Recruiting is the first part of his job. He has definitely assembled some talent, though maybe too many overestimated it. However, we now see that we are not going to win on talent alone. Not this season. We have hit some adversity. Now we will see Madsen's talent as a coach. Can he develop strategies to make these guys successful? Can he make adjustments? Can he keep them positive and motivated? Can we improve and win against better teams? Stay turned.
Now we will see what we have in Madsen
3,976 Views |
36 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by bearchamp
Wilner has jumped on the bandwagon!
"12. Cal (2-2)
Last week: 11Results: lost to Pacific 87-79, beat Cal State Bakersfield 83-63, lost to Montana State 63-60Next up: vs. UTEP (Monday)Comment: And so begins Cal's annual march to the bottom of the Power Six power ratings. Will any school beat the Bears to the cellar? We're skeptical."
"12. Cal (2-2)
Last week: 11Results: lost to Pacific 87-79, beat Cal State Bakersfield 83-63, lost to Montana State 63-60Next up: vs. UTEP (Monday)Comment: And so begins Cal's annual march to the bottom of the Power Six power ratings. Will any school beat the Bears to the cellar? We're skeptical."
The new players are not playing good defense, which is puzzling.
Go Bears!
You don't overcome in a few weeks the damage caused by having back-to-back the worst athletic directors imaginable (Mike Willians and Jim Knowlton) hiring the worst men's basketball coaches possible (Wyking Jones and Mark Fox).
I give Aimaq credit for his effort. But watching him its puzzling how he was a Defensive Player of the Year in any league. It doesn't seem possible.oskidunker said:
The new players are not playing good defense, which is puzzling.
Our guys look clueless on defense. My opinion is that they have enough athletisim to do a decent job, therefore I can only can conclude one of two things:
1) Mark Madsen has no defensive coaching skills
OR
2) The players have no ability to implement what the coach tells them.
It has to be one or the other.
This is a rebuild. There will be growing pains. Madsen brought in some talent, but there isn't a Carmelo Anthony or Anthony Davis in this group. Learn from this game and move on.
oskidunker said:
The new players are not playing good defense, which is puzzling.
It's easy to think that most of defense is "want to".
That's certainly an important factor, but execution and cohesion are also key... and that can take a while. We have basically a new roster, playing under a new staff (a staff that didn't work together last year, btw). And it's something that's almost impossible to be forged during the on-court workouts prior to October.
With all due respect, nobody ever thought there was a Carmelo Anthony or Anthony Davis in this group. A more relevant name drop here in this particular discussion would be Dennis Rodman or Scottie Pippen, defensive specialists.BigDaddy said:
This is a rebuild. There will be growing pains. Madsen brought in some talent, but there isn't a Carmelo Anthony or Anthony Davis in this group. Learn from this game and move on.
But rebuild or no rebuild what I saw last night was a team with at least average athleticism that appeared to demonstrate no appearance of any team defense. New guys, but after 6 weeks of practice shouldn't there be the slightest bit of purpose on the defensive end of the floor? How many times did I see Grant Newell leave his feet last night? Like Don McLean said the other night, defensively its not mandatory to block a shot, if you can make the offensive player MISS a shot.
I understand that in today's college game you have to pick and choose in a man to man when to get help, due to the short 3 point line. But that doesn't mean you NEVER do it. It depends on floor spacing and angles, and our guys don't seem to have a clue. Rebuild or no rebuild, these guys have been practicing for 6 weeks, and it doesn't look they're doing much work on team defense.
Agree, 100%. Don't think they will be playing their best basketball until late January early February they will be going through growing pains until then. He is giving his core guys lots of minutes so they can get used to playing with each other. Now we're dealing with injuries. The reality is now setting in that you can't just throw a group of players together and expect them to perform at a high-level. It'll take some time for them to gel.Big C said:oskidunker said:
The new players are not playing good defense, which is puzzling.
It's easy to think that most of defense is "want to".
That's certainly an important factor, but execution and cohesion are also key... and that can take a while. We have basically a new roster, playing under a new staff (a staff that didn't work together last year, btw). And it's something that's almost impossible to be forged during the on-court workouts prior to October.
Learn quickly. The jello is setting.
"Those who say don't know, and those who know don't say." - LT
Another thing - all the pace and spacing we heard about will require we make some threes. Last night we made 3 of 18, with 5 of 18 (28%) we win.
sure, its a rebuild. but how hard is it for coach to tell the guys at halftime, when walker is up at the top of the key with Aimac, anyone down low needs to help out by blocking the drive to teh basket as Aimac has zero chance to defend Walker's first step. Aimac was schooled by the Tommies, and now by Walker. He need help when up top.BigDaddy said:
This is a rebuild. There will be growing pains. Madsen brought in some talent, but there isn't a Carmelo Anthony or Anthony Davis in this group. Learn from this game and move on.
Or, try a Zone to mix it up for a couple of minutes.
Re: earlier post about injuries, Celestine? Again? Still?
First thing. Can we all now acknowledge that the talk of home run hire was drastically premature? Speaking eloquently and with passion is a great thing, but it is like 10% of what makes a coach successful on the court vs. in the court of public opinion. That is all any of us were saying. And I fear the massive overexuberance by some is only going to lead to a shorter honeymoon and a harder backlashcalumnus said:
Recruiting is the first part of his job. He has definitely assembled some talent, though maybe too many overestimated it. However, we now see that we are not going to win on talent alone. Not this season. We have hit some adversity. Now we will see Madsen's talent as a coach. Can he develop strategies to make these guys successful? Can he make adjustments? Can he keep them positive and motivated? Can we improve and win against better teams? Stay turned.
I argued after the first game (not based on the first game) that what we had as a team this year was extremely unpredictable. I disagree with the notion that was argued to me that we had a proven roster. People need to distinguish between better than Fox and good. Better than Fox is clear. Beyond that is not.
But over the months on the coaching front, somehow the narrative has gone from a good gamble on a promising young coach to a homerun hire proven commodity. The latter it is not. He didn't build a program from the ground up at his last stop. He took over a team that had gone 23-11 and 25-10 the two years that preceded him. He went 11-19, 11-11, 20-12, 28-9. He did a nice job. It is not sure thing material. It is what we recognized at the time. A promising, passionate coach and the type of hire that Cal needs to make. And it is also the type of hire that may work or it may not.
As for what to expect this year, this is an important year. It is not a free pass year. You only get one chance to make a first impression. We need a story to tell going forward and that has to be that we have a young coach who is rebuilding this program and has it moving in the right direction. And right direction is not 6 wins instead of 3. Or 9 wins. It is competing in Pac-12 games. Probably winning a third of those at least and looking good in at least a third and limiting the games that we get demolished.
But it is not a free pass year, and, let's be blunt, we have been terrible. Let's not pump up these opponents. Our players are much better than theirs. We should be walking over them. Yes, Montana State was 25-9 last year. They also lost to Grand Canyon and Quinnipiac in that run and they have lost to Seattle U this year. Other than beating us, UOP has lost to Sam Houston and lost to Nevada 88-41. The Tommies beat Idaho St. by 1. These are not teams that should be on the floor with us. And, frankly, watching them they are unathletic and not exceptionally skilled. Yes, their players have probably played together longer than ours, but the disparity should more than compensate. And frankly, today's power conference basketball means you need to assemble a new team every year and get them up to speed.
We lost these games because right now our offense is a disorganized mess and our defense is beyond a disorganized mess. Period. Can barely tell right now what we are even trying to do.
That being said, too many coaches are too concerned about winning those first few games of the season to the detriment of succeeding the rest of the year. This team will be measured by how they finish, not how they start. I'm not at practice. I don't know what they are trying to do or how well they are getting everything implemented. I can't know how close they are to having the light turn on. I don't want them implementing game plans to beat Montana State while possibility stunting our ability to beat the middle to bottom of the Pac later. We are way too early in making ANY judgment because the proof will be in how we progress. If we close out the back half of the conference season with something like 4-5 or 5-4, and competitive in every game, Montana State is a distant memory. If we are still playing this badly, there is no free pass, because neither recruits nor anyone else will be giving us one. Of course that doesn't mean he is fired, but we will have to be realistic that we need this year to have some positive results.
So where are we? Well, start with where we were. Really sucking. So, at least we don't know yet what we are, and that is better than knowing you really suck looking at the business end of 30 games. I'd say everything from really sucking to pretty good is on the table. That's better than last year at this time. Whether it is enough will be better determined in March.
I am no basketball coaching wizard or analyst, but three things are jumping out at me:
1) Our bigs leave their feet on fakes.
2) The double teams and help keeps coming early or late leaving defenders in no man's land and shooters open.
3) Our perimeter defense is poor either backing off afraid of being driven on or hesitant switches over screen both leaving shooters at the arc open or able to drive.
The athletic ability of the players seems greatly improved and so I can't make sense of these obvious deficiencies.
1) Our bigs leave their feet on fakes.
2) The double teams and help keeps coming early or late leaving defenders in no man's land and shooters open.
3) Our perimeter defense is poor either backing off afraid of being driven on or hesitant switches over screen both leaving shooters at the arc open or able to drive.
The athletic ability of the players seems greatly improved and so I can't make sense of these obvious deficiencies.
As stu pointed out, our 3pt % has to be better than 17%....Cone having a 1-10 from 3pt will pretty much guarantee a L against anyone....Askew being out leaves us with no point guards....Mike Meadows was a proven point guard....Losing him before the season started was a key to this type of start....Someone is going to have to learn how to play the 1 or this season will be a loooonnnnggggg one...Oh yeah, does anyone want to tell me Cone is a point guard again?
Oh for goodness sake. C'mon guys. It doesn't take performing at a high level to beat UOP and Montana State. It doesn't take gelling. It doesn't take playing your best basketball (NOBODY is playing their best basketball now). It doesn't take execution and cohesion that it takes months to develop. Injuries or not, the size, athleticism and skill level of the guys who were on the floor for us was lightyears ahead of what was on the floor for them. UOP is 1-2 (us being the 1) and lost a game 88-41.Basketball Bear said:Agree, 100%. Don't think they will be playing their best basketball until late January early February they will be going through growing pains until then. He is giving his core guys lots of minutes so they can get used to playing with each other. Now we're dealing with injuries. The reality is now setting in that you can't just throw a group of players together and expect them to perform at a high-level. It'll take some time for them to gel.Big C said:oskidunker said:
The new players are not playing good defense, which is puzzling.
It's easy to think that most of defense is "want to".
That's certainly an important factor, but execution and cohesion are also key... and that can take a while. We have basically a new roster, playing under a new staff (a staff that didn't work together last year, btw). And it's something that's almost impossible to be forged during the on-court workouts prior to October.
It is way too early to judge a season and I won't do that not just out of principle but also because I truly believe we can be a lot better. But I can judge these games and the bottom line is we have really sucked in 3 games and there is no talking around that and there is no excusing it away. As I said, if we are playing really well down the stretch of conference season, all of this is a distant memory and we have optimism going into next year. But let's at least be honest with ourselves that these performances really suck. Not just because we lost or almost lost to teams we should be blowing out, but because we looked bad doing it. Frankly, the positives I see so far are:
Tyson is a good individual player
They seem to have good emotional rapport with each other (if zero actual basketball cohesion yet)
It isn't Fox.
Our perimeter defense is really poor and very slow. I can see five seconds before it happens that we are going to give up an open three. There are a lot of "should I or shouldn't I? I guess no one's coming so here goes" threes being shot against us. If we don't get that fixed, when we play faster, more athletic teams we are going to be giving up wide open threes all day long.blungld said:
I am no basketball coaching wizard or analyst, but three things are jumping out at me:
1) Our bigs leave their feet on fakes.
2) The double teams and help keeps coming early or late leaving defenders in no man's land and shooters open.
3) Our perimeter defense is poor either backing off afraid of being driven on or hesitant switches over screen both leaving shooters at the arc open or able to drive.
The athletic ability of the players seems greatly improved and so I can't make sense of these obvious deficiencies.
And if we can't stop the Tommies or UOP or Montana State from driving on us, I don't know what to say.
I hang this on playing three against five. Bowser did almost nothing. Newell disappeared. Is he playing hurt? Plus all that first half sloppiness. Stodgy offense meant Cone could not get open looks. Tyson played almost the entire game. We're running him into the ground. And nobody came to help Aimaq against Walker. I kept yelling Help Him all night and nobody did. All in all this was a weak opponent but it's tough to win when it's three against five.
I have to say this with Cone. He takes off balance threes (like his last one in this game), WHEN HE DOESN'T NEED TO BE OFF BALANCE. I don't care if "he makes them" sometimes. There is no reason for a player of his experience not squaring up and shooting.bearmanpg said:
As stu pointed out, our 3pt % has to be better than 17%....Cone having a 1-10 from 3pt will pretty much guarantee a L against anyone....Askew being out leaves us with no point guards....Mike Meadows was a proven point guard....Losing him before the season started was a key to this type of start....Someone is going to have to learn how to play the 1 or this season will be a loooonnnnggggg one...Oh yeah, does anyone want to tell me Cone is a point guard again?
*************BINGOBearlyCareAnymore said:I have to say this with Cone. He takes off balance threes (like his last one in this game), WHEN HE DOESN'T NEED TO BE OFF BALANCE. I don't care if "he makes them" sometimes. There is no reason for a player of his experience not squaring up and shooting.bearmanpg said:
As stu pointed out, our 3pt % has to be better than 17%....Cone having a 1-10 from 3pt will pretty much guarantee a L against anyone....Askew being out leaves us with no point guards....Mike Meadows was a proven point guard....Losing him before the season started was a key to this type of start....Someone is going to have to learn how to play the 1 or this season will be a loooonnnnggggg one...Oh yeah, does anyone want to tell me Cone is a point guard again?
Bowser's confidence is shot. He can't get rid of the ball fast enough when it's in his hands. Shot an airball from the elbow last night which is hard to do. Rodney Brown should get all of his minutes.
Bowser did play some defense and get a few rebounds, not to mention zero turnovers. He did get bulldozed by Walker a few times after switches but come on, he's not a 250 lb PF. But I agree about offense, his shot is shot.BC Calfan said:
Bowser's confidence is shot. He can't get rid of the ball fast enough when it's in his hands. Shot an airball from the elbow last night which is hard to do. Rodney Brown should get all of his minutes.
Just so we are clear here. Walker averaged 6.6 points per game last year. If you take out his game against Cal, he's averaging 11 this year. Seattle held him to 37.5% shooting. His career high before last night was 17 and that was a pretty major outlier last year. He is not some unstoppable force.stu said:Bowser did play some defense and get a few rebounds, not to mention zero turnovers. He did get bulldozed by Walker a few times after switches but come on, he's not a 250 lb PF. But I agree about offense, his shot is shot.BC Calfan said:
Bowser's confidence is shot. He can't get rid of the ball fast enough when it's in his hands. Shot an airball from the elbow last night which is hard to do. Rodney Brown should get all of his minutes.
The way you stop a bigger player is by playing good position defense and making him foul you.
RedlessWardrobe said:With all due respect, nobody ever thought there was a Carmelo Anthony or Anthony Davis in this group. A more relevant name drop here in this particular discussion would be Dennis Rodman or Scottie Pippen, defensive specialists.BigDaddy said:
This is a rebuild. There will be growing pains. Madsen brought in some talent, but there isn't a Carmelo Anthony or Anthony Davis in this group. Learn from this game and move on.
But rebuild or no rebuild what I saw last night was a team with at least average athleticism that appeared to demonstrate no appearance of any team defense. New guys, but after 6 weeks of practice shouldn't there be the slightest bit of purpose on the defensive end of the floor? How many times did I see Grant Newell leave his feet last night? Like Don McLean said the other night, defensively its not mandatory to block a shot, if you can make the offensive player MISS a shot.
I understand that in today's college game you have to pick and choose in a man to man when to get help, due to the short 3 point line. But that doesn't mean you NEVER do it. It depends on floor spacing and angles, and our guys don't seem to have a clue. Rebuild or no rebuild, these guys have been practicing for 6 weeks, and it doesn't look they're doing much work on team defense.
Don't get me wrong, this team has to improve on the defensive end. But I've read a lot of extremely optimistic predictions for this team under Madsen in Year 1. That rosy outlook flies in the face of what we've been the last few years. Last season Cal was probably the worst team in the country, certainly among the worst. Getting back to the upper division of the Pac-12/ACC and the NCAA tournament will take time and patience.
Agreed. I haven't been focusing on Cone every time he touches the ball, but I've noticed that he tends to hit the 3 pt shots where he is either stationary or moving directly towards the basket. When he comes off a turn or is moving laterally as he shoots, he misses.bearmanpg said:*************BINGOBearlyCareAnymore said:I have to say this with Cone. He takes off balance threes (like his last one in this game), WHEN HE DOESN'T NEED TO BE OFF BALANCE. I don't care if "he makes them" sometimes. There is no reason for a player of his experience not squaring up and shooting.bearmanpg said:
As stu pointed out, our 3pt % has to be better than 17%....Cone having a 1-10 from 3pt will pretty much guarantee a L against anyone....Askew being out leaves us with no point guards....Mike Meadows was a proven point guard....Losing him before the season started was a key to this type of start....Someone is going to have to learn how to play the 1 or this season will be a loooonnnnggggg one...Oh yeah, does anyone want to tell me Cone is a point guard again?
BearlyCareAnymore said:First thing. Can we all now acknowledge that the talk of home run hire was drastically premature? Speaking eloquently and with passion is a great thing, but it is like 10% of what makes a coach successful on the court vs. in the court of public opinion. That is all any of us were saying. And I fear the massive overexuberance by some is only going to lead to a shorter honeymoon and a harder backlashcalumnus said:
Recruiting is the first part of his job. He has definitely assembled some talent, though maybe too many overestimated it. However, we now see that we are not going to win on talent alone. Not this season. We have hit some adversity. Now we will see Madsen's talent as a coach. Can he develop strategies to make these guys successful? Can he make adjustments? Can he keep them positive and motivated? Can we improve and win against better teams? Stay turned.
I argued after the first game (not based on the first game) that what we had as a team this year was extremely unpredictable. I disagree with the notion that was argued to me that we had a proven roster. People need to distinguish between better than Fox and good. Better than Fox is clear. Beyond that is not.
But over the months on the coaching front, somehow the narrative has gone from a good gamble on a promising young coach to a homerun hire proven commodity. The latter it is not. He didn't build a program from the ground up at his last stop. He took over a team that had gone 23-11 and 25-10 the two years that preceded him. He went 11-19, 11-11, 20-12, 28-9. He did a nice job. It is not sure thing material. It is what we recognized at the time. A promising, passionate coach and the type of hire that Cal needs to make. And it is also the type of hire that may work or it may not.
As for what to expect this year, this is an important year. It is not a free pass year. You only get one chance to make a first impression. We need a story to tell going forward and that has to be that we have a young coach who is rebuilding this program and has it moving in the right direction. And right direction is not 6 wins instead of 3. Or 9 wins. It is competing in Pac-12 games. Probably winning a third of those at least and looking good in at least a third and limiting the games that we get demolished.
But it is not a free pass year, and, let's be blunt, we have been terrible. Let's not pump up these opponents. Our players are much better than theirs. We should be walking over them. Yes, Montana State was 25-9 last year. They also lost to Grand Canyon and Quinnipiac in that run and they have lost to Seattle U this year. Other than beating us, UOP has lost to Sam Houston and lost to Nevada 88-41. The Tommies beat Idaho St. by 1. These are not teams that should be on the floor with us. And, frankly, watching them they are unathletic and not exceptionally skilled. Yes, their players have probably played together longer than ours, but the disparity should more than compensate. And frankly, today's power conference basketball means you need to assemble a new team every year and get them up to speed.
We lost these games because right now our offense is a disorganized mess and our defense is beyond a disorganized mess. Period. Can barely tell right now what we are even trying to do.
That being said, too many coaches are too concerned about winning those first few games of the season to the detriment of succeeding the rest of the year. This team will be measured by how they finish, not how they start. I'm not at practice. I don't know what they are trying to do or how well they are getting everything implemented. I can't know how close they are to having the light turn on. I don't want them implementing game plans to beat Montana State while possibility stunting our ability to beat the middle to bottom of the Pac later. We are way too early in making ANY judgment because the proof will be in how we progress. If we close out the back half of the conference season with something like 4-5 or 5-4, and competitive in every game, Montana State is a distant memory. If we are still playing this badly, there is no free pass, because neither recruits nor anyone else will be giving us one. Of course that doesn't mean he is fired, but we will have to be realistic that we need this year to have some positive results.
So where are we? Well, start with where we were. Really sucking. So, at least we don't know yet what we are, and that is better than knowing you really suck looking at the business end of 30 games. I'd say everything from really sucking to pretty good is on the table. That's better than last year at this time. Whether it is enough will be better determined in March.
Yes. This is my point. All coaching hires are gambles. Even a blue chip stock is a gamble, just safer.
I only saw his Utah Valley team play as a finished product. They looked well coached. However, as I said at the time, Madsen was a unicorn at Utah Valley: a smart LDS NBA veteran of Championship teams with an outgoing personality playing at a low level.
Madsen was a good bet but far from a sure thing. He was not my first choice. His embrace of Cal has far exceeded my expectations. He assembled a roster with some talent, greater than expected, but not overwhelming talent that can win on that basis alone.
This team clearly needs to be coached up.
We will now see what we have in Madsen.
> We will now see what we have in Madsen.
plus, says here, his teams improve as recruiting classes accumulate
plus, says here, his teams improve as recruiting classes accumulate
HearstMining said:Agreed. I haven't been focusing on Cone every time he touches the ball, but I've noticed that he tends to hit the 3 pt shots where he is either stationary or moving directly towards the basket. When he comes off a turn or is moving laterally as he shoots, he misses.bearmanpg said:*************BINGOBearlyCareAnymore said:I have to say this with Cone. He takes off balance threes (like his last one in this game), WHEN HE DOESN'T NEED TO BE OFF BALANCE. I don't care if "he makes them" sometimes. There is no reason for a player of his experience not squaring up and shooting.bearmanpg said:
As stu pointed out, our 3pt % has to be better than 17%....Cone having a 1-10 from 3pt will pretty much guarantee a L against anyone....Askew being out leaves us with no point guards....Mike Meadows was a proven point guard....Losing him before the season started was a key to this type of start....Someone is going to have to learn how to play the 1 or this season will be a loooonnnnggggg one...Oh yeah, does anyone want to tell me Cone is a point guard again?
I also hate all the transition trees. We don't have Steph Curry. If you get a fast break, they take it to the rim when we have numbers rather than shooting a 3 that's 60 percent of time going to be a miss with no one down there to rebound.
I hate all the Stanford trees.PtownBear1 said:
I also hate all the transition trees.
all shots on the move are harder than a catch and shootHearstMining said:Agreed. I haven't been focusing on Cone every time he touches the ball, but I've noticed that he tends to hit the 3 pt shots where he is either stationary or moving directly towards the basket. When he comes off a turn or is moving laterally as he shoots, he misses.bearmanpg said:*************BINGOBearlyCareAnymore said:I have to say this with Cone. He takes off balance threes (like his last one in this game), WHEN HE DOESN'T NEED TO BE OFF BALANCE. I don't care if "he makes them" sometimes. There is no reason for a player of his experience not squaring up and shooting.bearmanpg said:
As stu pointed out, our 3pt % has to be better than 17%....Cone having a 1-10 from 3pt will pretty much guarantee a L against anyone....Askew being out leaves us with no point guards....Mike Meadows was a proven point guard....Losing him before the season started was a key to this type of start....Someone is going to have to learn how to play the 1 or this season will be a loooonnnnggggg one...Oh yeah, does anyone want to tell me Cone is a point guard again?
our opponents have been getting catch and shoot opportunities with their offense
we haven't
I just can't imagine what the coaches are telling our guys to do. Is this some kind of experimental period?? No rest for the Cal fan.
Bobodeluxe said:
Wilner has jumped on the bandwagon!
"12. Cal (2-2)
Last week: 11Results: lost to Pacific 87-79, beat Cal State Bakersfield 83-63, lost to Montana State 63-60Next up: vs. UTEP (Monday)Comment: And so begins Cal's annual march to the bottom of the Power Six power ratings. Will any school beat the Bears to the cellar? We're skeptical."
We can only hope that jackazz Wilner will focus on slurping the new Big Ten teams, as he appears to be doing, and never write another word about Cal again.
bearmanpg said:*************BINGOBearlyCareAnymore said:I have to say this with Cone. He takes off balance threes (like his last one in this game), WHEN HE DOESN'T NEED TO BE OFF BALANCE. I don't care if "he makes them" sometimes. There is no reason for a player of his experience not squaring up and shooting.bearmanpg said:
As stu pointed out, our 3pt % has to be better than 17%....Cone having a 1-10 from 3pt will pretty much guarantee a L against anyone....Askew being out leaves us with no point guards....Mike Meadows was a proven point guard....Losing him before the season started was a key to this type of start....Someone is going to have to learn how to play the 1 or this season will be a loooonnnnggggg one...Oh yeah, does anyone want to tell me Cone is a point guard again?
Cone came in with a bit of a reputation as a chucker who can get hot sometimes. That is what he has showed so far.
When Kobe Bryant was a rookie he shot the ball like degree of difficulty was a component of scoring. He possessed some of that mentality throughout his career although he got better over time.
I am not saying Cone is Kobe, but I hope he is coachable and he can rein in those tendencies.
Featured Stories
See All
The Rodcast: The Greatest Drive Ever?
by Rod Benson
Cal Hosts Stanford In 127th Big Game
by Cal Athletics
Cal Wins Thriller Over Auburn
by Cal Athletics
Depleted Bears Hold Off Air Force, 78-69
by Jim McGill