Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Events Cause Mariners To Lose To Rangers

Is Great Defense the Only Way CBH & UCLA Basketball Can Win ?

As UCLA likely heads back toward .500 with a tough game at Kansas this week it is an easy time to start questioning UCLA Coach Ben Howland and whether UCLA can win again.  Bruin Report Online leader Tracy Pierson does just that in an interesting but ultimately flawed analysis of UCLA Coach Ben Howland that I think is worth discussing.   The whole article is here.  The main point of his article, made in different fashions, is that CBH can only win and bring UCLA back again by focusing on recruiting athletes that can play stifling great man-to-man defense and by committing to the same defense first and foremost approach that led to three final fours.  CBH can't win with his current personnel or his "push it" offense.  As Pierson concludes (emphasis in original).

Perhaps he’ll realize again that the fastest track back to competitiveness is to play defense, and that, for him and his system, defense isn’t just the fastest track back to competitiveness, but the only track.

I have to respectfully disagree because the last sentence is flawed on many levels.  I don't think CBH or any truly great coach is a coach who plays one system and one system only. 

Star-divide

First, take CBH's own record which proves he can win more than one way.  No, not at Pittsburgh whose team played the tough man defense that UCLA has played, but his first head coaching job where he was known for offense and 3 point shooting.(emphasis mine):

During Howland's tenure, Northern Arizona emerged as one of the top shooting teams in the country. In 1999, NAU became the first team in NCAA history to lead the country in both overall field goal (52.3) and 3-point field goal (44.5) percentage in the same season. Additionally, the Lumberjacks led the nation in 3-point shooting in 1997 (41.9 percent) and 1998 (43 percent), while finishing second in the NCAA for overall field goal percentage (51.6 in 1997 and 51.1 in 1998). From 1997 to 1998, not only did Howland's teams produce back-to-back conference titles, but also consecutive Big Sky Player of the Year awardees in Charles Thomas and Andrew Mavis.

That is a completely different identity than that of Pittsburgh and UCLA. 

While CBH is definitely not in the top echelon of truly elite coaches whose teams  have won it all years apart, you will notice those teams did not play the same styles. 

  • As always start with Coach.  The Lew Alcindor (KAJ) teams were completely different from the press-first guard-led first two championship teams of Walt Hazzard and Gail Goodrich. 
  • Similarly between Bobby Knight's first and second championship teams there was a huge difference between a total team approach with a defense first PG who couldn't shoot (Quin Buckner in 1976) to the team led by a Hall of Fame offense-first defensive liability little-PG named Isiah Thomas in 1981. 
  • Or more recently,  Duke.  Duke won their first championship with Christian Laettner, their Center, as the star and a defense-first little scoring Thomas Hill as the small forward .  More recently Duke won the title with a likely future professional wrestler (Brian Zoubek) as their Center and Kyle Singler a small forward/power forward three point shooter who was the NCAA Tourney MOP.  Duke of 1991 was a complete team where the PF Grant Hill was the backup PG while Duke of 2010 was a three point machine with a rebound specialist best fitted for a post college life as a Rugby player as their Center.   

Obviously I am making broad imperfect analogies but the point is great coaches don't win the same way.  If CBH is going to be a great coach he has to adept. 

Now taking this to 2010.  Right now, Kansas is the number 1 in FG percentage in the country and number 3 in scoring.  They are at home Thursday night where they have the longest home winning streak in the country.  This would be a tough game for any UCLA team let alone a young and learning team.  By the end of Thursday night's game it may well look like we have given up on Defense which is why it is so easy for guys like Tracy to write this now; he will almost certainly be proven right to some extent on Thursday night against Kansas.   But CBH has not given up on defense.  He is adapting to his personnel to push it more and working on improving the defense

Keep in mind the following facts:

1.  Lazeric Jones is a young kid that is learning the speed of D-1 the hard way.  He has played just 5 games against D-1 opponents. He will likely never be a great defender but he is trying hard and learning

The UCLA junior guard and his teammates had been repeatedly beaten by Villanova's breakneck backcourt tandem of Corey Fisher and Maalik Wayns, a blur unlike anything the Bruins had experienced in three season-opening victories over mid-major teams.

"I tried, I guess," Jones said. "I didn't do a great job at it. I guess we have to go back in practice and correct some things." . . .

"They are a fine team and we'll get better with experience," Bruins Coach Ben Howland said. "Lazeric's playing in a big game really for the first time against a top-10 team. … We have to learn from it and bounce back."

Zeke is no DC, JF, RW, or even Cameron Dollar. We can't be the level of the final four teams with him as PG . But he is by far the best we got right now and is better than what we had last year:

"We're much better than a year ago," Howland said of the Bruins, who went 8-10 in the Pac-10 and failed to reach the postseason. "It was hard to watch last year's team while getting ready to play Pepperdine again. We're more athletic and have a better point guard."

2.  As Tracy implies in his article the one common thing of three final fours was starting Power Forward,  Luc Richard Mbah a Moute.  Tracy correctly points out our PFs since have not measured up to the Luc standard.  LRMAM was awesome but no one would think of him as an offense first.  Since then the starting Power Forward have been Nikola Dragovic and Reeves Nelson.  While Drago was offensive in the literal sense, he was supposed to be a good three shooting and offense first power forward.  (Drago replaced Keefe in the starting lineup for more offense.)  Reeves is offense AND Rebounding first.  I think the latter is overlooked.  Reeves is a very good rebounder which is important to defense as well as offense. 

But Tracy's point still stands, CBH traded defense for offense at PF. But does that mean his conclusion that we will never be good again is also true?  Again no player in the near future is likely to equal Luc but it is way too early to compare Reeves and there is no way Reeves should be mentioned in the same breathe as Drago.

That said Reeves is to critics a crappy defender who does not care and to others a work in progress.  I will go the latter route.  On Friday against VCU, I watched Reeves a lot and saw him make more of an effort on defense but he still had lapses and make mistakes.  Reeves received two fouls in the first half when he slid over to help just a bit too late and was called for blocking fouls. It showed that Reeves is trying but has a lot to learn. 

I have no doubt it is Reeves CBH is talking about when he said (emphasis mine)

The one thing he regretted was switching to a zone defense from his trademark man-to-man defense midway through the season. At the time, Howland made the switch because it had become glaringly evident that UCLA didn't have enough athletes to play man-to-man defense at the level it would need to be successful in the Pacific-10 Conference.

"That was just doing everything we could to try to win games," he said. "But looking back on it, I wish I wouldn't have played zone because it really retarded the growth of some of the players we have now and they would be a little bit better at their man-to-man.

And I think Reeves is starting to get it.  Reeves has been talking about defense 

"We just have to get better on defense,’’ said UCLA sophomore forward Reeves Nelson. "We’re starting to play a lot of good teams. We also have to get off on better starts. We got down 8-0 right away [against VCU]. We’re better than last year. And these games will help us. If we can go to Kansas and win, that would give us great momentum going into the Pac-10.’’

 Reeves is not anywhere close to the defender of Luc but he is a slightly better rebounder and a superior offensive player.  (I would take Luc in a heart beat over Reeves, don't get me wrong, but I am saying Reeves is a good and improving player.)  Like Drago he thinks offense first but unlike Drago Reeves makes most of his shots, draws fouls, and rebounds.  He also has become a better passer this year.  He needs to keep working on defense and there are some good signs that he will.  

Point 3.  This team is not comparable to the final four teams PERIOD.  Right NOW we have one guy, maybe 2 guys, who could break into the regular rotation (the top 8 players)  on the last final four team.  (It is a different issue if you want to debate why UCLA failed to stay at that level.)  We can't play defense at that level.  So why not take advantage of the one thing this team does have over other UCLA teams, relatively fast and good in transition and rebounding players at the 3 and 4 slot?   The key question is not do they compare right now on Defense (they don't and won't) but  do they grow and become better players and a good team?  Where are they in March as a team entering the PAC 10 Tourney? Of course, on the way, they can't embarrass the four letters.  Right now they are a young team learning and improving.  But it is important they are a team, as Reeves Nelson said:

"I do feel more comfortable with this team this year because these guys are all my friends, not just my teammates," he said.

Obviously liking teammates, talking about Defense, etc. is just talk right now.  But the proof is not going to be in the  Kansas game but in the later games.  These Bruins need to win over 20 games, compete for the PAC 10 title and never give up (which of course means playing as hard  on defense.)  The latter will be the key against Kansas.  If they keep working, this will be a good UCLA team.  If they don't,  it may well prove Tracy right that CBH can only play one style with one type of player.  I hope and think Tracy is wrong and that this team will be competitive.  That is what I will be watching all season not just on Thursday. 

Go Bruins!

Comment 13 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I found Pierson's article a bit repetitive

I lost count how many times he asserted that Howland is a defensive coach, and by playing defense first basketball, it is likely the only way he/we will succeed.

This may be true, but all great teams and most recent National Champions won because they could do both. In our three trips to the final four, i think the one thing that kept us from getting over the top was an inability to score in crunch time. We kept the other team from scoring for long periods of time, but if you can’t fill that vacuum with points of your own, you have accomplished little.

I think CBH has recognized this and is looking to balance the scales. I don’t agree (with Pierson) that Howland went out and recruited the wrong kind of guys. But, I do agree that (for a little while) he went out and got all the shiny new toys, the guys with 4 and 5 stars and we got away from signing grinders. We find ourselves where we are today, because it’s going to take time to restock the shelves, and not as Pierson suggests because CBH can’t coach ‘em up, or the players can’t pick it up.

The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden

by MexiBruin on Dec 1, 2010 8:18 AM PST reply actions  

Yep, I agree on recruiting

Coach use to recruit some of both. Everyone focuses on the 5 star guys but his teams also had guys like Mike Warren and Larry Farmer, who while good players, were never going to be big pro players. Shoot he had a JC PG for a couple years as well.

by DCBruins on Dec 1, 2010 8:37 AM PST up reply actions  

Warren was a super player

Coach considered him the best point guard he ever coached. He was just too short for the pros. Coach had all-Americans who only played a few minutes in garbage time. UCLA saturated the NBA will all-stars from 1967 to 1974, so that there was even an annual UCLA vs. the World basketball game for a couple of summers.

by Herodotus on Dec 1, 2010 7:25 PM PST up reply actions  

Yes but

Coach also had starters who did not make the pros (which was my point), a few names from the big teams.

Michael Warren was a favorite of Wooden but he did not play in the pros.

John Vallely the PG on the teams between Kareem and Walton never really played in the pros.

The great 72 team had Greg Lee who played 10 games in the pros and Larry Farmer who did not make the Pros.

All the teams had starters who were not NBA greats. Of course, you are right they also had guys like Swen Nater who hardly played but became very good pros However, my point stands that they were not all “5 star” players. Warren would not be 5 star out of high school, etc.

by DCBruins on Dec 1, 2010 8:49 PM PST up reply actions  

Mexi, you are always right on

LRMAM was not only a terrific athlete and a team player who went to three Final Fours in his three seasons, but he was a THREE-STAR Recruit. Another THREE-STAR guy was RW, and we watched him blow up before our eyes. When it really comes down to it, the basketball situation mirrors football. PGs in basketball are like QBs in football, and through a mix of graduation, attrition, transfer, injury, bad recruiting choices, etc., both sports continue to struggle.

by charnaw on Dec 1, 2010 10:27 AM PST up reply actions  

Aw shucks.

The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden

by MexiBruin on Dec 1, 2010 1:07 PM PST up reply actions  

I don’t think it’s the ONLY way that Ben can win – certainly he showed he could win with a different style @ NAU, however, I do think that coaching hard-nosed man-to-man D is Ben’s strong suit, and will be UCLA’s best chance of long-term consistent success.

…and I don’t think Ben forgot how to coach, he’s just not emphasizing effort, and I think most of us know that effort is one of the biggest keys to playing tough D.

I don’t think it’s that Ben recruited the wrong guys – I think it’s that he’s not holding them accountable in a way that will mold their effort into something that will turn these guys into high-level players. For this team to succeed – at a minimum we need Tyler Honeycutt and Reeves Nelson to develop into impact players on both ends. I think both have the potential to do so…

by s.riley on Dec 1, 2010 11:40 AM PST reply actions  

I think great coaches can adapt

Whether or not CBH can do that, well, we shall see. Last few years, we’ve seen how stubborn he can be with regards to playing certain players, sticking with M2M instead of zone, etc.

This year and the next will be very telling since I’m not seeing as characteristic of a defense so far, perhaps the up tempo offense will be the new quality to see.

by BruinEngy on Dec 1, 2010 12:23 PM PST reply actions  

The NBA is the best measure of success

Look at the talent that has entered our program (and left it) during Howland’s tenure:

Ariza, Hollins, Farmar, Afflalo, LRMAM, Westbrook, Love, Collison, etc. etc.

I think the saddest situation is that Kyle Singler never came here. If he had, we would have won a national championship. Look at our team if so:

Darren at point
Westbrook at the 2
Singler at the 3
LRMAM at the 4
and Love at the five

With subs of Mata, Shipp as the 6th man, Keefe, and Aboya.

We wouldn’t have lost. 3-pt shooting, the bane of our existence that year, would have been solved with Singler’s stroke. We would have matched up much better with Russell on Rose, Singler on CDR, and Collison on Anderson. Ugh. I can dream, can’t I?

by OswegoBruin on Dec 1, 2010 1:32 PM PST reply actions  

Defense is not a dirty word

Playing solid work for their shot defense with strong defensive rebounding is always better than matador exhibits from last year. However, good defense can and should generate the offensive attacks. Run when its there but speed up and down the court drains the other team both physically and emotionally. CBH has been advertised as a defensive guru but as was pointed out you have to adapt to your personnel. A good zone is good and should always be a part-not the whole-of your defense. Switching back and forth keeps the opponents off balance. We will get better but by how much and how soon still needs to be determined.

by john4justice on Dec 1, 2010 4:27 PM PST reply actions  

No team can win giving up 80 pts per game

We have played two teams that may make the NCAA Tournament, Villanova and VCU. We gave up 80 to Villanova and 89 to VCU. We will never go above .500 if we can’t play better defense. This has nothing to do with CBH. RN and TH must learn to concentrate on defense or we won’t be successful. Zeke and ML play decent defense. Every point guard needs help defense, and this included RW and DC who were awesome defenders. Zeke is a level below, but plays really hard and will improve. Great defense is compatible with fast break offense. I know CBH is a great teacher, and I hope RN and TH are good students. If you doubt my assessment, watch RN when his man doesn’t have the ball. He stands straight with straight legs and is not poised to move. Until he gets his mind and body ready on defense, he won’t progress. He has the skills to do it. The question is does he have the will. I’m not down on RN or the team. I have enjoyed watching each game this year. It is so much better than last. The shortcomings so far are obvious. We have open shots, but don’t make them. This isn’t bad coaching. We are slow to react defensively. I believe this is a work in progress. I think our team will improve a great deal as the season progresses. I just wish they would come out of preseason ready to play, but perhaps there was too much to teach in a short time. They are a very young team. Go Bruins.

by 75NatChamps on Dec 1, 2010 11:38 PM PST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Bruins Nation, an unofficial daily online scrap book covering the greatest collegiate athletic program in the nation. Established June 16, 2005. GO BRUINS.

Managers

Uclabear1_small Nestor

Arron_afflalo1_small Tydides

Brad_pitt_as_achilles_small Achilles

377011_2642084725867_1068030137_32302525_1166539782_n_small Ryan Rosenblatt

Telemachus_small Telemachus

Licenseplate_small gbruin

2761_small tasser10

Blue_bellerophon_small Bellerophon

Img_0052_2_small Patroclus

Small DCBruins

Of Counsels

094_small Ajax

Menelaus2_small Menelaus

Small Meriones

Small Odysseus

Associates

Eee_small freesia39

Uclabruins_small AHMB