| | CBB : Teaser Line Matchup |
| |
UCLA ALABAMA |
|
| 144 | 50 Final 56 |
|
|
| | |
|
| | | |
829 | UCLA | +8 | Over 140.5 | 830 | ALABAMA | Pk | Under 148.5 |
|
|
| | |
|
| | | |
|
|
All Games | 8-4 | -1 | 4-8 | 6-5 | 77.7 | 36.2 | 44.0% | 41.9 | 72.0 | 33.4 | 41.1% | 36.0 | Road Games | 1-3 | -2 | 0-4 | 1-3 | 63.2 | 28.0 | 36.0% | 44.2 | 78.0 | 37.2 | 40.7% | 40.5 | Last 5 Games | 3-2 | 0 | 1-4 | 3-2 | 68.6 | 27.0 | 41.8% | 39.8 | 69.8 | 34.6 | 41.7% | 36.2 |
|
| |
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 77.7 | 36.2 | 27-61 | 44.0% | 7-18 | 36.8% | 17-26 | 65.6% | 42 | 12 | 15 | 18 | 7 | 13 | 5 | vs opponents surrendering | 65 | 30.4 | 22-56 | 40.1% | 6-19 | 31.9% | 14-21 | 69.3% | 34 | 10 | 12 | 19 | 6 | 14 | 4 | Team Stats (Road Games) | 63.2 | 28.0 | 22-62 | 36.0% | 4-17 | 24.6% | 14-23 | 61.7% | 44 | 12 | 11 | 17 | 5 | 16 | 3 | Stats Against (All Games) | 72.0 | 33.4 | 25-61 | 41.1% | 8-25 | 32.8% | 14-19 | 71.1% | 36 | 9 | 15 | 21 | 7 | 13 | 4 | vs opponents averaging | 70.6 | 33.6 | 25-57 | 44.0% | 6-19 | 33.8% | 14-21 | 68.9% | 38 | 11 | 13 | 19 | 7 | 14 | 4 | Stats Against (Road Games) | 78.0 | 37.2 | 27-66 | 40.7% | 9-29 | 33.0% | 15-21 | 72.3% | 40 | 11 | 17 | 21 | 9 | 11 | 5 |
|
|
| |
|
|
All Games | 8-3 | 0 | 4-5 | 6-2 | 73.2 | 34.4 | 45.2% | 33.7 | 66.5 | 31.7 | 43.1% | 33.5 | Home Games | 7-0 | +1 | 2-3 | 4-1 | 74.1 | 37.0 | 45.6% | 36.9 | 61.0 | 30.1 | 39.7% | 33.7 | Last 5 Games | 3-2 | -1 | 1-3 | 1-2 | 66.0 | 30.6 | 45.4% | 32.6 | 62.2 | 30.2 | 40.8% | 35.4 |
|
| |
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 73.2 | 34.4 | 24-54 | 45.2% | 7-21 | 31.9% | 18-24 | 75.8% | 34 | 9 | 12 | 20 | 8 | 12 | 4 | vs opponents surrendering | 67.3 | 31.6 | 24-55 | 42.9% | 6-19 | 32.3% | 14-20 | 67.5% | 34 | 9 | 12 | 20 | 7 | 14 | 4 | Team Stats (Home Games) | 74.1 | 37.0 | 25-54 | 45.6% | 6-19 | 28.9% | 19-26 | 74.7% | 37 | 12 | 12 | 19 | 9 | 13 | 5 | Stats Against (All Games) | 66.5 | 31.7 | 23-54 | 43.1% | 7-21 | 33.6% | 13-20 | 63.0% | 34 | 10 | 13 | 20 | 5 | 14 | 2 | vs opponents averaging | 69.7 | 32.8 | 25-56 | 44.3% | 6-19 | 33.6% | 14-21 | 66.6% | 36 | 10 | 13 | 19 | 7 | 14 | 3 | Stats Against (Home Games) | 61.0 | 30.1 | 22-55 | 39.7% | 7-21 | 30.9% | 10-17 | 60.3% | 34 | 11 | 10 | 22 | 5 | 16 | 2 |
|
| Average power rating of opponents played: UCLA 73.7, ALABAMA 72.8 |
| | |
|
|
11/14/2014 | MONTANA ST | 113-78 | W | -25 | W | 148 | O | 39-68 | 57.4% | 39 | 11 | 28-59 | 47.5% | 32 | 22 | 11/16/2014 | COASTAL CAROLINA | 84-71 | W | -16 | L | | - | 27-62 | 43.5% | 43 | 11 | 24-60 | 40.0% | 32 | 10 | 11/20/2014 | NICHOLLS ST | 107-74 | W | -27.5 | W | 150 | O | 38-68 | 55.9% | 49 | 13 | 30-70 | 42.9% | 33 | 14 | 11/23/2014 | LONG BEACH ST | 77-63 | W | -10 | W | 152.5 | U | 26-65 | 40.0% | 38 | 5 | 20-47 | 42.6% | 39 | 19 | 11/26/2014 | *OKLAHOMA | 65-75 | L | 2 | L | 152 | U | 26-69 | 37.7% | 51 | 13 | 21-64 | 32.8% | 43 | 10 | 11/27/2014 | *N CAROLINA | 56-78 | L | 5 | L | 152.5 | U | 17-44 | 38.6% | 38 | 23 | 28-67 | 41.8% | 35 | 11 | 11/28/2014 | *UAB | 88-76 | W | -14 | L | 139 | O | 27-63 | 42.9% | 46 | 12 | 26-68 | 38.2% | 37 | 10 | 12/3/2014 | CS-FULLERTON | 73-45 | W | -16 | W | 148 | U | 29-65 | 44.6% | 50 | 14 | 13-54 | 24.1% | 34 | 16 | 12/7/2014 | SAN DIEGO | 75-68 | W | -10 | L | 142 | O | 26-54 | 48.1% | 37 | 11 | 25-56 | 44.6% | 33 | 14 | 12/10/2014 | UC-RIVERSIDE | 77-66 | W | -16.5 | L | 140 | O | 25-47 | 53.2% | 40 | 16 | 22-68 | 32.4% | 33 | 8 | 12/13/2014 | GONZAGA | 74-87 | L | 7.5 | L | 147.5 | O | 25-60 | 41.7% | 30 | 12 | 31-53 | 58.5% | 34 | 13 | 12/20/2014 | *KENTUCKY | 44-83 | L | 16 | L | 136 | U | 19-71 | 26.8% | 42 | 15 | 32-64 | 50.0% | 47 | 12 | 12/28/2014 | @ ALABAMA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/2/2015 | @ COLORADO | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/4/2015 | @ UTAH | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/8/2015 | STANFORD | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/11/2015 | CALIFORNIA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/14/2015 | @ USC | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
| |
|
|
11/14/2014 | TOWSON ST | 82-54 | W | -14.5 | W | 131.5 | O | 29-63 | 46.0% | 34 | 8 | 18-50 | 36.0% | 34 | 22 | 11/17/2014 | W CAROLINA | 80-74 | W | -19 | L | 132.5 | O | 23-49 | 46.9% | 37 | 15 | 25-59 | 42.4% | 33 | 15 | 11/20/2014 | SOUTHERN MISS | 81-67 | W | -13.5 | W | 137.5 | O | 28-49 | 57.1% | 36 | 14 | 22-53 | 41.5% | 22 | 8 | 11/24/2014 | *IOWA ST | 74-84 | L | 5.5 | L | 146 | O | 27-70 | 38.6% | 31 | 9 | 29-50 | 58.0% | 34 | 15 | 11/25/2014 | *ARIZONA ST | 76-71 | W | -4.5 | W | | - | 21-50 | 42.0% | 32 | 9 | 25-58 | 43.1% | 35 | 9 | 12/2/2014 | S FLORIDA | 82-71 | W | -11 | T | 138.5 | O | 27-63 | 42.9% | 38 | 16 | 28-56 | 50.0% | 34 | 21 | 12/6/2014 | @ XAVIER | 84-97 | L | 7 | L | 150 | O | 28-53 | 52.8% | 22 | 17 | 30-53 | 56.6% | 32 | 13 | 12/13/2014 | TENNESSEE TECH | 65-53 | W | -15.5 | L | | - | 17-39 | 43.6% | 30 | 9 | 18-52 | 34.6% | 35 | 13 | 12/16/2014 | @ WICHITA ST | 52-53 | L | 13.5 | W | 141.5 | U | 20-43 | 46.5% | 28 | 11 | 20-49 | 40.8% | 32 | 10 | 12/19/2014 | STILLMAN | 69-49 | W | | - | | - | 25-58 | 43.1% | 45 | 16 | 19-58 | 32.8% | 40 | 20 | 12/21/2014 | APPALACHIAN ST | 60-59 | W | -18 | L | 137.5 | U | 23-56 | 41.1% | 38 | 11 | 24-60 | 40.0% | 38 | 13 | 12/28/2014 | UCLA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/2/2015 | N FLORIDA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/6/2015 | TEXAS A&M | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/10/2015 | @ TENNESSEE | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/13/2015 | @ S CAROLINA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1/17/2015 | KENTUCKY | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | UCLA: If you are talking about pure talent, the Bruins deserve to be higher on the list. However, this is as young of a team as there is in the conference, who will look to replace five key players that helped UCLA reach the Sweet 16 last season. The top incoming freshman is 6-foot-9 PF Kevin Looney, who is relentless on the glass. He should work well with C Tony Parker (6.9 PPG, 4.4 RPG, 0.6 BPG), who has to become a more imposing presence down low. He is skilled and agile for his size, but he has to be more aggressive in his junior campaign. SG Norman Powell (11.4 PPG, 2.8 RPG, 53% FG) leads a thin backcourt. Powell came off the bench last season, but will likely be the team's leading scorer, especially early as the freshmen class adjusts to college basketball. He must become a better shooter (29% from threes), as opposing defense are going to pack it in a bit and make the Bruins beat them from deep, but Powell played very well in the 2014 postseason with 14.0 PPG. He will be joined by PG Bryce Alford (8.0 PPG, 2.8 APG, 39% threes) who is the son of head coach Steve Alford, and has similarities to his father in his intelligence and long-range shooting. | | ALABAMA: The Crimson Tide have been on the NCAA Tournament bubble the past few seasons, missing out on the tourney each time. However, there is reason for optimism for the team this season, and SG Levi Randolph (9.6 PPG, 3.8 RPG, 35% threes) and SF Shannon Hale (8.8 PPG, 3.6 RPG, 35% threes) are a talented backcourt duo, as both guys are able to score in bunches. They do a great job of keeping pressure on the defense, as they are always looking to push the pace. The backcourt will be a strength of this team, as incoming freshmen like PG Justin Coleman and SG Devin Mitchell have the potential to contribute heavily this season. The Tide will have to figure out how to win outside of Tuscaloosa, as they did not win a road or neutral-site game last season, going 0-15 SU. |
| | |
| Last Updated: 6/15/2024 7:08:38 PM EST. |
|
|
| |
|