Will someone be kind enough to post one? By position please.

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

Will someone be kind enough to post one? By position please.

---

A lot depends on health and which frosh are the real deal:

1's: Austin, Brown
2/3's: Bradley, South, JHD, Klonaras
3/4's: Gordon, Kuany
4/5's: Kelly, Lars, Anticevich, Thorpe

With all the youth and injury questions it's going to be more about getting the best qualified players the most minutes over keeping with traditional positions.

Here's my WAG for next season's minutes distribution for the first half of the season. I think we'll see a pretty broad distribution of minutes early on while Fox figures out what he's got and who the real contributors are. And I'd expect that distribution to narrow considerably as the season progresses. With the relative strength of the team being guards and with no proven contributors in the post. I suspect we'll play relatively small.

Lead guard:
Austin - 28 mins/game
Brown - 10 mins/game

Shooting Guards:
Bradley: 28 mins/game
South: 30 mins/game

Wings:
Klonaras: 12 mins/game
Gordon: 18 mins/game
Harris-Dyson: 15 mins/game

4s/5s
Anticevich: 17 mins/game
Kuany: 5 mins/game
Thiemann: 12 mins/game
Thorpe: 5 mins/game
Kelly: 20 mins/game

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Here's my WAG for next season's minutes distribution for the first half of the season. I think we'll see a pretty broad distribution of minutes early on while Fox figures out what he's got and who the real contributors are. And I'd expect that distribution to narrow considerably as the season progresses. With the relative strength of the team being guards and with no proven contributors in the post. I suspect we'll play relatively small.

Lead guard:
Austin - 28 mins/game
Brown - 10 mins/game

Shooting Guards:
Bradley: 28 mins/game
South: 30 mins/game

Wings:
Klonaras: 12 mins/game
Gordon: 18 mins/game
Harris-Dyson: 15 mins/game

4s/5s
Anticevich: 17 mins/game
Kuany: 5 mins/game
Thiemann: 12 mins/game
Thorpe: 5 mins/game
Kelly: 20 mins/game

---

This could be about right, but, as we look at the bigger guys (especially), there are just SO MANY question marks:

- Will Gordon turn out to be a solid contributor? (this one is huge... my "X factor", as I could picture it going either way)

- Has Kelly dedicated himself to improving his game?

- Are Klonaras and Thiemann really players? If so, can they hit the ground running?

- Kuany, same question, and also, what is his natural position?

Exactly. Other than Austin, Bradley and South, I think everyone else is a question mark because of injury (Gordon) or development (Anticevich, JHD, Kelly) or just plain rookies. Some will take a big stride forward, I hope, and some may fizzle out. But with 12 bodies who all have the potential to become meaningful contributors, it'll be fun to watch. Lots of competition for minutes and with Fox being new, he likely has no favorites.

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Exactly. Other than Austin, Bradley and South, I think everyone else is a question mark because of injury (Gordon) or development (Anticevich, JHD, Kelly) or just plain rookies. Some will take a big stride forward, I hope, and some may fizzle out. But with 12 bodies who all have the potential to become meaningful contributors, it'll be fun to watch. Lots of competition for minutes and with Fox being new, he likely has no favorites.

---

Indeed. I was going to keep my season ticket anyway, because that is what I do. But now, even with the likelihood of our third-in-a-row lousy conference season, there is enough hope to where I'll actually be excited to come to Haas again (had to drag myself in lotsa times, the last two seasons).

Now all we need is steady improvement. I'll be patient, as long as we stay headed in the right direction.

Thanks to all for the responses.

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Here's my WAG for next season's minutes distribution for the first half of the season. I think we'll see a pretty broad distribution of minutes early on while Fox figures out what he's got and who the real contributors are. And I'd expect that distribution to narrow considerably as the season progresses. With the relative strength of the team being guards and with no proven contributors in the post. I suspect we'll play relatively small.

Lead guard:
Austin - 28 mins/game
Brown - 10 mins/game

Shooting Guards:
Bradley: 28 mins/game
South: 30 mins/game

Wings:
Klonaras: 12 mins/game
Gordon: 18 mins/game
Harris-Dyson: 15 mins/game

4s/5s
Anticevich: 17 mins/game
Kuany: 5 mins/game
Thiemann: 12 mins/game
Thorpe: 5 mins/game
Kelly: 20 mins/game

---

I'm not following this. There are only 40 minutes in a standard game. Your total minutes for shooting guard is 58, for the Wing, 45, and for two bigs together, 59 minutes. Do you mean to have Bradley and South playing a big man position some of the time, or Klonaras and Gordon doing the same?

I double checked the math and it's correct. Those averages add up to 200 mins/game (assuming no overtime) which is right.

Basically, what I'm saying is that we'll go with a three guard lineup much of the time. Based on those numbers, there's always one of the listed 4/5 in the game. Approximately half the time, we play two of the listed 4/5s and the other half, just one when we play small. Something like going four-out with Austin/Bradley/South, a big and a wing like Gordon.

I wouldn't over-analyze it too much. Just a guess on my part based on a first look at the personnel and how we might play. It will definitely be wrong somehow. Just a matter of how. It's also fair to quibble with the categorization of the players. I just find it hard these days to think of lineups in the traditional 1/2/3/4/5 sense since that's not how most teams play basketball anymore (and certainly not how we'll play next year).

TheSouseFamily said:

---

I double checked the math and it's correct. Those averages add up to 200 mins/game (assuming no overtime) which is right.

Basically, what I'm saying is that we'll go with a three guard lineup much of the time. Based on those numbers, there's always one of the listed 4/5 in the game and approximately half the time, we play two of the listed 4/5s and the other half, just one when we play small. Something like going four-out with Austin/Bradley/South, a big and a wing like Gordon.

I wouldn't over-analyze it too much. Just a guess on my part based on a first look at the personnel and how we might play. It will definitely be wrong somehow. Just a matter of how. It's also fair to quibble with the categorization of the players. I just find it hard these days to think of lineups in the traditional 1/2/3/4/5 sense since that's not how most teams play basketball anymore (and certainly not how we'll play next year).

---

In Fox I trust -- at least in terms of coaching compared to the last 5 years.

TSF,

Of course I had to double-check the minutes.

What you've done is provide really good analytical basis for discussing each
each player and position.

Thank goodness we have enough players to make it meaningful.

GO BEARS!!!

My WAG is that Brown will end up averaging far more than 10 minutes/ game this season.

TheSouseFamily said:

---

I double checked the math and it's correct. Those averages add up to 200 mins/game (assuming no overtime) which is right.

Basically, what I'm saying is that we'll go with a three guard lineup much of the time. Based on those numbers, there's always one of the listed 4/5 in the game. Approximately half the time, we play two of the listed 4/5s and the other half, just one when we play small. Something like going four-out with Austin/Bradley/South, a big and a wing like Gordon.

I wouldn't over-analyze it too much. Just a guess on my part based on a first look at the personnel and how we might play. It will definitely be wrong somehow. Just a matter of how. It's also fair to quibble with the categorization of the players. I just find it hard these days to think of lineups in the traditional 1/2/3/4/5 sense since that's not how most teams play basketball anymore (and certainly not how we'll play next year).

---

By golly, you are right. I was being too narrow-minded. Now that I understand it, unless a lot of the bigs are really raw, I would see them playing more, and Cal going small not very often, because our biggest weaknesses last season were rebounding and interior defense. We may not win a lot of games with weak perimeter shooting, but we won't win any more than last season unless we shore up the rebounding and interior defense, and we need height for both of those. I also like Kuany from the tapes and think he'd make an interesting wing. I'll take a stab at a depth chart.

PG: Austin, but maybe beaten out by Brown or even South

SG: Bradley, South (possibly vice versa), Klonaras

SF: Klonaras, Kuany, maybe Gordon if recovered from injury, Anticevich

PF: Kelly, Thorpe, (if recovered from injury), Kuany, Anticevich

C: Lars, Thorpe, Kelly

Defensive Specialist: JHD, can back up at SG, SF

Also I don't see Kelly hanging on to a starting spot if he hasn't improved his rebounding, defense, and attitude. We have too many eager players behind him.

Lars has offensive skills, but few defensive skills. I say he plays. We need post scoring, and he can do that.

Then again, few players live up their videotapes, and that is all I have to go on.

Remember Fox places defense first.

SFCityBear said:

---

PG: Austin, but maybe beaten out by Brown or even South

---

I think Austin plays according to his defense. Last season I thought he had the tools but lacked concentration.

Quote:

---

SG: Bradley, South (possibly vice versa), Klonaras

---

I think Bradley and South might be our only perimeter scoring options, if so both might be on the court for significant minutes.

Quote:

---

Defensive Specialist: JHD, can back up at SG, SF

---

Makes sense to me.

Quote:

---

SF: Klonaras, Kuany, maybe Gordon if recovered from injury, Anticevich

---

I don't think Anticevich is quick enough to play perimeter defense but be should be fine at PF.

Quote:

---

PF: Kelly, Thorpe, (if recovered from injury), Kuany, Anticevich

C: Lars, Thorpe, Kelly

---

I see PF and C as more or less interchangeable since none of these guys strike me as true centers.

Quote:

---

Also I don't see Kelly hanging on to a starting spot if he hasn't improved his rebounding, defense, and attitude. We have too many eager players behind him.

---

+1

stu said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

PG: Austin, but maybe beaten out by Brown or even South

---

I think Austin plays according to his defense. Last season I thought he had the tools but lacked concentration.

Quote:

---

SG: Bradley, South (possibly vice versa), Klonaras

---

I think Bradley and South might be our only perimeter scoring options, if so both might be on the court for significant minutes.

Quote:

---

Defensive Specialist: JHD, can back up at SG, SF

---

Makes sense to me.

Quote:

---

SF: Klonaras, Kuany, maybe Gordon if recovered from injury, Anticevich

---

I don't think Anticevich is quick enough to play perimeter defense but be should be fine at PF.

Quote:

---

PF: Kelly, Thorpe, (if recovered from injury), Kuany, Anticevich

C: Lars, Thorpe, Kelly

---

I see PF and C as more or less interchangeable since none of these guys strike me as true centers.

Quote:

---

Also I don't see Kelly hanging on to a starting spot if he hasn't improved his rebounding, defense, and attitude. We have too many eager players behind him.

---

+1

---

I hate ranking Grant so low, but I know more about him, and nothing about the others, only my being a fan with probably too much hope for the new guys.

stu said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

PG: Austin, but maybe beaten out by Brown or even have too many eager players behind him.

---

Nope. No way in college basketball does a senior point guard get beaten out by a freshman unless the freshman is some kind of superstar.

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

stu said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

PG: Austin, but maybe beaten out by Brown or even have too many eager players behind him.

---

Nope. No way in college basketball does a senior point guard get beaten out by a freshman unless the freshman is some kind of superstar.

---

---

That quote ended up in the wrong box, those weren't my words.

FWIW I think Austin, South, and Bradley will play a lot of minutes. I don't have any idea which of the others will step up.

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

stu said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

PG: Austin, but maybe beaten out by Brown or even have too many eager players behind him.

---

Nope. No way in college basketball does a senior point guard get beaten out by a freshman unless the freshman is some kind of superstar.

---

---

Stu, you've quoted me incorrectly, combining parts of two different sentences regarding two different players. I know it was not done on purpose, as multi-quoting is a minefield where I've screwed up a quote more than a few times myself.

What I wrote was that Austin would be my point guard, but maybe he might get beaten out by Brown OR SOUTH. I agree with you that a freshman would have a hard time, but Austin has a lot of challenges. He is not in my mind a PAC12 level starting point guard. He is a senior, which gives him a huge edge, but he is limited by size, shooting range, decision making, and defense at point of attack. He is not a bad player, he's adequate in many ways. Maybe with Fox's coaching he can improve. Brown looks very good on tape, and South even better. Plus South is a senior. He needs to play. Otherwise, why take him? Probably a two guard, but if Brown is not ready, then maybe he backs up Austin or supplants him. I think every position on this team is up for grabs, except for Bradley, who has to play major minutes. Just my two cents.

When I wrote the words, "have too many eager players behind him", it was in relation to Andre Kelly. I think Kelly as a sophomore with a year of experience would likely start, but he would likely have to show improvement over last year to keep his job. Fox has the luxury of having a lot of bigs on the roster this year, a luxury he created, and there will be a lot of competition for both big man positions. Kelly is by no means a lock to start.

SFCityBear said:

---

Stu, you've quoted me incorrectly, combining parts of two different sentences regarding two different players. I know it was not done on purpose, as multi-quoting is a minefield where I've screwed up a quote more than a few times myself.

---

Sorry, that was my attempt to group related items I wanted to comment on and reduce the length of the quoted text. Next time I'll make separate lines separate quotes.

Anyway I think we agree on the lineup. Should be fun to watch it develop.

Sorry Stu my quote about superstar freshman showed up looking like it came from you. And SFCity, I know Austin has shortcomings, but unless Brown or South come on like gangbusters I don't see the coach removing his only experienced senior from the starting lineup, especially at the point guard position.

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

Sorry Stu my quote about superstar freshman showed up looking like it came from you. And SFCity, I know Austin has shortcomings, but unless Brown or South come on like gangbusters I don't see the coach removing his only experienced senior from the starting lineup, especially at the point guard position.

---

I agree with you Redless. Austin is the best for the job from what we know now. He's played a year in the PAC12, he's played against some of the opponents' players,he's a senior, and I think he will start in camp and in opening games. If he loses minutes or his job, it will be because the talents of another player or players turns out to be a better fit. But in any case, I don't see that happening until we get a few games or more into the season, maybe as late as the conference season. It is hard to fully judge players during pre-conference season, because we play a lot of weak opponents like every PAC12 team does. At least Austin will have players behind him who will push him to be his best in practice and games, which he did not have last year with our thin roster.

SFCityBear said:

---

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

Sorry Stu my quote about superstar freshman showed up looking like it came from you. And SFCity, I know Austin has shortcomings, but unless Brown or South come on like gangbusters I don't see the coach removing his only experienced senior from the starting lineup, especially at the point guard position.

---

I agree with you Redless. Austin is the best for the job from what we know now. He's played a year in the PAC12, he's played against some of the opponents' players,he's a senior, and I think he will start in camp and in opening games. If he loses minutes or his job, it will be because the talents of another player or players turns out to be a better fit. But in any case, I don't see that happening until we get a few games or more into the season, maybe as late as the conference season. It is hard to fully judge players during pre-conference season, because we play a lot of weak opponents like every PAC12 team does. At least Austin will have players behind him who will push him to be his best in practice and games, which he did not have last year with our thin roster.

---

I think Austin and South will start out essentially even. Fox will presumably put in a new system which means that both start learning it from ground-zero. Even from the perspective of familiarity with teammates, three starters have left, so both will play with a group of largely new faces. Excellent point about competition, though. Last year's walk-ons couldn't have put much pressure on the starters in practice because if they had, they would have played more.

I hope Kelly hits the weights this summer and loses the baby fat because there's definitely room for a bruiser on this team. Sanders-Frison didn't have great hops, either, but made an impact once he got in shape.

As I understand it, South is considered more of a shooting guard, maybe a combo guard. (Any confirmation on this?) South should play more at the 2 (sometimes in the same lineup with Bradley), while Joel Brown backs up Austin.

OTOH, Bradley was halfway decent backing up Austin a bit last season... and maybe South CAN play the point.

What do we know about Kareem South's "natural" position?

Speaking of Sanders-Frison, the big guy is still going strong with his professional career. He's been in the top Japanese league for several years and I believe he plays now for Shibuya alongside former Duke forward Ryan Kelly. He's mostly been a starter all along and has put up big numbers. The league limits the number of non-Japanese players on each team, but he's always found a team. He's not a guy who I would have expected to have a long professional career but he's still at it and doing well. Pretty cool.

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Speaking of Sanders-Frison, the big guy is still going strong with his professional career. He's been in the top Japanese league for several years and I believe he plays now for Shibuya alongside former Duke forward Ryan Kelly. He's mostly been a starter all along and has put up big numbers. The league limits the number of non-Japanese players on each team, but he's always found a team. He's not a guy who I would have expected to have a long professional career but he's still at it and doing well. Pretty cool.

---

Go Bears!

Big C said:

---

As I understand it, South is considered more of a shooting guard, maybe a combo guard. (Any confirmation on this?) South should play more at the 2 (sometimes in the same lineup with Bradley), while Joel Brown backs up Austin.

OTOH, Bradley was halfway decent backing up Austin a bit last season... and maybe South CAN play the point.

What do we know about Kareem South's "natural" position?

---

I just hope he is not another "combo guard." Which usually means to me he is not quite a good enough shot to play the 2 spot well, or not quite good enough to play point guard well. Adequate at either, but not exceptional at either.

Have you thought about Klonaras? On tape he looks like he has perimeter shooting skills and point guard skills. He sees the floor on the break, passes well, can penetrate, drive,has mid range skills, and play defense. Maybe he can be a point forward. My concern is he does not use his right hand much, and may be easier to defend because of that.

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Speaking of Sanders-Frison, the big guy is still going strong with his professional career. He's been in the top Japanese league for several years and I believe he plays now for Shibuya alongside former Duke forward Ryan Kelly. He's mostly been a starter all along and has put up big numbers. The league limits the number of non-Japanese players on each team, but he's always found a team. He's not a guy who I would have expected to have a long professional career but he's still at it and doing well. Pretty cool.

---

Had no idea. Thanks for the info. Good for him!

South statistical profile is that of shooting or scoring guard. Low assist rates, 3pt attempts were about 40% of Field goal attempts.

He's worth a scholarship for next season, simply because it's a 1-year deal. He brings experience and above average shooting ability from 3 and the FT line.

Big C said:

---

As I understand it, South is considered more of a shooting guard, maybe a combo guard. (Any confirmation on this?) South should play more at the 2 (sometimes in the same lineup with Bradley), while Joel Brown backs up Austin.

OTOH, Bradley was halfway decent backing up Austin a bit last season... and maybe South CAN play the point.

What do we know about Kareem South's "natural" position?

---

SFCityBear said:

---

Big C said:

---

As I understand it, South is considered more of a shooting guard, maybe a combo guard. (Any confirmation on this?) South should play more at the 2 (sometimes in the same lineup with Bradley), while Joel Brown backs up Austin.

OTOH, Bradley was halfway decent backing up Austin a bit last season... and maybe South CAN play the point.

What do we know about Kareem South's "natural" position?

---

I just hope he is not another "combo guard." Which usually means to me he is not quite a good enough shot to play the 2 spot well, or not quite good enough to play point guard well. Adequate at either, but not exceptional at either.

Have you thought about Klonaras? On tape he looks like he has perimeter shooting skills and point guard skills. He sees the floor on the break, passes well, can penetrate, drive,has mid range skills, and play defense. Maybe he can be a point forward. My concern is he does not use his right hand much, and may be easier to defend because of that.

---

Regardless of position labels, if you are expecting or hoping South is an exceptional player then you are likely going to be disappointed. As a junior, he was third team all-conference in a middling conference. What his tape and stats show is a solid player who's experience will land him a starting spot on Cal's roster. I haven't seen anywhere that mentions him playing any pg.

As for Klanoaras, he played pg for his U17 Greek team, but is not projected to do so in college. He looks like he is going to need to add strength and experience before making an impact at this level, but you never know. Just recall that Nikola Knezevic dazzled high major Div 1 scouts with his pg skills before committing to Cal. Sarunas Marciulionis thought he would be the next Luthianian guard to play in the NBA.

My guess is Bradley will back up Austin and Brown at pg. Brown appears to be the real-deal but lacks an outside shot.

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

South statistical profile is that of shooting or scoring guard. Low assist rates, 3pt attempts were about 40% of Field goal attempts.

He's worth a scholarship for next season, simply because it's a 1-year deal. He brings experience and above average shooting ability from 3 and the FT line.

Big C said:

---

As I understand it, South is considered more of a shooting guard, maybe a combo guard. (Any confirmation on this?) South should play more at the 2 (sometimes in the same lineup with Bradley), while Joel Brown backs up Austin.

OTOH, Bradley was halfway decent backing up Austin a bit last season... and maybe South CAN play the point.

What do we know about Kareem South's "natural" position?

---

---

South is also worth a scholarship for next season because Bradley is pretty much the only other shooting guard on the roster. South is a decent player who fills a need.

Civil Bear said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

Big C said:

---

As I understand it, South is considered more of a shooting guard, maybe a combo guard. (Any confirmation on this?) South should play more at the 2 (sometimes in the same lineup with Bradley), while Joel Brown backs up Austin.

OTOH, Bradley was halfway decent backing up Austin a bit last season... and maybe South CAN play the point.

What do we know about Kareem South's "natural" position?

---

I just hope he is not another "combo guard." Which usually means to me he is not quite a good enough shot to play the 2 spot well, or not quite good enough to play point guard well. Adequate at either, but not exceptional at either.

Have you thought about Klonaras? On tape he looks like he has perimeter shooting skills and point guard skills. He sees the floor on the break, passes well, can penetrate, drive,has mid range skills, and play defense. Maybe he can be a point forward. My concern is he does not use his right hand much, and may be easier to defend because of that.

---

. Just recall that Nikola Knezevic dazzled high major Div 1 scouts with his pg skills before committing to Cal. Sarunas Marciulionis thought he would be the next Luthianian guard to play in the NBA.

Nikola was a Serb ...

---

Yes, my mistake.