How Do the 2005 Kentucky Wildcats Compare to the 1996 team?

 

I clearly recall thinking in November and December of 1995 that the 1995-96 Kentucky Wildcat team was good.  Not going to be good; they were simply and clearly Good!  In January 1996, Kentucky had two stunning blow-out SEC road wins that proved the point.  First, before a national TV audience, Kentucky owned a highly ranked Mississippi State in Starkville.  A couple of weeks later, Kentucky humiliated Vanderbilt in Nashville.  I was in Nashville that evening, and I will never forget the complete defensive dominance that prevented Vanderbilt from advancing repeated possessions past mid-court, allowing Kentucky to score off the turnovers nearly at will. 

 

The question soon became, How Good Are These Guys?

 

By early April of 1996, we all witnessed Kentucky’s waltz through the NCAA tournament.  We saw that this team was Good Enough; Good Enough to Win the game’s biggest prize. 

 

But, How Good Were Those Guys?  Power!  Power!  Power! 

 

The 1996 Kentucky basketball team was powerful.  This team posted an average power rating [1] for the entire season, against all competitors of 128.5 percent.  However, the 1996 team was powerful regardless of the opponent or the venue.

 

 

The 1996 team was a well-oiled machine.  Whether they played at Rupp Arena, on their opponent’s floor, or at a neutral location, this team played the game the only way they knew how.  They applied fierce defensive pressure in a relentless fashion from baseline to baseline.  They played at a pace [97 possessions per game] rarely seen in college basketball.  Regardless of their preference for a running game, this team could play the half court offense and defense with the same offensive efficiency and defensive effectiveness.  Actually, this team posted better numbers for their performance away from home than either neutral or home court appearances.  Furthermore, this Kentucky team is rare in achieving virtually the same performance record against SEC competition as non-conference competition.[2]

 

 

Of course, this brief journey down memory lane begs the question.  How do the current crop of Cats stack up against the 1996 National Champs?  Let’s compare their respective average offensive efficiency, defensive efficiency, net game efficiency, possessions per game, offensive rebounding margins, and turn over rates.  In addition, let’s compare the consistency of the two teams in conference and non-conference play, and at home and away from home.

 

Offensive Efficiency:

 

The 1996 National Champions averaged 0.960 points per possession over the course of the season.  Against all non-conference opponents, they averaged 0.963 ppp and against SEC teams, they averaged 0.946 ppp.  At home, they averaged 0.941 ppp while away from Rupp Arena, the 1996 champions were even better at 0.955 ppp and 1.006 ppp for neutral court and away games respectively.

 

In contrast, the current Kentucky team has an average offensive efficiency of 0.897 ppp through about ½ of the regular season.  Without any accommodation for relative strength of schedule, the 2005 team is better than average offensively, but has not matched the efficiency of the 1996 team.  Furthermore, the current team’s offensive efficiency falls dramatically when it plays on the road.

 

The 2005 Kentucky team does not measure up offensively with great teams of the recent past

 

Defensive Efficiency:

 

The 1996 National Champions allowed an average 0.747 points per possession over the course of the season.  Against all non-conference opponents, they allowed 0.751 ppp and against SEC teams, they averaged 0.744 ppp.  At home, they allowed 0.761 ppp while away from Rupp Arena, the 1996 champions were marginally less effective at 0.765 ppp and 0.787 ppp for neutral court and away games respectively.

 

In contrast, the current Kentucky team has posted an average defensive efficiency of 0.724 ppp through about ½ of the regular season.  Without any accommodation for relative strength of schedule, the 2005 team is much better than average defensively, exceeding the defensive efficiency of the 1996 team.  However, the current team’s defensive efficiency falls dramatically when it plays SEC competition [0.823 ppp] verses non-conference teams [0.697 ppp].  In addition, the current team’s defensive effectiveness falls when the team plays outside Rupp Arena [0.688 ppp at Rupp; 0.716 ppp on Neutral Courts; 0.836 ppp on the opponent’s court].

 

The 2005 Kentucky team, on average is playing better defense than its championship caliber counterparts.  However, the 2005 team has not been able to maintain the defensive intensity against SEC opponents or when on the road.   

 

Net Game Efficiency [Offensive Efficiency minus Defensive Efficiency]:

 

The 1996 National Champions outscored its opponents by an average 0.213 points per possession over the course of the season.  Against all non-conference opponents, they allowed 0.212 ppp and against SEC teams, they averaged 0.203 ppp.  At home, they allowed 0.179 ppp while away from Rupp Arena, the 1996 champions were marginally less effective at 0.190 ppp and 0.219 ppp for neutral court and away games respectively. 

 

In contrast, the current Kentucky team has outscored its opponents by an average of 0.173 ppp through about ½ of the regular season.  Without any accommodation for relative strength of schedule, the 2005 team is much better than average in terms of its average scoring margin [power], but the 2005 team has not been as powerful as the 1996 team.  Furthermore, the current team’s power falls dramatically when it plays SEC competition [0.072 ppp] verses non-conference teams [0.199 ppp].  In addition, the current team’s power falls dramatically when the team plays on the opponent’s floor [0.223 ppp at Rupp; 0.251 ppp on Neutral Courts; -0.011 ppp on the opponent’s court].

 

The 2005 Kentucky team on average is not as powerful as its championship caliber counterparts.  Furthermore, the 2005 team has not been able to exhibit great power against SEC opponents or when on the road.  

 

Summary:

 

The current Kentucky wildcat team is a very good college basketball team.  They are competing for SEC top honors again, and they very well may win the regular season title.  That remains to be seen, of course, but they stand at 4 – 0.  However, stern SEC road tests at Alabama, Florida, South Carolina, and Vanderbilt remain on the schedule.  In addition, Mississippi State is a dangerous team, especially now that it has sustained 2 early season SEC loses.

 

However, it is clear that this Kentucky team has not performed as well against the early SEC opponents or on the road.  They have not yet performed at the same level of consistency of  the well oiled machine that was the 1996 Kentucky Wildcats.

 

Update On SEC Predictions:

 

As of the end of play on January 19, 2005, Twenty-five SEC games are complete, and I have predicted the winner correctly in 18[72%] of these games. The seven games I have missed are: