Celestine in Portal

16,760 Views | 125 Replies | Last: 16 days ago by Big C
6956bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RedlessWardrobe said:

calumnus said:

touchdownbears43 said:

He averages 8.3ppg and 3rpg. Why is it such a big loss? He is by no means a game changer. He's a modest player on a modest team. If anything, it allows Madsen to upgrade over the position.


He shot .440 from Three, highest among our starters. He was our only starter who came to Cal as a freshman and was our only starter who we thought we would have back. We never really got to see him healthy for a full season. So plenty of reason to think next year he could be better, especially with more touches, and plenty of reason for fans to be disappointed he's leaving.
I always find it interesting when a player is reviewed solely by statistics, how one statement can omit a significant stat and how it make only take one more stat to change the entire perspective.

I've always been a great follower of stats, but by themselves they simply don't always tell the whole story. Considering the uncertainty of this whole transfer portal situation, anyone who watched Cal play this year would certainly welcome Jalen Celestine back for another season.
There are a lot of moving parts with this roster rebuild. The sheer amount of players needed and a limited NIL budget will limit some of what you can do. So sure there are likely few folks on this site that would welcome back Celestine. But apparently while away on Spring break and consulting with family and other "advisors" he decided he was worthy of a hefty new NIL package.

So the staff while wanting to keep Jalen now needs to weigh his value to the program over what they may be able to get via the portal. Teams all the time in the professional sports world make all sorts of decisions based on the salary cap. College sports do not have a cap, but each program is only able to provide an NIL package with available funds via the donor collective. Madsen needs to determine if what Celestine needs to stay is both appropriate for his skills and what it may do to the NIL budget. Cal has cap. It is whatever the donors have done and designated for mens basketball. Cal needs several players. Not just a player or 2. So they need to make some judgements regarding value to the program.

The uncertainty of everything could lend one to think keeping a player even at an inflated value is the right thing. But we do not know the overall NIL budget nor what players the staff has contacted that have shown interest and what that cost is. But the staff does. So if we believe in Madsen and the collective we have to assume they are in better position than we to decide on how Celestine should be compensated. And we do not know what the conversations between player and staff entailed and how that plays into the decision.

As a player I believe Cal can replicate the talent. Jalen is a nice open shooter but has limitations. He is not a great ball handler nor defender. He is not great at creating his own shot nor as a facilitator for others. Not awful, but really rather ordinary athletically. Yes he had an injury and that hurt him, but it is what it is. He was loyal and that counts but at what cost.

I believe the staff wanted to keep Jalen. But there is a price point. And the difference apparently is signifcant. I think it is worth remembering while appreciating the player the team did go 13-19. And significant roster improvement is needed.

In this new world of NIL and transfer portal there is a budget. Unlike the NFL we do not know what that number is. The contracts of these players are not public knowledge. And unlike the NFL the players in college now have completely unburdened freedom of movement. They can leave whenever they choose. Players have a lot of leverage. They are exercising it. Whether it is ultimately a good decision by Jalen to leave or for Cal to not match will be determined later. By the players Cal is able to secure and where Jalen ends up and how that works out for him. But at present IMO we have little choice but to trust Madsen and the collective to use the funds in a way that best works for the program. At this time that does not mean paying Celestine the amount he wants. I wish him well. He is leaving with a Cal degree and gave his best during his time. But this is a new world now. And he is choosing to leave. The staff did not force him out. They simply do not agree on the value of that roster spot. Happens all the time in pro sports. And if we are being honest what NIL and the transfer portal has done is bring a professional element to roster building. Decisions like this one are being made all over the college sports landscape. This has become a money and value proposition. The player and the staff differ in opinion on his "value".

Thanks for everything Jalen. Good luck in your future endeavors. Go Bears.
Bobodeluxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The NBA (and NFL) has a cap, more or less.

"College Sports" have no cap, other than that which wealthy people set for themselves towards their specific team.

The high budget collectives will rush to hire the players that their coaches specify. The early bidding wars will wain as rosters are filled, and a lot of good players will trickle down to the next level of monetized interest groups.

Rinse and repeat.

Eventually, every(?) team will field a roster.

Oakbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bobodeluxe said:



Eventually, every(?) team will field a roster.


and the haves will have and the have not will not have

so it goes (sorry kurt)
concernedparent
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SFCityBear said:

touchdownbears43 said:

He averages 8.3ppg and 3rpg. Why is it such a big loss? He is by no means a game changer. He's a modest player on a modest team. If anything, it allows Madsen to upgrade over the position.

Why use individual stats to judge him?
Because we're measuring individual performance and contribution?
sluggo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

touchdownbears43 said:

He averages 8.3ppg and 3rpg. Why is it such a big loss? He is by no means a game changer. He's a modest player on a modest team. If anything, it allows Madsen to upgrade over the position.


He shot .440 from Three, highest among our starters. He was our only starter who came to Cal as a freshman and was our only starter who we thought we would have back. We never really got to see him healthy for a full season. So plenty of reason to think next year he could be better, especially with more touches, and plenty of reason for fans to be disappointed he's leaving.
Celestine was an efficient scorer. He could have scored more with lower efficiency, which would have made him a less good player. Askew scored 16 points a game two years ago on 38% from the field and 30% from three. Shepherd scored 15 points three years ago with similar (lack of) efficiency.

I am not saying Celestine was a great player, but he was a big net positive.


PtownBear1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
All these comments that Celestine can easily be replaced seem delusional. We literally don't have a single proven college player on the roster presently. Wilkinson and Curtis could become good college players, but seems low probability it could happen as early as next season.

I'm not saying Madsen should have given Celestine whatever inflated amount he was seeking just to keep him, but this notion that we're going to be able to afford at least 5 players better than what Celestine would have offered the team next season seems far-fetched. But hey, maybe one of these confident posters is a secret multi-million dollar NIL donor...
DaveT
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PtownBear1 said:

this notion that we're going to be able to afford at least 5 players better than what Celestine would have offered the team next season seems far-fetched.
Madsen apparently disagrees. Celestine had an NIL deal in place for a value both sides originally thought was fair. That money now goes back to the pool and can be used to sign someone else of similar caliber (or up the ante on someone better).

I'm sure everyone wishes Celestine hadn't bolted (including Madsen), but he did. The real issue is whether Cal made a good decision in saying goodbye rather than paying up to keep him. Either you believe Madsen knows what he's doing, or you don't. He's got a lot more info than any of us, he certainly has a plan, and until proven otherwise he should probably get the benefit of the doubt.

Plus, I doubt any doors are irreversibly closed. Cal has loads of scholarship room, and Celestine may briefly test the waters and decide his original NIL was pretty good. Who knows. We're finally starting to see some quality commits along with a lot of additional portal entries, so the market for his skillset will likely get established pretty soon.
6956bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DaveT said:

PtownBear1 said:

this notion that we're going to be able to afford at least 5 players better than what Celestine would have offered the team next season seems far-fetched.
Madsen apparently disagrees. Celestine had an NIL deal in place for a value both sides originally thought was fair. That money now goes back to the pool and can be used to sign someone else of similar caliber (or up the ante on someone better).

I'm sure everyone wishes Celestine hadn't bolted (including Madsen), but he did. The real issue is whether Cal made a good decision in saying goodbye rather than paying up to keep him. Either you believe Madsen knows what he's doing, or you don't. He's got a lot more info than any of us, he certainly has a plan, and until proven otherwise he should probably get the benefit of the doubt.

Plus, I doubt any doors are irreversibly closed. Cal has loads of scholarship room, and Celestine may briefly test the waters and decide his original NIL was pretty good. Who knows. We're finally starting to see some quality commits along with a lot of additional portal entries, so the market for his skillset will likely get established pretty soon.
This. Madsen was hired to run the program. He was just extended. We need to let him do what he feels is in the programs best interests. He knows the budget. He knows what Celestine and family has requested to stay.

What we do not know is who the staff has targeted, the cost of said targets and what possible HS players they are still in pursuit of. My personal belief is Celestine is a solid role player. There have been some folks suggesting not only did he request a high NIL amount, but that the family also believes the offense needs to flow through him .

If those are the requests being made then IMO it is a great decision by Madsen to move on. He is not that player. I hate NIL but that is where we are. Donors provide the funds necessary to provide the NIL. It is really easy for some to say they need to keep him aboard. But who here is willing to front that money to do so? If I were a high level donator to NIL (I am not) I would frankly be upset paying an inflated amount to keep him here.

Cal needs to rebuild. Staying the course with an average player that wants NIL above his market value is a surefire way to have last season's dysfunction repeat itself.


JimSox
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DaveT said:

PtownBear1 said:

this notion that we're going to be able to afford at least 5 players better than what Celestine would have offered the team next season seems far-fetched.
Madsen apparently disagrees. Celestine had an NIL deal in place for a value both sides originally thought was fair. That money now goes back to the pool and can be used to sign someone else of similar caliber (or up the ante on someone better).

I'm sure everyone wishes Celestine hadn't bolted (including Madsen), but he did. The real issue is whether Cal made a good decision in saying goodbye rather than paying up to keep him. Either you believe Madsen knows what he's doing, or you don't. He's got a lot more info than any of us, he certainly has a plan, and until proven otherwise he should probably get the benefit of the doubt.

Plus, I doubt any doors are irreversibly closed. Cal has loads of scholarship room, and Celestine may briefly test the waters and decide his original NIL was pretty good. Who knows. We're finally starting to see some quality commits along with a lot of additional portal entries, so the market for his skillset will likely get established pretty soon.
There's a third option. Don't know if he knows what he's doing! Right now we don't actually have a basketball team. We shall see.
DaveT
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JimSox said:

DaveT said:

PtownBear1 said:

this notion that we're going to be able to afford at least 5 players better than what Celestine would have offered the team next season seems far-fetched.
Madsen apparently disagrees. Celestine had an NIL deal in place for a value both sides originally thought was fair. That money now goes back to the pool and can be used to sign someone else of similar caliber (or up the ante on someone better).

I'm sure everyone wishes Celestine hadn't bolted (including Madsen), but he did. The real issue is whether Cal made a good decision in saying goodbye rather than paying up to keep him. Either you believe Madsen knows what he's doing, or you don't. He's got a lot more info than any of us, he certainly has a plan, and until proven otherwise he should probably get the benefit of the doubt.

Plus, I doubt any doors are irreversibly closed. Cal has loads of scholarship room, and Celestine may briefly test the waters and decide his original NIL was pretty good. Who knows. We're finally starting to see some quality commits along with a lot of additional portal entries, so the market for his skillset will likely get established pretty soon.
There's a third option. Don't know if he knows what he's doing! Right now we don't actually have a basketball team. We shall see.
True, until we see what happens over the coming weeks it may be too soon to form an opinion at all. I'd counter with the fact he did a really good job with the portal last season, bringing in: (1) a guy who finished 3rd in the Pac-12 in PPG and is bound for the NBA, (2) another guy who led the Pac-12 in rebounds, and (3) a guy who played shutdown defense and finished sixth in steals per game. Doesn't mean he'll do the same this year, but does give me some hope.
6956bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JimSox said:

DaveT said:

PtownBear1 said:

this notion that we're going to be able to afford at least 5 players better than what Celestine would have offered the team next season seems far-fetched.
Madsen apparently disagrees. Celestine had an NIL deal in place for a value both sides originally thought was fair. That money now goes back to the pool and can be used to sign someone else of similar caliber (or up the ante on someone better).

I'm sure everyone wishes Celestine hadn't bolted (including Madsen), but he did. The real issue is whether Cal made a good decision in saying goodbye rather than paying up to keep him. Either you believe Madsen knows what he's doing, or you don't. He's got a lot more info than any of us, he certainly has a plan, and until proven otherwise he should probably get the benefit of the doubt.

Plus, I doubt any doors are irreversibly closed. Cal has loads of scholarship room, and Celestine may briefly test the waters and decide his original NIL was pretty good. Who knows. We're finally starting to see some quality commits along with a lot of additional portal entries, so the market for his skillset will likely get established pretty soon.
There's a third option. Don't know if he knows what he's doing! Right now we don't actually have a basketball team. We shall see.
You are right we do not know if he knows what he is doing. But he is hired to figure it out. Until we see what the results of this portal period brings to the program we do need to give him the benefit of the doubt.

We will find out soon enough if he has the magic touch with donors to provide a robust NIL warchest. And if he has the evaluation skills to find players that fit his preferred style of play.

It is hard to watch the outgoing players and see nobody headed this way yet. But Cal is not alone in this. Over half of the former P12 is in heavy roster turnover mode.

I hope Madsen has a plan and that there is enough NIL $$ available to execute the plan. But sure we do not know for sure. But overpaying for a role player off a 13-19 team does not seem to be a wise move to me.
GMP
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DaveT said:

JimSox said:

DaveT said:

PtownBear1 said:

this notion that we're going to be able to afford at least 5 players better than what Celestine would have offered the team next season seems far-fetched.
Madsen apparently disagrees. Celestine had an NIL deal in place for a value both sides originally thought was fair. That money now goes back to the pool and can be used to sign someone else of similar caliber (or up the ante on someone better).

I'm sure everyone wishes Celestine hadn't bolted (including Madsen), but he did. The real issue is whether Cal made a good decision in saying goodbye rather than paying up to keep him. Either you believe Madsen knows what he's doing, or you don't. He's got a lot more info than any of us, he certainly has a plan, and until proven otherwise he should probably get the benefit of the doubt.

Plus, I doubt any doors are irreversibly closed. Cal has loads of scholarship room, and Celestine may briefly test the waters and decide his original NIL was pretty good. Who knows. We're finally starting to see some quality commits along with a lot of additional portal entries, so the market for his skillset will likely get established pretty soon.
There's a third option. Don't know if he knows what he's doing! Right now we don't actually have a basketball team. We shall see.
True, until we see what happens over the coming weeks it may be too soon to form an opinion at all. I'd counter with the fact he did a really good job with the portal last season, bringing in: (1) a guy who finished 3rd in the Pac-12 in PPG and is bound for the NBA, (2) another guy who led the Pac-12 in rebounds, and (3) a guy who played shutdown defense and finished sixth in steals per game. Doesn't mean he'll do the same this year, but does give me some hope.


I trust Madsen but I am also very concerned about ANY coach's ability to recruit 7-8 high caliber players like we need. Players want money and minutes. How can he get them those things when he's recruiting 7-8 guys? I don't know.
6956bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GMP said:

DaveT said:

JimSox said:

DaveT said:

PtownBear1 said:

this notion that we're going to be able to afford at least 5 players better than what Celestine would have offered the team next season seems far-fetched.
Madsen apparently disagrees. Celestine had an NIL deal in place for a value both sides originally thought was fair. That money now goes back to the pool and can be used to sign someone else of similar caliber (or up the ante on someone better).

I'm sure everyone wishes Celestine hadn't bolted (including Madsen), but he did. The real issue is whether Cal made a good decision in saying goodbye rather than paying up to keep him. Either you believe Madsen knows what he's doing, or you don't. He's got a lot more info than any of us, he certainly has a plan, and until proven otherwise he should probably get the benefit of the doubt.

Plus, I doubt any doors are irreversibly closed. Cal has loads of scholarship room, and Celestine may briefly test the waters and decide his original NIL was pretty good. Who knows. We're finally starting to see some quality commits along with a lot of additional portal entries, so the market for his skillset will likely get established pretty soon.
There's a third option. Don't know if he knows what he's doing! Right now we don't actually have a basketball team. We shall see.
True, until we see what happens over the coming weeks it may be too soon to form an opinion at all. I'd counter with the fact he did a really good job with the portal last season, bringing in: (1) a guy who finished 3rd in the Pac-12 in PPG and is bound for the NBA, (2) another guy who led the Pac-12 in rebounds, and (3) a guy who played shutdown defense and finished sixth in steals per game. Doesn't mean he'll do the same this year, but does give me some hope.


I trust Madsen but I am also very concerned about ANY coach's ability to recruit 7-8 high caliber players like we need. Players want money and minutes. How can he get them those things when he's recruiting 7-8 guys? I don't know.
I don't know either. But at this point we have no alternative. Keeping Celestine for an over market NIL package IMO is not a good option. But I get the concern, I share your concerns. I think they are looking hard at the HS and international markets for possible low or no NIL alternatives.

It may have been best if Okafor, Newell and Brown decided to stay. But Cal was/is recruiting players that likely would keep them on the bench. And possibly return Celestine back to the bench. We know the bench players were unhappy this season. Doubtful that would change if they stayed and Madsen brought in a new group of starters. So now he has to find the 7-8 players good enough to improve the record that are willing to compete for starting roles. Not easy. But that is the task.
Oakbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
coaches that don't have a lot of NIL to play with will need to be creative

My gut is spend most of it on a PG/SF/Interior player (C PF) and then get roll players to fill out the roster

There are a lot of good players that will look even better with a PG that can dish, a SF that can shoot and an interior players that will need to be doubled..

I sort of have a similar view for Football, spend all your offensive NIL on OL, a good running back can look great with big holes to run thru, a good QB can look great if he has a second or two longer

really need to spend the money wisely .. some will some won't , just like in real life
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GMP said:

DaveT said:

JimSox said:

DaveT said:

PtownBear1 said:

this notion that we're going to be able to afford at least 5 players better than what Celestine would have offered the team next season seems far-fetched.
Madsen apparently disagrees. Celestine had an NIL deal in place for a value both sides originally thought was fair. That money now goes back to the pool and can be used to sign someone else of similar caliber (or up the ante on someone better).

I'm sure everyone wishes Celestine hadn't bolted (including Madsen), but he did. The real issue is whether Cal made a good decision in saying goodbye rather than paying up to keep him. Either you believe Madsen knows what he's doing, or you don't. He's got a lot more info than any of us, he certainly has a plan, and until proven otherwise he should probably get the benefit of the doubt.

Plus, I doubt any doors are irreversibly closed. Cal has loads of scholarship room, and Celestine may briefly test the waters and decide his original NIL was pretty good. Who knows. We're finally starting to see some quality commits along with a lot of additional portal entries, so the market for his skillset will likely get established pretty soon.
There's a third option. Don't know if he knows what he's doing! Right now we don't actually have a basketball team. We shall see.
True, until we see what happens over the coming weeks it may be too soon to form an opinion at all. I'd counter with the fact he did a really good job with the portal last season, bringing in: (1) a guy who finished 3rd in the Pac-12 in PPG and is bound for the NBA, (2) another guy who led the Pac-12 in rebounds, and (3) a guy who played shutdown defense and finished sixth in steals per game. Doesn't mean he'll do the same this year, but does give me some hope.


I trust Madsen but I am also very concerned about ANY coach's ability to recruit 7-8 high caliber players like we need. Players want money and minutes. How can he get them those things when he's recruiting 7-8 guys? I don't know.
People seem to not recognize that there is a middle ground between the coach is a bum who is crashing the program and the Coach is awesome and everything will be fine. Another possible situation is that he is not doing anything wrong, but we are still in a tough situation because of the overall circumstances. I'd argue that is the most likely situation to anyone who steps back and looks at the situation without five doses of copium. As you say, it is difficult for any coach to recruit 7-8 high caliber players especially when you are asking them to sign on with no one with any even medium level college production to join.

As the previous poster said, I think he did a really good job with the portal last season. And what that got us was 13-19 and everyone gone at the end of the year. If we are in a better position than we were 12 months ago, it is barely. For all intents and purposes we lost all of our production. If he repeats that really good job in the portal, or even does a little better, what makes anyone think we are going to move to a much tougher conference and improve on that 13-19?

So I don't know what the hope is that last year brings. That we can repeat 13-19? At this point, I think that would be yet another really good job in the portal. But if we are going to actually start doing something like finish over .500, we are going to need to have really good years in the portal AND keep some guys at the end of the year so we have something to build on.
Oakbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"So I don't know what the hope is that last year brings. That we can repeat 13-19?"

the hope is that he brings in 3-5 starter types and then some good role players to fill out the roster which leads to an NCAA berth

with Cal .. HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
6956bear said:

GMP said:

DaveT said:

JimSox said:

DaveT said:

PtownBear1 said:

this notion that we're going to be able to afford at least 5 players better than what Celestine would have offered the team next season seems far-fetched.
Madsen apparently disagrees. Celestine had an NIL deal in place for a value both sides originally thought was fair. That money now goes back to the pool and can be used to sign someone else of similar caliber (or up the ante on someone better).

I'm sure everyone wishes Celestine hadn't bolted (including Madsen), but he did. The real issue is whether Cal made a good decision in saying goodbye rather than paying up to keep him. Either you believe Madsen knows what he's doing, or you don't. He's got a lot more info than any of us, he certainly has a plan, and until proven otherwise he should probably get the benefit of the doubt.

Plus, I doubt any doors are irreversibly closed. Cal has loads of scholarship room, and Celestine may briefly test the waters and decide his original NIL was pretty good. Who knows. We're finally starting to see some quality commits along with a lot of additional portal entries, so the market for his skillset will likely get established pretty soon.
There's a third option. Don't know if he knows what he's doing! Right now we don't actually have a basketball team. We shall see.
True, until we see what happens over the coming weeks it may be too soon to form an opinion at all. I'd counter with the fact he did a really good job with the portal last season, bringing in: (1) a guy who finished 3rd in the Pac-12 in PPG and is bound for the NBA, (2) another guy who led the Pac-12 in rebounds, and (3) a guy who played shutdown defense and finished sixth in steals per game. Doesn't mean he'll do the same this year, but does give me some hope.


I trust Madsen but I am also very concerned about ANY coach's ability to recruit 7-8 high caliber players like we need. Players want money and minutes. How can he get them those things when he's recruiting 7-8 guys? I don't know.
I don't know either. But at this point we have no alternative. Keeping Celestine for an over market NIL package IMO is not a good option. But I get the concern, I share your concerns. I think they are looking hard at the HS and international markets for possible low or no NIL alternatives.

It may have been best if Okafor, Newell and Brown decided to stay. But Cal was/is recruiting players that likely would keep them on the bench. And possibly return Celestine back to the bench. We know the bench players were unhappy this season. Doubtful that would change if they stayed and Madsen brought in a new group of starters. So now he has to find the 7-8 players good enough to improve the record that are willing to compete for starting roles. Not easy. But that is the task.
The problem is, 6956, what if all those dastardly family and friends talking to Celestine are right? What if he goes out and gets a much better deal? He was obviously going to start and be a key player on the team. He is settled in here. He still decided to go. I'm on record as saying I agree with letting him go if you don't have the money and don't think he worth the asking price. I'm also on record saying he is replaceable, so let the volatile market ride. But, frankly, after losing the last guy that meant anything, I think the fear that we just might not have the juice is reasonable. Not that we don't have it - we won't know until the roster plays out - but worrying about it is warranted. No one is criticizing anyone right now. They are justifiably concerned.
6956bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlyCareAnymore said:

6956bear said:

GMP said:

DaveT said:

JimSox said:

DaveT said:

PtownBear1 said:

this notion that we're going to be able to afford at least 5 players better than what Celestine would have offered the team next season seems far-fetched.
Madsen apparently disagrees. Celestine had an NIL deal in place for a value both sides originally thought was fair. That money now goes back to the pool and can be used to sign someone else of similar caliber (or up the ante on someone better).

I'm sure everyone wishes Celestine hadn't bolted (including Madsen), but he did. The real issue is whether Cal made a good decision in saying goodbye rather than paying up to keep him. Either you believe Madsen knows what he's doing, or you don't. He's got a lot more info than any of us, he certainly has a plan, and until proven otherwise he should probably get the benefit of the doubt.

Plus, I doubt any doors are irreversibly closed. Cal has loads of scholarship room, and Celestine may briefly test the waters and decide his original NIL was pretty good. Who knows. We're finally starting to see some quality commits along with a lot of additional portal entries, so the market for his skillset will likely get established pretty soon.
There's a third option. Don't know if he knows what he's doing! Right now we don't actually have a basketball team. We shall see.
True, until we see what happens over the coming weeks it may be too soon to form an opinion at all. I'd counter with the fact he did a really good job with the portal last season, bringing in: (1) a guy who finished 3rd in the Pac-12 in PPG and is bound for the NBA, (2) another guy who led the Pac-12 in rebounds, and (3) a guy who played shutdown defense and finished sixth in steals per game. Doesn't mean he'll do the same this year, but does give me some hope.


I trust Madsen but I am also very concerned about ANY coach's ability to recruit 7-8 high caliber players like we need. Players want money and minutes. How can he get them those things when he's recruiting 7-8 guys? I don't know.
I don't know either. But at this point we have no alternative. Keeping Celestine for an over market NIL package IMO is not a good option. But I get the concern, I share your concerns. I think they are looking hard at the HS and international markets for possible low or no NIL alternatives.

It may have been best if Okafor, Newell and Brown decided to stay. But Cal was/is recruiting players that likely would keep them on the bench. And possibly return Celestine back to the bench. We know the bench players were unhappy this season. Doubtful that would change if they stayed and Madsen brought in a new group of starters. So now he has to find the 7-8 players good enough to improve the record that are willing to compete for starting roles. Not easy. But that is the task.
The problem is, 6956, what if all those dastardly family and friends talking to Celestine are right? What if he goes out and gets a much better deal? He was obviously going to start and be a key player on the team. He is settled in here. He still decided to go. I'm on record as saying I agree with letting him go if you don't have the money and don't think he worth the asking price. I'm also on record saying he is replaceable, so let the volatile market ride. But, frankly, after losing the last guy that meant anything, I think the fear that we just might not have the juice is reasonable. Not that we don't have it - we won't know until the roster plays out - but worrying about it is warranted. No one is criticizing anyone right now. They are justifiably concerned.
I am concerned as well. In the current situation you do need a well funded collective to have a chance. if they do they have a chance. I have no idea if they do or don't have the juice. So we will find out just how badly the donors that can make a difference are willing to do so. That is where the program is.

I just can't get to concerned over Celestine at this point. If he finds some program willing to pay him, good for him. But I am dubious that his particular situation has much to do with the overall dollars available in the collective. I think the collective and the staff had a number for Celestine. He wants more. So good luck to him.
Oakbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In the current situation you do need a well funded collective to have a chance.

One of the difficult parts of NIL is very few know how much is available. with the pros there is the salary cap info, but with NIL, as far as I know there is nothing public, not how much, who gets what, etc.. it seems to be a black hole for information
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sluggo said:

calumnus said:

touchdownbears43 said:

He averages 8.3ppg and 3rpg. Why is it such a big loss? He is by no means a game changer. He's a modest player on a modest team. If anything, it allows Madsen to upgrade over the position.


He shot .440 from Three, highest among our starters. He was our only starter who came to Cal as a freshman and was our only starter who we thought we would have back. We never really got to see him healthy for a full season. So plenty of reason to think next year he could be better, especially with more touches, and plenty of reason for fans to be disappointed he's leaving.
Celestine was an efficient scorer. He could have scored more with lower efficiency, which would have made him a less good player. Askew scored 16 points a game two years ago on 38% from the field and 30% from three. Shepherd scored 15 points three years ago with similar (lack of) efficiency.

I am not saying Celestine was a great player, but he was a big net positive.





Askew shot .299 from three that year, Shepard shot .292 the year before. The difference is neither had a history of shooting a higher percentage even on teams where they were not the primary scorer and often left open (Kentucky and Texas) or at a lower level in Shepard's case. It isnt just judicious shot selection, it is being a good three point shooter.

Celestine would thrive in a Monty offense. Monty regularly recruited guys like Cross, Hernandez, Moseley, Weems, Lottich…(bunch more) that were high percentage spot up three point shooters but usually couldn't create their own shot (Jacobsen, Randle, Crabbe, Cobbs…), and got them good looks with inside out play and off ball screens.

As I've said, Celestine is a lot like Jordan Mathews that way. He scored on Monty's structured offense off screens or when Tyrone Wallace or Jalen Brown would drive and dish, hitting him in the corner for an open three. A decent but limited player otherwise. Mathews averaged double figures. Second on the team. I think Celestine could have too. We would have been better than we were. Mathews went to Gonzaga where they won a National Championship with Mathews leading the team in 3 Point shooting, even though Mathews' scoring average actually declined from his scoring average at Cal. Similarly, Celestine could be a good role player on a good team.

My hunch is Madsen wants to bring in guys at the 2-3 that can create their own shots.

Bottom line is Celestine is graduating in Spring so finding somewhere to have basketball pay for a grad degree and maybe a coach that can better utilize and develop his skills makes sense. He is not critical to Madsen's plans so letting him go and wishing him well makes sense.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
6956bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

sluggo said:

calumnus said:

touchdownbears43 said:

He averages 8.3ppg and 3rpg. Why is it such a big loss? He is by no means a game changer. He's a modest player on a modest team. If anything, it allows Madsen to upgrade over the position.


He shot .440 from Three, highest among our starters. He was our only starter who came to Cal as a freshman and was our only starter who we thought we would have back. We never really got to see him healthy for a full season. So plenty of reason to think next year he could be better, especially with more touches, and plenty of reason for fans to be disappointed he's leaving.
Celestine was an efficient scorer. He could have scored more with lower efficiency, which would have made him a less good player. Askew scored 16 points a game two years ago on 38% from the field and 30% from three. Shepherd scored 15 points three years ago with similar (lack of) efficiency.

I am not saying Celestine was a great player, but he was a big net positive.





Askew shot .299 from three that year, Shepard shot .292 the year before. The difference is neither had a history of shooting a higher percentage even on teams where they were not the primary scorer and often left open (Kentucky and Texas) or at a lower level in Shepard's case. It isnt just judicious shot selection, it is being a good three point shooter.

Celestine would thrive in a Monty offense. Monty regularly recruited guys like Cross, Hernandez, Moseley, Weems, Lottich…(bunch more) that were high percentage spot up three point shooters but usually couldn't create their own shot (Jacobsen, Randle, Crabbe, Cobbs…), and got them good looks with inside out play and off ball screens.

As I've said, Celestine is a lot like Jordan Mathews that way. He scored on Monty's structured offense off screens or when Tyrone Wallace or Jalen Brown would drive and dish, hitting him in the corner for an open three. A decent but limited player otherwise. Mathews averaged double figures. Second on the team. I think Celestine could have too. We would have been better than we were. Mathews went to Gonzaga where they won a National Championship with Mathews leading the team in 3 Point shooting, even though Mathews' scoring average actually declined from his scoring average at Cal. Similarly, Celestine could be a good role player on a good team.

My hunch is Madsen wants to bring in guys at the 2-3 that can create their own shots.

Bottom line is Celestine is graduating in Spring so finding somewhere to have basketball pay for a grad degree and maybe a coach that can better utilize and develop his skills makes sense. He is not critical to Madsen's plans so letting him go and wishing him well makes sense.








And facilitate the offense, defend and handle the ball against pressure.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
6956bear said:

calumnus said:

sluggo said:

calumnus said:

touchdownbears43 said:

He averages 8.3ppg and 3rpg. Why is it such a big loss? He is by no means a game changer. He's a modest player on a modest team. If anything, it allows Madsen to upgrade over the position.


He shot .440 from Three, highest among our starters. He was our only starter who came to Cal as a freshman and was our only starter who we thought we would have back. We never really got to see him healthy for a full season. So plenty of reason to think next year he could be better, especially with more touches, and plenty of reason for fans to be disappointed he's leaving.
Celestine was an efficient scorer. He could have scored more with lower efficiency, which would have made him a less good player. Askew scored 16 points a game two years ago on 38% from the field and 30% from three. Shepherd scored 15 points three years ago with similar (lack of) efficiency.

I am not saying Celestine was a great player, but he was a big net positive.



Askew shot .299 from three that year, Shepard shot .292 the year before. The difference is neither had a history of shooting a higher percentage even on teams where they were not the primary scorer and often left open (Kentucky and Texas) or at a lower level in Shepard's case. It isnt just judicious shot selection, it is being a good three point shooter.

Celestine would thrive in a Monty offense. Monty regularly recruited guys like Cross, Hernandez, Moseley, Weems, Lottich…(bunch more) that were high percentage spot up three point shooters but usually couldn't create their own shot (Jacobsen, Randle, Crabbe, Cobbs…), and got them good looks with inside out play and off ball screens.

As I've said, Celestine is a lot like Jordan Mathews that way. He scored on Monty's structured offense off screens or when Tyrone Wallace or Jalen Brown would drive and dish, hitting him in the corner for an open three. A decent but limited player otherwise. Mathews averaged double figures. Second on the team. I think Celestine could have too. We would have been better than we were. Mathews went to Gonzaga where they won a National Championship with Mathews leading the team in 3 Point shooting, even though Mathews' scoring average actually declined from his scoring average at Cal. Similarly, Celestine could be a good role player on a good team.

My hunch is Madsen wants to bring in guys at the 2-3 that can create their own shots.

Bottom line is Celestine is graduating in Spring so finding somewhere to have basketball pay for a grad degree and maybe a coach that can better utilize and develop his skills makes sense. He is not critical to Madsen's plans so letting him go and wishing him well makes sense.

And facilitate the offense, defend and handle the ball against pressure.


Yes. I think he wants to sell guys at the 1-4 with NBA skills, or at least NBA potential, on the idea that he can get them there and as part of that is committed to playing "NBA style" basketball. Tyson getting drafted in the first round would be a HUGE boost to that messaging.
Sebastabear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oakbear said:

In the current situation you do need a well funded collective to have a chance.

One of the difficult parts of NIL is very few know how much is available. with the pros there is the salary cap info, but with NIL, as far as I know there is nothing public, not how much, who gets what, etc.. it seems to be a black hole for information
Once again, this is by design. You do not under any circumstances put out your available budget. It tells other teams exactly what they have to do to outbid you. It is a terrible idea. And no one does it for that reason.

It will never change until the rules change with some kind of cap. But the second a cap goes into effect we are right back to illegal payments of money being left in duffel bags, etc.

This genie doesn't go back into the bottle. So fans need to decide if they are interested in winning or not. The solution is there for any fanbase with the will and the financial resources.

https://calegends.com/calegendsdonate/
Johnfox
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Back to Celestine, I think Andrej Stojakovic is a way better version of Celestine.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
6956bear said:

BearlyCareAnymore said:

6956bear said:

GMP said:

DaveT said:

JimSox said:

DaveT said:

PtownBear1 said:

this notion that we're going to be able to afford at least 5 players better than what Celestine would have offered the team next season seems far-fetched.
Madsen apparently disagrees. Celestine had an NIL deal in place for a value both sides originally thought was fair. That money now goes back to the pool and can be used to sign someone else of similar caliber (or up the ante on someone better).

I'm sure everyone wishes Celestine hadn't bolted (including Madsen), but he did. The real issue is whether Cal made a good decision in saying goodbye rather than paying up to keep him. Either you believe Madsen knows what he's doing, or you don't. He's got a lot more info than any of us, he certainly has a plan, and until proven otherwise he should probably get the benefit of the doubt.

Plus, I doubt any doors are irreversibly closed. Cal has loads of scholarship room, and Celestine may briefly test the waters and decide his original NIL was pretty good. Who knows. We're finally starting to see some quality commits along with a lot of additional portal entries, so the market for his skillset will likely get established pretty soon.
There's a third option. Don't know if he knows what he's doing! Right now we don't actually have a basketball team. We shall see.
True, until we see what happens over the coming weeks it may be too soon to form an opinion at all. I'd counter with the fact he did a really good job with the portal last season, bringing in: (1) a guy who finished 3rd in the Pac-12 in PPG and is bound for the NBA, (2) another guy who led the Pac-12 in rebounds, and (3) a guy who played shutdown defense and finished sixth in steals per game. Doesn't mean he'll do the same this year, but does give me some hope.


I trust Madsen but I am also very concerned about ANY coach's ability to recruit 7-8 high caliber players like we need. Players want money and minutes. How can he get them those things when he's recruiting 7-8 guys? I don't know.
I don't know either. But at this point we have no alternative. Keeping Celestine for an over market NIL package IMO is not a good option. But I get the concern, I share your concerns. I think they are looking hard at the HS and international markets for possible low or no NIL alternatives.

It may have been best if Okafor, Newell and Brown decided to stay. But Cal was/is recruiting players that likely would keep them on the bench. And possibly return Celestine back to the bench. We know the bench players were unhappy this season. Doubtful that would change if they stayed and Madsen brought in a new group of starters. So now he has to find the 7-8 players good enough to improve the record that are willing to compete for starting roles. Not easy. But that is the task.
The problem is, 6956, what if all those dastardly family and friends talking to Celestine are right? What if he goes out and gets a much better deal? He was obviously going to start and be a key player on the team. He is settled in here. He still decided to go. I'm on record as saying I agree with letting him go if you don't have the money and don't think he worth the asking price. I'm also on record saying he is replaceable, so let the volatile market ride. But, frankly, after losing the last guy that meant anything, I think the fear that we just might not have the juice is reasonable. Not that we don't have it - we won't know until the roster plays out - but worrying about it is warranted. No one is criticizing anyone right now. They are justifiably concerned.
I am concerned as well. In the current situation you do need a well funded collective to have a chance. if they do they have a chance. I have no idea if they do or don't have the juice. So we will find out just how badly the donors that can make a difference are willing to do so. That is where the program is.

I just can't get to concerned over Celestine at this point. If he finds some program willing to pay him, good for him. But I am dubious that his particular situation has much to do with the overall dollars available in the collective. I think the collective and the staff had a number for Celestine. He wants more. So good luck to him.


The other huge factor is Celestine has been at Cal 4 years and will likely graduate in a couple months with a Cal degree and two years of eligibility remaining. Getting into a two year Cal grad program, and studying in it, while also trying to develop into an elite basketball player may be too tough a road, making moving on the sensible solution even if Cal Legends can match the market. It could be nobody is "wrong" here. I urge Cal fans to lay off the over the top criticism of him.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Johnfox said:

Back to Celestine, I think Andrej Stojakovic is a way better version of Celestine.


I could see a player trade that would be good for both.
parentswerebears
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I know my initial post was pretty doom and gloom but when someone graduates and moves on, I begrudge none of the parties involved. I hope Jalen finds his place and the price he wants and that Cal finds the right guys too (although I hope that they can bring him back in).
bearmanpg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It seems to me that eventually, college teams will need a GM of sorts to do the math instead of expecting th coach to do the whole job. Pro teams have GM's for a reason. Colleges may find that need soon.
Sebastabear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearmanpg said:

It seems to me that eventually, college teams will need a GM of sorts to do the math instead of expecting th coach to do the whole job. Pro teams have GM's for a reason. Colleges may find that need soon.
Madsen always calls me GM when we speak. I'm actually not sure if he knows my real name. I think GM'S get paid though. Could be wrong.
Bobodeluxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sebastabear said:

bearmanpg said:

It seems to me that eventually, college teams will need a GM of sorts to do the math instead of expecting th coach to do the whole job. Pro teams have GM's for a reason. Colleges may find that need soon.
Madsen always calls me GM when we speak. I'm actually not sure if he knows my real name. I think GM'S get paid though. Could be wrong.
That is hilarious.
6956bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sebastabear said:

bearmanpg said:

It seems to me that eventually, college teams will need a GM of sorts to do the math instead of expecting th coach to do the whole job. Pro teams have GM's for a reason. Colleges may find that need soon.
Madsen always calls me GM when we speak. I'm actually not sure if he knows my real name. I think GM'S get paid though. Could be wrong.
I think the idea of a GM is a good one. It does seem that programs are headed that direction.
BC Calfan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That's what Mark Fox is now hahahaha
wifeisafurd
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BC Calfan said:

That's what Mark Fox is now hahahaha
Sebastarbear> Fox
Bobodeluxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BC Calfan said:

That's what Mark Fox is now hahahaha
Ew. Take that back.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.