Afterword
UCLA made shots. Kansas missed shots.
I haven’t gone back and watched the game again to determine the relative approximate cause (bad Kansas offense vs. good UCLA defense) of the second sentence above. I probably won’t. In a box in a closet in my house there sits an unwatched tape of the 2002 National Semifinal, procured with the intention of charting Maryland’s relative success against Kansas’s man-to-man defense vs. Kansas’s “point zone.”
At least in the first half, Kansas missed shots they did a good job of creating. I believe that the quality and ease of shot that Kansas created declined as the game progressed.
Much of my writing here this season has depended on parsing final box scores in search meaning. I hope I have always remembered that those final numbers derive, in great part, from the effect of individual plays and brief sequences within the games. Because I am a Kansas fan and because Kansas lost, I cannot but wonder how the game would have played out if Kansas had converted some of their early opportunities, allowing them to trade blows with the Bruins for 40 minutes rather than attempting a desperate comeback over the final 13 minutes.
Because I am a Kansas fan and because Kansas lost, I focus not only on Kansas’s improbable misses, but also on UCLA’s improbable makes. This despite full knowledge that the inverse of both those descriptions most likely occurred. (The likelihood of Russell Robinson making both of his three-point attempts is about 11%.)
The inescapable fact of the game, the truth that catches wouldas, couldas, and shouldas in the throat, is this: UCLA won because they made shots that Kansas forced them into taking. Arron Aflalo’s contributions in this regard were most frequent and impressive. Darren Collison’s 23-foot heave over two Jayhawks as the shot clock expired elicited a pained, purely animalistic vocal response from me at the time. In my calmer moments and upon reflection I try to see the almost pure good fortune of the Bruins in that instance as another partial karmic payback for Clint Normore’s less-contested, but similarly deep, desperate, and successful three-point make in Kemper Arena in 1988. Perhaps Collison’s shot will prove to be the one that balances the books as we prepare for the twentieth anniversary of certain charmed events I would very much enjoy seeing replicated.
I had little doubt that UCLA was capable of beating Kansas. I only wish that the Jayhawks had given a better account of themselves with the ball in their hands. As a Kansas fan, though, I’ve experienced far worse ends to a season.
I have been cognizant of the last 24 trips Kansas has made to the NCAA Tournament. 23 of those trips have ended with a loss. 21* or 22** of those losses have been moderately to paralyzingly unpleasant. Even two days later it’s a cold comfort, but I’ve seen worse.
*(The certain exception to unpleasantness: The 1995 loss to Virginia in the Sweet 16 was foreseen by me from the moment the brackets were announced and I knew the ‘95 team would return intact (and add Paul Pierce) for 1996. Unfortunately, they returned to lose to Syracuse in the worst-played Regional Final I have ever witnessed and cause the quietest two-and-a-half drive (factoring in number of people in the vehicle) I’ve ever been a part of on the return to Atlanta from Birmingham on the night of March 21st, 1997.)
**(A possible second exception to unpleasantness: The 1994 loss to Purdue in the Sweet 16. The supposition that Kansas had no one who could hope to guard Glenn Robinson proved extraordinarily true. The revelation that, if Kansas had found someone to guard Cuonzo Martin, Robinson’s brilliance might not have been enough for Purdue to advance casts a retrospective pall of what-if over the game.)
* Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments
4 Responses to “Afterword”
Leave a Reply
Comment Policy:Be polite.You must be logged in to post a comment.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
We all put extra pressure on this team this year, given the last two years’ performances. Have heart. If this was 2 years ago, we’d be okay with the Elite 8. So it took us a while to get here with Self’s recruits. But if we let the pressure off a bit, and take this as a victory, I think we’ll be fine. We grew up more this season, and we have a good staggering of classes now, and I think Self coached better this year, despite a few mistakes this last game (ie. 1/1 3pt 1st half, Darnell and Sasha riding pine, Juju flailing and not getting pulled). We need to love Self even for his mistakes, and he’ll relax and be the same coach in the post season that he is in the regular season. We just didn’t play our game, and neither did Self. But thank God we’ve got game to begin with to afford to say that.
March 27th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
i’m wondering what kind of recriminations –if any — about Self’s coaching people closer to the source of KU basketball are hearing. bilas made the point during the game that KU was getting nothing out of their ball screens except a lot of bad turnovers, but self didn’t switch the offensive set at all. i don’t think this is necessarily a bad coaching move — it’s not like they can run something different in a late-season game that they haven’t run all year. still, post-season basketball at any level is about adjustments, and Self didn’t seem to make any in this game.
anyone else have any thoughts?
March 28th, 2007 at 11:30 am
I agree nychawk.
He benched Kaun when I thought he was doing well in the first half. He did not use Darnell as much as he could have either, despite also playing well.
Instead, he played Julian though he was totally out of control. He played Sherron a lot though he was offensively non-existant, then later admitted that Sherron was hurt.
The penetrate and kick wasnt working, at least not right down the lane every possession. I don’t think this was only because the guards penetrated too deeply, it was just in general, the play was obviously familiar to the UCLA defense.
We shot 1/1 from 3 point land in the first half? Is that right? Either way, why didn’t we shoot the 3? Several times Mario got open looks and didn’t cash in. In the 2nd half they extended their half court defense, and those opportunities weren’t there as much.
I don’t want to speak ill of Self, but I hope he continues to learn from his mistakes… It’s both endearing and sad to see Self redfaced and tightjawed in our post-season losses the last few years. He is getting better at adjustments during the regular season; I wouldn’t trade Self for any other coach in the world in terms of everything before the tournament. But he gets tight in the tourney, and I hope that he can learn to adjust to 6 good teams in quick succession. Its a mentality that he needs to overcome, and unfortunately, mentalities are tough things to change. He needs to be able to adjust better.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
approxinfinity raises a good point: when you think about it, Self’s still a relatively young coach, despite his previous tournament experience. true, roy made more final fours early in his career, but it took him awhile to get over the hump — and even then, he basically did it with dougherty’s team. and watching UNC’s epic collapse against georgetown just reinforces how much luck is involved in winning in the tournament. for a team with as many good players as UNC to go 1 for their last 23 defies any other explanation but bad luck.
ironically, the UNC fan’s day-after feeling is the same as the KU fan’s: it just wasn’t our day.
bottom line, i think Self’s proven ability to bring in talent far outweighs any possible problems with his in-game decision-making. in college BB, talent wins more games than coaching ability. just ask bobby knight and mike krzyzewski. not too many championships between those two since the talent started deserting them.
the last two years KU’s had as much talent as just about any other team. now if we can just get the right combination of talent and experience, i think any questions about Self’s coaching ability will be definitively put to rest.