One can take either a negative or positive response to that game. It's as if there were two Bruin teams playing yesterday - one in each half.
On the negative side there are many aspects of this team that just doesn't look good and does not bode well for the future.
Just to list a few:
The 5 spot is an empty hole. Jamerson has moments of inspired play, but mostly seems lost and overwhelmed out there. Booker is soft, soft, soft. That blocked layup should have been a "give no quarter" dunk. He often reaches for rebounds with one hand. He often doesn't move his feet to position himself in a stronger position where he can have his legs squarely and strongly beneath him, but rather appears to rely on his height and the length of his arms to reach for the ball. He often jumps a moment too late when trying to block or alter a shot so that when he reaches the apex of his jump the ball is already past his outstretched leap. I'm coming to the conclusion that his high school accolades were mostly due to his size and mobility, along with his outside shooting touch, just overwhelmed the competition. On this level his abilities are not so overwhelming. He needs to learn how to use his talents and abilities on this level. In other words, learn how to play tougher, stronger, and smarter. First off, he needs to get physically stronger and possibly mentally stronger as well.
This team may be "old" and experienced, but they play young. They make silly needless mistakes, don't make good decisions, are weak with the ball, don't yet know how to play defense without fouling, and often don't take shots they should and take too many shoots they shouldn't way way too often. In other words the Bruins just don't play smart. All the talent in the world can be nullified by not playing smart.
This is not a good rebounding team. If that's the case then a team needs to rely on fundamentals. Sometimes this teams blocks out beautifully. Sometimes only a couple of guys block out. If a team is not a good rebounding team then it is imperative that everyone blocks out every time. It's also important to go after rebounds with two hands. It's just fundamentals and this team is lacking in some of them.
On the plus side:
This team does not give up. They've shown they can come back. If they were a "stronger" team perhaps they wouldn't need to come back so often.
This team can shoot. We haven't yet seen everyone hitting like they can in a game. If that can ever happen this team will be hard to defend.
Dent appears to have adjusted and we're finally seeing what he showed last season. This bodes well for the Bruins moving forward. We've seen that he has the ability to take over games and make everyone better. Having a point guard with those abilities is an incredible advantage.
It appears that having Bilodeau at the five is the most efficient lineup. The bad news is that smaller lineup may not be to the Bruins' advantage against a lot of the B1G schools.
Yesterday's game wasn't really a 13 point loss. With a few minutes to go Cronin had gotten his team in a possible position to win. Like so often happens, when things don't go right in those waning minutes as the team behind takes risks the lead can expand. Stupid fouls on the Bruins part (again, immaturity) certainly didn't help. Anyway, in my mind yesterday was, in essence, a 4 to 5 point game.
Another positive is that the Bruins played Iowa fairly even without Clark. If Clark is unavailable for future games the Bruins know they can still compete.
From that perspective, it wasn't a devastating loss to travel to a hostile court, play a very good ranked team, have a devastating first half, lose a key player, and still be in a possible position to win with a few minutes left in the game. That's a positive in my mind.
On the flip side, playing a dismal half of basketball, make bad decisions, commit stupid fouls, have too many turnovers, and have to play with a 5 who really isn't a five are all negatives for this team.
As an aside, that 40 foot swish by Stirtz at the buzzer was unnecessary and a bit classless. It looked to me that Stirtz looked like he regretted taking that shot, but still he took it. The class move would have been to just let the time run out and give the ball over to the Bruins. The Bruins showed some class when they didn't try to score with the last 6 seconds they had after Stirtz's shot. It really doesn't matter but I did note it.
So, which team shows up on Tuesday. The first half Bruins or the second half Bruins. The second half Bruins can compete and IMO even playing to their maximum I fear the best they can do is somewhere in the middle of the B1G pack. If the first half Bruins continues to rear its head then the bottom of the pack looks likely for them and perhaps a whiff on the tournament.
Looking forward, even with Dent playing to the level many expected, Bilodeau having a breakout offensive year, Clark continuing to play really well (if he can come back), and getting strong contributions from Brown, Williams, Perry I still think the key for the Bruins' success is getting strong contributions from their fives. If Cronin can just get solid minutes from both Booker and Jamerson - hit a few shots, get rebounds, alter or block a few shots, firm up the inside, don't foul - combined with what their big three can provide along with the supporting cast, I thin k this team can make some noise. It likely not to happen, but they can't say that they don't see what they can be. IMO it really depends on how much they want it - again, that mentally strong thing.