Looking Forward to UCLA visiting MU

[Herman Cain]

The regular season game I am most looking forward to next year is when the UCLA Bruins come to Fiserv.

First , there is no question that UCLA has the best hair in the NCAA last year. Second, I enjoy the way they play . Jaquez has that old school power to the basket kind of power forward game. Sort of a modern day version of the late Dave Meyers with his tenacious play . Johnny Juzang is a pure scoring machine ( he may get drafted this year). Tyger Campbell will be running their offense with passion and good choices. Obviously Cronin is not joining in on the good hair but at least he shaves his head to compensate.

Our young team, with emerging hair,  actually played reasonable well against The Bruins on the road, was a close game till UCLA wore us out at the end. Should give the team confidence going into the rematch. Shaka has the best lettuce in the Big East and will show the Bruins what home cookin is all about.

[MUUWUWM]

They will blow our socks off..if they all return...but should be a good game to watch.

[brewcity77]

Ehh, maybe. Let's not forget they were a bubble team that very nearly lost in the play-in game. They're the most consistent overrated team in the "too early" rankings. Maybe a top-20ish team, but I don't see top-5.

[Pakuni]

Juzang declared for the draft today, but will maintain his eligibility for now.

[Herman Cain]

Juzang declared for the draft today, but will maintain his eligibility for now.

Dick Vitale has a point of view on the matter

https://247sports.com/Article/UCLA-Bruins-Basketball-preseason-No-1-2021-22-season-Dick-Vitale-prediction-Mick-Cronin-164316656/

[MuggsyB]

The most interesting question on this topic is why was I attacked weeks ago when I mentioned this game and that UCLA would be a top 5 team? 

[MUUWUWM]

Muggs..if you're on scoop..you will be attacked. lol

[79Warrior]

Ehh, maybe. Let's not forget they were a bubble team that very nearly lost in the play-in game. They're the most consistent overrated team in the "too early" rankings. Maybe a top-20ish team, but I don't see top-5.

Well, they did not lose and made it to the final. Pretty damn good.

[Herman Cain]

The most interesting question on this topic is why was I attacked weeks ago when I mentioned this game and that UCLA would be a top 5 team?

This should be a very good game for the fans .

[brewcity77]

Well, they did not lose and made it to the final. Pretty damn good.

Tournament results are frequently overrated when balanced against the full season, which is a far more accurate measuring stick. I just hope we get this game early while they are still highly ranked.

[MuggsyB]

Muggs..if you're on scoop..you will be attacked. lol

Ha!!  Alright.  Fair enough. 

[genious expert]

Tournament results are frequently overrated when balanced against the full season, which is a far more accurate measuring stick. I just hope we get this game early while they are still highly ranked.

Torvik has them projected as the #3 team next season and that's without Juzang.

I could be talked into believing it with Juzang, but I'm not buying it with him gone.

[brewcity77]

Torvik has them projected as the #3 team next season and that's without Juzang.

I could be talked into believing it with Juzang, but I'm not buying it with him gone.

I understand the argument, but even with him I'm a skeptic. They had an awesome run, but were ranked 30 in Torvik & 44 in kenpom going into the tournament. Their new rankings are reflecting an impressive but incredibly fortuitous run.

They played like an unranked team for 3+ months, then played like a top-5 team for 3 weeks. My main question is which data set is more reflective of their true worth.

[MikeDeanesDarkGlasses]

Torvik has them projected as the #3 team next season and that's without Juzang.

I could be talked into believing it with Juzang, but I'm not buying it with him gone.

They're not #3 unless they have an elite scorer that can get his own shot.  Who in Torvik's mind is replacing Juzang?   

[MU82]

They might still be in the preseason top 5 without Juzang ... but after an early loss or two or three, including quite possibly to Marquette, they'll fall like an anvil.

[mug644]

They're not #3 unless they have an elite scorer that can get his own shot.  Who in Torvik's mind is replacing Juzang?   

I've not read anything, but I would imagine that thinking would be that Jaquez will be that. During their run, I became a UCLA fan (thanks to my brother's enthusiasm) and I most enjoyed Jaquez' creativity and tenacity.

[brewcity77]

They're not #3 unless they have an elite scorer that can get his own shot.  Who in Torvik's mind is replacing Juzang?   

Torvik's is a model, so it's not in his mind, it's in the framework. It does look like Jacquez with a heavy dose of freshman Peyton Watson mixed in.

[warriorjoe]

The last time UCLA played MU in Milwaukee was 1964 in the Milwaukee Classic. The defending national champions had Gail Goodrich, Keith Ericsson, Kenny Washington, Fred Goss and Mike Lynn.

Marquette was leading near the end of the first half 24-22, with less than 20 seconds left until halftime. The late Tom Flynn told me that Al wanted the Warriors to take a shot with just six seconds left on the clock. "I took the shot with eight or nine seconds left on the clock. They get the rebound and Gail Goodrich hit a shot from beyond half court that went in at the buzzer to tie the game."

Flynn scored 19 for the Warriors that night. MU held Goodrich to 21 points and UCLA to 30 points under its season average, but lost 61-52.

Marquette and UCLA never played again during Al's tenure.

Last season was the first time a Marquette team played at Pauley Pavilion. The Warriors stayed within four points most of the game before UCLA finished off MU at the free throw line. A good effort by MU that night.

We will see how Shaka has the guys prepared for this season's rematch at the Fabulous Forum.

Go Warriors!

[MuggsyB]

The last time UCLA played MU in Milwaukee was 1964 in the Milwaukee Classic. The defending national champions had Gail Goodrich, Keith Ericsson, Kenny Washington, Fred Goss and Mike Lynn.

Marquette was leading near the end of the first half 24-22, with less than 20 seconds left until halftime. The late Tom Flynn told me that Al wanted the Warriors to take a shot with just six seconds left on the clock. "I took the shot with eight or nine seconds left on the clock. They get the rebound and Gail Goodrich hit a shot from beyond half court that went in at the buzzer to tie the game."

Flynn scored 19 for the Warriors that night. MU held Goodrich to 21 points and UCLA to 30 points under its season average, but lost 61-52.

Marquette and UCLA never played again during Al's tenure.

Last season was the first time a Marquette team played at Pauley Pavilion. The Warriors stayed within four points most of the game before UCLA finished off MU at the free throw line. A good effort by MU that night.

We will see how Shaka has the guys prepared for this season's rematch at the Fabulous Forum.

Go Warriors!

Ty warriorjoe!!  How are ya doing?  I hope you get to Ireland soon. and can write your novel.

[shoothoops]

Tournament results are frequently overrated when balanced against the full season, which is a far more accurate measuring stick. I just hope we get this game early while they are still highly ranked.

.....Unless it's Shaka's Final Four team, which was a 4th Place Colonial team, 11 seed. You have posted many, many times, positively about Shaka's Final Four. That's great. No problem there. For me, it counts. Results count. It's the inconsistency of your standard when other teams do it that doesn't make much sense. A similar result isn't somehow similar for you.

[brewcity77]

.....Unless it's Shaka's Final Four team, which was a 4th Place Colonial team, 11 seed. You have posted many, many times, positively about Shaka's Final Four. That's great. No problem there. For me, it counts. Results count. It's the inconsistency of your standard when other teams do it that doesn't make much sense. A similar result isn't somehow similar for you.

This take is completely wrong. I've also posted many times about how that team did not deserve a NCAA bid. Because regular season results matter. I said at the time and stand by the point now that VCU should not have earned a NCAA bid in 2011. Want evidence? Here's what I posted at the time:

No doubt. Virginia Tech out and VCU in? What a joke.

VCU did not deserve a bid. I never said otherwise. I will say that what matters is what you do with the postseason opportunity you are given. Smart has done very well with those opportunities, whether the 2011 Final Four, the 2010 CIT crown, or the 2019 NIT Championship. And that when he loses, it isn't in blowout fashion, it's on the last possession or overtime. HOWEVER that doesn't have any impact on my opinions of his teams the NEXT year.

You are making a false equivocation on two completely different topics. The reason I put weight in Smart's ability to generate March results is because he has done very well in March in the past and when he does lose, it's usually very close, so the expectation going forward is that he will be in the position to win games again.

The difference with UCLA is that while I can respect the excellent run they went on, I believe the results of 3.5 months are more valuable than than the results of 2.5 weeks. What UCLA was as a team was an unranked team that was a borderline NCAA team, and if they essentially return the same team, there's little reason to believe they'll be much more than marginally better than that in the next season. That doesn't mean Mick Cronin couldn't find similar magic if they do get into the Tournament, but that is a completely different topic than the value of those five March wins on their 2021-22 projection.

[warriorjoe]

Mugs:

Thanks for the note.

The novel will have to wait until I take care of some unfinished business with the fifth edition of my biography of Coach Al.

More details to come in the near future.

Go Warriors!

[shoothoops]

This take is completely wrong. I've also posted many times about how that team did not deserve a NCAA bid. Because regular season results matter. I said at the time and stand by the point now that VCU should not have earned a NCAA bid in 2011. Want evidence? Here's what I posted at the time:

VCU did not deserve a bid. I never said otherwise. I will say that what matters is what you do with the postseason opportunity you are given. Smart has done very well with those opportunities, whether the 2011 Final Four, the 2010 CIT crown, or the 2019 NIT Championship. And that when he loses, it isn't in blowout fashion, it's on the last possession or overtime. HOWEVER that doesn't have any impact on my opinions of his teams the NEXT year.

You are making a false equivocation on two completely different topics. The reason I put weight in Smart's ability to generate March results is because he has done very well in March in the past and when he does lose, it's usually very close, so the expectation going forward is that he will be in the position to win games again.

The difference with UCLA is that while I can respect the excellent run they went on, I believe the results of 3.5 months are more valuable than than the results of 2.5 weeks. What UCLA was as a team was an unranked team that was a borderline NCAA team, and if they essentially return the same team, there's little reason to believe they'll be much more than marginally better than that in the next season. That doesn't mean Mick Cronin couldn't find similar magic if they do get into the Tournament, but that is a completely different topic than the value of those five March wins on their 2021-22 projection.

Shaka Smart has made the NCAA Tourney 2nd weekend once on his career, with the above mentioned team. He has gotten out of the first round 3 times in 12 seasons. half of this was at a Power 5 school. That doesn't mean he can't have more or better success at MUBB or in the future.

I was more interested in your posts about it the past four months than one from ten years ago.

It wasn't about the value of the regular season vs postseason. It was about treating similar things similarly regardless of coach or school.

[brewcity77]

LIt wasn't about the value of the regular season vs postseason. It was about treating similar things similarly regardless of coach or school.

Using year over year postseason results as indicators of potential future postseason success is not remotely similar to using one set of postseason results to indicate a bubble team deserves a #1 ranking the following year.

[shoothoops]

Using year over year postseason results as indicators of potential future postseason success is not remotely similar to using one set of postseason results to indicate a bubble team deserves a #1 ranking the following year.

Neither I nor the two posters above your first post mentioned anything about #1 ranking. Neither did the additional poster who made positive remarks about UCLA's Final Four Run.

Then you mentioned that NCAA Tourney results are frequently overrated etc...and it went from there. It stood out to me because you frequently mention Shaka's FF Run as a positive, but, you seem less positive when others have done it. That was and still is what I was talking about. If it's a positive for one, it's a positive for others, and the reverse.