basedog
03-23-2015, 05:38 PM
A UCLA fans perspective on Howland...
2:24 PM
Here's my take on Howland:
Pros: A VERY good X's and O's coach. He is all about fundamentals, and of course -- defense. He plays a grinding style of defense, and loves games in the 50s-60s (UCLA called it 'Ben Ball'). It's really fun to watch his older UCLA teams completely put the clamps down on teams. With the right athletes, he'll only play man-to-man. Offensively, he runs motion a good deal of the time. He'll push it when need be, but his teams tended to be a bit methodical on the offensive side of the ball. A very good coach at developing players. Russell Westbrook, Luc Richard Mbah a Moute and Darren Collison were all 3-star recruits.
Cons: A weird personality. Gruff, quirky, and not a players coach. Unlike UNC and some other schools, players couldn't wait to leave for the NBA and would often take the plunge (even if not ready). He burned a lot of bridges in recruiting circles out west (which shouldn't be a problem for MSU).
Here's the deal with Ben: He's a great basketball coach. He'll have to surround himself with personable, gregarious assistants.
The reason his tenure at UCLA ended was purely from a recruiting standpoint. He took UCLA to the three-straight final fours with tough-minded, hard-nosed athletes (with the occasional elite prospect -- like Kevin Love, Arron Afflalo). He recruited those diamonds in the rough with a chip on their shoulder. These types of athletes weren't necessarily great shooters/scorers, but they helped him win games.
Because UCLA lost to Memphis (Derrick Rose) and Florida (Noah, Horford, Brewer), he changed his recruiting philosophy -- basically forgetting about local kids and instead targeting elite kids from out of the area -- in order to "improve" the scoring talent. This was his greatest failure. He negated local kids like James Harden (among others) and didn't sign a PG for four-straight seasons. He then looked into the JC ranks and signed kids that could shoot, but not play defense/weren't athletic. Also went after kids that weren't high character (like Reeves Nelson, Renardo Sidney). He won with high character guys (Afflalo, Collison, Mbah a Moute). In essence, he went away from what made him successful in the first place.
I personally think the time away from basketball did him good. At MSU, he won't be fighting for top 10 kids like he did at UCLA. He's at his best when he signs athletic, tough kids and builds the program around defense and athleticism. Sprinkle in a few shooters, and you'll have a good team. I think he can definitely make some noise with the right personnel. McCray is a good hire -- he got UCLA Tony Parker and Jordan Adams.
A great hire, IMO.
2:24 PM
Here's my take on Howland:
Pros: A VERY good X's and O's coach. He is all about fundamentals, and of course -- defense. He plays a grinding style of defense, and loves games in the 50s-60s (UCLA called it 'Ben Ball'). It's really fun to watch his older UCLA teams completely put the clamps down on teams. With the right athletes, he'll only play man-to-man. Offensively, he runs motion a good deal of the time. He'll push it when need be, but his teams tended to be a bit methodical on the offensive side of the ball. A very good coach at developing players. Russell Westbrook, Luc Richard Mbah a Moute and Darren Collison were all 3-star recruits.
Cons: A weird personality. Gruff, quirky, and not a players coach. Unlike UNC and some other schools, players couldn't wait to leave for the NBA and would often take the plunge (even if not ready). He burned a lot of bridges in recruiting circles out west (which shouldn't be a problem for MSU).
Here's the deal with Ben: He's a great basketball coach. He'll have to surround himself with personable, gregarious assistants.
The reason his tenure at UCLA ended was purely from a recruiting standpoint. He took UCLA to the three-straight final fours with tough-minded, hard-nosed athletes (with the occasional elite prospect -- like Kevin Love, Arron Afflalo). He recruited those diamonds in the rough with a chip on their shoulder. These types of athletes weren't necessarily great shooters/scorers, but they helped him win games.
Because UCLA lost to Memphis (Derrick Rose) and Florida (Noah, Horford, Brewer), he changed his recruiting philosophy -- basically forgetting about local kids and instead targeting elite kids from out of the area -- in order to "improve" the scoring talent. This was his greatest failure. He negated local kids like James Harden (among others) and didn't sign a PG for four-straight seasons. He then looked into the JC ranks and signed kids that could shoot, but not play defense/weren't athletic. Also went after kids that weren't high character (like Reeves Nelson, Renardo Sidney). He won with high character guys (Afflalo, Collison, Mbah a Moute). In essence, he went away from what made him successful in the first place.
I personally think the time away from basketball did him good. At MSU, he won't be fighting for top 10 kids like he did at UCLA. He's at his best when he signs athletic, tough kids and builds the program around defense and athleticism. Sprinkle in a few shooters, and you'll have a good team. I think he can definitely make some noise with the right personnel. McCray is a good hire -- he got UCLA Tony Parker and Jordan Adams.
A great hire, IMO.