|
Post by spudbeaver on Feb 22, 2019 7:33:00 GMT -8
Wtf was that? Letting the miss bounce? Did I miss something? That was smart. The clock does not start until someone touches the ball. Maybe it goes out of bounds? Unfortunately, one UCLA player knew enough to rush Tres, and all Tres could do was to try and draw contact. Kelly not being out there on defense at the end seemed like a glaring blunder. The last offensive possession of regulation was a joke. Call your timeout and get your players in and your play in. Calling a timeout with one second left? What a waste! Oregon State is one of the worst perimeter shooting teams in the country with one of the worst perimeter defenses. UCLA was winning first half three point shooting by 20%. Oregon State cut it to 10%, but the Beavers have only been able to overcome an outside shooting disparity that large once this year, against Washington State. If you want to go to the Tournament, you have to win games like that, and Oregon State did not. The Beavers need to win six of the next seven or the final three. Barring something unforeseen, nothing else gets Oregon State to the Dance. Thanks. I didn’t know that on a miss. I agree with what you say. Disappointing.
|
|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Feb 22, 2019 7:39:47 GMT -8
18-25! Beavers have shot 3! Who would have thought that a game against the Bruins would be lost at the foul line? That's what happens when you fall in love with 3's and no one goes to the hoop with exception of Tres a couple times. Did ourselves no favors in even TRYING to get to the line.
|
|
|
Post by joeavocado on Feb 22, 2019 8:48:33 GMT -8
Agreed. Beavs were way too passive on offense, especially the last two offensive possessions, plus were getting called for cheap fouls on the other end. Lots of standing around on offense. In the last six minutes, there were 7 fouls called on OSU, only 2 on UCLA. Not going to win too many close games that way. Only 8 fouls called on UCLA the entire game, that's crazy. Curiously it seems there would never be a reverse situation where the visiting team is called for only 8 fouls and the home team has 18 fouls. Just the way it works, home team gets a lot of the calls that could go either way, one of the reasons it's difficult to win on the road at any level. Home team has a tendency to be the aggressor, and officials have a tendency to make calls to keep the home team in the game, especially in the NBA.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Feb 22, 2019 9:15:59 GMT -8
My quick thoughts:
Ethan was 2-11 and a lot of those misses were easy looks at the rim.
UCLA played far more aggressively than they did in Corvallis. Casey Jacobsen mentioned multiple times the size advantage that their guards had vs. STjr., even at one point saying something about Stevie carrying OSU on his "scrawny, narrow shoulders" or something like that.
There was a sequence in the second half where we ran a play for Stevie for 3, and on the next possession ran the same play, but Tres slipped the screen and got an easy layup at the rim. One of the best offensive sets I've seen from us in years. I would've loved to see us call timeout and run that set again at the end instead of just playing it out.
Agree that the timeout call before the second free throw was the wrong time to use it. You can advance the ball to midcourt on a timeout in college now, right? I mean, if we save the timeout, UCLA may leave their guys on the line and just tap the ball out, but I still think you have a better opportunity if you rebound it cleanly and have a play from midcourt with .9 (just ask Lillard). Or better yet call it with 17 seconds left and draw something up to get a clean look.
While I would've liked more of a set play on the last two possessions, bottom line is our best player had good, open looks at a 3 on both of them and just flat missed them. It happens, and it sucks....but really that game could've gone either way.
We're now 3-4 in one possession games (counting the OT win vs. USC as one-possession since it was tied at the end of regulation), so I wouldn't say that there's a real trend of us mucking up late game situations.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Feb 22, 2019 9:23:27 GMT -8
My quick thoughts: Ethan was 2-11 and a lot of those misses were easy looks at the rim. UCLA played far more aggressively than they did in Corvallis. Casey Jacobsen mentioned multiple times the size advantage that their guards had vs. STjr., even at one point saying something about Stevie carrying OSU on his "scrawny, narrow shoulders" or something like that. There was a sequence in the second half where we ran a play for Stevie for 3, and on the next possession ran the same play, but Tres slipped the screen and got an easy layup at the rim. One of the best offensive sets I've seen from us in years. I would've loved to see us call timeout and run that set again at the end instead of just playing it out. Agree that the timeout call before the second free throw was the wrong time to use it. You can advance the ball to midcourt on a timeout in college now, right? I mean, if we save the timeout, UCLA may leave their guys on the line and just tap the ball out, but I still think you have a better opportunity if you rebound it cleanly and have a play from midcourt with .9 (just ask Lillard). Or better yet call it with 17 seconds left and draw something up to get a clean look. While I would've liked more of a set play on the last two possessions, bottom line is our best player had good, open looks at a 3 on both of them and just flat missed them. It happens, and it sucks....but really that game could've gone either way. We're now 3-4 in one possession games (counting the OT win vs. USC as one-possession since it was tied at the end of regulation), so I wouldn't say that there's a real trend of us mucking up late game situations. You cannot advance the ball to mid-court after a time out. You can in the Women's game, but that rule has not changed for the men.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Feb 22, 2019 9:51:56 GMT -8
My quick thoughts: Ethan was 2-11 and a lot of those misses were easy looks at the rim. UCLA played far more aggressively than they did in Corvallis. Casey Jacobsen mentioned multiple times the size advantage that their guards had vs. STjr., even at one point saying something about Stevie carrying OSU on his "scrawny, narrow shoulders" or something like that. There was a sequence in the second half where we ran a play for Stevie for 3, and on the next possession ran the same play, but Tres slipped the screen and got an easy layup at the rim. One of the best offensive sets I've seen from us in years. I would've loved to see us call timeout and run that set again at the end instead of just playing it out. Agree that the timeout call before the second free throw was the wrong time to use it. You can advance the ball to midcourt on a timeout in college now, right? I mean, if we save the timeout, UCLA may leave their guys on the line and just tap the ball out, but I still think you have a better opportunity if you rebound it cleanly and have a play from midcourt with .9 (just ask Lillard). Or better yet call it with 17 seconds left and draw something up to get a clean look. While I would've liked more of a set play on the last two possessions, bottom line is our best player had good, open looks at a 3 on both of them and just flat missed them. It happens, and it sucks....but really that game could've gone either way. We're now 3-4 in one possession games (counting the OT win vs. USC as one-possession since it was tied at the end of regulation), so I wouldn't say that there's a real trend of us mucking up late game situations. You cannot advance the ball to mid-court after a time out. You can in the Women's game, but that rule has not changed for the men. Thanks for that clarification. I could've sworn I was watching a men's college game earlier this year where a guy started dribbling up the court, called timeout, and the announcer said it was a mistake because now they couldn't advance the ball, but maybe the announcer flubbed the rule. I still contend that having the chance to call timeout and throw a pass from out of bounds would've been a better option than having Tres try to make a 75 foot heave, but the reality is either option is a very, very low percentage play.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Feb 22, 2019 9:58:00 GMT -8
You cannot advance the ball to mid-court after a time out. You can in the Women's game, but that rule has not changed for the men. Thanks for that clarification. I could've sworn I was watching a men's college game earlier this year where a guy started dribbling up the court, called timeout, and the announcer said it was a mistake because now they couldn't advance the ball, but maybe the announcer flubbed the rule. I still contend that having the chance to call timeout and throw a pass from out of bounds would've been a better option than having Tres try to make a 75 foot heave, but the reality is either option is a very, very low percentage play. Maybe....but we lost the game on the previous possession. The odds of converting a full court pass and hoop in 1 second are not good (despite that a-hole Laettner pulling it off)
|
|
|
Post by beaverbeliever71 on Feb 22, 2019 11:56:11 GMT -8
Agreed. Beavs were way too passive on offense, especially the last two offensive possessions, plus were getting called for cheap fouls on the other end. Lots of standing around on offense. In the last six minutes, there were 7 fouls called on OSU, only 2 on UCLA. Not going to win too many close games that way. Only 8 fouls called on UCLA the entire game, that's crazy. Curiously it seems there would never be a reverse situation where the visiting team is called for only 8 fouls and the home team has 18 fouls. Just the way it works, home team gets a lot of the calls that could go either way, one of the reasons it's difficult to win on the road at any level. Home team has a tendency to be the aggressor, and officials have a tendency to make calls to keep the home team in the game, especially in the NBA. Yea 28-3 in FT advantage for UCLA. Ive never seen that a big a gap in a game
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 22, 2019 15:11:24 GMT -8
Agreed. Beavs were way too passive on offense, especially the last two offensive possessions, plus were getting called for cheap fouls on the other end. Lots of standing around on offense. In the last six minutes, there were 7 fouls called on OSU, only 2 on UCLA. Not going to win too many close games that way. Only 8 fouls called on UCLA the entire game, that's crazy. Curiously it seems there would never be a reverse situation where the visiting team is called for only 8 fouls and the home team has 18 fouls. Just the way it works, home team gets a lot of the calls that could go either way, one of the reasons it's difficult to win on the road at any level. Home team has a tendency to be the aggressor, and officials have a tendency to make calls to keep the home team in the game, especially in the NBA. Yea 28-3 in FT advantage for UCLA. Ive never seen that a big a gap in a game To be fair... UCLA was far more aggressive all game long. We stood or didn't move our feet on both ends of the court. So the 3 might be a tad low, but OSU never forced action. The 28 a tad high, but most of the fouls were correct and because of laziness. Do UCLA "lost" baskets because they shot FTs. Once the game is so lopsided in aggressive play calls tend to go that way. Officials weren't terrible, OSU was.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Feb 22, 2019 16:03:52 GMT -8
Yea 28-3 in FT advantage for UCLA. Ive never seen that a big a gap in a game To be fair... UCLA was far more aggressive all game long. We stood or didn't move our feet on both ends of the court. So the 3 might be a tad low, but OSU never forced action. The 28 a tad high, but most of the fouls were correct and because of laziness. Do UCLA "lost" baskets because they shot FTs. Once the game is so lopsided in aggressive play calls tend to go that way. Officials weren't terrible, OSU was. We scored 40 pts in the paint.....I think we got fouled on some of those shots. It's not like we were just jacking up 3's all game. That being said, we still had a chance to win, just didn't execute very well at the end. Giving up offensive boards continues to be a problem for this team. I thought that was a big difference, especially in the 1st half.
|
|
|
Post by blastingsand on Feb 22, 2019 17:47:47 GMT -8
Yea 28-3 in FT advantage for UCLA. Ive never seen that a big a gap in a game To be fair... UCLA was far more aggressive all game long. We stood or didn't move our feet on both ends of the court. So the 3 might be a tad low, but OSU never forced action. The 28 a tad high, but most of the fouls were correct and because of laziness. Do UCLA "lost" baskets because they shot FTs. Once the game is so lopsided in aggressive play calls tend to go that way. Officials weren't terrible, OSU was. I agree with this, as watching the game UCLA really didn't even play defense. Most of our shots were pretty open (which is why the FG % was relatively decent), there was maybe a few that "could" have been called but I don't think it was even enough to have made up that differential. UCLA was just such a bad team they didn't really know how to play even play defense.
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Feb 23, 2019 8:06:59 GMT -8
To be fair... UCLA was far more aggressive all game long. We stood or didn't move our feet on both ends of the court. So the 3 might be a tad low, but OSU never forced action. The 28 a tad high, but most of the fouls were correct and because of laziness. Do UCLA "lost" baskets because they shot FTs. Once the game is so lopsided in aggressive play calls tend to go that way. Officials weren't terrible, OSU was. We scored 40 pts in the paint.....I think we got fouled on some of those shots. It's not like we were just jacking up 3's all game. That being said, we still had a chance to win, just didn't execute very well at the end. Giving up offensive boards continues to be a problem for this team. I thought that was a big difference, especially in the 1st half. I think the fact that Kelley tries to block everything in sight often puts him out of position to rebound. I like the fact that he is a great shot blocker and dramatically improves our defense, but giving up boards is the price to be paid for that.
|
|
|
Post by Bodhisattva on Feb 25, 2019 14:26:41 GMT -8
Agreed. Beavs were way too passive on offense, especially the last two offensive possessions, plus were getting called for cheap fouls on the other end. Lots of standing around on offense. In the last six minutes, there were 7 fouls called on OSU, only 2 on UCLA. Not going to win too many close games that way. Only 8 fouls called on UCLA the entire game, that's crazy. Curiously it seems there would never be a reverse situation where the visiting team is called for only 8 fouls and the home team has 18 fouls. Just the way it works, home team gets a lot of the calls that could go either way, one of the reasons it's difficult to win on the road at any level. Home team has a tendency to be the aggressor, and officials have a tendency to make calls to keep the home team in the game, especially in the NBA. Yea 28-3 in FT advantage for UCLA. Ive never seen that a big a gap in a game How about 35-2 for West Virginia at Kansas last week. 35-2.
|
|
|
Post by nexus73 on Feb 25, 2019 15:16:49 GMT -8
Tres Tinkle played poorly at the end. Fouls, turnovers and missed shots from our top stud did us in. Had he played the opposite of what he did in the last few minutes, we win the game.
On the last play of the game, a Bruin made a fantastic athletic shot for the winning score. Looking at their team shows an abundance of athleticism but it is not well coached. In a way, our loss at Pauley reminded me of our baseball loss to USC down there when we were going for a first ever road sweep of that team. We played subpar that day while the Trojans decided that was the one game they would show up at their best. Had we brought our A game, the sweep is ours.
Oh well, we are not that good a team and we do not play in a very good conference. When your conference's best team is only 30th best in the nation, that means as a conference we suck rutabagas. Some day I hope to see all these overrated coaches fired and a new batch come in so maybe some who actually know how basketball works can meld talent into a team on a consistent basis. John Wooden and Ralph Miller are rolling over in their graves at the atrocious display of cager action in the Pac-12.
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Feb 25, 2019 15:47:18 GMT -8
John Wooden is rolling over in his grave because UCLA no longer has someone like Sam Gilbert who could buy him the best players while receiving total immunity from any NCAA investigation.
|
|