Scouting Report: UCLA

by Achilles on Mar 26, 2008 3:23 PM PDT in Basketball

Sports Illustrated's Luke Winn asked an anonymous assistant coach from one of UCLA's earlier opponents for a scouting report.

It's an interesting and honest assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this Bruin team.

Here are some excerpts:

"UCLA is not a scoring machine, and the stuff they run is simple -- but they execute it all really well, by setting hard screens and being very physical. That's what makes them difficult to guard. At the end of day, though, they are not a very good outside shooting team. [Darren] Collison can get it going a little bit, but [Josh] Shipp has been struggling. [Russell] Westbrook is an average shooter at best, and [Luc Richard] Mbah a Moute doesn't shoot it well. Defensively you have to make sure you protect the paint and make them shoot as many contested jump shots as possible.

~snip~

"The flip-side of this is you aren't going to score on them that easily, either. So it becomes a rugby scrum, or a boxing match where you punch and continue punching. Because everything Mbah a Moute isn't offensively, he is defensively. He gets after it on defense. Westbrook gets after it, too; Collison gets after it, Mata gets after it. All those guys who aren't good on offense are great on defense. What UCLA is trying to do is overwhelm you physically in every phase of the game: denial, on the ball, setting screens, getting through screens, bumping cutters, hard shows on on-ball screens.

"More than anything, it becomes time-consuming to score against them. The No. 1 way you can do it is to get to the foul line, so you have to go right at them. If you shy away and shoot jump shots, you won't ever score. If you go back and look at the games they lost, they always have guys foul out. And in games that [opponents] shy away and take all jumpers, it's like blood in the water. They play just like the Detroit Pistons or the Knicks of old, in that they're programmed to be aggressive on every player. The detriment of that, though, is if they run into a ref with a tight whistle and get in foul trouble, they're just going to keep fouling you. They can't just turn that aggressiveness off mid-game, so you'll end up shooting 30 free throws. But sometimes, if you've got a West Coast crowd in their favor, the ref will start feeling bad because he's sent the other team to the line for 30, and might start compensating.

"Collison and Westbrook are such good defenders because they have great quickness and size, and long arms to create deflections. But when you're trained to be the attacker, as they are, when somebody attacks you, you're going to foul them. You want to put them in situations where they have to foul. Westbrook, especially, is really good if you're in passive mode, but when teams are aggressive and square up and go at him, he'll reach from behind, he'll get beat. When somebody is being the aggressor against him, it's hard for him.

It's a really interesting read, click the link above and check it out. There are also similar scouting reports for the other number one seeds.

HT to OdetoTyus, who linked this at Bruin Report Online earlier today.

UPDATE:

I think the number-one seed I'd least like to face is Kansas. Which sort of surprises me, because I would have thought it would be North Carolina. But, with all due respect to a really good Carolina team that I think is playing very well right now, we have a lot of bodies who can play Hansborough one on one (Love, Aboya, Mata, Keefe, even Luc). Not all will stop him, but we can play him man up and we have a great double team to throw at him.

And I think if you stop Hansborough, you're halfway there with Carolina. I think our defense overall matches up well with them, at least in respect to the other number one seeds.

Kansas, has a lot of weapons. According to the report, they play with great intensity. They have a balanced attack, so it seems, or at least they have a lot of guys who can hurt you.

Mostly, though, if the report is right, they won't panic or fold if they get a lead and we turn up the heat on defense.

All things equal, I'd prefer to play Memphis.

Which is not to say I don't think they are very tough, because I do think they are very tough.

But I think our defense matches up best with their attack. They do a lot of damage off of the dribble drive and we have two very good defenders who could play Rose man up in Collison and Westbrook. I also think that we are a strong defensive rebounding team who could neutralize their ability to grab weakside offensive rebounds (though I think Florida hurt us that way the last two years. We would double in the post, then they would hurt us on the weakside.)

All in all, the top four teams are all very good. None would be an easy match-up. But, based on this article, I'd most like to face Memphis, least like to face Kansas and have a fair amount of confidence against North Carolina.

Tweet Comment 9 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Link

Achilles, the link does not work.

What would John Wooden do?

by JKNaka on Mar 26, 2008 3:29 PM PDT reply actions

My bad ...

Try it now ... I think it's fixed.

Go Bruins

by Achilles on Mar 26, 2008 3:31 PM PDT up reply actions

Awesome

Thanks!

What would John Wooden do?

by JKNaka on Mar 26, 2008 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions

Here you go - UCLA's the last of the 4

Link

by Raisin on Mar 26, 2008 3:33 PM PDT up reply actions

Let's focus on one team only

Western Kentucky University and not look ahead.

GO BRUINS.

by Nestor on Mar 26, 2008 3:57 PM PDT reply actions

Is there some reason...

...we're talking about which #1 seed we'd most want to face?

Guys, Western Kentucky is no joke. And neither are Xavier and West Virginia.

There's a long way to go before Kansas, UNC and Memphis become relevant to our lives.

by Dexter Fishmore on Mar 26, 2008 4:20 PM PDT reply actions

I guess I need to respond to this ...

I thought Luke Winn's article was really interesting as it related to UCLA.

And because he wrote about all four teams, I thought I'd react in the immediate. They were just casual comments in reaction to Winn's article.

It never even occurred to me, frankly, that my focus needed to be solely on Western Kentucky. I'm 100% sure that my focus has zero to do with the outcome of tomorrow's game or any other game.

I wasn't "looking past" Western Kentucky or anyone else. I was just responding to Winn's article with some immediate thoughts.

I think it's more important that the team is focused solely on Western Kentucky. I'm not sure it matters as much if the fans engage in some speculative conversation about other teams in the tournament.

Go Bruins

by Achilles on Mar 26, 2008 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions

Totally true, the team needs to focus

on the next game and next game only. And as fans our "focus" has zero bearing on what will happen. But with all due respect I'm kind of tired of hearing all the talk around here like UCLA is the team that should be afraid of the competition.

Of course anyone can beat anyone, especially in the tourny, but I see the Bruins as the predetor. I have plenty of respect for Western Kentucky, and obviously making it this far they deserve it. But there is no reason we shouldn't EXPECT the Bruins to take care of business. And I don't care who we get in the next round, or the round after that, or after that.

WE ARE THE BRUINS. BRING IT ON!

I'm not trying to pick a fight with anyone here. Or tell this great group of fans how to feel. But I have been sensing a feeling of uneasiness. And I think its ok to be confident fans. Let other teams and fans fear us, but we have no reason to dread a match-up with anyone.

"Someday we'll look back on this and it will all seem funny" - Boss

by TCbruin32 on Mar 26, 2008 10:14 PM PDT up reply actions

Great Scouting Report

Remember its not Luke, but an anonymous assistant coach from a team we previously played, that provided Luke the scouting report. And its pretty dead on.

Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if it was A&M's assistant that gave that report.

In the first half A&M, if I remember correctly, covered the transition lanes well giving Love no chance of making his patented half full court passes. I also don't remember them giving up any fastbreak turnover points in the first half as well.

Of course later in the game (because of conditioning?) the game opened up.

He's also right about the physical nature of play and how the refs will only call so many fouls on a team to not appear to being biased. Letting calls go also improves the flow of the game.

Basically, when you control the tempo of the game you control how its called. Strong and aggressive teams tend to get calls go there way.

A basket may be a basket, but like most sports, its never completely black & white.

by Heffer on Mar 26, 2008 5:38 PM PDT reply actions