For the Pac-10 and other elite conferences who routinely lose players early, there’s no sense in even trying to make predictions before the NBA Draft.
So now that the dust has cleared, here’s one look ahead at what next season might be like, in a very early predicted order of finish:
1. UCLA
Who’s gone: Guard Aaron Afflalo (early).
Comment: Keeping Darren Collison around ensures the Bruins will be considered the team to beat. Josh Shipp is the injury plagued Jawann McClellan of this team but the inside looks much tougher with freshman Kevin Love.
2. Washington State.
Who’s gone: Wing Ivory Clark.
Comment: Was last season a fluke? I don’t think so. This is a smart, fundamentally sound team that is clearly better than the sum of its parts. Cougars will have to deal with being a major target, however.
3. Stanford.
Who’s gone: Nobody.
Comment: Is Trent Johnson the right man for this job? We’ll find out next season. He has virtually everybody back, including rising stars Lawrence Hill and Anthony Goods, plus the Cardinal kept the Lopez twins around. They should be contenders.
4. Arizona.
Who’s gone: Wing Marcus Williams (early), guard Mustafa Shakur, forward Ivan Radenovic.
Comment: Talent level could justify a higher prediction but Wildcats haven’t played up to their talent level in a while. This should be a better team chemistry-wise but that was the company line last season, too.
5. Oregon.
Who’s gone: Guard Aaron Brooks, backup post Adam Zahn.
Comment: Brooks’ departure drops the Ducks two or three notches. They have everybody else back, though.
6. California.
Who’s gone: Guard Ayinde Ubaka.
Comment: Forward DeVon Hardin’s withdrawal from the NBA Draft was huge. With Hardin and the underrated Ryan Anderson down low, plus some quality wing players, the Bears could compete for the upper division.
7. Washington
Who’s gone: Center Spencer Hawes (early).
Comment: Huskies return most of their key players but most have yet to live up to expectations. Can Quincy Pondexter be a go-to guy? We’ll see.
8. USC
Who’s gone: Forward Nick Young (early), guard Gabe Pruitt (early), guard Lodrick Stewart, center Aboulaye N’diaye.
Comment: Despite all the O.J. Mayo hype, the losses are too big here for the Trojans to equal last season’s success.
9. Arizona State.
Who’s gone: Forward Allen Morill, forward Serge Angounou, forward Bruno Claudino.
Comment: Herb Sendek will start making a move in Year Two with Top 25 guard James Harden plus the core of his young rotation players, who improved as last season progressed.
10. Oregon State
Who’s gone: Forward Sasa Cuic (early), guard Angelo Tsagarakis (transfer), center Liam Hughes (transfer), guard Wesley Washington (academics).
Comment: It’s all in the hands of center C.J. Giles, the troubled transfer from Kansas, and forward Marcel Jones, who withdrew from the NBA Draft. Can they save Jay John’s job? It won’t be easy.
Please add your thoughts. I won’t be able to update this blog as much in July, which is usually pretty quiet, but I know you guys will carry on anyway…
I believe expectations for the most part are low and potential much better than many believe.
You are most likely right but a second place finish is what I believe for the Cats.
— J 07/04/2007 05:19 PM #
— Daniella 07/04/2007 05:37 PM #
UCLA
Stanford who will come on late
AZ
WSU
CAL
USC
Oregon (Aaron Brooks was HUGE for them…his loss hurts)
ASU
Washington
OSU
should be a good year!
— scott 07/04/2007 07:53 PM #
— Jimmy 07/04/2007 08:35 PM #
as an unrelated note, can somebody please tell me why coach olsen does not play onobun. seems like he could really be a presence both on the boards and with toughness. and lets face it, walters is garbage (no touch and no real defensive threat). just some thoughts.
— chris 07/04/2007 09:34 PM #
While I still wouldn’t move Stanford up now, as of midsummer, picking 2, 3 and 4 is very tough…
— Bruce Pascoe 07/04/2007 09:53 PM #
I’d move the Cougars down a couple of spots. WSU isn’t going to surprise anyone in the PAC this year. Nobody took them serious until about 5 games into the conference schedule last year. Maybe I’m still finding their sudden rise to the top of the PAC a little hard to swallow.
On #5’s unrelated note, Fendi seems to play out of control most of the time when he’s on the court. I think we all have had a lot of hope for him simply because he’s such a fine physical specimen. The guy LOOKS like someone who could dominate at the NBA level, but the talent just isn’t there.
— Jeff 07/05/2007 08:46 AM #
My prediction 1. UCLA (hate them), 2-6 Arizona, WSU, Stanford, USC, Oregon, WSU (it is really too close to call between these teams. If I had to guess, I’d put them in that order. But we could be looking at a five way tie for second at 11-7 for each. Protecting homecourt will be a must next season), 7. Washington 8. ASU 9. Cal 10. OSU. Six teams in the NCAA tourney unless Washington gets hot, than 7.
— Mike H (because there is another Mike posting :) 07/05/2007 02:15 PM #
If Bayless can hit clutch 3’s, and Head Coach O’neill can tighten up the D and hold people to about 39% FG percentage, then UCLA and everyone else is done and the UA will win the Pac 10 and go far in the tourney. Everyone wants to get on the UCLA bandwagon, but I saw what Florida did to them – twice. If anything, UCLA is vulnerable to the three ball and once those start going in, their vaunted defense starts to look like swiss cheese. No, no, no. UA will be loaded offensively, so if UCLA wants to compete, they better learn how to score, something which Howland teams have not done so far.
— Robert 07/05/2007 02:45 PM #
I don’t care that UCLA is beefing up on the interior. So long as Howland insists on running a four corners offense and put the shackles on his own talent, I don’t see why UCLA should be a favorite, other than the incompentence of other coaches in the league who refuse to watch the Florida tapes from the last two years. Memo to all Pac 10 coaches out there: If you want to beat UCLA into submission, then run the %#$% ball!!! Tempo, tempo, tempo. UCLA is like a grappling specialist in ultimate fighing. If you play them in a slow tempo – close quarter brawl, you will lose. If, however, you play the game the way it was designed by getting out on the break, passing, and good floor spacing, you will smash UCLA. That’s one of the ways that Shakur killed us last year (one of many, that is). He has this annoying tendency of slowly walking the ball up the court. Contrast this to the way that Florida played UCLA by racing the ball up the court and applying pressure on the Bruins before they could set up their D.
I swear, if I see one more UA point guard walk the ball up the court against UCLA, I am going to go Marco on them and call for public beatings!
— Robert 07/05/2007 02:53 PM #
Meanwhile AZ just lost 3 starters and 3 of its 4 top scorers. Criticize Shakur, Williams and Irad all you want, that is still a ton to lose offensively and from an experience standpoint. AZ will be talented but unfortunately they will be very young. Youth and the harsh OOC schedule will either build or bury the young Wildcats’ psyche next year. I predict the later. Things will get worse than they have been before things start to get better in the 2008-2009 season.
— btheg 07/05/2007 03:58 PM #
I provide facts, i.e. UCLA has 4 returning starters from back to back Final four teams and that AZ lost 3 of its top 4 scorers. You provide speculation about Chase and Bayless; oh and name calling??? Nice. So UCLA will be worse because it lost Afflalo but AZ will be better because Chase is greater than 3 lost starters combined??? Bayless as a true frosh and SG is going to be an immediate improvement over a 4 year starter Shakur at the most critical position (PG) yet Love will not compensate for Afflalo’s points which will now be made in the paint? DC and Shipp for Afflalo’s leadership? Westbrook for Afflalo’s defensive intensity? Sure O.K!
Chase is a good offensive player but he will never be a good defensive player because he lacks the lateral quickness to play man to man.
Bayless I’m sure will eventually be better than Shakur and he may score more points than Shakur but PG requires much more than that just so you know. IMO, Bayless is not going to be able to reach his potential at PG in his first year at the new position.
Stop drinking the cactus Koolaid in Tucson. You think my analysis is flawed? I will come back here to laugh at you when AZ finishes worse than 3rd place next year.
— btheg 07/05/2007 06:35 PM #
It’s not that UCLA got worse, the UA simply has more talent across the board, period.
— Robert 07/06/2007 06:10 AM #
UCLA lost Afflalo, but they still have Collison who ran circles around the Cats last season. Also UCLA proved to be much quicker and more disciplined and took away the Cats’ fast break. And, they only lost Afflalo.
After all the hoopla, Budinger proved to be competent. Last year at this time, team chemistry supposedly had improved because Rodgers and Adams were gone.
The recruiting class and O’Neill seem to be sound fixes, but that’s only on paper.
As I have said several times before, let’s see what happens when they get on the court before annointing them.
— phxcat 07/06/2007 06:58 AM #
I disagree that UCLA slowed down the Cats break. Watch the games, more than anything, Staf slowed down the Cats break. He had a tendency to walk the ball up the court and dribble the air out of the ball in half court sets. He would then overpenetrate and then make a bad pass resulting in a turnover and/or just pass the ball to a player on the wrong spot on the floor. Bottom line, the offense was out of rythm when he ran the point and his overpenetration had a lot to do with it. Plus, he couldn’t hit the 3 ball.
That’s why I am stoked about Bayless. He can pull up and knock it down from long range with a hand in his grill. Whenever you have a player that can hit the 3 ball and is explosive off the dribble, he is impossible to defend. This makes UCLA’s vaunted defense less of a factor. Who do you double? If you try to shut down Bayless, you’ve got Buddinger open on the wing and he is going to kill you with the three or take you inside. Same thing if you try to shut down Chase, now you have Bayless one on one with his defender. If you try to take away the perimeter game, you’ve got Hill inside, etc. For the first time in about three years, we are going to have good floor spacing and good shooters.
Will UCLA be good? Yes. Will UA be better this year? Absolutely. A new coach and a new roster all of a sudden changes things. UA and UCLA will problably split this year, with eaching holding serve on their home court.
USC will be tough as well with the addition of Mayo. It will be a great for the fans as we will be able to watch two lottery picks, Mayo and Bayless, go head to head.
— Robert 07/06/2007 08:03 AM #
All speculation here, however I see validity on both sides of the argument regarding where UofA will end up this year.
They will be a far more exciting team to watch than previous seasons and will likely have more hunger, based upon the look and feel of incoming recruits and the addition of O’Neill.
I, personally, see this team making great strides this year, but not really reaching the ultimate goal just yet…a 3rd-5th place finish in the Pac-10 is likely and a solid run in the tourney will follow. However, I believe the experience is not there to get any further than the Sweet 16.
‘08 – ‘09? Now we’re talking…but this year will be fun and bring back the standards of AZ basketball. Over the past 3 months, this program has really committed to success and it will show.
— Nick 07/06/2007 08:12 AM #
Accept the fact AZ will take its lumps next year due to youth, adjusting to new coaching from O’Neill, and a brutal schedule.
— btheg 07/06/2007 09:19 AM #
Robert—I don’t know if Arizona has enough shooters to do what Florida did to UCLA in the Final Four. Florida had Humphrey and Brewer making everything they took, and Green was dangerous as well. Next year Arizona will have Bayless, Budinger, and ___? Who will step up and be a dangerous shooter? We don’t know. I would assume that if Bayless proves to be the best shooter, Collison will be chasing him around, and Collison is good enough to disrupt many shots. Chase has yet to prove to be a consistent shooter, hopefully he will work on his 3pt range this summer while he is in California. Who is gonna be the other shooter? Horne? LLP? Nic Wise? J-Mac? We don’t know, a couple of those guys are frosh, Nic Wise hasn’t played all that much, and J-Mac has been injured a lot. Who knows what will happen, but the Cats will need more than 1 solid shooter to beat UCLA.
— darren 07/06/2007 09:51 AM #
I am a UCLA fan just so you know. Did my undergrad at UCLA. I went to grad school at UofA and really enjoy watching both programs be successful. I don’t buy into the concept that one school has to be down for the other to be good. Both programs should be great at all times.
You’ve attacked my BB knowledge which I find laughable. I simply call it as I objectively see it. AZ has missed on many of its evaluations of H.S. players the last few years. That and some unfortunate injuries and early departures are the reason they are in this position. Hopefully, Lute & Co. have begun to rectify this with the 2007 class although Jacobson is a complete project and may never be able to make real contributions at the Pac-10 level.
You’ve never seen Love play and you really have no idea how good Love is do you?? You will see soon enough. Stop drinking the cactus Koolaid and wake up from your hallucinations. It will take at least one more year before Lute & Co. start to right things in Tucson.
As for your drivel and threats keep it in check son. I’d probably laugh harder if I saw you in person than I will be at the end of next season.
— btheg 07/06/2007 11:13 AM #
Love will be a good player, but Hill is a nasty player. He has some agression that I have not seen in some time from a UA low post player. I like UA on the inside next year. We have tons of fouls to give so we can afford to be more agressive and gang up on love.
As for that third shooter, probably J-Mac if he can stay healthy. Moreover, I think you will have plenty of leadership and experience with J-Mac and Buddinger.
btheg-
Again, the only guy that I think is good on UCLA from last year is Collison. Too bad Howland puts the handcuffs on him and slows the game down.
Yes, Kansas was humiliated by UCLA …........ because they played rugby with UCLA instead of basketball. Seriously, if you want to beat UCLA, put the foot on the accelerator and run, run, run and then run some more. Howland is offensively challenged and relies on good defense and the refs ignoring the obvious muggings that go on. Of course, the refs didn’t miss is it in the championshipt game because Billy Donavan worked the refs pretty good. That’s one thing that O’neill needs to work on. Before every game against the Bruins, he needs to go Zen Master and start complaining how physical UCLA is and how hard it is to get calls against them, etc. and how they get the benefit of the doubt on handchecking. Billy used it and it worked to perfection. Say what you will, but working the refs through the media before the game works.
— Robert 07/06/2007 11:19 AM #
I’ve seen Love play. I’ll take Hill.
— Robert 07/06/2007 11:21 AM #
— larry b 07/06/2007 12:01 PM #
I’m glad you think Collison is the only “good” player on UCLA’s roster. Howland must be truly amazing to reach back to back Final Fours with a bunch of scrub players. I mean he must be some sort of magician or something! UCLA’s offense will be significantly better with Love. The one thing Howland has been missing since he’s been at UCLA is a post player with a high offensive skill set. Next season, he has that in spades with Love.
Florida beat UCLA and everyone else in the NCAA’s because it had 3 NBA lottery picks in the front court pure and simple. Not because Donovan whined to refs about any claimed handchecking or mugging as you call it.
Marco-
Hill is a nice athletic player defensively but he has no polish to his game offensively. He is nothing more than AZ’s version of Mata or a slightly taller version of Aboya. As for Howland not restoring anything at UCLA, LOL! None of my Friends who are AZ fans anticipated how quickly UCLA would reclaim the Pac before the 2005-2006 season. I’m sure Lute, as well as all AZ fans have been shellshocked by how quickly UCLA has re-asserted itself after the Lavin years. Hence the bitterness that comes across so clearly from posters like you. Now you see Lute scrambling to fix things in firing Roz and hiring Kevin O’Neill. Will these changes work? Only time will tell but like it or not Marco, UCLA is back at the top and is going to be a force from here on out under Howland. BTW did you hear UCLA just landed Jrue Holiday and will likely have the #1 class for 2008? Sure to be forgotten in the wind very soon….BURP!
— btheg 07/06/2007 12:10 PM #
mostly don’t have an argument with you about UCLA…but My boy Jennings is the best in the land for 08…wathched them both on as many video streaming sites as i could find video of them and jennings outclasses holiday…
UCLA is the top program in the PAC-10 hands down, but they will never win a national championship until Howland unshackles the squad on offense. Watching UCLA in the tournament was downright painful…the Kansas game was bad, but the Indiana game was pure torture…UCLA kept them scoreless for over 13 minutes yet was only ahead by 7-8…If UA does that to you they’ll be up 30 and therein lies the difference.
On this topic I unhappily have to agree with Robert…with Shakur running the point we played UCLA’s game and got worked…with Bayless, who i’ve seen in person and is the real deal (would have worked over a Shakur lead team last year), we won’t fall into that trap…the best part about all this speculation: it’s July baby! can’t wait for the season…and just so you know, I’m not a UCLA hater…i root for all PAC teams as long as they ain’t playing UA!
— scott 07/06/2007 12:24 PM #
You say I give Love too much credit. True he has not played one minute of CBB but how many H.S. players rated in the top 3 turn out to be busts seriously? Love won a ton of national awards and was the Naismith National H.S. player of the year! Is Love going to forget how to play the game when he gets to college?
Perhaps you are giving Hill too much credit in claiming he will “dominate” Hill avgd. < 5 points, about 4 rebounds and < 1 block in 14 minutes per game last year. Those stats don’t jump out and say “Dominating” in any way shape or form but don’t let facts get in the way of your arguments. Like I said, Hill is about the equalvalent of Mata. Hill doesn’t come close to a talent like K. Love.
— btheg 07/06/2007 12:24 PM #
Good reasonable response. Kudos to you! Jennings is an amazing talent for sure. I’ve watched both as well and they are different players in terms of style. Jennings is a super quick, extremely athletic PG who is flashy with the passes. Jrue is a SG, not as flashy but more a “power” guard with amazing body control. They will both be very effective during their time in the Pac.
My theory is that Howland will let the offense flow more freely as better offensive players come into the program. He is getting these types of players in 2007 and 2008 and likely beyond.
— btheg 07/06/2007 12:32 PM #
I do like UofA but I’m a UCLA fan first and foremeost. Glad to know Hill has improved offensively. Hope what you see in pick up games transfers over to games that count.
Harrick’s offense was different at NAU than what he’s been running at UCLA. SO why won’t the offense be altered to fit new players’ with different strengths? I think Howland is an excellent coach who will do what he needs to do to improve a team’s chances. Just have to wait and judge this one later.
Curious why you call Jrue a thug? I have not read anything about the kid other than he is a good student-athlete from a good family. If you have any links to something let me know. I would be curious.
As for Love, again I’ll just say we shall see what he does this coming season. I predict he’ll be Pac-10 frosh of the year. UCLA’s 3rd FOY in 4 years BTW. :-)
— btheg 07/06/2007 02:56 PM #
— btheg 07/06/2007 03:13 PM #
I’m glad you used the word “stiff”. That’s kind of what I thought as well when I say Love play. Speed kills and I’m not so sure that Love can handle more athletic players.
btheg:
You gotta be kidding me! Mata? Anyway, Florida crushed them because of floor balance. If you watch the Florida game from this year, UCLA kept the Florida bigs under wraps in the first half. And then …......it was lights freakin’out as Florida began making 3’s like they were layups. The perimeter game then forced UCLA outside and then the big guys started to pick UCLA apart. Funny, the UA did the same thing with Salim and Channing. Sure, those were two NBA players and the Bruins were not there yet, but the style employed by Howland resulted in huge blowouts. He traps alot and doubles down inside. This means that someone is ALWAYS WIDE FREAKIN’ OPEN and if you have guys that can shoot (like Florida), there is no reason why you can’t run UCLA off the court. Fortunately for UCLA, they played against teams that were unathletic and not really deadly from the outside. They had a very favorable bracket and that’s why they cruised right on through to the final four. Scott brought up a good point, that Indiana game was just plain horrible basketball. People talk about good defense, but that was just spin by CBS. In essence, to put it lightly, that was %$#% offense. I mean, the game set basketball back 50 years and if more and more games turn into basketbrawl like that game, the NCAA will have to institute a 24 second shot clock and a defensive three seconds rule just to speed things up because, unless you are a Bruin fan, nobody is going to watch that crap. I swear, I would rather be subjected to the NBA East or the WNBA than be forced to watch reruns of UCLA-Indiana! Dr. Naismith was turning in his grave. The game was that bad.
Moreover, I think that Howland has had the benifit of two bad seasons for the UA. Well, the talent level is back at the UA as well as a new coach, so I don’t think UCLA is the favorite. By the end of the year, the Cats will be the class of the Pac 10 and O’neill will be crowned head coach (officially) at the end of the season.
— Robert 07/06/2007 03:17 PM #
If you guys think Love is a stiff then you guys are going to be sorely disappointed. Yeah the recruiting experts labeled Love the #1 Center of the 2007 class but they were wrong and you are right. You want a stiff? Then you need to look no further than Walters and Jacobson (the next Walters if he’s lucky).
Please tell me why Hill scoring < 5 pts and pulling in 4 rebs a game is somehow awesome? I didn’t look but I think Mata’s numbers are better in the piss poor offense you guys keep harping on.
You were right on this time about the UCLA-Florida game. I was also right in the stating they had 3 lottery picks in the frontcourt.
As for UCLA being lucky in the NCAA’s, you’ve got to be kidding. I guess UCLA is the luckiest team ever having back to back easy roads to the Final Four.(rollseyes). Give credit where credit is due for once! UCLA is 62-13 over the last 2 seasons and 5-0 against UA. You can call it ugly ball. I’ll call it WINNING!
UA may have had 2 bad seasons that MAY have benefited UCLA but what’s your point? UA is going to have another rough season this coming year due the reasons I’ve mentioned above. In 2008, the playing field will level out some b/c UCLA will have 3-4 players going to the NBA. This will alow UA a chance to catch up once again if O’Neill is indeed the answer and the recent recruiting blunders cease under Lute.
— btheg 07/06/2007 03:44 PM #
Were those the same guys that though Staf was the best point guard in the land?
Look, Love will be a good player, but I really didn’t see anything from him that makes me think that he can hang with more athletic big men. He has good hands and a decent shot, but I think defensively he’s going to have issues with quick power forwards and centers. As for Walters and Jacobsen, fouls and rebounds and the occasional rebound and/or blocked shot. Everything else from them is gravy.
— Robert 07/06/2007 04:03 PM #
Haha! Touche on the Shakur reference. Looking back I think Shakur had all the tools to be a great PG but for whatever reason he was missing something upstairs(confidence, killer instinct, etc.) Too bad b/c he seemed like a very good kid.
Love may very well have issues defending more athletic posts but that will be Mata and Aboya’s concern. Love’s #1 concern will be to score and he has all the offensive skills, footwork, touch, etc. to do so at a high clip. Love can also go to the top of the key for a 3 pointer pulling a big man out of the paint to defend him. Think Ryan Anderson from Cal last year except much better.
— btheg 07/06/2007 04:16 PM #
Your comments that Hill is more talented than Love are among the funniest things I have read in months. You two should be writing comedy.
You might want to ask Lute, if given his choice, which one he would rather have on his team.
— Jim Turner 07/06/2007 04:28 PM #
Reality is the Cats were a top five RPI team all season. They played well enough to win all but a couple games. The problem was they played a tough non-con schedule and the Pac-10 was really tough. Next year is not going to be any easier. Losing those three starters is huge. Bayless is rated about where Shakur was when he came in and you know all know how that turned out. Budinger has potential but with less proven offensive players around him it will be easier for teams to keep him from scoring.
And, — Robert
Maybe you should stay out of the sun. You posts have a lot of “If’s” all over the place.
Do you understand why Florida beat UCLA? And everyone else? It’s not that they just shot 3’s. What they had was two lottery picks (Horford and Noah) who dominated the much smaller 6’7 and 6’8 UCLA bigs. You double Horford and the 3 opens up. If you don’t double him he scores at will.
If Arizona just shoots 3’s against UCLA they will lose because the shots will be contested and they will shot a low percentage. Just like last year. Arizona does not have anyone even close to the talent of Noah or Horford, let alone both. I know you have Hill, but come on. Plus UCLA has Kevin Love. I know there are some Arizona fans here who think they know more than the experts, but he won more player of the year awards this season then anyone else. He is the real deal. Love is the missing piece who will help propel UCLA to their 12th title.
— UCLA Joel 07/06/2007 06:06 PM #
The only reason that UCLA did not win championships the past two years is Florida. UCLA’s defense dominates everyone (except Florida), their offense is good enough. They have had a makeshift inside game the past two years and still made the final four both times. It might be ugly but it works. Howland does not need to change a thing. I will take two ugly final fours over two “pretty” first round exits any day. With Love in the middle whether he has a good or great season the team will improve greatly.
— UCLA Joel 07/06/2007 06:17 PM #
If UCLA had been in Georgetown’s bracket, or had had to face OSU, similar results would have been the case…no one is saying that UCLA wasn’t good (Read my post…i cheered for them!) what we’re saying is that the teams that beat UCLA did so by running and hitting three’s- something we chose not to do against them…
I do think UCLA will be better than last years team…but I also think that UA will be significantly better and will end up challenging for a top three spot in the conference-
— scott 07/06/2007 07:58 PM #
The scouting report on Love is that he is a good rebounder, shooter, and passer, but that he will struggle against more athletic big men. No joke, look for yourself. That doesn’t make him a bad player, but I have a feeling that if you get up and down the court on him a few times, his effectiveness will diminish. Bottom line, he is a good big man, but has no speed. That’s not opinion, it’s fact. A player like Hill who can face up on him should be able to abuse him down low with quickness. I realize that you are a Bruins fan, but your love of them isn’t going to make Love one bit faster.
As for your comments about the 3’s, you may recall that Salim abused Howland’s squad on a regular basis. Like I said, because of the way that they trap and double, SOMEONE IS ALWAYS WIDE FREAKIN’ OPEN. That UCLA got as far as they did this year just goes to show just how bad the rest of the NCAA was. That UCLA-Indiana game as an afront to humanity.
— Robert 07/06/2007 10:39 PM #
— vegasallen 07/06/2007 10:56 PM #
Howland is a great coach at understanding the weak parts of his defense and making adjustments. Mata and Aboya will split time at PF with Love at center. If Love is as slow as you think they will provide help defense for him. Hill has some talent, but on the level of Aboya and Mata, with lesser defensive skills.
As far as what the experts say:
Look at Fox Sports Preseason Top 25
They put UCLA No.1 because of Love. Arizona at #23 just ahead of Stanford.
— UCLA Joel 07/07/2007 07:29 AM #
About Salim. Yes, he was a special talent. Is he quitting the pro’s to come back one more season? You bring it up like it has some relevance to next season. 1st, you don’t have anyone who can shoot like that, 2nd Salim did not play against the level of UCLA defense that they have played the past two seasons. If you watched them play you would see they don’t give up many open 3’s.
“That UCLA got as far as they did this year just goes to show just how bad the rest of the NCAA was.”
Wow, where to begin with this comment. The NBA had its most potent draft in years from this “bad” group. I could go on and on, just a dumb comment.
— UCLA Joel 07/07/2007 07:51 AM #
let me make this clear: NO ONE IS SAYING UCLA WON’T BE GOOD…we’re just offering you a warning: Don’t put your hopes into recruits (something that we’re all guilty of by the way) UA fans learned the hard way that if you base your outlook on incoming freshman…your sitting rather precariously. let me tell you how bad we got burned:
2003-4 incoming recruits were
Ndudi Ebi
Mustafa Shakur
Kirk Walters
Ivan Radenovic (who came midseason)
we had on hand:
Hassan Adams
Salim Stoudamire
Channing Frye
Andre Igoudala
Chris Rodgers
our starting five could have been
Channing Frye
Ndudi Ebi
Hassan Adams
Salim Stoudamire
Andre Igoudala
with Shakur coming off the bench with Chris Rodgers-
what happened?
Ebi declared for the draft, went in the first round and I beleive is now offering his services in city and office leagues as a “ringer”
We all know what happened with the rest of the gang…oh yeah, Shakur and Ebi were both first team high school all-americans…
so you see, we’ve been burned…so we’re trying to do you a favor by encouraging you to look at your squad more realistically…Of course if you do the same for us, we’ll tell you how great Bayless, Horne and the rest will be and how we’re going to be so much better becuase of it…
this is a great board…i cannot wait for mid-november
— scott 07/07/2007 08:00 AM #
Just read post 45-
in regards to the deep draft…take another look
of the teams in the final four: 9 picks in the draft of 60 15% of the draft from 4 teams
what about the elite eight teams?
Kansas
Oregon
North Carolina
Memphis
3 more picks so eight teams represent 12 picks in a 60 pick draft…20% from eight teams
there were 13 foreign players taken in the draft so between the elite 8 and foreign players there were 25 of 60 picks in the draft…just over 40% of the draft.
So yes it was a deep draft, mostly because the best of the best had a large amount of talent…the rest had enough talent to hang for a while, but not much more…it was a good year for college hoops because the best 8-16 teams were very evenly matched…
oh yeah…it seems to me that Salim played against Afflalo/Farmar…abused them, and in one instance put up a dagger from almost midcourt to beat the bruins at the buzzer (nice aliteration huh?)
— scott 07/07/2007 08:11 AM #
Florida beat UCLA by 10 and Ohio St by 9. So I am not so sure OSU would have easily beaten UCLA like Florida did. But, we will never know. Georgetown lost to OSU and they play a style similar to UCLA’s so I think UCLA would have won that one.
For what it takes to beat UCLA, its hard to run and shoot 3’s against them. Do you think the Wildcat’s did not try? UCLA’s pressure, swarming defense tends to get teams worried and confused about not turning the ball over. UCLA plays a tight man, especially at the 3 point line, so easy 3’s are not going to happen. They get back fast on the break so no easy fast break points. Teams beat UCLA when UCLA did not come with the proper defensive attitude. Florida was just a better team. No one could have beaten them in the Tournament the past two years. Even their center coming off the bench (would have started at most schools) got picked in the 2nd round.
As far as the Cats. If they have better team chemistry, play much better defense, Bayless steps in right away and is better than Shakur, Hill becomes more consistent and stops fouling all the time, they have no injuries and Budinger plays like the 1st half of last season and not the last half, then I agree they have a shot at 2nd or 3rd in the Pac.
If they play up to the level of the past two years and no better, then the slip to 6th or 7th and once again will have trouble just making the tourney.
— UCLA Joel 07/07/2007 08:14 AM #
oh yeah…it seems to me that Salim played against Afflalo/Farmar…abused them, and in one instance put up a dagger from almost midcourt to beat the bruins at the buzzer (nice aliteration huh?)
Yes, they were both freshmen, Salim was a senior. That was also the last time your wildcats have beaten the Bruins. You are talking about a Bruin team with 3 freshman starters who barely made the tourney. Again, if Salim is coming back then maybe I will worry a bit. The Bruin team that lost that game is not the current team in any way. So what’s the point?
— UCLA Joel 07/07/2007 08:25 AM #
You are correct. No one knows how these recruits are going to work out. Howland seems so far at least to be able to get the most out his talent, and help them improve. Look at Farmar and Collison in their 2nd seasons, he turned Mata into a solid player from almost nothing. Even Hollins had a much improved Senior season.
It seems to me that Arizona this year and next has to rely much more on the hope that these recruits work out as planned then the Bruins. If Bayless underachieves your team is in trouble. If Budinger has a 2nd year like Williams you are in trouble. Look at Adams, Rogers, Shakur, Williams, etc. Players at the UA have not developed over their career like in the past.
UCLA has enough proven talent that even if Love is no better than Mata, they will still have a good shot at the final 4.
— UCLA Joel 07/07/2007 08:35 AM #
Budinger > Shipp
Hill > Love
Walters > Mata
O’Neil > Lute
— Idiot 07/07/2007 12:56 PM #
Nice name.
O’Neil > Lute? Is this one of those tests where you find the item that does not fit the rest?
I would take a 40-something Howland over a 70-something Olson. He has clearly out coached him the past two years and matched or exceeded his recruiting.
I would also take Shipp over Budinger. Budinger has a better offensive game, Shipp’s defense makes him a more complete player.
Hill over Love. LOL
Bayless over Collison LOL
Walters over Mata LOL once again
— UCLA Joel 07/07/2007 01:53 PM #
By the way, I saw the nationally televised game (With a friend who is a UofA alumnus) where UofA shot 20 3 point misses in a row. You’re right- who needs defense. I guess U of A wants to lose pretty all the time. Good luck in the Pac 10.
— UCLA Steve 07/07/2007 02:08 PM #
— Idiot 07/07/2007 02:28 PM #
Thanks for ruining a pretty decent board…
the point about three’s is that Florida beat UCLA because they were able to hit the 3 and when UCLA compensated they had the ability to beat them down-low. that’s the formula to beat UCLA…
if our recruits pay-off this year we’ll be able to do that, and make this season a little more interesting than last.
I wouldn’t take Budinger of Shipp…and i’m sure most people would agree with that…defense can be compensated for if you have the “O” to make a difference, and Chase was a more dominant player as a freshman that Shipp was as a whatever he was last season (jr. right?)
— scott 07/07/2007 02:29 PM #
Actually, I don’t think too many would agree with that. Playing no defense puts a lot of points on the board (assuming that you are hitting that day) Good defense can be played everyday.
As far as recruits, there is no question that UCLA has outrecruited UofA according to all the pundits. You seem to base your sataements on your own observations, as in seeing a player in a pick up game or 2.
UCLA had some rough years under Lavin, but the Bruins are back. Ask anyone who knows. Back to back Final Fours, top recruits, recruits passing up Duke and UNC (and of course UofA) to go to Westwood.
A flashy offense is great when it works, but when its just not clicking or a good defense shuts it down, you have to wish the team had spent a little more time on boring defensive drills.
By the way, do you define a “pretty decent board” as one that agrees with your “observations” based on your “considered opinion”? Sorry I don’t fit in.
— UCLA Steve 07/07/2007 02:48 PM #
Another thing about Florida. That was a team of destiny. It took over 10 years and a lot of luck to put these guys together. Nobody could have beaten them in the playoffs.
They realized that and decided to go for 2 NC’s. It didn’t matter who they would have gone up against- they were not going to lose.
In this climate of one and done players, I don’t know if we will see something like that for a long time. Also you had NBA top picks who came from families with money. This too we don’t see too often.
It was not Donovan’s brilliant play calling that beat UCLA. It was a great team
— UCLA Steve 07/07/2007 02:57 PM #
1. They think Lorenzo Mata has any game. He wouldn’t start on any other Pac-10 team.
2. They think Kevin Love is their savior and are resting all hopes for the upcoming season on him. The kid dominated in OREGON HIGH SCHOOL BASKETBALL. Guess what?! So did Chris Rodgers and look how THAT turned out. After having watched several Youtube clips of him… he reminds me of a poor man’s Bret Brielmeier. Congrats, UCLA, congrats. Good luck with that.
— azcoachb 07/07/2007 04:11 PM #
Mata played with 100% energy every night, has lots of heart and plays tough D. You would benefit by having just one player like that.
Rogers was the 8th best shooting guard coming out of high school, about the 50th best high school player.
Love is the #1 Center coming out of high school, anywhere from 1st to 4th best overall player.
UCLA is projected first in most preseason projections (1st in the nation , not just the Pac-10). So most experts seem to think Love is more than a poor mans Brielmeier.
Of course, you and your fellow Wildcat fans know more and are unbiased.
— UCLA Joel 07/07/2007 04:41 PM #
Really clever name-calling-nice!
First I’m gonna assume that you are not a student or grad of UofA (I have a good friend who graduated from there, and he’s a very smart guy)
Next, Mata plays beter defense than anyone on UofA. He may not be a lotto pick put hes a hard worker and a good defender and an asset to the team-if you had someone like that starting on your team, you might not need to hit (or sometimes miss 20 in a row) all those 3’s Who knows, you might make it out of the first round. (for some defensively challenged UofA fans “good defender” means someone who knows how to play defense and actually does it)
As far as putting all our hope on Love? He will, IMHO be a great asset from all he has done not so much in high school, but in exhibition games since then.
THAT BEING SAID, if he were to be injured or be a complete wash- out, UCLA is very deep. We only lost 1 player to the draft, and we also brought in Chase Stanback.
So good luck getting to the 32! Work on that defense.
— UCLA Steve 07/07/2007 04:41 PM #
I am not saying don’t play defense. Quite the opposite, good defense leads to good breaking opportunities and layups and I think that’s what Cat fans are going to see next year. Remember UNLV back in the days of Tark? Are you telling me that their system didn’t work? They crushed people. Hey, what about Wooden? When his teams created turnovers, they were off and running. Howland, on the other hand, creates turnovers and then slows the pace of the game down.
— Robert 07/07/2007 04:58 PM #
— Idiot 07/07/2007 05:01 PM #
Yes he didn’t break Salim’s record nearly fast enough. LOL
— UCLA Joel 07/07/2007 05:07 PM #
Tark (although, because of his negativity toward Wooden in his book) is not my favorite coach. You do, however have a good point.
Howland, coming in did not get the top recruits as did Arizona at that time. Thus he worked with the talent he had. By anyone’s standards, 4 years 3 appearances in the NCAA tournament,2 final fours and a championship game appearance are pretty decent credentials.
That being said, I believe he builds on defense. The last 2 years, the 2 best defensive teams are the only 2 teams that made consecutive Final Four appearances. (Florida and UCLA)
Offense is great, and some players are able to execute better than others, but as a coach you must work with the strengths and weaknesses of the players you have.
I believe UCLA played more up tempo last year than the year before, because of the players (Collison, for instance is much faster than Farmar was)
Howland will never sacrifice defense though. A great offensive player who can’t or won’t play defense will not play for Howland. His teams will be consistent and I believe consistently improving.
Lutes statement about defense being boring disturbed me last year and led me to believe his time, though he was a great coach, is over.
Whether the pace is fast or slow the bottom line is w’s. and defense can be played every day, and a good offense can be built upon it.
— UCLA Steve 07/07/2007 05:16 PM #
2. Any 6’9’’ Frankenstein can score 20 a game in high school playing against a bunch of 6’2’’ centers. Congratufreakinlations. Now let’s see him do it against Pac-10 centers, shall we?
3. The same commotion was made last year when Spencer Hawes commited to Washington. Husky fans were on every message board singing his praises, saying “HE’S THE SAVIOR OF OUR TEAM!!!” and “WATCH OUT FOR U-DUB IN ‘06! PAC 10 CHAMPS!” Well guess what, he wasn’t and they weren’t. He was mediocre at best. So, too, will Kevin Love.
— azcoachb 07/08/2007 08:57 PM #
— scott 07/08/2007 10:18 PM #
— Mel 07/09/2007 12:49 AM #
Re-read your post. How are you a UofA fan? How does id “help Arizona to have a healthy succesSful UCLA team?”
Can you clarify that?
— AZCoachB 07/09/2007 08:38 AM #
really easy-
We’re in the same conference and play them twice and play common opponents twice each year. If UCLA is good and wins a majority of their games they have a strong RPI. If we play them and split or sweep it boosts our RPI which we all know plays a huge part in determining seedings in the tournament…its also a reputation thing nationally UCLA has a strong bball reputation, if we beat a strong UCLA team it increases our national reputation which feeds into the polls which plays a part in RPI. so it’s actually quite simple…a strong UCLA bball team is good for the pac-10
— scott 07/09/2007 08:48 AM #
Actually, by comparing Love to Spencer Hawes, you are doing a disservice to Hawes. I am thinking more on the lines of Cherokee Parks.
— Robert 07/09/2007 10:13 AM #
Wrong: Chris Rogers Rivals
8th Best Shooting Guard
Plus Wildcat players over the past few years have not developed during their career at the UA. Williams, Adams, Rogers, Shakur, etc. Bruin players seem to exceed expectations, Farmar, Afflalo, Luc Ricard, Collison. You can’t compare the current state of player development at the UA to UCLA and say Love will be like Rogers.
“3. The same commotion was made last year when Spencer Hawes commited to Washington.”
Hawes was ill during a good amount of the season. Not a good comparison. He ended up a lottery pick.
— UCLA Joel 07/09/2007 10:13 AM #
Very optimistic.
“Howland’s stubborness and insistance on the slow it down play will allow for our young Cats to compete.”
Howland’s coaching style got UCLA to back to back final fours. Something the UA has never done. Nothing he could have tried would have beaten Florida. Look for even more Pac-10 teams to play aggressive defense. USC, WSU and UCLA all proved it works.
— UCLA Joel 07/09/2007 10:20 AM #
I really can’t believe your last post. “Howlands stubborness and insistence on the slow it down play will allow our young Cats to compete”
Think about what you are saying. When the Bruins had less touted players, how did we stop you from competing the last 2 years? Was it a magic spell?
As the Bruins land better and better prospects, they will add new dimensions to their game. As I said before, Howland works with the strengths and weaknesses of the players he has. Everything, however, is built on a solid defense.
As far as Bruins putting all our hopes on Love, I believe he will be a standout player as do all the pundits. If he doesn’t turn out to be great, we still have the same thing that got UCLA to the last 2 final fours and kept a talented UofA out of the final 32- defense or lack thereof.
— UCLA Steve 07/09/2007 10:40 AM #
Yes, defense is key if you want to win titles, but if you want to be immortal, you better find ways to score points. Florida had balance. They could should you down and light it up on the offensive end.
I will give you that UCLA is back and that Howland’s D makes them competitive, but if he wants NCAA titles, he will have to take the cuffs off and let people play offense.
Moreover, I will say it again. I really think that the decline in the quality of player in the NCAA, overall, really helped UCLA in that people were unable to exploit UCLA’s offensive ineptness, the lone exception being Florida. Like I said, when you play UCLA, SOMEBOY IS ALWAYS WIDE FREAKIN’ OPEN. Memo to O’neill and Lute: tell the guys to swing the damn ball as opposed to dribbling out of trouble and someone is going to make a career out of playing the Bruins. Anyway, most young players do not have a perimeter game. Instead, they rely on isolation and taking people off the dribble. Teams like UCLA take that away and instead leave the 3 point line wide open. It’s a good strategy because most players can’t knock down that shot consistently enough to make them pay. When that Cats had Salim, he made them pay. I think that we are going to see history repeat itself here. The Cats are loaded with perimter guys that can knock down the three and it’s really going to open things up down low.
— Robert 07/09/2007 10:50 AM #
— btheg 07/09/2007 10:57 AM #
Wrong: Chris Rogers Rivals
8th Best Shooting Guard”
WRONG:
Scout.com: #21 overall prospect, #4 Best PG.
— AZCoachB 07/09/2007 10:58 AM #
— UCLA Steve 07/09/2007 10:58 AM #
You are a comedian and a dreamer.
Time will tell, why knock the guy? What do you fear? You have good recruits coming in, I am sure Bayless and Co. will be good for your team. It would be stupid for me to say he will be a bust like Shakur, no one knows at this point. Hopefully for your sake history does not repeat itself.
The one knock about Love that you all keep repeating is his speed. The experts are questioning his speed for the NBA. No one doubts is skills at the college level. Check out is game against Mater Dei, 36 points 15 rebounds against the best team in California on the road.
Regarding Cherokee Parks. Won a national championship, lost in the finals game two years later. Averaged 19 points 9 rebounds as a senior. Was an NBA lottery pick. If that is all Love does, the Bruins win back to back titles.
I know Parks sucked as a pro, but we are talking college hoops here so who cares.
— UCLA Joel 07/09/2007 11:01 AM #
You are right not to compare Hawes with Love cuz Love will be a better college center than Hawes. Would it surprise you to know that Love constantly schooled Kevin Durant, the #2 pick in the draft, when they played against eachother? Would it surprise you that Love held his own against Greg Oden, the #1 pick in the draft? Would it surprise you that Romar, the head coach at UDUB,when recruiting Love, stated Love was better than Hawes? I’m sure all this would surprise you given your ignorant comments.
— btheg 07/09/2007 11:04 AM #
I quoted Rivals you quoted Scout. Stop the “wrong” business.
The problem was not whether the scouts had it wrong. He had talent, but Lute and Co. did a poor job with him, like many others lately. Hard to blame him with some many similar examples at the UA.
— UCLA Joel 07/09/2007 11:06 AM #
You are wasting your time on AZ”Coach”B. You cannot convince one blinded bytheir hate of anything. You can only come back at the end of next season to laugh at him and gloat when you are right. Go Bruins!
— btheg 07/09/2007 11:09 AM #
Umm, in fact I AM a basketball coach so I feel I’m a little more qualified to make these assessments than you are. Also, I think it’s a little ridiculous that you’re challenging me to be “a little more intelligent” on an internet blog. You are a freakin’ troll who most likely has a resume that includes his high school JV basketball team at best so let’s not play the “keyboard warrior” game when it’s clear that one of us is more qualified than the other, mmmmmkay? Great.
At no point in this debate have I stated that UCLA is a bad team. I think they’re a pretty darn good team, in fact. The point I’m trying to make is that Kevin Love will not be the All Pac-10 player you shortsighted UCLA fans think he will be in his freshman season. He may develop into a nice player eventually but there’s a huge difference between Oregon high school bball and Pac 10 bball. I don’t care if you think UCLA is going to win the Pac 10 championship, just don’t base it on the presence of an 18 year old kid. The only other point I’ve attempted to make is that I think Mata is overrated. He plays decent defense but he’s a horrible offensive player. He shoots what, like 40% from the free throw line? I like Collison, Mbah Moute, even Shipp. Just don’t go throwing around this Love-Mata duo as something special because it’s not.
— AZCoachB 07/09/2007 11:14 AM #
Good post. You actually demonstrated rational thought for the first time in this thread. After starting out with a “UCLGAY” comment what did you expect?? If you are a coach, I think you would at least appreciate the coaching job Howland has done at UCLA.
— btheg 07/09/2007 11:32 AM #
The problem was not whether the scouts had it wrong. He had talent, but Lute and Co. did a poor job with him, like many others lately. Hard to blame him with some many similar examples at the UA.”
Sure, I’ll stop it but let’s not forget who started it. Also, I think it’s a fairly broad statement to make that “Lute and Co. did a poor job with him.” The kid was a headcase. None of his fellow students liked him and from all reports, none of his teammates did either. I don’t think Lute should take the blame for his lack of development. So many similar examples? Such as…? Hassan? Another character issue. Walters? Injuuries/Mononucleosis. Shakur? He’s probably the only one I’ll grant you although he did play brilliant at times so Lute must’ve gotten through to him on some level. Shakur just couldn’t produce consistently.
Now, about Howland, I went to his basketball camps at NAU as a kid. Great coach, though it’s not possible to put him on the level of Olson until he a.) wins a championship and b.) has the kind of success Lute has had for 20+ years. If those two things happen, then we’ll begin to make comparisons. Until then, there simply isn’t one to make.
— AZCoachB 07/09/2007 12:27 PM #
In basketball, Lute puts more talent on the court, now its time for Kevin O to shape these guys up and make them work.
Looking forward to seeing Marcus Williams in 30 min on NBA TV in the Spurs Summer league game, since I got blasted for my fellow Cats fans for not going along with the idea Marcus will be top 14 NBA pick.
Also: when Marcus walks up to Popavich and tells him his point forward dream that he let us all in on when he announced he was going pro…I can hear the scream and the laugh that will soon follow.
Mel
— Mel 07/09/2007 12:35 PM #
I give Howland absolutely nothing! UCLA has several advantages over alot of other schools no matter the coach. Beautiful campus, great basketball tradition, great media exposure, hot women, etc. Hell, I could sell that program, and I hate UCLA!
So, when I hear crap like, “Oh, Howland is doing such a great job,” I just want to puke because just about any marginal coach would have a competive squad with the amount of talent that UCLA gets by default of….....well, just being UCLA. Don’t get out the annointing oils just yet.
Look, I live in the lions den of UCLA fandome and I had a big laugh on the eve of the Florida-UCLA game. Everyone out here thought that Howland’s D was the answer and that they wouldn’t be phased by Florida. The local radio guys were up in arms because Florida players wouldn’t throw down any love for John Wooden and UCLA tradition. It’s like the people out here were insulted because Florida would not kiss the feet of the Wizard and shake in their boots at the thought of taking on the mighty Bruins. And then….......they proceed to kick the $$%t out of UCLA and back up everything they said.
Bottom line, you are a koolaid drinker, just like the myopic UCLA fans at ground zero. You actally believe the same D will set you free mantra that is brainwashing the masses out here. I’m sorry dude, but you have to unplug yourself from the matrix and look at the reality before you. You gotta score points in this game if you want to be the best and Howland’s system is dead set against letting players play. Collison will probably be better in the pros than he is now just because, for once, he will have the green light to score.
Everyone talks defense, defense, defense, but you know what, even the San Antionio Spurs, the best defensive basketball team in the world, have three guys who on any given night can go off for 30 plus.
— Robert 07/09/2007 12:52 PM #
Keep thinking like that. I just can’t believe you guys are for real after watching you miss 20 three pointers in a row and later in the tournament MISSING OUT on the final 32.
At one time your program was doing well, you picked up ONE title, but as the Stones said “it’s all over now”
Work on your defense
— UCLA Steve 07/09/2007 01:14 PM #
Yes, they missed a ton of threes. They missed, in my opinion, because they were being shot out of rythm. Shakur was lousy at establishing tempo and that’s about to change with his departure. I can’t stress enough how horrible he was.
— Robert 07/09/2007 01:54 PM #
— Idiot 07/09/2007 02:06 PM #
Wasn’t Mike Bibby a freshman when the Cats won in 97’? Just checking. Terry was a 2nd year player, right? And Simon, was he a senior when the won the title?
— Robert 07/09/2007 02:12 PM #
— Idiot 07/09/2007 02:13 PM #
“Shakur? He’s probably the only one I’ll grant you”
So many similar examples? Such as…?
Marcus Williams? Better freshman year. Salim? Didn’t Salim get benched at one point and there were questions if he was done on the team? JP Prince? They had a thin bench last year, why didn’t he play?
So lets say 4 out of the last 5 who left the UA for the NBA or graduated: Adams, Rogers, Mustafa and Williams did not grow much as players during their time with Lute and Co. Ivan would be the exception. You can blame the players if you want.
I would not compare Lute’s success to Ben Howland’s. I would take the current 40 something Howland over the 70 something Olson. I know a lot of Wildcat fans who would too.
— UCLA Joel 07/09/2007 03:31 PM #
That’s why O’neill’s here. We don’t have to take the 70 something Lute anymore.
— Robert 07/09/2007 03:51 PM #
“you actally believe the same D will set you free mantra”
Two straight Final 4’s works for me. Back to back 30 win seasons works too. Two things Lute and co. have never done. I will take it over early first round exits two years in a row.
“You gotta score points in this game if you want to be the best and Howland’s system is dead set against letting players play.”
The Bruin’s run, they did score 72 points a game. They shot 48% from the field, just like the Cat’s did. They won’t push it just to push it and take a bad shot, like your cat’s do. You really have not watched them play much.
Look at the NBA. Ever since the Pistons in the early 90’s won back to back titles, every team that has won has played tough defense. The flashy fast break teams never even make the finals. Look at the current Suns, the Kings a few years back, the Mav’s when they were a fast break team with Nash, Finley and Dirk. 0 finals appearances between all those flashy teams. The Mav’s finally reached the finals last year by slowing down and playing defense.
— UCLA Joel 07/09/2007 03:59 PM #
I live in Tucson so this is my local paper. I guess I missed where it says only Wildcat fans allowed.
— UCLA Joel 07/09/2007 04:07 PM #
Trust me, where I live, I get a plethora of UCLA coverage. Probably alot more than you do.
As for your analysis, it’s way off base. First, offense and defense are not mutually exclusive, unless of course you play for Ben Howland, the Buddy Ryan of the NBA. Yep, that’s right, I’m sure if he could, he would ban offense. He seems to hate it.
Anyway, the Lakers of the NBA and the Runnin’ Rebels were both fast breaking teams. They used defense to create tempo and offense. As for the Suns, they were a few ejections away from the NBA Finals. And by the way, they don’t take bad shots. San Antonio did not stop the break, but instead had to play the uptempo game. Steve Nash imposed his will, which is what good PGs do. Fortunately for San Antonio, they have Parker and Ginobli and both those guys can get out and run.
Also, San Antonio played an uptempo game to pound Cleveland. Bottom line, yes, you have to play defense, but you also have to score. UofA will do both next year. They will split the regular season with UCLA and will finish in the top 2 in the Pac and top 10 nationally by the time the tourney rolls around.
— Robert 07/09/2007 05:14 PM #
Just when I thought you had reached a point of civility, you resort back to nonsense with #95.
If you want to look at overall history Az does not compare to UCLA, not even close.
If you want to look at it from only when AZ joined the Pac-10 and had Lute as its coach, it’s still a lot closer than you think my homerific AZ fan. A tiny advantage maybe to AZ.
If you don’t want to look at the “past” as you claim and only concentrate on the present (the last 2 years) well again UCLA has AZ beat soundly.
— btheg 07/09/2007 06:07 PM #
They did? These were the scores:
Win 85-76
Win 103-92
Win 75-72
Win 83-82
Three of the 4 games neither team broke 85 points. The Spurs play great defense, and are very efficient in the half court. Just like the Lakers and Bulls under Jackson and Detroit before that.