Getting the Bruins, and Bruins Nation, On the Same Page
by gbruin on Mar 7, 2011 9:21 PM PST
in Basketball
Email
PrintI couldn't figure out this basketball team. But that was ok. I knew where to go. It was like those days and nights long ago in the BioMed library. The answers were in there, and I knew where to look (and that was before PubMed and the internet).
So for my basketball questions, I went looking through Bruins Nation. BN never let me down...before.
Going back just the last few weeks, the Bruins, save Malcolm Lee, were a terribly unprepared group that went to Cal, didn't play the first 20 minutes, and got singlehandedly finished off in OT by a guy named Jorge who put his hair in a bun and then spent the night looking like Michael or Kobe. Hell, Michael and Kobe, put together. And I thought I knew what we were.
And it seemed true when we squeaked by the last place team in the conference. But then we played Arizona and absolutely killed the best team and player in the conference and it wasn't even close. The Bruins in Pauley were dominant like Russia in the winter, and the blood of Coach healed all our wounds. It was a perfect performance. And I hoped that's who we really were.
So then we went to Seattle with a chance to win the conference, but couldn't hold a lead in the last few minutes. P wrote we started tough but we just can't finish. So that was the answer, right? But then we went to a building where we hadn't lost in 17 years, against a team missing its two best players, and started anything but tough. But in the end, the Bruins did play BenBall and finished. It was such an ugly win, that Coach Howland was inspired to kiss Jon Gold, who is definitely no song girl. But maybe Howland had finally reached this team. Maybe that's who we were.
Our recent guest blogger BruinBlue said we can't get any further with Howland. Well, surely that's wrong because Howland led a bunch of future NBA'ers to 3 straight Final Fours. But then again, if those guys didn't get over the hump and bring another banner back to Westwood, maybe BruinBlue was right after all. Maybe we were never what I thought. And then yesterday Achilles asked whether we were even the best team in Los Angeles. Damn, we're awful!
Then DC's yin and yang this morning had me swinging back and forth so fast between the positives and the negatives that I just got dizzy and went to lie down and take a nap. Hello geezerdom. And I still I don't understand this team at all.
Our Bruin Basketball team continues to perplex us all, and reading the posts and threads here on BN demonstrates that every day. For every "Hooray! We won 22 games, we are going to the tourney, we met expectations" there is a "Boo! We blew it at Cal and almost at WSU and we should always go to the tourney so why are we celebrating mediocrity?"
And of course, depending on what question you are asking, both sides are right. Or wrong. Or it's the opposite that is true. Which is really the problem. Are you even still with me?
18 weeks into the basketball season, and this team looks to be getting better. The team that started 3-4 and lost to Montana finished as a 22 win team and was in the running for the Pac-10 title on the last weekend of the season. Credit Howland for instilling his system, and Reeves for learning some defense, and Lee for becoming a shutdown defender, and Zeek and Josh and Jerime for filling their roles better than we could have hoped. We're even making free throws. This is more than we asked for, and more than I personally expected. I have to be happy with this, right?
On the other hand, 18 weeks into the season and we still aren't getting a consistent effort for 40 minutes. Reeves is a leader on the score sheet, but his actions still do not show him as a leader on the floor and locker room. Lee is our Captain and canned some huge clutch FT's in Pullman, but do you ever see Lee getting in his teammates faces to pick them up and exhort them to a better effort. Honeycutt is All Pac-10, but when was the last time he looked like it for 2 games in a row? Howland is kissing reporters (sure Gold does a great job, but what would N deserve after his years of effort here - umm, never mind) in celebration of winning 22 games. Are we that giddy at U.C.L.A. for winning 22 games and worrying about a tourney berth in early March?
I have realized that the answer to all these questions is yes, and no, and 42, and that there is no answer. This team is all the above and none of the above, and we are killing ourselves trying to define it, because it just cannot be done right now. So I'm not going to ask anymore. Well, not until the season is over with at least, because right now is tournament time. Our hand has been dealt, and it can fold before the flop or it can break the bank. Our job now is to support this team like crazy, and worry about the coach and the PF and the PG and the SF and the NBA when it's all said and done this year. Because then, just maybe, we'll have some answers.
In the meantime, we need to all be asking the same questions here, because I think we'll find a lot more agreement that way. Was last year an aberration which should never happen in Westwood? An easy yes. Given our projections and fears at the start of this year after Montana, are we happy that we've reached this point? I think we would all say yes to that. Are we satisfied with U.C.L.A. being a bubble team late in the year and having ongoing questions about personnel and discipline? I bet we'd all say no. See? It's easy to get along.
I want to find some common ground and unity among Bruins Nation. A good young Bruin fan called me out on this this week, and was exactly right. Unfortunately, the topsy turvy yin yang world of Bruins Basketball in the last couple years, let alone the last couple months, has got us all reeling, and in the chaos, inadvertently firing on each other.
So let's keep this in mind as we go forward. We're all Bruins and we all want to see our programs do well. We may have different ideas on how to achieve that, and we will continue to rely on the myriad of passionate and educated voices here to dissect those issues and crunch the data and offer solutions. But for now, it looks like only time will be able to answer my questions. Tournament time, that is.
43 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
LAT on Lee MRI: no news yet
And players and coaches were unable to exhale after the results of a second MRI exam on the junior guard’s left knee were not immediately available.
Makes me very nervous
I would think if it was good news it would have been announced right away, Maybe it’s inconclusive but that doesn’t make me feel any better! Fingers are crossed HARD!
"The entire world that bleeds blue and gold ... they have been dying for this." - Coach Rick Neuheisel
Bad news requires a decision on how to handle it.
I think that’s what they’re trying to make right now.
"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden
Just speculation
I’m not an orthopedic surgeon, but I know a little bit about MRI’s. The reason given for the repeat MRI was for more “advanced machinery” available in LA, which wasn’t available in Spokane. Advanced = resolution. This means to me they are looking for something of finer detail than they could see on the first scan. Which tells me: a) probably not a major injury, rupture or major tear; which would have been obvious on the first scan; b) maybe there is some persistent or unexplained swelling; and c) they are going to be real careful before letting Lee play/practice.
"Make each day your masterpiece."--JRW
by Give me a B... on Mar 8, 2011 9:46 AM PST up reply actions
This is one of the things I wonder about Honeycutt
When they were checking out his elbow, he had an x-ray, rather than an MRI. I don’t know if you never do MRIs for an elbow, but it would seem to make sense to have done it as it’s a better imaging process in general. Did he have something inserted for his back injury that makes MRIs impossible? Was something missed by just the x-ray?
He could still have an MRI
even with metal “instrumentation” placed in his spine. There would be interference in the spinal area on the scan, but it wouldn’t affect the ability to scan his elbow.
"Make each day your masterpiece."--JRW
by Give me a B... on Mar 8, 2011 8:41 PM PST up reply actions
Thanks for the posting
I almost wrote a “stop the sniping” post, but decided to keep quiet. This team has been so contradictory, so up and down, and the emotional highs and lows (and ongoing frustration with all of the above) are difficult to fathom. I think everybody needs to vent, but as G pointed out, we all want our team to do well.
I've mostly stayed away from the angst posts
because I’m nearing completion on a very important project and it has consumed me. Maybe the recent detachment has put things in perspective for me, but this is how I feel from a purely Project Management point of view:
The goal of any project is to finish on time and under budget. Given last year, the year that shall remain nameless, this team was definitely a project. Our stated goal was to get back in the tournament and compete for the Pac 10. We did that. Every thing else is icing on the cake.
The reason people feel the way they do is because we have played better than even we expected, and raised our expectations for this team, this year. It’s so close we can taste it, and I’m no different. These are the things I would like to see happen whether they are rational or not.
We did leave some unfinished business out there. No Bruin basketball team should ever lose to USC. Not in their house. Not in our house. Not in anybody’s house. If they hold up their end, and we hold up ours, we have the opportunity to avenge that loss in the Championship round of the Pac 10 tournament. This is an opportunity we cannot afford to let pass.
Even more likely is a possible match up with Washington on Thursday March 10th. This is another one of those losses that has to be avenged; honor sated kind of battles. We have to get these wins if they present themselves. Purely from a public perception stand point, these are statement games and we need to be making the statements, not those about whom statements are made.
As far as the NCAA tournament is concerned, we have to win at least one game, the opening round game. The second round game can be any where from nigh on impossible to very winnable. If we lose to a Duke or Ohio State, I’m not going to gnash my teeth. But, given the opportunity to play a winnable game, I hope to see our guys come away with a victory.
I don’t expect them to do win the NCAA tournament nor the Pac 10 tournament. I do expect them to enter each battle with fire and passion. Every thing else will take care of itself.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
Don't have much time to explain this but...
here’s a list of the 10 least experienced BCS Conference teams with Michigan being least experienced of the group and Depaul being most experienced of the group:
Note that we have the second best RPI. Note that we have the best win and the second best bad loss. Note that the difference between our worst lost and our best win is smaller than that of all but one of the other top ten teams. Basically, note that of the BCS’s youngest teams we are having the second best season behind only the University of Connecticut Fighting Kemba Walker’s, er, Huskies.
Next time someone on this board wants to attack our squad for playing erratically and losing focus, tell them to “remember that we’re a young team”. Then, when they say that “youth shouldn’t be an excuse” (and they will almost certainly say that) point out the above numbers.
One last note on the topic of youth and inconsistancy
In my humble opinion, based on what I could hear from the TV broadcasts, we have played in front of a boisterous pro-Bruin crowd exactly four times (BYU, USC, St. John’s and Arizona). In those games we went 4-0 beating the RPI #4 by 7, the RPI #66 by 14, the RPI #19 by 7 and the RPI #18 by 22.
Our team is a classic example of a highly-talented young squad that can feed off of the energy of a rocking crowd (see vs. Zona @ Pauley) or fall asleep when faced with a dead arena (see vs. Montana @ Pauley).
I have commented on the weird dynamic in Pauley this year
You say the team feeds off the crowd…which may be true. But the opposite appears more true: this year Pauley feeds of the team. The crowd turns on the team quickly, exhibiting the same type of frustration as reflected on BN at times, and goes very quiet when we are playing bad. The crowd gets back into the game only when the team has already turned it around and we are close to the lead. There is no crowd energy leading to the turnaround. The crowd feeds off a change in intensity of the team.
(Students excepted generally).
by Bruin Dad and Grad on Mar 8, 2011 9:05 AM PST up reply actions
Agree, you should provide that info. It's important.
Although, speaking of experience, I just found out (forgive my ignorance) that Notre Dame is in the top ten (I saw #4 in one poll and this part I already knew) and is STILL playing that guy, Hanrangody. Seems like he’s been around FOREVER. That has got to be a quality senior making a big difference for them.
Sounds like my source is wrong.
I do know that Hansborough is playing for them this year. Sorry, my bad!
But I would still say that we need to know how experience was calculated. Seniors who don’t play should hardly count for experience.
Harangody had his number retired last year and he's on the Celtics I believe
They are actually better without him now that Tyler’s little brother has blown up.
I know I've heard a couple of times
we’re one of only nine D-1 teams without a senior on the roster. Not just BCS, all of D-1.
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Which is somewhat
not entirely, but somewhat, of a misleading statistic nowadays. If you’re an elite program (I believe we are) any players that are good enough jump ship before their senior season. There are exceptions to the rule; see Tyler Hansbrough, Kyle Singler, the Florida f#@$ers five. But in general, the few seniors on elite teams are usually not big time contributors. My overall point is that I believe that even though teams may have seniors, it doesn’t necessarily correlate with success.
"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden
Maybe somewhat
Just looking at the top 10 teams in Pomeroy’s ratings, here are the classes’ of each team’s top 5 players in terms of minutes:
1. Ohio St.: Sr, Sr, Fr, Jr, Sr
2. Kansas: Sr, Jr, Sr, Jr, Jr
3. Duke: Sr, Sr, So, So, So
4. Purdue: Sr, Sr, Jr, Jr, So
5. Texas: Fr, So, Fr, Sr, So
6. Pittsburgh: Sr, Jr, Sr, Sr, So
7. Wisconsin: Jr, Sr, Sr, Fr, Sr
8. BYU: Sr, Sr, Jr, Fr, So
9. San Diego St.: Sr, So, Sr, Sr, So
10. Kentucky: Fr, Fr, Jr, Jr, Fr
That’s 21 seniors, 11 juniors, 10 sophomores, 8 freshmen. That works out roughly to 2 seniors and 1 from each other class among the team’s top 5 players. And on 7 of those 10 teams, the leader in minutes was a senior.
Now obviously total minutes isn’t an ideal measure, since it doesn’t tell you what they did on the court and it’s easily skewed by injuries or suspensions. It does tell you though that most of the best teams do rely on seniors.
FWIW, here were the UCLA lineups in the Final Four years:
2006: So, Fr, So, Sr, Fr
2007: Jr, So, So, So, Jr
2008: So, Jr, Fr, Jr, Jr
by SuperBruinMan on Mar 8, 2011 4:28 PM PST up reply actions
I think
that they rely heavily minute-wise on seniors, that’s true. Seniors provide invaluable on-court experience. I would also like to see rebound rate, point percentages, +/- statistics, etc. to really see their contributions. But even still that doesn’t tell the full story, I would think.
"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden
Sorry about the "board/blog"
I honestly had (and still have) no idea what the difference is. Didn’t mean to offend.
As for the calculation, it was multiplying each player’s total minutes this year by his number of years experience (I gave freshman 1 year, sophomores 2, etc., Zeke and Stover counted as a frosh since it is their first year of D1) then divide by the total minutes played for the team on the season. Add all those numbers together and you get the experience level of the team with % contribution taken into account
Going to have to quibble with Zeek being a frosh
As a PG, I think his mental maturity is what potentially made him valuable to us before the season started. The question was whether he was physically able to play at this level and clearly he is. It’d be equally valid to count him as a Junior since that’s the amount of collegiate games he has played in.
Also, not all sophs/juniors are equal in terms of experience. JF/AA and guys on this team like ML, Nelson, and Honeycutt who played extensively from day one (not counting Honeycutt’s injury freshman year) are in a different boat than say RW, Anderson, AA2, who played reserve roles in their early years. I know there’s no way to easily quantify all that, but that’s just something I think of because when we say youth we really mean lack of experience, which actual youth isn’t necessarily a good indicator of.
by Tydides on Mar 8, 2011 12:57 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Moreover
It doesn’t take into account all the games started be Nelson and Honeycutt in their freshmen season (and they started a LOT of games). So I appreciate the effort by LV but continue find the inexperience angle unpersuasive to say the least.
by Nestor on Mar 8, 2011 4:30 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
This is unrelated
Minnesota is a point guard away from being a deep playoff team because of our very own Kevin Love. Coach would be proud.
by Strathmore&Gayley on Mar 8, 2011 5:47 AM PST via mobile reply actions
Thanks for the great post GBRUIN
I love the college game. And I believe that is because it is a journey every year. Everywhere we see the word Team in this blog, we can insert Class. And everywhere we see Coach, we can insert Teacher. And from what we have seen thus far, this years Bruins have been an intriguing Class to watch. I look back and wonder what would have happened last year if Drew Gordon was a better student. And what impact did his release have on that team and their chemistry. Regardless, 2010/11 has been a good year to see these students progress. I am especially pleased with the continued improvement of Malcom and Jerime, the two remaining players from the 2008 #1 recruiting class making an impact. I can’t wait for the upcoming Tournaments and looking forward to how the coaching staff will prepare this team for the match ups they will face. Go Bruins! Class is in Session… :)
Great post
Good read. Thanks LVBruin for the graphic. MexiBruin has some good agenda items. I like avenging losses as a good goal.
Louisville, KY for UCLA class of '87
Ying and Yang is accentuated by expectations for the season vs the program
Part of the problem in celebrating the success of this year’s team is that it seems we are lowering our standards for the program. I see much progress this year relative to last year. I believe CBH has done a very good job of coaching the team up. As noted there has been real improvement over the course of the season.
But as noted over and over, a reasonable response is “Big Deal”. The standard of UCLA basketball demands more than this team can deliver this year. Second place in the PAC 10 is a success for this team but that is the problem….we should not be in this position. The erractic nature of our play is a result of our youth. But we should not be so dependent on youth. And, I believe the ying and yang erractic play also has something to do with the individuals on the team that showed last year they can and will check out of games. We should not be in a position of depending on those individuals so heavily.
All that said, I choose to celebrate the progress of this team. I am going to continue to celebrate the progress of this team, this season. This team can be good when they have focus and intensity and they can be awful when they let down the guard even a little. More than youth or anything else, the team’s erractic nature is more related to the thin line between very good and awful is so small for this set of individuals. Oh well, I have to live with that or give up on these Bruins.
Leads me to hope for some positive surprises in the tournaments coming up. I would not be surprised by this team having a big upset or two in the NCAA’s….this can be a dangerous team against the right opponent. But I can’t be stunned if we are upset early in either tournament. Disappointed yes. Surprised no.
by Bruin Dad and Grad on Mar 8, 2011 9:26 AM PST reply actions
Should have added
And look for improvements beyond this year in judging the program.
Sorry for the long post.
by Bruin Dad and Grad on Mar 8, 2011 9:27 AM PST up reply actions
I don't think people are saying
that you or anyone else can’t celebrate this team…. I believe Tydides has made the point many times that last year should be unacceptable. I think what we want to be avoiding as level-headed, success-minded Bruins fans is getting overly excited for a season where we’re taking second place in conference. I think he’s saying we should keep some of that optimism in the tank for our next final four run :)
"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden
I think we are saying the same thing
Last year was unacceptable and so far this year is barely acceptable for the program (and CBH is the head of the program).
But given the cards we started with at the beginning of this season, CBH the coach has prodded this team to get us to barely acceptable with some upside potential out there.
Optimism for the program is absolutely something that requires looking beyond this year.
by Bruin Dad and Grad on Mar 8, 2011 10:37 AM PST up reply actions
+1, gbruin,
all the way around—for the eloquently expressed angst, for the call to remember the common goal and unify, and for the Douglas Adams reference.
In well-deserved reward for your suffering, bipolar fandom, perhaps you should treat yourself, after all is said and done, and graduate from PubMed to Club Med. Come to think of it, don’t we all deserve this? See you in Cancun.
Good call.
Depending on the time of year, I heard that Cabo can be crawling with Defensive Coordinators.
I think the DCs set up outdoor shops, card tables and umbrellas, alongside the stands with painted shot glasses and t-shirts. Watch out, Joe Tresey, we know where there are plenty more.
Somewhat OT but still hoops
Granted, there are lots of conference tournaments going on, but there aren’t a massive number of BCS-conference tournament championship games needed. So, the Pac-10 championship is Saturday at 3:00 PST. The Big 12 championship is Saturday…at 3:00 PST. Not quite up to FML status for someone who’s a secondary KU fan, but less-than-brilliant scheduling on the part of whoever set theirs second. (I like watching KU, and I want them to win most of their games – just not against us. I may live in Kansas, but KU will always be ‘them’ and UCLA will always be ‘us.’ I am a Bruin.)
Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Glad to hear you haven't
joined the dark side, Luke. Now use your jedi mind tricks and get us a 6 seed :-)
"Every day was a good day at UCLA." -Coach John Wooden
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
