Nothing To Lose
So the team in SI.com’s “bubble watch” (again they pegged UCLA as a team that “should be in” and got sensitive and hilariously inconsistent after getting called out on it) pulled out a hard fought win in one of the toughest venues in West Coast, running up their record to 15-3, 5-1 in Pacific 10 Conference play. Every year Bruins go up to Pullman, I get the feeling in my stomach that the law of averages will finally catch up with us resulting in WSU students rushing the Friel court. Somehow, some what the Ben Ball warriors pulled out another win last night against a determined and tenacious opponent that gave everything they had to pull off a season defining upset (guess everyone looks for that against UCLA).
I want to highlight the positives first before discussing some lingering concerns heading into our next game. I think given what we have seen in last two games, we are going to be underdogs against the Huskies (who are tied for the conference lead with UCLA) Saturday in Seattle, where we haven’t won since 2004. I think we will be in a situation in which we will have nothing to lose (which I will expand on below). But as I wrote above, let’s start with the good stuff. There is no doubt who was the hero bailing us out from back to back possible disasters:
So, after UCLA wasted all of a 15-point second-half lead, Collison took over and scored six points in the final five minutes as 13th-ranked UCLA survived a late Washington State rally to win 61-59 Thursday in front of 8,434 at Friel Court.
"We didn't want that feeling of the Arizona State loss to happen again, so we had to show a little bit more toughness," said Collison, who had eight points, six assists and no turnovers. "I thought we played a good team. We just started losing a little bit of focus down the stretch in the last five minutes, and that can't happen.
"But I thought we played with more toughness than we did in the Arizona State game.
There is no doubt the toughness of DC. He put the team on his shoulders during those final mins when we were in a crisis mode:
"We have a play we call `clear' and it leaves the paint wide open," Collison said.
"Alfred set a big screen to help me get around the (center), and I tried to capitalize."
On the next possession Collison scored on a layup to give the Bruins the lead for good at 57-55, and he capped his own outburst with a pull-up 6-footer with 2:40 remaining to put the Bruins ahead 59-55.
"Darren really looked to be more aggressive, finally, at the end of the game and get to the basket," Howland said. "He knows by now, after four years, what he's supposed to do at the end of our games, and that's what he did."
DC ended the night with only 8 points mostly content with distributing the ball to his team-mates. He finished with 8 assists but possibly could have had more if his team didn’t blow some easy shots down low. The guy who was carrying the team in first half though was none other than ND, who is now starting to live up the hype of “Serbian Assassin.” ND was unconscious in the first half dropping in one bomb after another helping UCLA get off to a 13 pt half time lead:
"I was setting screens and getting open shots," Dragovic said. "It was nice to get the shots. My teammates were getting me the ball, and I was able to knock them down."
Since beginning the season 8 of 39 (20.5 percent) from 3-point range, Dragovic is 17of 36 (47.2). He is averaging 14.5 points in four games since becoming the starting power forward.
Dragovic attempted five shots in the second half, and missed his three 3-point attempts.
It’s great to see ND taking those shots with confidence. He is also showing why Howland decided to start him over JK (who btw had a pretty decent game too) since the start of the Pac-10. However, I am also getting a little concerned about our reliance on being a perimeter shooting team, which leads me to bring up the lingering concerns heading into next game.
As mentioned ND had a huge night early on. He finished the night 6 for 10 from the 3 pt line. As a team we shot a healthy 56.3% from the 3 point line last night making 9 of 16 shots. However, I do think we cannot afford to get to reliant on our outside shooting. I think the trick is here to find the right balance. I don't want us to settle for jump shots. I understand that our shooters shouldn’t hesitate when they are getting open looks within the flow of our offense. I don’t have a problem with that. However, I’d like to see us be more aggressive in attacking inside.
What I am getting the sense is that when we get really hot from the outside we started depending on it a little too much, get passive, and don’t take advantage of the available athleticism in our guards to drive inside. I'd like to see DC, JH and ML slash to the basket lot more and create their own shots as well or either get to the FT line. This way we can attack our opponents and inside and out relentlessly. In our last two games when our shooters were hot and draining 3s from all over the place, we stopped driving to the hoop in subsequent possessions and kept settling for jumpers.
I think just like football where a good offensive team is always striving for balance between their passing and running attacks, we need to strive for balance between our inside and outside game. It’s pretty clear we have some great shooters. I think the task at hand is when our shooters get hot, we should use that as opportunity to drive inside. We saw a little bit of that against Arizona when ND and MR were taking it to rack. We didn’t see much of that against ASU and not last night until DC started taking over late in the game. We will need that balance against a very talented Washington team tomorrow afternoon. Otherwise, if settle for one dimensional attack dependent on our outside shooting we are going to get buried in Seattle.
We will also get buried if we don’t show urgency in the department of rebounding. I thought our rebounding tenacity was woeful early. Washington State outrebounded us 28 to 21 (9 to 6 in offensive boards). That is not acceptable. Early on our guys were doing a horrific job in securing rebounds (which is emerging as a disconcerting theme last few games). AA2 finished the night with 1 rebound. JK led the team with 5 rebounds (in 11 mins) while DG finished with 4 (in 10 mins). Perhaps we will chalk it off as on off night for AA2 but we will need lot more from the President. Again we don’t need AA2 to give us KL like numbers. He just needs to hold his own. He did have 3 clutch jumpers and a mammoth block down the stretch playing his role in the big win. But we also need him to connect when he is getting point blank opportunities down low. Channeling Big Red: “Throw it down Big Man!”
Our FT shooting also bugged me all night. We made 6 of 10 shots. Ok, I don’t expect someone like DG to shoot like Larry Bird from the FT line. However, it doesn’t help when MR is shooting .500 from the FT line the entire season. That is not acceptable for a shooter of MR’s caliber.
I think the biggest concern I have right now about this team is our defense. Sure our offense froze up late in the game (until DC took control) leading to WSU’s ASU like rally last night. But it wasn’t our offense that was the issue. I think the biggest issue is we are not playing typical Ben Ball LOCKDOWN defense. From Coach Howland:
Washington State made 14 of 22 (63.6 percent) shots from the field in the second half after going 9 for 26 (34.6) in the first half.
"I thought what happened, the way they play with being so patient offensively eventually it wears you down," Howland said. "Our ball pressure wasn't nearly as good in the last 10 minutes as it was the first 10 minutes."
Coach Howland and his staff needs to figure out how to exactly sustain that lockdown defense during crunch time. In previous years it was AA, LRMAM and RW anchoring the suffocating defense we have all gotten used to in Westwood. This year we are not seeing that intensity.
It’s surprising to hear about our players getting gassed given the depth we have in our team. Again last night DG, ML, and JA played a grand total of 18 mins. I get Coach Howland going with his experienced seniors and upper classmen now that he has a talented core to work with (a luxury he didn’t have in those early years in Westwood and during his first years in Westwood). However, I think we are at a point now perhaps Coach Howland should consider unleashing his frosh for extended mins without worrying about losing a game.
At this point of time, I think we should head into Washington game with the mentality of nothing to lose. I strongly believe we are going to be the underdogs in that game against a very talented, Pac-10 leading Huskies team, that we haven’t beaten since 2004. It will not be the end of the world if we leave Washington splitting the road trip. We will still be in the thick of the conference race and not in a bad spot at all given our first 5 out 7 conference games were on the road.
What we need to do is come out on Saturday and play with the underdog mentality of NOTHING TO LOSE and show no fear. I am sure the memories of last year will be fresh in everyone’s mind. We all remember how Dentmon embarrassed DC all day and how AA2 was subject of one of the worst cheap shots we have ever seen in Pac-10 conference play. What we will need to do on Saturday is come out and start with defense. If our guys simply focus on locking down the perimeter and securing the paint, not giving up any second, third chance points to the Huskies, we will have a shot of escaping with a victory. If we can get back in our defensive grove, it will at least for now go a long way in alleviating the lingering concerns from last few games. Again it will not be the end of the world if we don't manage to pull out the win tomorrow afternoon but in terms of momentum, I think it will give us a rocket boost heading into rest of the season.
We will have more on the Huskies either later today or early tomorrow but the motto around here should be: we have nothing to lose on Saturday.
GO BRUINS.
52 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Balance
You are spot on. I’ve been trying to figure out exactly how to express what I think is missing and “balance” takes it a long way.
Consistency is a problem, too. At the FT line — we’ve had games where we’ve been great and games where we have not. FT’s make a difference in close games and we need to consistently protect ourselves at the line. On D — we seem to play one half with great D and one without. We should not be consistently giving up big leads. Yes, teams have runs, but we should stop them and have one of our own.
Slashing: It’s interesting that in years past when players took the ball to the rim there were concerns that we were playing “street ball”. Now, when they don’t we are concerned that perhaps we are not using our individual talent as best it can be used. I think you hit it on the head with “balance”. There is a happy medium, a place where individual effort and team play mesh to the benefit of the team. We need to try to get there.
I won’t second guess CBH but I, too, would have loved to see the kids get more playing time — especially when the starters were giving up our big lead. What was there to lose?
We do best when JS joins DC and leads. I truly wish he would step us, not back, in these critical moments. When he has, we’ve won.
Again, this was a great road win in a tough place. On to Saturday.
sjh
Great Win
It is clear that we are not perfect, but who cares.
(1) Sure we need balance. But we have zero reliable inside presence, and Howland put Drago in the starting lineup because he sees the 4 position as more of a perimeter position at this time. With four perimeter players on the floor most of the time—balance will always be hard. Yes, we have guys who can slash, but they don’t have any size, and without an reliable inside presence, slashing becomes very difficult. Aboya had an atrocious offensive game last night, I love him, but his often wild shots harkened back to Aboya of old. (credit to him for some solid free throws and a jumper or two at the end, however).
We are a three point shooting team right now. I would love a reporter to ask Howland if he is coaching this year as he did in Northern Arizona, with just a lot more talent.
(2) Nothing to lose. I understand the point, but I respectfully disagree; I think we have a lot to lose against Washington. Mostly that is because I think this team can be great, and am waiting for them to break through the ceiling. Perhaps, however, the feeling is grounded in my too-high expectations. I’m not entirely sure.
I agree, the game is a toss-up, and will be extraordinarily difficult to win. But we are the team in the top-15, and the pressure is on us to prove that we can beat a good team. As the season stands right now, Washington on the road will be our 4th opportunity to grab a “good” win. If we go 0-4, that is not a disaster. But it is telling, and will be painful and exposing.
Anyway, I think we have a lot to lose on Saturday. But that’s ok, UCLA has a lot to lose every game. But, Nestor, I agree with your point—we should play loose and confident, and we certainly shouldn’t look at the game as the end of the world. It’s important, but its a relatively early game in a long season.
Go Bruins.
Uh no
You are putting pressure on us. We won’t.
People will have to accept the reality that after winning three consecutive Pac-10 titles we are in rebuilding mode. So during this process if we lose some games here and there it won’t be the end of the world. If you want to exert that kind of pressure/expectations on this team … I’d advise you do it somewhere else because it gets tiring.
If you can’t enjoy the season and constantly heap expectations …. BN is not the place for you. Thanks.
all we have to lose
is national perception. And sure, that matters some. But in the big picture, for a team like UCLA, it doesn’t mean squat. We all know we’ll be in the tournament and we are looking at a top 5 seed at worst. So if “experts” think we’re not any good, who cares? We’ll prove them wrong come tourney time.
Even IF we happen to lose saturday, then we still control our own destiny in the Pac. We’d be one game behind UW and still play them at home, so at worst it would end in a tie if we both win out. So N is right, in terms of our season itself, there’s nothing to lose tomorrow
by bucknellbruin on Jan 23, 2009 9:05 AM PST up reply actions
I think they can be good
I think this team can be a Sweet 16 or better team, which makes a road game against Washington an important game. And nothing to lose doesn’t mesh with important. I don’t mind if you are just hoping for a tournament bid, nor do I mind that you think there is nothing to lose with this young team. I just disagree, or at least think the “nothing” in nothing-to-lose is significantly overstated.
In any case, my comments don’t place pressure on the team—they were made on a blog where live die-hard fans. The team won’t wilt under my opinion, just as it won’t have a weight lifted by yours. Neither opinion is relevant from the team’s standpoint—a team which I can tell you isn’t just shooting for a bid to the big dance (and I love um for that).
I personally don’t think a team with D.C., Shipp, Roll, Aboya, and the #1 recruiting class in the nation is rebuilding. They aren’t as good as last year, but every team which isn’t as good as last year isn’t necessarily rebuilding. Maybe a player or coach will post their opinion on the that, I’d be curious.
by rfirpo on Jan 23, 2009 10:29 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Then you are thinking way too far ahead
If you are already thinking about Steve-16 and beyond. This place has always been a home for die hard fans but our motto/narrative has always been taking it game by game and not saddle this team with expectations like whiners writing on message boards and calling into radio talk shots.
"Sweet 16 team"?
What the hell does that mean? It’s such a pointless description. A “sweet-16” team is a team that can beat two teams in 3 days. It’s really not that big of a deal when you’re a top 5 seed in the tournament. Sure, if you’re a double-digit seed, it would mean you beat a top team to get there. But I find it to be such a dumb term for top seeds.
Pac-10 champ is a good term. That’s the goal, and I find it far more meaningful than Steve-16.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I sometimes wonder if ...
our players take the time to read the Bruin blogs.
If so, I do think the way we express ourselves is important.
For example, I was troubled by DC’s statements in the press about losing the ASU game — it seemed that we were all intolerant of a loss which is not the case. Where did that come from? Some of the drive by blogs? Or, the MSM clowns speaking for the fan base — which they have no right to do.
sjh
They might poke around.
But given our coach, I would expect press or blogs to have very little (if any) impact on our team—even if the players are young guys. If there was any impact, it certainly wouldn’t be something that should ever affect any poster here. Disrespectful or hateful posts are one thing (which I rarely if ever see), but the vast majority of posts around here don’t even come close to that. And even assuming there was some kind of measurable impact on the team by posts here (which, I strongly believe not to be the case)—I would be for ignoring that impact in favor of free discussion, the latter being the only reason people come to places like this to begin with (I assume). There can’t really be an agenda, or else the whole thing falls apart.
I’m not sure which comments you are referring to by Collison, but if you are referring to his lamenting the loss and taking it hard, I agree, you sometimes feel for the kids taking it all so seriously. At the same time, great teams and players take losses hard. It’s not so much because of outside pressure though (in my opinion), I rather think its because great players and teams put more pressure on themselves then anybody else. It’s what makes them great. So while I feel for players who are devastated after early losses, I also know the sentiment probably makes them better.
You sound a little naive
and frankly a little clueless.
Yeah, I am sure. Everyone at UCLA has access to the internets except for our athletes. You have no idea how much coaches and players are aware of the conversation that goes on online (even though they will never admit publicly (and we wouldn’t want them to) to blowhard reporters in the traditional media).
Of course they are strong kids and will not get too bothered with whats written about them and as far I know we on BN have always made an attempt to make sure our players are never attacked in an unfair way (unless they did something really stupid off the court for which they deserved to get called out for). Yet they are also human. They are KIDS. So of course it will not totally he a huge surprise if some of the venom we have seen in other places bother them just a tiny bit.
Still the main point it is incredibly naive and clueless to assume players/coaches are not paying attention to what is being written/highlighted here. You sound like you have no idea from this comment above.
Concerns Regarding Perimeter Shooting Team
As a UCLA Bruin fan first and an Orlando Magic season ticket holder second (I missed the WSU game last night to attend the Celtics/Magic game but made it home to watch Bruins Live), I share your concerns with turning into a perimeter shooting team a la the Orlando Magic. When the shots are dropping (i.e., UCLA v. U of A game; Magic vs. Lakers last week, probably much to the chagrin of the Lakers’ fans on this blog) the offense can be a thing of beauty. When the 3 pointers do not fall (UCLA v. ASU; Magic v. Celtics last night) the game can turn ugly, with rushed shots in the final seconds of the shot clock.
The Bruins need DC and JH to penetrate more and either go to the line or drive and kick to create wide open shots for their outside shooters. A contested 3 has a much less chance of going in than a wide open 3. I would also like to see more DG on the low block, with AA2 trolling for boards if DG misses.
Key to sustained defense
is iMHO, keeping our guys fresh. As you pointed out, we need our young cubs to get some sustained minutes in the 2nd half of games so we can have fresh upper classmen legs come in and lock a team down in the final 8 mins. I think the reason Drag went a little cold in the send half was fatigue. Tired legs make for inconsistent shooting. He is playing many more minutes at a much higher intensity (especially defensively) which takes its toll down the stretch.
I almost like coming into the tourney a bit of an “unknown”. Maybe having lost a few more games than most would have expected. Maybe not be a 1 or 2 seed. Having to prove something. Playing with a bit of a chip on our shoulders vs. being the team everyone is gunning for. Maybe a different route to the final four will yield a different result. Maybe Banner #12.
Go Bruins.
Kick some Huskie A$$$.
Who would have guessed?
That even for a game, the 4 spot would be the most productive offensive position on the floor? ND and JK combined for 27. (Quick aside, what is the Bruin record for 3 pointers in a game? Looked like for a moment Nic was going to shatter it).
My big concern here on out is rebounding. Not only are we not that tall, but often we do a horrible job of putting a body on someone. Tracy Murray did a very good job of underlining my concerns on the radio broadcast. (Before I get called out by Fox and others, I was off to get pizza while the Tivo was recording. Have to get my fix anyway I can). We kept the WSU FG Pct low, but it was a moot point as they kept getting O board after O board.
I agree with much of above, I would like to see the frosh play more as they are the key for any real run into the tourney. There is going to come a game where we will need the size of a Bobo, even if it is only for 10 minutes. I realize the guy is still getting into shape, but we have to find a few important minutes for him, not just garbage time, to get him up to speed.
A few thoughts
1) Living by the Three: also means dying by the three. When we get cold is when our offense stagnates. We need to continue making good passes inside and opening the floor for driving to get high FG% shots.
2) Rebounding: absolutely atrocious getting offensive boards especially. That’s been our bread and butter the last 3 years and has given us tons of easy baskets
3) Defensive intensity as a product of fatigue and depth. I think it’s clear that our defensive intensity at times has been tempered by our fear of depth and due to fatigue. For example, last year when Collison got in foul trouble, we’d be in big trouble given that we didn’t have a lot of depth at guards. This year, however, we have much more depth and can rotate players at that spot. Aboya has done a marvelous job at avoiding fouls this year – but that’s also been a large part of his intensity as an enforcer in the past. Obviously, our depth up front isn’t as good as previous years, but with ND showing he can play as a starter, we still have 4-5 guys we can rotate up front.
How I noticed this was watching some clips of previous years and how we played defensively. Aboya was always considered raw on defense, but he readily sacrified the body to take charges. Taking charges of course also means you have chances of getting called on blocks and what not. There’s no doubt he’s avoided fouls, but I also feel like that means he’s taken a notch off the intensity of defense.
Same goes for when I watched some of Collison in previous years. He’s always been described as having machineguns for hands, with the way he can disrupt an opposing team’s point guard. This year, whether it’s fear of depth or fouling out, he hasn’t shown that same intensity at times. It’s helped keep him on the floor, as I rarely see him hit 3 fouls even (and that’s what got us in trouble last year against Western Kentucky for instance). But, with Holiday, Lee and Anderson all being excellent ball handers, I don’t think depth is any more of an excuse to avoid playing intense on defense.
I realize I’m naming these 2 names in particular, and they are far from being the only ones, but they were just the more obvious cases I’ve noticed after seeing some video of previous years compared to this year. Yeah, they’ve helped avoid fouls, but the defensive intensity just doesn’t feel the same.
4) We need to play looser. There, we said it. I understand we have high expectations going in this year, but it’s obvious with the pieces we lost and the # of freshmen we have, we’re going to go through a pain period of learning. Listening to the comments, I feel like a lot of players are playing under tremendous pressure of making the team better, when we should be willing to lose a few in PAC-10 play in order to gain experience and play hard when it matters.
I understand some fans have unreasonable expectations of this team, and surely our players feel it, but I also like to think of the 06 run we made: we played with an extremely talented freshman class (very underrated though), a very talented sophomore class, and leftovers from the Lavin years. Nobody thought we would make it to the championship game, and we very nearly didn’t. But we played with nothing to lose. There was that article posted that showed how at one point, CBH rolled out 4 freshman and a walk-on in our big game against LSU.
I’m just hoping we see more players get play time against Washington, since UW will undoubtedly try to force us to run and will tire our legs out a lot. We won’t let them dictate tempo, that’s for sure, but we’ll need to stay fresh and intense on defense. It’s going to be a tough game against UW as they’ve had our number up in Washington, but they are still beatable.
No Offense?
Like N, I’m much more concerned about our D than our O. In fact, according to Ken Pomeroy, we have the NUMBER ONE RANKED OFFENSE, in terms of adjusted efficiency, in Division 1:
absolutely
Our offense has been very efficient. We’re always shooting damn near 50% on FG’s and our FT shooting has improved from the begging of the year (though we need to improve a lot still). Our defense has actually regressed in the rankings though.
Two points on D regression
1. It’s mostly about Luc. Drago has really stepped up on the defensive side of the ball, and at times shows signs of being a good defensive rebounder, but let’s face it, he ain’t Luc. Luc is already an above average NBA defender. He is the Bucks’ lockdown guy. As a rookie. Most scouts will tell you that despite the knock on NBA teams not playing defense, the second biggest adjustment that rookies have to make after the fact that the season is MUCH longer than anything they’ve experienced before is that their defense is not up to par. When we had Luc, We knew that if an opposing 2, 3, or 4 started heating up, we could always switch Luc on him. With Keefe and Drago out there in his place, we no longer have that luxury.
2. The rest is about rebounding. We don’t do it very well. We generally play the defensive we’ve been accustomed to over the years on possession #1. But then we give up an offensive rebound, and the D the second time around isn’t nearly as good, even on shots that aren’t point blank. I’ve always felt that to have one dominant rebounder isn’t enough. You really need two guys committed to it, especially on the defensive glass, so that your opponent can’t box you out very easily. Aboya is generally a pretty good rebounder, but he needs help, because if he can be taken out of position, the board is truly up for grabs. Last year we had an extremely dominant rebounder in Love and another excellent rebounder in Luc. We NEVER worried about cleaning up our own glass. Opposing teams couldn’t box out both of them. Replacing these guys with any combination of Aboya, Keefe, Drago, Shipp just isn’t the same. This is why I’m really excited about Gordon, who is showing a lot of potential in this area. Whether he will shore up some of his other liabilities so that we can take advantage of his superior glass work is another issue though.
I should have waited for your post
Ty, exactly my thoughts, but you stated it better. I would add that the loss of Weestbrook was a huge part of it, too. Stephen Curry said RW was the toughest defender he faced. Russell’s arms were so long, and he’s so fast, that shooters could not get open. Abrams, Curry, Bayless … those guys were useless against us. Jrue is a solid defender, but Russell was otherworldly, voted the best defender in a league that was full of excellent defenders (most prominently Luc and Kyle Weaver).
Losing Westbrook is really big
But I think Holiday/Lee steps in there and the dropoff isn’t as pronounced as our other positions. That’s why I attribute our defensive dropoff to these two main factors. That being said, would I like for RW to come back and play some D for us? You bet your ass I would. How could anyone say no to the reigning defensive player of the year?
Bobo Is the Best Rebounder on the Team
and, although I know he may not be where we need him yet, he would really help on the glass.
sjh
Well I was talking about this year
Next year having both Gordon and Bobo in there purely from a defensive rebounding standpoint should be superb. Now, this doesn’t necessarily mean that I’m counting Bobo out for this year, but I haven’t seen enough data points to be confident that he will get up to speed quickly enough to play meaningful minutes this season. I don’t think anyone would claim that Gordon isn’t “ready” right now and more likely to contribute this season.
The other thing I like about Bobo is that he’s a shot blocking big as is Gordon. I’m a huge fan of Alfred, but if I were to have a choice between a charge-taking big and a shot blocking big, I want the shot blocker. No one does what AA2 does better than AA2. His positioning is fantastic, but the act of taking a charge leaves you out of position defensively and rebounding wise in ways that shot blocking does not.
Up from 6th before last night
We just scored 61 points in 49 possessions against the 12th ranked defense in the country. That is phenomenal. An average offense would have scored 43 points against WSU, so we did 42% better than an average offense. As a result, our offensive efficiency rating went from 6th to 1st. Our defense has been steadily regressing (as blinkshot points out below), with the biggest drop coming last night, when we fell from 33rd to 47th (WSU’s offense is average, ranking in the 150s)!
Our defensive woes are allowing teams to stay close and come back. Can we improve the defense? Looking at last year’s personnel, I don’t have much hope. We are much worse this year in each of the 3 positions where we had to replace our NBA defections. All 3 of the players we lost received Pac-10 accolades for their defense, including the Pac-10 defensive player of the year (RW). Luc and Love were our interior defenders and had a great combination of athleticism (Luc) and rebounding and shot blocking capabilities (Love). We went from very good to excellent at all 3 positions to merely adequate at all 3. We lost size, length and athleticism. It is no wonder that our defensive numbers have dropped.
Just a thought on that
How much of it is defensive intensity? I’ve noted that I feel like a lot of players are playing hard, but not as hard as they used to. I remember that we were all afraid AA2 and Collison would get in foul trouble, as that cost us badly last year (and because we’re thin in the post). That said, AA2 has been a beast defensively in the past, partially because he got involved in a lot of foul situations. And we’re much deeper at PG than in years past, but Collison hasn’t shown that same defensive intensity (hands wise at least) as in the past.
Intensity might be part of it
Shipp has never been intense on defense. Collison does seem to back off defensively, possibly to save it for his offense. AA2 has lost some of his aggressiveness as he tries to avoid foul trouble.
If it is intensity, then we could improve defensively between now and the end of the season. Not to the level of 2006-2008 (because no Luc, Hollins, Mata or Love), but to a level that could get us past some tough opponents.
Another thought on our intensity: at some point in the last two-plus seasons, our opponents have increased their intensity when they play us. You see it when you watch other
Pac-10 games. Our games appear to me to have a higher intensity level. Defenders dig into their stance a little better, they crash the boards harder (except Arizona, which is too soft to try to get intense against us). Our opponents get up for the games and try to match what they expect will be an unusual intensity level by the Bruins. In 2006, we may have won games just by playing harder than our opponents. But by now, our Pac-10 opponents and others as well, often match our intensity, taking away what used to be a big advantage. Anybody else see that?
I should correct this
Holiday is not “merely adequate” on defense. Holiday is a very good defender and likely will get Pac-10 accolades. Still, he’s not as good as Westbrook was last year, so there has been some drop off defensively at that spot, even though the much bigger and more significant drop off has come at the 4 and 5 positions.
Late game meltdowns
My concern isn’t as much the defense as the offense, though I agree the defense needs to be consistant from start to finish. Quite a number of games this season have had the same format, a double digit lead at halftime followed by a meltdown in the second half where we fail to score resulting in long droughts (5 min) for us and big runs (15-0) for the opponent. I realize CBH has a very methodical style of offense (pick and roll), but I think sometimes it’s too slow and maybe it’s not being executed correctly, but I start wishing for a return to our traditional athletic offense where we would run the other team ragged, Just my 2 cents.
Go Bruins!
some thoughts on rebounding...
i have mixed feelings about our perceived lack of rebounding, to some degree i feel it’s overstated, but then again it may also be a result of some tendencies.
as many have noted, we’re pretty efficient offensively. if you’re missing less it follows that there will be less offensive rebound opportunities. that’s a pretty simplified statement, i’ll agree, but i think it holds some weight. and as said above, love and the prince were rebounding machines, not just our best rebounders, they were great rebounders, that’s tough to replace. rw rebounded exceptionally well for his position, but i feel jh fills that void at 2.
now we play man d and one of the downfalls of it is you’re sometimes gonna be out of position for boards. that’s just a matter of fact. so with all that could lead to issues in rebounds.
but for the life of me i cant understand why aboya is spotting up for 18 foot jumpers, especially early in the clock. especially last night, i mean jk and nd are shooting 4’s, so they’re playing on the perimeter a lot. if aboya is out there too,who’s down low? opposing d’s are going to dare aboya to shoot that so his defender isn’t going to follow him out, which means we’re now playing 4-on-5 everytime he decides to spot up. with that said, i like the way gordon has played, he’s gonna be a banger.
i think it comes down to ft’s though. every game we lost we could’ve won if we produced at the stripe. aboya is shooting above 65% from the line which is great, but roll, shipp, keefe, drago, and jh need to step it up there. there’s no excuse for these guys to be shooting at their respective clips, they’re too good of shooters…
i’m really looking forward to saturday’s game, i think it’s gonna be holiday’s breakout
Across The Face
I have strong feelings about rebounding
That is, I feel strongly that we are only an okay rebounding team this year. We rarely send more than 3 players to the offensive glass. Last year, we were a great offensive rebounding team (10th on kenpom; up from 166th in 2007) for two primary reasons, one being that Love was possibly the best offensive rebounder in college last year and two being that Love drew double and triple teams, which left no one blocking out Luc or Keefe on the opposite side.
This year, we don’t have those two factors, but we also have a perimeter-oriented power forward and thus only one player—the 5 spot—who is consistently in the neighborhood to get offensive rebounds. And our starting 5 is undersized.
On the other hand, we have always been a good defensive rebounding team (9th in 2008, 38th in 2007 and 46th in 2006), but this year, we’ve fallen to 73rd so far.
I believe we will be favorites against Washington, NOT underdogs
We’re ranked #11/13 depending on the poll. Washington is unranked. I know we have had bad luck in Seattle in recent years and I expect a tough game tomorrow, but I still think Vegas will have us as the favorites.
My guess: UCLA by 2.5.
Besides, we’re due there! No wins since 2004? Really? That’s gotta change!
GO BRUINS!
I think Nestor meant for us
to realize that no matter what the line will be tomorrow, we will in all practicality be underdogs in this game.
I for one would be extremely happy with a win tomorrow, but won’t be surprised if it doesn’t happen.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
Help Needed finding Stat's
For an analysis I want to do, I’m looking for a Bruin stat site that will give me minutes played for the entire season, so far, for each Bruin.
The UCLA site simply gives games played.
I’d also like turnovers for each player.
Anyone know of a site that will have this stuff?
Thanks.
sjh
Don't know of a particular site
But I do have a spreadsheet with that information included, if you would like.
Here are Your Stats
Here you go 66:
http://www.pac-10.org/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2008-2009/ucla.html
Looking forward to the analysis!
by those stats
Gordon is by far our best rebounder/min with Keefe second
Not having one of them on the floor is hurting our rebounding
Fun Stat
Spencer Soo leads the team in FT% 1.000, and 3 PT percent 1.000.
Also, very impressive is our low turnover rates for
DC 2.1
JH 1.9
JS 1.6
AA 1.1
JA. 1.0
However, what I want to do is adjust the stat’s for actual time played, ie, turnover/minute played.
Unfortunately, the Pac 10 and UCLA sites don’t seem to have total minutes played, but I’m hoping Hoo’s spreadsheet does.
One thesis I want to test is that DG is having a monster season when one puts his stats into a perspective that reflects how little time he has played while amassing them.
sjh
Total Minutes Played
I think the Pac-10 site does have total minutes played. Scroll down to “Season Box Score.” The second column from the right shows total minutes. For example, DC has played 565, JS has played 436, and so forth.
Thanks for helping an old man ---
Duh! that’s exactly what I wanted and I didn’t see it.
It really confirms what I’ve been thinking.
I’m going to dig in and play:
Morgan has 17 rebounds in 86 minutes =s 1 every 5 minutes played
Gordon has 71 in 202 =s 1 every 3 minutes
Keefe 78/330 = 1 every 4.2
AA2 96/476 = 1 every 5 minutes
I’m going to do more of this and then try to figure out whether it means what I think it means — that we are very safe with DG on the floor and that when we are getting beat on the boards, JK is a good substitution for ND.
Rebounds are not everything, but from that very narrow perspective, DG is clearly our best rebounder. (and BTW — he is second on the team in FG percentage — behind AA2). it looks like he will be very high in block and steals when correlated for time on the floor, too.
With Hoo’s spreadsheet, i should be able to do the math, globally. This could be very cool.
sjh
Hope this can be of help
I believe that I have the data that you are looking for, let me know where to send it, and I’ll get the sheet emailed to you. I also have a sheet from last year, if you or DH91 are interested in a comparison.
the problem with our d
is that we’re not rebounding and giving teams 2nd , 3rd and 4th scoring opportunities. i’d be interested to see what our opponents’ fg% is on first shot opportunities. my impression is that we do a really good job on the primary scroing chance but because we haven’t secured posession after that teams are getting their points on the putbacks, etc.
on a side note, did malcolm lee play yesterday? i don’t recall him being out on the floor but from some of the posts, i get the impression that he was
Across The Face
thanks
that must’ve been during my trip to the restroom…=P
and if we’re underdogs as nestor anticipates, i have a economic stimulus plan to suggest to prez obama, take the points and bet on the bruins baby!
Across The Face
I know Romar is a Bruin
but he needs to pay for the way he handled the cheapshot thrown at AA2. The Huskies got killed by the media for it, even Coach Wooden spoke out against it and Romar basically said it was no big deal. It makes me sad that a former Bruin would disrespect Coach and our program that way.
by SmrtGuy82 on Jan 23, 2009 3:49 PM PST reply actions
Romar Fell From Grace with That
Both Coach and the Caretaker would have handled that a lot better. It was not Romar’s best moment.
sjh
i don't post often...
but i wouldn’t go so far as to say Romar disrespected Coach in how he responded. He may not have reacted as we would have liked, but Romar is still a class act. I’ve chatted with him many times at Husky breakfast outtings and we still rehash great stories of his time in westwood, particularly that 95 year with tyus. It’s interesting some of the comments, here… Some with high expectations and some saying we can’t expect to win “every game.” I think it’s clear this year that our reputation precedes us. People have an expectation given our history and our name, and because of that, our opponents bring in week in and week out. And yes, we’re young and have obviously had some key players leave. At the same time, we have a marquee coach, marquee recruites, and key senior leadership. And if we want to be a marquee program, as we are, people are going to have to get used to the idea of reloading, not rebuilding. Tom Izzo in East Lansing does it year in and year out. Again, that’s not to say success should be defined as a sweet 16 or final 4 or whatever. But I think there is an expectation that you can go into Pullman against a team in total rebuild who have not beaten anyone ranked and put it on them. Yeah, it’s a tough gym to play at, but I think when people try to play “possum” by hyping an opponents program up to pre-emptively “excuse” a loss or a “close game” (as seems to happen) I don’t buy it. U-Dub on the other hand is a program that Romar has turned around. They are young like we are. BofA is probably tougher to play at than even the Pit. This is one where I wouldn’’t be surprised by a W, but I’m definitely not expecting one — because, quite frankly, they may be more balanced than we are for whatever reason. We better come ready to board, run a bit for some easy finishes, and to establish our tempo. Either way, it should be fun and I’ll be cheering us on. Go Bruins.
by seattlebruin17 on Jan 23, 2009 7:13 PM PST up reply actions
the problem is
in college basketball, you can almost NEVER “expect” a dominant win. You bring up Izzo at MSU; well they just lost to Northwestern at home. On a neutral court i’d take WSU over Northwestern. Losses/close calls like this happen. The thing to remember is that these guys are kids. They’re liable to have up and down and inconsistent games. I’ve been amazed for the last 3-4 years at how good our Bruins have been at winning close games, whether it be against great teams or mediocre ones.
The trick is for CBH have them well prepared, so if they do have an “off night,” we can still come out on top. Clearly this year, we’ve lost some of those games – something we can attribute IMO to youth and inexperience. But CBH’s gameplanning paid off again Thursday, and even though our D wore down in the 2nd half, CBH’s work showed when we knew exactly what they were going to do on that last inbounds play.
The mark of a “marquee program” isn’t the regular season. It’s the tournament, because that’s when the true winners are revealed. We’ve been better than anyone at that stage the last 3 years, and I expect CBH to have us ready for another run, regardless of how many shaky performances we have during the regular season
by bucknellbruin on Jan 24, 2009 5:36 AM PST up reply actions
the problem is
in college basketball, you can almost NEVER “expect” a dominant win. You bring up Izzo at MSU; well they just lost to Northwestern at home. On a neutral court i’d take WSU over Northwestern. Losses/close calls like this happen. The thing to remember is that these guys are kids. They’re liable to have up and down and inconsistent games. I’ve been amazed for the last 3-4 years at how good our Bruins have been at winning close games, whether it be against great teams or mediocre ones.
The trick is for CBH have them well prepared, so if they do have an “off night,” we can still come out on top. Clearly this year, we’ve lost some of those games – something we can attribute IMO to youth and inexperience. But CBH’s gameplanning paid off again Thursday, and even though our D wore down in the 2nd half, CBH’s work showed when we knew exactly what they were going to do on that last inbounds play.
The mark of a “marquee program” isn’t the regular season. It’s the tournament, because that’s when the true winners are revealed. We’ve been better than anyone at that stage the last 3 years, and I expect CBH to have us ready for another run, regardless of how many shaky performances we have during the regular season
by bucknellbruin on Jan 24, 2009 5:36 AM PST up reply actions

by 



















