In partnership with CBSSports.com
You have no favorite boards.
Here is the prediction thread for Saturday's game at Texas A&M
Use this link to open the Prediction Summary Table
KY----76 Texas A&M----72
Back to the top
A & M 63
WE ARE UK
UK 75 aTm 65
UK 75 aTm 65
You trying to price is right me? WTH?
82 to 69. Cats.
2 1/2 hours to tip off
Here we go. Use the following link to see the results after the game.
During the second half, the table will provide standings based on projected final scores.
UK scored its 30 points on 30 possessions for the half, and TEXAS A&M scored its 21 points on 29 possessions. Kentucky won the battle of the boards in the first half 19-18, and Texas A&M won on the offensive boards, 6-3 producing an Texas A&M advantage on second chance points of 6-2. TEXAS A&M had an offensive efficiency of 0.517 ppp on its 29 first chance possessions and 1.000 ppp for its 6 second chance possession. UK had 0.933 ppp on its 30 first chance possessions and 0.667 ppp on its 3 second chance possessions. With respect to the offensive rebounding, UK grabbed a weak 20.0% of its misses as offensive rebounds while TEXAS A&M was able to convert 27.3% of its misses into bonus possessions with offensive rebounds.
UK hit poorly from the free throw line in this half, making 4 of 8 attempts (50.0%). TEXAS A&M finis4-8 from long range [50.0%]. For TEXAS A&M, their field goal shooting from inside the arc was a weak 7-20 [35.0%] and from long range, TEXAS A&M hit 0-9 [0.0%].
The Cats committed 6 turnovers, one for every 5.0 possessions. The Cats forced 3 TEXAS A&M turnovers, one for every 9.7 possessions.
Congratulations sleepydog (you benefitted from the OT)
UK scored its 72 points in 71 possessions [1.01 ppp] for the game, and TEXAS A&M scored its 68 points on 69 possessions [0.98 ppp].
Kentucky won the boards, with a rebounding edge 35-32, and Texas A&M won the battle of the offensive glass 11-8. TEXAS A&M converted its 11 second chance possessions into 12 second chance points while Kentucky converted their 8 second chance possessions to score 6 second chance points. TEXAS A&M had an offensive efficiency of 0.812 ppp on its 69 first chance possessions and 1.091 ppp for its 11 second chance possessions. UK had 0.930 ppp on its 71 first chance possessions and 0.750 ppp on its 8 second chance possessions. With respect to the offensive rebounding, UK grabbed 27.5% of its misses as offensive rebounds while TEXAS A&M was able to convert 28.9% of its misses into bonus possessions with offensive rebounds.
Kentucky shot poorly from the free throw line in this game, making 23-34 [67.6%]. TEXAS A&M made 18-19 [94.7%] for the game. Field goal shooting for UK was 21-44 overall [47.7%] and 7-15 from long range [46.7%]. For TEXAS A&M, their field goal shooting from inside the arc was a strong 22-49 [44.9%] and from long range, TEXAS A&M hit 2-12 [16.7%].
The Cats who committed 19 turnovers, one for every 3.7 possessions. The Cats forced 10 TEXAS A&M turnovers, one for every 6.9 possessions.
Prior to the game, the NGE analysis predicted a 3point Kentucky win, 67-64 at a pace of 66 possessions for UK and 66 possessions for TEXAS A&M. The final score was 72 (67) to 68 (64) at a pace of 71 possessions for the Cats and 69 possessions for TEXAS A&M. The UK offensive efficiency for the game was 1.014 ppp (1.015 ppp) and the UK defensive efficiency was 0.986 ppp (0.970 ppp).
Next Game On Schedule: February 5, 2013 when the Cats return to Rupp for face South Carolina.
I have updated the cumulative standings for all 21 games and for the 8 SEC games using all 3 methods.
Use the link below.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports