Austin: Major upgrade from last year, but monopolizes the ball while others stand around. Not much of a shot (How is this possible in the Age of Steph Curry?). Still, he's not bad

Sueing: Good player, but I'd like to see him spend less energy jacking up shots and more energy on everything else.

Bradley: Already one of our best players. Compares with Joe Shipp, but a little shorter.

Kelly: Looks smaller and more mobile than I had expected. Future star, if he plays his cards right.

Vanover: Already runs better than he did in his HS video. Goal this year should be to keep his feet and legs from chronic injury and then he will help, down the road. Could develop into a crowd favorite. Crowds on the road will probably enjoy him, too.

McNeill: Like last year, looks clueless for too many long stretches, on both ends of the court. He and the staff have known for the last 10 mos. that he was going to play off the ball this season. Is it rocket science?

Anticevich and Gordon: Had a lot of their minutes while I was getting my daughter to go to bed, but I could tell by the score that they didn't do much tonight.

Erving: I always wondered why he never played last season. Now I get it. Geez, he gets stripped and doesn't even make an effort to follow the guy down the court?

Overall defense: We're always 1/2 step out of position on defense (or more). That and no rim protection is a bad combination. Staff needs to simplify and teach. Getting JHD and maybe Davis back will help.

Overall offense: We can't shoot and we struggle to play as a team, but we knew this before.

Overall overall: Some of us are already giving up and getting sarcastic. I prefer to watch the bright spots. There are a few. Hoping to see togetherness and modest improvement, going forward.

Big C said:

---

Austin: Major upgrade from last year, but monopolizes the ball while others stand around. Not much of a shot (How is this possible in the Age of Steph Curry?). Still, he's not bad

---

I agree, all point guards should shoot as well as the greatest shooter of all-time.

GMP said:

---

Big C said:

---

Austin: Major upgrade from last year, but monopolizes the ball while others stand around. Not much of a shot (How is this possible in the Age of Steph Curry?). Still, he's not bad

---

I agree, all point guards should shoot as well as the greatest shooter of all-time.

---

It's late and people are feeling sarcastic, fine. What I'm saying is, I'm thinking every point guard coming up now must be practicing their shot from beyond the arc, plus there are shooting coaches out there. To get to one's 4th year in college with a shot that looks like that seems a little odd. But hey, he's a pretty decent player, overall.

Big C said:

---

Austin: Major upgrade from last year, but monopolizes the ball while others stand around. Not much of a shot (How is this possible in the Age of Steph Curry?). Still, he's not bad

---

Not much of a shot?

Austin was 6 for 10 in the game.

The rest of the team was a combined 29%, 12 for 41.

I'd like to see us get back on defense. That's it. That's my goal for the season. Seriously. If we can do that every game, it tells me that we are at least hustling. It doesn't take talent to hustle. Let's accomplish that first. Baby steps.

I swear, if Monty would've seen us do that once (let alone multiple times) he would've called a timeout immediately and chewed them out.

there was some good, there was some bad:

The Good:
1) Bradley Defense - great help defense. First ten minutes of the game, he made two great help side rotations, showing great anticipation and smarts. This matched with his quickness make him a tough match up. Clearly our best two-way player.

2) Kelly on the boards: For a team with zero inside presence, it was good to see him show some aggressiveness in the paint. His offense is raw, but there is potential. Why couldn't he be Romello White?

3) Paris: His pace and dribble penetration were impressive at times tonight. Near the end of the first half, he penetrated and kicked to Bradley on the left wing for a 3-ball. His dribble-drive collapsed the defense and Bradley's rotation was perfect Too often he got into the paint with no real plan and was forced to throw up a difficult shot. Perhaps he will mix his shot selection and his teammates will rotate to seams in the defense when they see him penetrate rather than watch him drive. One can hope...

4) Vanover: his athleticism is much better than anticipated. granted, I anticipated them to be non-existent.

The Bad...

a) Shot Selection: way too many contested 15ft jumpers. Far too often the offensive set resulted in a contested jumper out of rhythm. Very little creativity or patience on offense. Settling for jumpers, especially when no is very good at them is a very bad habit.

b) Sophmore "sensations": as referred to by Roxie. McNeil is clearly a streaky shooter, tonight was the bad side of the streak. Sueing seemed out of sync also. Coaches need to better game plan to get him involved. He is one of the few players on this team that can score in the Pac 12.

c) Lack of Intensity: We were outhustled on multiple plays. Too passive on offense. No movement, no creativity. Can Grant play with his back to the basket? He seems like a skilled player. We cant shoot 3s, we struggle with the mid-range and we don't have a true "go to" guy. Can we try to develop some of the skills he has shown at times? He seems really passive on offense.

BearSD said:

---

Big C said:

---

Austin: Major upgrade from last year, but monopolizes the ball while others stand around. Not much of a shot (How is this possible in the Age of Steph Curry?). Still, he's not bad

---

Not much of a shot?

Austin was 6 for 10 in the game.

The rest of the team was a combined 29%, 12 for 41.

---

Not much of an OUTSIDE shot. He's a decent scorer, pretty good defender and good passer (if his targets could convert more, he'd get a lot of assists).

Looks like we're in for yet another banner year for men's basketball.

Big C said:

---

Austin: Major upgrade from last year, but monopolizes the ball while others stand around. Not much of a shot (How is this possible in the Age of Steph Curry?). Still, he's not bad

---

The good news is Austin seems to be a decent player. The bad news is Austin seems to be our best player.

Shooting stats a bit deceiving. Austen and Bradley were both over 50%, but as pointed out Paris was successful mostly on drives.

Not quite fair to say "rest of the team" was 25%, because Kelly, Anticevich, and Vanover were each 2-3 (67%). It was basically Sueing (3-14) and McNeill (0-8) along with Gordon who missed his only 2 shots who contributed to the bricklaying convention.

I can't tell if we can shoot at all, because we never ran plays that might actually free up a shooter. It's supposed to be a motion offense, but not sure how you run motion if no one moves. There was one stretch of about 4 or 5 possessions that I watched carefully, in which there was not ONE SINGLE screen, not on-ball, not off-ball, no pin down. Nothing.

Like the OP of another thread, I so disheartened with the men's basketball program, I have lost all emotional connection to it. Normally, I'd love to read about posters impressions of our players but I saw the thread title, clicked and scrolled down to just write, why does anyone care? Stay away for 2-3 years and then let's see where we are.

fat_slice said:

---

Like the OP of another thread, I so disheartened with the men's basketball program, I have lost all emotional connection to it. Normally, I'd love to read about posters impressions of our players but I saw the thread title, clicked and scrolled down to just write, why does anyone care? Stay away for 2-3 years and then let's see where we are.

---

That's your prerogative, of course, but I'm looking forward to watching the young talent develop. Hopefully, there will be some evidence of decent coaching.

UrsaMajor said:

---

Shooting stats a bit deceiving. Austen and Bradley were both over 50%, but as pointed out Paris was successful mostly on drives.

Not quite fair to say "rest of the team" was 25%, because Kelly, Anticevich, and Vanover were each 2-3 (67%). It was basically Sueing (3-14) and McNeill (0-8) along with Gordon who missed his only 2 shots who contributed to the bricklaying convention.

I can't tell if we can shoot at all, because we never ran plays that might actually free up a shooter. It's supposed to be a motion offense, but not sure how you run motion if no one moves. There was one stretch of about 4 or 5 possessions that I watched carefully, in which there was not ONE SINGLE screen, not on-ball, not off-ball, no pin down. Nothing.

---

Was Yale in a zone during these times? Because that might explain the lack of movement of personnel. (Offense 101: Attack mam-to-man with movement of personnel. Attack zone with movement of ball.)

If Yale was playing man, then I don't know what to say. Yes, I noticed the players standing around a lot, while Austin had the ball.

Agree with most of the above, however Suing was set coming off the ball to catch-&-shoot numerous threes, only to pump fake and either attempt to drive to nowhere and take a low percentage shot or take a low percentage flat-footed three. I think if he shot those threes in the flow of the offense he would have ended up with a better night.

My guess is that with the loss of last years big men, Jones is telling Suing he better start taking them ball to the basket. Lasy year he would have taken those open shots. He didn't suddenly decide to drive .

Observations:
Austin is not a passing point guard; he doesn't control his teammates.
Anticevich is greatly improved on defense.
The players seem to think a contested jump shot off the bounce is better than a catch and shoot.
No off the ball anything.
Some bad free throw shooting.
NO DEFENSIVE HUSTLE in the second half.
The big guy impacted the game when he came in; Yale was befuddled for about five minutes. His presence also opened up the offside of the lane.

Conclusion: coaching is ineffective.

I was disappointed in Austin's first game, as I wrote in the thread on Austin. I liked his speed if he can harness it, and his quickness. I'd like to see a full court press with only Austin and Bradley pressing, a la 1959. Both are quick, can steal a ball, and can finish at the rim. Austin's shooting stroke is very unorthodox.

Bradley and Shipp have similar bodies, but Bradley is a more muscular inside player, while Shipp was primarily a perimeter shooter. I like Bradley. He is a good help defender, but not as good man on man, from what I could see.

I was disappointed in the two flagrant fouls, on Bradley and Gordon, primarily on hooking the opponent. Is this something we are teaching, the hooking, which when carried too far, becomes a flagrant foul? I don't like it.

Sueing is still playing like he is on a playground. Always dribbling first. One on oneh I always thought his release with the wrist cock is too slow, and he gets some of his shots blocked near the basket. I don't like our players taking heavily guarded shots, which are low-percentage.

I really liked Kelly's intuition on rebounds. He has a nose for loose balls. Shoots his free throws too quickly, and that goes for several players. Take your time, relax, get the feel of the ball, aim, and then shoot.

Anticevich looks really improved on lateral movement on defense. I don't know if he is quicker or anticipating better, but he looks much better on man defense. I don't like the way he stands around on offense, as the analyst pointed out. Everybody seemed to be doing it.

McNeill may be one of those player who has to have the ball in his hands to score, which may mean he can score better at point guard than at shooting guard, where he has to catch and shoot. That is OK. I don't mind him playing point guard for some minutes. He was streaky last season, and had hot and cold streaks. Hopefully this is just a slow start. He is still the best perimeter shooter and maybe the best free throw shooter on the team, until proven different.

I really liked Vanover. Already runs down the floor better than Rooks and Kingsley. He played smart, except I didn't like his three. He was off-balance and in traffic. I think we should just catch and shoot. I think he should be able to play 15 minutes, sliding Kelly to the 4.

Gordon looks not in game shape yet. I think he got frustrated with the fouls. He looks pretty athletic, so maybe might be a good player.

Wyking Jones: Yikes. We look too much like last season. To be fair, he has several new players to work into the rotation. Still, we don't move, we don't pass, and we are weak defensively. Other clubs are going to take us apart if we play like this. I think we hustle but we don't play smart. I don't like the sets, if it means players stand around. I especially don't like the weave. It has no purpose. The weave from Clair Bee to Pete Newell to Mike Montgomery should not be a bunch of handoffs with no objective. It should be a dribble-screen-handoff, so just as you hand the ball off, you screen your teammate's defender, forcing the defense to commit to staying with both of you or switching. Do this 5-6 times in a row or more, and someone is going to lose his man and the man will be wide open for an easy bucket.

I am glad football season has a few games remaining. The Cal football team plays more like a team than the Cal basketball team did in their first game, and I'll have something else to watch for sports entertainment.

Hope you enjoyed tonight's effort from the football team! Go Bears!

KenBurnski said:

---

Hope you enjoyed tonight's effort from the football team! Go Bears!

---

Loved it. Hard fought defensive struggle on both sides. Any time Cal beats USC in football, it is a good day, but this one was sweet, to break a long losing streak to them.