Howland’s Mentally Soft Bruins Drop Pac-12 Opener to Stanford 59-60
by Nestor on Dec 29, 2011 10:29 PM PST
in Basketball
Email
PrintIt's almost 1:30 am out here in the East Coast and I am wondering why I just stayed up to watch what just unfolded in Palo Alto. Ben Howland's Bruins were feeling good about themselves after a 5 game win streak (during PRN era) compiled against 4 cupcakes and a mediocre mid-major in Richmond. However, reality caught up tonight as they lost in a predictable heart-breaker up against an above average Stanford team up at the Farm.
The Bruins had two chances to win the game in the final seconds but they blew it by a hurried and unnecessary three point shot attempt from Jerime Anderson and then from another hapless one from Zeek Jones. The final score was 59-60 (box score). Yay for the moral victory loving losers. I can already see Chianti Dan typing away his next "blog" about Bruins (7-6, 0-1) "fighting hard" against Stanford (11-2, 1-0).
While the game turned out to be close, perhaps it was lost early in first few mins when a bad and stubborn strategic "defensive" decision by Howland cost the Bruins. We actually came out with a little energy and got up with a 4-0 "lead" on the road. That was it. Unfortunately for us Howland decided to come out with M2M and with two Wears on the court, Stanford ended up going with on a huge 15-2 run. IMO Howland miscalculation to go with M2M instead of zone early on that proved to be a decisive factor in this game. Stanford finished the game making only 33.9 percent of their shots. We could have won this game if we came out with a tenacious and tight zone D early. But Howland's stubbornness cost us dearly tonight.
It also didn't help us as our "point guard" Jones set the tone early with poor shot selection and without any effort to locate his team-mates. More on that and late night game notes after the jump.
Even though the game appear to get out of hand early on, thanks to some leadership on the defensive end from Jerime Anderson late in the second half Bruins made a 6-0 run thanks to couple of steals from Jerime and closed the game within 2 to 19-21. Jones than chipped in during that run, helping the Bruins to close the gap to 23-24. That was the score at the half.
So Jones was the "leading scorer" for the Bruins as he finished with team high 26 points. It was not a surprise though because he never really looked to set up his team-mates, especially our big guys in the paint. As usually he played like a 2 guard as our "starting point guard," not doing much to run a methodical and efficient half court offense. Bruins finished with 9 turnovers (3 from Jones and 3 from Tyler Lamb) and just 1 FREAKING assist during the first half (it came from Jerime). The Bruins finished with a total 8 assists for the entire game.
The two teams kept going back and forth for a while in early second half. In first few mins Howland went with a core line up with a heavy dose of the Wear twins minus Powell and Stover. When Powell was on the floor he put up some forced shots because ... well he had to get his attempts in because of the quick hook from Howland.
It'd be interesting to see how Powell's game would develop if he got serious mins where he wouldn't have to constantly look over his shoulder after every mistakes (unlike the Wear Twins or Dragovic or JS ... you get the idea).
Going back to the game the two teams kept going back and forth as Stanford clung to a small lead. Zeke kept us in the game with his shots from 3 point attempt. However, as noted above he wasn't really looking for his team-mates. While his team-mates were not stepping up, the question we have to reflect on whether our offensive flow was getting totally disrupted with a "point guard" with his shoot first mindset.
The Trees were up by a score of 47-46 with 7:10 left in the game. Around that time (12:40 AM EST) I thought the Bruins weren't mentally tough enough to pull the game out. The prediction turned out to be right. Bruins also self-destructed themselves with some ugly free throw shooting, making only 15 of their 24 attempts from the line. We kept missing FTs in second half with chances to take the lead. As mentioned above, the fear about being too mentally soft once again became a reality with these Bruins. These guys are nothing like the "Ben Ball warriors" of past. Then again Howland himself gave up on that mindset a while ago and continued it today with the huge mins for the Wear Twins.
The Wear Twins finished with combined 5 rebounds and 1 point in the first half. They couldn't get anything done on the offensive side and constantly found themselves out of position when the Bruins needed to come down with a board. They were awful yet Howland didn't bother to given Anthony Stover some good mins or even try out Brendan Lane. Howland left them on the court in the closing mins as they combined for a total of 7 points and 11 rebounds.
Lamb tried to keep us in the waning moments with couple of clutch buckets but it just wasn't enough. Even though we had a chance to win the game in closing seconds, we didn't get any good looks because of dumb shot selections courtesy of Anderson and Jones.
The stat line that jumps out to me is the rebounding margin. We thought the Bruins would have an advantage in the frontcourt with guys like Joshua Smith, Stover, the Wear Twins and Lane. Yet we got out rebounded by 3 (29 to 32) with Stanford dominating us early on. The Trees finished with 9 offensive rebounds to our 5.
As I said earlier today this Bay Area road trip is a big deal with ramifications on Howland's long term future at UCLA. Unfortunately for Howland and for us, he is off to a bad start thanks to same old stubborn and bad strategic decisions that have hurt this program on the court for last 3+ years. All the good vibes that were generated during our 5-0 run against cupcakes and a weak Richmond team is now gone.
With that we will let you take over this late night (early morning out here in the East) post game thread so you can fire away with your quick takes. If you have extended reflections (more than 75 words) make sure to use the fanpost section. Fire away.
GO BRUINS.
112 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Blame Howland
for spotting stanford 13 points before realizing he needed to play a zone.
hindsight is 20/20
I have the Sons of Westwood on my iPod in my "favorites" playlist ...
http://sonsofwestwood.wordpress.com
Yes, it is. This was not hindsight, though.
But if you had been paying even the slightest bit of attention during any of the past three seasons, or ever paid attention to how the team plays with the Wear twins in, you would know that.
by Seth Chandler on Dec 29, 2011 11:26 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
start with a zone and with powell
then if they cannot stop the team, go to man. It is just frustrating to watch him put a square peg in a round hole. Game after game, year after year. He is so stubborn
I rather have Lazeric shoot
than just about any other player on the team though.
by LavinRuinedCollege on Dec 29, 2011 10:36 PM PST reply actions
Really?
You want to have our leading scorer and only leader coming off the bench. Zeek and Lamb were the only guys who were mentally tough out there.
Also, Anderson’s shot was a good one. It was a wide open 3 from the corner. He just missed it, that’s what was bad about it.
by jcgobruins on Dec 29, 2011 11:33 PM PST via iPhone app up reply actions
What?
Where in my post does it say I was pleased by the loss? I was just surprised at the outcry against Zeek when he had a great game. Geez Louise
good shot...
….Where he had too much time to think about it.. instead of releasing it naturally . I knew from that moment he was not going to make it.
True
But my point was that it was not an “unnecessary three point shot attempt” like Nestor says in the post. A wide open three for a guard, who btw has been clutch in the past, is one of the best shots you can get in that situation. Especially with our limited offensive weapons.
it was indeed a good look
but he also potentially had the space to get closer for a better look.
But if he likes the spot he was in and felt in rhythm, no reason not to shoot it.
by VeniceBruin on Dec 30, 2011 11:34 AM PST up reply actions
when has Jerime been clutch in the past?
I always thought he was mentally weak, honestly. I can dig through some of the game archives though to see specific examples, anything come to mind?
Did you see the second half of Richmond game?
Jerime has his flaws but he has also come through in few games over the years. Specifically last year he made some clutch 3s in important moments. You can go through the archives.
Well
Who is making the decision to stick with the Wear Twins? Who made the decision to have Smith and Stover on together only for 13 mins?
Exactly
It’s kind of amusing to go through BN archives and check out all the comments defending Howland well into Pac-10 conference season for sticking with him.
Didn't say I don't blame Howland
Wasn’t really focusing on the coach. To me, the coach is always accountable no matter what. I was strictly talking about the players.
by LavinRuinedCollege on Dec 29, 2011 11:04 PM PST up reply actions
No worries
My comment above was more wrt to general frustration. However, these players are not being put in position to win. Our bigs were off early because the pg didn’t do much to set them up. Lot of this goes back to the rotation Howland has set and has stuck to despite need for change. It’s a team wide fail.
Jones
does need to do a better job of being a point guard. I do agree with that. It’s just hard to figure out if his play is making his teammates look bad or his teammates are just plain bad.
by LavinRuinedCollege on Dec 29, 2011 11:14 PM PST up reply actions
It goes back to the core principles
What is the identity of this program? Are we still about Ben Ball which is predicated on defense first and then smart, efficient offense? Looks like Howland has move away with the use of Wear twins and with a pg on the offensive end who looks to shoot first. We haven’t had the defense first mindset for 3+ years and it has rotten this program.
I don't blame it on the bigs in general,
We lost because 1) D. Wear was asleep 2) should have been playing zone more and early 3) when you play zone, you don’t have to put a third guard in at the 3, 4) Lamb disatrous for 75% of the game 5) Zeke had 26 but how many did his defensive assignment have especially at the line in the end which BTW his gettng bear to the basket give J. Smith his 5th foul.
I will repeat my previous post.
RN and JS are responsible for this messy basketball season. JS is an enigma. Does he really want to be a premier college center or is he the grinning goofy devil may care player he seems to be? The Wears are not centers and Stover has no offense. If you have an eye test for the center position it would deserve a D at best. I think if JS showed up this season in shape and determined to be a dominant player we would have won this game.
The person who recruited them
bears a lot of that responsibility.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Josh, Josh Josh....
I listened to an interview with him on Youtube where he was in denial about his conditioning. I’m still a big fan,but it is hard to hang on with him and not accept that he is headed towards a bust. CBH, tell his parents to let him stay in LA next summer, and make him go get a summer job.
Lack of Mental Toughness
This has to fall on the coach. Did Afflalo, Mata, Aboya etc have the mental toughness we needed before they arrived on campus, and CBH just honed it, or did he develop it from scratch?
It sure seems like it has been missing for a while. Without that, we don’t have a prayer.
You also have to ask
Whether Howland would have gien guys like AA, JF, LRMAM, PAA mins if they were came into this program in 2008 when we were established? I don’t think so.
Very Perceptive Question
This may be the scariest topic in a long time. Only thing scarier might be what DG does with his time when he is not tearing down our basketball and football programs.
If CBH was only successful because the basketball team was in rebuilding phase, and the players who he had needed to play because he didn’t have options, then he needs to go. Not being able to maintain momentum when established, and therefore setting up another recycling phase (in which he might be successful) is not satisfactory.
I am an Oakland A’s fan. So I unfortunately know all about rebuilding phases, and how said phases suck. As if we did not already have enough rebuilding through football.
Based on your question and answer, I would say that CBH must go. And DG will clearly never do that. We need to drain the swamp NOW.
I wonder how much the toughness of guys like Farmar and Afflalo rubbed off on their teammates compared to how much came from CBH. They really set the early tone for the Howland program.
Over
by cybermaldonado on Dec 29, 2011 11:13 PM PST up reply actions
Zone
Just play the F’ing zone the rest of the season….come on…not basketball rocket science. This team is not fun to watch and they can certainly ruin a nice evening….Wear Twins should be solid by the time they get to the Licthenstein league in a few years….YAWN
Would have also been nice...
…to have a TO to set up that last possession.
Also (as Nester pointed out), Stanford shot 81.3 at the line while UCLA was a terrible 62.5.
2 more free throws guys.
With respect to the rebounding disparity, its hard not to look at Josh Smith and his failure to physically prepare himself for the season. He should be dominating.
Rebounding
It was a total team fail on the boards. The most telling was when I think both Wears and Smith were on the court in the first half and Stanford kept getting offensive rebound after offensive rebound. The Wears are just terrible at rebounding. It seems to me their strategy with boards is to box out and let the guards get the ball.
I'm not surprised
I watched a few of their high school games and didn’t think much of them along with Taylor King. I still scratch my head whenever I heard or read some commentator or coach talk about their high basketball IQ. Years later and they still have not improved their games.
Ugh agreed on Jones and Anderson
The whole game it seemed like all they wanted to do was put their head down and drive to the basket without looking for anyone else. Especially Zeke. There was quite a few possessions where other people were wide open and he jacked up an ugly shot. So I have to disagree with earlier commenters who think the bigs lost us the game. IMO, we had zero inside out game and besides for a few nice passes in to Josh Smith, there was little effort by the guards to really move the ball around.
Also, did anyone else get the feeling that Powell is truly special when he shot that sweet baseline jumper near the beginning of the second half? It seems like nobody on our team knows how to shoot the midrange jumper I have no idea why Powell isn’t playing a lot more. It’s not just his athleticism but his shot mechanics just seem way more fluid and sound then anyone else I feel more comfortable with him out there taking shots and missing then anyone else on our team.
Yep
With Zeke running the show we never look to set up an inside/outside game because he just doesn’t look for his team-mates. As for Powell, the sky is the limit for him if Howland allocated real mins for him. He should be the starting 2 guard with Lamb at 3 and Anderson at 1.
Lamb seems to play well when Powell is in there. But with Zeek hogging all the shots it disrupts the entire team.
Great point
Lamb is great when he can find his rhythm but he never gets a chance when all he gets are the scraps
I wonder what is in Zeke's head,
regarding the chucking. How does a mediocre point guard come to UCLA and think has to do all the shooting, and not make the pass inside. Seems like a good kid. Did he just come to the conclusion that the whole team sucks and he has to do this?
Serious question
Would people have a problem with Zeke’s shot selection if he was 3 or 4 inches taller and was the SG? He is getting his scoring numbers very efficiently as he was 8-13 tonight and is shooting above 50% since the first few games. You may say he was terrible tonight but 13 shots is not a lot considering the percentage he shot tonight.
I personally don’t care who has the PG or SG label. I think Zeke should be off the ball a bit more and have us run some sets for him to get him some open shots with Jerime handling the ball more.
I have been pretty much on the same page as most on Powell’s minutes this year but I disagree this time. Powell did not have a good game by any stretch of the imagination tonight. He took a few rushed 3s very early in the shot clock, ran a terrible fast break, and he still ended up playing 17 minutes. I think Powell simply didn’t play his way into more minutes tonight because he wasn’t very good. If he would have played better I think Ben would have given him some more run tonight
Powell is taking rushed shots
Because he is afraid of getting yanked. This is not the first time it has happened with a highly recruited athlete at UCLA. It happened with Mike Moser. It is happening all over again with Powell.
Moser played?
I don’t really recall Moser ever getting any real minutes. I do remember Howland treating that guy who shall not be named as his favorite son like Phil Jackson always did with a similar lesser talent in Luke Walton. Baffling…
Moser got some mins
Not much. So whenever he came in he took quick shots. Powell has gotten more mins than Moser but still not enough. Given the talent level of this team he should be averaging 25-30 mins a game. We are not even close.
Damn.
Moser. I cringe every time I hear his name.
by LavinRuinedCollege on Dec 29, 2011 11:20 PM PST up reply actions
And...
I’m hearing it a lot these days. I love his hustle. Even with the few minutes he got as a Bruin, you could totally see it.
by LavinRuinedCollege on Dec 29, 2011 11:21 PM PST up reply actions
yes during the 76 classic
i went to all those games. losing to butler wasn’t so bad in the end since they went so far that year. but we lost to CSULB! freak! that was the tourney that really had a negative impact on the entire year… especially with the team chemistry. why he loved the belgrade bricklayer i will never know. who knows, if moser played, maybe jerime flourishes…
I think Zeke as a shooting guard would be a better idea.
If we had a point guard who was focused on ball movement and getting the inside out game established then I would have less of a problem with Zeke’s shot selection.
However, I do want to point out that his shooting percentage doesn’t tell the whole story. I’m actually surprised he was 8-13 it seemed a lot worse than that during the game. Even if he is shooting over 50%, he spends so much time dribbling around and dominating the ball that by time he passes it he’s not setting anybody up or spacing the floor.
I remember Darren Collison would spend a lot of time dribbling but he was so quick he would cover the whole court and everywhere he went required the defense to adjust and he would just keep probing to find a hole. Zeke puts his head down and tries to drive the basket and gets himself stuck in double teams then makes a pass but it takes so long to develop the defense has already had time to switch and cover.
I think Zeke is a very skilled player, but no amount of practice will help him grow 3-4 inches, and I’m not sure if he’ll be able to defend the 2 position if we did put him at SG.
When Zeek got here
I thought he’d help us out by someone emulating the role of Cameron Dollar. I’d thought he’d be a defensive oriented guard who would be great in feeding the post and setting up our bigs. Little did we know that we’d end up getting someone who thinks he is UCLA’s Derrick Rose.
This also goes back our recruiting issues as Howland and his staff have completely botched pg recruiting last few seasons.
coach ben howland fouled out of the game
by not having a time out at the end. this being such a close game, he needed to save one just for this moment. and jerime, i was hoping that he would have been clutch at the end to make the game winner… the pass for the assist? came from zeke. jerime was wide open but choked. the last play was for zeke just to take the last shot. based on the stats, not a bad choice. but he thought he was kobe and wanted the foul. i think as a team, everyone did rush and felt a mad urgency. hopefully the team will learn from this game as they had this. improve free throws, keep shooting the high percentage looks, and hustle on defense.
i do give credit to stanford for playing an in your face defense all night. when teams play like this you tend to drive on them as you got them beat with one step… let’s try and win two on saturday Bruins!
Don't let JS off the hook.
If he shows up this season ready to have an All American season we win this game. Imagine what he could do if he was in shape. Does JS look any different now that we have played almost half the season? Someone mentioned how hard it is to watch this team play and I agree its very hard. It is especially hard to watch JS play. This team is in good physical shape with the exception of JS. CBH has his hands full trying to keep him in the game which puts pressure on everyone to back him up because he can’t guard his man or make athletic moves. JS should be embarrassed by his lack of commitment. I do hope he gets his act together for the sake of his team and his career.
Of course
You have a good point but it also on Howland to motivate Smith. It was on him to do what he can to push and motivate (within NCAA rules) so that Smith came into this season inspired and in shape. Everyone is at fault here but the buck stops with Howland.
Three straight Stanford possessions late in the game
Three straight Stanford threes, deflating UCLA momentum as they were trying to push ahead. Whose responsibility was the corner shooter? David Wear. Dovetailed nicely with his 1-for-8 shooting night.
Of course, Howland was the one who left him in there all game long.
by indigo27 on Dec 29, 2011 11:25 PM PST via iPhone app reply actions
The corner shots
Yeah D Wear failed to close out on 2 of them. The other one was on Zeek.
by Nestor on Dec 30, 2011 6:51 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, the one from the wing was Zeek's.
Not to just pick one instance to pin the loss, but that sequence was egregiously bad. Killed the momentum. Any kind of D at all would’ve likely eked out a win.
Bay Area Bruins in force at Maples tonight
Louder support, sadly, than at the Sports Arena.
by indigo27 on Dec 29, 2011 11:26 PM PST via iPhone app reply actions
UCLA definitely represented!
We were there in full force! I was proud that a lot of us were out there to support the team and I am sure they felt it!
by UCLAman7 on Dec 30, 2011 8:25 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Lots of people up in the Bay for the bowl game oddly
And many of them made the trek to Palo Alto. Awesome to see all the blue & gold in Maples. Even better to hear all the UCLA chants too! Now if only they rewarded the fans.
It's not Howland's fault with Smith
Smith couldn’t care less about basketball and that isn’t going to ever change so just give up on him
Color me optimistic
I saw a leader on the court: Zeek. Yeah, he should be more of a distributor, but who was holding up their end of the receiving deal? Someone needs to take command of this offense and he has at least set a precedent. In time, I think he’ll be more of a true PG.
I saw defensive effort – inside and outside – which we (sadly) did not have a few weeks ago. Stanford sucks, but we defended well, if not for a bunch of lights out 3s.
I saw a coach making adjustments – 5 min of man early, then 35 min of zone.
I saw Norman Powell (who will be great) unable to make an impact (agree with themicheal). He’s not ready- but will be soon. On the flip side, Ty Lamb is a major asset, and IMO our best all around player.
Lastly, I saw Josh Smith under-performing. Sit his ass till he’s ready to play D-1 basketball. In the meantime, we need to spread the offense out so the center is not triple-teamed the second the ball comes inside.
Bringing my boy to his first college game NYE. Despite it all, I think we’ll get a win.
Time for change?
I think it might be a good time to start considering bringing a new coach in with the a new Pauley!
by Trojanswearskirts on Dec 30, 2011 6:15 AM PST via mobile reply actions
Let me be a broken record on this...
…but does anyone still underestimate just how important two guys were to Howland?
Jamie Dixon and Kerry Keating…I dont want to describe Howland as the hood ornament but, if the radiator cap fits…
Lovely
I can’t wait to watch the recording. Not.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
I thought I had it recording
while I was watching the Alamo Bowl, and didn’t realize until nearly halftime of our game that I hadn’t recorded it. Regardless, I still watched Washington and Baylor battle most of the night anyway – it was more entertaining, and actually higher-scoring.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
So if we win by 1 are we then mentally tough?
My opinion had been formed for the night win or lose during the game… Smith is big and sloppy, Zeke should pass the ball more, Powell should play more min, the Twins should not be out there together but in this particular game Howland should had play zone ALL game long… I was there fusttated when we would go man to man…
Nothing would change that opinion whether we win or lose… Zeke not passing at the end is not about being mentally tough… He doesn’t pass very much he’ll do that with 10min left and also with 5sec left…
I will say this the team that is playing out there today doesn’t lose to LMU… In fact LMU would get worked! That to me ladies and gentlemen is improvement… Now if Howland can only not be so stubborn and realize the above! We can be a lot better!
by UCLAman7 on Dec 30, 2011 8:21 AM PST via mobile reply actions
We would WORK LMU!
Vs getting worked? See the difference?
by UCLAman7 on Dec 30, 2011 8:26 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
No
If the team was mentally tough, it would not have come down to the final possession. Mental toughness means playing in your face defense, controlling the boards, and running your plays instead of being clueless on offense. Mentally tough also means figuring out what is not working and fixing it fast on the fly. There has been little evidence of this toughness from the coach or the players this season. Winning or losing by 1 is not the issue. The issue is even being in a dogfight against a team we should have killed.
This.
Considering Stanford did nothing particularly well last night, other than to collapse in Zeek on the last possession, they absolutely should’ve won this game going away. Stanford tried hard to give this game away and UCLA was clearly not up to the task.
This game exposed our recruiting problems
1. We lack a true point guard and last night’s game would have been won if we had one. So Zeke got “hot”…but then he was setting up his own shots and as the game wore on he spent more time looking for “his” than in setting up teammates. On several fast breaks he stubbornly took the ball to the hole with open teammates (does he trust them to knock down their shots?)
2. How is it that since Michael Roll left, we haven’t had a true “shooter” on our team"? (No, DRAGODORK doesn’t count) Stanfurd buried us with those 3 straight bombs…and though defensively we should have had someone on those shooters, the thought going through my mind was “must be nice to have someone you can count on to stick a 3 point shot”. (Missing Matt Carlino?) In fact, we should have 2 or 3 shooters on our team who can consistently bury a 3 point shot…in fact we don’t even have one (Yeah, Jones got hot last night, but he hasn’t been consistent).
Howland is done
The specifics of each disappointing game vary slightly but the constant is that Howland is failing to deliver a team that follows the principles that Coach put in place. It is painful to observe this happening. He has also failed to recruit the players who have the necessities to be successful.
Not yet
He still has some huge games left. As bad is Pac-12 left, I think the conference will get 2 to 3 invites. Bruins are not completely out yet IMO. Although blowing a winnable game last night against an average team was a big blow to Howland.
And I believe he will win some of them
And that’s what frustrates me the most. He gives us some hope for the future, then dashes it with dreadful performances. It’s not god enough from my perspective but I do understand that we don’t have good alternatives given the current state of affairs wrthis boss.
Good enough.
Sorry about unfortunate but slightly hilarious typo.
I agree we theoretically have a chance
to be a tourney team, but at this point I wouldn’t put more than about 3 cents on that likelihood…and that’s just because I got an extra paycheck this month.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Responding down here to the "personal axe to grind" swipe above regarding Joshua Smith
If one suspends thoughts about JS’s “potential”, and merely evaluate “what is actually there”, what do we see? What has JS shown us? 1) Occaisional flashes of brilliance, mostly against subpar, non-nba bound defenders; 2) Lack of mental discipline, mental drive, mental desire to fundamentally transform his body into genuine basketball shape. He’s always been a huge guy. This, what we see now, is the best shape of his entire life. From his perspective, his whole countenance / body language / bench personna… screams of a man very smug and “self-satisfied”. 3) Smiling, yuking it up, no matter the game situation. 4) Sure, at times he’s glum, mostly when he catches quick fouls and is forced to sit back down without having to run the court more than a few times (did I say run?).
This kid looks like, acts like, his NBA membership is already assured. I think it is. “Potential Card”. Just listen to the media hype of his guy: beast, big one, powerful, passes-to-teammates. Only us, in this community, regularly refer to this guy as: mostly lame & tame, overweight fatty, won’t/can’t jump and throw down consistantly, gives up on plays and dishes off. Joshua is a slightly upgraded J’Misson. Nothing more.
Hey, I personally love this kid, as I do all kids who attend and play at UCLA. But my four eyes see what they see. I’m no longer pretending.
And on the prentend note, let’s stop pretending that Ben is gonna right this ship. He doesn’t right ships. How we start is how we finish. As I’ve said countless other times, Jordan, Aron, et.al “came here on a mission to restore UCLA – on their way to the NBA”. Now, and for the past 4 seasons, we have bloggers who care more about UCLA Basketball per se, than the kids we give scholarships to. What are we gonna do? Another Rick? Wait all season… let us win-lose-win-lose-win-lose… watch Ben tell us in March, with 5 or 6 league losses, that we’re playing for First Place in the final week of a weak Pac 12? Then what? Hope we catch on fire, and somehow win the Pac Tourney and get to the dance? Then Ben apologists begging for “one more year”? Isn’t it clear, this is where we’re headed? Win-lose-win-lose the rest of this season.
U-C-L-A Fight, Fight, Fight! Go Bruins!
Go Lakers! Go Dodgers! Go Angels!
Another take on Josh
He’s 19 (or 20?). He may have just pissed away this season by not getting in shape or assuming that he could “play his way into” shape. It’s certainly a fault of our coaching staff that nobody was watching this kid after last season ended to make sure he came back to school ready to play.
However…what is happening to him this season MAY serve as a wake-up call. Imagine what this kid could be if he realizes that he is throwing away his future basketball career (if he wants an NBA career) and spends this next offseason reshaping his body and getting into the best basketball shape possible.
I’m not ready to give up on him. I AM pissed that our basketball staff could possibly have let this happen. But he IS still a kid. Let’s hope he matures before next season into his potential.
I never considered JS being here another season. This is it.
Especially, if behind the scenes, he’s being touted as a “project” that some NBA team will take a chance to invest in. Dude is 6’10 (maybe more), and 325+. He is an NBA big body. Big body’s get drafted just because they’re big bodies. No way do I see Joshua Smith coming back to UCLA if he catches wind that more than one team is in love with “his potential”. To stay longer would mean he would have to “work for real”. He leaves when Howland is down, and hides under the “UCLA was on a down-streak” cover. Playing as a Junior and/or Senior… well… that’s too much pressure in being exposed. Unless, of course, dude is up for the challenge. I just don’t see it, as of December, 2011. Who knows.
U-C-L-A Fight, Fight, Fight! Go Bruins!
Go Lakers! Go Dodgers! Go Angels!
I see your point...
except…the difference in his "take" if he comes out after this season vs. what he might get if he waits until next season may be incentive for him to stay. If he came out right now, he MIGHT be a mid to late 2nd round pick. If he came back to UCLA next season as an absolute beast, he might vault all the way into the middle of the first round.
I think he absolutely screwed his option of coming out after this season by being so horribly out of shape. Perhaps I am wrong, but I cannot see an NBA team wanting to throw millions at Josh when there are better "bigs" available in the draft.
I see your point
except…the difference in his “take” if he comes out after this season vs. what he might get if he waits until next season may be incentive for him to stay. If he came out right now, he MIGHT be a mid to late 2nd round pick. If he came back to UCLA next season as an absolute beast, he might vault all the way into the middle of the first round.
I think he absolutely screwed his option of coming out after this season by being so horribly out of shape. Perhaps I am wrong, but I cannot see an NBA team wanting to throw millions at Josh when there are better “bigs” available in the draft.
I would love JS to move on
There is no place in our program for someone who doesn’t respect his teammates, coach and school by showing up fat and out of shape.
I would have agreed with you in the begiining of the season.
RN is gone and this is a better TEAM. Its not clear to me that JS is a plus for this team. When the RN fiasco broke out it looked like JS had given up on the team as well. Of course JS could merely quit now and join RN on the Bruin dishonor roll.
But at this point I guess he has earned a spot on the team. It seems to me that a lot of comments have been made about the guards and forwards but little enough about the center position. A strong center makes everyone else better. In this case it seems to me that everyone else has to cover for a weak center, including Stover on offense. Considering both players strengths and weaknesses I would prefer Stover as the starter and JS as the backup.
Coaching strategy allows smaller, quicker teams to outrebound you. Right CBH?
The Wears, LJ and Anderson are Soooo concerned about scoring, we get out rebounded, which means outhustled.
Once again, we have 2 gaurds so desperately trying to make the NBA, that they are playing by themselves!!
Agree about M2M vs Zone, and Zeke trying to go Pros!
But, a combined 7 pts and 11 rebounds will NOT get it done from the Wear twins, who are used to following up NC offensive rebounds, but learned at NC, to NOT play the other end of the court. C’mon CBH, figure it out…Go Bruins!…Give Powell more time with the starters.
Some obvious remarks,
based on what we have all been seeing. 1. Howland is way too slow to change. 2. This team cannot play man D, but could learn to play an effective, aggressive, trapping zone. 3. The Wears are close to average, and might have good games now and then. 4. Josh acts dumb. Maybe he is dumb. 5. Lazeric Jones is trying too hard, but what else can he do, when the need for someone, anyone, to score is so great? 5. We should see more of Powell, Stover and Lane. 6. Lamb is O.K., and should get better. 7. Jerime is Jerime, but he is having a pretty good season, and we need him. 8. We have a decent chance in this league. 9. I don’t know if we can improve enough to beat a really good team. The prospects are poor.
I'm so tired of Howland's clownish game management.
Plays the wrong defense, the wrong combinations of players, shuffles players so often that they have a hard time getting into a rhythm, runs out of timeouts…
His being on the bench costs us at least 10 points a game.
I agree with Seth- Howland is not our coach for the future.
I like to look at the whole body of work. In the football context, the whole body of work for Coach Neuheisel said he should have been let go at the after the second 4-8 fiasco. Coach Howland’s whole body of work remains quite good. He is 364-188 (.659) for his career, and 196-89 (.685) at UCLA. The whole body of work also includes the last three years, in which his teams were 44-35 (.556). We fired CTS because his body of work was 35-27 (.564).
We have been blessed with having coaches who understood UCLA, and either started or became great representatives of our school. We take that for granted, and we should. No one should have the master whistle around his neck without that notion. Coach Howland embodies that.
Unfortunately, there are other things about Coach Howland, all well-documented here, which have caused me to think it’s time for him to go. I would like to think that there was something about practice that mandated his starting the Belgrade Bricklayer, but his Rago’s game performances made it clear that whatever good things he was doing in practice did not carry over to games. And so many other things. His inability to recruit anyone who can run an offense or shoot the ball. Did anyone else notice that our offense managed SEVEN points in the first ten minutes of the game? That’s on Coach Howland. I haven’t heard anywhere that Furd basketball was the defensive dynamo that we made them look like.
I give Coach Howland the rest of the season, but no more. He’s done all he can for us.
This just demonstrates the importance of getting rid of the bumbling oaf who is in charge of every single, solitary piece of athletics on the entire UCLA campus. Chianti Dan has whiffed three times on hiring football coaches. He cannot be allowed to screw up both our revenue soorts.
Another dubious change in Howland's philosophy
When Howland came aboard, the first thing he mentioned was that the UCLA team needed to get stronger and better physical condition. It showed with the results of the 3 Final Fours, but since then what have we seen? An out of shape Bobo who was promptly let go. Now Josh Smith is out of shape…. again.
I don’t know what happened but Howland has regressed as a coach on and off the court.
I disagree with the Anderson shot being a bad shot
he was open, that would have put the pressure on them to win it or tie it and I dont know if you are going to get a better shot especially since Smith was out of the game already.
But I agree with everything else you said. I dont mind Zeke putting up big numbers or taking alot of shots, but he has to learn to let the offense come to him rather than trying to be the offense. Let Anderson be the guy, atleast he has a pass first mentality.
I used to be a big Howland supporter (yeah even when Drago played) but I just dont get what the heck this coach is doing anymore. All Stover does is come in, give his all, and rebounds and blocks and alters everything on defense but does not sniff the court when we need him the most. It pissed me off last night, Howland was going offense defense substitutions last night with Smith (to protect him from fouling out) and using our best defender in Stover? No, with David frieken Wear. What is the point Howland, you want to save Smith for offense by letting them score on our defense. So frustrating.
FYI
Stover: 5 rebounds per 40 mins
DWear: 8.9 rebounds per 40 mins
TWear: 7.5 rebounds per 40 mins
Smith: 12.4 rebounds per 40 mins
Stover is NOT a good rebounder.
If you have all your timeouts left, I agree you can rotate Smith and Stover offense for defense. If you don’t, then even if you get a stop with Stover you are playing 4-on-5 on the next offensive set, which is bad news without an elite point guard or someone who can create a good shot for themselves.
by VeniceBruin on Dec 30, 2011 11:30 AM PST up reply actions
Excellent statistic.
Stover is a niche player. Not a good defender or rebounder, and doesn not have basketball IQ. I will give him that he has heart.
Where is Swen Nater when you need him!
he brings energy and is quick enough to help, and contests shots well
so he can definitely bring something to the defense, providing other people are securing the ball on rebounds or deflected shots, and providing that we are getting some offense from somewhere.
by VeniceBruin on Dec 30, 2011 11:36 AM PST up reply actions
The stats bear that out
Stover: 6.4 Blocks/40 min
DWear: 0.2 Blocks/40 min
TWear: 1.8 Blocks/40 min
Smith: 2.7 Blocks/40 min
There’s a potential chicken and the egg effect, where we have to wonder if he is told to go for blocks because he’s not a good rebounder, or if he’s a not a good rebounder because he goes for blocks and is therefore out of position when the shot goes up. You know what you’re getting with Stover, and considering the frontcourt was supposed to be a strength, it would seem like a successful defensive strategy to funnel penetration into Stover and have the other two forward positions crash the boards. Unfortunately, when the other two forwards are the Wears who seem to know next to nothing about blocking out and defensive rebounding in general, that strategy doesn’t work at all.
Should have read your comment before posting mine...
…then I wouldn’t have basically repeated what you said.
Stover does not have great touch
which I think means he is not good at securing the ball if he gets his hands on it. Wears have better hands but are neither long/great leapers (e.g. LRMAM) or strong battlers (e.g. KL, LM-R, Reeves etc).
Stover’s greatest rebounding asset ought to be his height/length/athleticism, but that means bringing the ball down contested, which he doesn’t seem well equipped to do.
I think it definitely makes more sense to use him as a contester rather than rebounder, but as you say we need other people to play a role…
by VeniceBruin on Dec 30, 2011 12:43 PM PST up reply actions
Disagree on Stover...
“Stover is NOT a good rebounder.”
I don’t think that it’s because he isn’t a good rebounder. He doesn’t plant his butt in the paint…he’s actively challenging shots. In fact last night he flew out on two three point attempts, altering them, and one of the Wears picked up those rebounds…
He may not be rebounding at the same rate because he is altering shots that other Bruins are picking up the boards on.
Having said that…his offensive liability is clearly why he isn’t getting more minutes. Which brings up this thought…are there times you can have both Stover and Smith in the game if Smith eats boards and Stover blocks shots? Stover can sometimes play that LoMata role of setting high screens and reversing the ball…while keeping Smith in the post.
Not sure that would work…just thinking…
right
and I made the same comment below; but I was responding to the comment above (my emphasis)
All Stover does is come in, give his all, and rebounds and blocks and alters everything on defense
and to comments like “the Wears aren’t rebounding the damn ball! Bring in Stover!!” in game threads. He definitely brings something to the table, but I don’t think it’s rebounding.
by VeniceBruin on Dec 30, 2011 12:38 PM PST up reply actions
Okay Venice, your point is valid and proven
But I think even without a solid point or a player that can create his own shot I would rather have Stover in for defense and be four on five on offense than have D. Wear in for offense and be four on five of defense. I will never remember LMR or AA2 ever doing anything offensively but I always wanted them in.
this game is on the bigs.
our backcourt did enough in this game to win – not great, but Zeek, Tyler and Jerime all had spurts in which they carried the team, and overall held their own against the Stanford backcourt, where they were supposed to have the advantage.
Josh Smith took himself out of the game with stupid/lazy fouls. If he is still in the game the last few minutes, I think we win. The Wears were poor on both ends. Stover provides energy and contests shots but is still a non-factor on offense and does not rebound well at all (statistically a lot worse than either of the Wears, but perhaps partly because he spends so much time going for blocks). Our bigs were a combined 6-17, which is not going to get it done.
As far as bigs go,
I would limit this to David Wear. He was asleep. Zeke, for the millionth time, let his man blow by him in the last 2 minutes to force a block attempt by Smith. And where the hell was the timeout for the last possession.
The CENTERs of the current problem[s]
Does anyone know if there was a common reason[s] that Carlino, Moser and Stanback left? Possibly this relates to current problems. If Stover developed some offense the whole world would look different. I’m guessing eye, hand, foot coordination problems left over from a rapid growth spurt? A hook shot? Simply dunk? The coach is not going to change unless the assistants shared their true feelings. Truth might not be welcomed. I watched an interview with the Manager of Operations, former PG Tyus Edney, and he was asked if he had "talked" with Smith. It was understood, but not stated, that the basis of such a talk was to improve Smith’s attitude, effort and focus. Mr. Edney looked very aggrieved as he said "yes" on 2 occasions he had spoken with Smith. And he would not add any elaboration. My take was that talking doesn’t work. I imagine Smith has been the victim of 100’s of motivational talks. Nevertheless, Smith understands he does not need to comply. I do not think UCLA can "force" a player, in the off-season to be compliant. The rest of the team can see this quite clearly and it under-minds the chemistry.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
