For UCLA To Get Back On Track In 2010-10: 5 Factors Ben Howland Needs To Address
by Nestor on Feb 22, 2010 5:00 AM PST
in Basketball
Email
PrintAll right, let us try to wipe off the Saturday night debacle from our memory at least for now and try to look ahead a bit. By looking ahead I am not talking about the game against Oregon State this Thursday night or looking forward to Ragovic's last home game at Pauley, I am talking about next year.
I still believe Ben Howland has a chance to rebuild once again from the pile of basketball wreckage in Westwood (this time which he is responsible for causing it himself). However, for him to succeed in his second rebuilding project, he and his staff will have to address number of factors concerning our diseased basketball programs:
- Rebuilding our shattered and demoralized backcourt
- Frontcourt management: defining roles and developing youngsters
- The conditioning of Josh Smith
- Flexibility in Howland's approach
- The need to fill in a missing link in assistant ranks
Let's go through them in detail after the flip.
Rebuilding Our Shattered And Demoralized Backcourt
I am not going to give up on our current group of sophomores. Not yet. By any measure Jerime Anderson and Malcolm Lee have been disappointing this season. I believe Lee still has the potential to become a productive player by the time he is done in Westwood. That is going to happen with Lee playing the 2 spot, where he can focus on playing defense, and work on getting his offensive confidence back by keying off his defense. If Lee really wants to dream about the NBA, he should be getting in touch with RW and AA, and find out from them how much dedication and hard work it took on their part for the work they put in during their off-seasons at UCLA.
Same goes for Jerime Anderson. Anderson has been plagued with injury all season. I don't believe he has ever been 100 percent after tweaking his groin during the pre-season and then retweaking it again. However, more disturbingly Anderson seemed to have been plagued with the issue of commitment. From what we saw this year, it did not seem like Anderson put together a lot of effort to get better this off-season and came in with a sense of entitlement thinking would just coast to the starting guard spot at UCLA. I hope the recruitment of Zeke Jones sends him a clear message on what kind of work he need to put in this off-season. In addition to Zeke Jones, UCLA should be bringing in at least one more point guard. It is not going to be an elite one, as the Bruins will most likely end up getting someone like Deonte Burton.
I know lot of people are excited about the arrival of Tyler Lamb. I suggest we temper our enthusiasm a bit considering our experiences with players from Orange County. From what I have read I am hopeful about Lamb but we need to be realistic with our expectations around him. The best we need to hope for is that Coach Howland will give him a fair shot in earning minutes as a freshman (which hasn't always been the case during his seven years in Westwood).
Whatever the final recruiting results are, Howland will need to install an honest competition without gifting the starting spot to any specific player. I also hope Mustafa Abdul-Hamid sticks around our program next year. Perhaps he will not get the minutes, but we need someone of his character and dedication in this program. He can be a real positive influence on our young guys and he has a coaches' mindset in approaching this game. Lastly, Howland will need to get back to his roots rewarding players who come in the mindset of playing defense first and dedicating themselves to fighting with 40 minutes of intensity and effort. Quiet simply Howland will need to find a way to to shape a leader out of his backcourt who will reestablish a warrior mentality based on work ethic and effort in his program. We have not had leadership in this program since DC's departure last season. If Howland is not able to bring back that culture of work ethic by developing leadership on the court (specifically in the backcourt), he will be doomed.
Frontcourt Management : Defining Roles And Developing Youngsters
Tyler Honeycutt has emerged as the key player for this basketball team. He is a joy to watch and is probably the most skilled athlete in our current roster. It is not clear to me though exactly how Ben Howland is going to get the most out of him in next season. I would love to hear thoughts from others here on BN, how best we can take advantage of these kids natural court vision and surreal passing skills. He also has shown the shooting touch from outside and AA like tenacity going after lose balls and rebounds. We also have to keep a very close eye on Honeycutt because for the health of this program, it is absolutely essential for Howland not to have just complete buy in from Tyler, but also making sure he is always connecting with him and keeping him inspired enough so that he comes back at least for his third season in Westwood. If Honeycutt high tails it out of Westwood after his second season, it will be a negative mark on Howland.
Meanwhile, Reeves Nelson had a solid start to his freshman season but regressed as the year went on. He needs to work on his FT shooting, watch a lot of game film to get an understanding of defensive positioning and also figure out how to play team-basketball. While UCLA leads the Pac-10 in assists, per ESPN Nelson has only 8 assists for the entire season. To put in perspective Brendan Lane already has 7 assists and Bobo Morgan and Mike Moser have 4 assists a piece for the season. That is just pitiful on Nelson's part. I am sure he is not a selfish kid and he is trying his best, but that kind of assist number is not going to cut it. He needs to figure out not to become a black hole in this offense and work with Honeycutt and rest of the team to establish a team-first mentality in this program.
Speaking of Lane, Morgan and Moser, I will not bother repeating about the need for PT rest of this season. I do think Lane and Moser have the potential to emerge as productive contributors if and only if their head coach figures out a way to trust them. Similarly Bobo's contributions in the minutes he has received lately has been encouraging but at the same time we have no idea how the coach is going to manage his minutes rest of this season. If I were Howland, I'd get these kids fired up and motivated with more minutes, especially in the remaining home games against Oregon schools, and work with them to make sure they do everything in their power to have a great off-season.
The Conditioning of Josh Smith
Bruins from all over the country is looking forward to arrival of another highly recruited 5 star center from the Pacific Northwest. Ben Howland and his staff are going to count on Josh Smith from Kentwood High school to contribute right away in his freshman season as a factor if not the starter at 5 spot. That sounds all good but there is a problem. Scout.com's database listed Smith at 6'9 270lbs to start the season. The most recent update on Smith (as he made the Jordan's High School All Start team) is now listed at 6'9 320 lbs. He gained a lot of weight this season following an injury around December which caused him a lot of playing time in his senior season. In the recent game we saw on ESPN (facing against Terrance Jones) Smith looked somewhat slow and out of shape.
Frankly if Smith does not lose 40-50 pounds by the time school starts next September, Bruins are going to be in trouble. It is not easy to shed weight just like that and it requires an incredible amount of hard work, dedication and guidance from the coaching staff. So that brings me to Howland and his staff. I would sure hope that Coach Howland's staff is on top of this situation and are working with Josh to make sure he is in fit and in good health when he checks into Westwood later this summer. Howland's coaching career will be depending on it.
Flexibility In Howland's Approach
We don't need to discuss in detail how stubborn Ben Howland is. It took him 14 games to figure out that he needed to play zone. He still has not figured out that he needed to bench Dragovic midpoint of this season. After experiencing some success with zone, he is now indicating that he will go back exclusively man-to-man next season if he has "the manpower" in his roster.
I strongly believe Howland needs to think this through and not make any decisions until Smith checks into campus. Moreover, it is clear Morgan and Lane have the potential to be very effective in a zone defense. We saw the defensive flexibility paying dividend last Thursday when the Bruins successfully used a mix of man-to-man and zone to get a nice win in Pullman.
This is a plea to Ben Howland. I really hope he understand the need for flexibility in his approach to this game. He is a great teacher and I will always be grateful to him for how he reestablished this program. However, now that this program is a complete wreck, he needs to understand he will need to be a little flexible, while also returning to roots of building a program around fundamentals and defense.
The Need To Fill In A Missing Link In Assistant Ranks
Achilles has already hit on this point multiple times and I imagine he might have more to say in the coming days/weeks. We desperately need some new blood in this program. The current combination which has been in place since the departure of Kerry Keating has not been working. Coach Keating possessed a certain skill set (like Jamie Dixon before him) that was crucial for Howland in building his program. We need an assistant of his mindset who is a recruiting gym-rat with a well established reputation within the high school coaching circles and who can evaluate talent and evaluate it early. Howland also desperately needs someone in his staff beyond Coach Donny Daniels who understands how to build the relationships with players and who understands recruiting strategy (long term, short term and with all the contingency plans). This strategy includes roster management, anticipating who will go pro early and who won't and figuring out early on who you likely can get and who you can't.
Naturally, no coach will be perfect with all these skills. Not everything can be foreseen or anticipated whether it's strategy or how guys will progress and develop. Mistakes are made, a program just cannot make many of them (not like we have in recent years). In UCLA's case, getting a guy like this is doubly important because unlike a Roy Williams, Bill Self or Jay Wright, Howland is not a great recruiter/closer. He's more reliant than those guys because he's a great practice game coach who isn't a fantastic recruiting coach.
As Achilles explained to me in an email, to use a football analogy, Karl Dorrell needed a guys like Eric Bieniemy because he himself was not a great recruiter or closer. CRN doesn't need someone like that as much, because he himself is a recruiting animal. Howland desperately needs to make a change in his staff after this season is over bringing back someone, who will fill in this missing link in his program.
So all that said, I think lot of folks are just hoping that everything is going to be automatically get back to normal next season as we will win 25 something games, contend for a Pac-10 championship and perhaps win couple of games in the tourney. As you can see from my thoughts above, I don't believe it is going to be easy. They all are complicated issues which Ben Howland has to address and carefully navigate around in these coming months.
We all want him to get back on top again. I have always appreciated how much reverence he has had for our school and our program. While we hope Howland can get this program back in groove next season, we are going to continue to react positively or negatively depending on how Howland addresses these issues in the near future. If people are uncomfortable with what we strongly believe are reasonable criticisms, then they shouldn't feel obligated to read or visit this blog Our admiration for Howland here on BN has never been based on blind faith and we would strongly recommend everyone in this community take the same approach in the coming weeks, months and next couple of years.
GO BRUINS.
72 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Agreed
I think you’ve been fair in your criticism of CBH while expressing support for him. It’s worth noting that Jamie Dixon was able to rebuild on the fly this year after losing his three best players and being picked to be near the bottom of the Big East. But it’s also worth noting that UNC, with Larry Drew at pg, is in the tank as badly as we are. As has been pointed out on BN, we’ve had a recruiting gap the past three years because of departures and the limits of the so-called #1 class of two years ago.
However, in planning for next year, I think we need to add a couple of caveats. For example, it would not surprise me to see Bobo leave. IIRC, he’s from East Texas, and as long as he’s not playing here, anyway, he might as well go somewhere closer to home. Also, we have no idea how deeply the Ragovic curse has affected the other players. It’s as frustrating to them as it is to us, if not moreso, to see that lazy bum get playing minutes while they ride the pines. They have to wonder what it takes to become the apple of CBH’s eye—just good practices? Game time means nothing?
I’m hoping for a return to sanity next year, when Ragovic is gone. I hope to see the positive energy of the past few years instead of the doldrums of this season.
Yep, all Howland has to do
is improve the backcourt, improve the frontcourt, improve our athleticism through recruiting, adjust his coaching, and shore up the assistants.
Other than that, it’s all good. ;-)
"I don't forget very much" Rick Neuheisel, 11/28/09
Yep
That is why people need to think harder before they just spurt out without thinking how this year has been just an aberration and that everything is going to be all right automatically next season. I hope the thoughts above give people some clue how we are not just leveling simple criticisms at this this program. There are deeper issues here and people cannot be in denial about in any more. At least not here on BN.
I would 2nd the notion that next year is not going to be automatically back to normal.
the pac 10 is very young. Following is a list of the teams and the seniors they are losing.
Arizona- Nic Wise Sr.- Noone projected to go early. Young up and coming coach
ASU- Boeteng, Glasser, Shipp- Another decent coach
Cal- Randle, Christopher, Boykin, Robertson all gone. This team should be down. Will Monty be next years Howland?
Oregon- Catron, Porter- team loaded with freshman and sophomores otherwise. Kent still on the hot seat. Will he be back? For UCLA’s sake I hope so.
Oregon St.- Shaftenaar, Tarvers- Not sure this team will ever return to the days of Ralph Miller
Stanford- Fields, Shiller- Fields is a huge loss and they need to retain Green who is a risk to bolt
Washington- Quincy- If Romar gets everyone else to return this should be the pac 10 favorite
WSU- Kopravica- Very young team that should peak in 2-3 years.
U$C- Garrity, Johnson, Lewis- but Lil’Romeo still only a sophomore.
My quick impression is that Cal and USC are losing the most in terms of who they rely on right now. Alot of teams are like UCLA, in that there are a couple Srs but they are very replaceable. I heard one announcer say the other day that “the pac 10 has had a very strong recruiting year” Not sure if he meant top to bottom or just the usual suspects. But unless Smith and Lamb are better than expected and barring Ziegler/Maccallum coming to Westwood, I personally think we should be prepared for another potential finish in the middle of the conference. Please don’t mistake that comment for a lack of faith. I do have faith that CBH will get the job done. I am just saying that there will be upside potential for alot of other Pac 10 teams.
by 84 on Feb 22, 2010 7:48 AM PST up reply actions
McCallum and Ziegler are not coming
It would be huge upset (bigger than USA beating Canada last night) if they are in UCLA uniforms next season. They don’t seem very interested in a program that looks like a train wreck and where it’s not certain whether the freshmen will be treated fairly in terms of playing time.
I don't think it would be that much
of an upset if we got McCallum. He just mentioned in a Scout interview that he’s still talking to all four schools and that UCLA especially intrigues him because of its tradition. I won’t cite the article, but it’s dated Feb 19. I think it’ll come down to Florida and us. He refers to Arizona as “point guard U” ummm hello?? Ever heard of Farmar, Collison, Westbrook, or Holiday???!!
"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 22, 2010 9:02 AM PST up reply actions
He is going to play for his Dad at Detroit
The fact that he referred to Arizona as “point guard U” just shows how little research and information he has been gathering on UCLA.
Yeah, and he also says how Florida
has an open PG spot. More lack of research on how desperately UCLA needs a competent point. I’ll be blindly optimistic for you Nestor
"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 22, 2010 9:10 AM PST up reply actions
Okay, so they're not coming
But I tend to think that if our coaching staff does a good job developing the skills of what we already have and will have, taking into considerations their actual playing time, etc., we can be competitive too.
Our current recruiting issues remind me of the mid to late eighties when Walt Hazzard coached in Pauley. We went toe to toe with the likes of Georgetown, North Carolina. Kentucky for some blue chipped players We were close but came up short everytime because Hazzard & company was not known for game strategies nor player development. They relied on some scrappy, feisty approaches to prepare players to perform well at game time.
Sure they won some games, most notably upsetting then #1 North Carolina at Pauley and a Steve Alford led Indiana team, which went on to become NCAA champions the following year. But players transferred. Greg Foster wound up in the pros even, after leaving UCLA in the same fashion as Drew Gordon. Other prep stars balked at coming. One succeeded in petitioning to get out of his UCLA letter of intent with . Sean Higgins managed to stay at Michigan, and won a championship ring his freshman year there when he could have contributed well in Pauley.
So what I am trying to say is that what we have now isn’t too shabby at all. Bobo, Lane , Moser can play well if they have the minutes and the appropriate training. If we do a good job with this bunch, others will come. Persisting in their stubborn, ineffective mode that culminated in some strange game time substitution pattern drew so much criticism already. The level would certainly rise several notches if it remains business as usual next season, or perhaps reach boiling point when something is forced to give.
you are absolutely right
in terms of other teams being loaded with young talent. At the same time, a lot of the seniors departing from other teams are 2 or 3 year starters. We will not miss MR/ND/JK as much as some of the other teams will miss their seniors; the question is whether our new talent is ready to contribute when it arrives.
by britishbruin on Feb 22, 2010 8:27 AM PST up reply actions
Coach Ben
Please just get rid of Jermine Anderson and go to all the States in the Union and find a point guard. he can’t score let alone dribble the ball.
by Carlos I. Carbajal on Feb 22, 2010 2:48 PM PST up reply actions
Agreed, with one exception
You wrote: " If Honeycutt high tails it out of Westwood after his second season, it will be a negative mark on Howland." This isn’t fair to Howland. These kids are getting offered millions of dollars. I’m not sure any “inspiration” from Howland can compete with that. Did Howland fail to keep AA, KL, RW, etc. inspired?
Sorry have to strongly disagree
UCLA is right now perceived rightly or wrongly a “one-two year boot camp” for NBA within high school recruiting circle. Overwhelming majority of our talented players have left early in recent years. As we have discussed at length if Howland wants to maintain an elite program he has to not only attract elite talents but also find a way to retain a good number of them just like Roy Williams and Bill Self manage to do at UNC and at KU respectively.
Howland needs to find a way to retain Honeycutt more than two years in Westwood. If he doesn’t the perception that UCLA is nothing but a “one-two year boot camp” will only intensify in recruiting circles and that will not be healthy for the long term health of this program.
If a player projects as a mid to early first round pick
the almost always leave every program. I agree the key is to have depth, talent down the bench. You need to have a base of players who can sustain the program and replace the one or two and done players with similar ones to stay at the top.
What are you talking about?
Have you see how Williams and Self have been able to retain their mid first round picks? Can you confidently say Kyle Singer would have stuck around at UCLA for his third or four season if he was playing for Howland?
Do not make arguments here like “if a player projects as a mid to early first round pick they almost always leave every program.” That is a take not based on reality if you look at the rosters of elite programs such as Kansas and UNC (which are the programs we should be measuring against). Again, if you want to offer counter, come with data. Not just throw your speculative arguments without offering any info. to support it.
Kyle Singler
I think he is an ideal type of college player – a guy with talent who knows that college can prepare him for the pros, and that sticking around makes sense for him. Would have loved to sign him, I think he would have been with us at least 3 years. Per wikipedia
After Duke lost to West Virginia in the second round of the 2008 NCAA Tournament, Singler put to rest any speculation that he may enter the 2008 NBA Draft saying
“I didn’t give the NBA any thought, I know I’m not ready. I need to mature both physically and mentally. I want to get stronger and quicker, and I want to work on learning how to play the game. I’m at a great place for that."
In the hypothetical “what if the target we had got out of the Northwest was Singler instead of Love” game, we would probably not have been Final Four caliber his freshman season, would have been significantly better last year (Singler taking ND’s minutes) and this year. Seems like a really solid kid.
by britishbruin on Feb 22, 2010 8:03 AM PST up reply actions
I think the key to retaining players is in recruiting
Sure, a coach can convince the occasional top NBA prospect to stay another year or two but to be successful in college, a coach needs to recruit players that will most likely hang around for three or four years. This is even more important now when every high school hot shot is looking to go one-and-done.
Addendum
AA stayed for three years. I am not sure if he would have jumped if was in Kanasas or in UNC. If Roy managed to keep Hansborough around for another year and Self managed to keep his talents till senior season, I’d bet they could do the same with AA.
Similarly JF left early. PAA was so desperate to get out after his third season he was looking for contracts in Europe. We all know the Holiday story now which was a fiasco. I am not sure if he would have left early in another program because he was not happy at UCLA.
KL and RW were exceptions. KL was a ready made top-5 pick while RW developed into a top-5 pick. They didn’t have reasons to stay.
DC would have left early too (and I can say this pretty confidently) if he had not gotten destroyed by Derrick Rose.
Howland has had serious issues with retention and if he wants to address that issue he can make a statement by convincing Honeycutt to stay for another year (unless of course Honeycutt develops into a lottery pick which might mean UCLA having an incredible season next year).
I agree that keeping AA for another year was a giant loss for the program
He went 27th, and would have given the Bruins a much better chance to win the National Championship with Kl, RW and DC, LRMAM. Hard to imagine why AA would leave, when he went only 27th and KL was on the way in to the program, champing at the bit to join a team that had won 30 games and went to the title game. I can only speculate that he was promised by NBA teams that he would be going earlier in the draft. The previous year he had declared for the draft and withdrew, presumably because he didn’t project high enough. As a junior, perhaps the lure of JF’s success was too much to pass up. What do you suppose could have been done or said to keep AA?
I think ...
… Coach Howland could have made the case that if AA came back he would have had the potential to emerge as the most important superstar in UCLA basketball uniform since Ed O’Bannon. I don’t know if Howland made an effort to present to AA the opportunity he had to lead the team with Kevin Love, Collison and Westbrook.
Also, if AA came back it probably might have indirectly resulted in one more year of RW … creating more continuity in the program.
Note AA did not have any kind of guarantee (from what I understand) when he kept his name in the NBA draft at the end of his third season.
Retaining Players
I wish I had the time/data to review each of the first rounders that Self, Williams, etc. have retained, but its not going to happen. That being said, the Singler example is interesting. I can’t imagine that playing for Coach K is very fun. He seems more angry than Howland and just as controlling. Plus, the team has not been particularly successful. I wonder how they got him to stay?
I’m not privy to UCLA’s rep in recruiting circles, but I’m not surprised to hear that its viewed as a one or two year boot camp for the NBA. That makes sense and helped me to understand your take.
When you look at the 2009 Draft
Only 5 of the top 30 players drafted were seniors, 6 were sophomores, 8 were jrs and the rest were internationals. The second round had many more seniors, most of whom don’t even know if they are going to make the roster for the first game of the season.
I am not belittling your point and not being personal in my comments. Part of the lure of UCLA is that it provides a platform to advance to the pros. The reality is that the Hansbroughs of the world, who want a degree and realize that their NBA potential is somewhat limited, are the exception. Most high quality Div. I players can’t wait to get into the NBA. Any coach who banks on a projected first round pick staying an additional year is short sighted. Reasoned argument as to why the player should stay just isn’t going to carry the day with the great majority, particulary because the coach could be wrong. I imagine CBH told JF that his stock would be higher if he stayed and made a run for the NCAA title. Even now reasonable minds will differ over whether JF should have left to be the 26th pick in the NBA draft, now that he has won the NBA championship with the Lakers and appears to be a valuable NBA commodity.
I think a college coach has to not only recruit the KL’s who will never stay for four years, but also the Jon Brockman’s who don’t have obvious pro potential, and will be the glue that holds the program together.
Can you really imagine that CBH didn’t make the national championship pitch? I believe that anyone with an IQ of over 75 would have made that pitch. Even if he didn’t, wasn’t it painfully obvious to AA and his family that the 2008 team, with AA and KL, would have made a run at the national championship, and AA just couldn’t resist the lure of the NBA? (Remember, RW hadn’t made his giant leap forward, and RW would have come off the bench if AA had stayed. He wouldn’t likely have been drafted at all in 2008.)
I also think that CBH’s style of play does reduce some of the run and gun fun of playing the game, and is a small part of players leaving. It was probably a factor in JF and JH leaving, but not in KL, RW or AA. I can’t imagine a coach dumping his signature style on the small chance that first rounders will stay, but reasonable minds will certainly differ on that.
Some say that JH left because CBH didn’t move DC from the point so JH could run it. Do we really want a program where the freshman dictates that the Sr (who is the better point guard) should move to the 2, just so we can retain the Fr.?
I don't trust Howland right now
I am not sure he sometimes sees the obvious.
He missed it this year until mid point of the season that we needed to give zone a sincere try.
He missed the obvious that Holiday was not happy and was going to leave after one season (without bothering to make contingency plans).
He missed the obvious with regards to playing time of Ragovic creating a cancerous situation on the basketball court.
He made a mistake (assuming it came from him) when Stanback was encouraged to leave the program.
Howland has had made way too many glaring mistakes overlooking the obvious. I don’t know whether he made a sincere pitch to AA about the opportunities he might had if he came back for his senior season.
You are choosing to trust him on blind faith (97 percent of your comments here on BN are made on blind faith). I am looking at the situation based on reality and I don’t like it. I certainly don’t trust Howland right now and I am hoping he earns it back in next two seasons.
In the meantime, if you don’t have anything else to add besides putting up comments based on blind faith, this reality based community is probably not the place for you.
AA
was a consensus All-American, #1 scoring option and unquestioned leader on a Final Four team.
Coming back he would have had a chance to win a National Championship; he also would have had to give up some of his offense because of the additional shots that KL was going to take (as opposed to the LMR/PAA combo who AA had played with his junior year). I don’t know how offensive production factors into people’s decisions about going to the draft, but if one of the complaints about CBH’s offensive system is that it deflates offensive numbers… then it’s possible that the arrival of additional talent exacerbates this problem for a guy like AA who had been the ‘feature player’ in his junior year – and that the departure of JF (who had a knack of taking over the offense in nationally televised games, IIRC…) may have made it easier for CBH to sell AA on returning for his junior year.
by britishbruin on Feb 22, 2010 8:22 AM PST up reply actions
And that gets us to the factor re flexibility
Perhaps Coach Howland should have been willing to be a little more flexible wrt to his office that would enable him to optimize the talent of AA and KL in the same team. He certainly has been more than “flexible” in the wrong way with regards to Dragovic, who he has given seemingly complete and total freedom to jack up dumb shots, without being held accountable.
right
and it’s not necessarily true that AA’s offensive game would have suffered – he would have probably had some easier shots courtesy of the attention given to KL.
I’d be curious what impact one-and-done players entering your program has on the likelihood of the other ‘first banana’ players jumping to the NBA. On the one hand, it brings additional media attention to some programs (e.g. Chris Douglas-Roberts staying and playing with Rose – though I forget the exact circumstances of him returning, and where he would have been projected); but at a major program, that might be less relevant. Do you want to go from being the talented NBA prospect junior leading a team to a talented NBA prospect sharing the court with can’t miss uber-talented freshman? It’s an aspect of it I hadn’t considered before so don’t have a strong sense of the effect it has had – I don’t know if Texas lost NBA guys prior to Durant’s arrival, and I doubt K-State had any prior to Beasley’s arrival…
by britishbruin on Feb 22, 2010 8:36 AM PST up reply actions
quickly on Texas right before Durant's arrival
lost So. LaMarcus Aldridge (#2 in the last pre-one-and-done draft, understandable decision)
less good decisions?:
So. Daniel Gibson (#42 overall)
and
Ju. PJ Tucker (#35 overall)
by britishbruin on Feb 22, 2010 9:01 AM PST up reply actions
I do not conclude so
… but I have no idea what sales pitch he used, or if there was a better one he could have tried, or if even if there was a better one than he tried whether that would have made a difference in the end result. I don’t see that there is any way to have a fact based argument about what CBH did or did not say to AA.
However, if you think that there is a pattern of guys leaving before it is in their best interests to do so, then you might question CBH’s ability to persuade a guy that it is in his best interests to stay (versus the other people in a player’s ear whispering that he should leave). Personally, I don’t think that is the case; but there is clearly disagreement on this general issue among regular BN posters.
by britishbruin on Feb 22, 2010 8:46 AM PST up reply actions
On the other hand...
Player’s that win NC’s see their stock rise a lot.
The UNC players last year were not projected to be all that highly drafted after their game against KU the prior year – winning it saw a lot of them move up a few positions in the draft
KU was the same… outside of Brandon Rush, the other guys were borderline 1st rounders… many safely made it in
Had Florida not won an NC, there’s a good chance few would have noticed Horford/Brewer/Noah enough to draft them where they were
Don't forget Bobo
Bobo lost a great deal of weight last offseason. If he could add strength and work on his footwork in the upcoming off season, he could be a proficient benefit to the program. He has shown that he sees the court well for a 5, and passes the ball well. If he can learn to move his feet and get off the ground with power on offense, he might turn into a player.
RN – it would have been nice if the quality of players on the team forced RN to work on his game to earn playing time. Instead, he was the obvious default who was absolutely necessary to give us a chance to win. I’d like to see him in ready position on defense, and more active at that end. If he could develop a short range jumpshot, it would make his drives to the basket much more effective. Free throws are an obvious problem, which he appeared to work on during the season. Attitude is key. He obviously has a lot of aggression in his game, but he looks like he gets frustrated easily. If he can pour his aggression into a hard working offseason, he has a great deal of upside potential.
JA – I hope you are right about him. He needs to show quickness and may be slowed by nagging injuries still.
ML was the leading scorer during the pre conference schedule. Now he can’t throw a pea in the ocean. Hopefully, a return to the 2 will bring back his offensive game. Perhaps a season at the point will improve his ballhandling skill as a slashing 2.
TH is probably the most explosive leaper I can remember in the program. He has had fantastic games as a shooter and a passer, but has also had some inconsistency, which is expected from a freshman, particularly one who missed most of the preseason. He is clearly the bright spot in the program, a player who would make any team in the country. My bet is he works hard on his game, because he sees NBA milliions in his future. I expect to hear that he is playing pick up games with the pros over the summer.
For starters...
As for the backcourt, JA and ML are not the future. Lee isn’t capable enough skills-wise or fast enough to keep up with talented point or off guards on defense. He has to overplay because he is too slow and will get beat. He may have basic speed up and down the court, but when it comes to moving laterally with quickness and reacting, he is much too slow to be a “go-to” defender. JA should simply ride pine the rest of the way, as someone else pointed out. And MAH is probably going to grad school at somewhere like Harvard (I have heard that he has been accepted- – don’t know if that’s true). Don’t bother counting on him just yet. So the backcourt is in shambles. Without rebuilding there ASAP, this team will continue to flounder. Teams playing zone really can’t compete with the top teams unless they are extremely disciplined, and this team is not even close. So we need to play man, and therefore need more players who have speed.
JA and ML
are indeed not the future, but they’re the right now. Until we bring in players that can contribute, they’re what we have. I share Nestor’s hope (though hope may not be reality!) that they’ll develop. Zeke Jones may well become a significant contributor, perhaps even a starter, but if we bench JA, put ML at the 2, MAH leaves, and if ZJ isn’t all that, then who’s running the point?
Confused
Why does the team need to play M2M instead of zone? We haven’t proved capable of playing M2M this year and it’s not looking good for next year. If ML lacks the lateral quickness to play man up, why would we go M2M?
Zone vs Man to Man
I don’t quite agree with 2ndGenBruin. When you don’t have a good match, you need to play zone. This year team is a perfect example of zone. I believe we will get killed game after game if this team plays man to man exclusively. Especially when you have good defensive players, man to man is the wau to go. This year we have no outstanding defensive players maybe with the exception of TH.
I don't disagree about the need to play zone...
…we are awful in MTM defense. It seems that you misunderstood what I was saying. Zone is the way with this squad, for now. But it’s not a “recipe for success.” If we want to go back to being an elite team, and playing true Ben Ball defense, then we MUST play MTM. Which means we must recruit exceptional lateral speed. Zone will not allow us to compete with the Kansas/UNC crowd. Sure, we may rattle a team or two that is decent, but not the elite teams- -they know how to break down a zone (for starters, they would have good shooters, something we lack entirely). I’m just saying that we need o rebuild that area of the team before we can truly compete, week in and week out.
I have to say that as goes the guards, so goes the team. We need to fix that first. We can’t fast break w/o a good point guard or #2 who can lead the break. I’d rather have TH finishing than dribbling (though he is the most able at this point, reminds me of Lamar Odom in some ways- -not as big but pretty agile for a big man)
If Smith doesn't lose weight
Let’s see what Bob Paclic can do with him :)
by captainqtp on Feb 22, 2010 8:47 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Made this observation in a prior post
I think Smith has as good a chance to start at Center for CRN as he does to CBH next year.
My gut tells me Smith is a project next year and goes by the way of AS and maybe takes a redshirt. Granted, Smith is a more skilled than AS, but because of Smith’s size and conditioning issues, I suspect AS will get more minutes at the 5 next year. If Smith stays on the active roster next year we’ll be 3 deep at the 5 which we may need given Bobo may continue having injury issues (ala Bynum and Oden)
Just a hunch.
If Smith has to redshirt
Howland will be looking for a new job a little more than a year from now. Just a hunch.
"I don't forget very much" Rick Neuheisel, 11/28/09
And to think
Some were concerned with us recruiting another one and done center a few months back..
by SuperBruinMan on Feb 22, 2010 2:40 PM PST up reply actions
show them "Pumping Iron"
and see if veteran Bobo gets inside the head of young, gifted JS2 in the same way Arnie got inside the head of Lou Ferigno…
by britishbruin on Feb 22, 2010 9:03 AM PST up reply actions
The Rattle in Seattle
Sorry, I couldn’t think of anything else that rhymed.
What I saw, until I couldn’t bear to look anymore, was a poorly prepared team. I think they were still basking in the glow of the Wash. St. game and thought all they had to do was show up. This team is has a Jekyl and Hyde complex. This time they went back to making poor shots, poor passing and kinda giving up early when things didn’t go their way. Yes, I know they are young but that doesn’t mean they can’t play smart and hustle and follow-up their shots and block out better and make better passes, etc. Those failures are about discipline and teaching discipline is about coaching. So the one thing I am in complete agreement here is – OUR COACHING STAFF NEEDS AND OVERHAUL. And if Howland doesn’t get it done next year, he needs to find employment elsewhere.
Right on, Keptycho!
The coaching staff needs to be more flexible in their approach to the athletes they have. You always need to make adjustments looking at the players you have. Our players are slow and really can’t play MTM defense very well and that’s why we went to zone. The coaches should have seen what was coming because they recruited those players. Also, for the coaching staff to allow their players to talk “smack” about each other to the media is unforgivable. Howland is responsible for that. He can not allow this to happen. If “smack talk” is done, it should be behind closed doors and with all coaches involved. This year’s team lacks “heart” and teamwork and discipline. The coach is responsible for teaching this to his team. When we have a timeout, the team doesn’t seem to listen to Howland. There is no fire there. I see O’Neill at $c and he is always pushing them to do more – even when they are winning by a big margin. Hoping here that we win the rest of our games this season.
Orange County BB players are not bad. They, like anyone else, need good coaching.
by Forever a Bruin on Feb 22, 2010 9:40 AM PST up reply actions
Conditioning and Defense
We need Smith here all summer -taking classes-and getting the pounds off(He did look out of shape fcompared to his junior year). He could play at 280 IF much of the excess weight is dropped and muscle replaces
Defense is not zone vs. man but rather a combination useage plus variants on each. Howland has been stubborn on this issue but he needs to look around. He can still use his man defense but switching things around is good defense.
Nestor pretty much laid it all out on where we are and what we need to get better. We will always have those who leave early-how many of us would turn down millions to play a game and get if not better coaching more of it due to NCAA practice restrictions.
It hurts my brain to think about basketball
Quickly, here are a few thoughts. I am just not savvy enough about hoops to make detailed observations, and I might be way off, but most fans are probably like me.
- At this point we don’t even need a great PG. We just need a serviceable PG. At UCLA under Howland, it means someone who is not worried about scoring, who doesn’t mind playing methodically and patiently, who has a relatively high basketball IQ, and who is an extension of Ben Howland on the floor. So far, only MAH fits that profile, but sadly he is not well endowed enough athletically to be effective. The mind of MAH in ML’s body would do the trick. So next year, will Zeke Jones be that player? I have no clue, but if he is not, we’re still in Suck City, unless JA gets healthy and gets his shit together in the offseason.
- Developing youngsters is a double-edged sword. Many people did great analysis here to show that most if not all of the past NCAA champions had upperclassmen with maybe one super freshman. I honestly cannot blame Howland too much for being twice shy about playing young’uns too much. He has seen too many of his good recruits bolt early and he may be thinking that if he limits their playing time their first year, that would make them stick around until they are at least juniors. While some of us think that you play the youngsters now to prepare for the future, he may be thinking the future would be better if he keeps their learning curve less than steep early on and turns them loose the next year. Win now (in a throw-away year) or win later, it depends how you look at it. TH and RN are only playing out of necessity, it seems.
- Josh Smith’s conditioning: if he has recovered from his injury, he has almost 9 months to get into shape. That’s 4-5 lbs a month to lose. At his age, that is really not that hard. CBH et al need to get on his case to get his cardio in playing form and give him Rivderdance feet.
- Howland’s flexibility: I don’t see it happening unless his back is to the wall. It is what makes him a good coach just as it could be his downfall. If we had a great shutdown guard, I think the matchup zone would probably be the best thing for this team now and next year.
- As for assistants, I really have no clue. Obviously it would be great to get Keating back, but that is a long shot. One name that came to mind for me was Reggie Theus. I know we clowned him when U$C* was interviewing him, and he probably has too much experience for the position, but he is from Inglewood, and he’s a pretty energetic guy. Just a thought because I really have nothing else to offer on that front!
Finally, I have definitely not given up on CBH. I still think he is the right guy for this job, he has unadulterated love and respect for this program and I have absolutely no doubt that he is not sleeping this season. He probably cried (out of rage) in private after Saturday’s loss…or maybe he punched a wall. This is probably the most challenging season he has ever had in his coaching career. I still don’t think there is anyone in the Pac-10 who could do better with this roster, though the love affair with Rago would have probably been over long ago. I strongly believe that this year’s struggles are due to roster mismanagement and not poor coaching. Next year, this team needs to be top-3 in the Pac-10 and get at least one win in the NCAA tournament, or I will ask to get paid for the Pauley renovation (you know, instead of making a donation…).
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
hahahahaha, Riverdance feet
"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 22, 2010 10:22 AM PST up reply actions
re: playing time
It will be interesting to see who stays/leaves this offseason. If indeed CBH thinks keeping players on the bench will keep them from leaving for the NBA, he may find that it doesn’t keep them from seeking to play at another school where they might even see some time on the court. Note I am not in any way advocating anything like starting MM; just hoping against hope that if CBH’s strategy truly is to bench kids to keep them that he’s getting them to buy in.
defensive 'flexibility' vs 'stubborness'
Perhaps someone can give me perspective on this about what other elite defensive coaches do.
I don’t think I want CBH to be chopping and changing his defense during a season. I want him to work out what core scheme works for his group of players, drill it preseason and predominantly stick to it, maybe occasionally throwing a few series of some other defense out there (maybe with different personnel) just to throw opponents off. Jim Boeheim went to some man-to-man out of necessity last year, but was incredibly reluctant to do so.
I presume that focusing on playing one style of defense allows you to play that style better than if you run a mix of defenses and play all of them moderately. I think that the occasional mixing things up is probably a good thing, but to establish a solid defensive identity it seems that a strong commitment to a certain way of playing is important.
I am not meaning to miscast anyone’s opinions, nor attribute straw man positions to people; just curious as to what sort of flexibility people are hoping to see from CBH on the defensive standpoint, and how that relates to other defense-minded coaches. I used to hate how discombobulated we looked against Timmeh’s junk defenses, but those struck me as a gimmick for a worse team to try to throw off a better team, not the sort of defensive philosophy you use to build a champion.
What should our template be for defensive supremacy?
If you're mediocre/bad, you mix.
Not a single great defensive team mixes schemes. Not one. That’s because it’s impossible in the limited college practice time to master multiple schemes well enough to execute them properly. If you have glaring weaknesses, then you mix to try and hide them.
The flexibility principle only comes into play if we have too many weaknesses to play man all the time. If so, then that’s sad, because as we all know CBH’s man defense awesome. Of course, if we somehow have the ability to be an amazing offensive team but mediocre defensive team, then mixing is fine to keep things decent on D. But it’s not an ideal.
+1
Boeheim is a perfect example. He lives by the zone and is widely considered an expert at coaching it and his teams are the best at playing it.
We are mediocre and thus had to mix this year.
CBH is a M2M coach. That is what got him where he is and most consider him one of the best teachers of the scheme. That is our identity.
But until we get the players to run an effective M2M scheme, I fear we’ll be in a constant state of ‘mix’ over the remainder of this season and next.
Based on CBH's past history of success
I would have to go with favoring the man to man. It remains the best way to shut down an opposing teams star scorer, provided you have a defensive stopper like an AA or CB. Force a team to use other players to beat you, and to some degree the defense dictates who those other players are. UCLAs recent success has been predicated on tough in your dish man 2 man. Until I see a CBH coached team win at a high level with a zone, then I am not a believer. Doesn’t mean the zone isn’t right for the current squad though. But they aren’t winning at the level I am referring to.
Question for those who remember 95’ better than I. Didn’t Harrick employ both a man and zone that year?
I think you have to favor the defense
that best fits your roster and gives them the best chance of succeeding. If the roster next year can be successful playing a man to man, which BH is most comfortable with, that is great. But if it doesn’t BH needs to step outside his comfort zone and do what is best for the team.
by silverlakebruin on Feb 22, 2010 1:34 PM PST up reply actions
Agree with your points
M2M is CBH’s bread and butter and I agree that this is CBH’s and UCLA’s identity on defense. However, CBH to date has not shown any willingness to be "flexible’ at all. Coaches across the country switch their schemes based on their roster or matchup. Yet, CBH reluctantly went zone this year when it was obvious that our team could not play his beloved M2M defense.
For instance…..in 2007, I don’t remember a single team pressing us. I wouldn’t either unless I had a death wish considering we had DC and RW who both could break the press for a bucket or to set someone else up. Defensively, I would have liked to see CBH throw some sort of press (full, 3/4, etc) when you have 2 really quick guards who were terrors on defense. KL could have protected the rim and we had pretty quick forwards in Shipp and Luc. Yes, we had depth issues and it could lead to foul trouble but I think switching our D to give opponents a different look is worth it.
On the other hand, Rose killed us in the FF because he was just bigger & stronger than DC. Memphis was able to use their dribble drive offense to take us on the bounce. IMO, this would have been a PERFECT time for CBH to have come out zone against them. Memphis was not a good perimeter shooting team. Also expecting DC & RW to contatin DR & CDR was asking too much IMO. Both DC & RW gave up a lot of size and asking them to keep them out of the lane was asking a lot. Calamari would have prepped his team against CBH’s M2M and imagine the shock they would have been in if CBH would have thrown some zone at them. If Memphis hits the perimeter shot, we tip our hat to them but instead of exploiting their weakness, CBH stayed status quo instead of modifying his gameplan based on the matchup. At the very least, Memphis would have had to waste time adjusting to this because they likely would have never scouted CBH going zone.
I’m not advocating CBH dumping his M2M defense. But I think he needs to be open to switching defenses in game as well as based on matchups. To date, I haven’t seen any willingness on CBH’s part to do so. And him switching zone half way into the season doesn’t count as being “flexible”.
and if AA was on that team against Memphis...
does he shut down Rose? Probably so. That one player probably makes a huge difference.
by 84 on Feb 22, 2010 5:58 PM PST up reply actions
CBH at his best does more than straight M2M and would not need zone
The goal of CBH’s defense in his best years is to take away the team’s best or key (sometimes not the same)player in addition to hard man to man. However, this year that didn’t work because there were so many weak defensive players on this team that the other options could kill us.
A simple example is the last game we were mostly Man to Man, AZ, CBH’s scheme worked to the extent that ML shut down AZ’s PG and arguably key player Wise making him go 2-7 from the field with 5 TOs. Wise’s first FG points came when ML was out and the other FG came in garbage time. CBH put his then 2 guard and best defender on the other teams point and offensive key.
But AZ’s Kyle Fogg scored a career high 25 (2 and 1/2 times his season average) off JA.
This is too simple but you don’t just match up. Man to man is not as simple as a coach telling a player who to guard. CBH defense has always been about taking away the best part of the other team’s offense, but this year that was not enough.
Zone does not allow you to take away an option as it is not as easy to adjust, you can’t hide an ND from your best player as we have seen often this year when teams run plays to his side. (M2M you can put an ND on a non-scorer or lesser scorer.) But Zone can bait badly coach team to setttle for jumpers or take advantage of good teams on their rare off nights. A famous example, in practice, many years ago as an assistant coach, Coach K with college kids in the first scrimmage game against the Dream Team won by playing a packed in zone. Obviously there was a shock value as zone D was illegal in the pros at the time and the Dream Team adjusted and never lost to the college kids or anyone else again.
The games we won this year with zone against better teams (CAL and Washington have more talent IMO) were predicted in part on there inability to hit threes in the CAL game (they shot 11% from 3) and against Washington on their settling for threes. We also got killed by both teams in the rematch. The CAL game was a bad defense game for ND and RN as Cal kept running the same play over and over on ND’s side. The problem was they were beyond belief bad from the outside but they still almost won.
The first Washington Game UW only had 60 possessions and were content much of the time to pass the ball around the outside and jack up an often open three. The second game they pushed it and had 76 possessions. They were not content with just the three and beat us everywhere.
My point in part is zone is a gimmick that made this easier to adjust to (in the UW game) or reliant on luck (Cal shooting beyond belief bad in the first game from outside). Zone is good for lesser teams because it can give them a chance with better teams. But it is almost never the best defense for a defense first team..
Zone has another advantage over man to man in that you get to rest on D. Again not helpful for a defense first coach or team.
Thus, it is best to be man to man with adjustments, assuming you have some talent.
I realize this is a generalization. There are gimmicks, match up zones, etc. I understand Syracuse and years ago Temple’s defense first very tough match up zone. But the best defense with equal to better players is always man to man because it gives you flexibility.
And look I realize a lot of GREAT teams go zone at times. But they are generally not Defense first teams. Again, this is a generalization. I would conclude with Bobby Knight who never played zone but always taught “man to man defense with zone principles.”
I am also puzzled
by the concept of ‘hiding’ players in the zone – the zone allows the opposition to dictate the matchups rather than the other way round. In our case it is less about hiding a player and more about compensating for team deficiencies. We could match up our worse defender ND against a slow player on defense, but our guards can’t handle their men one-on-one and our makeshift centers can’t play CBH’s way either (which in normal circumstances helps the guards defend the pick and roll, etc)
by britishbruin on Feb 23, 2010 9:58 AM PST up reply actions
I would add one more point that has to be addressed
- Rewarding good bevavior
BH needs to bench players that do not play hard defensively, regardless of their offensive contribution. Your offensive contribution can offset a lack of ability on defense, but it should never be allowed to offset a lack of effort.
Playing time should be reserved solely for those players that play hard, and making a mistake should be judged less harshly than failing to give maximum effort. It appears that this season mistakes were worse to BH than lack of effort, and coaching like that will destroy a program.
by silverlakebruin on Feb 22, 2010 1:38 PM PST reply actions
Very good point
I wrote this in the section under backcourt:
Lastly, Howland will need to get back to his roots rewarding players who come in the mindset of playing defense first and dedicating themselves to fighting with 40 minutes of intensity and effort. Quiet simply Howland will need to find a way to to shape a leader out of his backcourt who will reestablish a warrior mentality based on work ethic and effort in his program. We have not had leadership in this program since DC’s departure last season. If Howland is not able to bring back that culture of work ethic by developing leadership on the court (specifically in the backcourt), he will be doomed.
The bolded part really applies to the entire team.
Right on Nestor...
That hit the nail on the head. It doesn’t matter what defense they go with, if the 24/7/365 intensity isn’t there. From what I thought I knew of Howland, I can’t see how he abides the lack of intensity (walking the ball up the floor after an opposing team scores, instead of pushing the ball up the court, unless trying to kill the clock, which hasn’t been much of a problem this year). It is all over the place. From missing free throws to bad passes, to jogging up and down the court. I thought he was big on getting his lunch bucket bruisers to hustle all the time. Now we have a bunch of skinny kids (aside from “the Beast” RN) that don’t press on defense at all, and don’t help out much on weak side defense much either. Howland has really gotten away from the style of basketball he used to coach at Pitt. Of course you have to do the best with what you have (and can get on the recruiting trail), but players like Alfred Aboya and Mata-Real come to mind as classic Ben Ball Warriors who we should have more of, but don’t. You are exactly right though, he needs desperately to bring back that dedication (DC had it and I didn’t think we’d miss him as much as we do)- – whether through a coaching change, substitution/lineup changes, voodoo, geez, whatever it takes.
Conditioning Is An Issue for Everyone, Not Just Smith
Although I only see our players on TV, one thing that shocked me at the beginning of the season was that with the exception of Bobo, none of the soph’s seemed to have hit the gym to gain muscle mass and strength.
Am I wrong?
Compare them to what RW looked like when he came back after his first year. ML and JA still do not look “strong”.
Bobo gets a pass because it is very difficult to lose vast amounts of weight and build lean muscle mass at the same time.
His task for the summer is to muscle up.
Same for TH and BL.
sjh
ML frequently cramped up
toward the end of games in the first part of the season. Not sure if he does so as much any more – I don’t remember seeing it lately, but then I often watch on DVR and lately I’ve given up on the game well before the clock says it’s over.
Defense and Conditioning
Well, I have two separate and barely related points.
First, defense. What happened to the Bruins’ ability to lock down in the second half of close games? In the past, the Bruins would pick up the intensity and go on ten or fifteen point runs where the opponents could not score. It has not happened this year and I don’t think the guys “believe”. Roll and Keefe remember and try. Drago must have sleep walked through those games because he seems more like run killer this year. I am concerned that we will have no one on next year’s team that knows or remembers those runs and how to make it happen.
Second, maybe lack of conditioning prevents our Bruins from duplicating those defensive efforts from the past. Roll seems ready to play 40 minutes, and he has in those overtime games. No one else is ready.
One more point in defense of Malcolm Lee: he has gained weight and strength. OK, he’s not RW, but Lee was positively skeletal last year. I am sure he gained some weight and strength from last year.
Finally, I remain optimistic about next year and CBH. I still have the faith.
by Arturo del Mundo on Feb 22, 2010 4:36 PM PST reply actions
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.
