In my minimally informed opinion Bradley is our only high major talent. Brown and Thorpe could be, or not, too soon to tell. It's tough to evaluate the three international freshies but it didn't seem like we were competing with top programs for them. Harris-Dyson and Gordon are still mysteries. To me the others look like mid major talents.

Anyone want to predict how much is Fox likely to get out of this level of talent?

A lot of unknowns, but I think the fact that Brown and Thiemann made their national teams is a good sign. Will they set the world on fire? Doubtful. But the team won't be as bad as the past two years.

*If they are as bad, at least we have a decent coach who can help the kids course correct. *

The answer is... we have a lot of question marks.

Big C said:

---

The answer is... we have a lot of question marks.

---

Yeah, but a few months ago, we didn't even have question marks.

the coaches are very high on the German kid. Maybe not for this year, but they think he has a high ceiling - potential- with some good weight training.

South probably is a P5 talent (he was all conference last year, in a decent mid major conference), and I assume we be one of the team leaders.

stu said:

---

In my minimally informed opinion Bradley is our only high major talent. Brown and Thorpe could be, or not, too soon to tell. It's tough to evaluate the three international freshies but it didn't seem like we were competing with top programs for them. Harris-Dyson and Gordon are still mysteries. To me the others look like mid major talents.

Anyone want to predict how much is Fox likely to get out of this level of talent?

---

If his name were Wilcox, Cal fans would be extolling his virtues in the face of marginal results and mediocre recruiting. Looks and personality probably have something to do with it, but the opposing group think on these two men strikes me as odd.

Wouldn't be at all surprised if Fox exceeds expectations in his first season, while Wilcox falls short. Also wouldn't be surprised that, if after all that, fan opinion on these two men remains more or less the same.

wifeisafurd said:

---

the coaches are very high on the German kid. Maybe not for this year, but they think he has a high ceiling - potential- with some good weight training.

South probably is a P5 talent (he was all conference last year, in a decent mid major conference), and I assume we be one of the team leaders.

---

Theimann looked good offensively and rebounding in game videos I saw, but could not guard anyone. I like his potential a lot.

I am not so optimistic on South. He looks good on videos I saw. He was THIRD Team All-conference in the #28 ranked conference in the country out of 32 conferences, ranked by BMI. (Pac12 was ranked #7 in BMI), which does not indicate any particular readiness for P5 or the PAC12 to me. The Southland conference was ranked #30 out of 32 teams in RPI. It is not a tough conference. I think South's experience should bring some stability, but to start him means moving the undersized Bradley to SF position, and this team is already height-challenged, with a short point guard in Austin, and several unproven bigs. We were one of the worst rebounding teams in the nation last season, and we have to make big strides in that area to get competitive. You can't score if you don't have the ball. I'm glad we have South, but am cautious about what he can bring in terms of skills when playing at a much higher level of competition.

Northside91 said:

---

stu said:

---

In my minimally informed opinion Bradley is our only high major talent. Brown and Thorpe could be, or not, too soon to tell. It's tough to evaluate the three international freshies but it didn't seem like we were competing with top programs for them. Harris-Dyson and Gordon are still mysteries. To me the others look like mid major talents.

Anyone want to predict how much is Fox likely to get out of this level of talent?

---

If his name were Wilcox, Cal fans would be extolling his virtues in the face of marginal results and mediocre recruiting. Looks and personality probably have something to do with it, but the opposing group think on these two men strikes me as odd.

Wouldn't be at all surprised if Fox exceeds expectations in his first season, while Wilcox falls short. Also wouldn't be surprised that, if after all that, fan opinion on these two men remains more or less the same.

---

Fox has a track record, so I expect him to follow that track record. That said, he's off to an excellent start filling out the roster.

Other than optimism and potential, there really isn't anything to indicate that this roster has better talent than the past couple of seasons. Primarily because so much of it is new and unproven. However, upon Jones departure, it seemed that the roster would even be worse than the two last place finishers, so credit to Fox and friends for addressing that issue.

But by no means is the talent on this team close to rosters from the last couple decades or most of the competition.

The next check point is to see what this staff does with the talent they have. For that, we'll need to wait until fall.

SFCityBear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

the coaches are very high on the German kid. Maybe not for this year, but they think he has a high ceiling - potential- with some good weight training.

South probably is a P5 talent (he was all conference last year, in a decent mid major conference), and I assume we be one of the team leaders.

---

Theimann looked good offensively and rebounding in game videos I saw, but could not guard anyone. I like his potential a lot.

I am not so optimistic on South. He looks good on videos I saw. He was THIRD Team All-conference in the #28 ranked conference in the country out of 32 conferences, ranked by BMI. (Pac12 was ranked #7 in BMI), which does not indicate any particular readiness for P5 or the PAC12 to me. The Southland conference was ranked #30 out of 32 teams in RPI. It is not a tough conference. I think South's experience should bring some stability, but to start him means moving the undersized Bradley to SF position, and this team is already height-challenged, with a short point guard in Austin, and several unproven bigs. We were one of the worst rebounding teams in the nation last season, and we have to make big strides in that area to get competitive. You can't score if you don't have the ball. I'm glad we have South, but am cautious about what he can bring in terms of skills when playing at a much higher level of competition.

---

Good observations, SFCity, even if they do temper enthusiasm. However, as the old saying goes: if you have lemons, make lemonade. If a lineup with South and Austin is the best we can muster, then we go with it and deal with being height challenged. I don't know if there is a better starting 5 or not; I'd like to think Gordon, or even JHD could stand in at the 3, but we shall see.

UrsaMajor said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

the coaches are very high on the German kid. Maybe not for this year, but they think he has a high ceiling - potential- with some good weight training.

South probably is a P5 talent (he was all conference last year, in a decent mid major conference), and I assume we be one of the team leaders.

---

Theimann looked good offensively and rebounding in game videos I saw, but could not guard anyone. I like his potential a lot.

I am not so optimistic on South. He looks good on videos I saw. He was THIRD Team All-conference in the #28 ranked conference in the country out of 32 conferences, ranked by BMI. (Pac12 was ranked #7 in BMI), which does not indicate any particular readiness for P5 or the PAC12 to me. The Southland conference was ranked #30 out of 32 teams in RPI. It is not a tough conference. I think South's experience should bring some stability, but to start him means moving the undersized Bradley to SF position, and this team is already height-challenged, with a short point guard in Austin, and several unproven bigs. We were one of the worst rebounding teams in the nation last season, and we have to make big strides in that area to get competitive. You can't score if you don't have the ball. I'm glad we have South, but am cautious about what he can bring in terms of skills when playing at a much higher level of competition.

---

Good observations, SFCity, even if they do temper enthusiasm. However, as the old saying goes: if you have lemons, make lemonade. If a lineup with South and Austin is the best we can muster, then we go with it and deal with being height challenged. I don't know if there is a better starting 5 or not; I'd like to think Gordon, or even JHD could stand in at the 3, but we shall see.

---

I agree with all of it. I actually am pretty optimistic about Klonaras and Kuany, and either might be a good fit at the 3. I hesitate to go all in on them, because all I've seen are mixtapes, which are highlight films, not game films, and I remember falling for Omondi Amoke's highlight film, where he dribbled the ball up the floor against pressure and made threes. At Cal, he was ineffective beyond 3 feet from the basket, and was a really good rebounder for his height, but they didn't show that in the film. Anyway, Klonaras in his highlights showed play after play of ball handling, driving, shooting, and especially court vision and passing skills. It also did not ever show him using his off hand for anything, which is not so good, but can be improved. Kuany's highlights showed lots of athleticism and terrific energy, along with some scoring ability. I think either player could be a fit for two or more positions, or at least that is what I am hoping. Highlight mixtapes are not realistic, they only show what a player might be capable of, usually against weaker competition, and they almost never show a recruit's rebounding or defense, which is half the game of basketball. Nevertheless, based on what I saw in the videos, I will remain optimistic, and look forward to seeing them in person to see what Fox has managed to find, and see if they can compete against better athletes and coaches than they are used to. Occasionally a freshman can play right away, but even Rabb and Brown struggled for half a season or more. It usually takes a player 2 years or more to be able to be a front line contributor. I'll be happy with that, but hope for a little bit more this season. It should be very interesting for all of us to evaluate both the players and the coach.

Good post SF

It would be interesting what a mixtape of all the BI posters would look like!

HoopDreams said:

---

It would be interesting what a mixtape of all the BI posters would look like!

---

Probably better with no sound.

stu said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

It would be interesting what a mixtape of all the BI posters would look like!

---

Probably better with no sound.

---

Aw, I was just now getting the music ready for my portion. '50s rock and roll.

HoopDreams said:

---

Good post SF

It would be interesting what a mixtape of all the BI posters would look like!

---

As long as I talked myself into giving an early opinion, I'd like to throw in some love for Brown, Thorpe and the returnees. Both Brown and Thorpe had offers from some good programs. Brown had an offer from ASU, and if Bobby Hurley doesn't know what a good point guard recruit should look like, then who does? He was as good as they come (except for Jason Kidd). Thorpe has great genes, and even though Kam Rooks was not Sean Rooks, he was a presence and solid contributor by his junior season, so I expect good things from Thorpe. He is coming off a serious injury, so it may take him a while.

As for the returnees, Austin is Austin and will be the starter at PG at the beginning. He must improve his defense, decision making and hopefully he will have an offensive system he can run. Bradley is a stud, and will get better. He needs to make better decisions on the way to the basket. He's our best returning player, and will have to play 30-35 minutes. Kelly proved almost ready to be a PAC12 starter. He was mishandled by Wyking, and now he has a fresh start under a new coach. A year older and wiser, we hope. He has the size, but needs work on his jumping, and his physicality. He needs to convert the baby fat into muscle, and learn to play some defense and rebound better. He will be good, either this year or next. Anticevich has proved that he can improve, and is coachable. He just needs to keep working hard and making the most of his minutes. He is in the mix for a starting job. JHD needs to work on shooting, ball-handling, passing, all of it. He can defend and get loose balls, but that was it last season. Plus he keeps getting injured. I hope we can count on him this year. Gordon still needs more confidence that he can come back from his injury. He can play minutes, but he needs the minutes to be productive. The bench is what it is, Welle, Serge, Orender, Erving, and we saw little of them last season. A couple of new ones added, Logan Alters, and James Zhao, who was injured last season. The team as a whole has more bodies than last year, and more bodies for each position. Quantity seldom means quality, but that is why we play the games.

I think we can predict we will have better coaching. Hopefully good enough to get us to a higher level of play.

SFCityBear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

the coaches are very high on the German kid. Maybe not for this year, but they think he has a high ceiling - potential- with some good weight training.

South probably is a P5 talent (he was all conference last year, in a decent mid major conference), and I assume we be one of the team leaders.

---

Theimann looked good offensively and rebounding in game videos I saw, but could not guard anyone. I like his potential a lot.

I am not so optimistic on South. He looks good on videos I saw. He was THIRD Team All-conference in the #28 ranked conference in the country out of 32 conferences, ranked by BMI. (Pac12 was ranked #7 in BMI), which does not indicate any particular readiness for P5 or the PAC12 to me. The Southland conference was ranked #30 out of 32 teams in RPI. It is not a tough conference. I think South's experience should bring some stability, but to start him means moving the undersized Bradley to SF position, and this team is already height-challenged, with a short point guard in Austin, and several unproven bigs. We were one of the worst rebounding teams in the nation last season, and we have to make big strides in that area to get competitive. You can't score if you don't have the ball. I'm glad we have South, but am cautious about what he can bring in terms of skills when playing at a much higher level of competition.

---

Your right on South. Misread where he transferred from as the wrong Texas team, and thought he was from the Sun Belt, which is highly regarded. Texas has an absurd number of similar sounding schools with teams. I did like his film, but assumed it was against better competition.

Northside91 said:

---

stu said:

---

In my minimally informed opinion Bradley is our only high major talent. Brown and Thorpe could be, or not, too soon to tell. It's tough to evaluate the three international freshies but it didn't seem like we were competing with top programs for them. Harris-Dyson and Gordon are still mysteries. To me the others look like mid major talents.

Anyone want to predict how much is Fox likely to get out of this level of talent?

---

If his name were Wilcox, Cal fans would be extolling his virtues in the face of marginal results and mediocre recruiting. Looks and personality probably have something to do with it, but the opposing group think on these two men strikes me as odd.

Wouldn't be at all surprised if Fox exceeds expectations in his first season, while Wilcox falls short. Also wouldn't be surprised that, if after all that, fan opinion on these two men remains more or less the same.

---

The difference between hiring a young, up and coming assistant coach and hiring the long term coach of another program where he was fired for producing mediocre to poor results and spent a year unemployed. Though the level of fandom for Wilcox approaches early Tedford, while his record so far is more like Holmoe, I am reminded of how strongly Holmoe was supported on these boards. Fox is probably more analogous to Dykes, or when Rice hired Braun. With the older guy you expect similar results as his track record suggests. With the younger guy you can expect/hope he corrects mistakes and improves. Of course, it doesn't have to be that way. Young guys can be stubborn and old guys can change.

wifeisafurd said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

the coaches are very high on the German kid. Maybe not for this year, but they think he has a high ceiling - potential- with some good weight training.

South probably is a P5 talent (he was all conference last year, in a decent mid major conference), and I assume we be one of the team leaders.

---

Theimann looked good offensively and rebounding in game videos I saw, but could not guard anyone. I like his potential a lot.

I am not so optimistic on South. He looks good on videos I saw. He was THIRD Team All-conference in the #28 ranked conference in the country out of 32 conferences, ranked by BMI. (Pac12 was ranked #7 in BMI), which does not indicate any particular readiness for P5 or the PAC12 to me. The Southland conference was ranked #30 out of 32 teams in RPI. It is not a tough conference. I think South's experience should bring some stability, but to start him means moving the undersized Bradley to SF position, and this team is already height-challenged, with a short point guard in Austin, and several unproven bigs. We were one of the worst rebounding teams in the nation last season, and we have to make big strides in that area to get competitive. You can't score if you don't have the ball. I'm glad we have South, but am cautious about what he can bring in terms of skills when playing at a much higher level of competition.

---

Your right on South. Misread where he transferred from as the wrong Texas team, and thought he was form the Sun Belt, which is highly regarded. Texas has an absurd number of similar sounding schools with teams. I did like his film. but assumed it was against better completion.

---

Quote:

---

I liked his film as well. He can shoot, as shown by his 82% free throw percentage, which theoretically isn't affected much by the level of competition. One question would be whether Fox's system and his teammates can get him open looks where he likes to shoot from. Another question would be his defense, which we don't know anything about, but I have the same question about almost every new player we have, and even some of the returning ones. We just don't have much or any film on any of the new players playing defense. Fox is a strong defensive coach, from what I've read, so I expect the Bears to be better under Fox than under Wyking (not a high bar). I'm hoping South will be an important contributor.

---

calumnus said:

---

Northside91 said:

---

stu said:

---

In my minimally informed opinion Bradley is our only high major talent. Brown and Thorpe could be, or not, too soon to tell. It's tough to evaluate the three international freshies but it didn't seem like we were competing with top programs for them. Harris-Dyson and Gordon are still mysteries. To me the others look like mid major talents.

Anyone want to predict how much is Fox likely to get out of this level of talent?

---

If his name were Wilcox, Cal fans would be extolling his virtues in the face of marginal results and mediocre recruiting. Looks and personality probably have something to do with it, but the opposing group think on these two men strikes me as odd.

Wouldn't be at all surprised if Fox exceeds expectations in his first season, while Wilcox falls short. Also wouldn't be surprised that, if after all that, fan opinion on these two men remains more or less the same.

---

The difference between hiring a young, up and coming assistant coach and hiring the long term coach of another program where he was fired for producing mediocre to poor results and spent a year unemployed. Though the level of fandom for Wilcox approaches early Tedford, while his record so far is more like Holmoe, I am reminded of how strongly Holmoe was supported on these boards. Fox is probably more analogous to Dykes, or when Rice hired Braun. With the older guy you expect similar results as his track record suggests. With the younger guy you can expect/hope he corrects mistakes and improves. Of course, it doesn't have to be that way. Young guys can be stubborn and old guys can change.

---

I don't disagree with your analogies, but I do have a problem with the implications in your characterization of Mark Fox. I think you make out Fox to be worse than he was. He did have some success at Georgia, not consistently (not many coaches are consistent these days, because so much depends on recruiting and chemistry), but the success was there at times. First of all, Fox took over a team that was 12-20, an awful season, and he took over for Dennis Felton. The last time Georgia was any good was under Jim Harrick in his last two seasons (out of 4 seasons) one of which where he won the SEC East. Felton took over and had a losing record 84-91 over 6 seasons. He would have lost more, except he was fired mid-season in 2009. He never produced one nationally ranked team, but he made the NCAA once.

Fox took over Felton's 12-20 team, a team that lost two starters to graduation, including the team's leading scorer, recruited no top 100 ranked recruits, but still managed to achieve a 21-12 record in his second season, a national ranking (24), and an NCAA bid, his first of two at Georgia. He turned the program around in two seasons. That is exactly what I expect him to do at Cal, based on his prior history.

The following years at Georgia were up and down for Fox. He recruited only 3 or 4 top 100 ranked recruits over the next 7 seasons, which is not enough to make serious noise in the SEC. Even so, he did have three 20-win seasons in a row from 2014 to 2016, and a 19 win season in 2017.

If you look at the SEC teams in Fox's last season before he was fired, they place EIGHT teams in the NCAA tournament, while Georgia finished 11th. If you look at top 100 recruits, most of the teams in the SEC had several of them on the roster that year, while Fox had only the soph Hammonds and the freshman Crump, and Crump did not play a lot. Those SEC teams that year were loaded. Auburn and Tennessee tied for the regular season champion, and Kentucky won the SEC tournament. That is what Fox had to go up against. The PAC12 is not that strong a league right now, so I expect Fox to exceed expectations at Cal.

It would appear that Fox's problem at Georgia might have been his recruiting. Maybe Georgia is a tough place to recruit, or Georgia the school might not be a desirable destination for recruits. Harrick and Felton did not do much better than Fox in that regard at Georgia. Tom Crean, a well-respected coach took over Fox's 2018 team (18-15) which lost two starters, including the leading scorer, but still had two top 100 recruits, and Crean's 2019 team went 11-21 and finished 13th in the SEC. Crean has landed the best recruiting class in Georgia school history, so we shall see how he does in the years ahead. Clearly, Fox has to raise his success level with recruits. Hopefully, more good players will want to come to Cal than came to Georgia when Fox was there.

But to characterize Fox as mediocre to poor, well, I can see the mediocre or a kinder word is average, but poor? I just wouldn't go that far. I also don't think that being unemployed for a year may be a negative. Lots of coaches have had that happen, and still turn out to be OK when they returned to the game. It could be that no one wanted him, or no really attractive offer appeared, or maybe he just wanted time off from the pressure cooker that is the life of an NCAA coach. Time to think things over, what he did wrong and right, and what to do differently, if anything. I think Montgomery was unemployed as a coach when Cal hired him. Initially, I think Fox will be all right for Cal, because we can't go much lower, the league is not strong, and he can coach, as shown in his winning seasons at Georgia and Nevada.

I want this guy:

https://www.reddit.com/r/gifs/comments/chonsu/dunking_between_the_legs_with_no_run_up/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app

stu said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

It would be interesting what a mixtape of all the BI posters would look like!

---

Probably better with no sound.

---

Or visuals for that matter.

bearister said:

---

I want this guy:

https://www.reddit.com/r/gifs/comments/chonsu/dunking_between_the_legs_with_no_run_up/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app

---

The dunk is nice for sure, but the most impressive part is keeping his headphones in throughout it all. I wonder what Crosby, Stills and Nash song he was listening to.

TheSouseFamily said:

---

bearister said:

---

I want this guy:

https://www.reddit.com/r/gifs/comments/chonsu/dunking_between_the_legs_with_no_run_up/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app

---

The dunk is nice for sure, but the most impressive part is keeping his headphones in throughout it all. I wonder what Crosby, Stills and Nash song he was listening to.

---

O High O

Lol. You never disappoint.

bearister said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

The dunk is nice for sure, but the most impressive part is keeping his headphones in throughout it all. I wonder what Crosby, Stills and Nash song he was listening to.

---

O High O

---

That's a Neil Young song. Listening to Crosby, Stills, and Nash alone the kid couldn't dunk a donut.

stu said:

---

bearister said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

The dunk is nice for sure, but the most impressive part is keeping his headphones in throughout it all. I wonder what Crosby, Stills and Nash song he was listening to.

---

O High O

---

That's a Neil Young song. Listening to Crosby, Stills, and Nash alone the kid couldn't dunk a donut.

---

Dunking a donut properly is quite a skill, an art form, as was described by reporter Peter Warn to spoiled heiress Ellie Andrews, a pathetic dunker, in the movie, "It Happened One Night."

I tried to find the clip, but I'm no Bearister. or Okaydo

SFCityBear said:

---

stu said:

---

bearister said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

The dunk is nice for sure, but the most impressive part is keeping his headphones in throughout it all. I wonder what Crosby, Stills and Nash song he was listening to.

---

O High O

---

That's a Neil Young song. Listening to Crosby, Stills, and Nash alone the kid couldn't dunk a donut.

---

Dunking a donut properly is quite a skill, an art form, as was described by reporter Peter Warn to spoiled heiress Ellie Andrews, a pathetic dunker, in the movie, "It Happened One Night."

I tried to find the clip, but I'm no Bearister. or Okaydo

---

I eat punks like Okaydo for breakfast!

bearister said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

stu said:

---

bearister said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

The dunk is nice for sure, but the most impressive part is keeping his headphones in throughout it all. I wonder what Crosby, Stills and Nash song he was listening to.

---

O High O

---

That's a Neil Young song. Listening to Crosby, Stills, and Nash alone the kid couldn't dunk a donut.

---

Dunking a donut properly is quite a skill, an art form, as was described by reporter Peter Warn to spoiled heiress Ellie Andrews, a pathetic dunker, in the movie, "It Happened One Night."

I tried to find the clip, but I'm no Bearister. or Okaydo

---

I eat punks like Okaydo for breakfast!

---

Thanks, Big Guy. I knew you could do it.