Since UCSB's season is over, I haven't had much to write about. Yesterday that changed. While listening to the Stanford-Texas game, I was forced to listen to Billy Packer. After listening to Packer I'm pretty sure that I would rather hit myself with a hammer than listen to Packer.
I've always felt this way, but yesterday's performance by Mr. Packer threw lighter fluid and a match onto the pile of logs accumulating in my mind.
In Packer's opinion, everything (and I mean everything) DJ Augustin did drew incredible amounts of praise from Packer. Everything from jump shots to a pass to a wide open teammate were all "great plays." It was so ridiculous. Almost as if he wants to make out with Augustin. DJ is a phenomenal player, no doubt. However, when you're complimenting a point guard for passing to the open man, that's a bit silly. Isn't that what a point guard is supposed to do?
On the other hand, Stanford drew nothing but criticism from Packer. They did nothing right in his eyes. In fact, Packer's distaste for all things Stanford gave way to the funniest non-comment of the game. Early in the second half, Taj Finger drove to the basket and drew a foul call. It was a nice drive by Finger and a good job of getting to the line. After Jim Nantz was done with the play-by-play there was awkward silence for the next minute or so while Finger shot the free throw. Either Packer didn't want to give credit for getting to the line or he just couldn't think of any negative spin.
With that being said, I really want Packer to retire or get fired. Unfortunately, just like Bob Williams, Billy Packer will be back next year and the year after that.
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Looking Back at the Schedule
It's not secret that the Gauchos played an extremely strong weak out-of-conference schedule. Combine that with the mighty mighty Big West strength and you have one hell of a whopper schedule. Add to that a few losses to teams that the Gauchos have all no business losing to and you've got no chance at an at-large bid.
With that being said, I got to thinking in my post-March Madness hangover (can't wait for Thursday) about the Gauchos out-of-conference schedule. Yes, it was soft. However, the Gauchos only two out-of-conference losses (except Utah State and Mississippi) during the true OOC "season" came at the hands of Stanford (a Brook Lopez-less Stanford) and UNC.
Considering that these are two of the Sweet 16 contestants, they are looking like much better losses at this point in the season. To digress for a moment - one thing the readers don't know about me is that I grew up near the Stanford campus, went to their games and watched them as a kid so I consider myself a Stanford fan, as well. I was at the Anaheim venue on both Thursday and Saturday and Stanford looks very dominant.
In fact, in my tournament bracket, I have Stanford beating Texas and making it to the Final Four. Unfortunately, I have UNC losing to Tennessee in the Elite 8. If my bracket holds up, as myextremely accurate picks are known to, UCSB will have lost to two of the final 8 teams left in the country.
By the way, if Tyler Hansbrough stays at UNC for his senior year, is he not going to eat any UCSB post player alive? Hope Bob Williams brings theexact same complete opposite philosophy/strategy that caused him to lose to Irvine 3 times in a season. It's just not the same as Stanford losing to UCLA (one by a very bad call) three times in a season.
With that, I'm out.
Check back for updates. I'm planning on reviewing the season, position by position after the tournament is over.
With that being said, I got to thinking in my post-March Madness hangover (can't wait for Thursday) about the Gauchos out-of-conference schedule. Yes, it was soft. However, the Gauchos only two out-of-conference losses (except Utah State and Mississippi) during the true OOC "season" came at the hands of Stanford (a Brook Lopez-less Stanford) and UNC.
Considering that these are two of the Sweet 16 contestants, they are looking like much better losses at this point in the season. To digress for a moment - one thing the readers don't know about me is that I grew up near the Stanford campus, went to their games and watched them as a kid so I consider myself a Stanford fan, as well. I was at the Anaheim venue on both Thursday and Saturday and Stanford looks very dominant.
In fact, in my tournament bracket, I have Stanford beating Texas and making it to the Final Four. Unfortunately, I have UNC losing to Tennessee in the Elite 8. If my bracket holds up, as my
By the way, if Tyler Hansbrough stays at UNC for his senior year, is he not going to eat any UCSB post player alive? Hope Bob Williams brings the
With that, I'm out.
Check back for updates. I'm planning on reviewing the season, position by position after the tournament is over.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Academics and Basketball Success
One of the things that I meant to study, although not as comprehensive as this, was the effect that having an NCAA Tournament Men's Basketball team would effect the admissions and applicants at UCSB.
When I was younger, I remember hearing about the phenomenon that Michael Vick had created for the Virginia Tech football team. Because of Vick, I remember hearing that Virginia Tech had seen a large increase in the number of applicants. Additionally, I remember the Dean being quoted in the article about how the VT student body used to wear the logos of different schools around campus, but that since Vick, they only wear VT gear.
I've always felt that UCSB should put some more effort into having a men's basketball team that dominates the Big West, much like the women's team already does. One of the benefits is that the school should get increased exposure from sporting events on television. This should lead to a higher number of applicants which leads to more money.
The study seems to prove what I've long suspected:
Of course, the people with their heads up their asses naysayers love to point out that UCSB isn't in the Big East and that Bob is just a great coach. Logic doesn't work with these folks. However, I would point to Gonzaga and other mid-major schools (Xavier, etc...) with good basketball programs and I would bet that their schools experienced a similar effect. As to the Bob argument, I ask this: if you worked for the same company 10 years in a row and your department had the same mediocre numbers year after year and you failed to gain any ground on your competitor would your company keep you around? If they did, your company probably won't be around much longer, but you should keep that job because they're rewarding mediocrity. Why should basketball coaching be the same? I expect a return on my tax dollars and Bob doesn't deliver. Enough of the rant for today, enjoy the study.
When I was younger, I remember hearing about the phenomenon that Michael Vick had created for the Virginia Tech football team. Because of Vick, I remember hearing that Virginia Tech had seen a large increase in the number of applicants. Additionally, I remember the Dean being quoted in the article about how the VT student body used to wear the logos of different schools around campus, but that since Vick, they only wear VT gear.
I've always felt that UCSB should put some more effort into having a men's basketball team that dominates the Big West, much like the women's team already does. One of the benefits is that the school should get increased exposure from sporting events on television. This should lead to a higher number of applicants which leads to more money.
The study seems to prove what I've long suspected:
- All 64 schools in the NCAA basketball tournament had a 1 percent increase in applicants each year.
- Sweet Sixteen schools had a 3 percent application increase.
Of course, the
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
NIT 1st Round Game: UCSB at Ole' Miss
UCSB Gauchos (22-8, 12-4) at University of Mississippi Runnin' Rebels (21-10, 7-9)
Oxford, MS 5:00 pm (PST)
ESPNU
Tonight, the Gauchos take on the Ole' Miss Runnin' Rebels (land of Eli and Archie) in their first round match-up of the NIT (the Gauchos "reward" for choking in Anaheim). It's going to be a tough match-up for the boys of UCSB. The Rebels average about 6-8 across their front line and outweigh them by a lot.
Ole' Miss plays at a pace of about 70 possessions per game, compared to UCSB's 66. While this seems insignificant at face value, remember that the Gauchos play the pace their opponent tells them to play (hopefully that's the only thing they allow their opponent to do). In this case, the Rebels are extremely effective at keeping the pace within a range they want. Almost all of their games have been played in the high 60s to mid 70s. Look for the Gauchos to play faster than they're used to.
From an efficiency standpoint, the Rebels kill UCSB with an adjusted rating of 114.3. UCSB's adjusted rating (Can't believe I didn't notice this before) is a paltry 99.7. Anything below 100 sucks. The good news is that of all the times that Mississippi has been held under an efficiency rating of 100, they've lost all but one of those games. The bad news is that they've been held under 100 only 6 times (out of 31 games).
Let's get onto what could be the last analysis of the season.
Effective Field Goal %
UCSB: 52.2%
Miss: 51.5%
UCSB needs to hit their shots, especially their 3 point shots in this game because the Rebels have some beef on a front line that shoots over 50% from inside the arc. That number only figures to increase when the Rebels face the Gauchos because of their weak inside presence.
Free Throw Rate
UCSB: 26.0
Miss: 19.2
This is about UCSB's only true advantage in this game and it hinges on a big IF. IF the Gauchos don't choke at the line like they did in Anaheim, this could keep them in the game. In each televised game they've played, the Gauchos have had a less than average free throw shooting performance. As homerish as I am, that doesn't bode well for the Gauchos.
Offensive Rebounding %
UCSB: 28.4%
Miss: 39.3%
Oh lordy. This is going to be a problem. To summarize one USCB message board poster after this most recent loss to UCI, these guys better come out "breathing fire" if they stand a chance. Seriously, our rebounding percentage puts at 300th of 314 DI teams. That's bad. UCSB needs to man up, box up and prevent Mississippi from getting any offensive rebounds. They're big and they're beefy, but if you go in their pissed off, you can outrebound even the biggest guy on the block.
Turnover Percentage
UCSB: 21.1%
Miss: 18.0%
Mississippi does a great job of protecting the ball. This doesn't mean that UCSB can't get them to turn it over, all it means is that it's going to be harder. Play some pressure defense in the form of a press and get a few turnovers.
UCSB's mission is difficult, but it can be done. Let's go Gauchos. I'll be watching. Do us proud.
Oxford, MS 5:00 pm (PST)
ESPNU
Tonight, the Gauchos take on the Ole' Miss Runnin' Rebels (land of Eli and Archie) in their first round match-up of the NIT (the Gauchos "reward" for choking in Anaheim). It's going to be a tough match-up for the boys of UCSB. The Rebels average about 6-8 across their front line and outweigh them by a lot.
Ole' Miss plays at a pace of about 70 possessions per game, compared to UCSB's 66. While this seems insignificant at face value, remember that the Gauchos play the pace their opponent tells them to play (hopefully that's the only thing they allow their opponent to do). In this case, the Rebels are extremely effective at keeping the pace within a range they want. Almost all of their games have been played in the high 60s to mid 70s. Look for the Gauchos to play faster than they're used to.
From an efficiency standpoint, the Rebels kill UCSB with an adjusted rating of 114.3. UCSB's adjusted rating (Can't believe I didn't notice this before) is a paltry 99.7. Anything below 100 sucks. The good news is that of all the times that Mississippi has been held under an efficiency rating of 100, they've lost all but one of those games. The bad news is that they've been held under 100 only 6 times (out of 31 games).
Let's get onto what could be the last analysis of the season.
Effective Field Goal %
UCSB: 52.2%
Miss: 51.5%
UCSB needs to hit their shots, especially their 3 point shots in this game because the Rebels have some beef on a front line that shoots over 50% from inside the arc. That number only figures to increase when the Rebels face the Gauchos because of their weak inside presence.
Free Throw Rate
UCSB: 26.0
Miss: 19.2
This is about UCSB's only true advantage in this game and it hinges on a big IF. IF the Gauchos don't choke at the line like they did in Anaheim, this could keep them in the game. In each televised game they've played, the Gauchos have had a less than average free throw shooting performance. As homerish as I am, that doesn't bode well for the Gauchos.
Offensive Rebounding %
UCSB: 28.4%
Miss: 39.3%
Oh lordy. This is going to be a problem. To summarize one USCB message board poster after this most recent loss to UCI, these guys better come out "breathing fire" if they stand a chance. Seriously, our rebounding percentage puts at 300th of 314 DI teams. That's bad. UCSB needs to man up, box up and prevent Mississippi from getting any offensive rebounds. They're big and they're beefy, but if you go in their pissed off, you can outrebound even the biggest guy on the block.
Turnover Percentage
UCSB: 21.1%
Miss: 18.0%
Mississippi does a great job of protecting the ball. This doesn't mean that UCSB can't get them to turn it over, all it means is that it's going to be harder. Play some pressure defense in the form of a press and get a few turnovers.
UCSB's mission is difficult, but it can be done. Let's go Gauchos. I'll be watching. Do us proud.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Big West Semifinal Recap: UCSB vs. UCI
NIT, here we come! Hard to get excited for that, I know. After taking in a day to soak in the fact that the Gauchos lost (for the third time) to UCI, I finally brought myself to write a little game analysis.
While I've had (and still do) problems with Bob Williams, the blame for the loss falls solely on the players, in my opinion. Not only did the team shoot 16-29 from the free throw line, they also managed to miss at least 6 layups. When you lost by 5 points, and you leave that many points on the table, it's the players fault. The players played tight and looked like they were indifferent to whether they won the game.
Sure, Bob should have laid into them with some intensity and fire. What disappointed me most from a coaching standpoint was Bob's willingness to stick with the same strategy that led UCSB to two losses against UCI. The Gauchos pushed the ball up the court when they got a defensive rebound, but then they allowed UCI to set up their defense while UCSB ran a half court set. That's exactly what UCI wanted to do and you played right into their hands Bob. If you're going into a fight with a guy who wants to stand up and box with you, but your strength is taking the fight to the ground and winning by submission, you don't stand up and box with the guy, you get his ass on the ground and you pound him until he submits.
Unfortunately, the Gauchos, who should have been running and full court pressing the entire time (their strengths) submitted to the will of UCI and did whatever they wanted.
UCSB had one of their best defensive performances of the year against Irvine, holding them to a 84.5 efficiency rating. However, that doesn't do you any good when you register a 76.8 on the efficiency scale (for the record, that is the second worst performance of the season). The Gauchos upped the pace slightly this game, running the game at a 65, but that was too close to UCI's comfort range.
On another note, everytime I watch Brett Lauer I get a good laugh. Not only does he look like one of the shortest players on the court (maybe 5'10" with shoes on), but his player page says that he is 6'1". I don't know why, but I find his dramatic height exaggeration hilarious.
Effective Field Goal Percentage
UCSB: 36.3%
UCI: 50%
The Gauchos shot horribly from the floor. 15-47 overall and 4-17 from the three. Alex Harris, Ivan Elliot and James Powell stunk up the joint going 6-27. That's horrible. Combine that with the missed layups and you've got a problem.
With 5 minutes left in the first half, the Gauchos had only scored 9 points and missed 4 layups. Basically, that sums up the game.
Offensive Rebounding Percentage
UCSB: 19.5%
UCI: 27.4%
When you look at our offensive rebounds on the face of it, we did a decent job. However, when you look at how many defensive rebounds UCI got (31), it's ridiculous that we couldn't get any more rebounds.
The Gauchos managed 19 defensive rebounds. Weak.
Free Throw Rate
UCSB: 61.7
UCI: 52.5
Throw this stat out the window. Prior to this game, UCSB was one of the top 10 free throw shooting teams in the country at about 76%. During the game, UCSB went 16-29 from the line for a paltry 55.2%. If you give the Gauchos a 75% free throw performance in this game, they make 5 more free throws. Combine that with the missed lay-ups and the opportunities were there.
Justin Joyner was the primary offender in this category.
Turnover Percentage
UCSB: 16.9%
UCI: 35.3%
The Gauchos did a great job of forcing UCI into turnovers. However, they didn't convert many of the 23 turnovers into points. That hurts.
That's it for this analysis. Looks like we'll have to wait and see where we're going in the NCAA, I mean, NIT.
While I've had (and still do) problems with Bob Williams, the blame for the loss falls solely on the players, in my opinion. Not only did the team shoot 16-29 from the free throw line, they also managed to miss at least 6 layups. When you lost by 5 points, and you leave that many points on the table, it's the players fault. The players played tight and looked like they were indifferent to whether they won the game.
Sure, Bob should have laid into them with some intensity and fire. What disappointed me most from a coaching standpoint was Bob's willingness to stick with the same strategy that led UCSB to two losses against UCI. The Gauchos pushed the ball up the court when they got a defensive rebound, but then they allowed UCI to set up their defense while UCSB ran a half court set. That's exactly what UCI wanted to do and you played right into their hands Bob. If you're going into a fight with a guy who wants to stand up and box with you, but your strength is taking the fight to the ground and winning by submission, you don't stand up and box with the guy, you get his ass on the ground and you pound him until he submits.
Unfortunately, the Gauchos, who should have been running and full court pressing the entire time (their strengths) submitted to the will of UCI and did whatever they wanted.
UCSB had one of their best defensive performances of the year against Irvine, holding them to a 84.5 efficiency rating. However, that doesn't do you any good when you register a 76.8 on the efficiency scale (for the record, that is the second worst performance of the season). The Gauchos upped the pace slightly this game, running the game at a 65, but that was too close to UCI's comfort range.
On another note, everytime I watch Brett Lauer I get a good laugh. Not only does he look like one of the shortest players on the court (maybe 5'10" with shoes on), but his player page says that he is 6'1". I don't know why, but I find his dramatic height exaggeration hilarious.
Effective Field Goal Percentage
UCSB: 36.3%
UCI: 50%
The Gauchos shot horribly from the floor. 15-47 overall and 4-17 from the three. Alex Harris, Ivan Elliot and James Powell stunk up the joint going 6-27. That's horrible. Combine that with the missed layups and you've got a problem.
With 5 minutes left in the first half, the Gauchos had only scored 9 points and missed 4 layups. Basically, that sums up the game.
Offensive Rebounding Percentage
UCSB: 19.5%
UCI: 27.4%
When you look at our offensive rebounds on the face of it, we did a decent job. However, when you look at how many defensive rebounds UCI got (31), it's ridiculous that we couldn't get any more rebounds.
The Gauchos managed 19 defensive rebounds. Weak.
Free Throw Rate
UCSB: 61.7
UCI: 52.5
Throw this stat out the window. Prior to this game, UCSB was one of the top 10 free throw shooting teams in the country at about 76%. During the game, UCSB went 16-29 from the line for a paltry 55.2%. If you give the Gauchos a 75% free throw performance in this game, they make 5 more free throws. Combine that with the missed lay-ups and the opportunities were there.
Justin Joyner was the primary offender in this category.
Turnover Percentage
UCSB: 16.9%
UCI: 35.3%
The Gauchos did a great job of forcing UCI into turnovers. However, they didn't convert many of the 23 turnovers into points. That hurts.
That's it for this analysis. Looks like we'll have to wait and see where we're going in the NCAA, I mean, NIT.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Big West Semifinal Preview: UCSB vs. UCI
UCSB Gauchos vs. UCI Anteaters
March 14, 2008 5:30 p.m. (PST)
Whether you fear the Anteaters or not, today is the day of reckoning for the Gauchos. They face the only dragon (or anteater) they've yet to slay this season. UCI beat the Gauchos on January 10, 66-63. The Anteaters beat the Gauchos again, on February 9, 65-59.
This is the ultimate test for the Gauchos. If they want to get into the NCAA Tournament, their mission is simple: win two games and you're in. Therefore, we see how bad the Gauchos want it tonight. Second, we can see if Bob Williams has learned anything from this season's two losses to UCI. Specifically, Bob Williams has allowed his team to play right into the hands of UCI by playing the sloooooowest pace (the pace the Anteaters want).
TGM's recipe for sucess is simple. Bob, you need to run the Anteaters out of the gym. I don't care if you're not comfortable with that style. The Gauchos are better suited for that style than the Anteaters.
Why do we make said recommendation? Take a look at the Game Flo, courtesy of midmajority.com, from UCI's match-up with Pacific last night. If you looked at that chart, you'll notice that each half UCI started out very hot and increased their margin of victory. However, what you'll also notice is that the Anteaters flattened out substantially as each half wore on. When a team flattens out like that at the end of each half, I'd say that's a pretty clear indication they were getting tired.
Another reason for the recommendation? UCSB needs to show the Anteaters that the Gauchos will be controlling tonight's game. Mike Tyson once said, "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face." Never has something so complex been said so simply. We know what Irvine's plan is. They want to walk the ball up the court. Especially since they've played three games in three days. Forcing them to run is the equivalent of punching them in the face. Surely, UCI's coaches know that they dictated the tempo the last two games. It would be foolish to think that they don't believe they can't control the pace this time around. Therefore, the Gauchos need to induce maximum confusion by forcing the tempo. Press, push the ball on offense, etc...
An additional benefit of not letting them walk up the court is that the Anteaters are going to be tired, don't let them regain their energy. Please watch the youtube clip (specifically, the energy bar) to understand what I mean.
Clearly, Alan Beast and Tony Rhodes want to continue punching their guy when his energy is at his lowest. He can't defend himself as well and you're more likely to knock his ass out. If you punch him once, let him recoup, it's like you never punched him at all.
The last benefit of the recommendation is completely psychological. Irvine has beaten the Gauchos twice this season. If you let them stay in the game early, Bob, UCI will get this little thing called confidence. They will believe that they can hang with your team, Bob. The more hope you give them, the less their lack of energy counts. Show them that they can't play with their big bro. Have no mercy.
Now, onto the stats.
Effective Field Goal %
UCSB: 52.7%
UCI: 51.9%
We've already chronicled to death the fact that Irvine wants to play slow. IF UCSB allows UCI to dictate the pace (God help them), they need to make their three point shots to extend the defense. This will open up the post.
Tonight, the post men will be key. Not only do they need to keep Fells in check. But Devine, Elliot and Nedim (no 3's Nedim) need to be a three man wrecking crew. Sprinkle a little Gibb in there and you can make that a 4 man crew.
The key is controlling the pace. Don't play slow. Make UCI play fast. Put the fear into them. They don't want to run, so we want them to run. Make it happen, Bob.
Free Throw Rate
UCSB: 25.7
UCI: 24.7
Bottom line to this: Don't send them to the free throw line. If you do, make sure you get there more than they do. UCI is a great free throw shooting team. They're going to make you pay if you send them to the line. Fouling them in the act = bad idea.
The first game, we did a good job, we sent them to the line 10 times, we went 11. The second game, not so good. They got to the line 22 times, we got to the line 11 times. That very well could have been the game right there, considering they made 8 more free throws than us. Of course, six of those free throws came at the end of the game when we started intentionally fouling.
Offensive Rebounding %
UCSB: 28.8%
UCI: 26.4%
We're not very good here. Just don't give them second chance shots. The last couple times we've match-up, the offensive rebounds have been pretty close. However, defensively, they've cleaned up the glass compared to us.
Turnover Rate
UCSB: 21.3%
UCI: 19.0%
UCSB has one of the highest defensive turnover percentages. To maximize this, push the ball up the court. UCI doesn't turn it over much because they walk the ball up the court. When they are doing this, it's fairly difficult to make a turnover. Force them into playing faster and you might force a couple extra turnovers.
That's it folks. Like all of you, I'm hoping for the Gauchos to pull it off tonight. If they can beat the Anteaters, then it's one more game and the Gauchos will have made the tournament, so we can start doing this:
March 14, 2008 5:30 p.m. (PST)
Whether you fear the Anteaters or not, today is the day of reckoning for the Gauchos. They face the only dragon (or anteater) they've yet to slay this season. UCI beat the Gauchos on January 10, 66-63. The Anteaters beat the Gauchos again, on February 9, 65-59.
This is the ultimate test for the Gauchos. If they want to get into the NCAA Tournament, their mission is simple: win two games and you're in. Therefore, we see how bad the Gauchos want it tonight. Second, we can see if Bob Williams has learned anything from this season's two losses to UCI. Specifically, Bob Williams has allowed his team to play right into the hands of UCI by playing the sloooooowest pace (the pace the Anteaters want).
TGM's recipe for sucess is simple. Bob, you need to run the Anteaters out of the gym. I don't care if you're not comfortable with that style. The Gauchos are better suited for that style than the Anteaters.
Why do we make said recommendation? Take a look at the Game Flo, courtesy of midmajority.com, from UCI's match-up with Pacific last night. If you looked at that chart, you'll notice that each half UCI started out very hot and increased their margin of victory. However, what you'll also notice is that the Anteaters flattened out substantially as each half wore on. When a team flattens out like that at the end of each half, I'd say that's a pretty clear indication they were getting tired.
Another reason for the recommendation? UCSB needs to show the Anteaters that the Gauchos will be controlling tonight's game. Mike Tyson once said, "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face." Never has something so complex been said so simply. We know what Irvine's plan is. They want to walk the ball up the court. Especially since they've played three games in three days. Forcing them to run is the equivalent of punching them in the face. Surely, UCI's coaches know that they dictated the tempo the last two games. It would be foolish to think that they don't believe they can't control the pace this time around. Therefore, the Gauchos need to induce maximum confusion by forcing the tempo. Press, push the ball on offense, etc...
An additional benefit of not letting them walk up the court is that the Anteaters are going to be tired, don't let them regain their energy. Please watch the youtube clip (specifically, the energy bar) to understand what I mean.
Clearly, Alan Beast and Tony Rhodes want to continue punching their guy when his energy is at his lowest. He can't defend himself as well and you're more likely to knock his ass out. If you punch him once, let him recoup, it's like you never punched him at all.
The last benefit of the recommendation is completely psychological. Irvine has beaten the Gauchos twice this season. If you let them stay in the game early, Bob, UCI will get this little thing called confidence. They will believe that they can hang with your team, Bob. The more hope you give them, the less their lack of energy counts. Show them that they can't play with their big bro. Have no mercy.
Now, onto the stats.
Effective Field Goal %
UCSB: 52.7%
UCI: 51.9%
We've already chronicled to death the fact that Irvine wants to play slow. IF UCSB allows UCI to dictate the pace (God help them), they need to make their three point shots to extend the defense. This will open up the post.
Tonight, the post men will be key. Not only do they need to keep Fells in check. But Devine, Elliot and Nedim (no 3's Nedim) need to be a three man wrecking crew. Sprinkle a little Gibb in there and you can make that a 4 man crew.
The key is controlling the pace. Don't play slow. Make UCI play fast. Put the fear into them. They don't want to run, so we want them to run. Make it happen, Bob.
Free Throw Rate
UCSB: 25.7
UCI: 24.7
Bottom line to this: Don't send them to the free throw line. If you do, make sure you get there more than they do. UCI is a great free throw shooting team. They're going to make you pay if you send them to the line. Fouling them in the act = bad idea.
The first game, we did a good job, we sent them to the line 10 times, we went 11. The second game, not so good. They got to the line 22 times, we got to the line 11 times. That very well could have been the game right there, considering they made 8 more free throws than us. Of course, six of those free throws came at the end of the game when we started intentionally fouling.
Offensive Rebounding %
UCSB: 28.8%
UCI: 26.4%
We're not very good here. Just don't give them second chance shots. The last couple times we've match-up, the offensive rebounds have been pretty close. However, defensively, they've cleaned up the glass compared to us.
Turnover Rate
UCSB: 21.3%
UCI: 19.0%
UCSB has one of the highest defensive turnover percentages. To maximize this, push the ball up the court. UCI doesn't turn it over much because they walk the ball up the court. When they are doing this, it's fairly difficult to make a turnover. Force them into playing faster and you might force a couple extra turnovers.
That's it folks. Like all of you, I'm hoping for the Gauchos to pull it off tonight. If they can beat the Anteaters, then it's one more game and the Gauchos will have made the tournament, so we can start doing this:
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Big West Semis Are Set: UCSB vs. UCI Tomorrow
Irvine has beaten Pacific 57-56. You know what that means - the Gauchos will face off with Irvine tomorrow at 5:30 p.m.
The Gauchos have some demons to excise in this game. Irvine has beat them twice this season. Third time is a charm. I like the Gauchos. They appear to be playing well. Tomorrow, we'll post an analysis on the game for your enjoyment.
Also, check the post below that looks at the factors that correlated most with Gaucho victories.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
