calumnus said:

---

calumnus said:

---

drizzlybear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Anyone wanna bet that we get to 20 losses? $100 straight up?

---

The only way we don't get to 20 losses is if we win the National Championship or the PAC-12 Tournament gets canceled again due to a COVD surge before we can get knocked out.

Mark Fox in these last two years has already lost more games to PAC-12 opponents than Wyking Jones lost to PAC-12 opponents in his two years, more than any two year stretch in Cal history. And next year looks worse.

---

If you want to point out how bad Fox's teams have been and therefore he should be fired, you'll get no argument from me. But cherry-picking misleading stats and using absurdly carefully worded assertions to try to make things sound like what they're not is a bogus approach.

---

"We have lost more games to PAC-12 teams in the last two years than at any time in Cal history, but as a percentage, the two years of Wyking Jones were somewhat worse." 8 wins and soon to be 33 losses against PAC-12 opponents over the last 2 years.. worst in the PAC-12 over the last
two years. Give that whatever positive spin you want.

---

PAC-12 record over the last two years:
1T Arizona 29-11 .725
1T USC 29-11 .725
3. UCLA 28-11 .718
4. Oregon 25-13 .658
5. Colorado 26-14 .650
6. UW 15-15 .500
7. WSU 18-21 .462
8. ASU 17-20 .459
9. Stanford 18-22 .450
10. Utah 12-27 .307
11. OSU 11-29 .275
12. Cal 8-32 .200

---

Is this news to anyone? And what's the reason for omitting Fox's best season at Cal? Trying to understand the point here.

oskidunker said:

---

Wsu given a 76% chance of winning. Unless Grant becomes more aggressive, I dint see a win here.you never know how wsu is going to come out., although they are playing for an ncaa berth. Does he anyone care to leave bashing Fox and Knowlton to discuss the game? Fox and Knowlton are not going anywhere. The warriors might be a good option

---

Agree that Grant (& Shepherd) need to play near the top of their ability. Shepherd has been pretty consistent - so the worry is on Grant. Lars & Celestine also need to play like they have shown they're capable of for Cal to be in this offensively.

I think the bigger issue is going to be defensively containing WSU as best they can. We've seen examples where Cal's Defense can do this. They also need to avoid foul trouble (which sometimes happens when they defend).

As for tempo, I think this team needs to control the tempo - but not play at the slowest pace possible. Often, this team passes up a good shot to waste a few more seconds to get a worse shot. If Cal scores in the 50s, I feel we'll lose. If we score in the 60's or 70's we can win. If the score gets into the high 70s or 80s - we're probably losing a track meet or having a tremendous game.

drizzlybear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

calumnus said:

---

drizzlybear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Anyone wanna bet that we get to 20 losses? $100 straight up?

---

The only way we don't get to 20 losses is if we win the National Championship or the PAC-12 Tournament gets canceled again due to a COVD surge before we can get knocked out.

Mark Fox in these last two years has already lost more games to PAC-12 opponents than Wyking Jones lost to PAC-12 opponents in his two years, more than any two year stretch in Cal history. And next year looks worse.

---

If you want to point out how bad Fox's teams have been and therefore he should be fired, you'll get no argument from me. But cherry-picking misleading stats and using absurdly carefully worded assertions to try to make things sound like what they're not is a bogus approach.

---

"We have lost more games to PAC-12 teams in the last two years than at any time in Cal history, but as a percentage, the two years of Wyking Jones were somewhat worse." 8 wins and soon to be 33 losses against PAC-12 opponents over the last 2 years.. worst in the PAC-12 over the last
two years. Give that whatever positive spin you want.

---

PAC-12 record over the last two years:
1T Arizona 29-11 .725
1T USC 29-11 .725
3. UCLA 28-11 .718
4. Oregon 25-13 .658
5. Colorado 26-14 .650
6. UW 15-15 .500
7. WSU 18-21 .462
8. ASU 17-20 .459
9. Stanford 18-22 .450
10. Utah 12-27 .307
11. OSU 11-29 .275
12. Cal 8-32 .200

---

Is this news to anyone? And what's the reason for omitting Fox's best season at Cal? Trying to understand the point here.

---

Wait, what? Fox had a "best" year? (Or was that based on Stanford-style grade inflation?)

BeachedBear said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

Wsu given a 76% chance of winning. Unless Grant becomes more aggressive, I dint see a win here.you never know how wsu is going to come out., although they are playing for an ncaa berth. Does he anyone care to leave bashing Fox and Knowlton to discuss the game? Fox and Knowlton are not going anywhere. The warriors might be a good option

---

Agree that Grant (& Shepherd) need to play near the top of their ability. Shepherd has been pretty consistent - so the worry is on Grant. Lars & Celestine also need to play like they have shown they're capable of for Cal to be in this offensively.

I think the bigger issue is going to be defensively containing WSU as best they can. We've seen examples where Cal's Defense can do this. They also need to avoid foul trouble (which sometimes happens when they defend).

As for tempo, I think this team needs to control the tempo - but not play at the slowest pace possible. Often, this team passes up a good shot to waste a few more seconds to get a worse shot. If Cal scores in the 50s, I feel we'll lose. If we score in the 60's or 70's we can win. If the score gets into the high 70s or 80s - we're probably losing a track meet or having a tremendous game.

---

Without Brown turnovers could be a problem. Hyder is a reluctant shooter and Foreman is not shooting a high percentage, although he needs to take every open shot. Lars is playing better and hopefully can get 12-15 Alijiki seems lost for now but maybe he gets a few open looks. Celestine needs to continue to be agressive

stu said:

---

drizzlybear said:

---

... And what's the reason for omitting Fox's best season at Cal? Trying to understand the point here.

---

I'd say Fox's first season was better than expected. I was both surprised and impressed. However it was all done with players recruited by Martin and Jones, with the exception of Thiemann who played a lot of minutes but not effectively.

Now Fox has installed his system and most of the players are his recruits. Next season all the players will be his recruits unless Kelly stays. We'll see how that works out. I'm guessing not as well as his first season.

---

Booth. A thousand tined

https://fb.watch/bCqGVnnt5k/