Hoops Roundup: Howland Continues To Coddle Ragovic While Other Bruin Seniors Sound Clueless
by Nestor on Jan 20, 2010 6:04 AM PST
in Basketball
Email
PrintBruins are heading into this week's home game against Washington schools with lots of empty words and no signs of change from Coach Ben Howland. I had to LOL when I read this in the Daily News about Howland trying to "unlock" Ragovic. Apparently Howland pulled his clown aside yesterday to "talk about" how he needs to "rededicate himself to rebounding and getting more involved offensively":
To illustrate how far Dragovic's rebounding has fallen, he had 14 rebounds in the first game of the year against Cal State Fullerton, but managed just 16 through the Bruins' first five Pacific-10 Conference games.
"The main thing is to bring a great level of energy to everything we're doing and really try and do the tough things." Howland said. "He needs to put a big emphasis on rebounding the basketball for us to have success."
Dragovic is averaging 10.5 points and just 4.9 rebounds per game.
Part of the problem offensively is Dragovic is creating more of his shots this year, as opposed to past seasons when he would get open looks on kick-outs or pick-and-rolls.
Ironically, Dragovic came to the United States more of a creator offensively, having been more of a dribble-drive player in his native Serbia, but adjusted his game to suit the Bruins' needs.
"Now I'm going to have to change back to it and create more of my shots," he said.
Uhm. There are just so many things wrong here. First of all, exactly what does Howland think he is accomplishing by giving this fourth year scrub a "talk"? Exactly how a talk at this point of Rago's "career" which has been less distinguished than the ones belonging to Kevin Dempsey and Brandon Lloyd, is supposed to make a difference? What about just benching the guy who game after game throughout his entire career has not shown any interest whatsoever in playing defense?
Howland continues to send the wrong message to his team and the entire community around him by showing he has no desire to hold the ultimate defensive culprit accountable. I also have to LOL at the part of this poser "creating" his own shots because it probably means jacking up more bricks outside of the flow of the game while continue to be as effective as the Maginot line on the other end. What a joke. More on the other side.
While Ragovic continues to skate through his last year by being coddled and without having to answer for his defensive lapses, the other seniors just don't have any answers. Here is Roll:
"We are definitely going to be a lot better from here on out," Roll said.
And he can guarantee that?
"I cannot," Roll said. "All I can say is it's not going to be like that anymore."
Uh yeah. That's real comforting. Keefe's answers are even more confident (NOT):
"We haven't played a whole lot of games, so as of now it's anyone's conference," forward James Keefe said. "We are not far off and can turn the whole season around." But, as with Roll's guarantee, "how" becomes the question.
"There is not one answer to that," Keefe said. "The first answer, we've got to look into ourselves and figure out what each of us can do to make this team better. When you start losing, you get down on yourself; you get down on the team. We've just got to stay together and stay positive."
Feeling comforted now? Honestly, can anyone provide here genuine reasons why we should look forward to this week's game. Even if we win against Washington, which is not unthinkable considering they have shown their tendencies to choke on the road, it will probably mean we will follow it up with another sleepwalking performance against Washington State.
Howland's failure to develop these guys and worse his inability to hold his core accountable for not being true to his philosophy of defense and fundamentals have killed the interest in UCLA basketball within this community. Right now I can't find any reason to even care about this. Even while watching these guys embarrass themselves and the four letters infront of their jersey, I find myself switching channels checking out other games.
If tools like Ragovic actually cared about UCLA, he would have been apologizing for his disgraceful performances on the court and make a commitment to play defense and they show that kind of effort. Honestly though we have never seen any hint from him that he actually cares. I doubt he even cares about being a Bruin or getting a degree from UCLA. He is just happy to get his free ride in which he gets to just jack up shots in pathetic team, while club away his nights in Hollywood.
From Arron Afflalo to Chokola Ragovic. How did it come to this?
GO BRUINS.
42 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
IF Dragovic is on the court
and people are defending him on the outside, I’d like to see him to force the issue inside rather than jack up increasingly ill-advised shots from the outside.
I don’t want to see him dribble the ball much – I think he’d just get stripped – but he has had moments throughout the season where he has taken it inside and either made the shot or been fouled. I think that would take some of the pressure of RN and TH inside.
Re: Maginot line – are you saying ND would be effective on defense if he wasn’t overconfident in his teammates (/the Belgians) doing their job next to him…?
last line
was supposed to be a joke, but rereading it may come off as obnoxious…
But if Western Europe was playing zone in WWII, it was definitely the wing defense of Belgium that let down the solid frontline presented by the Maginot Line… only rescued by late game heroics from the US coming off the bench after sitting out most of the first half….
by britishbruin on Jan 20, 2010 7:37 AM PST up reply actions
I completely agree with your thoughts on using Rago more inside
I have said before and until proven otherwise will continue to ask, when did Ragovich become our 3 point specialist? Sure he gets hot every blue moon. Yeah, I remember the WSU game last year and the ASU game this year. Short of that I just don’t see where he deserves to be played like our version of Lee Humphrey.
He is our best free throw shooter. Like you, I would like to see his height used offensively closer to the basket, where I think he could be effective. Taking the pressure off of TH, RN and perhaps opening up outside shots for the rest. As it is now it seems like the opposing team knows we will pass the ball around the perimeter, occasionally try to feed the freshman in the block, but eventually settle for a 26 foot low percentage shot.
I
by 84 on Jan 20, 2010 7:47 AM PST up reply actions
Well
We saw him having some success with that in few games earlier this season. The problem is that he is inherently a lazy and dumb basketball player who is more suited for Steve Lavin team. Even if he has short term success by going inside in the near future, he will revert back to his old habits of jacking up dumb shots and of course all that while not playing any defense on the other hand. He is a waste of space on basketball court.
Couldn't agree more
but all I am saying is that if CBH continues to favor him for unseen reasons than I would rather see him used in that capacity. I guess I have thrown in the towel on begging to sit him. The only positive thing that can come from having him roam beyond the 3 point line is that it is a few less steps(which amounts to about 10 seconds) for Ragu to get back to the defensive side of the floor, where he can then catch his breath and enjoy the close up view of a 5 on 4 basketball game.
by 84 on Jan 20, 2010 8:10 AM PST up reply actions
Hoping Ragovic will play "smart" and "sensible' basketball
… is a hopeless proposition. I am not going to wait for that unicorn to come around. :-)
I vote for ND being
waaaaaaaaaaaaaay outside during the game. 500 feet would do. A couple of miles wouldn’t be a bad thing.
Postgame quotes on Rago
“Nicola had a tough game out there. We were expecting some tough defense, but the homeless guys at the 405 on-ramp really pressured him, and he was forced into some quick shots. It didn’t help that the traffic on the freeway was stopped, so there was no space for him to move inside. "
by Westwood Wizard on Jan 20, 2010 11:24 AM PST up reply actions
Or the ghosts from the Veterans' cemetry would have screamed
No, no, don’t shoot………………….
Sounds to me
as though CBH is just trying to do his job. Rubbing his team’s nose in that $C pile of steaming waste was definitely called for. Now we will see who gets it and responds like a man and who turns away, as if it had nothing to do with him. Also, urging Drago to rebound is calling attention to something he might actually be able to do, if he tried hard and used proper technique. He’s what, 6’ 9"? And, based on average minutes played per game, he ranks below Nelson, Honeycutt and Keefe and is roughly tied with Lee in rebounds. He can and should do more, and it can help. However, I read that he has a knee problem, hurt in “a” game last week; so maybe Nestor will get his wish, and he’ll be benched. Not that it will really help us to be short-handed against a pressuring D that, according to CBH, plays 10 guys, and took both Stanford and Cal out of the game by the end of the first half. Using the same analysis, Drago is not a big turnover guy; JA leads in that category, as many would suspect, followed by ML and RN; however, they compensate partially by getting far more steals. Drago has few. I too would like to see ND posting up, or at least hanging around the basket more. Even a blind pig, etc. And fer Gawd’s sake, let CBH talk. The man can’t burp without being subjected to withering scorn.
Reine
If you can’t handle the criticisms of Howland then don’t hang out here. Don’t tell us what we should be writing.
In defense of Reine
It’s not as if he were trying to defend the indefensible, i.e., CTS. The fact of the matter is that Coach Howland has had marvelous success at UCLA and elsewhere. He’s in a slump, obviously, as is his team. I doubt if he has forgotten all the successful things that got him all that success in the past.
That said, Reine, and in defense of many of the people here, Coach Howland is not and should not be immune from criticism. He’s still my team’s coach, and he’s still my choice to remain my team’s choice, and I still have confidence in him. He’s still part of the family, and indeed the head of one major part of the family. As his family, we are surely permitted to tell him what we don’t like, just as we are permitted to tell him what we do like. The negative is part of the family growth process, too. Every parent has heard, “Gee, Dad, that’s not fair” or worse, but the love and respect remains. I think that’s the same with the Bruins Nation with respect to Coach Howland.
Howland is not our "Dad"
He is in charge of taking care of a basketball program that belongs to John Wooden. Howland is not bigger and more important than UCLA.
This is very different than the criticisms we offered toward Karl Dorrell. We wanted Dorrell gone by the end of his second season because he was incompetent.
Howland has a proven track record and has accomplished some wonderful things while he has been in Westwood. I am grateful to him for that. However, that doesn’t mean we have to stay quiet if sense something is wrong and his explanations doesn’t sound convincing. It’s different than calling for his head or asking him to be removed.
If people have problem with frank observations on what we are hearing and reading from him, they can do something simple, just not read our posts. We are not going to care much about whining about what we write. If people want to offer a constructive pov of what they see in Howland’s remarks, they can write it up.
Howland is smart coach. Hope he will find a way to adjust and adapt in next two seasons.
Meanwhile, we are not going to treat Howland as if he is some kind of father figure of UCLA basketball who is beyond reapproach. If he is not making sense, if he is dolling out same lines of taking responsibility, we are going to call it like it is: that the shtick is getting old.
I think Reine has some sort of point
which is that
1) words uttered by players and CBH, taken out of context, often form a large part of the stories being offered up by the LAT, Daily News etc;
2) the MSM stories are the jumping off point for some number of BN posts;
3) as there are no ‘actions’ on which we can easily comment between games, we heavily scrutinize the words being used
4) beyond offering a couple of choice phrases like “I am benching Nikola Dragovic for the rest of the season, as I have had an epiphany as to his limitations” or “I am going to play the youngsters the rest of the way to build for next season”, it is unclear that there are any words CBH could offer that would provide people with much of a lift
5) dissatisfaction with what we are seeing on the court and what people perceive to be CBH’s stubborness in not ringing changes that people here on BN are asking for means that all the words coming from CBH and his team are taken in a negative light, and criticized as such.
In some cases, I think we pay a lot of attention to relatively vanilla comments (or vanilla comments spun into a story by a desperate beat reporter), because of a lack of any real news; and we are liable to throw criticism at the words as proxy for criticism of the actions. Mostly we are angry at the product on the court and, by extension, what must be going on off the court in practice (and in recruiting) that has led to this mess. The best PR firm in the world may struggle to come up with words for CBH and co to say that would be the ‘right’ thing to say and couldn’t be seen by some as empty, or ignoring a problem, or shifting the blame towards someone, or focusing on the wrong thing, or trite, or what have you.
When performances on the court improve, we will likely take less issue with vanilla comments. The obvious missteps – like our players making comments that are derogatory to other players or the coaches – are certainly something worth pointing out under any environment. But it seems that the best anyone can hope to do when we are performing so poorly is to avoid mistakes in their public statements, as very few public statements (beyond “I’m benching ND right now”) can provide much hope.
When the team is flying high, we are probably apt to praise coachspeak too much during non-game days and see it as validating our notions of everything we are doing right; when the team is low, we are probably apt to criticize a little too much and see it as validating our notion of everything we are doing wrong. If that is the basis for Reine’s statement, I buy it. I don’t buy that CBH is beyond criticism (and I don’t know that Reine really is saying that either), or is owed deference at this point in the season; but the words coming out of CBH’s mouth, filtered through soundbites from the press, seem to be taking extra heat as a proxy for our dissatisfaction with the product.
I am totally guilty of overanalyzing the quotes coming out myself, down to trying to parse nuances of single words, so I am in no position to cast stones. Just trying to explain why some people on this board might find the focus on snippets of quotations to be excessively negative, while other people scouring every news article for evidence of upcoming change are likely to find even vanilla statements to be aggravating.
by britishbruin on Jan 20, 2010 11:27 AM PST up reply actions
wow, way too long
need to learn to edit…
by britishbruin on Jan 20, 2010 11:28 AM PST up reply actions
If people don't want to read the posts
They don’t have to read it. If they want to whine about what we are writing, then can go somewhere else. Period.
of course
Clearly what people – and particularly you guys – want to post is your own business, and no-one has any standing to tell anyone else what to post. There is a fine line between disagreeing with someone’s take, and disagreeing with someone’s right to post their take on the front page; Reine’s post seems to stray too much towards the latter, I was just trying to separate the content of Reine’s ‘different take’ from his unacceptable presumption to tell you what should and shouldn’t be posted.
by britishbruin on Jan 20, 2010 2:41 PM PST up reply actions
(and I think his point is directed at the community in general, not at the frontpagers specifically)
by britishbruin on Jan 20, 2010 2:44 PM PST up reply actions
The thing is
And this goes out to everyone. If people want to offer positive takes on what they are reading in support of Howland then can easily weave out that narrative in the fanposts. Right now I am not feeling good about what is going on with hoops. And I am feeling that way not just because of particular game but few reasons which I have talked about it over the weeks through this season.
I am not going to hide that and fake it by pimping sunshine up everyone’s backside. It’s not going to be happen. When things go well it will reflect as such.
However, if others want to offer a different take and shoot even want to take their attempt at roundups, they can go right ahead. What our consternation is when we see people who seem to like being not only spoonfed but being spoonfed on what they want to read. Not going to happen.
yup
People with positive takes could say things like
“CBH shows belief that even old dogs can learn new tricks, finds new way to use ND’s height and weight: rebounding!”
or “Mike Roll believes effort will be better in future!”
Bit more difficult (or less motivating) to write a fanpost from the (presumed) Reine perspective: “Hoops roundup: nothing of any consequence happened today; empty coachspeak means no-one can be more or less happy today than they were yesterday; status quo maintained” or whatever.
by britishbruin on Jan 20, 2010 3:17 PM PST up reply actions
Worth Reading -- Not Too Long
Context is everything. The MSM takes soundbites out of context and creates stories. We then comment. It’s like the kid’s game of telephone. There is inherent distortion.
Over my years here, I’ve actually gone back and looked at the primary source material that generated the MSM articles. And, what did I find? What all of us who deal with the media already know — some items in quotation marks are not verbatim quotes, and that snippets, when read in the context of an entire statement, do not support the MSM reporter’s slant on the story.
However, I find much of the commentary here stronger than the MSM because even though it begins with a snippet, it usually is backed up with numbers and facts OR labeled “opinion”.
Although I am not as down on ND as others here, most of the criticism is backed by his stat’s. My issue with him has always been “who is playing better?”. But, I’ve now moved into the “play young” camp. Yes, we may lose a game we might have won — but I’m not sure of that. And, who knows, we may win games the vet’s would have lost.
sjh
Soundbites, Different Standards
I think it is fair and that there is a good purpose for analyzing CBH quotes. It is fair to be optimistic, pessimistic, harsh, etc. CBH is an adult and part of his job is to talk to the media. He has been doing it for years and should know what he is doing.
And he has used the media. For example, CBH criticized Kevin Love in the press early on to make him work more on Defense. He did that not to embarrass Love but, I assume, to motivate him. (E.g. you may be all High School All-World but you better work on hedges and defense if you want to play here.)
But I take a different take on a 19 year old freshmen\sophomore talking to the media. I think you can read too much into what they say, after a loss especially. I am sure at 19 I was not ready to be interviewed by a reporter in a difficult spot (getting blown out at home by $C qualifies as difficult.)
Notice, MR and JK quotes may be platitudes but they are acceptable team sayings. Guess what? They are seniors.
So, I would both cut ML and RN some slack and advise people not to read too much into their quotes. But CBH is fair game.
sure
CBH is fair game.
What becomes difficult is if people read single quotes out of context and read way too much into it.
I forget who did this, but someone called out CBH after he ‘refused to take responsibility’ for the $C loss, after reading his quotations in the press. His full quotes made it very clear he was taking responsibility, but the version presented to us through the most pervasive sources did not. That seems unfortunate.
To adopt 66’s previous angle to critics of ND’s playing time, “what else is CBH to say?” would be a reasonable question for people who think CBH is fair game and has said the wrong thing. Similarly for people criticizing MR/JK’s platitudes – I’m curious as to what a player could say that would meet with approval here, until such a time as performances on the court are improved.
by britishbruin on Jan 20, 2010 6:20 PM PST up reply actions
It's easy to understand why Drago's turnovers are so rare...
it’s hard to lose the ball during the fraction of a second between getting the ball and jacking it up.
ReineSeite, wise up
we have let CBH talk and it is not getting better, we need action from him (such as sitting Rago). And you say “if he (ND) tried hard and used proper technique.” He wont try hard and he wont use proper technique, he has had plenty of chances
by WoodenMania on Jan 20, 2010 10:36 AM PST up reply actions
Of course Howland can burp
Reine, not that I am on the band wagon against what you said also. Truth of the matter is CBH is really out of sorts this season. Only he knows in his own mind the reasons for some of the decisions he made.
In another month and a half, when conference season concludes, our collective griefs with ND will be over. I certainly hope CBH can tell us, once and for all, his wisdom in sticking with someone so inept, mediocre and inconsistent.
Trying to understand
why drago still plays. Nothing seems to make sense. Could Coach Howland giving the seniors such unreasonable minutes be his way of enticing players to come back to school rather than leaving early for the NBA? I know none of the current players are ready, but that hasn’t stopped others before. Many have said before that if we only had one of our stars comeback (AA, KL, RW, LRMAM), we would’ve been hands down favorites to win it all. It’s also been shown that Florida, Kansas, and UNC all got some measure of luck with players coming back unexpectedly in their title runs.
Personally, I don’t see any value in having Drago on the court. Not only does his play stink, he should have been benched indefinitely after disgracing the University with his second run in with the law. Whether he was guilty or not, he should’ve had the sense to stay out of trouble after last year’s incident with his girlfriend.
If anything
playing unproductive players over others who either could be productive or believe they could be productive would seem to entice the players on the bench to leave, not stay. For the most part, the players we need in order to stay at the level of competitiveness expected at UCLA are not going to be content to sit on the sidelines and watch if they are capable of contributing.
Agreed
all Howland is doing with ND is building resentment in the other players whom he will yank after 30 seconds if they make a mistake.
His people management skills are certainly hard to figure out.
"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"
by silverlakebruin on Jan 20, 2010 10:12 AM PST up reply actions
Very good point
As much respect as I have for Coach Howland, I wish I had a better understand of what he is thinking. In some respects, he seems to be very slow in reacting (defense and offense, playing those not earning time) and in some areas, he seems to overreact (notably recruiting players not fitting his style)
by truebluebruin on Jan 20, 2010 10:32 AM PST up reply actions
on the other hand...
We would never have made it to consecutive Final Fours, had we not let our freshmen play significant minutes
Had Darren Collison not been given 19.2 minutes per game as a freshmen, backing up a 1st round pick PG, we might not have had the same smooth transition the next year
Had Luc not been trusted to be given 30 minutes per game as a freshmen, do you think we make it to the Final Four that year?
Even Westbrook was given consistently 9 minutes per game his freshmen year – even through the tourney run. Some of our freshmen right now are lucky to get even 5 minutes per game… if they appear.
Sad But True
Had to LOL at the Maginot Line reference. It’s a rough way to put it but unfortunately it’s true.
Los Angeles Rams and the UCLA Bruins!!!!!
by Minnesota Bruinfan on Jan 20, 2010 10:22 AM PST reply actions
those 2 words again
CBH needs to adjust and adapt-can he? will he? Let’s hope the answer to both is yes. If we must lose it would be better to do so in a blaze of glory rather than slinking off. CBH will rebouind but not this season
Three Things
1) Drago Should be relegated to the role of a three-point specialist whose minutes are reserved for those points in the game when we need a three or want to extend the opponent’s defense. That means he’s not on the court more than 10 minutes a game at most.
2) Unless Howland kicks him off the team, there’s nothing wrong with him continuing to coach the kid. The Serbian might be a clown, but Howland ignoring him won’t change our the team’s situation.
3) We need a freakin’ point guard. Yeah, I said it again for the umpteenth time.
Now might be a good time
to dust off the old saw, usually attributed to Voltaire about disagreeing with what you say but defending to the death your right to say it, which is pretty much my attitude, except for the part about death. I f anyone imagines that I am so dense as to believe that I have any right to tell anyone else what to write, then I can only apologize for having given that impression. I certainly don’t mean to annoy anyone, least of all Nestor, for whom I feel nothing but respect and gratitude for all that he does for BN and Bruin athletics. I don’t even have that many disagreements. I am certainly on board with the youth movement concept, and I definitely agree that this mess belongs to CBH. I do hope that we can find some use for the players we have, and I think it is possible that Drago may make some significant contribution in the 13 games we know we have left; many others either don’ t think that is likely to happen, or don’t think it could possibly make up for all his failures, limitations, legal problems or just the unpleasant fact of his existence. I really can’t go any further in the defense of this guy, but I do know that he has been the top scorer and rebounder in a few games. Anyway, what has bothered me most is the treatment of CBH. The man is just a man, certainly, but he is our coach and things are not going well, so I admit to having sympathy for him, and feeling an urge to rally round in times of trouble. I am sorry if that seems out of line in some way, but I am not trying to argue for the sake of arguing, or intending to show any disrepect to others with differing views.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
