Well, this is a happier post to write, eh?
I wrote in my post on the UCLA game, and it is worth repeating here: THIS is the team many of us THOUGHT we would be seeing this season. Though RU beat Nebraska a little bit differently than they beat UCLA, still, the last 2 games are the recipe for success ... if it can be sustained (only a 2-game sample size). The Harper illness, which happens (illnesses or injuries happen) particularly hurt, and potentially cost RU 1 or both of the Indiana and Wisconsin games, IMO - and since RU has those 2 bad losses on its resume, losing opportunities like Indiana and Wisconsin really shrinks RU's margin of error more.
Before the game comments, an FYI: It is NOT unheard of for teams in the Big 10 to go on runs of winning streaks. Some examples include NON-top 25 teams with "surprising winning streaks that carried them into the NCAA, out of nowhere:
1) Penn St., 2022-23: Won 5 of their last 6 regular season games and 3 in the Big 10 tourney (so 8 of 10) ... 22-13 before the NCAA. However, no "bad" losses, I'll admit.
2) Northwestern, 2022-23: Won 6 straight in February, and 9 of 11 from late January into February (did stumble at the end) - and again, I'll admit, no bad losses.
3) Maryland, 2020-21: Got into the NCAA with a 15-12 regular season record, 1-1 in the Big 10 tourney for a 16-13 record ... won 6 games in a row towards the end of the season.
4) Maryland, 2022-23: Even more appropo, than Maryland of 2 years prior ... From January 25, won 8 of the next 10 games before losing their last 2, to finish 20-11 regular season.
My point is Big 10 teams CAN go on real winning runs, even if they are not Top 25 teams - and those runs CAN carry teams into the NCAA.
To the game ... so RU won, playing a terrific game, generally. Against UCLA, RU won with Bailey playing GREAT all around, Harper playing well (but not at the top of his potential game - but very well, generally), with primary complementary contributors being J. Williams (11 points on excellent shooting) and Sommerville (great rebounding), with a little J. Davis defense and FT's mixed in. Grant gave great energy and Ogbole was solid. In THIS game, RU had the same rough formula: Bailey and Harper leading (both playing well - Bailey simply outstanding, and Harper also, Harper performing better than against UCLA), and with several complementary players stepping up - but DIFFERENT complementary players. In this game the major complimentary players were Grant (more later - he was fantastic), Martini (where did THAT come from - more later) ... and Ogbole rebounding and Williams play-making. Pre-season and throughout I have been saying RU must have 2-3 complementary players step up every game - but they did not have to eb the SAME players each game.
Game Observations:
1) Offense: Got to lead here. IMO this was the most "connected" RU has been on offense all season (except MAYBE the Columbia game - but Nebraska is much better than Columbia, and this was on the road - so no real comparison). Ru was moving the ball by pass - and by driving and kicking. They had screens - which the players used effectively. RU had spacing - and by the 2nd half in particular had really figured out how to use Nebraska's short corner and post and in the paint (on drives) traps against Nebraska by putting TWO shooters on the wing and corner opposite to the trap, resulting in 1 Nebraska player to cover 2 shooters at the 3-pont line, spaced - and then skipping the pass to the wing for either an open shot there, or a quick swing from the wing to the corner for an open shot. Bailey did this several times (because of his height, he could easily make the pass). Williams also passed well after driving and drawing traps. RU shot 49% from the field against a team with a pretty solid defense on the road ... with mostly good shots. RU helped itself by hitting 41% of its 3's - on 29 3's (43%) of its shots, versus a usual average of 35% before this game). Those were the shots Nebraska was giving up ... RU hit 12 3's ... but many were either non-contested, or in Grant's and Bailey's cases, with their elevation, relatively open. RU also got 17 offensive rebounds (8 combined by Ogbole and Bailey, Williams had 3 and Grant had 2) ... 50% of RU's missed FG's. Unfortunately, the FT shooting was ... hurtful, shall we say ... missed 2 front ends of 1 and 1's, and Harper just 2=5 FT ... sigh. Still, 16 assists on 33 FG's and just 8 TO (Nebraska came into the game forcing 14 TO's per game). Bailey and Harper were very efficient, despite their volume of shiots. Grant was amazing (2 FG's off offensive rebounds, 1 alley-oop slam, other nice shots and 1-1 from 3). And Martini finally hit some open 3's - 3-4 ... plus a hustle lay-up off a scramble. And Williams, though he was just 1-5 from 3, was really good at play-making, really driving into the paint and kicking out for either open shots or forcing Nebraska to scramble so RU got open shots on the 2nd or 3rd passes (3 assists and 0 TO's).
2) Defense: So ... it was a good thing RU's offense was so good, because RU needed it all. Actually, despite Greene's analysis (I cannot dispute the NUMBERS), I thought RU played pretty good defnse. But there is no doubt the RESULTING defensive stats were much better against UCLA than against Nebraska. Now, one factor could be home vs road. Another factor might be that Nebraska has a 1st or 2nd team caliber offensive star in Brice Williams (so tougher to stop) ... a number of times RU's defender was practically in Williams' shorts, but he was able to elevate over the defender anyway and make the shot (like Bailey does) - I counted at least 3 or 4 made FG's with Davis or J. Williams sticking tightly to Br. Williams, and even hands up, that Brice Williams elevated and made the shot anyway. Si that bad defense, or simply ... a great player making a shot? Also, Greene's analysis mainly goes ot points versus number of possessions ... and you cannot deny his math. A part of that math was that Nebraska got 19 offensive rebounds - which is a lot to give up (and goes against the defensive stats - as it should). Still, RU had 6 blocked shots, EACH of which went out of bounds for team offensive rebounds ... usually at least SOME blocked shots end up with the defending team (like fumbles in football) - luck had it 0-6 RU gaining possession after a blocked shot. Also, one factor working against RU's defensive points per possession was the FT differential. True, Nebraska missed more FT's than normal (10), shooting just 63% (versus a season average of 76%). But they got 27 FT's on 20 RU fouls (FYI, RU has averaged committing 16.5 fouls per game) ... RU averages giving up about 1 FT attempt per foul on the season across 18 games ... in this game RU gave up 1.35 FT's per foul. If averages had held, Nebraska might have had 20-22 FT's, nit 27. For perspective, RU averages about 1.1 FT attempted per foul their opponents commit against RU ... and in this game RU got less than 1 FT per Nebraska foul (hurt by missing the front ends of 2 one and one tries. In the end, for whatever reason, Nebraska attempted 2X the FT's RU attempted. But RU also fouled the "right" guys ... Brice Williams, a 91% FT shooter, who averages almost 7 FT per game (almost twice as many as the next most by a Nebraska player) only got 2 FT ... and 3 of the worst Nebraska FT shooter got 7 FT (1-7). Finally, RU DID hold Nebraska to 45% FG, and was particularly good FG% defense in the 1st half.
3) Rebounding: Covered a bit in the "defense" section. RU did much better against UCLA, outrebounding a good rebounding UCLA team by a fairly wide margin. RU did not quite as well against Nebraska, also a good rebounding team.. BUT RU DID at least hold their own (thank you Bailey, Ogbole and Harper), and definitely helped themselves with their own offensive rebounding effort. RU scored 19 points on 17 offensive rebounds (versus Nebraska's slightly better 25 points on 19 offensive rebounds) - contrast to the UCLA game (gave up 8 2nd chance points on 10 UCLA offensive rebounds, while RU had 10 points on 11 offensive rebounds; and vs similar ratios vs Purdue, but awful rates versus Wisconsin - RU just 6 2nd chance points on 18 offensive rebounds ... how bad is that?, and giving up 34 2nd chance points on 18 offensive rebounds vs Indiana). As said above ... RU used a slightly different formula to beat Nebraska (a team with different strengths and weaknesses than UCLA) than it did to beat UCLA -.
Players:
1) Bailey: Wow ... another excellent game. I think he has taken it personally the national article criticizing him several weeks ago. Offensively efficient (8-16 FG, 4-7 3-point), another double double, 4 more assists, 3 more blocked shots and the steal of the game. I may do a separate thread on this, but Bailey now has an assist in 4 consecutive games, 8 in those 4 games, and at least 1 blocked shot in 7 consecutive games - and 9 of 10 - with 16 blocked shots in those 7 games. For perspective, Bailey now has 23 blocked shots in 16 games on the season to Cooper Flagg's 20 blocked shots in 17 games ... jus saying. Bailey also has had at least 7 rebounds in every game since the Texas A& M game, 11 consecutive games with at least 7 or more rebounds each game, averaging 9.3 rebounds per game in those 11 straight games (along with 20 ppg). He also has steals in 6 consecutive games. Bailey also has 8 turnovers in the last 6 games - reduced from a stretch of 6 games with 21 turnovers (3 or 4 in each game) - from Texas A&M through the Princeton game - and only 4 assists!. Since the Princeton game Bailey has 9 assists and 8 turnovers -0 a sharp improvement. Oh yeah, one more thing: Pikiell had Bailey defend against Nebraska's PG Worster most of the 2nd half - from at least the 17-18 minute mark (i.e. after Nebraska opened 8-0, and RU called a time out) - and did a really good job using his length and height to limit Worster to 0-2 FG in the 2nd half, and to limit his dribble drive penetration. I thought that was one of Pikiell's key adjustments.
2) Harper: It looks like he finally may be 100% again ... a very fine game (still a couple more turnovers than I would like). Still, 3 assists and just 1 turnover in the 2nd half. His ridiculous patented drives splitting the double team and unstoppable weave to the basket to "seemingly" easily finish. Good 3-point shooting. Solid rebounding. Solid defense. He's BACK!
3) Grant: Has to be next ... a career game. We cannot expect this every game of course (7-8 FG?) But almost all good shots ... unlike Martini (and somewhat similar to Bailey - though obviously not quite as athletic) he can get off his 3-point shot with a defender coming at him, in his face - because of his elevation and quick release. 2 huge offensive rebounds, with 1 being a tip-in and the other a lay-up or dunk. An alley-oop dunk. A mid-range FG. A 3-point FG. Solid, switching defense. A blocked shot. Tons of athletic energy.
4) Sommerville/Acuff - not much provided beneficial to the team except minutes (14 from Sommerville, 8 for Acuff). Acuff was 0-2 3-pointere ... and was not as good defensively as he had been against UCLA (solid vs UCLA). Sommerville ... 4 fouls and 0 rebounds in 14 minutes - not great defense .. did have a nice lay-up off a Harper assist. Sommerville was terrific vs UCAL, and WILL be terrific - or even solid - in future games. This was not one of them.
5) J. Williams: I thought he played very well. He was a bit overmatched one on one vs Brice Williams (when Williams was in during the 2nd half he generally covered Brice Williams) - Williams was just too tall and shot right over J. Williams. But otherwise I thought J. Williams had a fine game. Yes he was 1-5 from 3 - and some say he should not have taken so many if he is going to miss ... Well, I guess that is sort of true - but he was WIDE open on all of them, and except for one that was an NBA 3, I think he HAD to take the other 4 - otherwise the offense would be completely stagnant. His playmaking was excellent: 3 assists and 0 turnovers, many times successfully passing out of the traffic in the paint after dribble drive penetration, leading to more baskets than just those he directly assisted on.
6) Martini: FINALLY ... he has to play when he is making 3's like that ... and he also was at least solid on defense (he will never be a great defender, but vs Nebraska he was at least respectable. THIS was the Martini Pikiell signed up for, mostly. Several hustle plays, including an offensive rebound and lay-up off a scramble. I am not foolish enough to expect this every game. But the fact he was at least okay vs UCLA and very solid to better than solid in this game, offers some hope. Martini had been 3-15 in the 10 games going into UCLA, and is now 5-8 his last 2 games, moving his seasonal 3-point FG% from 33% to almost 40% - where RU needs it.
7) Ogbole: Terrific game, despite just 2 points and his missed FT's (including a front end of a crucial one and one). He was a real force on the backboard: 1 rebounds, 4 offensive. He did well, and played 24 minutes as a result, including in the end game. He is up to 4.2 rpg - including 30 offensive rebounds (tied with Bailey for the most on the team). he is shooting 64% FG ... and yes, just 57% from the FT line (had been over 60% prior to his 0-2 this game). There will be games where Sommerville plays better and deservedly gets more minutes. This game Ogbole earned the minutes.
8) J. Davis and Derkack: Davis forced his offense a little - not huge, but a bit ... and was 0-4 FG. But was fine defensively for the most part (not as good as versus UCAL or some other games, but at least okay) ... and had 2 assists to 0 turnovers (a good thing). Davis is up to 30 assists versus just 11 turnovers on the season. Derkack got a taste, after a DNP vs UCLA ... and was Derkack: In just 9 minutes, an energizer bunny3 rebounds, a put back basket after his own miss - and the FT when he was fouled ... but only so-so defense, frankly. No turnovers (good).He will get chances for more extended minutes in games if he shows he is productive during that individual game.
I wrote in my post on the UCLA game, and it is worth repeating here: THIS is the team many of us THOUGHT we would be seeing this season. Though RU beat Nebraska a little bit differently than they beat UCLA, still, the last 2 games are the recipe for success ... if it can be sustained (only a 2-game sample size). The Harper illness, which happens (illnesses or injuries happen) particularly hurt, and potentially cost RU 1 or both of the Indiana and Wisconsin games, IMO - and since RU has those 2 bad losses on its resume, losing opportunities like Indiana and Wisconsin really shrinks RU's margin of error more.
Before the game comments, an FYI: It is NOT unheard of for teams in the Big 10 to go on runs of winning streaks. Some examples include NON-top 25 teams with "surprising winning streaks that carried them into the NCAA, out of nowhere:
1) Penn St., 2022-23: Won 5 of their last 6 regular season games and 3 in the Big 10 tourney (so 8 of 10) ... 22-13 before the NCAA. However, no "bad" losses, I'll admit.
2) Northwestern, 2022-23: Won 6 straight in February, and 9 of 11 from late January into February (did stumble at the end) - and again, I'll admit, no bad losses.
3) Maryland, 2020-21: Got into the NCAA with a 15-12 regular season record, 1-1 in the Big 10 tourney for a 16-13 record ... won 6 games in a row towards the end of the season.
4) Maryland, 2022-23: Even more appropo, than Maryland of 2 years prior ... From January 25, won 8 of the next 10 games before losing their last 2, to finish 20-11 regular season.
My point is Big 10 teams CAN go on real winning runs, even if they are not Top 25 teams - and those runs CAN carry teams into the NCAA.
To the game ... so RU won, playing a terrific game, generally. Against UCLA, RU won with Bailey playing GREAT all around, Harper playing well (but not at the top of his potential game - but very well, generally), with primary complementary contributors being J. Williams (11 points on excellent shooting) and Sommerville (great rebounding), with a little J. Davis defense and FT's mixed in. Grant gave great energy and Ogbole was solid. In THIS game, RU had the same rough formula: Bailey and Harper leading (both playing well - Bailey simply outstanding, and Harper also, Harper performing better than against UCLA), and with several complementary players stepping up - but DIFFERENT complementary players. In this game the major complimentary players were Grant (more later - he was fantastic), Martini (where did THAT come from - more later) ... and Ogbole rebounding and Williams play-making. Pre-season and throughout I have been saying RU must have 2-3 complementary players step up every game - but they did not have to eb the SAME players each game.
Game Observations:
1) Offense: Got to lead here. IMO this was the most "connected" RU has been on offense all season (except MAYBE the Columbia game - but Nebraska is much better than Columbia, and this was on the road - so no real comparison). Ru was moving the ball by pass - and by driving and kicking. They had screens - which the players used effectively. RU had spacing - and by the 2nd half in particular had really figured out how to use Nebraska's short corner and post and in the paint (on drives) traps against Nebraska by putting TWO shooters on the wing and corner opposite to the trap, resulting in 1 Nebraska player to cover 2 shooters at the 3-pont line, spaced - and then skipping the pass to the wing for either an open shot there, or a quick swing from the wing to the corner for an open shot. Bailey did this several times (because of his height, he could easily make the pass). Williams also passed well after driving and drawing traps. RU shot 49% from the field against a team with a pretty solid defense on the road ... with mostly good shots. RU helped itself by hitting 41% of its 3's - on 29 3's (43%) of its shots, versus a usual average of 35% before this game). Those were the shots Nebraska was giving up ... RU hit 12 3's ... but many were either non-contested, or in Grant's and Bailey's cases, with their elevation, relatively open. RU also got 17 offensive rebounds (8 combined by Ogbole and Bailey, Williams had 3 and Grant had 2) ... 50% of RU's missed FG's. Unfortunately, the FT shooting was ... hurtful, shall we say ... missed 2 front ends of 1 and 1's, and Harper just 2=5 FT ... sigh. Still, 16 assists on 33 FG's and just 8 TO (Nebraska came into the game forcing 14 TO's per game). Bailey and Harper were very efficient, despite their volume of shiots. Grant was amazing (2 FG's off offensive rebounds, 1 alley-oop slam, other nice shots and 1-1 from 3). And Martini finally hit some open 3's - 3-4 ... plus a hustle lay-up off a scramble. And Williams, though he was just 1-5 from 3, was really good at play-making, really driving into the paint and kicking out for either open shots or forcing Nebraska to scramble so RU got open shots on the 2nd or 3rd passes (3 assists and 0 TO's).
2) Defense: So ... it was a good thing RU's offense was so good, because RU needed it all. Actually, despite Greene's analysis (I cannot dispute the NUMBERS), I thought RU played pretty good defnse. But there is no doubt the RESULTING defensive stats were much better against UCLA than against Nebraska. Now, one factor could be home vs road. Another factor might be that Nebraska has a 1st or 2nd team caliber offensive star in Brice Williams (so tougher to stop) ... a number of times RU's defender was practically in Williams' shorts, but he was able to elevate over the defender anyway and make the shot (like Bailey does) - I counted at least 3 or 4 made FG's with Davis or J. Williams sticking tightly to Br. Williams, and even hands up, that Brice Williams elevated and made the shot anyway. Si that bad defense, or simply ... a great player making a shot? Also, Greene's analysis mainly goes ot points versus number of possessions ... and you cannot deny his math. A part of that math was that Nebraska got 19 offensive rebounds - which is a lot to give up (and goes against the defensive stats - as it should). Still, RU had 6 blocked shots, EACH of which went out of bounds for team offensive rebounds ... usually at least SOME blocked shots end up with the defending team (like fumbles in football) - luck had it 0-6 RU gaining possession after a blocked shot. Also, one factor working against RU's defensive points per possession was the FT differential. True, Nebraska missed more FT's than normal (10), shooting just 63% (versus a season average of 76%). But they got 27 FT's on 20 RU fouls (FYI, RU has averaged committing 16.5 fouls per game) ... RU averages giving up about 1 FT attempt per foul on the season across 18 games ... in this game RU gave up 1.35 FT's per foul. If averages had held, Nebraska might have had 20-22 FT's, nit 27. For perspective, RU averages about 1.1 FT attempted per foul their opponents commit against RU ... and in this game RU got less than 1 FT per Nebraska foul (hurt by missing the front ends of 2 one and one tries. In the end, for whatever reason, Nebraska attempted 2X the FT's RU attempted. But RU also fouled the "right" guys ... Brice Williams, a 91% FT shooter, who averages almost 7 FT per game (almost twice as many as the next most by a Nebraska player) only got 2 FT ... and 3 of the worst Nebraska FT shooter got 7 FT (1-7). Finally, RU DID hold Nebraska to 45% FG, and was particularly good FG% defense in the 1st half.
3) Rebounding: Covered a bit in the "defense" section. RU did much better against UCLA, outrebounding a good rebounding UCLA team by a fairly wide margin. RU did not quite as well against Nebraska, also a good rebounding team.. BUT RU DID at least hold their own (thank you Bailey, Ogbole and Harper), and definitely helped themselves with their own offensive rebounding effort. RU scored 19 points on 17 offensive rebounds (versus Nebraska's slightly better 25 points on 19 offensive rebounds) - contrast to the UCLA game (gave up 8 2nd chance points on 10 UCLA offensive rebounds, while RU had 10 points on 11 offensive rebounds; and vs similar ratios vs Purdue, but awful rates versus Wisconsin - RU just 6 2nd chance points on 18 offensive rebounds ... how bad is that?, and giving up 34 2nd chance points on 18 offensive rebounds vs Indiana). As said above ... RU used a slightly different formula to beat Nebraska (a team with different strengths and weaknesses than UCLA) than it did to beat UCLA -.
Players:
1) Bailey: Wow ... another excellent game. I think he has taken it personally the national article criticizing him several weeks ago. Offensively efficient (8-16 FG, 4-7 3-point), another double double, 4 more assists, 3 more blocked shots and the steal of the game. I may do a separate thread on this, but Bailey now has an assist in 4 consecutive games, 8 in those 4 games, and at least 1 blocked shot in 7 consecutive games - and 9 of 10 - with 16 blocked shots in those 7 games. For perspective, Bailey now has 23 blocked shots in 16 games on the season to Cooper Flagg's 20 blocked shots in 17 games ... jus saying. Bailey also has had at least 7 rebounds in every game since the Texas A& M game, 11 consecutive games with at least 7 or more rebounds each game, averaging 9.3 rebounds per game in those 11 straight games (along with 20 ppg). He also has steals in 6 consecutive games. Bailey also has 8 turnovers in the last 6 games - reduced from a stretch of 6 games with 21 turnovers (3 or 4 in each game) - from Texas A&M through the Princeton game - and only 4 assists!. Since the Princeton game Bailey has 9 assists and 8 turnovers -0 a sharp improvement. Oh yeah, one more thing: Pikiell had Bailey defend against Nebraska's PG Worster most of the 2nd half - from at least the 17-18 minute mark (i.e. after Nebraska opened 8-0, and RU called a time out) - and did a really good job using his length and height to limit Worster to 0-2 FG in the 2nd half, and to limit his dribble drive penetration. I thought that was one of Pikiell's key adjustments.
2) Harper: It looks like he finally may be 100% again ... a very fine game (still a couple more turnovers than I would like). Still, 3 assists and just 1 turnover in the 2nd half. His ridiculous patented drives splitting the double team and unstoppable weave to the basket to "seemingly" easily finish. Good 3-point shooting. Solid rebounding. Solid defense. He's BACK!
3) Grant: Has to be next ... a career game. We cannot expect this every game of course (7-8 FG?) But almost all good shots ... unlike Martini (and somewhat similar to Bailey - though obviously not quite as athletic) he can get off his 3-point shot with a defender coming at him, in his face - because of his elevation and quick release. 2 huge offensive rebounds, with 1 being a tip-in and the other a lay-up or dunk. An alley-oop dunk. A mid-range FG. A 3-point FG. Solid, switching defense. A blocked shot. Tons of athletic energy.
4) Sommerville/Acuff - not much provided beneficial to the team except minutes (14 from Sommerville, 8 for Acuff). Acuff was 0-2 3-pointere ... and was not as good defensively as he had been against UCLA (solid vs UCLA). Sommerville ... 4 fouls and 0 rebounds in 14 minutes - not great defense .. did have a nice lay-up off a Harper assist. Sommerville was terrific vs UCAL, and WILL be terrific - or even solid - in future games. This was not one of them.
5) J. Williams: I thought he played very well. He was a bit overmatched one on one vs Brice Williams (when Williams was in during the 2nd half he generally covered Brice Williams) - Williams was just too tall and shot right over J. Williams. But otherwise I thought J. Williams had a fine game. Yes he was 1-5 from 3 - and some say he should not have taken so many if he is going to miss ... Well, I guess that is sort of true - but he was WIDE open on all of them, and except for one that was an NBA 3, I think he HAD to take the other 4 - otherwise the offense would be completely stagnant. His playmaking was excellent: 3 assists and 0 turnovers, many times successfully passing out of the traffic in the paint after dribble drive penetration, leading to more baskets than just those he directly assisted on.
6) Martini: FINALLY ... he has to play when he is making 3's like that ... and he also was at least solid on defense (he will never be a great defender, but vs Nebraska he was at least respectable. THIS was the Martini Pikiell signed up for, mostly. Several hustle plays, including an offensive rebound and lay-up off a scramble. I am not foolish enough to expect this every game. But the fact he was at least okay vs UCLA and very solid to better than solid in this game, offers some hope. Martini had been 3-15 in the 10 games going into UCLA, and is now 5-8 his last 2 games, moving his seasonal 3-point FG% from 33% to almost 40% - where RU needs it.
7) Ogbole: Terrific game, despite just 2 points and his missed FT's (including a front end of a crucial one and one). He was a real force on the backboard: 1 rebounds, 4 offensive. He did well, and played 24 minutes as a result, including in the end game. He is up to 4.2 rpg - including 30 offensive rebounds (tied with Bailey for the most on the team). he is shooting 64% FG ... and yes, just 57% from the FT line (had been over 60% prior to his 0-2 this game). There will be games where Sommerville plays better and deservedly gets more minutes. This game Ogbole earned the minutes.
8) J. Davis and Derkack: Davis forced his offense a little - not huge, but a bit ... and was 0-4 FG. But was fine defensively for the most part (not as good as versus UCAL or some other games, but at least okay) ... and had 2 assists to 0 turnovers (a good thing). Davis is up to 30 assists versus just 11 turnovers on the season. Derkack got a taste, after a DNP vs UCLA ... and was Derkack: In just 9 minutes, an energizer bunny3 rebounds, a put back basket after his own miss - and the FT when he was fouled ... but only so-so defense, frankly. No turnovers (good).He will get chances for more extended minutes in games if he shows he is productive during that individual game.
