Instant Takeaways: Utah Showed Progress, Late-Game Details Need Work
Dec 2, 2025, 11:02 PM | Updated: Dec 3, 2025, 10:47 am
Dec 2, 2025; Berkeley, California, USA; Utah Utes forward Seydou Traore (0) puts up a shot during the second half against the California Golden Bears at Haas Pavilion. Mandatory Credit: Bob Kupbens-Imagn Images
(0)
Berkeley, Ca.—Utah walked out of Haas Pavilion with a seven-point loss, but there are takeaways—good and bad, that should help Utah moving forward.
In a game the Utes controlled for long stretches, some numbers exposed the truth: Cal’s guards were too efficient, Utah’s late-game execution wasn’t, and every small margin — free throws, shot quality, defensive rebounding — tilted just enough to turn a winnable road test into a 79–72 reminder of how unforgiving college basketball can be away from home.
Here are the instant takeaways from Utah’s outing tonight against California.
Utah Lost the Efficiency Battle — and That Was the Ballgame
You can’t win a road game when the opponent shoots 91.7% from the line and nearly 46% from the field while posting an offensive efficiency of 1.197 points per possession (PPP). Utah finished at 1.043 PPP — solid, but not enough against a Cal team that squeezed every drop out of its possessions.
The numbers leave no wiggle room: respectable, but overshadowed by Cal’s ability to squeeze value out of every possession. That’s classic road basketball: the home team gets the whistle, hits the freebies, and the visitors need to win the math elsewhere. Utah didn’t.
.@terrencetbrown steals it and takes off for a
HIGH-FLYING slam‼️#GoUtes pic.twitter.com/C41PREE5HL— Utah Basketball (@UtahMBB) December 3, 2025
Utah’s margin for error is slim in general this season, and even tighter in late-game situations until this young roster matures together. You can’t win a road game when the opponent puts on an efficiency clinic from the line and doesn’t give possessions away.
Utah didn’t defend poorly — but “solid defense” loses when the opponent lives above 1.15 PPP. The team was more connected defensively, which is the most encouraging development on that end of the floor.
Jensen’s group needed to manufacture chaos and force more turnovers, or completely dominate the glass. They were unable to do either and Cal kept the game on script, which always favors the home team.
Pippen & Ames Took Advantage of Utah’s Perimeter Defense
The Bears’ backcourt enjoyed a very productive night of basketball. In a game Utah defended better than the score suggests, Cal’s guards still generated elite efficiency simply by being better tough-shot makers.
| Player | Points | Usage % | ORtg | TS% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dai Dai Ames | 25 | 28.8% | 134.4 | 72% |
| Justin Pippen | 23 | 27.4% | 133.1 | 68% |
This wasn’t just shot-making — it was shot-making efficiently at high usage. Essentially, Ames and Pippen combined for:
-
48 points on 29 shots
-
11-of-11 at the FT line
-
24.5% of Cal’s rebounds
The problem wasn’t just scoring — it was shot-making under pressure. Utah often defended well for 20+ seconds, only for Ames to hit a pull-up or Pippen to carve up a gap late in the clock. On the road, that’s demoralizing.
Utah’s guard defense is still far too reliant on individual effort. They don’t switch cleanly enough, don’t recover sharply enough, and don’t shrink the floor with enough aggression at the point of attack.
Ames and Pippen got to their spots without Utah dictating terms. That’s the gap between “competitive road team” and “road team that steals wins.” Until Utah takes more pride in keeping guards out of rhythm, games like this will slip away.
Utah’s Frontcourt Actually Outplayed Cal’s — the Numbers Back It Up
This may surprise people who watched the game live, but the quiet revelation of the night: Keanu Dawes and Seydou Traore were Utah’s advantages.
-
Dawes: 14 pts, 9 reb, 104.2 ORtg, 99.7 DRtg, 72.5% defensive stop rate
-
Traore: 14 pts, 5 reb, 2 ast, 98.1 ORtg, 76.3% defensive stop rate
Dawes, in particular, played like a veteran big — decisive finishing, sturdy defense, and good rebound positioning. His DRtg under 100 is good in a road environment. Traore delivered his best two-way outing of the season, consistently generating paint touches, collapsing the defense, and passing with purpose.
.@iamseydou35 finds @keanu_28 under the basket for the two-hand SLAM! #GoUtes pic.twitter.com/Ad71XAJ8jD
— Utah Basketball (@UtahMBB) December 3, 2025
There were still a handful of questionable decisions and turnovers, and that’s the rub.
However, the twist is this: Utah didn’t feed them enough in the final eight minutes. When the Utes cut the game to 50–48, it was Dawes and Traore dominating touches. Then Utah drifted back toward perimeter-heavy possessions.
Some of that was shot-clock pressure, some was Cal’s ball pressure, but the Utes needed to keep their offense anchored in the frontcourt. Instead, their most efficient weapons became bystanders.
Jacob Patrick Is Key To Utah’s Offense
Patrick delivered his most complete performance of the season:
-
13 points, 5–8 FG, 3–6 3FG (81% eFG%)
-
109.9 ORtg — best on the team
-
Team-best +10 plus-minus
-
2 steals, both turning into runouts
He didn’t just score — he defended multiple matchups, jumped Cal’s passing lanes, and hit timely shots that stopped runs. Patrick is Utah’s most “low-maintenance” guard: he provides spacing, he moves the ball quickly, doesn’t hunt bad shots, cuts with purpose, and competes defensively.
The eye test agrees with the numbers: Patrick brings lineup balance. Utah stabilizes when he’s on the floor. He doesn’t get sped up by pressure, doesn’t over-dribble, and his floor-spacing is the cleanest on the roster.
He’s not flashy, but he’s reliable — and Utah desperately needs reliability on the road. Given Utah’s lack of size, it’s hard to carve out more minutes for him but his time on the floor should be higher.
Utah’s Still Learning When to Hunt the Right Looks
Utah’s second-half shot chart shows the story:
-
Inside the arc: 10–14 (71.4%)
-
From three: 4–17 (23.5%)
Utah’s best offensive stretches came when they attacked the paint with Dawes, Traore, Brown downhill, and Patrick relocating to the weakside.
The worst possessions? The rushed, early-clock threes when the Utes were down two or four and didn’t need the hero shot.
Utah was punishing Cal whenever it worked through Dawes and Traore touches or got Brown downhill. But the Utes sabotaged their own efficiency by settling for 17 second-half threes — many early-clock, low-leverage attempts.
Cal wanted Utah to fall in love with the first semi-open perimeter look. And Utah obliged too often.
The harsh truth: this team is still learning how to control a game’s shot profile for 40 minutes. When they play through their physicality, their offensive rating spikes. When they bail out a defense with poor early-clock decisions, everything stagnates.
This is a correctable flaw — but it’s one that will keep showing up until the guards collectively buy into shot discipline.
Final Word
This was a loss that looked competitive on the surface but was ultimately decided by:
-
Cal’s hyper-efficient guard play
-
Free throws
-
Defensive rebounding
-
Utah’s late-game possessions collapsing under pressure
The analytics also show clear progress: Dawes and Traore played winning basketball, Patrick is vital to the offense, and Utah generated quality paint touches and defensive stops in bunches.
The Utes aren’t far off. But closing that gap is daunting given the lack difference in talent and cohesion they will face. If they want to win games like this in February, the details, the late-game situations, need to become strengths.
Alex Jensen’s squad showed meaningful growth. They battled, they adjusted, they competed.
But the analytics highlight the plain truth: Utah’s guard play needed to be better. Moving forward, Brown and McHenry must stabilize, their shot selection must sharpen, and their late-game execution must mature.
The blueprint is visible — the execution isn’t there yet. This is the type of loss young teams learn from. But it’s also the type of loss that will repeat until the numbers stop telling the same story.
