Bears Bounced from Tourney By Bigger, Deeper Duke
Every year, 65 teams enter the NCAA tournament. 64 go home disappointed; for them, it's only a matter of when.
For the Cal Bears, the dream finally died last evening around 7:30PM EST, as the Duke Blue Devils finished running away from the Bears and into the Sweet 16. It was not a heartbreaking loss; Cal was a heavy underdog in any case, and Duke slowly pressed their inside advantage over the Bears all night. It was definitely disappointing, though -- you can talk about how the Bears got beat by a better team, and how they had a successful season in any case, including a conference championship, but in the immediate aftermath of a tough loss to end the season, it's small consolation. Ask me again next week.
At the beginning of the season, while almost all the pundits looked at Cal's roster and declared them a Top 20 team, they also declared their lack of size to be their biggest weakness, the fatal flaw that might ultimately do them in. While the Bears got a taste of that in a loss at Kansas, this lack of size has been mostly understated all season, simply because no other team in the Pac-10 was set up to exploit it. Against Duke, however, the Blue Devils pressed their advantages in the paint and off the bench, and Cal, trailing for most of the game, simply could not shoot themselves back into it.
While you can look back at this game with disappointment, perhaps, you can't look back at it with regret; Duke is a better, deeper team, with matchup advantages they exploited, and while the Bears create their own matchup problems, they would have needed plenty of things to go their way to come away victorious. As Coach Montgomery said postgame:"If we played Duke 10 times, I think they would win more than us," California coach Mike Montgomery said. "We were a little overmatched, and there's not much we could do about it."
(As a side note, one thing I love about having Montgomery as a coach is how he's a straight-shooter with the press. He may not tell you everything you want to know, but he's give honest and sometimes insightful analysis, something that's a breath of fresh air in a world full of say-nothing-interesting coach-speak.)
I think Monty is right on the money here. In his hypothetical 10-game series, I think Cal wins just 2, maybe 3 of those games. Not that they couldn't do it, but a lot of things would have to go right for the Bears, things such as:
- Shooting the ball well (Cal shot under 40% for the game)
- Limiting turnovers (Ten giveaways isn't too bad, but when Duke only gives you five of them back...)
- Rebound the basketball (Duke outrebounded them 34-29)
- Get a few calls from the refs (I'm not going to go into it, but a couple of 50/50 calls now and then really could have helped)
Actually, when you look at the box score, you don't see any particular point of domination for Duke. Instead, what you see is across-the-board advantages.
Points - Duke 68, Cal 53
Shot Attempts - Duke 57, Cal 48
Shots Made - Duke 27, Cal 19
Offensive Rebounds - Duke 11, Cal 8
Defensive Rebounds - Duke 23, Cal 21
Assists - Duke 11, Cal 6
Steals - Duke 4, Cal 3
Blocks - Duke 5, Cal 1
Turnovers - Duke 5, Cal 10
Fouls - Duke 15, Cal 18
About the only areas where Cal came out ahead was slightly better free throw shooting (12 of 16 for Cal, just 11 of 17 for Duke) and fewer missed three pointers (3 of 12 made for Cal, an atrocious 3 of 17 for Duke), and that's not enough. Across the board Duke was just better -- they rebounded better, they controlled the ball better, they contested shots better, they found the open man inside better. Brian Zoubek in particular had a huge game, making all 6 of his shots (3 after offensive rebounds, 2 more on easy buckets from nice outside passes) to go with 13 total rebounds. The Bears tried several different things to slow down Duke's inside game, but Max Zhang was ineffective and Markhuri Sanders-Frison, despite a nice overall effort, kept picking up fouls. Simply put, for the majority of this game, the Bears were outplayed. After the game, Theo Robertson had this to say:
"They got us back on our heels early. There really was no turning point, it was a steady diet," Robertson said. "They executed so well and did a great job communicating."
And that's pretty much the long and the short of it. Can you pinpoint a play where the Bears lost the game? Not really. However, I suppose I can point to the last point at which I had real hope the Bears might win this one, and how quickly it died.
With just over 13 minutes to go in the game, Jamal Boykin grabbed an offensive rebound (his second of the possession) and put it back to cut the Duke lead to 7. It took a lot of effort, but the Bears had cut the Blue Devil halftime lead nearly in half with plenty of time left. In the next two minutes, it would be completely undone and more.
First, the Bears got Nolan Smith to brick a jump shot, only to have Zoubek grab the rebound and put it back it. Duke by 9. Randle tried to answer at the other end, but his layup as the shot clock wound down was off, and Zoubek cleared. It was Zoubek again at the other end, getting behind the defense, fed by Lance Thomas. Duke by 11. On the next Bears' possession, Nolan Smith picked up a foul for Duke, but Jorge Gutierrez' inbound attempt was stolen by Jon Scheyer and not only did Nolan Smith take it strong to the hoop at the other end, but Patrick Christopher picked up a stupid foul trying to defend the break, making enough contact to draw a guaranteed whistle, but not nearly enough to impede the shot. Duke by 13. And when Nolan misses the and-1 free throw, Zoubek is there once again for the offensive board, and Singler finishes. Duke by 15, and the Bears would never threaten again; the rest of the game was mostly an exercise in determining the final score.
Really, though, there's no need to further dwell on this loss. Duke is a very, very good team, and with Kansas out of the tournament, they have to be considered on the short list of teams who could win it all. Nothing about Sunday's game told us anything we didn't already know about our Bears -- it merely served to magnify the weaknesses inherent in the roster. Disappointing, sure, but not surprising or shameful in the least. Just because the Bears didn't really come close to pulling off what could only have been considered a pretty big upset doesn't diminish their impressive accomplishments for this season: 24 wins, a sweep of rival Stanford, and a watershed Pac-10 title (all three of these are the Bears' first in many, many years), not to mention a host of memories from a fantastic senior class, one that could fill a number of highlight films (should some industrious Cal fan decide to put them together).
So, what's next for our Bears? Well, for the seniors, it's time to finish up some classes, get that diploma and see if they can find a shot at the next level. None of the seniors are guaranteed to make an NBA roster, but any of them might find themselves a place somewhere, especially overseas. We'll definitely be remembering each of the seniors over the next couple weeks, and examining their professional prospects, should they choose to pursue them.
And as for the rest of the team? Well, 2010-11 looks to be, if not a full-blown rebuilding year, then at least a year of great transition. The Bears lose 80% of their starters, 77% of their scoring and 52% of their rebounding (64% if Amoke's suspension becomes more than temporary). Cal does hope to get Harper Kamp back from injury, Bak Bak back from academic probation, Omondi Amoke back from whatever he was suspended for, and will bring in a highly-touted recruiting class, led by the Gatorade California Player of the Year, Allen Crabbe. They also get an intriguing walk-on transfer in 6' 10" Robert Thurman, meaning the Bears' weakness this year (lack of size) could turn into a strength next season. In any case, it should be an interesting year, and if Monty can get this team back to the NCAA tournament for a third straight season, it might be his best coaching job yet.
0 recs |
14 comments
|
Comments
I really agree with this. Duke was bigger and deeper – even if the refs were biased in our favor, I still see us losing that game.
The only thing I wanted was to go out guns blazing, but Duke’s close outs and ability to chase shooters into their huge front line resulted in shots with hands in face. And while we can make those .. . we didn’t. Not enough yesterday.
Well, 2010-11 looks to be, if not a full-blown rebuilding year, then at least a year of great transition. The Bears lose 80% of their starters, 77% of their scoring and 52% of their rebounding (64% if Amoke’s suspension becomes more than temporary).
The prediction of what 2010-11 will be like is one we could have just easily made before this season started. With our senior laden team and the down year of the Pac-10 that we kind of expected, this was the perfect storm of years for Cal to win the conference championship. If we didn’t do it this year, I think our psyche as fans (as if not flogged enough throughout Cal sports history) would have taken a huge beating. It would have been a “If we couldn’t do it this year, when will we do it?” sort of thought process that we’ve seen in another sport near and dear to our hearts.
My takeaway from this basketball season is that we were the favored team to win the conference, and we got it done. And hell, we were very close to pulling off the regular season and tournament championship double dip. Were we the same team that we thought we’d be? No. Were we as good as we thought we could be? Probably not. But there’s something to be said for having the target on you as the favorite, taking a few shots to the jaw, yet winning the title at the end. I think that’s hard to do, particularly for a team that’s not considered a dominant team. I’m proud of this team despite yesterday’s bitter loss.
I am a Vereenian.
by Ohio Bear on Mar 22, 2010 5:47 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Duke is a better, deeper team [than Cal]
Yup.
Sure, there were some pretty horrible calls against us, and it seemed as if the refs allowed that hyper-pituitary freak Zoubek toss our defenders around like it was some bizarre medieval freestyle wrestling contest between the county Giant and a handful of midgets, but it was Duke out-playing, out-hustling, and out-executing us that was the difference.
I’m proud of our guys and very happy to have taken at least one game in the tourney. Our misfortune was having the rest of the country think so little of Cal and the Pac-10 which resulted in such a bad seeding. If we get the 5 – 7 seed I think we make it at least to the 16.
Still, griping is pointless. It was a good year and no Cal fans ought to be too upset today.
Whose Axe?
OUR AXE!
I like the fact that many reporters alluded to how the guys all handled themselves with class in the post-game. They certainly didn’t use the officiating as an excuse – in fact, I don’t think any of them even mentioned it. It’s really been fun seeing this group of seniors develop from year to year. All things considered (injuries + no Harper), they exceeded my expectations. What a great group of guys to support and cheer for. It’s been a great run. Now let’s hope football gets its act together and we get to break another 50+ year drought.
Fantastic season for our Bears. If UW can outrun West Virginia, we’ll get more confirmation on that— no doubt it was a down year for our conference, but overall, mission accomplished. The season produced a well-deserved conference championship banner for the rafters, a new all-time leading scorer in Randle, another in the top 5 in scoring all-time in Christopher, and the culmination of outstanding careers for Robertson, Boykin and Kniesevic.
It’s also a good time to recognize Ben Braun who assembled most of this team, and of course Mike Montgomery who has rejuvenated the program.
An unforgettable season— Go Bears!
Some news on our recruits
CIF regional finals were played over the weekend.
Franklin Jr.’s season is over. Crabbe and Solomon are still playing.
I am a Vereenian.
It would be interesting to see how we would have fared if we had faced Marquette and New Mexico here in San Jose. The Bears lost to the Lobos in the Pit, but it was a pretty tight game throughout, and I think we could have taken Marquette, especially in a virtual home game.
But c’est la vie, still a good season
It was kind of the Anaconda Plan
Much like what it must have been like playing against Stanford with the Lopez twins. (Ironically, one of Duke’s bigs was himself committed to Stanford before Trent Johnson left.) Duke kind of squeezed the life out of Cal’s players.
Christopher’s early exit killed off any energy and momentum that the team had. It was really a bad omen in every way…
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."
Size matters?
Great post. It ends by saying that we may have some size next year, something we sorely lacked this season.
The Pac10 as a whole this year didn’t have too much size, how will it be next year? Meaning if we have more size next year and the rest of the Pac is similar to this year, won’t that be a big strength for us?
by deanchoi on Mar 22, 2010 11:22 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
I think that is a very interesting question.
1. This year Cal struggled against teams with skilled large players. But against smaller Pac-10 teams the lack of size was not a problem, and in fact Zhang was particularly effective in shutting down the other team at the rim (some of the time). Sanders-Frison also had some effective games. With little size returning in the conference, next years tall team could be effective, particularly if Gutierrez continues to contribute tough perimeter defense and the other guards follow his lead. Offense is less promising, as we saw little scoring spark from the big men. I am encouraged by the passing skills of Sanders-Frison and Kamp, and like to think Zhang has good hands.
2. This year’s team performed well – they were expected to be skilled and have the ability to score, and they delivered on that. Next year’s team will have lower expectations and higher variance around their expected performance. It will be interesting to see if Coach Montgomery can weld a cohesive unit and develop the skills and execution of some of the key players. I like to think Zhang, Seeley and the frosh have upside potential that he can help them achieve.
jh
That might be what it IS
It’s not what it should be…
[puts away soapbox painted “I hate daylight savings time”…]
Shawn Spencer: "I’m receiving a transmission from your husband. Really more of a voicemail, if I'm being honest. A status update. Perhaps a twitter."
Burton Guster: "I believe it’s called a tweet."
Shawn Spencer: "There’s no way I’m saying that."

by 



















