Bruins go to 12-0 playing 8 on 5

by Tydides on Dec 28, 2006 10:11 PM PST in Basketball

I'm not going to get too much into the refs tonight because quite frankly, Pac 10 refs doing an awful job is nothing new. Suffice it to say that this was one of their poorer and more one sided performances than I can recall in recent memory.

First let's get to Washington State, and ref gripes aside, they put together a great effort in their bid to knock off the Bruins. Anyone who follows Pac 10 basketball knows that WSU is not one of the more talented teams in the league, and they come out playing snoozeball, which is to their credit. That's good coaching, putting your team in the best position to win. It says something that Coach Howland scheduled a couple of OOC teams that play their style just to prepare for the pair of games against WSU. Derrick Low ended up with 14 points, but as the go-to man on the team, that wasn't enough to beat the Bruins, who put the clamps on him in the second half.

Low not high enough. Photo: Matt Sayles, AP

The Bruins put together an inconsistent first half, getting beaten off the dribble on defense early, and slow to their spots offensively, missing open shots. In the second ten minutes, the offense continued to struggle while the defensive intensity began to pick up. The Bruins did a great job in the second half continuing to apply the defensive pressure, and this is something that I predict we will see more of this season. Teams are going to come out fired up to play us, but that enthusiasm will wane in the second half after 20+ minutes of facing the Bruin defensive sets. Predictably, WSU began to wear down, and the Bruins climbed back into the game and took the lead for good.

As I type this, SUC appears to be on its way to beating a still young UW team, which I can't help but think is a good thing for the Bruins. No longer can teams come in through the LA road trip and get up for just one game. Not just that, but UW is our next opponent, and considering that we can do everything SUC does but much better, this is a good sign for this Sunday.

Comments? This is the post game thread.

GO BRUINS!!

Tweet Comment 14 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Nice close victory

I'll take this one. And WSU performed better than I expected they would.

But, this game showed me a couple things. First, it's hard to beat a team when you can't make a shot and the other team is playing virtually mistake-free. Also, it showed that a slow-down approach again seemed to be a good strategy, particularly when combined with nice interior defense that basically negated our post options. Add to that Collision's foul trouble and early game frustrations, and you almost had one slip away at home.

But, as we've seen time and again, the defense tightened up when it mattered, the intensity increased, and we got a win. Like I said, I'll take it.

PS, I know they lost, but I gotta love Romar's call to give Spencer Hawes the 3-pt attempt to send it the other game in town into OT.

by Menelaus on Dec 28, 2006 10:17 PM PST reply actions

Talk about bad referees

that SC-Washington game was awful to watch. Was watching both games and when our game ended I watched that game the rest of the way. Washington had 4 guys foul out, and nearly a 5th. They were getting hosed. But they were not getting the ball inside at the end. Did love that 3 though.

by DumpDorrell on Dec 28, 2006 10:55 PM PST up reply actions

Great win

I only caught the last few seconds of the game, but looking at the numbers, it seems that we didn't play all that well. If indeed we didn't play well but still got a win, that bodes well for this season. (Would be better if we got that kind of win on the road, but I expect to see such victories.)

I can't help thinking if only .... If only we had a football coach who knew how to win, and who could teach that mind-set to his team.

But enough of that -- no negatives in a discussion of our 12-0, number one ranked Bruins. (Boy, does it feel good to say that.)

by Fox 71 on Dec 28, 2006 10:20 PM PST reply actions

I was making a conscious effort

not to inject any KD related stuff into the basketball threads. Of course, people are free to discuss what they like, comparisons between the coaches and all that if that suits you, but I didn't want his poisonous influence to taint my enjoyment of a hard fought Pac 10 victory.

by Tydides on Dec 28, 2006 10:38 PM PST up reply actions

Refs + Defense...

Ty, I'm sorry, but I can't agree with you about the refs. I was at the game, just got home, and the poor calls were about evenly distributed. Now, I will say that you're right in that the refs did not do a good job, but it had very little effect on the overall way the game played out. Though it'd be nice to think that there's some conspiracy against UCLA, this is quite frankly the #1 team playing at home (thoughts that, then, the Bruins should be on the receiving end of a positive advantage are welcome and would be agreed with, but that's neither here nor there).

Also, UCLA's defense was really no better in the second half than in the first. They gave up 24 points compared to 28, and they slowed the ball down much more once they got to about 4 or 5 minutes remaining - plus, WSU got a bunch of blocked shots in the 1st half (7?) which leads to a lot of quick possessions and fast breaks. The truth is, UCLA's offense picked up just enough; the defense really didn't change much all game:

WSU scored 14 points in the first 10 minutes of the game, 14 points in the second 10 minutes, 15 points in the third 10 minutes, and 12 points in the last 10 minutes when the Bruins were playing slow-down for half of that time-period. But UCLA's offense, broken down by the four 10-minute intervals: 7 points, 17 points, 19 points, 12 points (again, playing slowdown for a good portion of this part of the game).

I'm preparing a diary for all my thoughts on the game, but I did want to make a note of this in here. I don't mean to be particularly confrontational, but just because things -seem- a particular way doesn't make them true. shrug

by Underbruin on Dec 28, 2006 11:04 PM PST reply actions

No offense to you either

but I know in Pauley you don't get the benefit of as many replays as you get watching them on TV. I know, it's easier to see where the refs are wrong when you get the game slowed down for you, but they also have the advantage of being about 10 times closer to the action than I am. If you taped it at home, go and watch it and you'll see what I'm talking about.

I also didn't say that the defense was the same throughout the first half. If you'll notice, I made a distinction between the first ten minutes and the second ten minutes. In the first ten, we were getting beaten off the dribble, and in the second ten, the defense stepped up and started forcing turnovers and keeping WSU on the perimeter a lot more than before. I agree that the defense throughout the last 30 minutes of the game was pretty consistent.

The reason I don't look purely at the scoring summary is that WSU was just getting easier shots early in the game. They might have scored consistently throughout the half, but they worked harder to get those points as the Bruin D stepped up. In Howland's style of D, I believe that the difficulty in just running your base offense is almost as important as the result of that defensive possession. How many times have we won games in the past year and a half because the other team wore down in the second half in the face of Bruin D?

by Tydides on Dec 28, 2006 11:33 PM PST up reply actions

None taken... :)

While watching the game on TV offers the benefit of instant replays, watching live allows a perspective not available from your couch (and I had the benefit of having very good seats, luckily). I don't disagree that there were plenty of terrible calls in this game, plenty of which went against UCLA - but I think you're underestimating the number of times WSU also got jobbed. This was a very physical game, but the officiating was extremely uneven at both sides of the floor. You could make the argument that the calls were more -problematic- for the Bruins, as their offense is decidedly more flowing than Washington State's, but from a straight observational standpoint the calls were fairly evenly distributed.

"I also didn't say that the defense was the same throughout the first half." I'm not saying you did. I'm saying that the defense was very similar throughout the entire game, which is against what you claim. If UCLA 'wore down' WSU, then WSU must have started shooting much better after those first 10 minutes (which I don't think is the case), because there was almost no change in their ability to score all game.

I don't think the change from 15-15-15-12 is particularly meaningful, because as I said the Bruins slowed the game down significantly in the latter portion of the 2nd half, resulting in fewer possessions on both sides of the ball (as I said, the Bruin offense scored 19 points in the first 10 minutes of the second half and only 12 in the second 10 minutes). I think the defense was better than you give it credit for in the first 10 - the Bruins worked on controlling the interior. They switched midway through the first half to shutting down Low and the other WSU perimeter players after that point, which allowed plenty of easy baskets for their interior players in 1-on-1 post situations instead of the more common double teams.

by Underbruin on Dec 29, 2006 12:44 AM PST up reply actions

Probably more analysis than this deserves

I believe that fouls that lead directly to scoring opportunities (free throws) or those that take those opportunities away (charging) have a bigger "impact" on the game than the touch fouls on the perimeter or on the inside off the ball that reset the shot clock. I don't know as much about the second type of foul, but as for the first type, sorry man, those were not evenly distributed. I know what I saw, the camera doesn't lie. Judging from the comments, I guess other people also saw a disparity in the foul situation.

I just hope that I don't have to discuss this topic anytime in the near future, because while poorly officiated games are the norm in the Pac 10, one sided games aren't.

by Tydides on Dec 29, 2006 1:16 AM PST up reply actions

Just in case

As I said over in your diary, I think we're pretty much spinning our wheels here, and we'll have to agree to disagree. I stand by my take, but I'm done on the "ref" topic.

by Tydides on Dec 29, 2006 1:24 AM PST up reply actions

Refs were way too distracting

The refs were a real distraction and ruined the rhythm of the game. Their foul calling was a real distraction for me as a spectator so I can only imagine what it did to the players.

by UCngLA on Dec 28, 2006 11:38 PM PST reply actions

The refs in the Pac 10 are horrible

Collison got raped late in the 2nd with no call.
But if I thought the refs in the UCLA game were bad I really got an education when I switched over to the UW-SUC game. They fouled out UW's starting lineup while SUC had no one in foul trouble, IN DOUBLE OT!! I thought Lorenzo and Dollar were going to commit a homicide. I was happy to see UW lose since it is obvious they are good, but for SUC to get a victory like this, God help us when we go over to their new barn. We better run 10 deep.

by Ghost of seven in a row on Dec 29, 2006 12:03 AM PST reply actions

I don't know about raped....

At least in the UCLA game the bad calls were about even. In the SC-Washington game the refs gave UW the ball with 1.6 seconds left in OT when they clearly touched the ball last before it went out of bounds. Subsequently Spencer Hawes hit a 3 pointer to put the game into double OT. The most annoying thing about that moment(Other than caring about SC getting ripped off) was watching the refs take 5 minutes to adjust the clock from 1.0 to 1.6 while watching their mistake over and over again.

Another note about the SC game: The announcers were the biggest homers in TV history. I think the color guy was Westphal. He didn't give one neutral comment the entire game. And during the postgame show Lindsey Soto asked him if it was a fluke win for SC and he snapped at her.

by alcor805 on Dec 29, 2006 10:10 AM PST up reply actions

I agree it wasn't even

But SC certainly wasn't the one getting "ripped off" in that game. Granted, I only watched the last 10 minutes or so, but I saw a number of bad calls against UW (who, by then, had already lost 3 starters, and would end up losing 4, to fouls) that far off-set that last one.

And, though I hate to defend Pac-10 refs, I should point out that they don't have the authority to change that kind of call on video replay- they can only adjust the clock (and, by the way, after the ball hit the UW guy, I think it bounced off and hit the SC guy again in the hand, so I'm not clear that it was even a bad call).

But, that aside, what motivated me to write this post was to wholeheartedly agree with your characterization of the SC announcers. It was truly embarrassing. I don't suppose I expect anything more than a nit-wit covering a fourth tier Div. I hoops team, but those guys were beyond the pale.

by Menelaus on Dec 29, 2006 10:20 AM PST up reply actions

I don't think I've ever heard Pauley Boo quite as

loud as it did tonight. Now I haven't been there as long as some, but in the past 6 or so years it has never been so bad. I can't say I had the best vantage point for all the calls, but some were incredibly blatant. I bet the TV angles showed it much better, but there was one jump ball where from where I was, it looked like Lowe was giving Afflalo (?) a reach around.

How does such a good conference end up with the worst officials? Disgraceful!

by isodore on Dec 29, 2006 12:21 AM PST reply actions