Cal Basketball Blows Out UTPA, Proves Little

The Bears controlled this game almost from the opening tip.
Sometimes you can learn a lot from watching a 30-point blowout; I'm sure of it. Thursday night was not one of those times.
Instead, I witnessed the first round of the hideously non-descriptively-named "Global Sports Classic", a marketing debacle if ever there was one. I have no idea what is 'global' about this tournament, unless you take the Bears' opponent's name, 'Texas Pan-American', literally, and calling the first edition of something 'classic' is just a wee bit pretentious, don't you think? Moreover, the name of the tournament doesn't even imply basketball; "Global Sports Classic" could just as easily apply to a croquet club tournament in Duluth, MN, as it could to this bizarre manifestation of a college basketball tournament.

Moreover, I'm not even sure how these games work in the tournament. To guarantee TV ratings, I'm assuming, the tourney places the Bears directly into the final four of this tournament in Las Vegas with UNLV, Cincinnati, and Florida State, regardless of whether they win their first two games, last night's match vs. Texas Pan-American, and Monday night's tune-up vs. North Carolina A&T. Those two teams, plus two others (Coastal Carolina and Western Illinois) play the part of cannon fodder for two of the major teams each, and then are seeded directly in the "loser's bracket" regardless of whether they actually win one of these games or not. It's like these games don't even matter.
And in some sense, they don't. They're barely contests. The four "chump" teams in this tournament bring basically no name recognition or fan interest to the tournament, and they were all ranked between 234 and 278 by Ken Pomeroy's RPI last year. I honestly don't understand why these teams are in this tournament, or why the tournament is even 4 games long to begin with.
Anyway, enough ranting. UTPA (say "Opah!" in a loud and cheerful Greek accent) did manage to keep the game close for a little bit, holding leads of 6-2 and 11-8 before a 19-3 run by the Bears burried the Broncos and essentially ended the game before the half. It was painfully obvious that UTPA was no match for the Bears in any sense of the word, and the only suspense was whether Cal would let up and keep the Broncos in the game, or press their advantage and really put this game beyond reach. Thankfully, it was the latter.
Jamal Boykin's 18 points paced the Bears.
Though obviously you never want to read too much into a 27-point victory over a massively outgunned opponent, I did see a few encouraging signs:
• Other than the first few minutes, the Bears really got after it on defense. We saw almost none of the lazing around with a 10-point lead that marked the victories over Pacific and San Francisco. 9 steals by 7 different players makes for a lot of easy points.
• Speaking of getting after it, I really liked it when, in the middle of the first half, the Bears began applying full-court pressure. I'm not sure why Monty went to the press against UTPA -- perhaps something in the matchup suggested it would work. Nevertheless, it clearly harassed the Broncos and even led to a couple turnovers.
• Also regarding pressure, the Bears forced at least two shot-clock violations from UTPA, both times to due to 35 seconds of relentless, tiring defense. The Bears are by no means perfect defensively, but I think the improvement from the first game to this (the third) is definitely noticeable.
• Montgomery was finally able to empty his bench, getting everyone in on the action, including D.J. Seeley, who saw his first mintues as a Bear. Theo Robertson went to the bench with about 8 minutes to go, and he was the last starter still playing last night.
• Yes, the competition was suspect, but 23 assists to 11 turnovers is an encouraging statistic regardless of the opponent.
It's also quickly becoming apparent that Max Zhang is going to be a fan favorite. And why not? Sure, he's still a work in progress, but he also does things on the court that no one else can, blocking shots without jumping and drastically altering or discouraging the shots he doesn't get to.
However, due to the lopsided score, Max also got more action than he's seen before, and he responded by fouling out after just 8 minutes played.
Also discouraging: despite having the two tallest people in the building, the Bears were outrebounded 19-20, including giving up 12 offensive rebounds. Gotta do better than that, Bears.
For haltime entertainment, the Bears were treated to a demonstration from Cal's No. 7 women's volleyball team, stumping for more fans to make it out to their weekend matches with UCLA and USC. Indeed, the match vs. No. 9 UCLA should begin just about as this gets posted (5PM Friday).
Come watch us play! - Image via grfx.cstv.com
Anyway, I took a few photos of the halftime entertainment. Danzig, these are for you:
I also took a couple minutes of video, just so you can get a better feel of what the action is like. Enjoy!
0 recs |
9
comments
| Add comment
|
Read Related
Comments
I’m encouraged for our Bears this year because UCLA is horrible inside. They only have one ‘solid,’ experienced rebounder, Aboya, who may have a broken his hand against SIU today. Our experienced wing players will match up well against the heralded guys on UCLA’s backcourt. All the other Pac-10 teams look very beatable.
...Scuzzlin fo a Jack in Da Box
by Thoroughbred on
Nov 21, 2008 5:23 PM PST
reply
0 recs
Gotta say, the most encouraging thing is that this team is shooting the ball really really well so far this season. Shooting isn’t something that is very dependent on the other team – a 20 footer against a terrible opponent isn’t that much easier than a 20-footer against a good opponent. In our three games we are 8-for-15, 8-for-12 and 7-for-12 on threes. That includes two respectable opponents. That is 59% behind the arc. Holy hell that is good.
Zhang’s smidge of ability is encouraging too – if he can go out, block some shots, get some rebounds, and commit a few fouls, we can establish some presence inside that it seems Pac-10 teams totally lack. Plus he is tall enough, Monty should just turn him into a post-passer, and we should just have him kick the ball out to open men every time he gets it. And then continue hitting 59% on threes.
by Tedfordisgod on
Nov 21, 2008 6:29 PM PST
reply
0 recs
Shooting
I probably haven’t mentioned this enough, but I too am very encouraged by this team’s shooting. It’s looking like the Bears aren’t simply having a hot shooting night, but are actually really good shooters, and will have a sustainably high shooting percentage all year. Obviously, open shots will be tougher to come by when they face better defenses, and seeing how they create offense against tough defenses is really what I’m waiting to see from this team, but the early returns are very encouraging.
Also encouraging is that the scoring seems to be pretty spread out. We’ve got a number of good shooters on this team, with Randle, Christopher and Robertson all money from three, and Boykin can hit some outside jumpers as well, when he’s not taking the ball inside. Heck, our entire starting lineup is full of good shooters, as even Jordan Wilkes can stroke it from outside. Of course, the one trey he attempted against UTPA missed everything, but that’s a shot I’ve seen him knock down on more than one occasion.
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
by ragnarok on
Nov 22, 2008 7:51 AM PST
up
reply
0 recs
Zhang
I too am encouraged by Zhang, and have been pleasantly surprised by what he’s contributed so far, but I think he’s still pretty far from being an effective post passer, mostly because his hands are still not good. Right now, a tough inside pass to Max is more likely to be deflected out-of-bounds than it is to be caught. He kinda reminds me of Rod Benson : The Early Years.
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
by ragnarok on
Nov 22, 2008 7:55 AM PST
up
reply
0 recs
He better grow up soon… we’re going to need him through our Pac10 sched… sometimes when you have a big team it can close the spread during games.
by danzig on
Nov 22, 2008 9:56 AM PST
up
reply
0 recs
I can explain the "tournament" for you
Here’s the deal: NCAA teams get to play 27 games, always. They also get a choice: they can either play up to 2 additional games, or play in one “exempt event.” (Why exempt? Because it’s exempt from the normal limitations on scheduling games, of course!) The exempt event has to be composed of teams from all different conferences, can’t be more than 4 games long, and there might be one or two other limitations on it.
Teams like playing extra games. It usually can’t hurt— you have that many more opportunities to rack up some magic number of wins (even if the extra wins are against creampuffs) or pick off a top team, or whatever. So it’s a good idea to play in exempt events whenever you possibly can.
It used to be you could only play an exempt event every 4 (?) years, so there weren’t that many of them— CVC, PNIT, Maui and a few others. Then the NCAA changed the rule so that you could play in one EVERY season. This caused, shall we say, a demand spike… and the various corporate sponsors and shady hangers-on of the college game being what they are, that demand spike was met by the creation of numerous pseudo-“events”, all so that teams could squeeze those extra 2 games onto their schedule.
This travesty of a sham of a mockery is the latest “innovation”: a tournament which actually predetermines the results of the prelim round to make sure there’s no risk of, say, those Gardner-Webb peasants soiling the sacred floor of Madison Square Garden in place of Kentucky. The creampuffs go along with it because, let’s face it, the payoff is like half their budget for the year. And the big schools love it, because there’s no risk of them losing games off their schedule. The only ones who suffer are people who continue to cling to the quaint notion that, you know, tournaments should actually be winnable by all the entrants to them.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Nov 21, 2008 10:45 PM PST
reply
0 recs
wow
Thanks for the info. I was wondering how the participating teams were benefiting from this ridiculous farce of a tournament, and now I know. Totally stupid.
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
by ragnarok on
Nov 22, 2008 7:44 AM PST
up
reply
0 recs
Rags, you da man
I’m eternally grateful for the photos… some things I saw:
1) They weren’t playing full speed in that small demo… that’s not what live action looks like.
2) Kat is getting kinda fat… I’m not saying that to insult her… she’s a middle blocker and her vertical is one of the main reasons she’s out there… I’m saying she’s not in good playing weight… I would say the same thing for any of our football corners. Notice in the photo below (right)… she’s in good shape.

3) Later in the week I’ll post what’s happened to our team.. how the defenses are playing us and neutralizing or best offensive player. We won a squeaker vs UCLA last night… and it looks like we still haven’t solved what our opponents are throwing at us. Although chubby Kat had a great game vs the Bruins.
Question: Where were you sitting? Up close some of our girls look freakishly big and that might be off putting, but beyond the 10th row at Haas, they look very sexxxy. Go up and talk to some of them… it’s totally shocking how tall they are…
New Observation: Amra Solomon is looking very good, on and off the court…Her backside is reason enough to attend the games… but she’s really stepped up offensively because Morgan Beck isn’t herself after her ankle injury…
by danzig on
Nov 22, 2008 9:37 AM PST
reply
0 recs
My seats weren’t fantastic…lower part of Haas, but in the corner. During halftime I walked down closer to the action. All of the volleyball photos were taken from about 5 rows behind the visitors’ bench. I’ve only got 3x zoom on my camera (no super-expensive SLRs for me), so I’ve got to get pretty close to take decent photos (the Boykin photo was taken from right above The Bench — the ushers were pretty cool about letting me wander around with my camera).
As for going and chatting up the volleyball players? My wife gave my enough ribbing simply for taking a bunch of photos / videos of tall, athletic blondes.
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
by ragnarok on
Nov 23, 2008 12:44 PM PST
up
reply
0 recs

















