uhm what?

[ASUHATER!]

http://collegebasketball.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=2194&tid=97829776&mid=97829776&sid=1146&style=2

apparently the rivals basketball fanbase thinks arizona will miss the tourney this year.

[Zero]

idiots.

[popcorn]

Who cares...:tdown:

I like being an underdog anyway.:)

[Reydituto]

Yeah I have a response ... Uhm, What?!?

http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/2170/caveman3lo0.jpg

[scumdevils86]

huh

[11Banners]

Arizona almost missed the tournament last season and they lose much of their scoring and rebounding from that team. I think Arizona probably makes the tourney this year, but Arizona possibly missing it this year isn't as crazy as some of you believe.

[ASUHATER!]

Arizona almost missed the tournament last season and they lose much of their scoring and rebounding from that team. I think Arizona probably makes the tourney this year, but Arizona possibly missing it this year isn't as crazy as some of you believe.

actually it is

[bhanson]

11B, the post may be a little weaker scoring wise with Ivan gone, but the Cats have a true center now with Walters, and a true 4 with Hill. I see the defense and rebounding being stronger, although neither will have Ivan scoring numbers. Chase will play the 3, and with McClellan healthy at the 2, with Bayless backing him up, there will be plenty of scoring from the wings. Along with Bayless at the PG.

[Auercat]

I'm still trying to figure out how Arizona "almost missed the Tourney last season". :confused:

Bearing Down on An Uniformed Assertion Coupled With Another Inane Topic From The Rivals National Guys. Brilliant!

Auercat

PS I love the national football coverage on Rivals, but the national basketball segment is almost as embarassing as Scout's. Yes, it's that bad. :lol2:

[Reydituto]

Arizona almost missed the tournament last season and they lose much of their scoring and rebounding from that team. I think Arizona probably makes the tourney this year, but Arizona possibly missing it this year isn't as crazy as some of you believe.

That's craptastic. Neg rep for you ...

[11Banners]

I'm still trying to figure out how Arizona "almost missed the Tourney last season". :confused:

Bearing Down on An Uniformed Assertion Coupled With Another Inane Topic From The Rivals National Guys. Brilliant!

Auercat

PS I love the national football coverage on Rivals, but the national basketball segment is almost as embarassing as Scout's. Yes, it's that bad. :lol2:

Arizona was an 8 seed at large team. A loss at Stanford (Ivan's 37 ridiculous performance) and Oregon probably takes the Cats away from the tourney. Both were close games but the 'Cats pulled it out. There were times last season when people worried if Arizona would make the tourney. Furthermore, why is it so surprising that people don't believe Arizona will make it? The casual fan sees a team that struggled last season (blowout loss in the Pac-10 tourney and first round loss to Purdue) and lost 3 starters who provided most of the scoring and rebounding for the team. And, this isn't even bringing up the point that the Pac-10 is going to be an absolutely deadly conference. Nearly every single team should be improved or at the same level as last year, which is quite scary. Arizona has lots of question marks going into the season. Can Bayless handle the duties at the 1 or 2? Is Walters ready to perform like he did against Michigan State in Maui or will he flounder away like Mike Fey?

Rey, maybe you have those sunglasses on that you suggested I take off in that neg rep.

[Reydituto]

Arizona was an 8 seed at large team. A loss at Stanford (Ivan's 37 ridiculous performance) and Oregon probably takes the Cats away from the tourney. Both were close games but the 'Cats pulled it out. There were times last season when people worried if Arizona would make the tourney. Furthermore, why is it so surprising that people don't believe Arizona will make it? The casual fan sees a team that struggled last season (blowout loss in the Pac-10 tourney and first round loss to Purdue) and lost 3 starters who provided most of the scoring and rebounding for the team. And, this isn't even bringing up the point that the Pac-10 is going to be an absolutely deadly conference. Nearly every single team should be improved or at the same level as last year, which is quite scary. Arizona has lots of question marks going into the season. Can Bayless handle the duties at the 1 or 2? Is Walters ready to perform like he did against Michigan State in Maui or will he flounder away like Mike Fey?

Rey, maybe you have those sunglasses on that you suggested I take off in that neg rep.

You really don't want me to break it down for you ... I feel bad for you too ...

[11Banners]

You really don't want me to break it down for you ...

Please explain. I want to know why the rest of the college basketball world is crazy, especially since I did say Arizona "probably makes the tourney."

[Zero]

haha do it rey.

[11Banners]

11B, the post may be a little weaker scoring wise with Ivan gone, but the Cats have a true center now with Walters, and a true 4 with Hill. I see the defense and rebounding being stronger, although neither will have Ivan scoring numbers. Chase will play the 3, and with McClellan healthy at the 2, with Bayless backing him up, there will be plenty of scoring from the wings. Along with Bayless at the PG.

Nice post, Merkin. Do you think Mclellan's knees are going to be strong enough to start at the 2 for an entire season? Walters at the 5 has to be a question mark as well. I think Arizona makes the tournament, but if some of those question marks aren't answered, it's entirely possible with the strength of this year's Pac-10 and Arizona's extremely tough schedule that they could miss the tournament. I still don't understand why that possibility is so unfathomable.

[Zero]

Because every year people like you say it, and then they still dance.
Its just something we are used to laughing about.

Lute is smart with his scheduling and i think we all feel with some additions this team will be dancing again.

[haji81872]

Just out of curiosity, when would have been one of these years people predicted Arizona not to make the tournament. I can't think of a time where anyone would have predicted it since the nineties.

[UA Direct]

Arizona WILL NOT miss the NCAA tourney next year. Book it.

BTW, Arizonas RPI last year, all things being equal merited a 4 seed. The late season slide made the difference.

http://kenpom.com/rpi.php

[mighty whitey]

Well I'd like to say hello this is my first post.

Anyways...

Thats pretty ridiculous of them to say that Arizona wouldn't make the tournament. I'm sure Lute scheduling is gonna be top 10 RPI ( i haven't seen Arizona's 08 schedule yet ) And 20 wins is a given with this team.

[UA Direct]

Kirk replaces Ivan - if healthy, his shot-blocking will make a difference, and his scoring isn't needed.

A healthy Jawann is at a minimum equal to Marcus. At full strength, a better player.

Bayless should be as effective as Shakur - everyone else gets better.

KO's No BS methodology will be the difference maker.

[BeachCat97]

Nice post, Merkin. Do you think Mclellan's knees are going to be strong enough to start at the 2 for an entire season? Walters at the 5 has to be a question mark as well. I think Arizona makes the tournament, but if some of those question marks aren't answered, it's entirely possible with the strength of this year's Pac-10 and Arizona's extremely tough schedule that they could miss the tournament. I still don't understand why that possibility is so unfathomable.

Do you think Josh Shipp's hip is going to be strong enough to start at the 2 for an entire season? A freshman at the 5 has to be a question mark as well. I think UCLA makes the tournament, but if some of those question marks aren't answered, it's entirely possible with the strength of this year's Pac-10 and UCLA's extremely tough schedule that they could miss the tournament. I still don't understand why that possibility is so unfathomable.

[MrBug708]

Why arey ou turning this into a UCLA thread?

[Daryl Zero]

Well I'd like to say hello this is my first post.

Anyways...

Thats pretty ridiculous of them to say that Arizona wouldn't make the tournament. I'm sure Lute scheduling is gonna be top 10 RPI ( i haven't seen Arizona's 08 schedule yet ) And 20 wins is a given with this team.

Newbie. :rolleyes:

I think Arizona will be lucky to win 2 games.

[UAtrue]

Newbie. :rolleyes:

I think Arizona will be lucky to win 2 games.

2???

[97cats]

Yeah I have a response ... Uhm, What?!?

http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/2170/caveman3lo0.jpg

when the discussion turns to Mike Wallace, that conversation ends with me putting him into the wall.

[the real dill]

A healthy Jawann is at a minimum equal to Marcus. At full strength, a better player.



I disagree with that statement.


11B, the post may be a little weaker scoring wise with Ivan gone, but the Cats have a true center now with Walters, and a true 4 with Hill. I see the defense and rebounding being stronger, although neither will have Ivan scoring numbers. Chase will play the 3, and with McClellan healthy at the 2, with Bayless backing him up, there will be plenty of scoring from the wings. Along with Bayless at the PG.

So Bayless will start the season as the starting 1?

[AZCat Man]

Do you think Josh Shipp's hip is going to be strong enough to start at the 2 for an entire season? A freshman at the 5 has to be a question mark as well. I think UCLA makes the tournament, but if some of those question marks aren't answered, it's entirely possible with the strength of this year's Pac-10 and UCLA's extremely tough schedule that they could miss the tournament. I still don't understand why that possibility is so unfathomable.

Beachcat, I know you were mocking an earlier post but I want to make sure people really look at UCLA's early schedule. Who do they play...really? Michigan at Crisler Arena. A team with alot of questions. And finally, Texas at Pauley, who are missing there top players from last year to the NBA. I think they are playing 13 of their first 16 at Pauley.

[Basketcats]

Oh come on guys...everyone knows our Cats almost miss the tourney every year. /sarcasm off :P

[mrb1823]

BC97, every fanbase has some myopic faith in their team. True Love is a freshman and it remains to be seen how he will perform at the college level and true Shipp is recovering from hip surgery. With that said, AZ fans are putting faith in Bayless running the point as a true frosh (IMO PG is the most important position on the floor, definiately more important than a post position being played by a frosh). Also we've seen Walters as a player, so unless Walters has a Hollins type senior campaign, I think he's got to be a concern for AZ fans.

I don't think opposing fans have said AZ was in danger of missing the tourney in any previous season for as long as I can remember. What some opposing fans have pointed out is the outlandish predictions made by a few here that AZ was a given to win the the conference the past few seasons or that AZ was a given to make the FF. As a UCLA fan, I've never said UCLA was a given to make the FF, and I won't say it for the upcoming season either. There's just too many intangibles for any team (chemistry, inability to get same production from players who replaced starters, injuries, bad luck, etc.) to make such bold predictions.

I think all 11B is saying is that there has to be some concern for logical AZ fans going into this season with having a much younger unknown team, a hellish schedule and the way the team has performed under Lute the past 2 seasons (9 & 8 seeds respectively and 4th and tied for 3rd place finishes in conference the last two years). That's all that is being said.

[kilroi]

There are questions about this team that are serious:

Who will start at point, Jerryd or Nick?
If Nick starts, who starts at the 2?
The team will be young with only one or two upper classman starting, how much will the youth of the team factor into production?
How will Jawann's knees hold out?
Will Kirk be the factor he should be?
What will be the real influence of KO on the team?

That said, there is a ton of talent on this team and real options at every single position. I am confident that Chase, Jerryd and Jordan will be great players at their respective positions. The question is how the other two players will shake out.

kilroi

[mrb1823]

Beachcat, I know you were mocking an earlier post but I want to make sure people really look at UCLA's early schedule. Who do they play...really? Michigan at Crisler Arena. A team with alot of questions. And finally, Texas at Pauley, who are missing there top players from last year to the NBA. I think they are playing 13 of their first 16 at Pauley.

UCLA could have used 1 or 2 more marquee matchup games from an entertainment standpoint I'll grant you that. It makes it very exciting as a fan to see those types of games. With that said, you failed to mention the very likely matchups against either Michigan State and/ or Maryland in the CBE Classic. Plus one can't overestimate how hellish the Pac-10 conference round robin and tourney is going to be this season. I can't remember a season where so many conf. teams were this dangerous, not even 1997. Facing Stanford, WSU, AZ, USC, Oregon and Washington 2x is going to be a b!tch for every team. I predict even Cal and ASU will play spoiler for someone. OSU is the only doormat I see in the Pac-10. The Pac-10 champ could have up to 6 conference losses this year.

[MrBug708]

Beachcat, I know you were mocking an earlier post but I want to make sure people really look at UCLA's early schedule. Who do they play...really? Michigan at Crisler Arena. A team with alot of questions. And finally, Texas at Pauley, who are missing there top players from last year to the NBA. I think they are playing 13 of their first 16 at Pauley.

Gotta prep ourselves for our tourney run. Why play games out of state when we never will :)

[MrBug708]

Seriously. Banners point wasn't that you guys were going to miss the tournament. He was basically saying that to the casual east coast observer, you guys lost a huge portion of a team that was playing in the 8/9 seed game. To assume that the average person knows the intricate details of whether or not players leaving is a good/bad thing is something you are giving too much credit to other people and their basketball knowledge.

I'd be more worried about conditioning this year and being able to make a deep run in the tournament. Gassed players are not conducive to playing well into March

[Reydituto]

Please explain. I want to know why the rest of the college basketball world is crazy, especially since I did say Arizona "probably makes the tourney."

Funny thing, I went to submit this late Tuesday night, and I went to a page with the cutest kitten, but couldn’t get back to the forum. Ah well. Here it is 34 hours later … pay attention Banner, Bug & mrb.

Since you asked for it ... I'll give you the Reader's Digest Abridged version of "Why UA Will Make the NCAA's for the 24th Consecutive Year" (UA Direct gave you the Cliffs Notes already).

1. PERSONNEL

Simple breakdown of this year's rotation vs. last year's rotation:

PG: Bayless > Shakur - Bayless is already a better decision maker and shooter, almost as quick and even more athletic than Shakur. A top 10 ‘07 talent and future NBA Lotto pick, he'll probably struggle early on defense, and will have to adjust to college ball like all FR, plus learning what Lute wants out of a PG, but by February he’ll be firing on all cylinders.

SG: This Year's McClellan >>> Last Year's McClellan - Healthier, will assume leadership role as a SR, plus his minutes should be limited in the OOC by a stronger bench (more on that later) so that he can play 25-30 mins by the 2nd Half of the Pac-10 schedule.

SF: This Year's Chase >>>>>>>> Last Year's Chase - He wore down physically last year (losing his preseason conditioning due to tonsillitis), and opted to take a back seat offensively to Marcus Williams (he gone) - two things that won't happen this season. Simply put, Chase will be one of the Top 10 players in College BB, and will demonstrate how players improve the most from their FR to SO year.

PF: Jordan Hill ≤ Marcus Williams - Marcus might have been both a.) the main reason UA made the NCAAs last year, and b.) one of the main reasons UA stumbled down the stretch while he decided to pull an Iggy. Hill won't score as much as Williams, but he's improved both his post and midrange game, he'll provide better defense, rebounding and shot-blocking, and he'll be a better teammate on the floor, having IMO as much a positive impact to the bottom line as Williams did last season. Hill will blow up this year, mark my words.

C: Kirk Walters <<< Ivan Radenovic - No doubting who's the better player or the bigger contributor. Coming off the RS year he's needed since coming here and playing alongside Hill however, Walters won't need to "replace" Ivan. All that should be expected from him is 20+mins/game, along with 8p/5r/2b a night, good defense, and selective fouling.

Bench: This Year's Bench (Wise, Horne, Fendi, LLP, Dillon, Bret) >>>>> Last Year's Bench (Hill, Dillon, Bret, can of corn, bag of chips) - A markedly more mature and improved Wise will be a 6th "starter" this season (for Walters, moving the other 4 players 1 position over), and depending on the matchups will likely log more minutes than Walters. Fendi has a clean slate and will prove worthy of solid bench minutes IMO. Horne would be starting for half the Pac-10 this year, but for UA he'll be their top reserve by January. Some believe LLP could challenge for a starting role - he'll at least get valuable PT off the bench - and Dillon and Bret are known commodities as role players, a year older and wiser. Plus, all signs point to this year's bench actually being used.

In short, UA will be as good or better at every position except Center, and even then will at least have a true C in that position, and will have a much deeper bench than last season. Big Advantage to this year's team.

2. SCHEDULE

UA's OOC slate will once again be a Top 5-10 RPI schedule, but looking at the games and where they are played, while I expect the team to take some early lumps, the only games that really concern me are @ Kansas and @ Memphis. I expect UA to 9-4 OOC at worst, more likely 10-3.

In conference, I think UA will improve as the season goes along. I believe UCLA will repeat, but after that any of 3 teams could finish 2nd. I have UA finishing 2nd at 14-4, 2 games behind UCLA and 1 game ahead of Stanford (UA beat them twice last year), 2 games ahead of Wazzu (they won't be sneaking up on anyone this season), and markedly better than USC (too many FR in key roles), Oregon (Brooks made that team go), Cal (no point guard) and UW (will bounce back, but still a 2nd tier team of mismatched parts).

Overall, the RPI should be Top 10, the SOS should be Top 10, and UA should have at least 23 wins heading into the Pac-10 Tourney, and a NCAA seed between 3-6 in their sights.

3.) COACHING - The O'Neill Factor

Let's face it: Kevin O'Neill was brought into a program full of Good Cops to be the Bad Cop. He's an intense workaholic with serious head coaching credentials and is one of the best defensive minds at any level of the game. As a top recruiter his presence has already paid dividends in the 2008 class (namely Jeff Withey) and beyond. I believe he'll also be able to help Lute get more out of the bench, as they'll have to in order to play the Man D preferred by O'Neill for 40 minutes.

Lute will give him the latitude to do what needs to be done to improve UA's ability to stop other teams, and you'll see better intensity, effort, conditioning and most importantly, better team defense to go along with the typical Ferrari-level offense.

4.) CONCLUSION

Despite losing Williams, Shakur and Radenovic, there are more than enough pieces between returning talent and incoming recruits to fill the void. UA will be deeper, will play with an increased intensity and focus, and will get better as the year progresses. Besides, any team with Chase Budinger, Jerryd Bayless and Jordan Hill should make the tournament - Look for UA to do just that, winning 25+ games and getting to the Sweet 16 or beyond. There’s too much sheer talent not to, that’s why anyone who thinks UA won’t make the NCAAs is bonkers.

P.S. - You're welcome Banners.

[CatnPhx]

KO's No BS methodology will be the difference maker.

And this is the difference. Although it's never a sure thing that we will make the tourney (and someday, we will miss it), our defense and toughness will be much improved and carry us at times this year.

[bhanson]

Now that's a post!

Just wanted to highlight: McClellan >>> Last Year's McClellan - Healthier, will assume leadership role

Leadership 2007/8 >>> 2006/7 McClellan along with Bayless.

Kirk Walters <<< Ivan Radenovic

True, but Kirk Walters as a center > Ivan Radenovic as a center

I-Rad was way too small, couldn't push anyone around and couldn't disrupt anyone coming to the hole. Kirk will change all that. The Cats will never call any plays for Kirk, but if he gets 8-10 points on putbacks, I will be happy with that and Kirk will be going up for boards much stronger.



Funny thing, I went to submit this late Tuesday night, and I went to a page with the cutest kitten, but couldn’t get back to the forum. Ah well. Here it is 34 hours later … pay attention Banner, Bug & mrb.

Since you asked for it ... I'll give you the Reader's Digest Abridged version of "Why UA Will Make the NCAA's for the 24th Consecutive Year" (UA Direct gave you the Cliffs Notes already).

1. PERSONNEL

Simple breakdown of this year's rotation vs. last year's rotation:

PG: Bayless > Shakur - Bayless is already a better decision maker and shooter, almost as quick and even more athletic than Shakur. A top 10 ‘07 talent and future NBA Lotto pick, he'll probably struggle early on defense, and will have to adjust to college ball like all FR, plus learning what Lute wants out of a PG, but by February he’ll be firing on all cylinders.

SG: This Year's McClellan >>> Last Year's McClellan - Healthier, will assume leadership role as a SR, plus his minutes should be limited in the OOC by a stronger bench (more on that later) so that he can play 25-30 mins by the 2nd Half of the Pac-10 schedule.

SF: This Year's Chase >>>>>>>> Last Year's Chase - He wore down physically last year (losing his preseason conditioning due to tonsillitis), and opted to take a back seat offensively to Marcus Williams (he gone) - two things that won't happen this season. Simply put, Chase will be one of the Top 10 players in College BB, and will demonstrate how players improve the most from their FR to SO year.

PF: Jordan Hill ≤ Marcus Williams - Marcus might have been both a.) the main reason UA made the NCAAs last year, and b.) one of the main reasons UA stumbled down the stretch while he decided to pull an Iggy. Hill won't score as much as Williams, but he's improved both his post and midrange game, he'll provide better defense, rebounding and shot-blocking, and he'll be a better teammate on the floor, having IMO as much a positive impact to the bottom line as Williams did last season. Hill will blow up this year, mark my words.

C: Kirk Walters <<< Ivan Radenovic - No doubting who's the better player or the bigger contributor. Coming off the RS year he's needed since coming here and playing alongside Hill however, Walters won't need to "replace" Ivan. All that should be expected from him is 20+mins/game, along with 8p/5r/2b a night, good defense, and selective fouling.

Bench: This Year's Bench (Wise, Horne, Fendi, LLP, Dillon, Bret) >>>>> Last Year's Bench (Hill, Dillon, Bret, can of corn, bag of chips) - A markedly more mature and improved Wise will be a 6th "starter" this season (for Walters, moving the other 4 players 1 position over), and depending on the matchups will likely log more minutes than Walters. Fendi has a clean slate and will prove worthy of solid bench minutes IMO. Horne would be starting for half the Pac-10 this year, but for UA he'll be their top reserve by January. Some believe LLP could challenge for a starting role - he'll at least get valuable PT off the bench - and Dillon and Bret are known commodities as role players, a year older and wiser. Plus, all signs point to this year's bench actually being used.

In short, UA will be as good or better at every position except Center, and even then will at least have a true C in that position, and will have a much deeper bench than last season. Big Advantage to this year's team.

2. SCHEDULE

UA's OOC slate will once again be a Top 5-10 RPI schedule, but looking at the games and where they are played, while I expect the team to take some early lumps, the only games that really concern me are @ Kansas and @ Memphis. I expect UA to 9-4 OOC at worst, more likely 10-3.

In conference, I think UA will improve as the season goes along. I believe UCLA will repeat, but after that any of 3 teams could finish 2nd. I have UA finishing 2nd at 14-4, 2 games behind UCLA and 1 game ahead of Stanford (UA beat them twice last year), 2 games ahead of Wazzu (they won't be sneaking up on anyone this season), and markedly better than USC (too many FR in key roles), Oregon (Brooks made that team go), Cal (no point guard) and UW (will bounce back, but still a 2nd tier team of mismatched parts).

Overall, the RPI should be Top 10, the SOS should be Top 10, and UA should have at least 23 wins heading into the Pac-10 Tourney, and a NCAA seed between 3-6 in their sights.

3.) COACHING - The O'Neill Factor

Let's face it: Kevin O'Neill was brought into a program full of Good Cops to be the Bad Cop. He's an intense workaholic with serious head coaching credentials and is one of the best defensive minds at any level of the game. As a top recruiter his presence has already paid dividends in the 2008 class (namely Jeff Withey) and beyond. I believe he'll also be able to help Lute get more out of the bench, as they'll have to in order to play the Man D preferred by O'Neill for 40 minutes.

Lute will give him the latitude to do what needs to be done to improve UA's ability to stop other teams, and you'll see better intensity, effort, conditioning and most importantly, better team defense to go along with the typical Ferrari-level offense.

4.) CONCLUSION

Despite losing Williams, Shakur and Radenovic, there are more than enough pieces between returning talent and incoming recruits to fill the void. UA will be deeper, will play with an increased intensity and focus, and will get better as the year progresses. Besides, any team with Chase Budinger, Jerryd Bayless and Jordan Hill should make the tournament - Look for UA to do just that, winning 25+ games and getting to the Sweet 16 or beyond. There’s too much sheer talent not to, that’s why anyone who thinks UA won’t make the NCAAs is bonkers.

P.S. - You're welcome Banners.

[Reydituto]

Now that's a post!

Just wanted to highlight: McClellan >>> Last Year's McClellan - Healthier, will assume leadership role

Leadership 2007/8 >>> 2006/7 McClellan along with Bayless.

Kirk Walters <<< Ivan Radenovic

True, but Kirk Walters as a center > Ivan Radenovic as a center

I-Rad was way too small, couldn't push anyone around and couldn't disrupt anyone coming to the hole. Kirk will change all that. The Cats will never call any plays for Kirk, but if he gets 8-10 points on putbacks, I will be happy with that and Kirk will be going up for boards much stronger.

Good points about Kirk being a true C Merk, something last year's squad lacked playing Ivan and Jordan out of position. This year's team will have more positional flexibility as well as continuity. Hill is a more natural PF, and will thrive with someone else down low, while still being able to put up quality minutes at the 5 against many teams. Chase will play anywhere from 2-4, and may have some PG duties as a point-forward at times also. Wise can come in for Jawaan and push Bayless to SG, for Chase and push Bayless to SG and Jawaan to SF, come in for Kirk and push everyone else 1 position over, or come in for Bayless at PG and keep the status quo. Horne and Fendi can play either F spot, LLP can play either guard spot, and Dillon can play at either wing.

I think it will be hard for a FR like Bayless to "lead" but by March, there are no "freshman". Expect Jawann, Chase and Bret to be the real leaders on and off the court this season, while Bayless will take a lot on his shoulders in games by the end of the Pac-10 season. Kirk will also be an old sage on the team, not a vociferous "leader", but someone the young'uns can go to.

[Basketcats]

Funny thing, I went to submit this late Tuesday night, and I went to a page with the cutest kitten, but couldn’t get back to the forum. Ah well. Here it is 34 hours later … pay attention Banner, Bug & mrb.

Since you asked for it ... I'll give you the Reader's Digest Abridged version of "Why UA Will Make the NCAA's for the 24th Consecutive Year" (UA Direct gave you the Cliffs Notes already).

1. PERSONNEL

Simple breakdown of this year's rotation vs. last year's rotation:

PG: Bayless > Shakur - Bayless is already a better decision maker and shooter, almost as quick and even more athletic than Shakur. A top 10 ‘07 talent and future NBA Lotto pick, he'll probably struggle early on defense, and will have to adjust to college ball like all FR, plus learning what Lute wants out of a PG, but by February he’ll be firing on all cylinders.

SG: This Year's McClellan >>> Last Year's McClellan - Healthier, will assume leadership role as a SR, plus his minutes should be limited in the OOC by a stronger bench (more on that later) so that he can play 25-30 mins by the 2nd Half of the Pac-10 schedule.

SF: This Year's Chase >>>>>>>> Last Year's Chase - He wore down physically last year (losing his preseason conditioning due to tonsillitis), and opted to take a back seat offensively to Marcus Williams (he gone) - two things that won't happen this season. Simply put, Chase will be one of the Top 10 players in College BB, and will demonstrate how players improve the most from their FR to SO year.

PF: Jordan Hill ≤ Marcus Williams - Marcus might have been both a.) the main reason UA made the NCAAs last year, and b.) one of the main reasons UA stumbled down the stretch while he decided to pull an Iggy. Hill won't score as much as Williams, but he's improved both his post and midrange game, he'll provide better defense, rebounding and shot-blocking, and he'll be a better teammate on the floor, having IMO as much a positive impact to the bottom line as Williams did last season. Hill will blow up this year, mark my words.

C: Kirk Walters <<< Ivan Radenovic - No doubting who's the better player or the bigger contributor. Coming off the RS year he's needed since coming here and playing alongside Hill however, Walters won't need to "replace" Ivan. All that should be expected from him is 20+mins/game, along with 8p/5r/2b a night, good defense, and selective fouling.

Bench: This Year's Bench (Wise, Horne, Fendi, LLP, Dillon, Bret) >>>>> Last Year's Bench (Hill, Dillon, Bret, can of corn, bag of chips) - A markedly more mature and improved Wise will be a 6th "starter" this season (for Walters, moving the other 4 players 1 position over), and depending on the matchups will likely log more minutes than Walters. Fendi has a clean slate and will prove worthy of solid bench minutes IMO. Horne would be starting for half the Pac-10 this year, but for UA he'll be their top reserve by January. Some believe LLP could challenge for a starting role - he'll at least get valuable PT off the bench - and Dillon and Bret are known commodities as role players, a year older and wiser. Plus, all signs point to this year's bench actually being used.

In short, UA will be as good or better at every position except Center, and even then will at least have a true C in that position, and will have a much deeper bench than last season. Big Advantage to this year's team.

2. SCHEDULE

UA's OOC slate will once again be a Top 5-10 RPI schedule, but looking at the games and where they are played, while I expect the team to take some early lumps, the only games that really concern me are @ Kansas and @ Memphis. I expect UA to 9-4 OOC at worst, more likely 10-3.

In conference, I think UA will improve as the season goes along. I believe UCLA will repeat, but after that any of 3 teams could finish 2nd. I have UA finishing 2nd at 14-4, 2 games behind UCLA and 1 game ahead of Stanford (UA beat them twice last year), 2 games ahead of Wazzu (they won't be sneaking up on anyone this season), and markedly better than USC (too many FR in key roles), Oregon (Brooks made that team go), Cal (no point guard) and UW (will bounce back, but still a 2nd tier team of mismatched parts).

Overall, the RPI should be Top 10, the SOS should be Top 10, and UA should have at least 23 wins heading into the Pac-10 Tourney, and a NCAA seed between 3-6 in their sights.

3.) COACHING - The O'Neill Factor

Let's face it: Kevin O'Neill was brought into a program full of Good Cops to be the Bad Cop. He's an intense workaholic with serious head coaching credentials and is one of the best defensive minds at any level of the game. As a top recruiter his presence has already paid dividends in the 2008 class (namely Jeff Withey) and beyond. I believe he'll also be able to help Lute get more out of the bench, as they'll have to in order to play the Man D preferred by O'Neill for 40 minutes.

Lute will give him the latitude to do what needs to be done to improve UA's ability to stop other teams, and you'll see better intensity, effort, conditioning and most importantly, better team defense to go along with the typical Ferrari-level offense.

4.) CONCLUSION

Despite losing Williams, Shakur and Radenovic, there are more than enough pieces between returning talent and incoming recruits to fill the void. UA will be deeper, will play with an increased intensity and focus, and will get better as the year progresses. Besides, any team with Chase Budinger, Jerryd Bayless and Jordan Hill should make the tournament - Look for UA to do just that, winning 25+ games and getting to the Sweet 16 or beyond. There’s too much sheer talent not to, that’s why anyone who thinks UA won’t make the NCAAs is bonkers.

P.S. - You're welcome Banners.


Wow...there's nothing I can add to this. I think it is probably the most accurate analysis of the Cats (I've seen) in a long time. Nice post :)

[BeachCat97]

BC97, every fanbase has some myopic faith in their team. True Love is a freshman and it remains to be seen how he will perform at the college level and true Shipp is recovering from hip surgery. With that said, AZ fans are putting faith in Bayless running the point as a true frosh (IMO PG is the most important position on the floor, definiately more important than a post position being played by a frosh). Also we've seen Walters as a player, so unless Walters has a Hollins type senior campaign, I think he's got to be a concern for AZ fans.

I don't think opposing fans have said AZ was in danger of missing the tourney in any previous season for as long as I can remember. What some opposing fans have pointed out is the outlandish predictions made by a few here that AZ was a given to win the the conference the past few seasons or that AZ was a given to make the FF. As a UCLA fan, I've never said UCLA was a given to make the FF, and I won't say it for the upcoming season either. There's just too many intangibles for any team (chemistry, inability to get same production from players who replaced starters, injuries, bad luck, etc.) to make such bold predictions.

I think all 11B is saying is that there has to be some concern for logical AZ fans going into this season with having a much younger unknown team, a hellish schedule and the way the team has performed under Lute the past 2 seasons (9 & 8 seeds respectively and 4th and tied for 3rd place finishes in conference the last two years). That's all that is being said.

Apparently the humor in my post (however slight or poorly conceived) was lost on mrb. Wasn't mrb the dad on Different Strokes?

[mrb1823]

Apparently the humor in my post (however slight or poorly conceived) was lost on mrb. Wasn't mrb the dad on Different Strokes?

Hey you didn't use the :) emoticon to reflect humor so how was I supposed to know.

[mrb1823]

Funny thing, I went to submit this late Tuesday night, and I went to a page with the cutest kitten, but couldn’t get back to the forum. Ah well. Here it is 34 hours later … pay attention Banner, Bug & mrb.

Since you asked for it ... I'll give you the Reader's Digest Abridged version of "Why UA Will Make the NCAA's for the 24th Consecutive Year" (UA Direct gave you the Cliffs Notes already).

1. PERSONNEL

Simple breakdown of this year's rotation vs. last year's rotation:

PG: Bayless > Shakur - Bayless is already a better decision maker and shooter, almost as quick and even more athletic than Shakur. A top 10 ‘07 talent and future NBA Lotto pick, he'll probably struggle early on defense, and will have to adjust to college ball like all FR, plus learning what Lute wants out of a PG, but by February he’ll be firing on all cylinders.

SG: This Year's McClellan >>> Last Year's McClellan - Healthier, will assume leadership role as a SR, plus his minutes should be limited in the OOC by a stronger bench (more on that later) so that he can play 25-30 mins by the 2nd Half of the Pac-10 schedule.

SF: This Year's Chase >>>>>>>> Last Year's Chase - He wore down physically last year (losing his preseason conditioning due to tonsillitis), and opted to take a back seat offensively to Marcus Williams (he gone) - two things that won't happen this season. Simply put, Chase will be one of the Top 10 players in College BB, and will demonstrate how players improve the most from their FR to SO year.

PF: Jordan Hill ≤ Marcus Williams - Marcus might have been both a.) the main reason UA made the NCAAs last year, and b.) one of the main reasons UA stumbled down the stretch while he decided to pull an Iggy. Hill won't score as much as Williams, but he's improved both his post and midrange game, he'll provide better defense, rebounding and shot-blocking, and he'll be a better teammate on the floor, having IMO as much a positive impact to the bottom line as Williams did last season. Hill will blow up this year, mark my words.

C: Kirk Walters <<< Ivan Radenovic - No doubting who's the better player or the bigger contributor. Coming off the RS year he's needed since coming here and playing alongside Hill however, Walters won't need to "replace" Ivan. All that should be expected from him is 20+mins/game, along with 8p/5r/2b a night, good defense, and selective fouling.

Bench: This Year's Bench (Wise, Horne, Fendi, LLP, Dillon, Bret) >>>>> Last Year's Bench (Hill, Dillon, Bret, can of corn, bag of chips) - A markedly more mature and improved Wise will be a 6th "starter" this season (for Walters, moving the other 4 players 1 position over), and depending on the matchups will likely log more minutes than Walters. Fendi has a clean slate and will prove worthy of solid bench minutes IMO. Horne would be starting for half the Pac-10 this year, but for UA he'll be their top reserve by January. Some believe LLP could challenge for a starting role - he'll at least get valuable PT off the bench - and Dillon and Bret are known commodities as role players, a year older and wiser. Plus, all signs point to this year's bench actually being used.

In short, UA will be as good or better at every position except Center, and even then will at least have a true C in that position, and will have a much deeper bench than last season. Big Advantage to this year's team.

2. SCHEDULE

UA's OOC slate will once again be a Top 5-10 RPI schedule, but looking at the games and where they are played, while I expect the team to take some early lumps, the only games that really concern me are @ Kansas and @ Memphis. I expect UA to 9-4 OOC at worst, more likely 10-3.

In conference, I think UA will improve as the season goes along. I believe UCLA will repeat, but after that any of 3 teams could finish 2nd. I have UA finishing 2nd at 14-4, 2 games behind UCLA and 1 game ahead of Stanford (UA beat them twice last year), 2 games ahead of Wazzu (they won't be sneaking up on anyone this season), and markedly better than USC (too many FR in key roles), Oregon (Brooks made that team go), Cal (no point guard) and UW (will bounce back, but still a 2nd tier team of mismatched parts).

Overall, the RPI should be Top 10, the SOS should be Top 10, and UA should have at least 23 wins heading into the Pac-10 Tourney, and a NCAA seed between 3-6 in their sights.

3.) COACHING - The O'Neill Factor

Let's face it: Kevin O'Neill was brought into a program full of Good Cops to be the Bad Cop. He's an intense workaholic with serious head coaching credentials and is one of the best defensive minds at any level of the game. As a top recruiter his presence has already paid dividends in the 2008 class (namely Jeff Withey) and beyond. I believe he'll also be able to help Lute get more out of the bench, as they'll have to in order to play the Man D preferred by O'Neill for 40 minutes.

Lute will give him the latitude to do what needs to be done to improve UA's ability to stop other teams, and you'll see better intensity, effort, conditioning and most importantly, better team defense to go along with the typical Ferrari-level offense.

4.) CONCLUSION

Despite losing Williams, Shakur and Radenovic, there are more than enough pieces between returning talent and incoming recruits to fill the void. UA will be deeper, will play with an increased intensity and focus, and will get better as the year progresses. Besides, any team with Chase Budinger, Jerryd Bayless and Jordan Hill should make the tournament - Look for UA to do just that, winning 25+ games and getting to the Sweet 16 or beyond. There’s too much sheer talent not to, that’s why anyone who thinks UA won’t make the NCAAs is bonkers.

P.S. - You're welcome Banners.

That's all fine and dandy. You just laid out the most perfect scenario for the Wildcats heading into this coming season. I'm not saying some or even all those things can't become true, however the operative word for each point you laid out is "COULD."

[Reydituto]

That's all fine and dandy. You just laid out the most perfect scenario for the Wildcats heading into this coming season. I'm not saying some or even all those things can't become true, however the operative word for each point you laid out is "COULD."

That's BS wishful thinking for a Bruin fan and you know it. My scenario is much more along the lines of "should" and "would" than "could". Definitely not the perfect scenario for UA. Chase has the talent to be national POY really. Bayless is a darkhorse candidate for national FOY. I don't think we're expecting that much out of Kirk. I think it's obvious to a blind man, much less a UCLA fan, that UA will be deeper. Maybe we're hoping McClellan can approach his promise of yesteryear, but his knees are more of a chronic condition that can be managed and less of a severe permanent injury, so it's possible he can be a key contributor and avg 25 mins a game all season. Just because Hill doesn't have the "name" value of the Lopez twins, Brockman, Love, LRMBAM, Taj, Anderson, or even Leunen, doesn't mean he won't be as effective as any or all of them.

A "Perfect Scenario" involves being the Pac-10 Regular Season & Tourney Champs, splitting with Memphis/Kansas and UCLA, beating everyone else and being 32-2 & a #1 seed going into the NCAAs. Also, Chase as a 1st Team AA and Pac-10 POY, Jerryd as a FR All-American and Pac-10 FOY, and Hill All-Pac-10. I figure with the scheduling thoughts I stated in the other post, going 25-9 (losing in the Pac-10 Tourney Finals) and heading into the NCAAs as a 4/5 seed, along with Chase making 2nd Team AA and 2 players being All-Pac-10 is realistic.

Besides, I'm not taking pot-shots at UCLA here, so what's your beef?

[BeachCat97]

Hey you didn't use the :) emoticon to reflect humor so how was I supposed to know.

This leads to me think that emoticons are gradually eroding our collective ability to discern the tone of a post. If the only way to employ a humorous, playful, or facetious tone is to affix a happy face to our posts, we might as well ask journalists to start affixing them to their editorials, playwrights to their scripts, and comic strip artists to their dialogue bubbles.

Come on, mrb. You can muster just a wee bit more of cognitive force when perusing these here threads.

...oh, almost forgot, :) :) :)

[MTFC]

Arizona was an 8 seed at large team. A loss at Stanford (Ivan's 37 ridiculous performance) and Oregon probably takes the Cats away from the tourney. Both were close games but the 'Cats pulled it out.
And if they had pulled out the USC game where they were up with less than three minutes left, or the Virginia game where they were up 15 or the Washigntons State OT game, etc. etc. Arizona was what they were last season - a mediocre #8 seed that slept comfortably the night before Selection Sunday.

I mean we can play the 'What If...' game all day. For example, what if JP Batista didn't have a complete meltdown and Kansas decided to make a layup? Would you clowns still be giving group fellatio to Ben Howland? You are what you are, the college hoops season is long enough for quirky things to even out.

[mrb1823]

That's BS wishful thinking for a Bruin fan and you know it. My scenario is much more along the lines of "should" and "would" than "could". Definitely not the perfect scenario for UA. Chase has the talent to be national POY really. Bayless is a darkhorse candidate for national FOY. I don't think we're expecting that much out of Kirk. I think it's obvious to a blind man, much less a UCLA fan, that UA will be deeper. Maybe we're hoping McClellan can approach his promise of yesteryear, but his knees are more of a chronic condition that can be managed and less of a severe permanent injury, so it's possible he can be a key contributor and avg 25 mins a game all season. Just because Hill doesn't have the "name" value of the Lopez twins, Brockman, Love, LRMBAM, Taj, Anderson, or even Leunen, doesn't mean he won't be as effective as any or all of them.

A "Perfect Scenario" involves being the Pac-10 Regular Season & Tourney Champs, splitting with Memphis/Kansas and UCLA, beating everyone else and being 32-2 & a #1 seed going into the NCAAs. Also, Chase as a 1st Team AA and Pac-10 POY, Jerryd as a FR All-American and Pac-10 FOY, and Hill All-Pac-10. I figure with the scheduling thoughts I stated in the other post, going 25-9 (losing in the Pac-10 Tourney Finals) and heading into the NCAAs as a 4/5 seed, along with Chase making 2nd Team AA and 2 players being All-Pac-10 is realistic.

Besides, I'm not taking pot-shots at UCLA here, so what's your beef?

I thought the discussion centered around those who question the possibility of AZ making the NCAA's next year and why? (My opinion later). There are no pot shots being taken here by me, just discussion about the possible reasons why some have questioned AZ making the NCAA's next year. As an AZ fan you say its crazy to even consider that a POSSIBLITY. The audacity of those who have some doubts and think everything you said could go the opposite way! (Again not me).

To point out there are some ? marks on this young team is not me trying to denigrate Arizona. I personally feel that AZ will win 20 games (give or take 1 either way), finish in the top half of a very strong Pac-10 conference and make the NCAA's again with a chance to be a very dangerous opponent for whoever faces them. But that's certainly not your scenario so please fire away and call me a hater.

[Reydituto]

Every team has question marks mrb, even UCLA, and I've referenced a few of them for other teams in my breakdown post, while also addressing some of the common questions in UA's team. Besides, we're dealing with the vagaries of 18-22 year olds, none of us really know, but that doesn't preclude any of us from having firm opinions.

What it comes down to is this: UA will make the NCAAs, and to believe otherwise is foolhardy. I'm not denying anything's possible, but not everything's likely, and UA's chances of making the NCAAs IMO are much more than likely.

[mrb1823]

Every team has question marks mrb, even UCLA, and I've referenced a few of them for other teams in my breakdown post, while also addressing some of the common questions in UA's team. Besides, we're dealing with the vagaries of 18-22 year olds, none of us really know, but that doesn't preclude any of us from having firm opinions.

What it comes down to is this: UA will make the NCAAs, and to believe otherwise is foolhardy. I'm not denying anything's possible, but not everything's likely, and UA's chances of making the NCAAs IMO are much more than likely.

You and I are in agreement then for the most part. I'm just a little more pessimistic about AZ than you and you are little more optimistic about AZ than me. There's no fault in any of it. I do beleive AZ will make the NCAA's. That was never my point. I only sought to point out why there are some who believe they won't based on plausible POSSIBILITIES. Hopefully they are wrong b/c I would like to see AZ evolve this year into a really dangerous team by season's end as opposed to de-evolving like last season. It would be very nice publicity for the UCLA-UA rivalry of the early to mid 1990's to re-emerge into that of two super powers colliding annually so that ESPN and others HAVE to give notice to the Pac-10.

[Reydituto]

You and I are in agreement then for the most part. I'm just a little more pessimistic about AZ than you and you are little more optimistic about AZ than me. There's no fault in any of it. I do beleive AZ will make the NCAA's. That was never my point. I only sought to point out why there are some who believe they won't based on plausible POSSIBILITIES. Hopefully they are wrong b/c I would like to see AZ evolve this year into a really dangerous team by season's end as opposed to de-evolving like last season. It would be very nice publicity for the UCLA-UA rivalry of the early to mid 1990's to re-emerge into that of two super powers colliding annually so that ESPN and others HAVE to give notice to the Pac-10.

I mostly agree with you then as well, and (in bold) that is exactly what I forsee. It will take awhile for things to click IMO, I can see them losing 2 of @ Houston, @ UNLV, @ Illinois and vs. aTm at home, but they should beat most if not all of them based on talent and coaching alone. I can even see them going 6-4 through the first 10 Pac-10 games, then reeling off 10 of the next 11 before the NCAAs. I just think way too many things would have to go wrong for UA to be left out of the dance, that I don't see it as a real possibility.

This doesn't apply to you, but I also believe that those who think it's a real possibility want it to be so more than anything.

[mrb1823]

I mostly agree with you then as well, and (in bold) that is exactly what I forsee. It will take awhile for things to click IMO, I can see them losing 2 of @ Houston, @ UNLV, @ Illinois and vs. aTm at home, but they should beat most if not all of them based on talent and coaching alone. I can even see them going 6-4 through the first 10 Pac-10 games, then reeling off 10 of the next 11 before the NCAAs. I just think way too many things would have to go wrong for UA to be left out of the dance, that I don't see it as a real possibility.

This doesn't apply to you, but I also believe that those who think it's a real possibility want it to be so more than anything.

Great, now we can all sing Kumbaya. :) Good posts by the way. The really tough pre-season games for AZ that I see are Memphis and Kansas. The above 4 are all winnable depending on how early they are played in the season. As you stated it will likely take AZ some time to mesh into a team. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't see Houston or aTm without their great PG or coach playing at McKale being much of a problem. Does anyone know what UNLV or Illannoy's teams look like this coming season?

[TheCat]

Nice post, Merkin. Do you think Mclellan's knees are going to be strong enough to start at the 2 for an entire season? Walters at the 5 has to be a question mark as well. I think Arizona makes the tournament, but if some of those question marks aren't answered, it's entirely possible with the strength of this year's Pac-10 and Arizona's extremely tough schedule that they could miss the tournament. I still don't understand why that possibility is so unfathomable.


I believe Az has some question marks and may not win 20 games this year. I do think they make the tourney. 11 Banners you might want some of the skeptism when you look at the Bruins. Lost the heart and soul of there defense. There leading scorer, and probably the only guy on the offense that can really create his own shot. Bruins think KLove is the answer. I might agree if he was a soph but it is difficult for freshman post players (see Hawes, and the Twins ) especially when you are 6'8'' or 9''. Those guys were/are legit 7'.

Could Az miss the tourney.....I think the answer is yes but I wouldn't bet against them. The last time Az. lost this much firepower they were not ranked to start the season and three weeks later in the top ten.

[CBCat]

You and I are in agreement then for the most part. I'm just a little more pessimistic about AZ than you and you are little more optimistic about AZ than me. There's no fault in any of it. I do beleive AZ will make the NCAA's. That was never my point. I only sought to point out why there are some who believe they won't based on plausible POSSIBILITIES. Hopefully they are wrong b/c I would like to see AZ evolve this year into a really dangerous team by season's end as opposed to de-evolving like last season. It would be very nice publicity for the UCLA-UA rivalry of the early to mid 1990's to re-emerge into that of two super powers colliding annually so that ESPN and others HAVE to give notice to the Pac-10.

Having grown up a UCLA Bruin because my Dad is an alumni, and being from Los Angeles, and thus having grown up never being allowed to utter the initials U-S-C in my household and therefore literally hating USC, it is so hilarious to me I see (your main rival) never once uttered in the above paragraph. Long live the ARIZONA/UCLA rivalry. FUSC

[11Banners]

Rey, I wish I knew you personally so I could make a wager with you on Arizona going 14-4 in the Pac-10. If Arizona finishes 11-7 again in this year's tougher conference, it should be quite a feat and fans of the team should congratulate the coaching staff and players for a recovery not shown in wins and losses. I mean, seriously, if Arizona just splits with UCLA, Stanford, Oregon and Washington State, that's 4 losses in the conference already. That's not even counting sc, ASU (much tougher team this year), UW and CAL. If you really believe Arizona is going to finish 1st or 2nd in the conference, you are setting yourself up for a major disappointment.

And TheCat, why are you turning this into another UCLA thread? I think UCLA will be a better team than last year and will finish 15-3 again in the conference, the same as last year's record. There are too many tough road games in this conference but the Bruins will go undefeated again at Pauley. I can see a loss on the horrendous Washington trip (physically exhausting from all the travel), Stanford/Cal, and one at the Arizona or Oregon schools.

Edit: And if you think UCLA doesn't have scorers this year, you're crazy. Love is going to be a hell of a force scoring in the post. Collison is a hell of a playmaker at the PG position. Westbrook is going to have a great sophomore year and created better than Afflalo.

[BeachCat97]

And TheCat, why are you turning this into another UCLA thread? I think UCLA will be a better team than last year and will finish 15-3 again in the conference, the same as last year's record. There are too many tough road games in this conference but the Bruins will go undefeated again at Pauley. I can see a loss on the horrendous Washington trip (physically exhausting from all the travel), Stanford/Cal, and one at the Arizona or Oregon schools.

Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in this paragraph? First, this guy questions TC for "turning this into another UCLA thread." Next, he does -- in an underhanded, self congratulatory kind of way -- the very thing he decries.

11B, UCLA's the class of the conference right now; Arizona's clawing their way back to the top. Your school's riding high; ours is coming off a disappointing season. We get it. You don't have to periodically remind us of UCLA's status and prospects. You've stated your opinion that Arizona will have a tough time making the tourney this year but that they'll end up getting in. Fine. If you want to discuss the Bruins, do it in the appropriate thread, not in one based on Arizona's chances of making the tourney.

God I hate UCLA.

[11Banners]

Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in this paragraph? First, this guy questions TC for "turning this into another UCLA thread." Next, he does -- in an underhanded, self congratulatory kind of way -- the very thing he decries.

11B, UCLA's the class of the conference right now; Arizona's clawing their way back to the top. Your school's riding high; ours is coming off a disappointing season. We get it. You don't have to periodically remind us of UCLA's status and prospects. You've stated your opinion that Arizona will have a tough time making the tourney this year but that they'll end up getting in. Fine. If you want to discuss the Bruins, do it in the appropriate thread, not in one based on Arizona's chances of making the tourney.

God I hate UCLA.


ROFL...Now that's IRONY!

[TheCat]

Rey, I wish I knew you personally so I could make a wager with you on Arizona going 14-4 in the Pac-10. If Arizona finishes 11-7 again in this year's tougher conference, it should be quite a feat and fans of the team should congratulate the coaching staff and players for a recovery not shown in wins and losses. I mean, seriously, if Arizona just splits with UCLA, Stanford, Oregon and Washington State, that's 4 losses in the conference already. That's not even counting sc, ASU (much tougher team this year), UW and CAL. If you really believe Arizona is going to finish 1st or 2nd in the conference, you are setting yourself up for a major disappointment.

And TheCat, why are you turning this into another UCLA thread? I think UCLA will be a better team than last year and will finish 15-3 again in the conference, the same as last year's record. There are too many tough road games in this conference but the Bruins will go undefeated again at Pauley. I can see a loss on the horrendous Washington trip (physically exhausting from all the travel), Stanford/Cal, and one at the Arizona or Oregon schools.

Edit: And if you think UCLA doesn't have scorers this year, you're crazy. Love is going to be a hell of a force scoring in the post. Collison is a hell of a playmaker at the PG position. Westbrook is going to have a great sophomore year and created better than Afflalo.

Just to point out how your cup is always half empty for Az. and half full for UCLA. You are claiming that a guy that never as played a minute will be a force in the PAC that is much stronger and has much more athletic and experienced big men. That a guy that I can hardly remember getting in more than a few games is better than the conference player of the year. A joke I hope. You are doubting that Jawann's knees will hold up but not questioning a guy who has multiple hip problems. See the half full/half empty reasoning?

Where I think Az will faulter is I don't believe that Bayless will be effective as a point. That will force Wise to play more and hurt the defense where for all his faults Walters has been serviceable. I think Az. big men effectiveness will depend on dribble penetration by the guards and dumping the ball off. If this does not occur you are only going to have 3 real scoring threats and that will be tough to win in this league with.

I do think Az. might not win 20 games. That was more likely until they added those two stiffs recently. I think A-State will be the most improved team in the conference and that Cal with Harden will be a close 2nd.

I do not believe Az will only lose 4 games in conference. More likely 6.

[azcat49]

If the Cats play D they will win 20 and get 14 wins during PAC 10 play. If they don't committ to D no chance.

Offensively they will benefit by having a solid secondary scorerfrom the perimeter in Bayless.

And with Walters back we will be much stronger along the baseline and at the rim. UCLA is still the king until someone knocks them off but AZ has too much talent to miss the tourney or to simply go .500 in the conference (which it would take for them to miss the tourney)

[bruins01]

Bruins think KLove is the answer. I might agree if he was a soph but it is difficult for freshman post players (see Hawes, and the Twins ) especially when you are 6'8'' or 9''. Those guys were/are legit 7'.

6'9" Tyler Hansbrough as a freshman: 18.9 ppg, 7.8 rpg.

[TheCat]

You might not know this but arguing from the exception is a formal error in logic. You want me to list the 100 other guys that didn't do so well?

So is he going to dominate Harden? how about Patterson? Taj? Lopez?.
Don't see it happening.

You might also want to look at UNC offensive production that year and the number of points scored per game. They didn't have many 25 point halfs.

[mrb1823]

Having grown up a UCLA Bruin because my Dad is an alumni, and being from Los Angeles, and thus having grown up never being allowed to utter the initials U-S-C in my household and therefore literally hating USC, it is so hilarious to me I see (your main rival) never once uttered in the above paragraph. Long live the ARIZONA/UCLA rivalry. FUSC

Amen! As you know UCLA and suc are natural rivals ala AZ and ASU. However their BB program (Like ASU's) has sucked for so long that I consider AZ to be UCLA's main rival in BB year in and year out. I'm pretty sure most AZ fans feel the same about ASU and UCLA.

[bruins01]

You might not know this but arguing from the exception is a formal error in logic. You want me to list the 100 other guys that didn't do so well?

So is he going to dominate Harden? how about Patterson? Taj? Lopez?.
Don't see it happening.

You might also want to look at UNC offensive production that year and the number of points scored per game. They didn't have many 25 point halfs.

I don't know why I'm bothering to argue with a person who doesn't know how to pluralize the word "half" but here goes.

I did not say what I said because my logic is legitimate, I said it because your logic is not. Spencer Hawes averaged 14.9 points per game last year. I guess you weren't watching the games Washington played against LSU in Washington or their game at the Galen Center. Spencer Hawes should have done much, much more than he did at Washington, and almost certainly would have if he had been better coached.

No one, NO ONE, is asking Kevin Love to "dominate" anyone. It is ridiculous to judge an incoming freshman, or any player for that matter, under the rubric "ability to dominate." There is no such thing as a dominant player in the college game except POSSIBLY a player like Greg Oden was last year. Even Kevin Durant was shown to be human by a slightly undersized Pac-10 team in the NCAA Tournament.

If you think the freshman years of players like Spencer Hawes and Brook Lopez (12.6 ppg and 1.7 bpg despite not playing 30 minutes in any single game until January 11th!) are good indications of Kevin Love's future success, then I think a better indication is the success of other recent Gatorade Athletes of the Year. Past winners: Greg Oden, Dwight Howard, Lebron James...

[TheCat]

They all had something in abundance that Love does not ...Athletism. Comparing him to Lebron......you have lost it. I think you should be happy if he reaches Hawes productivity. Hawes was the 6th rated player in his class and the number 2 center overall (to Oden ). Went in the lottery in the draft. He achieve alot as a freshman yet you seem to think that Klove 4 to 5" shorter will be a much better player. I just disagree. You are beginning to sound a bit like Bassy.....

I would be happy if Hill put up Hawes numbers this year. Just like Wa found out it is hard for a freshman big man to dominate (the last two years) I think it will be hard for KLove. Not a knock on the guy just reality. Still don't have an answer which of those PAC 10 guys he will dominate.

Sorry about my spelling of halves ....pointing out spelling errors is the last refuge when your logic is faulty I guess. It is beneath you I'm sure....

[bruins01]

They all had something in abundance that Love does not ...Athletism. Comparing him to Lebron......you have lost it. I think you should be happy if he reaches Hawes productivity. Hawes was the 6th rated player in his class and the number 2 center overall (to Oden ). Went in the lottery in the draft. He achieve alot as a freshman yet you seem to think that Klove 4 to 5" shorter will be a much better player. I just disagree. You are beginning to sound a bit like Bassy.....

I would be happy if Hill put up Hawes numbers this year. Just like Wa found out it is hard for a freshman big man to dominate (the last two years) I think it will be hard for KLove. Not a knock on the guy just reality. Still don't have an answer which of those PAC 10 guys he will dominate.

Sorry about my spelling of halves ....pointing out spelling errors is the last refuge when your logic is faulty I guess. It is beneath you I'm sure....

Oh my god. 11Banners warned me that you will have a complete and willful inability to comprehend what I actually say, and I am extremely disappointed with myself that I didn't believe him.

You know, if you go through the archives, 11Banners is right a LOT more often than you guys think he is.

[bruins01]

Still don't have an answer which of those PAC 10 guys he will dominate.

What the hell are you talking about?? The only person who said anything about Kevin Love dominating in this thread is you. Your question ("So is he going to dominate Harden? how about Patterson? Taj? Lopez?") was completely unprovoked.

I'm not hoping Kevin Love "dominates" anybody. The only person who gives a **** here is you. If he's as good as the guys on your list (except Patterson--who the hell is Patterson??) I'll be happy, as those are great players. No one is asking him to do any more than that. Except you, apparently.

[TucsonDon]

They're finally starting to figure out TheCat. He's really just having conversations w/himself; arguing feverishly against whatever pops into his own mind at that particular moment. It's kinda freaky, but at least he's got a style all his own.

[11Banners]

Just to point out how your cup is always half empty for Az. and half full for UCLA. You are claiming that a guy that never as played a minute will be a force in the PAC that is much stronger and has much more athletic and experienced big men. That a guy that I can hardly remember getting in more than a few games is better than the conference player of the year. A joke I hope. You are doubting that Jawann's knees will hold up but not questioning a guy who has multiple hip problems. See the half full/half empty reasoning?

Where I think Az will faulter is I don't believe that Bayless will be effective as a point. That will force Wise to play more and hurt the defense where for all his faults Walters has been serviceable. I think Az. big men effectiveness will depend on dribble penetration by the guards and dumping the ball off. If this does not occur you are only going to have 3 real scoring threats and that will be tough to win in this league with.

I do think Az. might not win 20 games. That was more likely until they added those two stiffs recently. I think A-State will be the most improved team in the conference and that Cal with Harden will be a close 2nd.

I do not believe Az will only lose 4 games in conference. More likely 6.

Let me try and decipher your message...

A. You don't think Kevin Love is going to have a very good season. When everyone who has seen him or played against him (he dominated the Lopez twins, Roy Hibbert and others on the AAU circuits) thinks he will be fantastic next year, you throw out his size as a problem. From his AAU games and his workouts now such as the Adidas camp, it's pretty safe to say he's going to be a very good player for UCLA. Nobody is claiming he's going to score 20/10/5. If he can get anywhere near a double-double, that will be huge for us. The kid claims to be 6'10 and Gottlieb says 6'8. We'll see who's right, but I don't think his height is going to be a problem at all. Look at how well he rebounds and scores in the post (see him vs another 7'1 guy in Jacobson at Mater Dei). Furthermore, Ben Howland said this kid could have been playing for us 3 years ago. I am pretty confident he's going to have a very solid freshman year.

B. Your argument against Russell Westbrook reminds me of the arguments against Collison last year. You need to read more closely and see that I didn't say Westbrook will be better than AA. The point was that Westbrook can create his own shot better than Afflalo. And Russell Westbrook is going to be a star at UCLA. I hope you doubt him as well.

C. Yes I am doubting Jawaan's knees. I've read from Arizona posters who know much more than you that they don't know how well he will hold up. Moreover, I think you were talking about Josh Shipp's hip when I did not talk about him at all.

[mrb1823]

Kumbaya my Lord, Kumbaya....:lol2:

[Reydituto]

Rey, I wish I knew you personally so I could make a wager with you on Arizona going 14-4 in the Pac-10. If Arizona finishes 11-7 again in this year's tougher conference, it should be quite a feat and fans of the team should congratulate the coaching staff and players for a recovery not shown in wins and losses.

Blah, blah, blah ...

Why? So you could feel bad for me in person? :lol2:

This is your opinion, just because you believe it to be so doesn't transcend it to fact. I know my opinions are strong, and somewhat controversial among the BruinFans who post here, but I am quite measured in assessing UA's chances this season, and have supported my case with reasoned analysis. You disagree, thus you think I'm setting myself up for disappointment, and inferring that I am somehow delusional or misguided. I could easily say the same thing about you and your opinion of UCLA, but I won't bother.

Let's do this - A harmless sig bet, based on the following circumstances:

IF UA finishes ≥ 14-4 in the Pac-10, I win;
IF UA finishes ≤ 11-7 in the Pac-10, you win;
IF UA finishes 12-6 or 13-5, no winner.

This is regardless of placement in the Pac-10, just the record. Prize is loser displaying photo of winner's choosing for 1 week in his sig, photo can't be obscene or insulting to his own school, but obviously can be in favor of the other.

I'm down. Whaddaya say?

You know, if you go through the archives, 11Banners is right a LOT more often than you guys think he is.

Not sure your bias as a BruinFan reading another BruinFan posting on an Arizona board meets the objective definition of "right" but sure, whatever.

I'm not hoping Kevin Love "dominates" anybody. The only person who gives a **** here is you. If he's as good as the guys on your list (except Patterson--who the hell is Patterson??) I'll be happy, as those are great players. No one is asking him to do any more than that. Except you, apparently.

I'm guessing he meant Jeff Pendergraph from ASU. Benefit of the doubt to TheCat, as otherwise I also would have no idea who he is referring to.

Let me try and decipher your message...

... yada, yada, yada ...

... Moreover, I think you were talking about Josh Shipp's hip when I did not talk about him at all.

I'm not going to sit here and rehash every positive point you make for UCLA and negative assessment you make of UA, but TheCat is correct in calling you out on your selective memory and reasoning.

To be clear, I think UCLA is going to win the Pac-10 conference, win 28+ games going into the NCAAs, and be a Top 3 seed. DC should be the co-favorite for Pac-10 POY with Chase. Love is the co-favorite for Pac-10 FOY along with Mayo, but Bayless and Harden will also get consideration. Love will do well in OOC (which sets up nicely for UCLA), hit a few speed bumps his first time around the Pac-10, but will be a significant factor in the 2nd half of the conference season.

I do think Afflalo will be missed from a leadership and clutch play standpoint. I have the same questions about Shipp that you have about Jawann, as they are equally important to each team's chances as the 3rd or 4th option. I don't think UCLA will miss Keefe all that much, with LRMBAM, Mata, and Aboya ready. I don't think Westbrook is as good as y'all seem to think he is, but he could prove me wrong by season's end. I think Chace Stanback will be your top reserve by January, a real scoring option off the bench and someone who could ease Shipp's transition into the later part of the year. I think the rest of your bench (Passion of the Mike Roll, Dragovic, Keefe if he can return by Dec/Jan) is mediocre at best, especially your guard depth, but UCLA will still go 8-9 deep, which should be enough until late March. I do not think they'll win the NCAA Championship - Carolina, Georgetown, Memphis and Kansas are deeper and just as talented.

I also wonder if the rest of Pac-10 making adjustments to UCLA's style of play over the last 2 years will catch up to the Bruins, from both a roster/recruiting perspective and strategic coaching adjustments, but that remains to be seen - it hasn't happened yet.

Finally, I believe my analysis of UCLA is as reasoned and measured as my analysis of UA, which is not something I could say about most BruinFans who post here.

P.S. - Kumbaya mrb, kumbaya ... :)

[Statman]

There is no such thing as a dominant player in the college game except POSSIBLY a player like Greg Oden was last year. Even Kevin Durant was shown to be human by a slightly undersized Pac-10 team in the NCAA Tournament.

Uh, Durant was significantly more dominant than anyone in the nation - including Oden.

The one game you mention him "shown to be human" - he still scored 30 points (in 24 shot attempts) along with 9 rebounds, 2 blocks, & a steal. Yep - pretty mediocre there.

What does a guy have to do to be considered dominant - go 40, 20, & 10 every game?

[Statman]

.......of Kevin Love's future success, then I think a better indication is the success of other recent Gatorade Athletes of the Year. Past winners: Greg Oden, Dwight Howard, Lebron James...

Yeah - past winners may be great indicators.....Damon Bailey, LaBradford Smith, Felipe Lopez, LaVell Blanchard, Kelvin Torbert......

:twak:

[What I See]

Arizona almost missed the tournament last season and they lose much of their scoring and rebounding from that team. I think Arizona probably makes the tourney this year, but Arizona possibly missing it this year isn't as crazy as some of you believe.

I disagree 100%. This team will have at least 4 players that average double figures in scoring.

[bhanson]

I disagree 100%. This team will have at least 4 players that average double figures in scoring.

At least. Hill, Budinger, McClellan and Bayless for sure. I suspect Walters and Wise may also get double figures too.

[catgrad97]

If Arizona finishes 11-7 again in this year's tougher conference, it should be quite a feat and fans of the team should congratulate the coaching staff and players for a recovery not shown in wins and losses. I mean, seriously, if Arizona just splits with UCLA, Stanford, Oregon and Washington State, that's 4 losses in the conference already. That's not even counting sc, ASU (much tougher team this year), UW and CAL. If you really believe Arizona is going to finish 1st or 2nd in the conference, you are setting yourself up for a major disappointment.

I think UCLA will be a better team than last year and will finish 15-3 again in the conference, the same as last year's record. There are too many tough road games in this conference but the Bruins will go undefeated again at Pauley. I can see a loss on the horrendous Washington trip (physically exhausting from all the travel), Stanford/Cal, and one at the Arizona or Oregon schools.

Edit: And if you think UCLA doesn't have scorers this year, you're crazy. Love is going to be a hell of a force scoring in the post. Collison is a hell of a playmaker at the PG position. Westbrook is going to have a great sophomore year and created better than Afflalo.

You had a shred of credibility before this homer post, Banners. We're not on Arch Rivals here, so please keep the fanboy gushings like those above confined to that forum from now on.

Why shouldn't we believe Arizona won't finish at least second in the conference next season? The Cats swept Stanford and Cal, both of which have not significantly upgraded themselves in the off-season, and they SHOULD have swept Oregon except for one of the most embarrassing end-of-game collapses ever in the Olson Era.

Lay that home loss squarely on Shakur and Marcus Williams, two players who have moved on. The Ducks never caught fire until the Pac-10 tournament anyway and have no replacement for Aaron Brooks.

As for losing to either ASU or UW next year, get real. Both were swept last year by a weaker Arizona squad. Arizona is still MILES ahead of both schools in almost every category, and there is ABSOLUTELY not an IOTA of reason to believe that this year's results will be any different.

As for Wazzu, every opponent is in danger of losing to the Cougars at Pullman. But, all due respect to Tony Bennett, no way the Cats lose again to them at McKale. Uh-uh. Not going to happen. That's why we brought back Kevin O'Neill.

Meanwhile, UCLA lost what little clutch offense it had in Arron Afflalo, so while Collison will be the best PG in the conference next year, to expect the other guys around him to simply "step up" and fill those shoes is unrealistic by any estimation. The Bruins will continue their new tradition of greatness, but they won't have enough to go undefeated in Pauley.

The Bruins' most reliable scorer next season will be their starting point guard. Not good news for a team hoping to go to its third straight Final Four.

Even more auspicious, the Kevin Love hype has nearly outshouted the Spencer Hawes hype--yet there were teams who found a way to outrun Spencer and even frustrate him in the post. I don't believe a single thing about Love's greatness until I see it against a DIVISION 1 team--and you shouldn't either.

BTW, did you seriously compare Russell Westbrook to Afflalo? You want us to be "serious" here, then don't be ridiculous. Afflalo was one of the most competitive players in the history of the Pac-10 and had a baseline jumper that no college defense had an answer for. Unless Howland knows something you or I don't, Westbrook will be battling Mike Roll for a mere starting spot next season. His abilities to "create" really won't matter until Collison leaves.

[11Banners]

Why? So you could feel bad for me in person? :lol2:

If you read a few words over, I stated that I would love to make a real wager with you on that.

This is your opinion, just because you believe it to be so doesn't transcend it to fact. I know my opinions are strong, and somewhat controversial among the BruinFans who post here, but I am quite measured in assessing UA's chances this season, and have supported my case with reasoned analysis. You disagree, thus you think I'm setting myself up for disappointment, and inferring that I am somehow delusional or misguided. I could easily say the same thing about you and your opinion of UCLA, but I won't bother.

Sorry, but you cannot easily say that my opinion of UCLA winning the conference this coming season is nearly as "delusional" or "misguided" as Arizona finishing 14-4 in the conference. Tell that to the other eight Pac-10 teams and see which side they think is delusional.





Let's do this - A harmless sig bet, based on the following circumstances:

IF UA finishes ≥ 14-4 in the Pac-10, I win;
IF UA finishes ≤ 11-7 in the Pac-10, you win;
IF UA finishes 12-6 or 13-5, no winner.

This is regardless of placement in the Pac-10, just the record. Prize is loser displaying photo of winner's choosing for 1 week in his sig, photo can't be obscene or insulting to his own school, but obviously can be in favor of the other.

I'm down. Whaddaya say?

Sure, that sounds like a good bet.






I do think Afflalo will be missed from a leadership and clutch play standpoint. I have the same questions about Shipp that you have about Jawann, as they are equally important to each team's chances as the 3rd or 4th option. I don't think UCLA will miss Keefe all that much, with LRMBAM, Mata, and Aboya ready. I don't think Westbrook is as good as y'all seem to think he is, but he could prove me wrong by season's end. I think Chace Stanback will be your top reserve by January, a real scoring option off the bench and someone who could ease Shipp's transition into the later part of the year. I think the rest of your bench (Passion of the Mike Roll, Dragovic, Keefe if he can return by Dec/Jan) is mediocre at best, especially your guard depth, but UCLA will still go 8-9 deep, which should be enough until late March. I do not think they'll win the NCAA Championship - Carolina, Georgetown, Memphis and Kansas are deeper and just as talented.

Keefe should be back by the Pac-10 play. The Bruins will have 11 guys on the roster - Collison, Westbrook, Shipp, Roll, Stanback, Dragovic, Luc Richard, Keefe, Aboya, Love and Mata. I don't see any of those teams above as being clearly better than UCLA or being better coached. When it's tourney time, it's a crap shoot though. UCLA has just as good of a chance as anybody at banner #12.





I also wonder if the rest of Pac-10 making adjustments to UCLA's style of play over the last 2 years will catch up to the Bruins, from both a roster/recruiting perspective and strategic coaching adjustments, but that remains to be seen - it hasn't happened yet.

Finally, I believe my analysis of UCLA is as reasoned and measured as my analysis of UA, which is not something I could say about most BruinFans who post here.

P.S. - Kumbaya mrb, kumbaya ... :)

I believe your UCLA analysis is somewhat well reasoned; however, your analysis of Arizona is extremely bullish. We'll see if you're right as last year high expectations (including my own for Arizona) were completely wrong.


You had a shred of credibility before this homer post, Banners. We're not on Arch Rivals here, so please keep the fanboy gushings like those above confined to that forum from now on..

Uh, please explain my homer post. I said it's possible that Arizona misses the tournament, though not likely. For the national fan that doesn't follow Arizona very closely, seeing all those seniors leave makes them weary of the team, especially with the past 3 of 4 years being disappointments. Sorry, I don't think I am being a homer by predicting UCLA as the conference champ next year. I think we'll be the heavy favorite, but I guess time will tell when the media takes their picks if that's a homeristic take and someone else is picked ahead of the Bruins.

Why shouldn't we believe Arizona won't finish at least second in the conference next season? The Cats swept Stanford and Cal, both of which have not significantly upgraded themselves in the off-season, and they SHOULD have swept Oregon except for one of the most embarrassing end-of-game collapses ever in the Olson Era..

I think I have already spelled it out a few times in this thread.

A. Arizona has many question marks, primarily at center and the guard position.
B. The Pac-10 will be even tougher next season.
C. It's possible Arizona finishes second, but the other teams such as Oregon, Stanford and Wazzu seem like much safer picks to finish 2nd as they return a lot of starters from very talented teams.


As for losing to either ASU or UW next year, get real. Both were swept last year by a weaker Arizona squad. Arizona is still MILES ahead of both schools in almost every category, and there is ABSOLUTELY not an IOTA of reason to believe that this year's results will be any different...

1. Arizona State should be a very good team this year. Pendergraph could be the most polished offensive big man in the conference next year. James Harden is an absolute stud as well. The Sun Devils played very tough basketball the last half of the Pac-10 and that should carry over for them with the massive infusion of new talent.

2. Playing at UW is tough. The UW trip is deadly and winning there is not as easy as you think it is.


As for Wazzu, every opponent is in danger of losing to the Cougars at Pullman. But, all due respect to Tony Bennett, no way the Cats lose again to them at McKale. Uh-uh. Not going to happen. That's why we brought back Kevin O'Neill...

Now you sound like Mustafa Shakur. Talk about homer.

Meanwhile, UCLA lost what little clutch offense it had in Arron Afflalo, so while Collison will be the best PG in the conference next year, to expect the other guys around him to simply "step up" and fill those shoes is unrealistic by any estimation. The Bruins will continue their new tradition of greatness, but they won't have enough to go undefeated in Pauley.

Wait a minute here. Arizona loses Shakur, Williams and Radenovic and you are expecting other guys to step up and improve your team from last year. UCLA loses ONE guy and we cannot expect guys with national championship and final four experience to step up for us? Give me a break.



The Bruins' most reliable scorer next season will be their starting point guard. Not good news for a team hoping to go to its third straight Final Four.

The most reliable scorer will most likely be Love in the post. Having a two man game of Love and Collison isn't something that is spooking many UCLA fans.

Even more auspicious, the Kevin Love hype has nearly outshouted the Spencer Hawes hype--yet there were teams who found a way to outrun Spencer and even frustrate him in the post. I don't believe a single thing about Love's greatness until I see it against a DIVISION 1 team--and you shouldn't either.

Spencer Hawes and Love are different players. And your point about not believing in Love is great. Did you not believe Chase Budinger was going to be a fantastic freshman before he stepped on the court. How about Durant? How about Oden? How about Eric Gordon or Derrick Rose? Of course I am going to assume Love is going to be outstanding in college. He has proven it in every single venue - whether in high school, AAU ball, all-star tournaments, pickup ball at UCLA with the pros and at the latest Adidas camp. Don't forget that Spencer Hawes lost about 20+ lbs with his mono that sidelined him for awhile as well. Considering Romar did not get him the ball enough, he still had a good freshman season and was picked up in the lottery.


BTW, did you seriously compare Russell Westbrook to Afflalo? You want us to be "serious" here, then don't be ridiculous. Afflalo was one of the most competitive players in the history of the Pac-10 and had a baseline jumper that no college defense had an answer for. Unless Howland knows something you or I don't, Westbrook will be battling Mike Roll for a mere starting spot next season. His abilities to "create" really won't matter until Collison leaves.

Yes I compared Russell Westbrook to Afflalo. Westbrook will be the more prolific offensive player before he leaves Westwood. Your arguments, once again, sound like the "how are you comparing Collison to Farmar when he only scored 3 points per game and shot 38%." I guess you'll be pleasantly or unpleasantly surprised by RW's game this year.

[ghostwhitehorse]

Keefe should be back by the Pac-10 play. The Bruins will have 11 guys on the roster - Collison, Westbrook, Shipp, Roll, Stanback, Dragovic, Luc Richard, Keefe, Aboya, Love and Mata. I don't see any of those teams above as being clearly better than UCLA or being better coached. When it's tourney time, it's a crap shoot though. UCLA has just as good of a chance as anybody at banner #12.

Well considering that nobody other than UCLA is capable of winning a 12th banner. . .I guess you have no chance what so ever. . . :devil:

[wooha]

Does anyone know what UNLV or Illannoy's teams look like this coming season?

UNLV does not look very tough on paper at all IMO. They lose 5 key players, 4 of them starters, from last year (Kruger, Umeh, White, Essenque, Anthony). Those players accounted for 120/200 minutes per game last year. They do have Beas Hamga, 5-star center coming in. Will he and Wink Adams be enough? It'll come down to how well Kruger can coach the younger guys on the team who didn't play much last year, but I'm not too worried about this game for UA, despite being in LV.

Ilannoy loses Warren Carter, their top scorer last year, and Rich McBride. I'm not sure who will step up to replace them. I'm also not sure what the status is of the two players who were involved in that bad DUI car crash last year either. Regardless, their best returning player is big man Shawn Pruitt, but other than that I don't see much. I'll admit I'm not too familiar with their team, however. They have a couple 4-star recruits coming in. Not sure if they'll play much. This will likely be a tougher game than UNLV, especially being in Chicago, but I still think UA will win it with its vastly superior talent.

[catgrad97]

Uh, please explain my homer post. I said it's possible that Arizona misses the tournament, though not likely.

That comment by itself would be enough to explain it. But to use your words, I think I have spelled out my explanation a few times in this thread.

However, if you want to continue to believe that Russell Westbrook will ever be the equivalent of Arron Afflalo, you go right ahead. :lol: And Nikola Dragovic would have been as good as Chase Budinger. :rolleyes:

For the national fan that doesn't follow Arizona very closely, seeing all those seniors leave makes them weary of the team, especially with the past 3 of 4 years being disappointments.

Seeing these misspellings and misrepresentations of "national fan" opinion by a UCLA fan on an Arizona forum makes me very weary. Anyone who saw Shakur's non-performances in the postseason can only look at Bayless OR Wise as addition by subtraction.

And you conveniently continue to ignore the Kevin O'Neill factor. He doesn't accept "disappointment," he shakes things up until the team performs to its abilities--even if that means starting David Bagga. And believe it or not, he WILL have Arizona playing defense as good as UCLA by the end of next season. That's OK, you can eat crow later for not believing. :)

Nobody's calling you a homer for thinking UCLA will repeat as conference champs next season. But if the Pac-10 is going to be as dangerous next season as you and I both agree it will be, the Bruins will be anything but "heavy" favorites.

You guys lost to Cal before the tournament, remember? You weren't THAT much better than the top half of the conference.

A. Arizona has many question marks, primarily at center and the guard position.

The "guard position"? There are two of them, which one are you talking about? I see no question marks at shooting guard or the forward positions at all.

B. The Pac-10 will be even tougher next season.

And yet UCLA somehow will still be the "heavy favorite." Like I said, homer.

C. It's possible Arizona finishes second, but the other teams such as Oregon, Stanford and Wazzu seem like much safer picks to finish 2nd as they return a lot of starters from very talented teams.

Again, I repeat: Stanford got SWEPT by Arizona last season! The Cardinal actually faded badly down the stretch.

I won't argue Oregon or Wazzu as preseason picks by the skeptics, but how is STANFORD somehow a "much safer pick" to finish second, ahead of Arizona? :crazy:

1. Arizona State should be a very good team this year. Pendergraph could be the most polished offensive big man in the conference next year. James Harden is an absolute stud as well. The Sun Devils played very tough basketball the last half of the Pac-10 and that should carry over for them with the massive infusion of new talent.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda. I wouldn't call one new recruit a "massive infusion of new talent" at all. Even the mere implication that ASU has a chance to beat Arizona next season really has no basis in reality and doesn't engender any support here.

2. Playing at UW is tough. The UW trip is deadly and winning there is not as easy as you think it is.

See, here's where you get confused. I never said the UW trip was "easy." I even conceded that Wazzu will probably beat Arizona in Pullman, if that's what you're referring to.

But Arizona swept a more talented UW squad last season and there is zero reason to believe it won't happen again this year.

Wait a minute here. Arizona loses Shakur, Williams and Radenovic and you are expecting other guys to step up and improve your team from last year. UCLA loses ONE guy and we cannot expect guys with national championship and final four experience to step up for us? Give me a break.

I don't think that's so unreasonable. Teams adjust. Ivan will be a heavy loss, but Arizona, with Bayless, Horne and other members of its best recruiting class to date (at least until next season ;) )--not to mention Coach O'Neill--has enhanced itself more than any other Pac-10 team, by far.

Where do you believe that losing Shakur will be so big? Wise will hardly have to "step up" to replace him at all. Budinger and Bayless will replace Williams' scoring.

The most reliable scorer will most likely be Love in the post. Having a two man game of Love and Collison isn't something that is spooking many UCLA fans.

Again, based on what? UCLA fans seem to assume that Love is going to step in at center and just dominate from the opening tap of the first game--just like myopic UW fans thought about Hawes last season.

Collison shouldn't be denied his due, but Love didn't face many seven-footers--or defenses, for that matter--in high school. And he'll be UCLA's "most reliable" scorer all season? "Most likely"?

News flash: Tony Bennett's teams play defense. So do Kevin O'Neill's and even Herb Sendek's on occasion. Kevin Love will actually have to deal with those. He'll have to adjust. I would say only a homer would look at the Pac-10 from top to bottom next season and assume an incoming freshman recruit can be the "go-to" scorer.

Spencer Hawes and Love are different players. And your point about not believing in Love is great. Did you not believe Chase Budinger was going to be a fantastic freshman before he stepped on the court.

Nope. We've had a lot of heralded freshman come through Tucson since Sean Elliott, and it would be foolish of me to assume Chase, Durant, Oden or any other recruit would be "fantastic" before he played a minute of college ball.

What if Love doesn't come in and play "fantastic" for the Bruins right away? I'll tell you what will happen: Bruin fans will question him, doubt him and eventually throw him under the bus, just like a lot of Husky fans did with Hawes.

Don't forget that Spencer Hawes lost about 20+ lbs with his mono that sidelined him for awhile as well. Considering Romar did not get him the ball enough, he still had a good freshman season and was picked up in the lottery.

Yet Kevin Love will, with 100 percent certainty, have a flawless, injury- and distraction-free freshman season. Be realistic. Hawes did well for himself. He did not carry his team to victory, though he was given ample opportunity to do so.

Yes I compared Russell Westbrook to Afflalo. Westbrook will be the more prolific offensive player before he leaves Westwood.

In Ben Howland's system? You really don't think you sound like a homer making a statement like that? I pity you.

Your arguments, once again, sound like the "how are you comparing Collison to Farmar when he only scored 3 points per game and shot 38%."

Not the same comparison at all. I'll point it out one more time: Russell Westbrook will NOT be playing the role of distributor or creator until AFTER Collison leaves. He will be looked on to SCORE next season only--NOT be the point like Collison was expected to be after Farmar.

That is actually good news for Bruin fans after seeing how badly West Virginia ate him up on the road last season. Still, expecting Westbrook to replace Afflalo's scoring immediately, particularly when you look at Russell's PPG average from last season, is ludicrous and baseless.

I don't know any "national fan" who looks at what Westbrook did last season and sees the heir apparent to Afflalo. Your main points are fine, Banners, but they're only homer opinions when they're substantiated with such wishful thinking.

[scumdevils86]

ooo domination by catgrad97

[mrb1823]

P.S. - Kumbaya mrb, kumbaya ... :)

Thanks for keeping it light Rey and all in good fun. :)

UNLV does not look very tough on paper at all IMO. They lose 5 key players, 4 of them starters, from last year (Kruger, Umeh, White, Essenque, Anthony). Those players accounted for 120/200 minutes per game last year. They do have Beas Hamga, 5-star center coming in. Will he and Wink Adams be enough? It'll come down to how well Kruger can coach the younger guys on the team who didn't play much last year, but I'm not too worried about this game for UA, despite being in LV.

Ilannoy loses Warren Carter, their top scorer last year, and Rich McBride. I'm not sure who will step up to replace them. I'm also not sure what the status is of the two players who were involved in that bad DUI car crash last year either. Regardless, their best returning player is big man Shawn Pruitt, but other than that I don't see much. I'll admit I'm not too familiar with their team, however. They have a couple 4-star recruits coming in. Not sure if they'll play much. This will likely be a tougher game than UNLV, especially being in Chicago, but I still think UA will win it with its vastly superior talent.

Thanks for the response and info on the other teams. A loss by Az to UNLV doesn't seem possible. Illinois too, but the Illini do seem to put together good teams most years.

You had a shred of credibility before this homer post, Banners. We're not on Arch Rivals here, so please keep the fanboy gushings like those above confined to that forum from now on.

Why shouldn't we believe Arizona won't finish at least second in the conference next season? The Cats swept Stanford and Cal, both of which have not significantly upgraded themselves in the off-season, and they SHOULD have swept Oregon except for one of the most embarrassing end-of-game collapses ever in the Olson Era.

Lay that home loss squarely on Shakur and Marcus Williams, two players who have moved on. The Ducks never caught fire until the Pac-10 tournament anyway and have no replacement for Aaron Brooks.

As for losing to either ASU or UW next year, get real. Both were swept last year by a weaker Arizona squad. Arizona is still MILES ahead of both schools in almost every category, and there is ABSOLUTELY not an IOTA of reason to believe that this year's results will be any different.

As for Wazzu, every opponent is in danger of losing to the Cougars at Pullman. But, all due respect to Tony Bennett, no way the Cats lose again to them at McKale. Uh-uh. Not going to happen. That's why we brought back Kevin O'Neill.

Meanwhile, UCLA lost what little clutch offense it had in Arron Afflalo, so while Collison will be the best PG in the conference next year, to expect the other guys around him to simply "step up" and fill those shoes is unrealistic by any estimation. The Bruins will continue their new tradition of greatness, but they won't have enough to go undefeated in Pauley.

The Bruins' most reliable scorer next season will be their starting point guard. Not good news for a team hoping to go to its third straight Final Four.

Even more auspicious, the Kevin Love hype has nearly outshouted the Spencer Hawes hype--yet there were teams who found a way to outrun Spencer and even frustrate him in the post. I don't believe a single thing about Love's greatness until I see it against a DIVISION 1 team--and you shouldn't either.

BTW, did you seriously compare Russell Westbrook to Afflalo? You want us to be "serious" here, then don't be ridiculous. Afflalo was one of the most competitive players in the history of the Pac-10 and had a baseline jumper that no college defense had an answer for. Unless Howland knows something you or I don't, Westbrook will be battling Mike Roll for a mere starting spot next season. His abilities to "create" really won't matter until Collison leaves.

I have to disagree with this assessment. Why is it that UCLA's players won't step up offensively but AZ's new players automatically will??? You are calling 11B a homer but the statements you made in that post re: AZ were much more over the top in terms of homerism. Shipp was a very reliable scorer last season BTW. UCLA will be just fine with it's scoring options.

As for Westbrook he is a combo guard and actually better at being two guard as his PG skills last year were questionable IMO. I don't think anyone is comparing him to AA in terms of clutch, defense or leadership abilities. That would be foolish. All that I've seen said, is that Westbrook is more athletic than AA and can create his own shot which AA had trouble doing. Both true BTW.

As for Love, well it's much more likely than not that he will be competent in the paint with his skill set (a much better version of Ryan Anderson at Cal IMO). Also, Love is not some skinny 18 year old frosh post coming into play that needs a redshirt year to beef up before he can handle himself in the paint. Put it this way, I have more confidence in Love stepping up than I do Westbrooke or any other UCLA player who was not a starter on the team last year. Love will do just fine.

[11Banners]

Seeing these misspellings and misrepresentations of "national fan" opinion by a UCLA fan on an Arizona forum makes me very weary. Anyone who saw Shakur's non-performances in the postseason can only look at Bayless OR Wise as addition by subtraction..

And Wise proved what?????? I never thought Shakur was very good, but what has Nic Wise proved to show he's better than Mustafa?

And you conveniently continue to ignore the Kevin O'Neill factor. He doesn't accept "disappointment," he shakes things up until the team performs to its abilities--even if that means starting David Bagga. And believe it or not, he WILL have Arizona playing defense as good as UCLA by the end of next season. That's OK, you can eat crow later for not believing. :)..

Now that's the most absurd thing you've said - and that's saying something. Not only do you need coaching, Catgrad; you also need the personnel. Ben Howland's first team struggled because the components, experience and attitude were not there. The Bruins return 4 starters from a defensive team that played about as well as anyone in the country. Two of our starters could be 1st team all defensive players NATIONALLY in Collison and Luc Richard. Our bench has guys with final four experience and a few years playing in Howland's system such as Aboya, Roll, Westbrook and Mata. If you really feel the Cats will be playing defense as well as the Bruins by years end, you are leading yourself up for another massive disappointment. O'Neill needs more than one season to turn the Cats from a lackluster defensive team to possibly a top 5 defensive team. To put that type of expectation on O'Neill is extremely unfair and luckily Bruin fans gave Howland time to change the atmosphere in Westwood instead of thrashing him after his first year.

Nobody's calling you a homer for thinking UCLA will repeat as conference champs next season. But if the Pac-10 is going to be as dangerous next season as you and I both agree it will be, the Bruins will be anything but "heavy" favorites...

In preseason outlets, the Bruins are pretty much locked in at #1 or #2 and occasionally #3. Frank Burlison actually stated the Bruins are "heavy favorites" to win the Pac-10.

You guys lost to Cal before the tournament, remember? You weren't THAT much better than the top half of the conference....

We won the conference going 15-3 and went to another final four. We were clearly the best team. Next year our team is going to be better but with the conference being so tough, I think we go 15-3 or possibly 14-4.



The "guard position"? There are two of them, which one are you talking about? I see no question marks at shooting guard or the forward positions at all....

Jawaan Mcllelan returning to form is a huge unknown. Does anybody even know who your starting PG will be next season? Will Bayless play the 1 or 2? Can Bayless play the 1 effectively enough to make Arizona a better team? Or will he shoot too much and have the natives here having bad memories of Andre Iguadala and Marcus Wlliams?


Again, I repeat: Stanford got SWEPT by Arizona last season! The Cardinal actually faded badly down the stretch.

I won't argue Oregon or Wazzu as preseason picks by the skeptics, but how is STANFORD somehow a "much safer pick" to finish second, ahead of Arizona? :crazy:.

Stanford lost to Arizona in Tucson early in the Pac-10. I believe it was in December. Then the Cardinal lost to Arizona after Radenovic went berserk with 37 points. Arizona lost the key components to winning those games while Stanford returns EVERYONE. Not only do they return everyone, their massive frontline goes from freshmen to sophomores which normally leads to substantial improvement.



Woulda, coulda, shoulda. I wouldn't call one new recruit a "massive infusion of new talent" at all. Even the mere implication that ASU has a chance to beat Arizona next season really has no basis in reality and doesn't engender any support here..

The Sun Devils played tough the last half of the Pac-10. They were severely undermanned but showed a lot of grit by nearly beating UCLA and Wazzu in Tempe. With Pendergraph and Harden running the show, they will be tough for any team to handle, including the defending champions in your own mind, Arizona.


I don't think that's so unreasonable. Teams adjust. Ivan will be a heavy loss, but Arizona, with Bayless, Horne and other members of its best recruiting class to date (at least until next season ;) )--not to mention Coach O'Neill--has enhanced itself more than any other Pac-10 team, by far.

Where do you believe that losing Shakur will be so big? Wise will hardly have to "step up" to replace him at all. Budinger and Bayless will replace Williams' scoring. .

The same things were said about Hassan Adams and Chris Rodgers. Now they are being said about Williams, Shakur and Radenovic.



Again, based on what? UCLA fans seem to assume that Love is going to step in at center and just dominate from the opening tap of the first game--just like myopic UW fans thought about Hawes last season..

Not only do UCLA fans expect Love to play extremely well his freshman season, but so do all the recruiting analysts and college hoops insiders. Unlike Spencer Hawes, Love will have a talented and experienced surrounding cast. UCLA's guards and forwards in terms of talent and experience are unquestionably vastly superior to the team Hawes was surrounded by.

Collison shouldn't be denied his due, but Love didn't face many seven-footers--or defenses, for that matter--in high school. And he'll be UCLA's "most reliable" scorer all season? "Most likely"?
..

Love faced the Lopez twins, Hibbert and other 7'0 guys on the AAU trails. He also dominated Clint Chapman (going to Texas), Andy Poling (going to Gonzaga) and your very own 7'1 incoming freshman.


News flash: Tony Bennett's teams play defense. So do Kevin O'Neill's and even Herb Sendek's on occasion. Kevin Love will actually have to deal with those. He'll have to adjust. I would say only a homer would look at the Pac-10 from top to bottom next season and assume an incoming freshman recruit can be the "go-to" scorer...

Kevin Love dealt with teams absolutely packing the post against him in every high school game. His team looked like children compared to him, especially in the Mater Dei game where Lake Oswego was totally dwarfed by the size of Mater Dei. Saying Love will be close to a double-double next year isn't something out of this world. And, Love's game is good enough that the Bruins can count on him to score in the post - something we haven't had in awhile.



Nope. We've had a lot of heralded freshman come through Tucson since Sean Elliott, and it would be foolish of me to assume Chase, Durant, Oden or any other recruit would be "fantastic" before he played a minute of college ball...

I guess Lute Olson was foolish for being so excited about Budinger last year. Rick Barnes was also for Kevin Durant, and Ben Howland will be next on the list for being excited about the prospect of having Kevin Love.

What if Love doesn't come in and play "fantastic" for the Bruins right away? I'll tell you what will happen: Bruin fans will question him, doubt him and eventually throw him under the bus, just like a lot of Husky fans did with Hawes. ..

Do you mean like Mustafa Shakur, Chris Rodgers, Marcus Williams, Andre Iguadala, JP Prince, etc.? No fan base is immune to eating up their own, including your own.

Yet Kevin Love will, with 100 percent certainty, have a flawless, injury- and distraction-free freshman season. Be realistic. Hawes did well for himself. He did not carry his team to victory, though he was given ample opportunity to do so...

And Love won't need to be a Durant next year. See Darren Collison, Luc Richard, Josh Shipp, Russell Westbrook, Lorenzo Mata, etc.



Not the same comparison at all. I'll point it out one more time: Russell Westbrook will NOT be playing the role of distributor or creator until AFTER Collison leaves. He will be looked on to SCORE next season only--NOT be the point like Collison was expected to be after Farmar...

And I think I'll point this out one more time - Russell Westbrook is a better creator on offense than Afflalo. Lighten up, read the quote and realize that doesn't mean I'm saying he's going to be better than Afflalo next season. Simply put, Russell can get to the basket much easier and has a much better vertical when attacking the basket.


That is actually good news for Bruin fans after seeing how badly West Virginia ate him up on the road last season. Still, expecting Westbrook to replace Afflalo's scoring immediately, particularly when you look at Russell's PPG average from last season, is ludicrous and baseless..

See above. You continue to be confused after having this explained to you over and over again.

I don't know any "national fan" who looks at what Westbrook did last season and sees the heir apparent to Afflalo. Your main points are fine, Banners, but they're only homer opinions when they're substantiated with such wishful thinking.

Do you mean like saying Arizona is going to be playing as well as UCLA on defense next season? That may be the most homer take I've ever seen on this board in over 4 years of reading and posting here.

[bruins01]

Catgrad97, the length of your post belies how completely wrong it is. I hope you are not feeling too good about yourself after winning over such a sharp and independent mind as that belonging to scumdevils86.

That comment by itself would be enough to explain it. But to use your words, I think I have spelled out my explanation a few times in this thread.

No, it is not outside the realm of possibility that Arizona misses the tournament this year. It is also not outside the realm of possibility that WSU misses it, or that ASU makes it. The probability of any of these things happening is low, but it's not 0%. That was 11Banners' point, and he's absolutely right. It doesn't mean that he or I think that Arizona isn't going to make the tournament.

It's also not outside the realm of possibility that Duke doesn't make the tournament next year.

However, if you want to continue to believe that Russell Westbrook will ever be the equivalent of Arron Afflalo, you go right ahead. :lol: And Nikola Dragovic would have been as good as Chase Budinger. :rolleyes:

Please, point out where 11Banners said that Westbrook would be "the equivalent" of Arron Afflalo. He said that he has the POTENTIAL to be a better SCORER than Afflalo was. Afflalo was limited by his athleticism, and Westbrook has no such limits. But no one, including 11Banners, is expecting him or anyone to fill Afflalo's shoes perfectly.

Seeing these misspellings and misrepresentations of "national fan" opinion by a UCLA fan on an Arizona forum makes me very weary. Anyone who saw Shakur's non-performances in the postseason can only look at Bayless OR Wise as addition by subtraction.

This might be the worst part of your ridiculous post. This very thread started because you Arizona fans disagree with a "national fan"!! What the hell did 11Banners "misrepresent"???

And then the patented Arizona fan addition by subtraction argument. This is the kind of math that they teach in Tucson, apparently.

Team A loses two scholarship players from the previous season. One was a starter, an All-American, and the team's leading scorer, and the other was a reserve who didn't play much and didn't figure to play much in the future. The former is replaced in the starting lineup by the #1 or #2 recruit in the entire country, and the latter is replaced by a top 60 or so four star recruit who isn't expected to have much of an immediate impact.

Team B loses three STARTERS from the previous season, including its four-year starting point guard. Its #1, #3, and #4 scorers are gone, along with the top two rebounding leaders, the top three assists leaders, and its #1, #3, and #4 steals leaders. The departing point guard will probably be replaced by a former 3-star recruit who didn't show much as a freshman and who will forever be limited by the fact that he's about 5'3. The shooting guard position will be manned by an incoming top-10 recruit. If that doesn't work, he will move over to the point guard position even though he has never played there before, and the starting shooting guard will be a guy who had knee problems that limited him to only a handful of minutes per game for much of the previous season. The final departing starter will be replaced by a center who will finally be leaving the program after his seventeenth year of college basketball. In the previous sixteen years, he has never been productive, but some fans of Team B are convinced he will be an effective player in the post. These fans also speak reverently of a new assistant coach who apparently has an effect named after him. They believe he is capable of the type of instant turnaround that can only be accomplished by the best assistant coach in the history of college basketball. They also believe he is a better coach than a man who was their Hall of Fame head coach's chief assistant for decades.

Imagine if Team B were ASU and Team A were someone Arizona Fan doesn't care about, like Marquette or St. Johns or something. Which team would you believe is going to be more improved next year? Why would "national fan" think Team B is going to be better than it was last year??

And you conveniently continue to ignore the Kevin O'Neill factor. He doesn't accept "disappointment," he shakes things up until the team performs to its abilities--even if that means starting David Bagga. And believe it or not, he WILL have Arizona playing defense as good as UCLA by the end of next season. That's OK, you can eat crow later for not believing. :)

OK, I might have been wrong before. THIS might be the most ridiculous part of your ridiculous post.

Are there a bunch of coaches in college basketball who "accept disappointment" that I didn't know about? Is this an epidemic? Does not accepting disappointment make one a better coach?

Is that why Jim Rosborough was (quasi-) fired? Because he accepted disappointment? Is that why Arizona has had two straight bad years by their standards? I didn't know that the fact that the Arizona coaching staff accepted disappointment was the reason they weren't all that good last season. Thank god Lute Olson got rid of the assistant coach that was spreading the "accepting disappointment" disease all around.

Also, I didn't know Hall of Famer Lute Olson had given his new assistant authority over who plays and who doesn't. Do other coaching staffs do this? This is a phenomenon of which I have never heard.

Are you saying that Lute Olson cannot be trusted with not accepting disappointment? That he'd rather his team be mediocre than "shake things up until the team performs up to its abilities"? If that's the case, wouldn't you rather O'Neill be the head coach and Lute Olson be the assistant?

Nobody's calling you a homer for thinking UCLA will repeat as conference champs next season. But if the Pac-10 is going to be as dangerous next season as you and I both agree it will be, the Bruins will be anything but "heavy" favorites.

You seem to have trouble understanding what it means to be a heavy favorite. It means that if you polled a bunch of authorities and asked them who the best team in a conference is, and the vast majority of them pick the same team, then that team is a heavy favorite. I guarantee that if you polled a bunch of people and asked them who the best team in the Pac-10 is, the vast majority would say UCLA. There. Heavy favorite. See how it works? It isn't all that complicated.

You guys lost to Cal before the tournament, remember? You weren't THAT much better than the top half of the conference.

Who the hell cares? UCLA won the Pac-10 last year by 2 games, and it would have been three if it weren't for a meaningless game at Washington. UCLA was the second-best team in the country last year. The only way UCLA could have been separated from the rest of the Pac-10 last year is by the rest of the Pac-10 being worse than they were. Georgetown wasn't much better than the rest of the Big East, Florida wasn't much better than the rest of the SEC, North Carolina was arguably not even the best team in the ACC. How good a basketball team is has nothing to do with how much better they are than the rest of their conference. If that were the case, then Gonzaga would be the best team in the country every year.

The "guard position"? There are two of them, which one are you talking about? I see no question marks at shooting guard or the forward positions at all.

Are you acting like an idiot to make a point? He said "the guard position" and you say you don't see a question mark at ONE of the guard positions. Why wouldn't you think something like, "well, I guess he meant the OTHER guard position..." Why did you instead think, "my brain is not capable of comprehending what 11Banners just said."?

And yet UCLA somehow will still be the "heavy favorite." Like I said, homer.

I can't even say anything here that involves a pot and a kettle. The expression doesn't apply. What you are doing is something else. What you are doing is like a pot staring something that is obviously bright red right in the eye and calling it black.

Again, I repeat: Stanford got SWEPT by Arizona last season! The Cardinal actually faded badly down the stretch.

I won't argue Oregon or Wazzu as preseason picks by the skeptics, but how is STANFORD somehow a "much safer pick" to finish second, ahead of Arizona? :crazy:

How many starters is Stanford losing from last year? How many starters did they have last year who were freshman five star recruits? What about Arizona? Please, please, PLEASE don't give me your addition by subtraction crap as an argument as to why your team is better than a team that doesn't have to do any subtraction at all.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda. I wouldn't call one new recruit a "massive infusion of new talent" at all. Even the mere implication that ASU has a chance to beat Arizona next season really has no basis in reality and doesn't engender any support here.

James Harden is a fantastic prospect, and not their only recruit. They are also getting a four star point guard in Jamelle Mcmillan, and a couple pretty good wing recruits. They certainly will be capable of beating ANYONE in the Pac-10, including Arizona.

See, here's where you get confused. I never said the UW trip was "easy." I even conceded that Wazzu will probably beat Arizona in Pullman, if that's what you're referring to.

But Arizona swept a more talented UW squad last season and there is zero reason to believe it won't happen again this year.

There's plenty of reason to believe that it won't happen again next year. Let's put it this way. There is much, MUCH less reason to believe that Arizona WON'T get swept by WSU next year than there is to believe that Arizona won't sweep Washington.

I don't think that's so unreasonable. Teams adjust. Ivan will be a heavy loss, but Arizona, with Bayless, Horne and other members of its best recruiting class to date (at least until next season ;) )--not to mention Coach O'Neill--has enhanced itself more than any other Pac-10 team, by far.[QUOTE]

I find your statement that the 2007 recruiting class is Arizona's best recruiting class to date pretty offensive. I doubt you'll find much support for that statement on this forum. In fact, you don't have to go back very far to find a class that was better than the 2007 class. Chase Budinger and Jordan Hill were freshmen just last year.

[QUOTE]Where do you believe that losing Shakur will be so big? Wise will hardly have to "step up" to replace him at all. Budinger and Bayless will replace Williams' scoring.

Wise will definitely have to "step up" from his 1.9 ppg, .5 rbg, .5 apg, and 5 feet, 9 inches to get to Mustafa Shakur's 12 ppg, 4 rbp, 7 apg, and 6 feet, 3 inches.

Again, based on what? UCLA fans seem to assume that Love is going to step in at center and just dominate from the opening tap of the first game--just like myopic UW fans thought about Hawes last season.

Once again, no UCLA fan believes that crap. I know for a fact that 11Banners doesn't think Kevin Love is going to come in and "dominate" and I don't know of any UCLA fans who think this. UCLA doesn't need him to dominate. He and I think that Kevin Love, barring injury, will get close to a double-double on the season, with Hawes-like scoring.

Collison shouldn't be denied his due, but Love didn't face many seven-footers--or defenses, for that matter--in high school. And he'll be UCLA's "most reliable" scorer all season? "Most likely"?

Love faced PLENTY of seven-footers in high school. This ridiculous argument could be made about any incoming freshman. Kevin Durant didn't face many seven footers in high school, I bet. Neither did Greg Oden. How many great defenses did Jarryd Bayless face?

News flash: Tony Bennett's teams play defense. So do Kevin O'Neill's and even Herb Sendek's on occasion. Kevin Love will actually have to deal with those. He'll have to adjust. I would say only a homer would look at the Pac-10 from top to bottom next season and assume an incoming freshman recruit can be the "go-to" scorer.

You put "go-to" in quotes as if someone other than you suggested it. No one did.

Nope. We've had a lot of heralded freshman come through Tucson since Sean Elliott, and it would be foolish of me to assume Chase, Durant, Oden or any other recruit would be "fantastic" before he played a minute of college ball.

What if Love doesn't come in and play "fantastic" for the Bruins right away? I'll tell you what will happen: Bruin fans will question him, doubt him and eventually throw him under the bus, just like a lot of Husky fans did with Hawes.

Dear catgrad97,

You are a freaking moron and I hate you.

Sincerely,

Andre Iguodala, Hassan Adams, Isaiah Fox, Mustafa Shakur, Marcus Williams, J.P. Prince...

Yet Kevin Love will, with 100 percent certainty, have a flawless, injury- and distraction-free freshman season. Be realistic. Hawes did well for himself. He did not carry his team to victory, though he was given ample opportunity to do so.

Yes, I'm sure Lorenzo Romar is as capable of giving opportunity as Ben Howland is.

In Ben Howland's system? You really don't think you sound like a homer making a statement like that? I pity you.

What the hell does this comment mean? Arron Afflalo played in Ben Howland's system too. Why is it that Ben Howland's system makes Russell Westbrook incapable of becoming a more proficient scorer than Arron Afflalo? Is Afflalo the best possible offensive player in the world and he represents the Ben Howland system ceiling or something?

Not the same comparison at all. I'll point it out one more time: Russell Westbrook will NOT be playing the role of distributor or creator until AFTER Collison leaves. He will be looked on to SCORE next season only--NOT be the point like Collison was expected to be after Farmar.

That is actually good news for Bruin fans after seeing how badly West Virginia ate him up on the road last season. Still, expecting Westbrook to replace Afflalo's scoring immediately, particularly when you look at Russell's PPG average from last season, is ludicrous and baseless.

I don't know any "national fan" who looks at what Westbrook did last season and sees the heir apparent to Afflalo. Your main points are fine, Banners, but they're only homer opinions when they're substantiated with such wishful thinking.

Russell Westbrook will have largely the same role as last year, except his role as the shooting guard will increase a bit. He still has to be Darren Collison's backup at the point guard position.

Why do you refuse to apply your logic to Arizona? Why do you expect Jerryd Bayless to replace the scoring of Marcus Williams? Why do you expect Kirk freaking Walters to replace the scoring of Ivan Radenovic? Why do you expect Nic Wise to replace the scoring, rebounding, and passing of Mustafa Shakur? Have you seen THEIR ppg averages from last year??

As a group, I know for a FACT that Arizona fans are smarter than this.

[catgrad97]

Hey bruins, Banners,

You want to get into a flame war, get it on with yourself. This wasn't a UCLA thread until you made it one, and your failure to comprehend my points simply exhibits your lack of reading comprehension.

My points were quite clear, and I have yet to hear an Arizona fan who dissents with them. But that's why they play the games. As for anyone else, final news flash: I don't owe you any further explanation.

Resurrect this thread after January, boys. I've got better things to do than get caught in some idiotic Bruin pile-on on an Arizona board.

And btw, bruins01, I find your response offensive in its entirety. Snotty, condescending and insulting, all in all--not to mention way off on pretty much every point. Kind of like 11Banners', except even more of a waste of bandwidth.

Typical of a UCLA fan who thinks his teams and fans can do no wrong. And in a PT thread about Arizona, too. :rolleyes:

Go back to Arch Rivals and return when you're ready to have a polite conversation. You forget where you are.

[bruins01]

Hey bruins, Banners,

You want to get into a flame war, get it on with yourself. This wasn't a UCLA thread until you made it one, and your failure to comprehend my points simply exhibits your lack of reading comprehension.

My points were quite clear, and I have yet to hear an Arizona fan who dissents with them. But that's why they play the games. As for anyone else, final news flash: I don't owe you any further explanation.

Resurrect this thread after January, boys. I've got better things to do than get caught in some idiotic Bruin pile-on on an Arizona board.

And btw, bruins01, I find your response offensive in its entirety. Snotty, condescending and insulting, all in all--not to mention way off on pretty much every point. Kind of like 11Banners', except even more of a waste of bandwidth.

Typical of a UCLA fan who thinks his teams and fans can do no wrong. And in a PT thread about Arizona, too. :rolleyes:

Go back to Arch Rivals and return when you're ready to have a polite conversation. You forget where you are.

I went back through the posts you wrote in this thread and found nothing that wasn't entirely "snotty, condescending, and insulting." If you wanted cordial discussion, then you shouldn't have used such an unnecessarily arrogant and disdainful tone in your posts. But you did, and now you're complaining about your opponents in this discussion responding in kind.

[TucsonDon]

And believe it or not, he WILL have Arizona playing defense as good as UCLA by the end of next season.
Wow, Jorge, that's quite a statement, my man.

I think at least for this upcoming year, UCLA is significantly better than everyone else in the Pac...but in general, Arizona doesn't have to play defense like UCLA does to accomplish what everyone wants to see; they just have to take the **** seriously and not treat playing it like a duty but rather an opportunity every time down the floor.

[Winger]

Wow, Jorge, that's quite a statement, my man.

I think at least for this upcoming year, UCLA is significantly better than everyone else in the Pac...but in general, Arizona doesn't have to play defense like UCLA does to accomplish what everyone wants to see; they just have to take the **** seriously and not treat playing it like a duty but rather an opportunity every time down the floor.

Agreed.

Plus, what everyone need to realize is that the Cats aren't replacing as much as is generally asumed in IRad, MShakur, and Williams.

Point being, I never could really figure out this last year why we couldn't elevate our performance into Top 10 range, until the last few months - when I realized that (God Bless and good luck to them) - IRad, MShakur, and Williams weren't as good as thought/advertised.

We are replacing undrafted - and played out of position all year, undrafted, and secound rounder likely to spend the upcoming season either on the bench or the DL.

That ain't much - and should give the Cats' fans reason for optimism for '07='08.

[TheCat]

What the hell are you talking about?? The only person who said anything about Kevin Love dominating in this thread is you. Your question ("So is he going to dominate Harden? how about Patterson? Taj? Lopez?") was completely unprovoked.

I'm not hoping Kevin Love "dominates" anybody. The only person who gives a **** here is you. If he's as good as the guys on your list (except Patterson--who the hell is Patterson??) I'll be happy, as those are great players. No one is asking him to do any more than that. Except you, apparently.

Your right ....I used the word dominate. What was actually said that Love will be "a hell of a force". I'm sure you can educate me on the difference.

[TheCat]

They're finally starting to figure out TheCat. He's really just having conversations w/himself; arguing feverishly against whatever pops into his own mind at that particular moment. It's kinda freaky, but at least he's got a style all his own.

Condesending A**hole. You never fail me and that is what I like about you TD. You got thrown out of here under your previous name and come back. To me that is "kinda freaky". Some people learn to leave when they aren't wanted. Your history includes some interesting comments about Steve Kerr's father, Lute etc..

Go write for BRO they could use the help. Take the band of brothers with you.

[catgrad97]

I think at least for this upcoming year, UCLA is significantly better than everyone else in the Pac...but in general, Arizona doesn't have to play defense like UCLA does to accomplish what everyone wants to see; they just have to take the **** seriously and not treat playing it like a duty but rather an opportunity every time down the floor.

This is the most objective post of this entire thread--and probably the most accurate.

Ultimately, until January we're shooting in the dark about the levels at which Arizona and UCLA will compete. But yep, if anybody dogs plays, they better find their butts on the bench or the Cats will be no better than last year.

Don't believe the hype, guys: believe the performance.

[TheCat]

As for Love, well it's much more likely than not that he will be competent in the paint with his skill set (a much better version of Ryan Anderson at Cal IMO). Also, Love is not some skinny 18 year old frosh post coming into play that needs a redshirt year to beef up before he can handle himself in the paint. Put it this way, I have more confidence in Love stepping up than I do Westbrooke or any other UCLA player who was not a starter on the team last year. Love will do just fine.[/QUOTE]

I don't think anyone would quarrel with saying that Love will be competent in the paint but that is not what has been said by most Bruins. Love will do just fine for a freshman in the PAC. He has great size (weight) for a frosh and it will help him immensely establishing and holding position. What has been disputed is whether he will be a "hell of a force".

[mrb1823]

I don't think anyone would quarrel with saying that Love will be competent in the paint but that is not what has been said by most Bruins. Love will do just fine for a freshman in the PAC. He has great size (weight) for a frosh and it will help him immensely establishing and holding position. What has been disputed is whether he will be a "hell of a force".

I don't know what that means exactly to everyone or anyone here. All I will say is that I'm thinking (hoping) Love avgs. 14 pts, 6 rebs and 2 assists per game and that Love poses a legit threat to score from anywhere in the low post thereby freeing up the guards and wings to do their thing (a luxury UCLA did not have last year).

[TheCat]

That is a good prediction although I think he will get more rebounds....8+. Very good for a frosh.

[mrb1823]

That is a good prediction although I think he will get more rebounds....8+. Very good for a frosh.

Thanks I was trying to be conservative but I'll gladly take your prediction on the rebs. :) :)

[TheCat]

I think that is realistic. Where he is going to help the Bruins is rebounding and outlet passing. He may allow the Bruins to pick up a few easy buckets which they can use. I don't think anyone doubts his ability but the jump from HS to college for a big man is huge. You can no longer dominate because of your size and the guys you are playing against are bigger, stronger and more athletic then you have ever played. You see double teams coming from different spots on the floor by more athletic guys. That is the only point I was making......

[MrBug708]

Rey, I wish I knew you personally so I could make a wager with you on Arizona going 14-4 in the Pac-10. If Arizona finishes 11-7 again in this year's tougher conference, it should be quite a feat and fans of the team should congratulate the coaching staff and players for a recovery not shown in wins and losses. I mean, seriously, if Arizona just splits with UCLA, Stanford, Oregon and Washington State, that's 4 losses in the conference already. That's not even counting sc, ASU (much tougher team this year), UW and CAL. If you really believe Arizona is going to finish 1st or 2nd in the conference, you are setting yourself up for a major disappointment.

And TheCat, why are you turning this into another UCLA thread? I think UCLA will be a better team than last year and will finish 15-3 again in the conference, the same as last year's record. There are too many tough road games in this conference but the Bruins will go undefeated again at Pauley. I can see a loss on the horrendous Washington trip (physically exhausting from all the travel), Stanford/Cal, and one at the Arizona or Oregon schools.

Edit: And if you think UCLA doesn't have scorers this year, you're crazy. Love is going to be a hell of a force scoring in the post. Collison is a hell of a playmaker at the PG position. Westbrook is going to have a great sophomore year and created better than Afflalo.

You're an idiot Banners!

[Reydituto]

You're an idiot Banners!

Oh, yeah, he's an idiot all right ... like he had the prescience to know UA would be without key players for most of the conference season ... and you're an idiot for dredging this thread up too Bug ...

:)

[T-Bone]

Forget the fact that our head coach wasn't around ALL SEASON. Good job, Bug.

[bruins01]

I wish someone would make a catgrad97 prediction greatest hits compilation someday.

[TucsonDon]

You can pretty much go back and find threads just like this one from the past three years running. UCLA fans aren't right very much, but when it comes to predicting Arizona's prospects for an upcoming season, they always end up looking pretty damn smart in retrospect, at least compared to all the Cat fans who disagree with them.

[T-Bone]

You can pretty much go back and find threads just like this one from the past three years running. UCLA fans aren't right very much, but when it comes to predicting Arizona's prospects for an upcoming season, they always end up looking pretty damn smart in retrospect, at least compared to all the Cat fans who disagree with them.

You guys are so smart. I love you. :hangref:

[Zero]

Just another reason to not like most UCLA fans here.
HAHA

Either way I'm ok with them being right, we haven;t been good the past few years.

But I'd love to see a little more respect on our boards.

Good luck Bruins.

[ajzlakers1]

You guys are so smart. I love you. :hangref:

Ditto.

It's always nice to have optimistic hopes for your team and know that a well-intending rival fan will be there to bring you back down to earth. :rolleyes:

[catgrad97]

I wish someone would make a catgrad97 prediction greatest hits compilation someday.

Like the one about how Ben Howland's big men are recruited in volume, and everyone else in the Pac-10 needed to learn how to combat that rotation?

Or how about my multiple threads in which I'm the only one warning about the Oregon Ducks and how they ALWAYS, particularly Tajuan Porter, go off against Arizona?

Yeah, I would LOVE it if somebody made a compilation of my predictions someday. Why don't you spearhead that project bruins01, since you're so interested?

When I'm right, no one remembers.
When I'm wrong, no one forgets.
When I'm respectful of UCLA, no Bruin fan lets that go unpunished.

All predictions made pre-Lute LOA are apparently fair game to ignorant Bruin fans as well. Last time I checked, there were no worries when Steve Lavin was hired to succeed Jim Harrick in Westwood either.

[smashmode]

This is why I don't make predictions, because they will be brought up..and laughed at.

Hindsight people. Thank god I did not predict UW to finish in the top 3!

[bruins01]

Like the one about how Ben Howland's big men are recruited in volume, and everyone else in the Pac-10 needed to learn how to combat that rotation?

Or how about my multiple threads in which I'm the only one warning about the Oregon Ducks and how they ALWAYS, particularly Tajuan Porter, go off against Arizona?

Are you joking right now? Ben Howland's big men are not recruited "in volume" at all. If a player isn't good enough, he doesn't play--UCLA only really had three posts in the rotation this year. There are only four real posts on this year's roster, from three different recruiting classes.

As for Oregon, I have to assume you're joking. You predicted Oregon would score points against Arizona? And you're proud of that? Oregon scored points against everyone. They have the #4 offense in the entire country. They "go off" against everyone. In fact, neither of their offensive performances this year against Arizona were as efficient as their effort against UCLA at Oregon on January 24th.

All predictions made pre-Lute LOA are apparently fair game to ignorant Bruin fans as well. Last time I checked, there were no worries when Steve Lavin was hired to succeed Jim Harrick in Westwood either.

Fine, I'm sure Lute could have gotten this team to finish higher than 7th in the Pac-10. The last two years are great evidence that Lute has gotten such an incredible amount out of his talent.

And there were plenty of worries when UCLA hired Steve Lavin.

When I'm right, no one remembers.

Yeah, OK.

[Reydituto]

You can pretty much go back and find threads just like this one from the past three years running. UCLA fans aren't right very much, but when it comes to predicting Arizona's prospects for an upcoming season, they always end up looking pretty damn smart in retrospect, at least compared to all the Cat fans who disagree with them.

What a load of crap GasCan Don ...

['ZONA97]

Jesus, who the f*ck let you idiots out of your AR cages?

Go. Away. Now.

[11Banners]

Oh, yeah, he's an idiot all right ... like he had the prescience to know UA would be without key players for most of the conference season ... and you're an idiot for dredging this thread up too Bug ...

:)

Yes, Rey, because a healthy Arizona team means you finish 14-4 or better. That was such a ludicrous prediction but at that time Kevin O'Neill was God on the boards. With a healthy roster and Lute Olson, they still don't get very close to 14 wins. And I am eagerly awaiting another bet with you Rey.

[Reydituto]

Yes, Rey, because a healthy Arizona team means you finish 14-4 or better. That was such a ludicrous prediction but at that time Kevin O'Neill was God on the boards. With a healthy roster and Lute Olson, they still don't get very close to 14 wins. And I am eagerly awaiting another bet with you Rey.

Maybe not, but 12-6 isn't so farfetched when you factor in that UA played 10 conference games without either Bayless or Wise and 5 games were lost in conference by 5 points or less, which would not have won the bet for you. It wasn't ludicrous to anyone but UCLA fans who felt threatened by such optimism.

The KO optimism was couched on the idea that he would be the lead assistant and not the head coach. You could not have foreseen this, or the injuries, even if you thought that UA would have a tough time coping with a substantial injury to any of their key players.

Besides, there's no need for you to be obnoxious about it. You know I was a good sport about the bet, and lived up to the terms without complaint. Just be careful what you wish for Bananas ...

[T-Bone]

Yes, Rey, because a healthy Arizona team means you finish 14-4 or better. That was such a ludicrous prediction but at that time Kevin O'Neill was God on the boards. With a healthy roster and Lute Olson, they still don't get very close to 14 wins. And I am eagerly awaiting another bet with you Rey.

Keep acting like a toddler, tool.

[MrBug708]

Like the one about how Ben Howland's big men are recruited in volume, and everyone else in the Pac-10 needed to learn how to combat that rotation?

Or how about my multiple threads in which I'm the only one warning about the Oregon Ducks and how they ALWAYS, particularly Tajuan Porter, go off against Arizona?

Yeah, I would LOVE it if somebody made a compilation of my predictions someday. Why don't you spearhead that project bruins01, since you're so interested?

When I'm right, no one remembers.
When I'm wrong, no one forgets.
When I'm respectful of UCLA, no Bruin fan lets that go unpunished.

All predictions made pre-Lute LOA are apparently fair game to ignorant Bruin fans as well. Last time I checked, there were no worries when Steve Lavin was hired to succeed Jim Harrick in Westwood either.

I agree with what you are saying, especially the part when everyone remembers when you are wrong and forgets all of the times you are right. I think both sides are guilty of this.

[11Banners]

Keep acting like a toddler, tool.

Way to set the example.

['ZONA97]

I agree with what you are saying, especially the part when everyone remembers when you are wrong and forgets all of the times you are right. I think both sides are guilty of this.

And what a wonderful contribution you made in an effort to remedy this problem. Kudos.

[TucsonDon]

What a load of crap GasCan Don ...
Whatever. Buy the ticket, take the ride.

I make plenty of predictions that end up sucking and plenty that end up looking great. Only time I catch sh1t for the bad ones is when I'm acting like a jerk in the process and piss people off. Also, not being able to admit when you've made a stupid call is poor form (yes, I'm talking to you...all of you defending yourselves in this thread). I wasn't even involved in this thread, didn't bump it, didn't argue with anyone in it, but I mean, come on, some of these posts are brutal and were just nuts to begin with.

The moral here (aside from the fact that Arizona fans have for three years running been wildly inaccurate in predicting how their team will perform) is that just because someone roots for UCLA doesn't mean they don't know what they're talking about and also automatically have it in for Arizona and its fans...and for the UCLA fans, it goes the other way. Not every UA fan here is incapable of being objective and not every UA fan here is incapable of speaking truthfully and accurately about both the Bruins and the Cats.

[BlueMikey]

Not every Arizona fan is doom and gloom or overly optimistic.

It's a vocal minority and quite a few of us gets sick of such predictions every single year.

[TucsonDon]

I like you and I like your post. Very well said.

[Reydituto]

Whatever. Buy the ticket, take the ride.

I make plenty of predictions that end up sucking and plenty that end up looking great. Only time I catch sh1t for the bad ones is when I'm acting like a jerk in the process and piss people off. Also, not being able to admit when you've made a stupid call is poor form (yes, I'm talking to you...all of you defending yourselves in this thread). I wasn't even involved in this thread, didn't bump it, didn't argue with anyone in it, but I mean, come on, some of these posts are brutal and were just nuts to begin with.

The moral here (aside from the fact that Arizona fans have for three years running been wildly inaccurate in predicting how their team will perform) is that just because someone roots for UCLA doesn't mean they don't know what they're talking about and also automatically have it in for Arizona and its fans...and for the UCLA fans, it goes the other way. Not every UA fan here is incapable of being objective and not every UA fan here is incapable of speaking truthfully and accurately about both the Bruins and the Cats.

Clever ... didn't know I was stepping onto a bus ... just making a prediction which didn't turn out how I thought it would, for various reasons. It wasn't a "stupid" call, it just didn't work out. No biggie. I don't think my posts in this thread have warranted some of the "jerk-like" responses I've received from Bruin Fans. I just take issue with your blanket statement that somehow UCLA fans are usually right about UA while UA fans have been foolish somehow in their optimistic beliefs, as well as pointing out that your notion of "objectivity" is highly subjective.

[T-Bone]

The moral here (aside from the fact that Arizona fans have for three years running been wildly inaccurate in predicting how their team will perform) is that just because someone roots for UCLA doesn't mean they don't know what they're talking about and also automatically have it in for Arizona and its fans...and for the UCLA fans, it goes the other way. Not every UA fan here is incapable of being objective and not every UA fan here is incapable of speaking truthfully and accurately about both the Bruins and the Cats.

Well, when you went to Arizona, but root for UCLA and have a history of making incendiary comments about the Arizona program, players, and coaches, you appear to "have it in for Arizona and its fans" and your split allegiances make people question whether you know what you're talking about. Sorry, it's the nature of the beast when you're a bandwagon fan.

As for 11banners, you talk to people like you know everything, but your backhanded compliments of Arizona and comments to Arizona fans on this board evidence your immaturity.

[TucsonDon]

people question whether you know what you're talking about.
There may be a fair number of people on this site who don't like me, but the vast majority of them know better than to do what you just said. Truth is, if I didn't know what I was talking about they wouldn't dislike me...they'd just ignore me, like the rest of us do w/BeachCat.

Clever ... didn't know I was stepping onto a bus ... just making a prediction which didn't turn out how I thought it would, for various reasons. It wasn't a "stupid" call, it just didn't work out. No biggie. I don't think my posts in this thread have warranted some of the "jerk-like" responses I've received from Bruin Fans. I just take issue with your blanket statement that somehow UCLA fans are usually right about UA while UA fans have been foolish somehow in their optimistic beliefs, as well as pointing out that your notion of "objectivity" is highly subjective.
You read what you want to read. Don't pick up on some things, take other things too seriously. Mis-judge, mis-evaluate, mis-read.

For this subject, all I was getting at was basically what you just said. Its pretty fair to say UA fans have, as you put it, been foolish in their optimistic beliefs. UCLA fans have consistently been much closer to getting it right in terms of predicting how the Cats' seasons will unfold...and its been that way for a bit now. Doesn't mean they are 'usually right' about anything else...just happens they're able to be more objective about your basketball team than you've been.

Then again, this is a forum for fans. They're not supposed to be objective, they're not supposed to just agree with rival fans, they're not supposed to resist the temptation to yell and scream and curse those mother****ers out. I get all this and I'm not intending to impugn anyone. Search for a prediction on how well UCLA's football season would turn out back in the fall and you may find a bunch of Bruins looking foolish.

My point is a lot of Arizona fans get angry at people like myself because from time to time I'll give an opinion they don't particularly like the sound of. They feel compelled to forcibly suppress criticism. That's fascist and its garbage.

[smashmode]

Truth is, if I didn't know what I was talking about they wouldn't dislike me...they'd just ignore me, like the rest of us do w/BeachCat.
.

That doesn't hold true with Jim Basnight, and he doesnt even post here anymore heh.

[BlueMikey]

Comparing someone to Basnight is a LOW BLOW.

[smashmode]

Comparing someone to Basnight is a LOW BLOW.

I wasn't comparing Tuscon to Basnight..Just saying most people think that Basnight does not know what he is talking about..But still give him alot of time. Tuscon is 180 of Basnight.

[T-Bone]

There may be a fair number of people on this site who don't like me, but the vast majority of them know better than to do what you just said. Truth is, if I didn't know what I was talking about they wouldn't dislike me...they'd just ignore me, like the rest of us do w/BeachCat.

Oh, the Almighty Dintzer gets upset when someone points out how ridiculous he is. Also, I like how you try to command respect but then spend the rest of your post trashing someone else who probably knows as much as you think you do.

['ZONA97]

I wasn't comparing Tuscon to Basnight..Just saying most people think that Basnight does not know what he is talking about..But still give him alot of time. Tuscon is 180 of Basnight.

Who is Tuscon?

[Basketcats]

A wise person once told me (see below) :)

[TucsonDon]

Oh, the Almighty Dintzer gets upset when someone points out how ridiculous he is. Also, I like how you try to command respect but then spend the rest of your post trashing someone else who probably knows as much as you think you do.
Upset?

Command?

Trashing?

Those words are way too strong for both what I just said and for how I feel about this. It doesn't bother nor offend me if you think I don't know what I'm talking about.

[Reydituto]

There may be a fair number of people on this site who don't like me, but the vast majority of them know better than to do what you just said. Truth is, if I didn't know what I was talking about they wouldn't dislike me...they'd just ignore me, like the rest of us do w/BeachCat.

While I may know better and give you more credence than others here, you can't blame others for the perception problems that you yourself create, which is all I think T-Bone was saying..


You read what you want to read. Don't pick up on some things, take other things too seriously. Mis-judge, mis-evaluate, mis-read.

...

Its pretty fair to say UA fans have, as you put it, been foolish in their optimistic beliefs. UCLA fans have consistently been much closer to getting it right in terms of predicting how the Cats' seasons will unfold...and its been that way for a bit now.

...
Then again, this is a forum for fans. They're not supposed to be objective, they're not supposed to just agree with rival fans, they're not supposed to resist the temptation to yell and scream and curse those mother****ers out. I get all this and I'm not intending to impugn anyone. Search for a prediction on how well UCLA's football season would turn out back in the fall and you may find a bunch of Bruins looking foolish.

My point is a lot of Arizona fans get angry at people like myself because from time to time I'll give an opinion they don't particularly like the sound of. They feel compelled to forcibly suppress criticism. That's fascist and its garbage.

When UCLA fans come on here and feel "compelled to correct what they believe are misjudgements, misevaluations, and misreads", how do you really expect UA fans to respond on a UA board? You do know better than this TD.

In this vein I don't think it's pretty fair to say UA fans have, somehow been foolish in their optimistic beliefs, or to maintain that UCLA fans have consistently been much closer to getting it right in terms of predicting how the Cats' seasons will unfold. Not only is it the height of pomposity to state such, as well as to further say it is under the guise of "correcting your misevaluations", to suggest UA fans were foolish and shouldn't be this way goes against the core idea of being a fan. Most people become sports fans in order to be optimisitic about something you identify with. Like you said, this is a forum for such "fans" and to expect complete objectivity from fans or rival fans regarding any team's prospects ... now that's foolish.

I also think that you and a few others in particular post at times to stir the pot and provoke a predictable reaction. All I would say is that when you get that reaction, you can't act all surprised that someone reacted that way. You might as well throw rocks at a hornet's nest.

I don't rush to judgment on much here, and just because I may express strong opinions that you or others disagree with, it's dangerous to assume I or anyone else have "misread" what you or others posted. While there are a few here who act in a fascist manner, arguing forcefully with someone's opinion isn't always an attempt to suppress criticism. Going back to the UA & ASU in the NCAAs discussion, I wasn't trying to suppress your opinion, I was wholly disagreeing with the selective manner in which you framed the discussion. If you didn't like it, that's fine, no skin off my back, but that wouldn't stop me from speaking out in the future either.

[T-Bone]

There may be a fair number of people on this site who don't like me, but the vast majority of them know better than to do what you just said.
...

You read what you want to read. Don't pick up on some things, take other things too seriously. Mis-judge, mis-evaluate, mis-read.

How would you classify these two statements?

[BlueMikey]

Well, it's probably fair to say that if Team A has a bad season, fans of Team B are more likely to be correct. If Team A has a good season, fans of Team A are more likely to be correct.

That said, a lot of people around here are still too optimistic about things. But I don't really know that this thread is good evidence of that. I don't think that Rey's initial prediction was such too egregious...after all, we did go 9-3 in the non-conference and, while 14 wins may have been high, I don't think 12-6 (which would have been the push in the bet between Rey and 11Banners) was absurd, especially considering the injuries down the stretch.

People on this board have trouble finding middle ground, though. There are a lot more dumb predictions by Arizona and UCLA fans than you can read in this thread.

[T-Bone]

In this vein I don't think it's pretty fair to say UA fans have, somehow been foolish in their optimistic beliefs, or to maintain that UCLA fans have consistently been much closer to getting it right in terms of predicting how the Cats' seasons will unfold. Not only is it the height of pomposity to state such, as well as to further say it is under the guise of "correcting your misevaluations", to suggest UA fans were foolish and shouldn't be this way goes against the core idea of being a fan. Most people become sports fans in order to be optimisitic about something you identify with. Like you said, this is a forum for such "fans" and to expect complete objectivity from fans or rival fans regarding any team's prospects ... now that's foolish.

I also think that you and a few others in particular post at times to stir the pot and provoke a predictable reaction. All I would say is that when you get that reaction, you can't act all surprised that someone reacted that way. You might as well throw rocks at a hornet's nest.

Wow, in two paragraphs, Rey described most of the UCLA posters on here to a T.

[TucsonDon]

How would you classify these two statements?
They're statements. Not 'commands' from an 'upset' person. You don't think I know what I'm talking about, that's okay with me. I'm telling you that you're in the minority here...not 'trashing' your opinion.



When UCLA fans come on here and feel "compelled to correct what they believe are misjudgements, misevaluations, and misreads", how do you really expect UA fans to respond on a UA board? You do know better than this TD.

In this vein I don't think it's pretty fair to say UA fans have, somehow been foolish in their optimistic beliefs, or to maintain that UCLA fans have consistently been much closer to getting it right in terms of predicting how the Cats' seasons will unfold. Not only is it the height of pomposity to state such, as well as to further say it is under the guise of "correcting your misevaluations", to suggest UA fans were foolish and shouldn't be this way goes against the core idea of being a fan. Most people become sports fans in order to be optimisitic about something you identify with. Like you said, this is a forum for such "fans" and to expect complete objectivity from fans or rival fans regarding any team's prospects ... now that's foolish.

I also think that you and a few others in particular post at times to stir the pot and provoke a predictable reaction. All I would say is that when you get that reaction, you can't act all surprised that someone reacted that way. You might as well throw rocks at a hornet's nest.

I don't rush to judgment on much here, and just because I may express strong opinions that you or others disagree with, it's dangerous to assume I or anyone else have "misread" what you or others posted. While there are a few here who act in a fascist manner, arguing forcefully with someone's opinion isn't always an attempt to suppress criticism. Going back to the UA & ASU in the NCAAs discussion, I wasn't trying to suppress your opinion, I was wholly disagreeing with the selective manner in which you framed the discussion. If you didn't like it, that's fine, no skin off my back, but that wouldn't stop me from speaking out in the future either.
All right...that's fair enough.

Discussion is great, Rey. That's why I've been on here for nearly five full years. Dismissing someone's opinion just because they are affiliated with a different school is just plain silly, and I'm sure you agree with that. Unfortunately there are plenty of folks on this site who do just that. To me, its ignorance and those people obviously don't want to have genuine discussions, but rather sit around pulling each others dicks until everyone becomes happy and satisfied. Those people can go off in the corner and do just that; this board is still much better than that, IMO.

[BeachCat97]

Oh, the Almighty Dintzer gets upset when someone points out how ridiculous he is. Also, I like how you try to command respect but then spend the rest of your post trashing someone else who probably knows as much as you think you do.

thanks for the compliment?

[T-Bone]

They're statements. Not 'commands' from an 'upset' person. You don't think I know what I'm talking about, that's okay with me. I'm telling you that you're in the minority here...not 'trashing' your opinion.

When you say that most people know not to make the same mistake I did, aren't you attempting to hold yourself out as some sort of authority figure? And by doing that, aren't you implicitly trying to command respect from all of the lowly internet posters who read your posts?

Furthermore, when Rey asks why UCLA posters are being such *ssholes in this thread and you spell out all of the reasons that he's misperceived multiple posts in this thread, aren't you trashing his reading comprehension skills and his ability to understand what other people are communicating? And, implicitly, if Rey can't even understand what your'e saying, (although the backhanded compliments such as "You guys are insanely optimistic, but, hey, that's okay, you're just fans." are difficult to decipher), doesn't that mean that he probably can't analyze the subject at hand on the same level as you (again, see posts about UA optimism versus UCLA reality)?

As I alluded to earlier, if your posts, as well as those from 11banners, et al., weren't so condescending, no one would think you had a superiority complex and discussions in which you engage may not be so combative.

[TucsonDon]

Wow.

No...everything here is being overanalyzed by you.

[T-Bone]

Yeah, that's it. I'm pulling the condescension out of thin air. It has nothing to do with you saying it's okay for UA fans to be optimistic, but then labelling anyone who thinks we can win a certain amount of games as a fool. Yeah, you're right, I'm overanalyzing.

[Reydituto]

As I alluded to earlier, if your posts, as well as those from 11banners, et al., weren't so condescending, no one would think you had a superiority complex and discussions in which you engage may not be so combative.

Bingo. I must admit, this is the core of my perception of many UCLA fans when it comes to basketball, as well as ASU fans when it comes to football (as I just usually disregard or shoot down their opinions on basketball). Case in point, TD elucidated ASU's case for inclusion in the NCAAs stronger than any ASU fan had her or in blog comments, even though I fully disagree with his framing of the issue, and it's not because he is a UCLA fan, but because he is not an ASU fan, and truthfully, not really a UA "fan".

Obviously, there are still some sore feelings on the part of many UCLA fans from all the shlt they had to eat during the end of the Lavin Era on this board and elsewhere. Now that the worm has turned to a certain extent, many can't help themselves from piling on, which to me would be fine on a UCLA board, but is rather poor form on a UA board.

[TucsonDon]

Yeah, that's it. I'm pulling the condescension out of thin air. It has nothing to do with you saying it's okay for UA fans to be optimistic, but then labelling anyone who thinks we can win a certain amount of games as a fool. Yeah, you're right, I'm overanalyzing.
In another thread on how the season would go for the Cats, Mr. Bug, a UCLA poster, said Arizona would win 25 games. I responded by saying that I've got a bridge to sell him.

Point is I don't care if you're an Arizona fan, a UCLA fan, a Duke fan...whatever. If you say something I don't agree with, I'm going to tell you I don't agree. It doesn't make it right, it doesn't mean I know more, and it doesn't mean I'm a jerk. Its just an opinion, like the one you give, like the one Bug gives, like the one Rey gives. You can't know if its right until after that opinion either comes true or doesn't.

Beyond that, you appear to be quite angry here; the terms you're using are not ones I have used. I didn't call anyone a 'fool' for thinking a certain way. I looked at these posts and thought they were a little nuts before the season but I didn't say anything. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion.

Now all I've said here is that if you look back in this thread, there is a pretty clear pattern which formed. The UCLA fans, for the most part, were closer to being right on about Arizona than the UA fans were. That's what I said, that's why you and Rey took offense. I encourage you to argue with that.

[Reydituto]

They were right in the sense that UA was not as good as I and others thought they would be. THey were not right by the reasons of how & why they thought UA would not be as good as UA fans thought they would. There is a difference.

[T-Bone]

You can pretty much go back and find threads just like this one from the past three years running. UCLA fans aren't right very much, but when it comes to predicting Arizona's prospects for an upcoming season, they always end up looking pretty damn smart in retrospect, at least compared to all the Cat fans who disagree with them.


In another thread on how the season would go for the Cats, Mr. Bug, a UCLA poster, said Arizona would win 25 games. I responded by saying that I've got a bridge to sell him.

Did you pull up the thread at the end of the season and call him out on it as you did to Arizona posters above?

Point is I don't care if you're an Arizona fan, a UCLA fan, a Duke fan...whatever. If you say something I don't agree with, I'm going to tell you I don't agree. It doesn't make it right, it doesn't mean I know more, and it doesn't mean I'm a jerk. Its just an opinion, like the one you give, like the one Bug gives, like the one Rey gives. You can't know if its right until after that opinion either comes true or doesn't.

Exactly, but can't you admit that you look like an *sshole when you call out a whole class of posters after the fact knowing that no one had any real idea of what was going to happen this season? See the first post quoted above. I know you'll try to play that off as making a mere observation but we all know it was a diss.

Beyond that, you appear to be quite angry here; the terms you're using are not ones I have used. I didn't call anyone a 'fool' for thinking a certain way. I looked at these posts and thought they were a little nuts before the season but I didn't say anything. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion.

So, you thought they were a little off at first, but decided not to say anything until later when you and your fellow UCLA fans could claim success? Yeah, that's not condescending. Also, it doesn't take a genius to equate "pretty damn smart . . . compared to Cat fans" with "Cat fans are foolish." Rey didn't just pull that term out of his *ss.

Now all I've said here is that if you look back in this thread, there is a pretty clear pattern which formed. The UCLA fans, for the most part, were closer to being right on about Arizona than the UA fans were. That's what I said, that's why you and Rey took offense. I encourage you to argue with that.

I think you think I'm taking this personally because UCLA fans were more pessimistic about UA's chances this year than UA fans were. I'm not. I don't recall making any absurd predictions at the beginning of the year and I don't see anyone calling me out specifically in this thread.

The reason I decided to post in this thread was because I thought it was pretty *sshole of all the UCLA fans to pull this up as a sort of slap in the face knowing full well that NO ONE knew what would transpire this year and that all bets were off in regard to our record this year the second Lute left and KO took over. Again, if you could just admit that those posts were condescending, even if only in your own mind, I would be satisfied that everyone here is willing to acknowledge the truth of the situation.

[BeachCat97]

Bingo. I must admit, this is the core of my perception of many UCLA fans when it comes to basketball, as well as ASU fans when it comes to football (as I just usually disregard or shoot down their opinions on basketball). Case in point, TD elucidated ASU's case for inclusion in the NCAAs stronger than any ASU fan had her or in blog comments, even though I fully disagree with his framing of the issue, and it's not because he is a UCLA fan, but because he is not an ASU fan, and truthfully, not really a UA "fan".

Obviously, there are still some sore feelings on the part of many UCLA fans from all the shlt they had to eat during the end of the Lavin Era on this board and elsewhere. Now that the worm has turned to a certain extent, many can't help themselves from piling on, which to me would be fine on a UCLA board, but is rather poor form on a UA board.

Good post, rey.

But you give TD too much credit. For one thing, I'm not sure he can even spell "elucidate." TD's cyber persona is that of a self-important gadfly. He watches a lot of college basketball, I'll give him that. Heck, I would too if I lived with my folks and didn't have a mortgage to pay. But that's beside the point. TD arouses scorn because he presumes to know more and better than everyone, and he never admits when he's wrong. Sort of like our commander in chief.

I hope to heaven that UCLA gets knocked out early, so we can listen to TD's exclusive, point by point, analysis of why the greatest team on earth couldn't close the deal for a third consecutive year.

[TucsonDon]

Did you pull up the thread at the end of the season and call him out on it as you did to Arizona posters above?

So, you thought they were a little off at first, but decided not to say anything until later when you and your fellow UCLA fans could claim success?

First off, I actually did bump that thread from six months ago, something I never do, but I did it to give credit to an Arizona poster (whom I genuinely think is a bad poster) who accurately predicted a few things that would happen this season.

http://forum.goazcats.com/showthread.php?t=70049&page=4&

Again, I didn't pull up this thread we're in right now, didn't remember it existed but read through it and just posted the obvious point you found so objectionable.

As to your second question, its not 'claiming success.' I really wasn't involved with this thread before (aside from one or two posts which I made very mild predictions) and if you think I associate myself/take pride in the other UCLA posters on this site you're misinformed (that's why I'm here in the first place, so to speak)...and clearly missing the point I've been making here. I'm just as likely to call out a UCLA poster, a Carolina poster..etc...as I am to say something about an Arizona guy if I don't agree with what's being said. Just because (in general) the UCLA posters happened to be more accurate in their predictions in this particular thread than the UA posters is no source of pride for me, I can assure you. It was a simple point, an observation that I made. If there was a Duke/Carolina thread before the season and one of those groups was acting like a bunch of a-holes...and turned out to be wrong after the year, if someone else had bumped the thread I'd have made the same comment. You're barking up the wrong tree with this line of thinking.


I hope to heaven that UCLA gets knocked out early, so we can listen to TD's exclusive, point by point, analysis of why the greatest team on earth couldn't close the deal for a third consecutive year.
I've been saying all season I didn't think UCLA would even make the final four this year (although now with its incedible draw I can only see Connecticut getting in the way) let alone win it all.

Btw, BC, I'll see you out in Anaheim tomorrow, you bring the UCLA specialty mustard for the tailgate this time, okay?

[WayneNewton]

I've been saying all season I didn't think UCLA would even make the final four this year (although now with its incedible draw I can only see Connecticut getting in the way) let alone win it all.

You are surprised by this? This is one of the main reasons on why I thought they would win it at the beginning of the season.

Danny G certainly earns his pay... especially with his work on the selection committee.

[TucsonDon]

Well...the DG issue is a silly thing to say because you know he's not allowed to be in the room for that but UCLA's draw along with the bad calls at the end of the year make Bruin fans feel like there is some sort of destiny involved here. Personally, I'm somewhat pessimistic; think the Bruins used up their luck the last two seasons (not to mention those Berkeley/Stanford games at Pauley) and now they're THE target in this tournament, THE team everyone expects to at least get to San Antonio (even before the friendly draw). That's a lot to handle, IMO.

[TheCat]

I think you are a genuinely bad poster too TD who rarely predicts accurately.

[TheCat]

If Az. recieves some kind of miracle and makes it to PHX the place will ROCK. NOT LIKELY THOUGH.

[Phylek]

Arizona will go 40-0 while winning the PAC-10 Tournament, NCAA Championship, and win by an average margin of 30 points. For the Final Four Lute will call me and ask me to sit on the bench next to him to reward my loyal fandomness. The Hall of Fame will induct Lute a second time having made room by removing Mike Krysewisky(yeah it's spelled wrong). During Lute Olson's amazing season Dick Vitale becomes so enamored with Arizona that he finds himself never speaking about ACC teams unless he is actually calling an ACC game. At the very end of the season when we have the Cat's welcome home rally from the final four Jerryd, Chase and Jordan all announce they are coming back and Gilbert Arenas finds a loophole that will allow him to come back for his last two seasons.

I stand by my prediction. This is how it all plays out when I am sleeping.

[CBCat]

I stand by my prediction. This is how it all plays out when I am sleeping.

Love that post
classic

[Longhorned]

Ah, the night before we play Team Georgia is always a good time to sip warm camel's milk and predict Arizona's season. I see Lute taking an LOA and returning until it's all said and done. KO will coach a 9-3 pre-conference schedule and then an injury-ridden 8-10 finish in the conference. We'll be a 10-seed against WVU in the West bracket, and maybe I'll give you my tourney predictions before tip-off at 6:40 PM mountain time. By the way, it's not the milk that's warm. It's the camel! She stole my terry-cloth robe straight out of the hamper.

You're always there, Phylek.

[MrBug708]

I think you are a genuinely bad poster too TD who rarely predicts accurately.

This is what you call unintentional comedy

[TheCat]

Mr Bug get lost .....