ESPN’s "Draft Analyst" Chad Ford Takes Ridiculous Cheap Shots At Ben Howland

This is so….I don’t have a word negative enough for this utterly absurd, insane tripe.

Do you think it’s possible that—having absolutely no actual ability to investigate, research or write—guys like this just try to write something so ridiculous that it just has to get a “reaction?”

(I’m just having trouble believing this guy is sincere, because of, you know, the ignorance level here.)

CBH coaches to WIN games, not showcase what kind of NBA talent he has. Do we forget 3 straight Final Fours that quickly?

However, for those of us who watched DC and RW every game of their UCLA careers, we knew what kind of talent they were bringing to the NBA. We could have told Mr. Ford how explosive that talent was and could be. Their NBA success is absolutely no surprise to us. Chad may know that if he didn’t just watch ACC games three nights a week on ESPN.

And great point about defense, N. How can he disregard how all those players developed defensively under CBH?

Love his preparation ability and his focus on defense, but think he tries to stay the course a little too long sometimes in games, but all-in-all, he’s done a great job developing kids into productive NBA players and producing winning seasons (the exception being last year).

Funny how he didn’t bring up 2-time NBA champ JF.

having to play in that style of play and having the athleticism to play a faster pace made them better suited for the NBA. Otherwise, they may not have had enough experience to handle a slowdown game in the NBA if CBH just had a run-and-gun offense. Not every team plays like the Phoenix Suns.

If they were that good at UCLA playing uncomfortably, then there’s no reason to believe that DC and RW, and even JH weren’t going to succeed in NO, OKC, or PHI where the style of play is better suited for quicker, more athletic PG.

and now i want those 30 seconds of my life back…

He also mostly played Westbrook and Holiday off the ball (alongside Collison), which obscured their playmaking skills.

so we were supposed to move DC to off guard? or just sit him and let JH play point? this guy’s a moron.

also gotta love DC’s “so-so college stats”

• 2007 pac-10 first team
• 2008 pac-10 second team
• 2008 pac-10 tournament mvp
• 563 / 1185 (47.5%) overall shooting at UCLA
• 164 / 377 (43.5%) overall 3pt at UCLA

i’ll take half of those bullets for any body on our team any year. individual year stats are pretty good too – except for his first season which i guess is what this clown is referencing? and if you want anything about RW – just check youtube.

CBH’s style isn’t as exciting as other styles – but it wins. we could have used JH to stick around some more, and we need malcolm lee to buy into the system.

i guess he’s a fan of the programs that showcase individual talent in college and then takes joy in watching these kids flame out at the next level? Talent alone doesn’t bring you success! It takes character and a strong work ethic.

would actually be a compliment to Howland and his system. It seems like by what he says, CBH prepares players for the NBA in more ways than through individual skills. Quite a concept for the boys at ESPN to handle, I guess – the fact that defense and playing the style of the team instead of what you’d prefer as an individual actually lead to success.

I’d rather have it your way than the other way around like say Coach K. What Ford is stating, as a guy not instantly upset at the insult, is that Howland’s style doesn’t let players blow up the statsheet. As a UNC guy I’ve heard the same thing about Dean. Howland does develop players, give them tools and skills and when the leash is taken off at the next level they’re excelling.

Much better to have that as an issue than having guys like Redick, Shelden Williams, Josh McRoberts get huge stats, put up big numbers and then disappoint at the next level.

This so-called “draft analyst” misses one humongous point when he makes this oh-so-ignorant statement: “[they] exceeded expectations set by their so-so college stats.”

Here’s the thing draft anal yst: Professional NBA talent scouts don’t stake their life’s work and reputation on stats; instead, they look for talent, hence the wording in their job titles.

If stats were the ultimate determinant of NBA success, then every member of the 1990 Loyola Marymount team should have been perennial NBA All-Stars and MVPs… As it was, none of those guys became an impact player the NBA, let alone a starter or a star and LMU never made a Final 4 like Ben’s “so-so stat” teams have done 3 times.

If we ran the ball up court it seems to me that we would have a better chance to find at least one defender out of place or not exactly ready, and would give us an easier shot. At the same time, I’m pretty sure that Coach Howland knows more about basketball than I do.

He’s a clear CBH project who, with the great D he learned at UCLA, became a starter and respected player.

Is forcing kids to play D holding them back?

Not in the eyes of the pro teams and coaches who draft them.

perception often trumps reality. And I believe that this perception has hurt UCLA in terms of recruiting.

Jordan played three years at UNC

CBH was so successful in hiding talent that RW was selected as the #4 player in the draft. RW developed under CBH, which was a combination of UCLA training and tremendous hard work by RW. RW grew an inch before coming to the Bruins and hit the weight room hard between his sophomore and junior year. He showed his ability to play the point when DC went down, and averaged 12.6 ppg. on a team that had DC and KL, as well as JS, LRMAM and AA2. His monster dunk against Cal and his superior play against Memphis (the only player who could match their strength, speed and quickness) pushed him up the draft charts like a meteor. RW’s run to the finals put him on center stage for the NBA scouts and GMs.

 I am sure that RW thanks CBH for the way he developed as a player. It is hard to say that a #4 pick exceeds expectations, but in fact RW has. I believe he has exceeded expections to a degree, in the same way the Micheal Jordan exceeded expectations as the 2nd selection (of course to a far lesser degree). Sometimes the very good ones turn out to be great (RW) and the great ones sometimes become superstars (MJ). This doesn’t mean that either was hidden. Was MJ hidden at NC?

JH was hidden at a First round, #11 draft pick after a lackluster freshman season. If the object was to promote JH, then CBH should have played him at point. If the object was to put together the best team, it is hard to argue that DC wasn’t the better point guard. In fact, he is still the better point guard. I realize that Nestor and others suggested that DC and JH could have been switched or that JH could have been rotated more to the point, but I don’t think that would have enhanced his scoring. JH’s shooting percentage was around 43% as a Bruin, and it fell to around 32% for the second half of Pac10 play, including an 0-5 performance against Arizona State and an 0-8 performance against USC. He was just having a nightmare hitting jumpshots. I don’t know what CBH could have done to improve that. He still is not a great outside shooter. Additionally, with KL and LRMAM gone, the Bruins were hard pressed to fast break because they could not dominate the boards and could not leak out the guards. JH has hardly set the world on fire as a pro. He averaged 8 pts a game, and somewhere near 9.6 ppg as a starter, as an injury replacement for some guy named Lou Williams. However, JH’s stats are padded because the 76ers are a horrible team and much of their games are garbage time. In any event, JH was hardly hidden from anyone. He was the 11th pick in the draft and on the NBA’s radar from his Junior year at Cambell Academy. I think the concensus is that he would have benefitted from another year at UCLA. He would have been the point guard and number one scoring option on the team. He would have had another year to work on his game. JH just wasn’t having fun in CBH"s defense first system, and perhaps CBH"s taciturn manner, and the lure of even a middle first round selection to start his life’s dream was too hard for him to pass up. JH is still quite young and if he works as hard as RW he’ll probably mature in to a very good pro, or better. The 76ers took a gamble, not unlike the Lakers with Andrew Bynum, that a talented player would mature into a very good pro. Given JH’s recognized talent coming out of high school, and his relatively mature, if uneven, play as a Bruin, it wasn’t a very high risk gamble. However, he was not hidden by CBH or anyone.

DC was the 21st player selected. DC was hidden for 3 years as the starting guard at UCLA, and in two of those years UCLA was among the Top 3 high profile programs, having make runs the the finals and having recruited KL. He averaged 13-14 ppg. and shot nearly 50%. DC was hardly hindered in his exposure or his performances. The knock on DC was that he was too small for the NBA and would be abused by the bigger NBA point guards. He also has a funky looking shot, so scouts and gm’s wondered if he could get his shot off in the NBA. DC is averaging 13.7 ppg. and 5.7 apg. for New Orleans. DC, one of my top 5 Bruins of all time, has exceeded everyone’s expectations. He is the personification of Coach Wooden’s theorum that quickness is the number one attribute. DC was hardly hidden by CBH, he was showcased. DC proved his mettle as a 3 pt. shooter over his career and the go to player as the clock ran down. I believe that some of the NBA scouts and GM’s who picked other players before DC wish they had picked him, but it remains to be seen whether DC will be a star in the league, or just a good pro. I love him and I hope he finds the right team that will complement his talents. He certainly will not start over Chris Paul.

Rather than hiding talent, playing for CBH is practically a ticket the pros for the better players. JF, AA, KL, RW, DC, LRMAM have all flourished in the pro ranks. The pros know they are getting smart two way players out of CBH’s program. It is very hard to say that the players were picked later in the draft than they should have been. Some of the players have met expectations, and some have exceeded expectations, but all of them were on the radar and there relative merits were known.

is that Westbrook was taken with the fourth pick in the draft. If Howland’s system held him back … I mean, if he had played for someone else would he have gone third?

I think the draft that year was Rose, Beasley, Mayo, Westbrook … how much higher would he have gone? Collison, Holiday and Westbrook all went in the first round … how held back were they?

I mean, it’s possible that the way we play holds down their stats but so what? Nobody drafts based on stats.

Anyway, Ford can’t argue that Howland held Westbrook back and his success is a surprise when OKC took him fourth overall. Clearly, whatever Howland did, Westbrook got noticed.

There is a side comment I want to make, too. When articles like this come out, how come none of the players is ever quoted? How hard would it be? Just call Westbrook or Collison or Holiday and ask them what impact playing for Howland had on their development. At least two of them would sing his praises, as would Afflalo and Farmar and Love. Maybe … maybe … Hoilday’s experience wasn’t as good for him, but his was an unusual situation as he was recruited to replace Collison and then Collison stayed for his senior season.

This kind of blather results from having a job where you have to fill columns, but don’t have any accountability. He can make an unsupported statement without having to back it up and if its wrong so what. That’s different from a scout or gm who has to actually make the selection and then live with the consequences. You never hear Michael Jordan say that Dean Smith hindered his development, yet because of a joke – “Who is the only person to hold Michael Jordan under 20 pts, Dean Smith,” this kind of junk lives on. In fact, MJ gave Dean Smith the credit for “elevating my basketball talents” when interviewed after MJ was announced as a hall of fame inductee.

Another point that needs mentioning, is that if RW, KL and DC are teammates, how can they possibly all average over 20 ppg in a college season. If you are the only scorer, or one of two, then it may be possible. But on a team with balance, all the players will have their averages held down.