Can anyone give assurance that Paris has been working extremely hard on his mid-range
to 3-pt shot? In his last season at Boise State, he was 7 for 33 (21.2%) from 3. So it would seem
is lack of a shot was made up for by the fact that he hardly took the shots. He's a tough kid,
seems like a good leader...but

BEARUPINDC said:

---

Can anyone give assurance that Paris has been working extremely hard on his mid-range
to 3-pt shot? In his last season at Boise State, he was 7 for 33 (21.2%) from 3. So it would seem
is lack of a shot was made up for by the fact that he hardly took the shots. He's a tough kid,
seems like a good leader...but

---

Shooting is one of the top deficiencies of last years team. We only had one credible 'threat' - McNeil. Maybe Sueing on a good day. Today's college games really needs two or three on the floor at the same time. I'm not talking about a good shooter. Just a credible threat.

I'd be happy if Austin's shooting at least keeps defenses honest. That means shooting at least 4 or 5 from mid-range and beyond. And making at least 1/3 of them.

But until we see it consistently during games - there are no assurances.

Here's what I like about this post:

PG: Paris Austin (SR), Joel Brown (FR)

SG: Darius McNeill (JR), Matt Bradley (SO), Charles Smith IV (FR)

2/3: Juhwan Harris-Dyson (JR)

SF: Justice Sueing (JR), Jacoby Gordon (SO)

"Bigs": Andre Kelly (SO), Grant Anticevich (JR), Connor Vanover (SO), DJ Thorpe (FR)

And you potentially also have a 5th-year Sr in Roman Davis.

That's a good amount of experience throughout the lineup, and unlike last year (and probably this year to some extent), we won't be relying on Freshmen for significant minutes, unless they earn it and are ready for it. Teams make runs when talented classes reach their Jr and Sr years. We'll find out how talented these guys are, and where their ceiling is, but that'll finally be an experienced group, and a group that's had several years to understand and buy into CWJ's system.

SFCityBear
In reply to Civil Bear 11:37a, 10/10/18
SFCityBear said:

If Austin averages 28 minutes, McNeill can pick up the other 12 minutes. Last season he played 33 minutes a game, and I'd like to see him playing a little less this season. If he plays 33 minutes again, that means he would play 21 minutes at SG, with Bradley and JHD playing 19 minutes between them. Maybe it works. I still would like to see what James Zhao can do. In this modern world of more player injuries, I think it could help to have more backup at point guard than we have.



Good analysis.I'd like to see most of 19 minutes given to Bradley. He's played both PG and SG.
As for Zhao, I was glad to see him at the Summer Strength Series. He's got a lot to take in...language,
culture, teammates, plays etc.

In a fairly quick search, here's what I found


http://www.dulwich-beijing.cn/cf_enotify/view.cfm?n=643
"With James Zhao's flashy but sometimes pointless dribbles along with the hustle plays from Joseph Liu, Alex Jin, and Steven Kim, we won the semifinals with ease and entered the finals as the favourites."

SFCityBear
In reply to Civil Bear 11:37a, 10/10/18
SFCityBear said:

If Austin averages 28 minutes, McNeill can pick up the other 12 minutes. Last season he played 33 minutes a game, and I'd like to see him playing a little less this season. If he plays 33 minutes again, that means he would play 21 minutes at SG, with Bradley and JHD playing 19 minutes between them. Maybe it works. I still would like to see what James Zhao can do. In this modern world of more player injuries, I think it could help to have more backup at point guard than we have.


Good analysis.Thank you. I'd like to see most of 19 minutes given to Bradley. He's played both PG and SG.

As for Zhao, I was glad to see him at the Summer Strength Series. He's got a lot to take in...language,
culture, teammates, plays etc. In a fairly quick search, here's what I found

http://www.dulwich-beijing.cn/cf_enotify/view.cfm?n=643
"With James Zhao's flashy but sometimes pointless dribbles along with the hustle plays from Joseph Liu, Alex Jin, and Steven Kim, we won the semifinals with ease and entered the finals as the favourites."

https://beijing.dulwich.org/news-and-events/uc-berkeley-athletic-scholarship-signing-ceremony

Gosh. I really blew that last post. My heart was in it, my brain is, as yet, not fully engaged.

BTW: Someone has to start this;

*Matt Bradley doesn't just lift weights, he juggles them"

BeachedBear
In reply to BEARUPINDC 1:40p, 10/11/18
BEARUPINDC said:
Can anyone give assurance that Paris has been working extremely hard on his mid-range
to 3-pt shot? In his last season at Boise State, he was 7 for 33 (21.2%) from 3. So it would seem
is lack of a shot was made up for by the fact that he hardly took the shots. He's a tough kid,
seems like a good leader...but
Shooting is one of the top deficiencies of last years team. We only had one credible 'threat' - McNeil. Maybe Sueing on a good day. Today's college games really needs two or three on the floor at the same time. I'm not talking about a good shooter. Just a credible threat.

I'd be happy if Austin's shooting at least keeps defenses honest. That means shooting at least 4 or 5 from mid-range and beyond. And making at least 1/3 of them.

But until we see it consistently during games - there are no assurances

"assurance" was definitely not the right word. I've been a CAL fan
long enough to know there isn't much of an assurance about anything. I asked about what Austin
has been/is doing now to work on his shot. I saw from the Summer Strength Series that he's worked/is working on strength and, probably, stamina. Just asking if there's been any word on him being in the gym taking lots of shots.

Someone (I don't remember who and I'm don't have time to look it up, else I'd give them credit) went through the trouble looking back at McNeil's shooting over the entire season. The percentages dropped rather dramatically as the long season wore on. I'm hoping Bradley can provide some relief....both as a combo
guard and as a scorer. One of the few negatives I've read on Matt is that
he might not be able to easily get off his shot against really good defenders.
That was from an "expert" and I don't know how much weight to it.

GO BEARS!!!!

BEARUPINDC said:

---

BeachedBear
In reply to BEARUPINDC 1:40p, 10/11/18
BEARUPINDC said:
Can anyone give assurance that Paris has been working extremely hard on his mid-range
to 3-pt shot? In his last season at Boise State, he was 7 for 33 (21.2%) from 3. So it would seem
is lack of a shot was made up for by the fact that he hardly took the shots. He's a tough kid,
seems like a good leader...but
Shooting is one of the top deficiencies of last years team. We only had one credible 'threat' - McNeil. Maybe Sueing on a good day. Today's college games really needs two or three on the floor at the same time. I'm not talking about a good shooter. Just a credible threat.

I'd be happy if Austin's shooting at least keeps defenses honest. That means shooting at least 4 or 5 from mid-range and beyond. And making at least 1/3 of them.

But until we see it consistently during games - there are no assurances

"assurance" was definitely not the right word. I've been a CAL fan
long enough to know there isn't much of an assurance about anything. I asked about what Austin
has been/is doing now to work on his shot. I saw from the Summer Strength Series that he's worked/is working on strength and, probably, stamina. Just asking if there's been any word on him being in the gym taking lots of shots.

Someone (I don't remember who and I'm don't have time to look it up, else I'd give them credit) went through the trouble looking back at McNeil's shooting over the entire season. The percentages dropped rather dramatically as the long season wore on. I'm hoping Bradley can provide some relief....both as a combo
guard and as a scorer. One of the few negatives I've read on Matt is that
he might not be able to easily get off his shot against really good defenders.
That was from an "expert" and I don't know how much weight to it.

GO BEARS!!!!

---

You raise a good point about stamina and conditioning as well as depth. After listening to yesterday's media interviews, it seems that this staff is focusing on shooting and spreading the floor - so I take that as assurance that they are trying (in a positive way).

Also, reading between the lines a bit - it struck me that this staff is more cohesive than last season. Which could make a TREMENDOUS difference from last season. We know that Theo didn't work out, but O'Toole was probably not on the same page either (although his presence and continuity may have helped in other ways).

I mean, really, how hard can it be to recruit perimeter shooters??Ernie Kent from WSU just said that they have 7 guys 7!!!!!!!!! who are shooting better than 40% in practice.

BeachedBear said:

---

BEARUPINDC said:

---

BeachedBear
In reply to BEARUPINDC 1:40p, 10/11/18
BEARUPINDC said:
Can anyone give assurance that Paris has been working extremely hard on his mid-range
to 3-pt shot? In his last season at Boise State, he was 7 for 33 (21.2%) from 3. So it would seem
is lack of a shot was made up for by the fact that he hardly took the shots. He's a tough kid,
seems like a good leader...but
Shooting is one of the top deficiencies of last years team. We only had one credible 'threat' - McNeil. Maybe Sueing on a good day. Today's college games really needs two or three on the floor at the same time. I'm not talking about a good shooter. Just a credible threat.

I'd be happy if Austin's shooting at least keeps defenses honest. That means shooting at least 4 or 5 from mid-range and beyond. And making at least 1/3 of them.

But until we see it consistently during games - there are no assurances

"assurance" was definitely not the right word. I've been a CAL fan
long enough to know there isn't much of an assurance about anything. I asked about what Austin
has been/is doing now to work on his shot. I saw from the Summer Strength Series that he's worked/is working on strength and, probably, stamina. Just asking if there's been any word on him being in the gym taking lots of shots.

Someone (I don't remember who and I'm don't have time to look it up, else I'd give them credit) went through the trouble looking back at McNeil's shooting over the entire season. The percentages dropped rather dramatically as the long season wore on. I'm hoping Bradley can provide some relief....both as a combo
guard and as a scorer. One of the few negatives I've read on Matt is that
he might not be able to easily get off his shot against really good defenders.
That was from an "expert" and I don't know how much weight to it.

GO BEARS!!!!

---

You raise a good point about stamina and conditioning as well as depth. After listening to yesterday's media interviews, it seems that this staff is focusing on shooting and spreading the floor - so I take that as assurance that they are trying (in a positive way).

Also, reading between the lines a bit - it struck me that this staff is more cohesive than last season. Which could make a TREMENDOUS difference from last season. We know that Theo didn't work out, but O'Toole was probably not on the same page either (although his presence and continuity may have helped in other ways).

---

I believe it was eventually reported here that O'Toole, like Theo, sort of came with the job, when Wyking Jones was hired. Not a good way to start. At least O'Toole and Jones had worked together the previous year. A credit to Jones that he has replaced them with two assistants who seem to be of high quality.

helltopay1 said:

---

I mean, really, how hard can it be to recruit perimeter shooters??Ernie Kent from WSU just said that they have 7 guys 7!!!!!!!!! who are shooting better than 40% in practice.

---

I agree with you that perimeter shooters should not be hard to find. Finding ones who can get open, have a quick enough release, and who can play good enough defense, that is another question. With all due respect, practice is practice. I can remember Cuonzo saying once that Domingo was lighting it up in practice.

BEARUPINDC said:

---

SFCityBear
In reply to Civil Bear 11:37a, 10/10/18
SFCityBear said:

If Austin averages 28 minutes, McNeill can pick up the other 12 minutes. Last season he played 33 minutes a game, and I'd like to see him playing a little less this season. If he plays 33 minutes again, that means he would play 21 minutes at SG, with Bradley and JHD playing 19 minutes between them. Maybe it works. I still would like to see what James Zhao can do. In this modern world of more player injuries, I think it could help to have more backup at point guard than we have.



Good analysis.I'd like to see most of 19 minutes given to Bradley. He's played both PG and SG.
As for Zhao, I was glad to see him at the Summer Strength Series. He's got a lot to take in...language,
culture, teammates, plays etc.

In a fairly quick search, here's what I found


http://www.dulwich-beijing.cn/cf_enotify/view.cfm?n=643
"With James Zhao's flashy but sometimes pointless dribbles along with the hustle plays from Joseph Liu, Alex Jin, and Steven Kim, we won the semifinals with ease and entered the finals as the favourites."

SFCityBear
In reply to Civil Bear 11:37a, 10/10/18
SFCityBear said:

If Austin averages 28 minutes, McNeill can pick up the other 12 minutes. Last season he played 33 minutes a game, and I'd like to see him playing a little less this season. If he plays 33 minutes again, that means he would play 21 minutes at SG, with Bradley and JHD playing 19 minutes between them. Maybe it works. I still would like to see what James Zhao can do. In this modern world of more player injuries, I think it could help to have more backup at point guard than we have.


Good analysis.Thank you. I'd like to see most of 19 minutes given to Bradley. He's played both PG and SG.

As for Zhao, I was glad to see him at the Summer Strength Series. He's got a lot to take in...language,
culture, teammates, plays etc. In a fairly quick search, here's what I found

http://www.dulwich-beijing.cn/cf_enotify/view.cfm?n=643
"With James Zhao's flashy but sometimes pointless dribbles along with the hustle plays from Joseph Liu, Alex Jin, and Steven Kim, we won the semifinals with ease and entered the finals as the favourites."

https://beijing.dulwich.org/news-and-events/uc-berkeley-athletic-scholarship-signing-ceremony


I'm hoping Zhao is the 2nd coming of Jeremy Lin.

---

LOUMFSG2 said:

---

Here's what I like about this post:

PG: Paris Austin (SR), Joel Brown (FR)

SG: Darius McNeill (JR), Matt Bradley (SO), Charles Smith IV (FR)

2/3: Juhwan Harris-Dyson (JR)

SF: Justice Sueing (JR), Jacoby Gordon (SO)

"Bigs": Andre Kelly (SO), Grant Anticevich (JR), Connor Vanover (SO), DJ Thorpe (FR)

And you potentially also have a 5th-year Sr in Roman Davis.

That's a good amount of experience throughout the lineup, and unlike last year (and probably this year to some extent), we won't be relying on Freshmen for significant minutes, unless they earn it and are ready for it. Teams make runs when talented classes reach their Jr and Sr years. We'll find out how talented these guys are, and where their ceiling is, but that'll finally be an experienced group, and a group that's had several years to understand and buy into CWJ's system.

---

Wyking Jones was dealt a losing hand, when as a new head coach, he had to recruit practically a whole new team, and he had few veterans to depend on. It is really hard to keep balance among all 5 positions, let alone keep depth at all 5 positions, and keep it going from one year to the next, when you only have 13 total scholarships to work with. Pete Newell had 17 scholarships to give per year, so he could stockpile players on the frosh team, the JV team, and the varsity. Thank you Title IX.

Wyking's problem started with Montgomery and maybe earlier with Braun, when players transferred or left for the NBA, or were kicked off the team for breaking rules. Anytime you have a big recruiting class of say, 5 recruits, if it isn't balanced, there can be problems, and when the players in it graduate, a big hole is left. In 2013, Monty brought in a 5 man class of Mathews, Bird, Rooks, Singer, and Moute, and in 3 years under Cuonzo, all those players had left, and Wyking was left with finding new pieces in a hurry.

I agree with all you've said, but all the front line players are question marks, and we don't know how good they might be. There looks to be a balance problem again in 2020-2021, because we again don't know how well the front line will play, and both Austin and Davis will graduate, so we have only two scholarships to use, one for a big, and one for a point guard to replace Austin. The way college is now, one or more players may transfer, leaving Cal with an extra scholarship or two to use to shore up that front line.

I agree that players having more experience under the same system should lead to better play, but I'm not at all sure what Wyking Jones' system is. After watching several games last year, I can't say Jones knows what it is either. It looked to me like he was experimenting. There is nothing wrong with doing that in his first season with all new players, mostly young players, but I hope he settles down into a more structured system this season.

smokeyrover said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

In this modern world of more player injuries, I think it could help to have more backup at point guard than we have.

---

No inside info, but I get the feeling that Jacob Orender would be the emergency third point guard as he has a little more experience at the college level and practiced with the team last year.

---

I don't think he is strong enough. it might be a repeat of chauca and winston, where they were not strong enough with the ball, so defenders would just force turnovers

and then would Jacob be able to defend?

I don't think Jacob can contribute like the two recent former walk-on guards

helltopay1 said:

---

I mean, really, how hard can it be to recruit perimeter shooters??Ernie Kent from WSU just said that they have 7 guys 7!!!!!!!!! who are shooting better than 40% in practice.

---

I don't understand it either.

helltopay1 said:

---

I mean, really, how hard can it be to recruit perimeter shooters??Ernie Kent from WSU just said that they have 7 guys 7!!!!!!!!! who are shooting better than 40% in practice.

---

How's it worked out for him?

HoopDreams said:

---

smokeyrover said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

In this modern world of more player injuries, I think it could help to have more backup at point guard than we have.

---

No inside info, but I get the feeling that Jacob Orender would be the emergency third point guard as he has a little more experience at the college level and practiced with the team last year.

---

I don't think he is strong enough. it might be a repeat of chauca and winston, where they were not strong enough with the ball, so defenders would just force turnovers

and then would Jacob be able to defend?

I don't think Jacob can contribute like the two recent former walk-on guards

---

I may be mistaken, but didn't both Chauca and Winston have scholarships? One recent former walk-on guard who contributed to a Cal team was Nick Hamilton, and Brendan Glapion contributed some. Before them, guard Jeff Powers was a major contributor. All were walk-ons, with Hamilton having been recruited. Glapion was given a scholarship for his final season, and Hamilton and Powers maybe have been given schollies in their last year as well, but I just don't remember.

SFCityBear said:

---

One recent former walk-on guard who contributed to a Cal team was Nick Hamilton, and Brendan Glapion contributed some. Before them, guard Jeff Powers was a major contributor. All were walk-ons, with Hamilton having been recruited. Glapion was given a scholarship for his final season, and Hamilton and Powers maybe have been given schollies in their last year as well, but I just don't remember.

---

I wouldn't call Powers' contributions major, though he did play. How about Robert Thurman, I think he was originally a walk-on? Also, farther back, was Ryan Forehan-Kelly a walk-on?

stu said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

One recent former walk-on guard who contributed to a Cal team was Nick Hamilton, and Brendan Glapion contributed some. Before them, guard Jeff Powers was a major contributor. All were walk-ons, with Hamilton having been recruited. Glapion was given a scholarship for his final season, and Hamilton and Powers maybe have been given schollies in their last year as well, but I just don't remember.

---

I wouldn't call Powers' contributions major, though he did play. How about Robert Thurman, I think he was originally a walk-on? Also, farther back, was Ryan Forehan-Kelly a walk-on?

---

I was responding to HoopDreams, who had written a post mentioning "recent walk-on guards". Powers' contributions were much more than any other recent walk-on guards, which include Hamilton, Glapion, Garrett Galvin, Rafi Chalian, and Koko. Forehan-Kelly was a better player than Powers and contributed more than Jeff, but I didn't consider him a recent walk-on guard. Ryan graduated from Cal in 2002. Robert Thurman was a walk-on center, who contributed a lot, but I didn't consider him in my post, because he was not a walk-on guard.

Powers played in 75 games, 21 as a senior, where he shot 46% from three point range, 18-39. His three point shooting percentage increased every year, from .0.320 to 0.357 to 0.375 to 0.462. He averaged 7 minutes a game and scored 469 points for his career. He was physically limited, but he did what he was asked to do, come off the bench and make threes. I can remember when Crabbe got injured, poked in the eye or something and could not play against Washington, I believe, and Powers played for Crabbe and the Bears won the game. Powers' contributions were not major, except in comparison to Cal's other walk-on guards over the last few years

Hamilton did contribute last season after not playing much at all over his first 3 seasons. In 2018, he played 31 games, averaging 14 minutes, shooting 37%, averaging 1.9 points, scoring 59 points for the season, more of a contribution than other Cal walk-on guards, except Powers.

I wonder why Cal can't get quality players to walk on and fill the bench. 60 years ago, Cal held tryouts before the season began and 60 players would compete for a spot on the freshman team. Those scrimmages were very competitive, and the many of the players who did not make the team played in Cal's intramural league, which was also a high level of competition. The Putnam Hall intramural team had 3 players who were 6-7,and had quit the Cal frosh to concentrate on their studies, and 3 other players who were starters in high school, and we could not even win the intramural championship. We finished 2nd. A number of Cal students played in the local industrial league, and many more played in lively pickup games with Cal Varsity and Frosh players at Harmon or down at Live Oak where the best local high school and college players played in off hours. I just can't figure out why Cal can't find some talent to walk-on these days. Many walk-ons are not very skilled at all.

SFCityBear said:

---

I was responding to HoopDreams, who had written a post mentioning "recent walk-on guards".

---

I missed that.

Quote:

---

Powers played in 75 games, 21 as a senior, where he shot 46% from three point range, 18-39.

---

I agree he could shoot, and Montgomery could devise schemes to get him a shot. However I don't remember any other contributions and 18 threes only amounted to 54 points.

Quote:

---

I wonder why Cal can't get quality players to walk on and fill the bench.

---

Two possibilities I can think of: More playing time may be available at mid-major, D2, and D3 schools. Also admission to Cal is much more competitive than in my day (late '60s) .

Dear Stu: BINGO

SFCityBear said:

---

stu said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

One recent former walk-on guard who contributed to a Cal team was Nick Hamilton, and Brendan Glapion contributed some. Before them, guard Jeff Powers was a major contributor. All were walk-ons, with Hamilton having been recruited. Glapion was given a scholarship for his final season, and Hamilton and Powers maybe have been given schollies in their last year as well, but I just don't remember.

---

I wouldn't call Powers' contributions major, though he did play. How about Robert Thurman, I think he was originally a walk-on? Also, farther back, was Ryan Forehan-Kelly a walk-on?

---

I was responding to HoopDreams, who had written a post mentioning "recent walk-on guards". Powers' contributions were much more than any other recent walk-on guards, which include Hamilton, Glapion, Garrett Galvin, Rafi Chalian, and Koko. Forehan-Kelly was a better player than Powers and contributed more than Jeff, but I didn't consider him a recent walk-on guard. Ryan graduated from Cal in 2002. Robert Thurman was a walk-on center, who contributed a lot, but I didn't consider him in my post, because he was not a walk-on guard.

Powers played in 75 games, 21 as a senior, where he shot 46% from three point range, 18-39. His three point shooting percentage increased every year, from .0.320 to 0.357 to 0.375 to 0.462. He averaged 7 minutes a game and scored 469 points for his career. He was physically limited, but he did what he was asked to do, come off the bench and make threes. I can remember when Crabbe got injured, poked in the eye or something and could not play against Washington, I believe, and Powers played for Crabbe and the Bears won the game. Powers' contributions were not major, except in comparison to Cal's other walk-on guards over the last few years

Hamilton did contribute last season after not playing much at all over his first 3 seasons. In 2018, he played 31 games, averaging 14 minutes, shooting 37%, averaging 1.9 points, scoring 59 points for the season, more of a contribution than other Cal walk-on guards, except Powers.

I wonder why Cal can't get quality players to walk on and fill the bench. 60 years ago, Cal held tryouts before the season began and 60 players would compete for a spot on the freshman team. Those scrimmages were very competitive, and the many of the players who did not make the team played in Cal's intramural league, which was also a high level of competition. The Putnam Hall intramural team had 3 players who were 6-7,and had quit the Cal frosh to concentrate on their studies, and 3 other players who were starters in high school, and we could not even win the intramural championship. We finished 2nd. A number of Cal students played in the local industrial league, and many more played in lively pickup games with Cal Varsity and Frosh players at Harmon or down at Live Oak where the best local high school and college players played in off hours. I just can't figure out why Cal can't find some talent to walk-on these days. Many walk-ons are not very skilled at all.

---

Sorry, when I meant 'recent walk-on guards' I was referring to Glapion and Hamilton. Glapion was a solid ball handler that didn't try to do too much. I actually remember one time where a defender forced a turnover on him, but the reason I remember it was because I was impressed how solid he was with the ball. I actually saw him play in the RSF last month with another former Pac12 player, and some pretty good competition (for the RSF at least). He was the best player on the court and hit all but one of his 3s. Much more sure ball handler than either Winston or Chauca, and my guess Jacob. By the way, coincidently, I thought I saw Jacob at today's game, although it could have been our incoming 2019 walkon

SFCityBear said:

---

I wonder why Cal can't get quality players to walk on and fill the bench.

---

I don't have any data to back it up, but I always felt Cal got more than their fair share of preferred walk-ons (players that are actually recruited, given preferential admission, and essentially guaranteed a roster spot). As for walk-ons making the team from the general student body, I don't think with today's networking that any student with the ability to play Div. 1 hoops would have gone completely unnoticed in High School. Add to the mix today's admission standards at Cal, and the chance of a non-PWO making a roster spot is even more unlikely.

Civil Bear said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

I wonder why Cal can't get quality players to walk on and fill the bench.

---

I don't have any data to back it up, but I always felt Cal got more than their fair share of preferred walk-ons (players that are actually recruited, given preferential admission, and essentially guaranteed a roster spot). As for walk-ons making the team from the general student body, I don't think with today's networking that any student with the ability to play Div. 1 hoops would have gone completely unnoticed in High School. Add to the mix today's admission standards at Cal, and the chance of a non-PWO making a roster spot is even more unlikely.

---

You make good points.

I don't fully buy the high admissions standards thing. Even with the high standards, the size of the studentbody today is much bigger than back in the day. And just because a kid has high academics does not mean he can't be a good basketball player. Lots of kids who were good athletes in high school and at Cal gave up their sports for various reasons, but the big one was to concentrate on academics. Back in the day, the Cal frosh opened with 18 on the roster, and by the end of the season there were maybe 10 players left. The JVs were similar in attrition. I knew many athletes at Cal in different sports, and many of them quit their sports to avoid flunking out. Today, it may not be the same, as I read where grading has been relaxed somewhat.

I don't have any data either, but my eyes tell me we have and have had a number of bench players not capable of playing Division 1 hoops. (And a few kids with recruit rankings who weren't capable of playing D1 hoops either: Bak Bak, Kaileb Rodriquez, Kahlil Johnson, Emerson Murray, Brandon Chauca, and so forth). After a couple years, Bak had improved enough to play some minutes here and there in game situations.

Some of the recent walk-ons had some high school credentials: Hamilton, Glapion, Koko, Galvin, and King were recruited by Cal. Only Hamilton was able to finally contribute a lot of minutes, as a senior on a last place team. Some unranked players like Geoffrey Frid you take a chance on, based solely on their potential. How did Rafi Chalian get a roster spot? He looked like he had never played much before.


Some walk-ons came from the student body. Didn't Cole Welle's father ask the coaching staff, "Hey, my father played for Cal. Please take a look at my son."? Or something like that. Didn't Robert Thurman call or write Coach Montgomery a letter and asked to be considered for a spot? Ditto for Jeff Powers, who either wrote a letter or was recommended by Brandon Smith or someone else. I think Steve Kerr asked Cuonzo Martin to consider his son, Nick, as a grad transfer, but I don't know if Nick had already enrolled in grad school at Cal before his father had contacted Cuonzo. On this year's Cal roster is David Serge, who has been a team manager at Cal for the last two years. His bio indicates very little experience. Did he work out with the team last season and did Jones think he deserved to be on the roster? Jones couldn't find a better walk-on to recruit than the team manager? I shouldn't be saying this. He may be a stud, and we don't know it yet.

I also notice that only few walk-ons last more than a year on Cal's roster. I still wonder if the pool of quality available players is shrinking or Cal does not care much about the players beyond the rotation. I can't believe we can't find better players than some of our walk-ons and even a few of our recruits.

SFCityBear said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

I wonder why Cal can't get quality players to walk on and fill the bench.

---

I don't have any data to back it up, but I always felt Cal got more than their fair share of preferred walk-ons (players that are actually recruited, given preferential admission, and essentially guaranteed a roster spot). As for walk-ons making the team from the general student body, I don't think with today's networking that any student with the ability to play Div. 1 hoops would have gone completely unnoticed in High School. Add to the mix today's admission standards at Cal, and the chance of a non-PWO making a roster spot is even more unlikely.

---

You make good points.

I don't fully buy the high admissions standards thing. Even with the high standards, the size of the studentbody today is much bigger than back in the day. And just because a kid has high academics does not mean he can't be a good basketball player. Lots of kids who were good athletes in high school and at Cal gave up their sports for various reasons, but the big one was to concentrate on academics. Back in the day, the Cal frosh opened with 18 on the roster, and by the end of the season there were maybe 10 players left. The JVs were similar in attrition. I knew many athletes at Cal in different sports, and many of them quit their sports to avoid flunking out. Today, it may not be the same, as I read where grading has been relaxed somewhat.

I don't have any data either, but my eyes tell me we have and have had a number of bench players not capable of playing Division 1 hoops. (And a few kids with recruit rankings who weren't capable of playing D1 hoops either: Bak Bak, Kaileb Rodriquez, Kahlil Johnson, Emerson Murray, Brandon Chauca, and so forth). After a couple years, Bak had improved enough to play some minutes here and there in game situations.

Some of the recent walk-ons had some high school credentials: Hamilton, Glapion, Koko, Galvin, and King were recruited by Cal. Only Hamilton was able to finally contribute a lot of minutes, as a senior on a last place team. Some unranked players like Geoffrey Frid you take a chance on, based solely on their potential. How did Rafi Chalian get a roster spot? He looked like he had never played much before.


Some walk-ons came from the student body. Didn't Cole Welle's father ask the coaching staff, "Hey, my father played for Cal. Please take a look at my son."? Or something like that. Didn't Robert Thurman call or write Coach Montgomery a letter and asked to be considered for a spot? Ditto for Jeff Powers, who either wrote a letter or was recommended by Brandon Smith or someone else. I think Steve Kerr asked Cuonzo Martin to consider his son, Nick, as a grad transfer, but I don't know if Nick had already enrolled in grad school at Cal before his father had contacted Cuonzo. On this year's Cal roster is David Serge, who has been a team manager at Cal for the last two years. His bio indicates very little experience. Did he work out with the team last season and did Jones think he deserved to be on the roster? Jones couldn't find a better walk-on to recruit than the team manager? I shouldn't be saying this. He may be a stud, and we don't know it yet.

I also notice that only few walk-ons last more than a year on Cal's roster. I still wonder if the pool of quality available players is shrinking or Cal does not care much about the players beyond the rotation. I can't believe we can't find better players than some of our walk-ons and even a few of our recruits.

---

Couple of points here . . .

• Although the undergrad population may be larger than it was in late 50's, I'm pretty sure that the academic requirements are much more stringent. At least they are since I attended in the 80's. Yes, there are academic students that are also good athletes, but most people would agree that it is less likely that those same kids that spend all that time on academics are also spending all that time on basketball. It happens, but it is less likely than when a higher percentage of kids didn't have a singular focus on one sport.
• I think you're point about lack of quality bench players answers your question about D1 capability. There simply is NOT that large of a pool of candidates that have the size, skills, athleticism and focus to play at that level. The difference between a starter, bench or walk-on player is much steeper than even 20 years ago. I'm not trying to get into the players are better then vs now discussion - simply the walk-ons vs D1 in general. The more athletic players have ENOUGH skills to overpower those more skillful. However, the more skillful players do not have enough athleticism to do the same.
• Not just at Cal, but elsewhere - is it much more rare for a walk-on or even a PWO to make contributions to a game. Not unheard of, but much more rare than even 10 years ago. Again - a reflection that the difference between D1 and walk-on is wider (in general).
• I think you bring up a good point with Bak Bak, Rodriguez and others. IMHO, they are examples of recruiting size or athleticisim over skills and bball IQ. Some times these guys can get coached up, but more often than not - they can't. But what is the old adage? You can't coach height?
• Thurman transferred from D3 Norwich and redshirted (not a walk on).
• I agree that this staff needed to improve the quality depth of the bench - and has done so with 2018 and 2019. It is shy of size but is headed in the right direction.
• Last year is a tough lens - since there may have been a number of bench recruits or PWOs that avoided Cal because it was obvious that Cuonzo was on his way out after the Bakersfield debacle and Jones was unknown. Simply a lot of stuff that is unknown to us.

Big C said:

---

Thirteen months from now....

PG: Paris Austin, Joel Brown

SG: Darius McNeill, Matt Bradley, Charles Smith IV

2/3: Juhwan Harris-Dyson

SF: Justice Sueing, Jacoby Gordon

"Bigs": Andre Kelly, Grant Anticevich, Connor Vanover, DJ Thorpe

That's a roster that should get us above .500 in conference and probably into the NCAA Tournament. (Not that we don't aspire to even greater heights, but not a bad two-year makeover.)

---

Im optimistic but we don't know how we'll stack up against the Pac12. When you look at the way Arizona, USC, UCLA, Stanfurd, Washington and Oregon not to mention Colorado and Utah have recruited, I don't see talent superiority at all. We should be competitive and will learn if Wyking and staff can coach.

BeachedBear said:

---

Couple of points here . . .

• Although the undergrad population may be larger than it was in late 50's, I'm pretty sure that the academic requirements are much more stringent. At least they are since I attended in the 80's. Yes, there are academic students that are also good athletes, but most people would agree that it is less likely that those same kids that spend all that time on academics are also spending all that time on basketball. It happens, but it is less likely than when a higher percentage of kids didn't have a singular focus on one sport.
• Thurman transferred from D3 Norwich and redshirted (not a walk on).

---

Completely agree with your first bullet point.

Regarding your 5th, I believe Powers was also a transfer from Denver. He, Thurman and Kerr were all PWO's that transferred into Cal from other programs. Not sure if it is in play here, but Cal also has a history of relaxing admission requirements for upper division transfers since so many lower division students crap out.

You make really good points. I especially liked your description here of the modern game:
"The more athletic players have ENOUGH skills to overpower those more skillful. However, the more skillful players do not have enough athleticism to do the same."

I guess this is what saddens me. I grew up in a game where skills meant more than athleticism. Oh, there were a lot of athletic players around, but usually they became most teams' go-to scorer, and as such they became great one-on-one players, and it was usually fairly easy to stop teams with one go-to player, by using tough defense, more of which was allowed by the old rules. Today one last refuge of the skilled player who is not very athletic is the area outside the three point line (except in the NBA). I prefer a game where all can play and compete, both the athletic and the skilled, in their various combinations. I'm saddened that participation is more limited to the athletic, and less available to the less athletic, but sometimes more skilled or more cerebral players. It used to be a ritual that walk-on players got to play in "garbage time" at the end of blow out games. They willingly got beaten up in practice every day, all for the chance of a little glory, by being rewarded playing time in the final minutes and maybe making a bucket, to the delight of their fans, often relatives and friends. Now even some fans decry the walk-on that minute of enjoyment, insisting that it is more important to keep playing the rotation players, even in a blowout, so they get more practice to improve their play.

It may be a reason why there is less studentbody involvement in games now. The athletes are so heavily recruited for their athletic ability, that I wonder if the studentbody still respects them as student-athletes.
As to Robert Thurman, according to this article on Thurman from the Daily Cal, March 4, 2013, it was Thurman who first contacted Cal and asked to walk on to the team as a transfer:
"So after talking to a friend who went to Berkeley, he emailed Cal assistant coach John Montgomery and said he wanted to walk on to the team. It really was that simpleIn the fall of 2009, fresh off transfer paperwork, a 20-year-old walked on to the Cal basketball team. Thurman did not have a scholarship. He sat out the season due to NCAA transfer eligibility rules."

I'm not sure that Cal has improved the overall quality of the bench. As to the end of the bench, what Jones has done, ethically or not, has sent some players packing, Chauca, Winston, and McCullogh. I don't know if Koko left the team or was another player Jones asked to leave. But in Jones first year he replaced Koko, with Orender and Erving, who together played fewer minutes on a much weaker team. I am surprised both are still on the Cal team. For this season, with Hamilton, Welle, and King graduating, Jones has replaced them with Zhao, Welle's kid brother, and Serge, who was the team's manager the last two years. I have serious questions about this group. I am hoping they are not just warm bodies to fill spots.
What Jones has done is recruit for depth, and we will see a lot of new faces this year and next, nearly all of them ranked recruits. I'm still not sure Jones can evaluate players, based on the Winston-McCullogh experience, so I'll wait and see. At least, Jones will be getting more ranked recruits for his bench and not have to play walk-ons major minutes. Still, those walk-ons can be valuable, like Powers was, and like Welle and Hamilton were in down years. The better the bench is the better the starters and rotation can become.

SF ... guess you don't like the new ncaa metric which will factor in margin of victory. walk on minutes just dropped in half. hope they enjoy those 30 seconds of glory (for the record, i agree with you, and don't like the new metric)

i remember thurman early, and thought he could never get significant PT, due to his extremely slow feet. He just couldn't move them to defend. But by his senior year he could start on many D1 teams, and played a significant, though restricted role on this Cal team. I actually think Monty was too restrictive with him as he could shoot the mid-range shot, but didn't have the green light to do it.

Other teams didn't think he was a scoring threat from watching film, so he would sometimes be unguarded. This resulted in many uncontested/open dunks including in the NCAA

I think Monty strategy was always to maximize the best player, and on that team it was obviously Crabbe. This is one reason why Monty had so many conference MVP, and why his teams always over performed.

as for walk-ons, I wouldn't be too concerned. I don't expect any walk-on to have significant impact for the team till their junior or probably senior year. There are exceptions, but not many.