Possible March Madness opponents for Kentucky in NCAA Tournament

The Wildcats have had an up and down 2024-25 campaign, posting a 19-10 overall record (8-8 SEC) so far while ranking among the nation’s elite in scoring; averaging 85.3 points per game (4th nationally). However, their defense remains a concern, surrendering 77.2 points per game, a potential vulnerability against disciplined or high-scoring opponents in the NCAA Tournament. And while they have been able to beat several top teams, they are now without Jaxson Robinson.

Projected NCAA Tournament Opponents

First-Round Matchup Possibilities

As a projected 4-seed, Kentucky will likely face a 13-seed in the opening round. Based on bracketology projections, teams in this range include:

High Point University Panthers

Record: 26-5 (14-2 Big South)
Team Stats:

• Points: 82.4 PPG
• FG%: 49.4%
• 3PT%: 36.6%
• Rebounds: 36.4 RPG
• Defense: 68.8 PPG allowed

Key Players:

• Kezza Giffa (G): 14.6 PPG, 2.5 RPG, 2.5 APG, 44.4% FG, 32.1% 3PT
• Juslin Bodo Bodo (F): 5.2 PPG, 8.6 RPG, 1.4 BPG, 63.3% FG
• Bobby Pettiford (G): 8.5 PPG, 3.5 APG, 61.1% FG

Matchup Analysis:
High Point thrives on offensive efficiency and fast-paced play, ranking among the best in field goal percentage. Their 82.4 PPG offense could test Kentucky’s porous defense (77.2 PPG allowed), especially with Giffa’s playmaking and Pettiford’s high-percentage shooting. However, Kentucky holds an edge in rebounding (39.4 RPG vs. 36.4 RPG).

Lipscomb University Bisons

Record: 22-9 (14-4 ASUN)
Team Stats:

• Points: 79.2 PPG
• FG%: 47.3%
• 3PT%: 35.6%
• Rebounds: 35.8 RPG
• Defense: 67.2 PPG allowed

Key Players:

• Jacob Ognacevic (F): 20.3 PPG, 8.0 RPG, 58.2% FG, 41.3% 3PT
• Will Pruitt (G): 13.0 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 46.5% FG
• Gyasi Powell (G): 11.7 PPG, 37.4% 3PT

Earlier Matchup vs. Kentucky:
Kentucky defeated Lipscomb earlier this season 97-68, dominating on the glass, out-rebounding the Bison 43-28. Lipscomb’s three-point shooting (5-29, 17.2%) struggled mightily, a key weakness against a high-powered Kentucky offense.

Matchup Analysis:
Ognacevic’s inside-out scoring could challenge Kentucky especially more than they did earlier this season with the injuries Kentucky has had since.

Akron University Zips

Record: 23-6 (15-1 MAC)
Team Stats:

• Points: 83.4 PPG
• FG%: 46.7%
• 3PT%: 35.5%
• Rebounds: 39.4 RPG
• Defense: 74.0 PPG allowed

Key Players:

• Nate Johnson (G): 13.6 PPG, 5.1 RPG, 44.9% FG
• Tavari Johnson (G): 13.0 PPG, 4.0 APG, 45.7% FG
• Isaiah Gray (G): 9.3 PPG, 4.9 RPG

Matchup Analysis:
Akron’s balanced attack nearly mirrors Kentucky’s scoring and rebounding numbers. Their 83.4 PPG offense and 39.4 RPG could make this a shootout, but Kentucky’s superior shooting efficiency should allow them to pull away, not a good matchup though.

Yale University Bulldogs

Record: 19-7 (12-1 Ivy)
Team Stats:

• Points: 82.7 PPG
• FG%: 49.3%
• 3PT%: 38.3%
• Rebounds: 39.6 RPG
• Defense: 70.0 PPG allowed

Key Players:

• John Poulakidas (G): 18.9 PPG, 40.0% 3PT
• Nick Townsend (F): 15.6 PPG, 7.3 RPG, 53.4% FG
• Bez Mbeng (G): 13.4 PPG, 5.9 APG

Matchup Analysis:
Yale’s efficient shooting and rebounding (39.6 RPG) could neutralize Kentucky’s edge on the glass. Poulakidas’ three-point shooting (40.0%) could be a concern, Kentucky would need to up the tempo to pull away.

Liberty University Flames

Record: 23-6 (11-5 C-USA)
Team Stats:

• Points: 75.4 PPG
• FG%: 48.5%
• 3PT%: 37.8%
• Rebounds: 33.3 RPG
• Defense: 61.7 PPG allowed

Key Players:

• Kaden Metheny (G): 13.2 PPG, 38.1% 3PT
• Taelon Peter (G): 12.8 PPG, 55.8% FG
• Zach Cleveland (F): 10.4 PPG, 6.5 RPG, 5.0 APG

Matchup Analysis:
Liberty’s elite defense (61.7 PPG allowed) could challenge Kentucky’s high-scoring offense as they are very physical. However, Liberty’s rebounding struggles (33.3 RPG) and Kentucky’s superior pace should be the deciding factors.

James Madison University Dukes

Record: 20-11 (13-5 Sun Belt)
Team Stats:

• Points: 74.1 PPG
• FG%: 44.2%
• 3PT%: 34.8%
• Rebounds: 35.8 RPG
• Defense: 70.2 PPG allowed

Key Players:

• Mark Freeman (G): 15.2 PPG, 3.2 APG, 34.1% 3PT
• Bryce Lindsay (G): 13.6 PPG, 41.5% 3PT
• Elijah Hutchins-Everett (C): 11.5 PPG, 5.9 RPG

Matchup Analysis:
James Madison’s balanced attack and perimeter shooting could challenge Kentucky’s defense.

Chattanooga Mocs

Record: (23-8, 15-3 SoCon)
Team Stats: PPG: 79.0 | FG%: 48.2% | 3PT%: 36.2% | RPG: 33.1 | Defense: 72.1 PPG allowed
Key Players:
Honor Huff (G) – 14.7 PPG, 41.7% 3PT
Bash Wieland (G) – 14.0 PPG, 56.5% FG
Trey Bonham (G) – 13.5 PPG, 2.7 APG
Matchup Analysis
Chattanooga shoots the ball well but lacks size and rebounding (33.1 RPG). Huff’s shooting could test Kentucky’s perimeter defense, but the Wildcats should dominate inside and control the tempo.

PPG: 79.0
FG%: 48.2%
3PT%: 36.2%
RPG: 33.1
Defense: 72.1 PPG allowed

Key Players:

• Honor Huff (G) – 14.7 PPG, 41.7% 3PT
• Bash Wieland (G) – 14.0 PPG, 56.5% FG
• Trey Bonham (G) – 13.5 PPG, 2.7 APG

Towson Tigers (21-10, 16-2 CAA)

PPG: 69.5
FG%: 41.9%
3PT%: 33.5%
RPG: 36.7
Defense: 65.9 PPG allowed

Key Players:

• Tyler Tejada (G) – 16.8 PPG, 33.3% 3PT
• Dylan Williamson (G) – 13.8 PPG, 41.7% 3PT
• Nendah Tarke (G) – 11.3 PPG, 4.6 RPG

Matchup Analysis
Towson relies on defense, allowing just 65.9 PPG. However, they struggle offensively (69.5 PPG, 41.9% FG). Kentucky’s fast-paced attack should be too much for them to keep up with.

McNeese State Cowboys (24-6, 18-1 Southland)

PPG: 76.9
FG%: 47.8%
3PT%: 35.1%
RPG: 36.2
Defense: 64.4 PPG allowed

Key Players:

Alyn Breed (G) – 17.5 PPG, 52.2% FG (limited games)
Javohn Garcia (G) – 12.8 PPG, 1.6 SPG
Sincere Parker (G) – 12.0 PPG

Matchup Analysis
McNeese State boasts an elite defense (64.4 PPG allowed) and aggressive play (9.1 SPG). Their ability to force turnovers could disrupt Kentucky, who is not known for being good with the ball.

Conclusion: Kentucky’s Path Forward

One fun little matchup could come in terms of Utah Valley, that’s Mark Pope’s old stomping ground. Could be an interesting idea, but for now they are just outside of the range of Kentucky’s opponents.

Kentucky’s offensive dominance (85.3 PPG) makes them favorites in all first and second-round matchups, but their defense (77.2 PPG allowed) remains a concern against efficient and disciplined teams like Yale and Liberty. If Kentucky shores up its perimeter defense and continues rebounding at a high level, they should comfortably advance past these early challenges.

Ultimately, if Kentucky plays to its strengths—scoring efficiency, rebounding dominance, and perimeter shooting—they have the firepower to make a deep run. However, defensive consistency will determine just how far they go in March Madness.