Inside The Numbers - 2008 Cal Basketball Regular Season
We are about to enter a brave new world of "seeding," North Carolina States, and Tournaments where the only vowel in their name is an "A" or two. This is definitely undiscovered country for many Cal fans in recent years.
Coach Montgomery has brought a new era of hope to fans of Cal basketball. Of course with hope for success comes anxiety over failure. I don't know about you, but I am very nervous over the next few weeks. Figuring out the new and inventive ways for karma to screw Cal over. When I was at Cal, we always seemed to face the home team in the 2nd round. Pitt in Pitt. Oklahoma in Oklahoma City. Always felt like Cal got the short end of the straw.
So, I am feeling anxious. This is probably how Kirk and McCoy felt after they were framed for the assassination of Gorkon in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. Fearful that I'll be sentenced to life at the gulag Rura Pente, but hopeful that Cal will make a Sweet 16 run.
"The plot of this movie was not as apropos to Cal's current basketball situation as the title led me to believe" via www.startrek2.com
With that mindset, I decided to take a look at the regular season statistics. What can we gleam from them and what might they tell us for the future? And is there a Star Trek movie better compared to this situation? Because I'm at a loss for metaphors here.
All numbers are from here.
TEAM STATISTICS CAL OPP
--------------------------------------------------
SCORING................. 2326 2108
Points per game....... 75.0 68.0
Scoring margin........ +7.0 -
FIELD GOALS-ATT......... 839-1724 767-1741
Field goal pct........ .487 .441
3 POINT FG-ATT.......... 196-448 171-494
3-point FG pct........ .438 .346
3-pt FG made per game. 6.3 5.5
FREE THROWS-ATT......... 452-596 403-573
Free throw pct........ .758 .703
F-Throws made per game 14.6 13.0
REBOUNDS................ 1051 953
Rebounds per game..... 33.9 30.7
Rebounding margin..... +3.2 -
ASSISTS................. 482 384
Assists per game...... 15.5 12.4
TURNOVERS............... 380 390
Turnovers per game.... 12.3 12.6
Turnover margin....... +0.3 -
Assist/turnover ratio. 1.3 1.0
STEALS.................. 149 161
Steals per game....... 4.8 5.2
BLOCKS.................. 63 102
Blocks per game....... 2.0 3.3
ATTENDANCE.............. 155233 126633
Home games-Avg/Game... 18-8624 12-9629
Neutral site-Avg/Game. - 1-11080
SCORE BY PERIODS 1st 2nd OT OT2 OT3 Total
--------------- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
California..... 1070 1210 22 13 11 - 2326
Opponents...... 977 1091 19 13 8 - 2108
First, let's talk about score by periods. Cal was viewed as a 2nd half team. Is this perception accurate? Well, they scored 140 more points in the second halves. But they also gave up 114 points in the second half. So, that could be indicative of players tiring in the second half on defense. And, also, extra free throws at the tail ends of games. But that comes out to a 13% increase in the second half for Cal compared to an 11% increase for their opponents. We'd probably have to do a more in depth analysis of many other teams to determine if that 2% difference is statistically significant.
Looking at the other available numbers, what jumps out firstly to me is that Cal outrebounded their opponents by about 3 rebounds a game. Considering many criticized this team for lacking a solid inside presence, that is intriguing to me. Most other numbers seemed more in line with my perception. For example, our 3 Pt percentage is quite a bit higher than our opponents at .438 to .346. I'm moderately surprised to see that we attempted about 50 fewer 3 pointers than our opponents. That might have something to do with our opponents trying to catch up late in games by just jacking up bad 3s? Not entirely sure, but we were clearly much more efficient with our 3 pointers.
POINTS G Pts Pts/G SCORING AVERAGE G Pts Avg/G
----------------------------------- ----------------------------------
Randle, Jerome...... 31 571 18.4 Randle, Jerome...... 31 571 18.4
Christopher, Patrick 31 453 14.6 Christopher, Patrick 31 453 14.6
Robertson, Theo..... 31 398 12.8 Robertson, Theo..... 31 398 12.8
Boykin, Jamal....... 31 301 9.7 Boykin, Jamal....... 31 301 9.7
Wilkes, Jordan...... 30 145 4.8 Wilkes, Jordan...... 30 145 4.8
Gutierrez, Jorge.... 31 133 4.3 Gutierrez, Jorge.... 31 133 4.3
Kamp, Harper........ 31 123 4.0 Kamp, Harper........ 31 123 4.0
Amoke, Omondi....... 30 82 2.7 Amoke, Omondi....... 30 82 2.7
Seeley, D.J......... 24 46 1.9 Miller, Eddie....... 7 17 2.4
Knezevic, Nikola.... 21 28 1.3 Seeley, D.J......... 24 46 1.9
Zhang, Max......... 15 20 1.3 Zhang, Max......... 15 20 1.3
Miller, Eddie....... 7 17 2.4 Knezevic, Nikola.... 21 28 1.3
I'm not entirely sure why Cal lists essentially the same stat twice here. Unfortunately, Cal controls by game and not by minutes. They do list minutes later in the stat sheet here, but it might be prudent to look at some of these numbers per minute, too.
For example, if my calculations are accurate here, Randle scored a point per every 1.88 minutes of play. Patrick Christopher was at 2.27. Now, next would be Theo with 100 points more than Boykin. Except that Boykin scored a point per 2.4 minutes, while Theo was 2.6. Again, I'm not smart enough to know if a .2 difference is significant there, but it could potentially mean that Boykin was a more efficient scorer than Theo.
FG PERCENTAGE FG ATT Pct FIELD GOAL ATTEMPTS G Att Att/G
---------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Carter, Nigel....... 2 2 1.000 Christopher, Patrick 31 370 11.9
Miller, Eddie....... 6 8 .750 Randle, Jerome...... 31 356 11.5
Zhang, Max......... 9 13 .692 Robertson, Theo..... 31 300 9.7
Boykin, Jamal....... 122 226 .540 Boykin, Jamal....... 31 226 7.3
Wilkes, Jordan...... 59 116 .509 Wilkes, Jordan...... 30 116 3.9
Randle, Jerome...... 179 356 .503
Kamp, Harper........ 47 95 .495 FIELD GOALS MADE G Made Made/G
Robertson, Theo..... 147 300 .490 -----------------------------------
Amoke, Omondi....... 29 60 .483 Randle, Jerome...... 31 179 5.8
Knezevic, Nikola.... 7 15 .467 Christopher, Patrick 31 167 5.4
Christopher, Patrick 167 370 .451 Robertson, Theo..... 31 147 4.7
Gutierrez, Jorge.... 49 109 .450 Boykin, Jamal....... 31 122 3.9
Wilkes, Jordan...... 30 59 2.0
What jumps out at me here is PC being so far down the list. He attempted the most field goals on the team by about 15 over Randle. But his pct is about .050 points worse than Randle. Even compared to Theo who shot 50 fewer FGs, PC's percentage is about .040 points lower.
Personally, I think some of that stems from Randle's amazing season. Of the players with significant minutes, 3 out of the top 4 are inside players, shooting far closer to the basket than Randle. Yet, Randle is right in the middle of them, making half of his shots! Half! And lord knows half of those shots were those 58 footers that always cause the fans to groan until it swishes through!
This is, IMO, a sign of Monty being a much better coach than Braun. We all knew Randle had the talent and Monty was able to better focus Randle on that talent.
3-POINT PERCENTAGE 3FG ATT Pct 3-POINT FG ATTEMPTS G Att Att/G
---------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Miller, Eddie....... 4 5 .800 Randle, Jerome...... 31 165 5.3
Boykin, Jamal....... 3 6 .500 Christopher, Patrick 31 119 3.8
Robertson, Theo..... 53 107 .495 Robertson, Theo..... 31 107 3.5
Randle, Jerome...... 77 165 .467 Gutierrez, Jorge.... 31 19 0.6
Knezevic, Nikola.... 3 7 .429 Seeley, D.J......... 24 15 0.6
Christopher, Patrick 46 119 .387
Seeley, D.J......... 5 15 .333 3-POINT FGS MADE G Made Made/G
Gutierrez, Jorge.... 5 19 .263 -----------------------------------
Robinson, Nican..... 0 2 .000 Randle, Jerome...... 31 77 2.5
Kamp, Harper........ 0 1 .000 Robertson, Theo..... 31 53 1.7
Wilkes, Jordan...... 0 1 .000 Christopher, Patrick 31 46 1.5
Amoke, Omondi....... 0 1 .000 Gutierrez, Jorge.... 31 5 0.2
Seeley, D.J......... 24 5 0.2
No real surprises here. We all knew Theo was kicking butt at 3s. And we all knew that Randle attempted a LOT (!) of them. The fact that Randle attempted so many and STILL had a fairly good percentage is unbelievable.
FT PERCENTAGE FT ATT Pct FREE THROW ATTEMPTS G Att Att/G
---------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Miller, Eddie....... 1 1 1.000 Randle, Jerome...... 31 156 5.0
Carter, Nigel....... 1 1 1.000 Christopher, Patrick 31 89 2.9
Randle, Jerome...... 136 156 .872 Boykin, Jamal....... 31 76 2.5
Christopher, Patrick 73 89 .820 Robertson, Theo..... 31 65 2.1
Wilkes, Jordan...... 27 34 .794 Gutierrez, Jorge.... 31 46 1.5
Robertson, Theo..... 51 65 .785
Boykin, Jamal....... 54 76 .711 FREE THROWS MADE G Made Made/G
Kamp, Harper........ 29 44 .659 -----------------------------------
Gutierrez, Jorge.... 30 46 .652 Randle, Jerome...... 31 136 4.4
Knezevic, Nikola.... 11 17 .647 Christopher, Patrick 31 73 2.4
Seeley, D.J......... 11 18 .611 Boykin, Jamal....... 31 54 1.7
Amoke, Omondi....... 24 40 .600 Robertson, Theo..... 31 51 1.6
Gutierrez, Jorge.... 31 30 1.0
Again, Randle shows his value here. He has attempted, BY FAR, the most FTs on the team. Add PC and Theo together and you get Randle's amount. And yet, he is hitting nearly 90% of them! I mean I knew that Randle was having an amazing season, but before I really looked at these numbers, I didn't realize just HOW amazing. Sometimes the numbers can lie, but in this instance, I think they are reflective of just how great a season he has had.
However, it's not all just Randle on this team. Christopher also makes better than 80% of his free throws, and all five starters make better than 70% from the charity stripe -- all better than the national average. Unsurprisingly, Cal ranks 13th in the country in free throw shooting as a team, at 75.8%. If you're trailing the Bears with less than a couple minutes to go, these guys make it very difficult for any team to come back against.
REBOUNDS G Reb Reb/G ASSISTS G No. A/G
----------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Boykin, Jamal....... 31 200 6.5 Randle, Jerome...... 31 156 5.0
Wilkes, Jordan...... 30 121 4.0 Robertson, Theo..... 31 76 2.5
Robertson, Theo..... 31 119 3.8 Christopher, Patrick 31 65 2.1
Christopher, Patrick 31 118 3.8 Gutierrez, Jorge.... 31 51 1.6
Kamp, Harper........ 31 102 3.3 Kamp, Harper........ 31 32 1.0
REBOUND AVERAGE G Reb Avg/G STEALS G No. S/G
----------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Boykin, Jamal....... 31 200 6.5 Gutierrez, Jorge.... 31 26 0.8
Wilkes, Jordan...... 30 121 4.0 Christopher, Patrick 31 24 0.8
Robertson, Theo..... 31 119 3.8 Robertson, Theo..... 31 23 0.7
Christopher, Patrick 31 118 3.8 Randle, Jerome...... 31 21 0.7
Kamp, Harper........ 31 102 3.3 Boykin, Jamal....... 31 16 0.5
Kamp, Harper........ 31 16 0.5
First, a note on steals. Jorge leads the team in steals. What is most amazing about it is that he's played half the minutes of PC, Theo, and Randle. They all have 1,000+ minutes, while he has 566. So, those numbers for Jorge are EVEN better than they look.
As for rebounds, Boykin being up top isn't surprising. Having Wilkes be only 2 and 3 boards more over the course of the season than Theo and PC, respectively, was surprising. I anticipated that Wilkes would have many more rebounds than them. Hmmmmmm.
And Randle has all the assists. Just continues to show his value. When he can hit his shots and distribute well, we could be unstoppable! Just look at Thursday night against Arizona in the second half. I am salivating at the thought of upsetting some team in the Round of 32 after Randle has an epic game to make the Sweet 16. A Cal fan? Optimistic? This can certainly lead to nothing good! Unless you count emotional devastation as good. Which, considering most USC fans feed off of the tears of Cal fans, could end well for Pete Carroll.
OFFENSIVE REBOUNDS G No. Avg/G BLOCKED SHOTS G No. Blk/G
----------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Boykin, Jamal....... 31 71 2.3 Wilkes, Jordan...... 30 14 0.5
Christopher, Patrick 31 37 1.2 Zhang, Max......... 15 13 0.9
Kamp, Harper........ 31 33 1.1 Boykin, Jamal....... 31 10 0.3
Wilkes, Jordan...... 30 32 1.1 Kamp, Harper........ 31 9 0.3
Gutierrez, Jorge.... 31 22 0.7 Amoke, Omondi....... 30 6 0.2
DEFENSIVE REBOUNDS G No. Avg/G MINUTES G No. Min/G
----------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Boykin, Jamal....... 31 129 4.2 Randle, Jerome...... 31 1084 35.0
Robertson, Theo..... 31 100 3.2 Robertson, Theo..... 31 1035 33.4
Wilkes, Jordan...... 30 89 3.0 Christopher, Patrick 31 1030 33.2
Randle, Jerome...... 31 82 2.6 Boykin, Jamal....... 31 724 23.4
Christopher, Patrick 31 81 2.6 Kamp, Harper........ 31 623 20.1
FOULS G No. Per/G TURNOVERS G No. TO/G
----------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Kamp, Harper........ 31 75 2.4 Randle, Jerome...... 31 91 2.9
Robertson, Theo..... 31 72 2.3 Robertson, Theo..... 31 66 2.1
Gutierrez, Jorge.... 31 65 2.1 Christopher, Patrick 31 53 1.7
Christopher, Patrick 31 64 2.1 Gutierrez, Jorge.... 31 50 1.6
Boykin, Jamal....... 31 57 1.8 Kamp, Harper........ 31 31 1.0
I mostly wanted to talk about the turnovers here. Randle having the most turnovers by far is not a surprise to many. We all know that with good Randle comes bad Randle. Just in general he is going to have more turnovers, too, because he handles the ball more. But the stark difference here stems from the bad Randle times.
He averaged 1 turnover per every 11.9 minutes. Jorge's minutes aren't listed there, but he had 566 minutes. That comes out to a turnover every 11.32 minutes. So, he was about at the same rate as Randle. Not surprising to many. By comparison, Theo had a turnover every 15 minutes, roughly. For PChris, it almost 20 minutes per turnover. These numbers are not terribly surprising, however, especially given the heavy ball-handling loads that the two point guards were asked to shoulder. Would it be nice if Jerome and Jorge could cut down on the turnovers? Of course. However, I think these numbers are overall pretty acceptable, and it's nice to see that no one else on the court is turnover-prone.
Final Thoughts:
This all goes through Randle. If Randle can play at the level we know he can (distributing well, hitting his shots, including 3s), this could be a dangerous team. Of course, the flip side is if he plays poorly, well, we've seen what can happen there. I shouldn't put so much pressure on Randle, of course, because there are so many other parts to this team. But I really think that Randle could be our key to a successful tournament run.
But enough of what I have to say. What do you think?
34 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The old caveat – if you have upper-classman guards who are good, you can go far in the tournament, I think rings true. I think a lot hinges on how good our looks from long-distance are going to be – shooting 43% from downtown is a serious advantage.
On the down side, I’m worried about the low number of blocks we have as a team (Max Zhang aside) – we clearly don’t have anyone to defend the rim, so if we end up against a team that can get to the rim, we’ll be in a lot of trouble.
Finally Which, considering most USC fans feed off of the tears of Cal fans, could end well for Pete Carroll. USC should be very very very well fed for eons to come. Making Cal fans cry is like making TwistNHook type babble. They should feed off something more challenging, like jokes from BN.
+1 for the Star Trek reference
great use of metaphor!
2 points
1) I would like to see the numbers with crummy non-conference teams removed – say, all of the Pac-10 games, plus Mizzou, FSU, Utah, and UNLV. I’m curious to see our rebounding and turnover numbers against the cream of the crop.
2) The best Star Trek analogy would be Star Trek IV. We survived the confusion and pain of Ben Braun/Star Trek III, and now we’re having all kinds of fun running around the Bay Area making goofy jokes. And there are even some whales involved (Thanks Pacific Life!)
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
I agree that it’s important to look deeper into these numbers. But its also important to have an overall picture. Ragnarok and I have discussed doing further analyses during the off-season. We have MANY months to fill, of course. Perhaps you’d be interested in helping us in this regard.
TYRANNICAL KING OF UC EUGENE! BRING ME THE HEAD OF SEATTLE QUACKER!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Thoughts
Feeling screwed re: Pitt at Pitt and Ok at Ok. —> Yes, me too. However, the answer to this is WIN MORE GAMES and GET A HIGHER SEED and then you get to be CAL @ Oakland, San Jose, or Sacramento! It’s all about recruits for Cal at this point. We know Monty is a great coach. Now he just needs the players. If we can bring in the blue chippers, we’ll be the high seeded home team others complain about. If not, we’ll be middlings.
Defending the rim —> Sadly, nothing changes next year in this regard.
Guttierez and steals—> If he can get a jump shot (next 3 years), then we got something.
Feeling nervous? —> 99.265% of all teams that make it to the tourney can “Get to the rim”. You have reason to be nervous.
For this post-season, I ain’t sweatin’ it any longer. They lost some games they should have won, and they could have gotten a high enough seed (6, even) that would have allowed them to play a weak 1st round game, and potentially get a surprising upset in the 2nd round against a foolish 3 seed, which would put us in the sweet 16 and would have been AMAZING. However, they lost twice to OSU and got blown out on National TV and so will likely earn a 7-9 seed, which presents them with more of an equal first round game, which, if they win, I will definitely be satisfied for this team, and then a tough 1 or 2 seed in the 2nd round, which is an automatic out (see below). I say I ain’t sweatin’ it, b/c all the scenarios I mentioned are major upgrades beyond pre-season expectations. So, yes, they could have set themselves up for something unbelievable, but even realty has been very good!
Instead, I’m looking to next year. I think Cal, which will have Seeley and DJ playing a year wiser at the 2 and 3 spots, but with seemingly no improvement in the frontcourt, should adjust it’s style of play. Since we still won’t be able to defend the rim, we might as well try to outscore them by running. Our advantage will be in the rotation of 1-3 positions, so we might as well attack like an army or orcs!
So...we lose Wilkes
Boykin and Kamp are our experienced ‘bigs.’ I don’t know if we’re expecting Max to contribute, or Taylor Harrison to come back, but I would be excited to see a small lineup to really push the tempo. I’m thinking Jerome, Patrick, Theo, Seeley/Amoki and Kamp/Boykin. I don’t know how Monty feels about coaching ‘Nellie ball,’ but he sure seems able to adapt his coaching to the talent he has on hand.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
If Sanders-Frison isn't ready to play major minutes, he's completely pointless
You don’t take junior college sophomores as projects… I mean, maybe he’s a bust, but we have nothing to go on there.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
Sanders-Frison
I’m concerned that we took him b/c we couldn’t get anyone else. Hopefully I’m wrong and Monty saw something he liked and he will fill a role, hopefully WELL, just like Gutierrez did.
If nothing else, they could have given the scholarship to Smith...
besides, they didn’t even know for sure there would be a scholarship at all.
The report at ESPN.com makes it sound like he could be excellent if he can knock off 20 pounds or so. Kind of a lower-middle-class man’s Dexter Pittman with a better jumpshot.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
I'm convinced "pushing the tempo" would be a disastrous mistake
Bottom line, the BIg Three are not steal-producers. It’s not their game and it never has been. And this year, Cal has clearly been a worse team the faster they’ve played. A faster pace has made the Bears worse on offense and better on defense, but the loss on offense exceeds the gain on defense.
Fast-paced games favor athletic teams that can’t shoot— teams like Washington, Tennessee, Missouri. Cal is diametrically the opposite of those teams. This Cal team is structured more like a mid-major— disciplined offense, 3-point shooting prowess, and generally conservative ballhandling (Randle notwithstanding).
There’s a pretty well-developed script for beating more-athletic opponents in college basketball. It’s pretty much as follows:
1. Slow the game down.
2. Run a system offense that relies on plays, not players, to get open looks.
3. Take only good shots, which goes along with #1.
4. Play conservative defense. Force the other team to make jumpshots, not layups, to beat you.
5. Get defensive rebounds without worrying too much about offensive rebounds.
This is basically how it goes. Apart from the occasional Davidson-type anomaly that has one amazing player, basically all teams that enjoy success without landing big-time recruits follow some variant of this script. Cal is both uniquely suited to run it at an extremely high level (because they have three amazing outside shooters who would be most teams’ #1 option beyond the arc) and totally unsuited to attempt an up-tempo strategy. I know Jerome Randle produces highlight-reel plays when he’s running down the court, but the highlight reels don’t show the plays where he dribbles the ball off his foot out of bounds or throws up a brick layup 1-on-3. He is a better player in the halfcourt offense, as is the rest of the Cal team.
Cal needs a game plan that emphasizes the team’s strengths and minimizes its weaknesses. That game plan is, simply, get good shots. In a game where each team is getting about the same number of good shots, Cal is usually going to win because they shoot better.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
by PaulThomas on Mar 9, 2009 12:30 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I like what you wrote here, PT
You make a lot of good points. Perhaps in seeing our limitations I was willing to upset the whole apple cart, just to make it fun and see what happens. Rather die by the unknown that the known. The lack of size inside next year just spells doom to me. Images of Taj going over the back on Wilkes on that free throw rebound are playing in my head. And Wilkes is 7 feet tall! And gone next year!
And I feel like I’m the only one hoping like all get out that Taylor Harrison comes back as a big bad mother with his hair grown out like he had in high school. But he’s looking too thin in that nice suit and haircut on the sidelines.
But the beauty of college basketball
and the reason why I love it and hate the NBA, is that you can overcome limitations. Nothing spells doom if you have the right coaching.
Southern Illinois made a living for some years (they’re off this year, but I don’t know if that’s just a down year in the program’s cycle) out of playing tenacious defense. They did it without ever having any height at all, and without NBA talent, either, for that matter. How? They had a policy of switching all screens and training their players to be able to defend at any point on the floor.
That’s not to say every team needs to or should adopt that system— but it shows what you can do if you have a system. And Montgomery does. Recruiting to your system is as important, or more so, as recruiting objectively elite talent.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
I don't understand
What exactly you mean. You enjoy the underdog aspect of college basketball because the system is better? You do realize the best teams in the NBA run similar systems, right?
by BearsNecessity on Mar 9, 2009 9:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Nope, I don't follow the NBA at all
I should have said “one of the reasons,” since the general apathy, interminable length of the season and playoffs, overpromotion, and excessively long games are also significant factors.
Cut the season to 40 games, the playoffs to 3 rounds of best-of-5, and the games to 40 minutes and I could probably get behind it.
I should add that I don’t have any particular preference for slowdown basketball. I like that coaches have a variety of options that they can use to build a winning team— VMI-style craziness is equally interesting, particularly when it clashes with an opposing style of play. I do think the slowdown game is easier to recruit for and fits the current Bears’ personnel better, though.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
Cut the season to 40 games, the playoffs to 3 rounds of best-of-5, and the games to 40 minutes and I could probably get behind it.
Heh, in other words, make it just an extension of college basketball. Understandable. The NBA isn’t for everyone.
by BearsNecessity on Mar 10, 2009 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions
Twist, I love that you are a Trekkie! I have been in the closet for so many years. Sadly, I remain in there to this day. I really want to come out, but I cannot. All of my so called friends make fun of the franchise and brutalize anyone showing any inkling of being a Trekkie. I am a coward for not confronting them! Can’t wait for the prequel to TOS (that’s ‘The Original Series’ to non Trekkies.) It comes out in May! See you there, Twist!
"I look forward to a future in which our country will match its military strength with our moral restraint, its wealth with our wisdom, its power with our purpose."
John F. Kennedy
Pitt in Pittsburgh & Oklahoma in Oklahoma City has an explanation
Repercussions of Bozeman’s mail order cash for players system – plain and simple.
The NCAA was still pissed. Even in Braun’s first year, when he had his best team with Bozeman’s players and we got a good seed, we had to go out East and play Princeton, which had recently upset UCLA in a similar scenario.
You know the NCAA was rooting for the same thing when they drew it up.
The committee can’t keep you out of the field when you deserve it. They have total control, and can deliberately make life tough though. Pitt in Pittsburgh for a second round game was rough. The next year, when it was the Sooners in Oklahoma City, that proved in my mind these were not accidents.
Now that even Bozeman made it last year after sitting out his mandatory 5 years, the NCAA is likely finally over it. They know Monty had nothing to do with it. Hell, he was probably helpful in turning Cal in.
We aren’t going far for years anyway. But, we are in the field, and are fun to watch. We have a coach, the students are enthused again, considering we lost Ryan Anderson – we are a little ahead of schedule. If we all keep the proper prospective, this is going to be a great ride as long as Coach wants to keep coaching.
by BearBackerGoesBackBackBack on Mar 9, 2009 1:08 PM PDT reply actions
Eh
Pac-10 teams always get hosed in the NCAAs. I mean, two years ago, Stanford got sent to Kentucky to play Louisville… in the 6-11 game! The SIX SEED had a virtual homecourt game in the first round (and the second round, too, which must have irritated the hell out of Texas A&M fans, since top 5 seeds are supposedly protected against homecourt disadvantage). On top of which, it was at 9 AM Bay Area time. Was that in retribution for some kind of violation? No, it’s just par for the course.
Eastern teams will always have an unfair advantage in the tournament, because the tourney sites are closer together (making it easier for them to draw supporting fans) and they don’t have to play those awful first-round morning games while jet-lagged.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
Stanford Lousville, and Tx A&M
Yes, I remember that. What a crock of shit that was.
Perhaps they really DO just do a shitty job.
They should mandate that all schools finish their tournaments by a certain time on Saturday, stay up all night, then release the (proper) seeding Sunday morning. Oh, wait. That would mean lost TV revenue. Never mind.
I’ll go back to my prior point – win more games and you’ll be Cal in Oakland/Sacto/San Jose.
I think a lot of it is just time pressure
and part of it is spending too much time on figuring out who gets admitted and too little time on getting the seeding and matchups right.
I wish they’d make more of an effort to avoid pairing two mid-majors against each other too.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
Well that's a new twist I hadn't heard before.
I just thought they did a sucky job in their seeding.
Joe Lunardi has Cal playing St. Mary's in Minneapolis
by BearBackerGoesBackBackBack on Mar 9, 2009 6:44 PM PDT reply actions
Would have been a fun matchup, but with the loss tonight, I don’t think there’s any way they’ll be in the tournament. I think if they suffered a close loss with Mills showing that he’s 100%, they’d be in.
They smartly snuck in an extra game on Friday
Another chance for Mills to audition his health for the committee. Clearly he isn’t “there” yet, but if he shows improvement on Friday, it’ll make an impression.
Many years from now, when his name's recalled
Everyone will say, "He should have passed the ball"
-- Al Stewart, "Football Hero"
Aren't they all the same!??!
(actually, they’re all just slow, like their football teams… Unleash the Randle against Minnesota on Penn State!!!)
by Thoroughbred on Mar 9, 2009 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions

by 























































