Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

Well, it’s time for the offseason, and I'm excited at our prospects next year. Sure, we should only be cautiously optimistic, and obviously, we have to get past possible NBA defections, transfers, and other issues during the offseason. Surely, I can't fault the kids for doing what they believe is best for their future. However, if we do get all our players back next year, we will be young but full of athleticism, size and length. This team will be built a lot like the 05-06 team in that we'll have a great compliment of frosh and sophomores with some seniors.

As we send our seniors off, it's also time to see what's in store for next year. So, assuming all players return, we can expect these players next year, and my analysis:

Jrue Holiday - Soph - 6'3 PG - Obviously, he has incredible potential and may still get drafted this year. However, he was pretty much a no show offensively in the Nova game. A lot of people have been heard to say that he's going to be a top 5 pick if he returns for another year to polish his game. If he comes back, I expect him to play at the PG position all year. When he has ran the point, he has definitely shown flashes of brilliance, especially in his passing game. I love DC as much as the next guy, but Jrue is definitely on another level in play making and court vision. He's also got size and strength at his position.

Malcolm Lee - Soph - 6'5 SG/SF - He's played out of control at times this year, but he's obviously got immense upside and potential. Already considered one of the best defenders on the team, he's definitely a size and length mismatch against most players in the NCAA. We didn't get to see a lot out of him this year, and he's played out of control a lot of times, but a offseason of practice, weights, and experience will probably see him start at the 2 next year. LIttle known fact is that in high school, he played center for his team but he has the handles of a combo guard. Also had NBA range 3 point ability since high school, although he didn’t attempt too many this year.

Nikola Dragovic - Senior - 6'9 SF/PF - We all saw his development this year. A lethal 3 point shooter when his feet are set, he's improved his mid-range game over the year and rapidly improved his post game towards the end of the season. Obviously, not a great defender, but he does have size and bulk to match up against most players on offense - he's just been slow on rotations defensively. A full year as a starter with an entire offseason of pratice and conditioning, assuming he returns, and he might be our most complete player at the 3/4 combo next year - he's shown good court vision, passing ability, can handle the ball, and obviously has a good jump shot.

Drew Gordon – Soph – 6’8 PF/C – The heir apparent to Aboya. Great rebounder, extremely energetic and active around the post. Very limited in post offense skills, but lots of room for improvement and potential. His length also makes him a good shot blocker. He definitely needs to cut down on the fouls, as he’s a little too aggressive at times and needs to lay back and let the game come to him. When he gets more used to the defensive system, and gets to be a better hedger, I think he’s got great potential to be our enforcer down low.

J’Mison Morgan – Soph – 6’10 C – I’m hoping to see Bobo get in better shape and into the system for next year. He’s got obvious bulk and size, and can really clog the lane and prevent dribble penetration. He’s shown flashes of post brilliance this year, in the limited amount of time he’s got. Plus, he’s sure to draw a lot of fouls from opposing players trying to stop a player his size. He’s also had an incredible amount of blocked shots given how little time he played this year, so he’s definitely got defensive upside. He’ll definitely need to work on getting out to the perimeter to hedge faster, but he’s got tremendous upside and can be the big body center we’ve been looking for.

Jerime Anderson – Soph – 6’1 PG – Yeah, he’s had some bad games at the point this year, but he’s also filled in admirably for DC most of the season. He might be listed at 6’1 only, but he definitely seems larger overall than DC, and probably has more strength as well. He needs to cut down on the turnovers, and also needs to work on his decision making, but he’s shown the ability to dribble penetrate and kick it out for open shots. He’ll definitely see more time backing up the point next year if Jrue comes back as the starting point, or he might start outright if JH leaves.

Michael Roll – RS Senior – 6’5 SG/SF – He made a huge leap and became and legit 3 point threat this year. He’ll be the last guy left from the 3 Final Four runs, and is likely to give some good minutes at the 2 and 3 next year. He’ll play his D as well next year, and will again be a solid all around player. His most valuable part though will definitely be his mentorship of the younger players with the tremendous experience he’s had.

James Keefe – Senior - 6’8 PF – Offensively, he’s still been limited and the emergence of Drago meant that Keefe has been somewhat lost in the shuffle. However, he has tremendous experience in our defensive system, and started to drain some 3’s in Pac-10 play. Hopefully, a full year as a starter at the 4 will give him that senior jump that Aboya saw. He was one of our best rebounders this year too, so he’s definitely going to be key next year with so many young kids coming in.

Now, for our new additions and from the knowledge I have of their games (I’ve only seen a few play):

Tyler Honeycutt – Listed 6’8/185 - SF  - What immediately stands out is how tall he is for a SF in the college game. He’s got tremendous height and length, and was a great shot blocker in high school. He isn’t much of a 3 point shooter, but is a good finisher around the rim, and a good passer as well. He really exploded from his junior to senior year in high school, where he averaged nearly 20 ppg, 15 rpg, 4 bpg, and 4apg. Will definitely need to hit the weights coming in, and he’s a much more finesse oriented player, but he’s got a very high upside.

Brendan Lane – Listed 6’10/210 - PF – He was in the CIF Division II state championship game Friday night. He put up 27 points, 19 rebounds, and 10 blocks. He mainly played the 5 in HS, and his size and length advantage was apparent. Obviously, it was just a high school game, but he’s athletic with a solid basket-facing game already. Some people consider his game a lot like Ryan Anderson. From what I saw on Friday, his offensive motion and flow is good, possibly better than Keefe coming in already. Like all freshmen, could use a little more bulk, but listed at 6’10 and over 200, he’s already a sturdy player. Most of his game is in the inside, but he’s also got a shot to 3 point range. Averaged 21.9 ppg, 11.9 rpg, 4.7 bpg, and 1.6 apg.

Reeves Nelson – Listed 6’8/230 – PF – Highly recruited forward, very energetic and athletic. Averaged over 24 ppg in his senior year in high school, he’s got great inside game. Not much of a jump shot so far, but he’s a tenacious player inside and is a lot like Drew Gordon in that respect – plays a lot bigger than his listed size. He should be one of our new enforcers and bruisers inside. Definitely looks like he will be a force on the boards and around the rim for years to come.

Anthony Stover – Listed 6’10/215 – C – From all accounts, an extremely raw post player, but one with tremendous length, athleticism and upside. Some have said he’s a likely redshirt candidate, especially with the amount of post players we have already, but he’s got some great potential. He’s already a great shot blocker, and should be a good rebounder as well. Offensively, he needs a lot of work, but his fundamentals have improved tremendously. Some added bulk in college and he can be a defensive force.

Mike Moser – Listed 6’7/185 – Wing – By all accounts, he’s the heir apparent to Luc. He can play against the 2, 3 or 4. He’s got the length and quickness to defend all the perimeter positions, and is a solid rebounder. Definitely needs to work on building strength, and his jump shot needs a lot of work, but he’s already a tenacious defender and should get a lot of play time immediately as a defender.

As always, we need to be careful to put up ridiculous expectations on these guys. But the upside and potential is undoubtedly there.  Just look at the size of our potential lineup, again assuming everyone comes back:

Starters:

C – Gordon 6’8

PF – Keefe 6’8

SF – Dragovic 6’9

SG – Lee 6’5

PG – Holiday 6’3

Bench:

Anderson 6’1

Roll 6’5

Morgan 6’10

Moser 6’7

Honeycutt 6’8

Lane 6’10

Nelson 6’8

Stover 6’10

Compare our roster to our first Final Four run, and its obvious that our size, length and athleticism will be much greater than that team, which was also extremely freshmen and sophomore heavy. Obviously, we can’t expect to see the same results, as we had some unique warriors those years, but it’s going to be exciting seeing these guys develop and play.

Of course, this is assuming that all players return. However, things do look good when you consider that our man to man defense is largely predicated on each of our players being able to guard their position, and we will have a definite size advantage to go along with a lot of players that have natural defensive tenacity. Our rebounding should also improve dramatically and we will see some of our best years still ahead of us.

----------------------

Also, just a look ahead at some Pac-10 competition. Overall, we should have an easier time with our improved size and athleticism. ASU is going to take a big hit from losing Harden and Pendegraph, as will The Standard, which will be in the gutter.

OSU and Oregon should all improve, as will Stanford and Cal. UW gains Abdul Gaddy, but loses Brockman, so they'll be even more guard oriented next year without the same presence Brockman gave. USC will gain Sidney and Hill, but lose DeRozan and Gibson.

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

Ok, so this is an extremely long fanpost, but if you hate logical reasoning as to why people are being irrational on team expectations, you can stop reading.

I've posted similar thoughts elsewhere before, but after this past game, I've read a lot of bashing on the freshmen on message boards (what a mistake visiting them), and some comments here. I know that Jrue has struggled mightily in the last 4 games, and JA has had some hiccups, but I'm still shocked at how unreasonable people were with expectations.

Yes, the consensus #1 recruiting class ranking meant some lofty expectations, and I was certainly a believer in the hype, but took a step back and realized that they weren't very valid.

Look at the history of recruiting classes and tell me who's made a huge impact that puts a team over the top. The fact of the matter is that only Carmelo Anthony joined a team and became the impact player to win a championship as a freshman. And seeing how he has NBA Hall of Fame-level talent, I think it's unreasonable for people to expect those things out of a recruiting class.

The other team you might have a valid argument is UConn's 2003 class that played as freshmen on a championship team. Josh Boone, Charlie Villanueva, and Marcus Williams were all great talents and contributed to the championship, and all 3 are in the NBA now of course. But that ignores the fact that UConn had juniors Ben Gordon and Emeka Okafor, and senior point guard Taliek Brown. They were the primary contributors to that championship team, and they barely made it too (last second shot against UW to send the tourney game to OT iirc).

Also, all 3 of them stayed at UConn for 2 or 3 years before jumping to the NBA. Their play certainly gave UConn a national championship, but I don't think too many people can compare the talent levels of Okafor and Gordon to Aboya, Collison or Shipp and that's not a slight to our players either, its just that Okafor and Gordon are big time talents.

Lets dig deeper into this. Think of freshmen that have taken their teams to a national championship game. And by taken, I mean they were the key piece. Recently, we had Greg Oden and Derrick Rose. By all accounts, these guys are once-in-a-decade type of players and were awarded with the #1 pick in the draft (and they would've been #1 as well, had they been able to jump straight to the NBA).

But that also ignores the contributions by the rest of the team. Rose came into a team who's style of play meshed well with his immense athleticism and playing ability - and they were veterans of 3 straight elite 8's and were athletic beasts and certainly a great team even without him. Of course, they couldn't shoot free throws for their life and they lost to a very talented Kansas.

That also ignores the fact that Greg Oden came into Ohio State with 2 other 5 star's (in the top 2-3 at their position as well) and the fact that Ohio State won the Big 10 the year earlier, so its not like the team wasn't lacking talent. By all accounts, while our team was ranked #1, you can't reasonably compare our classes impact (even without hindsight) compared to names like Greg Oden, Daequan Cook and Mike Conley.

Look at all the great players that have come into college basketball over the years. Kevin Durant? Bounced in the 2nd round to SUC. Michael Beasley? Bounced in the 2nd round after beating down SUC. OJ Mayo and Jerryd Bayless? First round knocked out.

Lets look at these other supposed "great" recruiting classes over the years from other teams. I'll list the school, the year, the recruiting team ranks, and their big name recruits:

Kansas 2005 (#1 on scout, #4 on rivals): Brandon Rush, Mario Chalmers, Julian Wright, Micah Downs
Kansas 2006 (#4 on scout): Darrel Arthur, Sherron Collins, Brady Morningstar

And what did Bill Self have to show for having 2 great classes?

2005-2006: Eliminted in first round
2006-2007: Eliminated by UCLA in the elite 8
2007-2008: National Championship

So yes, it took Kansas the 3rd year for their #1 class to win a championship, which might never have happened had Brandon Rush not tore his ACL the year earlier and missed the NBA draft.

How about big old UNC? They seem to ooze with talent:

UNC 2005 (#4 on scout, #9 on rivals): Bobby Frasor, Marcus Ginyard, Danny Green, and the ESPN-immortal-Tyler Hansborough
UNC 2006 (#1 on scout, #1 on rivals): Ty Lawson, Wayne Ellington, Brandan Wright, Deon Thompson, Alex Stepheson, William Graves

So lets see what Roy Williams did:
2005-2006: Eliminated in 2nd round
2006-2007: Eliminated in elite 8 by Georgetown by 12
2007-2008: Blown out by Kansas in final 4

So it took 3 years of Tyler Hansborough's-the-greatest-ever-per-ESPN to even get UNC to the final 4 - where they were soundly crushed. Obviously, this is their 3rd year playing together and they have a legit shot at the title this year.

But what did Kansas and UNC all have in common? The two teams had back to back recruiting classes that were in the top 10 but they didnt make that jump to the final 4 until they had played together 2 years. By the way, I had a great chuckle reading the Rivals 2006 recruiting class rankings on UNC:

No wonder they are already being called one of the favorites to reach the 2006 Final Four.

Oops! Not so fast!

-------------------------------

So what was the point of this long post? It's that expecting our freshmen to come in and send us to another Final 4 is downright ridiculous. Getting a sweet 16 would be better than what most schools do with their freshmen class. And if you lose 3 players that are starters as rookies in the NBA right now, you are going to undoubtedly struggle as you rely on freshmen.

Undoubtedly, these expectations aren't just on the freshmen - but also the team as a whole. However, when we consider that Aboya was a backup to LMR and LRMAM for 2 years (and of course, LMR backed up Love last year as well), that Shipp has always been the 3rd option on the team, that Dragovic barely had minutes before this season and isn't a great defender yet (and has skillsets more fitting of a 3, but has to play the 4 for us) - it should be no doubt that we'd have inconsistent play as we try to fit a convert a bunch of former roleplayers to starters and integrate 5 freshmen into a defensive system.

It kills me also to hear people bash Jrue, for instance, for not living up to the hype of being Gatorade National Player of the Year and all that. For one, what kind of impact do you think he should have? Put up 20 ppg? Cryin out loud, look at his season line so far (not including today): 9.4 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 3.4 apg to 2.1 turnovers per game (1.6 assist to turnover ratio is incredible for a freshman).

He's filling in for Westbrook, who was amazing last year, but look at Westbrook's freshman year: 3.4 ppg, 0.8 rpg, 0.7 apg, 0.7 turnovers per game for a 1.0 assist to turnover ratio. Yes, Westbrook played far fewer minutes than Jrue, but even if you normalize it out in stats per minute played, Jrue would still have double the rebounds per game, double the assists per game, and score 30% more points per game. That's amazing production from a freshman, especially one that has started from day one, and didn't have the benefit that RW did of being a backup to DC and of course, Afflalo!

All this bashing of him for being NPOY also ignores the fact that talent for previous high school NPOY awards were given to some once in a generation talent: Kevin Love, Greg Oden (2x), Dwight Howard, Lebron James, etc. Even before we saw Jrue play, no one was going to confuse Jrue with the likes of Oden, Howard, James etc. so why expect him to have the same impact? And with this being a down year talent wise for freshmen, it's utterly unreasonable for people to expect him to make the same impact as Oden or Love (who, even as amazing as he was, was coming to a team that was talented enough it could probably have made the final 4 even without him).

So my point is that we need to sit back and enjoy watching these guys develop, not wonder why they havent brought us a championship in one year. If 4 years later, they don't develop like the Lavin-era players did, then yes our criticisms on them and CBH might be valid. But for me? Knowing how much players advance within a year of playing collegiately, while having the benefit of senior leaders to learn from, I cannot wait to see what these guys do playing together for the next few years!

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

Rough week for our Bruins, as we drop two in a row for the first time in what seems like forever. But such is life in the Pac-10, where road games, especially against two amped up teams, never come easy.

Pro’s and cons from this game. Well let’s see:

Cons:

1. Outrebounded again.They outrebounded us by 5 boards, including two offensively. But it wasn’t the raw totals – it was the fact that we weren’t securing the ball when we were touching it. I saw way too much tipping the ball around, knocking it out of bounds, etc. which gave Arizona a ton of extra chances. This ties into our lack of a big post presence which has hurt big time – getting outrebounded, and having little defense in the paint. Sure we stopped Harongody, but against Harden & Pendergraph, and today against Wise & Hill, we got burned repeatedly. Right about now, I really wish Bobo was able to play better defensively, because a big body underneath means rebounds and clogging the paint.

2. Did not get to the line again. 7 free throws vs. 30. Yeah, some of it might be home cooking, but we just did not do a good job in the inside. Our lack of interior presence really bit us too with Hill there.

3. Defense. Defense. Defense. They shot over 50% from the field. You can’t win often if they shoot greater than 50% from the field and they burned us throughout the game. We were slow on rotations which meant a lot of 3’s were being relatively uncontested.

4. Lackadaisical playing. We need to play more aggressively both on defense and offense. Our defensive intensity was WAY down, we didn’t play that man to man coverage on each possession we’ve gotten used to, and it cost us time after time. Offensively, I saw us get them to commit on jump shot fakes and what not, but seemed timid to press the case when the defense over-committed.

5. Turnovers. Wow, the first half was uncharacteristic of a CBH coached team. Inexcusable.

And that leads to my biggest con from this game was:

6. Our lack of intensity and focus coming in. Both against ASU and AZ, we fell into early holes that we could not dig ourselves out of. On the road, that is lethal. The best course of action was to take the crowd out of the game and play our style of ball. Instead, we fell behind and let them dictate what to do.

Now typically I have no issues with Coach Howland’s coaching or preparation, but these past two games have disappointed me tremendously. It’s both up to the players, team leaders and the coach to get our team motivated and prepared for road games against good teams. Instead, for the first time I’ve seen in a long time, if ever, CBH was outcoached for a half of the game. Defensive lapses, inability to adjust to the aggressive zone, etc. are largely on the shoulders of players, but adapting to the game and preparing players to focus is also on the coaches.

Now I fully expect ourselves to rebound from this trip with a new focus and with eyes set on crushing UW at home. I know CBH will not let us lose 3 in a row and I certainly hope the lessons learned here will be learned by everyone on this team.

Now for the Pro’s:

1. Our offense is still excellent. We shot 49% from the field, and 40% from 3’s. When we make shots, we still score. Had we not turned it over 18 times, 12 times in the 1st half no less, this game would’ve been within reach even with our poor playing on the defensive end.

2. Our freshmen still play with incredible intensity and energy. Again, I’d love to see our depth get more playtime on the court. Lee, in particular, stood out this game – his length and athleticism made him a capable defender against Harden at ASU, and when he came in during the 2nd half this game, he really helped us on that run towards the end of the game. Add in the fact that he’s got great offensive moves and is a shooter, and I think he could be a gem off the bench if he played a bit more (consistently, as well).

3. JH. I know we are down on JH, and he made some boneheaded passes himself, but I have a hard time faulting him too. He also made some brilliant plays and passes we’d all be raving about had the guy on the receiving end held onto the ball for instance. In a lot of ways, JH is mature in the game way beyond his years – he sees plays and passing lanes a lot of players dont expect. He makes the pass, but the player’s dont expect it. I’d like him to be more assertive on the offensive end to finish as he’s a great offensive rebounder and finisher, but if nothing else, make plays to free up shots for DC.

4 DC was torrid from 3’s tonight. Hopefully this will give him some of that confidence that he can make big 3’s still. I know DC has shouldered a lot of the pressure this year, and he isn’t the greatest playmaker on the floor, but he’s still our #1 offensive player.

I know we harped about getting go-to-guys this year, and our team is incredibly balanced offensively – but the truth is, DC has been our to go to guy. In fact, even last year. Sure, Love put up the big numbers - but who was the guy at the end of the game that drove for the layups, made the big free throws,and put teams out of their misery?

Now, I know Howland is grooming Anderson to be our PG of the next few years, but I don’t think it’d hurt if we experimented with switching up the scheme a bit. For instance, play JH at PG and DC as the shooting guard. Or even JA at PG at times. My logic behind this is that it gives DC some time to rest from the pressure of handling the ball at all times, and it also allows JH or JA to use their playmaking ability to get some free looks for DC, especially out on the perimeter. Plus, it keeps opposing defenses off guard when they realize we don’t have only 2 official PG’s to watch.

5. We didn't give up. This team should never have dug itself in its hole had the team played the first half like we did in the last 10 mins. No excuses there. But at least we didn’t give up even when down 25. Louisville packed up for home before the 2nd half even started against ND, and at least we tried to gain some of our dignity back. We might have played like crap, but we did not quit.

And finally

6. Two losses in a row will spark a fire under the butts of the players and coaches. No doubt about it. This is going to be a hell week of practices I bet, but there is no greater teacher than learning from defeats. And no greater coach for these lessons than Howland.

-----------------------------------

Wanted to add this too, since I hear it a lot: people claiming our recruiting class was overrated. That could not be more wrong. Maybe Holiday isn't the same star people thought he would be - a Love or Durant type player or something, but few players are.  In fact, how many players have single-handedly led their team to a NCAA Championship, or even Championship game? Carmelo is the only one in recent history to single handedly come in and take over, but he's obviously an incredible talent that should've went straight to the NBA and would've been the #1 pick had Lebron not been in the same draft. (Oden doesn't count either, since he came in with Conley, who was also highly regarded)

Kansas won last year with recruits from their 2005 class (Brandon Rush and Chalmers) which was their #1 class. It took Kansas 3 whole years for their #1 ranked class to cash in a final 4 appearance and championship (it didn't hurt that they were #8 the next year also with Arthur and others).

How about UNC? After winning it all in 2005, they brought in the #4 class (including espn-love-fest Hansborough) and then the #1 class the next year and.... they got blown out in the final 4 by Kansas

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

After 2 weeks of play, all the gloom and doom talked about by the detractors around our Ben Ball Warriors has disappeared. Two weeks and four wins later, the tone of our team has changed considerably.

First, I've updated our team's statistics into a spreadsheet on Google docs. These stats run through February 8th.

You can compare these stats with my previous compilation, through January 24th.

Those stats were compiled after the loss to UW. Much has been made about what happened after the game, with the OC register writing about the meeting between the seniors and CBH. As the article wrote:

Following that Sunday meeting, which also touched on UCLA's sometimes-stagnant offense, the Bruins played their two most dominant games of the season in routs of Cal and Stanford last week.

Howland said he decided to summon Darren Collison, Alfred Aboya and Josh Shipp when he realized he had a rare opportunity. The previous year's team had just one senior and the one before that had none.

"We felt like we were at a crossroads," Howland said. "They wanted to meet with me; I wanted to meet with them."

According to Aboya, leadership wasn't the only topic. He said players suggested to Howland that a more up-tempo offense could remedy the stagnant stretches that caused the Bruins to blow leads in games against Arizona State, Washington State and Washington.

"Some of us felt like they were not involved in our offense, that we can play much better than we were playing before," Aboya said. "To free everyone and let everyone play, we figured running more motion was the most efficient way."

A lot of detractors like to say that Howland is a stubborn coach, but does any of the above sound like a stubborn coach? He met with the seniors and addressed leadership, focus, and listened to their concerns on being involved in game. Well the last 4 weeks have seen us blow out teams by an average of 22.7 points a game. This is definitely a team that has shown what it can do when it is jelling and clicking on all cylinders, as per this team report:

"It was a good statement for our team and our conference to play them like this," UCLA coach Ben Howland said after the 89-63 win. "It’s obvious we’ve been performing at a new level and just improving as a team."

Seniors Darren Collison, Alfred Aboya and Josh Shipp had a meeting with Howland after UCLA’s loss at Washington three weeks ago, and the team has responded with its best stretch of the season.

"The meeting aired out a lot of things and we were able to get on the same page and it’s showing," Shipp said. "Everybody is out there playing for each other, and it’s a team game. Before, some players were upset by a few things and it was affecting them, but now everybody is feeling good in their position, and we’re rolling right now."

The Bruins squeezed 63 turnovers out of Cal, Stanford and USC, and have won the past four games—including Notre Dame—by an average margin of 22.7 points.

"It’s our intensity," Collison said. "We raised the level a notch on the defensive end and guys started playing their role harder. When our intensity is at a high level, we’re hard to beat."

This certainly feels like what people would call a crossroads for the team. And the team has responded brilliantly, especially defensively. Please note that these stats are from only 4 games, and so they are skewed by the small sample size. However, they can certainly show a trend, especially when compared to previous trends:

• At the time I wrote my articles on team statistics, our kenpom ranks were #3 in adjusted offense, and #53 in adjusted defense. Our defense was downright atrocious. Well, if you follow that link to kenpom, you'll see that 4 games later, we are still ranked #3 on adjusted offense. Defensively, however, we've jumped from #53 to #26! That's right, over just four games, we've improved our national standing on adjusted defensive efficiency by 27 positions. If that isn't a jump in defensive intensity, I don't know what is.
• Through 1/24, we had a team total of 159 steals. Four games later, we are sitting nicely at 198 steals. In other words, 39 steals over 4 games... or 25% of our season's total in steals has come in the last 4 games. Now obviously Cal, Stanford, USC, and Notre Dame don't have the greatest ball handlers and point guards in the nation, but to account for 25% of our steals in 17% of our total games played is definitely a sign of kicking up our defense, especially team defense.
• Have we attacked the rim more? Absolutely. Our Free Throw attempts per game has increased from 17.1 to 17.7 over four games. In fact, we've gone to the line 88 times over the last 4 games, or 22 times per game, after previously going 17.1 times per game. 5 more free throw attempts is a huge difference.
• Have we really become less reliant on 3 point shooting? Well, in just 4 games, we decreased our 3-point attempts from 19.7 per game to 18.7 per game, while maintaining 55.5 field goal attempts per game. So yes, we've decreased the number of long distance shots attempted.
• Our offense in FG% and 3FG% have improved. Better shot selection, higher rate of high-percentage shots being taken are all big.
• Our team assist to turnover ratio of 1.27 is the best of any of our teams these 4 years. We're definitely much better at handling the ball and passing the ball as a team.

Final point regards our team tempo. Has our team played more up-tempo? Well, according to kenpom's UCLA stats, the answer is yes. Take a look at the calendar - the possessions are to the right of the final score.

Over the last 4 games, we have had: 67, 74, 72, and 72 possesions. At 71.3 possessions per game, that's well above the national average of 66.9. Sure, it's only over 4 games, but we've definitely played more uptempo. Compare this to our 3 previous PAC-10 games against ASU, WSU, and UW: 55, 49, 73, respectively. Huge difference in possesions. Perhaps calling it an adaptation to our team lineup is indeed true: 3 out of our 4 losses were played below to well-below average tempo (except UW, which was well above).

In fact, looking at PAC-10 play before these last 4 games, we've had just under 60 possessions per game. Contrasted to 71 possessions per game, it's been a huge shift in our gameplan.

Needless to say though, this improvement in defensive intensity has boosted our offensive game. Furthermore, our team has definitely begun to find its identity and the roles each player fills. As long as our team keeps playing intensely on defense, attacks the rim on offense, and plays as team, we will play some damn good basketball.

That's not to say we should start to expect a Final 4 or anything like that - there's tons of basketball left to be played, and we can just as easiliy blow it on our Arizona road trips this week. But this has been, without a doubt, two of the most exciting regular-season weeks for Bruin basketball as we saw a team develop and jell after adversity, right in front of our own eyes. Now let's beat up these AZ teams!

Bumped. GO BRUINS. -N

Hey all,

As I promised in my other post, I wrote that I had compiled a spreadsheet with data. Well I finished this a few days ago, but haven't had time to post it up with a full analysis. Anyways, thanks to statsheets for providing a lot of this data.

Here is the spreadsheet on on Google documents.

Please note that the spreadsheet is split into years from 2005-06 through to the current 2008-09. So we'll have the 3 previous Final 4 years along with this year. I have also included the possessions/game and total possesions this year as calculated by Kenpom. These statistics first include the raw totals of the year. The second set of stats are the values of the player per game. The next is the values of the player per minute the player played.

We then have these player's performances pro-rated out to 40 mins, 30 mins, 20 mins, and 10 mins. In other words, this is what they would perform if they maintained their current rates/min and played that amount of time. Finally, we have their performances per possession.

 Now I have to ask people read these notes on why some values do not line up correctly with some stats out there 100% and also why there are caveats to this information:

1. I took out players that missed significant time or do not play a lot. This mostly pertains to walk-on players for example. This also means that I removed Shipp in 2005-06 and Roll in 07-08 for example. Thus there will be some issues, mainly with possessions but these should be statistically insignificant. All the other values are historical values that occured.
2. These values are from the raw statistics of this year. In other words, the numbers presented are based on history. Obviously, 05-08 seasons are complete and done with. These values also are not adjusted to competition yet.
3. You can't take these values without considering strength of schedule. The historical data for the previous 3 years include our runs through the tournament which means that we will have faced much tougher competition in the tournament. Also, the previous 3 years have had different strength of schedules, such as the much tougher Pac-10 last year. 
4. The number of young players and cupcakes we have played may certainly skew our rates compared to previous years. On the flip side, our development should improve our numbers over the year which may balance out increases in strength of schedule.
5. On the data of player rates, please remember that these stats cannot factor in what fatigue, foul trouble, etc. would do if a bench player were given more minutes. So yes, if Morgan were able to play 30 minutes a game, he would put up big numbers, but he hasn't shown that ability yet.
6. Finally, these stats cover the whole year and do not cover just the previous few games. Any recent/new trends won't be felt until a few more games when the data starts moving in the new direction.

I'm sure I'm missing something and I'll add it when it comes to mind. Anyways, looking at the data, I had a few points that immediately stuck out at my mind on the team in general, compared to year's past:

1. We have had some bonafide stars these last few years. Looking all the way back to 05-06, seeing all these names now on the next level certainly brings a smile to me knowing what our program has produced.
2. I was shocked to see that LoMata had barely been used in 05-06 but really developed into an impressive defender in the past 2 years. In fact, Ryan Wright was used more than Mata in our 05-06 run.
3. We had an incredible starting lineup last year with Westbrook, Shipp, Love and Collison all averaging double figures. The previous 2 years, Afflalo was our star on offense, without a doubt.
4. Who says that our offense has done worse over the years? Its true that our season isn't done yet, and we haven't played tougher competition, but our points per game have gone up every year since 05-06. And it shows with our recent #1 rating in Kenpom offensive efficiency.
5. Statistically, our best comps are with the 06-07 and 05-06 teams. In fact, rebounding/game wise, we are similar to the 06-07 team. Our difference is that our defense is ranked in the 50's versus a team ranked in the top 10 at the end of the season. On that note, our rebounding last year, to no surprise, was a beast.
6. Stats wise, we are getting more steals per game than in previous years. But that's both a good thing and a bad thing. Good in that we're getting other teams to turn it over. Bad in that it seems like we've made a lot more defensive gambles this year. Particularly against Texas, we made some defensive gambles where we got burned bad. However, our increased length and athleticism is no doubt a major impact on tihs front.Our post woes are definitely there. Our blocks per game are down,
7. LRMAM was a beast on the boards and on defense over his 3 years here. Man, I miss him.
8. If you think we aren't drawing enough fouls, you're right. Our free throws per game are the lowest of these 4 years. That's easily 2-3 points a game, which is a big difference. Our free throw % is also much worse than last year (.685 vs .735).
9. All that talk about how we are a much better ball handling team? Yes and no. We're giving up slightly more turnovers / game than the past 2 years, but we are putting up much more assists per game. In fact, we have the best A/TO ratio of any of our 4 teams. So we're definitely getting the ball around and protecting the ball, for the most part.

Now, past teams only mean so much for us. So as to some analysis of our team this year:

1. If you thought Gordon was our best rebounder, you're correct. He's easily our best rebounder per minute/possession. Our second best rebounder is Keefe. Not having one of Gordon or Keefe on the floor means that we are playing at a rebounding disadvantage.
2. The Holiday and Westbrook comparisons are much closer than people think. Yeah, JH isn't a lockdown defender, but both are our best rebounding guards. Both get steals at a high rate, have similar Assist and Turnover ratios and rates. JH doesn't get as many free throws as Westbrook does though. At their freshmen years though, Holiday is much better. If Holiday stays another year, he may, dare I say it, be better than RW.
3. Morgan, in the limited time and competition he has played, has incredible block rates and gets a lot of fouls drawn. However, he also fouls a lot of people. I can't wait to see him develop though - a little more speed and explosiveness, and this guy will be a huge part of our team. He's a big guy so he can alter shots and clog the lane, but he also draws a lot of fouls from other teams and is efficient on offense. He's got a lot of work to do, but if he can develop in time for the tournament, we might have a huge piece.
4. Lee has been a good rebounder and scorer in his limited time. His injury has certainly set his development back though, and limited his time. Hopefully he does develop a bit more as well this year, as he could be a key person to slot in the 2/3 and his length and height helps him get a lot of boards, something we've been hurting on.
5. A sign that our team is inexperienced: we foul more per game than any other of our teams. In fact, we have more than one foul per game than 05-07, and 3 more fouls per game than last year. Yes, 1.5 more fouls per game might not seem like a lot. However, This can easily average out to a 2-5 more points per game given to the opponent. A foul means they're closer to being in the bonus, or gives them another possession on offense, or allows them to get and-1's. This has already burned us a few times this year, and might be why our defensive ratings are so poor this year. However, this is an experience issue as our players with the highest rate of fouls are all our freshmen.
6. Our free throws per game are at the lowest of any of these 4 years. Big difference. A player with the athletic ability of Holiday should aim for getting more free throws as well. Looking at the past comparisons, Farmar and Westbrook both drew nearly twice as many free throws per minute/possession.

Anyways, thats as far as it goes for my analysis as I have other things I have to work on right now. Please take a look at these stats and see anything you find, reminisce about our prior teams, and see if any of your beliefs or thoughts are reflected in the numbers.

I'm certainly optimistic about where our team can go. I would certainly agree with a lineup tweak of having either one of Gordon or Keefe on the floor at all times, as they are our best rebounders. We also need to foul less (largely an experience issue though, as our biggest foulers are our freshmen) and draw more free throws.

In a nutshell, it appears that our biggest problem this year is that we have been giving teams second chances too often. This is certainly illustrated in second halves, when teams that are down make runs that come back at us. We need to deny opponents second chances by rebounding better and limiting our fouls on them that give them a new possession or a chance at the free throw.

However, a lot of this is an experience thing. We have a very bright future ahead if we continue to develop. Our freshmen are inexperienced at fouling and what not, but they have incredible athletic ability. I hope to see all of them get more play time and experience because if they in time for the tournament, we will have the capability to make a deep run. And looking to next year, if they make the same freshmen to sophomore jump other players have on this team, watch out...

Bumped. A must read post. GO BRUINS. -N

Warning: extremely long post ahead filled with numbers!

To preface this, I've been wanting to post this for a while because I'm a big guy on stats (it's my baseball roots I swear!) and analysis. I've been compling statistics of our team through 19 games so far to get a feel of how we are doing as a team essentially mid-way through our season. I'll have a more in depth analysis of what I found later. But during the course of research, I found some startling statistics I thought I would share and perhaps illuminate some of the concerns we've raised, and perhaps quell some myths and perceptions. I haven't had the time to do a full in-depth analysis on each player, and the small sample size can certainly skew perception, but I'd thought some statistical stats are in order.

Offensive & Defensive Efficiency and Success

Much has been made about our offensive woes in the media. They say that we can't score like UNC and can't win it all without an offense. Now, a lot know about Ken Pom's efficiency statistics. Let's apply this data to the last few final four teams, shall we?

Championship team is bolded:
Team, Adjusted Offensive Efficiency Rank, Adjusted Defensive Efficiency Rank, Adjusted Tempo Rank

2008
Kansas: 2, 1, 136
Memphis: 4, 4, 87
UCLA: 7, 3, 217
UNC: 1, 19. 8

2007
Florida: 1. 12. 167
Ohio St: 4, 15, 218
Georgetown: 2, 20, 328
UCLA: 23, 2, 266

2006
Florida: 2, 5, 114
UCLA: 28, 3, 300
LSU: 50, 4, 95
George Mason: 49, 18, 286

2005
UNC: 1, 5, 8
Illinois: 3, 11, 251
Louisville: 7, 14, 122
Michigan St: 6, 25, 142

2004
UConn: 4, 5, 86
Georgia Tech: 25, 3, 64
Duke: 2, 4, 82
Oklahoma State: 5, 12, 218

KenPom stats only go back to 2004. And 2003, Syracuse was a great team but Carmelo, a once in a lifetime type of talent, largely put them over the top. But what do all these fancy numbers mean in terms of getting to the Final 4? Besides cinderella George Mason, the teams were all in the top 10 in either adjusted offense or defense, or in both. Besides Florida's repeat year, the champion has been in the top 5 in both adjusted offense and defense. Who say's that the tournament is completely a crapshoot? The best all-around team on both ends have won since 2004.

As far as tempo goes, there is a huge variation in the tempo of teams that make it to the Final 4. Georgetown's 328th rank in 2007 was even slower than ours! George Mason's 286th rank along with a top 20 adjusted defense (and some March Madness) gave them a cinderella run for the ages. 2007 saw 3/4 teams play way below the average tempo.

Yes, it's true that all the champions have played at near average tempo (Kansas, Florida 2007), slightly faster than average (Florida 2006, UConn 2004), or way faster (UNC) but all these champions had the same things in common: they were in the top 5 in adjusted offense AND defense (cept Florida 2007 at #12 defensively, but no other team in the final 4 was top 10 in both). But again, the correlation has by and large been to be in the top 5 in each and not tempo (at least, there aren't enough statistics done to correlate tempo to success). 2008 was our closest shot but we lost to the better team.

First Half-Second Half Splits

Unfortunately, college basketball doesn't offer too much in depth on statistical splits like baseball does, but we have some data we can use on this.

Compiled through our game with Washington, this is the total of what we scored in each half:

UCLA First Half: 709 points
UCLA Second Half: 707 points
UCLA OT: 4 points

And here's how our opponents are faring:

Opponents First Half: 497 points
Opponents Second Half: 637 points
Opponents OT: 7 points

That's right, no typo there. We have let opponents score a total of 637 points in the second half, or a grand total of 140 more points overall in the second half than in the first half.

Now make no mistake about it - a lot of the cupcakes we played, we had such a large lead by halftime that we didn't play defense at our full capacity in the second half.

However, it is quite clear that our problem throughout this season, and in particular the recent woes, have stemmed from poor second half defense. By statistics, through a course of a season, a team's first and second half on offense will be statistically equal, and it is: 709 points vs. 707 points for us. Our offense in the 2nd half of this season has matched our offense in the 1st half for the most part.

But that giant +140 points differential in favor of an opponent's second half is absolutely startling, and brings me to a few thoughts on what might cause our problems:

1. Is it fatigue? Statistically speaking, over the course of the season, we have been giving our bench a lot more playtime than in previous years. And against UW, we substituted the bench pretty well. However, a part of this that might go unnoticed is that CBH often plays the starters for longer stretches during the 2nd half. In other words, bench players get more time in the 1st half than the 2nd.
2. Opponent half-time adjustments are certainly a thing to notice. Coach Bennet up in WSU is certainly a brilliant coach IMO, having brought a ton of success to a team that wasn't known for having great talent. WSU scored a whole 13 more points in the 2nd half than the 1st half against us, and we scored 11 fewer points in the 2nd half than in the 1st in that game. We certainly can't ignore half-time adjustments by opposing coaches.
3. How about fouls? This year, we are averaging around  17.5 fouls per game. In contrast, the previous three years, we averaged 14.2, 16.4, and 16.2 fouls per game. We certainly have more depth than in previous years, but fouls can lead to multiple free throw opportunities as well as and-ones. Averaging 3 more fouls per game this year, compared to last year, can easily account for 3-4 more points per game for the opponent. On top of that, it also cuts down the number of minutes that impact players can get time on the floor, which probably costs us more.
4. Starters vs Bench. Now this is where I wish college basketball had a +/- stat (or better yet, statistical splits by half). This way we can get a gauge for how much a player's impact is on the course of the game. However, what has been troubling a lot of posters from what I've read is that this is very un-Ben Ball like to watch our starters cough up leads. Against ASU and WSU, our starters were the primary players on the floor in the 2nd half when we blew leads. Early in the season, when our freshmen hit the floor and opposing teams climbed back, CBH would pull the freshmen/bench and reinsert starters to get some stability. In the couple of weeks though, we've seen a much more stable bench and freshman play (a testament to CBH's ability to develop players).However, we've also seen our starting line up give up big leads in the 2nd half which has been very uncharacteristic. I'm not sure if its the lineup we're throwing out there, if it's fatigue, or a combination of a lot of things, but that's the fact.

Now those are just 4 possible factors that might cue in on our troubles this year, particularly recently. However, the point remains: over the course of the year, our defense in the 2nd half has been much worse than in our first half and that is going to need to change.

As Collison Goes, So We Go?

Many posters have noticed that Collison has been off recently in Pac-10 play since that game against USC. Here are his statistics over the last 4 games:

Minutes Played, FGM-FGA, 3FGM-3FGA, FTM-FTA, Points, Assists, Turnovers, Steals, Personal Fouls
vs AZ: 28 Mins, 2-5 (.400), 0-2 (.000), 2-2 (1.000), 12 Pts, 6 Ast, 2 TO, 3 Stl, 3 PF
vs ASU:  42 Mins, 4-14 (0.286), 0-4 (.000), 6-6 (1.000), 14 Pts, 3 Ast, 3 TO, 0 Stl, 2 PF
vs WSU: 35 Mins, 3-8 (0.375), 0-2 (.000), 2-2 (1.000), 8 Pts, 6 Ast, 3 TO, 1 Stl, 0 PF
vs UW: 36 Mins, 5-14 (0.357), 0-4 (.000), 2-2 (1.000), 12 Pts, 5 Ast, 2 TO, 1 Stl, 5 PF
Total: 35.25 mins/game, 14-41 (0.341), 0-12 (.000), 12-12 (1.000), 11.5 ppg, 5 apg, 2.5 to/g, 2.5 foul/g

Assist and turnover-wise, Collison has more or less been in line with the rest of his season. His free throw shooting is brilliant. However, after shooting most of the season around .500 on 3 pointers, he has gone 0 for his last 12. Obviously, its damn hard for anyone to maintain .500 on field goals, let alone 3-pt field goals, and his career 3 point shooting is in the .400's. That 0-12, however, reminds me of Shipp last year who couldn't hit a 3 for his life. Whether Collison is pressing, injured, or what not, it's clear that his jumper has left him recently. Sure, some shots are rimming out and others are desperation shots at the last second, but going 0-12 over 4 games is very unlike Collison.

Also, 14-41 for a .341 FG% is way below the rest of his seasons numbers. Yes, the competition is much tougher now, but missing that much is again, very unlike him. I know that many posters as well as CBH have said Collison should shoot more, so I'd have to wonder how much of this is him pressing vs. simply being in a slump.

Finally, for a guy who has been nearly perfect at the charity line this year, he doesn't get to the basket often enough. Besides the 6 free throws he shot against ASU, he's gone to the line twice in each of the rest of the games. I'm not sure if he's trying to shoot too much rather than driving, if he's not being aggressive enough, or whatever it is, but I'd love to see him go for more shots that give him free throws, because he is an absolute wizard at the line.

Just How Much the Opponent Stars are Hurting Us

The last couple of years, we've had some lockdown defenders we've assigned to defend the opposing team's star. Afflalo of course. Westbrook last year made Mayo and Bayless look like absolute fools. This year, however, I've noticed some startling statistics on some of the stars that have lit us up.

Let me first say that in basketball, there's always a teammate that can pick up someone's slack. And you can't always stop a great player. Last year, Brazelton of WKU dropped 31 on us in the tournament. And of course, D. Rose was just plain unstoppable all tournament (except free throws that is).

And of course, not shutting down the opponent's star player usually isn't conducive to success. However, in the losses we've suffered, we've been unable to stop their best offensive players: Harden dropped 24 on us (Pendergraph added 18 as well), AJ Abrams put up 31, I. Thomas put 24 up as well. Against Michigan, Sims put up 18 (and Manny Harris added 15).

Obviously, you can't possibly expect to slow every player down as there are 5 people on the court for each team at once. And some of these guys are just plain stars (like Harden, Abrams, etc.) But some of these are players that we actually have had size advantages on. And then you look at some other teams:

Tajuan Porter put 24 on us in Oregon. DeRozan had 15 points and was a big reason USC took the lead until Holiday shut him down. Taj Gibson had 13 in 23 minutes (thank goodness he was ridin the pine most of the night). Jordan Hill had 22 (and Budinger 14).

Again, we can't possibly expect to stop every player on every team, much less their stars. However, what is troubling is that we've given many players big nights and won despite not having shut them down.  Usually, it's because of our depth and talent advantage. But, when we play against teams with equal depth or talent (such as Texas or UW), letting stars consistently put up big numbers has resulted in losses or games that were way closer than they should have been.

It's true we don't have the defensive stoppers of the past (when Luc or AA or Westbrook could be assigned to take on their best guy), but defense is also a team effort and its troubling when teams are consistently seeing their star player (and often times, as the list above shows, their 2nd best player) put up numbers better than their season averages against us. Yes, last year we had games where opposing players had big games on us, but we also saw plenty of games where their stars were better off on the bench (Mayo's 4 point clunker, Bayless, etc.) at times.

We're only 7 games into the Pac-10 season, so we have plenty of games left to see some progress on the defensive end. But needless to say, with so much of our offense coming from our defensive ability, struggling on defense has been a big issue and without defensive stoppers as in years past, we need to play better team D as a whole now.

Final thought of this long post is on the UW game: As in last year, at UW, we ended up playing on a tempo dictated by them, which was also a loss. I hope we clobber these guys when they come down to Pauley.

Bumped. Some good takes worth considering as head into a big on Saturday with nothing to lose. GO BRUINS. -N

As I posted this comment in Nestor's 'Nothing to Lose' post, here were some of my thoughts on the WSU game and the pressures both the fans and players have put on the team:

1) Living by the 3: also means dying by the 3. When we get cold is when our offense stagnates. We need to continue making good passes inside and opening the floor for driving to get high FG% shots.

2) Rebounding: absolutely atrocious getting offensive boards. That’s been our bread and butter the last 3 years and has given us tons of easy baskets and denies easy possessions to the other team.

3) Defensive intensity as a product of fatigue and depth: I think it’s clear that our defensive intensity at times has been tempered by our fear of depth and due to fatigue. For example, last year when Collison got in foul trouble, we’d be in big trouble given that we didn’t have a lot of depth at guards. This year, however, we have much more depth and can rotate players at that spot. Aboya has done a marvelous job at avoiding fouls this year – but that’s also been a large part of his intensity as an enforcer in the past. Obviously, our depth up front isn’t as good as previous years, but with ND showing he can play as a starter, we still have 4-5 guys we can rotate up front.

How I noticed this was watching some clips of previous years and how we played defensively. Aboya was always considered raw on defense, but he readily sacrified the body to take charges. Taking charges of course also means you have chances of getting called on blocks and what not. There’s no doubt he’s avoided fouls, but I also feel like that means he’s taken a notch off the intensity of defense.

Same goes for when I watched some of Collison in previous years. He’s always been described as having machineguns for hands, with the way he can disrupt an opposing team’s point guard. This year, whether it’s fear of depth or fouling out, he hasn’t shown that same intensity at times. It’s helped keep him on the floor, as I rarely see him hit 3 fouls even (and that’s what got us in trouble last year against Western Kentucky for instance). But, with Holiday, Lee and Anderson all being excellent ball handers, I don’t think depth is any more of an excuse to avoid playing intense on defense.

I realize I’m naming these 2 names in particular, and they are far from being the only ones, but they were just the more obvious cases I’ve noticed after seeing some video of previous years compared to this year. Yeah, they’ve helped avoid fouls, but the defensive intensity just doesn’t feel the same.

Wanted to add this after Class of 66's fanpost on the performance of the bench:

Gordon: 4 rebounds in 10 minutes
Keefe: 5 rebounds in 11 minutes
AA2: 1 rebound in 30 minutes
ND: 4 rebounds in 29 minutes

AA2 obviously had a very down game for most of it, but it's pretty startling to see that our 2 bench post players got some big rebounds when they did play. Offensively, our bench played really well (Keefe and Roll were absolutely efficient). I'd really like to see more of our bench play, as it gives our starters more resting time to stave off fatigue from the game and from the rough pac-10 schedule. Also, our bench has played relatively turnover free and has played solid D. Either way, it hasn't been our bench on the floor when the teams made their comebacks the lats couple of games.

Some will say that Keefe and DG got most of their play time when we were up in the 1st half. Actually, we pulled away with ND hitting those 3's and shutting down WSU in the 1st half, and undoubtedly they played a big role in defense and narrowing the rebounding gap. We have a far deeper team than the last 2 years and I love watching players develop, which leads to this 4th point about it:

4) We need to play looser: There, we said it. I understand we have high expectations going in this year, but it’s obvious with the pieces we lost and the # of freshmen we have, we’re going to go through a pain period of learning. Listening to the comments, I feel like a lot of players are playing under tremendous pressure of making the team better, when we should be willing to lose a few in PAC-10 play in order to gain experience and play hard when it matters.

I understand some fans have unreasonable expectations of this team, and surely our players feel it, but I also like to think of the 06 run we made: we played with an extremely talented freshman class (very underrated though), a very talented sophomore class, and leftovers from the Lavin years. Nobody thought we would make it to the championship game, and we very nearly didn’t. But we played with nothing to lose. There was that article posted that showed how at one point, CBH rolled out 4 freshman and a walk-on in our big game against LSU.

I’m just hoping we see more players get play time against Washington, since UW will undoubtedly try to force us to run and will tire our legs out a lot. We won’t let them dictate tempo, that’s for sure, but we’ll need to stay fresh and intense on defense. It’s going to be a tough game against UW as they’ve had our number up in Washington, but they are still beatable.

Added this thought: Reading the DC comments, I absolutely love that he's the leader on this team and is willing to be in charge when the game is on the line. But that's also what prompted me to make my comments on playing looser: it's a long tough season, and I don't want to see DC beat himself up for trying to live up to unreasonable expectations. Losses happen in basketball, and it's better to lose and learn now than in March.