They had double the number of free throw attempts as of late in the second half until desperation time came and they had to foul. There was no question, as is the case with most games we've played, that the officiating has been biased against us. The most remarkable thing Golden has done for this program is to coach our players past the officiating. He has developed a play on mentality in them which has motivated them to express their grievances in their performance and not with their words and with a negative attitude.
With about 7 or 8 minutes left in the game, they had 25 free throw attempts to our 13. We are a better defensive team than they are not because we foul, but because we have more skilled players than they do across the board. There was a clear cut disparity in what constituted a foul when Bama had the ball than when we did. I agree, that it was hard to notice only because Golden has coached our players beyond what the refs are going to do. That is his job to yell and scream at the refs not our players.
We are ahead of Duke in KPI, WAB, and SOR, I believe, but Duke is way ahead on most performance metrics. I’ve been sort of intrigued by the record setting metrics of some of these teams and wondered aloud if we have figured out how to game them. Keeping starters in longer? Running more offensive or squeezing out more possessions late? I don’t quite know. But the numbers are through the roof this season.
I thought Bilas' description of Sears as a Brunson was spot on. He does not have the talent of Jalen Brunson, but he is a close second. Right now, Brunson is one of the top 3 point guards in the NBA. Sears is a notch below that- a super incredible talent.
I was just reading that a 1 seed loses the the 2nd game every other year while a 2 seed loses it every 3 years. I would like to see a 8/9 seed SEC team kick their butts in round 2
I don't disagree with your post. However, you stated that Duke beat Auburn, but failed to mention that Kentucky beat Duke. I'm not saying that Duke is a bad team, but that they have young players (albeit 5*) and they have played in a very down ACC conference this year. Therefore, they really haven't been battle tested; they haven't been punched in the nose. As such, I believe them to be slightly overrated imho.
Legitimately think this may be the year the computers break. If you have teams crushing metric precedents, yet DON'T perform well in the tournament, there could be real move in the opposite direction. Or maybe some of these guys will begin changing their formulas to account for how teams have figured them out. On the other hand, it could be that these teams are that much better, and the computers reflect it. I especially think that's the case for Auburn, Houston, us, maybe Tennessee. Our teams are deep, experienced, and balanced in a way that is rare for college hoops since the NBA age limit went into effect. Duke is the exception to the rule this year (four 5* freshmen, handful of other young top-25 kids). The rest of us are using NIL to keep our rosters intact, then the portal to find really good fits who complement what we have. Ordinarily, you wouldn't have a Broome, Sears, Clayton, or Cryer back for their fourth/fifth seasons. Add them to rosters that have lots of continuity and experience, and that's terrific cocktail for offensive efficiency, adapting to different opponents/styles of play, performance on the road, and consistency over the course of a long season--all things that can impact the metrics.
I developed a methodology & can get the data to analyze runs of foul calls for bias, but I was just trying to enjoy the season without getting into that stuff...
When attempting to predict the future, the most likely outcome is that you’ll be left scratching your head.
I'm late to post game analysis and most everything has likely been said, but in the skimming I've done I didn't see two points that I'd like to bring up: 1.) I loved TFG giving UK run early in the 1st half. This had to be to keep the fouls down for Martin and Zel. Just brilliant. And Urban did pretty well against Sears, too! 2.) In the end of game nonesence. I felt that Haugh should have just gone ahead and taken that deep ball from Clayton to the rack for an easy two. He ended up hitting both FTs, but it would have used just as much time and he would have had a 95%+ 2FGA v two 75% FTAs.
I thought the same. What a great pass from Clayton and clear path to the basket. It probably would have used up more time even if he got fouled at the basket and didn't make the two.
Yeah when that happened I said at the least he should have run to the rim and faked a layup attempt, then kept running back out to the arc. At least use up about 5-8 seconds instead of the 1.3 they took off the clock. Thinking about it more I'd say just take the layup because they'll run the 5 seconds off bringing it upcourt after the made shot.
I drunkenly explained in depth to my wife the many reasons why Haugh should have driven to the hoop with that one. The argument was so sophisticated that my sober self can’t now recreate it, but rest assured it was breathtaking and definitive.
I agree, but in that moment, you don't really have time to stop and do the math. "Run some clock" was Tommy's first thought, and probably was the instruction received from CTG during the last stoppage.
