Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Shootings Near Thunder's Arena Follow Win Over Lakers

Cal Men's Basketball 2010-2011 Preview: Point Guards

Basketball. Basketball? Basketball.

With only two and a half weeks until Cal basketball tips off, it's time to take a look at the upcoming delightful season of no expectations. (You think no expectations is bad? Think about how much enjoyment you've derived from watching Cal football the past few years.) Our defense of the Pac-10 championship begins with eight members of last year's team (whether via graduation, transfer, dismissal, or nationalism) gone, and a fresh new crop of California Golden Bears ready to attack the hardwood at Haas with fervor and enthusiasm.

Today, we look at the Cal point guard situation.

Avinash: Replacing Jerome Randle is probably impossible. Just look at his accolades. Defending Pac-10 Player of the Year. Greatest 3 point shooter in Golden Bear history. Nasty on the court. Great penetrator, sat back and ran the offense. Pretty much owned the conference his final two years. I know plenty of people in Pullman and Tucson are happy never to see Randle again, because he feasted against them.

That leaves us with this group.

Star-divide



Jorge proved he was capable of running the points for stretches last season. Now he's likely going to be called upon to be the main starter. He has a curious handle (seems like it's too far away from his body), and he'll never be respected as a big-time shooter (he's made big-time shots, but to ask him to produce on the level of Randle is asinine). At least we know one thing that'll improve is point guard defense with Jorge; Jerome might be a great offensive player, but like most guys his size couldn't do much other than funnel his man into the help defense. Jorge could give a lot of opposing guards trouble.

Brandon Smith...man. He didn't look good at all last season. His struggles forced Randle to play even more minutes and we had to go to Jorge to run the backup point. Getting anything out of him would be great. I'm intrigued by Franklin, although I doubt he's up to college standards. What does everyone else think about the Cal point guard position?

Kodiak: I know that Coach Montgomery said that Jorge wanted to play point and that they'd give him a shot there.

Um.  Not sure how long that experiment will last.  There's a big difference between bringing the ball up a few times a game and running things full time.  Granted, Jorge improved dramatically from the turnover machine as a frosh to being fairly reliable as a soph.  He's shown an ability to penetrate and dish without knocking people over in open-court situations - I just don't know how effective he'll be in half court sets.  You know he really works hard at his game.  There was a significant improvement in his outside shot last year.  It would be great if he could just knock down open shots with enough consistency that teams don't help off of him - and any improvements in his mid-range game would be gravy.  Personally, I feel more comfortable with him off the ball.  However, I suspect that Monty is going to change his offensive system to be less reliant on the point guard being able to manufacture plays and more dependent on crisp ball movement + screens and motion.  If that's the case, Jorge probably works just fine.

Brandon Smith looked okay at the beginning of last year (I thought he was pretty poised for a frosh), but struggled overall.  I've heard some reports that he had some injury issues.(ankle)  Besides Kidd, I don't think I've seen too many true freshman PG's handle the transition to Pac-10 play all that smoothly, so Smith's struggles really didn't surprise me.  But, he needs to show improvements across the board if he's going to earn minutes at the expense of the talented newcomers.  I remember Randle telling reporters that he constantly would tell Smith to shoot it when open because he had a good shot...it just never showed up in games.  He's under-sized and may not be able to match the speed/athleticism of the new guys, so he'll have to make up for that with some grit - either toughness on D, steadiness with the ball, decision-making.  He may be that smart/steady backup that comes in and gives you a good 10-15 minutes a night without hurting you.  Considering Jorge's all-out style, and the fact that true freshmen tend to be foul-magnets, we really need Smith to be able to step up.

It would be absolutely awesome if Gary Franklin wins the starting job.  He's got good size, can shoot it, and has combo guard skills.  Although he looked great when I saw him at the Academic All-Star game, that's a far cry from playing more structured, organized ball at the Pac-10 level.  A lot of HS guards look great in wide-open systems where they can dominate the ball, but struggle when they move to college and have to run a more structured offense against guys who are just as big/fast/quick, and have more athletic help defenders.  My suspicion is that Monty would love for Franklin to emerge as the guy because he offers the most potential at that position. 

However, that's a lot of responsibility to put on a young player.  I could see him splitting duties w/ Jorge/Franklin...Start Franklin at the off-guard so he doesn't have as much to worry about and give him more minutes at the point as he becomes more comfortable.  I'm more concerned about him on defense.  Youngsters tend to get abused.

If Smith can't provide steady play, and we have foul trouble w/ Franklin, we may even need Emerson Murray to swing over.  He's also considered a combo guard.  Maybe he'd be more of a scoring point than a true set-up guy...but that works as long as he has the handles to initiate the offense as needed.

TwistNHook: I miss Randle already!

LeonPowe: Obviously expecting the sort of production we had from Randle from our 3 headed trio is just silly. But one of the things that a basketball coach has got to like, is that you can change your system from year to year in basketball. Knowing Monty's history at the Furd, and seeing as how our best offensive players are going to be Kamp and Crabbe - I think we move to an offense where the point guard is not expected to do much more than bring the ball up the floor and initiate the passing game or motion flow. I don't think Jorge really proved that he could run back-up point last year - all he proved is that he was better than Smith - but I think this year, Smith wins a lot of minutes being a low-turnover, don't take anything off the table guard. I think we're going to see the offense initiate from the high and mid posts - with Kamp and Sanders-Frison both being excellent passers with a soft touch from 10-15' - either that or see Murray and Crabbe be the initiators.

For comparison's sake - take a look at the Lakers triangle offense - Ever since Phil has been there, the Lakers have never had a really good point guard - and the triangle offense never ran well with the decade's best point guard at the helm (that'd be Jason Kidd). You can scheme around having an average point guard. 

Let's be frank - this is a learning year - I don't like the talent we have at the 1, but in the end that might not matter as much as our ability to defend and grind teams with our big men. And getting Crabbe the ball.

ragnarok: I think the point about Monty working his offense around the pieces he has is a very good one.  In fact, his Cal teams these past two seasons have been pretty unusual for him, as he had a trio of very efficient scorers outside and not much size or experience inside.  To his great credit, he took the hand he was dealt, played to their strengths and won a conference title.

This, of course, is not to say he can do it again (this year's team will be much, much less experienced than last year's senior-heavy squad), but instead that it's likely that point guard will be a weakness for this team, so I'd expect to see Monty play away from that.

At this point, I think we know what we'll get from Jorge, and while he'll definitely handle the ball some (IIRC, he was recruited to play the point, but the coaching staff switched him off the ball to get him on the court sooner), if he's running point for 30+ minutes like Randle was, I think we could be in trouble.  Brandon Smith didn't show me much last year (albeit in limited minutes); I didn't see him do anything really poorly, but I also didn't see him do anything really well.  Maybe the game slows down for him this year and he gets a lot more comfortable with the college game.

Franklin is really the wild card here.  As good as high school stars look in highlight reels, I'm never confident about freshmen coming in and being able to dominate, at least until I see them on the court.  He could be great, or he could really struggle; he'll probably do both in consecutive games.

Poll
I am _________ about the Cal point guard situation.
very excited
21 votes
excited
74 votes
indifferent
28 votes
concerned
114 votes
very concerned
28 votes

265 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 102 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I voted "excited"

Because I am. Maybe strangely, I’m really excited to watch this team this year and excited to see who emerges as the point guard under Monty’s tutelage. We’ve seen how good a coach Monty can be for us already. We’re REALLY going to see it in these next few years when he’s recruiting and developing “his own” guys.

Monty Sunshine Pumper right here, baby!

Yes, I am an Old Blue. Now get off my lawn.

by Ohio Bear on Oct 25, 2010 3:36 PM PDT reply actions  

Agreed on all fronts… As much I will miss last year’s chemistry and cast of characters (and believe me, I will), I’m excited to see Monty’s recruits get on the court and start playing together… We may struggle this year, but it’ll be fun to see who emerges as the next group of lovable Cal b-ballers

"Remember the Maine! TO HELL WITH STANFORD!"

by CruzinBears on Oct 25, 2010 4:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m concerned about the point guard situation, but I am very excited to watch these guys play!

by atomsareenough on Oct 25, 2010 4:23 PM PDT reply actions  

Does this mean I’ll get to tune into key contests like the Kansas game?

I’m trying to get into hoops, but it just freaks me out that Monty looks like Sandy who looks like Oski.

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 25, 2010 4:26 PM PDT reply actions  

I’ll allow it. We need the support. We’re not going to win.

by LeonPowe on Oct 25, 2010 8:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm so excited! I'm so scared!

about our PG situation. Having Jorge (and Brandon Smith…not sold that he is really a D-1 player) actually means that this is a position where we have some experience, but then Jorge is not really a true PG.

by LEastCoastBears on Oct 25, 2010 4:26 PM PDT reply actions  

+1
Wondering why he gets no love in this column?

by boomtho on Oct 25, 2010 6:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

He’s getting love in another post coming soon.

Yes, I am an Old Blue. Now get off my lawn.

by Ohio Bear on Oct 25, 2010 6:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

DON’T TRY TO SILENCE ME WITH LOGIC AND WORDS, OLD MAN!

by boomtho on Oct 25, 2010 6:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Don't worry

Logic and words don’t silence anyone here!

Yes, I am an Old Blue. Now get off my lawn.

by Ohio Bear on Oct 25, 2010 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Bad Comparison?

The 2007 and 2009 Cal football teams both had great expectations that were not met. Both years Cal was pegged to finish 2nd in the conference and both years saw the team rise to top 6 rankings before plummeting in familiar fashion. In 2008 and 2010 the team had/has no realistic expectations.

by TooMuchtoBear on Oct 25, 2010 5:55 PM PDT reply actions  

I think the idea is that teams that fail to meet expectations hurt to watch. So enjoy watching this basketball team because they have no expectations with which to disappoint!

The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS

by norcalnick on Oct 25, 2010 7:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

Plus, I just enjoy watching Monty coached teams. I had season tix for the two years I overlapped w/ Braun, and it was not too fun to watch. Monty’s team is just so much more…fluid, better-coached, and enjoyable to watch.

by boomtho on Oct 25, 2010 7:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

shhhhhhhhh. [i’m not really rod benson]

by boomtho on Oct 25, 2010 7:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

Posters faking themselves as Cal power forwards from the early – mid 90s? We don’t stand for that sort of thing around here. No sir.

by LeonPowe on Oct 25, 2010 8:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Early/mid 2000s, though, bring it on!!!

by atomsareenough on Oct 25, 2010 9:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Gah. You know what’s strange? I think my login at Bear Insider is MontyBuckley3.

by LeonPowe on Oct 25, 2010 10:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

At least it isn’t Jamo.

Old Toothwrangler

by Kodiak on Oct 26, 2010 1:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

Totally Agree

The Braun years were characterized by complete lack of creativity on offense and questionable lineup decisions. Not that Braun was a terrible coach, but I would argue that he had more talent on his teams than you would expect given his record.

You know Monty’s teams will be well coached and give it their all.

by The Red Mamba on Oct 25, 2010 8:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

Zactly. Braun was not a terrible coach. Monty is just a much better coach.

Yes, I am an Old Blue. Now get off my lawn.

by Ohio Bear on Oct 25, 2010 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

You could put that on Braun’s linkedin testimonial.

“Coach Braun worked with my local university sports team. He was not a terrible coach.” – Ohio Bear

by LeonPowe on Oct 25, 2010 9:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

No. That’s false. Braun was a terrible coach. He did a good job of bringing in talent, but he was absolutely awful at coaching.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 8:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

I thought he did a pretty good job his first year getting to the Sweet 16 with Yogi, Prentice, Randy Duck, Tony G, Anwar…especially after Ed Gray broke his foot right before the tournament. It’s not like those guys had any semblance of coaching whatsoever from Bozeman.

Afterwards, not so much.

Old Toothwrangler

by Kodiak on Oct 26, 2010 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

Braun was a pretty good recruiter though. And he has the second biggest “coaching tree” among active D-1 coaches, which is pretty damn cool.

by boomtho on Oct 25, 2010 9:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

I actually think that was part of his problem. His teams did well with high bball IQ players. When he started getting success recruiting the higher rated guys who were more athletes than players, his teams really struggled.

Old Toothwrangler

by Kodiak on Oct 26, 2010 1:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

Just look at a guy like Theo. He came in with the highest “basketball IQ” on the team as a freshman from his time with Alloco. Dude knew how to play basketball. Then he regressed significantly under Braun, because Braun flat out cannot coach. Then Monty comes and, and….well, Theo’s back to playing good basketball.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 8:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

It wasn’t a lack of creativity on offense. They literally did not run an semblance of offense whatsoever.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

There was a point in time where I tried to tell people just how bad of a coach Ben Braun was, and some people were skeptical of my claims. Then Monty came in, and now even the most skeptical of Cal fans can see the obvious difference in what a good coach brings compared to a bad one. Good times.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 8:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

The problem is, Braun really wasn’t a “bad” coach — unless you simply define “bad” as being “not as good as Monty.”

Woah … quotation mark overload.

My point being the reason you got skeptical response to your claims that Braun was a bad coach is because you were wrong. Braun was a good coach who often got more out of a mediocre team than seemed possible. But he wasn’t a great coach, and never was able to take a good to great team and make them better.

Hair splitting, maybe. But that counts too.

Being an Old Blue means fearing any athletic success.

by SoCal Oski on Oct 26, 2010 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

I thought the knock on Braun was that he could recruit well and do nothing with them.

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 26, 2010 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

That was my view, also. I saw him stock some great teams with talent, but players never really seem to develop. Midgley and Tamir were the quintessential examples.

CGB's Jimmy Carter

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Oct 26, 2010 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

And it’s beyond just a lack of development. It’s that he never got a single one of his teams to play good basketball on the offensive end. Decision making was always questionable from guys like Ubaka to Midgley to Shantay, offensive sets were almost non-existant with little to no proper reads being made….he was not able to teach his players to play good basketball, for whatever reason.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

Tamir dropped 40 against Oregon, son!

CGB's Jimmy Carter

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Oct 26, 2010 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions  

Hence my point:

Braun […] often got more out of a mediocre team than seemed possible [but] never was able to take a good to great team and make them better.

Being an Old Blue means fearing any athletic success.

by SoCal Oski on Oct 26, 2010 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

I would say when you see him getting more out of a mediocre team than seemed possible, it’s more that we tend to judge players based on their offense, and the one thing Braun could do a little bit is get guys to play D. So a team of “mediocre” players that played good D is a decent team…..but if those guys are good enough defensively, they really aren’t “mediocre”, they’re just underrated…..

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

Simply put…..no. Ben Braun was not a good coach. If you broke down film on what his players were doing, you’d see…..nothing. There was no real offense going around. A lot of standing around and playing 1 on 1. Bad basketball. Horrible decision making. Underperforming talents. A lack of development. It’s not that he’s “bad compared to Monty”. Braun was legitimately a bad coach.

That said, recrutiing does count, and he was a very good recruiter. I give him credit for that. He brought in enough talent that his lack of ability to do anything with it was offset at least to some degree.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

Braun had a good amount of success in the first half of his time at Cal. Let’s not let the frustrations of the second half color our perspective.

CGB's Jimmy Carter

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Oct 26, 2010 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions  

That said, recrutiing does count, and he was a very good recruiter. I give him credit for that.

He had some alright success, and it should be credited. That success did not come from coaching his players to play good basketball. It came from playing defense and having some talented kids.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think we’ve seen many situations where a collection of talent isn’t enough for success. Braun was good at getting talent on his team and then getting them to a certain point.

Also “playing defense” is part of “playing good basketball.” You seem to really lambast his offensive decisions and perhaps you are right. But you cant just focus on one part as an indication that he was a terrible coach. I think we can all agree he was very defense oriented, but that doesnt mean hes a bad coach.

CGB's Jimmy Carter

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Oct 26, 2010 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well, the defense part is kind of strange to me, because his teams seemed to be more effective that way earlier in his tenure rather than late. I’m not sure if it was the players he had, assistant coaches, or a change in philosophy on his part, or what.

You seem to really lambast his offensive decisions

It’s not so much his decisions, it’s getting his players to play good offensive. Good ballmovement, passing, decisionmaking, making the right reads and cuts….I mean, I’m not really going to criticize a coach for the offensive system they choose to use or anything (that’s a lie, I hate the Princeton offense!), as long as the players are running it well….

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 10:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

Dude, if there was one thing the Braun era teams were good at it was passing. Around the perimeter. Repeatedly. Until the shot clock ran down to 2.

CGB's Jimmy Carter

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Oct 26, 2010 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

Ha, I won’t argue with that.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions  

LOL.

That was play #1.

Play #2 was throwing it to the post. Looking confused. Throw it out again. Repeat until the shot clock was about to expire.

Old Toothwrangler

by Kodiak on Oct 26, 2010 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions  

+1

I think Missing Barry may be bitter about the last half of Braun’s tenure.

I stand by my assertion that Braun was a good but not great coach. Good coaches have teams finish in the top three and make the post season often enough so it isn’t a miracle. Bad coaches never do. Great coaches almost always do.

Being an Old Blue means fearing any athletic success.

by SoCal Oski on Oct 26, 2010 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions  

Honestly, it’s not about being bitter at all. I’m actually not bitter. I’ve only heard good things about Braun, and he did help get the basketball team on the right track. It was time to move on, but I personally don’t feel any real bitterness towards him. For me it all comes down to how painfully poorly coached his teams were. Basketball is far and away the sport I understand the most. I won’t pretend I can break down football film and tell you what’s going on. I can do that with basketball. I can see poor decisions in real time, when guys don’t make the cut they should, miss a defensive rotation, are late on a pass to a cutter, attack the wrong foot, mess up their spacing…..Braun’s teams were legitimately some of the worst teams fundamentally I’ve watched. Simply put, they played bad basketball. It was closer to the AAU/HS teams that stand around playing one on one I describe down below than anything you’d see De La Salle HS (they play some excellent basketball) doing.

Personally, I think if you could somehow combine Braun/Monty into one he’d be unstoppable. Recruit like Braun, coach like Monty….

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions  

Oh God

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 26, 2010 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions  

That’s really what it would be like. I think Monty is as good a coach as anyone in college basketball. He’s on the level of Izzo, Coach K, Roy Williams, and a very selective group of others. He just isn’t as good at bringing in talent. Braun could do it on a more comparable level to those other guys.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions  

Braun's Recruiting

“Braun could (bring in talent) on a more comparable level” to Izzo, Coach K, Roy Williams, and a very select group of others."

How widely Missing Barry is missing the mark on this one.

NBA rosters have been stocked with talent from the coaches cited above and not just to warm an NBA bench.

And Braun? Other than the real Leon Powe, who kind of fell into his lap (since Leon wanted to stay near home for family reasons), who else is there from Ben’s long and exasperating 12 years that could play in the NBA? Sean Marks, Francisco Elson, and Dominic McGuire? Benchwarmers at the NBA level. Even Leon, because of his unfortunate knee injuries, has not and likely will not make much of an impact in the pros.

Remember, Braun is the coach who brought us Verneisel with some fanfare. No disrespect to this player, but he was not really a Pac 10 caliber basketballer. This is the coach who gave a scholarship to the kid now at Oregon, whose loyalty to Ben—thank goodness!—brought us Jorge via Montgomery when said kid (his name escapes me) opted out of his Cal commitment.

Ben is the coach who played many walk-ons for significant minutes in many different years, because his roster was so bereft of Pac-10 caliber talent.

There is no need to dredge up the memory of his many mediocre recruits to see that comparing Ben to some of the best college recruiting coaches is beyond preposterous.

by Jimes-boy on Oct 26, 2010 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

You’re completely and utterly ignoring the impact coaching has on turning those kids into NBA caliber players, as well as the advantages those guys have on Braun in recruiting. When you have a program with the success and tradition of UNC, you’re going to get better recruits. Give Monty that kind of talent, and he’d turn Cal into that kind of program. Ubaka could have been an NBA player with enough coaching. Devon Hardin should be a quality NBA C right now, that he destroyed his career playing for Braun for 4 yers is a tradgedy. You’re simplifying things down to the point where it just isn’t a good comparison.

by Missing Barry on Oct 27, 2010 7:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

Good points

I agree that good coaching can make a big difference and that Monty is almost infinitely better in that regard than Braun. Am skeptical about your evaluation of Ubaka and whether anyone could have gotten through to Hardin is hard to know. I do agree with your assessment of his raw talent. And after posting I realized that I forgot to include Ryan Anderson, probably Ben’s best recruit, after Powe.

Still, I feel that you were pushing it to compare Ben as a recruiter with any elite coach. His best recruit may have been Earl Boykin, at Eastern Michigan, where Ben should have stayed.

Assuming that Monty has the desire and energy to keep at it for the next 5 to 10 years, I am sure his recruiting will prove far superior to Braun’s.

If this freshman group is as good as advertised, we may already be seeing his superior recruiting.

by Jimes-boy on Oct 27, 2010 9:13 AM PDT up reply actions  

With Hardin, one of the things that always stuck with me was the good things Pete Newell had to say about him. I’m not sure if Hardin went to his camp more than once, but Newell had a lot of great things to say about his worke thic, the progress he made, his skills, and how he could provide a lot more than he was doing to Cal. Then afterwards he got back to Cal and Braun was back to wasting his talent, and all of those things he did over the summer with Newell disappeared….

by Missing Barry on Oct 27, 2010 9:18 AM PDT up reply actions  

Interesting about Newell and Hardin

I did not know about this.

Still, Hardin has to take the major share of the credit for wasting his talent, not Braun, as much as I was unimpressed with his coaching/teaching.

by Jimes-boy on Oct 27, 2010 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well, depends on how hard he was working. I can’t speak to that. What I can speak to is I don’t think Braun did anything to help his development whatsoever, and might have actually impeded it.

by Missing Barry on Oct 27, 2010 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Also, his players liked him. Not sure if that’s a ‘skill’. I’ve heard some of the Braun-recruited players chafed under Monty’s reign (Seeley comes to mind, but also some of the seniors too), although the results seem to justify themselves.

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 26, 2010 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think that’s a reasonable thing to credit him with. I don’t know how he did in terms of academic stuff, either, but it’s another area I think is fair to judge him on.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

Randle: you forgot about...

…how Randle was ice at the free throw line. How many games was this the difference?

I think we will see all 3 guards at PG as follows:

Jorge – starter with majority of minutes. What he lacks on offense he makes up on defense, and the 2 spot has other candidates that you’d want on the court

Franklin – has the shot and the athleticism but certainly not the experience. Still he will be the first off the bench.

Smith – will be used depending on the situation and match ups. For one, he needs to be able to shoot free throws. That’s fundamental for a PG (although Jorge is sub-par in that category also). I wish Smith had more size because his defensive fundamentals look solid.

by No.8 on Oct 25, 2010 9:57 PM PDT reply actions  

Randle and the Point

No question that Jerome could shoot.

However, after that there wasn’t much. Forget his being short. With his quickness he should have been able to stay in front of his man, but did not do so with any consistency. Forget that he was short; his height would matter if opposing guards shot over him or posted him. What they generally did was go around him! Defensively he will not be missed.

Jerome essentially was a shooting guard who played the point because he was so short, and hence did not really fit the off guard position. However, he had no real instinct as a passer. He did tally quite a few assists, because he had the ball in his hands so much of the time.

Jorge, on the other hand, despite his lack of polish, has much better point guard instincts. His assist to turnover ratio last year was much better than Jerome’s; in the Pac 10 season, Jorge’s overall ratio was about 1.8, with Randle’s at just under 1.3. Jorge’s passing this year should create more offensive rhythm. His size and explosiveness to the basket will lead to many assists, particularly if his shooting has continued to improve.

Defensively, there is really no need for discussion. Even in his freshman year there were Pac 10 home games that we do not win without Gutierrez. Remember how he put the clamps on James Harden in that early victory in 2008? Or his incredible performance against Stanford that same year?

Hopefully he has continued and will contine to improve, be more under control, not get into foul trouble, and stay healthy.

Hard to know about Smith, but as others have suggested, probably he will be a more confident player this year. If so, he will be another true point guard in the mix, looking first to set up others and playing serious defense. He appears to be both intelligent and gritty. Let’s hope he can bring a lot to this year’s team.

I doubt that both Jorge and Smith combined will replace Jerome’s points. Big deal. Did Kidd lead the Bears or any team he has played on in the NBA in scoring?

by Jimes-boy on Oct 25, 2010 10:36 PM PDT reply actions  

Not that I disagree with your comment regarding Randle vs Jorge as actual point guards, but I think last year’s ATO statistics fail to paint the entire picture. Jerome had the ball in his hands a staggering amount of time – Jorge failed to really claim the back up point guard spot with an serious minutes – so to look only at ratio would not be an apple to apple comparison.

I don’t think point guard is going to be a high assist position for us this year – I bet we’ll have something odd where Kamp leads the team in assists with 2-3 a game.

by LeonPowe on Oct 25, 2010 10:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Leon's prediction that Kamp will lead team in assists

Assuming both Kamp and Jorge stay healthy: The two should be great for each other, because they are both bright and selfless players. If I were a bettor, and I am not, I would wager that Jorge at least doubles Kamp’s assists total.

by Jimes-boy on Oct 25, 2010 10:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Having the ball a staggering amount of time

If a player deserves the ball a staggering amount of time, he either must score with it—and Jerome did do that—or set up others to score without turning the ball over—and pretty much Jerome did not do that.

I don’t quite see why a good point guard lowers his assists to turnovers ratio by having the ball in his hands. Never seemed to be much of a problem for Stockton or Jason or Nash. Of course, turnovers go up, but so should assists proportionately.

by Jimes-boy on Oct 25, 2010 11:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Let's do the math

Last year’s totals, through Pac 10 Tournament:

Randle, 58 assists divided by 45 turnovers = 1.29

Gutierrez, 29 assists divided by 16 turnovers = 1.81

The figures are from the Cal website.

by Jimes-boy on Oct 26, 2010 8:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

A/T isn’t a very good metric, though…

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 9:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, except Randle had the ball in his hands four times as much as Jorge did. So his turnover rate ends up being lower.

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 26, 2010 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions  

Turnovers don’t just come from passing the ball. Shooting more often will lead to more turnovers, too. Trying to isolate total turnovers as just a “passing” part of the game is misleading.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 9:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

Good passing big men don’t tend to rack up nearly the same number of assists as wings. It’s simply the nature of the game. I don’t expect a big man to lead the team in assists.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 9:33 AM PDT up reply actions  

Thanks for reminding me about that ASU game. What an effin’ performance. IIRC the first real “Jorge will lock you down” game he had.

I think we’re going to run a lot of cool offensive sets this year. Harper was built to play at the high post and have the offense run through him. I hope we have MSF setting screens and then crashing to the post – his size is so overhwelming that if his defender has to hedge on a screen he should be able to get great position. We’ve got a lot of “bouncy” players — wonder if Monty will try to ratchet up defensive pressure even more and get the guys out and running?

For some reason, I am really excited about this season.

by boomtho on Oct 25, 2010 11:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ratcheting up the defense

How could it be otherwise this year, with the graduation of two of the biggest toreadors I have ever witnessed at Cal? Jerome is numero uno all time, in my opinion, among good Cal players and Patrick Christopher was pretty good at that role himself, preferring to try to swipe the ball away, rather than hold position against his man. I recently looked at last year’s game against Duke; both Jerome and Patrick were so pathetic at the defensive end that it was painful once again to behold. For that matter,

Boykin won’t be much missed when it comes to defense, though I admit that he tried hard. He was just too slow and clumsy.

Let’s remember we have arguably the best coach in the conference. His Stanford teams played pretty amazing defense given the pedestrian speed of most of his players there. I would imagine that with the more athletic kids he is bringing to Cal, we will see a renewed emphasis on defending.

He actually improved Braun’s group a lot defensively, but as it is said, hard to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.

This year should be fun and the team will be better than many pundits are predicting—assuming that Jorge and Kamp play in good health the entire season.

by Jimes-boy on Oct 25, 2010 11:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

Okay, this assessment is a little too harsh on Jerome and PC

Neither had the athletic ability to be great one-on-one defenders. They performed very well except against elite teams like Duke. When that happened, they had to gamble and take risks, because there’s no way they were going to out-defend the Dukies. Boykin isn’t a great defender, no, but he made up for it with great rebounding and being a very efficient scorer.

I was quite pleased with the overall quality of our team defense by season’s end.

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 26, 2010 1:13 AM PDT up reply actions  

Also a little harsh on Boykin considering he was an undersized, miscast at the 4/5 spot out of necessity, and had to spend a considerable amount of time covering for other guys.

I think the emphasis on D has always been there, but we just didn’t have the horses.

I’m excited about the prospect of a healthy Kamp paired with a slimmed down MSF manning the post. That’s a big difference from playing Boykin + 4 guards.

We still don’t have any shot-blocking, but our ball denial/post-position D and boxing out should be much better.

Old Toothwrangler

by Kodiak on Oct 26, 2010 2:01 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, and calling Boykin “slow and clumsy” seems odd to me. He was a bit undersized, but by no means did he struggle with the bigger guys from a quickness standpoint…

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

This whole discussion is totally weird to me

The complaints that Jimes are advancing are like the direct opposite of the truth. The Cal defense was mediocre because it played decent positional D but never forced turnovers. The offense was really good because it shot well and didn’t commit turnovers. The players were athletic enough to get decent numbers of rebounds despite the team being quite short outside of Zhang. It added up to a team that was pretty damn good, but not quite elite.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Oct 26, 2010 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Huh?

Whatever else one can say about Patrick Christopher and Jerome Randle, the notion that they lacked athleticism is ridonkulous.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Oct 26, 2010 4:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

I was actually always pretty unimpressed with Christopher’s lateral movement. He’s got some quickness, and he definitely has hops, but he reminds me a bit of a college version of JRich – he wasn’t very smooth and didn’t move side to side very well. His athleticism was straight-line forward (or up) kinda athleticism. Actually, the more I think about it, the more he really does remind me of a college version of Richardson, in all aspects.

by Missing Barry on Oct 27, 2010 7:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

Ageed

Good comparison, though am sure Richardson was a much better college player than Christopher, who will never an NBA court.

by Jimes-boy on Oct 27, 2010 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah when I said “college version” I meant more like he is to major conference college basketball what JRich is to the NBA. Definitely not on the same level as Richardson.

by Missing Barry on Oct 27, 2010 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

I think we’ll run selectively.

The problem with being able to run consistently is you need dominant rebounding and good outlet passing. Last year’s team really would have benefited from running more, but our lack of size meant we needed everyone back to hit the boards.

Now if Kamp/MSF are able to clean the glass effectively, I think it’d be a great way to take advantage of the young guys who are probably more effective in the open-court anyways.

Old Toothwrangler

by Kodiak on Oct 26, 2010 1:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t really agree with your take. Randle was not a particularly good passer for a PG, I don’t disagree with that, but you’re really underestimating the impact a guy who can beat his man has. Randle’s ball handling, quickness and shooting allowed him to create a decent amount of shots for his teammates. It was more than just having the ball a lot, it was his ability to beat his man that contributed as well. It made up quite a bit for his lack of natural passing skills.

Next, A/T is a crappy metric.

Finally, I haven’t seen Jorge demonstrate much ability to create for teammates. Without veteran players, who can also shoot/score around him like Theo, Jerome, Boykin and Christopher, I see him struggling if asked to do too much.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

Hot Air

We all get a charge out of letting off steam in this blog.

So, let’s leave it at that, and see how the team and its component parts fares as the season unfolds.

Let us remember the strides that Jerome made between his sophomore and senior seasons. As Jorge showed substantial improvement offensively between his freshman and sophomore years, we can hope he will continue making strides in the upcoming season and the one beyond.

by Jimes-boy on Oct 26, 2010 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions  

Jimes-boy, always great to hear your thoguhts on all matters Cal. Even if people disagree, it’s still good to get the discussion going. Thanks!

CGB's Jimmy Carter

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Oct 26, 2010 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

It’s a good point, Jorge has improved a tremendous amount since he stepped foot on campus, much as Randle did. It’ll be interesting to see if he can (or maybe already has!) take another big step forward.

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions  

Beating One's Man

You make a good point here, Missing Barry. Breaking down the defense off the dribble is an extremely valuable talent.

I think that A/T is more than “a crappy metric,” however imperfect it and virtually any other statistic may be.

Also, there is the quality in a good passer to know instantaneously when to get someone the ball. Many assists have nothing to do with beating one’s man off the dribble, but have everything to do with vision and timing. Think of John Stockton and Steve Nash, for example.

In watching Jerome for four years and Jorge for two, it is my opinion that Jorge is way ahead of Jerome with regard to these latter qualities, not to mention selflessness.

by Jimes-boy on Oct 26, 2010 9:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Many assists have nothing to do with beating one’s man off the dribble, but have everything to do with vision and timing.

Right, but you also have to have the ballhandling to create a passing lane and the angle to make the pass. The defense is trying to disrupt those opportunities, after all. That’s where I worry more about Jorge. As of right now I’m not sure he has much more than Theo or Christopher did in terms of setting up teammates.

I think that A/T is more than "a crappy metric," however imperfect it and virtually any other statistic may be.

If you want to compare assists and turnovers, at least do assists – turnovers. It’s better. Another thing I don’t like about it is if you use anything involving turnovers as a passing metric. Many turnovers have nothing to do with passing.

by Missing Barry on Oct 27, 2010 7:39 AM PDT up reply actions  

Assists less Turnovers

Randle, 58 less 45 = 13 in 522 minutes

Gutierrez, 29 less 16 = 13 in 261 minutes

Christopher, 37 less 21 = 16 in 496 minutes

Robertson, 34 less 32 = 2 in 507 minutes

My contention remains that Jorge has more vision than any of last year’s big 3. However, our different opinions, notwithstanding, will remain opinions and the games will be played. We shall then know better from retrospect. I can hardly wait for the season to begin!

by Jimes-boy on Oct 27, 2010 9:27 AM PDT up reply actions  

Maybe Randle/Christopher, but I actually think Theo had some very nice court vision. He was a very fundamental player, had he been a bit more athletic, I think he would have the best shot at an NBA roster of the bunch.

by Missing Barry on Oct 27, 2010 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Is Leon Powe really Leon Powe?

If so, what’s going on with your career? I am hoping you are feeling good and are really healthy. All Cal fans and anyone who has had the pleasure to meet you are pulling for you.

by Jimes-boy on Oct 25, 2010 10:56 PM PDT reply actions  

On Mondays, Tuesdays and Thursdays it’s Leon. All other days it’s his ghost writer.

by patzcalski on Oct 26, 2010 1:10 AM PDT up reply actions  

No, the reader LeonPowe here is not the real LeonPowe. However, reader Kodiak really is a giant brown bear

CGB's Jimmy Carter

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Oct 26, 2010 7:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

scariest. ortho visit. evair.

"Remember the Maine! TO HELL WITH STANFORD!"

by CruzinBears on Oct 26, 2010 8:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

People keep bringing me picnic baskets, honey pots, and telling me that they didn’t start any forest fires.

It’s a little odd to say the least.

Old Toothwrangler

by Kodiak on Oct 26, 2010 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions  

No

but I am really Frank Cohen.

*Inset something witty here*. Oh, and Stanfurd Sucks.

by FrankCohen on Oct 26, 2010 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

So I have a few thoughts. First, I think this is the single biggest area of concern on the team. Jorge is a solid player, a lot of that because of his defense. It’s extremely questionable how he’ll do taking on a bigger offensive role, though, and even more questionable how he’ll be able to run the point. I haven’t seen the skills for him to be an impact player offensively, especially for a PG. He seems like he’s worked very hard on his shot to the point where he’s an acceptable set shooter when he’s open, so I’ll give him credit for that, but unless he’s improved significantly, it’s still at the point where he needs someone to get him open. I don’t see that other player on the team. His handles aren’t up to PG quality – I see him struggling to break guys down and create for teammates. It’s less a criticism of Jorge and more that he’s not suited for what this team needs – he’s a guy who makes his biggest impact cutting to the rim off the ball and shooting the occasional jumpshot on offense, and focusing on D. Great for last years team. This year’s team needs guys to step up on offense, though, and he has a long way to go (from last years version) to be able to do that effectively. Serious area of concern. This team is lacking a real PG. I don’t know much about the depth, so I won’t really comment on them other than to say it doesn’t seem like it’s looking that good?

Next, from a team perspective, I think passing in general is a huge area of conern for this team. It’s not just about guys having passing skills, it’s also about guys who can create for their teammates and then get them the ball, which generally means beating your man. I don’t see any real threats to do that consistently on this team. I think they’re really going to struggle to create good shots for others. Even if a guy like Crabbe comes in and can score some, will he be able to help his teamamtes score? I’m not sure.

Just a couple of general things I read I want to comment on:

A lot of HS guards look great in wide-open systems where they can dominate the ball, but struggle when they move to college and have to run a more structured offense against guys who are just as big/fast/quick, and have more athletic help defenders

True, though I’d take it even farther. A lot of guys in HS don’t play in any system at all. Both AAU and high school, it’s mostly standing around and letting a guy who’s a big time prospect beat his man. Works great at high school, because you’re playing people like me. I was a good high school player, but there’s only so much I could do to make up for my physical limitations. When you go against that kind of talent…..well, no amount of good basketball from me can make up for the difference between us physically. It’s fine. But man, I played a whole lot of teams both in AAU and HS that just didn’t even run anything. It’s sad how close it is to the norm, at least for teams that have that kind of talent.

You can scheme around having an average point guard.

Well, I wouldn’t say you can scheme around it. At least, my interpretation of that is you can find a scheme that makes your PG better than he is, which I don’t think is the case. What you can do is emphasize other players more and your PG less. In the triangle offense, for instance, that means running offense through Pau/Kobe instead of the PG, or Jordan/Pippen instead of the PG. Emphasizing your other talents. It doesn’t make your PG any bette, it just relies on other players. Does Cal have enough firepower elsewhere that it can overcome a lack of offensive talent at the PG spot?

by Missing Barry on Oct 26, 2010 9:55 AM PDT reply actions  

You raise a lot of good points and I simply don’t know enough about this team to have any answers.

I would hope that either MSF/Kamp develops into a post threat. I don’t know if we have anyone who can just take someone off the dribble and penetrate. However, we might have a number of guys who can catch it coming off a screen and use that opening to drive to the basket…then dump off or finish depending on what the D does. That might be how Jorge contributes as a PG.

Like you said, this depends on the guys being able to move the ball crisply enough. It’s a good thing we have a really good coach and reportedly some high bball IQ/high work ethic players.

Old Toothwrangler

by Kodiak on Oct 26, 2010 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, I don’t think any of us would have the answers. Gotta start seeing them play before we can figure out what we’re really working with. I’ll also note that everything I’m saying is talking about this year specifically. I don’t think Cal is going to be very good. But that’s not the goal of this season, so it’s really not that big of a deal. I think we’d all be pleased to see some good development and some good signs for the future out of the guys this year.

by Missing Barry on Oct 27, 2010 7:41 AM PDT up reply actions  

BTW, I read a report from Jay John and he said Emerson isn’t going to see any time at the 1. So, I apologize to the roundtable for my earlier criticisms. Good stuff guys :)

by boomtho on Oct 26, 2010 10:44 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The California Sports Website that's .....different from all the rest.

GoldenBlogs' FAQ and Community Guidelines

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Cal_2_small
Cal Softball Playoff Video: First Cal vs. Arkansas Game - Reid Steals Home
Cal_2_small
Softball Playoff Video: Cal vs. Iona
Ajoceywcalhatpic_small
DBD 5/18/12:  Riddles!
Cal_2_small
Cal Men's Crew Earns Second Place at the Pac-12 Championships
Cal_2_small
Cal Women's Crew Dominates the Pac-12 Championships

Recent FanPosts

Ab_small
DBD 5.22.12 I've made a huge mistake
Noneedtobeupset1_small
DBD 5.21.12 Jimmy Rustling DBD
Logo1_small
Cal rugby?
Oski_mini_small
Cal Men's Tennis vs. Virginia (Round of 16) Open Thread
Southparkavatar_small
DBD 5.17.12 CGB wordcloud

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Coach Tedford is mic'd up for spring practice. Listen to him talk, while people practice! It is...
Steve Bartkowski elected to College Football Hall of Fame
Shareef Abdur-Rahim earns his Cal degree 16 years later!  Better late than never, right?  We're all proud of him.  Go Bears!  (H/T John Montgomery's Twitter)

Click here for more on this story from The Sacramento Bee.
Cal Women's Crew Captures Pac-12 Championship

Recent FanShots

DANBURY MINT CAL MEMORIAL STADIUM REPLICA- Just wondering if anyone had...
Alex Morgan links
Natalie Coughlin feature on ESPN
warren long should be offered he has all cal needs really good kid is the word around town.
I recorded the entire last out as Cal clinches the first ever PAC12 Softball Title! It was also a...
WSJ Writer Urges Pac-12 & Big Ten to Secede From BCS Playoffs
KTVU profiles the USA Olympic men's eight rowing hopefuls, and it includes interviews with former...
Former Cal football players make career in music
Cal has one of college football's best passing and catching duos
Best unimpressed by Floyd Mayweather, boxing in general

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

More great SB Nation Blogs

Pac-12 On SBN

Pacific Takes (Pac-12)

Pacifictakes-165x74_medium

NORTH

AddictedToQuack: (Oregon)

UW Dawg Pound: (Washington)

CougCenter: (Washington State)

BuildingTheDam: (Oregon State)

Rule Of Tree: (Stanford)

CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: (Cal)

 

SOUTH

BruinsNation: (UCLA)

ConquestChronicles: (USC)

HouseOfSparky: (ASU)

Arizona Desert Swarm: (Arizona)

TheRalphieReport: (Colorado)

Block U: (Utah)


Marshawnthusiasts!

Bear_small ragnarok

Script_cal_small HydroTech

Cal_football_2005_09_16_roll_07_012_small CBKWit

Cstcst3644_small TwistNHook

1262541127_small yellow fever

Avinash6_small Avinash Kunnath

Jahvidtician

Bear__small norcalnick

Monty_in_cal_gear_small Ohio Bear

Giorgiorope_small Berkelium97

Ajoceywcalhatpic_small Kodiak

Mbc_small ManBearCal

Members Of The Follettariat

Oski_mini_small LEastCoastBears

Sofele20squarecal_stanford2011_small solarise

47081_1264898881265_1793562355_517598_1551191_s_small FrankCohen

Rugby_split_small RugbyVet

Sam_i_am_small unclesam22

The Hit Squad

1129748640_small LeonPowe

Atom_small atomsareenough

Basketball_desktop_small CALumbus Bear

Humpty_dance_1_small Cugel