Field Trip: Pauley Pavilion
I just got back from UCLA's thrilling overtime victory over Stanford at Pauley Pavilion that clinched the Bruins' third straight Pac 10 title. I went to the game because my father asked me, "Have you ever been to a really big time college basketball game?" I rattled off all the amazing games I've attended - regional finals, Texas-Kansas showdowns, and so on, but when I finished he said, "Set aside the NCAA Tournament games, which are their own beast. But this will be something different than what you've seen before."
And it was. It really was as great a college basketball environment as I've ever seen. Part of it was the context - two Top 10-ranked Pac 10 teams battling in the season's final week for the conference crown. But it was more than just a big game, too. This was a real gym, with real history, and real fans who live and die for the hoops team like Texas football fans live and die with the football team.
A few notes on Pauley, and then the game.
- Pauley Pavilion is a basketball gym - not a special events center. It's built to watch basketball, and there are literally no bad seats in the house. I know this for certain, because as my Dad and his buddy were down in primo seats by the court, I was up at the very top row, tucked in the corner. And it was still a great, great vantage point to take in the game. In fact, when I briefly joined my Pops down by the court, I wasn't so sure I didn't prefer my seat at the top. (This is true of the Rose Bowl, as well. Every seat, even at the top row, is a good one.)
- The student section is sizable, occupying the length of one side of the court, ten rows deep. The student section is full, rambunctious, and loud. Unofficially, many more students extend up past the court-side section up to the top rows. Student support for the team dwarfs what we see at Texas.
- Another big difference? Every fan is extremely into the game. The 40-and-over crowd in attendance stand, they clap loudly, do the cheers, sing the songs, and yell like their lives depend on it. Though older Texas fans are as dedicated to their football team as these Bruins fans are to their hoops team, a good many Texas fans are extremely passive in comparison. I wouldn't roll my eyes at anyone who described a Pauley game as "electric."
- On to the game: UCLA's offense in the first half was Ben Howland basketball at its worst. Slow, methodical, predictable, and unimaginative, with painful outside shooting. UCLA managed a meager 18 points by half, trailing by as many as 14 points. Watching the first half unfold, I kept scribbling in my notes: "Stanford is slow. When's UCLA going to start taking advantage of their advantage in speed and quickness??"
- UCLA never did in the first half, but Darren Collison awoke in the second half, keying the big comeback. At one point, UCLA's point guard scored 11 straight points, helping UCLA take advantage of Stanford's subpar transition and perimeter defense. Without this adjustment, I'm comfortable saying the Bruins lose by 10+ points. In the first half, Howland simply had his guards work the ball to Kevin Love on the low block over and over. Love's so good that they got a few good baskets this way, but Stanford's twin centers made life much more difficult than the freshman is used to, and without any perimeter shooting to help, the offense stalled. When Collison got going in the second half, everything else opened up.
- As much as I cringe watching Ben Howland teams play offense, the defense is something to behold. Perhaps most importantly, they stop penetration better than any team in America. But they're also a picture perfect off-ball defending team, as well. They deny passing lanes exceptionally well, and know when and where to rotate (and do so crisply).
- I have never seen a seven-footer try to dribble as much as I did Brook Lopez tonight. He did a lot of things very well tonight, and is surprisingly agile for his height, but it's criminal how often he puts the ball on the floor. His coaches aren't getting the most out of him yet at all.
- Speaking of Stanford coaching... they blew this one badly. Nursing a quickly evaporating five point lead with two minutes remaining in the game, Stanford on back-to-back possessions (once right out of a timeout) took a terrible shot with 25 seconds on the shot clock. Though the Cardinal do a lot well, I would have been infuriated with Trent Johnson if I were a Stanford fan tonight. Beyond the clock management disaster, the lack of adjustments in the final ten minutes of the second half was astounding. It was like Trent Johnson was surprised UCLA was double teaming Brook Lopez. Unbelievable.
- From my vantage point, the whistle Darren Collison got with 2.5 seconds left was questionable, at best. I didn't have the best angle on the play, but I got two text messages from friends watching on TV who couldn't believe the call, either, so I'm inclined to believe UCLA got a bit of a break there. Foul or not - credit to Collison, who did what he'd been doing throughout the second half - attacking. That's why you want your team being aggressive in the paint; it not only pressures the defense, it pressures the officials, as well.
Update [2008-3-7 18:48:1 by HornsFan]: The Pac 10's head of officials tells Andy Katz it wasn't a good call.
- Looking ahead to the NCAAs, Stanford's going to have a tough time with quick teams. Their size inside is terrific, but it's a slow, slow team overall. A quick team that's athletic enough to clean the defensive glass is going to give the Cardinal fits. As for UCLA... well, it's tough to say. The defense is certainly supreme, but outside Collison, their perimeter game is textbook Howland - awful. If I'm a UCLA fan, I worry about a team which won't get dominated by love and who also has an elite defender to deal with Collison. In that situation, UCLA's going to have trouble scoring enough to win. I'll say this: at their best, UCLA's easily a Final Four team. Based on what I've seen so far, though, it's hard to see them winning this tournament. There just aren't enough offensive weapons.
- Congratulations to Ben Howland and UCLA, who won their third straight Pac 10 regular season championship - the first time they've done so since the Wooden era. Another excellent year in Westwood.
--PB--
15 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Sounds like us
Slow, methodical, predictable, and unimaginative, with painful outside shooting.
That sounds like the Texas offense at time this year. That's what worries me most about this team. We can go in some big time offensive funks where points are extremely rare. If we're not shooting well we really struggle to put points on the board because of our lack of post play, guys who can create their own shot, and the ability to get to the stripe.
Anyone else agree? Or disagree?
Personally... I think Stanford got robbed....
by homecourt officials. This seems to be a trend in college basketball. The foul on Lawrence Hill (Stanford) with 3 seconds left to put Darren Collison (UCLA) on the line for two to tie the game and send it to overtime was good television, but far from legitimate. There was no foul. Period.
I could care less if Stanford won or not. I just don't like seeing games come down to a referee's error/bias- whichever the case may be.
Once UCLA tied the game at the end of regulation, it sure seemed inevitable they would pull it out in OT on their home court with that momentum.
Sure isn't the first time it has happened in NCAA basketball this year. I guess we will let it slide until it happens to us.
I saw the last 10 minutes and overtime
And had some thoughts as well.
UCLA Pom Squad. Wow. Nice work ladies, keep it up.
I really really want some twin brothers who are good at basketball at Texas. Could you imagine if the Lopez brothers signed with the Griffen brothers?
Bad call to end regulation, maybe his left hand committed the foul, but the right was totally clean. Oh well. Stanford was playing not to lose and not playing to win, its their fault they were in that situation in the first place. They were consistently scoring when both Lopez's were in down the stretch. I know dude pulled his fourth foul. But when theres a minute left, with the game on the line, you don't save your best lineup because of foul trouble (howd that turn out in overtime for you anyway, Cardinals?). Brook was getting doubled, and they cant do that if his bro is there. Play to win, or don't cry when you let UCLA right back into it. How many of those putbacks would Love have gotten if both Lopez' were there?
Love is great at positioning. Im not sure hes the most talented dude on the floor, and he looks gassed half the time, but he always finds the right spot, and plays hard. Good god though, am I the only one who is freaked out by his facial hair? It looks like adolescent porn stache. Grow it out or cut it off man...
Teams are plural. I dont know what else to say here. The mascot is singular, the team (consisting of multiple people) is a plural. Cardinals. Get off your hippie high horse and stop this dumb charade. Your mascot is the Cardinal. You yourself are a Cardinal, when there are several Stanford people together playing basketball, you are the Cardinals. Love the tree though.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Mar 7, 2008 8:06 AM CST reply actions
Cardinal color not Cardinal bird
Lord knows there's a lot to scratch your head about in Palo Alto, but The Cardinal refers to the cardinal in the school colors of cardinal and white. They were referred to as the Cardinals for awhile until someone realized this grammar faux pas and the university president decreed the singular form to be the official rep. Would you call a group the Oranges or the Golds (hold the Jewish jokes)? BTW, before the Cardinals/Cardinal controversy was resolved, the university took suggestions for potential new nicknames. Unfortunately, both Robber Barons (here's to you, Leland Stanford!) and Steaming Manhole Covers failed to garner adequate support.
That I was not aware of.
I suppose I have no choice but to rescind that comment.
But I reserve the right to continue calling them the Stanford Trees for the appalling notion that their teams should be referenced primarily by a color and not a mascot.
Yes I'm looking at you Syracuse.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Mar 7, 2008 4:23 PM CST up reply actions
Harvard Crimson, as well
my law school alma mater, however, the New York University Violets.....that's not referring to the color. no, that's the flower. that's just about as manly as NYU's athletic teams.
I thought it was after...
... the 1940's Looney-Toons insult.
"Questionable Call"
PB,
You are being too kind. You may have been sitting too high, but the call at the end of regulation was TERRIBLE. Even if there was a little contact with the body, there is no reason for that call to be made in the closing seconds with the game on the line. I thoughts the refs did a good job for most of the game by letting the players play and not interjecting themselves into the contest. But with the game on the line, the whistle was blown at the worst time.
As bad as Stanford may have managed the clock, they still should have won the game fair and square if the refs let the players decide the outcome.
Seconded
by 512 on Mar 7, 2008 9:12 AM CST up reply actions
I'll pile on as well
Call at the end of regulation was questionable at best. The intentional foul call in overtime was also horrible. The guy clearly went for the ball and it was difficult to tell if Westbrook tried to dribble it and that made the ball bounce, but it was possible that this intentional foul was called when the Stanford player actually hit the ball. Marinate on that for a second.
Stanford ran a lot of sets late in the game where both Lopez twins were situated on the block. Blech. No room for cutting or penetration and they weren't setting any screens for the guards either. I don't understand that philosophy. The ball has to be on either side of the court for an angle for an entry pass, so why clog the lane when they ball can't be entered to you?
Brook Lopez made a serious mistake in overtime when he let Darren Collison split his hedge and make it to the basket on a screen. Lopez's body was perpendicular to the baseline to allow him to get back into position on Love's roll to the hoop, but he failed to slow down Collison at all. Why hedge if you aren't even going to slow the guy down? This happens a lot in the NBA too and while D-Wade and Kobe are extraordinarily talented to split as many double teams as they do, I feel like a lot of that is just poor footwork by the bigs.
UCLA Pom. Wow. UCLA Pom in stunning high definition. Double wow. A triple wow for stunning high definition and slow motion replay. No offense to Texas Pom (y'all are beautiful ladies), but they aren't in the same class as the ladies from UCLA.
by ghostoftheplaymaker4 on Mar 7, 2008 1:18 PM CST up reply actions
very good game
Felt a lot like a tourney game. I'll say that I was impressed with Brook Lopez's range. Both Lopez players were better all around than I had assumed.
Stanford gets almost nothing out of its guards, or it felt that way watching the game. They'll run into a quick team that can hit the 3 in the tourney, and they'll be done. They won't be able to keep up.
Texas dodged a bullet getting UCLA when Collison was just starting to play after his injury. Don't know if they outcome would have been different, but it's clear to see that he's their difference maker more than anyone else. It's fun to watch someone so quick and aggressive at attacking the rim. But, he also brings that aggressiveness to the defensive end, too. I think he and Augustin share some great things in common, but that defensive intensity is what I love most about Collison. I guess they both excel at finding a way to get shots, but they seem to do it in different ways. (DJ with more floaters, fadeaways, etc.)

by 
































