This is probably the most difficult game to draw any conclusions from.
Not because it was so inconclusive, but because only a very limited number of people on the planet actually saw it.
So, it would be rather presumptious to draw too many conclusions from the radio game report, newspaper account and the box score.
I think it's fairly evident that the team put together a couple of good stretches – one in each half – that essentially won the game for UCLA. Without having seen it, it's difficult to judge what precipitated those runs. Many of the accounts attribute it to a renewed effort on defense by the Bruins, which would be a particularly significant development for this team. UCLA hasn't played very good defense so far this season. Teams were shooting a Pac-10 best 36% from three against the Bruins before this game. Washington, which as a team was shooting 40% from three and had made 32 threes in its last three games, made just 2 of 12 from three, which is 16.7%. Again, without being able to see the game, it's impossible to conclude if this was due to UCLA's defense or
There are many positive points to take from this game:
-- Andre Patterson is becoming a force in the paint, blocking 5 shots against
-- UCLA out-rebounded
-- T. J. Cummings, at least from listening to the game on the radio, seemed in better control. He had a team-high 16 points and had a career-high nine rebounds.
-- Jason Kapono regained his shooting touch, scoring 15 points and hitting 3 of five from three. He also had five assists.
-- Dijon Thompson did in fact play and was a huge factor, scoring 14 and making some timely assists.
-- UCLA kept Washington, a team shooting 45% from the field on the season, to just 33.3% from the field.
The worries that weren't allayed but linger:
-- UCLA blew a couple of sizeable leads to allow a bad
-- UCLA committed an astounding 29 turnovers, which is the most in a game in recent memory. And it's easily the most committed in a game by the winning team that I can remember.
Overall, again, it's tough to take anything from this game – and really, not only because most of us weren't able to watch it. It's tough to draw conclusions because it's hard to determine if UCLA's strides were solid strides, or just against a really poor opponent. It's hard to determine whether this was, essentially,
But you can at least take a couple of things from it: UCLA played with renewed enthusiasm, according to reports, especially on defense, and you have to give the Bruins credit for that. And also, in a season where many thought that UCLA could easily lose to