Hoops Game Day Roundup: Howland's Bruins Set To Make Ugly History
I can understand why some of us will work ourselves up, making tonight's matchup against Southern Cal "the biggest game of the season". I am just not seeing it that way. We could have said the biggest basketball game for us was last Saturday against Cal when we had to hold serve at home, yet we imploded after a good start. Similarly we had the biggest basketball game of the season almost two weeks ago, when took on a demoralized Oregon team on the road. We could have buried them after getting off to a solid start, yet we relaxed and failed to pounce.
Couple of weeks prior to that let down, we had the biggest basketball game of the season against Southern Cal when we had to hold serve at Pauley. We ended up humiliating the four letters. The game right before that could also have been the biggest basketball game of the season, when we had a great chance to sweep the Bay Area road trip after an emotional and lucky win against Cal. We didn't show up in that game either.
So no I don't really care about tonight's game being a "big" game. I will watch it just like any other game and get amused over Ben Howland using the same rotation all over again in his fear of not losing a ball game. Bruins have not showed up time and time again all season, when it really mattered. Even if they do show up to "compete" it will only amount to keeping this game close and competitive, as Howland's mentally soft players will most likely melt down the stretch.
What exactly is on the line tonight? Well for starters the Trogans will be chomping at the bit to get their first ever victory at Pauley East. We are also looking at near certainty of Ben Howland becoming the first head coach in Post Wooden era to lose three straight games against Just$C basketball program. Chew on that for a minute before you get fired up over tonight's game. More after the jump.
If you want to read up on the matchup heading into tonight's game, Bruin Report Online has a preview up. It is not behind any subscription firewall at the time I am blogging this, so here is Rob Carpentier's take on how the Bruins can "at least be competitive":
Since crushing the Bruins in January the Trojans have gone 3-3, beating teams they shouldn't and losing to teams they shouldn't. Perhaps that bodes well for the Bruins' chances. USC has been all over the map in terms of its play over the past few weeks and there's nothing in the way that USC is playing that should surprise anyone. The key for the Trojans has been the offense or lack thereof. USC has one bona fide scorer in senior Dwight Lewis (6'5" 215 lbs.) who torched the Bruins for 24 points in the first meeting, and then a collection of athletes who, while not skilled scorers, are far superior athletically to the Bruins. Outside of that great performance against the Bruins, though, Lewis has been pretty average this year. He leads the Trojans in scoring at 13.3 PPG, but the key is that Lewis is only shooting 31% from the three-point line. In the first meeting Lewis was able to hit early and often from deep because of the screens his teammates set against a very porous UCLA man defense. Once he gained his confidence it seemed as if Lewis couldn't miss. Against the UCLA zone Lewis may have more trouble scoring. It is important to note, though, that for UCLA to bother Lewis with its zone then the Bruins have to play with passion and focus. The Bruins need to know where Lewis is at all times. If UCLA lacks focus then UCLA could allow Lewis to have the kind of performance that Stanford's Landry Fields had last week when he scored 35 points against the Bruins. It can't be overstated that the Bruins can't allow Lewis to gain confidence right away or else they will be staring at a comparable outcome to what happened when these two teams met at Pauley Pavilion.
If the zone is played effectively then UCLA should be able to offset the other area that USC has an advantage; size. Trojan Coach Kevin O'Neill starts two of the best big men in the Pac-10 in junior Alex Stepheson (6'9" 235 lbs.) and sophomore Nikola Vucevic (6'10" 240 lbs.). Stepheson is a physical brute who really didn't do anything outstanding in the first UCLA/USC game. He rebounds well and scores when he's around the basket, but a zone defense can specifically neutralize a player like Stepheson fairly easily. The danger-man is Vucevic. While he isn't a deep shooting threat he is very good out to about 15 feet. That means he could be the "zone-buster" rather than an outside shooter like Lewis. One of the weak spots in any 2-3 zone is in the so-called "short corner" that sits in the space between the low, middle defender and the two low, wing defenders. It is in this space that Vucevic can excel. That means that UCLA will need to be active defensively along the baseline and that may mean seeing more of Tyler Honeycutt at the ‘4" and a bit less of Nikola Dragovic. That doesn't mean that Dragovic's minutes are going to drop to 15 minutes, but it does mean that Coach Ben Howland may be forced to go to extreme lengths to play effective defense against the Trojans. If Vucevic is given any space along the baseline then he will burn the Bruins. He is coming off an 18 point 14 rebound performance against Stanford and is more than capable of doing the same to the Bruins.
Stepheson and Vucevic aren't the only reasons that USC has a size advantage in this game. Senior Marcus Johnson (6'6" 210 lbs.) and sophomore Marcus Simmons (6'6" 200 lbs.) both play bigger than their size precisely because of their athleticism. Johnson helped the Trojans to own the boards in the first meeting while Simmons can be used as a lockdown defender.
All of that simply deals with the defensive end of the floor for the Bruins. USC's defense presents the Bruins with a whole host of other issues. The first time these two teams met the Trojan defense completely shut down the Bruin offense. While some of that had to do with UCLA's lackadaisical effort, even had the Bruins brought their ‘A' game they still would have had trouble scoring against what is clearly the best defense in the Pac-10. UCLA doesn't have a single player on its roster that can take their respective Trojan off the dribble. That means that UCLA must screen and pass efficiently and quickly in order to get good shots. In order to do this expect the Bruins to run their motion offense almost exclusively. Further, UCLA must take their time on offense to look for the best shot possible. That means that Dragovic can't be taking deep ‘threes' ten seconds into the shot clock when the Bruins have no offensive balance.
Uh yeah, I am really going to hold my breath over that last comment. Speaking of the clown, the LA Times has a profile on the two Nikolas. I didn't really bother reading it after checking out the headline because I have no interest in caring about Ragovic. If you want to read up on him and the Nikola from the Trogans, here is the link.
Meanwhile, Jon Gold has posted a little Q&A with Ben Howland on the Daily News. Guess the only thing that I found interesting was how Howland is dead set on going back to total man-to-man next season:
DN: Was there any internal conflict about playing zone?
BH: No, but we should have done it sooner.
DN: Does zone now have to be part of the arsenal?
BH: No.
DN: So once you have the manpower, you're going back to man-to-man?
BH: Yes.
I do want us to go back to man-to-man defense but I wonder what is going to happen if Josh Smith doesn't lose weight, Zeke Jones turn out to be less than average, and we don't sign any high impact recruits rest of this season (which we are not going to). I would hope after this season Howland would be open to being flexible but guess we will have to find out.
Howland trotted out the same excuse about Jrue Holiday leaving early leaving a hole in the program, to which Gold failed to push back with the question about why he and his staff didn't anticipate that scenario, when it was obvious to rest of the world. Gold failed to ask him the question why Howland and his staff didn't bother to have other pgs on their recruiting radar early in the season, when it was apparent to many basketball observers that Holiday basically came by Westwood for a little pit stop, before riding into Philly.
Gold also didn't bother pressing Howland on one of the major issues - PTs for Lane and Moser - this season and ask him why he has continued to peddle Ragovic as a legitimate basketball player in his program. Then again, it is not surprising because too much to expect an inexperienced beat writer (who doesn't have a lot of perspective on UCLA athletics) to ask the poignant and precise question concerning the program.
Don't think we are going to get any answers tonight either. I expect a basketball game in which we are going to be bunch of dead men walking. As I have said along, don't care much for a "hard fought effort" and losing a game, when we are going to see the head coach doing the same inexplicable thing over and over again. The tip-off is scheduled for 7:00 pm PST. The open thread will go up half an hour before it.
GO BRUINS.
44 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
agree with you
Agree it is interesting that CBH dismisses the idea of making zone part of the arsenal; agree with the concern about whether or not the reinforcements can shore up the man defense.
I don't read his answer as categorical
He says it doesn’t “have to be” rather than “never will be”.
I read that as a preference for man, which many of us share, if we have the talent.
If we don’t, he leaves open the door for the zone.
sjh
ditto
If only the Bruin men could put 40 minutes of intensity together the way the women did yesterday, we wouldn’t be bemoaning this season. And as you’ve said all along, N, it’s next season that’s make-or-break.
BBall
I have NEVER seen us lose to the ketchup & mustard Mcdonalds crew in men’s BBall— NEVER. Yeah, shows you how closely I follow it (esp. this season). I expect our guys to kick their Satanic Thugula Trogan asses even in a down year.
The gals made Mr. Cooper F**K UCLA eat is F**KING words last night. Good.
So here’s to our boys taking care of business TODAY.
BTW: UCLA = HEART. You can hear from far and near the Mighty Bruin roar!
Nestor, I agreed on most of your points on CBH but
what do you want the players or coach to say. Every week you ridicule a player for a comment on the games but what do you exactly want them to say?
"I can't believe I ate the whole thing" Homer Simpson
CBH: “The lengthy hostage situation involving my family has been resolved, and the Serbian boosters responsible will soon be brought to justice”
by britishbruin on Feb 14, 2010 1:04 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
4-3 in three years against the Trogans
Pathetic
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
by tasser10 on Feb 14, 2010 12:59 PM PST via mobile reply actions
We have to realize by now we are not a good team
After several games into the season, or even after the first game, we should know that we are an average team with poor shooting average and passing skills. I can only say that MR, RN, and TH deserve to be the starters, and the rest of the team would not make most of the PAC-10 team as starters. Under that condition, even if we hire Phil Jackson, he can’t cure our problems. From this point on, we have nothing to lose because we are not going to the NCAA Tournament, lets develop the freshmen and it is time to bench ND and JK even if we lose to SC.
I take something different from the Daily News Article
Mainly CBH is working hard on improving the team. In what could be a response to many who are saying “play for next year” or who have already written this season off, CBH said:
“You keep saying it like I’ve given up on the season. You’re talking about it like the season is over, and I’m not looking at it like that. . . . You never quit. You’re never going to give up. I’m hoping we can continue to improve. We had won four of our last five into Saturday’s game, and we lost to the first-place team. A senior-laden group. We’re in a tough point right now, going into the road swing, but one thing you’ve seen in the Pac-10 this year, anything can happen. Anything’s possible. . . . I’m still looking forward.”
And, in all fairness to CBH
we applauded CRN’s taking a time out against $c in a game we could not win.
Where I differ with CBH, and I didn’t even sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night — so who knows how valuable my opinion is, is that I don’t think it is more likely that we would lose if we played a bit younger.
Until proven otherwise, I’d like to see if we might play better.
I can’t remember which game it was — but there was a game in which a team of youngsters went on a run and closed a gap.
sjh
I think it is the most important game
Unfortunately, it is in the negative rather than the positive. If CBH loses tonight, that would mean he went 0-2 against the Trogans and will have a record of 11-13 with six games to go, making a winning season all but impossible. A win today and we move back to 12-12 and are still in contention in the Pac 10. A loss and this season is officially nonredeemable.
I know many have made the argument that we should be playing for next year, something I have been against as I have always felt that this could be a salvageable season. But with a loss today, I think I will have to agree with them.
Poncho
I have deep respect for your opinions.
Do you believe that having ND on the floor for a lot of minutes, gives us a better chance of winning?
sjh
Not at all
Poncho seems to know a lot more about the nuts and bolts of basketball than most of us.
And, his posts have been very analytic and well thought out.
I would love to know who he would start and give major minutes to in this game that, in his words could define whether this is a “salvageable season”.
sjh
I do
You have to have players on the floor who are a threat to shoot. If we don’t have ND out there, we only have one credible threat on the outside in MR. ML, TH, and JA don’t have to be defended close up, so defenders can sag off of them and make it much more difficult to get the ball in to RN in the post. Even when ND isn’t making shots, other teams still key in on him because they know he has the potential to get hot.
ND isn’t a good defender and I wont argue that. But since BL is at best going to be a 10 minute a game bench player next year, I don’t see why he should be getting a load of minutes this year when he hasn’t shown to be any better defender than ND and not nearly the offensive threat.
ND is an easy target when things go bad because when he has a bad game, its painfully obvious and usually correlates to a loss because we don’t have enough scoring to makeup for his bad game. Everyone has roles on a team, NDs role isn’t to be a lock down defender, playmaker, or rebounder, it is to be a shooter. He has had his struggles, but he has done his role as a shooter just as well as ML has as a defender or JA as a playmaker. We only have three people performing up to their potential right now (MR, RN, and TH), and five people have to be on the floor. I’d much rather have one of the other players on the court at least have the potential to get hot than nothing at all.
ND on a good night can go for 20. For BL (who will be good by his junior year), if he scored 10 points and had 5 rebounds we would all consider that a great game. I’d much rather have a player with a high individual game ceiling on the court than one who might have a long term higher ceiling. But again, if things go badly today, we might as well start giving BL some time since winning individual games this year will be rather irrelevant.
Thanks
I’m torn but, but most of the time, I agree with you.
All year long, I’ve been making clear the dilemma — who do you play when you don’t have 5 strong players.
Before he emergence of TH, we had one sure choice, RN, one clear choice, MR and then some question marks. So, now we have RN, TH — our two best players — MR a consensus starter and then questions.
Your explanation as to why ND should be playing is well presented. There’s one other point — he’s one of our best FT shooters.
I think you explain why we have to suffer his defense in order to get a CHANCE of his offense; and I’m particularly glad you explained how that “chance” forces the other team to defend him and gives our other shooters (who ever they are) a better chance of scoring.
Bottom Line: CBH has to face an “avoidance:avoidance” conflict — one of life’s least pleasant.
sjh
He is our best "FT" shooter
Yet he managed to miss crucial shots against Cal in the second half, when he did nothing else right.
I still find LOL funny that people think ND can have a "good night" when he has had those perhaps once or twice the entire season and probably 4 or 5 times in his 4 years in Westwood. Whatever. This scrub will be mercifully gone in 7 games, except next couple of year Moser/Lane emerge as good players, we will wonder why Howland stunted their growth in their first season in Westwood while wasting mins on Ragovic.
+1
A win today is important to salvage the season. If we lose today, the argument becomes much stronger, almost inevitable, that it is time to think of next year.
Hmmm.
I’ve always considered that finishing the year with a winning record was imperitive. However, if finishing with a losing record means a season write-off, and finally we quit “playing to win” and “play to learn and grow for next season”, giving minutes to younger players, would that be a bad thing?
(Sorry for poor sentence structure above, too lazy to re-write though).
Go Bruins!
You always play to win
But it is not black and white. For example, most coaches give more players a longer look at the beginning of the year and settle in to the rotation later on. (I say BL got that look but others passionately disagree with me.)
As the season goes on, only the best 7 or 8 play. Besides the obvious reasons, teams need the stability of a rotation . If we are going to have a losing season, the argument goes it is time for those younger players at the end of the bench to have a longer look in the more important PAC 10 games. In other words play more like the beginning of the season. This is certain to cause problems and cost us games. However, it will give those end of the bench freshman a chance to play in the PAC 10, could be invaluable experience in future years.
Uh
I’d say playing Ragovic all season has been the ultimate example of playing it safe ala “Dorrellian” mode of “playing not to lose.”
That's my challenge with this whole thing.
Does a pretty much guaranteed losing season finally give us the opportunity to explore our other options for next year? Forge tthe best 7-8 right now. Who’s our 7-8 for next year?
Go Bruins!
Who is better?
You always bring up BL as the ND alternative. But let me ask you this. Everyone knew in the 12 minutes in CSF game that RN could play. Similar it was obvious with TH could play in his first minutes. When in BL 132 minutes has he shown he can play? When in his double digit minutes (against bad teams) did he shine so much that he deserves to play?
I am not a fan of ND. I just don’t see anyone better and want a winning season. (That said, if ND goes cold I am fine with MR at 3 and JA or better yet MAH at 2.)
Again
Actually Nelson and Honecutt was allowed to make sh!tload of mistakes and grow through it. Lane has shown enough during his appearances that he is not as bad as Ragovic. No one can be worse than Ragovic. It’s not possible given what we have seen from this guy for 4+ seasons. You just like Howland have decided to hold Lane, Moser and other guys to different standards than Nikola Ragovic. It’s kind of pathetic.
Did anyone post here that we have to see more of BL
after his first appearance. People did for TH and RN. Come on, look at the game posts for RN for that FIRST game. Tell me there wasn’t something there from the start that was NOT there for BL.
No one can be worse? We don’t win ASU without ND’s individual performance. Further, we don’t beat UW if UW doesn’t game plan around stopping ND. Neither would happen with BL. Remember the +/- analysis, ND was a key. There is no way BL does that. I don’t like ND, it is just he is one of the top 7 players on this team.
And to your alleged different standards standard, isn’t it possible that MM and BL just aren’t any good? If you want to go after CBH for recruiting, that is different. But when has BL shown that he can takeover a game or that he is anywhere near equal to RN and TH in their first 120 minutes?
Ragovic had 7-10 good mins against ASU
and then his lack of defense rest of the game necessitated a desperate run. It continues to amaze me that people keep banking on 2-3 good stretches from the entire freaking season from a scrub who has averaged 30+ mins entire game.
You should look at the game posts and you also admitted that you haven’t seen every game. Lane has had decent mins to merit more time. He wouldn’t be so bad as Ragovic on defense even if he tried. I am guessing he will finish his UCLA career with better “shooting” percentage than Ragovic, which is lower than what we got from Brandon Lloyd. Whatever.
Does anyone have an online stream for this game?
No cable :(
"We should have a banner up there: the only team to make the tournament without a coach." -- Baron Davis, remembering his "coach" at UCLA
by inhowlandwetrust on Feb 14, 2010 4:32 PM PST reply actions
Stream
Check one of these two sites, they’re guaranteed to have it:
http://www.channelsurfing.net
http://www.atdhe.net/watchtv.html
Running out of excuses...
…for Howland at this point. Nestor and others may not be where I am already yet, but there are some major questions and strikes against him right now:
1. This roster is 100% his. These are the guys he’s recruited and brought into the program. We have NO point guard. We have some guys who resemble point guards, but we do not have a legitimate point guard, which I find absolutely amazing given that this program developed Jordan Farmar and Darren Collision into NBA-quality point guards.
2. The Jrue Holiday situation. Whatever your opinion of Jrue, everyone knew, just like KL, he was one-and-done. That was a certainty and no one was holding their breath hoping he would come back. We all hoped that Jerime and Malcolm would form a solid PG-SG duo, akin to JF and AA, but obviously that never happened. Who else is in our backcourt? Roll, who is a solid role player, but not a program centerpiece, and walk-ons (Abdul-Hamid, Soo, Arnet, and DeMarcus). We have no legitimate back-up guard who can spell these guys off the bench, and now that Anderson has been exposed as a woefully incapable PG, we really have only two guards we can give regular minutes to in Lee and Roll. I know a lot of people love Abdul-Hamid, but folks, it’s dire straits when your “great hope” is a walk-on who should more likely be playing for Harvard than UCLA. Given how obvious it was Jrue was gone, why did Howland completely fail to bring in a quality freshman point guard this year. Oh sure, he “tried” but by the time he got in on those kids, it was way too little, way too late.
3. The Belgrade Bricklayer. What more can I say that hasn’t been said? He doesn’t play defense. His offense is terrible, except for the once-every-two-months lights-out shooting performance he’ll sometimes have. His effort is lacking and sets a terrible example for the guys who can’t find the floor (Moser and Lane).
4. Moser and Lane. Howland has burned their redshirt, and for what? Marginal playing time? The quick hook when any minor error is made (while Nikola is free to destroy our team from within with his garbage game)? If Howland committed to giving each guy 15 minutes a night from the outset of the season, I wonder how more developed and “ready” they would be to contribute by now. If you all recall, JF and AA were pretty raw as freshman. By the end of the season, because of the minutes they played, they were essentially sophomores and their game had really taken a major step forward. By the next season, they were our stars. Had they gotten the minutes Moser and Lane played, they may have never developed, or if they did, not until well into their sophomore seasons, and who knows how our chances play out in the following years?
5. Stubborn player rotation. The refusal to switch to zone earlier. I don’t need to elaborate on this at all.
6. Our failure to bring in quality recruits since 2006. I’ve already spent an entire post on this topic. I’m not going to re-hash it all, but the bottom-line is that Howland isn’t getting it done on the recruiting trail. The guys he’s brought in are proving to be overrated/overhyped or (and this could be a even bigger strike against CBH) do have the talent and skill but aren’t developing in our system.
7. As Nestor said:
We are also looking at near certainty of Ben Howland becoming the first head coach in Post Wooden era to lose three straight games against Just$C basketball program.
Not even that complete f**k-up fraud of a “coach” who had the program before Howland managed to do that. Pretty sad.
I’m not calling for Howland’s head. Not yet. But these points are beginning to form a major indictment against Howland keeping his job long-term. A losing season is never acceptable in Westwood. Period. This season is a complete joke and if this team does not seriously contend for the Pac-10 title next season and make it into the Big Dance (which is where we should have been had Howland built on the momentum we had after our three Final Four runs), the hot seat will be real hot.
Finally, the devil’s advocate in me wants to pose this question: we ripped the Lizard for always being a Sweet Sixteen machine. Steve-16 could get us into the Dance, win some games, but always choked hard and never brought up a title despite having a lot of NBA talent on his teams. Howland has gone to three Final Fours, but choked when it mattered the most in each run, despite having NBA talent on his team (AA, JF, RH, RW, KL, DC, LRMAM, Jrue) and very solid contributors (all of whom would be a major upgrade from this current roster: JS, AA2, LMR, CB). Yes, Howland brings toughness back into the program. Yes, he’s an actual coach who developed some guys (AA, JF, DC, RW, LRMAM). But, in the end, the results have been the same: no title since 1995. Just a thought.
No, the results have not been the same
I get the lack of patience with Howland this year, a cumulative effect of watching Dragojevic play. But to completely urinate on three final fours by claiming their result was the “same” as some crap-roll sweet sixteens because all non-tltle results are the same is ridiculous. The results of those years, in addition to appearances in the FF, was a litany of great efforts, great performances, and great coaching jobs that were delightful to watch. Unlike a single game of Lavin’s tenure. And unlike many games and seasons produced by coaches who have won a national title (like Harrick, not to denigrate him, Boeheim, and Gary Williams).
I’m not saying the lack of a title is meaningless. (Though only in ‘08 did it mean anything about the coach.) But wiping out the value of three great years because of one lousy season borders on a kind of sports nihilism that I can’t support.
That wasn't the problem with Lavin
Steve-16 could get us into the Dance, win some games, but always choked hard and never brought up a title despite having a lot of NBA talent on his teams.
Lavin’s teams were always among the most talented in the nation, but they were generally mediocre and inconsistent, pulling off upsets against highly ranked teams then losing to bottom feeders or getting blown out. His teams’ performances in the tournament were not choke jobs but rather the highlight of the year, saving his job a couple times. His teams were generally 4-8 seeds, would win their first game (except for Detroit Mercy), then would pull off the “miraculous” upset to reach the 2nd weekend (and promptly lose).
On the other hand, Howland’s teams have won 3 Pac-10 Championships and each time followed up with a run to the Final Four. Once there, they faced other legitimately good teams with NBA talent. It’s not like Derrick Rose or Al Horford have been busts in the NBA. Someone had to “choke.”
by SuperBruinMan on Feb 14, 2010 6:58 PM PST up reply actions
I hate to say it
but losing today would make us 4-4 against U$C* in the last three years. And that, my friends, would mean that the gap has closed. I remember when we used to make fun of that. Now, it just might become true.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
by tasser10 on Feb 14, 2010 5:39 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Honestly not worried about those clowns
What they do is fairly worthless to me if we have our act together. They nudged a little ahead of us during Lavin era but it took us just a year or two build up a huge lead. If Howland can have a team that contends for Pac-10 championship next season and then make a Final-4 run the year after, whatever the Trogans do as usual will be moot.
Head-to-heads in basketball don't define gaps
This isn’t football.
Oh?
Head to head record doesn’t count? Cool! Looks like our players agree with you. How convenient.
I get that we’re not “worried” about the clowns across town, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t worry about losing to them.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
by tasser10 on Feb 14, 2010 6:51 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Of course it counts. But it doesn't define a program's stature
During our Final Four run Tim Floyd’s Trogans gave us the toughest competition game-by-game in conference. So what?
Def. telling
that going into this game players are dropping line about “competing” and “hanging” against these clowns. For me though the issue is more about us and how our program is being managed than what they are doing.
I want to know when Man to Man defense required a certain talent level.
I was brought up playing man to man, and the only qualification I am aware of is a willingness to work hard. Playing man to man is A LOT more work than zone, so sure, you are going to need players in peak physical conditioning. But, shouldn’t playing D1 basketball at a top notch program make this a given? I’m not talking about freshman needing to bulk to compete against seniors. Basic all out hustle on the defensive end is all about lung power.
Hustle is all about heart and work ethic. Some have more than others. But, it can be taught.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
BL and MM
So has any of the frosh ended up being redshirted officially?
Great...
So Howland basically wasted at least 2 players’ years of development with little to no court action.

by 





















