RedlessWardrobe said:

---

the equivalent of the 2013 football season when Dykes took over for Tedford. Let me qualify: Tedford's career was nothing like Mark Fox, but by 2012 it was feeling like Fox.

The obvious parallel to Dykes football team. Finally got guys on offense that can score, but on defense they just can't stop anybody.

Final note: At the risk of being delusional I still think there's a chance that this team can finish fourth in Pac12 IF defensive weakness can be somewhat minimized. And for those of you that may be concerned about my separation from reality, I've been watching Cal sports for almost 60 years and have never found it necessary to visit a psychiatrist due to teams losing. Over the years I have probably acquired "Cal fan Immunity."

Hope things turn around starting with UCSD. (Note, we played horrible defense against Ole Miss but they are a very good shooting team.)

---

Gkhoury2325 said:

---

I believe Askew should start when he is fully health and ready to go. He is a much better facilitator, can defend at a much higher level, has a strong handle despite holding the ball too long sometimes.

Cone could be an amazing 6th man that can come off the bench be a spark that can get you 10-12 points. We have no great scorers off the bench, but if we linked him to with Brown and Celestine that could be a decent bench. There was no rhythm with the offense yesterday.

---

Gkhoury2325 said:

---

I believe Askew should start when he is fully health and ready to go. He is a much better facilitator, can defend at a much higher level, has a strong handle despite holding the ball too long sometimes.

Cone could be an amazing 6th man that can come off the bench be a spark that can get you 10-12 points. We have no great scorers off the bench, but if we linked him to with Brown and Celestine that could be a decent bench. There was no rhythm with the offense yesterday.

---

calumnus said:

---

Gkhoury2325 said:

---

I believe Askew should start when he is fully health and ready to go. He is a much better facilitator, can defend at a much higher level, has a strong handle despite holding the ball too long sometimes.

Cone could be an amazing 6th man that can come off the bench be a spark that can get you 10-12 points. We have no great scorers off the bench, but if we linked him to with Brown and Celestine that could be a decent bench. There was no rhythm with the offense yesterday.

---

Askew has a 3.0 to 3.0 Assist to Turnover Ratio. He is shooting .182 from Three. His 4 year stats are not much better so it is not like he is slumping that much. It is who he is as a player.

I'd rather we play more zone and play more of Brown, who is only going to get better.

---

oskidunker said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Gkhoury2325 said:

---

I believe Askew should start when he is fully health and ready to go. He is a much better facilitator, can defend at a much higher level, has a strong handle despite holding the ball too long sometimes.

Cone could be an amazing 6th man that can come off the bench be a spark that can get you 10-12 points. We have no great scorers off the bench, but if we linked him to with Brown and Celestine that could be a decent bench. There was no rhythm with the offense yesterday.

---

Askew has a 3.0 to 3.0 Assist to Turnover Ratio. He is shooting .182 from Three. His 4 year stats are not much better so it is not like he is slumping that much. It is who he is as a player.

I'd rather we play more zone and play more of Brown, who is only going to get better.

---

Agree. We know what we have got with Askew. He played in games we lost

---

stu said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

I am not a Cone fan. Too short to defend

---

Leilani McIntosh on our women's team is usually the shortest player on the court and almost always the best defender. And Paris Austin was a pretty good defender as a senior after Fox convinced him to work at it.

---

Strykur said:

---

I have mentioned that when watching the 2013 Dykes team I did not look at the scoreboard or think of the results much that year, I just wanted to see a squad that was working on building something and there was visible improvement despite the (lack of) defense, same deal on the hardwood this year, there is potential despite the losses and every game has been competitive thus far.

---

ncbears said:

---

Strykur said:

---

I have mentioned that when watching the 2013 Dykes team I did not look at the scoreboard or think of the results much that year, I just wanted to see a squad that was working on building something and there was visible improvement despite the (lack of) defense, same deal on the hardwood this year, there is potential despite the losses and every game has been competitive thus far.

---

Except that Daws, Kennedy, and Cone are here for just this year. I can't recall if Tyson is available next year.
But, the better players (and corers) on this years team won't be here next year - it will be, in effect, a whole new team.

---

stu said:

---

I agree - defense is all about motor and attitude.

---

HoopDreams said:

---

stu said:

---

I agree - defense is all about motor and attitude.

---

Yes, those factors are very important

But also important are defensive fundamentals such as knowing when and how to switch, knowing when, where and how to help, and being able to execute the defensive system

Also, length, quickness and athleticism are also key factors

And as someone said, coaching. I think a lot of defensive coaching relates to picking the right matchups and in game adjustments

---

HoopDreams said:

---

stu said:

---

I agree - defense is all about motor and attitude.

---

Yes, those factors are very important

But also important are defensive fundamentals such as knowing when and how to switch, knowing when, where and how to help, and being able to execute the defensive system

Also, length, quickness and athleticism are also key factors

And as someone said, coaching. I think a lot of defensive coaching relates to picking the right matchups and in game adjustments

---

dimitrig said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

stu said:

---

I agree - defense is all about motor and attitude.

---

Yes, those factors are very important

But also important are defensive fundamentals such as knowing when and how to switch, knowing when, where and how to help, and being able to execute the defensive system

Also, length, quickness and athleticism are also key factors

And as someone said, coaching. I think a lot of defensive coaching relates to picking the right matchups and in game adjustments

---

No arguments. Knowing where to be, when to rotate, and so on are important. Matchups are where coaching matters a lot. Leave the guy in, take him out, put someone else on him, double team , leave him open - a lot of decisions to make.

I still think that individual defense is mostly about effort. That doesn't mean conditioning and athleticism and size aren't important, but one has to have a desire to be a good defender. A lot of players have all the tools to be excellent defenders but don't make a commitment on that end of the floor.

I am not sure what to make of this Bears defense other than we always seem a step slow and out of position. My personal opinion is that the guys on the roster are offense first types and aren't really that well-coached on the fundamentals that make for good role players. Madsen can't undo years of bad habits in half a season even if he was an excellent coach.

It's also clear that being a grinding defensive team a la MFer isn't really his style. That's fine by me because even though the results aren't much better the games are a lot more enjoyable for the fans and the players as well. I think that is what we need to turn the program around.

---