Johnfox said:

---

One player I'm watching is Myles Che. He's wilkinson's friend and the dude knows how to play ball the right way

---

Yes on Myles Che. His stats are impressive...good shooter.

eastcoastcal said:

---

Not to bang the NIL drum, but if we want top 1/3 performance, we need top 1/3 funding. Some whales need to sign checks

---

Stop wishing for something that's never going to happen.
Yes, more $$ would be great, but it's not the only reason Cal could get better and shouldn't be the focus of Operation Bears Go Dancing 2027.
Two points in support:
1.
I count 6 games this year we lost by 5 points or less, two of those in OT. Closing games is not about your talent level or NIL kitty. Closing games is about the half dozen intangibles that we know about, game management, ice in your veins as a shooter, clutch plays, hustle, a little bit of luck thrown in, I could name others. Those are things that can be fixed, not fundamental talent problems. Imagine if we won even half of those nail-biter games. Now you have 16 wins and you ARE in the middle third of the ACC. Now imagine we won all six games. Basketball can turn on a team attitude at the end of a game. I saw that grit from this team, but not often enough.
2.
I'm watching USF play tough against Wash St. in the WCC tourney. The team is 23-8, 16-1 at home, they are blazing. Wouldn't be surprised at all to see them win the tournament. Why are they better than us, is it all the NIL money they spend?
Look at the roster. Six guys from six different countries, including China, Greece, England, Georgia, Australia and Estonia. Why are we not looking around the world, why is it only about the portal? I think there's talent out there, and we can get more creative about finding it… without having to harpoon any whales.

Don't know how accurate this is, but this gives you an idea of where we stand on NIL compared to other Power 5s
https://nil-ncaa.com/power5/

Johnfox said:

---

Helps a LOT to have maxime raynaud as your center. If sissoko was on that team, they have the same record as Cal. Also this is blakes' last year so it also helps bringing in a 5th year guy for one year

---

Raynaud is an elite college center, but again Sissoko is the last of our problems. He's one of our best players and one of the top centers in the ACC.

What we need is some athletes that can shoot and defend, for example Omot

USF wouldn't survive an ACC schedule. They lost by 15 to Clemson and "played WSU tough" (WSU is below us in KenPom). They'd be bottom third in the conference (not cellar but bottom third) if they played an ACC schedule.

Obviously we can do things better, but if you're in a power conference you need to attract top talent because you can't go the mid major route of winning a weak conference and getting an auto-bid; you need to simply win a huge volume of games vs very deep opponents for 4+ months. It costs money. The minute the portal opens after we lose our lsat game (reality is it's already begun), Anrej and JW are going to be fielding offers to poach them. Several other players too.

And you say it can't happen- we have multiple billionaires who sit at Haas and take in the games. The average networth of many of the floor seat donors is... large to say the least. The excuses have been removed- tax deductibility, title IX questions, etc (written about by Sebastabear here, I won't leak premium content). As SB says, "We've now given [the donors] a chance to do so. We'll see if they take it."

This idea that we can moneyball our way to the tournament is foolish, IMO. Your post insinuates that there's some gold mine of talent in foreign countries that we're refusing to look at. I am here to plainly tell you that of course the staff is looking at them. Madsen took an Asia trip and inquired about acquiring a Chinese player, e.g. Every solid program in NCAA has deep scouting abroad. We aren't moneyballing this. If we want a top 1/3 roster we need donors to sign checks, good coaching, and strong rapport/continuity among a core that plays together multiple years.

eastcoastcal said:

---

USF wouldn't survive an ACC schedule. They lost by 15 to Clemson and "played WSU tough" (WSU is below us in KenPom). They'd be bottom third in the conference (not cellar but bottom third) if they played an ACC schedule.

Obviously we can do things better, but if you're in a power conference you need to attract top talent because you can't go the mid major route of winning a weak conference and getting an auto-bid; you need to simply win a huge volume of games vs very deep opponents for 4+ months. It costs money. The minute the portal opens after we lose our lsat game (reality is it's already begun), Anrej and JW are going to be fielding offers to poach them. Several other players too.

And you say it can't happen- we have multiple billionaires who sit at Haas and take in the games. The average networth of many of the floor seat donors is... large to say the least. The excuses have been removed- tax deductibility, title IX questions, etc (written about by Sebastabear here, I won't leak premium content). As SB says, "We've now given [the donors] a chance to do so. We'll see if they take it."

This idea that we can moneyball our way to the tournament is foolish, IMO. Your post insinuates that there's some gold mine of talent in foreign countries that we're refusing to look at. I am here to plainly tell you that of course the staff is looking at them. Madsen took an Asia trip and inquired about acquiring a Chinese player, e.g. Every solid program in NCAA has deep scouting abroad. We aren't moneyballing this. If we want a top 1/3 roster we need donors to sign checks, good coaching, and strong rapport/continuity among a core that plays together multiple years.

---

Some good points. But I do think there is some moneyball component to this that should not be overlooked. Every program needs to find the right fit. You need to spend to be sure, but as we saw in football with FSU you can look good on paper and have it blow up. Conversely ASU and Indiana went to the CFP after both had miserable 2023 seasons. Neither were super high spenders in the portal. But both spent wisely.

This ACC hoops season has seen Louisville rise from the dead to be a very strong team. They completely turned over the roster and coaching staff. They won more conference games this season than total games in the previous 2 seasons combined. Pat Kelsey brought in 13 new players. Several including Terrance Edwards Jr came from mid major programs. Including a few from his former school (Charleston). They are also senior laden.

IMO Madsen may need to evaluate how he fills out his roster. I may be more inclined to try and find a strong 8 and fill out the rest with "moneyball" types and role playing seniors that may wish for a Cal certificate or grad degree. It is really hard to keep everyone happy but you absolutely have to have a strong 8 if you hope to play competitively in a power conference.

This team is really poor shooting the ball. But equally as poor defending. I think a greater emphasis has to be placed on defense. Defense travels generally. Shots do not always fall but good defense allows you to have a chance. I do not expect lockdown defense but you cannot be ranked in the 300's and expect to win more than you lose.

I think the staff may need some change. And I think a GM may be needed as well. Matt Scherbenske on staff may be a good fit there. There will be a lot of coaching turnover once the season is over. A coach that may be able to bring a player with him is worth looking at.

The House settlement should provide $3M for NIL. The outside collective has some money but the lack of tax deductability may prove to be a big hurdle in securing outside collective funds. The House settlement places a cap on University revenue payments. If you want to play with the big dogs the outside collective will need to be a lot more robust than it appears to be.

Madsen will need to try and keep the top guys. Wilkinson and Stojakovic likely will cost. Can Cal match? How much is left to compensate the balance of the roster. I expect a player or two Madsen likely would like to keep to enter the portal. 2 players worth keeping an eye on IMO are Ola-Joseph and Omot.

The program is once again at a crossroads. There is very little building of programs these days. It is win now. The donor base will need to be activated if the program is to truly ascend. But in the end Cal's athletic fortunes and staying in the P4 is much tied to football. I think getting Cal to the upper tier of the ACC in hoops is going to be a major challenge.

Rytis is also a must keep player

The staff has told me that they love Elijah mahi from santa clara. Keep an eye on that player

barsad said:

---

eastcoastcal said:

---

Not to bang the NIL drum, but if we want top 1/3 performance, we need top 1/3 funding. Some whales need to sign checks

---

Stop wishing for something that's never going to happen.
Yes, more $$ would be great, but it's not the only reason Cal could get better and shouldn't be the focus of Operation Bears Go Dancing 2027.
Two points in support:
1.
I count 6 games this year we lost by 5 points or less, two of those in OT. Closing games is not about your talent level or NIL kitty. Closing games is about the half dozen intangibles that we know about, game management, ice in your veins as a shooter, clutch plays, hustle, a little bit of luck thrown in, I could name others. Those are things that can be fixed, not fundamental talent problems. Imagine if we won even half of those nail-biter games. Now you have 16 wins and you ARE in the middle third of the ACC. Now imagine we won all six games. Basketball can turn on a team attitude at the end of a game. I saw that grit from this team, but not often enough.
2.
I'm watching USF play tough against Wash St. in the WCC tourney. The team is 23-8, 16-1 at home, they are blazing. Wouldn't be surprised at all to see them win the tournament. Why are they better than us, is it all the NIL money they spend?
Look at the roster. Six guys from six different countries, including China, Greece, England, Georgia, Australia and Estonia. Why are we not looking around the world, why is it only about the portal? I think there's talent out there, and we can get more creative about finding it… without having to harpoon any whales.

Don't know how accurate this is, but this gives you an idea of where we stand on NIL compared to other Power 5s
https://nil-ncaa.com/power5/

---

Ughhh.....

WCC talent is not ACC talent. Those teams would get blitzed in conference.

They make some Tourney noise because teams do not have time to prep against them (the coaches can break down tape but the players don't get a chance to really hone the game plan). But those teams (and uCSD) would win like 4-5 conference games Against ACC talent.

Yes, we lost a lot of close games. But we won a few close ones as well. Ultimately this team needs upgrades in the shooting skills at the 2-3 and 4. Maybe the 4+ but Cal can work with Dort even though I am pretty sure he can't shoot past 5 feet.

HoopDreams said:

---

the difference between Madsen's first and second year in terms of growing the program:

1. shows he plays an exciting brand of basketball
2. shows he can develop players
3. shows he's a player's coach

and ...

in year 1 he completely rebuilt the program with transfers, but lost his starters and every significant 2nd team player to NBA, graduation or transfer

that made year 2 challenging but he showed he has stabilized the program, and again demonstrate he can develop players (e.g. Sissoko made a huge jump this season, and Wilkinson who he developed and gave him the freedom to shine)

as important he recruited players with experience but remaining eligibility

therefore year 3 will have continuity we didn't have in year 2 (of course retaining our key players is critical and that's going to take NIL)

---

Sissoko's huge jump wasn't due to his skill improvement, it was due to his teammates finally getting him the ball in scoring position. For the first 15 games or so, they largely ignored him when he was set up on the block or rolled after setting a pick. The rare times he did get the ball, you could see he had a nice little jump hook. Maybe it was Madsen who finally emphasized getting Sissoko the ball where he could do some damage. Anyway, it took way too long.

These days, most "student-athletes" simply go to the highest bidder. Continuity in a program is not a top priority for players anymore. As they say, it's all about the money.

Stojakobrick is clearly not the loyal type considering how we landed him. And JW is likely to get loads of money thrown his way from SEC powerhouses much closer to his Atlanta home. I'm assuming we're going to have to start over again.

Sorry, that may be part of it but I disagree his improvement is largely due to coaching and getting extensive experience over the season

HearstMining said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

the difference between Madsen's first and second year in terms of growing the program:

1. shows he plays an exciting brand of basketball
2. shows he can develop players
3. shows he's a player's coach

and ...

in year 1 he completely rebuilt the program with transfers, but lost his starters and every significant 2nd team player to NBA, graduation or transfer

that made year 2 challenging but he showed he has stabilized the program, and again demonstrate he can develop players (e.g. Sissoko made a huge jump this season, and Wilkinson who he developed and gave him the freedom to shine)

as important he recruited players with experience but remaining eligibility

therefore year 3 will have continuity we didn't have in year 2 (of course retaining our key players is critical and that's going to take NIL)

---

Sissoko's huge jump wasn't due to his skill improvement, it was due to his teammates finally getting him the ball in scoring position. For the first 15 games or so, they largely ignored him when he was set up on the block or rolled after setting a pick. The rare times he did get the ball, you could see he had a nice little jump hook. Maybe it was Madsen who finally emphasized getting Sissoko the ball where he could do some damage. Anyway, it took way too long.

---

BearGoggles said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

Okay, this might be a bit dramatic, but watching the way these guys never stopped playing yesterday really has me hoping that these guys can stick together for another year. I know its the ultimate cliche, but one thing you cannot say against Madsen is that these guys ever quit on him.

---

Well after two years with two completely new rosters, Madsen produced the same results. Perhaps with continuity there might be some improvement next year.

---

I don't agree the result was the same. Last year, the team was reliant on one great player (Tyson), lost games that were supposed to be easy out of conference wins (Pacific/Montana State), was lacking in young talent, and reportedly had a lot of internal dysfunction.

This year was an improvement on all fronts. The trajectory for Cal is upward, albeit not as fast as we'd all like. The key questions as I see them:

• Will Cal have the NIL to compete?
• Can Madsen hang on to young talent, recruit new talent (incoming class seems promising), and continue to mine the portal? This is obviously NIL related, but Cal has to this point done well in the portal. Can Madsen continue to sell Cal to players?
• Can Madsen improve as a game coach? His players play hard, but I see many tactical mistakes that make a difference in close games.
• And in that regard, can Cal get over the hump in close games? They lose too many heartbreakers. Not surprising given the roster, but to take the next step, those need to become wins (like football).

I'm cautiously optimistic on all fronts except the most important one - NIL. I have no insights there, but I'm concerned that others in the know seem to be concerned.

---

In wins and statistics, the results are about the same. The strength of schedule was 77 this year versus 79 last year, offensively they did improve in PPG from 165th last year to 134th this year, but defensively about the same - 317th in OPPG to 312th this year. League wise they finished lower than last year - thank goodness for NC State or Cal wouldn't even be in the ACC tournament.

If Madsen is able to keep the key pieces together for next year, if he is able to make some good portal additions and if that continuity results in an improvement in wins/losses, offensive/defensive play, then sure, this year could be looked at has a step in the right direction. We'll see.