Cal in Viva Las Vegas! Game # 1

5,869 Views | 73 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by calumnus
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal got left on the train station platform holding their schwantz when they passed on Kyle Smith.

Klay Thompson advocated WSU hire of Kyle Smith as hoops head man


https://247sports.com/college/washington-state/Article/Washington-State-basketball-Kyle-Smith-Klay-Thompson-Cougars-Cougs-Wazzu-WSU-130564668/
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
HoopDreams
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Golden One said:

Grant can't hit anything tonight.


Every thing is short and now he's missing FTs

Either it's loss of confidence or he's injured or exhausted because every thing is short

BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bear Haas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So it's a "coaches decision." Anybody have insight on what that means? Is he trying to make sure he's not hurt long term, is it an attitude thing? If he's healthy feels odd to have one of your best players on the bench in the conference tournament
KenBurnski
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thanks Knowlton. Look forward to seeing some Mark Fox season hype tweets around October. He's so ****ing dynamic.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
BC Calfan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Now we are rooting for donor intervention or mass transfers to remove our coach. Let the offseason begin.
HoopDreams
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Down 8, foul with 8 seconds?
KenBurnski
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Lol Shepard hurt some bettors
HoopDreams
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HoopDreams said:

Down 8, foul with 8 seconds?


Guess it worked!
We netted 1 point!

Play of the game… Celestine steal for the (royal) flush

(hey it's Vegas)
GoCal80
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal won the second half 39-34. Moral victory!
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KenBurnski said:

Lol Shepard hurt some bettors


Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thank God that disaster is over!
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bear Haas said:

So it's a "coaches decision." Anybody have insight on what that means? Is he trying to make sure he's not hurt long term, is it an attitude thing? If he's healthy feels odd to have one of your best players on the bench in the conference tournament


The Matt Bradley sit down ... Bet you brown transfers from this you know what show.
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fat_slice said:

Bear Haas said:

So it's a "coaches decision." Anybody have insight on what that means? Is he trying to make sure he's not hurt long term, is it an attitude thing? If he's healthy feels odd to have one of your best players on the bench in the conference tournament


The Matt Bradley sit down ... Bet you brown transfers from this you know what show.


If Brown transfers, that won't be much of a loss. We can use the scholarship.
UrsineMaximus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Welp, that is 2 hours of my life that I will never get back.
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Golden One said:

fat_slice said:

Bear Haas said:

So it's a "coaches decision." Anybody have insight on what that means? Is he trying to make sure he's not hurt long term, is it an attitude thing? If he's healthy feels odd to have one of your best players on the bench in the conference tournament


The Matt Bradley sit down ... Bet you brown transfers from this you know what show.


If Brown transfers, that won't be much of a loss. We can use the scholarship.


For a player who will no doubt be worse. Fox can't recruit - which of these guys can start on another team? Maybe shepherd? But fox did not develop him.
4thGenCal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Golden One said:

fat_slice said:

Bear Haas said:

So it's a "coaches decision." Anybody have insight on what that means? Is he trying to make sure he's not hurt long term, is it an attitude thing? If he's healthy feels odd to have one of your best players on the bench in the conference tournament


The Matt Bradley sit down ... Bet you brown transfers from this you know what show.


If Brown transfers, that won't be much of a loss. We can use the scholarship.
Actually he is valuable to the team when he is healthy. Joel will need off season minor surgery on his knee which hampered him the last half of the season. He is an excellent on ball defender, cannot press him and in transition is effective. Yes on becoming a much better shooter, finisher at the rim (needs a floater) but the teammates really respect his effort and commitment. He sets an example of competing and does not give in on the court. Yes I don't want him to transfer, and unless he can finish his Haas Business courses/degree early, he will return.
philbert
How long do you want to ignore this user?
glad i don't have pac12 network so i missed this epic game.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GoCal80 said:

Cal won the second half 39-34. Moral victory!

Exactly. To "fans" who complain about our lack of scoring, what do you say about the Bears pouring in 39 points in the second half?!? Let's continue the rebuild and...

Okay, that's as long as I could keep a straight face.
drizzlybear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Very frustrating. Cal had the rebounding and the quality looks to win this game. Shooting was atrocious. Too bad. Not like we were going to win the next one, but would've been nice to get this first one.
stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HoopDreams said:

Down 8, foul with 8 seconds?
This isn't the first time I've seen us let an opponent with a lead run the clock out. Is Fox a defensive coach to the extent he doesn't want us to get the ball back?
stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drizzlybear said:

Very frustrating. Cal had the rebounding and the quality looks to win this game. Shooting was atrocious. Too bad. Not like we were going to win the next one, but would've been nice to get this first one.
Some nights, like tonight, good shots don't fall. Other nights, like in Eugene, they do.
drizzlybear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HoopDreams said:

HoopDreams said:

Down 8, foul with 8 seconds?


Guess it worked!
We netted 1 point!

Play of the game… Celestine steal for the (royal) flush

(hey it's Vegas)

For me, the best play was Shepherd's no-look pass to cutting JC for the finish.

Will be interesting to see what happens with this team over the next 8 mos.

Go Bears!!
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

GoCal80 said:

Cal won the second half 39-34. Moral victory!

Exactly. To "fans" who complain about our lack of scoring, what do you say about the Bears pouring in 39 points in the second half?!? Let's continue the rebuild and...

Okay, that's as long as I could keep a straight face.


"It's a simple game, two baskets and a ball."
-Todd Bozeman

Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
eastcoastcal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

Quote:

drizzlybear said:
Very frustrating. Cal had the rebounding and the quality looks to win this game. Shooting was atrocious. Too bad. Not like we were going to win the next one, but would've been nice to get this first one.
Some nights, like tonight, good shots don't fall. Other nights, like in Eugene, they do.
If you don't mind me saying, while I appreciate the more positive outlook, some of the shots coming out of our guys hands tonight looked downright atrocious. I've seen high school JV shooters who looked better than Grant tonight. The reality is the team sorely lacks shooters & scorers, and a better team would've turned the immense rebounding advantage we had tonight into buckets. (To be clear, I understand you weren't saying anything against this, I just think the "our shots just weren't falling tonight" trope doesn't really apply when it's clear that our team does not possess the ability to shoot effectively or make free throws haha)
stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You're right, our conference averages of .415 overall and .288 on threes aren't going to get us many wins. But if we'd shot those numbers tonight we would have won.

You're also right about the old trope. Sorry about that.
dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?

WSU's practice facility clearly gave them the advantage

ColoradoBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KenBurnski said:

Lol Shepard hurt some bettors


Also helped some
KenBurnski
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Nice!
HearstMining
How long do you want to ignore this user?
stu said:

drizzlybear said:

Very frustrating. Cal had the rebounding and the quality looks to win this game. Shooting was atrocious. Too bad. Not like we were going to win the next one, but would've been nice to get this first one.
Some nights, like tonight, good shots don't fall. Other nights, like in Eugene, they do.
They had quality looks because the WSU zone defense had holes all over it. Maybe the shooting was atrocious, but it was all too typical for this season's Cal team. By all accounts, a team of great guys, but not enough of them are good basketball players.
EDIT: I just read eastcoastcal's comments and he made much the same point but I think stated it more precisely.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
4thGenCal said:

Golden One said:

fat_slice said:

Bear Haas said:

So it's a "coaches decision." Anybody have insight on what that means? Is he trying to make sure he's not hurt long term, is it an attitude thing? If he's healthy feels odd to have one of your best players on the bench in the conference tournament


The Matt Bradley sit down ... Bet you brown transfers from this you know what show.


If Brown transfers, that won't be much of a loss. We can use the scholarship.
Actually he is valuable to the team when he is healthy. Joel will need off season minor surgery on his knee which hampered him the last half of the season. He is an excellent on ball defender, cannot press him and in transition is effective. Yes on becoming a much better shooter, finisher at the rim (needs a floater) but the teammates really respect his effort and commitment. He sets an example of competing and does not give in on the court. Yes I don't want him to transfer, and unless he can finish his Haas Business courses/degree early, he will return.


He is essential to the team because we don't have anyone else at PG next year except Hyder.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HearstMining said:

stu said:

drizzlybear said:

Very frustrating. Cal had the rebounding and the quality looks to win this game. Shooting was atrocious. Too bad. Not like we were going to win the next one, but would've been nice to get this first one.
Some nights, like tonight, good shots don't fall. Other nights, like in Eugene, they do.
They had quality looks because the WSU zone defense had holes all over it. Maybe the shooting was atrocious, but it was all too typical for this season's Cal team. By all accounts, a team of great guys, but not enough of them are good basketball players.
EDIT: I just read eastcoastcal's comments and he made much the same point but I think stated it more precisely.


There is a reason Kyle Smith and WSU have won the last 5 matchups against Mark Fox and Cal, home, away and neutral court. There is a reason WSU's defense is #35 in the country in Ken Pom despite their zone seemingly "having holes all over it."

Kyle Smith is a far better coach and he and his staff do their research and now know us very well. It is "nerd ball" in action. They know where on the court each of our players shoots well from and take that away. The shots we took are generally the shots they gave us, the ones they wanted us to take.

I am sure we lose to them every time we face them next year too.
stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In 3 games against WSU this season we've made 67 of 178 shots (.376) including 15 of 60 threes (.250).

Both are significantly below our conference averages of .415 and .288 so those "holes" in WSU's defense may be openings for bad shots.
RedlessWardrobe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
eastcoastcal said:

Quote:

Quote:

drizzlybear said:
Very frustrating. Cal had the rebounding and the quality looks to win this game. Shooting was atrocious. Too bad. Not like we were going to win the next one, but would've been nice to get this first one.
Some nights, like tonight, good shots don't fall. Other nights, like in Eugene, they do.
If you don't mind me saying, while I appreciate the more positive outlook, some of the shots coming out of our guys hands tonight looked downright atrocious. I've seen high school JV shooters who looked better than Grant tonight. The reality is the team sorely lacks shooters & scorers, and a better team would've turned the immense rebounding advantage we had tonight into buckets. (To be clear, I understand you weren't saying anything against this, I just think the "our shots just weren't falling tonight" trope doesn't really apply when it's clear that our team does not possess the ability to shoot effectively or make free throws haha)

My take. I agree, the Bears' shooting from the outside was bad, and I mean bad even by our team's standards. Many, many good looks, I don't think we were "jacking up shots", most of them were clean looks, but man every guy on our team looked like they caught "shooters' disease". I watched Cal play all year, and while we all know that despite their glaring weaknesses, in most occasions they hit a definitive higher percentage of these 3 point attempts than they did last night. Maybe it was the infamous "large arena background", don't really know, but it really sucked.
Page 2 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.