The combo of bird, kreklow and matthews have contributed almost nothing. We're basically playing 4v5 out there. I'd give Monty coach of the year if he can get is into the NCAA tourney.

glorybear;842292140 said:

---

The combo of bird, kreklow and matthews have contributed almost nothing. We're basically playing 4v5 out there. I'd give Monty coach of the year if he can get is into the NCAA tourney.

---

I think Bird and Mathews are more 2s. Kreklow has really not done much overall. Ty is a 3 and has good spurts. But he's not played well lately.

All year????
I guess Mathews' 32 against Oregon didn't count, or his 22 against UCLA. Or Kreklow's defense against Arizona. Or Bird averaging double figures before his injury. I agree they have been awful today, but have a little perspective

UrsaMajor;842292172 said:

---

All year????
I guess Mathews' 32 against Oregon didn't count, or his 22 against UCLA. Or Kreklow's defense against Arizona. Or Bird averaging double figures before his injury. I agree they have been awful today, but have a little perspective

---

To be fair, I think those two performances by Mathews were exceptions rather than the rule. He'll be good, but is wildly inconsistent. Bird needs to drain some treys in the 2nd half! Kreklow plays good defense at times, but his outside shot is pretty non-existent. 20 minutes to get good, folks.

OP said, "nothing all year."
Mathews has scored 16 or more 5 times this year; he's averaging nearly 9 points a game, 38% from 3 and 76% from the line. Of course, he's been wildly inconsistent (he's a freshman), but to say that he's done "nothing all year" is rampant b*llsh*t.

UrsaMajor;842292172 said:

---

All year????
I guess Mathews' 32 against Oregon didn't count, or his 22 against UCLA. Or Kreklow's defense against Arizona. Or Bird averaging double figures before his injury. I agree they have been awful today, but have a little perspective

---

Basketball isn't all about gross stats. It's also about who can you count on day in day out. Matthews had a big game vs. Oregon as a complete unknown. I doubt they even game planned for him. Bird doing well against scrub teams means nothing. All he did was wake wide open threes. He still hasn't shown any creativity or instincts on offense or defense. Kreklow vs. Arizona was impressive I guess? I thought Wallace and cobbs holding Johnson to 1 for 12 was more crucial. With solo and dk holding their bigs

UrsaMajor;842292194 said:

---

OP said, "nothing all year."
Mathews has scored 16 or more 5 times this year; he's averaging nearly 9 points a game, 38% from 3 and 76% from the line. Of course, he's been wildly inconsistent (he's a freshman), but to say that he's done "nothing all year" is rampant b*llsh*t.

---

You left out 39% fg and when he completely disappears from games and doesn't guard his man. Take out the 32 outlier against Oregon and you have a pretty low average

Take away the 32 and his average goes down 1 point.

Which is a lot. His fg % drops to 36.7%. Allen iverson territory.

Are you saying Allen Iverson couldn't play basketball? I'd be thrilled if we had someone that good.

glorybear;842292140 said:

---

The combo of bird, kreklow and matthews have contributed almost nothing. We're basically playing 4v5 out there. I'd give Monty coach of the year if he can get is into the NCAA tourney.

---

We missed Crabbe even more than I thought we would.

However, remember that Bird and Kreklow both were injured this year and it may have impacted their games since.

Cobbs, Wallace, Bird are more effective going to the rim and Mathews and Kreklow, arguably our best 3 point shooters, have been inconsistent. Might it have been different if Kreklow and Bird hadn't had the mid-year injuries? This team just never really came together as many of us expected it would. Strangely passive first half today. I'd feel better about the NIT if I were confident they'd show up.

59bear;842292383 said:

---

Cobbs, Wallace, Bird are more effective going to the rim and Mathews and Kreklow, arguably our best 3 point shooters, have been inconsistent. Might it have been different if Kreklow and Bird hadn't had the mid-year injuries? This team just never really came together as many of us expected it would. Strangely passive first half today. I'd feel better about the NIT if I were confident they'd show up.

---

Not really Bird unless he is in the open court. Bird has no half-court inside game, which was kind of shocking for all his accolades. He did well early on because he was hitting his 3 balls. But that's really all he was doing -- which is great, but one dimensional. So when he's not doing that, there wasn't much else.

UrsaMajor;842292355 said:

---

Are you saying Allen Iverson couldn't play basketball? I'd be thrilled if we had someone that good.

---

Ya, let's see how many games we win next year with any player shooting 30 times a game at 36.7%

Bird and Kreklow both had fairly significant injuries that threw their season off and also disturbed chemistry. Bird's injuries really threw off his progress and development. Matthews didn't get enough PT. He seems like the kind of kid who has to play a lot of minutes but is also streaky.

Our problem this year was finding a reliable 3rd scorer night in and night out. A team with two scorers is a shut down defender away from a loss. We can look at individual performances all year, but over the season where we came up short was when we had to rely on one guy.

glorybear;842292417 said:

---

Ya, let's see how many games we win next year with any player shooting 30 times a game at 36.7%

---

Mathews' 36.7% from 3 is pretty good. Better than Crabbe's 34.8% last year to win Pac-12 POY. Only Powers' 53.3%(!) is better. 36.7% from 3 is the equivalent of 55% from 2, which is good for a big man (Solomon is 54.3% and Kravish is 53.3%).

If you shoot 30 times from 3 at 36.7% you score 33 points. I would be happy with that next year.

calumnus;842292427 said:

---

Mathews' 36.7% from 3 is pretty good. Better than Crabbe's 34.8% last year to win Pac-12 POY. Only Powers' 53.3% is better.

If you shoot 30 times from 3 at 36.7% you score 33 points.

---

And we lose by 10-15.

Dear OP:
I have never missed Allen Crabbe less than I do right now!

calumnus;842292427 said:

---

Mathews' 36.7% from 3 is pretty good. Better than Crabbe's 34.8% last year to win Pac-12 POY. Only Powers' 53.3% is better.

If you shoot 30 times from 3 at 36.7% you score 33 points.

---

That's his 2 point % minus the Oregon outlier. I'm not questioning Jordan's production at all. He wasn't even supposed to be a key player. Bird playing like a walk on I think surprised even Monty. Our production at the "3" was awful. I think the expectation was for bird to score especially with Ty being more of a defender/slasher/point. I wouldn't be so critical of what seems to be a good kid. But his lack of hustle, lack of instincts is really confusing.

Three point shooting is a real concern. Unless you are a dominant defensive and rebounding team(Arizona) you need to threaten your opponent with some 3 point shooters. Mathews who is a sub was the best 3 point shooter. As the season went on, it became apparent that teams dared Wallace, Bird , Kreklow and even Cobbs to shoot 3 's.

That must change next year or the team will struggle to score. There is no ready replacement for Soloman or Cobbs. Although Rorie and Singer may be decent PG it is doubtful they can duplicate Cobbs scoring and toughness and Singer has shown he is a very poor FT shooter. Wallace, Bird, Kreklow and Mathews all need to pickup their perimeter shooting. All need to get into the high 30% area and the number of attempts will need to increase. They will not have enough inside to offset poor perimeter shooting.

concordtom;842292430 said:

---

Dear OP:
I have never missed Allen Crabbe less than I do right now!

---

And the Big Guy who left with him.

:wave

Bobodeluxe;842292456 said:

---

And the Big Guy who left with him.

:wave

---

Oh yeah.
Mr. Dunk, Dunk, Dunk, Dunk, Dunk, Dunk.

CALiforniALUM is right, we never found a dependable third scorer and I am not sure how much we can blame Monty for basically Bird and Kreklow turning in major disappointing seasons. Yes, both were injured, but Kreklow averaged just 6 points per game while Bird was sixth in the team in scoring and wasn't even named to the All-Freshman Team. We all know Wallace is inconsistent and he proved that today with his scoring surge but 4 missed FTs and 3 TOs but who would have thunk in Game 32, Bird wouldn't score.

Colorado didn't do anything special. I think the Buffaloes played better in the OT loss on Saturday. Johnson and Scott combined for 21 points, Booker scored 17 but wasn't dynamic in the second half but the key was Talton hitting three 3-pointers. We never had a dependable 3-point shooter and our lack of depth because of poor recruiting is getting old. The only way we're a tournament team next is if Bird absolutely takes off and becomes what he was supposed to be while our PG recruit along with Singer can lead the offense.

It's hard to watch every team we play seem to have more talented players and depth than we do. Behrens, Rooks and Moute aren't Pac-12 caliber players, is that suddenly going to change next season?

gwashburn14;842292531 said:

---

CALiforniALUM is right, we never found a dependable third scorer and I am not sure how much we can blame Monty for basically Bird and Kreklow turning in major disappointing seasons. Yes, both were injured, but Kreklow averaged just 6 points per game while Bird was sixth in the team in scoring and wasn't even named to the All-Freshman Team. We all know Wallace is inconsistent and he proved that today with his scoring surge but 4 missed FTs and 3 TOs but who would have thunk in Game 32, Bird wouldn't score.

Colorado didn't do anything special. I think the Buffaloes played better in the OT loss on Saturday. Johnson and Scott combined for 21 points, Booker scored 17 but wasn't dynamic in the second half but the key was Talton hitting three 3-pointers. We never had a dependable 3-point shooter and our lack of depth because of poor recruiting is getting old. The only way we're a tournament team next is if Bird absolutely takes off and becomes what he was supposed to be while our PG recruit along with Singer can lead the offense.

It's hard to watch every team we play seem to have more talented players and depth than we do. Behrens, Rooks and Moute aren't Pac-12 caliber players, is that suddenly going to change next season?

---

You post to harsh our mellows, dude?

:gobears:

gwashburn14;842292531 said:

---

CALiforniALUM is right, we never found a dependable third scorer and I am not sure how much we can blame Monty for basically Bird and Kreklow turning in major disappointing seasons. Yes, both were injured, but Kreklow averaged just 6 points per game while Bird was sixth in the team in scoring and wasn't even named to the All-Freshman Team. We all know Wallace is inconsistent and he proved that today with his scoring surge but 4 missed FTs and 3 TOs but who would have thunk in Game 32, Bird wouldn't score.

Colorado didn't do anything special. I think the Buffaloes played better in the OT loss on Saturday. Johnson and Scott combined for 21 points, Booker scored 17 but wasn't dynamic in the second half but the key was Talton hitting three 3-pointers. We never had a dependable 3-point shooter and our lack of depth because of poor recruiting is getting old. The only way we're a tournament team next is if Bird absolutely takes off and becomes what he was supposed to be while our PG recruit along with Singer can lead the offense.

It's hard to watch every team we play seem to have more talented players and depth than we do. Behrens, Rooks and Moute aren't Pac-12 caliber players, is that suddenly going to change next season?

---

+1. It is really in the number 7-10 guys on the roster where we move from being in the upper tier of Pac -12 programs to being on Wazzu level. It probably also hurts practice - the Frosh don't HAVE to run out to defend the three as much cause we don't have guys who HIT the three....and Bird and Mathews probably drain em cause they don't have guys closing out.

Oh well, Giants start playing in a couple of weeks. Hopefully Pagan stays healthy.

I agree that the production wasn't what we hoped for, but Mathews was a solid contributor off the bench as a freshman, Kreklow shot 35% from 3 which isn't bad, and I challenge your characterization of Bird. After his injury he wasn't the same player, but I won't say that he lacked hustle, just that he was lost (and he did say finally that the ankle was still bothering him). Also when you dismissed his performance before the injury as being against "stiffs," are you including Arkansas (15 points) and Syracuse (17 points before his injury)? In what universe is Syracuse a low-level stiff?

UrsaMajor;842292696 said:

---

I agree that the production wasn't what we hoped for, but Mathews was a solid contributor off the bench as a freshman, Kreklow shot 35% from 3 which isn't bad, and I challenge your characterization of Bird. After his injury he wasn't the same player, but I won't say that he lacked hustle, just that he was lost (and he did say finally that the ankle was still bothering him). Also when you dismissed his performance before the injury as being against "stiffs," are you including Arkansas (15 points) and Syracuse (17 points before his injury)? In what universe is Syracuse a low-level stiff?

---

There was talk about how Bird's injury was a nagging one, that he wasn't 100% after it. For a high flying type of kid use to doing anything without much thought, that would be a big issue. Monty also mentioned the injury really threw off his development, that he was thinking Bird would make the needed adjustments to excel in conference but the injury prevented that.

Any way, I hope he gets it back, and maybe, just maybe he lights it up and becomes the player everyone imagined, takes over the team and averages 20 ppg and ripping off 3s. I sure hope so.

UrsaMajor;842292696 said:

---

I agree that the production wasn't what we hoped for, but Mathews was a solid contributor off the bench as a freshman, Kreklow shot 35% from 3 which isn't bad, and I challenge your characterization of Bird. After his injury he wasn't the same player, but I won't say that he lacked hustle, just that he was lost (and he did say finally that the ankle was still bothering him). Also when you dismissed his performance before the injury as being against "stiffs," are you including Arkansas (15 points) and Syracuse (17 points before his injury)? In what universe is Syracuse a low-level stiff?

---

Again, you've got to get past gross numbers. Did you watch the Syracuse game? Fair was absolutely lighting bird up. I knew from that game bird didn't have elite athleticism. His +/- couldn't have been very good. Arkansas game was good I guess? Matthews was productive? Kinda? To me I have a higher standard of what's productive. Disappearing for the majority of games doesn't cut it. Bird being injured as an excuse is one thing but not fighting through screens, losing your man for open threes every game, not setting screens, not rebounding (running out to cherry pick), etc. is another. My premise still holds: our "3" spot did virtually nothing all year. I'll make it clearer: as relative to not just gross stats but also to +/-, relative to other "3"s in the PAC and as relative to winning ball games

glorybear;842292713 said:

---

Again, you've got to get past gross numbers. Did you watch the Syracuse game? Fair was absolutely lighting bird up. I knew from that game bird didn't have elite athleticism. His +/- couldn't have been very good. Arkansas game was good I guess? Matthews was productive? Kinda? To me I have a higher standard of what's productive. Disappearing for the majority of games doesn't cut it. Bird being injured as an excuse is one thing but not fighting through screens, losing your man for open threes every game, not setting screens, not rebounding (running out to cherry pick), etc. is another. My premise still holds: our "3" spot did virtually nothing all year. I'll make it clearer: as relative to not just gross stats but also to +/-, relative to other "3"s in the PAC and as relative to winning ball games

---

I'll pre-empt you're citing fairs 5-17. Watch the game. Look what fair did to bird multiple times. Lol

I think we are being a little too critical of Mathews and Bird. These kids are freshmen, after all, and they don't get a lot of playing time, compared to say, the minutes Allen Crabbe played as a freshman. Crabbe averaged 34 minutes a game that first year. If you will remember, he too was struggling to learn both the offense and the defense, and his shooting went into a few mini slumps during that season. There were games where he could not buy a bucket. But Crabbe was starting and playing big minutes, because Cal had no other option.

This year, Mathews and Bird average only about 19 minutes a game apiece. Most shooters need to be on the floor to get into a rhythm and begin making shots. There are some players who are better at coming off the bench, but these two may not be like that. Mathews had only 3 games all year, Oregon, and the UCLA and USC games in LA, where he played as many minutes in a game as freshman Crabbe AVERAGED every game. Bird had only two games, Arkansas and Syracuse, where he hadas many minutes as freshman Crabbe AVERAGED every game. And many of Bird's games with very low minutes came when he was returning from his injured ankle.

Montgomery has been in a quandary. The team has had lots of trouble scoring at times, and the first substitutes at wing and guard are Mathews and Bird, who are good shooters, but poor defenders. He has to decide whether to put one of these kids in for offense, and hope they don't give up too much on defense. If they miss their first couple of shots, then Cal starts losing ground because of their defense and inability to score, so he has to pull them off the floor. They seldom get enough time to warm up in the game and get in a shooting rhythm. I think you will see one or both starting next season, and with them playing most of the minutes, you are likely to see better shooting percentages and more consistency from both of them. Not to mention that their defense will be better. It already has improved over this season.

:Monty

Thanks for a little perspective, SFCB. They can improve a LOT in the next 3 years, and I bet they will.

Bearprof;842292821 said:

---

Thanks for a little perspective, SFCB. They can improve a LOT in the next 3 years, and I bet they will.

---

I relish the year they are seniors. I hope they have a good supporting cast to go with them.

glorybear;842292417 said:

---

Ya, let's see how many games we win next year with any player shooting 30 times a game at 36.7%

---

I would think that all of our freshman will have nice positive growth and improvement. They usually do. Your post is pretty negative.

Bearprof;842292821 said:

---

Thanks for a little perspective, SFCB. They can improve a LOT in the next 3 years, and I bet they will.

---

Yes, they will improve a lot over the next 3 years and should be great as seniors in the 2016-2017 season. Next year could be rough though. We will really be relying on them as they develop their games. Even our few upperclassmen (two of which have been greatly hampered by injury) have a lot of room for growth. Kravish being the one guy who is already playing like the upperclassman that he is.