Does Kentucky go undefeated in the ACC?

[Cusefannotindc]

Short answer, highly unlikey

It was raised in the Kentucky vs Wisconsin thread that Kentucky wouldn't go undefeated in a stronger conference. So I created a quick simulation using Ken Pomeroy's data to find out how Kentucky would have done as the 16th member of the ACC.

Randomly selecting their schedule with three home and homes against Duke, UNC and Syracuse, home against FSU, GTech, BC, Clemson, Wake and Louisville, away at VT, Miami, Pitt, UVA, ND and NC State.

In 1000 simulations Kentucky never went undefeated.

Kentucky was the favorite in every game it played, only at Duke was close for them.

Kentucky would have competed for the conference title.

Kentucky's most frequent outcome was 15-3 32% of the time, 16 and 14 wins both happened 24% of the time.

 

[rrlbees]

Short answer. No. Long answer. No way.

 

[OrangeOnions]

I think you just got your answer.

 

[longislandcuse]

Two toughest games UK played season.

ND-Won by 2
Wisconsin-Lost

 

[MikeSU02]

No way.

This UK team was overrated.

Great team? Yes. All time team? Absolutely not.

 

[Jasoncuse]

They'd lose at Duke 98 out of 100 times. I bet ND or UVA could've taken them too.

 

[Briancuse]

They would have lost two or three games.

 

[SoBeCuse]

Just because they lost tonight let's not be morons and just totally disregard their great season. I think Duke, ND, or maybe UVA could beat them once. They still would win the ACC and rather easily too, imo. Wisconsin is a terrific team.

 

[longislandcuse]

Just because they lost tonight let's not be morons and just totally disregard their great season. I think Duke, ND, or maybe UVA could beat them once. They still would win the ACC and rather easily too, imo. Wisconsin is a terrific team.

They'd lose 2 or 3 games and wouldn't be running through squads like a buzz saw. They would not be in the conversation for best team ever coming from the ACC.

 

[DeGrozz]

No way. They had an awesome year that they should definitely be proud of, but they were never challenged by a top 16 team after Christmas break until they played a close one against ND.

There's too much parity amongst good teams in CBB. The only way a team could go undefeated now in conference play is in a mid-major conference or a very down SEC.

 

[OrangeCrush22]

If Kentucky played in the ACC (or one of the other power conferences for that matter) they probably win the title. Their biggest fault this season was a lack of experience against top tier teams.

 

[Cusefan95]

If Kentucky played in the ACC (or the other power conferences for that matter) they probably when the title. Their biggest fault this season was a lack of experience against top tier teams.

100% agreed. Same thing happened to UNLV as well.

 

[two3zone]

I don't think they do, but then again I think they were better than Virginia and they did pretty well in the ACC>

 

[SWC75]

Or the Big 10.

I'm not big on simulations, (I guess they are all we have besides opinions), but it seems to me Calipari has gotten an awful lot of wins over the years in part because of the conference he was in.

 

[tbonezone]

ole miss and texas a&m both took them to overtime. ole miss clanked the last shot in regulation and aggies was double OT. they were very good but also very beatable.

 

[rosconey]

sec was pathetic -

heck i doubt cornticky goes undefeated in the big east

 

[jncuse]

KP which is my favourite way to try to compare teams with different schedules, suggests they were a bit better than the group of Virginia, Duke, Nova, Wisconsin, Arizona.

I never look at KP to tell me who is the best of the bunch... but more to get a sense of where a team should be grouped with. So I say they were at the same level and would have had 2 or 3 losses in another conference.

At the end of the day the teams with the top 6 resumes were great (Villanova debatable / excluded). I think Virginia was a great team as well, that never recovered from an injury and was declining.

It has made for a very good final 4.

 

[jncuse]

If Kentucky played in the ACC (or one of the other power conferences for that matter) they probably win the title. Their biggest fault this season was a lack of experience against top tier teams.

That is possible as well. They have at least one loss, are more game ready. and have a lot less pressure on them.

 

[El Jefe Syr]

UK was a great team and I do think they would have won the ACC, but I think they'd have lost to two to three away games along the way. Interestingly, being 16-2/15-3 in the ACC probably would have prepped them better for this game. Teams like Wisc., Duke, ND, and MSU seemed to be very much improved coming out of conference play whereas teams like UK and Arizona dominated their conferences and perhaps went into March Madness with a bit of fool's gold. (the weird exception to this is UVA who had the defense to shut it down in-conference, but couldn't ratchet their offense enough to out gun anyone - which is what you usually need to do to make it out of the region).

I thought going into the tournament that the only way UK doesn't win the championship is if they either choke and have an awful game or some team like Wichita State has some freakishly hot (75-80%) shooting game. Turned out I was wrong, as I thought UK played well both against ND and Wisc. and ultimately succumbed to a better team.

 

[HoustonCuse]

Short answer, highly unlikey

It was raised in the Kentucky vs Wisconsin thread that Kentucky wouldn't go undefeated in a stronger conference. So I created a quick simulation using Ken Pomeroy's data to find out how Kentucky would have done as the 16th member of the ACC.

Randomly selecting their schedule with three home and homes against Duke, UNC and Syracuse, home against FSU, GTech, BC, Clemson, Wake and Louisville, away at VT, Miami, Pitt, UVA, ND and NC State.

In 1000 simulations Kentucky never went undefeated.

Kentucky was the favorite in every game it played, only at Duke was close for them.

Kentucky would have competed for the conference title.

Kentucky's most frequent outcome was 15-3 32% of the time, 16 and 14 wins both happened 24% of the time.

Nice work. How many times did Syracuse beat them in the 2000 simulated games? I'll guess 150-200 times.

 

[rstone7727]

Probably wouldn't have lost more than 6-7 games in the ACC. Badly over rated though. Tons of talent but weak in the coaching area.

 

[pfister1]

They had an awesome year that they should definitely be proud of....

Should they? If you take a collection of players that in most measures are significantly superior to all other teams in terms of the talent you are putting on the floor, should they be proud that they did what was expected?

If you put an NBA team in a college conference and they go undefeated should the NBA team be proud that they beat a bunch of undermanned teams?

You take the dream team to the 1992 Olympics in Barcelona and the mop the floor with their competition, should they be proud of that achievement?

Is this Kentucky roster that much better than all of the other college teams competing that anything less than an undefeated season and National Championship should really be viewed as a monumental failure?

Here is the roster

Marcus Lee - 2013 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 20 recruit
Devin Booker - 2014 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 30 recruit
Aaron Harrison - 2013 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 10 recruit
Andrew Harrison - 2013 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 10 recruit
Dakari Johnson - 2013 McDonald's AA - #2 Center in the Nation
Tyler Ulis - 2014 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 25 recruit
Karl Anthony Towns - 2014 McDonald's AA - Gatorade Player of the Year
Willie Cauley-Stein - Top 50 Recruit class of 2012 - Kentucky's version of a Project
Trey Lyles - 2014 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 15 recruit
Alex Poythress - 2012 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 20 recruit - Only played 8 games this year because his season cut short due to an ACL injury

 

[zeekay]

Truth be told, Kentucky did amazing for a team dominated by underclassmen. It will be interesting to see how they grow from this experience in their next three yearshahahahaha

 

[Orange2389]

im not sure

 

[NineOneSeven]

Should they? If you take a collection of players that in most measures are significantly superior to all other teams in terms of the talent you are putting on the floor, should they be proud that they did what was expected?

If you put an NBA team in a college conference and they go undefeated should the NBA team be proud that they beat a bunch of undermanned teams?

You take the dream team to the 1992 Olympics in Barcelona and the mop the floor with their competition, should they be proud of that achievement?

Is this Kentucky roster that much better than all of the other college teams competing that anything less than an undefeated season and National Championship should really be viewed as a monumental failure?

Here is the roster

Marcus Lee - 2013 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 20 recruit
Devin Booker - 2014 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 30 recruit
Aaron Harrison - 2013 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 10 recruit
Andrew Harrison - 2013 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 10 recruit
Dakari Johnson - 2013 McDonald's AA - #2 Center in the Nation
Tyler Ulis - 2014 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 25 recruit
Karl Anthony Towns - 2014 McDonald's AA - Gatorade Player of the Year
Willie Cauley-Stein - Top 50 Recruit class of 2012 - Kentucky's version of a Project
Trey Lyles - 2014 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 15 recruit
Alex Poythress - 2012 McDonald's AA - Consensus top 20 recruit - Only played 8 games this year because his season cut short due to an ACL injury

If dakari johnson was the number 2 center in the land and Marcus lee was a top 20 recruit, then I don't know anymore