The level of consistency from anyone outside of Anigwe was atrocious. It didn't take genius to recognize what Cal's game plan was. There was no point in guarding anybody besides her. They need to stop being so reliant on Anigwe and take the load off her. Players like Micayla, Asha, Mi'cole, and Jaelyn need to trust themselves, be more aggressive, and take more shots. This team has too much talent to waste being just a body that lobs it to one player that's triple teamed every time.

dpy;842823024 said:

---

The level of consistency from anyone outside of Anigwe was atrocious. It didn't take genius to recognize what Cal's game plan was. There was no point in guarding anybody besides her. They need to stop being so reliant on Anigwe and take the load off her. Players like Micayla, Asha, Mi'cole, and Jaelyn need to trust themselves, be more aggressive, and take more shots. This team has too much talent to waste being just a body that lobs it to one player that's triple teamed every time.

---

100% correct.
What a waste of talent, it's coaching girls and boys....

Every year the offense is the same...throw to the triple teamed low post player.

Anigwe had 11 turnovers last night and Cowling had 12 turnovers vs LSU. Cowling's majority were attempted entry passes to KA. Probably 60% of the TOs have to do with trying to get Anigwe the ball.


Gottlieb recruits "athletes" that are not good shooters and hopes that they improve...I've always felt that shooting skills are natural: either one has it or they don't...One can improve on those inate skills via practice. One could easily make a long list of local stars that either Cal passed on or they passed on Cal. I'm talking about ones that became Div I starters...

Cal has faded to the bottom third (4 teams) in the Pac 12 Conference. Utah owns Cal (four consecutive conference victories) and Colorado is rising team built around four sophomores. Arizona is the hopeless cellar dweller. The Bears need to perform better than 4-14 (2015-16) or 6-12 (2016-17) in conference or their program is a joke.

The team has no identity as a rebounding juggernaut, a tough defensive team (like Cuonzo's mens team #1 in conference) or a offensive powerhouse. Nada. One double-digit scorer on the entire team. No structured offense to set screens to free up Asha Thomas for a three...This is Gottlieb's final season coming up and she had better have the Bears finish in the top half of the Pac 12 or bye bye.

GO BEARS!

Schroeder71;842823106 said:

---

Anigwe had 11 turnovers last night and Cowling had 12 turnovers vs LSU. Cowling's majority were attempted entry passes to KA. Probably 60% of the TOs have to do with trying to get Anigwe the ball.


Gottlieb recruits "athletes" that are not good shooters and hopes that they improve...I've always felt that shooting skills are natural: either one has it or they don't...One can improve on those inate skills via practice. One could easily make a long list of local stars that either Cal passed on or they passed on Cal. I'm talking about ones that became Div I starters...

Cal has faded to the bottom third (4 teams) in the Pac 12 Conference. Utah owns Cal (four consecutive conference victories) and Colorado is rising team built around four sophomores. Arizona is the hopeless cellar dweller. The Bears need to perform better than 4-14 (2015-16) or 6-12 (2016-17) in conference or their program is a joke.

The team has no identity as a rebounding juggernaut, a tough defensive team (like Cuonzo's mens team #1 in conference) or a offensive powerhouse. Nada. One double-digit scorer on the entire team. No structured offense to set screens to free up Asha Thomas for a three...This is Gottlieb's final season coming up and she had better have the Bears finish in the top half of the Pac 12 or bye bye.

GO BEARS!

---

I believe she got a 3 year extension before this current season started. She in under contract for 4 more seasons.

GATC;842823130 said:

---

I believe she got a 3 year extension before this current season started. She in under contract for 4 more seasons.

---

I think that's great. Coach G took a young team (top 8 are 1 SR, 2 JR, 2 SO, 3 FR) of her own recruits to the second round of the NCAA Tournament. We lost a few games we thought we should win but young teams do that. We lost to Baylor on their home court but most teams do that. We're not Baylor, we're not Connecticut, but we did win 4 games against NCAA Tournament teams. And with more promising recruits coming in I see a bright future. I'm happy to say I expect Coach G will be getting quite a few more contract extensions.

stu;842823160 said:

---

I think that's great. Coach G took a young team (top 8 are 1 SR, 2 JR, 2 SO, 3 FR) of her own recruits to the second round of the NCAA Tournament. We lost a few games we thought we should win but young teams do that. We lost to Baylor on their home court but most teams do that. We're not Baylor, we're not Connecticut, but we did win 4 games against NCAA Tournament teams. And with more promising recruits coming in I see a bright future. I'm happy to say I expect Coach G will be getting quite a few more contract extensions.

---

Thank you. My sentiments exactly.

The issue isn't the win/loss number, nor making the NCAA, but whether the team plays well to its potential. My vote is that Coach G is failing by that measure consisteantly.

bearchamp;842823184 said:

---

The issue isn't the win/loss number, nor making the NCAA, but whether the team plays well to its potential. My vote is that Coach G is failing by that measure consisteantly.

---

Weird. I was under the impression that the important metric was the number of wins relative to the number of losses. I guess I shouldn't be such a wise acre...

But I'm with Stu and SFCALBear72. And I think there is a bright future ahead with more contract extensions for LG.

Wins and losses and NCAA opportunities will take care of themselves it the talented players at Cal play to their potential. As a player, I was never happy when we won but played poorly; I was less happy if we loss and played poorly.

bearchamp;842823239 said:

---

Wins and losses and NCAA opportunities will take care of themselves it the talented players at Cal play to their potential. As a player, I was never happy when we won but played poorly; I was less happy if we loss and played poorly.

---

You do realize that Baylor is a #1 seed and has dominated virtually everyone they've payed this season (32-3) with their experience, height, deep bench and athleticism. And that our "poor play" could have been a result of these factors. Give the opponent some credit for disrupting our play. And for a significant amount of minutes, we had three freshmen on the floor. See what you want and it seems to be despair. I see an optimistic future ahead for this team.

My critique is for the season, not Baylor. Many here have commented on the lack of progress and lack of recognizable offensive strategy. Even the television commentators opined that the "offense" was just throw the ball up and hope Anigwe could get it even when double and triple teamed. As is commented above, many of the turnovers resulted from attempted passes to A when surrounded by defenders. The facts are beyond dispute that the offense is just slightly better than just rolling the ball out and hoping. Optimism is misplaced unless changes are made.

Yes, she is very nice and certainly deserves her extensions.

BSH;842823197 said:

---

But I'm with Stu and SFCALBear72. And I think there is a bright future ahead with more contract extensions for LG.

---

What do you consider a "bright future" to be in the very competitive conference? Top 3? 4-6?

I agree with a little of what everyone had to say. The analyst once again said "Cal needs to play and stop relying on Anigwe".
News flash: The gig is up, all the teams in the Pac 12 and outside of the Pac 12 have the scoutting report to shut down Anigwe. What needs to happen is our ladies need to be confident in their abilities, they are athletic too! There is no way under 6ft Davis (who's always played as if she's 6'2)should be looking back at our 6'2 players like "..your'e not in my league" BUT our players are on her level and we have All Americans on our team too, we just gotta play like it!
Work on spreading the ball around to get the open shot instead of holding the ball (the ball sticks a lot). Try if Anigwe gets double teamed, have her quickly kick it back out move the ball, get open player a shot. Baylor had beautiful ball movement.

The teams that just 2yrs ago were at bottom of the Pac 12 have all loaded up. Some of those teams beat us this year, and some of them are ahead of schedule-Oregon.
If we don't get it going next year we will be looked at like U of A and they are in total rebuilding mode.

We need a plan B and C the competition in the Pac 12 is no joke :gobears:

I think Gottlieb has helped take Cal to new women's basketball heights but it's time to understand that more schools are putting emphasis on women's basketball so it's time for her to step up her coaching. Anigwe is a once-every-10-years type of player and she's got two years left, so it's up to Gottlieb to surround her with talent and to coach better to improve her players. I think she's far from being on the hot seat, but she's getting the reputation of being a good recruiter and good with her players in being a mentor but not so good with X's and O's. And these veteran coaches like Kim Mulkey will squash you if you aren't prepared. Gottlieb wasn't prepared for Baylor. The 'Throw it in to Anigwe" method doesn't work anymore. There has to be better ball movement and fewer turnovers.

Some of those turnovers are flat embarrassing and that is coaching. She has to either bench players who are careless with the ball or tell them not to take unnecessary chances. Cowling had 12 turnovers in the first-round game. That is damn near impossible to do in a 40 minute game. The rest of the Pac-12 is getting better and Cal has to made adjustments. Gottileb has done great for Cal's program but she has to step up her coaching --whether it's hiring new assistants, going to clinics, spending time with WNBA coaches -- and improve her offensive schemes. If not, we're going to be 19-13 every year.

I don't know if we're doing a lot of analysis. I could imaging going over all of the game video and categorizing every made shot, every missed shot, every assist, every turnover, etc. to find out what our players can do and what they can't. Then either coach them up and/or scheme to put them in situations they can handle.

agree with others that we are a young team
we finally have the chance to change that starting next year
my question is will we improve our shooting?
will we improve our passing? (I don't mean just to Kristine ... I mean less single minded and pass to others for assists)

We will have more depth, so with Coach use our athletes to fast break and take advantage of it?

a ton of promise ... a lot of questions
but I enjoy this team and think it's got a bright future

So what is a better option than throwing the ball to Anigwe?

Asha Thomas can make threes if she's given room (only LSU (ask people there about the coaching) and a couple others did so) but she's not very tall and fairly easily contained since she's not that great going to the rim.

Mikayla Cowling is a complementary player who can score on occasion but isn't a consistent offensive threat.

Courtney Range was hampered all year by injury, and whoever the other starter was (Cayton or Davidson) could be easily defended one-on-one or with a zone because of their limited options.

You can talk all you want about Xs and Os but getting shots for players who can't make them won't help you win. (My last year at Bentley, against most teams we got all the shots we wanted but simply couldn't knock them down. Athenian invited us to take all the corner threes we wanted, which we did, but it doesn't help if they don't go in.) Other coaches are well aware of the limitations of Cal's players and game-plan accordingly.

So, thought one: Teach kids to shoot. A good plan but almost impossible at the college level. Shooters are made during their middle-school years, and it's very, very difficult to develop a shooter after that time. Brittany Boyd could have made several million more dollars (no exaggeration) if she had learned to shoot, and she's tried, but changing shot mechanics is very, very difficult for older players.

Thought two: Recruit shooters. LG has tried, but there aren't very many who can both shoot and hang with Power 5 players athletically. Just look at the SEC, which is full of athletes who can't shoot; and really, any P5 conference. Athleticism erases skills, thus an athlete can keep a pure shooter from scoring with size and quickness, but athleticism seldom comes with shooting skill.

Maybe Kianna Smith can step in and supply consistent offense from the perimeter, but that will be asking a lot of a freshman -- and no one else on the roster, except the undersized Thomas, appears to be able to do more than Anigwe double-teamed. And if Anigwe double-teamed is your best way to score (not necessarily a good way), then that's pretty much what you need to do.

The Princeton motion doesn't require 3-point shooters. Wisconsin was running a multi screen offense that resulted in layups. The whole point of "team" offense is to provide open opportunities that don't require extraordinary shooting skills. Before the 3-point line, the goal was a 15 footer or less. Cal makes no attempt for anything other than the A option or a 3 pointer. Play off the ball is stagnant and therefore easy to guard and help on A.

Arizona State lost to their #1 seed, South Carolina, by 3 points (71-68)! Oregon was a 10th seed and shocked #2 seed, Duke, by 7 points. Pac 12 has five of the Sweet Sixteen teams still at the dance...Gottlieb almost made me laugh when she mentioned Cal winning the Pac 12 Conference. Has anyone researched my question as to whether the women's bball team has ever lost by forty points previously? I think not.

Schroeder71;842823570 said:

---

Has anyone researched my question as to whether the women's bball team has ever lost by forty points previously? I think not.

---

I checked the archives before the 2005-2006 season and found on Jan 31, 1997 we lost at Stanford by a score of 95-44 and on Feb 3, 1996 we lost at Stanford by a score of 87-36. FWIW most of those seasons had one or more losses by 30+ points.

Schroeder71;842823570 said:

---

Arizona State lost to their #1 seed, South Carolina, by 3 points (71-68)! Oregon was a 10th seed and shocked #2 seed, Duke, by 7 points. Pac 12 has five of the Sweet Sixteen teams still at the dance...Gottlieb almost made me laugh when she mentioned Cal winning the Pac 12 Conference. Has anyone researched my question as to whether the women's bball team has ever lost by forty points previously? I think not.

---

Your point? Not good comparisons to Cal's game. Put ASU and Oregon up against Baylor and see what happens. South Carolina was missing a key starter (Coates) and another one went down (Gray) with a leg injury in the 4th quarter I believe. For that matter, Baylor is a much stronger #1 seed than South Carolina.

Britney unlikely to make "several millions more" even if she learned to shoot. Britney was not going to be one of the top three players in the world and thus, was going to make that kind of money. She certainly would have made more than she does now.

+1 Don't see the purpose of SR71 question..other than him trying to pile on even more!

I could continue making the argument that Gottlieb & Co don't have the magic that it takes to win in the Pac 12 Conference. Since most of you want to continue on into oblivion with her makes it clear to me that you will continue to rationalize her short comings. Que sera, sera.

Schroeder71;842823843 said:

---

I could continue making the argument that Gottlieb & Co don't have the magic that it takes to win in the Pac 12 Conference. Since most of you want to continue on into oblivion with her makes it clear to me that you will continue to rationalize her short comings. Que sera, sera.

---

Says the man who has probably never attended a game in Berkeley since Lindsay Gottlieb became coach. Easier to sit at the computer and write negative posts. You're not an alum or season ticket-holder, why do you even care what happens with Cal sports and this one in particular?

Well, they HAVE won it once, so ...

It sounds to me like you are not even a fan. Your recent posts are just piling on more crap. Come to a game, donate money, and/or actually demonstrate that you are a supporter before you post more. There's no problem with criticism, but if you want to be a NegaBear, go back to football or men's basketball where you might find friends. We're tired of your continuous lack of anything constructively critical (unlike comments by Clay and others who are more negative than positive, not all of whom I agree with but who at least CARE in a positive way about this team--and actually know something about basketball other than reading a stat sheet or press release.) It seems like you WANT her not to succeed.

I don't LG is a lost cause, but the offensive schemes definitely need some improvement, or a scheme more than the 1. Sue Bird, while annoying, is correct that the 1-trick pony just doesn't work, and the other players play tentatively. As Clay points out, we do not currently have the players we once had, but more offensively could be done with this group. Cowling moves so well without the ball and is reliable when not having to play point or look for Kristine, CJ is a good passer in the high post when she gets playing time, Jaelyn can be aggressive and successful on the drive when the situation is right, and why not set up some screens to free Asha up from 3? She can obviously shoot--let's get her open more. Will it take a new assistant coach? And how will LG improve her player development?

But, that said, I still love this team and will continue to root for success!

bearchamp;842823801 said:

---

Britney unlikely to make "several millions more" even if she learned to shoot. Britney was not going to be one of the top three players in the world and thus, was going to make that kind of money. She certainly would have made more than she does now.

---

OK, let's do the math.

First, WNBA success is directly correlated to overseas income. A player on an all-WNBA team is going to generate significantly more income overseas than a starter, and a starter more than a rotation player. Let's call that difference, conservatively, $50,000 a year. Note also that a max salary in the WNBA is $100,000, about $20,000 more than a starter and $30,000 for a rotation player.

Brittney Boyd has absolutely everything necessary to be a premier WNBA starting point guard, and conceivably even an all-star, except any kind of outside game. (It also kept her from making any USA Basketball teams, which also would have added to her value.)

If she were a starter instead of a rotation player, she would make about $70,000 more per year, and over a 10-year career, that's worth $700,000. Bump the annual difference to $75,000, which is probably more accurate, and it's $950,000.

But if Boyd were a star, or borderline star, she would have made at least $180,000 more per year, which is $1.8 million over a ten-year career. Again, that's conservative, so "millions" is not inaccurate. And more than just the top three players make significant money. WNBA starters can make $400,000 or $500,000 in China, plus their WNBA salary, and obviously that can add up quickly.

Compared to the NBA, of course, it's not much, but a 15-year professional career for an elite player (top ten in the world for a few years, say) will generate close to $5 million -- which is a lot more money than I will make in my lifetime.

Schroeder71;842823843 said:

---

I could continue making the argument that Gottlieb & Co don't have the magic that it takes to win in the Pac 12 Conference. Since most of you want to continue on into oblivion with her makes it clear to me that you will continue to rationalize her short comings. Que sera, sera.

---

Quote:

---

Has anyone researched my question as to whether the women's bball team has ever lost by forty points previously? I think not.

---

In this case it is not about the criticism ..it's about your piling on. Who care if they have loss by more. I'm sure with all the time you write up your comments on WBB or SB, you have the time and capability to research this yourself. Why try to drag others in to do your dirty work? GO Bears!!

ClayK;842823487 said:

---

So what is a better option than throwing the ball to Anigwe?

Asha Thomas can make threes if she's given room (only LSU (ask people there about the coaching) and a couple others did so) but she's not very tall and fairly easily contained since she's not that great going to the rim.

---

Your point kept sticking in my mind so I went back to see how we did when opposing coaches did not stop Thomas. Interestingly since conference play started, Thomas has had a good game in all of our wins except the last USC game. She had a good game in the first USC game (which we won) and it appears the coach (who got fired) made an adjustment to stop her in the last game. We won anyway but I think that had more to do with Simon being injured. Colorado also learned from their first game against us but that had to do more with their post out scoring and out rebounding Anigwe.

So since conference games started, Thomas averaged 12.6 points per game in the games we won and 7.4 points per game in the games we lost. If you take out the last USC game, Thomas averaged 14.4 points in our wins.

If we have another scoring threat next year (especially a guard), this should open things up a little for Anigwe and Thomas. I did not realize what a big factor Thomas was in our wins.

Is Destiney Littleton a potential recruit for Cal? I think that I recall reading that there was some contact after her USC decommit.

Her prep career suggests she could be the diversification of scoring option

Little late to the convo here.. but honestly look back 50+ pages on this forum to the end of the boyle era.. everyone said "well I hope get a coach that gets this stagnant offense moving"... and then LG got hired and many of you said way back then that the offense would likely stay very stale.. and guess what, you were right. And if you can notice it from the stands, don't you think coaches/administrators can see that too? And that really delves into the deeper question of what does the admin expect of the program? Obviously fans want them to compete for titles, and after a taste of the final four, maybe even a national title. But in reality, the bears have only been finishing in the top half of the pac10/12 for what, 10 years? And only 5 of those years have they made a push for a conference title, and 2 of those they still finished 5-6 games back.

So I guess what I am saying is, are you not satisfied with 9 NCAA tournament appearances in the last 12 years? Are you expecting deeper runs into the tournament every year? Or is the brand of basketball that you are watching that isn't doing it for you? Because honestly, I don't think the latter 2 are going to change much under the current crew. It may look different with an influx of talent, which may align again at some point, but I think it will solely be based on talent and not coaching. I mean, LG still has some recruiting clout with the Final 4 appearance, but thats fading. Good luck on trying to get a coach to completely change philosophies though