Poor Defense Costs Cal In Loss To Washington State
by norcalnick on Jan 22, 2012 3:00 AM PST
in California Golden Bears Men's Basketball
Email
PrintMaybe it's just bad timing. For a year and a half Faisal Aden hasn't been a productive player for Washington State. He basically took jump shots and never drew fouls. Cougar fans were openly questioning why Ken Bone gives him so many minutes. Which is why I blame them for what happened.
Clearly Faisal Aden heard the criticism and decided the only way to get WSU fans on his side was to constantly attack the basket, take good shots, and draw fouls. After dropping 33 against Stanford Aden scored 24 against the Bears, mostly on easy layups and free throws. He got into the paint whenever he wanted against every defender Cal threw at him.
And there were a few. Washington St. already has a highlight video, and if you watch it you'll see Aden up against Jorge Gutierrez, Justin Cobbs and Emerson Murray, amongst others. Before the game we worried that Cal would look sluggish . . . watching the highlight video, I can't recall seeing the Bears look so slow to react this year. Aden goes around guys like they aren't even there. The stats are just as painful as the film. Washington St. had an eFG% of 61.2 and shot 22 free throws. You won't win many game when opponents score like that, especially on the road.
It certainly wasn't offense that lost the game for the Bears. Cal's starters all had reasonably solid offensive performances. A solid shooting night and generally excellent ball control kept Cal right there with the Cougar offense. I suppose you could even argue that Cal got a little unlucky making just 6 of 20 three pointers, most of which were open (assuming Roxy wasn't lying to me while I listened to the 2nd half on the radio). Then again, weary legs on defense likely means weary legs on jump shots.
Of course, part of the reason the legs might've been weary is because of the minutes the starters played on the road trip. Gutierrez, Cobbs, Allen Crabbe and Harper Kamp all played 34 minutes or more against both Washington and Washington State. Is that a good idea?
Pro: Due to a series of blowouts, Cal didn't have to play their starters a ton of minutes in the non-conference schedule, so they should be rested for the conference schedule.
Con: I don't think 5 or 10 minutes extra in non-conference games means much. The players are going to be tired because of trekking across the frozen tundra of eastern Washington.
Pro: A conference title is on the line and every game is a key game. You play your best players and let the chips fall where they may.
Con: Our best players need to be at their best, and they won't be at their best if they play 37 minutes every night.
Pro: Come on, the bench is clearly thin. With Brandon Smith recovering from injury and Richard Solomon suspended, what else are you going to do?
Con: Well, somebody will have to step up. Jeff Powers can hit a three, Emerson Murray can play some D, Bak Bak can pull down boards. Give our bench players a chance to shine!
I don't really know where I fall on the debate. The good news is that Cal only has three more road trips, and one of those is a single game in Palo Alto, so that barely counts. My hope? That Cal blows out Utah and nobody has to play more than 25 or 30 minutes against Utah, allowing everybody to stay fresh for Colorado. And we can always get up for games against USC and UCLA, right? Those Bruins always bring out our best.
In 8 days the Bears may very well be back in first place alone in the conference. Beat Stanford and this game will disappear quickly from the memory.
10 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
woah
I know it was a highlight reel for WSU, but the guys in gold looked like they were sleepwalking out there. I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a lackadaisical defensive game from Monty’s crew. They must have been pretty exhausted to play like that. Very strange to see the Bears so passive on D.
"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded
by atomsareenough on Jan 22, 2012 10:11 AM PST reply actions
Also
Agreed that we NEED to see more of Powers and Murray, and Bak if our starters are going to have anything left in the tank at the end of the season. Sub them in strategically so that the rest of the players on the floor are starters when they come in, if you are afraid of a drop off, but we can’t have Jorge, Harper, Crabbe, and Cobbs playing 35+ minutes every game.
"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded
by atomsareenough on Jan 22, 2012 10:16 AM PST reply actions
We could have used Jerome Randle and his 41 points.
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
Let's face it
We are who we are without Solomon. A good team that lacks the ability to be a great one. Our starters are perhaps the best in the Pac-12, our bench (at this year) is probably the worst.
Don’t expect too much from this team and don’t start thinking about March for another month or so. Just enjoy the ride and hope this team can win the conference.
by Avinash Kunnath on Jan 22, 2012 11:12 AM PST reply actions
Good Post, Avinash
We need a bit of patience with this team. If expectations do not outpace reality, there is plenty to enjoy in the way this group plays so selflessly. There is a reasonable chance that the Bears can go undefeated at home and at worst split on their trips to LA and UT/CO. And maybe sweep the Tree.
This may prove too optimistic, but whatever happens, it is a pleasure to watch and follow this group.
Probably in future years, with some luck, our team(s) will be deeper. There is still from fallout from the Braun years that is making it difficult right now.
Curious what you think the fallout from the Braun years is. Aren’t we getting to the point where that’s over, and Monty’s responsible for the talent out on the floor?
I’m coming around more and more to the belief that recruiting has been the weakest part of the Monty regime. Next year’s class doesn’t fill me with optimism that the depth problems will get much better, although I’m open to the possibility that Rodriguez is way better than advertised or we get some useful late adds.
I know there have been some extenuating circumstances, but ultimately the coach is responsible for the roster…and it took one guy going down to turn us into a team that’s paper thin.
I do not mean this as a complaint against the overall Monty regime. He does a lot of things very well, and it’s been a good run so far. I’m just trying to look our problems squarely in the eye.
Fallout from Braun
Not all of it is directly attributable to missteps by Ben, but: Seeley, Max, Amoke left at the same time that Randle, Christopher, Robertson, Boykins, and Knezevic graduated. That is 8 guys who played substantial minutes. No program should have to deal with replacing 8 guys in a year.
Monty’s recruits: Jorge in Monty’s first year; Smith, Bak, and MSF in 2nd; Crabbe, Franklin, Rossi, Solomon, and Rossi in 3rd; Kravish, Cobbs, Behrens, and Kreklow in 4th; Rodriguez, Wallace, and maybe one more in 5th.
Bad recruits? Bak, for sure. The jury is out on the rest. Franklin? Stuff happens with recruits, and I think it is unreasonable to fry a coach over one guy jumping ship. MSF, a junior college recruit, turned out pretty good, though a four year recruit is better. However, with the cupboard pretty bare, it made sense to get MSF.
I am making no argument that Monty has been as good a recruiter as he is a coach. I wish he were. Still, he is not as bad as the grousers would have it.
Next year, regarding your frontcout concern: Solomon, Kravish, Thurman, Behrens, Rodriguez, and possibly another freshman. Could be a problem, but not necessarily. If Solomon comes back and is dedicated to his game, he and Kravish should be really effective at clogging the middle defensively. About both Behrens and Rodriguez, who can say? They might turn out to be pretty good contributors. Having seen what Kravish can do, after no one was giving Monty any kudos for bringing him in, I am inclined to refrain from frying Monty on the basis of recruits that have yet to enroll or play much at Cal. I would not be surprised to see Kravish do everything better next year, including low double digit scoring.
With Crabbe, Cobbs, Smith, Kreklow, Rossi, and Tyrone Wallace on the perimeter, we may well be deeper there than at any time since Monty has been at Cal. You are right to question the frontcourt depth, since a lot is unknown about many guys who must contribute there.
If our coach were a super recruiter, or had one on his staff, that would be great. That is not Monty, for sure. However, his recruits at Stanford became increasingly impressive, as he established the national prominence of their program. I am hoping he stays motivated and healthy. If he does, I believe we will see a similar pattern at Cal.
I’m not saying he’s a terrible recruiter by any means. He’s been just good enough at this point to give us a really good core that embraces his style of play, with no depth to support it. In particular, his lack of success the first two years is leading to our depth problems now. The first year is understandable, but it’s hard not to call the second one a real bad year, and what’s holding us back from being an elite program this year.
Like I said, I’m open to the possibility Rodriguez is way better than advertised, but there’s an odds thing going on here…you’re only going to hit on those so often, as opposed to how often you hit on four and five stars. Even if he comes in and is productive, and Solo gets his grades together, we’re still talking about a frontcourt that is maybe as good as we were at the start of this season. It’s a concern. I hold out hope that this will fix it, but we’ve probably only got a 25% shot even if you’re very optimistic:
If Monty is going to duplicate his success at furd, we need a period where we unexpectedly jump to national prominence. It’s unlikely to be this year now that Solo is out. Hopefully it will come soon, because he is not a spring chicken.
This is the exact same attitude UW fans should have.
Many don’t, and it leads to a lot of unneeded consternation.
