In Reply to: I know this is your pet theme lately, but posted by ej on January 05, 2025 at 09:04:46
respond to you becuz your takes are doctrinaire with far too often little analytical depth. In a word: proclamations.
Your last line: "Cronin's offense which I think is just fine as it is."
There is nothing substantive to support that proclamation. Conversely, there's a mountain of data refuting it. If you take the most basic official stats measuring O capabilities in college hoops from the NCAA official stats, UCLA with a top tier #19 NET rating is a dismal #167 of 355 Div 1 teams. And, this includes a # of comparatively obscure teams in comparatively obscure hoops leagues (355 vs circa 130 in Div 1 college football).
Making it more relatable, of the 18 teams in the B10, only NW, UDub and Minny have a worse O rating. That's not a proof, that's an indictment. UCLA is one of the more inept teams I have seen in getting into its O. No NCAA stats therein but I'd bet a dollar to a donut that they are one of the "leaders"(sic) in Div 1 in going deep into their possession clock. It's becuz CMC runs a sparse collective of plays coming out of his halfcourt sets. Not having an effective orchestrator at the point, nor much of a semblance of post-up game for our bigs, nor much of a variation from our O Coordinator (CMC) in our halfcourt sets, leaves us with our characteristic late-shot clock isos and perimeter weaves as the clock winds down to 30 secs.
The statistical evidence is overwhelming and it drowns out any proclamations to the contrary. UCLA's top tier NET rating of #19 is virtually solely a function of its elite #6 ranking in D (to CMC's total credit) in the same official NCAA Div 1 stats.