Sure fire starters: Blacksher (really pleasantly surprised he's back to his full ability, I was worried with our luck we'd get the player from the last 2 years and not the 2 years before that), Maddy Sissoko.

I would guess the 3rd starter is Petraitis, but could be Stojakovic just because he's the "star" of the recruiting class.

Will definitely play: Dort, Ola-Joseph, Tucker, Omot, Stojakovic.

Unsure: Campbell (don't really know what we have with him, undersized 2 that was efficient on a decent team last year), Wilkinson.

Sitting: Mahoney, Vlad, Devin Curtis. Could see Gus Larson getting spot minutes in certain matchups.

Blacksher at point. Especially early on, late-clock and improv scoring and playmaking ability will be much needed.
JOJ - Provides scoring and athleticism. Yes, he's gotta board better. Seems he has good potential to grow there. Curious about him as a small-ball 5.
Stojakovic - Got versatile offensive skillset and athleticism.

Other two starters come out of - Sissoko, Petraitis, Wilkinson, and Omot .

Campbell and Tucker will play important roles.

Dort and Wilkinson seem like the real wildcards. Nobody is expecting much, but both have potential to contribute in ACC.

That's a 10-man rotation.

Mahoney and/or Curtis could find spot minutes too.

Vlad - Curious about his development.

Stojakovic, Sissoko, and Petraitis are the penciled in starters. Blacksher/Tucker and Omot/Ola-Joseph are battling for the other 2 spots. Campbell is an interesting one (can play 4 positions)

I am suggesting what I hope for instead of what will happen. I don't really care if the team wins 10 games or 12 games this year. I do hope they win 20 games next year. To me that is the goal.

1: I thought Tucker might start and Blacksher, because of his size and injury history, might be instant offense off the bench. But the word here is that Blacksher is too valuable so he starts.

2/3: Stojakovic starts at 2 or 3 because he is one of the two players on the roster with a high ceiling.

4: Petraitis is a jack of all trades and gets the nod at 4.

5: Sissoko starts. It would be best if Dort beat him out, but I have not idea if that is realistic.

Back to 2: Maybe Campbell starts at 2 and Stojakovic moves to 3. But best if Wilkinson, the other high ceiling player, beats him out for conference play and Campbell is sixth man offense off the bench. I doubt this happens.

Or: Stojakovic moves to 2, and O-J starts at 3/4 with Petraitis the other 3/4.

Unless Omot has learned how to shoot I don't see how he contributes.

sluggo said:

---

Unless Omot has learned how to shoot I don't see how he contributes.

---

You can't watch his tape and not see how he might contribute. He will be a nightmare in certain matchups. His problem is his awful shot selection, which I don't think Madsen will tolerate given how much deeper this team is.

concernedparent said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Unless Omot has learned how to shoot I don't see how he contributes.

---

You can't watch his tape and not see how he might contribute. He will be a nightmare in certain matchups. His problem is his awful shot selection, which I don't think Madsen will tolerate given how much deeper this team is.

---

that's an interesting video and who ever did it spent the time to break down his stats.

BJ can put up 20, although sometimes with lower efficiency. He has the same long, lean body type as 2K, but based on this highlight has a better 3 point shot (can shoot off a move, while 2K was purely a catch and shoot player.

He also looks to have better body control than 2K (I thought 2K had a ton of upside, but he never quite realized it at Cal, partly because he had a loose dribble and not quite the body control to get to the rack and finish).

But 2K was a strong defender, and who knows how well BJ can do on that side of the court

Right now, we don't know jack squat, but we are about to start finding out a lot more, very, very soon. Hopefully we win more than we lose, non-conference.

HoopDreams said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Unless Omot has learned how to shoot I don't see how he contributes.

---

You can't watch his tape and not see how he might contribute. He will be a nightmare in certain matchups. His problem is his awful shot selection, which I don't think Madsen will tolerate given how much deeper this team is.

---

that's an interesting video and who ever did it spent the time to break down his stats.

BJ can put up 20, although sometimes with lower efficiency. He has the same long, lean body type as 2K, but based on this highlight has a better 3 point shot (can shoot off a move, while 2K was purely a catch and shoot player.

He also looks to have better body control than 2K (I thought 2K had a ton of upside, but he never quite realized it at Cal, partly because he had a loose dribble and not quite the body control to get to the rack and finish).

But 2K was a strong defender, and who knows how well BJ can do on that side of the court

---

Omot appears to have an inconsistent midrange shot. He missed as many or more than he made and that was on a highlight video. Probably because he doesn't practice it - not as glamorous as a trey. That's what I liked about Jaylon - he had a midrange game to go along with driving and a 3pt shot. A good mid-range shooter can exploit holes in a zone defense - especially if they're overplaying the 3pt shooters.

concernedparent said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Unless Omot has learned how to shoot I don't see how he contributes.

---

You can't watch his tape and not see how he might contribute. He will be a nightmare in certain matchups. His problem is his awful shot selection, which I don't think Madsen will tolerate given how much deeper this team is.

---

A nightmare? In the ACC? I hope he is better than I think, but the competition will be tough.

In the past when low efficiency scorers transfer to Cal they stay as low efficiency scorers. This team lacks a star like Tyson to draw double teams, and an inside scorer like Aimaq to play the inside-outside game. It is going to be interesting.

sluggo said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Unless Omot has learned how to shoot I don't see how he contributes.

---

You can't watch his tape and not see how he might contribute. He will be a nightmare in certain matchups. His problem is his awful shot selection, which I don't think Madsen will tolerate given how much deeper this team is.

---

A nightmare? In the ACC? I hope he is better than I think, but the competition will be tough.

In the past when low efficiency scorers transfer to Cal they stay as low efficiency scorers. This team lacks a star like Tyson to draw double teams, and an inside scorer like Aimaq to play the inside-outside game. It is going to be interesting.

---

We don't only play ACC teams, there are going to be bad ACC teams, and there are going to be good matchups for him. He isn't an undersized chucker like Dontae Coleman or Devin Askew. He's 6'8, can move, has bounce, and has perimeter skills. He just needs to be reined in. Can he is up to him and Madsen. No contested off the bounce 3's, no stepbacks, no fadeaways, no pounding the rock for 10 seconds, if he's shooting open threes, slashing to the rim, and being active in transition he will be a lot more efficient.

concernedparent said:

---

sluggo said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Unless Omot has learned how to shoot I don't see how he contributes.

---

You can't watch his tape and not see how he might contribute. He will be a nightmare in certain matchups. His problem is his awful shot selection, which I don't think Madsen will tolerate given how much deeper this team is.

---

A nightmare? In the ACC? I hope he is better than I think, but the competition will be tough.

In the past when low efficiency scorers transfer to Cal they stay as low efficiency scorers. This team lacks a star like Tyson to draw double teams, and an inside scorer like Aimaq to play the inside-outside game. It is going to be interesting.

---

We don't only play ACC teams, there are going to be bad ACC teams, and there are going to be good matchups for him. He isn't an undersized chucker like Dontae Coleman or Devin Askew. He's 6'8, can move, has bounce, and has perimeter skills. He just needs to be reined in. Can he is up to him and Madsen. No contested off the bounce 3's, no stepbacks, no fadeaways, no pounding the rock for 10 seconds, if he's shooting open threes, slashing to the rim, and being active in transition he will be a lot more efficient.

---

Just like we underrate the ACC in football, we overrate the ACC in basketball. The Pac 12 was just as good.

oski003 said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

sluggo said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Unless Omot has learned how to shoot I don't see how he contributes.

---

You can't watch his tape and not see how he might contribute. He will be a nightmare in certain matchups. His problem is his awful shot selection, which I don't think Madsen will tolerate given how much deeper this team is.

---

A nightmare? In the ACC? I hope he is better than I think, but the competition will be tough.

In the past when low efficiency scorers transfer to Cal they stay as low efficiency scorers. This team lacks a star like Tyson to draw double teams, and an inside scorer like Aimaq to play the inside-outside game. It is going to be interesting.

---

We don't only play ACC teams, there are going to be bad ACC teams, and there are going to be good matchups for him. He isn't an undersized chucker like Dontae Coleman or Devin Askew. He's 6'8, can move, has bounce, and has perimeter skills. He just needs to be reined in. Can he is up to him and Madsen. No contested off the bounce 3's, no stepbacks, no fadeaways, no pounding the rock for 10 seconds, if he's shooting open threes, slashing to the rim, and being active in transition he will be a lot more efficient.

---

Just like we underrate the ACC in football, we overrate the ACC in basketball. The Pac 12 was just as good.

---

Last year's football Conference Ratings:
Pac12: #2
ACC: #5 (last of the P5 conferences)

Last year's basketball Conference Ratings:
ACC: #4
Pac12: #7 (last of the P6 conferences and behind the Mountain West)

HearstMining said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

concernedparent said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Unless Omot has learned how to shoot I don't see how he contributes.

---

You can't watch his tape and not see how he might contribute. He will be a nightmare in certain matchups. His problem is his awful shot selection, which I don't think Madsen will tolerate given how much deeper this team is.

---

that's an interesting video and who ever did it spent the time to break down his stats.

BJ can put up 20, although sometimes with lower efficiency. He has the same long, lean body type as 2K, but based on this highlight has a better 3 point shot (can shoot off a move, while 2K was purely a catch and shoot player.

He also looks to have better body control than 2K (I thought 2K had a ton of upside, but he never quite realized it at Cal, partly because he had a loose dribble and not quite the body control to get to the rack and finish).

But 2K was a strong defender, and who knows how well BJ can do on that side of the court

---

Omot appears to have an inconsistent midrange shot. He missed as many or more than he made and that was on a highlight video.

---

It's not a highlight video in that sense. It's showing trends in his play, including his strengths and weaknesses.

sluggo said:

---

I am suggesting what I hope for instead of what will happen. I don't really care if the team wins 10 games or 12 games this year. I do hope they win 20 games next year. To me that is the goal.

1: I thought Tucker might start and Blacksher, because of his size and injury history, might be instant offense off the bench. But the word here is that Blacksher is too valuable so he starts.

2/3: Stojakovic starts at 2 or 3 because he is one of the two players on the roster with a high ceiling.

4: Petraitis is a jack of all trades and gets the nod at 4.

5: Sissoko starts. It would be best if Dort beat him out, but I have not idea if that is realistic.

Back to 2: Maybe Campbell starts at 2 and Stojakovic moves to 3. But best if Wilkinson, the other high ceiling player, beats him out for conference play and Campbell is sixth man offense off the bench. I doubt this happens.

Or: Stojakovic moves to 2, and O-J starts at 3/4 with Petraitis the other 3/4.

Unless Omot has learned how to shoot I don't see how he contributes.

---

It's interesting that Omot got minutes over Petraitis, particularly down the stretch.

Civil Bear said:

---

sluggo said:

---

I am suggesting what I hope for instead of what will happen. I don't really care if the team wins 10 games or 12 games this year. I do hope they win 20 games next year. To me that is the goal.

1: I thought Tucker might start and Blacksher, because of his size and injury history, might be instant offense off the bench. But the word here is that Blacksher is too valuable so he starts.

2/3: Stojakovic starts at 2 or 3 because he is one of the two players on the roster with a high ceiling.

4: Petraitis is a jack of all trades and gets the nod at 4.

5: Sissoko starts. It would be best if Dort beat him out, but I have not idea if that is realistic.

Back to 2: Maybe Campbell starts at 2 and Stojakovic moves to 3. But best if Wilkinson, the other high ceiling player, beats him out for conference play and Campbell is sixth man offense off the bench. I doubt this happens.

Or: Stojakovic moves to 2, and O-J starts at 3/4 with Petraitis the other 3/4.

Unless Omot has learned how to shoot I don't see how he contributes.

---

It's interesting that Omot got minutes over Petraitis, particularly down the stretch.

---

He played well. He shot 2 of 6 from three, but his misses were close and he seemed to move well to position himself for shots. I may have underestimated him.

Petraitis seemed a little off, although his box score was good per minute. His flopping may be effective but I don't have to like it.