UCLA vs. Kentucky: Game Thread

[Katmendo]

I'd be worried if Kentucky was totally complimenting each other on December 3 starting four freshmen and a sophomore. They've been way ahead of schedule offensively in my mind, even after today.

Thought they were ahead of schedule defensively, but got a reality check today. When playing solid competition they failed miserably on the defensive end.

Still not sure we're talking about how players compliment each other. I would go so far as saying that Briscoe is an unusual player because he's basically a point guard being force to play on the wing most of the time. We talked last year about how he didn't fit in totally. But up until today he'd been a devastating player.

Best thing about Briscoe is that you can stick him in the middle of zones and his passing and strength kill you. Alford smartly didn't play zone today and Briscoe was taken out.

Not sure any of that speaks to how well or poorly the players compliment each other.

One thing I want to check, here. I never said that THIS team didn't compliment each other. I said, in response to DVZ's remark about Cal's teams lacking shooters, that Cal recruits the best players, but that they don't always compliment each other. If the best players are 6'5" non shooters,.... that's what will be on his team.

I think this team is actually very well made for itself. So, let's not get this too far out of hand.

[Joneslab]

I think for a time you could do it to the Knight team.

That team shot almost 40% from the three point line.

You could do it a little more with the Randle/Harrisons team, but Aaron Harrison shot 35% from out there, as did James Young.

The reason teams slough isn't always because a team can't shoot, it's sometimes because they're picking poison. If you didn't help on Julius Randle he'd kill you. Teams are playing a numbers game there; they're not necessarily saying "Eh, Kentucky can't shoot so let's not guard them."

That team, like this one, struggled most with its defense. Last year's team was a terrible defensive team on the whole. I thought we were going to see much better with this bunch, and we still should, but I'm a little scared. That wasn't normal what happened today.

[Katmendo]

I don't remember every single player who played for every single one of those teams (I doubt you do, either), nor do I have the time to sift through every lineup right now. Maybe tomorrow.

Even if I did, I don't think we'd get anywhere because you seem to have a pretty specific definition of "compliment." If you're the one who decides what it means to compliment one another, then you can make the data say whatever you want.

I can clear it up a bit. By compliment, I mean those teams had players whose talents and deficiencies weren't duplicated in large or whole by other players.
It's great to have 3 shooters. It's bad to have three shooters that don't rebound.

It's fine to have guards that thrive in the open floor. It's bad to have 3 guards who thrive in the open floor, but can't run a half court set.

[George]

That team shot almost 40% from the three point line.

You could do it a little more with the Randle/Harrisons team, but Aaron Harrison shot 35% from out there, as did James Young.

The reason teams slough isn't always because a team can't shoot, it's sometimes because they're picking poison. If you didn't help on Julius Randle he'd kill you. Teams are playing a numbers game there; they're not necessarily saying "Eh, Kentucky can't shoot so let's not guard them."

That team, like this one, struggled most with its defense. Last year's team was a terrible defensive team on the whole. I thought we were going to see much better with this bunch, and we still should, but I'm a little scared. That wasn't normal what happened today.

I think we've taken the long way around to making the same point, because this is what I've been trying to say (maybe not very well). It isn't that we lose every time a team clogs the lane, but that it seems to be a common strategy against us. I don't see why a team would choose to clog the middle and let us shoot, as you described with Randle, if they didn't feel like giving us shots was a risk they could take - which you certainly wouldn't do if our roster was loaded with guys who all shoot at a nice percentage.

[Joneslab]

I don't see why a team would choose to clog the middle and let us shoot, as you described with Randle, if they didn't feel like giving us shots was a risk they could take - which you certainly wouldn't do if our roster was loaded with guys who all shoot at a nice percentage.

I think it's because Randle was such an explosive offensive player you couldn't contain him with one guy. But I never looked at that team (outside of Andrew at times) and thought, "Man, if we just had more shooters we'd be unstoppable."

There's an old adage that you can never have enough shooters, but there is another end of the floor. Shooters are great in theory. You have to have them to win in this sport. But you can't have them at the expense of other facets of the game.

Cal stacks his teams to be defense-first, which is what made today so interesting and surprising. That a team full of athletes got nearly a hundo put on them in Rupp is cause for serious anxiety, at least in the short-term. That teams are packing it in on us isn't really on my radar, because we keep scoring in buckets.

[Katmendo]

One thing that I don't like about this team is that it's a bit soft. Cal has coached them to avoid the issues of fouls, which is not foolish, but today I watched a team that wasn't very physical with their opponent that never impacted the other team. I mean, Bam is big, but he's not very physical, defensively, to avoid the issue of fouls he had in game 1.

Briscoe is pretty physical, coming and going. And, Humphries is actually pretty physical when he plays. But Fox, Monk, Gabriel, and to a lesser extent, Bam, are trying to play too clean.

I would like to have seen a couple of good hard fouls in place of those ticky tack fouls. Ball driving the lane and getting floored is an entirely more impacting moment that him driving and getting the nickles and dimes on you, IMO.

I foresee another round of blocking pad practices coming up.

[Westtncat]

Coaching seems easy.

In all honesty I agree with you about today's game. I don't think it's a common thing I've noticed with Cal or anything (pretty gaudy winning percentage), but just looking at today they definitely panicked. Started to grab and slap and foul when they got down double-digits.

I think it's a byproduct of having so much youth. Those are 18- and 19-year-olds. Cal usually does a good job at keeping them grounded, but they lost the thread a little today.

Part of that is because you dont panic when you are winning. Going all the way back to Memphis he has had more talent most of the time. I have seen many of his teams do it. John Wall and company had a great season played very well 99% of the time. They got down to West Virginia and played the exact same way. Start jacking up threes and crazy jumpers trying to come back all at once. Tried to win that one with too much one on one also. You dont see it much because we dont play from behind much. If you look at the losses many will be similar.

[Joneslab]

One thing that I don't like about this team is that it's a bit soft.

Yes.

Monk as great as he is is the biggest culprit here. Almost never gets to the line, which is shocking for a Calipari player.

The Harrisons, who had about half of Monk's athletic gifts, knew how to seek out contact. Monk just doesn't like mixing it up and tries everything he can to free himself out in space.

This is probably part of why we struggle defensively. We don't like working through those screens and try our best to stay away from the bumps that come with playing at this level.

[George]

I know I've said this before, but Monk continues to bewilder me. I don't mean that in a bad way, nor have I been disappointed with him, necessarily. He just hasn't been the player that I thought we were getting. To be honest, I didn't think he'd ever score a point outside of five feet, with the occasional three sprinkled in for good measure.

[Joneslab]

I know I've said this before, but Monk continues to bewilder me. I don't mean that in a bad way, nor have I been disappointed with him, necessarily. He just hasn't been the player that I thought we were getting. To be honest, I didn't think he'd ever score a point outside of five feet, with the occasional three sprinkled in for good measure.

I think he's been pretty much the player we thought we were getting. Averaging 19 points a game. That's fairly insane on a team with this many weapons.

If they would've kept feeding him today I think he might have brought them back. Got kind of an unlucky turnover there and then Isaac shot the bad shot. He's unusual because he scores in these huge clumps, but he's only taken 19 free throws.

Not a high-level defender right now but none of them are. Briscoe maybe but not today.

[George]

I think he's been pretty much the player we thought we were getting. Averaging 19 points a game. That's fairly insane on a team with this many weapons.

If they would've kept feeding him today I think he might have brought them back. Got kind of an unlucky turnover there and then Isaac shot the bad shot. He's unusual because he scores in these huge clumps, but he's only taken 19 free throws.

Not a high-level defender right now but none of them are. Briscoe maybe but not today.

I never doubted that. It's the way he's getting them that surprises me. I thought it'd be dunk city with him. He hits the long-range shot at a much better clip than I thought he would. I sort of doubted him as a shooter prior to the season, to be honest. I know he won the three point contest, but every video of him showed nothing but powerhouse slams; I figured the shooting was one of those cases that would have been overblown by hype and mixtapes.

What he hasn't done, and I expected him to do, is dunk on defenders. Not seen a ton of that yet. He does some amazing stuff when he breaks away on his own, but he isn't flying in over defenders with regularity like I thought he would. Might go back to that contact thing you're talking about.

I'm just fine with what he's giving us, though.

[KCKUKFan]

I know I've said this before, but Monk continues to bewilder me. I don't mean that in a bad way, nor have I been disappointed with him, necessarily. He just hasn't been the player that I thought we were getting. To be honest, I didn't think he'd ever score a point outside of five feet, with the occasional three sprinkled in for good measure.

You thought we'd be getting a better Archie Goodwin.

Malik Monk has exceeded my expectations so far. He's the only reason we didn't lose by fifteen today.

[George]

You thought we'd be getting a better Archie Goodwin.

Malik Monk has exceeded my expectations so far. He's the only reason we didn't lose by fifteen today.

I think I expected better than that, but I was never too impressed with Goodwin in the first place.

Monk's actually playing a lot like I thought James Young would play.

[Joneslab]

What he hasn't done, and I expected him to do, is dunk on defenders

Not strong enough and doesn't particularly like contact. When he has the potential to twist away from the hit, he usually does.

I think this is something that's actually coachable. Cal talked about it at length after the game. He isn't going to bully people with his frame but I do think he can do some things to get to the line more.

[George]

^ I agree with Katmendo: blocking pads are coming.