P ALO ALTO “”mdash; Man, I hate trees.
That was quite possibly the most unpleasant experience of my life, besides the time I had a cyst on my tailbone (or maybe including that time).
To lose on the road is not so much a big deal. To lose to Stanford is not so much of a big deal.
To lose to Stanford on the road after leading 37-20 because you play with no fire for roughly 20 minutes … well, the deals start to get bigger at that point.
Junior Arron Afflalo had 17 points in the first half on a variety of turnaround jumpers and 3-pointers.
Then he went 14 minutes of the second half without scoring a point.
This strikes me as peculiar (infuriating, actually, but I’m trying to utilize some perspective, which is hard to come by eight minutes after the game ends).
Sure, Stanford did a better job of guarding him in the second half. You have to give the Cardinal (stupid nickname) some credit for that. But UCLA also did a great job of not getting the ball to the one guy on the team who should probably have touched the ball on every possession.
Stanford outscored the Bruins 55 to 31 over the last 22 minutes or so. That is, of course, a ridiculous occurrence that should never have happened. I don’t care how well Stanford plays, they should never score that many points with the Lopez twins having off nights.
OK, maybe the refs were calling some ticky-tack stuff (I’m not really sure ““ by that point in the second half I was blind with rage). But if the Bruins had been playing well, they would have been able to overcome any number of bad calls.
UCLA was also outcoached, as much as it hurts to say it. Coach Ben Howland had an excellent opening game plan, but made no adjustments once his big men got in foul trouble (and yes, they were all in foul trouble, as can be seen by sophomore Ryan Wright playing). Wright is not capable of playing big minutes ““ not at this point ““ and not against the quality big men Stanford can throw out there. Stanford coach Trent Johnson, on the other hand, started to rely more on his guards in the second half, which seemed to throw off UCLA’s defensive game plan.
That all actually sounds like explanation for the inexplicable.
The main point I took away from the second half is that for 20 minutes UCLA essentially stopped playing with intensity.
Afflalo was not given the ball and didn’t fight as hard to get it.
Sophomore Josh Shipp began to take his individual jaunts into the lane that, while he may score from time to time, take the offense entirely out of rhythm. Sophomore
Darren Collison and Shipp both began to throw questionable passes.
It’s hard to understand how a team can look so good in the first half of a game that I am saying things to the effect of “Wow, they could really run the table” and then play so
poorly in the second half of the same game that I wonder if they will ever start clicking on all cylinders.
Maybe I’m fickle (and yes, I definitely am fickle) but is it too much to ask for some consistent play? This team does not have the overall talent to coast for a half, like
maybe Florida can. They have to play hard consistently.
Look, I know UCLA is 18-2, and I understand that Stanford is a good team. But this should not have been the kind of loss that it ended up being.
I really hate trees.
E-mail Woods at dwoods@media.ucla.edu if you also have seen opposing fans rush the field/court in both football and basketball.