How much is Vanover eating?

SFCityBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I doubt Fox cares that much. It's a rebuild either way. Fox wants to get as many of his guys to build his program as possible. And he doesn't need upperclassmen who aren't going to be around when the rebuild blossoms who aren't "all in".

Fox probably sees it as one more scholarship to use to get someone he wants who will be in the program for 4-5 years.

---

Coaches have a window of opportunity to succeed at a program before fans, players, and most importantly recruits stop buying what they are selling. If Cal goes 8-10 next year, Fox can sell that to recruits. If we repeat our 3-15 record, makes recruiting tough. He certainly doesn't want an attitude problem, but he most certainly wants the best roster he can have to get the best record next year. We are not going to replace our leading scorers with better players next year. I guarantee Fox does not want guys to leave.

---

I'm sure he'd prefer his best player with two years of eligibility left to stay, but I think he's not fretting over it because he sees the upside.

He's not going to be judged on next year or even the year after. It will be year 3 and 4 that he has to hit his mark. There is a benefit to using that scholly on a guy who in theory is comparable or better than the departed who will be in his prime in years 3/4.

His sell to recruits for this year and next year: YOU CAN PLAY RIGHT AWAY and will have an opportunity to SHOWCASE yourself. Depth chart is wide open. That's his pitch with or without Seuing.

---

Why wouldn't Fox be judged on next year or the year after? The last guy was.

---

I know this question (rhetorical) was directed at GBear4Life, but I'm bored and tossing in my two pesetas. . .

Judging a coach probably has at least the following components: W/Ls, the eye test, recruiting, PR, game management (includes x's,o's, substitution patterns, clock management, etc.). The ultimate is W/Ls - which if the other four are clicking, tend to sort themselves out.

Judging success also takes more time than judging failure. Because sometimes a team can win despite itself or have a good season with the right team, despite poor coaching. Therefore, success needs some time to smooth out the aberrations. Failure, however, can be judged rather quickly. If most or all of the factors are not working and at the end of the season you're working with hope - that's a very good indication of failure. If the second season is the same pattern, with few or none of the issues changing, then that's enough to judge failure. If we break it down into plus, minus or neutral, Jones was minus in all areas, except recruiting - where I would say he was neutral. To be a P12 coach, you need to be mostly plusses with maybe a neutral or two at best.

I went to most all of the home games this past season. Let's be clear about Sueing's attitude, body language and effort at both ends of the court:

Maybe not the greatest ever, but it wasn't bad. Not bad, by any means. He was our best player last season. His stats compared rather favorably with some of the players that made all-conference (though he did run up these numbers on a last place team). For Pac 12 forwards, he ranked well in points, rebounds, assists and steals. The times I noticed inconsistencies in his attitude/effort tended to be earlier in the season.

Granted I like Vanover and Bradley best of all, as a core to build around, but Sueing's departure is disappointing and he will be hard to replace. Not a good start for the Fox Era.

GBear4Life said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I doubt Fox cares that much. It's a rebuild either way. Fox wants to get as many of his guys to build his program as possible. And he doesn't need upperclassmen who aren't going to be around when the rebuild blossoms who aren't "all in".

Fox probably sees it as one more scholarship to use to get someone he wants who will be in the program for 4-5 years.

---

Coaches have a window of opportunity to succeed at a program before fans, players, and most importantly recruits stop buying what they are selling. If Cal goes 8-10 next year, Fox can sell that to recruits. If we repeat our 3-15 record, makes recruiting tough. He certainly doesn't want an attitude problem, but he most certainly wants the best roster he can have to get the best record next year. We are not going to replace our leading scorers with better players next year. I guarantee Fox does not want guys to leave.

---

I'm sure he'd prefer his best player with two years of eligibility left to stay, but I think he's not fretting over it because he sees the upside.

He's not going to be judged on next year or even the year after. It will be year 3 and 4 that he has to hit his mark. There is a benefit to using that scholly on a guy who in theory is comparable or better than the departed who will be in his prime in years 3/4.

His sell to recruits for this year and next year: YOU CAN PLAY RIGHT AWAY and will have an opportunity to SHOWCASE yourself. Depth chart is wide open. That's his pitch with or without Seuing.

---

1. He will be judged on next year and the year after. If Fox has a Wykingian 2 year record he and Knowlton will hopefully both be collecting asinine quotes about how fantastic they are as they try to find their next gigs.

2. What in Fox' record makes anyone think he can fill a class with players better than Sueing?

3. Sueing is probably the ideal that Fox is recruiting for - 4 year guy with good academics who can contribute from day 1 and isn't out of place as a major conference starter for at least his last 2 or 3 years.

Big C said:

---

I went to most all of the home games this past season. Let's be clear about Sueing's attitude, body language and effort at both ends of the court:

Maybe not the greatest ever, but it wasn't bad. Not bad, by any means. He was our best player last season. His stats compared rather favorably with some of the players that made all-conference (though he did run up these numbers on a last place team). For Pac 12 forwards, he ranked well in points, rebounds, assists and steals. The times I noticed inconsistencies in his attitude/effort tended to be earlier in the season.

Granted I like Vanover and Bradley best of all, as a core to build around, but Sueing's departure is disappointing and he will be hard to replace. Not a good start for the Fox Era.

---

Sueing played hard on the floor. His attitude was good, it seemed to me. I was surprised by his rebounding from day one, and he did lead the team in many statistics, except for 3-point shooting percentage, where only Austin shot threes worse, among the usual rotation players who attempted threes. That is where he will have to improve the most, if he is to play a lot for a better team. He did improve the rest of his statistics over the previous season, which is a plus.

We always don't like to lose a player, especially one who was perhaps the best player in many ways. Still, he had his limitations, and was not the type of player who could lead Cal to the next level, which is to play .500 ball in the PAC12 and from there to compete for the title. He was a one-on-one scorer, who had to drive in order to score, with not much of a shot outside 8 feet. He finished well at the rim, not being able to shoot well from outside held him back. He wasn't much of a passer, and usually looked to driver rather than set up teammates or look to pass to them. He was hindered by having to switch positions from SF to PF, and concentrate on rebounding and interior defense more. He will be hard to replace. Looking at this roster, it might be Kelly who replaces him as a SF, with Anticevich at the PF, or maybe Bradley moves to SF, and Smith is the SG. I hope Gordon and Thorpe (and JHD) will be over their injuries. If they are not, and Fox can not sign someone, it will be a long season with a roster as thin or thinner than last season.

GBear4Life said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I doubt Fox cares that much. It's a rebuild either way. Fox wants to get as many of his guys to build his program as possible. And he doesn't need upperclassmen who aren't going to be around when the rebuild blossoms who aren't "all in".

Fox probably sees it as one more scholarship to use to get someone he wants who will be in the program for 4-5 years.

---

Coaches have a window of opportunity to succeed at a program before fans, players, and most importantly recruits stop buying what they are selling. If Cal goes 8-10 next year, Fox can sell that to recruits. If we repeat our 3-15 record, makes recruiting tough. He certainly doesn't want an attitude problem, but he most certainly wants the best roster he can have to get the best record next year. We are not going to replace our leading scorers with better players next year. I guarantee Fox does not want guys to leave.

---

I'm sure he'd prefer his best player with two years of eligibility left to stay, but I think he's not fretting over it because he sees the upside.

He's not going to be judged on next year or even the year after. It will be year 3 and 4 that he has to hit his mark. There is a benefit to using that scholly on a guy who in theory is comparable or better than the departed who will be in his prime in years 3/4.

His sell to recruits for this year and next year: YOU CAN PLAY RIGHT AWAY and will have an opportunity to SHOWCASE yourself. Depth chart is wide open. That's his pitch with or without Seuing.

---

Every coach is and should be judged every year. Especially by recruits. They will not want to play for a team that goes 3-15 again. Need to have a positive story. The only recruits that go to a 3-15 to get playing time are crappy ones that can't get playing time on the 6-12,8-10, 12-6 teams. It is important to show some turn around year 1. Doesn't have to be winning record, but has to be positive.

If you know what this upside is he sees, let me know what it is. If by that you mean we cannot possibly get worse and are likely to improve, okay. If you think we are challenging for top four in conference, I don't see it. We've got a few good pieces, and Sueing was definitely one (I agree with the Joe Shipp comparison) who if they reached full potential could be good starters, but we don't have enough to be losing any. If by upside you mean that every college team turns over in four years, so we don't know that we don't have All Americans ready to play in 2026. Okay.

SFCityBear said:

---

He will be hard to replace. Looking at this roster, it might be Kelly who replaces him as a SF

---

IMHO Sueing was the only small forward on the roster other than possibly Gordon, who wasn't healthy enough to show us anything. The way I see it either Gordon heals and plays well or we'll have to go with 3 guards. I doubt Kelly will ever be quick enough to play on the perimeter.

stu said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

He will be hard to replace. Looking at this roster, it might be Kelly who replaces him as a SF

---

IMHO Sueing was the only small forward on the roster other than possibly Gordon, who wasn't healthy enough to show us anything. The way I see it either Gordon heals and plays well or we'll have to go with 3 guards. I doubt Kelly will ever be quick enough to play on the perimeter.

---

It was a typo. Sueing played PF last season, more or less, and even some center. So I think Kelly might end up as the PF this season, with Anticevich playing on the perimeter, who can make a three once in a while. I think Bradley at 6-4 is too small to play SF, but that is where he might end up. He is strong enough to get some boards and is our best three point guy until we see Smith, I guess. I hope Fox can get a warm healthy body who can help, because JHD and Gordon have yet to get healthy and prove themselves.

SFCityBear said:

---

I think Kelly might end up as the PF this season, with Anticevich playing on the perimeter, who can make a three once in a while.

---

I'm expecting Anticevich and Kelly to share PF (and perhaps backup C). I don't think Vanover, Kelly, or Anticevich will be able to defend on the perimeter even if they can hit some threes. I wouldn't be surprised if Fox's top recruiting priorities are SF and PG.

stu said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

I think Kelly might end up as the PF this season, with Anticevich playing on the perimeter, who can make a three once in a while.

---

I'm expecting Anticevich and Kelly to share PF (and perhaps backup C). I don't think Vanover, Kelly, or Anticevich will be able to defend on the perimeter even if they can hit some threes. I wouldn't be surprised if Fox's top recruiting priorities are SF and PG.

---

Also PF and C. Maybe SG, too. Pretty much everything. Hope he gets some good ACs, too.

boredom said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I doubt Fox cares that much. It's a rebuild either way. Fox wants to get as many of his guys to build his program as possible. And he doesn't need upperclassmen who aren't going to be around when the rebuild blossoms who aren't "all in".

Fox probably sees it as one more scholarship to use to get someone he wants who will be in the program for 4-5 years.

---

Coaches have a window of opportunity to succeed at a program before fans, players, and most importantly recruits stop buying what they are selling. If Cal goes 8-10 next year, Fox can sell that to recruits. If we repeat our 3-15 record, makes recruiting tough. He certainly doesn't want an attitude problem, but he most certainly wants the best roster he can have to get the best record next year. We are not going to replace our leading scorers with better players next year. I guarantee Fox does not want guys to leave.

---

I'm sure he'd prefer his best player with two years of eligibility left to stay, but I think he's not fretting over it because he sees the upside.

He's not going to be judged on next year or even the year after. It will be year 3 and 4 that he has to hit his mark. There is a benefit to using that scholly on a guy who in theory is comparable or better than the departed who will be in his prime in years 3/4.

His sell to recruits for this year and next year: YOU CAN PLAY RIGHT AWAY and will have an opportunity to SHOWCASE yourself. Depth chart is wide open. That's his pitch with or without Seuing.

---

1. He will be judged on next year and the year after. If Fox has a Wykingian 2 year record he and Knowlton will hopefully both be collecting asinine quotes about how fantastic they are as they try to find their next gigs.

2. What in Fox' record makes anyone think he can fill a class with players better than Sueing?

3. Sueing is probably the ideal that Fox is recruiting for - 4 year guy with good academics who can contribute from day 1 and isn't out of place as a major conference starter for at least his last 2 or 3 years.

---

Exactly.

Big C said:

---

I went to most all of the home games this past season. Let's be clear about Sueing's attitude, body language and effort at both ends of the court:

Maybe not the greatest ever, but it wasn't bad. Not bad, by any means. He was our best player last season. His stats compared rather favorably with some of the players that made all-conference (though he did run up these numbers on a last place team). For Pac 12 forwards, he ranked well in points, rebounds, assists and steals. The times I noticed inconsistencies in his attitude/effort tended to be earlier in the season.

Granted I like Vanover and Bradley best of all, as a core to build around, but Sueing's departure is disappointing and he will be hard to replace. Not a good start for the Fox Era.

---

Agreed. If nothing else, Sueing was likely the focus of most (if not all) of our opponents defenses. That helped the likes of Bradley and Vanover and others.

stu said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

I think Kelly might end up as the PF this season, with Anticevich playing on the perimeter, who can make a three once in a while.

---

I'm expecting Anticevich and Kelly to share PF (and perhaps backup C). I don't think Vanover, Kelly, or Anticevich will be able to defend on the perimeter even if they can hit some threes. I wouldn't be surprised if Fox's top recruiting priorities are SF and PG.

---

Sounds like a plan.

boredom said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I doubt Fox cares that much. It's a rebuild either way. Fox wants to get as many of his guys to build his program as possible. And he doesn't need upperclassmen who aren't going to be around when the rebuild blossoms who aren't "all in".

Fox probably sees it as one more scholarship to use to get someone he wants who will be in the program for 4-5 years.

---

Coaches have a window of opportunity to succeed at a program before fans, players, and most importantly recruits stop buying what they are selling. If Cal goes 8-10 next year, Fox can sell that to recruits. If we repeat our 3-15 record, makes recruiting tough. He certainly doesn't want an attitude problem, but he most certainly wants the best roster he can have to get the best record next year. We are not going to replace our leading scorers with better players next year. I guarantee Fox does not want guys to leave.

---

I'm sure he'd prefer his best player with two years of eligibility left to stay, but I think he's not fretting over it because he sees the upside.

He's not going to be judged on next year or even the year after. It will be year 3 and 4 that he has to hit his mark. There is a benefit to using that scholly on a guy who in theory is comparable or better than the departed who will be in his prime in years 3/4.

His sell to recruits for this year and next year: YOU CAN PLAY RIGHT AWAY and will have an opportunity to SHOWCASE yourself. Depth chart is wide open. That's his pitch with or without Seuing.

---

1. He will be judged on next year and the year after. If Fox has a Wykingian 2 year record he and Knowlton will hopefully both be collecting asinine quotes about how fantastic they are as they try to find their next gigs.

2. What in Fox' record makes anyone think he can fill a class with players better than Sueing?

3. Sueing is probably the ideal that Fox is recruiting for - 4 year guy with good academics who can contribute from day 1 and isn't out of place as a major conference starter for at least his last 2 or 3 years.

---

#2: Fox doesn't need to recruit players better than Sueing right away. He is apparently a very good defensive coach, and good defense is usually taught at the D1 level, and recruits seldom have good defensive fundamentals, so it doesn't matter too much what kind of recruits you get. Recruits are ranked based on their offense, not on their defensive ability. He had good defensive teams at Georgia and Nevada. The question is once he establishes good defense at Cal, can he build on that by recruiting players who can also play offense? But winning basketball starts with a good defense, as two of the best defenses around played for the NCAA title last night, and the best defensive team in the PAC12, Washington, won the PAC12 title.

#3: I hope that Sueing is not the ideal that Fox is recruiting for. He was a one tool player on offense. A drive to the basket. His play was selfish Either that was his idea, or the coach's idea, but he seldom passed and took too many threes for someone who did not shoot threes well. He was not particularly good on defense, but was better than several of his teammates. Just because he was a starter on the worst team in the worst major conference does not mean he is a "major conference starter". I'm not sure he could start for any other team in the PAC12. He started for Cal for two years, because Jones had no one else who could start at that position. It will be interesting to see where he ends up, and if he becomes a starter there as a 4th year junior. All that negative stuff being said, I would be happy if he changed his mind and returned. He played hard and has potential to be better. I'd like to see what our new coaching staff could do to get him to improve.

Well my view of Sueing is quite different

SFCityBear said:

---

boredom said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I doubt Fox cares that much. It's a rebuild either way. Fox wants to get as many of his guys to build his program as possible. And he doesn't need upperclassmen who aren't going to be around when the rebuild blossoms who aren't "all in".

Fox probably sees it as one more scholarship to use to get someone he wants who will be in the program for 4-5 years.

---

Coaches have a window of opportunity to succeed at a program before fans, players, and most importantly recruits stop buying what they are selling. If Cal goes 8-10 next year, Fox can sell that to recruits. If we repeat our 3-15 record, makes recruiting tough. He certainly doesn't want an attitude problem, but he most certainly wants the best roster he can have to get the best record next year. We are not going to replace our leading scorers with better players next year. I guarantee Fox does not want guys to leave.

---

I'm sure he'd prefer his best player with two years of eligibility left to stay, but I think he's not fretting over it because he sees the upside.

He's not going to be judged on next year or even the year after. It will be year 3 and 4 that he has to hit his mark. There is a benefit to using that scholly on a guy who in theory is comparable or better than the departed who will be in his prime in years 3/4.

His sell to recruits for this year and next year: YOU CAN PLAY RIGHT AWAY and will have an opportunity to SHOWCASE yourself. Depth chart is wide open. That's his pitch with or without Seuing.

---

1. He will be judged on next year and the year after. If Fox has a Wykingian 2 year record he and Knowlton will hopefully both be collecting asinine quotes about how fantastic they are as they try to find their next gigs.

2. What in Fox' record makes anyone think he can fill a class with players better than Sueing?

3. Sueing is probably the ideal that Fox is recruiting for - 4 year guy with good academics who can contribute from day 1 and isn't out of place as a major conference starter for at least his last 2 or 3 years.

---

#2: Fox doesn't need to recruit players better than Sueing right away. He is apparently a very good defensive coach, and good defense is usually taught at the D1 level, and recruits seldom have good defensive fundamentals, so it doesn't matter too much what kind of recruits you get. Recruits are ranked based on their offense, not on their defensive ability. He had good defensive teams at Georgia and Nevada. The question is once he establishes good defense at Cal, can he build on that by recruiting players who can also play offense? But winning basketball starts with a good defense, as two of the best defenses around played for the NCAA title last night, and the best defensive team in the PAC12, Washington, won the PAC12 title.

#3: I hope that Sueing is not the ideal that Fox is recruiting for. He was a one tool player on offense. A drive to the basket. His play was selfish Either that was his idea, or the coach's idea, but he seldom passed and took too many threes for someone who did not shoot threes well. He was not particularly good on defense, but was better than several of his teammates. Just because he was a starter on the worst team in the worst major conference does not mean he is a "major conference starter". I'm not sure he could start for any other team in the PAC12. He started for Cal for two years, because Jones had no one else who could start at that position. It will be interesting to see where he ends up, and if he becomes a starter there as a 4th year junior. All that negative stuff being said, I would be happy if he changed his mind and returned. He played hard and has potential to be better. I'd like to see what our new coaching staff could do to get him to improve.

---

SFCityBear said:

---

boredom said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I doubt Fox cares that much. It's a rebuild either way. Fox wants to get as many of his guys to build his program as possible. And he doesn't need upperclassmen who aren't going to be around when the rebuild blossoms who aren't "all in".

Fox probably sees it as one more scholarship to use to get someone he wants who will be in the program for 4-5 years.

---

Coaches have a window of opportunity to succeed at a program before fans, players, and most importantly recruits stop buying what they are selling. If Cal goes 8-10 next year, Fox can sell that to recruits. If we repeat our 3-15 record, makes recruiting tough. He certainly doesn't want an attitude problem, but he most certainly wants the best roster he can have to get the best record next year. We are not going to replace our leading scorers with better players next year. I guarantee Fox does not want guys to leave.

---

I'm sure he'd prefer his best player with two years of eligibility left to stay, but I think he's not fretting over it because he sees the upside.

He's not going to be judged on next year or even the year after. It will be year 3 and 4 that he has to hit his mark. There is a benefit to using that scholly on a guy who in theory is comparable or better than the departed who will be in his prime in years 3/4.

His sell to recruits for this year and next year: YOU CAN PLAY RIGHT AWAY and will have an opportunity to SHOWCASE yourself. Depth chart is wide open. That's his pitch with or without Seuing.

---

1. He will be judged on next year and the year after. If Fox has a Wykingian 2 year record he and Knowlton will hopefully both be collecting asinine quotes about how fantastic they are as they try to find their next gigs.

2. What in Fox' record makes anyone think he can fill a class with players better than Sueing?

3. Sueing is probably the ideal that Fox is recruiting for - 4 year guy with good academics who can contribute from day 1 and isn't out of place as a major conference starter for at least his last 2 or 3 years.

---

#2: Fox doesn't need to recruit players better than Sueing right away. He is apparently a very good defensive coach, and good defense is usually taught at the D1 level, and recruits seldom have good defensive fundamentals, so it doesn't matter too much what kind of recruits you get. Recruits are ranked based on their offense, not on their defensive ability. He had good defensive teams at Georgia and Nevada. The question is once he establishes good defense at Cal, can he build on that by recruiting players who can also play offense? But winning basketball starts with a good defense, as two of the best defenses around played for the NCAA title last night, and the best defensive team in the PAC12, Washington, won the PAC12 title.

#3: I hope that Sueing is not the ideal that Fox is recruiting for. He was a one tool player on offense. A drive to the basket. His play was selfish Either that was his idea, or the coach's idea, but he seldom passed and took too many threes for someone who did not shoot threes well. He was not particularly good on defense, but was better than several of his teammates. Just because he was a starter on the worst team in the worst major conference does not mean he is a "major conference starter". I'm not sure he could start for any other team in the PAC12. He started for Cal for two years, because Jones had no one else who could start at that position. It will be interesting to see where he ends up, and if he becomes a starter there as a 4th year junior. All that negative stuff being said, I would be happy if he changed his mind and returned. He played hard and has potential to be better. I'd like to see what our new coaching staff could do to get him to improve.

---

I was responding to a post that said "there is a benefit to using that scholly on a guy who in theory is comparable or better than the departed". For that to be true Fox does have to recruit better players than Sueing. I'm not sure why you decided to move the goalposts?

boredom said:

---

I was responding to a post that said "there is a benefit to using that scholly on a guy who in theory is comparable or better than the departed". For that to be true Fox does have to recruit better players than Sueing. I'm not sure why you decided to move the goalposts?

---

Easier to score that way?

OaktownBear said:

---

If Cal goes 8-10 next year, Fox can sell that to recruits.

---

If Cal goes 8-10 next year in conference, give him a pay raise. Short of some talented transfers with sick Bay Area moms, he's not gonna have a ton to work with next year.