Last I heard he was 183.5.
2024-25 Roster Tracker
41,410 Views |
180 Replies |
Last: 1 mo ago by WalterSobchak
I don't mind a PG either, but same argument at the 4/5 spot. Who plays behind Petraitis? Who plays behind Sissoko when he gets in foul trouble? Dort and Curtis are even less proven than Tucker.BeachedBear said:I'm more concerned with quality than quantity. Not sure any of those are ACC ready - and we need 2 ACC ready distributors if we are going to play 3 wings.concernedparent said:A PF preferably. We already have 3 PGs on the roster, Tucker, Wilkinson and Vlad.Johnfox said:
With 1 spot available, I think our biggest need is a PG or PF. We are deep on the wings, deep on centers, deep on SG's, but only have 2 PG's. I say we get Saran or Sharavjamts. Or, a guy named Luke Bamgboye wants to come to Cal.
Bill Russell was rail thin and still dominated around/under the boards. Admittedly, his was a very different era before strength programs became popular and the game was significantly less physical but his ability to compete on favorable terms with Wilt suggest that good skinny players can do okay against bulkier, perhaps stronger, foes.SFCityBear said:OK, Newbie. What is your source for Omot at 185?Johnfox said:
Omot is 185. Get it right. Cody Mauch gained 85 pounds in a year or 2.
You need to know that our most accurate poster on the usual stats was Tsubamoto, and he schooled us on the fact that team websites often exaggerate players' weights and heights, while sports-reference.com is not biased and much more accurate. North Dakota website has Omot at 185, and sports-reference.com has him at 175. And at 6-8 and 185, he would still be skinny as a rail, which was my point. He may be a helluva talent, but he is skinny.
I rest my case.
Gosh, I miss you Tsuba.
SFCityBear said:
I don't see what all the hoopla is about. The staff has managed to snag a lot of guards and wings, but where is the height? And where is the beef?
This team went no where except a little better than the previous year, maybe because they had fewer injured players. Now we have a team with serious deficiency up front. Teams with bigger taller players have an edge, most of the time.
The tallest talented big man we have is Mark Madsen, and his eligibility is all used up. Dort is projected as our center, and he is 6-10. But he has played in 18 games and averaged one point and two rebounds, or is it the other way around? I forget.
We have Curtis who is interesting, but do you think he is ready to start, or play major minutes? At least we had Daws last season, who could get rebounds and score well enough, even though his defense was not up to par. And you don't have Okafor, who might have helped.
I suggest you all stop dreaming about Mahaney. We have enough shooting guards, and we don't need another one, even though weeks ago, I would have loved it if we had signed him. What we need now is what we have always needed: tall and wide. Omot is 6-8, but he is skinny as a rail. 175 lbs. That is too skinny for a guard nowadays, and he is supposed to be a big on our roster, I think.
I don't understand it. Madsen was a terrific power forward, and played with one of themost dominant centers of all time in Shaquille, so he must know what a good big man player or a good big man recruit looks like. I would have thought he would have landed one by now, even though they are rare. End of rant, and I don't feel any better.
Rod Benson was "skinny." Chet Holmgren was "skinny." Joe Smith was skinny (in college). Porzingas is skinny. Jared Vanderbilt and Naz Reid were skinny "in college." Even Wembanyama is "skinny." How they are used, what they bring, and what Madsen will be asking of them (how he uses their particular talents) will be the thing. Not really how "skinny" they are.
Johnfox said:
Sports reference ain't updated. Still got his freshman year flic. Try again. Everywhere else, he's 185. Even 247. Again, how does sport reference know his exact unbiased weight as you say? Did they speak to him directly. Probably not. Omot told the school + 247.
Wait, does he weigh 185, or 247? That's quite a difference! Maybe they're confusing him with Dort or Sissoko, who both weigh 247...
^ kidding 
Isn't that you, pretty much 247?
As the projected roster stands now, I initially thought interior scoring was the biggest need. Other than two games early in his junior year against Gonzaga (14 pts) and Kentucky (16 pts), Sissoko hasn't done much of note offensively in his 15-20 mpg. He only averaged 3 fga last year. Perhaps there is some untapped potential. Right now he kinda reminds me of and perhaps can produce like sr Devon Hardin (averaged 24 min, 9 pts, 7 reb). Maybe flip the rebounds and points for Sissoko. Depending on Dort/Curtis readiness, 24 mpg for Sissoko might be the upper limit.BeachedBear said:I'm more concerned with quality than quantity. Not sure any of those are ACC ready - and we need 2 ACC ready distributors if we are going to play 3 wings.concernedparent said:A PF preferably. We already have 3 PGs on the roster, Tucker, Wilkinson and Vlad.Johnfox said:
With 1 spot available, I think our biggest need is a PG or PF. We are deep on the wings, deep on centers, deep on SG's, but only have 2 PG's. I say we get Saran or Sharavjamts. Or, a guy named Luke Bamgboye wants to come to Cal.
But even with interior scoring being a big unknown and most obvious lack, I've come around to another point option being the most crucial need. Consistent two-way pg play had a huge impact on last year's W-L. So much rides on pg, it all starts there. Need another production-ready and/or tested option beyond Tucker. I'm hopeful that Vlad and Wilkinson can contribute if needed in spots. If they challenge for more than that, fantastic.
Integrating a near entirely new roster, leadership/experience/reliability at point will be huge.
parentswerebears said:
Isn't that you, pretty much 247?
yes, but i'm also serious pretty much 24/7... between 1% and 99%... depends
smokeyrover said:As the projected roster stands now, I initially thought interior scoring was the biggest need. Other than two games early in his junior year against Gonzaga (14 pts) and Kentucky (16 pts), Sissoko hasn't done much of note offensively in his 15-20 mpg. He only averaged 3 fga last year. Perhaps there is some untapped potential. Right now he kinda reminds me of and perhaps can produce like sr Devon Hardin (averaged 24 min, 9 pts, 7 reb). Maybe flip the rebounds and points for Sissoko. Depending on Dort/Curtis readiness, 24 mpg for Sissoko might be the upper limit.BeachedBear said:I'm more concerned with quality than quantity. Not sure any of those are ACC ready - and we need 2 ACC ready distributors if we are going to play 3 wings.concernedparent said:A PF preferably. We already have 3 PGs on the roster, Tucker, Wilkinson and Vlad.Johnfox said:
With 1 spot available, I think our biggest need is a PG or PF. We are deep on the wings, deep on centers, deep on SG's, but only have 2 PG's. I say we get Saran or Sharavjamts. Or, a guy named Luke Bamgboye wants to come to Cal.
But even with interior scoring being a big unknown and most obvious lack, I've come around to another point option being the most crucial need. Consistent two-way pg play had a huge impact on last year's W-L. So much rides on pg, it all starts there. Need another production-ready and/or tested option beyond Tucker. I'm hopeful that Vlad and Wilkinson can contribute if needed in spots. If they challenge for more than that, fantastic.
Integrating a near entirely new roster, leadership/experience/reliability at point will be huge.
Fairly solid roster, but I don't see any one aspect of the game where we look to be really good, except we seem to have more depth than last season. What fascinates me right now is that the staff -- and dumb they are not -- knows that we underperformed last November and December and now we're coming back with even more new pieces. What's their plan for that?
The plan might be getting players who will play together and not underperform.Big C said:smokeyrover said:As the projected roster stands now, I initially thought interior scoring was the biggest need. Other than two games early in his junior year against Gonzaga (14 pts) and Kentucky (16 pts), Sissoko hasn't done much of note offensively in his 15-20 mpg. He only averaged 3 fga last year. Perhaps there is some untapped potential. Right now he kinda reminds me of and perhaps can produce like sr Devon Hardin (averaged 24 min, 9 pts, 7 reb). Maybe flip the rebounds and points for Sissoko. Depending on Dort/Curtis readiness, 24 mpg for Sissoko might be the upper limit.BeachedBear said:I'm more concerned with quality than quantity. Not sure any of those are ACC ready - and we need 2 ACC ready distributors if we are going to play 3 wings.concernedparent said:A PF preferably. We already have 3 PGs on the roster, Tucker, Wilkinson and Vlad.Johnfox said:
With 1 spot available, I think our biggest need is a PG or PF. We are deep on the wings, deep on centers, deep on SG's, but only have 2 PG's. I say we get Saran or Sharavjamts. Or, a guy named Luke Bamgboye wants to come to Cal.
But even with interior scoring being a big unknown and most obvious lack, I've come around to another point option being the most crucial need. Consistent two-way pg play had a huge impact on last year's W-L. So much rides on pg, it all starts there. Need another production-ready and/or tested option beyond Tucker. I'm hopeful that Vlad and Wilkinson can contribute if needed in spots. If they challenge for more than that, fantastic.
Integrating a near entirely new roster, leadership/experience/reliability at point will be huge.
Fairly solid roster, but I don't see any one aspect of the game where we look to be really good, except we seem to have more depth than last season. What fascinates me right now is that the staff -- and dumb they are not -- knows that we underperformed last November and December and now we're coming back with even more new pieces. What's their plan for that?
stu said:The plan might be getting players who will play together and not underperform.Big C said:smokeyrover said:As the projected roster stands now, I initially thought interior scoring was the biggest need. Other than two games early in his junior year against Gonzaga (14 pts) and Kentucky (16 pts), Sissoko hasn't done much of note offensively in his 15-20 mpg. He only averaged 3 fga last year. Perhaps there is some untapped potential. Right now he kinda reminds me of and perhaps can produce like sr Devon Hardin (averaged 24 min, 9 pts, 7 reb). Maybe flip the rebounds and points for Sissoko. Depending on Dort/Curtis readiness, 24 mpg for Sissoko might be the upper limit.BeachedBear said:I'm more concerned with quality than quantity. Not sure any of those are ACC ready - and we need 2 ACC ready distributors if we are going to play 3 wings.concernedparent said:A PF preferably. We already have 3 PGs on the roster, Tucker, Wilkinson and Vlad.Johnfox said:
With 1 spot available, I think our biggest need is a PG or PF. We are deep on the wings, deep on centers, deep on SG's, but only have 2 PG's. I say we get Saran or Sharavjamts. Or, a guy named Luke Bamgboye wants to come to Cal.
But even with interior scoring being a big unknown and most obvious lack, I've come around to another point option being the most crucial need. Consistent two-way pg play had a huge impact on last year's W-L. So much rides on pg, it all starts there. Need another production-ready and/or tested option beyond Tucker. I'm hopeful that Vlad and Wilkinson can contribute if needed in spots. If they challenge for more than that, fantastic.
Integrating a near entirely new roster, leadership/experience/reliability at point will be huge.
Fairly solid roster, but I don't see any one aspect of the game where we look to be really good, except we seem to have more depth than last season. What fascinates me right now is that the staff -- and dumb they are not -- knows that we underperformed last November and December and now we're coming back with even more new pieces. What's their plan for that?
Maybe. That would be great. Can't wait to find out!
Again, this is a shallow response based on a single video of a player against JC competion. Nwanko's offensive game looked really good to me.Big C said:smokeyrover said:As the projected roster stands now, I initially thought interior scoring was the biggest need. Other than two games early in his junior year against Gonzaga (14 pts) and Kentucky (16 pts), Sissoko hasn't done much of note offensively in his 15-20 mpg. He only averaged 3 fga last year. Perhaps there is some untapped potential. Right now he kinda reminds me of and perhaps can produce like sr Devon Hardin (averaged 24 min, 9 pts, 7 reb). Maybe flip the rebounds and points for Sissoko. Depending on Dort/Curtis readiness, 24 mpg for Sissoko might be the upper limit.BeachedBear said:I'm more concerned with quality than quantity. Not sure any of those are ACC ready - and we need 2 ACC ready distributors if we are going to play 3 wings.concernedparent said:A PF preferably. We already have 3 PGs on the roster, Tucker, Wilkinson and Vlad.Johnfox said:
With 1 spot available, I think our biggest need is a PG or PF. We are deep on the wings, deep on centers, deep on SG's, but only have 2 PG's. I say we get Saran or Sharavjamts. Or, a guy named Luke Bamgboye wants to come to Cal.
But even with interior scoring being a big unknown and most obvious lack, I've come around to another point option being the most crucial need. Consistent two-way pg play had a huge impact on last year's W-L. So much rides on pg, it all starts there. Need another production-ready and/or tested option beyond Tucker. I'm hopeful that Vlad and Wilkinson can contribute if needed in spots. If they challenge for more than that, fantastic.
Integrating a near entirely new roster, leadership/experience/reliability at point will be huge.
Fairly solid roster, but I don't see any one aspect of the game where we look to be really good, except we seem to have more depth than last season. What fascinates me right now is that the staff -- and dumb they are not -- knows that we underperformed last November and December and now we're coming back with even more new pieces. What's their plan for that?
I had the same response. He definitely looks like our most athletic player, and has deep range. And being named the #2 JC player in the country has to count for something, right?RedlessWardrobe said:
Again, this is a shallow response based on a single video of a player against JC competion. Nwanko's offensive game looked really good to me.
Does anyone have rumors/intel on who is No. 13? Does there even have to be a 13th scholarship? The consensus on the Forums seems to be that we need a backup PG. Personally I do not think Dort or Curtis are legitimate center backups, so I'd like to see a big man walk through the door for No. 13.
In Madsen I trust.
MB said (or at least strongly implied) that there will be a 13th player announced sometime this week. Seems like they may already know who it is.
Please give to Cal Legends at https://calegends.com/calegendsdonate/donate-football/ and encourage everyone you know who loves Cal sports to do it too.
To be in the Top 1% of all NIL collectives we only need around 10% of alumni to give $300 per year. Please help spread the word. "If we don't broaden this base we're dead." - Sebastabear
Thanks for reading my sig! Please consider copying or adapting it and using it on all of your posts too. Go Bears!
To be in the Top 1% of all NIL collectives we only need around 10% of alumni to give $300 per year. Please help spread the word. "If we don't broaden this base we're dead." - Sebastabear
Thanks for reading my sig! Please consider copying or adapting it and using it on all of your posts too. Go Bears!
I think both a second point guard in addition to Tucker and a backup center are needed. But there are not very many people in the world that are at least 6'9'', so centers are very expensive and there would be a lot of competition. Dort is a wildcard, he might be able to give some minutes. Curtis was not even good in high school.barsad said:
Does anyone have rumors/intel on who is No. 13? Does there even have to be a 13th scholarship? The consensus on the Forums seems to be that we need a backup PG. Personally I do not think Dort or Curtis are legitimate center backups, so I'd like to see a big man walk through the door for No. 13.
If Nwankwo does not sign, maybe both could be found. But I would guess any other center would be on the level of Larson.
Did Boyed finally land somewhere?
Having key pieces injured/unavailable was the main reason for the early losses to weak opponents. If they have a full, healthy squad from the get-go, that problem should be resolved.Big C said:smokeyrover said:As the projected roster stands now, I initially thought interior scoring was the biggest need. Other than two games early in his junior year against Gonzaga (14 pts) and Kentucky (16 pts), Sissoko hasn't done much of note offensively in his 15-20 mpg. He only averaged 3 fga last year. Perhaps there is some untapped potential. Right now he kinda reminds me of and perhaps can produce like sr Devon Hardin (averaged 24 min, 9 pts, 7 reb). Maybe flip the rebounds and points for Sissoko. Depending on Dort/Curtis readiness, 24 mpg for Sissoko might be the upper limit.BeachedBear said:I'm more concerned with quality than quantity. Not sure any of those are ACC ready - and we need 2 ACC ready distributors if we are going to play 3 wings.concernedparent said:A PF preferably. We already have 3 PGs on the roster, Tucker, Wilkinson and Vlad.Johnfox said:
With 1 spot available, I think our biggest need is a PG or PF. We are deep on the wings, deep on centers, deep on SG's, but only have 2 PG's. I say we get Saran or Sharavjamts. Or, a guy named Luke Bamgboye wants to come to Cal.
But even with interior scoring being a big unknown and most obvious lack, I've come around to another point option being the most crucial need. Consistent two-way pg play had a huge impact on last year's W-L. So much rides on pg, it all starts there. Need another production-ready and/or tested option beyond Tucker. I'm hopeful that Vlad and Wilkinson can contribute if needed in spots. If they challenge for more than that, fantastic.
Integrating a near entirely new roster, leadership/experience/reliability at point will be huge.
Fairly solid roster, but I don't see any one aspect of the game where we look to be really good, except we seem to have more depth than last season. What fascinates me right now is that the staff -- and dumb they are not -- knows that we underperformed last November and December and now we're coming back with even more new pieces. What's their plan for that?
Would rather gamble on Dort (former 5 star, offers from Kansas and Zona) being ready than relying on Wilkinson/Vlad to carry pg duties should Tucker not be available.sluggo said:I think both a second point guard in addition to Tucker and a backup center are needed. But there are not very many people in the world that are at least 6'9'', so centers are very expensive and there would be a lot of competition. Dort is a wildcard, he might be able to give some minutes. Curtis was not even good in high school.barsad said:
Does anyone have rumors/intel on who is No. 13? Does there even have to be a 13th scholarship? The consensus on the Forums seems to be that we need a backup PG. Personally I do not think Dort or Curtis are legitimate center backups, so I'd like to see a big man walk through the door for No. 13.
If Nwankwo does not sign, maybe both could be found. But I would guess any other center would be on the level of Larson.
RedlessWardrobe said:Again, this is a shallow response based on a single video of a player against JC competion. Nwanko's offensive game looked really good to me.Big C said:smokeyrover said:As the projected roster stands now, I initially thought interior scoring was the biggest need. Other than two games early in his junior year against Gonzaga (14 pts) and Kentucky (16 pts), Sissoko hasn't done much of note offensively in his 15-20 mpg. He only averaged 3 fga last year. Perhaps there is some untapped potential. Right now he kinda reminds me of and perhaps can produce like sr Devon Hardin (averaged 24 min, 9 pts, 7 reb). Maybe flip the rebounds and points for Sissoko. Depending on Dort/Curtis readiness, 24 mpg for Sissoko might be the upper limit.BeachedBear said:I'm more concerned with quality than quantity. Not sure any of those are ACC ready - and we need 2 ACC ready distributors if we are going to play 3 wings.concernedparent said:A PF preferably. We already have 3 PGs on the roster, Tucker, Wilkinson and Vlad.Johnfox said:
With 1 spot available, I think our biggest need is a PG or PF. We are deep on the wings, deep on centers, deep on SG's, but only have 2 PG's. I say we get Saran or Sharavjamts. Or, a guy named Luke Bamgboye wants to come to Cal.
But even with interior scoring being a big unknown and most obvious lack, I've come around to another point option being the most crucial need. Consistent two-way pg play had a huge impact on last year's W-L. So much rides on pg, it all starts there. Need another production-ready and/or tested option beyond Tucker. I'm hopeful that Vlad and Wilkinson can contribute if needed in spots. If they challenge for more than that, fantastic.
Integrating a near entirely new roster, leadership/experience/reliability at point will be huge.
Fairly solid roster, but I don't see any one aspect of the game where we look to be really good, except we seem to have more depth than last season. What fascinates me right now is that the staff -- and dumb they are not -- knows that we underperformed last November and December and now we're coming back with even more new pieces. What's their plan for that?
My post was referring to any aspect of the entire team looking "really good". You see us having a really good offensive team next season? If so, I hope you are right, as I love watching Cal teams that can score... and I will be in Haas this season, just like every other season, rain or shine. Go Bears!
Not yet.RedlessWardrobe said:
Did Boyed finally land somewhere?
This is current:
Wisconsin Badgers in pursuit of JUCO transfer center Noah Boyed (usatoday.com)
GO BEARS!!!
If you believe in forever
Then life is just a one-night stand
If there's a rock and roll heaven
Well you know they've got a hell of a band
Then life is just a one-night stand
If there's a rock and roll heaven
Well you know they've got a hell of a band
BerkeleyBAT said:I had the same response. He definitely looks like our most athletic player, and has deep range. And being named the #2 JC player in the country has to count for something, rightRedlessWardrobe said:
Again, this is a shallow response based on a single video of a player against JC competion. Nwanko's offensive game looked really good to me.
SFCityBear
smokeyrover said:
Would rather gamble on Dort (former 5 star, offers from Kansas and Zona) being ready than relying on Wilkinson/Vlad to carry pg duties should Tucker not be available.
So my choices in this gamble are either put my chips on a 4-star recruit (not 5 according to this SI article
https://www.si.com/college/cal/DortcommitstoCal)
who played one game last year after being accused of strangling his girlfriend… or bet on an untested freshman? Can I leave this craps table and find another one?
Vlad is only there as a defensive specialist, not a PG, so there are really only single backups at these two positions. Can we send Gus a snack basket and get him back?
Ola-Joseph are Omot are also very athletic. Sissoko too, although different position.BerkeleyBAT said:I had the same response. He definitely looks like our most athletic player, and has deep range. And being named the #2 JC player in the country has to count for something, right?RedlessWardrobe said:
Again, this is a shallow response based on a single video of a player against JC competion. Nwanko's offensive game looked really good to me.
Jeff Borzello of ESPN put out his annual compilation of offseason roster moves for the power conference teams (and a few notable mid-majors, like Gonzaga, Florida Atlantic, and sadly Oregon State and Washington State now). If it's like last year, he'll make updates as needed.
It's probably nothing that you haven't seen before, but it may be helpful to see it summarized in one place.
Quote:
California Golden Bears
Departed or expected to depart: Jaylon Tyson (19.6 PPG), Fardaws Aimaq (14.5 PPG), Jalen Cone (13.4 PPG), Keonte Kennedy (9.3 PPG), Jalen Celestine (8.7 PPG), Grant Newell (5.5 PPG), Devin Askew (6.2 PPG), ND Okafor (1.9 PPG), Rodney Brown Jr. (3.5 PPG), Monty Bowser (0.3 PPG), Gus Larson (1.4 PPG)
In limbo: None
Expected to return: Devin Curtis (0.4 PPG), Vladimir Pavlovic (0.9 PPG)
Incoming transfers: Andrej Stojakovic (7.8 PPG at Stanford), B.J. Omot (16.7 PPG at North Dakota), Rytis Petraitis (15.7 PPG at Air Force), Joshua Ola-Joseph (7.5 PPG at Minnesota), Mady Sissoko (3.3 PPG at Michigan State), Lee Dort (1.0 PPG at Vanderbilt), DJ Campbell (11.6 at Western Carolina), Christian Tucker (11.3 PPG at UTSA), Jeff Nwankwo (juco)
Incoming freshmen: Jeremiah Wilkinson (NR)
Head coach: Mark Madsen
It's probably nothing that you haven't seen before, but it may be helpful to see it summarized in one place.
No offense to you Brevity, but I can't stand it when these reports/post don't contain their Year, Position or Size. That's an underlying story of this top-ranked recruiting class. Only 2 of the 9 players are Seniors/Grad: Sissoko & Tucker. 5 are juniors. 1 sophomore.
As the MBB world adjusts to the new reality, I'm getting the sense that Juniors may be the key to Transfer gold. On one hand, there is a couple years of D1 data to get a strong sense of what they can do. On the other, there is a chance we can get 2 years of play out of them.BC Calfan said:
No offense to you Brevity, but I can't stand it when these reports/post don't contain their Year, Position or Size. That's an underlying story of this top-ranked recruiting class. Only 2 of the 9 players are Seniors/Grad: Sissoko & Tucker. 5 are juniors. 1 sophomore.
BTW - for me, an upside of the new reality is that I no longer have to put up with the unrelenting fawning over often unproven HS recruits that has existed for decades.
I can understand that, but what you're looking for sounds a lot like the official 2024-2025 team roster. Fortunate that Cal already has one available; a lot of schools won't bother publishing one until the late summer or early fall.BC Calfan said:
No offense to you Brevity, but I can't stand it when these reports/post don't contain their Year, Position or Size. That's an underlying story of this top-ranked recruiting class. Only 2 of the 9 players are Seniors/Grad: Sissoko & Tucker. 5 are juniors. 1 sophomore.
For what it's worth, each player name in Jeff Borzello's compilation is a link to that player's ESPN stat page, which does include the year, position, and size.
Another source you might consider -- maybe not for Cal, but for other teams -- is Andrew Parrish's 2024-2025 Scholarship Tracker, a Google Spreadsheet with every Division I team organized by conference. It also doesn't list positions or sizes, but the years are color-coded so you get an idea as to how old/experienced a team might be compared to others on the conference's page. And because it's a spreadsheet, you can tell how close each team is to the 13-scholarship limit. (You can periodically monitor the race between Arkansas and Kentucky as they go from 0 to 13, for example.)
Here's what it says for the Golden Bears, without the benefit of colors:
California
Seniors/grads/5th years:
Christian Tucker (grad transfer)
Mady Sissoko (grad transfer)
Juniors:
Jeff Nwankwo
B.J. Omot
D.J. Campbell
Joshua Ola-Joseph
Rytis Petraitis
Sophomores:
Devin Curtis
Vladimir Pavlovic
Lee Dort (redshirt sophomore)
Andrej Stojakovic
Freshmen:
Jeremiah Wilkinson
One significant disadvantage is that Parrish has not adjusted for conference realignment, so Cal and Stanford are still on a Pac-12 page rather than with the ACC. Second, it also does not account for non-scholarship players. Finally, you'll notice that Lee Dort is listed as a redshirt sophomore, while the official roster has him listed as a junior. This is tricky; I'm guessing he's an academic junior, but for scholarship purposes he currently has 3 more years of eligibility, so maybe both are right?
Hey, glad you're posting here, brevity! Go Bears!
brevity said:I can understand that, but what you're looking for sounds a lot like the official 2024-2025 team roster. Fortunate that Cal already has one available; a lot of schools won't bother publishing one until the late summer or early fall.BC Calfan said:
No offense to you Brevity, but I can't stand it when these reports/post don't contain their Year, Position or Size. That's an underlying story of this top-ranked recruiting class. Only 2 of the 9 players are Seniors/Grad: Sissoko & Tucker. 5 are juniors. 1 sophomore.
For what it's worth, each player name in Jeff Borzello's compilation is a link to that player's ESPN stat page, which does include the year, position, and size.
Another source you might consider -- maybe not for Cal, but for other teams -- is Andrew Parrish's 2024-2025 Scholarship Tracker, a Google Spreadsheet with every Division I team organized by conference. It also doesn't list positions or sizes, but the years are color-coded so you get an idea as to how old/experienced a team might be compared to others on the conference's page. And because it's a spreadsheet, you can tell how close each team is to the 13-scholarship limit. (You can periodically monitor the race between Arkansas and Kentucky as they go from 0 to 13, for example.)
Here's what it says for the Golden Bears, without the benefit of colors:
California
Seniors/grads/5th years:
Christian Tucker (grad transfer)
Mady Sissoko (grad transfer)
Juniors:
Jeff Nwankwo
B.J. Omot
D.J. Campbell
Joshua Ola-Joseph
Rytis Petraitis
Sophomores:
Devin Curtis
Vladimir Pavlovic
Lee Dort (redshirt sophomore)
Andrej Stojakovic
Freshmen:
Jeremiah Wilkinson
One significant disadvantage is that Parrish has not adjusted for conference realignment, so Cal and Stanford are still on a Pac-12 page rather than with the ACC. Second, it also does not account for non-scholarship players. Finally, you'll notice that Lee Dort is listed as a redshirt sophomore, while the official roster has him listed as a junior. This is tricky; I'm guessing he's an academic junior, but for scholarship purposes he currently has 3 more years of eligibility, so maybe both are right?
Should we now believe that, going forward, Cal (and others) will be limiting incoming frosh recruits to 1 or 2, while leaning on the portal for more proven, game-ready 2nd and 3rd year portal transfers, plus a grad transfer or two as their roster makeup?
Hard to say since this year we needed a total rebuild.Pittstop said:
Should we now believe that, going forward, Cal (and others) will be limiting incoming frosh recruits to 1 or 2, while leaning on the portal for more proven, game-ready 2nd and 3rd year portal transfers, plus a grad transfer or two as their roster makeup?
FWIW our women are bringing in 4 freshies and 2 grad transfers.
Pittstop said:brevity said:I can understand that, but what you're looking for sounds a lot like the official 2024-2025 team roster. Fortunate that Cal already has one available; a lot of schools won't bother publishing one until the late summer or early fall.BC Calfan said:
No offense to you Brevity, but I can't stand it when these reports/post don't contain their Year, Position or Size. That's an underlying story of this top-ranked recruiting class. Only 2 of the 9 players are Seniors/Grad: Sissoko & Tucker. 5 are juniors. 1 sophomore.
For what it's worth, each player name in Jeff Borzello's compilation is a link to that player's ESPN stat page, which does include the year, position, and size.
Another source you might consider -- maybe not for Cal, but for other teams -- is Andrew Parrish's 2024-2025 Scholarship Tracker, a Google Spreadsheet with every Division I team organized by conference. It also doesn't list positions or sizes, but the years are color-coded so you get an idea as to how old/experienced a team might be compared to others on the conference's page. And because it's a spreadsheet, you can tell how close each team is to the 13-scholarship limit. (You can periodically monitor the race between Arkansas and Kentucky as they go from 0 to 13, for example.)
Here's what it says for the Golden Bears, without the benefit of colors:
California
Seniors/grads/5th years:
Christian Tucker (grad transfer)
Mady Sissoko (grad transfer)
Juniors:
Jeff Nwankwo
B.J. Omot
D.J. Campbell
Joshua Ola-Joseph
Rytis Petraitis
Sophomores:
Devin Curtis
Vladimir Pavlovic
Lee Dort (redshirt sophomore)
Andrej Stojakovic
Freshmen:
Jeremiah Wilkinson
One significant disadvantage is that Parrish has not adjusted for conference realignment, so Cal and Stanford are still on a Pac-12 page rather than with the ACC. Second, it also does not account for non-scholarship players. Finally, you'll notice that Lee Dort is listed as a redshirt sophomore, while the official roster has him listed as a junior. This is tricky; I'm guessing he's an academic junior, but for scholarship purposes he currently has 3 more years of eligibility, so maybe both are right?
Should we now believe that, going forward, Cal (and others) will be limiting incoming frosh recruits to 1 or 2, while leaning on the portal for more proven, game-ready 2nd and 3rd year portal transfers, plus a grad transfer or two as their roster makeup?
I suspect it will be a fluid situation, depending on who's out there and who we can get. Each year will be a small sample size. Also of note that "the COVID year" of extra eligibility will be disappearing soon.
But something like your example might be pretty close.
Big C said:Pittstop said:
Should we now believe that, going forward, Cal (and others) will be limiting incoming frosh recruits to 1 or 2, while leaning on the portal for more proven, game-ready 2nd and 3rd year portal transfers, plus a grad transfer or two as their roster makeup?
I suspect it will be a fluid situation, depending on who's out there and who we can get. Each year will be a small sample size. Also of note that "the COVID year" of extra eligibility will be disappearing soon.
But something like your example might be pretty close.
Yes, this is now "the new normal" thanks to NIL. You might think that these kids would not want to pack their bags and reset their lives every year, but if there's $$$ talking and they're unhappy about their minutes, or both, they will walk. I expect half of the juniors we have now will be announcing a senior year transfer in a year… not because anything terrible will happen this season, but because the grass is always greener somewhere else and all sense of loyalty, honor, and commitment to a single team has been shredded by the new system.
Featured Stories
See All
Washington Safety Tristan Dunn Signs With Cal
by Jim McGill
Bears Raise the Bar in Decisive 89-63 Win Over Temple
by Jim McGill