[2006alum]

Many useful observations by my fellow cardboarders about this game, but let me also note that senior nights, filled with emotion and attended by all the players' friends and family, are often unpredictable.

That said, here are my thoughts:

1) I am getting worried about Jump.  I've seen the pattern before, with Karlie Samuelson, with Kiana Williams--even with Lindy LaRocque.  Players who are terrific three point shooters early in their careers, and early in their senior season, start to press too hard and suffer from declining accuracy at the end of their senior year.  It has happened over and over--why I don't know.  I also wonder if Tara's decision to start Jump and play her for nearly 40 minutes in so many games has taken a toll--more psychological than physical.  In this game Tara did take her out of the game several times as if to give her a reset, but it did not work.  0 points in 30 minutes.  She spent a lot of time defending Londynn Jones, though, who with 14 points on 5/10 shooting was held somewhat in check.

2) Let's celebrate something extraordinary with Cameron Brink.  UCLA was attempting Mike Montgomery's strategy against Tim Duncan and just decided to foul her over and over.  A year or two ago, this board was filled with concern about Brink's free throw shooting.  She was barely a 60% free throw shooter that last couple of years, and sometimes she went into deep free throw shooting slumps which encouraged other teams just to hack her to death.  But tonight she was 15/15 from the line and that was more than enough for the victory.  Tonight's officials were not Friday's officials, thankfully. 

3) UCLA's defense is quite good--not up to USC standards--but more steals and enough quickness to make passing difficult.  We were reminded of that with all the turnovers early in the game.  However, our defense was better.  We shot 47% and held them to 36%, and we did so while committing 14 fouls compared to their 19.  UCLA has several top three point shooters, and our own Jump was 0/2.  Nevertheless, we shot 36% from three point range while holding UCLA to 28%.  In short, chalk this victory mainly up to defense.  At the beginning of the year our defense was a weakness, but against good teams late in the year, it is now a strength.  That is what a year of coaching can do.

4) As others have noted, this game was only close because we gave UCLA 17 offensive rebounds, compared with only 7 for us.  That led to UCLA having 17 second chance points compared to our 2.  TWO!  Oregon's coach Graves described UCLA's strategy as a "chuck and chase" strategy.  By that he meant they took lots of shots early and crashed the boards to get the misses back, not worrying too much about accuracy.  The way to punish such a strategy is to make sure that when you do get a defensive rebound you get it out quickly in transition--since if UCLA's 5 players are all crashing the boards then no one should be back on defense.  We did get 12 fast break points--which is better than most games--but not enough to compensate for giving them 17 second chances.  Brink only had 5 Dboards, Jones only 6.  Betts had 5 in 15 minutes--she was our best rebounder tonight.

5) I was frustrated at times tonight with Jones, but looking at the stat sheet has quieted those misgivings.  This was actually a good game for her.  She was an efficient 7/13 with 18 points.  She led with 6 Dboards.  I was saddened that she missed two free throws, had 4 turnovers, but she had a couple of assists and 3 steals to help balance it out a bit.  Her +/- for anyone who cares was the best on either team, +11.  (You will never guess the worst on either team at -17.  I was shocked to see Londynn Jones.)

6) Lepolo 3/5 on three point attempts, made herself one of 4 players in double digits.  Her friendly rival Nivar had 0 points tonight.  Those two seem to go back and forth.  But playing against a quick defense that made it difficult to pass, she had only 2 assists to 3 turnovers.  She was mainly assigned to defend Osborne, who was held to 3/15 shooting, so I would count that as a major plus for the freshman.

7) Finally, Betts is really coming into her own.  I noticed, however, that she did tire after being in for too long a stretch.  Her cardio is much better than in the fall, but it has a ways to go before we will see her playing 40 minutes, which she may need to do after Brink graduates.  Tonight, her 12 points in 15 minutes with 2/2 free throws, an assist, and 0 turnovers--was actually better than Brink's numbers per minute played.  I am delighted to see her coming along so well.

81, great write up. Although I attended tonight's game (first, and last, home game of this season!), I'm not sure I have a ton to add to your excellent recap. A few stray thoughts:

Overall, and awesome crowd and environment. Really fun to attend such a packed home game - it felt close to 90% full, and easily the most crowded I can even remember seeing Maples since the heydays of Monty.

Jones did seem to be moving slowly at times - and in a few instances I noticed, it hurt us on the few fast break possibilities where Lepolo was looking to push the ball up in transition but her pass to Jones stopped forward progression and Jones would hold back at midcourt with the ball. Not sure if she's just tired from a season of playing a ton of minutes, but a few times she was noticeably slow in transition and all but foreclosed any possibility of fast break points. Once she was in the paint, as usual, she was her athletic, attacking self, but she seemed slower than usual to start the offensive sets. Also: has she just given up on trying to make treys? She was wide open several times and didn't even seem to consider attempting to launch from outside.

In general, our slowness was something that really struck me in the third: we were so hesitant to look for half court plays, push the tempo, or move the ball around quickly. At times it felt like the Portlandia sketch with the cars at the stop sign: "go! no, you. no, you!" No one wanted to take the damn shot! Politeness does not net you many baskets, it turns out, and it was during this stretch that UCLA was having their way with steals and fast breaks.

UCLAs trio of speedy guards (Jones, Osborne, and Conti) were every bit as hard to handle as I was expecting, and our bad stretch in the third came largely with two or all three of them on the floor, disrupting passes, pressuring our offense, and juking to open up their outside game.

I also noticed that Betts looked gassed after more than 2-3 minutes in at a time. Unfortunately, she doesn't seem to have great quickness getting up and down the floor, so for a team that otherwise likes to push tempo, she can be a liability sometimes. That said, that 6'7" feathery touch is sure lovely to see when it goes in.

Agreed that Jump is forcing too much, but it must suck being the "beneficiary" of everyone's best guard defender, week in, week out. She truly had no open looks that I could see the entire game, so I'm not quite sure what she could do differently. Unfortunately, 81, you're spot on: this has progressed just like Karl's senior season.

I know others think highly of Nivar, and I hold out a lot of promise, but I just didn't see it this game. Lepolo, by contrast, kept hitting shots (treys, free throws) in those clutch moments when the lead could slip away from us. I know she moves more like Sniezek than anyone else, but her game also reminds me a bit of early era Amber Orrange - not overly confident in choosing to take her own shots, but surprisingly accurate when she did. She did seem to get a little rattled by the pressing of the UCLA guards, though.

Did I blink and miss Prechtel? She seemed to barely enter the court. I don't quite know what to make of her decline in playing time over the last two seasons. And even Fran's minutes were pretty limited, and have been all year. I will say, from what I've seen of them this season, I don't even think that's the wrong call given what we get from Brink, Betts, and Iriafen inside, but it must be mildly surreal to be a senior and see three freshman playing more than you are, especially on senior day. At one point Betts, Nivar, and Lepolo were on the floor together for an extended stretch, and yet I don't recall a single moment that the Funky Four were!

Moment of the game for me was the Brink coast-to-coast to open Q4. It showed everything about how much Brink wanted it, and was willing to make it happen herself, if necessary, after coming off a truly desultory 3Q. I've said this before, but at times she and Jump seem to be the only two players who tangibly seem like they would do everything to win. I know we're not supposed to guess as to player motivation, but I just don't see that kind of hunger among several other notable names on our team. If there has been any drop-off from last season, it turns out it hasn't really be in either our defensive prowess or our perimeter shooting - it's been our lack of grit. The Hulls and Wilson were gritty "AF", and we just don't see replacements for those kind of energizer bunnies that motivate the rest of the team by example.


All in all, congrats to our seniors for bringing back the hardware during their time on campus. Their arrival really spelled the beginning of realistic national championship ambitions again after at least a decade drought after the end of the Ogwumike x2 era. I'm grateful to each of them for what they've contributed to our team, and if it turns out none of them is going to take a COVID year, then I'm glad their last "home" game was a big win on national TV.

[2006alum]

Many useful observations by my fellow cardboarders about this game, but let me also note that senior nights, filled with emotion and attended by all the players' friends and family, are often unpredictable.

That said, here are my thoughts:

1) I am getting worried about Jump.  I've seen the pattern before, with Karlie Samuelson, with Kiana Williams--even with Lindy LaRocque.  Players who are terrific three point shooters early in their careers, and early in their senior season, start to press too hard and suffer from declining accuracy at the end of their senior year.  It has happened over and over--why I don't know.  I also wonder if Tara's decision to start Jump and play her for nearly 40 minutes in so many games has taken a toll--more psychological than physical.  In this game Tara did take her out of the game several times as if to give her a reset, but it did not work.  0 points in 30 minutes.  She spent a lot of time defending Londynn Jones, though, who with 14 points on 5/10 shooting was held somewhat in check.

2) Let's celebrate something extraordinary with Cameron Brink.  UCLA was attempting Mike Montgomery's strategy against Tim Duncan and just decided to foul her over and over.  A year or two ago, this board was filled with concern about Brink's free throw shooting.  She was barely a 60% free throw shooter that last couple of years, and sometimes she went into deep free throw shooting slumps which encouraged other teams just to hack her to death.  But tonight she was 15/15 from the line and that was more than enough for the victory.  Tonight's officials were not Friday's officials, thankfully. 

3) UCLA's defense is quite good--not up to USC standards--but more steals and enough quickness to make passing difficult.  We were reminded of that with all the turnovers early in the game.  However, our defense was better.  We shot 47% and held them to 36%, and we did so while committing 14 fouls compared to their 19.  UCLA has several top three point shooters, and our own Jump was 0/2.  Nevertheless, we shot 36% from three point range while holding UCLA to 28%.  In short, chalk this victory mainly up to defense.  At the beginning of the year our defense was a weakness, but against good teams late in the year, it is now a strength.  That is what a year of coaching can do.

4) As others have noted, this game was only close because we gave UCLA 17 offensive rebounds, compared with only 7 for us.  That led to UCLA having 17 second chance points compared to our 2.  TWO!  Oregon's coach Graves described UCLA's strategy as a "chuck and chase" strategy.  By that he meant they took lots of shots early and crashed the boards to get the misses back, not worrying too much about accuracy.  The way to punish such a strategy is to make sure that when you do get a defensive rebound you get it out quickly in transition--since if UCLA's 5 players are all crashing the boards then no one should be back on defense.  We did get 12 fast break points--which is better than most games--but not enough to compensate for giving them 17 second chances.  Brink only had 5 Dboards, Jones only 6.  Betts had 5 in 15 minutes--she was our best rebounder tonight.

5) I was frustrated at times tonight with Jones, but looking at the stat sheet has quieted those misgivings.  This was actually a good game for her.  She was an efficient 7/13 with 18 points.  She led with 6 Dboards.  I was saddened that she missed two free throws, had 4 turnovers, but she had a couple of assists and 3 steals to help balance it out a bit.  Her +/- for anyone who cares was the best on either team, +11.  (You will never guess the worst on either team at -17.  I was shocked to see Londynn Jones.)

6) Lepolo 3/5 on three point attempts, made herself one of 4 players in double digits.  Her friendly rival Nivar had 0 points tonight.  Those two seem to go back and forth.  But playing against a quick defense that made it difficult to pass, she had only 2 assists to 3 turnovers.  She was mainly assigned to defend Osborne, who was held to 3/15 shooting, so I would count that as a major plus for the freshman.

7) Finally, Betts is really coming into her own.  I noticed, however, that she did tire after being in for too long a stretch.  Her cardio is much better than in the fall, but it has a ways to go before we will see her playing 40 minutes, which she may need to do after Brink graduates.  Tonight, her 12 points in 15 minutes with 2/2 free throws, an assist, and 0 turnovers--was actually better than Brink's numbers per minute played.  I am delighted to see her coming along so well.

81, great write up. Although I attended tonight's game (first, and last, home game of this season!), I'm not sure I have a ton to add to your excellent recap. A few stray thoughts:

Overall, and awesome crowd and environment. Really fun to attend such a packed home game - it felt close to 90% full, and easily the most crowded I can even remember seeing Maples since the heydays of Monty.

Jones did seem to be moving slowly at times - and in a few instances I noticed, it hurt us on the few fast break possibilities where Lepolo was looking to push the ball up in transition but her pass to Jones stopped forward progression and Jones would hold back at midcourt with the ball. Not sure if she's just tired from a season of playing a ton of minutes, but a few times she was noticeably slow in transition and all but foreclosed any possibility of fast break points. Once she was in the paint, as usual, she was her athletic, attacking self, but she seemed slower than usual to start the offensive sets. Also: has she just given up on trying to make treys? She was wide open several times and didn't even seem to consider attempting to launch from outside.

In general, our slowness was something that really struck me in the third: we were so hesitant to look for half court plays, push the tempo, or move the ball around quickly. At times it felt like the Portlandia sketch with the cars at the stop sign: "go! no, you. no, you!" No one wanted to take the damn shot! Politeness does not net you many baskets, it turns out, and it was during this stretch that UCLA was having their way with steals and fast breaks.

UCLAs trio of speedy guards (Jones, Osborne, and Conti) were every bit as hard to handle as I was expecting, and our bad stretch in the third came largely with two or all three of them on the floor, disrupting passes, pressuring our offense, and juking to open up their outside game.

I also noticed that Betts looked gassed after more than 2-3 minutes in at a time. Unfortunately, she doesn't seem to have great quickness getting up and down the floor, so for a team that otherwise likes to push tempo, she can be a liability sometimes. That said, that 6'7" feathery touch is sure lovely to see when it goes in.

Agreed that Jump is forcing too much, but it must suck being the "beneficiary" of everyone's best guard defender, week in, week out. She truly had no open looks that I could see the entire game, so I'm not quite sure what she could do differently. Unfortunately, 81, you're spot on: this has progressed just like Karl's senior season.

I know others think highly of Nivar, and I hold out a lot of promise, but I just didn't see it this game. Lepolo, by contrast, kept hitting shots (treys, free throws) in those clutch moments when the lead could slip away from us. I know she moves more like Sniezek than anyone else, but her game also reminds me a bit of early era Amber Orrange - not overly confident in choosing to take her own shots, but surprisingly accurate when she did. She did seem to get a little rattled by the pressing of the UCLA guards, though.

Did I blink and miss Prechtel? She seemed to barely enter the court. I don't quite know what to make of her decline in playing time over the last two seasons. And even Fran's minutes were pretty limited, and have been all year. I will say, from what I've seen of them this season, I don't even think that's the wrong call given what we get from Brink, Betts, and Iriafen inside, but it must be mildly surreal to be a senior and see three freshman playing more than you are, especially on senior day. At one point Betts, Nivar, and Lepolo were on the floor together for an extended stretch, and yet I don't recall a single moment that the Funky Four were!

Moment of the game for me was the Brink coast-to-coast to open Q4. It showed everything about how much Brink wanted it, and was willing to make it happen herself, if necessary, after coming off a truly desultory 3Q. I've said this before, but at times she and Jump seem to be the only two players who tangibly seem like they would do everything to win. I know we're not supposed to guess as to player motivation, but I just don't see that kind of hunger among several other notable names on our team. If there has been any drop-off from last season, it turns out it hasn't really be in either our defensive prowess or our perimeter shooting - it's been our lack of grit. The Hulls and Wilson were gritty "AF", and we just don't see replacements for those kind of energizer bunnies that motivate the rest of the team by example.


All in all, congrats to our seniors for bringing back the hardware during their time on campus. Their arrival really spelled the beginning of realistic national championship ambitions again after at least a decade drought after the end of the Ogwumike x2 era. I'm grateful to each of them for what they've contributed to our team, and if it turns out none of them is going to take a COVID year, then I'm glad their last "home" game was a big win on national TV.