UK-LSU Wrap-up

I know, this Rich Bozich article is a couple of days old now. But, after sitting (and standing, and getting chewed out for standing at the "wrong time," and almost getting in a fight, and watching fans throw items at other fans, and having the cops called into our section, etc.) in Rupp for the LSU game, living through the hostility and heartbreak that is Kentucky basketball at the moment, I couldn't bring myself to read anything about that game. Until this morning.

Bozich makes some good points, at least one of which I will visit in a moment. But first, amidst this climate of rampant negativity, I'd like to note a positive: The UK-LSU game was the first time I've seen Billy Gillispie make a significant in-game adjustment, and it was a great one. He not only radically changed personnel (a move that doesn't come easily for him, for whatever reason) he just as importantly adjusted his strategy.

OK, that's the good. The sole good. And coupled with it I must note that, whatever else is true of that game, it wasn't lost just at the end, but also at the beginning, when once again the Cats started with an ineffective lineup. Spotting the best team in your conference the entire first half by stubbornly refusing the play your most effective point guard is not a good way to win games.

I love Michael Porter. I love watching him play. He's a tough, hard-nosed kid. And, though the idiots in Rupp don't seem to notice, he's smart, too. He got booed twice against LSU for turning down open looks (what, because he's white he's supposed to be able to shoot?!? He's a 25% 3 pt shooter. Them ain't good odds!), but on both plays the team scored. That's smart basketball. Know yourself, know the offense, and work for the best look for your team to score.

But he's clearly less effective than Kevin Galloway. When Galloway plays, good things happen. So, of course, Galloway never plays.

More troubling than the substitution patterns seemingly set at random and the stubborn refusal (save for Saturday) to make in game adjustments is coach Gillispie's apparent lack of maturity. That brings us to Bozich's column. His willingness to toss the student athletes he's supposed to be leading under the metaphorical bus while pretending to take "full responsibility" bothers me almost as much as his abrasive in-game interviews.

As Bozich writes:

It's alarming when a team's 19-year-old center is handling the adversity of this choppy UK season with more poise than the team's 49-year-old coach.

It is counterproductive to compare and contrast Gillispie with Tubby Smith. That leads only to frustration. Yet Smith's steady hand, his recognition that a team is never as good or as bad as it is supposed to be, coupled with his conviction that neither the coach nor the players should get too up or too down, is clearly missing. This team is as emotional and unpredictable as their coach.