Ccajon2 said:

---

Have to admit that Cals recruiting is 180 degrees removed from the Monty years. All the pieces are in place to get the talent we need to make a run. Am optimistic staff can coach what we already have up. We get JB Sky's the limit.

---

I think we've heard all this before. Skiptomylu lives. He was least heard telling us that if we got the other JB (Jaylen Brown) the sky would be the limit. Brown, Rabb, Bird, Wallace, and Mathews. Who could stop us? We'd be Final Four at least and more. (BTW, we also have to admit that three of those starters, Bird, Wallace, and Mathews, were Mike Montgomery recruits.) We made an unceremonious exit in the first round.

The new staff looks better on paper, but the proof will be in the pudding. We Cal fans always come back for more, no matter how many disappointments we suffer. The Bible says, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

The current coach seems a good guy, he often says the right things, but his coaching has not shown much so far, other than the willingness to change to a different player or plan when things don't go well. So far he has not shown that he can coach his way out of a paper bag, He is on a very steep learning curve for a head man. It is possible that your JB may be one or two-and-done. Realistically speaking, if you land JB, I'd say 3rd or 4th place is the limit, and not the sky. That would be a very good turnaround, wouldn't it? And to make a run, you also need to be optimistic that the PAC12 will have better years than last year, so there can be more teams invited from this conference.

tequila4kapp said:

---

Fyght4Cal said:

---

We see that Wyking can build a staff. That bodes well for building a program. I just hope all of you nattering nabobs of negativism are ready to pony up for Wyking's next contract. It's gonna be a doozy.

I'm curious, how does this staff stack up against our best staffs of the past?

---

WJ is going to be another example of how coaches get pretty damn smart as soon as they put more talent on the floor.

---

And the smartness they acquire is mainly to realize that they are in the entertainment business, where the financial rewards are truly great, and the path to these riches is to put the type of players on the floor who will excite fans and induce them to support their schools by contributions and buying tickets. It is easy to pick out the athletic recruits, find the fancy dunkers, and the long distance marksmen. They know many of these players have egos that will have to be stroked, and they only dream that they can get them to play together enough to be successful. They know that in the end, the fans will continue to forget or excuse them because players got injured or played selfishly, or left for the NBA. As long as they can keep recruiting stars, and win most of the time, especially in the NCAA, that it will make them wealthy. Cuonzo Martin is an example. With Rabb and Brown, he had the two best recruits he ever had, and his team was not very successful, yet he parlayed that ability to recognize what attractive recruits looked like into a new job worth many millions more than he had been making. More fans worship at the altar of the individually-talented recruit than don't, no matter what the evidence. But Cuonzo never became a smarter coach on the floor. He still could not win the important games or the team trophies.

I am a broken or stuck record. I've posted 1000 times that it takes so much more than individually-talented recruits to win in team sports. Basketball is the least of team sports, in that one or two talented players can take over games against lesser teams and beat them. Win games yes, but rarely do teams like that win an NCAA. In baseball, all defensive plays are the result of teamwork, and many offensive plays. In football, if one player out of eleven misses an assignment, a play can be ruined. Let's look at the most loaded teams in Cal history:

1971: Jackie Ridgle, Charles Johnson, Phil Chenier, Ansley Truitt, John Coughran. All five went on to the pros, with CJ and Chenier winning NBA Championships as starters. None were really selfish players, but they were not coached to play together as a team. They finished 16-9, 3rd in the PAC8.

1993: Jason Kidd, Lamond Murray, Al Grigsby, Bryan Hendrick. Beat Duke, blown out by Kansas in the NCAA. The next year, without Grigsby and Hendrick, but with Michael Stewart, Monty Buckley, and Randy Duck lost to little Wisconsin-Green Bay in the NCAA. Bozeman another guy who could recruit but not coach, and his team was lucky to be led by Jason Kidd, like having a coach on the floor.

2004: Leon Powe, Ayinde Ubaka, Marquise Kately, Amit Tamir, Richard Midgely, Dominic McGuire, and Rod Benson. Coached by Ben Braun, who was unable to harness the egos into a team. Finished 13-15, 4th in the PAC10

2016: Ivan Rabb, Jaylen Brown, Jabari Bird, Tyrone Wallace, and Jordan Mathews. Not well coached, especially on offense by Cuonzo Martin, and had injuries. 3rd in PAC12, lost 1st round NCAA.

On another note, consider Pete Newell's first year at Cal, 1955. Newell had already won a national title, the 1949 NIT with USF. At Cal he inherited All-American Bob McKeen, and recruited future All-American Larry Friend, and arguably he had a worse first year than Wyking Jones' first year, as Cal under Newell finished 1-11 in last place in the PCC. Even a great coach sometimes can not get players to play together or to their best abilities. Newell won his NCAA championship in 1959 with no highly recruited players. The modern game is so restricted by rules that encourage individual play and limit the creativity of the coaches, that I admit you need good recruits to win, but coaches still have an impact on how well or how poorly their players perform, no matter how talented those players are. I would argue that many or maybe most Cal teams have underperformed their realistic expectations based on talent level, and few teams have exceeded them, with the exception of the teams of Newell and Montgomery.

wifeisafurd said:

---

Big C said:

---

Oh, YOU were in the Air Force, too?

j/k

---

Scary thought for our national defense.

Grace has ins on the west coast AAU level beyond that of our current coaching staff. He also apparently knows his "x's" and "o's". And he is real motivated to show his worth.

---

FWIW: For me, the extraordinary praise online for his character/integrity/soul/etc. is the most impressive (because the spiritual side of things is so central to coaching). Of course there appears to be no question about his skills/knowledge/understanding/etc.

SFCityBear said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Schroeder71 said:

---

Cal has hired two new assistants that could take over as the head coach if Wyking doesn't turn the program around next season. As one recruiting service put it, Cal's recruiting can only improve with these two additions.
David Grace spent the last five years at UCLA so he knows Cal's academic standards...Does anyone know how
old Grace is? I couldn't locate it anywhere. GO BEARS!

---

Not sure I see it this way. First, let's just hope that Coach Jones and the staff DO turn things around and your point is a moot one. But if they don't and a change does need to be made at some point, we're surely not gonna promote someone from the same staff that couldn't win. Especially not a guy like Wilson who had a poor HC record at Pepperdine or a guy like Grace who has never been a HC (like Coach Jones).

But let's just work on the assumption that Wyking turns things around and that the new hires prove to be solid assistants.

---

We just did promote someone from the same staff that couldn't (or rather, didn't) win. It was a staff that, even with top recruits, could not design an effective, good looking offense. Cuonzo Martin was a mediocre coach, who could coach a defense to look better and be effective, but who had no clue whatsoever how to coach offense.

---

Which is why it is unlikely we would make the same mistake again (IF it turns out to be a mistake). I believe that was the point of the previous post.

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Schroeder71 said:

---

Cal has hired two new assistants that could take over as the head coach if Wyking doesn't turn the program around next season. As one recruiting service put it, Cal's recruiting can only improve with these two additions.
David Grace spent the last five years at UCLA so he knows Cal's academic standards...Does anyone know how
old Grace is? I couldn't locate it anywhere. GO BEARS!

---

Not sure I see it this way. First, let's just hope that Coach Jones and the staff DO turn things around and your point is a moot one. But if they don't and a change does need to be made at some point, we're surely not gonna promote someone from the same staff that couldn't win. Especially not a guy like Wilson who had a poor HC record at Pepperdine or a guy like Grace who has never been a HC (like Coach Jones).

But let's just work on the assumption that Wyking turns things around and that the new hires prove to be solid assistants.

---

We just did promote someone from the same staff that couldn't (or rather, didn't) win. It was a staff that, even with top recruits, could not design an effective, good looking offense. Cuonzo Martin was a mediocre coach, who could coach a defense to look better and be effective, but who had no clue whatsoever how to coach offense.

---

Which is why it is unlikely we would make the same mistake again (IF it turns out to be a mistake). I believe that was the point of the previous post.

---

I'm not a mind-reader. And I'd be careful using words like "surely" in connection with college basketball. As Amarillo Slim used to say, "Never bet on anything that eats."

SFCityBear said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Schroeder71 said:

---

Cal has hired two new assistants that could take over as the head coach if Wyking doesn't turn the program around next season. As one recruiting service put it, Cal's recruiting can only improve with these two additions.
David Grace spent the last five years at UCLA so he knows Cal's academic standards...Does anyone know how
old Grace is? I couldn't locate it anywhere. GO BEARS!

---

Not sure I see it this way. First, let's just hope that Coach Jones and the staff DO turn things around and your point is a moot one. But if they don't and a change does need to be made at some point, we're surely not gonna promote someone from the same staff that couldn't win. Especially not a guy like Wilson who had a poor HC record at Pepperdine or a guy like Grace who has never been a HC (like Coach Jones).

But let's just work on the assumption that Wyking turns things around and that the new hires prove to be solid assistants.

---

We just did promote someone from the same staff that couldn't (or rather, didn't) win. It was a staff that, even with top recruits, could not design an effective, good looking offense. Cuonzo Martin was a mediocre coach, who could coach a defense to look better and be effective, but who had no clue whatsoever how to coach offense.

---

Which is why it is unlikely we would make the same mistake again (IF it turns out to be a mistake). I believe that was the point of the previous post.

---

I'm not a mind-reader. And I'd be careful using words like "surely" in connection with college basketball. As Amarillo Slim used to say, "Never bet on anything that eats."

---

I didn't use the word "surely." And don't call me Shirley...

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Schroeder71 said:

---

Cal has hired two new assistants that could take over as the head coach if Wyking doesn't turn the program around next season. As one recruiting service put it, Cal's recruiting can only improve with these two additions.
David Grace spent the last five years at UCLA so he knows Cal's academic standards...Does anyone know how
old Grace is? I couldn't locate it anywhere. GO BEARS!

---

Not sure I see it this way. First, let's just hope that Coach Jones and the staff DO turn things around and your point is a moot one. But if they don't and a change does need to be made at some point, we're surely not gonna promote someone from the same staff that couldn't win. Especially not a guy like Wilson who had a poor HC record at Pepperdine or a guy like Grace who has never been a HC (like Coach Jones).

But let's just work on the assumption that Wyking turns things around and that the new hires prove to be solid assistants.

---

We just did promote someone from the same staff that couldn't (or rather, didn't) win. It was a staff that, even with top recruits, could not design an effective, good looking offense. Cuonzo Martin was a mediocre coach, who could coach a defense to look better and be effective, but who had no clue whatsoever how to coach offense.

---

Which is why it is unlikely we would make the same mistake again (IF it turns out to be a mistake). I believe that was the point of the previous post.

---

I'm not a mind-reader. And I'd be careful using words like "surely" in connection with college basketball. As Amarillo Slim used to say, "Never bet on anything that eats."

---

I didn't use the word "surely." And don't call me Shirley...

---

No, but The SouseFamily used the word, and my comment was in response to his post. His word "surely" and your word "unlikely" have totally different meanings, so I didn't miss his point. I don't agree with either one of you. It is entirely possible, maybe even likely that Cal might hire someone off this staff, even after another losing season. Nothing is a sure thing, or even a likely thing with Cal Athletics. They make good decisions and bad. They are human, and have a great deal of political pressure to deal with that the athletic-factory schools don't have to deal with. They have now used some capital in hiring an AD with a military background, and if Cal has another losing season, they might just hire the coach who will please the politically correct who might be nipping at their heels. Or they might go all-in and hire a coach from one of the military academies. I have no clue what they Cal Admin will do about anything, and I don't know anyone who does, is all I'm saying. They can hire a coach like Newell who had a national title on his resume, and they can hire a coach in Wyking Jones who had never coached a game at any level. If you can explain the reasoning for anything they do, be my guest.

Dear SFCB--intelligent decisions require a legitimate AD. We now have a legitimate AD. Even legit AD'S have to have the backing of a legit chancellor, We now have one. Pity that she is 71 years old. This means a new Chancellor is right around the corner. and, you know what that means........Hello...Chancellor Dirks.

SFCityBear said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Schroeder71 said:

---

Cal has hired two new assistants that could take over as the head coach if Wyking doesn't turn the program around next season. As one recruiting service put it, Cal's recruiting can only improve with these two additions.
David Grace spent the last five years at UCLA so he knows Cal's academic standards...Does anyone know how
old Grace is? I couldn't locate it anywhere. GO BEARS!

---

Not sure I see it this way. First, let's just hope that Coach Jones and the staff DO turn things around and your point is a moot one. But if they don't and a change does need to be made at some point, we're surely not gonna promote someone from the same staff that couldn't win. Especially not a guy like Wilson who had a poor HC record at Pepperdine or a guy like Grace who has never been a HC (like Coach Jones).

But let's just work on the assumption that Wyking turns things around and that the new hires prove to be solid assistants.

---

We just did promote someone from the same staff that couldn't (or rather, didn't) win. It was a staff that, even with top recruits, could not design an effective, good looking offense. Cuonzo Martin was a mediocre coach, who could coach a defense to look better and be effective, but who had no clue whatsoever how to coach offense.

---

Which is why it is unlikely we would make the same mistake again (IF it turns out to be a mistake). I believe that was the point of the previous post.

---

I'm not a mind-reader. And I'd be careful using words like "surely" in connection with college basketball. As Amarillo Slim used to say, "Never bet on anything that eats."

---

I didn't use the word "surely." And don't call me Shirley...

---

No, but The SouseFamily used the word, and my comment was in response to his post. His word "surely" and your word "unlikely" have totally different meanings, so I didn't miss his point. I don't agree with either one of you. It is entirely possible, maybe even likely that Cal might hire someone off this staff, even after another losing season. Nothing is a sure thing, or even a likely thing with Cal Athletics. They make good decisions and bad. They are human, and have a great deal of political pressure to deal with that the athletic-factory schools don't have to deal with. They have now used some capital in hiring an AD with a military background, and if Cal has another losing season, they might just hire the coach who will please the politically correct who might be nipping at their heels. Or they might go all-in and hire a coach from one of the military academies. I have no clue what they Cal Admin will do about anything, and I don't know anyone who does, is all I'm saying. They can hire a coach like Newell who had a national title on his resume, and they can hire a coach in Wyking Jones who had never coached a game at any level. If you can explain the reasoning for anything they do, be my guest.

---

I understand your point, SFC, and, of course, trying to predict a possible hire after a possible firing that might happen who knows when is a fools errand.

That said, I think the bolded statement is a bit of a stretch. FWIW, I believe I DO know what the administration will do about a lot of things. Carol Christ is a close personal friend, and I know most of the top administrators; while I might not be able to predict hypothetical coaching hires, I can tell you what will be done in a number of different areas.

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Schroeder71 said:

---

Cal has hired two new assistants that could take over as the head coach if Wyking doesn't turn the program around next season. As one recruiting service put it, Cal's recruiting can only improve with these two additions.
David Grace spent the last five years at UCLA so he knows Cal's academic standards...Does anyone know how
old Grace is? I couldn't locate it anywhere. GO BEARS!

---

Not sure I see it this way. First, let's just hope that Coach Jones and the staff DO turn things around and your point is a moot one. But if they don't and a change does need to be made at some point, we're surely not gonna promote someone from the same staff that couldn't win. Especially not a guy like Wilson who had a poor HC record at Pepperdine or a guy like Grace who has never been a HC (like Coach Jones).

But let's just work on the assumption that Wyking turns things around and that the new hires prove to be solid assistants.

---

We just did promote someone from the same staff that couldn't (or rather, didn't) win. It was a staff that, even with top recruits, could not design an effective, good looking offense. Cuonzo Martin was a mediocre coach, who could coach a defense to look better and be effective, but who had no clue whatsoever how to coach offense.

---

Which is why it is unlikely we would make the same mistake again (IF it turns out to be a mistake). I believe that was the point of the previous post.

---

I'm not a mind-reader. And I'd be careful using words like "surely" in connection with college basketball. As Amarillo Slim used to say, "Never bet on anything that eats."

---

I didn't use the word "surely." And don't call me Shirley...

---

No, but The SouseFamily used the word, and my comment was in response to his post. His word "surely" and your word "unlikely" have totally different meanings, so I didn't miss his point. I don't agree with either one of you. It is entirely possible, maybe even likely that Cal might hire someone off this staff, even after another losing season. Nothing is a sure thing, or even a likely thing with Cal Athletics. They make good decisions and bad. They are human, and have a great deal of political pressure to deal with that the athletic-factory schools don't have to deal with. They have now used some capital in hiring an AD with a military background, and if Cal has another losing season, they might just hire the coach who will please the politically correct who might be nipping at their heels. Or they might go all-in and hire a coach from one of the military academies. I have no clue what they Cal Admin will do about anything, and I don't know anyone who does, is all I'm saying. They can hire a coach like Newell who had a national title on his resume, and they can hire a coach in Wyking Jones who had never coached a game at any level. If you can explain the reasoning for anything they do, be my guest.

---

I understand your point, SFC, and, of course, trying to predict a possible hire after a possible firing that might happen who knows when is a fools errand.

That said, I think the bolded statement is a bit of a stretch. FWIW, I believe I DO know what the administration will do about a lot of things. Carol Christ is a close personal friend, and I know most of the top administrators; while I might not be able to predict hypothetical coaching hires, I can tell you what will be done in a number of different areas.

---

Yes, please tell us what the Administration "will do in a number of different areas".

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

. . . I have no clue what they Cal Admin will do about anything, and I don't know anyone who does, is all I'm saying. . . .

---

I understand your point, SFC, and, of course, trying to predict a possible hire after a possible firing that might happen who knows when is a fools errand.

That said, I think the bolded statement is a bit of a stretch. FWIW, I believe I DO know what the administration will do about a lot of things. Carol Christ is a close personal friend, and I know most of the top administrators; while I might not be able to predict hypothetical coaching hires, I can tell you what will be done in a number of different areas.

---

SFCB - I'm not as connected as Ursa, but I do try to keep in touch with a smattering of faculty, students, alumni and administrators. From my experience, there is a key difference in tone and attitude over the last few years. Particularly from Faculty and Admin . . .

5,10, 20, 30 years ago - almost all of the responses were "I know what the problem is and the solution needs to be XXX" And if you asked 5 different people, you got five different problems and XXX's. Very characteristic of your response in bold.

However, over the last few years (since about middle of Ykes tenure as HC), there is a much more common theme of: "We have some systemic problems. Academics, Alumni, Administrators and Athletics need to work together. We need some new ideas and help sorting this out"

All three of the above statements are different from the prior thirty years. I'm not sure what caused the change - maybe things just got bad enough for people to listen.

I'm hopeful that change is in the air - but still need to see it play out. All of the 'solutions' are longer term and I don't YET have the confidence that any of the constituents have the patience to stay the course.

Stay Tuned!

:gobears

What specifically do you want to know?

Bird was injured for a huge chunk of that time, and brown in the ncaa. And the final four talk was only if swanigan were to come, and had he, and had we been healthy, even Braun could have taken them there, imo.

SFCityBear said:

---

Ccajon2 said:

---

Have to admit that Cals recruiting is 180 degrees removed from the Monty years. All the pieces are in place to get the talent we need to make a run. Am optimistic staff can coach what we already have up. We get JB Sky's the limit.

---

I think we've heard all this before. Skiptomylu lives. He was least heard telling us that if we got the other JB (Jaylen Brown) the sky would be the limit. Brown, Rabb, Bird, Wallace, and Mathews. Who could stop us? We'd be Final Four at least and more. (BTW, we also have to admit that three of those starters, Bird, Wallace, and Mathews, were Mike Montgomery recruits.) We made an unceremonious exit in the first round.

The new staff looks better on paper, but the proof will be in the pudding. We Cal fans always come back for more, no matter how many disappointments we suffer. The Bible says, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

The current coach seems a good guy, he often says the right things, but his coaching has not shown much so far, other than the willingness to change to a different player or plan when things don't go well. So far he has not shown that he can coach his way out of a paper bag, He is on a very steep learning curve for a head man. It is possible that your JB may be one or two-and-done. Realistically speaking, if you land JB, I'd say 3rd or 4th place is the limit, and not the sky. That would be a very good turnaround, wouldn't it? And to make a run, you also need to be optimistic that the PAC12 will have better years than last year, so there can be more teams invited from this conference.

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Schroeder71 said:

---

Cal has hired two new assistants that could take over as the head coach if Wyking doesn't turn the program around next season. As one recruiting service put it, Cal's recruiting can only improve with these two additions.
David Grace spent the last five years at UCLA so he knows Cal's academic standards...Does anyone know how
old Grace is? I couldn't locate it anywhere. GO BEARS!

---

Not sure I see it this way. First, let's just hope that Coach Jones and the staff DO turn things around and your point is a moot one. But if they don't and a change does need to be made at some point, we're surely not gonna promote someone from the same staff that couldn't win. Especially not a guy like Wilson who had a poor HC record at Pepperdine or a guy like Grace who has never been a HC (like Coach Jones).

But let's just work on the assumption that Wyking turns things around and that the new hires prove to be solid assistants.

---

We just did promote someone from the same staff that couldn't (or rather, didn't) win. It was a staff that, even with top recruits, could not design an effective, good looking offense. Cuonzo Martin was a mediocre coach, who could coach a defense to look better and be effective, but who had no clue whatsoever how to coach offense.

---

Which is why it is unlikely we would make the same mistake again (IF it turns out to be a mistake). I believe that was the point of the previous post.

---

I'm not a mind-reader. And I'd be careful using words like "surely" in connection with college basketball. As Amarillo Slim used to say, "Never bet on anything that eats."

---

I didn't use the word "surely." And don't call me Shirley...

---

No, but The SouseFamily used the word, and my comment was in response to his post. His word "surely" and your word "unlikely" have totally different meanings, so I didn't miss his point. I don't agree with either one of you. It is entirely possible, maybe even likely that Cal might hire someone off this staff, even after another losing season. Nothing is a sure thing, or even a likely thing with Cal Athletics. They make good decisions and bad. They are human, and have a great deal of political pressure to deal with that the athletic-factory schools don't have to deal with. They have now used some capital in hiring an AD with a military background, and if Cal has another losing season, they might just hire the coach who will please the politically correct who might be nipping at their heels. Or they might go all-in and hire a coach from one of the military academies. I have no clue what they Cal Admin will do about anything, and I don't know anyone who does, is all I'm saying. They can hire a coach like Newell who had a national title on his resume, and they can hire a coach in Wyking Jones who had never coached a game at any level. If you can explain the reasoning for anything they do, be my guest.

---

I understand your point, SFC, and, of course, trying to predict a possible hire after a possible firing that might happen who knows when is a fools errand.

That said, I think the bolded statement is a bit of a stretch. FWIW, I believe I DO know what the administration will do about a lot of things. Carol Christ is a close personal friend, and I know most of the top administrators; while I might not be able to predict hypothetical coaching hires, I can tell you what will be done in a number of different areas.

---

Thanks for revealing your friendship with Carol Christ and other administrators. Maybe you did that before and i missed it. I will defer to you on all matters re Cal Administration.

bearsandgiants said:

---

Bird was injured for a huge chunk of that time, and brown in the ncaa. And the final four talk was only if swanigan were to come, and had he, and had we been healthy, even Braun could have taken them there, imo.

SFCityBear said:

---

Ccajon2 said:

---

Have to admit that Cals recruiting is 180 degrees removed from the Monty years. All the pieces are in place to get the talent we need to make a run. Am optimistic staff can coach what we already have up. We get JB Sky's the limit.

---

I think we've heard all this before. Skiptomylu lives. He was least heard telling us that if we got the other JB (Jaylen Brown) the sky would be the limit. Brown, Rabb, Bird, Wallace, and Mathews. Who could stop us? We'd be Final Four at least and more. (BTW, we also have to admit that three of those starters, Bird, Wallace, and Mathews, were Mike Montgomery recruits.) We made an unceremonious exit in the first round.

The new staff looks better on paper, but the proof will be in the pudding. We Cal fans always come back for more, no matter how many disappointments we suffer. The Bible says, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

The current coach seems a good guy, he often says the right things, but his coaching has not shown much so far, other than the willingness to change to a different player or plan when things don't go well. So far he has not shown that he can coach his way out of a paper bag, He is on a very steep learning curve for a head man. It is possible that your JB may be one or two-and-done. Realistically speaking, if you land JB, I'd say 3rd or 4th place is the limit, and not the sky. That would be a very good turnaround, wouldn't it? And to make a run, you also need to be optimistic that the PAC12 will have better years than last year, so there can be more teams invited from this conference.

---

---

I think you have your 2016 Cal players all mixed up. Bird played 33 games that year, and missed only one game. Unfortunately it was the first round NCAA game vs Hawaii, when he was scratched before the tip due to back spasms. I believe you must have been thinking of Tyrone Wallace, who missed 6 games that season, including the Hawaii game. Jaylen Brown was not injured in the NCAA tournament, as you said. He played in the 1st round game vs Hawaii, scored 4 points, got 2 rebounds, committed an atrocious 7 turnovers, and fouled out after only playing 17 minutes. He made no excuses about being injured.

My recollection of the 2016 season was that skiptomylu was spreading passionate optimism about the Cal team going to the Final Four and beyond all through the summer right up to and into the first few games, from when Swanigan was on the radar, maybe or maybe not ever serious about coming to Cal, and long after he had signed with Purdue. In my opinion, Swanigan would have helped that 2016 Cal team only marginally at best. In that season, while at Purdue, he averaged 10 points, 8 rebounds, 0.2 blocks, and 3 turnovers, not a lot better than Cal's combo of Rooks and Okoroh, who averaged 5 points, 7 rebounds, 2 blocks, and one turnover. Purdue made it to the NCAA, but lost to mighty Arkansas-Little Rock in the first round, while Cal was doing the same to Hawaii. And Swanigan was two and done like Rabb, so he would not have helped Cal avoid the roster depletion we suffered in 2017.

Even with the injuries to Bird and Wallace, Cal should have easily won that first round NCAA game with Hawaii, if you go by recruit rankings, as apparently you do. Cal had top 5 recruit Jaylen Brown, top 10 recruit Ivan Rabb, and top 100 recruit Jordan Mathews, along with 3-star recruits Sam Singer and Kam Rooks. Hawaii DID NOT HAVE A SINGLE HIGHLY RANKED RECRUIT. Stefan Jankovic, a 3-star, was the highest ranked Hawaii player, and he was supported by 2-star ranked recruits Aaron Valdes, Rod Bobbitt, Mike Thomas, and UNRANKED Quincy Smith (who scored 19 points) and they beat Cal easily. Cal was very poorly coached. The guy you made fun of, Ben Braun, could have won that game, IMO.

Villanova won the NCAA Championship that year, 2016. Their best players were Josh Hart, Phil Booth, and Ryan Arcidiacono, all 4-star recruits, none of them highly ranked 5-star recruits. These are the kind of recruits Cal needed and needs to pursue now, players maybe a cut below the big stars with the big reputations, but still very good players who could be taught to play together and play like a team.

SFCityBear said:

---

bearsandgiants said:

---

Bird was injured for a huge chunk of that time, and brown in the ncaa. And the final four talk was only if swanigan were to come, and had he, and had we been healthy, even Braun could have taken them there, imo.

SFCityBear said:

---

Ccajon2 said:

---

Have to admit that Cals recruiting is 180 degrees removed from the Monty years. All the pieces are in place to get the talent we need to make a run. Am optimistic staff can coach what we already have up. We get JB Sky's the limit.

---

I think we've heard all this before. Skiptomylu lives. He was least heard telling us that if we got the other JB (Jaylen Brown) the sky would be the limit. Brown, Rabb, Bird, Wallace, and Mathews. Who could stop us? We'd be Final Four at least and more. (BTW, we also have to admit that three of those starters, Bird, Wallace, and Mathews, were Mike Montgomery recruits.) We made an unceremonious exit in the first round.

The new staff looks better on paper, but the proof will be in the pudding. We Cal fans always come back for more, no matter how many disappointments we suffer. The Bible says, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

The current coach seems a good guy, he often says the right things, but his coaching has not shown much so far, other than the willingness to change to a different player or plan when things don't go well. So far he has not shown that he can coach his way out of a paper bag, He is on a very steep learning curve for a head man. It is possible that your JB may be one or two-and-done. Realistically speaking, if you land JB, I'd say 3rd or 4th place is the limit, and not the sky. That would be a very good turnaround, wouldn't it? And to make a run, you also need to be optimistic that the PAC12 will have better years than last year, so there can be more teams invited from this conference.

---

---

I think you have your 2016 Cal players all mixed up. Bird played 33 games that year, and missed only one game. Unfortunately it was the first round NCAA game vs Hawaii, when he was scratched before the tip due to back spasms. I believe you must have been thinking of Tyrone Wallace, who missed 6 games that season, including the Hawaii game. Jaylen Brown was not injured in the NCAA tournament, as you said. He played in the 1st round game vs Hawaii, scored 4 points, got 2 rebounds, committed an atrocious 7 turnovers, and fouled out after only playing 17 minutes. He made no excuses about being injured.

My recollection of the 2016 season was that skiptomylu was spreading passionate optimism about the Cal team going to the Final Four and beyond all through the summer right up to and into the first few games, from when Swanigan was on the radar, maybe or maybe not ever serious about coming to Cal, and long after he had signed with Purdue. In my opinion, Swanigan would have helped that 2016 Cal team only marginally at best. In that season, while at Purdue, he averaged 10 points, 8 rebounds, 0.2 blocks, and 3 turnovers, not a lot better than Cal's combo of Rooks and Okoroh, who averaged 5 points, 7 rebounds, 2 blocks, and one turnover. Purdue made it to the NCAA, but lost to mighty Arkansas-Little Rock in the first round, while Cal was doing the same to Hawaii. And Swanigan was two and done like Rabb, so he would not have helped Cal avoid the roster depletion we suffered in 2017.

Even with the injuries to Bird and Wallace, Cal should have easily won that first round NCAA game with Hawaii, if you go by recruit rankings, as apparently you do. Cal had top 5 recruit Jaylen Brown, top 10 recruit Ivan Rabb, and top 100 recruit Jordan Mathews, along with 3-star recruits Sam Singer and Kam Rooks. Hawaii DID NOT HAVE A SINGLE HIGHLY RANKED RECRUIT. Stefan Jankovic, a 3-star, was the highest ranked Hawaii player, and he was supported by 2-star ranked recruits Aaron Valdes, Rod Bobbitt, Mike Thomas, and UNRANKED Quincy Smith (who scored 19 points) and they beat Cal easily. Cal was very poorly coached. The guy you made fun of, Ben Braun, could have won that game, IMO.

Villanova won the NCAA Championship that year, 2016. Their best players were Josh Hart, Phil Booth, and Ryan Arcidiacono, all 4-star recruits, none of them highly ranked 5-star recruits. These are the kind of recruits Cal needed and needs to pursue now, players maybe a cut below the big stars with the big reputations, but still very good players who could be taught to play together and play like a team.

---

If only we had Rickey Kreklow

UrsaMajor said:

---

What specifically do you want to know?

---

Does the Administration under Christ differ from previous ones on the role that intercollegiate athletics should have at Cal? How confident are you that the current Administration will be able to solve the issues of athletic department finances,Title IX, and competitive teams? Thank you.

Christ has made it clear (publicly and privately) that IA must be an integral part of the campus. She is also aware that football drives the bus and is exploring a number of ideas for increasing football revenue.

As for Title IX and IA financing, these will be solved because they must be. The administration is on record that there will be no IA deficit as of 2020 an we will be in compliance with Prong 1 by 2021. Now, HOW this will be accomplished remains to be seen--it may involve choices that some here won't like (cutting sports, cutting rosters, etc.), but it has to happen for budgetary and legal reasons. Unlike Dirks, who just pushed the problem down the road and OK'd subsidies for Mike Williams when IA failed to meet budget, this won't happen anymore.

Legit AD, but he comes from a place where there is a clear chain of command and the priorities are known and clear. Cal is a quagmire when it comes to decision making/makers.

socaliganbear said:

---

rkt88edmo said:

---

Legit AD, but he comes from a place where there is a clear chain of command and the priorities are known and clear. Cal is a quagmire when it comes to decision making/makers.

---

Somehow I don't think this accurately describes the federal government or even the military.

---

somehow . . .

Back to Grace, here's his post on hiring:



I would like to thank Coach Wyking Jones for hiring me as an assistant coach at Cal! What an honor and a blessing to be able to work for such an outstanding coach and person! Very Blessed to also work with Chris Walker, Marty Wilson, Keith Brown and the rest of the Cal staff.
11:04 PM - 19 Apr 2018

Sounds like he's happy to be at Cal.

without wallace and bird, Roger, Chauca and Domingo got lots of PT that they didn't normally get during the year.

Roger - 26 minutes, was 0-5, scored 3 pts, 2 boards, 2 assists
Chauca - 8 minutes, was 0-2 (no points) and 1 assist
Domingo - 14 minutes, was 0-4 (no points) and 1 rebound

BearGreg said:

---

SF - Do you think that the deep experience of the Villanova roster might have made things a little easier for them relative to our Bears? Did we feel Bird and Wallace's loss more because they were a junior and a senior as well as our point guard? How might the very late injuries to Wallace and Bird have impacted team chemistry and rotations for the Bears do you imagine? Do you think Brown all the sudden felt the weight of the world on his shoulders? What's your view of how distracting Yanni Huffnagel's suspension and press might have had on the squad?

Personally, I will remember 2016 as a very good basketball year, among the best Cal teams over the past 30+ years and very enjoyable to watch. The confluence of events that led to the first round loss speak for me of how fragile winning in sports can be AND what might have been had Wallace and Bird stayed healthy.

---

Greg - You make very good points.

The only one I'd wonder about is how much effect the Yanni Huffnagel situation may have had on the team. I never played on a team that had an assistant coach. The teams I watched while at Cal did not have one on the bench. How important was Huffnagel? He was a lacrosse player, was cut from his high school basketball team. What coaching ability did he have? Wasn't he just a recruiter, a guy who befriended players and gave them a sales pitch? Also, I'm not privileged to be close to the players or to be close to any Cal students of that age to understand their emotional maturity. I only know what I read or hear in the news about kids today being unable to tolerate anything unpleasant. Many colleges have now provided a "safe space" or "safe zones" where they won't have to be confronted with unpleasant talk. I would hope our players would be more mature than that, and that they would have been able to put the Yanni episode behind them, but maybe they couldn't. That would be disappointing.

You are a good Cal fan, probably a lot better Cal fan than I am. I'm a fan of good basketball first, and a fan of Cal second. I try to be objective about Cal. I remember an interview given by Wilt Chamberlain long after he had retired, where he was asked about modern basketball. He said the modern players on average were bigger, stronger, and more athletic, but that "they don't play basketball in the correct way." I don't know exactly what Chamberlain meant, but for me, the correct way to play is the way Newell's teams or Wooden's teams played. In terms of individuals at Cal, the correct way for me would be the way Jason Kidd played, the way Kevin Johnson played, or Gene Ransom, Keith Smith, Larry Friend, Don McIntosh, Bob Dalton, Dan Wolthers, Butch Hays, Jerome Randle, and Jorge Gutierrrez, and many more. These players always looked for player who might be more open than they were, and some were good scorers as well, but they gave the ball up to a player who had the better chance to score.

Even with all the rule changes to favor offensive play and limit defenses, it is still possible and IMO, preferable to look for high percentage open shots rather than take low percentage heavily guarded shots. That is done by players moving to get open, and the player with the ball looking for the open player. You may like the style of play where one player does a lot of work to score on his own over one or two defenders, and that is your preference.

My impression of that 2016 team was that they were mostly individual scorers who had to have the ball to be effective, and seldom looked to find an open man, and when they did look, most of the time there was no one open. It was a credit to their outstanding individual ability that they were able to score as much as they did. If they had some offensive structure or mindset to look for the open man, I think they would have scored so much more. My favorite player on that team was Ivan Rabb. He always seemed to want to pass the ball, but most of the time there was no one open. Mike Montgomery was able to find ways to get his players wide open shots. Pete Newell did it even better, as his teams seldom took a shot that was tightly guarded or guarded at all. The 2016 team made spectacular shots at times, but most of the time they missed the shot. They hardly ever took an open shot. I don't even remember them doing a simple back cut. With a Jaylen Brown on the roster, that would have been a play in my playbook to use often.

I guess I prefer Harvard or Chaminade basketball to Cuonzo Martin basketball. They don't have any recruits and yet can put a team on the floor with a system that can compete now and then with stronger teams with higher ranked recruits. I still think Cal can be successful with a mix of good recruits, maybe not the one and dones, and good coaching. We already get much better recruits than Harvard or Chaminade, and if the Cal coaching gets better, the sky is the limit as they say.

SFCityBear said:

---

BearGreg said:

---

SF - Do you think that the deep experience of the Villanova roster might have made things a little easier for them relative to our Bears? Did we feel Bird and Wallace's loss more because they were a junior and a senior as well as our point guard? How might the very late injuries to Wallace and Bird have impacted team chemistry and rotations for the Bears do you imagine? Do you think Brown all the sudden felt the weight of the world on his shoulders? What's your view of how distracting Yanni Huffnagel's suspension and press might have had on the squad?

Personally, I will remember 2016 as a very good basketball year, among the best Cal teams over the past 30+ years and very enjoyable to watch. The confluence of events that led to the first round loss speak for me of how fragile winning in sports can be AND what might have been had Wallace and Bird stayed healthy.

---

Greg - You make very good points.

The only one I'd wonder about is how much effect the Yanni Huffnagel situation may have had on the team. I never played on a team that had an assistant coach. The teams I watched while at Cal did not have one on the bench. How important was Huffnagel? He was a lacrosse player, was cut from his high school basketball team. What coaching ability did he have? Wasn't he just a recruiter, a guy who befriended players and gave them a sales pitch? Also, I'm not privileged to be close to the players or to be close to any Cal students of that age to understand their emotional maturity. I only know what I read or hear in the news about kids today being unable to tolerate anything unpleasant. Many colleges have now provided a "safe space" or "safe zones" where they won't have to be confronted with unpleasant talk. I would hope our players would be more mature than that, and that they would have been able to put the Yanni episode behind them, but maybe they couldn't. That would be disappointing.

You are a good Cal fan, probably a lot better Cal fan than I am. I'm a fan of good basketball first, and a fan of Cal second. I try to be objective about Cal. I remember an interview given by Wilt Chamberlain long after he had retired, where he was asked about modern basketball. He said the modern players on average were bigger, stronger, and more athletic, but that "they don't play basketball in the correct way." I don't know exactly what Chamberlain meant, but for me, the correct way to play is the way Newell's teams or Wooden's teams played. In terms of individuals at Cal, the correct way for me would be the way Jason Kidd played, the way Kevin Johnson played, or Gene Ransom, Keith Smith, Larry Friend, Don McIntosh, Bob Dalton, Dan Wolthers, Butch Hays, Jerome Randle, and Jorge Gutierrrez, and many more. These players always looked for player who might be more open than they were, and some were good scorers as well, but they gave the ball up to a player who had the better chance to score.

Even with all the rule changes to favor offensive play and limit defenses, it is still possible and IMO, preferable to look for high percentage open shots rather than take low percentage heavily guarded shots. That is done by players moving to get open, and the player with the ball looking for the open player. You may like the style of play where one player does a lot of work to score on his own over one or two defenders, and that is your preference.

My impression of that 2016 team was that they were mostly individual scorers who had to have the ball to be effective, and seldom looked to find an open man, and when they did look, most of the time there was no one open. It was a credit to their outstanding individual ability that they were able to score as much as they did. If they had some offensive structure or mindset to look for the open man, I think they would have scored so much more. My favorite player on that team was Ivan Rabb. He always seemed to want to pass the ball, but most of the time there was no one open. Mike Montgomery was able to find ways to get his players wide open shots. Pete Newell did it even better, as his teams seldom took a shot that was tightly guarded or guarded at all. The 2016 team made spectacular shots at times, but most of the time they missed the shot. They hardly ever took an open shot. I don't even remember them doing a simple back cut. With a Jaylen Brown on the roster, that would have been a play in my playbook to use often.

I guess I prefer Harvard or Chaminade basketball to Cuonzo Martin basketball. They don't have any recruits and yet can put a team on the floor with a system that can compete now and then with stronger teams with higher ranked recruits. I still think Cal can be successful with a mix of good recruits, maybe not the one and dones, and good coaching. We already get much better recruits than Harvard or Chaminade, and if the Cal coaching gets better, the sky is the limit as they say.

---

SFCity:

I don't know what Wilt meant either, and I'm afraid it's a little too late to ask him. I do know that basketball when he was in his prime relied an awfully lot (at least the Warriors) on throwing the ball into the post and letting the big man dominate. On the other hand, I agree with YOU that good basketball involves movement with and especially without the ball. I remember Mike Montgomery complaining once about Brevan Knight (who was, IMO, and excellent point guard) that too often Brevan looked to make the pass that led to the shot instead of looking to make the pass that led to the pass that led to the pass that led to the shot. This is why I am so thrilled with the revolution that the Warriors have wrought in the NBA. Movement! Passing! Positionless basketball! Funny enough, Shaq and Barkley are bemoaning that this isn't REAL basketball because it doesn't involve one-on-one let the best man win ball. Look at the Warriors' last game: 36 assists on 43 makes.

I guess I agree completely that if you can coach good players over several years to be unselfish and to understand the game (everyone talks about basketball IQ), you can beat teams with better one-on-one players.

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

BearGreg said:

---

SF - Do you think that the deep experience of the Villanova roster might have made things a little easier for them relative to our Bears? Did we feel Bird and Wallace's loss more because they were a junior and a senior as well as our point guard? How might the very late injuries to Wallace and Bird have impacted team chemistry and rotations for the Bears do you imagine? Do you think Brown all the sudden felt the weight of the world on his shoulders? What's your view of how distracting Yanni Huffnagel's suspension and press might have had on the squad?

Personally, I will remember 2016 as a very good basketball year, among the best Cal teams over the past 30+ years and very enjoyable to watch. The confluence of events that led to the first round loss speak for me of how fragile winning in sports can be AND what might have been had Wallace and Bird stayed healthy.

---

Greg - You make very good points.

The only one I'd wonder about is how much effect the Yanni Huffnagel situation may have had on the team. I never played on a team that had an assistant coach. The teams I watched while at Cal did not have one on the bench. How important was Huffnagel? He was a lacrosse player, was cut from his high school basketball team. What coaching ability did he have? Wasn't he just a recruiter, a guy who befriended players and gave them a sales pitch? Also, I'm not privileged to be close to the players or to be close to any Cal students of that age to understand their emotional maturity. I only know what I read or hear in the news about kids today being unable to tolerate anything unpleasant. Many colleges have now provided a "safe space" or "safe zones" where they won't have to be confronted with unpleasant talk. I would hope our players would be more mature than that, and that they would have been able to put the Yanni episode behind them, but maybe they couldn't. That would be disappointing.

You are a good Cal fan, probably a lot better Cal fan than I am. I'm a fan of good basketball first, and a fan of Cal second. I try to be objective about Cal. I remember an interview given by Wilt Chamberlain long after he had retired, where he was asked about modern basketball. He said the modern players on average were bigger, stronger, and more athletic, but that "they don't play basketball in the correct way." I don't know exactly what Chamberlain meant, but for me, the correct way to play is the way Newell's teams or Wooden's teams played. In terms of individuals at Cal, the correct way for me would be the way Jason Kidd played, the way Kevin Johnson played, or Gene Ransom, Keith Smith, Larry Friend, Don McIntosh, Bob Dalton, Dan Wolthers, Butch Hays, Jerome Randle, and Jorge Gutierrrez, and many more. These players always looked for player who might be more open than they were, and some were good scorers as well, but they gave the ball up to a player who had the better chance to score.

Even with all the rule changes to favor offensive play and limit defenses, it is still possible and IMO, preferable to look for high percentage open shots rather than take low percentage heavily guarded shots. That is done by players moving to get open, and the player with the ball looking for the open player. You may like the style of play where one player does a lot of work to score on his own over one or two defenders, and that is your preference.

My impression of that 2016 team was that they were mostly individual scorers who had to have the ball to be effective, and seldom looked to find an open man, and when they did look, most of the time there was no one open. It was a credit to their outstanding individual ability that they were able to score as much as they did. If they had some offensive structure or mindset to look for the open man, I think they would have scored so much more. My favorite player on that team was Ivan Rabb. He always seemed to want to pass the ball, but most of the time there was no one open. Mike Montgomery was able to find ways to get his players wide open shots. Pete Newell did it even better, as his teams seldom took a shot that was tightly guarded or guarded at all. The 2016 team made spectacular shots at times, but most of the time they missed the shot. They hardly ever took an open shot. I don't even remember them doing a simple back cut. With a Jaylen Brown on the roster, that would have been a play in my playbook to use often.

I guess I prefer Harvard or Chaminade basketball to Cuonzo Martin basketball. They don't have any recruits and yet can put a team on the floor with a system that can compete now and then with stronger teams with higher ranked recruits. I still think Cal can be successful with a mix of good recruits, maybe not the one and dones, and good coaching. We already get much better recruits than Harvard or Chaminade, and if the Cal coaching gets better, the sky is the limit as they say.

---

SFCity:

I don't know what Wilt meant either, and I'm afraid it's a little too late to ask him. I do know that basketball when he was in his prime relied an awfully lot (at least the Warriors) on throwing the ball into the post and letting the big man dominate. On the other hand, I agree with YOU that good basketball involves movement with and especially without the ball. I remember Mike Montgomery complaining once about Brevan Knight (who was, IMO, and excellent point guard) that too often Brevan looked to make the pass that led to the shot instead of looking to make the pass that led to the pass that led to the pass that led to the shot. This is why I am so thrilled with the revolution that the Warriors have wrought in the NBA. Movement! Passing! Positionless basketball! Funny enough, Shaq and Barkley are bemoaning that this isn't REAL basketball because it doesn't involve one-on-one let the best man win ball. Look at the Warriors' last game: 36 assists on 43 makes.

I guess I agree completely that if you can coach good players over several years to be unselfish and to understand the game (everyone talks about basketball IQ), you can beat teams with better one-on-one players.

---

I don't think that basketball in Wilt's prime relied a lot on passing the ball into the post and letting the big man dominate. If you look at the top scorers of Wilt's prime, his first 5 years, the players who put up the most shots, except for Wilt, were not centers, they were the guards and forwards. And the centers who did shoot and score a lot were not only post players, they were mid-range jump shooters like Bob Pettit and Walt Bellamy. Some other centers who scored were Russell, Red Kerr, Wayne Embry, and I don't think their teams were relying on them often to dominate inside. Maybe you were thinking of the era of Shaq, Olajuwon, Howard, Mourning, Ewing, David Robinson, and Karl Malone. Now that was a era where big men dominated a lot of the scoring.

The Warriors did post up Chamberlain, by design of their coaches, because Wilt could dominate. In one interview, Bill Russell told Wilt that he was a team player, and Wilt said he did whatever the team or the coach asked him to do, whether it was scoring, or passing, or rebounding and playing defense. He said it embarrassed him in that game against the Knicks where he scored 100 points, when his coach and his teammates all wanted to run every play through him to have him shoot all the shots, but he did as he was asked. He hardly ever wanted to embarrass any player or get in his face. You could see it in his dunks. They were so quick, so effortless, that if you blinked, you would miss seeing his dunk. Contrast that with this kid Simmons who went up for a one-hand slam in a close game in the playoffs recently, blew the dunk, and cost his team the game. One of the things that Wilt was proudest of was one year when before the season, some sportswriters were goading Wilt, saying he seldom passed the ball. He announced to them that he would lead the NBA in assists that season, which he did at 8.6 assists per game.

Wilt scored a lot of his points with perimeter shots off the glass, what today would be 3-pointers. I went to a game at the Cow Palace with the Philadelphia Warriors vs the Minneapolis Lakers, before both teams migrated west. Wilt scored 75 and Elgin Baylor scored 60. Wilt posted up a lot, but he also made 8 or 10 long range shots off the glass in that game.

Maybe you are right about coaches being able to coach players to play unselfishly over a period of years. I think every kid who has ever played basketball starting at an early age grabbed that ball and tried to get as close to the basket as they could and shoot it. I've seen first grade teams do that, maybe all of them. By 5th grade, you learn you should pass sometimes, but until you get real coaching, it does not become a skill. I learned to pass in the 9th grade, when coach taught us all the passes and made us practice them to death, before he ever taught us any plays. Some kids are born point guards, and are already taking pride in dishing the ball by the 6th or 7th grade. Passing is something you can't practice on your own very well, neither is defense. That can only be done with a coach and teammates present. I would like to hope you are right that it can be coached. Unfortunately some players never learn to do it, which is sad. It is really fun to play basketball by trying to lose your defender to get open, and really fun for the player with the ball to look for you and get you the ball and see a successful basket made that you and he (and maybe a screener or two) participated in.