Defensive Thoughts

by Nestor on Feb 13, 2009 5:36 AM PST in Basketball Comment 74 comments

About two weeks ago we talked about the simple principles of Ben Ball: defense and rebounding. I will get to the last minute call against DC below but I think we all need to acknowledge up front that we did not play up to our usual standard last night Tempe. We also have to credit Arizona State for out hustling us on the boards and also executing their offensive plan as their supporting cast stepped up in a huge way to take some pressure of James Harden. For us I think we have to figure out a way to get back to finding our defensive form in last four games. If we are going to make a charge through rest of the Pac-10 and tourney season (and I think we are capable of doing it) it will have to come from our defense first.

So let's zero in on our defense. The numbers don't lie. They shot 60% percent from the field and 61% from the three point line knocking down one open shot after another. Sure the inconsistent play calling from the SPTRs had an impact on the flow of the game. Yet I also believe we played some really sloppy defense in stretches, which has to be disappointing to Howland.

Our defensive rotations were slow and we weren't closing out like we had in our previous four games. Our guys were not sharp in giving each other weakside help and our post doubles were not all that effective either. We simply didn't bring the defensive intensity we displayed in last three games which I found to be disappointing. I actually thought our defensive intensity markedly improved when our freshmen (not JH) got into the game later in the first half. JA, ML and DG energized the squad and helped our guys close the huge lead ASU built early in the first half.

I also don't buy the excuses of DC, ND dealing with flu and other nagging injuries considering ASU was also coming into the game banged up. Glasser had been dealing with concussion from the Oregon trip and Rihard Kuksiks was also dealing with the flu (See post game thread on House of Sparky). Yet both of them were able to play 29+ minutes. They came in ready and fired up and we didn't respond to the challenge.

Speaking of not responding to the challenge JH had a nightmarish game. He finished the game with 0 points, 1 assists and 3 turnovers. That's not good. Don't get me wrong. I love JH and I do think he has the potential to be a great Bruin. However, I think for him to justify being considered as one of the best pro prospects in the country he will have to show something little more beyond potential in huge games.

JH had a big game against Southern Cal at Pauley East earlier this season (13 pts). However, besides that game he has come up short in marquee games such as at Texas (3 pts), ASU at Pauley (2 pts), and at Washington (8 pts). I think if we had gotten minimal contributions from JH last night we would have had an even better shot at winning the game (and not have to depend on the intellect of SPTRs). We needed something out of him and we didn't get it. We got it when ML was in the game in the first half. I am hoping JH will reflect a little bit and realize how much we need his athletic talent to be succcesful rest of this season. He clearly has "it" in terms of athletic potential as we have seen in games in recent home stand. He is smooth. He is effortless. He has to develope the "it" in terms of the defensive intensity, desire, aggression that has marked the careers of ultimate Ben Ball warriors such as AA and RW. Perhaps it is too much for all of us to ask a freshman to bust out and become AA and RW in one season (they both took two years to develop) but if JH wants to justify himself as a lottery pick time as far as this year in concerned is creeping up on him. He has to make himself more reliable as options beyond DC and JS.

As far as offense is concerned I was disappointed with how we didn't take advantage of easy opportunities in the first half. I think we blew something like 3 gimme layups in first half blowing 8 pts. If this squad wants to develop into a great team (they are a very good team IMHO) they will have to take advantage of those opporunties to emerge as the "silent assasins" like previous Ben Ball warriors.

I also think we didn't show the requisite poise and composure to pull out the victory. I will not rehash PAA's techincal foul. That was a dumb mistake and a senior like him should know better (and he knows it). I also thought the offensive possession before the (what was probably decisive) questionable call on DC was horrendous. From the Daily News:

Holding a 67-66 lead, the Bruins were called for a shot clock violation with 1:33 to play when Shipp couldn't get off a shot.

"I lost track of the time," Shipp said. "We got sped up with their zone."

Not good enough JS. A senior shouldn't be losing track of time.

Also, it wasn't good when JS lost his cool in the first half shoving right into an ASU player when he was running up the court. JS was admirable in the way he didn't retaliate to Trojie's thug tactics in Pauley. There was nothing like that from ASU guys last night and I was disappointed that JS lost his cool that way in the first half

Perhaps JS was getting frustrated with yet another typical night for SPTRs. Actually it was worse than typical for those clowns. They were horrendous. I think people here have every right to be frustrated as we saw Harden getting away an obvious charge on PAA just mins before call was made on DC. He was getting treated like an NBA star by the SPTRs. Also to be fair on our side we got some bad calls when a double dribble probably should have been call on DC in the second half. Still the call on DC was atrocious which led to Howland (who has always been extremely reserved when it comes to commenting on SPTR) to say this:

"I thought it was a block, because the guy was moving," Howland said. "I've already asked my video person who saw a replay of the game, and he said, 'Yes, you were right, he was moving, no question about it."

Not much we can add to that. If anyone has any doubts you can watch the clips from Tele below.

Still we can't really sulk about it all that much given how we failed to play defense up to our standards and didn't bring all around intensity to this game.

If anything, our guys need to put this game out of their minds right away, and zero in on Arizona. I think Saturday's game (10:00 am PST tip off) will probably represent Arizona's best shot against UCLA in next years. I am not sure Buddinger, Hill and Wise will have a more viable opportunity to upset the Ben Ball warriors as they will probably all bolt Arizona after this season. Given how that program is in total shambles with the state of their recruiting they are probably going to approach Saturday's game as their one last shot at Howland's program.

So our guys cannot go in there with the same intensity and laxed defense they played last night. If they do that they fill find themselves further behind in the Pac-10 race (but not out of it). Here is to our warriors digging deep and rediscovering the defensive form from last couple of weeks.

GO BRUINS.

1 recs | Comment 74 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Rebounding

Excellent insights, as usual, Nestor.

In terms of rebounding, DG was second leading rebounder on team with 3, despite playing only 10 minutes. Nobody had more than 4 (JH), and AA, ND and JS had 2 or less in 25 or more minutes. Obviously part of that is the fact that you can’t get a rebound when the ball comes out the bottom of the net, but still…

JK was MIA. Only 3 minutes and a clean slate (no shots, no boards, no fouls). He seems to have fallen out of the mix.

I agree that JS should have known the clock situation better, but it seemed like that was a team effort (in a negative way). To be in the position where you have to jack up a shot at 0 means that there was a lot of standing around and lack of ball movement before that point in the possession. The clock management at the end of the 1st half was also very iffy- MR bailed the team out by making room himself for a pressure 3 at the buzzer. As has been mentioned in previous posts in previous games, clock management is different when facing a zone than a man defense.

Finally, I noticed more than once that MR was guarding Pendergraph. This was fairly scary to watch, but MR did a good job in the circumstances of limiting the damage. I couldn’t tell if this was the result of ASU setting good screens that we couldn’t work through, or if this was a designed scheme. Either way, it was interesting to say the least.

The Bruins will bounce back. I am glad that you keep this site on an even keeled pace. It is too easy to get excited when we roll over teams who don’t play defense as well, and it is also too easy to think the sky has fallen when we lose. This is still our team, and I am still having fun watching them.

by islandbruin on Feb 13, 2009 6:18 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Both posts are accurate and I'm relieved to read some that aren't entirely focusing on the blown call

Right. Hard to rebound when they are shooting 60. If they shoot 50 (still too high) the rebounding would have been equal and we win.

Offensive possesion with the one point lead and under two minutes was atrocious. No way for a championship caliber team to play with under two minutes in a tightly contested game. We seemed content with our one point “cushion”. It wasnt all JS. He just happened to have it in the last 5 seconds.

Right. Roll buried the big 3 at half that should have provided the needed spark. DC should have penetrated and kicked it out. He made little to no effort to do so. Roll was on last night. Would have loved to see him get a few more looks. I also noticed him on Pendergraph but I think that was just normal off ball screen switching. Usually when DG was in for PAA.

No doubt there was a horrendous call that impacted the game at the end. It sucks to feel that. Now we know what Texas A&M felt like and at least ours wasnt a tourney game. We have the opportunity to rise out of this and exact some revenge on UW and hopefully ASU at Staples. Maybe even shove it on SUC one more time for a three peat. But first lets put the hammer down on the standard and help keep them off the bubble. They have a long run in the NCAA tourney and its time to start their new run of consecutive NITs.

by popopapa on Feb 13, 2009 6:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Focus

JS running into the guy and almost missing a fast-break dunk really disappointed me. He has been so smooth and calm over the last few games. He was clearly frustrated and his reactions did not help the cause.

They kept showing statistics how we had forced significantly more turnovers yet it did not seem like we were getting a lot of baskets off of them like we have in the past two weeks.

by EdtheBruin on Feb 13, 2009 6:38 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

subs

It was a bit dissapointing to see that towards the end of the game, we went back to the first ASU matchup where the same guys were on the floor all game. When Lee, Gordon, and Anderson were in the game towards teh end of the first half, we played some killer defense that lead to us tying the game at the half. I know CBH doesn’t like putting the freshmen in big spots immediately, but I would certainly have liked to see these guys get some play time, if nothing else, to give starters more rest time.

I figure, better now than in the tournament

by blinkshot on Feb 13, 2009 6:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

agreed

The subs, including MR, brought an energy to the floor that the starters couldn’t seem to muster—with the exception of JS early and PAA in the second half. (I forgive him that mistake at the end—it was a reflex play, and he couldn’t really help himself.) The Devils couldn’t figure out what to do with ML, who penetrated with ease.

by Herodotus on Feb 13, 2009 8:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Nestor. Good work.

Nothing else to say, I agree.

I agree the Collison charge should have been a block. But, it was bang bang, and sometimes you don’t get the call. Besides, we all recall the Collison play against Stanford last year—in that game Collison got blocked in my opinion, but we got the call. This game wasn’t about the refs, this was about our limitations—even though we’re still a really good team.

by rfirpo on Feb 13, 2009 7:06 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

disagree about the call in the Stanford game last year.

replays show that Lawrence Hill blocked the ball, but had full lower body contact. That is a foul pure and simple. They called the same thing at the other end of the floor just prior to that when Hill went up for a shot. Everybody forgets that. The SPTR’s were actually consistent for a moment that day.

by popopapa on Feb 13, 2009 10:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

yup

i really liked the enrgy the subs came with at the end of the first half and was wondering where they went. in particular jerime and m. lee. although jh didn’t have a good game, he wasn’t getting the ball which reflects a failure on the team as a whole. one thing to criticize jh about though, i don’t like it when he starts a game shooting a three. he rarely makes it and i think he’d be better off taking to the rack and get some flow going. aside from the point ive made in prior posts about getting the cutters, jh was making so nice passes for easy shots off the baseline and we totally went away from that too. sometimes i feel the players insist the on making the game difficult for themselves

Across The Face

by rb bruin on Feb 13, 2009 12:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

JH lack of effort on at least one play

I remember being very disappointed with JH’s defensive effort in one play last night. He tried to take a charge but no call was made. ASU missed the shot and there was a battle for the rebound. JH seemed dejected about the no-call and slow to get up…but even by the time he got up there was another missed shot or they were still battling for the ball (can’t remember which). He just stood there motionless under the basket and made no attempt at all the rebound.

by gradstudentbruin on Feb 13, 2009 2:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

proof?

i think you’re assuming a lot in your comment. maybe he was slow to get up because getting run into hurts, you can’t just say it was a lack of effort. the fact that he was slow to get up doesn’t automatically show he wasn’t trying out there, c’mon now

Across The Face

by rb bruin on Feb 13, 2009 2:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, that occurred to me. The fall could have hurt. But he snapped into action on the offensive end as soon as the rebound was secured, without any apparent trouble. I don’t have proof but in my mind it was very likely a lack of hustle issue.

by gradstudentbruin on Feb 13, 2009 2:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Old issues re-emerge when it's not a 20 pt blow-out

Old stuff hurts:
- Not a strong rebounding team (lost boards 18-24); AA had only 2 rebs.
- Just average overall team speed led to slow rotations against a team that really passes well and spaces the floor well.
- You have to take the good & bad with Josh: drives to nowhere attacking the lane; dumb plays like losing track of the clock & tech foul bumping the ASU guy (cost us 2 pts and possession) & fouling 3 pt shooter (cost us 3 points).
- Jrue was over-hyped. He’s good, but scores ZERO in such a big game. IMHO, he also committed a killer turnover when we had built our best lead of 4 pts, had a defensive stop and were ready to go up by 6/7 when Jrue is stripped while doing some fancy dribbling 35 ft away from the basket, they go down and nail a 3. 1pt game again!
- Darren still has trouble seeing the court well in 1/2 court offense. He blatantly missed feeding Alfred when Alfred had a shrimp (Abbott?) guarding him because of a switch. Alfred was calling for the pass right in front of Darren.
- Ben hasn’t figured out how to beat good zones (like Beilein and Sendak). Our offensive execution basically stunk all game. If it weren’t for causing turnovers, the game would not have been close.
- Ben doesn’t trust Freshmen. In 2nd half, few minutes to Jerime & ML, despite their good play earlier and DESPITE Darren being under the weather.
- Fans like me were expecting too much this year. We replaced Love, Westbrook and Luc (not to mention Lorenzo) with two part-time starters and a freshman.
——————
- Blow out wins at home against teams that either play poor defense or are a collection of head cases (u$c) was “fools gold” to us!
- Props to Mike Roll: Nice 3’s (that’s the norm for him), nice pickpocket steal on Harden; nice drive to the basket for the “and one”.
- BIG PROPS to Darren Collison who showed great heart last night. Could have been a hero except the ref’s robbed him (but did you notice the BIG HOOK that Darren put on the guy defending him? He never does that; I chalk it up to him being gassed and not confident he could make his normal quick move to beat the guy.
- Lots of hoops left to play. I saw no reason not to still be excited by Jerime, Drew, Malcolm, the much improved play of Roll and Drago, I’m still a bit mystified by Darren’s 3pt shot. He seems very reluctant to shoot it. Alfred is a warrior. Josh will be Josh; I did like his “attitude” tonight. He was the one guy who looked really pissed at what was going down in the first half. Hit some big shots and played hard.

by mplsbruin on Feb 13, 2009 7:35 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

"fools gold"

your comment that is.

Typical over-reaction post about how Howland hasn’t figured out how to beat zone.

“Ben” (are you his friend calling him by first name? Does anyone here call Wooden John? Who are you?) “doesn’t trust freshman”? Do you realize how many mins AA, JF and LRMAM played in their freshman year? What a ridiculous comment.

Lot of good responds so far in this thread. But this is garbage.

by Nestor on Feb 13, 2009 7:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Could we "respectfully disagree"?

This is the problem with digital communication. I totally respect Ben Howland. And lot’s of people will refer to him that way (as "Ben") ‘electronically" with NO disrespect. I would never call him that to his face – it’s just quicker and easier to type. He’s a relatively young guy (I’m 15 years older than Coach Howland), so that might be why I slip into the first name. And no, I don’t even write “John” when referring to Coach Wooden. And my observation is that none of the beat writers who call Coach Howland “Ben” to his face, NEVER call Coach Wooden “John”.
Ok, maybe Coach Howland really does trust these freshmen more than I think, but I didn’t see evidence of that in the second half. As for playing Shipp, Afflalo and Farmar as freshmen, that was a completely different situation. Those guys were all clearly better than any other option avaiable to him.
I totally love your write-ups and Bruin Nation is one of my “go to” Bruin websites. But I disagree that I posted garbage. Do we really believe we have solved the ASU zones? Do we think we are a strong rebounding team, esp compared to last year?
Did you not read the positive takes in my post?
I post fairly frequently on several boards, but this is the first time any post of mine has been called garbage. Perhaps it was garbage. Perhaps it was because last night was a really tough loss for both of us to take!

by mplsbruin on Feb 13, 2009 9:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Your post was not well thought

You conceded above that you made the assertion about Howland not trusting his freshmen based on second half of yesterday’s game. That is little ridiculous given the data points we have on Howland from last 5+ years in Westwood. That is a garbage assertion which might work on other boards but not here on BN.

Also, yes UCLA did have a rough time with ASU’s zone (btw it was a matchup-zone not a pure zone … hope you know the difference) at times … last night and in previous game. Yet we shot the ball fairly well. And if we had converted on the easy TO opportunities, it wouldn’t have mattered as much. Plus we shot pretty well against them last night. So it’s ridiculous to assert Howland hasn’t figured out how to deal with ASU’s zone. That’s a take (a garbage one) not based on facts.

by Nestor on Feb 13, 2009 9:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ok, we disagree on what happened with our attacking ASU’s zone.
I still would have like to have seen some more minutes from Jerime spelling Darren a little in the second half. Although the game was very close, Jerime’s D in the first half was very good, He seemed to be all over their pgs without fouling or over-committing.

by mplsbruin on Feb 13, 2009 9:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Let me get in on this

I agree somewhat with mplsbruin that Ben (and I call him that when I talk to him) doesn’t trust freshmen – and that is coming from a position of power. Look how all the upper classmen improve in this program. Why would you put a freshman in when you’ve got someone who has committed himself to the program for 2 or 3 years to choose from.

As good as these freshmen are going to be in the next couple of years, they’re not great now. If I was the coach (and I’m not), I’d want DC on the floor – not JA. In crunch time, I’d take PAA, ND, or JK over DG and JS over ML.

And last night, I would have played MR over JH near the end of the game.

Nestor – keep up the good work by the way.

by mizzou on Feb 13, 2009 10:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Huh?

You agree with him that “Ben doesn’t trust freshmen” yet than you later point out how you “would have played MR over JH”

So Ben in fact trusted a freshmen over junior? Did you realize how you contradicted yourself?

Also, you can call Howland whatever you want … but knock off that “Ben” nonsense here. Thanks.

by Nestor on Feb 13, 2009 11:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Contradiction

I hedged my comment in my first post by saying I agree somewhat that CBH (as is normal to this site) doesn’t trust freshment – no absolute there.

Yes – he trusted the “best and outstanding” freshman but none of the others.

My point was that he generally trusts his program. He grows his players from raw recruit to NBA draft pick. Of course, there are exceptions such as JH this year and KL last year.

A good example is RW two years ago.

by mizzou on Feb 13, 2009 11:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I believe that the problem wasn’t our offense. We looked inside more and tried to drive more. Sure, Darren doesn’t have the best court-vision, but he was still running the offense today decently. The main problem was our defense. Like the main post said, we were slow rotating and we left them too many wide open looks. We didn’t box out particularly well either. I remember when play on a free throw attempt where ASU got the ball back, and then made the basket. That was frustrating.

by chenalex on Feb 13, 2009 10:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

A Couple of Things

When JH misses shots early, he stops shooting. He made two great moves to the basket but missed both close in shots. From then on, he really didn’t try to score inside.

We are really weak, on D, at the 4. Yes, Drago has improved, but still, he’s very slow to get out on the rotation and a lot of the wide open 3’s were on him.

Drago is giving us tremendous effort and scoring.

But, there are times when we really need D that I’d like to see DG at the 4. I think we don’t do this because we need DG to back up PAA — since JM isn’t ready BUT, DG might be able to do both — if he stays out of foul trouble. JK has disappeared and that’s too bad. He has so much potential and I would love to see him have a great year.

JA is playing extremely well and ML is coming on strong. It might make sense to give them more second half minutes — especially in games like last night’s where they played extremely well and helped pull us back in the game.

You really can’t fault JS for that bad possession. All season we have stood around and then been forced to take desperate last second shots. The ball just happened to be in JS’s hands.

We gave up driving the baseline — which had been very productive, for outside shots. I don’t get it.

All of that said:

I DON’T CARE WHAT SEED WE GET. Sorry to shout, but I find all the seed analysis to be both premature and not meaningful. Eventually, if you are to move forward in the tournament, you have to beat the best teams in the bracket. If you play them earlier rather than later, we still have to play them.

It would be nice to win every game but that is unrealistic and somewhat unimportant. So, we lost a game. Move on.

What really matters is that we learn from our mistakes and get better. That our inexperienced players get more experience and that our seniors play like seniors.

I love this team and am enjoying the season.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Feb 13, 2009 7:57 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Seeding

Absolutely right on the seeding argument. We have control over the games that we play, and we can get a very good seed if we go on a run and do very well for the rest of the season including PAC10 Tourney. If we struggle, then we leave the decision in the hands of others. If we play great basketball, then there is nothing to worry about.

by EdtheBruin on Feb 13, 2009 8:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

DC's charging/blocking foul

I agree with everyone that the call on DC was atrocious but looking at the video of it, DC absolutely hooked his defensive man out front to get by him…there was no call there….regardless, we have to play through SPTR, man up and bounce back with a strong win Saturday morning….

GO BRUINS!!!!!!

by Bruins44 on Feb 13, 2009 8:01 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Two wrongs dont make a right

Even if we were to evaluate those two plays in a vacuum and ignore all of the other terrible calls, all that means is that the SPTR blew 2 calls instead of 1. If the ref thought that he should have called a hook but didn’t, then that moment of the game is over and you have to judge the next moment of the game (the charge/block) on its own merits. By saying “Well he should have had a hook before it” is something that terrible referees use to justify their first failure and straying from the rulebook. Simply unacceptable.

by bruinponcho on Feb 13, 2009 8:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Trade 1 Hook for a Game Full of Forearm Shivers

I said what I wanted to say about the SPTR’s last night.

My basic theory: Any team in the Pac 10 that leaves a game close until the last minutes runs the risk of the SPTR’s deciding it instead of the players.

We need to build leads and stay so far ahead that their calls have no impact.

But, if DC hooked once, and got away with it, Harden used his forearm push on almost every drive and was never called for it.

SPTR’s are what they are — but our weak D hurt us more than they did.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Feb 13, 2009 8:06 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

LOL Exactly

I’m just going to laugh at anyone that talks about anyone on our team getting away with using an off arm after Harden was delivering stiff arms all game long.

As for weak D, I do believe more specifics are needed. Parts of it were quite good. Extending ball pressure beyond the 3 pt line largely neutralized their shooting percentage by turning them over way more than they’re used to. Unfortunately we couldn’t capitalize on a lot of our break opportunities and that’s on us. Rotation and recovery were terrible, and that’s the area I’d single out as the weak point of the D last night. As well as ND has been doing in man defense lately, he is still the weakest help defender out there, and I noticed it was either him that was running out at the shooter right before they made a 3 or running out at the guy that makes the extra pass to said shooter.

I have to admit to getting irritated though with the “just play better” argument. It seems that we’re willing to sit back and accept that on certain nights, one team has to not only be better to pull out a win but MUCH better. I mean, to me that’s not much different than “hey, if we made 100% of our shots, we would have won”. There was another team on the court, and they played well too. There were some people in the thread last night that treated the game like we were the only ones on the court. It might be hard for some people to accept but not everything is in our control.

I guess what upset me most about what went down last night was that all the complaints from the previous games we lost, which essentially boiled down to us “not making plays” or “not being aggressive” or something else equally vague wasn’t really the case this time. That DC drive WAS us “making a play”. At the point of contact, there were three options:
1) Blocking foul on Pendergraph – By the book the correct call, And-1 for Collison
2) No Call – “End of game” correct. Let the players decide the game. Tie game and ASU ball.
3) Charging foul on Collison – Dead. Fucking. Wrong.

It’s not like I don’t understand the mentality of us concentrating on the things that are under our control, but with the SPTR literally getting worse every year, I’m hopeful that the new commish, whoever that is, makes overhauling our officiating crews a TOP priority. ESPN barely pays attention to the Pac 10, but even they and the national media know that our officials are a joke. That’s how you know we have a problem. Maybe us talking about it won’t help solve the problem, but I know that not talking about it won’t help solve it either. Why avoid the elephant in the room?

Then there was the second to last offensive possession which I think N wrongly blames Shipp for. Plenty of other guys touched the ball on that possession and didn’t do much with it. Shipp was just the guy left holding it at the end. Aboya’s technical foul? Well, there’s no defense for that. That play just wasn’t a very good idea.

by Tydides on Feb 13, 2009 8:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

the problem with option 2

is that essentially that would be the refs deciding the game. They have to make the correct call, no matter what. Pendergraph made the decision to step and and try and draw the charge – which by all accounts a good play. Obviously he got there late and it should’ve been a block. So while it would’ve been “even” to not make a call, IMO that would be worse officiating that calling a charge. When there’s contact like that, where the defensive player is trying to draw a foul, then one has to be called one way or another.

by bucknellbruin on Feb 13, 2009 8:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

In principle we're in complete agreement

I’d love for fouls to be called the same in the paint as they are outside of it. I’d love for the time of the game to not matter. I’d love for “make up calls” to be a thing of the past. Those are my three huge pet peeves about officiating basketball in general (mostly from watching NBA games). But these things do matter, and this isn’t specifically a SPTR problem because all conferences and NBA refs have the same problem.

I listed it there because option 2 is more justifiable than option 3. Option 1 is obviously justified. It was correct. A ref that chooses option 2 is still wrong, but he can always hide behind the unwritten rule where the end of the game is a whistle free zone (how stupid does that sound BTW?), and because almost all refs are guilty of this one, it would generally be accepted by most people as well as the talking heads on ESPN presumably. There is no justification for option 3. It is an F up. Pure and simple.

by Tydides on Feb 13, 2009 9:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah i'm changing my mind on that

you’re right Ty. Option 2 isn’t right, but 3 is just flat wrong. I guess I didn’t think of it that way. Better to make no call than the wrong one.

Also, Tele has a good point about the fact that DC made the bucket. No harm no foul, I guess, and no harm would’ve been done to either team with a no call

by bucknellbruin on Feb 13, 2009 12:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

For option #2 the ref could hide behind the

“advantage gained” concept. DC made the basket so the contact could be ruled “incidental.” But of course the SPTRs are inconsistent with that – like the no-call when Harden slammed into PAA as he dished off to Pendergraph a few play before. That was clearly advantage gained as PPA was knocked out of the play and Pendergraph had an easy slam dunk.

by Telemachus on Feb 13, 2009 9:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

option 2 not so bad

considering they had been swallowing their whistles on charges all game. plenty of contact down below on multiple plays in favor of asu. it was obviously a block so it shouldve been an “and one”. i think what the poster means is option 2 would’ve not been the correct call, but at least understandable/quasi-rational. but that was just a blown call

Across The Face

by rb bruin on Feb 13, 2009 12:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

JS

You guys are probably write about putting too much blame on JS re. that possession. I guess I got too irritated from reading that quote early this morning. It wasn’t just JS. Everyone except DC was treating the ball like a hot potato during that possession. I guess it was his comment that bugged me especially him being a senior.

I am definitely not one of JS haters. I love the kid. He is a great kid who has done everything Howland asks for him. He plays tough. Sure he has lapses on defense every now and then, and sometimes he gets out of offensive rhythm, but on balance he has been awesome.

by Nestor on Feb 13, 2009 9:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

we must've had 2 or 3 open looks

on that possession. IIRC Drago had one, JH had one, and DC had one. All 3 passed it up. That was a total team screw-up…

by bucknellbruin on Feb 13, 2009 12:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Shipp's Comment

He may have chosen to take the blame himself rather than throw it onto somebody else. That’s part of being a leader.

by snorkeldorf on Feb 13, 2009 2:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

collected some thoughts

… while I was driving to work today:

-Defensive rotations. We planned from the beginning to double team Harden, but we were slow – very slow – to get to the open man when he passed it off to Pendergraph or someone on the wing for open 3’s. ND was a bit slow to get to a lot of these 3’s, but in general it was a poor effort on all sides on that.
-We stopped attacking the rim sometime late in the 1st half. Shipp was doing really well driving the baseline early and JH had a few drives too, but missed and seemed to get frustrated. In general, it felt like once we got frustrated, things stopped clicking
-Our freshmen played big in getting us back to even at halftime. At one point we had 4 freshmen on the floor I believe. I would love to see them get more minutes to give starters rest and, perhaps more importantly, get some expereince in. I know that it was a close game we wanted to win big, but i’d rather take my losses in the regular season than the tournament. And besides, if nothing else, they have a few fouls to give.

by blinkshot on Feb 13, 2009 8:23 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

forgot to add

But I heard ESPN College Basketball Final called out the Pac-10 refs. Good, hopefully the more exposure there is, the refs get held accountable for their piss poor reffing. And I’m not talking about last night in particular, but it’s been atrocious in general throughout the season for many seasons now.

by blinkshot on Feb 13, 2009 8:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Just out of curiosity, what did ESPN say about the PAC-10 refs?

by chenalex on Feb 13, 2009 10:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

On the DC call specifically ....

Len Elmore made no bones about it not being a charge, although he did point out the hook beforehand, as well. I don’t recall any remarks about the officiating in general, but my guess is that the game announcers are probably well instructed just not to go there.

by snorkeldorf on Feb 13, 2009 2:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

From the embedded video on ESPN website

here’s the page with the video.

greg in denver - UCLA guy for life

by gbruin on Feb 13, 2009 3:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Amazing Not One Comment on Aboya Getting Flattened on the Play Before

This isn’t football — you cannot block and knock down a defender.

It was a blatant, uncalled foul — and no one commented on it — either during the game or in the after game commentary.

IIRC — there was a time out after that play and Howland went straight after the ref’s — something he very rarely does.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Feb 13, 2009 3:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Officiating

rarely decides a game, though calls in the last minute may seem to. But usually it is what has gone before that is truly decisive. We failed repeatedly to build on a 3 or 4 oint lead, so we had no margin for anybody’s error—ours or the officials. We just weren’t sharp in our help rotations, and their open shooters hit a remarkable percentage. Reminded me of one of the Florida games. Also, we didn’t rebound with even average efficiency. Why? Have we forgotten how to play basketball in one game? Is Howland really just a fraud, completely bamboozled by a zone defense? No. The Bruins are just young men who will perform inconsistently from time to time. JH probably had the worst game of his life. But I am sure we will bounce back, as we have before.

by ReineSeite on Feb 13, 2009 8:38 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Oops

I mean a 3 or 4 Point lead.

by ReineSeite on Feb 13, 2009 8:39 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

UCLA's dominance

First off, got to give some credit to asu. They have good athletes, but I think Sendak has had his team prepared to play us (in fact the entire PAC-10 looks for ways to knock the Bruins off, it is highlight of their season).

I want to go back to the ND game, teams were letting Harangody get his points and they were guarding their perimeter shooters. ND went on a six game slide. CBH decided to harass, double team Harangody, and not let McLarney (sp?) go off on the perimeter. We dared the other guys to beat us.

I guess our defensive game plan was to collapse on Harden and dare them to beat us on the perimeter, plus causing turnovers means that we have to gamble at times, which puts us in bad defensive balance.

I think asu was ready for this, in hindsight, I wonder if we gave Harden different looks at times-JS, JH, ML guarding him and stayed with their perimeter guys. The great thing about CBH is that he plans correctly 99.9% of the time, but when teams are hitting their shots, you have to give them kudos.

Let’s be relentlessly optimistic for the rest of the season!

by UCLA Championships Made Here on Feb 13, 2009 8:47 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

good thought

ASU is built a lot like Notre Dame, but they have Harden as their Harongody, play a slow down tempo, and are actually good defense. Doubling Harongody worked because ND plays no defense and are worse at ball handling, so it was easy to recover on the times they made 3’s. In a slower paced game with fewer turnovers, giving up 3’s hurts a lot as you have fewer possessions to recover the extra point. Doubling Harden, who has much better passing abilities than Gody, meant a lot of open 3’s and weak side shots for Pendergraph

And I can’t argue with that teams seem to be always ready to beat us

by blinkshot on Feb 13, 2009 8:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

One thing that's been bugging me

I saw this last night, but I’ve been thinking about it in other games. Seems like our shooters don’t take advantage when they get their defender in the air. In one particular play down the stretch last night, with the shot clock winding down, JS faked and got his defender in the air. Instead of going up to draw contact, he kicked it to JH a couple of feet from the top of the key for a desperation three. I seem to recall seeing that a lot (not just JS) in other games, wondering why our players seem to avoid the faked out player. Any one else notice this?

by Telemachus on Feb 13, 2009 9:12 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

i noticed that as well

but early in the game, i think it was Shipp who did the same thing and then drove baseline for points in the paint

it was definitely frustratin to see the defender commit but we’d just pass it out

by blinkshot on Feb 13, 2009 9:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

yup, you're right

clearly, if getting the defender up in the air allows one to blow by to the hoop, go for it. But it seems there have be times (especially against tough zones) where we don’t draw the foul and yet there’s nowhere to go – again, like where JS kicked it out to JH far from the hoop.

by Telemachus on Feb 13, 2009 9:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Reasons for Concern

I’m confident the Bruins will win the Pac-10, which will would be a great accomplishment. They are talented enough to make a run at the Final Four. But I’m concerned about their seeding for the tournament. The reality is the Bruins have not beaten a good team this season and that will reflect in their seeding. What’s worst is that they might get shipped out of the West region.
As for the game, I was more disappointed in the Bruins sloppy play in the final minutes when they had a lead. JH’s turnover and the clock violation were inexcusable mistakes and very uncustomary for Howland coached teams. When the Bruins had a chance to seize the game, they failed to step up.
It’s easy to point the figure at Holiday but he was simply overmatched by Harden. Holiday is not another Westbrook, at least not yet. In this game at least, the Bruins were better on both ends of the court with JH on the bench.
I don’t fault the strategy to double Harden; the execution was poor. Instead of forcing Harden to give up the ball, he repeatedly beat the double and then found an open teammate when the Bruins scrambled to recover.

richramus

by richramus on Feb 13, 2009 9:14 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Holiday / Harden

Westbrook was a turnover prone freshman, who wasn’t trusted in a lot of spots, then became the #4 pick 1 year later. In a lot of respects, Holiday has done better as a FR than Westbrook, but again, he’s still a FR. If he stays one more year, his game will undoubtedly be taken to the next level.

The jump from freshman to sophomore is probably the largest in college – look at Harden. While he certainly could have been a lottery pick last year, he took it to another level this year. As far as our plan to guard Harden… the execution wasn’t great, but at the same time, in a game they wanted to slow down, getting burned on 3’s hurts a lot more because there are fewer possessions to recover. Questionable shoulders and stiff arms aside, Harden reminds me a lot as an equivalent of Love at the guard position: will not wow you athletically, but he is extremely strong for his position, great passing ability, and plays fundamental.

I hope we meet these guys in the tournament again and prove that we can beat em.

by blinkshot on Feb 13, 2009 9:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Westbrook wasn't Westbrook his freshman year either

He had the raw skills: the quick feet, lateral movement, anticipation, good hands. Those gifts got him into trouble though when he’d overcommit and let his man into the lane. It was only in his sophomore year that his mind caught up with his body defensively. He realized he could play slightly farther off and still be as effective pressuring the ball and getting in passing lanes. I’m still not counting on Holiday coming back, but if he does, he could be an absolute terror at this level. Just something for him to think about.

by Tydides on Feb 13, 2009 9:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

but I think part of what he meant is that...

…. some of us were hoping that Jrue as a Fr would replace Westy as a Soph. Look at the other names of Gatorade HS POY: Durant, Love, etc., a list of “one and done” players. Well, that made for very high expectations. But even as a Soph, Westy had a few bad games offensively. Even in the NBA, he’s not shooting a very good percentage. Maybe Jrue’s comparative play to Westbrook as a soph is better than we think. Jrue will be fine, and next year – look out!

by mplsbruin on Feb 13, 2009 10:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not knocking Holiday

I agree it’s a bit like apples to oranges comparing Westbrook as a soph. to Holiday this year. Westbook was stronger and more athletic as a soph. compared to the freshman version of Holiday. That much is not in doubt. My point is that Holiday was overmatched by Harden last Thursday. In hindsight, he did an admirable job guarding a bigger, stronger player. The matchup magnifies the Bruins lack of big, athletic wing players. A weakness that will be address starting next season with the likes of Honeycutt and Moser coming on board.
I too hope Holiday comes back next season and I believe he would benefit greatly from another year in school. But the 2010 draft looks quite weak, making it an almost sure thing Holiday will be a top 10 pick.

richramus

by richramus on Feb 18, 2009 11:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Just for kicks...

…I quickly calculated the points per posession of last night’s game, from Pomeroy’s stats. This tends to provide more depth to how our defense (or offense) performed than something like FG% or other stats – though in this case, I think allowing 60% FG allowed is pretty obviously not good defense without having to do much analysis. Nevertheless:

UCLA PPP: 1.10 (Last game against ASU: 1.05)
ASU PPP: 1.21 (Last game: 1.11)

In conference before this game, UCLA PPP was at about 1.16 so ASU’s zone bugged us a bit more than usual, especially during certain stretches. Now the 1.22 is ridiculously high and 0.22 (~22%) higher than our in-conference average. What’s telling is that we were terrible on defense, below-average on offense yet we were a couple of terrible ref calls (or just one obvious one) away from winning. It really boils down to defense though – if we play like we’re capable of playing (and the other team isn’t insanely hot from the floor), then we can survive a slight offensive letdown or ridiculous refs.

One more thing – and apologize for the long post. I asked about this last night but I’m still curious. Why are the SPTRs so bad? Do they not have adequate training? What do other conferences do different with their refs that the Pac-10 does not? What can be done when the matter is addressed?

by zinlinez on Feb 13, 2009 9:41 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

i think these refs

are contracted out and are brought in, so they aren’t actual refs dedicated just to the pac-10, but don’t quote me on that

Those 3’s certainly increased ASU’s PPP but it’s still atrocious to give up 1.21 PPP – a clear sign our defense was just bad. Our offense did decrease a bit but it wasn’t as bad as everyone makes it (whereas the previous game, we were definitely much worse than what we did all season).

by blinkshot on Feb 13, 2009 9:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That was certainly the case for the game vs. Notre Dame ...

I don’t know about league games.

by snorkeldorf on Feb 13, 2009 2:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Regarding the referees, I mean.

by snorkeldorf on Feb 13, 2009 2:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Link to Referee Bios for the game ...

http://statsheet.com/mcb/games/2009/02/12/2009-02-12_ucla_vs_arizona-state

Scroll to the bottom. Select a referee’s name, then select the conferences tab to see all the conferences that referee works in.

Based on this, we may want to rethink the SPTR moniker and change it to SWCR for Stupid Western Conferences Referees. It looks like all of these guys work in all the major conferences west of the Rocky Mountains with some concentrating more on the PAC-10 conference, some more on the WAC, and some more on the Mountain West, etc.

by snorkeldorf on Feb 13, 2009 3:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

some parity

is showing up in the Pac 10. Teams like ASU would have folded in past years when the Bruins took a lead. Lets credit some good coaching from Sendak, Montgomery, Romar and Bennett (perhaps Robinson at OSU too, though it is still early). Bruins actually played great ball, and forced all those turnovers, but were still outplayed by ASU. One game at a time, we still control our own destiny. And yes, this is a fun team to watch and root our hearts out. (can’t help looking ahead to the Wash game at Pauley – I know, Ariz is up first).

by Vanman7475 on Feb 13, 2009 10:33 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

the pac-10

Teams aren’t as great as last year, but aren’t as bad as last year either (except maybe Oregon). It’s parity indeed.

by blinkshot on Feb 13, 2009 10:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Lack of composure and execution

Not sure why but it hits me that when it is crunch time, the Bruins are not as composed as they have been in past years (key guys gone to the draft?), and the game would have been over in our favor if the following happened:
1. The steals and slam dunks or easy baskets had been made.
2. JS controlled himself on the obvious foul and then was able to execute the several times he drove the lane and either lost the ball or his balance, and then lost the ball.
3. We hadn’t gotten unlucky at the end with the Aboya technical, etc.
Forget the DC incorrect foul. Let that happen with the above corrected, and we win going away.
Bill

BillSouthBay

by Mensgym on Feb 13, 2009 10:55 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Latest Bracketology has us still as a #4 seed

we went from the best #4 seed Monday to the last #4 seed today. If we’re the 4th seed in the west, I’m plenty happy.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bracketology

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 13, 2009 1:23 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

not sure if that takes last night into account

Our record is 19-5, and Lunardi has us at 19-4. So either he made a mistake, or last night’s games weren’t factored in

by bucknellbruin on Feb 13, 2009 1:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It takes last night into account

They didn’t update the numbers, but if you click UCLA and read his comments, Lunardi mentions two losses to ASU.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 13, 2009 3:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

ok then

that’s not bad at all – meaning the 4 seed

by bucknellbruin on Feb 13, 2009 3:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That sounds about right.

But, more importantly my mind, Our Kenpom rating did not drop at all, he still has us as #6. (ie the 6th best team in the country, not a #6 seed!). If we do eventually wind up with a 4 seed, we are gonna be one of those scary 4 seeds that the #1’s really don’t want to face in round 3.

If we win out from here, our record will be 29-5, and I expect we would get a #2 seed. There is a decent chance of this happening, our only 2 really hard games left on the schedule are this Sat @ AU, and then the bay area road trip (I dont expect as much trouble when we face UW at home next week).

As painful as last night was, I am sure our team is a better team this morning for having gone through it. I am still really up on this team, it has been great watching them get better from week to week, and I see no reason why they wont continue to improve right up till tourney time.

by haster123 on Feb 13, 2009 4:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

cbh vs. the zone

i think this is a non-issue. our problems with zone d’s/match-up zones is not a coaching thing, it’s an execution thing. the players are not making the necessary passes to the center of the zone, cutters, or baseline which enables a successful offensive result against a zone. cbh can’t make the passes for the players, they’re the ones that need to read, recognize, and respond. it’s not that his offensive system can’t handle this style of D. nothing some film sessions can’t handle

Across The Face

by rb bruin on Feb 13, 2009 2:27 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Our offense and defense

I think our offense was okay last night. It was the defense that struggled to make the stops, especially in the second half. Our defense fuels a good chunk of the offense; the comeback late in the first half occurred when the Bruins caused turnovers.

I have to say that asu seemed to be confident offensively late in the game. Ben Ball Warriors usually disrupts other team’s offense and make them tentative.

The D really needs to be there against the next 2 team’s with offensive firepower, UofA, and UW.

Relentlessly optimistic!

by UCLA Championships Made Here on Feb 13, 2009 3:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Agree

our offense was fine (unlike the ASU game at Pauley). All the stat freaks have already shown that this was a good game offensively (FG , 3 pt %, PPP, etc.). Our defense could not stop the SunDs in crunch time, and they continued to shoot lights out. How many teams lose when they shoot over 60 from both 2 pt and 3 pt range? UofA and UW both have firepower, but have not shown the discipline of ASU.

by Vanman7475 on Feb 13, 2009 4:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

I don’t understand comments from people that Howland cannot figure out the zone. His offensive schemes are based on spacing and execution that leads to a high percentage shot. The problem occurs when the players are not executing it correctly. Early on the concern was a lack of post play. Aboya has now played well offensively in the post, being aggressive when he gets the ball and getting high percentage shots most of the time. The problem is when other players are not aggressively looking to shoot. Last year, outside of Darren Collison, Russell Westbrook was the one who would aggressively attack the basket if the offense bogged down at the guard position. This year, Jrue Holiday has deferred more to the upperclassmen and not been as aggressive attacking the basket consistently. When players are too passive against the zone, the defense pretty much is getting a rest. What’s even more frustrating is the zone allows a lot of offensive rebound opportunities, but this year’s Bruin team isn’t rebound as well as in the past because they’re smaller and not aggressively going after offensive rebounds. Instead they go back on defense after a miss. The players need to find a balance.

by UCLA4Life on Feb 13, 2009 4:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I Enjoyed All the Comments, But

we need to clean up some of the four letter words on your open thread. I was sad to see us losing and I was frustrated to see the unjusticed calls, but we need to maintain our social value. Don’t forget we have a lot of lady and young Bruin fans. Trust me, I know exactly how every Bruin fan felt about the game. Go Bruins.

by NNL on Feb 13, 2009 5:15 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

With All Due Respect NNL

the words are either inappropriate or they are not — without regard to the gender of those participating in the thread. It demeans our sister Bruins (“lady” Bruins to you) to assume that they ought to be treated differently than we treat our brothers.

I write as the father of a 17 year old girl. I’d prefer she have the full experience that 17 year old boys have — not a sheltered version but the full version. And, if I feel that reading a game day thread would be damaging to her, I’d ask her not to do it — rather than censor the thread and change the nature of the dialogue. (Were Jen to read these threads, she’d laugh at your concern. As, she’s said to me many times when I slip and try to clean up my own language around her “Daddy, it’s just a word and I’ve heard it before.”)

In light of the passion involved in these games, and the contemporaneous nature of the posts, I’m neither surprised when an F Bomb gets dropped nor offended by its use.

And, to assume that all the coarse language is being used by men is flat out wrong — one of my very, very favorite Bruin sisters has dropped an appropriate phrase, every once in a while, too.

Actually, this is just my opinion — this is Nestor’s site. He can set the regulations and we can choose to follow or not participate. I, for one, hope that he leaves things the way they are because this site, and particularly the game threads are “real” and not unlike sitting in the stands amongst friends. The raw passion and honesty that flow are part of my game day experience and get this Bruin in Exile as close to a real experience as I can expect.

My thought is that those offended by the occasional coarse language might choose to not read the posts of those who use it. For those of us who are not offended, censorship would change the experience.

sjh

by Class of 66 on Feb 14, 2009 7:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Well said

by Nestor on Feb 14, 2009 9:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

This is from Dohn today

“I don’t like to complain about refs or blame them for the outcomes of games, but I thought it was a horribly officiated game Thursday. It was awful, in my opinion.”

from his Q&A today

by bucknellbruin on Feb 13, 2009 7:27 PM PST reply actions 0 recs