barsad said:

---

I've been thinking about how Cal is going to succeed in the ACC, a very different landscape from the current one. Without a dominating presence in the middle of the court it seems unlikely that the team will thrive. Then I took a look at the offers we have out and got alarmed:
https://www.espn.com/colleges/basketball/recruiting/school/_/id/25/class/2024/page/offers
No offers to centers, only one PG signed so far. Are we going to grab another transfer? To ensure more than a one-and-done like we had with Daws this year, shouldn't we be finding a frosh that can grow into an elite ACC center?
If others have better knowledge about the recruiting process please correct me on this.
Top 100 Prospects
https://www.espn.com/college-sports/basketball/recruiting/playerrankings

These top guys all seem wrapped up already.

So a few other questions:
1. Is Gus Larsen the guy? I like his gritty play but he seems too wiry to be dominating.
2. If Gus is not the guy, who should be? By "the guy" I mean a center that regularly gives us the Daws double-doubles without the greasy hands and short range shooting problems… and do it for 3-4 years.
3. Isn't this Madsen's forte as a former big man himself (just found out he's 6' 9", not classic big)?

---

Johnfox said:

---

I have a good feeling that Aziz Bandaogo will transfer to Cal next season. He's not getting a lot playing time at Cincinnati. Future for playing time is not looking bright either with a lot of veteran bigs on Cincinnati. Mark and him have a good relationship, so I feel that Mark will call him up and tell him you'll be our 5 man (Aimaq's role). I don't really know the transfer rules after they let second time transfers play, but this would be his 3rd transfer.

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

My guess is that moving forward MM will again hit the transfer portal for maybe 3-4 players and gradually up the percentage of HS recruits until he reaches a balance that he's comfortable with from year to year. Hopefully, the administration won't screw it all up and end up losing him.

---

6956bear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

My guess is that moving forward MM will again hit the transfer portal for maybe 3-4 players and gradually up the percentage of HS recruits until he reaches a balance that he's comfortable with from year to year. Hopefully, the administration won't screw it all up and end up losing him.

---

Well this years starting lineup has 4 transfers. 3 are out of eligibility and the 4th (Tyson) is a possible NBA draftee. If Tyson somehow decides to return he will be costly. So what 3 or 4 transfers do you think Madsen would be able to bring in that would be able to get the program to an NIT level program? These 4 transfers on this team represented a top 20 transfer class. And all were very experienced. 2 6th year players and one 5th year player.

The team is 10-14 overall 6-7 in conference.

Is the NIL budget such that they can get a better class than last year? It better be. Or their international recruiting will need to pay major immediate dividends. The ACC while down over some past seasons is still a better league than the current P12 that has one team of note. And they recruit the HS ranks much better than has Cal.

I think you are right in the approach, I just have less confidence it will work well. They will need a boffo transfer class or they likely finish near the bottom of the ACC.

---

HoopDreams said:

---

barsad said:

---

I've been thinking about how Cal is going to succeed in the ACC, a very different landscape from the current one. Without a dominating presence in the middle of the court it seems unlikely that the team will thrive. Then I took a look at the offers we have out and got alarmed:
https://www.espn.com/colleges/basketball/recruiting/school/_/id/25/class/2024/page/offers
No offers to centers, only one PG signed so far. Are we going to grab another transfer? To ensure more than a one-and-done like we had with Daws this year, shouldn't we be finding a frosh that can grow into an elite ACC center?
If others have better knowledge about the recruiting process please correct me on this.
Top 100 Prospects
https://www.espn.com/college-sports/basketball/recruiting/playerrankings

These top guys all seem wrapped up already.

So a few other questions:
1. Is Gus Larsen the guy? I like his gritty play but he seems too wiry to be dominating.
2. If Gus is not the guy, who should be? By "the guy" I mean a center that regularly gives us the Daws double-doubles without the greasy hands and short range shooting problems… and do it for 3-4 years.
3. Isn't this Madsen's forte as a former big man himself (just found out he's 6' 9", not classic big)?

---

I think some are over rating Larsen, with one poster saying he's better than Aimaq

He's been a good role player, and not sure where we'd be without him, but if Larsen is our starting center we will have a very tough first year in the acc

Don't forget we also have Curtis who gives us some length, but he's another role player next year

We need 1 or 2 bigs (a center and a true PF) to compete in the ACC where many teams have a post rotation of 4 player

---

HearstMining said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

barsad said:

---

I've been thinking about how Cal is going to succeed in the ACC, a very different landscape from the current one. Without a dominating presence in the middle of the court it seems unlikely that the team will thrive. Then I took a look at the offers we have out and got alarmed:
https://www.espn.com/colleges/basketball/recruiting/school/_/id/25/class/2024/page/offers
No offers to centers, only one PG signed so far. Are we going to grab another transfer? To ensure more than a one-and-done like we had with Daws this year, shouldn't we be finding a frosh that can grow into an elite ACC center?
If others have better knowledge about the recruiting process please correct me on this.
Top 100 Prospects
https://www.espn.com/college-sports/basketball/recruiting/playerrankings

These top guys all seem wrapped up already.

So a few other questions:
1. Is Gus Larsen the guy? I like his gritty play but he seems too wiry to be dominating.
2. If Gus is not the guy, who should be? By "the guy" I mean a center that regularly gives us the Daws double-doubles without the greasy hands and short range shooting problems… and do it for 3-4 years.
3. Isn't this Madsen's forte as a former big man himself (just found out he's 6' 9", not classic big)?

---

I think some are over rating Larsen, with one poster saying he's better than Aimaq

He's been a good role player, and not sure where we'd be without him, but if Larsen is our starting center we will have a very tough first year in the acc

Don't forget we also have Curtis who gives us some length, but he's another role player next year

We need 1 or 2 bigs (a center and a true PF) to compete in the ACC where many teams have a post rotation of 4 player

---

Larsen has the build of a David Kravish and I wondered if he'd evolve into a similar role. The problem is Larsen is a RS-Soph, so in his third year of college ball. Kravish was a more developed player than Larsen at this point, both skill-wise and, although never confused with Shaq, stronger physically than Larsen. I think Larsen can get stronger and better, but I don't think he'll have the sort of impact that Kravish did his last two years.
EDIT - Forgot to add my final thought here. Given that big men are late, and uncertain developers as players, Center might be the position where Madsen does focus on transfers and instead expends most of his HS recruiting energy on PGs and guys in that 6-5 - 6-7 range who can shoot (probably the same guys everybody else is looking for).

---

calumnus said:

---

Kravish rarely played center. When he first joined the team we had Richard Solomon and in his last years we had Rooks and Okoroh.

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

barsad said:

---

I've been thinking about how Cal is going to succeed in the ACC, a very different landscape from the current one. Without a dominating presence in the middle of the court it seems unlikely that the team will thrive. Then I took a look at the offers we have out and got alarmed:
https://www.espn.com/colleges/basketball/recruiting/school/_/id/25/class/2024/page/offers
No offers to centers, only one PG signed so far. Are we going to grab another transfer? To ensure more than a one-and-done like we had with Daws this year, shouldn't we be finding a frosh that can grow into an elite ACC center?
If others have better knowledge about the recruiting process please correct me on this.
Top 100 Prospects
https://www.espn.com/college-sports/basketball/recruiting/playerrankings

These top guys all seem wrapped up already.

So a few other questions:
1. Is Gus Larsen the guy? I like his gritty play but he seems too wiry to be dominating.
2. If Gus is not the guy, who should be? By "the guy" I mean a center that regularly gives us the Daws double-doubles without the greasy hands and short range shooting problems… and do it for 3-4 years.
3. Isn't this Madsen's forte as a former big man himself (just found out he's 6' 9", not classic big)?

---

I think some are over rating Larsen, with one poster saying he's better than Aimaq

He's been a good role player, and not sure where we'd be without him, but if Larsen is our starting center we will have a very tough first year in the acc

Don't forget we also have Curtis who gives us some length, but he's another role player next year

We need 1 or 2 bigs (a center and a true PF) to compete in the ACC where many teams have a post rotation of 4 player

---

Larsen has the build of a David Kravish and I wondered if he'd evolve into a similar role. The problem is Larsen is a RS-Soph, so in his third year of college ball. Kravish was a more developed player than Larsen at this point, both skill-wise and, although never confused with Shaq, stronger physically than Larsen. I think Larsen can get stronger and better, but I don't think he'll have the sort of impact that Kravish did his last two years.
EDIT - Forgot to add my final thought here. Given that big men are late, and uncertain developers as players, Center might be the position where Madsen does focus on transfers and instead expends most of his HS recruiting energy on PGs and guys in that 6-5 - 6-7 range who can shoot (probably the same guys everybody else is looking for).

---

Kravish rarely played center. When he first joined the team we had Richard Solomon and in his last years we had Rooks and Okoroh.

---

sluggo said:

---

Interesting that after 17 posts no one has mentioned Okafor, who, if healthy, would I think be the overwhelming choice to be the starting 5. Larsen has been a nice role player, but he gets physically abused. Curtis is tall but raw. Okafor is a good athlete and has the strength to play against almost anyone. Would have been great to have him against Bona on Saturday.

So I think that the depth chart is Okafor (if healthy) and then Curtis or Larsen depending on the opposition and how much Curtis improves. I think Cal needs to add two bigs, hopefully one who score and one who is more a defender/rebounder. I mean better if they get the next Joel Embiid, bit I am trying to be realistic.

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Interesting that after 17 posts no one has mentioned Okafor, who, if healthy, would I think be the overwhelming choice to be the starting 5. Larsen has been a nice role player, but he gets physically abused. Curtis is tall but raw. Okafor is a good athlete and has the strength to play against almost anyone. Would have been great to have him against Bona on Saturday.

So I think that the depth chart is Okafor (if healthy) and then Curtis or Larsen depending on the opposition and how much Curtis improves. I think Cal needs to add two bigs, hopefully one who score and one who is more a defender/rebounder. I mean better if they get the next Joel Embiid, bit I am trying to be realistic.

---

For some reason, I keep visualizing Okafor more as a PF. Not sure why. He has size, but it still feels like he's not a true center. Maybe I'm not convinced he's really 6-9. If you can straighten me out on this one, I would certainly welcome your reply. (or anybody's)

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Interesting that after 17 posts no one has mentioned Okafor, who, if healthy, would I think be the overwhelming choice to be the starting 5. Larsen has been a nice role player, but he gets physically abused. Curtis is tall but raw. Okafor is a good athlete and has the strength to play against almost anyone. Would have been great to have him against Bona on Saturday.

So I think that the depth chart is Okafor (if healthy) and then Curtis or Larsen depending on the opposition and how much Curtis improves. I think Cal needs to add two bigs, hopefully one who score and one who is more a defender/rebounder. I mean better if they get the next Joel Embiid, bit I am trying to be realistic.

---

For some reason, I keep visualizing Okafor more as a PF. Not sure why. He has size, but it still feels like he's not a true center. Maybe I'm not convinced he's really 6-9. If you can straighten me out on this one, I would certainly welcome your reply. (or anybody's)

---

Big C said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Interesting that after 17 posts no one has mentioned Okafor, who, if healthy, would I think be the overwhelming choice to be the starting 5. Larsen has been a nice role player, but he gets physically abused. Curtis is tall but raw. Okafor is a good athlete and has the strength to play against almost anyone. Would have been great to have him against Bona on Saturday.

So I think that the depth chart is Okafor (if healthy) and then Curtis or Larsen depending on the opposition and how much Curtis improves. I think Cal needs to add two bigs, hopefully one who score and one who is more a defender/rebounder. I mean better if they get the next Joel Embiid, bit I am trying to be realistic.

---

For some reason, I keep visualizing Okafor more as a PF. Not sure why. He has size, but it still feels like he's not a true center. Maybe I'm not convinced he's really 6-9. If you can straighten me out on this one, I would certainly welcome your reply. (or anybody's)

---

Watching Okafor play earlier this year, I thought he had made incremental progress at best, over the off-season, kind of like Newell. He has always had some semblance of offense in the low post, but he usually seems to be a step out of place when it comes to rebounding and defense.

I feel like he will need to make significant strides, if he is going to be a big contributor next season. Not impossible!

---

JimSox said:

---

I think the OP was asking here if anyone has knowledge of the recruiting process and can tell us if any new bigs are in the offing to replace Aimaq. No real answer yet.

---

barsad said:

---

Right, but I see the portal as only good for short term fixes because it's more likely we get one-and-dones (eg Aimaq) instead of the next Zach Edey.
That's why I was puzzled that we don't have any offers out to centers - I guess something to work on for the '25 recruiting class.
I don't mind a battle between Larsen and Okafor for a starting spot, competition is good and will motivate them. I believe Larsen has better skills overall and a shot, but he's got to get in the gym in the offseason if he's going to survive the ACC meat grinder.

---

barsad said:

---

Right, but I see the portal as only good for short term fixes because it's more likely we get one-and-dones (eg Aimaq) instead of the next Zach Edey.
That's why I was puzzled that we don't have any offers out to centers - I guess something to work on for the '25 recruiting class.
I don't mind a battle between Larson and Okafor for a starting spot, competition is good and will motivate them. I believe Larson has better skills overall and a shot, but he's got to get in the gym in the offseason if he's going to survive the ACC meat grinder.

---