so many things to love about this game...

seniors get it done!
Solo was very active on defense and a beast offensively and rebounding. Another double-double

Justin was clutch, and played fast and loose. Really looked like he was having fun out there as he was shooting, dishing, driving and defending

Wallace burned them with his shooting. Awesome game.

Behrens played a lot of minutes and played good defense and grabbed four boards. Good for him!

Powers followed up on his breakout game with a solid performance. When he plays within himself and the team plays zone he is effective.

freshmen looked like freshmen today

Nastic is a thug. Why does stanford always have at least one thug on their team every year?

Love the Cal fans hijacking stanford's cheers

Grant Verhoeven who choose stanford over Cal hardly plays, although I guess he will play more next year as a junior since 3 of their bigs graduate

dawkins always looks like a deer in the headlights when things start going south

wsu is truly a bad team, utah looks like they are for real, and osu is the other (with stanford) underperforming team based on their roster

“That’s what a team is about,” Cobbs said. “Guys who aren’t used to playing many minutes came in and contributed in a positive way. That’s what makes a team.”

It's always sweet beating stanford, and this one at maples too

HoopDreams;842254617 said:

---

so many things to love about this game...

seniors get it done!
Solo was very active on defense and a beast offensively and rebounding. Another double-double

Justin was clutch, and played fast and loose. Really looked like he was having fun out there as he was shooting, dishing, driving and defending

Wallace burned them with his shooting. Awesome game.

Behrens played a lot of minutes and played good defense and grabbed four boards. Good for him!

Powers followed up on his breakout game with a solid performance. When he plays within himself and the team plays zone he is effective.

freshmen looked like freshmen today

Nastic is a thug. Why does stanford always have at least one thug on their team every year?

Love the Cal fans hijacking stanford's cheers

Grant Verhoeven who choose stanford over Cal hardly plays, although I guess he will play more next year as a junior since 3 of their bigs graduate

dawkins always looks like a deer in the headlights when things start going south

wsu is truly a bad team, utah looks like they are for real, and osu is the other (with stanford) underperforming team based on their roster

"That's what a team is about," Cobbs said. "Guys who aren't used to playing many minutes came in and contributed in a positive way. That's what makes a team."

It's always sweet beating stanford, and this one at maples too

---

Huge win considering all the foul trouble and injuries

RealScouting;842254618 said:

---

Huge win considering all the foul trouble and injuries

---

That's what I'm thinking. After the injuries and the poor showing @ Creighton, I didn't think we stood much of a chance. Never been happier to have the team prove me wrong.

Great job, Bears!

Great win! I have to say I was not optimistic. And after Stanford's 7 pt possession I feared it was slipping away. But we were the better team tonight. I think Wallace deserves a huge amount of love. I wanted to hug him during his scoring spurts. Guy really stepped up. And Solo was making his free throws. Win feels really good.

Bearprof;842254634 said:

---

Great win! I have to say I was not optimistic. And after Stanford's 7 pt possession I feared it was slipping away. But we were the better team tonight. I think Wallace deserves a huge amount of love. I wanted to hug him during his scoring spurts. Guy really stepped up. And Solo was making his free throws. Win feels really good.

---

Ty kept us in the game early. Solo is a beast, and will be hard to stop. Powers just needs to hit open jumpers. Singer can beat people off the dribble -- he's already big so once he really gets strong, watch out. Mathews is still figuring out his game. Nice contribution by Behrens. Monty will have to figure out well placed minutes from Rooks, as he may struggle in Pac-12 play. Kravish is always solid but shouldn't take 20 footers unless he has it totally faced up. Cobbs - well, this is his team. Way to take ownership. Thank you Monty for giving us some good times.

Definitely a win we needed to have. Strange opening round: Oregon struggles @Utah; WSU scores like it was the 1930s; UW surprises ASU.

59bear;842254753 said:

---

Definitely a win we needed to have. Strange opening round: Oregon struggles @Utah; WSU scores like it was the 1930s; UW surprises ASU.

---

I think biggest surprise was the UW game @Tempe. Utah is much improved and will win a lot of games, esp. at home. They were virtually guaranteed either a last second win in OT or a 2nd OT, but they botched it.

a great and unexpected win.
I think stanfurd sort of gift-wrapped this one for us, by missing free throws and taking quick shots. Monty's team was better focused and playing harder.

our bigs outplayed theirs, and managed their fouls a bit better at the end.

i was really surprised to see Powell foul out on a weak reach -- which he definitely comitted.

I'm really pleased that RSolo outplayed Powell -- 14 & 13, great game Richard!

http://www.calbears.com/mediaPortal/player.dbml?id=3149699&db_oem_id=30100

Wallace was really feeling it!

Great win for sure. What made it even more impressive for me was after listening to Montgomery on the pre-game radio show, where he said Wallace had been sick for a day and a half, and Cobbs was sick, we saw a game where both of them came out and had perhaps their best performances of the season.

Montgomery also said prior to the game, Galvin was sick or out, along with Cobbs, Wallace, Kreklow and Bird so he had trouble finding 10 healthy players to have a scrimmage. He said he had John Montgomery suit up to scrimmage, and he said John held his own out there in the scrimmage, "which was kinda scary".

This was a big win for a team that was struggling, but we need to remember that if Stanford makes a couple more threes, and a couple more free throws, they maybe win this game. We must not overlook them when they come to Berkeley. They still have a good starting five.

:gobears:

SFCityBear;842255547 said:

---

Montgomery also said prior to the game, Galvin was sick or out, along with Cobbs, Wallace, Kreklow and Bird so he had trouble finding 10 healthy players to have a scrimmage. He said he had John Montgomery suit up to scrimmage, and he said John held his own out there in the scrimmage, "which was kinda scary".

---

What about Theo?!

SFCityBear;842255547 said:

---

Montgomery also said prior to the game, Galvin was sick or out, along with Cobbs, Wallace, Kreklow and Bird so he had trouble finding 10 healthy players to have a scrimmage. He said he had John Montgomery suit up to scrimmage, and he said John held his own out there in the scrimmage, "which was kinda scary".

---

Why? Montgomery played D1 ball at Loyola Marymount.

SFCityBear;842255547 said:

---

we need to remember that if Stanford makes a couple more threes, and a couple more free throws, they maybe win this game.

---

The same could be said for just about every close basketball game ever played. If Cal made a couple more threes and a couple more free throws the game wouldn't have been close.

Civil Bear;842255674 said:

---

The same could be said for just about every close basketball game ever played. If Cal made a couple more threes and a couple more free throws the game wouldn't have been close.

---

It did seem that Stanford missed a lot of open 3s. I didn't look at percentages, but it seemed that way, and I had heard they were a good 3 pt shooting team. So perhaps they underperformed.

Bearprof;842255780 said:

---

It did seem that Stanford missed a lot of open 3s. I didn't look at percentages, but it seemed that way, and I had heard they were a good 3 pt shooting team. So perhaps they underperformed.

---

All teams underperform and never play to their true potentials. Even perennial powerhouses like Duke, Kansas, Arizona, Syracuse, etc. cause their fans to tear their hair out because of stupid decisions and bad play. They just have more room for error because of their superior athletes and coaches. We are lucky that Monty has Cal consistently playing closer to its potential than most other teams. :Monty

Bearprof;842255780 said:

---

It did seem that Stanford missed a lot of open 3s. I didn't look at percentages, but it seemed that way, and I had heard they were a good 3 pt shooting team. So perhaps they underperformed.

---

I would think Cal closing out aggressively on the 3 point shooters could have had something to do with it.

Civil Bear;842255812 said:

---

I would think Cal closing out aggressively on the 3 point shooters could have had something to do with it.

---

My impression was that we made it harder on most 3-point attempts than we did in our games with Stanford last year. And on the few occasions when we didn't, Stanford shot quite well.

Our defense appears to be improving.

Go Bears!

south bender;842255839 said:

---

My impression was that we made it harder on most 3-point attempts than we did in our games with Stanford last year. And on the few occasions when we didn't, Stanford shot quite well.

Our defense appears to be improving.

Go Bears!

---

agree with both of you. but I did have the feeling they were missing open threes a lot too.

jyamada;842255567 said:

---

Why? Montgomery played D1 ball at Loyola Marymount.

---

You'll have to ask Coach Montgomery. He is the one who said that about his son.

:beer:

Civil Bear;842255674 said:

---

The same could be said for just about every close basketball game ever played. If Cal made a couple more threes and a couple more free throws the game wouldn't have been close.

---

Yes, but if you had checked the box score vs the overall season statistics, you would have found that Stanford shot WELL BELOW their season average for three pointers, shooting 29% vs 38% for the season. And you would also have found that Stanford shot a PITIFUL 50% from the free throw line, vs 69% for the season for them.

And you would have found that Cal shot a whopping 46% on three pointers vs 33% for the season so far. Cal's FT shooting was 72%, vs 69% for the season, slightly higher than they normally shoot.

Stanford's 3-point and FT shooting was way below their season average, while Cal's 3-point shooting was way above their season percentage. Stanford missed a lot of wide open looks, including FTs, and Cal didn't miss many. So which one do you think is more likely, that Stanford is likely to shoot better next time out, or Cal is likely to shoot even better than they did in this game, which was already far better than they shoot on average?

SFCityBear;842255898 said:

---

You'll have to ask Coach Montgomery. He is the one who said that about his son.

:beer:

---

My bad......I thought you added the "kinda of scary" part!

jyamada;842255908 said:

---

My bad......I thought you added the "kinda of scary" part!

---

No problem. I wish they could transcribe or post these interviews online, because Montgomery comes out with all sorts of interesting comments.

True, but you are assuming that shooting percentages have NOTHING to do with defense. Of course, the FT shooting was down, and that isn't dependent on the defense, but what makes you think that Cal's defense wasn't what caused the drop in 'furd shooting? Or do you think that Stanfurd should be able to make the same percentage of shots regardless of the defense.

One minor nit: given the small sample size, 72% isn't really higher than 69%; it amounts to less than 1 made FT.

Couldn't say enough good things about cal crowds @ Maples. Thought we were playing at home :cheer

SFCityBear;842255906 said:

---

Yes, but if you had checked the box score vs the overall season statistics, you would have found that Stanford shot WELL BELOW their season average for three pointers, shooting 29% vs 38% for the season. And you would also have found that Stanford shot a PITIFUL 50% from the free throw line, vs 69% for the season for them.

And you would have found that Cal shot a whopping 46% on three pointers vs 33% for the season so far. Cal’s FT shooting was 72%, vs 69% for the season, slightly higher than they normally shoot.

---

I didn't need to check the box scores to know that the 'furds didn't shoot well and that Cal shot better than normal from three. However I also understand that teams don't always duplicate their averages every game. I also understand that with such small sample sizes per game that what appears to be BIG DIFFERENCES are really NOT THAT BIG. For instance if the 'furds shot and made just 2 more threes they would have matched their season average for attempts and makes.

So to your original point: The 'furds are capable of shooting better, so we shouldn't just assume Cal will win next time? Okay, got it.

After being dogged on this board for the form and efficacy of his perimeter jumper, Wallace timely and accurate (4-7) outside jumper was a key contribution to the Bear win over the furd at Maples. Tyrone's performance against the "tough to defeat at Maples" furd should bolster his confidence and make him even more dangerous through the conference season. Good to see.

puget sound cal fan;842256014 said:

---

After being dogged on this board for the form and efficacy of his perimeter jumper, Wallace timely and accurate (4-7) outside jumper was a key contribution to the Bear win over the furd at Maples. Tyrone's performance against the "tough to defeat at Maples" furd should bolster his confidence and make him even more dangerous through the conference season. Good to see.

---

You can't take anything away from Cobbs, a senior leader, who is the man on this team. Nor can you take anything away form Solo, who has done everything asked of him to help this team, and at the same time himself, and has done so. But Tyrone Wallace is my favorite player on this team. Even headed, even handed he just goes about business. No up and down stuff (excepting his shooting earlier on) with his ball handling, or many of his choices as he matures, I just love this guy. He IS CAL. Game, game face, demeanor, he is our guy. Hope we have two more years here, but not so sure.

puget sound cal fan;842256014 said:

---

After being dogged on this board for the form and efficacy of his perimeter jumper, Wallace timely and accurate (4-7) outside jumper was a key contribution to the Bear win over the furd at Maples. Tyrone's performance against the "tough to defeat at Maples" furd should bolster his confidence and make him even more dangerous through the conference season. Good to see.

---

Maybe Tyrone read SFCity's 20 posts on how he can't shoot.

Ty's defense in the Stanford game was critical to our win. He closed out on many potential 3-point shots, actually deterring the shooter from even trying to launch his shot. He was not perfect, but he was better as the game wore on. He also had four steals.

His shooting is still a bit up and down, but his defense and rebounding are almost always really good.

Go Bears!

puget sound cal fan;842256014 said:

---

After being dogged on this board for the form and efficacy of his perimeter jumper, Wallace timely and accurate (4-7) outside jumper was a key contribution to the Bear win over the furd at Maples. Tyrone's performance against the "tough to defeat at Maples" furd should bolster his confidence and make him even more dangerous through the conference season. Good to see.

---

An interesting question: One of the reasons for his successful 3s-shooting game is that his past failures from 3s lulled the opposition into trying, almost, to bait him into taking them by giving him a lot of really open shots. So, the assumption is that this will no longer happen, in which case, three things: (1) It will be harder for him to make 3s (because they'll be more contested and it won't be so easy in front to get him a pass in good shooting position); (2) That could make it easier for him to drive - although I (just) don't know whether he has that killer first step or cross-over dribble to start a drive from a dead stop (or similar); (3) That could (and I would feel surer about this) increase the possibilities for all the other guys to get open - he's definitely a pretty good (if not better than pretty good) passer.

mikecohen;842256106 said:

---

An interesting question: One of the reasons for his successful 3s-shooting game is that his past failures from 3s lulled the opposition into trying, almost, to bait him into taking them by giving him a lot of really open shots. So, the assumption is that this will no longer happen, in which case, three things: (1) It will be harder for him to make 3s (because they'll be more contested and it won't be so easy in front to get him a pass in good shooting position); (2) That could make it easier for him to drive - although I (just) don't know whether he has that killer first step or cross-over dribble to start a drive from a dead stop (or similar); (3) That could (and I would feel surer about this) increase the possibilities for all the other guys to get open - he's definitely a pretty good (if not better than pretty good) passer.

---

A part of his game that is a work in progress is Ty's passing while making a foray to the basket, really anywhere off the dribble. Being a team player, I would bet on his figuring this out. He is only halfway into his 2nd year.

Go Bears!

SFCityBear;842255906 said:

---

Yes, but if you had checked the box score vs the overall season statistics, you would have found that Stanford shot WELL BELOW their season average for three pointers, shooting 29% vs 38% for the season. And you would also have found that Stanford shot a PITIFUL 50% from the free throw line, vs 69% for the season for them.

And you would have found that Cal shot a whopping 46% on three pointers vs 33% for the season so far. Cal's FT shooting was 72%, vs 69% for the season, slightly higher than they normally shoot.

Stanford's 3-point and FT shooting was way below their season average, while Cal's 3-point shooting was way above their season percentage. Stanford missed a lot of wide open looks, including FTs, and Cal didn't miss many. So which one do you think is more likely, that Stanford is likely to shoot better next time out, or Cal is likely to shoot even better than they did in this game, which was already far better than they shoot on average?

---

So, basically, Cal played better than Stanford and might not next game.

Cal defended the three better than in the past and some of the more open shots were not open for their best shooters. Randle generally had someone on him. Brown was 2-5, close to his season average. John Gage wasn't a factor, though as I recall he killed us in one game last year. They shot 14 three-pointers for the game while their average before that game was about 18, which indicates they weren't getting a lot of open looks out there.

Two other points. Stanford fattened up their three point stats against the bad teams they played. Against the better teams they haven't shot that well. I suspect it's got a lot to do with better teams handling their big men inside without doubling, but that's a guess. The second point is that it would be interesting to see a shot chart of where their open shots were and whether that was a spot the shooter likes or not. Part of defending the three is knowing where not to let it occur and where the percentages are better for you.

SFBearz;842256044 said:

---

Maybe Tyrone read SFCity's 20 posts on how he can't shoot.

---

I hope with all my heart that I am dead wrong about Tyrone Wallace's shooting technique and that he shoots lights out the rest of the season and his career.

:gobears:

SFCityBear;842257354 said:

---

I hope with all my heart that I am dead wrong about Tyrone Wallace's shooting technique and that he shoots lights out the rest of the season and his career.

:gobears:

---

Don't you think it has improved?

I am not claiming his form has gotten to where he or we want it to be, but it looks better to me than I remember it from last year.

Go Bears!

south bender;842258135 said:

---

Don't you think it has improved?

I am not claiming his form has gotten to where he or we want it to be, but it looks better to me than I remember it from last year.

Go Bears!

---

Night and day. Not just his form (which is obvious), but it is born out in the statistics, Wallace currently leads the team in 3 pointers made with 19. He made only 22 all of last year.

As for percentages, for our returning Guards/Wings:

[U]Last Year This Year Change[/U]
Wallace .224 .339 +115
Kreklow .233 .389 +156
Cobbs .325 .211 -114
Powers .375 .538 +163

The improvement in the shooting of Wallace and Kreklow has been a key. Hopefully Cobbs (and Mathews) comes around and we get Ricky (and Jabari) back soon. When I said Powers was our best returning 3 point shooter, some took great exception, but I think that has born out this year.

This team is potentially very dangerous from 3, which should open things up nicely for Solomon and Kravish inside. I am confident that this team's best basketball is ahead of it.