Are you talking about the transfers? I think Collins and Caruso were pretty good.

Lance Uppercut said:

---

I don't get some of the posts. I thought the effort was plainly, visibly there for the entire game.

The tournament for me was a chance to see if we could compete with some good teams. The Virginia Tech comeback was really impressive, and against a coach that many would have preferred to have coaching our team. Flip the outcome of that game and we never would have heard the end of it until the end of the Kennedy era.

And today we have the announcers talking about how UCLA could be the best team in the Pac, a team that will likely be a high seed in the tournament, playing close to home and the Aggies took them down to the wire while holding them to 27 points under their season average. UCLA is better than all but a very small number of the games we play in conference, and if we can play with that kind of intensity, we should win a lot of SEC games and be back in the tournament.

I don't see that as being a "good enough" fan, it's just being realistic. The team lacks in guard play because of eligibility issues, and has 3 sophomores and some new guys building an identity after losing 80% of their starting lineup, senior leadership, and a vast portion of their scoring. I was impressed by the Virginia Tech comeback and the effort today. I would think the script for this year is to get better working up to conference and then win a lot of games there and get an above 8-9 seed for the tournament. The results of this tournament make me think that's very achievable.

---

With how Hogg was playing I wanted this line up.

The turnover when we were up 1 was lazy on both Hogg and Williams. If that isn't a turnover would have been interesting. The boys are starting to grow up.

This team deserves to be ranked on Monday.

Its hard to argue for Hogg after that howler, but no lineup where its Hampton instead of Hogg should be taken seriously. Even in this game Hampton only gets you the one three pointer, none of the hustle layups, none of the rebounds and even not the several assists Hogg had.

I think you'd probably agree I'm on the more negative side of the norm and you slightly on the positive (though I try to stay in my idea of fair).

With that, I completely agree with you. Yes we made mistakes. Yes Hogg was ice cold. Yes we could have upset a top 15 team. But we didn't execute well enough and came up a little short. The effort was there and there is a lot to learn from this game.

It's not a bad loss, and I hope we see them again in the ncaa's so our 5 seed team can upset their 4 seed in the 2nd round.

Lance Uppercut said:

---

I don't get some of the posts. I thought the effort was plainly, visibly there for the entire game.

The tournament for me was a chance to see if we could compete with some good teams. The Virginia Tech comeback was really impressive, and against a coach that many would have preferred to have coaching our team. Flip the outcome of that game and we never would have heard the end of it until the end of the Kennedy era.

And today we have the announcers talking about how UCLA could be the best team in the Pac, a team that will likely be a high seed in the tournament, playing close to home and the Aggies took them down to the wire while holding them to 27 points under their season average. UCLA is better than all but a very small number of the games we play in conference, and if we can play with that kind of intensity, we should win a lot of SEC games and be back in the tournament.

I don't see that as being a "good enough" fan, it's just being realistic. The team lacks in guard play because of eligibility issues, and has 3 sophomores and some new guys building an identity after losing 80% of their starting lineup, senior leadership, and a vast portion of their scoring. I was impressed by the Virginia Tech comeback and the effort today. I would think the script for this year is to get better working up to conference and then win a lot of games there and get an above 8-9 seed for the tournament. The results of this tournament make me think that's very achievable.

---

Ditto

Caruso was a make shift PG because, well, we didn't have another pint guard worth a darn. Caruso became default PG because he couldn't shoot nor create his own shot as a typical SG. he struggled against smaller quick PG and never really used his size as a PG to his advantage. he did many other things well like pass, defend, and probably had the best passing lane awareness of any aggie I can recall.
but again he was a forced by team make up PG. BK didn't recruit Alex to play point.

Collins was awful. that comment far fetched IMO.

free_mhayden said:

---

nanoDUDE said:

---

Happy with the way we played. Hogg is a streaky player. He will have nights like this. I still love what he brings to the table and feel good about him playing lots of minutes and jacking up a bunch of shots because when they start falling...watch out.

---

Being a streaky player is fine -- your shots not falling doesn't mean you can be lazy on defense and passing. Good players fine ways to help their team.

I'm guessing if we get any postgame talk from Kennedy we're gonna find that Hogg was under the weather. Still no excuse for lack of hustle plays.

---

He did throw some bad passes, that's true. I didn't see any lazy defending on Hogg's part, per se. I'm not sure why he was matched up on Ball as much as he was (when we were in man) - that's a really bad matchup for Hogg. Gilder is by far our best perimeter defender and gave Ball trouble when he was matched up on him at the beginning of the game. Kennedy probably switched defensive assignments after UCLA's other guard got hot in the 1st half.

the last three by Ball was lazy defense Hogg. way to soft guarding the three. has to trust his help on penetration since he knows he can't stop Balls drive. sagging way too far off.

Tough loss after a well played game. Hopefully you guys will forgive Hogg one awful game after his great start this season and before many games to come. No sense in piling on one of our best players

jml2621 said:

---

This team deserves to be ranked on Monday.

---

If only we had finished against USC, we probably would be.

Overall, they looked pretty good. Proud of them, they are going to do fine.

This is a tournament team no doubt. Now they have to pick up a few of these wins to ensure they have a tournament resume.

Fun game. Hogg had a bad night. 4/18 and a lazy lazy pass that gave the momentum right back to UCLA and they exploded to a 5 pt lead. Couldn't claw back with 1:30 left.

t - cam said:

---

This is a tournament team no doubt. Now they have to pick up a few of these wins to ensure they have a tournament resume.

---

Enjoyed the game and agree 100% that we looked like a tournament team this weekend. Tonight, I thought most of the players looked good, except Hogg. He took some bad shots and didn't look confident afterwards. Hopefully he gets over the hump- when he's on, we're pretty tough to beat.

agfan1030 said:

---

Lance Uppercut said:

---

I don't get some of the posts. I thought the effort was plainly, visibly there for the entire game.

The tournament for me was a chance to see if we could compete with some good teams. The Virginia Tech comeback was really impressive, and against a coach that many would have preferred to have coaching our team. Flip the outcome of that game and we never would have heard the end of it until the end of the Kennedy era.

And today we have the announcers talking about how UCLA could be the best team in the Pac, a team that will likely be a high seed in the tournament, playing close to home and the Aggies took them down to the wire while holding them to 27 points under their season average. UCLA is better than all but a very small number of the games we play in conference, and if we can play with that kind of intensity, we should win a lot of SEC games and be back in the tournament.

I don't see that as being a "good enough" fan, it's just being realistic. The team lacks in guard play because of eligibility issues, and has 3 sophomores and some new guys building an identity after losing 80% of their starting lineup, senior leadership, and a vast portion of their scoring. I was impressed by the Virginia Tech comeback and the effort today. I would think the script for this year is to get better working up to conference and then win a lot of games there and get an above 8-9 seed for the tournament. The results of this tournament make me think that's very achievable.

---

---

Yessir

Team played pretty good, and if Hogg hits at even close to his normal FG% on all those good looks, who knows how the game plays out. The color commentator was ****ing atrocious, really ruined the game for me.

I will say my biggest negative, and it will be until we change coaches or go to a guard oriented team, is we have NO ****ING CLUE how to play around a good post. Davis will be setting up, and we'll have hampton just lazily jog past him then sit in the corner about 5 ft away from him. WTF is he thinking, you just closed off a ton of room for Davis to work in and allowed a free double team and made the entry pass more difficult.
Or he or williams will set a screen for the other, and that guy will start to post up and the guards just swing the ball lazily to the other side.

Just go back and watch some of the game, we are attempting an entry pass from the wing to the post, with 3 of us almost within arms reach of each other.

UCLA is a good team, but I still think we aren't anywhere playing anywhere near as good as this team can

Frustrating that Gilder has the two mistakes at the end, after being one of the main reasons we were there at the end.

Morpholino said:

---

Tough loss but the Ags showed improvement in play in this tournament compared to the first few games. They still have things to work on but overall things are looking encouraging.

---

And ultimately thats why these tournaments are invaluable, as we go back to playing the sisters of the poor before SEC play. Getting Williams minutes in that environment is great, and some of our returning players minutes in new roles.

I don't think we are gonna see Hogg miss that many good looks again all year.

Agreed Pat Ag. On all of it.

before it seems like I'm being overly negative, I just assumed we covered all the good stuff we did. We made several good adjustments throughout the game. I would also say, most of the good looks Hogg was getting was due to good ball movement and off the ball movement, which is definitely good coaching.

Maybe college kids just aren't up to consistently executing entry passes and being oriented around post play overall, I dunno.

It was a well-played game. You could argue that they won on experience. Or that we could use better guard play. The game was worth watching every second. The ending wasn't particularly surprising. We might have a late lottery pick. They have an early lottery pick. And Bryce is pretty good, too.

TST said:

---

Collins was awful. that comment far fetched IMO.

---

Collins was not even close to "awful". He played excellent defense, hit every three and every free throw he ever took practically, and ran the offense very well. He'd have an occasional mental lapse here and there and let it affect him a couple of games but he was more than serviceable and helluva lot better than what we have now.

Moral victories are ok in basketball

Sid Farkas said:

---

Moral victories are ok in basketball

---

Especially in November.

Quote:

---

t won't always be Showtime for this incarnation of the UCLA Bruins. Not all fastbreaks and deft passes.

There will be days like Sunday, when the game is more a struggle and the opponent has little interest in letting the Bruins run wild to some flashy highlight reel.

---

http://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/la-sp-ucla-basketball-20161127-story.html

""I thought we had some bad possessions offensively, but a lot of that had to do with UCLA," Kennedy said. "I was really impressed with their poise on the perimeter. We had a hard time guarding those guys."

wonder why

PatAg said:

---

""I thought we had some bad possessions offensively, but a lot of that had to do with UCLA," Kennedy said. "I was really impressed with their poise on the perimeter. We had a hard time guarding those guys."

wonder why

---

Because they have a freshman guard that will be in the NBA next year.

Bondag said:

---

PatAg said:

---

""I thought we had some bad possessions offensively, but a lot of that had to do with UCLA," Kennedy said. "I was really impressed with their poise on the perimeter. We had a hard time guarding those guys."

wonder why

---

Because they have a freshman guard that will be in the NBA next year.

---

I was thinking it also had something to do with us only having one D1 caliber guard on the team, but playing 2-3 others at times.

Their guard was pretty awesome too, hard to believe he airballed two 3's earlier in the game.