Hoops stats

Here are some stats, courtesy of UCLA, about the men’s basketball team:


UCLA’s 75.5 scoring average is the highest in Ben Howland’s six seasons and the highest since 2000-01 (79.5). It is also 50th nationally entering the Sweet 16.

UCLA’s 49.0 field goal percentage is the highest of the Ben Howland Era and the highest since 1997-98 (also 49.0). It is also third nationally entering the Sweet 16.

UCLA’s 39.9 three-point field goal percentage is the highest in Howland’s six seasons and the highest since 1991-92 (also 39.9). It is also 12th nationally entering the Sweet 16.

UCLA is ranked 13th nationally in scoring margin (11.5) and 27th nationally in assist/turnover ratio (+1.23) entering the Sweet 16.

Opponents’ 64.0 scoring average is the highest since 2004-05 (71.7), Howland’s second season.

Opponents’ 44.5 field goal percentage is also the highest since 2004-05 (44.6).

Opponents’ 36.1 three-point field goal percentage is the highest since 2002-03 (36.7), prior to Howland’s arrival.

Darren Collison currently ranks fourth nationally in free throw percentage (89.7). He finished his career ranked 16th in career scoring (1,639), tied for first in career games (142), fourth in career three-point field goal percentage (.435), sixth in career three point field goals (164), third in career free throw percentage (.851), second in career steals (231) and fifth in career assists (577). His 89.7 free throw percentage this season ranks fourth on UCLA’s season list.

Josh Shipp concluded his career ranked 12th in career scoring (1,734), third in career three point field goals (198), tied for sixth in career steals (179) and third in career games (140).

Alfred Aboya concluded his career tied for first in career games (142).

Michael Roll enters his senior year ranked fifth in career three-point field goal percentage (.412) and 10th in career three-point field goals (129). His 51.5 three-point field goal percentage this season ranks second on UCLA’s season list.

Share this post:Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditShare on TumblrShare on LinkedInEmail this to someonePrint this page
  • Mike

    I just want to say, Villanova(3) just beat Pitt(1) to reach the final four. This is after beating Duke(2) by 23 points. So it was unreasonable to expect the UCLA team to beat Villanova on a rebuilding year.

  • 89-69 Villanova

    The better team won! If UCLA is rebuilding THIS year, what will next year look like with Holiday and Collison both gone, and Gordon transferring to a different school? You don’t want to think about it …

  • Anonymous

    Since when is Drew Gordon transferring? What crack are you smokin’, ace?

  • Anonymous

    Would requiring registration to comment help prevent the comment section from turning into the scout.com forums?

  • Anon

    I’m guessing not because scout.com already requires you to register to comment genius.

  • Anon

    Probably not because scout.com already requires you to register before commenting.

  • Mike

    Villanova 89-69, I don’t know how you inferred from my post anything other than “the best team won.” I agree, the best team won.

    As for rebuilding years, they are a FACT of modern college basketball. This year we had 1 early first round player (Holiday) and 1 late first / early second round player (Collison). Neither Shipp nor Aboya are likely to be drafted. In comparison, Arizona has 2 lottery / early first round players (Hill/Budinger) and Nic Wise, and they finished 6/10 in conference play–do you think they would have beaten Villanova?

  • Mike

    Florida, which won two NC in a row, has failed to make the NCAA tournament for two years now! Pitt, a team with tons of talent, has again failed to advance past the Elite 8 and hasn’t been to the Final Four in 50 years. Where is Memphis this year? They were in the NC game last year and lost in the Sweet 16 this year. Duke hasn’t even reached an Elite 8 since 2005. UConn has a NC in the 2000s, but basically hasn’t done anything in the NCAA tournament until this year.

    Under Ben Howland we made the NC game (2005-6), then a FF (06-7), then a FF (07-8), then we made the tournament after finishing 2nd in the conference in a rebuilding year (08-9). Outside of UNC and Kansas, nobody can say that they’ve had this much consistent success (including our down year) in the NCAA tournament as we have had.

  • Anonymous

    In conclusion I think your dissatisfaction with the program demonstrates that you know nothing about college basketball. How easy do you think it is to make a deep run in the tournament anyways? Are there improvements that are needed (more athletic players)? Yes–hence why our freshman class and our incoming freshmen class are full of athletic players. Are there mistakes? Yes, everybody makes mistakes. Howland isn’t Wooden–nobody is–and college basketball is a LOT more competitive than it was in Wooden’s age. Also, Wooden had the benefit of keeping players all 4 years. Also note that Wooden was criticized very much by the fan base because his team didn’t win by a “large enough margin” during his NC streak, and that was a big reason he left. So please, give your complaining a break and focus on the positives.

  • Demetrius

    As I told you earlier in the season folks, you are blinded by the 3 final fours and can’t see through the fog and realize we got there because of our talent. If BH does not change his coaching style he will lose his recruiting power, why? because kid’s don’t have to come to UCLA to go to the NBA..Think about it:if you had a kid that had tons of talent and could go where ever he wanted to, would you let him go to UCLA now? Be Honest!
    It would not be your #1 choice. Now realize I luv UCLA but sometimes you have to take hard looks at yourself and make changes and not be stubborn BH!

  • Mike

    Demetrius, Howland has had the same coaching style since his days in Pitt. And we just had a #1 freshman class and and another top recruiting class come in. The evidence doesn’t support your conclusion that his coaching style is detrimental to our play ability.

    As for talent vs coaching, none of Westbrook, Luc, Collison, Dragovic, or Shipp were highly recruited. We got these players when Howland had just started at UCLA and when we had an ugly record, and since then our recruiting has shot WAY up (Love last year, this year and next year’s class).

    And in regards to players staying, Collison stayed. You can’t use two people leaving in the lottery (Westbrook and Love) and one person leaving for probably financial reasons (Luc) to demonstrate that nobody wants to stay on our team.

    Do I think Howland is perfect in his coaching? Hell no, he’s made plenty of mistakes. SO HAS EVERY OTHER COACH IN THE NATION. But if you think he’s anything other than a great recruiter and a great coach, you’d be sorely mistaken.

  • Mike

    play ability –> recruiting ability

  • doug4ucla

    I have been watching UCLA basketball since 1964, that puts me at 58 years old….so what you say, A LITTLE OLD GUY STUFF…Wooden and many other successful coaches, coach the old way and are successful at all levels…..IT’S ALL ABOUT TALENT