Yogi Bear said:Intelligence and athletic capability are not directly related. You could get the ten best basketball coaches in America to coach me and I'm still going to be a giant liability in even women's hoops.HearstMining said:stu said:Quote:
I don't know how much hoops IQ he has, but we're talking about a Cal student here, so I think JHD can be coached up.
Hey, if Roger Moute a Bidias can make it to the G-League, anything is possible.Yogi Bear said:Intelligence and athletic capability are not directly related. You could get the ten best basketball coaches in America to coach me and I'm still going to be a giant liability in even women's hoops.HearstMining said:stu said:Quote:
I don't know how much hoops IQ he has, but we're talking about a Cal student here, so I think JHD can be coached up.
Harris-Dyson's one remarkable attribute is one that is shared by most college basketball players. At the high school level, it gave him an advantage. At the college level, it's not enough. He has to learn how to play basketball and the first two years don't give me any indication that's going to happen.
Civil Bear said:I'm totally okay with taking a project if the coaches see potential upside. Sometimes they pan out and sometimes they don't (Rod Benson v. Davis), but there is room on a 13 man roster for 1 or 2 of those. What I don't want to see are schollies waisted on projects with limited upside (Chuaca, McCullough, etc.).PtownBear1 said:This history lesson can easily extend through Monty's tenure and likely far beyond. The start of this post season was actually the first time I recall not having any space fillers on scholarship. Last year's group - Davis + Thorpe/Brown/Smith IV would have been a pretty solid roster IMO and didn't have any fillers.Big C said:This is where Fox, if he doesn't know it already, could use a little recent Cal Hoops history lesson:bluesaxe said:I hope like hell we aren't giving out scholarships just to get bodies. If we have to go shorthanded this season, so be it. I have no problem with keeping JHD though.PtownBear1 said:
JHD coming back was very needed. You guys complaining are delusional. We have 7 players on the roster and Fox isn't exactly known for his recruiting prowess. An athletic former 4 star junior that hasn't reached their potential is a very good use of a scholarship.
Fox also needs to make sure he does what it takes to keep Vanover. I don't see him being able to fill 5 or 6 scholarships with P12 level players that are going to be eligible next year. My guess is at best, he'll land one grad transfer that's ready to contribute at a P12 level. And we'll likely be stuck with 2 or 3 Chauca/Davis types taking up roster space for the next several years just because we'll need the bodies.
1. Cuonzo: "A mistake I made at Tennessee was offering too many schollies my first year, to guys who couldn't really help."
2. Cuonzo: "Hey Brandon Chauca, we'd like to offer you a scholarship!"
3. Wyking: "History, shmistory! Hey, McCoullough and Winston, we'd like to offer you scholarships!"
(I'm also fine with JHD coming back. He'll almost certainly get a little better and his schollie frees up in two years.)
I think we're all hoping that any offers for the sake of having bodies are offered as walk-ons, but I doubt that will be the case. It looks like we're already in consideration for a filler and I'm sure there will be a couple more riding the pine for the next 3-4 years.
Looks like it might be a while before the NBA call-up happens.Civil Bear said:Hey, if Roger Moute a Bidias can make it to the G-League, anything is possible.Yogi Bear said:Intelligence and athletic capability are not directly related. You could get the ten best basketball coaches in America to coach me and I'm still going to be a giant liability in even women's hoops.HearstMining said:stu said:Quote:
I don't know how much hoops IQ he has, but we're talking about a Cal student here, so I think JHD can be coached up.
Harris-Dyson's one remarkable attribute is one that is shared by most college basketball players. At the high school level, it gave him an advantage. At the college level, it's not enough. He has to learn how to play basketball and the first two years don't give me any indication that's going to happen.
helltopay1 said:
....and 99% of women cannot be taught the value of silence.
interesting that you brought up Omoke. Athletic with length, no shot, but was a big contributor after he gained some experience and coachingcalumnus said:Dyson was a 4 star in Scout and ESPN. However, that was despite playing Division 3 for a small Christian school. That makes me suspect that he used his 6'5" size and athleticism to dominate weak competition (similar to Omoke) in a way that does not work against equal or better competition.Civil Bear said:I'm totally okay with taking a project if the coaches see potential upside. Sometimes they pan out and sometimes they don't (Rod Benson v. Davis), but there is room on a 13 man roster for 1 or 2 of those. What I don't want to see are schollies waisted on projects with limited upside (Chuaca, McCullough, etc.).PtownBear1 said:This history lesson can easily extend through Monty's tenure and likely far beyond. The start of this post season was actually the first time I recall not having any space fillers on scholarship. Last year's group - Davis + Thorpe/Brown/Smith IV would have been a pretty solid roster IMO and didn't have any fillers.Big C said:This is where Fox, if he doesn't know it already, could use a little recent Cal Hoops history lesson:bluesaxe said:I hope like hell we aren't giving out scholarships just to get bodies. If we have to go shorthanded this season, so be it. I have no problem with keeping JHD though.PtownBear1 said:
JHD coming back was very needed. You guys complaining are delusional. We have 7 players on the roster and Fox isn't exactly known for his recruiting prowess. An athletic former 4 star junior that hasn't reached their potential is a very good use of a scholarship.
Fox also needs to make sure he does what it takes to keep Vanover. I don't see him being able to fill 5 or 6 scholarships with P12 level players that are going to be eligible next year. My guess is at best, he'll land one grad transfer that's ready to contribute at a P12 level. And we'll likely be stuck with 2 or 3 Chauca/Davis types taking up roster space for the next several years just because we'll need the bodies.
1. Cuonzo: "A mistake I made at Tennessee was offering too many schollies my first year, to guys who couldn't really help."
2. Cuonzo: "Hey Brandon Chauca, we'd like to offer you a scholarship!"
3. Wyking: "History, shmistory! Hey, McCoullough and Winston, we'd like to offer you scholarships!"
(I'm also fine with JHD coming back. He'll almost certainly get a little better and his schollie frees up in two years.)
I think we're all hoping that any offers for the sake of having bodies are offered as walk-ons, but I doubt that will be the case. It looks like we're already in consideration for a filler and I'm sure there will be a couple more riding the pine for the next 3-4 years.
However, maybe it was the injuries that held him back. I am glad he is back, both for his sake and because we are unlikely to fill all the open slots with players who are all better than him/offer more upside.
Great at stealsHoopDreams said:interesting that you brought up Omoke. Athletic with length, no shot, but was a big contributor after he gained some experience and coachingcalumnus said:Dyson was a 4 star in Scout and ESPN. However, that was despite playing Division 3 for a small Christian school. That makes me suspect that he used his 6'5" size and athleticism to dominate weak competition (similar to Omoke) in a way that does not work against equal or better competition.Civil Bear said:
I'm totally okay with taking a project if the coaches see potential upside. Sometimes they pan out and sometimes they don't (Rod Benson v. Davis), but there is room on a 13 man roster for 1 or 2 of those. What I don't want to see are schollies waisted on projects with limited upside (Chuaca, McCullough, etc.).
However, maybe it was the injuries that held him back. I am glad he is back, both for his sake and because we are unlikely to fill all the open slots with players who are all better than him/offer more upside.
helltopay1 said:
Dear Stru: There are some things in life that cannot be taught. 99% of players cannot be taught how to shoot, and 99% of women cannot be taught the value of silence.
If we're all agreed that the coaching of the last two seasons was woefully below what it should have been , are we in agreement that we have no basis to pass judgement on whether JHD or anyone else who decides to stay has had their skills coached up?Yogi Bear said:Great at stealsHoopDreams said:interesting that you brought up Omoke. Athletic with length, no shot, but was a big contributor after he gained some experience and coachingcalumnus said:Dyson was a 4 star in Scout and ESPN. However, that was despite playing Division 3 for a small Christian school. That makes me suspect that he used his 6'5" size and athleticism to dominate weak competition (similar to Omoke) in a way that does not work against equal or better competition.Civil Bear said:
I'm totally okay with taking a project if the coaches see potential upside. Sometimes they pan out and sometimes they don't (Rod Benson v. Davis), but there is room on a 13 man roster for 1 or 2 of those. What I don't want to see are schollies waisted on projects with limited upside (Chuaca, McCullough, etc.).
However, maybe it was the injuries that held him back. I am glad he is back, both for his sake and because we are unlikely to fill all the open slots with players who are all better than him/offer more upside.
Agreed. Good point.HoopDreams said:SFCityBear said:JHD has shown that he is athletic, and has potential, defensively at least. He may turn out to be a good player for Cal, or he may not. So far, even considering his illness and his injury, it looks like yet another case where a player is very over-rated by those who compile recruit rankings.PtownBear1 said:
JHD coming back was very needed. You guys complaining are delusional. We have 7 players on the roster and Fox isn't exactly known for his recruiting prowess. An athletic former 4 star junior that hasn't reached their potential is a very good use of a scholarship.
Fox also needs to make sure he does what it takes to keep Vanover. I don't see him being able to fill 5 or 6 scholarships with P12 level players that are going to be eligible next year. My guess is at best, he'll land one grad transfer that's ready to contribute at a P12 level. And we'll likely be stuck with 2 or 3 Chauca/Davis types taking up roster space for the next several years just because we'll need the bodies.
We may end up with Chauca/Davis types (or Kaileb Rodriguez/Khalil Johnson types), but for heaven's sake, get them through try-outs for walk-on slots, not scholarship slots on the roster. Cole Welle was better than any one of these players, and he was a walk-on. And once in a while, you get a Forehan-Kelly.
Dyson greatly exceeded all those players in his freshman year even with his partial recovery from a big illness
Because stand-around-and-try-not-to-do-anything-stupid guard sounds really harsh.oskidunker said:
I can only go by what I see. Two years and one shot beyond point blank range. Bodies? Ok. I think we could find someone better. Come back after next year and tell me how much he has improved. Yogi is spot on. Maybe Fox can work a miracle.
Ps. How can you be listed as a shooting guard when you can't shoot ?
no one seems to care about defense. now I don't think Dyson is a great defender yet, but he won two games on the last play of the game ... one I already talked about from his freshmen year. another one where he locked down his defender on the last play of the game, shut him down, and forced a turnoverUthaithani said:Because stand-around-and-try-not-to-do-anything-stupid guard sounds really harsh.oskidunker said:
I can only go by what I see. Two years and one shot beyond point blank range. Bodies? Ok. I think we could find someone better. Come back after next year and tell me how much he has improved. Yogi is spot on. Maybe Fox can work a miracle.
Ps. How can you be listed as a shooting guard when you can't shoot ?
He's more worthy of a scholarship than trump is your vote.Golden One said:Only if we're short of bodies. Otherwise he's not worth spending a scholarship on.oskidunker said:
Figures. I wonder if Fox will take him back.
How much does a guy in the g league get paid?Civil Bear said:
Hey, if Roger Moute a Bidias can make it to the G-League, anything is possible.
Lamond Murray ain't walking thru that door.oskidunker said:
I wonder if Fox will take him back.
A source confirms to RidiculousUpside.com that the salary intervals penciled in at the "A," "B," and "C" tiers from last season will remain the same. Such salaries are listed at $25,000, $19,000, and $13,000, respectively.concordtom said:How much does a guy in the g league get paid?Civil Bear said:
Hey, if Roger Moute a Bidias can make it to the G-League, anything is possible.
You really have a one-track mind. Get over your obsession with Trump! Dyson is definitely not worth a scholarship. If he gets one, it's a sign we are really hard up.concordtom said:He's more worthy of a scholarship than trump is your vote.Golden One said:Only if we're short of bodies. Otherwise he's not worth spending a scholarship on.oskidunker said:
Figures. I wonder if Fox will take him back.
Poor Tom. It seems like he is drinking the kool-aid and is out there in left field now, in more ways than one.Golden One said:You really have a one-track mind. Get over your obsession with Trump! Dyson is definitely not worth a scholarship. If he gets one, it's a sign we are really hard up.concordtom said:He's more worthy of a scholarship than trump is your vote.Golden One said:Only if we're short of bodies. Otherwise he's not worth spending a scholarship on.oskidunker said:
Figures. I wonder if Fox will take him back.
I am also optimistic about JHD's potential with us, but I really don't think he was one of our most exciting players last season, unless you're talking about the exciting suspense of "Will this dunk go in?"HoopDreams said:no one seems to care about defense. now I don't think Dyson is a great defender yet, but he won two games on the last play of the game ... one I already talked about from his freshmen year. another one where he locked down his defender on the last play of the game, shut him down, and forced a turnoverUthaithani said:Because stand-around-and-try-not-to-do-anything-stupid guard sounds really harsh.oskidunker said:
I can only go by what I see. Two years and one shot beyond point blank range. Bodies? Ok. I think we could find someone better. Come back after next year and tell me how much he has improved. Yogi is spot on. Maybe Fox can work a miracle.
Ps. How can you be listed as a shooting guard when you can't shoot ?
we need length, athleticism, and hustle on defense...things we needed more of last year
also, basketball is a game. it is for entertainment, and he is one of our most exciting players, making some of the most exciting plays (and I don't even mean just his dunks)
we are absolutely better with Dyson
More than just better. Given the players expected to stay committed and the returning players not expected to transfer, Dyson will start. Austin, Bradley, Dyson, plus 2 out of Kelly, Thorpe, Anticevich and Vanover (if he stays). If Gordon recovers from his injury maybe Dyson is first wing off the bench. I don't expect a better wing to arrive because Cal, though it is within reason.HoopDreams said:no one seems to care about defense. now I don't think Dyson is a great defender yet, but he won two games on the last play of the game ... one I already talked about from his freshmen year. another one where he locked down his defender on the last play of the game, shut him down, and forced a turnoverUthaithani said:Because stand-around-and-try-not-to-do-anything-stupid guard sounds really harsh.oskidunker said:
I can only go by what I see. Two years and one shot beyond point blank range. Bodies? Ok. I think we could find someone better. Come back after next year and tell me how much he has improved. Yogi is spot on. Maybe Fox can work a miracle.
Ps. How can you be listed as a shooting guard when you can't shoot ?
we need length, athleticism, and hustle on defense...things we needed more of last year
also, basketball is a game. it is for entertainment, and he is one of our most exciting players, making some of the most exciting plays (and I don't even mean just his dunks)
we are absolutely better with Dyson
Yeah. With a real coach, I'll bet you that Kelly and Vanover start (if he returns) and Dyson comes off the bench, like all scrubs do on real teams.sluggo said:More than just better. Given the players expected to stay committed and the returning players not expected to transfer, Dyson will start. Austin, Bradley, Dyson, plus 2 out of Kelly, Thorpe, Anticevich and Vanover (if he stays). If Gordon recovers from his injury maybe Dyson is first wing off the bench. I don't expect a better wing to arrive because Cal, though it is within reason.HoopDreams said:no one seems to care about defense. now I don't think Dyson is a great defender yet, but he won two games on the last play of the game ... one I already talked about from his freshmen year. another one where he locked down his defender on the last play of the game, shut him down, and forced a turnoverUthaithani said:Because stand-around-and-try-not-to-do-anything-stupid guard sounds really harsh.oskidunker said:
I can only go by what I see. Two years and one shot beyond point blank range. Bodies? Ok. I think we could find someone better. Come back after next year and tell me how much he has improved. Yogi is spot on. Maybe Fox can work a miracle.
Ps. How can you be listed as a shooting guard when you can't shoot ?
we need length, athleticism, and hustle on defense...things we needed more of last year
also, basketball is a game. it is for entertainment, and he is one of our most exciting players, making some of the most exciting plays (and I don't even mean just his dunks)
we are absolutely better with Dyson
Am I missing something?
Sluggo
No coach, even "real" ones, starts more than two bigs, and some start only one. I think your post would make more sense if you mentioned other wings. Unfortunately, Cal does not have any other than walk-ons and Gordon, who seems not to have fully recovered from his injury.Yogi Bear said:Yeah. With a real coach, I'll bet you that Kelly and Vanover start (if he returns) and Dyson comes off the bench, like all scrubs do on real teams.sluggo said:More than just better. Given the players expected to stay committed and the returning players not expected to transfer, Dyson will start. Austin, Bradley, Dyson, plus 2 out of Kelly, Thorpe, Anticevich and Vanover (if he stays). If Gordon recovers from his injury maybe Dyson is first wing off the bench. I don't expect a better wing to arrive because Cal, though it is within reason.HoopDreams said:no one seems to care about defense. now I don't think Dyson is a great defender yet, but he won two games on the last play of the game ... one I already talked about from his freshmen year. another one where he locked down his defender on the last play of the game, shut him down, and forced a turnoverUthaithani said:Because stand-around-and-try-not-to-do-anything-stupid guard sounds really harsh.oskidunker said:
I can only go by what I see. Two years and one shot beyond point blank range. Bodies? Ok. I think we could find someone better. Come back after next year and tell me how much he has improved. Yogi is spot on. Maybe Fox can work a miracle.
Ps. How can you be listed as a shooting guard when you can't shoot ?
we need length, athleticism, and hustle on defense...things we needed more of last year
also, basketball is a game. it is for entertainment, and he is one of our most exciting players, making some of the most exciting plays (and I don't even mean just his dunks)
we are absolutely better with Dyson
Am I missing something?
Sluggo
man, the diggs reference took me back to a dark placeYogi Bear said:He can't shoot, he misses layups, he can't dribble, and he can't pass. That pretty much covers basketball skills.helltopay1 said:
Yogi: He is actually athletic. He just can't shoot from the perimeter and he lacks a high basketball IQ. In a high-powered conference, he would be a walk-on. A good walk-on, to be sure. In practice, he actually shoots pretty well. His confidence, however, is sorely lacking, and he handicaps his team on offense.
I'm not interested in a poor man's A.J. Diggs.
Yogi Bear said:
...You could get the ten best basketball coaches in America to coach me and I'm still going to be a giant liability in even women's hoops....
I got bulk, but not the good kindbearister said:Yogi Bear said:
...You could get the ten best basketball coaches in America to coach me and I'm still going to be a giant liability in even women's hoops....
Not me, bruh, I got hops, handles, a high motor and major attitude. I would crush it in women's hoop. Plus I can actually close the deal on an uncontested bunny.
I have nothing against JHD. It's the people who insist that he's good that are annoying. And people do this over and over again over the years with guys who just aren't good.oskidunker said:
Just ban him for a while. I banned sf city but now have forgiven the pro jones rambling wrecks from Georgia tech. Most of what Yogi says is true. We all want good players on the basketball team. Some people's definition of good is different but that's ok. I hope I am wrong and Dyson becomes Jerome Randle.
Oh and by the way, where was all this concern for the player's feelings when you were all slamming McIlwain and Garbers last year?GrandPa Bear said:
There is nothing on this board more annoying than the smug nastiness that you spew.
What a stupid thing to say. I enjoyed the good things they did and had nothing bad to say about either of them. And while it is true that you are not the only jerk on this board, your nastiness is by far the most annoying.Yogi Bear said:Oh and by the way, where was all this concern for the player's feelings when you were all slamming McIlwain and Garbers last year?GrandPa Bear said:
There is nothing on this board more annoying than the smug nastiness that you spew.
Hypocrites.
I'd complain about you, but I can't remember you ever writing anything memorable.GrandPa Bear said:What a stupid thing to say. I enjoyed the good things they did and had nothing bad to say about either of them. And while it is true that you are not the only jerk on this board, your nastiness is by far the most annoying.Yogi Bear said:Oh and by the way, where was all this concern for the player's feelings when you were all slamming McIlwain and Garbers last year?GrandPa Bear said:
There is nothing on this board more annoying than the smug nastiness that you spew.
Hypocrites.
