Stanford at Arizona

What a game in Tucson this afternoon! The game essentially turned into Jerryd Bayless and Chase Budinger vs. Brook and Robin Lopez. Bayless' 31 points -- which, following a 39-point game against Arizona State last weekend and 33-point effort against California on Thursday, gave him the Arizona record for scoring over a three-game stretch -- weren't quite enough, as the Cardinal prevailed 67-66.

1. I wrote recently about being sick of teams who go away from their bread and butter in crunch time. It's been a pleasure, then, to watch Stanford twice in the last three days. The Cardinal's offense today consisted of -- as it did Thursday against Arizona State -- throwing the ball into a Lopez on the block and letting the seven-footers go to work. Brook tallied 30 points against the Sun Devils in a game Stanford somehow lost -- blowing a nine-point lead in the last 4:35 before falling 72-68 in overtime -- and Robin had 14 to go along with Brook's 23 to key the win today. The Cardinal know that having two capable big guys is to their advantage, and the rest of the team does a great job of understanding that and feeding them down low.

2. I thought Arizona coach Kevin O'Neill made a big mistake bringing Jordan Hill back as early as he did with four fouls. The Wildcats were down 55-51 and there was 5:34 on the clock, but a minute earlier, Brook Lopez -- the more talented offensively of the twin brothers -- had gone to the bench with foul trouble of his own. On this possession, Stanford fed it into Robin, and seven seconds after checking back in, Hill had fouled out. Yes, the call was very bad -- Robin Lopez appeared to clear space with his elbows before jumping into Hill as Hill stood still with his arms in the air -- but it seemed unnecessarily risky to bring him back in to play against a weaker opponent. Brook Lopez had done a lot of damage against Hill in the first half, but by the second half had figured out to move to Brook's left shoulder to bother the jump hook (although to his credit, Brook still made a couple anyway with Hill guarding him that way).

The only justification for it that I could come up with is that Hill had been sitting with four fouls since the 9:14 mark, and that his replacement, Kirk Walters -- who doesn't play much -- may have been getting tired. If that was the case, O'Neill could have thought that he could buy a few minutes with Hill on a player less likely to draw that fifth foul. If that wasn't the case, it's an inexplicable move.

(Parenthetical aside #1: I suspect that most Arizona fans will crow about the bad foul call at the end that gave Brook Lopez the opportunity to hit the two-game winning free throws, but the disqualifying foul on Hill was just as egregious and ultimately more harmful. Indeed, on Stanford's last possession -- when Walters challenged Brook from one side and Budinger came in from the wing and cleanly stripped him -- the Cardinal probably would have ended up with the points anyway. Budinger blocked the ball down, directly into Brook's hands, and with Walters out of position, Brook had a clean path to the basket. Lopez would have had to just turn, maybe taken a dribble, and laid it in. The best-case scenario for Arizona would have had someone else fouling Lopez and sending him to the line, and a three-point play -- given that no Wildcat was in position to stop him but they all would have tried given the situation -- may have been likely. The call that sent Hill to the bench for the last five and a half minutes was a much bigger deal.)

(Parenthetical aside #2: I know Walter doesn't play much, and he did a valiant job despite being overmatched, but I'd like to think that a veteran like him could do a better job of fighting for position. Time and again in the second half, he set up on Brook Loopez's right shoulder and let him catch the ball. When you're at a height and skill disadvantage, as he was, you need to work harder early in the possession to keep your man from getting the ball.)

3. How about Jawann McLellan's three that tied it at 62 with 2:30 to play. Up until that point, McLellan had taken just three shots the entire game, and missed all of them. Eleven of the 15 shots Arizona had taken in the second half to that point had been taken by Bayless or Budinger, and there was a long stretch where the offense consisted of watching Bayless do his thing. (And what a thing it was! Bayless was getting to the rim and the free throw line at will.) Bayless again did much of the work on this play, driving past his man and drawing the defense before hitting a wide-open McLellan in the right corner, but for McLellan to be ready to take and make that shot speaks volumes about his focus and selflessness.

Maryland at Duke, Kansas State at Texas Tech

1. As well as Duke has played, one thing worries me about them. Whenever they come out of a timeout, whenever they draw up a play for a shot out of the huddle, it's always a three. I noticed it tonight, against Maryland, when the Terps spent their out-of-commercial possessions getting the ball inside to Bambale Osby. Duke's got excellent three-point shooters and their edge over their opponents is definitely on the perimeter, but an over-reliance on the three-pointer has been the death of many a high seed come March.

2. I've noticed far too many teams getting away from what works for them mid-game. Georgetown's been doing it all year with Roy Hibbert, and tonight I watched it happen twice. Maryland would only occassionally throw it in to Osby in the post. Every time they did, something good happen, but the majority of their possessions consisted of Greivis Vasquez going to the basket. Vasquez scored a bunch of points, but I don't know why Osby was an afterthought.

Kansas State did a little bit better, reducing a 22-point deficit to four mostly on the shoulders of Bill Walker -- who was absolutely unguardable tonight -- and Michael Beasley. But they got away from it down the stretch, shooting three-pointers late (two of which, by Jacob Pullen, went in). Texas Tech wasn't doing anything differently defensively; in fact, K-State had been getting the ball to their freshman frontcourt duo just by tossing it up in the air and letting them go get it. I don't know if fatigue was a factor -- Walker wasn't even on the court for a few minutes -- but the Wildcats got away from what brought them back in the first place.

3. Kansas State finally played "young" tonight, especially in the first half and the first few minu.es of the second. Nothing was going right for them on either end of the court, and they allowed themselves to get frustrated, barking at the referees on every possession, concentrating on perceived missed calls rather than putting the ball in the basket and getting back on defense. Walker was a particularly egregious offender at the start of the second half, loafing back on defense and allowing Texas Tech three transition baskets right out of the gate. The Red Raider lead swelled to 22 at that point, and though Walker played valiantly in the Wildcat comeback, the lackadaisical play of him and his counterparts put them in a hole too deep to climb out of.

And1 Nice scene at the end of the game, as recently-retired Tech coach Bobby Knight choked back tears as he applauded his former team's first victory without him at the helm. Taking his place, of course, was his son and long-time assistant Pat.

I really like Pat Knight's demeanor on the sideline, by the way. I've never had a problem with his dad, but Pat is definitely a bit calmer, and I think that even keel will serve him and his teams well.

Robbie Hummel, Kalin Lucas, Tyler Hansbrough

1. Robbie Hummel has some killer instinct. A late play in Purdue's 60-54 win Tuesday night encapsulates it perfectly. The Boilermakers were up 53-50, as the clock approach a minute and a half to play. They caught Michigan St. scrambing in defensive rotation, and the ball swung to Hummel on the left wing. The Spartans' Kalin Lucas -- more on Lucas later -- rushed out from the low post area at Hummel, leaving Keaton Grant open in the corner. Did the thought of flipping the ball to Grant -- a 43 percent three-point shooter, by the way -- ever cross his mind? I don't think it did. Hummel, who had 19 points at the time, let fly, and hit nothing but net. After Michigan St. answered with a bucket to cut the lead back to four, the 6'8" Hummel capped his night with an 18-footer over 6'10" Goran Suton, a shot he made despite lifting off with his left (opposite) foot forward.

Other than some early contributions from fellow freshman E'Twaun Moore, Hummel was Purdue's offense. After going scoreless for the first 13 minutes, he scored 13 points in the final seven minutes of the first half, including one spectacular play where he grabbed an offensive rebound, threw it to a teammate while flying over the endline, stepped back inbounds to receive a pass in the right corner, and drilling a three-pointer, part of a big run that gave the Boilers a 34-18 halftime lead. In the second half, he made a number of hustle plays, twice following his own miss from the perimeter with an offensive rebound.

But don't let his image and reputation as simply a hard-worker fool you. He's got a lot of assassin in him.

2. Hummel's performance on the big stage was matched by his freshman counterpart on MIchigan State, Kalin Lucas. The point guard is coach Tom Izzo's sixth man, but he came off the bench quickly as the Spartans went more than four minutes before scoring their first points. Given that Michigan State's veterans and scoring leaders -- Drew Neitzel and Raymar Morgan -- finished the first half with zero points between them, it's safe to say that as bad shape MSU was in heading into halftime, it would have been so much worse without Lucas.

And where Neitzel continued to struggle all night, Lucas poured in 20 points, including six on drives down the stretch when Michigan State needed baskets. He did everything he could to give them a chance to win.

3. I can officially say that I have no idea what kind of professional player Tyler Hansbrough will be. My instinct is to say "not a very good one," because his main avenues of scoring will be of dubious utility at the next level. For starters, he's not getting to the line nearly as much in the Assocation as he does now.

Secondly, it seems that he releases almost all of his shots in the post from some weird angle below his shoulders, turning his body to shield the ball and attempt to draw a foul. Against bigger, savvier defenders, this isn't going to cut it.

But then I see performances like his in the first half on Tuesday night in Charlottesville, and I start to wonder. Hansbrough's fist five field goal attempts vs. Virginia last night: 12-foot turnaround from left baseline, 17-foot jumper from top of key; 12-foot turnaround from left baseline; 15-foot faceup jumper from right wing; and 15-foot jumper after jab step from the right wing.

Swish. Swish. Swish. Swish. Swish.

"Psycho T" has practically unparalleled energy and desire, so it's probably safe to say no matter the composition of his offensive game, he's going to have a job in the NBA, at least for a few years. If he can prove that he's got an offensive arsenal to go with his size, athleticism, and determination, then he'll help his draft stock considerably -- and I think rightfully so. I'd need to see more of it to make a determination, but so far, I've liked what I've seen.

And 1 One more thing about Purdue. Watching this young group -- the Boilers started two freshmen, two sophomores, and a junior Tuesday night, and have only one senior in their regular rotation, I couldn't help saying to myself, "These guys are going to be contenders next year."

Last team I said that about around this time? The 2002-2003 Syracuse Orange, otherwise known as the "2002-2003 national champions."

Of course, I'm not expecting history to repeat itself by Purdue winning the title a year "early." There are significant differences between the two clubs, not the least of which being that the Boilermakers don't have anything approaching Carmelo Anthony. Hummel, Moore, and Grant each shoot better than 40% from the three-point line, but none of them are as automatic as Gerry McNamara was (no shame in that, of course). They don't have a post threat the likes of Hakim Warrick, as much as Warrick liked to play facing the basket.

But, they do defend well, and have a young coach, and together they don't have enough experience to know any better. Is a Final Four run likely? No, but it's not out of the question, either. Keep an eye on these guys.

Kansas, Clemson, bizarre endings

1. Despite their 72-69 loss at No. 11 Texas tonight, I still think Kansas is the best team in the nation. Take a look at the other title contenders; all have a flaw, a question mark. North Carolina can't defend. UCLA labors to score on occasion. Memphis can't shoot free throws. Duke -- once again -- lacks a big man.

Kansas can answer all of those those questions. They defend extremely well, particularly on the perimeter, where their ball-hawking guards average about seven steals a game. They hit about 70 percent of their free throws. And they have quality depth inside and outside.

They also don't rely too heavily on the three-pointer, despite hitting the deep ball at a 37 percent clip. I think my favorite stat of the college basketball season is this: In KU's 100-90 win over Baylor at Allen Fieldhouse on Saturday, the Jayhawks went 0-for-9 from three-point range. If you can drop 100 points by going to the basket, dumping the ball inside, and getting to the free throw line, you aren't vulnerable to the cold streaks that are known to sink teams that rely too heavily on the three-point shot. The threes they do take are most often of the inside-out variety, which usually are the best looks you can get from distance.

2. Clemson's incredible collapse at Carolina - moving their all-time road record at UNC to an 0-53, an NCAA record for road losses versuse one opponent - happened yesterday, and I wasn't planning on writing about it, but one part of it has been bugging me all day, so here we are.

Having committed three straight turnovers that Carolina used to cut an 11-point lead to five with two minutes left, Clemson set up in a full court trapping defense. The Heels broke it easily, and the ball quickly found a wide-open Danny Green, who knocked down a three to cut the lead to two. Cliff Hammonds answered for Clemson with a three of his own after running the shot clock down, but then the Tigers did the unthinkable: They set up in the trap again! Carolina broke it easy for a second consecutive possession, and it again resulted in a quick, open look for Green, who drilled another triple.

Why, why WHY, Oliver Purnell?! Yes, your press helped force turnovers on UNC's first five possessions, but after that, it had been fairly ineffective. And besides, you didn't need a steal: You needed UNC to take some time off the clock. The only thing worse than letting the Heels score is letting the Heels score quickly. And you let it happen - twice, on back-to-back possessions no less.

Teams are often criticized for taking tough three-point shots during the endgame instead of taking a quick two and then looking for a steal or a foul. This was the defensive equivalent of taking taking a three when the situation didn't call for it yet, and it's part of what cost Clemson the game.

3. Still waiting for Georgetown to play up to its reputation, a reputation which I am on record as saying months ago is undeserved. I can't remember being as unimpressed with a team that has stuck around in the Top Ten as I am with the Hoyas this year.

At any rate, I can't write anything about their 55-53 win over Villanova because the ending was so infuriating. For those who missed it, an official whistled Wildcat freshman Corey Stokes for ever so slightly brushing Hoya senior Jonathan Wallace as the latter dribbled up the left sideline, 70 feet away from the basket, with less than a second to go. Under normal circumstances, this was a ticky-tack foul. Given that it stopped the clock with 0.1 -- that's one-tenth -- seconds left, it was an UNTHINKABLE call. PREPOSTEROUS and DISGRACEFUL come to mind, as well. Wallace hit both free throws, and the Hoyas escaped again.

I differentiate this call and the non-call at the end of last week's Indiana-Illinois contest. In that one, an Illinois player grabbed D.J. White's arm as White was launching an 80-foot Hail Mary with the score tied and the clock nearing zero. While it was highly improbable that White would make the shot, there's a threshold for the amount of contact you can reasonably let go, and this exceeded it. Indiana ended up winning in double OT, so no harm, no foul, I guess.

Not so here. Villanova deserves an apology, and they have a chance of getting it. They also deserve an extra five minutes to decide the outcome of this game -- a game they needed to keep their dimming NCAA hopes alive -- but they won't get that.

The Rutgers women, however, might get what they deserve. Roughly the same time Georgetown was being gifted their game against Georgetown, a bizarre scene was unfolding in Knoxville: the second-ranked Vols were down one with under 30 seconds. They missed one shot, and Candace Parker grabbed the rebound and missed again as the clock apparently ran out. Inexplicably, it stopped with 0.2 -- that's two-tenths, for those keeping track -- allowing Nicky Anosike to grab an offensive rebound and get fouled before the clock started again and the buzzer went off. Anosike, to her credit, drilled both free throws and Tennessee had a controversial 59-58 win.

It's irritating that the clock stopped, but I don't know if a person is to blame or the equipment malfunctioned or whatever. What bothers me most is that the officials looked at the tape and determined that Anosike -- who was in the process of catching the ball as the clock froze -- was fouled within two-tenths of a second (remember that NCAA rules don't allow for a catch and shoot with fewer than four-tenths on the clock).

I don't know what the rules for appeals are, but I'd like to see the NCAA make good on this one and award Rutgers the victory. I suppose it's too much to ask for Tennessee -- who, as the home team, is in charge of the clock -- to take that step itself.

And1 Don't tell anyone, but I liked the pink uniforms the Rutgers women wore tonight. Great cause, too.

WVU/Pitt, Illinois/Indiana

1. All credit to Ronald Ramon for drilling the triple at the buzzer that gave Pittsburgh a 55-54 win over West Virginia Thursday night, but don't overlook Keith Benjamin, who provided the assist on the play. Panthers coach Jamie Dixon had called timeout to set up a final play, but by the time Benjamin received the ball -- with three seconds left, at the top of the key -- the play had broken and Pittsburgh was in scramble mode. Rather than panicking, Benjamin drove left as the clock wound down. The defense converged on him as the clock wound down, but again, he didn't lose his poise. Feeling Ramon's defender slough off, he flicked a pass to the wing, giving Ramon just enough time to catch and fire the game-winner.



In professional basketball, you rarely see players rush in the waning seconds, but college is a different story. I was even a little surprised that Benjamin didn't panic and loft an almost impossible three-pointer when he first received the ball, and even more shocked that he didn't toss up a runner when given the first sliver of daylight on his drive. But his patience, as much as Ramon's shot, won the game for his team.



(Also, if WVU wants to complain about Pittsburgh's bucket that pulled them within one, I'll listen. The Panthers were inbounding the ball under their own bucket down 53-50, and Benjamin threw a pass up high to DeJuan Blair in the post. Blair went up high with one hand and deftly tapped the ball back to Benjamin before coming down with it. It appeared to me, however, that Benjamin only got one foot down before catching the ball, which means he should've been ruled out of bounds. How ESPN announcers Dave Pasch and Len Elmore -- who impressively noted that the play was made possible by the WVU defender leaving Benjamin to double Blair as the pass went up -- missed this is beyond me, given how many times they showed the replay).



2. The millionth example of a coach overthinking something: Indiana and Illinois tied at 69 with two seconds left in overtime Thursday night. On the line is Shaun Pruitt, a 55% free-throw shooter who missed a pair of foul shots at the end of regulation that might have won the Illini the game. His first attempt is woefully short, a line drive that richocheted hard off the front rim. He turns away from the basket, talking to himself in frustration. Teammates Demetri McCamey and Jeffrey, son of Michael walk to the line to give him some words of encouragement, while ESPN color analyst Jay Bilas commends them for trying to pick up a teammate. Still, Pruitt looks like he's a serious underdog to make the second.



Indiana coach Kelvin Sampson calls timeout, trying to ice a shooter who simply cannot be iced any further.



The whole point of calling a timeout and making a kid think about it to get in his head, to get him out of his rhythm. Pruitt was already in his own head, and the only rhythm he was feeling was the sound of his repeated bricks from the stripe echoing in his head.



Yeah, I know, Pruitt missed anyway -- long this time -- and Indiana went on to win in double overtime. But the point remains that nothing that could have happened during that timeout would have made Pruitt any less likely to make that shot. Instead, he gave the young man the opportunity to re-compose himself, and gave the Illinois coaches the chance to calm him down.



It was also Indiana's final timeout, which meant that once Pruitt did miss, the Hoosiers couldn't stop the clock and set up a play for a long inbounds pass and a shot.



3. Really impressed with Indiana winning in that environment, full of venom recognizing Hoosier star freshman Eric Gordon's first visit to Champaign. (I don't have the space to get into why Illini fans hate Gordon, but briefly, Gordon had apparently committed to Illinois before enrolling at Indiana, and the guys in orange aren't sure that Sampson's recruitment of Gordon was on the up and up. For more details, try Google).



To be honest, I expected a strong effort at the outset from an Illinois team that has this year shown plenty of pluck but little ability to score. So I wasn't surprised, not a bit, when they came out defending well, and my eyebrows raised only a bit when they hit three-pointers on four consecutive possessions during one stretch in the early-going. If Indiana could weather the early storm and not let the crowd -- booing on every Gordon touch -- get to them, eventually their superior talent would be enough for them to win comfortably.



The Hoosiers were up to the task despite a rough first half for Gordon. At the break, Illinois held a four-point lead, but I really felt like there was no way a team that has been as anemic offensively as they have could score enough to beat a good team like the Hoosiers.



But then, the second half started, and McCamey was still hitting threes and the lead stretched to double digits. At that point, with one of the toughest crowds in the country booing and yelling who-knows-what at their team's 18-year-old best player, it would have been hard to blame Indiana for packing it in. Instead, the Hoosiers hung in there, even as Gordon continued to struggle.



But they hung in there, getting a basket here and there, a stop when they needed one, and eventually Illinois' shots -- particularly from the free throw line -- stopped going in. Credit the Hoosiers for still being in the game when they did.