Cal Trio Earns Pac-12 Postseason Honors

Congratulations!

Complete All-Conference Team:

Mathurin, Uof A
Koloko, U of A
Tubelis, U of A
Juzang, UCLA
Jaquez, UCLA
Campbell, UCLA
Mobley, U$C
Peterson, U$C
Brown, UW
Walker, Colorado

All-Frosh team:

Gueye, Washington State
Ingram, Stanford
Simpson, Colorado
Stefanovic, Utah
Taylor, Oregon State

Not the most talented group of frosh I've ever seen in this conference, especially with Ingram as FOY.

Big C said:

---

Not the most talented group of frosh I've ever seen in this conference, especially with Ingram as FOY.

---

The sophomore class looks strong. It takes awhile to sort out best players in the freshman class since in most programs, even our own, freshmen play so little.

Big C said:

---

Complete All-Conference Team:

Mathurin, Uof A
Koloko, U of A
Tubelis, U of A
Juzang, UCLA
Jaquez, UCLA
Campbell, UCLA
Mobley, U$C
Peterson, U$C
Brown, UW
Walker, Colorado

---

Pretty brutal state of the conference when 80% of the all-conference team come from only 25% of the conference teams.

CalLifer said:

---

Big C said:

---

Complete All-Conference Team:

Mathurin, Uof A
Koloko, U of A
Tubelis, U of A
Juzang, UCLA
Jaquez, UCLA
Campbell, UCLA
Mobley, U$C
Peterson, U$C
Brown, UW
Walker, Colorado

---

Pretty brutal state of the conference when 80% of the all-conference team come from only 25% of the conference teams.

---

Or you could just say it is a pretty brutal state of the conference when there are 3 clear cut tourney teams and nobody else anywhere close to the bubble. When the Pac-12's top three teams are pretty even with the WCC's top 3 teams -- NET rankings for Arizona, UCLA, and SC are 2, 11, and 34, and for Gonzaga, SMC, and USF 1, 18, and 25 -- you know things are bad.

Based on OOC results, there were two or three good teams and 9-10 mediocre to poor teams. The conference results didn't change this. OOC, USC was a big fat question, because outside of San Diego St., they didn't play anybody good (Temple, a current NET ranking of 110, was the best team they faced outside of the Aztecs). By losing to Stanford twice(!) and to Oregon at home, SC showed it isn't all that strong, I don't feel good about their tourney chances.

There are those who have suggested that Stanford and Oregon folded at the end, but neither one was very good to begin with. Oregon loses to BYU by 32 in Portland? Stanford loses by 16 to Santa Clara? Stanford needs OT to beat Dartmouth? Outside of Oregon sweeping in LA and Stanford sweeping SC, neither school had anything to fold from.

Take the top 5 teams in the WCC. Their combined record against the Pac-12 was 6-1, with the only loss being Santa Clara's loss at Cal when they were missing their two big men (no way Cal beats a healthy Santa Clara). And except for Cal and Utah, none of the games were against the bottom three of the Pac, Gonzaga beat UCLA, Santa Clara beat Stanford, BYU smacked Oregon and beat Utah, St. Mary's beat Oregon, and USF beat ASU. Yeah, the bottom of the Pac-12 is better than the bottom of the WCC, because the bottom of the Pac-12 is bad and the bottom of the WCC is terrible, but being bad instead of terrible isn't an accomplishment.

We could go at this a thousand ways, but yes, the state of the conference is pretty brutal.

Big C said:

---

Complete All-Conference Team:

Mathurin, Uof A
Koloko, U of A
Tubelis, U of A
Juzang, UCLA
Jaquez, UCLA
Campbell, UCLA
Mobley, U$C
Peterson, U$C
Brown, UW
Walker, Colorado

---

WinShsres:
1. Mathirin, Arizona
2. Koloko, Arizona
3. Mobley, USC
4. Brown, uW
5. Flowers, WSU
6. Tubelis, Arizona
7. Jaquez, UCLA
8. Walker, Colorado
9. Peterson, uSC
10. Campbell, UCLA
11. Richardson, Oregon
12. Bernard, UCLA
13. Battery, Colorado
14. Terry, Arizona
15. Abogidi, WSU
16. Juzang, uCLA
17. Kriisa, Arizona
18. Ellis, USC
19. Ballo, Arizona
20. Goodwin, USC
21. Kelly, Cal
22. Jones, Stanford
23. Barthelemy, Colorado
24. Guerrier, Oregon
25. Gueye, WSU
.
.
40. Shepherd, Cal
.
.
63. Celestine, Cal
.
.
66. Thiemann, Cal
.
.
68. Anticevich, Cal
.
70. Kuany, Cal
.
.
84. Alajiki, Cal
.
86. Brown, Cal
.
.
.
100. Foreman, Cal
.
.
112. Anywanwu, Cal
.
.
131. Alters, Cal
.
.
144. Hyder, Cal
.
.
147. Klonaras, Cal
.
.
161. Roberson, Cal

173 players ranked

Of the Top 25:
Arizona 6
USC 4
UCLA 4
Colorado 3
WSU 3
Oregon 2
UW 1
Cal 1
Stanford 1

Celestine, Lars, Kuany, Alsjiki, Brown is our best returning 5, but only OSU is weaker based on this year's play.

calumnus said:

---

Big C said:

---

Complete All-Conference Team:

Mathurin, Uof A
Koloko, U of A
Tubelis, U of A
Juzang, UCLA
Jaquez, UCLA
Campbell, UCLA
Mobley, U$C
Peterson, U$C
Brown, UW
Walker, Colorado

---

WinShsres:
1. Mathirin, Arizona
2. Koloko, Arizona
3. Mobley, USC
4. Brown, uW
5. Flowers, WSU
6. Tubelis, Arizona
7. Jaquez, UCLA
8. Walker, Colorado
9. Peterson, uSC
10. Campbell, UCLA
11. Richardson, Oregon
12. Bernard, UCLA
13. Battery, Colorado
14. Terry, Arizona
15. Abogidi, WSU
16. Juzang, uCLA
17. Kriisa, Arizona
18. Ellis, USC
19. Ballo, Arizona
20. Goodwin, USC
21. Kelly, Cal
22. Jones, Stanford
23. Barthelemy, Colorado
24. Guerrier, Oregon
25. Gueye, WSU
.
.
40. Shepherd, Cal
.
.
63. Celestine, Cal
.
.
66. Thiemann, Cal
.
.
68. Anticevich, Cal
.
70. Kuany, Cal
.
.
84. Alajiki, Cal
.
86. Brown, Cal
.
.
.
100. Foreman, Cal
.
.
112. Anywanwu, Cal
.
.
131. Alters, Cal
.
.
144. Hyder, Cal
.
.
147. Klonaras, Cal
.
.
161. Roberson, Cal

173 players ranked

Of the Top 25:
Arizona 6
USC 4
UCLA 4
Colorado 3
WSU 3
Oregon 2
UW 1
Cal 1
Stanford 1

Celestine, Lars, Kuany, Alsjiki, Brown is our best returning 5, but only OSU is weaker based on this year's play.

---

Headed for 11th place like a rocket!

For Centers, hard to argue against Koloko and Mobley, especially since AZ and UCLA were at the top of the Pac12 ... but Kelly should have earned 2nd team (although Battey is also deserving)

Shepherd might have been considered for 2nd team too, beating out the Utah, Oregon or ASU player

Sam earning HM freshmen class probably is about right

Brown should have been on the all-defense team, at a minimum as a HM

Congrats to all for the honors

Cal8285 said:

---

CalLifer said:

---

Big C said:

---

Complete All-Conference Team:

Mathurin, Uof A
Koloko, U of A
Tubelis, U of A
Juzang, UCLA
Jaquez, UCLA
Campbell, UCLA
Mobley, U$C
Peterson, U$C
Brown, UW
Walker, Colorado

---

Pretty brutal state of the conference when 80% of the all-conference team come from only 25% of the conference teams.

---

Or you could just say it is a pretty brutal state of the conference when there are 3 clear cut tourney teams and nobody else anywhere close to the bubble. When the Pac-12's top three teams are pretty even with the WCC's top 3 teams -- NET rankings for Arizona, UCLA, and SC are 2, 11, and 34, and for Gonzaga, SMC, and USF 1, 18, and 25 -- you know things are bad.

Based on OOC results, there were two or three good teams and 9-10 mediocre to poor teams. The conference results didn't change this. OOC, USC was a big fat question, because outside of San Diego St., they didn't play anybody good (Temple, a current NET ranking of 110, was the best team they faced outside of the Aztecs). By losing to Stanford twice(!) and to Oregon at home, SC showed it isn't all that strong, I don't feel good about their tourney chances.

There are those who have suggested that Stanford and Oregon folded at the end, but neither one was very good to begin with. Oregon loses to BYU by 32 in Portland? Stanford loses by 16 to Santa Clara? Stanford needs OT to beat Dartmouth? Outside of Oregon sweeping in LA and Stanford sweeping SC, neither school had anything to fold from.

Take the top 5 teams in the WCC. Their combined record against the Pac-12 was 6-1, with the only loss being Santa Clara's loss at Cal when they were missing their two big men (no way Cal beats a healthy Santa Clara). And except for Cal and Utah, none of the games were against the bottom three of the Pac, Gonzaga beat UCLA, Santa Clara beat Stanford, BYU smacked Oregon and beat Utah, St. Mary's beat Oregon, and USF beat ASU. Yeah, the bottom of the Pac-12 is better than the bottom of the WCC, because the bottom of the Pac-12 is bad and the bottom of the WCC is terrible, but being bad instead of terrible isn't an accomplishment.

We could go at this a thousand ways, but yes, the state of the conference is pretty brutal.

---

Maybe it's "east coast bias"?

calumnus said:

---

CalLifer said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Big C said:

---

Complete All-Conference Team:

Mathurin, Uof A
Koloko, U of A
Tubelis, U of A
Juzang, UCLA
Jaquez, UCLA
Campbell, UCLA
Mobley, U$C
Peterson, U$C
Brown, UW
Walker, Colorado

---

WinShsres:
1. Mathirin, Arizona
2. Koloko, Arizona
3. Mobley, USC
4. Brown, uW
5. Flowers, WSU
6. Tubelis, Arizona
7. Jaquez, UCLA
8. Walker, Colorado
9. Peterson, uSC
10. Campbell, UCLA
11. Richardson, Oregon
12. Bernard, UCLA
13. Battery, Colorado
14. Terry, Arizona
15. Abogidi, WSU
16. Juzang, uCLA
17. Kriisa, Arizona
18. Ellis, USC
19. Ballo, Arizona
20. Goodwin, USC
21. Kelly, Cal
22. Jones, Stanford
23. Barthelemy, Colorado
24. Guerrier, Oregon
25. Gueye, WSU
.
.
40. Shepherd, Cal
.
.
63. Celestine, Cal
.
.
66. Thiemann, Cal
.
.
68. Anticevich, Cal
.
70. Kuany, Cal
.
.
84. Alajiki, Cal
.
86. Brown, Cal
.
.
.
100. Foreman, Cal
.
.
112. Anywanwu, Cal
.
.
131. Alters, Cal
.
.
144. Hyder, Cal
.
.
147. Klonaras, Cal
.
.
161. Roberson, Cal

173 players ranked

Of the Top 25:
Arizona 6
USC 4
UCLA 4
Colorado 3
WSU 3
Oregon 2
UW 1
Cal 1
Stanford 1

Celestine, Lars, Kuany, Alsjiki, Brown is our best returning 5, but only OSU is weaker based on this year's play.

---

Headed for 11th place like a rocket!

---

Brutal when in a 12 team league with 60 starters you only have 2 players in the top 60 most productive players and neither is returning.

---

Goes against the narrative that Fox is building something, doesn't it? It's remarkable that some fans and apparently Knowlton believe we'll be better next year. Reality is we'll be in the bottom quartile again in year four of this "rebuild".

HKBear97! said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Brutal when in a 12 team league with 60 starters you only have 2 players in the top 60 most productive players and neither is returning.

---

Goes against the narrative that Fox is building something, doesn't it? It's remarkable that some fans and apparently Knowlton believe we'll be better next year. Reality is we'll be in the bottom quartile again in year four of this "rebuild".

---

Oh you missed the narrative then. Next year is the REBUILD. This year is where we peaked. Obviously you missed the wins over Oregon, Stanford and .... and .... and . .....

I think there was a real good half against USC somewhere.

/sarcasm - but seriously, I've heard both Fox and Knowlton refer to next year as a rebuilding year.

calumnus said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Brutal when in a 12 team league with 60 starters you only have 2 players in the top 60 most productive players and neither is returning.

---

Goes against the narrative that Fox is building something, doesn't it? It's remarkable that some fans and apparently Knowlton believe we'll be better next year. Reality is we'll be in the bottom quartile again in year four of this "rebuild".

---

Oh you missed the narrative then. Next year is the REBUILD. This year is where we peaked. Obviously you missed the wins over Oregon, Stanford and .... and .... and . .....

I think there was a real good half against USC somewhere.

/sarcasm - but seriously, I've heard both Fox and Knowlton refer to next year as a rebuilding year.

---

Yeah, year 4, when all of the players are your recruits, you have 6 seniors and you have only 2 players coming in is a "rebuilding year"?

Undoubtedly, year 5 will be a rebuilding year when all those seniors depart. That is why not moving on from Fox now will be so disastrous: it will be Fox filling all or most of those slots for another 4 years, even if we make a change a year from now.

---

This a million times over. We have multiple open scholarships for Fox to use this coming recruiting class. Regardless of an extension, he is on the hot seat. What recruits will he be able to attract when players have real concern about the direction of the program?

HKBear97! said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Brutal when in a 12 team league with 60 starters you only have 2 players in the top 60 most productive players and neither is returning.

---

Goes against the narrative that Fox is building something, doesn't it? It's remarkable that some fans and apparently Knowlton believe we'll be better next year. Reality is we'll be in the bottom quartile again in year four of this "rebuild".

---

Oh you missed the narrative then. Next year is the REBUILD. This year is where we peaked. Obviously you missed the wins over Oregon, Stanford and .... and .... and . .....

I think there was a real good half against USC somewhere.

/sarcasm - but seriously, I've heard both Fox and Knowlton refer to next year as a rebuilding year.

---

Yeah, year 4, when all of the players are your recruits, you have 6 seniors and you have only 2 players coming in is a "rebuilding year"?

Undoubtedly, year 5 will be a rebuilding year when all those seniors depart. That is why not moving on from Fox now will be so disastrous: it will be Fox filling all or most of those slots for another 4 years, even if we make a change a year from now.

---

This a million times over. We have multiple open scholarships for Fox to use this coming recruiting class. Regardless of an extension, he is on the hot seat. What recruits will he be able to attract when players have real concern about the direction of the program?

---

You need to bring in an exciting coach who can start laying the groundwork for that 2023 class NOW. The recruits will ignore next year's results if they feel they are part of something NEW and exciting.