keep this group together and we can have a lot of success

lots of young talent on this team

Big C said:

---

bearister said:

---

I will be very disappointed in my abilities as an amateur talent evaluator if Matt Bradley's career stats at Cal do not surpass those of Joe Shipp. I was a huge Shipp fan.

Joe averaged: 13 PPG; 4 RB and 1.5 AST
Bradley so far: 10.6 PPG; 3.4 RB and 2.1 AST

Matt Bradley will be an elite player for Cal.

---

Shipp might've been runner-up for conference POY, his senior year (I forget who won).

---

I think that was Ridnour's year. Brandon Roy is the one that beat out Powe.

I have a lot of thoughts on each player, but the clear leaders on this team are Justice and McNeil. Bradley and Vanover have huge upside, although each have significant challenges (Vanover strength, and Bradley height). I also really like Kelly, and we have some solid role players also.

whether you agree or disagree with the above, it shouldn't be too big a surprise to most.

therefore I'd like to talk about a player where others might have a difference of opinion ... Juhwan Harris-Dyson.

If I have an imperfect basketball team (and there are no perfect teams in the pac12), then I want Juhwan on my team. Defense is usually under rated, and it takes more than just the physical/athletic to be a great defender. You also need the defensive IQ and the desire.

I think few would argue with me that he has the size/length and elite athletics to be a great defender. But90%in man defense, he also has impressed me with his hoops IQ enabling him to anticipate passes to get steals or tips. But what separates him from 90% of pac12 players is his desire and passion to play defense. In man defense he already is better than Roger, another long, athletic player known for his defense, and who played extremely hard.

Now is he a great defender yet? Certainly not. He reaches way too much, his stance is sometimes to upright, and he still is weak in a zone, but he also is only a soph. I think he has a ton of defensive upside.

But what about offense? Certainly not a good shooter, has a loose handle so turns the ball over on drives (and he doesn't dribble low enough), and hasn't finished well. The ball also gets stuck in his hands as he surveys his defender, making the entire offense more stagnant (big problem). Unlike his Defensive IQ, his offensive IQ isn't there yet, which is unusual because usually a player just has or doesn't have a high hoops IQ (both offense and defense)

Yes, a big work in progress on offense, and probably will always be limited on that side of the court. But I think he can improve, as he works hard in the off season, and actually has improved his shooting form. He consistently shoots with a low arc, and consistently shoots short, but the key word is 'consistently'. He also consistently shoots in line with the basket, and that is more important than distance and arc because they are easier to fix. I would have a bigger concern if his basic form was broken, or if his shots were all over the place. Look at how his FT shooting has improved since last year. I hope he develops a mid range jumper as I think that's something he can effectively develop.

He is also improving his rebounding, which is particularly important on this team, and recently he's been flying from the wing and just grabbing the ball to the surprise of the opponents who had better position. Basically playing fearless.

Here is a play that summarizes what I mean about his defense. Look where the opponent has the ball, and look where Dyson starts from. Then look how much distance he covers to steal the pass, and then how he jets past the defender like he was sleep walking. Then the effortless dunk running at full out throttle.

That's one hell of an impressive play.

I want a defender like Juhwan on my team

How about that jumper JHD drained against the Cougs! Must've been at least 15 feet out: Nothin' but net.

Yogi Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

bearister said:

---

I will be very disappointed in my abilities as an amateur talent evaluator if Matt Bradley's career stats at Cal do not surpass those of Joe Shipp. I was a huge Shipp fan.

Joe averaged: 13 PPG; 4 RB and 1.5 AST
Bradley so far: 10.6 PPG; 3.4 RB and 2.1 AST

Matt Bradley will be an elite player for Cal.

---

Shipp might've been runner-up for conference POY, his senior year (I forget who won).

---

I think that was Ridnour's year. Brandon Roy is the one that beat out Powe.

---

I friggin hated Ridnour. My wife and I refered to him as a Hobbit and would deride him. It was counter intuitive because we liked hobbits. We figured he was one of the a-hole Hobbits at Bilbos final send offf. Luke also grew up in Blaine, rhe fictitious place of the Stool Boom in Waiting for Guffman. I hope he rots in Mordor.

2020-21 is probably our peak season, good enough for an NCAA appearance and more with luck (contending for conference title, possible sweet-16), unless recruiting improves substantially. The current sophomore class is our strongest, with the freshman rounding out the rotation for the next couple years.

Juniors:
Austin is needed now and next year, as a ball handler and penetrating PG, but doesn't take us to a higher level offensively or defensively. Others will develop and cut into his minutes next year.

Davis could make the team better on the boards by playing more minutes now and next year, but he's in the way for developing our future stars.

Orender, Serge: Practice squad contributors and garbage time entertainment.

Sophomores:
Anticevich is finding his niche as a midrange scorer with turnarounds from the free-throw line against the zone and shots from the baseline after guard penetration. He'll get abused by dominant posts, but be solid defensively against average ones. Limited ceiling, but a definite contributor.

McNeil and Harris-Dyson are very good defenders now and have the athletic ability to be NBA players if they can dramatically improve their ball handling and scoring. How fast they improve will determine the level of our peak performance and ability to compete with elite college teams. We'll be sad to see them go after their senior seasons.

Sueing is more polished now, but his rate of improvement won't be as fast. Great 4-year college player and maybe an overseas pro.

Freshmen:
Bradley and Vanover can be top-tier Pac-12 players as juniors. Connor possibly goes pro after our sweet-16 run his junior year. It'll be Bradley's team his senior year unless some new recruits reach his level.

Kelly makes us better against weaker teams, but is somewhat neutralized by stronger teams. He's a good contributor when we need 2 bigs, but will not get many minutes when we want to play small.

Gordon: If we're lucky, he develops into the type of elite athletic player we need to compete at the top level. Long way to go, though. For now he's an athlete who hasn't shown us much in the way of skills.

Irving: Doesn't seem to be part of the greater plan.

Zhao, Welle: Practice squad contributors and garbage time entertainment.


Incoming Class:
Smith: Our highest rated recruit, but shooting guard isn't our greatest need. Best case he ends up being good enough to challenge our veteran guards for minutes. More likely he's an important contributor as an upper-classman.

Thorpe: Posts take longer to develop and he could get stuck behind Vanover/Kelly/Anticevich. He should be a key part of the team his Junior and Senior years. If he's good enough to contribute before then it's a bonus. We could use an upgrade over Kelly and Anticevich, but at 6'8" he's the same height as both of them.

Brown: A quick, penetrating PG is our biggest need for 2020-21, but he's our lowest rated recruit. Hopefully he can fill the role if McNeil and Harris-Dyson don't become high level ball handlers.

HoopDreams said:

---

I have a lot of thoughts on each player, but the clear leaders on this team are Justice and McNeil. Bradley and Vanover have huge upside, although each have significant challenges (Vanover strength, and Bradley height). I also really like Kelly, and we have some solid role players also.

whether you agree or disagree with the above, it shouldn't be too big a surprise to most.

therefore I'd like to talk about a player where others might have a difference of opinion ... Juhwan Harris-Dyson.
. . .

---

Good Post HD. I agree that JHD will be a defensive stopper on the perimeter for Cal. Great to have when the opponent has a top player that needs to be neutralized. As for his offense, If he can get past the stickiness that you and I abhor, he and the staff can maximize the offensive skills he has. He doesn't need to be great, just a threat to keep opposing defenses honest when he is in the game.

4thGenCal said:

---

Big C said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Vanover vs Kingsley vs Marcus Lee
Compare and contrast.

---

Kingsley never had a very high ceiling, but we sure could've used him this season.. Lee, though a much better player, was too inconsistent and seemed to lack hoops savvy, but he's gonna be a serious winner in the game of life.

I'm super-excited about watching Vanover develop. Each off-season, it'll be like "Can't wait to see how much Vanover's progressed!!" Hoping he can avoid the type of injuries that derailed Kam Rooks.

i know we never want to base coaching decisions on player-retention, but should either Bradley or Vanover leave, either because we keep WJ or because we don't, I'll be really disappointed.

---

Should WJ be retained, only one player would consider transferring (not a key player). Players like the staff and chemistry has been surprisingly strong, despite the very trying season.

---

Thanks for posting this 4thgen! Despite the warts of the last two seasons, this is a testament to the players and staff and their good character.

Yogi Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

bearister said:

---

I will be very disappointed in my abilities as an amateur talent evaluator if Matt Bradley's career stats at Cal do not surpass those of Joe Shipp. I was a huge Shipp fan.

Joe averaged: 13 PPG; 4 RB and 1.5 AST
Bradley so far: 10.6 PPG; 3.4 RB and 2.1 AST

Matt Bradley will be an elite player for Cal.

---

Shipp might've been runner-up for conference POY, his senior year (I forget who won).

---

I think that was Ridnour's year. Brandon Roy is the one that beat out Powe.

---

I remember being miffed at talk that Roy might beat out Powe for POY, as Powe was leading the conference in points and rebounds. But I hadn't seen Roy play. Toward the end of the year, Cal went up to Seattle for a big game, as both teams were neck and neck in the standings (I just checked and we were 11-4 in conference, tied with UCLA for first, and one game up on UW before the game against UW). And then the game started and it was clear Roy was on another level - playing chess while everyone else was playing checkers. It's a bummer he had so many injuries, he would have been a great player.

R90 said:

---

2020-21 is probably our peak season, good enough for an NCAA appearance and more with luck (contending for conference title, possible sweet-16), unless recruiting improves substantially. The current sophomore class is our strongest, with the freshman rounding out the rotation for the next couple years.

Juniors:
Austin is needed now and next year, as a ball handler and penetrating PG, but doesn't take us to a higher level offensively or defensively. Others will develop and cut into his minutes next year.

Davis could make the team better on the boards by playing more minutes now and next year, but he's in the way for developing our future stars.

Orender, Serge: Practice squad contributors and garbage time entertainment.

Sophomores:
Anticevich is finding his niche as a midrange scorer with turnarounds from the free-throw line against the zone and shots from the baseline after guard penetration. He'll get abused by dominant posts, but be solid defensively against average ones. Limited ceiling, but a definite contributor.

McNeil and Harris-Dyson are very good defenders now and have the athletic ability to be NBA players if they can dramatically improve their ball handling and scoring. How fast they improve will determine the level of our peak performance and ability to compete with elite college teams. We'll be sad to see them go after their senior seasons.

Sueing is more polished now, but his rate of improvement won't be as fast. Great 4-year college player and maybe an overseas pro.

Freshmen:
Bradley and Vanover can be top-tier Pac-12 players as juniors. Connor possibly goes pro after our sweet-16 run his junior year. It'll be Bradley's team his senior year unless some new recruits reach his level.

Kelly makes us better against weaker teams, but is somewhat neutralized by stronger teams. He's a good contributor when we need 2 bigs, but will not get many minutes when we want to play small.

Gordon: If we're lucky, he develops into the type of elite athletic player we need to compete at the top level. Long way to go, though. For now he's an athlete who hasn't shown us much in the way of skills.

Irving: Doesn't seem to be part of the greater plan.

Zhao, Welle: Practice squad contributors and garbage time entertainment.


Incoming Class:
Smith: Our highest rated recruit, but shooting guard isn't our greatest need. Best case he ends up being good enough to challenge our veteran guards for minutes. More likely he's an important contributor as an upper-classman.

Thorpe: Posts take longer to develop and he could get stuck behind Vanover/Kelly/Anticevich. He should be a key part of the team his Junior and Senior years. If he's good enough to contribute before then it's a bonus. We could use an upgrade over Kelly and Anticevich, but at 6'8" he's the same height as both of them.

Brown: A quick, penetrating PG is our biggest need for 2020-21, but he's our lowest rated recruit. Hopefully he can fill the role if McNeil and Harris-Dyson don't become high level ball handlers.

---

Depends on the service re. the recruits. 24/7 has Brown rated 50 spots above Smith and Thorpe as the highest rated of the 3. Smith was rated the highest at the time of commitment but fell quite a bit for whatever reason.

Big C said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Vanover vs Kingsley vs Marcus Lee
Compare and contrast.

---

Kingsley never had a very high ceiling, but we sure could've used him this season.. Lee, though a much better player, was too inconsistent and seemed to lack hoops savvy, but he's gonna be a serious winner in the game of life.

I'm super-excited about watching Vanover develop. Each off-season, it'll be like "Can't wait to see how much Vanover's progressed!!" Hoping he can avoid the type of injuries that derailed Kam Rooks.

i know we never want to base coaching decisions on player-retention, but should either Bradley or Vanover leave, either because we keep WJ or because we don't, I'll be really disappointed.

---

As I see it, Vanover has the best basketball skills of the three; certainly the best shooter by far.

Lee is the best athlete, but not a shooter, and a poor defender given his size and athleticism (a foul-a-minute machine).

King had the biggest body, but frankly not much else.

All in all, I see Vanover with a greater ceiling than either Kingsley or Marcus, IF he can develop his body.

PtownBear1 said:

---

R90 said:

---

2020-21 is probably our peak season, good enough for an NCAA appearance and more with luck (contending for conference title, possible sweet-16), unless recruiting improves substantially. The current sophomore class is our strongest, with the freshman rounding out the rotation for the next couple years.

Juniors:
Austin is needed now and next year, as a ball handler and penetrating PG, but doesn't take us to a higher level offensively or defensively. Others will develop and cut into his minutes next year.

Davis could make the team better on the boards by playing more minutes now and next year, but he's in the way for developing our future stars.

Orender, Serge: Practice squad contributors and garbage time entertainment.

Sophomores:
Anticevich is finding his niche as a midrange scorer with turnarounds from the free-throw line against the zone and shots from the baseline after guard penetration. He'll get abused by dominant posts, but be solid defensively against average ones. Limited ceiling, but a definite contributor.

McNeil and Harris-Dyson are very good defenders now and have the athletic ability to be NBA players if they can dramatically improve their ball handling and scoring. How fast they improve will determine the level of our peak performance and ability to compete with elite college teams. We'll be sad to see them go after their senior seasons.

Sueing is more polished now, but his rate of improvement won't be as fast. Great 4-year college player and maybe an overseas pro.

Freshmen:
Bradley and Vanover can be top-tier Pac-12 players as juniors. Connor possibly goes pro after our sweet-16 run his junior year. It'll be Bradley's team his senior year unless some new recruits reach his level.

Kelly makes us better against weaker teams, but is somewhat neutralized by stronger teams. He's a good contributor when we need 2 bigs, but will not get many minutes when we want to play small.

Gordon: If we're lucky, he develops into the type of elite athletic player we need to compete at the top level. Long way to go, though. For now he's an athlete who hasn't shown us much in the way of skills.

Irving: Doesn't seem to be part of the greater plan.

Zhao, Welle: Practice squad contributors and garbage time entertainment.


Incoming Class:
Smith: Our highest rated recruit, but shooting guard isn't our greatest need. Best case he ends up being good enough to challenge our veteran guards for minutes. More likely he's an important contributor as an upper-classman.

Thorpe: Posts take longer to develop and he could get stuck behind Vanover/Kelly/Anticevich. He should be a key part of the team his Junior and Senior years. If he's good enough to contribute before then it's a bonus. We could use an upgrade over Kelly and Anticevich, but at 6'8" he's the same height as both of them.

Brown: A quick, penetrating PG is our biggest need for 2020-21, but he's our lowest rated recruit. Hopefully he can fill the role if McNeil and Harris-Dyson don't become high level ball handlers.

---

Depends on the service re. the recruits. 24/7 has Brown rated 50 spots above Smith and Thorpe as the highest rated of the 3. Smith was rated the highest at the time of commitment but fell quite a bit for whatever reason.

---

Yeah, the ratings for these three guys seem to be all over the map, depending on who's doing the ratings and when. Thorpe's injury didn't help whatever his final ratings will be. I guess that's the way it is for guys in the 75-200 spots.

I will go with EricBear's assessment that all these guys are legitimate Pac 12 players. Each should get some minutes next season. Thorpe may play the most. out of need. I'd love it if he ended up an inch or two taller, but that hardly ever happens.

If we get a grad-transfer big and, most importantly, how good he will be, might be our biggest "X factor" for next year. Well, that and the coaching situation.

HoopDreams said:

---

I have a lot of thoughts on each player, but the clear leaders on this team are Justice and McNeil. Bradley and Vanover have huge upside, although each have significant challenges (Vanover strength, and Bradley height). I also really like Kelly, and we have some solid role players also.

whether you agree or disagree with the above, it shouldn't be too big a surprise to most.

therefore I'd like to talk about a player where others might have a difference of opinion ... Juhwan Harris-Dyson.

If I have an imperfect basketball team (and there are no perfect teams in the pac12), then I want Juhwan on my team. Defense is usually under rated, and it takes more than just the physical/athletic to be a great defender. You also need the defensive IQ and the desire.

...

---

How would you compare JHD's development to Jorge Gutierrez? Jorge came in with decent athleticism, intense desire to play defense, and really no offensive skills to speak of. Each year, he improved. He became a smarter defensive player. His handle was never great, but it definitely improved. He gradually extended his shooting range, particularly his 4th year. You could sense that he focused on 1 or 2 areas each off-season and the results showed. That may or may not have been Montgomery's influence.

JHD is, of course, taller and I think more athletic. Playing in a zone defense somewhat obscures JHD's defensive abilities, but I am disappointed that his offense and ball skills have not improved more. Maybe developing a 8-10 ft shot that he could use flashing into the middle of the zone defense. That's what I hoped to see this year. As you say, he has the great mindset - maybe he just needs a plan to follow.

HearstMining said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

I have a lot of thoughts on each player, but the clear leaders on this team are Justice and McNeil. Bradley and Vanover have huge upside, although each have significant challenges (Vanover strength, and Bradley height). I also really like Kelly, and we have some solid role players also.

whether you agree or disagree with the above, it shouldn't be too big a surprise to most.

therefore I'd like to talk about a player where others might have a difference of opinion ... Juhwan Harris-Dyson.

If I have an imperfect basketball team (and there are no perfect teams in the pac12), then I want Juhwan on my team. Defense is usually under rated, and it takes more than just the physical/athletic to be a great defender. You also need the defensive IQ and the desire.

...

---

How would you compare JHD's development to Jorge Gutierrez? Jorge came in with decent athleticism, intense desire to play defense, and really no offensive skills to speak of. Each year, he improved. He became a smarter defensive player. His handle was never great, but it definitely improved. He gradually extended his shooting range, particularly his 4th year. You could sense that he focused on 1 or 2 areas each off-season and the results showed. That may or may not have been Montgomery's influence.

JHD is, of course, taller and I think more athletic. Playing in a zone defense somewhat obscures JHD's defensive abilities, but I am disappointed that his offense and ball skills have not improved more. Maybe developing a 8-10 ft shot that he could use flashing into the middle of the zone defense. That's what I hoped to see this year. As you say, he has the great mindset - maybe he just needs a plan to follow.

---

love the Jorge analysis. It was always fun to see these guys come into their own. Jerome Randall.
And then you would see complete fails..the PG from DLS to name one.

Big C said:

---

PtownBear1 said:

---

R90 said:

---

2020-21 is probably our peak season, good enough for an NCAA appearance and more with luck (contending for conference title, possible sweet-16), unless recruiting improves substantially. The current sophomore class is our strongest, with the freshman rounding out the rotation for the next couple years.

Juniors:
Austin is needed now and next year, as a ball handler and penetrating PG, but doesn't take us to a higher level offensively or defensively. Others will develop and cut into his minutes next year.

Davis could make the team better on the boards by playing more minutes now and next year, but he's in the way for developing our future stars.

Orender, Serge: Practice squad contributors and garbage time entertainment.

Sophomores:
Anticevich is finding his niche as a midrange scorer with turnarounds from the free-throw line against the zone and shots from the baseline after guard penetration. He'll get abused by dominant posts, but be solid defensively against average ones. Limited ceiling, but a definite contributor.

McNeil and Harris-Dyson are very good defenders now and have the athletic ability to be NBA players if they can dramatically improve their ball handling and scoring. How fast they improve will determine the level of our peak performance and ability to compete with elite college teams. We'll be sad to see them go after their senior seasons.

Sueing is more polished now, but his rate of improvement won't be as fast. Great 4-year college player and maybe an overseas pro.

Freshmen:
Bradley and Vanover can be top-tier Pac-12 players as juniors. Connor possibly goes pro after our sweet-16 run his junior year. It'll be Bradley's team his senior year unless some new recruits reach his level.

Kelly makes us better against weaker teams, but is somewhat neutralized by stronger teams. He's a good contributor when we need 2 bigs, but will not get many minutes when we want to play small.

Gordon: If we're lucky, he develops into the type of elite athletic player we need to compete at the top level. Long way to go, though. For now he's an athlete who hasn't shown us much in the way of skills.

Irving: Doesn't seem to be part of the greater plan.

Zhao, Welle: Practice squad contributors and garbage time entertainment.


Incoming Class:
Smith: Our highest rated recruit, but shooting guard isn't our greatest need. Best case he ends up being good enough to challenge our veteran guards for minutes. More likely he's an important contributor as an upper-classman.

Thorpe: Posts take longer to develop and he could get stuck behind Vanover/Kelly/Anticevich. He should be a key part of the team his Junior and Senior years. If he's good enough to contribute before then it's a bonus. We could use an upgrade over Kelly and Anticevich, but at 6'8" he's the same height as both of them.

Brown: A quick, penetrating PG is our biggest need for 2020-21, but he's our lowest rated recruit. Hopefully he can fill the role if McNeil and Harris-Dyson don't become high level ball handlers.

---

Depends on the service re. the recruits. 24/7 has Brown rated 50 spots above Smith and Thorpe as the highest rated of the 3. Smith was rated the highest at the time of commitment but fell quite a bit for whatever reason.

---

Yeah, the ratings for these three guys seem to be all over the map, depending on who's doing the ratings and when. Thorpe's injury didn't help whatever his final ratings will be. I guess that's the way it is for guys in the 75-200 spots.

I will go with EricBear's assessment that all these guys are legitimate Pac 12 players. Each should get some minutes next season. Thorpe may play the most. out of need. I'd love it if he ended up an inch or two taller, but that hardly ever happens.

If we get a grad-transfer big and, most importantly, how good he will be, might be our biggest "X factor" for next year. Well, that and the coaching situation.

---

Seems like a reasonable assessment. While lacking star power, I don't get that "*** were the coaches thinking giving this kid a P12 scholly" feel about any of the three 2019 recruits. We had way too many of those over the past decade.

I also didn't get that feeling about any of the four 2018 recruits and they all turned out to be key contributors. Looks to be a pretty solid group of 7 underclassmen.

PtownBear1 said:

---

Seems like a reasonable assessment. While lacking star power, I don't get that "*** were the coaches thinking giving this kid a P12 scholly" feel about any of the three 2019 recruits. We had way too many of those over the past decade.

I also didn't get that feeling about any of the four 2018 recruits and they all turned out to be key contributors. Looks to be a pretty solid group of 7 underclassmen.

---

I'm OK doing that with the occasional 6 -10 project. Sometimes it turns out, sometimes it doesn't. But guards and 6-7 slashers are a dime a dozen these days. Thats the real wubbit the fubbick moment IMO.

cal83dls79 said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

I have a lot of thoughts on each player, but the clear leaders on this team are Justice and McNeil. Bradley and Vanover have huge upside, although each have significant challenges (Vanover strength, and Bradley height). I also really like Kelly, and we have some solid role players also.

whether you agree or disagree with the above, it shouldn't be too big a surprise to most.

therefore I'd like to talk about a player where others might have a difference of opinion ... Juhwan Harris-Dyson.

If I have an imperfect basketball team (and there are no perfect teams in the pac12), then I want Juhwan on my team. Defense is usually under rated, and it takes more than just the physical/athletic to be a great defender. You also need the defensive IQ and the desire.

...

---

How would you compare JHD's development to Jorge Gutierrez? Jorge came in with decent athleticism, intense desire to play defense, and really no offensive skills to speak of. Each year, he improved. He became a smarter defensive player. His handle was never great, but it definitely improved. He gradually extended his shooting range, particularly his 4th year. You could sense that he focused on 1 or 2 areas each off-season and the results showed. That may or may not have been Montgomery's influence.

JHD is, of course, taller and I think more athletic. Playing in a zone defense somewhat obscures JHD's defensive abilities, but I am disappointed that his offense and ball skills have not improved more. Maybe developing a 8-10 ft shot that he could use flashing into the middle of the zone defense. That's what I hoped to see this year. As you say, he has the great mindset - maybe he just needs a plan to follow.

---

love the Jorge analysis. It was always fun to see these guys come into their own. Jerome Randall.
And then you would see complete fails..the PG from DLS to name one.

---

I keep seeing these comments about Jorge, and it just doesn't match my memory. Looking at the stats, he shot 45% as a frosh, 31% from 3. As a senior he shot 44%, 33% from 3. He did take more shots, which ups the difficulty, so that should be taken into account. But I don't remember him as having no offensive game. I remember him as being a freshman. He needed to polish his offensive game and offense wasn't his role. But he didn't have anything close to the shooting struggles that JHD has.

Thank you. Dyson is no Jorge. Jorge defended, Dyson fouls alot. Dont agree at all.

JHD is absolutely an asset on defense and I agree with HD that he rightfully earns PT for that alone, despite the offensive struggles. I'd just like to see the offensive usage rate come down a little which is too high for a player with such low efficiency. I wouldn't expect his shot to ever come around. It just doesn't look natural and he's now 0-21 from 3 as a Bear.

Where I'd like to see JHD improve offensively is how to use his size at 6'5" and athleticism to finish better at the rim. If he's gonna be a transition guy and a slasher offensively, he needs to convert from up close and that's not happening yet. This is an opportunity for Bradley too, I think. Even though he's been lethal from 3, his driving game can definiteky improve if he can learn to use his bulk to ward off a defender.

Some of the numbers are pretty-eye opening:

Dunk shots
Sueing: 10-12 (83%)
Bradley: 2-2 (100%)
Austin: 0-1 (0%)
McNeill: 3-3 (100%)
Kelly: 8-8 (100%)
Vanover: 18-18 (100%)
Anticevich: 0-0
Gordon: 1-1 (100%)
Harris-Dyson: 7-13 (58%)

Shots at the rim:
Sueing: 75-116 (63%)
Bradley: 42-85 (49%)
Austin; 61-114 (54%)
McNeill: 39-63 (62%)
Kelly: 54-78 (69%)
Vanover: 28-37 (76%)
Anticevich: 9-15 (60%)
Gordon: 7-14 (50%)
Harris-Dyson: 36-76 (47%)

R90 said:

---

Connor possibly goes pro after our sweet-16 run his junior year.

---

I'd be very surprised if Vanover isn't a four year college player

Big C said:

---

I will go with EricBear's assessment that all these guys are legitimate Pac 12 players.

---

What was the basis for that assessment?

HearstMining said:

---

How would you compare JHD's development to Jorge Gutierrez?

---

One was a force of pure will and the other plays basketball and can't shoot or dribble.

Yogi Bear said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

How would you compare JHD's development to Jorge Gutierrez?

---

One was a force of pure will and the other plays basketball and can't shoot or dribble.

---

I would say that is fairly accurate. Now for controversy: Jorge was a great Bear, a good person and always gave maximum effort. With that said, here is my opinion which is in the minority and extremely unpopular: I never liked his game. I could see his poor shot selection coming a mile away and those type of shots are nothing more than turnovers and; once he was an established player in the league the refs let him mug opposing players and they called it "hardnose defense." Just the opinion of Your Humble Servant.

So you like Dyson over a The Kickee?

bearister said:

---

Yogi Bear said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

How would you compare JHD's development to Jorge Gutierrez?

---

One was a force of pure will and the other plays basketball and can't shoot or dribble.

---

I would say that is fairly accurate. Now for controversy: Jorge was a great Bear, a good person and always gave maximum effort. With that said, here is my opinion which is in the minority and extremely unpopular: I never liked his game. I could see his poor shot selection coming a mile away and those type of shots are nothing more than turnovers and; once he was an established player in the league the refs let him mug opposing players and they called it "hardnose defense." Just the opinion of Your Humble Servant.

---

I didn't think he got special treatment by the refs. I don't think that he took bad shots per se - it's just that there was almost always someone on the floor that you would have rather had take the shot if he was open unless he got within 15 feet of the rim. His 2 point percentage (47%) and his assist numbers (around 4) for a non PG were pretty good offensively, but he was only ever a complementary player on offense.

I award myself 50 Cyberbear points for typing all of that calmly and not coming unglued, LOL.

Special treatment from the refs is what Sharma is going to get in Maples on Thursday night. That guy is a bull in a china shop and he is going to get a free pass to break as many plates and vases as he wants. Corruption.

oskidunker said:

---

Thank you. Dyson is no Jorge. Jorge defended, Dyson fouls alot. Dont agree at all.

---

I brought up Jorge and my point (poorly made, I guess) was that neither JHD nor Jorge were great players as frosh and had obvious gaps in their games. But Jorge improved his second year (not amazingly, but the numbers generally support this) and JHD has not.

HearstMining said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

Thank you. Dyson is no Jorge. Jorge defended, Dyson fouls alot. Dont agree at all.

---

I brought up Jorge and my point (poorly made, I guess) was that neither JHD nor Jorge were great players as frosh and had obvious gaps in their games. But Jorge improved his second year (not amazingly, but the numbers generally support this) and JHD has not.

---

Jorge did something great in his freshman year that I will remember forever. JHD hasn't done anything great unless you get excited about dunks on an undefended rim.

Yogi Bear said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

Thank you. Dyson is no Jorge. Jorge defended, Dyson fouls alot. Dont agree at all.

---

I brought up Jorge and my point (poorly made, I guess) was that neither JHD nor Jorge were great players as frosh and had obvious gaps in their games. But Jorge improved his second year (not amazingly, but the numbers generally support this) and JHD has not.

---

Jorge did something great in his freshman year that I will remember forever. JHD hasn't done anything great unless you get excited about dunks on an undefended rim.

---

OK, Yogi. You get the last word. Happy?

TheSouseFamily said:

---

JHD is absolutely an asset on defense and I agree with HD that he rightfully earns PT for that alone, despite the offensive struggles. I'd just like to see the offensive usage rate come down a little which is too high for a player with such low efficiency. I wouldn't expect his shot to ever come around. It just doesn't look natural and he's now 0-21 from 3 as a Bear.

Where I'd like to see JHD improve offensively is how to use his size at 6'5" and athleticism to finish better at the rim. If he's gonna be a transition guy and a slasher offensively, he needs to convert from up close and that's not happening yet. This is an opportunity for Bradley too, I think. Even though he's been lethal from 3, his driving game can definiteky improve if he can learn to use his bulk to ward off a defender.

Some of the numbers are pretty-eye opening:

Dunk shots
Sueing: 10-12 (83%)
Bradley: 2-2 (100%)
Austin: 0-1 (0%)
McNeill: 3-3 (100%)
Kelly: 8-8 (100%)
Vanover: 18-18 (100%)
Anticevich: 0-0
Gordon: 1-1 (100%)
Harris-Dyson: 7-13 (58%)

Shots at the rim:
Sueing: 75-116 (63%)
Bradley: 42-85 (49%)
Austin; 61-114 (54%)
McNeill: 39-63 (62%)
Kelly: 54-78 (69%)
Vanover: 28-37 (76%)
Anticevich: 9-15 (60%)
Gordon: 7-14 (50%)
Harris-Dyson: 36-76 (47%)

---

Agree that Dyson needs to understand his offensive roll better, and reduce his shots. I don't just mean he shoot shoot fewer shots. I also mean fewer scoring attempts overall. As you said, reduce his usage.

Offensively he hasn't yet developed the vision to make the quick judgements needed to know when to drive, and his loose handle, and upright style of driving makes him prone to steals.

Also he doesn't finish well at the rim.

Again, I don't expect he will ever be a great offensive player, but he works hard in the off season, shows improvement and is only a soph.

Hopefully the game slows down for him and he continues to improve his offensive game where he can contribute on offense within a limited role.


Interesting stats. I'm a huge fan of alpha dog Bradley but 2-2 dunks is misleading. There have been a high number of dunk attempts that were blocked by opponents

HearstMining said:

---

Yogi Bear said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

Thank you. Dyson is no Jorge. Jorge defended, Dyson fouls alot. Dont agree at all.

---

I brought up Jorge and my point (poorly made, I guess) was that neither JHD nor Jorge were great players as frosh and had obvious gaps in their games. But Jorge improved his second year (not amazingly, but the numbers generally support this) and JHD has not.

---

Jorge did something great in his freshman year that I will remember forever. JHD hasn't done anything great unless you get excited about dunks on an undefended rim.

---

OK, Yogi. You get the last word. Happy?

---

It's really awful when extra facts are added to a discussion. Ruins the whole thing.

concordtom said:

---

Vanover vs Kingsley vs Marcus Lee
Compare and contrast.

---

2 thoughts: 1) the ability to put the ball in the basket is, surprisingly, often undervalued; 2) dunks/blocked shots tend to be overvalued. If he stays healthy, Vanover will have a more productive career than either Okoroh or Lee.

59bear said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Vanover vs Kingsley vs Marcus Lee
Compare and contrast.

---

2 thoughts: 1) the ability to put the ball in the basket is, surprisingly, often undervalued; 2) dunks/blocked shots tend to be overvalued. If he stays healthy, Vanover will have a more productive career than either Okoroh or Lee.

---

Dunks are the most efficient shot in the game and are if anything underrated.

Agree that blocks are a bit overrated, but a player that blocks shots discouraged teams from entering the key and alters shots when they do, which is hard to quantify and thus underrated.

Yogi Bear said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

Thank you. Dyson is no Jorge. Jorge defended, Dyson fouls alot. Dont agree at all.

---

I brought up Jorge and my point (poorly made, I guess) was that neither JHD nor Jorge were great players as frosh and had obvious gaps in their games. But Jorge improved his second year (not amazingly, but the numbers generally support this) and JHD has not.

---

Jorge did something great in his freshman year that I will remember forever. JHD hasn't done anything great unless you get excited about dunks on an undefended rim.

---

My memory can be fuzzy at times, but as I recall, Jorge came in with a very high basketball IQ. His only shortcoming was his outside shot. From day one, he hustled, played smart D and took care of the ball on O. Harris-Dyson has a number of non-shooting skills, but he is not yet the "basketball player" Jorge was.

JHD has a higher ceiling than Jorge (as much as I like Jorge).

JHD leads the team this year in bogus foul calls against him. That's hurt his confidence and aggressiveness on both ends.

He's had a couple failed emphatic dunk attempts that made us all cringe. I think that's a function of his frustration. He can do them, but probably shouldn't in most cases.

This latest Wazzu game was therapeutic and we saw some glimpses of what he can do within our team concept, mostly defensive, but also a mid-range shot and the finishes.

Worth watching the highlights again to see what all the guys can do well:

https://pac-12.com/videos/extended-highlights-cal-mens-basketball-capitalizes-turnovers-top-washington-state

Hopefully we don't get screwed to badly on the farm, which would be a setback.