Looking forward to next year
Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N
Well, it’s time for the offseason, and I'm excited at our prospects next year. Sure, we should only be cautiously optimistic, and obviously, we have to get past possible NBA defections, transfers, and other issues during the offseason. Surely, I can't fault the kids for doing what they believe is best for their future. However, if we do get all our players back next year, we will be young but full of athleticism, size and length. This team will be built a lot like the 05-06 team in that we'll have a great compliment of frosh and sophomores with some seniors.
As we send our seniors off, it's also time to see what's in store for next year. So, assuming all players return, we can expect these players next year, and my analysis:
Jrue Holiday - Soph - 6'3 PG - Obviously, he has incredible potential and may still get drafted this year. However, he was pretty much a no show offensively in the Nova game. A lot of people have been heard to say that he's going to be a top 5 pick if he returns for another year to polish his game. If he comes back, I expect him to play at the PG position all year. When he has ran the point, he has definitely shown flashes of brilliance, especially in his passing game. I love DC as much as the next guy, but Jrue is definitely on another level in play making and court vision. He's also got size and strength at his position.
Malcolm Lee - Soph - 6'5 SG/SF - He's played out of control at times this year, but he's obviously got immense upside and potential. Already considered one of the best defenders on the team, he's definitely a size and length mismatch against most players in the NCAA. We didn't get to see a lot out of him this year, and he's played out of control a lot of times, but a offseason of practice, weights, and experience will probably see him start at the 2 next year. LIttle known fact is that in high school, he played center for his team but he has the handles of a combo guard. Also had NBA range 3 point ability since high school, although he didn’t attempt too many this year.
Nikola Dragovic - Senior - 6'9 SF/PF - We all saw his development this year. A lethal 3 point shooter when his feet are set, he's improved his mid-range game over the year and rapidly improved his post game towards the end of the season. Obviously, not a great defender, but he does have size and bulk to match up against most players on offense - he's just been slow on rotations defensively. A full year as a starter with an entire offseason of pratice and conditioning, assuming he returns, and he might be our most complete player at the 3/4 combo next year - he's shown good court vision, passing ability, can handle the ball, and obviously has a good jump shot.
Drew Gordon – Soph – 6’8 PF/C – The heir apparent to Aboya. Great rebounder, extremely energetic and active around the post. Very limited in post offense skills, but lots of room for improvement and potential. His length also makes him a good shot blocker. He definitely needs to cut down on the fouls, as he’s a little too aggressive at times and needs to lay back and let the game come to him. When he gets more used to the defensive system, and gets to be a better hedger, I think he’s got great potential to be our enforcer down low.
J’Mison Morgan – Soph – 6’10 C – I’m hoping to see Bobo get in better shape and into the system for next year. He’s got obvious bulk and size, and can really clog the lane and prevent dribble penetration. He’s shown flashes of post brilliance this year, in the limited amount of time he’s got. Plus, he’s sure to draw a lot of fouls from opposing players trying to stop a player his size. He’s also had an incredible amount of blocked shots given how little time he played this year, so he’s definitely got defensive upside. He’ll definitely need to work on getting out to the perimeter to hedge faster, but he’s got tremendous upside and can be the big body center we’ve been looking for.
Jerime Anderson – Soph – 6’1 PG – Yeah, he’s had some bad games at the point this year, but he’s also filled in admirably for DC most of the season. He might be listed at 6’1 only, but he definitely seems larger overall than DC, and probably has more strength as well. He needs to cut down on the turnovers, and also needs to work on his decision making, but he’s shown the ability to dribble penetrate and kick it out for open shots. He’ll definitely see more time backing up the point next year if Jrue comes back as the starting point, or he might start outright if JH leaves.
Michael Roll – RS Senior – 6’5 SG/SF – He made a huge leap and became and legit 3 point threat this year. He’ll be the last guy left from the 3 Final Four runs, and is likely to give some good minutes at the 2 and 3 next year. He’ll play his D as well next year, and will again be a solid all around player. His most valuable part though will definitely be his mentorship of the younger players with the tremendous experience he’s had.
James Keefe – Senior - 6’8 PF – Offensively, he’s still been limited and the emergence of Drago meant that Keefe has been somewhat lost in the shuffle. However, he has tremendous experience in our defensive system, and started to drain some 3’s in Pac-10 play. Hopefully, a full year as a starter at the 4 will give him that senior jump that Aboya saw. He was one of our best rebounders this year too, so he’s definitely going to be key next year with so many young kids coming in.
Now, for our new additions and from the knowledge I have of their games (I’ve only seen a few play):
Tyler Honeycutt – Listed 6’8/185 - SF - What immediately stands out is how tall he is for a SF in the college game. He’s got tremendous height and length, and was a great shot blocker in high school. He isn’t much of a 3 point shooter, but is a good finisher around the rim, and a good passer as well. He really exploded from his junior to senior year in high school, where he averaged nearly 20 ppg, 15 rpg, 4 bpg, and 4apg. Will definitely need to hit the weights coming in, and he’s a much more finesse oriented player, but he’s got a very high upside.
Brendan Lane – Listed 6’10/210 - PF – He was in the CIF Division II state championship game Friday night. He put up 27 points, 19 rebounds, and 10 blocks. He mainly played the 5 in HS, and his size and length advantage was apparent. Obviously, it was just a high school game, but he’s athletic with a solid basket-facing game already. Some people consider his game a lot like Ryan Anderson. From what I saw on Friday, his offensive motion and flow is good, possibly better than Keefe coming in already. Like all freshmen, could use a little more bulk, but listed at 6’10 and over 200, he’s already a sturdy player. Most of his game is in the inside, but he’s also got a shot to 3 point range. Averaged 21.9 ppg, 11.9 rpg, 4.7 bpg, and 1.6 apg.
Reeves Nelson – Listed 6’8/230 – PF – Highly recruited forward, very energetic and athletic. Averaged over 24 ppg in his senior year in high school, he’s got great inside game. Not much of a jump shot so far, but he’s a tenacious player inside and is a lot like Drew Gordon in that respect – plays a lot bigger than his listed size. He should be one of our new enforcers and bruisers inside. Definitely looks like he will be a force on the boards and around the rim for years to come.
Anthony Stover – Listed 6’10/215 – C – From all accounts, an extremely raw post player, but one with tremendous length, athleticism and upside. Some have said he’s a likely redshirt candidate, especially with the amount of post players we have already, but he’s got some great potential. He’s already a great shot blocker, and should be a good rebounder as well. Offensively, he needs a lot of work, but his fundamentals have improved tremendously. Some added bulk in college and he can be a defensive force.
Mike Moser – Listed 6’7/185 – Wing – By all accounts, he’s the heir apparent to Luc. He can play against the 2, 3 or 4. He’s got the length and quickness to defend all the perimeter positions, and is a solid rebounder. Definitely needs to work on building strength, and his jump shot needs a lot of work, but he’s already a tenacious defender and should get a lot of play time immediately as a defender.
As always, we need to be careful to put up ridiculous expectations on these guys. But the upside and potential is undoubtedly there. Just look at the size of our potential lineup, again assuming everyone comes back:
Starters:
C – Gordon 6’8
PF – Keefe 6’8
SF – Dragovic 6’9
SG – Lee 6’5
PG – Holiday 6’3
Bench:
Anderson 6’1
Roll 6’5
Morgan 6’10
Moser 6’7
Honeycutt 6’8
Lane 6’10
Nelson 6’8
Stover 6’10
Compare our roster to our first Final Four run, and its obvious that our size, length and athleticism will be much greater than that team, which was also extremely freshmen and sophomore heavy. Obviously, we can’t expect to see the same results, as we had some unique warriors those years, but it’s going to be exciting seeing these guys develop and play.
Of course, this is assuming that all players return. However, things do look good when you consider that our man to man defense is largely predicated on each of our players being able to guard their position, and we will have a definite size advantage to go along with a lot of players that have natural defensive tenacity. Our rebounding should also improve dramatically and we will see some of our best years still ahead of us.
----------------------
Also, just a look ahead at some Pac-10 competition. Overall, we should have an easier time with our improved size and athleticism. ASU is going to take a big hit from losing Harden and Pendegraph, as will The Standard, which will be in the gutter.
OSU and Oregon should all improve, as will Stanford and Cal. UW gains Abdul Gaddy, but loses Brockman, so they'll be even more guard oriented next year without the same presence Brockman gave. USC will gain Sidney and Hill, but lose DeRozan and Gibson.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
5 recs |
78 comments
|
Comments
good breakdown
although I wouldn’t be surprised to see Roll starting at the 3 and Drago at the 4. Obviously a lot depends on the offseason and who improves, but I think Drago is just too slow defensively to play the 3 in CBH’s system
by bucknellbruin on Mar 21, 2009 3:33 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't see Drago starting at the 3 if everybody returns; maybe if Jrue does leave...
If everybody stays, we have 7 players who are primarily frontcourt players, C: Gordon, Bobo, Stover; PF: Drago, Keefe, Lane and Nelson. While under this scenario, the backcourt/wing is not as deep as ideal, the 6 players remaining, PG: Jrue, Anderson; Wing: Lee, Roll, Honeycutt and Moser, should be able to hold down the backcourt. Under this scenario, I see:
PG: Holiday, Anderson
SG: Roll, Moser
SF: Lee, Honeycutt, Moser (Honeycutt could play his way into the lineup, likely at the expense of Roll, shifting Lee to 2-guard)
PF: Dragovic/Keefe, Lane, Nelson
C: Gordon, Bobo, Stover (RS?)
If Jrue does jump to the NBA, then the shallow depth in the backcourt may force CBH to play Drago at the 3. The Bruins would be left with only 5 players who primarily play one of the 3 backcourt positions, 2 of whom are freshmen. I can see CBH keeping one of the experienced guard/wings as a 6th man, so to prevent having to use a freshman in a critical situation in case of injury or foul trouble for a starter. Under this hypo, I see the following:
PG: Anderson
SG: Lee, Roll, Moser (or, Roll, Lee, Moser)
SF: Dragovic, Honeycutt, Moser
PF: Keefe, Lane, Nelson
C: Gordon, Bobo, Stover
by bruinhoo on Mar 21, 2009 8:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thin at point
Kind of scary that if JH leaves we only have one pg. Would ML be the back up?
by buffsnbruins on Mar 22, 2009 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really agree with you that it's scary...
From what I saw, neither Malcolm or Jerime showed as solid a handle as I’ve seen in some really good freshman guards. They both need to really improve on that for next year.
Heck, even Jrue scares me when he dribbles!
by mplsbruin on Mar 22, 2009 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What? U serious?
Don’t judge ml he barely showed his handles this year and jrue is straight nasty with the ball
by harveyismyboy on Mar 22, 2009 7:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Jrue sometimes tries to do too much with the ball
I’d rather he just keep the ball in front of him, under control at all times.
Fundamentals first, flash later.
by freesia39 on Mar 22, 2009 10:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
ML played point in HS until senior year...
… when the kid played C due to lack of big players. Best of both worlds — guy has point handles, but is used to banging around inside a little.
M
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
by Meriones on Mar 23, 2009 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree with Buck
Drago is not quick enough to play the 3. CBH is notorious for not playing FR unless necessary. Next year, we won’t have a established go-to guy. It will be a bunch of guys trying to find their roles. CBH runs a very efficient offense but I think we need to sacrifice some of that efficiency and open things up. Our strength will be in numbers (if they prove to be able to contribute) and athleticism. I don’t know if it’ll be a mix that will work but I think CBH needs to look into this.
by BlueReign on Mar 21, 2009 3:42 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
if JH comes back
A lot of it will be how much latitude he lets JH run the offense through him. Jrue has shown some tremendous and dynamic play making ability. Being loose and more open is fine if we have the personnel for it so that remains to be seen as well.
by blinkshot on Mar 21, 2009 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd like to see Stover
I saw him once, and I was very impressed by his speed and athleticism. Maybe he could be a Hollins-type player somewhere down the line.
by SuperBruinMan on Mar 21, 2009 4:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
We are certainly going to be long and athletic
If the sophomores all progress and some of the freshman can contribute early, this will be a deep team, very excited to see how this group shapes up w/ or w/out Jrue (although I’d love to have him back)
O.A.
by Ollie on Mar 21, 2009 4:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Good writeup Blink
I was thinking of doing the same thing, but you beat me to it. I watched Brandon Lane’s CIF game and he is an impressive player. When he originally committed I thought he was going to be a throw away recruit since we already had so many bigs, but I am pretty sure that was wrong.
Lane has great hands and a great motor. He blocked one shot coming down from the free throw line. His team really under utlitized him and I expect him to be one of the better contributors next season. I know a lot of people will think I am crazy for saying this, but he seems like a taller, faster Kevin Love minus the great passing.
Anyways, here is my depth chart for next year (unlike others, I feel pretty confident JH will stay)
PG: Holiday, Anderson, Abdul-Hamid
SG: Lee, Roll, Moser
SF: Drago, Honeycutt, Moser
PF: Keefe, Lane, Nelson
C: Gordon, Morgan, Stover
Drago is the biggest wildcard. He improved so much this season that it is scary how good he could be if he gets even better of the summer. People are down on him for his defense, but his offense more than makes up for it. Plus, CBH loves seniors so I fully expect for him to give both Drago and Keefe the opportunity to start at the beginning of the season.
As far as the freshman next year, I only expect Honeycutt, Lane, and Moser to get any playing time. Nelson will be a good player for practice to toughen up everyone else (next PAA) and there is no way that Stover takes playing time from Gordon/Keefe/Drago/Morgan or even Lane.
We will probably be the 3rd or 4th best team in the Pac 10 next year since ASU and UA will be terrible following the loss of all their talent, OSU, UO, and Stanford wont be much better. We will be likely even with Cal and I expect UW and USC to be the top teams next year. We will probably still be ranked at the start of the season in the 18-25 range. Following this year and CBH’s history of getting out coached when we play against superior athletes, I am hopeful for next year since we will be more athletic, but I really have no expectations other than a tournament birth. Oh well, should be fun at least.
Go Bruins!
by bruinponcho on Mar 21, 2009 6:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think it's way too early to sort out conference position
Our roster is a lot more clear than most other teams’. We should probably come back to a conference assessment after draft declaration day.
by Tydides on Mar 21, 2009 7:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very true
But UW will have everyone but Brockman and Dentmon back, and will add Gaddy. As for USC, DeRozan is gone and Gibson might go, but even if he does, I think both of those teams have more proven talent than we will have next year. As for ASU and UA, those teams are going to lose their 2 and 3 best players respectively leaving bare rosters. Cal very well could be one of the best teams in the Pac next year assuming Christopher isnt dumb and leave early.
by bruinponcho on Mar 21, 2009 7:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Under that scenario
I can see that, but as our own experience shows, you never really know who is going to come out (Westbrook, Luc) and who isn’t (Collison). You might think you have a good read on it, but it’s always iffy until that day has come and gone.
by Tydides on Mar 21, 2009 7:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the state of Arizona is pretty easy to predict
For ASU, Pendergraph is graduating and Harden is a top 5 pick, so there really is no way that he comes back. Of course he does seem a little eccentric like Gilbert Arenas so who knows, maybe he will go against logic and come back.
As for Arizona, Hill is a likely top 5 pick and after being suckered into staying the last two years, there is no way Budinger stays. Wise could come back and be a star next year, but even if he does they have no recruits and not much else on that team.
The Oregon schools are hard to predict. OSU has no one that will turn pro, but Dunigan from Oregon could be a first rounder. If he goes, then Oregon wont be very good again next year. After UW loss today, I dont think Pondexter will leave and WSU will lose Rochestie and Baynes to graduation, so they will probably be down next year too.
That only leaves Cal, UW, and USC to be good next year. As much as the MSM loves to hate on the Pac 10, next year looks to be a down year for the conference. Of course, as UW and CAL showed this year, a team can improve a lot over a season.
by bruinponcho on Mar 21, 2009 8:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good overview
I do like that we have some of the least uncertainty for once. I also see a down year for the Pac 10 even if all the 50/50 guys decide against the draft. Funny how a strong UCLA correlates with a strong Pac 10…
I suppose the good news is that our team appears to have the most upside. If we run with the young guys early and often next season, going to the bench and seeing what develops, there is a lot of potential there. Of course, upside generally means that you’re starting off lower to begin with, and that’ll be true as well. My gut tells me that Cal will be the dangerous team next season with another season of coaching under Monty.
by Tydides on Mar 21, 2009 8:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oregon
They should be a whole lot better next year (of course how can they not be after winning two Pac-10 games) assuming that Kent stays around. Remember, 7 of their top 10 players this year were true freshmen that got a ton of experience and I expect a lot more from them next year.
by turs12 on Mar 21, 2009 7:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
a lot of what Oregon does will rely on Tajuan Porter
it amazes me how much his game has fallen/leveled off since his great freshman year. His sophomore slump turned into a junior slump. They need him to get back to the old Porter next year – which means playing off the ball on offense. He’s not a PG at all and they suffer when he has to run the offense.
by bucknellbruin on Mar 21, 2009 8:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kent retained?
Last year, at this time, there was a strong call for Kent to be fired. Will he survive this year?
My thought has been that Mark Few will get the job as soon as he Zags are out of the tournament.
Anyone know exactly what’s happening with Kent?
sjh
by Class of 66 on Mar 22, 2009 6:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
well
it seems as though Few could’ve gotten a new job anytime he wanted over the last few years…so do we know that he wants to leave? I know that Oregon is a big step up from Gonzaga in terms of money and conference affiliation, but obviously he is happy at Gonzaga seeing how long he’s been there.
Should be interesting – especially if the Zags make a deep run (like I predicted lol)
by bucknellbruin on Mar 22, 2009 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's still up in the air
I heard from someone I trust that Kilkenny would keep Kent for one more year if it were his choice, but with Bellotti taking over as AD, it will be his choice. What Bellotti wants is unknown because he’s been so wrapped up in the football program that he isn’t as well versed in the rest of the programs. From what I’ve heard, I think Bellotti will give Kent one more year so he can evaluate him for an entire season, but that’s just my guess.
I think if Kent does get the ax, Few will be the head coach there within a week. He grew up in Oregon, is an Oregon grad, will have Phil Knight’s money and a brand new arena. The problem for Oregon is if they give Kent one more year, by the time they end up looking for a new coach Few could be in Arizona.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Mar 22, 2009 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
IMO Few won't go to Arizona
His only move will be in the Pacific Northwest. His family is very tied into Gonzaga and the rumor is his wife is very much attached to Gonzaga (I think she is an alum). He turned down some big programs before ie..Indiana and maybe even UCLA.
by 84 on Mar 22, 2009 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think he could make the move to Arizona
They will be able to offer him more money and will match the perks he gets from Gonzaga. Currently, his team gets to go to almost all of their road games on a chartered plane and he gets to use a private plane for all his recruiting trips. Those are things that Arizona can match and I know at least UCLA couldn’t match.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Mar 22, 2009 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Few is a different guy
He could have left “little” Gonzaga bor “big name” programs several times in the last few years, all with bigger exposure, bigger budgets, and bigger paychecks. He hasn’t. The guy really loves where he is, and much of that is related to his family and the lifestyle (he is a huge fly fisherman).
Oregon is a reasonable option, should Few leave Gonzaga. I don’t think AZ is.
greg in denver - UCLA guy for life
by gbruin on Mar 22, 2009 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree
I have heard a great deal about Few and his fly fishing..his is tremendously passionate about it, and about his life in Eastern Washington. I don’t see him going to AZ, either.
Love My Bruins
by Bruingirl83 on Mar 23, 2009 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
C'mon, WHP
Your fans are clamoring for another fly-casting gem.
BG, to refresh your memory, recall WHP’s comment >The view from the catbird seat.. concerning Chris Petersen at a time when some were lobbying for his hire at ucla.
..through rose-colored binoculars shows a lonely man, fly-casting in an Idaho trout stream bathed in the headlights of his pick-up truck, dreamily thinking of what mighta been, knowing that he is doomed to this existence for the next decade at least (if he wishes to stay in the ranks of collegiate head coaching). He knows the roads to Los Angeles and Eugene, been snowed over since late December, will probably not thaw out any time soon, and can only console himself with the thought that he’s stuck in THIS PLACE with only that damned blue carpet to array his teams on..
..anguished over his diminished job opportunities and the dwindling recruiting prospects now pledging to remain closer to home — like his meagre trout catch — in this cold, barren environ, he lets out a plaintive wail, “Ste-l-l-l-l-l-l-a!”
by Bruinut on Mar 23, 2009 7:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't give them any ideas....
Of course they should keep Ernie on. With Montgomery and (if he stays) Bennett and Sendak and Lorenzo and Robinson, we need Ernie and Tim to stay until the former flops enough to get fired and the latter gets busted by the NCAA.
by ucla7477 on Mar 22, 2009 7:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I only say this
For 2 reasons really. First, he actually got a contract extension at the end of last season so I have my doubts about whether he would get fired just one season after getting an extension. Secondly, I think he will be given a free pass on this season because he played so many freshmen. I do think, however, if they do not see a huge jump next year when all those experienced freshman become sophomores and Porter is a senior then that could be it for him.
by turs12 on Mar 22, 2009 11:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Contract extensions mean nothing
A coach needs a contract lasting 4 or 5 years so they can recruit. It’s tough to get a kid to commit to your program if the coach’s contract doesn’t last through his tenure there. These contracts always come with a buyout so they can pay him that and move on. Contract extensions are meaningless in college sports. I don’t think he’ll be fired either, but the contract extension isn’t a reason why.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Mar 23, 2009 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't like the trading defense for offense idea.
Sorry poncho, but the phrase, “People are down on him for his defense, but his offense more than makes up for it” scares me more than a bit.
I can see how the lack of outside shooting by JH may have made CBHw ant to put ND in the lineup, but I still wish we would have had a better overall D.
IF ND can become conssitent on D to the point where he can use his length to ahrass SFs and not get blow-torched by guards, I can live with him as the starting SF, particularly with the length we get from a JH and ML backcourt and a jumping jack like DG at the 5. But if he doesn’t improve his D rotations — shoot, even his straight on-ball D — then he had better be giving us 15 and 6 a game consistently.
If not, I’d rather have Roll giving us something like 12 and 4 while still playing sound team D (i.e. rotations, dobule-teams, screen hedges, rebounding, etc.) and smart, if not overpowering, position D.
M
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
by Meriones on Mar 23, 2009 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can't agree with you on Lane.
Lane has great hands and a great motor. He blocked one shot coming down from the free throw line. His team really under utlitized him and I expect him to be one of the better contributors next season. I know a lot of people will think I am crazy for saying this, but he seems like a taller, faster Kevin Love minus the great passing.
That does sound like crazy talk. I went to Friday’s game with another UCLA alum and during the game we were discussing the distinct difference between Kevin Love and Brendan Lane – not to knock Brendan, just as a continued realization of how special Love was. While Brendan had a lot of trouble grabbing rebounds and finishing with contact against a very small team (the game was poorly officiated and the refs seemed to let the ‘little guys’ get away with murder inside against a much taller opponent), Love had no problem rebounding and finishing while going against a slew of tough centers in his freshman year.
To be honest, unless this summer’s workout program is enough for Lane to add quite a bit of strength, I don’t see him getting much playing time next year and his best option may be to redshirt (then again, I’ve only seen him play twice and I haven’t seen any of the other incoming freshmen). I think he has a ton of potential, and it was a joy to watch him play, but Kevin Love was a man amongst boys – even at the college level.
by cabz on Mar 23, 2009 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh my god
Can somebody please just calm me down about our depth for the next 4/5 years. Were the most priviliged program in country and it’s ABSOLUTELY DISFREAKINGUSTING!!!!
by harveyismyboy on Mar 23, 2009 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
are there any other recuits posibly coming in this year.
by kyl57es on Mar 21, 2009 8:52 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
None that I am aware of
And unless Jrue does enter the draft, there are no open scholarships remaining (for reasons of scholarship management, I feel it unwise to add a player to next year’s class under this scenario, unless for a certain one-and-done).
by bruinhoo on Mar 21, 2009 9:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
if Jrue leaves
CBH is gonna try and bring a guard in for next year. Dohn’s mentioned the possibility several times
by bucknellbruin on Mar 21, 2009 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another thing
others have touched on this. I see signs that ML and DG (I’m sure everybody saw his emotion when entering the game late) are going to be our “vocal” leaders in the near future. We’re really fortunate that the seniors gave the program another year. I’m sure the FR learned a lot from them which should accelerate their ability to be leaders.
by BlueReign on Mar 21, 2009 9:58 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Good work blink
I was going to do something similar to this, but I want to wait a week or two and let the season sink in a little first. I’m going to agree with a lot of your thoughts though.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Mar 21, 2009 10:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Work in progress
Hopefully the team will improve as the season goes on and mature by the time it’s tournament time. It certainly didn’t happen this season.
Oh well, it could be worse… you can wake up and realize no matter what you did, you’re still a trojan.
by UCLA4Life on Mar 21, 2009 11:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I just really want to see Jrue with a year at the 1
I know its unwise to put too much stock in him coming back right now, but i cant stop thinking about the idea of him driving, dishing, and making the offense go from the 1…i really think he’s raw enough right now where he’ll be advised to come back, but i guess we’ll just have to wait and see
O.A.
by Ollie on Mar 22, 2009 10:25 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
He can
It would require us to change our offense some because the 3 in our offense is more of a slasher and the 2 runs off of screens for jumpers. If ML were playing then 2 though then you could just flip ML and MR offensively so MR got the screens and ML was slashing, which fits his skill set.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Mar 22, 2009 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
that sounds good
I think Roll deserves to start this next year, his defense got a lot better in 08-09 and his three-point gunning will really help to spread the floor. Thing is, I’d like to see Holiday, Lee, Roll, Gordon, and Honeycutt all on the floor at the same time next year; a lot of people are subbing Keefe for Honeycutt in their projected lineups, but we’ll need low-post offense next year and I think TH will be a lot better in that department.
by theslammer on Mar 22, 2009 11:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
drago at 3?
You have to be kidding. He is too slow to guard power forwards. How do you think he could guard a 3? These are guys like Pondexter, Demar Derozan, James Harden etc. No way no how. Drago is not a 3 and never will be. Sorry, I don’t mean to criticize, but we should at least present factually possible scenarios.
At this point, we should pencil in Drago at the 4 and Roll at the 3. Given that those two are spot up shooters who do not excel at defense, we should hope that one of the freshmen—Moser or Honeycutt being the most likely—can play the 3 well enough to start there. Having a 6’7" or 6’8" small forward with quickness, long arms and hops could go a long way toward bringing back Ban Ball Warrior defense that we grew accustomed to before this season.
by BruinsRule on Mar 22, 2009 1:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Roll Plays Better D Than Given Credit For
MR plays some good D and shouldn’t be denigrated on that side of the ball.
On the O side, he’s one of our best at feeding the post.
He has a very strong all around game and should be a serious contender for a starting position.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Mar 22, 2009 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
Roll always gives a solid effort, relies on fundamentals to give everything he has on D. He doesn’t have the athleticism but he again gives everything he has. He has always been underappreciated.
by Nestor on Mar 22, 2009 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not a put down of Roll
To say he does not “excel” at defense. He is good, solid, works hard etc., yes, but with that he is solid but not excellent on defense. We need one player who excels at defense at either the 3 or the 4, a defensive stopper, a game changer. Roll is not that. Drago obviously is not either. Thus, if I were crafting the starting lineup, I would find whoever is the best defender at the 3 or 4 and put him in and bring Roll or Drago off the bench. All things being equal, I would prefer to have Roll starting with Lee at the wing because they have complementary skill sets and to find a 4 who can bring the physical presence on defense that we sorely lacked in our losses to USC and Villanova. It was evident that our physicality was far inferior to what we had in 2006-08. As the name of the position would lead us to believe, we need a "power"ful presence at the 4. If we don’t find one, I would like to see us go with a long, defensive oriented 3 so that we can defend the perimeter in an otherworldy fashion and thus disguise the lack of a physical presence at the 4 spot on defense.
by BruinsRule on Mar 22, 2009 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did I hear MR wants to graduate and immediately become assisstant on CBH's staff??!!
by harveyismyboy on Mar 22, 2009 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
ive heard the same rumor before
that he wants to eventually become a graduate assistant before heading on to coaching
by blinkshot on Mar 22, 2009 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
MR is graduating this year per the Academic advisor in a 570 interview
So I have been wondering how he was going to play next year (graduate school as well??)
I have not heard the rumor about him wanting to coach.
by Bruin Dad and Grad on Mar 23, 2009 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Graduate-level courses
Same as Aboya this past season, for example. Not an uncommon occurance, actually.
by bruinhoo on Mar 23, 2009 11:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. he knows where to go and what to do, which is HUGE.
He may not be the most physically gifted, but shoot, neither was Rick Fox when he played the 3 for the Lakers.
I’d have no problem whatsoever starting MR next to ML next year at the 2 and 3 spots next to eiher JH (if he stays) or JA.
A bigger, defensively sound perimeter trio of
2010: 6-3 (JH)/ 6-5 (MR)/ 6-5 (ML)
OR
2010: 6-2 (JA)/ 6-5 (MR)/ 6-5 (ML)
is still less likely to get burned by bigger guards than our previous rotations of
2009: 6-0 (DC)/ 6-3 (JH)/ 6-5 (JS)
2008: 6-0 (DC)/ 6-3 (RW)/ 6-5 (JS)
M
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
by Meriones on Mar 23, 2009 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rolls slow footedness is a blessing...
The fact that MR is slow to react is a gift for him on D because it keeps him from being out of position. When a player tries to drive by him it is pretty hard to do because he doesn’t move, even after all the shake-n-bake…
The fact he doesn’t gamble really helps out a lot as well. I’m sure he’ll produce if he comes back next year…
by RScal on Mar 23, 2009 8:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Roll chooses not to gamble, and while fundamentals don't make up for everything...
… they are the absolute best places to start with.
Just think back to what we had before:
2006
6-2 JF
6-5 AA
6-6 CB
6-0 DC®
6-5 MR®
2007
6-0 DC
6-5 AA
6-5 JS
6-3 RW®
6-5 MR®
2008
6-0 DC
6-3 RW®
6-5 JS
NO RESERVES (ugh).
2009
6-0 DC
6-3 JH*
6-5 JS
6-5 MR*
6-5 ML*
6-2 JA*
- possibly returning
Our arguably strongest perimeter defenses the past couple of years have had size and depth and experience. This year, we had size, but really not much experience.
I’m looking forward to JH hoepfully coming back, but even if not, we still have good length and more experience (even 1 year is better than none) coming in.
M
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
by Meriones on Mar 24, 2009 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Golden words
Apropos of nothing…
I usually watch basketball games without sound—partly, because I find it more enjoyable that way, and partly to avoid a Fox lecture, but had I done so today, I would have missed some of the most amusing and pleasing words I’ve heard on a BB broadcast in a long time:
“Tim Floyd is going nuts on the sideline!”
by Bruinut on Mar 22, 2009 4:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
He had a right to
2-3 no-calls, and then a touch foul on the other end cost USC a good chance at a comeback (down only 1 possession to Mich. St)
by dokein on Mar 22, 2009 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Meh. Not feeling much sympathy.
SC got away with as many no calls down the stretch as did Mich. St.
by bruinhoo on Mar 22, 2009 8:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
got away with no calls all season
so it’s a little disingenuous for them to complain, now.
sjh
by Class of 66 on Mar 22, 2009 8:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
from what i've read and see on youtube/rivals videos
honeycutt, moser, and reeves nelson could all jump some of the current players and get in the lineup. they seem physical and polished enough.
while next years class doesn’t rank as high as this years (i.e. not number 1) its all relative, the players next year might be more physical and ready to contribute since they were scouted relative to next years class. they might be more howlandesque players.. i hope
its a good sign when 2nd round exit, 26 wins, runner up in conference – is a down year.
by realfabfive on Mar 22, 2009 7:26 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Worth it to point this out
Last year, after we got bounced, we were all bracing for impact upon the knowledge that RW, KL, DC, LRMAM, and JS could all jump to the pros. Now, the mood is much more optimistic because JH is likely returning and our young nucleus of ML/DG/Bobo bears a strong resemblance to the JF/AA/LRMAM nucleus of 05-06. I see 08-09 playing out very similarly to that year, btw; some losses that shouldn’t have been early, but the team gelling over the course of the season and hitting its peak late in the Pac-10 season.
by theslammer on Mar 22, 2009 9:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Dang, blink, you beat me to my annual crystal ball post!
Nah, I’m kidding. GREAT work breaking each player down.
I’m torn between seeing MR or ND at the starting 3-spot, because I think that while CBH will want a veteran there, I don’t want him to do an automatic trade of offense for defense like I think the ND at the 4 experiment was this year.
The only way i see it working is if:
(1) ML’s quickness at the 2 compensates for ND’s poor rotations;
(2) ND learns to rotatea LOT better than this year; and
(3) DG’s can be a shot blocker to comepsnate for missed defense WITHOUT excessive fouling.
Having ND as a 6-9, 3-shooting SF would give us Florida-style look, but ND HAS to improve his defensive quickness and focus. Otherwise, I’d just as soon put MR at the 3 and give us another undersized, but defensively sound, set of perimeter players.
Still, and all 6-8 or 6-9 frontcourt looks AWFULLY good. Add that to the tallest backcourt we’ve had in years if the 6-3 JH comes back (as I think he will, doing the declare with no agent path this summer and leaving in 2010) alongside the 6-5 ML, and we may finally have the right combo of length and quicks to do damage with our D again.
BACKSTOP — DG — 6-9, 235 — shot blocking, good rebounding.
SHOTGUN — JK — 6-8, 238 - good rebounding, good double-team, good rotations.-SF—???
???
SEEKER/ WING — ML — 6-5, 200 — good on-ball defense, good-to-great rotations, great length.
INTERCEPTOR — JH — 6-3, 195 — good on-ball defense, average rotations, great length for position.
And at the 3?
WING — ND — 6-9, 215 — average position D, below-average rotations, average-to-good rebounding, average length.
—OR—
WING — MR — 6-5, 210 — average perimeter D, good rotation, average length.
Again, great post, blink.
M
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
by Meriones on Mar 23, 2009 11:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Woops, didn't mean to do the strikethru up there.
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
by Meriones on Mar 23, 2009 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great preview
Very reassuring. There are some mature players (Roll, Drago, Keefe), this year’s freshmen have valuable experience, and another outstanding class is coming in.
When I was following the recruiting closely, last year around this time and then at the beginning of the season, Reeves Nelson seemed extremely impressive. I don’t see him mentioned much here and wouldn’t want him to be forgotten—around the time that DG committed, Nelson was slated as similar, an athletic bruiser with great skills. Somehow my guess is that he might be more ready to play than some of the other guys, but I really don’t know them as well.
Bobo still seems to be a year away from playing a central role, but he should make progress with deep immersion in the program. He can get faster and stronger in a hurry, and then we’ll be able to see what his skill level, touch and flow is like. I’m a bit surprised to see such a strong commitment in this thread to DG as a center. I guess there’s really no choice, and he’s stronger and more athletic than the other major returning candidates. But he seems like a natural PF who can destroy other teams at that position, and he would be most effective playing next to a true center. I suppose I answered my own question because Bobo isn’t ready.
Lots of great talent, and I look forward to learning more about the freshmen and seeing what JH does. We got a great, tantalizing look at how effective he can be at PG, and if he returns the Bruins will be an elite team, especially with contributions from ND, MR, and JK, as well as ML getting big minutes for the first time. Without JH it will be trickier, and we’ll have to see how the team comes together.
by citizen zhiv on Mar 23, 2009 1:52 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the big thing is rebounding
We’ve got some big time rebounders coming in, as well as our existing players (Gordon and Morgan) should be better at rebounding next year as well.
Providing offense from the post is fine, but being able to rebound big time is absolutely key. I can’t think of any team that has won it all that didn’t have a good rebounding team, be it one guy who was great, or everyone who was pretty capable. For example, Kansas last year didn’t have a single big-time rebounder post guy, but all their players were capable at it.
If we play with our best lineup coming in next year, we can have all 5 starters as average-to-above average rebounders at their position meaning we should control boards like its 07-08 all over again.
by blinkshot on Mar 23, 2009 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
JH is taller
I heard an interview earlier this season where JH was asked how tall he really was because he seemed more than 6’3". He said he’s actually 6’4". He’s also only 18, so he’s probably still growing a little. If he sticks around, and I really really hope he does, we are going to be a very big and athletic bunch.
by UCLAbruin920 on Mar 24, 2009 8:43 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't put too much stock in this, but
If you want to base the conference by how many NBA-ready players there are in it, NBAdraft.net has a grand total of four non-UCLA Pac-10 players being draft-worthy in 2010: Patrick Christopher of Cal (projected pick: #41), Nic Wise of Arizona (projected pick: #48), Dwight Lewis of USC (#57), and Daniel Hackett of USC (#58). Contrast that to 2009, when Jordan Hill, James Harden, Demar DeRozan, and Chase Budinger are all projected lottery picks, and Jeff Pendergraph and Taj Gibson are both projected late first round selections. Do with that info what you will.
by theslammer on Mar 24, 2009 1:20 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Shooting
Hopefully there will be better shooting next year,as at times this year it was downright pittifull.
by Bruinbigfan on Mar 24, 2009 6:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Not quite
we had the best shooting percentage in the country this year. Another tired argument by a new poster.
For the 168th time, our offense was not the problem this year, but the defense was.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
by tasser10 on Mar 25, 2009 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And our defense was pretty good a lot more times than not.
Remember, we had a good overall record. There are lots and lots of schools who can only dream about having a team which performed like ours.
by Fox 71 on Mar 25, 2009 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tasser you should lighten up
Yes you are right that defense was our problem this year. Generally.
But it still absolutely fair to say: “at times this year it was downright pittifull.” That is an absolutely correct fact. Yes we shot well across the year. Though most of our competition was not strong.
At key times (remember ASU at Pauley) we had real problems. Bruinbigfan is correct in what he wrote though he could have modified it to be more accurate:
“Hopefully there will be better shooting when we need it and against tougher defenses next year, as times this year it was downright pitiful.”
by Bruin Dad and Grad on Mar 25, 2009 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think so
It’s been discussed over and over on this site, and it gets quite annoying when newbies do a drive-by posting to drop their eminent knowledge on us without providing any background.
At times this year, our offense was indeed very ineffective. But you can’t say that we need better shooting on the team when we have the best shooting percentage in the country, just because we had a few stretches where our offense did not click. It is obviously not a problem of ability but of focus. If it only happens “at key times”, it is a mental problem.
And I am not the only one who is annoyed with this.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
by tasser10 on Mar 25, 2009 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, geez, not again.
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
by Meriones on Mar 25, 2009 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 





















