Up tempo, guard oriented, pressing, running, liberty to create offensively. This requires depth because guys get tired, which means that recruits know they are going to get PT. There are lots of smaller sized players that can surprise, fewer big guys - and they end up going to *other* schools.

Our current roster is situated for this, so why not find a coach for RIGHT NOW and then hope he recruits and coaches x-o's well enough down the road. Unless you get a long term brand name like Mark Few, any other guy is going to be a crap shoot.

I have long said that I think run and gun attracts recruits anyways. They all want to go to the NBA and they don't believe they can get there unless they are scoring 20 ppg. So, let them showcase themselves, even if we do lose a few games b/c a smart guy like Monty wasn't there to save them from themselves. They'd at least be having fun, rather than gloomy controlled ball. Fun, positive vibes, translates into success more often than not.

Up-tempo would at least create highlights and have the potential to put fannies in the seats.

40 minutes of hell. Now, Mike Anderson's failure to get the ball low vs. Kravish was stupid, so, he's out. But I like the coaching style otherwise. Just get a different guy.

concordtom;842300826 said:

---

Up tempo, guard oriented, pressing, running, liberty to create offensively. This requires depth because guys get tired, which means that recruits know they are going to get PT. There are lots of smaller sized players that can surprise, fewer big guys - and they end up going to *other* schools.

Our current roster is situated for this, so why not find a coach for RIGHT NOW and then hope he recruits and coaches x-o's well enough down the road. Unless you get a long term brand name like Mark Few, any other guy is going to be a crap shoot.

I have long said that I think run and gun attracts recruits anyways. They all want to go to the NBA and they don't believe they can get there unless they are scoring 20 ppg. So, let them showcase themselves, even if we do lose a few games b/c a smart guy like Monty wasn't there to save them from themselves. They'd at least be having fun, rather than gloomy controlled ball. Fun, positive vibes, translates into success more often than not.

Up-tempo would at least create highlights and have the potential to put fannies in the seats.

40 minutes of hell. Now, Mike Anderson's failure to get the ball low vs. Kravish was stupid, so, he's out. But I like the coaching style otherwise. Just get a different guy.

---

Ditto. One of the myriad of reasons to like a guy like Shaka is that he plays that style of BB.

HOWEVER (to argue the don't side), it also is the cast that the Pac-12 often has several good Point guards and if you don't get the turnover you suddenly are looking at easy fast break points the other way.

concordtom;842300826 said:

---

Up tempo, guard oriented, pressing, running, liberty to create offensively. This requires depth because guys get tired, which means that recruits know they are going to get PT. There are lots of smaller sized players that can surprise, fewer big guys - and they end up going to *other* schools.

Our current roster is situated for this, so why not find a coach for RIGHT NOW and then hope he recruits and coaches x-o's well enough down the road. Unless you get a long term brand name like Mark Few, any other guy is going to be a crap shoot.

I have long said that I think run and gun attracts recruits anyways. They all want to go to the NBA and they don't believe they can get there unless they are scoring 20 ppg. So, let them showcase themselves, even if we do lose a few games b/c a smart guy like Monty wasn't there to save them from themselves. They'd at least be having fun, rather than gloomy controlled ball. Fun, positive vibes, translates into success more often than not.

Up-tempo would at least create highlights and have the potential to put fannies in the seats.

40 minutes of hell. Now, Mike Anderson's failure to get the ball low vs. Kravish was stupid, so, he's out. But I like the coaching style otherwise. Just get a different guy.

---

Good points. Also, good college big men are tough to find. Moreover, Cal has always had good walk-on depth because of or academics and the attraction of admission preference.

I agree with your philosophy, but I'm not as sold on the immediate success of such an approach. Our roster does have a plethora of talented 2's and 3's, but we're not that quick and athletic overall. Bird is quick and athletic for a wing. Wallace is athletic, but no Jahii Carson, Mathews is average in quickness, as is Kreklow. Singer is fairly slow for a pg. Rooks is very slow, Kravish isn't all that athletic. I don't know about Rorie. If we are going to be successful at that style of play, we need to upgrade.

I had been thinking along the same lines given the rules change that seems to favor penetrating guards. It's so hard to play on the ball defense against quick guards without getting a foul called. It would seem that playing uptempto with really good guards can get you a long way. I'd love to have a backcourt that can get the other teams guards and big men in foul trouble right off the bat. On the flip side it's important to have depth, so other teams have a hard time doing the same time to you. So, a coach who can recruit great guards and lots of quality players for great depth. Am I asking too much?

Push the ball ! Even a less athletic team can play this game and get an open look before the more athletic team sets up his half court D . U just need to get in shape and get used to shooting free throws when ur legs are burnt out. But what u really need is a point who can make correct decisions with the ball and not turn the ball over while they are going full speed .

UrsaMajor;842300848 said:

---

I agree with your philosophy, but I'm not as sold on the immediate success of such an approach. Our roster does have a plethora of talented 2's and 3's, but we're not that quick and athletic overall. Bird is quick and athletic for a wing. Wallace is athletic, but no Jahii Carson, Mathews is average in quickness, as is Kreklow. Singer is fairly slow for a pg. Rooks is very slow, Kravish isn't all that athletic. I don't know about Rorie. If we are going to be successful at that style of play, we need to upgrade.

---

Well, if we want to be successful at any style of play we need talent, but I think this group would do well with a more up-tempo style. I don't think we'd be deep enough immediately for any kind of 40 minutes of hell approach, but on the offensive end running more and attacking more in transition would help. I think the main point is we could hold serve while recruiting to a more attractive system of play.

R.Hobbs;842301035 said:

---

Push the ball ! Even a less athletic team can play this game and get an open look before the more athletic team sets up his half court D . U just need to get in shape and get used to shooting free throws when ur legs are burnt out. But what u really need is a point who can make correct decisions with the ball and not turn the ball over while they are going full speed .

---

I agree. It's nice if your pg is quick enough to penetrate in the half court at will but in transition it's more about vision and decisions and good ballhandling. You need guys who can finish in transition and I think we have a few of those now.