I’ve done 80 bazillion posts on this blog and yet I don’t think I’ve ever dealt with this question for KU – at least not head on. Considering the six games in January have all been victories despite Kansas averaging just 65 points per game, the temptation is to say “defense” – especially considering the fewest points per game by any Kansas team in the last 30 years is 72.1. Even so, I’m not going to look at this question based only upon six games, but rather based upon 30 seasons.
REGULAR SEASON
The first thing I’m going to do is look at the 10 seasons since 1984 that were the highest scoring for Kansas and then the 10 seasons that were the lowest scoring. What I’m interested in initially is the difference between them.
|
Highest Scoring KU |
|
Lowest Scoring KU |
||||
|
Year |
PPG |
Record |
|
Year |
PPG |
Record |
|
1990 |
92.1 |
30-5 |
1999 |
72.1 |
23-10 |
|
|
2002 |
90.9 |
33-4 |
1984 |
72.5 |
22-10 |
|
|
1989 |
89.0 |
19-12 |
2012 |
73.5 |
35-3 |
|
|
1997 |
84.9 |
34-2 |
1987 |
73.7 |
25-11 |
|
|
1998 |
84.6 |
35-4 |
2005 |
75.0 |
23-7 |
|
|
1992 |
84.5 |
27-5 |
2006 |
75.2 |
25-8 |
|
|
1993 |
84.4 |
29-7 |
1988 |
75.3 |
27-11 |
|
|
1991 |
84.2 |
27-8 |
1985 |
75.4 |
26-8 |
|
|
1995 |
83.0 |
25-6 |
2004 |
75.8 |
24-9 |
|
|
2003 |
82.7 |
30-8 |
2009 |
76.4 |
27-8 |
|
|
Avg |
86.0 |
29-6 |
|
Avg |
74.5 |
26-9 |
As you can see, the top-10 seasons by scoring have an 11.5 ppg advantage which translates into three more wins and three fewer losses. Now, the same thing on defense.
|
Highest Scoring OPPONENTS |
|
Lowest Scoring OPPONENTS |
||||
|
Year |
PPG |
Record |
|
Year |
PPG |
Record |
|
1989 |
78.9 |
19-12 |
2006 |
61.3 |
25-8 |
|
|
2002 |
74.7 |
33-4 |
2008 |
61.5 |
37-3 |
|
|
1988 |
74.7 |
27-11 |
2012 |
61.7 |
32-7 |
|
|
1990 |
72.3 |
30-5 |
2007 |
61.7 |
33-5 |
|
|
2000 |
70.1 |
24-10 |
2010 |
64.2 |
33-3 |
|
|
1995 |
70.0 |
25-6 |
1999 |
64.5 |
23-10 |
|
|
1993 |
69.7 |
29-7 |
2011 |
64.7 |
35-3 |
|
|
1991 |
69.6 |
27-8 |
2005 |
65.2 |
23-7 |
|
|
1985 |
69.4 |
26-8 |
1996 |
65.3 |
29-5 |
|
|
2001 |
69.3 |
26-7 |
2009 |
65.4 |
27-8 |
|
|
Avg |
71.9 |
27-8 |
|
Avg |
63.6 |
30-6 |
With respect to defense, you can see that the best-10 allow 63.6 ppg compared to the worst-10 at 71.9. That’s an 8.3 ppg difference. The better defensive teams have a 2.5 game advantage (30-6 versus 27-8).
The bottom line is that based upon wins and losses, the advantage for the offenses and defenses appear to be about equal.
One way to determine this for sure is to begin by adding all the records of the Highest Scoring KU PLUS the Highest Scoring Opponents. Those 20 records add up to a cumulative record of 555-139 (80.0%).
Now, add all the records of the Lowest Scoring KU PLUS the Lowest Scoring Opponents. Those 20 records add up to 554-144 (79.4%).
As you can see, there is barely any difference.
And, if you are only interested in KU’s Highest Scoring (Offense) versus Opponent’s Lowest Scoring (Defense), that’s 289-61 (82.6) versus 297-59 (83.4%).
Again, that’s nearly the same. But, FWIW, defense has a very slight advantage over offense.
COOL FACTOID: Since 1984, the best defensive average by Kansas is 2006 (61.3) as you can see in the table above. Kansas’ average so far in 2013 is 59.1. So, if there is any advantage of a good defense versus a good offense, then this season’s team is doing exactly what it needs to do.
POST SEASON
That’s the regular season. What I thought I would do next is to look at the post season using the same tables.
|
Highest Scoring KU |
|
Lowest Scoring KU |
||||
|
Year |
PPG |
Record |
|
Year |
PPG |
Record |
|
1990 |
92.1 |
1-1 |
1999 |
72.1 |
1-1 |
|
|
2002 |
90.9 |
4-1 |
1984 |
72.5 |
1-1 |
|
|
1989 |
89.0 |
0-0 |
2012 |
73.5 |
5-1 |
|
|
1997 |
84.9 |
2-1 |
1987 |
73.7 |
2-1 |
|
|
1998 |
84.6 |
1-1 |
2005 |
75.0 |
0-1 |
|
|
1992 |
84.5 |
1-1 |
2006 |
75.2 |
0-1 |
|
|
1993 |
84.4 |
4-1 |
1988 |
75.3 |
6-0 |
|
|
1991 |
84.2 |
5-1 |
1985 |
75.4 |
1-1 |
|
|
1995 |
83.0 |
2-1 |
2004 |
75.8 |
3-1 |
|
|
2003 |
82.7 |
5-1 |
2009 |
76.4 |
2-1 |
|
|
Avg |
86.0 |
25-9 |
|
Avg |
74.5 |
21-9 |
As you can see, the top-10 seasons by scoring have an four win advantage. Now, the same thing on defense.
|
Highest Scoring Opponents |
|
Lowest Scoring Opponents |
||||
|
Year |
PPG |
Record |
|
Year |
PPG |
Record |
|
1989 |
78.9 |
0-0 |
2006 |
61.3 |
0-1 |
|
|
2002 |
74.7 |
4-1 |
2008 |
61.5 |
6-0 |
|
|
1988 |
74.7 |
6-0 |
2012 |
61.7 |
5-1 |
|
|
1990 |
72.3 |
1-1 |
2007 |
61.7 |
3-1 |
|
|
2000 |
70.1 |
1-1 |
2010 |
64.2 |
1-1 |
|
|
1995 |
70.0 |
2-1 |
1999 |
64.5 |
1-1 |
|
|
1993 |
69.7 |
4-1 |
2011 |
64.7 |
3-1 |
|
|
1991 |
69.6 |
5-1 |
2005 |
65.2 |
0-1 |
|
|
1985 |
69.4 |
1-1 |
1996 |
65.3 |
3-1 |
|
|
2001 |
69.3 |
2-1 |
2009 |
65.4 |
2-1 |
|
|
Avg |
71.9 |
26-8 |
|
Avg |
63.6 |
24-9 |
With respect to defense, you can see Kansas actually has a slightly better NCAA tournament record in seasons when the opponents scored more points per game.
I’ll do the same analysis as I did during the regular season where I begin by adding all the records of the Highest Scoring KU PLUS the Highest Scoring Opponents. Those 20 tournament records add up to a cumulative record of 51-17 (75.0%).
Now, add all the records of the Lowest Scoring KU PLUS the Lowest Scoring Opponents. Those 20 records add up to 45-18 (71.4%).
In the case of the tournament games, offense is superior – at least according to this.
And finally, if you are only interested in KU’s Highest Scoring (Offense) versus Opponent’s Lowest Scoring (Defense), that’s 25-9 (73.5%) versus 24-9 (72.7%).
CONCLUSION
It appears that KU’s success during the regular season is slightly better when the defense excels. However, if anything, KU’s success during the tournament is slightly better when the offense excels. Either way, the differences are minimal.
I hate going to all this work and not be able to report anything profound. However, maybe the fact that there hardly appears to be any difference at all is somewhat profound considering we almost always have been led to believe that defense rules – especially in the tournament.
It’s possible this isn’t a big enough sample, but for Kansas, it’s as big as it gets. Going back before 1984 would grossly skew the numbers because there was a lot less scoring as you go back in time.
Tomorrow, I plan on doing something similar to this for the NCAA as a whole. Do higher scoring teams perform better than teams that allow the fewest points? I might even do it based upon FG%. Do teams that have the highest FG% win more games than teams that allow the lowest FG%?
Martin Manley
Sports In Review
SportsInReview.com

Why are there no comments on SIR?