UCLA Basketball Roundup: What the Carlino Transfer Means
by DCBruins on Dec 11, 2010 7:37 AM PST
in Basketball
Email
PrintBefore we turn to the big news of yesterday, the transfer of Matt Carlino, let me just add the most frightening comment during the press conference may have been the comment from CBH that he needed Malcolm Lee against the Cal Poly Mustangs. We know have only 9 scholarship players but the fact that we need a player against a 3-4 mid-major for a home game is either coaching hyperbole or a danger sign.
It looks like Lee will play tonight but he may have long term issues:
In better news for the Bruins, Howland also said that sophomore shooting guard Malcolm Lee should be able to play against Cal Poly on Saturday at Pauley Pavilion even though Lee tweaked his previously sprained ankle in practice Thursday and is suffering from patellar tendinitis after hurting his knee against Montana.
That we need Lee against a team that is ranked 330th in FG% and 327th in Points per game is worrisome. Of course part of the problem is we are down to 9 Scholarship players due to Carlino leaving. Speaking of the other news, Matt Carlino is transferring.
Five things on the Carlino transfer. Three big Negatives and two other not so negatives. (I will not say positives. It is not a good thing for a kid to leave like this.)
The obvious negatives.
1. We have only nine scholarship players available, only four of which are guards. Of those four, Malcolm Lee has some injury and durability issues. Zeke Jones has some fouling issues. The other two guards are young (Tyler Lamb) and Jerime Anderson. I am not laughing at DoctorMexican now, well I am but Blake Arnet may see action at some point this year when the game still matters.
2. This is the sixth transfer in recent years for CBH. Wright, Stanback, Gordon, Morgan, Moser, and now Carlino. Superbruinman pointed out that Duke has had a lot of kids transfers as well. However, this is a flag of concern. Considering the fact we have lost four in the last two years. Individually all have explanations but taken as a group there are some questions developing for CBH. The biggest concern is did CBH know of the potential issues when we recruited the kids and why did UCLA recruit them?
3. Which brings us to Carlino. Why the heck was Carlino recruited in the first place? Carlino said he came as a PG, in his first interview on coming to UCLA:
It was a good fit for me as a point guard, and how many guys Coach Howland has done a great job.
Yet Carlino could not beat out Anderson as backup PG and was considered a shooting guard at this point. This is not DC backing up JF. At 2, we have Tyler Lamb, Malcolm Lee and next year Norman Powell (who by the way is being compared to Westbrook as an athlete.) Did Carlino read the writing on the wall and transfer?
But the larger case is again why was he recruited?!? (A three point specialist?) CBH admitted he screwed up in not playing him against Montana when a three point specialist could have played but the larger question is why recruit him in the first place.
Two not so negative comments.
1. As others have mentioned this frees up a scholarship for a PG. CBH must recruit a true PG that can contribute right away.
2. Carlino may be a bit of a head case. His basketball odyssey is interesting. He commits to Indiana and moves to go to high school there from Arizona, then surprises Indiana by coming to UCLA before his senior year of high school. Carlino knew his playing time was not guaranteed and it seems a bit early to leave and may be a sign of larger problems. After all Carlino said in question with Jon Gold after he was recruited:
JG: How important will playing time be to you next season?
"Whatever coach Howland feels is going to help him win, he'll do. I'm concerned on doing whatever coach asks me when I get there. Everything will work out how it works out. We have a lot of good players coming in and a lot currently there. He has the tools and he knows what to do with them."
Obviously he is a young kid and I tend to agree with Class of 66 sick of this "junior high" stuff. But I don't care how you slice it there are still major concerns here regarding CBH. Yes, I realize that Roy Williams did not know the Wear twins were leaving and was blindsided by there coming to UCLA but still worrisome to hear CBH say the things he said in response to Carlino leaving:
Howland said he was blindsided by the decision and hadn't seen any warning signs - he also said Carlino had a great practice a day earlier - and it appears to be a playing-time issue. . . .However, when UCLA's shooting numbers were dreadful in Sunday's 66-57 loss to Montana, Howland still decided not to play Carlino. After the game, Howland even said he wouldn't consider redshirting him.
"That's definitely an aspect of it," Howland said of Carlino's dissatisfaction with playing time. "He's done fine academically. He doesn't see it long-term being best for him. That's why he made the decision."
Or this:
"It really caught me off guard because I wasn't expecting this," Howland said. "I didn't see him being down or lowly this whole time, so it was a surprise. I understand why it's hard after you're used to being the star of your high school team, which most of these kids are."
Carlino, who graduated high school early so he could enroll at UCLA this season, averaged 13.4 points and 4.3 assists in leading Bloomington South High to a 23-1 record and into the Indiana 4A State Regional finals. He was a point guard in high school but was going to play shooting guard for the Bruins. His departure leaves the Bruins (3-4) with only nine eligible scholarship players.
"It's obviously disappointing because it leaves us short-handed," Howland said. "Where it will hurt us is if we come down with a significant injury."
CBH needs to win 20+ games this year and compete for the PAC 10 title, even if Blake Arnet is the backup PG.
Montana Game One Last Time (I hope ) and Cal Poly
As some reported in the threads, it seems Smith and/or Nelson had colds in the Montana game. Smith particularly seemed limited. Between Smith's cold and his thumb, it may be in line to cut him some slack.
However, Reeves Nelson is another issue:
Howland said he had spoken with sophomore Reeves Nelson about the forward's tendency to sulk when things aren't going to his liking.
"So much of his stuff when he's not doing well is mental," Howland said. "He gets down, he drops his head and it only is a self-defeating thing when he starts to do that."
. . . There was a five-point, five-rebound effort against the Jayhawks offset somewhat by what Howland called "maybe the best defensive effort of his career," followed by a five-point, six-rebound game against the Grizzlies in which Nelson repeatedly missed layups and put up little fight when a Montana player tried to tug the ball away in the second half.
But Howland said he was encouraged by Nelson's play in practice this week for the Bruins, who are on a four-game losing streak.
The Kansas game was interesting in that Reeves not only played decent M2M D on his one of the Kansas twins he also had 4 assists and played up top. The Montana game is unexplainable, except by the cold. Reeves need to have a big game tonight, not to win this game, but to get himself back on track. In addition to the obvious good effects maybe that will help purge the "bad Reeves" that sulks and yells at teammates.
Cal Poly Mustangs
This should be a win, relatively easy but I am loathe to predict that. In addition to the terrible numbers mentioned above:
The Mustangs have lost their last three away from home, as they continue their five game, 29 day road trip. Cal Poly has lost the four all-time meetings with UCLA.
On the positive side for Cal Poly the Mustangs give up only 60.3 points per, 44th in the nation and limit opponents to 41.4 FG%. They will likely play a match up zone. Their guards have some size but not their forwards. Really, none of their players really stick out. They should not be able to score much on UCLA and their hope will be their zone defense will not allow UCLA to score either. More details on the Mustangs here.
The Mustangs aren't the issue. Will Malcolm Lee's injuries effect him? Will Reeves become a better teammate and play at the level he is capable on both ends of the court? Will Smith start to play more consistently? And most unbelievably, will Blake Arnet play because we need him or (hopefully) in the last minutes of a blow out?
42 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Big Picture, Little Picture
The Big Picture is that we have major player issues when it comes to talent, and surprising ones when you consider the goodwill of UCLA in major college basketball. Despite a great attitude and effort, and an improvement over last year, Jones does not appear to be a top 20 PG. Lee has been a continuing mystery at shooting guard. And now Nelson seems to drift in and out of games, even at Kansas. It really boils down to major recruiting problems at any kind of guard, the most important position according to Coach of blessed memory. Even with Nelson’s current problems, he was a major get and we really have excellent front line players overall IMO. That has not been Howland’s big problem.
The Little Picture is the Carlino transfer. Not a big hit, perhaps, but not a good sign either and certainly a waste of a scholie this year. Here’s our best, pure shooting guard, according to reports anyway, but he never gets into a game where we’re being killed by a zone and he’s apparently perfectly healthy. Then Howland gives a Dorrelian quote essentially saying he never been thought about using his best shooter to shoot over the zone and was blindsided the kid wanted to transfer, and, apparently didn’t try or couldn’t talk the kid out of it with a simple promise of some playing time. Am I the only one thinking there’s something wrong with this picture?
Now I am biased. I’ll admit it. I’ve never been a big fan of CBH’s East Coast style even though he got us into three Final Fours. Call me spoiled or stupid. All that matters is winning, right? But I objectively thought we won despite his slow-down style, probably due to his tremendous defense and discipline and the amazing players, especially the point guards he had – JF, DC, RW – who overcame his shackling offense and made it work, but OMG how much more could they have won if they pushed the ball, like CBH has tried to do this year with much inferior players? But I digress. I was just trying to admit by bias. Sorry. That is the minor point with this team.
Put the big and little pictures together and it is clear Howland is in trouble. I don’t like him being in trouble. I don’t like our team being in trouble. I want Howland to win. I think he’s trying to change, to adapt, to improve, but, here’s the painful part, this year looks pretty tough even in a crappy PAC-10 and unless and until he gets a gifted PG, the future is equally questionable.
I don’t want, and am not calling for his head. He’s a top coach IMO, certainly a top 10 coach by any objective standard, who should be able to recruit the cream guards around the nation, but hasn’t or has just missed in his evaluation or just got unlucky with Holiday (though some would argue CBH’s misuse of his talents, too). So maybe he can right the ship.
Maybe this year he can further develop Jones, or Lee will finally show up or Lamb will amaze us. Or maybe next year he can land some out of this world PG. Let’s hope.
CBH’s main problem is, this is not football. It’s basketball where expectations and standards are Woodenesque and not Donahueesque. If it were football, he could have three crappy years in a row. No problem. But it ain’t. So if he doesn’t win this year he might be out anyway. And certainly if we stink next year, too.
Sorry for the stream of consciousness, but I am really shocked at the state of the program right now. I never dreamed CBH would take UCLA basketball to this level ever.
I hope he can turn this mess around. I really do, but at least in this one sport, excellence is expected and demanded. So the ball is literally in is court. Good luck, Ben. I don’t envy you. Your future is in the hands of your players.
Communications are necessary ... by Coach!
Does Howland talk with his players frequently on how they feel about what’s going on in the team. To have that many “recruited” players leave is not only a worry now but a larger worry goind forward.
We cannot live through another 14 – 18 season now or ever. Howland is a good guy but it seems he’s falling out lately.
bout the many transfers we have had, please remember we are gaining 2 HUGE transfers...
from North Carolina…the Weir twins for next season…these guys make me very upbeat about the coming seasons for BRUIN bball…and while this hurts us this year, it might open up the recruiting more for next year as well…
What position do they play?
Oh yeah, they’re tweener 3/4 guys.
Can either play PG?
Yeah, that’s what I thought.
This team will continue to suck, no matter who we have on the roster, until we get an elite point guard. Look at the last decade of champions:
2010: Duke (Jon Scheyer)
2009: North Carolina (Ty Lawson)
2008: Kansas (Mario Chalmers)
2007: Florida (Taurean Green)
2006: Florida (Taurean Green)
2005: North Carolina (Raymond Felton)
2004: Connecticut (Ben Gordon)
2003: Syracuse (Gerry McNamara)
2002: Maryland (Steve Blake)
2001: Duke (Jay Williams/Chris Duhon)
2000: Michigan State (Mateen Cleaves)
Look at the best UCLA teams of recent memory and who our starting PG was:
1994-1995: Tyus Edney
2005-2006: Jordan Farmar
2006-2007: Darren Collison
2007-2008: Darren Collison
Like I said, until we get an elite starting PG who can distribute the ball (we don’t need a superstar scorer: look at Taurean Green who was an efficient game manager and ball protector) well and run the offense without stupid turnovers, we’re not going anywhere. Period.
by Bellerophon on Dec 11, 2010 10:37 AM PST up reply actions
Just to be clear
Hope you agree that Carlino transfering out has nothing to do with our critical problems at pg? Scouts downgraded Carlino on the basis of his performance in Indiana after transfering. Arriving here, there seemed to be considerable opinion that pg was not his position.
I’m not bothered too much by his loss. He may have seen the handwriting on the wall for playing time. And he certainly has seen the staff working hard to bring in an elite pg. With Norman Powell arriving as well, transfer just doesn’t seem that surprising.
Just wish we could have seen some pt from him before he bolted. Imho, not getting pt in the Montana game was not a good reason to leave. We were facing a hugely bad loss and a moderately rated Fr pg coming off weeks of inactivity due to concussion would not be a solution. Now if he had been buried on the bench during a blowout win, that’s another matter.
And . . .
. . . was Carlino that elite point guard?
No.
Just making sure. I’m still unclear as to how the Carlino transfer is an issue for our program.
Aside from
the structural issue of having a small number of scholarship players, as DCBruins points out in the post.
And player misevaluation
An increasingly common problem after assistants like Keating and Ziegler left.
Agree with uclahy
We are also worried about the direction of the UCLA BB program. We ( my husband and I ) were not very happy when Howland was picked as our coach, we really didn’t know him that well, and his lack of ability to keep players is getting to be a problem. Some of these players leaving UCLA are making contributions at other schools (UNLV). He seems aloof with his players and his assistant coaches. We have also heard from people that know that some of his players don’t like him that much. I hope our BB program improves and that those four letters, UCLA, are respected again in the BB world. GO BRUINS!!!
by Forever a Bruin on Dec 11, 2010 10:03 AM PST reply actions
We may actually need a big offensive game from Nelson
At this point, after Montana was able to shut us down both inside and outside, Nelson appears to be one of the few players on the team that can be reasonably effective anywhere on the floor. We may need some of the passing ability he showed in the Kansas game. I know I said just yesterday I was in favor of sitting him if angry, sulky, petulant Reeves came out, and I still am, but I guess CBH’s comments are encouraging that he’s at least aware of the issue. Let’s see if he’s addressing it. Best case is that the transfer jolts all of these guys where they’ll buckle down and assume a bunker mentality.
I also have to address the comments on the whining about pace – it’s baseless and shortsighted. Lest we forget that the pace we used during the Final Four years were good fits for those teams and that the pace helped feed into the suffocating defense that helped us in actual tournament games: Alabama in ‘06, Memphis in ’06, Indiana in ’07, A&M in ’08. Three second round games that we won with defense. CBH is right that the offense isn’t always going to be there, but defense has a much higher correlation with effort, and I’d much rather have our tournament chances tied to effort and mental preparation than chance. If CBH decides that his team in any given year may not be capable of locking down, then I’m fine with him pushing the pace to adjust to his team. That’s what a good coach should do. But retroactively applying that “logic” to previous teams that benefited from a slower pace is just ridiculous whining.
And lastly, this probably isn’t a surprise to DCBruins, but I believe his standard of 20 wins is very fair. I’d go a step further and say we better be a tournament team, but 20 wins is a more objective mark.
to address 20 wins
this would mean going 4-0 vs Cal Poly, UC Davis, Montana St, UC Irvine to get us to 7 wins
then 13-7 vs Pac-10, BYU and St Johns.
Say for sake of argument we beat BYU and St Johns:
do we think 11-7 in a weak Pac-10, and no trip to the tourney, would be anything other than hugely disappointing?
by britishbruin on Dec 11, 2010 11:23 AM PST up reply actions
You and Tydidies are right, 20 wins is not enough
It is 20 wins and compete for the PAC 10 title. I will edit the above as well.
I was looking at the numbers as well
And that’s why I say it’s “fair”. Obviously I hope for more, and I still believe a tournament berth is a baseline minimum, but the fact is I don’t know how things are going to shape up around the country. If it’s a mid major dominated year, there will be fewer at large bids for major conferences and that may have an effect on how I think about it, but the 20 win mark is something I’ll know we have or haven’t achieved.
And like DCBruins, I also feel we must be in the running for the Pac 10 title, and if we do not win it, we must be in it until the second to last or last week of the conference schedule. Being eliminated from contention before that will likely say some very bad things about how the season is already going.
Nelson
Is a bit hard to figure out. He is playing defense better (but still Lane is much better on help defense.) He is passing much better than last year. (His 16 assists so far this year is more than the entire SEASON last year.) Yet he was having trouble scoring against Montana on the same play he beat Pacific with easily.
I guess the good news is if he puts together everything at once, the only thing he needs to improve on is his FT shooting and help defense. Of course that is a big if.
I kind of agree on the Tournament Mark
but am reluctant to go there. If we finish second in the PAC 10 or tied for first but the PAC-10 Tournament is won by a lower seed, I could see us screwed because the PAC 10 maywill only get two teams as of now. But I think it is fair to say a Tourney bid is a must, I am just reluctant for that reason.
Also British forgets we could get another win in the PAC 10 Tournament so we could go 10-8 and 1-1 in the PAC 10 Tourney and still hit 20 wins. Not good enough obviously.
I also think we need no more embarrassing blow outs. We gave up last year. Against Montana we squabbled and played like crap but it was not as bad as CAL or UW last year in that we did not give up completely as we did in those games. (Of course Montana at home is NO comparison to UW or CAL on the road.)
yeah, I was thinking you meant 20 reg season wins...
and, as with football, it isn’t even necessarily the W/L purely as the overall season performance in those games. Scratching out 20 total wins while being blown out twice by Washington and Arizona wouldn’t cut it…
by britishbruin on Dec 11, 2010 12:05 PM PST up reply actions
20 wins is just sad
Given where this program was only a few years ago, and given how absolutely terrible the Pac-10 is this year, the fact we’re hoping for 20 wins is just pitiful.
Had Howland actually sustained the momentum from those Final Four runs and brought in quality recruits and planned accordingly (i.e. seeing what everyone knew in Holiday leaving early), we’d be in a position to easily dominate the conference and earn a high seed in the dance.
I’m very pessimistic and predict we end up going to the NIT, where we promptly lose in the second round.
At least Jaime Dixon is a Southern California guy.
Two points
CBH is a great coach. I am surprised he has not been flexible with his philosophy though (before this year). I am also surprised with how much the mini fab 5 recruiting class fared when they got to UCLA. Attitude problems, no leadership skills and over rated abilities. There was definitely a component of the recruitment process that was missing in terms of evaluating the players (see next paragraph). I am a fan of Lee though, at least he gives his best and is not a head case.
Next year, we get the twins and Norman Powell. We definitely need a PG but a lot of the great talents are signed up. There is a PG from Bellflower, CA, who is still uncommitted. Assuming, TH leaves this year, we still have 11 scholarship players next year. The year after, with the graduation of Lee, JA and Zeke, we will have at least 5 scholarships available (6 if RN leaves). We need recruits with heart and leadership ability and who will stay at least 3 years. I tend to stay away from wanting the 5 star recruits because they are one and done (assuming the team does well again as we hope it should). So a 4 star recruit who shows more tenacity, skill and leadership ability than Jerime Anderson is who I hope CBH can recruit. I remember reading a post about CBH needing to recruit from the LA county HS players.
We need a PG with that edge to drive and break down defenders and not let guys walk past them to the hoop.
And I think we need a wrinkle on defense. Like a full court press. Our defense, though great during the F4 years was one dimensional. Man to man, hedge screen and double the post. A full court zone trap, or a 3 -1-1, something to toss at the opposing team and manufacture points at certain points of the game, not necessarily for the whole game. Good luck to us this next 3 months. I hope something clicks in Zeke’s play since I think he is the key for a successful season. this year and next.
I had forgotten about Lee's injury
which is worrying, CBH won’t try to start him tonight will he?
Lamb definitely needs the play time and it seems he was fairly productive in the last game.
I have to admit I'm still fuming over Rick and the state of Football.
I did not even see the Montana game so I could not begin to venture a guess what went wrong there. As for the Carlino transfer, I’ll go with DCBruins, it’s not the transfer that is concerning so much as the number of transfers in recent years. We did not have these kind of problems under the Lizard, Harrick, or anybody that I can recall for that matter. It is true that the College Basketball landscape has changed, and players have much bigger feelings of entitlement, and thus transfers are becoming more common.
The only thing in common I see with all of these transfers is Ben Howland. But! this is not the same as saying that CBH is the problem. I am a hardcore believer that you do not cater to the spoiled. Fuck ’em. Get tough or get out. But, even I have to admit that it appears we are drawing more than our fair share of prima donnas. And, that can be laid on CBH and the coaching staff.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
If you had been at the Montana disaster
You would have livid, depressed, and in a quandry all at once. After having sat in on that excuse for FBS football on our part the night before and then realizing I actually paid money for my seat in Pauley for the Montana game—I figured there is no hope and the best course of action is ditch the PAC-9, 10, 11 or 12 for the MIssouri Valley Conference where at least we could compete. I think we can compete with North Dakota State in football but perhaps not. Incidentally, there may be forces at play which will prevent us from competing downstream with any success in the PAC-9 to 12 in the revenue producing sports. I really believe that.
I agree with your analysis about prima donnas. Yes, its on Coach Howland for recruting prima donnas. But the prima donnas and their parents are part of the problem.
And not all transfers (drop-outs) are prima donnas. It is hard to succeed at UCLA academically and when a player has to go to practice where he is pressed more than ever before, some kids cannot play at UCLA because they cannot cut the mustard both academically and on the court. That is slightly different from being an out and out prima donna.
Go Bruins!
Agree
We shouldn’t be catering to spoiled kids who think they’re the next coming of His Airness.
But who is to blame for bringing these kids, who are obviously not Ben Ball Warriors in the JF, AA, DC, LRMAM, LMR, KL, RW, AA2 mold?
That’s right: Ben Howland (well, technically, his shitty staff that can’t recruit without a Dixon or a Keating, which ultimately falls on Howland for hiring these dumbass assistants).
Carlino
This one confuses me. Pardon my ignorance, but can someone tell me why Carlino would leave now rather than after the season? Is it that he will be eligible to play next year if he leaves now, rather than having to sit out a year? I’m just curious what his (or his handlers) strategic thinking is, since the timing seems so odd. What level of school will now jump to take him, do you think?
It means he can play
In the spring semester or winter quarter 2012, depending on the academic calendar of the school he chooses. If he waited until the end of the season he would miss the entire 2012 season and be a redshirt sophomore in 2013.
by SuperBruinMan on Dec 11, 2010 1:45 PM PST up reply actions
By not playing this year in a regular season game...
does that mean he still has 4 yrs of eligibility? That may be why he chose to leave now instead of getting garbage minutes throughout the season.
I think CBH is a good coach. He might just need to communicate with each of the players more often instead of assuming that everything is great because “We’re UCLA” as he’s stated many times recently.
We’ll be fine this season. We just have to gain some consistency and stick to the game plan. I think we also need to feed it down low a lot more to take advantage of Joshua. In a lot of games this season, he’s open but we still choose to swing it around instead of feeding him.
Even if he hadn't played at all this year
He would’ve lost his redshirt year before sitting out after transferring, so the year off would count as a year of eligibility.
by SuperBruinMan on Dec 11, 2010 3:22 PM PST up reply actions
Carlino leaving is a little crazy to me, and surprised at Reeves
Yeah, I’m not too sad Carlino is leaving, even without seeing him shoot a single basket. A true freshmen who just had a concussion and he’s crying because he hasn’t gotten playing time yet? Forget it, I don’t care who you are.
And I’m surprised at the story about Reeves sulking… I didn’t see it last year when we struggled, and now that we’re better, I’m a little surprised to see it surface now. I love the way the kid plays and it seemed tome his attitude was to just play hard and get his body in there no matter how bad he’s playing.
Look forward to seeing the kids bounce back tonight. Looks like BYU game will be a nice challenge with a ranked team and another chance to see if we belong in the tourney bid talk or not. Go Bruins…
Surprising indeed...
I don’t think CBH should be saying stuff like that in public. Kids don’t take criticism very well nowadays and we don’t have the luxury of making our best players feel stupid. It’s not a huge criticism but I don’t think it helps the situation in any way.
My thought too...
… maybe the radar is up because being concerned about Chow’s curious public comments about Brehaut’s failings, but this very public criticism of a 19 year old seems odd to me. Did Wooden ever give personal criticism like this in public? As I say maybe I’ve just got selective recall.
Carlino leaving is a mystery, but not one that likely matters
1. If he left because he saw he could not beat out our point guards, then we lose some potential outside shooting against a zone, if he can do that, but not much else. If he didn’t think he could challenge what we have, he’s not a very good player. As a less than experienced freshman minus, he was unlikely to help us much this year.
2. If he left because, after overcoming injury, he didn’t get into the Montana game because CBH was distracted by trying to figure out how the heck he was going to fix this mess, well, goodbye to yet another prima donna.
3. If he wasn’t accepted by the team or didn’t like the school, he didn’t give either much of a chance.
4. Only if he turns out to be a great player, not just an okay player, will this matter. When and if we start winning, everything will return to normal.
5. It adds a small negative vibe for recruiting, but he’s been pretty flighty all along, so its not a big deal.
Shotgun Marriage
I’m not surprised that this union didn’t work out. Carlino seemed like an ill-advised, last-ditch, desperation pick up by CBH. That being said, I am concerned with the trend of players fleeing our program as quickly as possible, be it by transfer or early entry into the draft. I think we’ve all got to consider the distinct possibility that CBH just doesn’t get a long with his players on a fundamental level.
Not exactly a passion bucket type of coach
Looking at his history, Carlino is by all means not a normal player/person either. I won’t fault CBH for this one. The rest of the team seems fine.
Carlino, Howlan, UCLA basketball
First off, this is my first comment on BruinsNation. I’ve enjoyed reading this blog site since October, 2010. Anyway, here are my thoughts on the above story;
1. Carlino- I say good riddance. If he and his dad want to be quitters and go somewhere else, so be it. Let’s not forget that in addition to leaving the most storied basketball team in history, he is also turning his back on the chance of getting a UCLA degree, which is something to be proud of and something that could’ve helped him in his life after basketball.
2. Coach Howland- In my opinion, he’s a great coach, just has had a few years now where recruits or situations have not worked out. Three Final 4’s in three years didn’t happen by accident. Further, when Russell Westbrook came to UCLA, he was so raw in his basketball skills that hardly any other programs wanted him. Look at him now, obe of the best PG’s in the NBA and a lot of that skill was developed under Coach Howland. His defense and tenacity carry the Howland stamp.
So several recruits didn’t work out. That happens. Look at some of the top recruits throughout the nation every year, some over-deliver, and some simply don’t pan out. Lee and Anderson were supposed to be great, they’re not. It happens. But look at Reeves, he wasn’t supposed to be much and he is turning into an excellent player. It’s just the way it goes. Coaching and recruiting 17-18 year olds is very tricky, more art than science.
3. Ultimately, I think UCLA is a team that is developing into becoming a very good, dangerous NCAA tournament team. Look at the Kansas game, they were right there and I think that show’s potential. Sure, they let themselves and Bruin Nation down with that stinker against Montana, but I consider that an anomaly. It was like Virginia Tech losing to James Madison right after losing to Boise State. After losing a heartbreaker, a bad loss is ripe to happen. Sure, they could’ve showed a lot of fortitude and grit by winning that game, but they just aren’t there yet, they are still developing…
I say give this team a long leash. They are going to have ups and downs, but Nelson, Honeycut, Jones, Smith, Lamb, and Stover are going to get better every game. Hopefully, Lee and Anderson can contribute in a positive way too.
Watch out for UCLA in March. I think by then they will get in sync, play hard, get the right focus, and be able to play with anyone in the Pac-10 tournament.
+1
Agreed and welcome (officially) to BN!
I don’t think that by recruits leaving, CBH should be given blame. We can blame him for not going to zone sooner last season, but not for his kids decisions to go elsewhere. If we won 20 games last season and didn’t lost to Montana this season, nobody would be questioning Ben.
Like the tennis man and others have stated, no big deal. Let’s move on
With UW losing to A&M on the road
And UA currently getting smashed by one of our future opponents in BYU at halftime, the Pac 10’s stock continues to nosedive.
23 students currently at Pauley...
I know winter break just started and the last game was a punch to the gut, but that’s just pathetic. Maybe more will show in the next 20 minutes, but I’m not hopeful. Just sad.
by andrewsm78 on Dec 11, 2010 4:42 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
