Does Kentucky basketball need an offensive coordinator?
A renewed focus and emphasis on creating high quality shots could make Kentucky an offensive juggernaut.
I was listening to a podcast by ESPN’s NBA writer Zach Lowe where he was talking with SI.com’s Chris Herring about the Indiana Pacers. They were talking about how Indiana had changed their offensive strategy under new head coach Nate Bjorkgren from the system favored by previous coach Nate McMillan. I’m paraphrasing here, but Herring’s point was that Bjorkgren was taking a more strategic approach to offense by looking to create high-value shots, whereas McMillan tended to let his best players take whatever was open. The result is that Bjorkgren’s offense is purposefully resulting in more three-pointers and shots near the rim, whereas the Pacers under McMillan consistently ranked among the leaders in midrange shots taken. NBA teams will frequently leave midrange shots open, since these go in much less frequently than shots at the rim and are worth 50% less per make than three pointers.
To me, this point encapsulates the offensive approach of Kentucky basketball under John Calipari. I think the team would be well served to have a staff member who focused on a more strategic approach to organizing the offense. In this edition of Hoops Insight, I explain why the offensive issues this season are not an aberration, but the product of an offensive system that has its own strengths and weaknesses.
Kentucky has been very good at offense under John Calipari
The first thing to acknowledge is that Kentucky has had very good offensive teams under John Calipari. From 2010 through this season, here are the annual rankings of Kentucky’s offense in KenPom’s adjusted offensive efficiency metric: 22, 8, 2, 38, 14, 6, 5, 12, 24, 14, 24, and this season they are 88th. This season looks like a complete aberration, as the only other year the Wildcats were out of the top 25 was in 2013.
There are four key factors that impact offensive performance: effective FG%, turnover rate, offensive rebound rate, and free throw rate. Kentucky has specialized in the latter two, while only occasionally being good at at the former two. 9 times in Calipari’s 12 seasons the Wildcats have been in the top 50 nationally in offensive rebound rate, and they have never ranked worse than 94th. Meanwhile, UK has been in the top 50 in free throw rate 8 times, and only ranked outside the top 100 in 2016 and 2011. To contrast, UK has been in the top 50 in eFG% 5 times under Calipari, and 4 of those were her first 4 seasons. 4 times they’ve been outside the top 100, including 303rd this season. As for turnover rate, Kentucky has been in the top 50 5 times but outside the top 150 5 times as well…the Wildcats are just as likely to be poor at taking care of the ball as they are to be great at it.
Kentucky has consistently been elite at something on offense under Calipari. In 10 of his 12 season the Wildcats have finished in the top 20 of at least of the four factors. They’ve done so 7 times in free throw rate, 5 times in offensive rebound rate, 2 times in turnover rate, and even once in eFG% in the 2012 title season. In 2013 they weren’t in the top 20 in anything, but they were at least in the top 40 in both eFG% and free throw rate; it was defense that really let down the Cats that season.
Signs of slippage in recent years
Kentucky’s offense has usually been fairly well-rounded. Only 4 times (including this season) has Kentucky ranked outside the top 100 in 2 of the four factors:
2014 (151 in eFG%, 150 in TO%, but 2nd in Oreb% and 12th in FT rate)
2018 (134 in eFG%, 181 in TO%, but 8th in Oreb% and 4th in FT rate)
2020 (123 in eFG%, 122 in TO%, and 81st in Oreb% and 18th in FT rate)
2021 (303 in eFG%, 236 in TO%, and 38th in Oreb% and 87th in FT rate)
As you may notice, 3 of the last 4 years have seen Kentucky slipping among their peers in shooting and turnovers but mitigating this with rebounding and free throws. Note that I use the phrase “slipping among their peers”, which is an absolute choice on my part.
Kentucky is not shooting as well in the last 2 years as they did previously under Calipari, that’s for certain; 2020 and 2021 are 2 of the 3 worst shooting seasons for Kentucky since 2009. Kentucky is also having its 2nd worst season with turnovers this year as well. But this is magnified because the rest of college basketball has been getting better at this things as well. I wrote about this specific effect regarding shooting a couple weeks ago, and I’ll revisit that concept here.
In 2010, the 50th best team in effective FG% was Drake at 51.9%. In 2021, the 50th best team is Drexel at 53.3%. College offenses have improved by taking more shots at the rim and more threes, which improves effective FG%, yet Kentucky has had two of their worst shooting seasons in the last 2 years with 2 very different teams.
In 2010, the 50th best team in turnover rate was VCU, who turned it over on 17.9% of their possessions. In 2021, the 50th best team is Belmont at 16.5%. Again, college basketball teams turn the ball over less now than they did a decade ago, but Kentucky is having more trouble than ever.
In a similar vein, being among the best at offensive rebounding and drawing free throws isn’t quite the honor it once was. In 2010, the 50th best offensive rebounding team grabbed 35.1% of their own misses; in 2021, it’s 32.2%. You can be much worse at offensive rebounding overall, but look good compared to your peers because other teams are foregoing offensive boards. Similarly, in 2010 the 50th best team at drawing free throws drew about 44 for every 100 FGA; in 2021 it’s 37 for every 100 FGA.
To put this in perspective, here’s how Kentucky’s offensive four factor performance from this season would rank in 2010:
Effective FG% of 46.4% would be 273rd
Turnover rate of 20.2% would be 157th
Offensive Rebound rate of 33.0% would be 100th
Free throw rate of 35.2 would be 240th
Granted, Kentucky is playing a tough schedule this season, but it just shows how rough this season has been. The things that Kentucky seems decent at this year (offensive rebounding and drawing free throws) only look respectable because the rest of college basketball has gotten worse at them, not because Kentucky is still good at them. Over the last 2 seasons, Kentucky’s offense has been among the worst teams at UK under Calipari in almost every key offensive factor:
2021 is worst in eFG%, 2nd worst in turnover rate, 3rd worst in offensive rebound rate, and worst in free throw rate
2020 was 3rd worst in eFG%, 6th worst in turnover rate, worst in offensive rebound rate, and 4th worst in free throw rate
So what, can Kentucky do to turn this around?
A more strategic approach to offense
The easiest answer to turn it around is “get better players”, but I would like to point out 2 rebuttals:
It’s hard to just get better players
The players Kentucky is getting are sought after by other college programs and the NBA, so they must have some talent
I don’t know how many top-100 recruits are needed for a team to be good, but UK has 8 this season plus a transfer who made 3rd team All-ACC. Last season Kentucky also had 8 top-100 recruits, and 3 of the top 42 picks in the NBA Draft.
I believe Kentucky does have a strategy on offense, and I’d summarize it as thus:
Have lots of size and go for offensive boards
Find ballhandlers who can create their own space and shot
Be more athletic than the other team and win on the margins
This strategy is likely borne out of a focus on defense, and finding players who can use their athleticism to overwhelm more veteran skilled players. The problem is, this approach leads to players taking more of the shots where they can get themselves open, and does not yield a cohesive offensive strategy. It’s the same problem I mentioned in the introduction, where Nate McMillan let his Indiana Pacers ballhandlers create their shots instead of structuring the offense to get great shots in specific areas. The players had freedom, but the offense wasn’t optimized. Kentucky has the same problem.
Here are Kentucky’s rankings each year under Calipari in the percentage of shots taken at the rim, from midrange, and from three:
The offensive strategy clearly is resulting in a lot of 2 pointers taken away from the rim. Kentucky is almost always in the bottom 25% of teams in frequency of threes, and usually in the bottom half in frequency of shots at the rim. It is possible that Kentucky is doing this because they are very good at midrange shots, and so they want to maximize that advantage. Let’s see how they rank in FG% from these areas:
Oh my, that’s not good. Kentucky is taking way more midrange shots than other teams, but is among the worst teams at hitting them. Meanwhile, Kentucky is usually elite in finishing at the rim (except this season) but doesn’t prioritize getting those shots. And when Kentucky has been good from three (2016, 2012) they didn’t use that advantage by taking many more threes.
This data screams out that Kentucky does not have a strategy in place to get quality shots. That results in the effective FG% data I showed earlier that indicates Kentucky is falling behind their peers in that area. At the same time, Kentucky is less and less able to rely on offensive rebounding or free throws to bail them out.
Kentucky could benefit from a more strategic and purposeful offensive approach which would look to generate quality shots for players. The Indiana Pacers are a great case study in this. Last season, Indiana took the 2nd most midrange shots in the NBA at 17 per game; this made up almost 20% of their shots. This season under a new coach, the Pacers are taking just over 8 midrange shots per game; this makes up under 10% of their shots. Their effective FG% has increased this season due to better shot selection, even though their 2nd best shooter last season (TJ Warren) has missed almost the whole season.
Last season Nick Richards was one of the top finishers at the rim, hitting 83.7% of his shots there. Among players who took at least 100 shots at the rim, that was 2nd only to Udoka Azubuike of Kansas. But despite playing 7% more minutes than Azubuike, Richards took 20% fewer shots at the rim. Richards took just 7 more shots at the rim than Ashton Hagans, despite Hagans hitting just 54% of his shots there. A more strategic offensive design would have looked to get more opportunities for Richards at the rim, and likely more outside shots for Immanuel Quickley (who hit 43% of his threes). Kentucky needs to have someone on staff who can create a more cohesive approach that purposefully tries to get quality shots (at the rim and from three) and relies less on shot creation of individual players. If Kentucky could combine their talent pipeline, the solid defensive strategies of Calipari, and a more structured and purposeful offense, the Big Blue Dynasty would likely be back among the very elite teams nearly every season.