Carberry’s criticisms of UCLA team prove to be unfounded

Ifurung is a third-year political science student.

By Nick Ifurung

Maegan Carberry’s absurd column about the UCLA men’s
basketball program (“Bruin Bloopers,” Daily Bruin,
Viewpoint, April 24) demonstrates a classic example of what happens
when someone who claims to be a fan of Bruin basketball decides to
cheaply criticize the team: they end up looking like a complete
fool. Using shallow and petty arguments, the only thing Carberry
manages to prove is how little she knows about our basketball
team.

Carberry loses credibility from the start by expressing her
satisfaction for the team from two years ago when the team
supposedly had “pizzazz and crowd-pleasing appeal.”
While that may be true, this is the same team who was eliminated in
the first round of the tournament by Detroit Mercy. She further
contradicts herself by criticizing players who leave UCLA to enter
the NBA draft. Too bad her beloved Baron Davis and JaRon Rush did
exactly that.

As for this year’s tournament, Carberry oddly seems to
deny herself the pleasure of witnessing such a successful
tournament run. In the first round, the Bruins soundly beat one of
the hottest teams in the nation, snapping Hofstra’s 16-game
winning streak. Contrary to Carberry’s column, Jason Kapono
and Matt Barnes were then suspended from starting the second-round
game against Ohio State, not the Sweet Sixteen game against Duke.
While I am speaking of Duke, there is absolutely no shame in being
eliminated by the best team in the nation, who went on to win the
national title.

I will be the first to admit (OK, maybe I haven’t been the
first) that losses to teams like Northridge expose the flaws and
inconsistencies of the team. Selfish shot taking, lazy transitions,
terrible free throw shooting, dumb fouls and turnovers are problems
that coaches deal with at all levels of the game.

It hurts me to say it, but the Bruins have been guilty of all
these mistakes. The importance lies in learning from those mistakes
and then pulling off victories against Arizona and Stanford, while
sweeping USC. I’ll take a few dumb fouls any day if it means
I get to rush the court after beating the Wildcats or laugh in the
face of some hostile Trojans after humiliating them at their house.
Did Carberry even attend either of those games? I really
can’t tell.

Carberry’s failure to see the obvious improvements of the
Bruins proves she has an inability to understand basketball. Since
she loved the ’98-’99 team so much, maybe she remembers
a young recruit from Sacramento named Barnes. As a freshman, this
kid averaged 3.9 points from the field and 2.9 rebounds. In 2001,
Barnes scored a career-high 32 points against Stanford.

Now entering his senior year, he’s averaging over 30
minutes, grabbing on average at least seven boards and averaging
11.2 points. Want even more improvement? Dan Gadzuric has evolved
into a legitimate threat in the paint, now averaging 8.6 rebounds
per game, while Billy Knight has proved himself to be a legitimate
three-point threat. Carberry’s statement that “they
aren’t getting any better” is wrong.

The timing of Carberry’s column is unfortunate. She tries
to argue that our players are “superstars who have no sense
of loyalty,” while on the same day, press releases officially
announced that Kapono will return to UCLA to settle some
“unfinished business.”

I almost feel sorry for Carberry if she really believes that
“when Earl Watson ships out this spring, we won’t have
a single player left that we can count on.” Are you kidding
me? I personally will “count on” Kapono to light up the
scoreboard, Gadzuric to grab rebounds, Barnes to post and slash to
the basket, and Knight to hit the long jumpers when they count.

I’m positive this is news to Carberry, but UCLA has
attracted one of the best recruiting classes in the nation for the
’01-’02 season. For example, Cedric Bozeman, a 6-foot-5
guard from Santa Ana is a McDonald’s All American and is
considered by some to be one of the top two guards in the West. I
certainly could go on and on listing qualifications, but I’ll
leave it to the new guys to prove themselves next season.

Once Carberry starts to hear names like Bozeman, Michael Fey,
Dijon Thompson and Andre Patterson, she will realize that the loss
of Watson is not the end of the world but the beginning of
legendary UCLA careers.

I don’t buy Carberry’s claim that she withheld
criticism because she thought saying something in the middle of the
year was “tacky.” Carberry’s attempt to bash the
basketball team so late in the year officially makes her the last
person to try to jump on the “the UCLA program is an
embarrassment” bandwagon. And now, exactly like those people
before her who were calling for Lavin’s head, she has been
proven wrong. This team is not an embarrassment and they are
destined to succeed.

I do realize Carberry is a Viewpoint columnist and not a sports
writer. Even though she has her facts backward, she at least has
the desire to see the Bruins win. Here’s to a 12th banner in
Pauley Pavilion.