's not like they played an awful game. In fact they outplayed UK in many categories. And shooting free throws better is part of outplaying your opponent. However, if UK had made more free throws, you can't say they automatically win. Make some free throws, the score changes which means some strategies change, different sets get run, etc. It's not as simple as saying "we make 7 more free throws and we win". If they'd have made more free throws, yes it would have been a different game, but not necessarily a different outcome. Games don't operate in that kind of a vacuum where if you change one thing, the outcome automatically becomes different. You can't just change one thing without other things changing as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that's an overly simplistic way to look at the loss. Was it a factor?? Yes, no doubt. But to say that's the sole reason doesn't give UConn the credit they deserved. It's not like they played an awful game. In fact they outplayed UK in many categories. And shooting free throws better is part of outplaying your opponent. However, if UK had made more free throws, you can't say they automatically win. Make some free throws, the score changes which means some strategies change, different sets get run, etc. It's not as simple as saying "we make 7 more free throws and we win". If they'd have made more free throws, yes it would have been a different game, but not necessarily a different outcome. Games don't operate in that kind of a vacuum where if you change one thing, the outcome automatically becomes different. You can't just change one thing without other things changing as well.

 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion but I disagree with you. I understand your point, but I still say that if they had taken care of the job at the foul line they would have won this game. A team can't shoot barely above 50% at the FF line when your offense dictates that you are going to be making numerous trips to that spot, and expect to win a close game. I'm not taking anything away from UConn. They did the things it took for them to win. But regardless of what they did if UK had taken care of business at the charity stripe they win the game. And I'm not saying they had to shoot 90%, or even 80%. But not 54% with 24 attempts. It's not asking too much for college players to make 70 to 75% of their foul shots. Make a respectable percentage and the title was theirs for the taking, regardless of all the other factors in the game. Nothing simplistic about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats to the Cats for making a big kick in the tournament and getting to the title game, just missing being national champs by a few free throws. Being a U. Memphis fan first, Cats second, I saw the tail lights of UConn three times already this season, and I had a lot of respect for their capabilities. It is ironic how Memphis swept Louisville and Louisville swept UConn. At the end of the day, it doesn't seem that Randle was at 100%, and the team really missed WC-S in this game. Which we could have a do-over in a couple of weeks....but that would probably cost some guys some money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone is entitled to their opinion but I disagree with you. I understand your point, but I still say that if they had taken care of the job at the foul line they would have won this game. A team can't shoot barely above 50% at the FF line when your offense dictates that you are going to be making numerous trips to that spot, and expect to win a close game. I'm not taking anything away from UConn. They did the things it took for them to win. But regardless of what they did if UK had taken care of business at the charity stripe they win the game. And I'm not saying they had to shoot 90%, or even 80%. But not 54% with 24 attempts. It's not asking too much for college players to make 70 to 75% of their foul shots. Make a respectable percentage and the title was theirs for the taking, regardless of all the other factors in the game. Nothing simplistic about that.

 

And I understand your point as well :-). And I do agree, you've got to shoot free throws better than they did. But if UK is knocking down free throws, that changes other dynamics, which could change certain strategies. Maybe UK does win if they are making free throw. However, think about this.......the average college basketball team in the country shoots 70% (which is what you were asking for) from the line. If UK does that, they only make 3 or 4 more free throws, not enough to change the outcome. They would have had to shoot over 80% from the line to change the outcome.

 

What I do disagree with you is that it was solely about free throws. UConn took more shots, had a high shooting percentage, more rebounds, more steals, and less turnovers in addition to having a higher free throw percentage. Kentucky needed to do a few more things better than just make more free throws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I understand your point as well :-). And I do agree, you've got to shoot free throws better than they did. But if UK is knocking down free throws, that changes other dynamics, which could change certain strategies. Maybe UK does win if they are making free throw. However, think about this.......the average college basketball team in the country shoots 70% (which is what you were asking for) from the line. If UK does that, they only make 3 or 4 more free throws, not enough to change the outcome. They would have had to shoot over 80% from the line to change the outcome.

 

What I do disagree with you is that it was solely about free throws. UConn took more shots, had a high shooting percentage, more rebounds, more steals, and less turnovers in addition to having a higher free throw percentage. Kentucky needed to do a few more things better than just make more free throws.

 

I agree with your point but UConn didn't shoot the ball that much better. UK shot 39.1% and UConn shot 41.5%. Not a glaring difference. UK hit one less 3 pointer. KY had 3 more assists. It was a close game that UConn made more plays to win. I, like you, think it's a little more than FT's but that's where the #1 place "I Can change" begins when you analyze it. :thumb:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I understand your point as well :-). And I do agree, you've got to shoot free throws better than they did. But if UK is knocking down free throws, that changes other dynamics, which could change certain strategies. Maybe UK does win if they are making free throw. However, think about this.......the average college basketball team in the country shoots 70% (which is what you were asking for) from the line. If UK does that, they only make 3 or 4 more free throws, not enough to change the outcome. They would have had to shoot over 80% from the line to change the outcome.

 

What I do disagree with you is that it was solely about free throws. UConn took more shots, had a high shooting percentage, more rebounds, more steals, and less turnovers in addition to having a higher free throw percentage. Kentucky needed to do a few more things better than just make more free throws.

 

One nuance to your free throw analysis is how many misses were the front end of one and ones. Hitting those with thei extra chances they would have produced could have made up the 6 point difference, still using the 70% mark.

 

What was UK's FT percentage for the year? It may not have even been the 70%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One nuance to your free throw analysis is how many misses were the front end of one and ones. Hitting those with thei extra chances they would have produced could have made up the 6 point difference, still using the 70% mark.

 

What was UK's FT percentage for the year? It may not have even been the 70%.

 

Good point, I don't know the answer to that. But don't get me wrong. Free throws were a big part of the loss. Just not the only part, and making free throws doesn't automatically flip things, as this would have caused other things to possibly change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know the rule on the over and back call. I watched a replay of that call in the UK game and it was clear that neither the ball nor Harrison touched the mid court line, but the ball broke the plane of the line while it was in the air. Does this make it a violation? Just curious as to the rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know the rule on the over and back call. I watched a replay of that call in the UK game and it was clear that neither the ball nor Harrison touched the mid court line, but the ball broke the plane of the line while it was in the air. Does this make it a violation? Just curious as to the rule.

 

Player or ball must touch the line. In live action it appeared to be the correct call (to me). When I saw the replay, it looked like they missed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know the rule on the over and back call. I watched a replay of that call in the UK game and it was clear that neither the ball nor Harrison touched the mid court line, but the ball broke the plane of the line while it was in the air. Does this make it a violation? Just curious as to the rule.

 

Clyde answered it here in post 210:

 

http://bluegrasspreps.com/college-basketball/connecticut-60-kentucky-275787-page11.html#post5020416

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.