It's great that we have utilized the portal well, but everyone else has, too, and schools that have nothing more than hoops are not surprisingly doing best of all. Preseason games can be meaningless. MLB results are often completely opposite when comparing the season to spring training records. Madsen likely working with 10+ guys trying to figure things out more so than the competition. But it can be indicative of team chemistry, depth, and coaching. Monday will tell us more than these last two scrimmages.

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

Are you referring to scrimmages held This year?

oskidunker said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

Yikes. Well, early reports last year were also bad and then it was basically confirmed once Cal got through the OOC schedule. We'll likely know soon enough.

---

You would think Madsen would decide on a starting line up by now. If 10 players are all equal, as Madsen says, then two players being out should not have mattered, right?

---

True, but it is also the type of team that has a lot of need/potential to be coached up. This isn't a "just give it to your best player and clear out" team. It will be a test of Madden and staff's coaching abilities.

HKBear97! said:

---

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

Yikes. Well, early reports last year were also bad and then it was basically confirmed once Cal got through the OOC schedule. We'll likely know soon enough.

---

OOC will say a lot. Would have been a pretty long season without Tyson for the whole thing like the OOC.

Gotta beat the cupcakes this year, IMO. Neither SC or StM are cupcakes.

rkt88edmo said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

Yikes. Well, early reports last year were also bad and then it was basically confirmed once Cal got through the OOC schedule. We'll likely know soon enough.

---

OOC will say a lot. Would have been a pretty long season without Tyson for the whole thing like the OOC.

Gotta beat the cupcakes this year, IMO. Neither SC or StM are cupcakes.

---

BakersDozen is.

rkt88edmo said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

Yikes. Well, early reports last year were also bad and then it was basically confirmed once Cal got through the OOC schedule. We'll likely know soon enough.

---

OOC will say a lot. Would have been a pretty long season without Tyson for the whole thing like the OOC.

Gotta beat the cupcakes this year, IMO. Neither SC or StM are cupcakes.

---

And Kennedy! Cal's defense wasn't great, but imagine how awful it would have been without Kennedy.

calumnus said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

Yikes. Well, early reports last year were also bad and then it was basically confirmed once Cal got through the OOC schedule. We'll likely know soon enough.

---

You would think Madsen would decide on a starting line up by now. If 10 players are all equal, as Madsen says, then two players being out should not have mattered, right?

---

True, but it is also the type of team that has a lot of need/potential to be coached up. This isn't a "just give it to your best player and clear out" team. It will be a test of Madden and staff's coaching abilities.

---

I suspect three starters are set, though certain players can play more than one position. As time goes by, some of the starters will depend on who Cal plays against, and where Madsen puts his three main starters. This was alway going to be the way things were pre-season with so many new players, and so many players who can play at different spots. The good news is expect this team to have depth. I'm not sure what stock you can put in scrimmages when at least Cal is trying to assess so many players and combinations of players.

HKBear97! said:

---

BearGreg said:

---

Context matters:

Cal held out two starters from the Santa Clara game and after an initial blitzing from St. Mary's, Cal outscored them in the last half of the scrimmage. Further, the Bears started the Gaels scrimmage trying out a new defense for nearly the very first time. Once they went back to their regular D, things were quite different.

More importantly, the Bears are an entirely new team whilst St Marys and Santa Clara return a solid core. Let's see where things sit in January

I'm not saying this is a great Basketball team etiher today or in March, but I do know its WAY too early to judge them

---

Heard similar lines of thinking last year when we reportedly lost by 15 to Boise St. in a scrimmage before the season started - players out, new system, etc. Then OOC started. What struck me was the team looked less athletic than the mid-majors they were playing and sadly didn't improve that much in a very weak Pac-12.

Yes, it's early, staff has a year under their belt, hopefully team chemistry is better, etc., so we'll see, but this is not a great leading indicator.

---

Not really what happened last year. We had a horrendous non-conference and starting figuring it out in Pac12 play including beating 3 out of the 4 eventual tourney teams. In the back end of the season the team fell apart because of depth issues; no playable point guards and no guys to back up Daws.

Now, I don't expect a better result this year, but this team fundamentally has a very different roster construction with room to grow for next year. It will, at the very least, look different. Way more athleticism on the back-end defense, actual point guards on roster, but no polished go-to-scorers.

concernedparent said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

BearGreg said:

---

Context matters:

Cal held out two starters from the Santa Clara game and after an initial blitzing from St. Mary's, Cal outscored them in the last half of the scrimmage. Further, the Bears started the Gaels scrimmage trying out a new defense for nearly the very first time. Once they went back to their regular D, things were quite different.

More importantly, the Bears are an entirely new team whilst St Marys and Santa Clara return a solid core. Let's see where things sit in January

I'm not saying this is a great Basketball team etiher today or in March, but I do know its WAY too early to judge them

---

Heard similar lines of thinking last year when we reportedly lost by 15 to Boise St. in a scrimmage before the season started - players out, new system, etc. Then OOC started. What struck me was the team looked less athletic than the mid-majors they were playing and sadly didn't improve that much in a very weak Pac-12.

Yes, it's early, staff has a year under their belt, hopefully team chemistry is better, etc., so we'll see, but this is not a great leading indicator.

---

Not really what happened last year. We had a horrendous non-conference and starting figuring it out in Pac12 play including beating 3 out of the 4 eventual tourney teams. In the back end of the season the team fell apart because of depth issues; no playable point guards and no guys to back up Daws.

Now, I don't expect a better result this year, but this team fundamentally has a very different roster construction with room to grow for next year. It will, at the very least, look different. Way more athleticism on the back-end defense, actual point guards on roster, but no polished go-to-scorers.

---

I suppose that's one way to look at last season. The Pac-12 was garbage and squeaking out a few home court wins against bubble-level tournament teams sure didn't look like improvement to me. In any event, we'll get to see what the team looks like tomorrow.

BearGreg said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

I suppose that's one way to look at last season. The Pac-12 was garbage and squeaking out a few home court wins against bubble-level tournament teams sure didn't look like improvement to me. In any event, we'll get to see what the team looks like tomorrow.

---

It was not the P12s best year.

That said, they got four teams into the NCAA tournament and all four advanced to at least the 2nd round with a final mark of 6-4. So four of the final 32 teams.

Garbage?

---

The keybto the season isvthe first 10 games. We will see how competitive we will be

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

Yikes. Well, early reports last year were also bad and then it was basically confirmed once Cal got through the OOC schedule. We'll likely know soon enough.

---

You would think Madsen would decide on a starting line up by now. If 10 players are all equal, as Madsen says, then two players being out should not have mattered, right?

---

True, but it is also the type of team that has a lot of need/potential to be coached up. This isn't a "just give it to your best player and clear out" team. It will be a test of Madden and staff's coaching abilities.

---

I suspect three starters are set, though certain players can play more than one position. As time goes by, some of the starters will depend on who Cal plays against, and where Madsen puts his three main starters. This was alway going to be the way things were pre-season with so many new players, and so many players who can play at different spots. The good news is expect this team to have depth. I'm not sure what stock you can put in scrimmages when at least Cal is trying to assess so many players and combinations of players.

---

I suspect the initial starters are set, but on a team with this much depth from many different situations and no clear stars, it is going to be critical that Madsen be flexible and recognize who is playing well and not be locked into a particular lineup, something that plagued our last two coaches.

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

where did you get these numbers/

BearGreg said:

---

Context matters:

Cal held out two starters from the Santa Clara game and after an initial blitzing from St. Mary's, Cal outscored them in the last half of the scrimmage. Further, the Bears started the Gaels scrimmage trying out a new defense for nearly the very first time. Once they went back to their regular D, things were quite different.

More importantly, the Bears are an entirely new team whilst St Marys and Santa Clara return a solid core. Let's see where things sit in January

I'm not saying this is a great Basketball team etiher today or in March, but I do know its WAY too early to judge them

---

so we have the injury bug?

I have friends on both the St Mary's and Santa Clara basketball team. Private message me if you want me to go more in detail

calfanz said:

---

BearGreg said:

---

Context matters:

Cal held out two starters from the Santa Clara game and after an initial blitzing from St. Mary's, Cal outscored them in the last half of the scrimmage. Further, the Bears started the Gaels scrimmage trying out a new defense for nearly the very first time. Once they went back to their regular D, things were quite different.

More importantly, the Bears are an entirely new team whilst St Marys and Santa Clara return a solid core. Let's see where things sit in January

I'm not saying this is a great Basketball team etiher today or in March, but I do know its WAY too early to judge them

---

so we have the injury bug?

---

Didn't we go through this rodeo last year?

bearsandgiants said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

Yikes. Well, early reports last year were also bad and then it was basically confirmed once Cal got through the OOC schedule. We'll likely know soon enough.

---

You would think Madsen would decide on a starting line up by now. If 10 players are all equal, as Madsen says, then two players being out should not have mattered, right?

---

True, but it is also the type of team that has a lot of need/potential to be coached up. This isn't a "just give it to your best player and clear out" team. It will be a test of Madden and staff's coaching abilities.

---

I suspect three starters are set, though certain players can play more than one position. As time goes by, some of the starters will depend on who Cal plays against, and where Madsen puts his three main starters. This was alway going to be the way things were pre-season with so many new players, and so many players who can play at different spots. The good news is expect this team to have depth. I'm not sure what stock you can put in scrimmages when at least Cal is trying to assess so many players and combinations of players.

---

I suspect the initial starters are set, but on a team with this much depth from many different situations and no clear stars, it is going to be critical that Madsen be flexible and recognize who is playing well and not be locked into a particular lineup, something that plagued our last two coaches.

---

Last year we had a clubhouse cancer on the team, a tall guy who wasn't really that tall and was comparatively weak down low, with a bad shot and poor defense. A shooting guard who couldn't shoot but shot anyway, way too much. A superstar who left the game with sore legs, often, because nobody else did much of anything. And after cleaning house and landing a bunch new players to address those issues, including a 5 star shooting guard, we can't shoot, aren't very good at free throws, and are even shorter down low? And got blown out by two mid majors in pick up games. Good stuff! How do you not have a good shooting team at this level? Not even one guy? Fml

---

You kind of lost me on the sentence structure. The 5 star shooting guard is Tyson right? (Not part of the "new players.") You meant we lost the 5 star shooting guard I'm guessing.
Look I understand it could be a rough year, but is this doom and gloom conclusion a bit premature since we haven't even played a real game yet?

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

bearsandgiants said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

Yikes. Well, early reports last year were also bad and then it was basically confirmed once Cal got through the OOC schedule. We'll likely know soon enough.

---

You would think Madsen would decide on a starting line up by now. If 10 players are all equal, as Madsen says, then two players being out should not have mattered, right?

---

True, but it is also the type of team that has a lot of need/potential to be coached up. This isn't a "just give it to your best player and clear out" team. It will be a test of Madden and staff's coaching abilities.

---

I suspect three starters are set, though certain players can play more than one position. As time goes by, some of the starters will depend on who Cal plays against, and where Madsen puts his three main starters. This was alway going to be the way things were pre-season with so many new players, and so many players who can play at different spots. The good news is expect this team to have depth. I'm not sure what stock you can put in scrimmages when at least Cal is trying to assess so many players and combinations of players.

---

I suspect the initial starters are set, but on a team with this much depth from many different situations and no clear stars, it is going to be critical that Madsen be flexible and recognize who is playing well and not be locked into a particular lineup, something that plagued our last two coaches.

---

Last year we had a clubhouse cancer on the team, a tall guy who wasn't really that tall and was comparatively weak down low, with a bad shot and poor defense. A shooting guard who couldn't shoot but shot anyway, way too much. A superstar who left the game with sore legs, often, because nobody else did much of anything. And after cleaning house and landing a bunch new players to address those issues, including a 5 star shooting guard, we can't shoot, aren't very good at free throws, and are even shorter down low? And got blown out by two mid majors in pick up games. Good stuff! How do you not have a good shooting team at this level? Not even one guy? Fml

---

You kind of lost me on the sentence structure. The 5 star shooting guard is Tyson right? (Not part of the "new players.") You meant we lost the 5 star shooting guard I'm guessing.
Look I understand it could be a rough year, but is this doom and gloom conclusion a bit premature since we haven't even played a real game yet?

---

He's talking about Stojakovic.

concernedparent said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

bearsandgiants said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

Yikes. Well, early reports last year were also bad and then it was basically confirmed once Cal got through the OOC schedule. We'll likely know soon enough.

---

You would think Madsen would decide on a starting line up by now. If 10 players are all equal, as Madsen says, then two players being out should not have mattered, right?

---

True, but it is also the type of team that has a lot of need/potential to be coached up. This isn't a "just give it to your best player and clear out" team. It will be a test of Madden and staff's coaching abilities.

---

I suspect three starters are set, though certain players can play more than one position. As time goes by, some of the starters will depend on who Cal plays against, and where Madsen puts his three main starters. This was alway going to be the way things were pre-season with so many new players, and so many players who can play at different spots. The good news is expect this team to have depth. I'm not sure what stock you can put in scrimmages when at least Cal is trying to assess so many players and combinations of players.

---

I suspect the initial starters are set, but on a team with this much depth from many different situations and no clear stars, it is going to be critical that Madsen be flexible and recognize who is playing well and not be locked into a particular lineup, something that plagued our last two coaches.

---

Last year we had a clubhouse cancer on the team, a tall guy who wasn't really that tall and was comparatively weak down low, with a bad shot and poor defense. A shooting guard who couldn't shoot but shot anyway, way too much. A superstar who left the game with sore legs, often, because nobody else did much of anything. And after cleaning house and landing a bunch new players to address those issues, including a 5 star shooting guard, we can't shoot, aren't very good at free throws, and are even shorter down low? And got blown out by two mid majors in pick up games. Good stuff! How do you not have a good shooting team at this level? Not even one guy? Fml

---

You kind of lost me on the sentence structure. The 5 star shooting guard is Tyson right? (Not part of the "new players.") You meant we lost the 5 star shooting guard I'm guessing.
Look I understand it could be a rough year, but is this doom and gloom conclusion a bit premature since we haven't even played a real game yet?

---

He's talking about Stojakovic.

---

Correct.

To me, the preseason report (while very much appreciated) reads like this "we aren't very good at basketball, but we hope to be surprised." Yet there was a lot of hype about all of these guys. So that leads me to question whether Madsen is actually a capable coach. It sounds like they've regressed since showing up, and that's a big concern. Yes, way too early. Yes overreacting. But as a cal fan, this is all that I know.

Im hoping they obliterate Bakersfield tonight but for gods sake, we need some shooters. It's a basketball team. And if we don't have actual big men, not having an outside or even mid range threat, of any kind, is a disaster. Only chance would be if these guys play absolute mad defense. And if the shortcomings on the offensive side are anywhere near accurate, Madsen had better be making this team a defensive juggernaut.

bearsandgiants said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

bearsandgiants said:

---

calumnus said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calumnus said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

Yikes. Well, early reports last year were also bad and then it was basically confirmed once Cal got through the OOC schedule. We'll likely know soon enough.

---

You would think Madsen would decide on a starting line up by now. If 10 players are all equal, as Madsen says, then two players being out should not have mattered, right?

---

True, but it is also the type of team that has a lot of need/potential to be coached up. This isn't a "just give it to your best player and clear out" team. It will be a test of Madden and staff's coaching abilities.

---

I suspect three starters are set, though certain players can play more than one position. As time goes by, some of the starters will depend on who Cal plays against, and where Madsen puts his three main starters. This was alway going to be the way things were pre-season with so many new players, and so many players who can play at different spots. The good news is expect this team to have depth. I'm not sure what stock you can put in scrimmages when at least Cal is trying to assess so many players and combinations of players.

---

I suspect the initial starters are set, but on a team with this much depth from many different situations and no clear stars, it is going to be critical that Madsen be flexible and recognize who is playing well and not be locked into a particular lineup, something that plagued our last two coaches.

---

Last year we had a clubhouse cancer on the team, a tall guy who wasn't really that tall and was comparatively weak down low, with a bad shot and poor defense. A shooting guard who couldn't shoot but shot anyway, way too much. A superstar who left the game with sore legs, often, because nobody else did much of anything. And after cleaning house and landing a bunch new players to address those issues, including a 5 star shooting guard, we can't shoot, aren't very good at free throws, and are even shorter down low? And got blown out by two mid majors in pick up games. Good stuff! How do you not have a good shooting team at this level? Not even one guy? Fml

---

You kind of lost me on the sentence structure. The 5 star shooting guard is Tyson right? (Not part of the "new players.") You meant we lost the 5 star shooting guard I'm guessing.
Look I understand it could be a rough year, but is this doom and gloom conclusion a bit premature since we haven't even played a real game yet?

---

He's talking about Stojakovic.

---

Correct.

To me, the preseason report (while very much appreciated) reads like this "we aren't very good at basketball, but we hope to be surprised." Yet there was a lot of hype about all of these guys. So that leads me to question whether Madsen is actually a capable coach. It sounds like they've regressed since showing up, and that's a big concern. Yes, way too early. Yes overreacting. But as a cal fan, this is all that I know.

Im hoping they obliterate Bakersfield tonight but for gods sake, we need some shooters. It's a basketball team. And if we don't have actual big men, not having an outside or even mid range threat, of any kind, is a disaster. Only chance would be if these guys play absolute mad defense. And if the shortcomings on the offensive side are anywhere near accurate, Madsen had better be making this team a defensive juggernaut.

---

Madsen talks a good game. Now we will see if what he is doing is going to work.

bearsandgiants said:

---

Last year we had a clubhouse cancer on the team, a tall guy who wasn't really that tall and was comparatively weak down low, with a bad shot and poor defense. A shooting guard who couldn't shoot but shot anyway, way too much. A superstar who left the game with sore legs, often, because nobody else did much of anything. And after cleaning house and landing a bunch new players to address those issues, including a 5 star shooting guard, we can't shoot, aren't very good at free throws, and are even shorter down low? And got blown out by two mid majors in pick up games. Good stuff! How do you not have a good shooting team at this level? Not even one guy? Fml

---

Omg I forgot about Tyson action figure with exercycle and towel, legit rhabdo worries

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

What are you talking about? Cal just played their first game of the season tonight, and beat CSU Bakersfield.

glutton said:

---

Johnfox said:

---

When you lose to Saint mary's by 35 and to santa clara by 12, it's a long long year incoming

---

What are you talking about? Cal just played their first game of the season tonight, and beat CSU Bakersfield.

---

There were pre-season scrimmages, but thankfully they don't count.

Have not watched the game yet as tip off was after east-coast bed time. Have a few thoughts though, just reading through the game thread.

First, the 8:30 tipoff is just WAY too late. That being said, I think it's great that they scheduled the women's game for the same day. It should have tipped off at 5 or 4, and this one at 7 or 6, however. It was on ACCNx anyway. Doesn't matter. It's just too late. It's great that lots of fans got to see both teams, though, as the women's team is pretty good this year. Finally a marketing win. Although it may have been happenstance.

Regarding the game, it seems like we still have the same problems we had all of last year. This is a new squad, but not being able to inbound the ball, not boxing out, that has to be fixed immediately. This is a Madsen issue. It's basic fundamentals and this team needs to improve on that front.

But! It sounds like we are more athletic, are playing tougher and harder, and everyone that steps on the court is contributing in some way. No liabilities. This is great and also attributable to Madsen, both in terms of coaching and recruiting.

Sounds like Andrej felt he had a mandate to lead given his status as a star transfer, but tried to do too much, too often. That can be fixed, too. Lots to work on for Madsen, but this team came out and got the win, covered the spread (not that I care but nice to see), and looks poised to build on a decent win. On to game 2.

BOX OUT! GET REBOUNDS! DOMINATE GAMES! GO BEARS!