Seems likely with Cobb out for a while.

*

Do Byrd's Fly?

LOL....yes

oskidunker;842152135 said:

---

Seems likely with Cobb out for a while.

---

If he's 10% as good as he's hyped to be, he'll start.

Bird is a great recruit and nba material. Since Jt is not coaching he will start.

Vineyardview;842152178 said:

---

Do Byrd's Fly?

---

Good one!

Monty runs a complex system, and doesn't like to start freshmen if he has an experienced player ahead. I imagine Bird will come off the bench for the first 5 games.

calgo430;842152366 said:

---

Bird is a great recruit and nba material. Since Jt is not coaching he will start.

---

Love the post. MM is not easy, but with JT it would be nigh impossible.

Honestly, this shouldn't even be a question. It's not like we have a bunch of All-Americans on the roster.

Crabbe and Franklin started as freshman under Monty, but he didn't have any real alternative other than Smith. Bird seems to be the likely starter at the 2 or 3 spot. I don't think it's automatic, though. We just don't know enough yet about about how much Kreklow and Wallace have improved over the summer and Singer and Mathews might have more of the skills Monty wants to see on day 1. Of course Bird eventually becomes the starter.

I'd go with Cobbs, Wallace, Bird as the most likely opening day starting guards. Kreklow could displace Wallace or Bird, and Cobbs' recovery could be slower than hoped. If Cobbs isn't ready then Singer could end up being the starting point if he can do what Monty wants him to.

Against slower, non-conference foes early in the season the fundamentally sound (but less athletic) players can perform better.

RicoRico;842152677 said:

---

Monty runs a complex system, and doesn't like to start freshmen if he has an experienced player ahead. I imagine Bird will come off the bench for the first 5 games.

---

I think you are right about this. The most important thing for Montgomery is defense. Bird hasn't shown me any defensive skills yet, or even an aggressive mindset on defense. We could argue as some will, that Pro Am games are not a good example to use, but if Bird plays defense like he did in those games, that will hurt his chances to start on day one at Cal.

Can you think of a single time at Cal when Montgomery has started a player who could not or would not play defense? There have been two times when Montgomery did start a good offensive player who did not play much defense, but both times Montgomery did not have much choice, because there was no other quality player available. The first was Jerome Randle, who had Knesivic and Gutierrez behind him. Knesevic was not good enough, and Jorge as a freshman was really raw. Monty had to go with Randle.

The second instance was Alan Crabbe, who had Alex Rossi and Jeff Powers behind him. Rossi got hurt before the season began. Powers was limited athletically, and again Montgomery had to go with an offensive player, who played little defense. This year Montgomery has enough depth, that he can afford to have Jabari sit and watch a bit to learn how he will want Jabari to play defense.

Before Cobbs' injury, I expected that Montgomery would start Kreklow at the three spot, and bring Jabari off the bench, while watching his progress, and leaving Wallace at the two guard spot. As Jabari progressed, I felt he would begin starting, and Monty would move Kreklow to the two guard, moving Wallace to back up Cobbs at point.

Now, with Cobbs hurt, the whole process will move faster, and Mathews will have a big role in it. Kreklow is the best defender among all the guards, unless Mathews, Singer, Johnson, or Roger have some defensive skills we have not yet heard about. But if Mathews comes along and wins a starting role, then Kreklow may keep starting at the three, or may back up both Jabari and Mathews. All this depends on Kreklow being and staying healthy. He is a big key to the success of the team this season, just as losing him last season killed our chances of winning the PAC12 and going further than we did.

Having either Jabari or Kreklow come off the bench is not a bad thing. Either one will change the game when they come in and pick up the team, Jabari with instant offense, or Kreklow with defensive intensity and hustle.

:gobears:

SFCityBear;842152745 said:

---

Having either Jabari or Kreklow come off the bench is not a bad thing.

---

I think a healthy Kreklow could be a great sixth man.

calgo430;842152366 said:

---

Bird is a great recruit and nba material. Since Jt is not coaching he will start.

---

Uncalled for and totally irrelevant. It doesn't bear a response but JT started freshmen when deemed appropriate. Pretty sure you're referring to Kline but just recently, he has started numerous freshmen like Keenan, Harper, Isi, Treggs, McClure, Jalil, McCain etc etc. I could go on and on and on.

Tedforddebateocarcinoma is a serious condition which, as we have seen, can resist even the most radical of conventional treatments (e.g. termination). It is troubling to see indications of it spreading outside the football board. I recommend immediate high-intensity radiation therapy on the afflicted threads.

In laymen's terms: Holy crap, he's fired already and you're still arguing about him? And on the basketball board!? Come on.

stu;842152822 said:

---

I think a healthy Kreklow could be a great sixth man.

---

If Cobbs has recovered and Kreklow is healthy, Ricky will probably start at the three and eventually start at the two. He's a five tool player, and I don't think he can be kept off the floor, except maybe by committing too many fouls. My pick for sixth man in this scenario would be Wallace, and if Cobbs is slow recovering, then Mathews will be sixth man. Since our bigs will need rest at times, a big like Behrens or Rooks might be your sixth man. I am beginning to understand why, when Monty was asked about how we will do while Cobbs is out, he replied, "We'll be all right". And I think we will. We are loaded, compared to last year.

:beer:

Just my opinion I totally agree with tsubamoto

The answer is yes. Wallace will start at PG. Kreklow will start at SG. Bird will start at SF. Singer will spell Wallace at PG. Mathews will spell both Kreklow and Bird and Powers will occasionally spell Bird. Johnson and Rooks will battle to see who is the first big off the bench The loser will be the #4 big off the bench. Behrens may or may not play because of his damaged knee- he may be a candidate for a medical scholarship- Moute will see very limited playing time because, at this point, he's way, way to small and skinny to playPF and he can't shoot well enough to play SF- Monty says he's a great kid, and, there's something to be said for great kid. When Cobbs returns, Wallace will spell Cobbs. Singer and Mathews will spell Kreklow and Bird.

SFCityBear;842152860 said:

---

If Cobbs has recovered and Kreklow is healthy, Ricky will probably start at the three and eventually start at the two.

---

I agree Kreklow is good enough to start, but with his high energy and ability to play several positions (2, 3, emergency 4) he could be most valuable as a spark off the bench.

helltopay1;842152910 said:

---

The answer is yes. Wallace will start at PG. Kreklow will start at SG. Bird will start at SF. Singer will spell Wallace at PG. Mathews will spell both Kreklow and Bird and Powers will occasionally spell Bird. Johnson and Rooks will battle to see who is the first big off the bench The loser will be the #4 big off the bench. Behrens may or may not play because of his damaged knee- he may be a candidate for a medical scholarship- Moute will see very limited playing time because, at this point, he's way, way to small and skinny to playPF and he can't shoot well enough to play SF- Monty says he's a great kid, and, there's something to be said for great kid. When Cobbs returns, Wallace will spell Cobbs. Singer and Mathews will spell Kreklow and Bird.

---

It is fun for us to speculate on what the depth chart will look like, and who will start and who will get minutes. I did it in my earlier post as well. How much do we know for sure? Let me play devil's advocate: We do know what Cobbs can do, but we don't know if or when he will recover from the foot injury. We do know what Kravish, Solomon and Powers can do, because we have seen them play many games in the PAC12. We have seen Wallace play primarily as a shooting guard. He did OK, and likely will be a decent point guard, but we don't really know for sure until he gets 10-15 games at PG under his belt. Beyond that, the real speculation starts.

I'd say for sure that Jabari can play in the PAC12 offensively with the best of them. However, there will be some very good wings in this league that Jabari will have to guard. If he scores 25 but gives up 20 on defense, that's a problem. Kreklow and Behrens played only a few games last season, and both played injured, so even as much as I like both, who knows how they will do in PAC12? Johnson played out on the wing. He did not play well in games, he got only a handful of minutes. Now he is moving to PF. We have no idea how well he can play PF at this level. Mathews, Singer, and Rooks all look good on paper, except the league Singer played in was not very good competition, apparently. But can they all play at a PAC12 level as freshmen? Do we know if Singer is really better than Galvin? I guess you have written off Moute already, but I'd respectfully suggest that we don't know for sure any more about him to say he won't play, than we know about the other freshmen, except for Jabari, as being able to play at a PAC12 level.

I'm very optimistic a good team will come out of all this, and that Cobbs' foot will be our last serious injury this year. On paper the pieces are here. We now need to see the reality of team play in game competition, to find out what we have got.

:beer:

Honestly, I think people are hilarious how they make judgments about coaches based on image. Monty is kind of an old school guy, so he must not like to play frosh. Even though he has started plenty of frosh in his coaching career. There is always some reason that he had to start a frosh (which usually amounts to the frosh being the best player). The question I would ask is what freshman did Monty not start who should have? I think that is unquestionably zero. On the flip side, he did start a freshman, Franklin, who it turned out was significantly outplayed by Smith once he got a chance. I'd argue that Monty played the guy who was the higher ranked recruit over the guy who was better.

Byrd will start if he's the best player. Wouldn't surprise me (assuming Cobbs is back) if he didn't start the first few games (but played a ton) just to get his feet under him. But I would be shocked if he wasn't starting by conference play.

OaktownBear;842153235 said:

---

Honestly, I think people are hilarious how they make judgments about coaches based on image. Monty is kind of an old school guy, so he must not like to play frosh. Even though he has started plenty of frosh in his coaching career. There is always some reason that he had to start a frosh (which usually amounts to the frosh being the best player). The question I would ask is what freshman did Monty not start who should have? I think that is unquestionably zero. On the flip side, he did start a freshman, Franklin, who it turned out was significantly outplayed by Smith once he got a chance. I'd argue that Monty played the guy who was the higher ranked recruit over the guy who was better.

Byrd will start if he's the best player. Wouldn't surprise me (assuming Cobbs is back) if he didn't start the first few games (but played a ton) just to get his feet under him. But I would be shocked if he wasn't starting by conference play.

---

I totally agree.

The whole speculation about starters and subs and playing time is hilarious, given all the unknowns confronting us armchair coaches.

Fortunately we have a great coach who through practice and incomparable experience will figure all this out and again orchestrate our team so that, I would predict, the whole of the team will exceed the sum of its individual parts.

Go Bears!

SFCityBear;842152954 said:

---

I'd say for sure that Jabari can play in the PAC12 offensively with the best of them. However, there will be some very good wings in this league that Jabari will have to guard. If he scores 25 but gives up 20 on defense, that's a problem.

---

Now, SFCB, if you had written that Jabari scores 20 but surrenders 25, that is a problem.

The other way you have stated it, ain't no problem. If the other 4 positions do as well, we win by 25!

Go Bears!

OaktownBear;842153235 said:

---

Honestly, I think people are hilarious how they make judgments about coaches based on image. Monty is kind of an old school guy, so he must not like to play frosh. Even though he has started plenty of frosh in his coaching career. There is always some reason that he had to start a frosh (which usually amounts to the frosh being the best player). The question I would ask is what freshman did Monty not start who should have? I think that is unquestionably zero. On the flip side, he did start a freshman, Franklin, who it turned out was significantly outplayed by Smith once he got a chance. I'd argue that Monty played the guy who was the higher ranked recruit over the guy who was better.

Byrd will start if he's the best player. Wouldn't surprise me (assuming Cobbs is back) if he didn't start the first few games (but played a ton) just to get his feet under him. But I would be shocked if he wasn't starting by conference play.

---

Monty developed the reputation of not starting freshmen at Stanford. In interviews he was quite open about it. Guys that didn't start as freshmen but I thought might have included Josh Childress and Chris Hernandez (Giovacchini was the starting PG) and that is just on the 2001-2002 team.

However, those were pretty loaded teams. At Cal he has not had that luxury and he has started freshmen. Bird will almost certainly start, especially if Cobbs isn't back right away.

south bender;842153243 said:

---

Now, SFCB, if you had written that Jabari scores 20 but surrenders 25, that is a problem.

The other way you have stated it, ain't no problem. If the other 4 positions do as well, we win by 25!

Go Bears!

---

Mostly agree , SB, except that Bird is supposed to be our superstar.

Bearprof;842153326 said:

---

Mostly agree , SB, except that Bird is supposed to be our superstar.

---

all McD AA have high expectations to contribute from day 1. To help lessen the high expectations each carries (as Bird does), go look at the Pac12 McD AA's that came into league last year.... look at their stat lines....... MPG, PPG, APG, RBP... it takes some time playing against 15 to 18 year olds vs 18 to 22.....(unless your not really 18)

south bender;842153243 said:

---

Now, SFCB, if you had written that Jabari scores 20 but surrenders 25, that is a problem.

The other way you have stated it, ain't no problem. If the other 4 positions do as well, we win by 25!

Go Bears!

---

Southbender,

With all due respect, if Wallace, Kravish, and Solomon are starting as is projected by most fans, those three will be severely challenged to consistently outscore the man they are guarding night after night, and outscore him at all, let alone outscore him by five points. Solomon scored 9 points per game last year, Kravish 8, and Wallace 7. In order to outscore their opponents by 5, they would have to hold them to 4, 3, and 2 points respectively. One of the reasons we went to a zone was that we could not hold opponents down that well. Like last year, the primary scorers will have to make up the deficit of the bigs and Wallace all not scoring a lot, even if the three of them will have improved, which I expect they will.

The good thing about this year is there is plenty of potential from the new guards on campus. Still, you don’t know if they will pick up enough of the system for Monty to trust them in games. Last year, we really needed someone to back up Crabbe. After Kreklow got hurt, it was up to Powers and the freshman Johnson. Johnson never progressed enough to get Monty’s trust. Hopefully he puts it together this year. It is a no-brainer to predict that the five star recruit Jabari will get major minutes and probably start, but the rest of the recruiting class are three star recruits, and it is much less of a given that they will play major minutes.

Injuries could play a big factor. Kreklow, Cobbs and Behrens all rehabbing, and we don’t know if they will be effective. Also, you could very likely see a lot of zone again, if the new players are not skilled enough to play man. Then you don’t have a personal responsibility to outscore your man, because you don’t have one, except on paper in the box score.

:gobears:

SFCityBear;842153538 said:

---

Southbender,

With all due respect, if Wallace, Kravish, and Solomon are starting as is projected by most fans, those three will be severely challenged to consistently outscore the man they are guarding night after night, and outscore him at all, let alone outscore him by five points. Solomon scored 9 points per game last year, Kravish 8, and Wallace 7. In order to outscore their opponents by 5, they would have to hold them to 4, 3, and 2 points respectively. One of the reasons we went to a zone was that we could not hold opponents down that well. Like last year, the primary scorers will have to make up the deficit of the bigs and Wallace all not scoring a lot, even if the three of them will have improved, which I expect they will.

The good thing about this year is there is plenty of potential from the new guards on campus. Still, you don't know if they will pick up enough of the system for Monty to trust them in games. Last year, we really needed someone to back up Crabbe. After Kreklow got hurt, it was up to Powers and the freshman Johnson. Johnson never progressed enough to get Monty's trust. Hopefully he puts it together this year. It is a no-brainer to predict that the five star recruit Jabari will get major minutes and probably start, but the rest of the recruiting class are three star recruits, and it is much less of a given that they will play major minutes.

Injuries could play a big factor. Kreklow, Cobbs and Behrens all rehabbing, and we don't know if they will be effective. Also, you could very likely see a lot of zone again, if the new players are not skilled enough to play man. Then you don't have a personal responsibility to outscore your man, because you don't have one, except on paper in the box score.

:gobears:

---

OK, SFCB. It would be interesting to see if Crabbe out scored his counterpart last year by more than five. Ditto for Cobbs. And so forth.

Of course, we played so much zone down the stretch that it may be impossible to come up with the data.

Go Bears!

south bender;842153636 said:

---

OK, SFCB. It would be interesting to see if Crabbe out scored his counterpart last year by more than five. Ditto for Cobbs. And so forth.

Of course, we played so much zone down the stretch that it may be impossible to come up with the data.

Go Bears!

---

What I was hoping for this year was to have a team that had three scorers on the floor most of the time. We should have that this year. If Monty can add a big in 2014 or 2015, who can also put the ball in the basket, the sky could be the limit for our Bears.

:beer:

If we were Arizona or Monty's Stanfurd teams, we'd maybe have the luxury of bringing in a talent like Bird off the bench. But since we're not, assuming he isn't a complete wreck defensively--which isn't close to being the case, having seen him in HS, he's got to start. Lets not hold back talent, please!!!

I just keep remembering the fact that Smith started over Cobbs at the beginning of 2011 even though everyone knew Cobbs was the better player. My feeling at the time was that, because Smith was a returning starter, Monty wanted to make Cobbs win the starting job via his play in real games. I have no evidence to back that up, except that if that's not the reason then it implies that Monty really thought Smith was the better point guard, and that's hard to believe.

Ricky was going to be a starter before his foot troubles, so it's somewhat reasonable to say that there is a returning starter at every position. Therefore it wouldn't surprise me if Bird is the first man off the bench against Coppin State -- but I would be shocked if he's not starting before conference play.

By the way, five-star freshman Sam Dekker didn't start a single game for Wisconsin last year, and I don't think that's a team that was overflowing with All-Americans at his position. Although I like to think that Monty isn't quite as "old school" as Bo Ryan, who is downright Paleolithic.

I'm not sure starting is all that it is cracked up to be. If our talented freshman, make the right decisions with the basketball and play with a high basketball IQ..they will play significant minutes.

antipattern;842153756 said:

---

I just keep remembering the fact that Smith started over Cobbs at the beginning of 2011 even though everyone knew Cobbs was the better player. My feeling at the time was that, because Smith was a returning starter, Monty wanted to make Cobbs win the starting job via his play in real games. I have no evidence to back that up, except that if that's not the reason then it implies that Monty really thought Smith was the better point guard, and that's hard to believe.

Ricky was going to be a starter before his foot troubles, so it's somewhat reasonable to say that there is a returning starter at every position. Therefore it wouldn't surprise me if Bird is the first man off the bench against Coppin State -- but I would be shocked if he's not starting before conference play.

By the way, five-star freshman Sam Dekker didn't start a single game for Wisconsin last year, and I don't think that's a team that was overflowing with All-Americans at his position. Although I like to think that Monty isn't quite as "old school" as Bo Ryan, who is downright Paleolithic.

---

I disagreed vehemently with Monty on starting Smith over Cobbs. IMO, it slowed down the team's development and even had a very negative effect on Smith, who lost a ton of confidence after his benching.

Wisconsin had veterans with experience on the wings last season. As much as I like them, Kreklow is a guy that has done near nothing thus far in his college career and Wallace put up some poor shooting percentages last season. It's just my opinion, of course, but I don't see any reason to hold Bird back if he shows out in the practices, etc.

tsubamoto2001;842153786 said:

---

I disagreed vehemently with Monty on starting Smith over Cobbs. IMO, it slowed down the team's development and even had a very negative effect on Smith, who lost a ton of confidence after his benching.

Wisconsin had veterans with experience on the wings last season. As much as I like them, Kreklow is a guy that has done near nothing thus far in his college career and Wallace put up some poor shooting percentages last season. It's just my opinion, of course, but I don't see any reason to hold Bird back if he shows out in the practices, etc.

---

As I recall lots of people were upset. I certainly remember thinking it was strange. And you're right that it didn't go very well!

But the question was *will* Bird start, not *should* Bird start. And I'm saying I'm sure he will start eventually, but I'm less certain that he starts his first game.

God, I wish college basketball had a summer league! This conversation is a clear sign that we have nothing useful to talk about :headbang

calumnus;842153324 said:

---

Monty developed the reputation of not starting freshmen at Stanford. In interviews he was quite open about it. Guys that didn't start as freshmen but I thought might have included Josh Childress and Chris Hernandez (Giovacchini was the starting PG) and that is just on the 2001-2002 team.

However, those were pretty loaded teams. At Cal he has not had that luxury and he has started freshmen. Bird will almost certainly start, especially if Cobbs isn't back right away.

---

See, this is the issue with looking at these things after the guys careers are over. You look at a guy like Childress, for example, and say Wow! Monty didn't start him as a freshman? Well, let's look at that.

I'm going to assume you don't think Childress should have started over Casey Jacobson. So I'll assume you think he should have replaced junior Julius Barnes. It's not a one to one comparison because Barnes was really a guard and Childress was more of a 3, so you'd have to move Jacobson to the 2 to make the switch. Barnes stats on the ball handling side are clearly much better than Childress, and Childress was much better rebounding. But Barnes AT THAT POINT was a much better scorer and much more efficient shooter. I don't think looking at the stats you can justify Childress starting unless you wanted to play bigger on the wing. (which may have been a factor because Monty did start Childress over Barnes 6 times).

Their minutes disparity was actually not that great (26/gm vs. 21)

Points:
Barnes - 10.9
Childress 7.8

FG%
Barnes - .417
Childress - .402

3pt
Barnes - 46-136/.338
Chilress - 22-80/.275

FT
Barnes - 81%
Childress - 69%

Assists:
Barnes 87
Childress 24

Turnovers:
Barnes 52
Childress 35

Rebounds:
Barnes 2.3
Childress 4.8