Men's Basketball: USC Crushes Cal, 97-60

Cal's strategic choices were sound - but none of it mattered

Photo courtesy Rob Hwang

This year’s Cal team has had games where their defense has been good enough to win, but their offense has not generated nearly enough points. In the Cal/USC game from November 30th, I wrote that if Cal shoots their season average, their 15-point loss may have been a tossup game. Thursday night, Cal’s defense was entirely ineffective. Compare the combined statlines of USC’s star duo of Boogie Ellis and Drew Peterson;

• November 30th, 20 total points on 7/16 shooting

• February 16th, 52 total points on 15/27 shooting (plus 13 rebounds)

Coming off a road sweep at the Oregon schools, USC worked out their frustrations against an overmatched Cal squad. Leading 50-23 at halftime, Ellis and Peterson still played 27 minutes in the second half. The crowd, the courtside DJ, the Fox Sports TV announcers, even our internal WriteforCal group chat were all expecting USC to try to reach 100 points. USC did not let up until there was under 90 seconds left to play.

In the first matchup, USC’s bigman Joshua Morgan dominated the paint, and made Lars a nonfactor. He did not play Thursday due to injury. Cal’s strategy at the beginning was to forcefeed the ball to Lars in the low post, and to see if he could find success against USC’s freshman 7-footer Vincent Iwuchukwu. With Cal’s DeJuan Clayton not available, going inside for scoring is a reasonable strategy. Here is Cal’s first 11 possessions of the game.

1. Lars gets the ball in the low post, rushes a somewhat difficult shot. Miss. (OK decision, poor execution)

2. Lars gets the inlet pass in midrange, dribbles towards the basket while well defended. Takes a difficult shot. Miss. (poor decision)

3. Kuany dribble-drive towards the basket. Defense collapses on him in low post. Cannot make an outlet pass. Turnover.(OK decision, poor execution)

4. Lars gets the ball in the low post. Holds the ball for over 4 seconds. Attempts to dribble and rotate towards basket, but fumbles the ball and turns it over. (poor decision, poor execution)

5. Lars gets the ball in the low post. Travels while attempting to pivot towards basket. Turnover. (poor decision, poor execution)

6. Monty Bowser long jumper. Miss. (OK decision, OK execution -just missed)

7. Joel Brown drive to the basket in desperation as the shot clock expires. Turnover. (poor execution to get to that point in the shot clock)

8. ND Okafor gets the entry pass, is double-teamed. Attempts a difficult shot. Miss. (not a horrible decision, but high degree of difficulty)

9. Grant Newell gets the offensive rebound, but misses the putback (OK decision, OK execution - just missed)

10. Bowser long jumper. Miss. At this point, Cal is 0/7, with 4 turnovers. (OK decision, just missed the shot)

11. ND Okafor jumper from the free throw line. Made. Cal is on the board.

As stated earlier, the interior offensive focus is a reasonable strategy. Cal was stubborn with it early on. USC was quick to react in the paint, with help defense collapsing on the slower Cal players. Monty Bowser and Grant Newell have been Cal’s best players the last few games. Bowser’s shots were both curls off high screens and were reasonable shots. Besides the offensive rebound in #9, Grant Newell did not get a shot attempt until 8 minutes into the game.

On the defensive side, Cal played zone defense for much of the game. As a strategy, zone defense takes the pressure off individual defenders, and protects slower players from bad matchups. Plus, it lessens the risk of foul trouble, and it requires less intensity over man-to-man defense. It is a reasonable strategy for an injury-filled roster that is lacking in high-end athletes.

The best way to beat a zone defense? Shooting and cutting. USC’s shooters used what space was given them. Drew Peterson was a consistent attacker from the outside, going through the soft spots in the zone. For the game, USC shot 59% on field goal attempts, including 53% from 3-point range.

In summary, Cal’s strategies coming into the game were entirely reasonable given the roster makeup and individual matchups. None of it worked. USC did not beat Cal because of Cal’s strategy. USC beat Cal because they are a better-coached team of superior athletes - and Cal had no way to compensate.

My individual frustration is due to Cal rarely trying anything different. It’s the same thing over and over again, like Lars getting 4 of Cal’s first 5 looks on the offensive end. In Saturday’s loss to Arizona State, Cal employed a small-ball lineup for 16 of the possible 45 minutes. In the last 5:04 of regulation, a lineup of Joel Brown, Sam Alijiki, DeJuan Clayton, Kuany Kuany and Devin Askew outscored ASU 12-8 to force overtime. Coach Mark Fox played the entire 5-minute overtime period with the same lineup, and never once subbed in Lars Theimann or ND Okafor. Cal was outscored in the OT period 13-4, and lost 70-62.

Cal going small-ball for the last 10 minutes of that game gave me a bit of optimism. It showed some flexibility from the coaching staff. The last 5 minutes of regulation were visually pleasing basketball. The energy level was high, the players were active and decisive with their actions and decisions. It was fun to watch. I could argue that in OT, bringing in a big man may have helped, but I don’t fault Fox for sticking with the lineup that got the game to OT in the first place.

On the defensive side, Cal never makes it uncomfortable for the opposing team. Casey Jacobsen was the first TV announcer I’ve heard all year make this assessment, though we’ve been talking about it for awhile in our discussion threads. Cal does not pressure the ball handler as they bring it upcourt, so opponents are free to run their offense. Cal does not try to trap in the frontcourt, as the help defense typically plays back to try to prevent driving or secondary action. Except Cal is too slow as a team, and cutting action typically is still successful. Cal is sometimes slow to get into position on the defensive end, and has been caught flat-footed when teams enter attack mode as they cross halfcourt. For a defensive specialist, Coach Fox is not showing any creativity, or reaching into the proverbial bag of tricks, to try to change the outcome.

I am aware that I am coming across as a grumpy old man, yelling “Try something different” to the clouds. I know it’s not as simple as that. The injuries and roster composition make systemic changes a challenge. But in a lost season, I am looking for something that shows the coaching staff is willing to take risks to see if the outcome is any different. Against USC, it was the same thing for the entire game - and it was wholly depressing.