Cal Bears Throttle the Utes, 81-45
by Kodiak on Jan 14, 2012 9:29 PM PST
in California Golden Bears Men's Basketball
Email
PrintJorge bounced back in a big way. Harper continued his hot hand and was deadly both inside and out. Justin Cobbs controlled this game from the point. Even better, we had a Rossi sighting! And contributions from Behrens!
From start to finish, this game had "Bears" stamped all over it. This was a contest that we should have dominated. And after Thursday's gut-wrencher, it was highly satisfying to see us return to the mean and execute offensively as we've grown to expect.
Alas, no waffles, but any game where we get to see Raffi Chalian is a good one.
Rejoice, Cal fans. A more in-depth recap will fire up tomorrow, but in the meantime, revel and get ready to make Washington Bear Territory!
Go Bears!
38 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It's cool to win easily
But Utah looked every bit as bad as they were supposed to be. I don’t know how that team has been having actual games versus other teams in the conference.
Now it gets real. Next two weeks will tell us a lot about how this conference season is going to go.
The conference is that bad?
"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded
by atomsareenough on Jan 14, 2012 9:36 PM PST up reply actions
or...
I don’t know how that team has been having actual games versus other teams in the conference.
Um, maybe we’re not as bad as you seem to think we are? Or, maybe we look at the circumstances leading up to Thursdays game, late game on previous Sunday keeping the team from leaving Oregon until Monday…. short week of practice… and a decent opponent. We won a game Thursday playing terribly which most teams would have lost. But we won. And we blew out our overmatched opponent yesterday.
Color me not nearly as optimistic as all that, but I guess it doesn’t matter who’s right — the next couple weeks will be telling and I hope the recent doubts I’ve developed about this team are way off.
That’s all fine… I agree we should let the games play out… and I guess I’ll go ahead and enjoy the wins instead of worrying about potential upcoming losses (because we most assuredly will lose a couple of more games) but what I don’t get is why you seem to dismiss us blowing out a team who you acknowledge has given other teams a game of it?
All the data through their game versus Colorado indicated Utah was among the worst teams in the country. Even after their recent improvement in play, Kenpom (for example) still has them 316 of 345. And what I saw with my own two eyes confirmed that. Admittedly, I’ve only watched them once. (I’m a bit of a junky, but even I’m not going out of my way to watch Utah games, life’s too short.) But what I saw was a team that was completely devoid of talent offensively and defensively. They also did not seem particularly well coached…examples include a number of horrific turnovers, a brief experiment with a full court trap in a game that they clearly needed to tempo down, and a commitment to leaving us open 15 foot jumpers, which we’re quite adept at making (I thought they probably had a better chance letting us have the low post, not that this is much of a chance either).
When there’s seemingly good data and some outliers, I tend to believe the data is right and the outliers are variance.
And by the way, I posted awhile back about enjoying the conference season rather than worrying about March, so I hear you on enjoyment over worry. But I guess where we differ is my enjoyment comes as much from process as results, so it’s hard for me to be completely satisfied with some mediocre performances (O v CU and D v OSU). I believe that, outside of certain matchups, this team has the makeup to compete with anyone in the country when playing well, and, strange as it sounds, I tend to take more enjoyment from a well played loss than a poorly played win.
I completely agree with you they looked terrible against us. I also think they are REALLY bad… I mean, seriously bad. All I was saying is you acknowledged they have given other teams a game of it, so maybe part of their looking terrible against us had something to do with us.
I think we have laid 1 1/2 eggs this season. Against Missouri. That was just a terrible game and it really hurt that it was on national TV. I don’t think @ UNLV was an egg laying. They are a very good team, and we were probably at 1/2 strength if that due to illness. Yeah we got blown out (and I was there with Sandy so it made it sort of less enjoyable) but it wasn’t and “egg laying.” @ San Diego State is also a solid team and we barely lost to them. OSU I would give 1/2 egg lay… In retrospect it gets more annoying ;-)
I didn’t say but probably should have…I thought we played very well last night. I guess my point was the conference favorite is supposed to do that against the presumptive last place finisher…so it did not do much to assuage concerns I had going in.
For me, I throw out UNLV and Mizzou. There are a handful of matchups that are just horrible for us, and we just happened to get two of them preseason. I think we lose those a very high percentage of the time against those teams even if we play our best, just like, as great as Ali was, I think he’d have lost to Norton a high percentage. I’m okay with that.
For me the eggs were OSU, CU, and possibly USC (although I give Kevin O’Neill a ton of credit for taking us off our game, so I give a little allowance for that one). Eggs in the sense that not only did we not play our best, we played below what our average level should be.
This is a team with the best coach in the conference, more than enough heart, talent, and commitment to win every night in the P12. I get that there will be off nights. That’s part of the ebb and flow of a season. But in six conference games, we’ve been shaky three times. That’s where my worry comes from, because I think there’s enough here to destroy this league…I’ve posted that I’m hoping for 14-4, but secretly I’ve thought that the ceiling was actually higher than that. So I guess where my worrying is coming from is rooted in that secret hope.
I like wins, I really do. I just think if we bring the offensive execution we brought on Thursday to the next couple weeks, we won’t be getting enough of them. I don’t want just a good season. I want Jorge and Harper to leave after a magical season. That feeling I got in 1993 and 1997. That’s why I follow this sport.
I think we’re pretty much in agreement on the macro not quite the micro. ;-)
I don’t think any win counts as an egg laying. Ever. A lot of weird circumstances leading to Thursday’s game, along with some horrid shooting, and we still win. To me that is a gutty find-a-way to win performance, backed up by Saturday’s obliteration of a clearly inferior team. I like that and it’s what helps define a championship team and can be stored for later reference… how did we win when we weren’t at our best?
With SC bottom line is we won. It was frickin’ ugly but no one holds that against us. You are going to have tough wins. And then we backed it up with a total dismantling of UCLA.
Some one mark this day and time down, because i am being more critical, but Mizzou was a total and complete egg laying. Terrible match ups for us, but this team should not lose a game by 39 points. It was a terrible game for us. The final score was perfectly indicative of the game. We got blown out in the first half and we got blown out in the second half.
One other thing, ’93 will forever be tainted for me. I was at the sweet 16 game in St Louis and even so it will never be magical to me. 97, yes. But by far the most magical was 2010. Right now I want “real” banners we can hang in Haas, and a Conference Championship means more to me than a Sweet 16 (though I would take them both!).
To clarify one thing after re-reading your post…I don’t think we’re bad. I actually think at our best we’re very good, and quite underrated nationally. I also think we’ve laid a few eggs, and that we don’t have a high enough level of talent to allow for egg laying in the long run. I want to see us play as well as we can, rather than as poorly as we played against Colorado. I’m hopeful this will happen more as the season continues.
Effort
As hard as Colorado appeared to play Thursday, these guys appeared to play soft.
I’m talking Defense.
True, but we also looked good. Our defensive effort and execution was really good, and of course on offense things really started clicking toward the end of the first half.
"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded
by atomsareenough on Jan 14, 2012 9:37 PM PST up reply actions
Well, against Colorado we kept letting Austin Dufault shoot threes, and our offense never got in rhythm the whole game.
"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded
by atomsareenough on Jan 14, 2012 9:48 PM PST up reply actions
I think that’s how our defense is. The oppositions can get relatively easy look from 3’s against us but nothing more. Against hot shooting, we are screwed.
by LEastCoastBears on Jan 14, 2012 9:51 PM PST up reply actions
Not as much this year. Now that we’re playing man instead of zone, we’ve actually been better at closing out on shooters. Were we have trouble is denying dribble penetration against quick and athletic guards. That often sets up open outside shots.
Against CU, it was a little bit of youth (Kravish) and rust/mental breakdowns (Solo) that kept letting Dufault getting free.
Old Toothwrangler
I think this was magnified a bit by how bad our O was. Taking a step back we held them to 50 points, 31% shooting, and 26% 3p. Dufault was 3-4 from deep and they were all open, so it was a lapse, but not a ridiculous one, and one that probably wouldn’t have even been noticed if we had performed with some minimal competence offensively.
I don’t think it’s so much about our D denying particular options across the board, I think it’s about denying the other team’s preferred options on a given night. That’s the problem against teams whose preference is running their offense through multiple athletic guys who can both penetrate and pull up. We direct our energy toward stopping it but don’t have the athletes.
Really good points. I think Cobbs is getting better as a man defender. Jorge is tough, but does have trouble with really quick guards. Crabbe also has issues with really athletic guards. And these issues are magnified when we go to our bench.
That’s why I’m worried about matching up with UW. They can be really hot and cold. CU shut them down with disciplined play, so hopefully we can replicate that. Glass half-empty says they run us out of the gym like Missouri or UNLV.
Old Toothwrangler
unfortunately for us, we’ll have a target on our back heading into Seattle with the tie for the league lead
still, I don’t think it’s fair (to Missouri and UNLV) to put U-Dub in their category
it’s not going to be easy but it’s definitely plausible for the Bears to pull out with a W even with Washington playing well
by LEastCoastBears on Jan 14, 2012 11:11 PM PST up reply actions
I don't think
that this is a Braun thing – but through the Monty teams I have really enjoyed how much they seem to like playing with each other. First the Randle/PChris/Theo/Boykin group, and now the Kamp/Jorge/Crabbe/Cobbs group.
Emerson's stroke is looking nice
If we can get him to hit an open three every now and then and he can stay in front of his fellow bench player, he can give us 5-10 quality minutes every now and then. Would love that.
And Rossi is pure. That shot was off the dribble too!
by Avinash Kunnath on Jan 14, 2012 9:41 PM PST reply actions
I’m hoping this is a trend, not a blip on the radar.
Smith has been serviceable this year, but seems like he’s lost confidence with his shot and struggles with athletic guards. If Murray can get it together, it would be a really nice boost off the bench.
Rossi was touted as both a great shooter and his team’s best defender in HS. I’m really excited to see him able to play again. Classic annoying Montyball player.
Old Toothwrangler
I think Smith is struggling being a second unit player. It’s easier for him to fill in his role when he’s the fifth option as a scorer, but off the bench he has to be a primary option. Not something that’s easy to get used to.
by Avinash Kunnath on Jan 14, 2012 10:06 PM PST up reply actions
Interesting. Makes sense, I guess, from a mentality standpoint.
I thought he usually subs in and still has two guys either Jorge/Cobbs/Crabbe still in, so he can facilitate instead of trying to assert himself. But, if he’s in with Bak/Powers/Thurman, that’s a whole other situation. For whatever reason, he seems like he’s pressing this year.
Old Toothwrangler
I think it’s hard for Smith as the third guard. Because both Jorge and Cobbs are better creators and better shooters, where do you really fit in? You just have to manage the offense and pick your spots, or otherwise Monty will keep on keeping the top two in.
by Avinash Kunnath on Jan 14, 2012 10:16 PM PST up reply actions
Smith Does Not Have to Be a Primary Option
No one expects Smith to be a primary option, under any real game circumstances. His problem is confusion/lack of confidence brought on by his reduced role. He passes up shots he should take (and hurts us by so doing) and then compounds his reluctance by missing open shots much more frequently than he did last year. Some times, also, he has tried to do too much, driving to the basket where he has no viable shot or pass.
Hopefully, he will adjust to his diminished time and play at least as well as he did last year in the latter part of the season.
As many of us know, it is much harder to play well coming off the bench, when you are fearing being jerked quickly if you mess up at all.
This
I’m not sure if that’s the cause, but those sure are the symptoms, and it would be nice if they got better. I wouldn’t say a return to form is critical to the team’s success, but it would help.
Reef, What Do You See as Smith's Problems
I understand that I am speculating, in explaining Smith’s regression this year.
I am interested in what you think explains it.
No idea. I think you’re theory is a good one, I just can’t directly draw a line between cause and effect.
I do think sometimes there are factors off the court at play that we don’t see (which is the first thing I think of when an unexplained deterioration happens)…or sometimes players just regress because they regress. But you’re right, something is now in his head, regardless. The good news is, he’s got enough game to contribute off the bench if he gets himself right.
And If Smith Doesn't Get Himself Right
I suppose that Murray will take away at least some of his minutes, like last night when with Murray in and Cobbs out, Jorge for the first time all year went to the 1.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
GoldenBlogs' FAQ and Community Guidelines
Related FanPosts on California Golden Blogs
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
I recorded the entire last out as Cal clinches the first ever PAC12 Softball Title! It was also a...
Pac-12 On SBN
Pacific Takes (Pac-12) NORTH AddictedToQuack: (Oregon)
UW Dawg Pound: (Washington)
CougCenter: (Washington State)
BuildingTheDam: (Oregon State)
Rule Of Tree: (Stanford)
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: (Cal)
SOUTH
BruinsNation: (UCLA)
ConquestChronicles: (USC)
HouseOfSparky: (ASU)
Arizona Desert Swarm: (Arizona)
TheRalphieReport: (Colorado)
Block U: (Utah)
Golden Bears Football Schedule
| Fresno St. | Sat 09/03 | W 36 - 21 |
@
Colorado
|
Sat 09/10 | W 36 - 33 |
| Presbyterian | Sat 09/17 | W 63 - 12 |
|
@
Washington
|
Sat 09/24 | L 23 - 31 |
|
@
Oregon
|
Thu 10/06 | L 15 - 43 |
|
USC
|
Thu 10/13 | L 9 - 30 |
|
Utah
|
Sat 10/22 | W 34 - 10 |
|
@
UCLA
|
Sat 10/29 | L 14 - 31 |
|
Washington St.
|
Sat 11/05 | W 30 - 7 |
|
Oregon St.
|
Sat 11/12 | W 23 - 6 |
|
@
Stanford
|
Sat 11/19 | L 28 - 31 |
|
@
Arizona St.
|
Fri 11/25 | W 47 - 38 |
|
@
Texas
|
Wed 12/28 | L 10 - 21 |
