Did losing Jordan Adams end UCLA's chances of making a serious run in the tournament?
Jack Follman, Pacific Takes: Yes, I don't know if I see them getting out of the first round. Shabazz Muhammad simply looked disinterested in the Pac-12 Tournament and they really have no one else who can be counted on to put up points consistently.
David Piper, Addicted to Quack: Absolutely. They just don't have the depth to make a serious push, especially in a two-games-in-three-days scenario. They looked gassed at the end of the Pac-12 tourney, hard to see how that changes here.
NorcalNick, California Golden Blogs: Yes. UCLA would be a major dog against Florida even with a full roster. Without Adams? Even a win over Minnesota would be a decent accomplishment. Maybe if Shabazz goes nuts, but even then I just don't see it.
Andy Wooldridge, Building The Dam: Unless the fix is in, yes. There isn't enough depth and versatility on the UCLA roster to survive the variety of challenges they are going to face.
Gekko Mojo, UW Dawg Pound: Of course. Not only is Jordon Adams a somewhat calming talent on a volatile squad, but he is also one of just seven men in the regular rotation. Without him, UCLA is essentially a six man team. They might be able to sneak past Minnesota (though I doubt it), but they lack the depth to get any further.
Adam Butler, Pac Hoops: He was their best shot creator. Until he began to take that game over against Arizona, the Bruins were offensively inept. Adams was the only player capable of creating off the dribble with Drew locked up. What's more is his absence costs them crucial depth the Bruins will miss against the athletic Gophers.