Tony Parker starting to stay out of foul trouble

UCLA big man Tony Parker’s 13-point outing at Stanford last Saturday was his best offensive showing in nearly a month. It also included just one foul — his first game with less than two since Nov. 24. It’s part of a small but not insignificant trend.

Through his first seven Pac-12 games as a sophomore, Parker committed 9.26 fouls per 40 minutes. Through his last seven, he committed 6.85. While the latter number still puts him last on the team’s eight-man rotation, the 6-foot-10 forward appears to be getting a little more comfortable with how to use his frame.

“He’s not fouling in transition, which is something that’s been good,” said head coach Steve Alford. “In the post, he’s just using his strength more versus leaning on people. I think he got in trouble early in the season when he was leaning on people.”

Added Parker: “All the refs talk to me, ‘Just keep your hands up.’ I feel like I get little knick-knack fouls. Playing with my hands up has really helped me out a lot.”

Facebook Twitter Plusone Digg Reddit Stumbleupon Tumblr Email
  • SUCC de trop

    Yes, TP has improved his foul problems by playing no defense. He had just three rebounds and zero blocked shot for the game. Stanford scored at will while Parker was in the middle. Better he provide defense and foul out than stand around like a telephone pole. A one point loss is the same as a 20 point loss. Parker should have had 13 reb’s and some blocked shots, instead of 13 irrelevant points.

    • Jack Wang

      Fair point, but it’s not like TP was a standout defender earlier in the season. He had 14 defensive rebounds and three blocks through the first seven Pac-12 games, and 13 and four through the last seven.

  • gotroy22

    Why no interviews with the football team and their progressive head coach Jim Mora about their opinion on Let’s Attack Israel Week? Your recruit target Josh Rosen might be interested.
    To quote Russoviet: “At UCLA, one of the main
    highlights of the week was a student council vote on whether to urge the
    university and the University of California as a whole to divest from
    companies associated with the Israeli occupation of Gaza [sic] and the
    West Bank.

    The resolution, which would have been a big victory for the “Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions” movement, was defeated, 7-5, after a debate that lasted nearly twelve hours, starting Tuesday evening and ending Wednesday
    morning. The debate was so highly contested that council members
    deadlocked on whether to vote by secret ballot until the council president cast a tiebreaking vote in favor, according to the Daily Bruin.

    As William Jacobson of LegalInsurrection noted,
    the council’s note-taker was so distraught that the resolution failed
    that she interrupted the meeting with a histrionic rant, full of tears,
    profanity, and high dudgeon. “I, like, always bite my tongue through
    these meetings…but I’ve never been more f****ng disappointed, on
    anything…because people are getting hurt, and we could have stopped it,” she said, pounding the table and sobbing.”
    No doubt Josh would love to go to such an anti-semite filled campus.

    • UCLAlum11

      It’s a complicated issue, but one people have every right to discuss. UCLA, and everybody else for that matter, should always have an open conversation on how they perceive the goings on in the world, and what should be done to improve.

      This is hardly “Let’s Attack Israel” week. Compared to the way so many people perceive some middle eastern countries, this dialogue is pretty isolated.

      I hope Rosen comes to UCLA. I think he’d be a great fit. But shaping your discussions around whether it entices a football player is complete USC territory.

      • WESTWOOD ROB

        These guys have not been on a college campus in a while if they think that protests about Israeli policies are something new.

        • gotroy22

          Protests by a few wacko Muslims and communists like the Spartacus Youth League are one thing. Your student body being split down the middle 50-50 on adopting anti-semitism as a policy of the school is another.

          • WESTWOOD ROB

            Looks like my response got “moderated” into oblivion, for whatever reason. As I was saying, your “50-50 anti-Semites” claim is just silly. Do you really think that most students know or care what their student council is up to? Most kids are busy partying and/or trying to figure out their futures, not following the debates of the activist types (of whatever persuasion) who participate in student government. Also, what is actually pretty creepy here is your fixation on what you assume to be Rosen’s religion.

          • ProbationU

            Apparently GoTroy has a problem with the 1st amendment and arithmetic.

          • http://amillennialist.blogspot.com Santiago Matamoros

            The First Amendment is a poor cloak for anti-Semitism.

          • ProbationU

            I think you are making the assumption that this was anti-Semitic based upon the opinion of GoTroy.

            I, for one, am NOT an expert on the Middle East. I do believe that the official US position for several years, even prior to Obama was for a 2 state solution. There are many people that believe that the settlements in the occupied territories can be an impediment to that position and to peace. These opinions have been expressed both inside and outside Israel.

            Israel is our only truly trusted ally in the region. and yet they spy on us and we spy on them. If people do not blindly accept the policies of Netanyahu, lit does not mean that they are Anti-Semitic or that they don’t support Israel. Many Jews hold these same positions.

            The 1st Amendment is not a cloak. However, it does allow a person to express their opinions and for others to denounce them. I don’t believe in censoring students for expressing their opinions. It is all part of education and growing up. If one’s opinions are unchanged since college, then it is easy to assume you haven’t learned much since.

          • http://amillennialist.blogspot.com Santiago Matamoros

            A two-state solution is a victory for jihad, since when Israel was recreated, it was immediately attacked by its Muslim neighbors. The “Palestinians” were told to evacuate for a bit, Israel would be wiped out, and then they could come back and enjoy the spoils.

            The only problem was, Israel defended itself. Well. Several times. It’s made a number concessions already; have you ever heard of victors conceding to those whom they’ve defeated?

            Besides that, there are a number of Arab/Islamic nations in the area; they should help. And even if they don’t, should genocidal warfare be rewarded?

            Of course, no human government acts with perfect moral clarity on all occasions, but if the choice is between a free nation — which, by the way, affords equal rights to even its Muslim citizens — and jihad, defend civilization every time.

          • ProbationU

            My point is simply that it is not Anti-Semitic to agree with a 2 state solution. Israel has effectively had nobody to negotiate with. There are many Israelis who believe that is the path as well. Clearly, many in the Middle East do not believe that Islam can co-exist with democracy. I just think one should be careful when tossing about the anti-semitic charges.

          • http://amillennialist.blogspot.com Santiago Matamoros

            You’re right (probably) that most students don’t know or care about what their student council does, but isn’t the fact that punishing Israel for defending itself against jihad is even being entertained frightening? That it’s a close vote a cause for alarm?

            Would you be so dismissive if instead of anti-Semitism, the motion up for debate promoted racial segregation or [insert hot-button topic here]?

          • WESTWOOD ROB

            My comments keep getting sent to moderation limbo, so I’m going to try this again…

            A different hot button topic might well draw more interest and more concern. If student government was demanding racial segregation, presumably many athletes (of all races) would be disturbed (then again, many black athletes play for the Ole Miss “Rebels,” which has always seemed peculiar to me; but that’s their business anyway).

            But that particular hot-button topic was not the one being debated, and many people do not view all of Israel’s policies as being simply a matter of Israel “defending itself against jihad.” Many people do not automatically equate criticism of Likud positions with anti-Semitism. While gotroy22 and rusoviet were obviously excited about the chance to condemn Obama and UCLA’s alleged “leftist anti-Semitic professors,” you can find criticism of various Israeli policies in places far from the left — TheAmericanConservative [dot] org, for example. It is just not true that all of these critics are anti-Semites. (Well, maybe Pat Buchanan (just kidding)). Therefore, I’m not particularly frightened if a bunch of activist college kids get a bit carried away by emotion while debating a topic that should not be off limits anyway.

            And getting back to the original topic here, I still think it is creepy that this episode prompted a couple of fans to start crowing about how Rosen will avoid UCLA. It’s like they looked at his name, and they immediately saw his (possible) religious background flashing in big neon letters.

          • ProbationU

            Perhaps SC fans will be boycotting the basketball game against OSU because they are being coached by Obama’s brother-in-law? Will you be boycotting?

            Oh…I forgot…SC fans pretty much boycott every game.

          • http://amillennialist.blogspot.com Santiago Matamoros

            Fans? The players are boycotting their own games.

          • WESTWOOD ROB

            Zing!

      • http://amillennialist.blogspot.com Santiago Matamoros

        Compared to the way so many people perceive some middle eastern countries, this dialogue is pretty isolated.

        The problem is that it is perverse; it blames the victim and provides cover for the perpetrator. Israel has only defended itself against decades of (literally) genocidal anti-Semitism.

        With regard to “perception,” there’s a reason for that: Israel produces Nobel Prize winners and its Islamic neighbors produce suicide bombers. If Muslims stop detonating their shoes, underwear, intestines, and breasts in efforts to maim and murder “unbelievers,” perceptions will change.

        • UCLAlum11

          There are two sides to every issue. Yes, Israel has been bombarded with threats and attacks, and that’s awful. But this issue isn’t black and white.

          That’s why it’s great that we can have this discussion. How awesome is this, an exchange of ideas.

          Shouting anti-Semitism (why would you jump to this conclusion?) and condemning anybody that even entertains a discussion is counterproductive for getting your own ideas across.

          • http://amillennialist.blogspot.com Santiago Matamoros

            It’s neither “shouting,” “condemning,” nor “jumping to conclusions (but you’re quick to mischaracterize my position).

            Perhaps you’re unaware that the “Israeli apartheid” divestment nonsense is a propaganda effort by Israel’s genocidal enemies. And many (especially on the Left, it seems) are only too happy to play the Useful Idiot in promoting this nonviolent jihad.

            And you can’t get much more “black-and-white” than a democracy which affords equal rights to all its citizens versus this:

            “the Messenger of Allah . . . came to us and said: (Let us) go to the Jews. We went out with him until we came to them. The Messenger of Allah . . . stood up and called out to them (saying): O ye assembly of Jews, accept Islam (and) you will be safe.

            [. . .]

            “he killed their men, and distributed their women, children and properties among the Muslims, except that some of them had joined the Messenger of Allah . . . who granted them security. They embraced Islam.

            [. . .]

            “It has been narrated by ‘Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah . . . say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim” (Muslim Book 19, Number 4363-4366).”

    • ProbationU

      GoTroy….this is one of the all-time dumbest posts in the history of dumb posts on either blog.

      Should African-American and female athletes at USC not attend because Athletic Director Pat Haden is a member of the Augusta National Golf, which until VERY recently did not have any African-American or female members? Haden, I believe, is also a member of the Los Angeles Country Club, which until recent times also had no African American members and no Jewish members.

      Frankly, I don’t find either situation particularly relevant to the recruiting of student athletes. If I had to choose one, I would say that having your AD as a member of a historically racist club would be more relevant.

      • gotroy22

        You don’t find it relevant to the recruiting of Jewish student athletes? The student body, not the athletic director, not the football coach, not the basketball manager, but the student body seriously considered adopting an anti-semite statement. Why would any Jewish student like Josh Rosen want to go to a school with that many anti-semites? It would be like going to the University of Tehran now or the University of Berlin in 1936.

        • ProbationU

          No. It’s not relevant and I would bet that 98% of the student body was not aware of what was going on with the student council.

          Also, why would you and your Comrade be so consumed with the UCLA Student Council. Do you watch the USC Student Council this closely? Are you under the assumption that there are no anti-Israeli sentiments on campus at SC?

          I actually think it is more important what the AD is doing as he represents the University. However, I don’t think either situation should have any impact on recruits. Should a potential Jewish USC recruit reject USC because the President of Egypt, Mohamed Morsi of Muslim Brotherhood fame was educated at SC? It would be reasonable to assume his SC education had nothing to do with his radicalization. All in all, not a well thought out argument.

    • http://amillennialist.blogspot.com Santiago Matamoros

      If she really wants to stop the violence, rather than attack the only
      decent country in the Middle East, she should address Islam’s ancient
      and sacralized mandates for war against the Jewish people.

      But USC is little better, gotroy22, as for years it’s hosted its Muslim
      Student Association’s collection of Islamic “sacred” texts, which
      includes some of the most virulent and genocidal anti-Semitic literature on Earth.

      It was only after several Jew-hating ahadith were exposed that the MSA removed some of these passages and re-branded their site as the Center for Muslim-Jewish Engagement (www[.]usc[.]edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/home/).

      While that sounds nice, the only “engagement” in which Muhammad was interested was either with women as the spoils of war or this:

      “Shall I point out to you something much worse than this, (as judged) by
      the treatment it received from Allah? Those who incurred the curse of
      Allah and His wrath, those of whom some He transformed into apes and swine, those who worshipped evil; these are (many times) worse in rank, and far more astray from the even path” (Qur’an 5:60)!

      “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say, “O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him”‘” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177).