Cal Adds Transfer Jordan Shepherd

SFCityBear said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Well here is the data I have for Cal over the past 11 years:
Year Coach Number of different starting lineups:
10-11 Monty 5
11-12 Monty 6
12-13 Monty 4
13-14 Monty 5
14-15 Martin 5
15-16 Martin 6
16-17 Martin 10
17-18 Jones 8
18-19 Jones 11
19-20 Fox 10
20-21 Fox 18

18 different starting lineups in 29 games is just very notable. FWIW, at Georgia Fox ranged from 5 to 12.

Pretty sure some of Monty's teams dealt with injuries too.

A major factor in maximizing wins is playing your best players as much as they can play.

Some teams emphasize their depth by playing fast and playing a deep rotation. We are not deep and we play very slowly.

---

Some of it is coaching style (a la your last point), but I'd toss out 20-21 as being a weird outlier (i.e. players losing practice and game time for qurantine issues was unique). Even doing so, my take is your second to last point about playing your best players - that is we just haven't had 5 or 6 talented players to settle into a rotation.

By observation, I think Fox has been an average coach in terms of rotations. My only big beef has been his stubbornness with Lars, but I temper that with lack of obvious options. I would put Monty as a plus and Jones and Braun as a minus. However, Martin had some puzzling rotations, as I recall.

---

I agree with all of this. I often wondered why Braun would start a different player once in a while, and the player usually didn't perform very well. I figured that maybe Braun had started him because the player done well in practice that week. There are practice players and game players, and a coach needs to start or give the most minutes to players who perform best in games, not necessarily the ones who play best in practice. I also like the idea of sometimes rewarding a backup player who had played well in the past game with more minutes or a start.

---

It just makes sense to give more minutes In games to players who are producing in games and reduce the minutes of players who are not.

When you go through the stats there are sometimes players with great stats per minute who play very little. The stats are usually waved away BECAUSE the player has played very little. An alternative might be to give the player more minutes and see if their good play continues.

Many coaches will yank a player immediately if they make a mistake (which tends to make players overly tentative) but Braun also would often sit players who were hot, after a made three for example (Fox has done some of that too). When asked, coaches who do that usually respond "I was worried they would get tired" or "he looked winded." Seems the opposite, they would not be on such a hot streak if they were tired, wait until the hot hand ends before you send them to the bench (oh, hot hands are real, btw, the statistics that debunked them was flawed).

SFCityBear said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Well here is the data I have for Cal over the past 11 years:
Year Coach Number of different starting lineups:
10-11 Monty 5
11-12 Monty 6
12-13 Monty 4
13-14 Monty 5
14-15 Martin 5
15-16 Martin 6
16-17 Martin 10
17-18 Jones 8
18-19 Jones 11
19-20 Fox 10
20-21 Fox 18

18 different starting lineups in 29 games is just very notable. FWIW, at Georgia Fox ranged from 5 to 12.

Pretty sure some of Monty's teams dealt with injuries too.

A major factor in maximizing wins is playing your best players as much as they can play.

Some teams emphasize their depth by playing fast and playing a deep rotation. We are not deep and we play very slowly.

---

Some of it is coaching style (a la your last point), but I'd toss out 20-21 as being a weird outlier (i.e. players losing practice and game time for qurantine issues was unique). Even doing so, my take is your second to last point about playing your best players - that is we just haven't had 5 or 6 talented players to settle into a rotation.

By observation, I think Fox has been an average coach in terms of rotations. My only big beef has been his stubbornness with Lars, but I temper that with lack of obvious options. I would put Monty as a plus and Jones and Braun as a minus. However, Martin had some puzzling rotations, as I recall.

---

I agree with all of this. I often wondered why Braun would start a different player once in a while, and the player usually didn't perform very well. I figured that maybe Braun had started him because the player done well in practice that week. There are practice players and game players, and a coach needs to start or give the most minutes to players who perform best in games, not necessarily the ones who play best in practice. I also like the idea of sometimes rewarding a backup player who had played well in the past game with more minutes or a start.

---

"Man look, I hear you... it's funny to me too, I mean it's strange... it's strange to me too, but we're talking about practice man, we're not even talking about the game... the actual game, when it matters... We're talking about practice."

"How the hell can I make my teammates better by practicing?"

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I believe his name is Makale, not Malik....and as far as highlights are concerned, my focus is on shot form and possibly offensive rebounding....

bearmanpg said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I believe his name is Makale, not Malik....and as far as highlights are concerned, my focus is on shot form and possibly offensive rebounding....

---

Sometimes appearances are deceiving. I agree with SF's point in that based on conference stats, Foreman was the 2nd most productive of our returning players (Kelly #1) and third most per minute of the guys who got significant minutes (Kelly #1, Celestine #2).

When Bradley was out Fox usually started Brown, Foreman and Betley with different combos at the 4/5. Sometimes Hyder instead of Foreman. With Celestine replacing Betley in the above, you can predict what Fox is likely to do.

Thus, the starting lineup initially is likely Brown, Foreman, Celestine, Anticevich, Kelly. Maybe Lars instead of Grant if we need more size on defense.

Shepard seems like another Hyder, someone to compete and play in the 1/2 spots. He was a three point threat as a freshman at Oklahoma hitting .340, but has become a horrible shooter, .293 and .294 with Charlotte. If that continues I just don't see him as anything other than a 1, but Fox might play him at 2 for his slashing and defense.

Hopefully someone from our long list of potential candidates emerges as a standout at the 2/3. But until then, I think Foreman is likely to start and get a lot of minutes.

calumnus said:

---

bearmanpg said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I believe his name is Makale, not Malik....and as far as highlights are concerned, my focus is on shot form and possibly offensive rebounding....

---

Sometimes appearances are deceiving. I agree with SF's point in that based on conference stats, Foreman was the 2nd most productive of our returning players (Kelly #1) and third most per minute of the guys who got significant minutes (Kelly #1, Celestine #2).

When Bradley was out Fox usually started Brown, Foreman and Betley with different combos at the 4/5. Sometimes Hyder instead of Foreman. With Celestine replacing Betley in the above, you can predict what Fox is likely to do.

Thus, the starting lineup initially is likely Brown, Foreman, Celestine, Anticevich, Kelly. Maybe Lars instead of Grant if we need more size on defense.

Shepard seems like another Hyder, someone to compete and play in the 1/2 spots. He was a three point threat as a freshman at Oklahoma hitting .340, but has become a horrible shooter, .293 and .294 with Charlotte. If that continues I just don't see him as anything other than a 1, but Fox might play him at 2 for his slashing and defense.

Hopefully someone from our long list of potential candidates emerges as a standout at the 2/3. But until then, I think Foreman is likely to start and get a lot of minutes.

---

with Bradley and Bentley gone, we need shooters, and Foreman is our best returning shooter (unless Celestine can keep his shooting percentage while taking a lot more contested shots)

yes Foreman will play a lot

HoopDreams said:

---

calumnus said:

---

bearmanpg said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I believe his name is Makale, not Malik....and as far as highlights are concerned, my focus is on shot form and possibly offensive rebounding....

---

Sometimes appearances are deceiving. I agree with SF's point in that based on conference stats, Foreman was the 2nd most productive of our returning players (Kelly #1) and third most per minute of the guys who got significant minutes (Kelly #1, Celestine #2).

When Bradley was out Fox usually started Brown, Foreman and Betley with different combos at the 4/5. Sometimes Hyder instead of Foreman. With Celestine replacing Betley in the above, you can predict what Fox is likely to do.

Thus, the starting lineup initially is likely Brown, Foreman, Celestine, Anticevich, Kelly. Maybe Lars instead of Grant if we need more size on defense.

Shepard seems like another Hyder, someone to compete and play in the 1/2 spots. He was a three point threat as a freshman at Oklahoma hitting .340, but has become a horrible shooter, .293 and .294 with Charlotte. If that continues I just don't see him as anything other than a 1, but Fox might play him at 2 for his slashing and defense.

Hopefully someone from our long list of potential candidates emerges as a standout at the 2/3. But until then, I think Foreman is likely to start and get a lot of minutes.

---

with Bradley and Bentley gone, we need shooters, and Foreman is our best returning shooter (unless Celestine can keep his shooting percentage while taking a lot more contested shots)

yes Foreman will play a lot

---

I'm hoping the fact that Fox invited Foreman back indicated that he felt semi-confident that Makale could at least shore up other parts of his game. He must've felt that he was, at the minimum, "coachable".

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

His defensive stats look good.

The way I see it is he is likely an upgrade at the 1 (though a year ago that was said about Hyder too) but given his poor shooting I think pairing him with Brown in the backcourt would be brutal for our offense. Teams could really pack it in against us which would neutralize his driving and screw up Kelly's inside game as well.

bearmanpg said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I believe his name is Makale, not Malik....and as far as highlights are concerned, my focus is on shot form and possibly offensive rebounding....

---

Thanks for the correction on Foreman's name.

If I do something like this, my girlfriend, who happens to be from China, will usually say, "You are so stupid." And I'll reply, "I'm not stupid. I'm just lazy." And she will answer that with, "You are stupid, AND you are lazy."

Anyway, I will try and do better, so thanks.

SFCityBear said:

---

bearmanpg said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I believe his name is Makale, not Malik....and as far as highlights are concerned, my focus is on shot form and possibly offensive rebounding....

---

Thanks for the correction on Foreman's name.

If I do something like this, my girlfriend, who happens to be from China, will usually say, "You are so stupid." And I'll reply, "I'm not stupid. I'm just lazy." And she will answer that with, "You are stupid, AND you are lazy."

Anyway, I will try and do better, so thanks.

---

Marry that woman

Fyght4Cal said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

bearmanpg said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I believe his name is Makale, not Malik....and as far as highlights are concerned, my focus is on shot form and possibly offensive rebounding....

---

Thanks for the correction on Foreman's name.

If I do something like this, my girlfriend, who happens to be from China, will usually say, "You are so stupid." And I'll reply, "I'm not stupid. I'm just lazy." And she will answer that with, "You are stupid, AND you are lazy."

Anyway, I will try and do better, so thanks.

---

Marry that woman

---

I did ask her to marry me. I even proposed with a ring. She tried it on for several minutes, and finally declared, "It's too small."

I asked, "Oh, the diamond is too small? Well, let's go shopping. We can get you a ring that you'll like."

"No", she said. "The diamond is fine. It just doesn't fit on my finger."

I went home wondering, does this mean "Yes", or "No"?

The next morning at my office, I went to talk with two of my co-workers, both Asian, to get their opinion. I told them that I had proposed last night. They looked at each other, and said, "Don't tell us what happened. We will tell you how it went."

One of them got down on bended knee, pretending he had a ring, and then asked the other one to marry and handed him the imaginary ring. The other one tried the ring on for several minutes, and declared, "It's too small."

I split my sides laughing. "How did you know?"

They said, "Don't worry. All Asian girls are like that when you first ask them to marry." I have a lot to learn.

SFCityBear said:

---

Fyght4Cal said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

bearmanpg said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I believe his name is Makale, not Malik....and as far as highlights are concerned, my focus is on shot form and possibly offensive rebounding....

---

Thanks for the correction on Foreman's name.

If I do something like this, my girlfriend, who happens to be from China, will usually say, "You are so stupid." And I'll reply, "I'm not stupid. I'm just lazy." And she will answer that with, "You are stupid, AND you are lazy."

Anyway, I will try and do better, so thanks.

---

Marry that woman

---

I did ask her to marry me. I even proposed with a ring. She tried it on for several minutes, and finally declared, "It's too small."

I asked, "Oh, the diamond is too small? Well, let's go shopping. We can get you a ring that you'll like."

"No", she said. "The diamond is fine. It just doesn't fit on my finger."

I went home wondering whether this meant "Yes", or "No".

The next morning at my office, I went to talk with two of my co-workers, both Asian, to get their opinion. I told them that I had proposed last night. They looked at each other, and said, "Don't tell us what happened. We will tell you how it went."

One of them got down on bended knee, pretending he had a ring, and then asked the other one to marry and handed him the imaginary ring. The other one tried the ring on for several minutes, and declared, "It's too small."

I split my sides laughing. "How did you know?"

They said, "Don't worry. All Asian girls are like that when you first ask them to marry." I have a lot to learn.

---

Hilarious! I am crying over here. The proposal story is great on its own. But the re-enactment is the chef's kiss. It looks as though you're on the right track. Hang in there.

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

Fyght4Cal said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

Fyght4Cal said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

bearmanpg said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I believe his name is Makale, not Malik....and as far as highlights are concerned, my focus is on shot form and possibly offensive rebounding....

---

Thanks for the correction on Foreman's name.

If I do something like this, my girlfriend, who happens to be from China, will usually say, "You are so stupid." And I'll reply, "I'm not stupid. I'm just lazy." And she will answer that with, "You are stupid, AND you are lazy."

Anyway, I will try and do better, so thanks.

---

Marry that woman

---

I did ask her to marry me. I even proposed with a ring. She tried it on for several minutes, and finally declared, "It's too small."

I asked, "Oh, the diamond is too small? Well, let's go shopping. We can get you a ring that you'll like."

"No", she said. "The diamond is fine. It just doesn't fit on my finger."

I went home wondering whether this meant "Yes", or "No".

The next morning at my office, I went to talk with two of my co-workers, both Asian, to get their opinion. I told them that I had proposed last night. They looked at each other, and said, "Don't tell us what happened. We will tell you how it went."

One of them got down on bended knee, pretending he had a ring, and then asked the other one to marry and handed him the imaginary ring. The other one tried the ring on for several minutes, and declared, "It's too small."

I split my sides laughing. "How did you know?"

They said, "Don't worry. All Asian girls are like that when you first ask them to marry." I have a lot to learn.

---

Hilarious! I am crying over here. The proposal story is great on its own. But the re-enactment is the chef's kiss. It looks as though you're on the right track. Hang in there.

---

Thanks for your support. You are probably too late.

Chef's kiss? How did you know the lady was the owner of my local Chinese restaurant? I used to work as an engineering manager during the day, and after work, I'd hustle over to help out in the restaurant. It was so much fun. She let me keep my tips and I always ate free. It was one of my dreams, to meet a lady who owned a Chinese restaurant, because I figured if I was ever unemployed, I would always have a place to eat. I may write a book. Many hilarious stories.

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

My issue is not whether Shepard should or shouldn't start, it is that if he starts does Brown start too? Or do you play someone (Foreman, Kuany..?) who brings more to the table since Shepard can play PG? Brown and Shepard on the floor together seems too easy for teams to defend.

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

My issue is not whether Shepard should or shouldn't start, it is that if he starts does Brown start too? Or do you play someone (Foreman, Kuany..?) who brings more to the table since Shepard can play PG? Brown and Shepard on the floor together seems too easy for teams to defend.

---

I think Brown has to play a lot because he is the only person who has the ball handling skill to get the offense started if there is ball pressure. I think Shepherd brings more to the table than anyone else, while granting that two bad three point shooters at the 1 and 2 is a problem. Cal needs better players so it has to make fewer tradeoffs.

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

My issue is not whether Shepard should or shouldn't start, it is that if he starts does Brown start too? Or do you play someone (Foreman, Kuany..?) who brings more to the table since Shepard can play PG? Brown and Shepard on the floor together seems too easy for teams to defend.

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

My issue is not whether Shepard should or shouldn't start, it is that if he starts does Brown start too? Or do you play someone (Foreman, Kuany..?) who brings more to the table since Shepard can play PG? Brown and Shepard on the floor together seems too easy for teams to defend.

---

---

Early returns are that Shepard is solid and is in good position to start along side Brown. Celestine, Kelly, GA would be the starting 5 assuming continued progress and health free. Brown is a excellent competitor and defender and is working hard on his offensive play. Hyder is recovering from surgery so status is currently unknown and Celestine is progressing well but is doing PT as well. Competition will be lively given the # of players on the roster. But likely the incoming freshmen will not be ready for major minutes. Unknown is if Kuany can hopefully improve at both ends of the floor, given his athleticism and will Lars be able to provide more scoring?

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

Well, many of us have written a post where we would rather not deal with the replies. But this is a forum, and you have to expect replies. You can take your marbles and go home, but the rest of us do have a right to reply, especially if you post something critical about a Cal player or coach. We are fans, and that is what we do.

I will try and remember that when you write a comment about a player, that you might not have seen that player play in a game before. That will help me determine whether to respond to it or not.

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

Well, many of us have written a post where we would rather not deal with the replies. But this is a forum, and you have to expect replies. You can take your marbles and go home, but the rest of us do have a right to reply, especially if you post something critical about a Cal player or coach. We are fans, and that is what we do.

I will try and remember that when you write a comment about a player, that you might not have seen that player play in a game before. That will help me determine whether to respond to it or not.

---

There is a misunderstanding. My point about not going on and on was pointed at ME, not YOU. I should refrain from saying less positive things so often. I welcome you to comment as you see fit.

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

Well, many of us have written a post where we would rather not deal with the replies. But this is a forum, and you have to expect replies. You can take your marbles and go home, but the rest of us do have a right to reply, especially if you post something critical about a Cal player or coach. We are fans, and that is what we do.

I will try and remember that when you write a comment about a player, that you might not have seen that player play in a game before. That will help me determine whether to respond to it or not.

---

There is a misunderstanding. My point about not going on and on was pointed at ME, not YOU. I should refrain from saying less positive things so often. I welcome you to comment as you see fit.

---

Sorry I misunderstood you. Let's chalk it up to electronic communication not being a perfect way of communicating.

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

Well, many of us have written a post where we would rather not deal with the replies. But this is a forum, and you have to expect replies. You can take your marbles and go home, but the rest of us do have a right to reply, especially if you post something critical about a Cal player or coach. We are fans, and that is what we do.

I will try and remember that when you write a comment about a player, that you might not have seen that player play in a game before. That will help me determine whether to respond to it or not.

---

There is a misunderstanding. My point about not going on and on was pointed at ME, not YOU. I should refrain from saying less positive things so often. I welcome you to comment as you see fit.

---

Sorry I misunderstood you. Let's chalk it up to electronic communication not being a perfect way of communicating.

---

Yes, misunderstandings are inevitable. It is cleared up, no harm, no foul.

4thGenCal said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

My issue is not whether Shepard should or shouldn't start, it is that if he starts does Brown start too? Or do you play someone (Foreman, Kuany..?) who brings more to the table since Shepard can play PG? Brown and Shepard on the floor together seems too easy for teams to defend.

---

---

Early returns are that Shepard is solid and is in good position to start along side Brown. Celestine, Kelly, GA would be the starting 5 assuming continued progress and health free. Brown is a excellent competitor and defender and is working hard on his offensive play. Hyder is recovering from surgery so status is currently unknown and Celestine is progressing well but is doing PT as well. Competition will be lively given the # of players on the roster. But likely the incoming freshmen will not be ready for major minutes. Unknown is if Kuany can hopefully improve at both ends of the floor, given his athleticism and will Lars be able to provide more scoring?

---

thanks for the inside look

troubling that two of our top 6 rotation players are still limited by injuries/recoveries

if we start brown, celestine, shepard, kelly and grant will we have enough shooting?

I am really hoping we see 2K breakout this year. He looks to have the tools, but can he put it together and be our breakout player?

HoopDreams said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

My issue is not whether Shepard should or shouldn't start, it is that if he starts does Brown start too? Or do you play someone (Foreman, Kuany..?) who brings more to the table since Shepard can play PG? Brown and Shepard on the floor together seems too easy for teams to defend.

---

---

Early returns are that Shepard is solid and is in good position to start along side Brown. Celestine, Kelly, GA would be the starting 5 assuming continued progress and health free. Brown is a excellent competitor and defender and is working hard on his offensive play. Hyder is recovering from surgery so status is currently unknown and Celestine is progressing well but is doing PT as well. Competition will be lively given the # of players on the roster. But likely the incoming freshmen will not be ready for major minutes. Unknown is if Kuany can hopefully improve at both ends of the floor, given his athleticism and will Lars be able to provide more scoring?

---

thanks for the inside look

troubling that two of our top 6 rotation players are still limited by injuries/recoveries

if we start brown, celestine, shepard, kelly and grant will we have enough shooting?

I am really hoping we see 2K breakout this year. He looks to have the tools, but can he put it together and be our breakout player?

---

Agreed, but his defensive lapses have held him back. Lot of good solid character young men - can they flip the switch and become tougher defensively and will Lars, Foreman and Kuany bring increased offense? Roberson, Bowser will in time contribute, but both need to mature physically. Hyder can contribute but has yet to be healthy so his impact has not been shown.

4thGenCal said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

My issue is not whether Shepard should or shouldn't start, it is that if he starts does Brown start too? Or do you play someone (Foreman, Kuany..?) who brings more to the table since Shepard can play PG? Brown and Shepard on the floor together seems too easy for teams to defend.

---

---

Early returns are that Shepard is solid and is in good position to start along side Brown. Celestine, Kelly, GA would be the starting 5 assuming continued progress and health free. Brown is a excellent competitor and defender and is working hard on his offensive play. Hyder is recovering from surgery so status is currently unknown and Celestine is progressing well but is doing PT as well. Competition will be lively given the # of players on the roster. But likely the incoming freshmen will not be ready for major minutes. Unknown is if Kuany can hopefully improve at both ends of the floor, given his athleticism and will Lars be able to provide more scoring?

---

thanks for the inside look

troubling that two of our top 6 rotation players are still limited by injuries/recoveries

if we start brown, celestine, shepard, kelly and grant will we have enough shooting?

I am really hoping we see 2K breakout this year. He looks to have the tools, but can he put it together and be our breakout player?

---

Agreed, but his defensive lapses have held him back. Lot of good solid character young men - can they flip the switch and become tougher defensively and will Lars, Foreman and Kuany bring increased offense? Roberson, Bowser will in time contribute, but both need to mature physically. Hyder can contribute but has yet to be healthy so his impact has not been shown.

---

If I am anyone on the team (other than Kelly, Lars or Thorpe, who need to work on post moves), I spend all summer at the gym working on my 3 point shot. That includes walkons like Welles.

With some accounting for other skills, I would make our 5th starter the player who is our best 3pt shooter and also plays good defense, or at least is not a liability on defense. The 3 is that important to winning in modern basketball and is the most glaring deficiency on our team.

Maybe Kelly should practice threes too

He's capable but doesn't seem to have the green light even from 16 feet

calumnus said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

My issue is not whether Shepard should or shouldn't start, it is that if he starts does Brown start too? Or do you play someone (Foreman, Kuany..?) who brings more to the table since Shepard can play PG? Brown and Shepard on the floor together seems too easy for teams to defend.

---

---

Early returns are that Shepard is solid and is in good position to start along side Brown. Celestine, Kelly, GA would be the starting 5 assuming continued progress and health free. Brown is a excellent competitor and defender and is working hard on his offensive play. Hyder is recovering from surgery so status is currently unknown and Celestine is progressing well but is doing PT as well. Competition will be lively given the # of players on the roster. But likely the incoming freshmen will not be ready for major minutes. Unknown is if Kuany can hopefully improve at both ends of the floor, given his athleticism and will Lars be able to provide more scoring?

---

thanks for the inside look

troubling that two of our top 6 rotation players are still limited by injuries/recoveries

if we start brown, celestine, shepard, kelly and grant will we have enough shooting?

I am really hoping we see 2K breakout this year. He looks to have the tools, but can he put it together and be our breakout player?

---

Agreed, but his defensive lapses have held him back. Lot of good solid character young men - can they flip the switch and become tougher defensively and will Lars, Foreman and Kuany bring increased offense? Roberson, Bowser will in time contribute, but both need to mature physically. Hyder can contribute but has yet to be healthy so his impact has not been shown.

---

If I am anyone on the team (other than Kelly, Lars or Thorpe, who need to work on post moves), I spend all summer at the gym working on my 3 point shot. That includes walkons like Welles.

With some accounting for other skills, I would make our 5th starter the player who is our best 3pt shooter and also plays good defense, or at least is not a liability on defense. The 3 is that important to winning in modern basketball and is the most glaring deficiency on our team.

---

HoopDreams said:

---

Maybe Kelly should practice threes too

He's capable but doesn't seem to have the green light even from 16 feet

calumnus said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

My issue is not whether Shepard should or shouldn't start, it is that if he starts does Brown start too? Or do you play someone (Foreman, Kuany..?) who brings more to the table since Shepard can play PG? Brown and Shepard on the floor together seems too easy for teams to defend.

---

---

Early returns are that Shepard is solid and is in good position to start along side Brown. Celestine, Kelly, GA would be the starting 5 assuming continued progress and health free. Brown is a excellent competitor and defender and is working hard on his offensive play. Hyder is recovering from surgery so status is currently unknown and Celestine is progressing well but is doing PT as well. Competition will be lively given the # of players on the roster. But likely the incoming freshmen will not be ready for major minutes. Unknown is if Kuany can hopefully improve at both ends of the floor, given his athleticism and will Lars be able to provide more scoring?

---

thanks for the inside look

troubling that two of our top 6 rotation players are still limited by injuries/recoveries

if we start brown, celestine, shepard, kelly and grant will we have enough shooting?

I am really hoping we see 2K breakout this year. He looks to have the tools, but can he put it together and be our breakout player?

---

Agreed, but his defensive lapses have held him back. Lot of good solid character young men - can they flip the switch and become tougher defensively and will Lars, Foreman and Kuany bring increased offense? Roberson, Bowser will in time contribute, but both need to mature physically. Hyder can contribute but has yet to be healthy so his impact has not been shown.

---

If I am anyone on the team (other than Kelly, Lars or Thorpe, who need to work on post moves), I spend all summer at the gym working on my 3 point shot. That includes walkons like Welles.

With some accounting for other skills, I would make our 5th starter the player who is our best 3pt shooter and also plays good defense, or at least is not a liability on defense. The 3 is that important to winning in modern basketball and is the most glaring deficiency on our team.

---

---

If he were the fifth three point shooter we could be the Warriors, but I don't see much advantage him being the third (with Anticevich and Celestine), that would leave Brown and Shepard to drive, score inside and rebound? Basically an upside down team. I think we need him to be an inside scoring threat and rebounder. He is our best returning scorer, so we need him to stick with what he does best and just do it more.

However, I do think adding a three point shot would make him a more viable player at the next level, wherever that is. He is just not big enough to be a PF even overseas without an outside shot.

I'm not so sure about that starting lineup. Are you up to speed on the incoming Freshman? They are far more athletic than the starting line up you posted and that's what Fox wants to come with. Jordan will start for sure though.

calumnus said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

Maybe Kelly should practice threes too

He's capable but doesn't seem to have the green light even from 16 feet

calumnus said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I wonder if he will mostly play PG (challenge Brown for minutes/starts) or play the 2 (seems to be a lot of emphasis of him as a scorer) with the idea he will help replace Bradley and Betley.

---

If you watch him play his strength is off the dribble, either taking it to the basket or settling for the midrange. So I think he will do a lot of Paris Austin, late in the shot clock things. His Assist to turnover ratio is only a little over 1-to-1, so he will not be a classic 1. I think he pairs with Brown, who brings great defense. It certainly does not hurt that he will be in his fifth year with a lot of experience and physical maturity.

If you want to feel positive about him, check out

---

So you are guessing our starting lineup will be Kelly, GA, Celestine, Sheppard, Brown?

I agree, he looks good creating off the dribble. If we we had another obvious option at 2/3 I'd like to see him mostly at PG. I am hoping 1 or 2 of our wings has a breakout season.

---

Yes. I see Call having a 7 man team, those 5 plus Hyder and Kuany. So two of three of Brown, Hyder and Shepherd start. I think Brown and Shepherd are most likely with Hyder relieving either of them. Celestine is the 3 and GA and Kelly are 4/5. Kuany comes in for Celestine or one of the bigs.

If other players improve, then they get minutes. I think Thorpe is most likely to earn them. He makes sense in an 8 man rotation replacing Kelly at the 5.

That is what I think should happen. What I think will happen is that Fox will play like 12 players in almost random configurations.

---

Interesting that you project Sheppard as a starter, unless you have seen him play. You and everyone else have not mentioned Foreman, who is still on the roster, and who hit a lot of threes for us last season, while probably taking too many shots. I was critical of that last season, but that was what both he and Betley were recruited to do, shoot threes. Foreman did hit a couple of threes in the clutch at the end of games. He is limited in size and in the ability to penetrate and finish, but I think he should be in any rotation, unless Sheppard shows himself to be better, of course. Hyder can be in a rotation, but I would not think he would start, unless he has improved considerably over the summer. He has more upside than Foreman, but I saw nothing much from him last season to warrant him starting ahead of Malik, or getting major minutes. And Hyder can't shoot a three to save himself. He shot too many bricks last season. He has to improve that. I was hoping he could be a point guard, but he hasn't shown that he can do that very well yet either. He is still very young, and can get better.

Over two years, Thorpe has improved slightly, and so has Lars. It is hard to choose between them, as they have different skills and different weaknesses. But I haven't seen anything from Thorpe that would make me think he was ahead of Lars at the end of last season. It looks more like a 9-man usual rotation to me.

---

Now we can debate whether my opinion is worth anything. But I don't form one without having seen someone play. With Shepherd it is just highlights. I even posted some in this link. I think they together with his stats paint a clear picture. I have seen Foreman play and he is not a pac12 athlete, undersized, and not a good enough shooter to overcome that.

---

Of course your opinion is worth something, to me at least. Especially if you have seen someone play. And if you have seen him play up close, or for several games, then it is worth even more. If you mean that you saw him play in a highlight film, well, you can evaluate a little from that, but not very much. Highlight films are just that, highlights. Offensive highlights. They hardly never show defense (50% of basketball), passing, setting picks, or moving without the ball. They cherry pick the player's best moments, leave out all his shortcomings, and sync it with some modern music, to sell scouts, fans and coaches on a player. They are pure basketball propaganda, IMO. I still watch all of them, but don't get overly excited and won't evaluate a player until I see the player play games on our team, with our players and our coach. I once saw a highlight video of Omondi Amoke, which showed him scoring inside, draining threes, and a good-looking handle, leading a couple of fast breaks up the floor. In person, in our games, he was a very good rebounder, especially offensive rebounds, but he couldn't make a shot outside three feet.

I understand your points about Foreman. I agree that he is undersized, but I don't agree with the rest of your opinion.

Last season, Foreman had these PAC12 numbers:

44 threes made, 15th in the PAC12
2.9 threes made per 40 minutes, 4th in the PAC12
FT% 0.868, tied for 4th in the PAC12
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, tied for 27th in the PAC12

All that tells me he qualifies as a PAC12 athlete.

Here are his numbers per 40 minutes, compared to his Cal teammates:

2.9 threes made, 1st on the Cal team
FT% 0.868, 1st on the Cal team
Assists 3.0, 3rd on the Cal team
Fewest turnovers 2.1, tied for 4th on the Cal team
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.4, 3rd on the Cal team
Steals 0.9, tied for 3rd on the Cal team

I don't say that Malik should be the starter, only that he was one of Cal's best players last season, albeit on a bad team, and his numbers were the best of all the returning players in several categories. Malik's 3pt shooting percentage dropped 5% from his previous season. He is undersized, as you said, and as such, Fox needs to scheme for getting him more open looks, maybe even mid range shots from behind double screens. If Monty was his coach, he'd be getting those open looks. If Sheppard or Roberson are better players, then maybe Malik does not play much, if they need some scoring, Malik still needs to be allowed to compete for minutes, IMO. My only concern with Malik is his defense against bigger guards, so matchups will be important in giving him minutes.

---

I will make one counter post, but my point is not to tear down Cal players. You have one point, that Foreman is a good free throw shooter. But he barely gets to the line, 2.5 per 40 minutes, so this is only relevant at the end of the game. He shot 32% from 3, which is not efficient, and I would hope we are past valuing high counts that come from inefficiency. 3 assists per 40 minutes is so low that it is hardly an endorsement, even if other players were equally poor. 0.9 steals per 40 minutes is fairly meaningless, like a steal every other game in the minutes that he might get. Given his other limitations, I would play others ahead of him.

In terms of Shepherd, it is much easier to evaluate college stats than high school stats. Given his highlights video plus his stats, I think it is clear what Cal has, a decent pac12 reserve who is forced to play more than he should because there is no strong alternative. Defense can be taught, and he is athletic enough to be an average defender. I believe and hope he starts.

---

I don't get it. You say your point is not to tear down Cal players, and then you proceed to ridicule Cal's Makale Foreman.

Once again, I never said Foreman should start, only that he should be in the rotation. The modern game requires that teams make a good number of threes to have a chance to win their games. Last season, Cal had five 3 point shooters, and did not win many games. Two of them are gone. If Foreman is not in your rotation, then the only time you will have a good three-point threat in the game is when Grant and Celestine are on the floor, and neither can play 40 minutes. Unless Joel Brown, who has made threes, can up his attempts from 1.7 per 40 minutes to 4 or 5, and shoot his same percentage.

If you think Foreman was not efficient at shooting threes at 32%, then how do your rate Shepherd better, when he shoots them at 29%? And if you want to use Foreman's stats to make a case for who starts, him or Shepherd, then you need to use his stats from his last season at Stony Brook, not his stats from Cal. Otherwise, you are comparing apples with oranges. At Stony Brook he shot threes at 36%, not 32%. If Foreman's 3 assists per game is not an endorsement, is Shepherd at 3.4 per 40 that much better? Or Shepherd's 1.6 steals per 40 minutes that meaningful, compared with Makale's 0.9? I agree that 2.5 FTAs is not many, but I disagree that his free throws are only relative at the end of a game. Cal plays a number of close games, and if Cal loses a game by one point, then if if player missed a free throw or two in the first five minutes, it is just as bad if he missed them at the end of the game. Both lead to a loss.

I looked at the stats of some of Cal's transfer guards, Grant Mullins, Kareem South, Ryan Betley, Makale Foreman, and Jarred Hyder (May be unfair to include Hyder yet, because he had only one year of experience at a lower level, while the others had 3 or 4. Here are the strength of schedules for each one:

Mullins: Columbia -2.55, Cal 6.34
South: Texas A&M CC, -5.68. Cal 9.05
Betley: Penn, - 0.36, Cal 9.75
Foreman: Stony Brook, -4.41, Cal 9.75
Hyder: Fresno St., 3.39, 9.75

and for comparison, Shepherd: Charlotte, -2.43, Cal ?

Hyder was making the smallest transition in level by jumping to Cal, and South made the biggest transition in level. Roberson will also be making a big transition in level from high school to Cal. What they all had in common was some of their important stats suffered a drop when they played for Cal in the PAC12, especially three point percentage.

Both Hyder and Shepherd seem to be able to score inside the arc, Foreman not so much. I think who plays when really depends on the matchups, and what you need from your team. If you need threes to catch up, then I play Foreman, no question. If you need defense to shut down an opposing shooter, probably Hyder or Shepherd (or Roberson) might be the choice, or if you need penetration or mid range shooting. Remember one of Hyder, Shepherd, or Roberson will have to be Brown's backup, and I'm not in favor of having a player learn two positions. Celestine could be in the mix for the 2, if one of the other wings can play SF. Celestine is the best looking passer on the team.

---

I said just one counter post but would not go on and on. True points count all the same, but when the other team is fouling at the end free throw shooting is at a premium. Foreman is a better three point shooter than the others, but I favor them because they bring other things to the table. Shepherd in particular brings the ability to beat him man off the dribble, a priority in the Fox "offense". He is also a better, bigger athlete. Hyder brings similar things to the table if he lives up to his promise.

I don't think any of the freshmen are good enough to contribute more than a few filler minutes.

Agree on Celestine. He shows a real feel for the game and had some excellent interior passes toward the end of the season. He is the best Fox recruit, but that is not good enough.

---

My issue is not whether Shepard should or shouldn't start, it is that if he starts does Brown start too? Or do you play someone (Foreman, Kuany..?) who brings more to the table since Shepard can play PG? Brown and Shepard on the floor together seems too easy for teams to defend.

---

---

Early returns are that Shepard is solid and is in good position to start along side Brown. Celestine, Kelly, GA would be the starting 5 assuming continued progress and health free. Brown is a excellent competitor and defender and is working hard on his offensive play. Hyder is recovering from surgery so status is currently unknown and Celestine is progressing well but is doing PT as well. Competition will be lively given the # of players on the roster. But likely the incoming freshmen will not be ready for major minutes. Unknown is if Kuany can hopefully improve at both ends of the floor, given his athleticism and will Lars be able to provide more scoring?

---

thanks for the inside look

troubling that two of our top 6 rotation players are still limited by injuries/recoveries

if we start brown, celestine, shepard, kelly and grant will we have enough shooting?

I am really hoping we see 2K breakout this year. He looks to have the tools, but can he put it together and be our breakout player?

---

Agreed, but his defensive lapses have held him back. Lot of good solid character young men - can they flip the switch and become tougher defensively and will Lars, Foreman and Kuany bring increased offense? Roberson, Bowser will in time contribute, but both need to mature physically. Hyder can contribute but has yet to be healthy so his impact has not been shown.

---

If I am anyone on the team (other than Kelly, Lars or Thorpe, who need to work on post moves), I spend all summer at the gym working on my 3 point shot. That includes walkons like Welles.

With some accounting for other skills, I would make our 5th starter the player who is our best 3pt shooter and also plays good defense, or at least is not a liability on defense. The 3 is that important to winning in modern basketball and is the most glaring deficiency on our team.

---

---

If he were the fifth three point shooter we could be the Warriors, but I don't see much advantage him being the third (with Anticevich and Celestine), that would leave Brown and Shepard to drive, score inside and rebound? Basically an upside down team. I think we need him to be an inside scoring threat and rebounder. He is our best returning scorer, so we need him to stick with what he does best and just do it more.

However, I do think adding a three point shot would make him a more viable player at the next level, wherever that is. He is just not big enough to be a PF even overseas without an outside shot.

---

all true, but we are going to have to manufacture points this season, and Kelly popping out for an opportunity three occasionally can catch the defense off guard. It will also take the post defender out of the paint for someone to drive

it's not like Kelly has never done this before... I think he's taken about 20 threes since he's been here. Certainly a low number, but his form is solid and he's been shooting threes since HS

But regardless of whether this is a good or bad idea, I certainly think Fox needs to give him the green light at 15 feet. He had several open shots from there, but you can tell coach didn't want him to take that shot

Summer work in Berkeley. 👊 pic.twitter.com/wl6YrNkxaW

— Cal Basketball (@CalMBBall) July 28, 2021

HoopDreams said:

---

Summer work in Berkeley. 👊 pic.twitter.com/wl6YrNkxaW

— Cal Basketball (@CalMBBall) July 28, 2021

---

Whooeee! Is that young Lars with a left hand hook? And elevating? Two things I haven't seen him do before.
It must be a trick camera or a photoshop. Or some serious coaching and one heck of a lot of hard work.

SFCityBear said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

Summer work in Berkeley. 👊 pic.twitter.com/wl6YrNkxaW

— Cal Basketball (@CalMBBall) July 28, 2021

---

Whooeee! Is that young Lars with a left hand hook? And elevating? Two things I haven't seen him do before.
It must be a trick camera or a photoshop. Or some serious coaching and one heck of a lot of hard work.

---

Actually, we don't know if the shot went into the basket. Points are not given for good form, and points are what Cal needs from him. The proof will become known in the Fall.