These two games are a perfect example of why snap judgments shouldn't be made on very little evidence.

We all heard that Coleman had made improvements in the offseason and if this was the first game we saw, everyone would be saying, "Wow, he really did improve."

But instead, the other game was first and many said Coleman stinks and will never be good because his first game was so inefficient and error-prone.

If this was Lee's first game, everyone would've said, "Wow, this is the player we hoped we'd be getting. He just needed to have more of the offense run through him than he saw at Kentucky."

King had a career high 15 tonight so optimism probably would be running high with him, too, even with Cal Poly's smaller and less effective frontcourt.

The fact is, none of them were as bad as they showed Friday or probably as good as they looked today.

UCR was MUCH tougher in the paint, Surprisingly so. There will be nights against big and aggressive posts that they'll need to score in other ways. There will be nights where Coleman forces things too much. But as Wyking said after the game, he's glad for this learning opportunity for Coleman to see what a difference it makes to tighten things up and play more efficiently instead of forcing things all the time.

Really looking forward to Harris-Dyson getting a couple games under his belt. He probably would've helped contest some of those 3's and should help a lot with the press, too.

Not sure where you got that from what I said.

Definitely not as bad as they were on Friday but do I see King averaging 15, Lee regularly going for 21 and 11 or Coleman scoring 30 on 61% from the floor and 78% from the line with minimal turnovers? No.

The answer's likely somewhere in between and an improvement from all 3 over last season.