Finally watched the game. A few thoughts.

[BigBlueFanGA]

1. We lost our defensive intensity late in the first half and never got it back.

2. We were being impatient offensively.

3. We have guys not playing to their strengths. By this I mean shot selection.

4. Rebounding must get better, I'm sure it will.


I was reading the game thread during the game and have read countless "woe is me" posts since then. I didn't think it was that bad. I tend to think Willis is correct, that several guys were fighting a bug. I think that is what caused our defensive drop off. Ball is very good but I prefer Fox. Ball certainly didn't seem like the second coming or anything. I don't prefer Fox launching a bunch of 3 attempts though. That is not his strength. I saw someone yesterday talking about how great Leaf was. I didn't see it. Athletically he is probably behind, or at best on par with, Willis. He is a good junk man but many of his rebounds and points were from odd tips and bounces instead of superior position.

I thought I would be really frustrated watching the game, but I saw a young team that couldn't play their A game and then tried to make up for it by forcing many, many plays. They will learn some valuable lessons from this one. I hope we see UCLA again in the tournament. Overall, I was not discouraged by the effort. I think that was UCLA's ceiling. It certainly wasn't ours.

 

[arenk]

1. We lost our defensive intensity late in the first half and never got it back.

2. We were being impatient offensively.

3. We have guys not playing to their strengths. By this I mean shot selection.

4. Rebounding must get better, I'm sure it will.


I was reading the game thread during the game and have read countless "woe is me" posts since then. I didn't think it was that bad. I tend to think Willis is correct, that several guys were fighting a bug. I think that is what caused our defensive drop off. Ball is very good but I prefer Fox. Ball certainly didn't seem like the second coming or anything. I don't prefer Fox launching a bunch of 3 attempts though. That is not his strength. I saw someone yesterday talking about how great Leaf was. I didn't see it. Athletically he is probably behind, or at best on par with, Willis. He is a good junk man but many of his rebounds and points were from odd tips and bounces instead of superior position.

I thought I would be really frustrated watching the game, but I saw a young team that couldn't play their A game and then tried to make up for it by forcing many, many plays. They will learn some valuable lessons from this one. I hope we see UCLA again in the tournament. Overall, I was not discouraged by the effort. I think that was UCLA's ceiling. It certainly wasn't ours.

One of the best posts I've read in the 18 years I've been on this forum!

 

[Wall2Boogie]

I agree with you op. It was a bad game it happens during the season. I think by years end they will be a better team. They are freshmen and we are this every year

 

[docholiday51]

1. We lost our defensive intensity late in the first half and never got it back.

2. We were being impatient offensively.

3. We have guys not playing to their strengths. By this I mean shot selection.

4. Rebounding must get better, I'm sure it will.


I was reading the game thread during the game and have read countless "woe is me" posts since then. I didn't think it was that bad. I tend to think Willis is correct, that several guys were fighting a bug. I think that is what caused our defensive drop off. Ball is very good but I prefer Fox. Ball certainly didn't seem like the second coming or anything. I don't prefer Fox launching a bunch of 3 attempts though. That is not his strength. I saw someone yesterday talking about how great Leaf was. I didn't see it. Athletically he is probably behind, or at best on par with, Willis. He is a good junk man but many of his rebounds and points were from odd tips and bounces instead of superior position.

I thought I would be really frustrated watching the game, but I saw a young team that couldn't play their A game and then tried to make up for it by forcing many, many plays. They will learn some valuable lessons from this one. I hope we see UCLA again in the tournament. Overall, I was not discouraged by the effort. I think that was UCLA's ceiling. It certainly wasn't ours.

Thought the last 5 minutes of 1st half and first 5 of the second half did us in.If we had players under the weather that would do much to explain it.

I thought Bam,Monk and Fox earned their stripes for the most part,they can play on the big stage.A few others need to step up especially on the boards and finish around the rim in traffic

We only lost the rebounding war by 3,killed them in turnovers but they shot us out of the game or more to the point we shot ourselves out of the game.

 

[carl]

Good post I agree.

I think they lost intensity because of the way the game was called. I thought we got some bad calls after we went out to the lead and never really figured out how to keep the pressure on without getting fouls called. Not that I'm blaming the refs but we haven't played competition that we had to work hard to guard and they were sort of lost on defense. Fox also had two early was especially affected. It also played out in the rebounding war where we really lost the game imo.

In addition they played from behind for the first time, had to rely on half court sets most of our possessions several players then forced the issue. all of those combined were too much to overcome. They will learn.

 

[ulismyman]

John Higgins and Showes on same crew never good....Hey look at me contest

 

[kuhlkat]

Disagree about Leaf.
That kid is tremendous

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Disagree about Leaf.
That kid is tremendous

Perhaps, but I watched him purposely after reading all the post game hype. I don't agree. He is very limited, but he is a solid player. Someone yesterday actually said he was the best player on the court at times. No, he was not. He was very fortunate for many of his stats in that game. Watch it again and watch him. Solid, not great.

 

[Xception]

We are young and it showed but they need time to learn , same thing every year and yet some fans expect a seasoned team . I don't care at all about the loss and can find the positives in it , it's no big deal .

 

[Cawood86_rivals]

Cal won't use it, nor should he, but if some of the players were sick, or had been sick, it probably had an effect as well. UCLA was lights out though. Can't take anything away from that.
These guys strike me as super competitive, I'm sure losing will motivate them.

 

[LexCatnOhio]

I think this loss stings b/c of the fact we lost at home to UCLA more than anything. The expectations of this squad and the hot start probably disenfranchised the fair weather fan. I was honestly rabid during the game until the last minute or so. Two things kept me positive:

1. My 4 year old constantly asking me questions about the game and cheering them on til the end. It's hard to stay mad while teaching your kid about basketball. Meanwhile you're thinking how your heart is melting at the fact he's genuinely interested in learning (and rooting for the cats). We were talking about how you never quit til the end. Crazy how unbiased kids are and how refreshing that is.

2. The fact that there was an actual glimpse of the lock down defense this team can play in the last minute. Sure they were forced to foul some times but how many possessions did they force a turnover on the in bounds pass (Steve Alford chucked his clipboard a couple times). UCLA is a great team that played solid. Can't take anything away from them, but our future looks bright.

 

[HICATFAN]

Still haven't watched it yet....don't know if I will....

AlohaCat

 

[mick1642]

Perhaps, but I watched him purposely after reading all the post game hype. I don't agree. He is very limited, but he is a solid player. Someone yesterday actually said he was the best player on the court at times. No, he was not. He was very fortunate for many of his stats in that game. Watch it again and watch him. Solid, not great.

Wow. Guy had every intangible that game. Calapari pretty much said he "beasted" Kentucky. You mistake looking awkward as not being that talented. By the way, Ball makes everybody better on that team. There is a reason their offense is so efficient this year. That is why he will be a better player than Fox before their careers are over. You really don't get it.

 

[kuhlkat]

Leaf is a great passer...good shooter...effective pick setter and Outstanding rebounder...and almost never makes a mistake.
His basketball IQ is off the charts.
BTW.....I've watched him play several times.

 

[Goblin life]

Thought the last 5 minutes of 1st half and first 5 of the second half did us in.If we had players under the weather that would do much to explain it.

I thought Bam,Monk and Fox earned their stripes for the most part,they can play on the big stage.A few others need to step up especially on the boards and finish around the rim in traffic

We only lost the rebounding war by 3,killed them in turnovers but they shot us out of the game or more to the point we shot ourselves out of the game.

I tend to agree. We got had a major drop off near the end of the 1st half. Ball hitting that 3 at the end of the 1st half certainly brought him back to life. We got caught trading layups for 3s in the 2nd half. That just doesn't work in a game like that. Especially when our shooters can't buy a bucket. Anyway. I liked the heart they showed near the end. Got it within 3 points with 8 seconds left. Tough loss.

 

[PowerofPelphrey]

One of the best posts I've read in the 18 years I've been on this forum!

Only forgot to add several players were up all night nauseated and on the *******.. per Uncle Eddie.

 

[EvilMD]

I gotta go with the pro-Leaf crowd. You can go back and focus on any player and see mistakes. Leaf always seemed to be the guy who was getting the rebound, putting our defense in an awkward position, and hitting key shots. I'd take him on my team any day. Let the other team take him lightly because of his appearance.

 

[thepip]

Perhaps, but I watched him purposely after reading all the post game hype. I don't agree. He is very limited, but he is a solid player. Someone yesterday actually said he was the best player on the court at times. No, he was not. He was very fortunate for many of his stats in that game. Watch it again and watch him. Solid, not great.

I like your post until Willis vs Leaf, I'm thinking, LensCrafters can be your friend.

 

[Aike]

When UCLA got into the bonus so early our defensive intensity changed.

We have to learn from that because it won't be the last time this year we deal with a quick whistle.

 

[megablue]

The OP made some good observations, but I disagree with him on Leaf. That kid is much better than Willis. I don't think it's even close.

 

[awf]

Wow. Guy had every intangible that game. Calapari pretty much said he "beasted" Kentucky. You mistake looking awkward as not being that talented. By the way, Ball makes everybody better on that team. There is a reason their offense is so efficient this year. That is why he will be a better player than Fox before their careers are over. You really don't get it.

So you use your fourth post to tell OP that his post is wrong. You really don't get it and probably never will......

 

[CATSrock_rivals215465]

Leaf is a player - no question about it. We got beat by a very solid team and if we don't play harder this can and will happen again. They simply outworked us on the glass and we didn't play smart basketball for long stretches of the game. Cal will fix this and we will be fine.

 

[Stenchymouse]

Fox taking those jumpers in transition when we were trying to catch up hurt us.

Our young team will have to learn to make better decisions in a close game.

UCLA is just gonna be tough for anyone to beat when they're shooting like that.

Leaf is a really good player but I need to see more of him before I go all in on the hype.

 

[ManitouDan_anon]

Great post Ga -- I wish I would back off the keyboard right after a loss, but the board is really fun . My biggest agreement is no way UCLA can play better than that . That was as good as it gets with them , while we can much better . One worry is confidence , we got rocked . Bigtime . Will the swagger come back if we lose to UNCheat ? Or struggle against Valpo ? The blueprint is out there ( ULCA , Wisc ,) can we overcome it ?

 

[mick1642]

So you use your fourth post to tell OP that his post is wrong. You really don't get it and probably never will......

Quality over quantity my friend.

 

[Xception]

We took some quick freshman shots without passing but that's fine , we'll learn. Big game and they get caught up in it

 

[docholiday51]

Great post Ga -- I wish I would back off the keyboard right after a loss, but the board is really fun . My biggest agreement is no way UCLA can play better than that . That was as good as it gets with them , while we can much better . One worry is confidence , we got rocked . Bigtime . Will the swagger come back if we lose to UNCheat ? Or struggle against Valpo ? The blueprint is out there ( ULCA , Wisc ,) can we overcome it ?

If a team is going to shoot that well and get up that many shots they are going to be tough to beat.They took away some of our usually easy transition baskets and we panicked in the half court at times.When they stopped turning the ball over (mid to late first half) the game changed

 

[CATSrock_rivals215465]

The silver lining is that UCLA played a very good game and made a ton of shots and we simply didn't play anywhere near our best and it was a 3 pt game with 8 seconds to play. Better defense, rebounding, passing and we will be fine.

 

[Eddie Gran can coach]

After watching replay, it confirmed my belief when watching it live, Alford had a defined game plan offensively and defensively, while UK just played loose with little structure on offense or defense. UCLA exploited UK on switches and defensively they gave UK all the 15 foot jumpers they wanted, and UK took the sucker bet. SKJ has to play more for UK to reach its max, cause Gabriel, Humphries and Willis have limitations on defense. Also, no excuse for Mulder not to get clock, Briscoe was frankly poor in this game

 

[BruinSteve]

My biggest agreement is no way UCLA can play better than that . That was as good as it gets with them , while we can much better .

First, I think what we saw was TWO very good college basketball teams...Both should win a ton of games and go far in the tourney. Both could win the title if things fall right. As a Bruin, I am happy to have won, but for you guys, I would think you should recognize that your team has nothing to be ashamed of--they played well, never gave up, but lost...it happens.

That said, I've got to reply to the above sentiment. UCLA WILL get better as it gets healthier. Both Anigbogu and Golomon were both just back from injury, Anigbogu from knee surgery. The kid is a monster, but just getting back into game-mode...and he is only a freshman. As the season rolls on, he should get more accustomed to the college game and to the referees' calls. Add that the team is still missing Prince Ali. Ali gives them that fourth guard behind Ball, Alford and Holiday...and also gives them a back-up to Isaac Hamilton who, right now, is really the only SF on the roster. In this game, they were hampered a little by lack of depth--three guys were in serious foul trouble most of that second half.

So, yes, while the Bruins played well, I certainly don't think this was any sort of "ceiling". What it did show was the Bruins, despite being a very young team--depending on three freshmen and a soph in major roles--for the most part held its composure and beat a very good team in their own gym.

OTOH, it really didn't expose all that much about Kentucky. Often a team loses and you look at the game tape as a "blueprint" of sorts on how to beat that team...But I don't think many future opponents can really use this game as a game plan--since I doubt many future opponents have the level of talent--and the type of players--that UCLA has..Anyone you've yet to play has the shooters? size? great point guard? Note that the Bruins have six players averaging in double figures and all six scored 13+ again in this game (Not an oddity, they've consistently done this all season). Most teams just aren't built the same way. Cal will be able to defense most other teams differently--shut down the scorers with the athletes you have, double team into turnovers and start fast breaks and go into "runs".

Basketball is a game of match-ups...This one just wasn't a good one for you. Cal tried putting defensive players on UCLA's offensive players for some very different reasons--and they didn't work most of the time. But even with that, you were still somewhat close. Against a less talented team, you'd likely have pulled it out.

Good luck the rest of the season...but don't panic over a "good" loss.

 

[ManitouDan_anon]

No panic , hope we meet again . With the right draw you guys look like a FF contender at the least.

 

[caneintally]

Wow. Guy had every intangible that game. Calapari pretty much said he "beasted" Kentucky. You mistake looking awkward as not being that talented. By the way, Ball makes everybody better on that team. There is a reason their offense is so efficient this year. That is why he will be a better player than Fox before their careers are over. You really don't get it.

HAHAHA the scouts even said after the game Fox was much more impressive. Fox will have a whale of a career while Ball will be a decent pro. Leaf is a damn good player in the Kevin Love mode ( total non athlete ) . He will be a 1st rounder but never a lotto pick .

 

[caneintally]

First, I think what we saw was TWO very good college basketball teams...Both should win a ton of games and go far in the tourney. Both could win the title if things fall right. As a Bruin, I am happy to have won, but for you guys, I would think you should recognize that your team has nothing to be ashamed of--they played well, never gave up, but lost...it happens.

That said, I've got to reply to the above sentiment. UCLA WILL get better as it gets healthier. Both Anigbogu and Golomon were both just back from injury, Anigbogu from knee surgery. The kid is a monster, but just getting back into game-mode...and he is only a freshman. As the season rolls on, he should get more accustomed to the college game and to the referees' calls. Add that the team is still missing Prince Ali. Ali gives them that fourth guard behind Ball, Alford and Holiday...and also gives them a back-up to Isaac Hamilton who, right now, is really the only SF on the roster. In this game, they were hampered a little by lack of depth--three guys were in serious foul trouble most of that second half.

So, yes, while the Bruins played well, I certainly don't think this was any sort of "ceiling". What it did show was the Bruins, despite being a very young team--depending on three freshmen and a soph in major roles--for the most part held its composure and beat a very good team in their own gym.

OTOH, it really didn't expose all that much about Kentucky. Often a team loses and you look at the game tape as a "blueprint" of sorts on how to beat that team...But I don't think many future opponents can really use this game as a game plan--since I doubt many future opponents have the level of talent--and the type of players--that UCLA has..Anyone you've yet to play has the shooters? size? great point guard? Note that the Bruins have six players averaging in double figures and all six scored 13+ again in this game (Not an oddity, they've consistently done this all season). Most teams just aren't built the same way. Cal will be able to defense most other teams differently--shut down the scorers with the athletes you have, double team into turnovers and start fast breaks and go into "runs".

Basketball is a game of match-ups...This one just wasn't a good one for you. Cal tried putting defensive players on UCLA's offensive players for some very different reasons--and they didn't work most of the time. But even with that, you were still somewhat close. Against a less talented team, you'd likely have pulled it out.

Good luck the rest of the season...but don't panic over a "good" loss.

I agree with this for the most part. UCLA is a top 5 team due to talent and matches up great with UK lately but Alford is not a good coach . He can recruit but time and time again he under acheives . I do think this year that means not making the final 4 so we will see if he does . Last year he should of had UCLA in the sweet 16 and they didn't even make the dance. But yall are loaded that is for sure. ONly UK and Duke are more talented but younger .

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Wow. Guy had every intangible that game. Calapari pretty much said he "beasted" Kentucky. You mistake looking awkward as not being that talented. By the way, Ball makes everybody better on that team. There is a reason their offense is so efficient this year. That is why he will be a better player than Fox before their careers are over. You really don't get it.

Pretty sure I said Leaf was a solid player. I watched him specifically and saw where his stats came from. Ball is a very good player, I said that as well. I still prefer Fox, I said that too. It's my opinion. I may be wrong.

 

[TheDude73]

Great post Ga -- I wish I would back off the keyboard right after a loss, but the board is really fun . My biggest agreement is no way UCLA can play better than that . That was as good as it gets with them , while we can much better . One worry is confidence , we got rocked . Bigtime . Will the swagger come back if we lose to UNCheat ? Or struggle against Valpo ? The blueprint is out there ( ULCA , Wisc ,) can we overcome it ?

If there was a positive to come from it (e.g., "moral victory"), we played about as bad as we could have with this talented team, but still scored 92 points. However, the negative is we allowed 97 points - albeit many of UCLA's shots were going in regardless of how tight the defense was - they were on.

 

[CATSrock_rivals215465]

HAHAHA the scouts even said after the game Fox was much more impressive. Fox will have a whale of a career while Ball will be a decent pro. Leaf is a damn good player in the Kevin Love mode ( total non athlete ) . He will be a 1st rounder but never a lotto pick .

Leaf is VERY athletic. Moves well, jumps well, nice shot - don't know where you get that he is a non athlete.

 

[kuhlkat]

Because he's white

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Leaf is VERY athletic. Moves well, jumps well, nice shot - don't know where you get that he is a non athlete.

I have to disagree with this. He is pretty slow actually but he is a good ball player.

 

[mick1642]

HAHAHA the scouts even said after the game Fox was much more impressive. Fox will have a whale of a career while Ball will be a decent pro. Leaf is a damn good player in the Kevin Love mode ( total non athlete ) . He will be a 1st rounder but never a lotto pick .

Probably the same scouts whose teams continue to pick in the lottery. Fox is a " beast" no doubt. He disappeared in the second half however. Again, if Ball and Fox switched teams who do you think wins that game on Saturday? The kid is about making his teammates better. If Fox played Ball in a "one on one" tournament" I'd put money on Fox but if it was 5 on 5 and supporting cast was similar, I'm taking Ball all day. I wonder if these scouts would take Wall over Kidd?

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Probably the same scouts whose teams continue to pick in the lottery. Fox is a " beast" no doubt. He disappeared in the second half however. Again, if Ball and Fox switched teams who do you think wins that game on Saturday? The kid is about making his teammates better. If Fox played Ball in a "one on one" tournament" I'd put money on Fox but if it was 5 on 5 and supporting cast was similar, I'm taking Ball all day. I wonder if these scouts would take Wall over Kidd?

Mick, I think you're on the wrong board.