Chat Room
Go Back   The Bear Insider - Covering Cal Sports 24 x 7 > The Public Place where "CyberBears" Growl > Men's Basketball
Reload this Page Cal recruiting 2010 SG Ben Brust
Notices
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  (#31) Old
tsubamoto2001 tsubamoto2001 is online now
Loyal Bear
 
Posts: 3,210
Join Date: Jul 2008
04-17-2010, 09:19 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bearon View Post
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-wvqsHmiv4

link to a highlight vid of Brust
Maybe this kid is the next Jimmer Fredette. Who knows. Monty has seen him plenty of times and wants him, so if we happen to land him, we'll at least know we're getting a guy who can shoot the hell out of the ball. It's no guarantee we get Josiah Turner or Gary Bell or Collin Woods, so maybe Monty has that mind. He'll probably end up in the Big Ten, though, but maybe Rossi is in his ear.

Last edited by tsubamoto2001; 04-17-2010 at 09:33 PM.
Reply With Quote
  (#32) Old
balky98 balky98 is offline
New Bear
 
Posts: 44
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
04-17-2010, 09:40 PM

I totally agree. I also think that Monty realizes that the college game is much more like our team from last season. You need multiple people on the floor at all times that pass and more importantly shoot the ball.

If we had a more consistent rebounding post presence, last year's team would have gone a lot farther. We should have that presence this coming year with the return of Kamp and hopefully a slimmer, more active MSF and addition of Solomon. We don't have any guarantees with our current crop of guards so adding another shooter makes sense to me.
Reply With Quote
  (#33) Old
Mike Zillion
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
04-17-2010, 09:44 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by tsubamoto2001 View Post
You can't tell stuff like that off a highlight video, but I don't think Franklin is much of a point from seeing him live on numerous occasions. Can't comment on Brust since I haven't seen him, but Monty obviously feels he can help.
Seems to have a beautiful shooting stroke, but how many shooters does one team need? Get me someone who can dribble with his head up, get into the key, finish in traffic, and likes to pass. Or just get me someone who immediately makes us a tournament contender next year. Otherwise, don't bother.
Reply With Quote
  (#34) Old
6956bear 6956bear is offline
Loyal Bear
 
Posts: 2,980
Join Date: Jul 2008
04-18-2010, 05:24 AM

You hit on my biggest fear. That Brust is the best they can land. The staff may know they face a real uphill batlle in landing their top targets at PG for next season. Turner, Bell, Johnson and Carson will all be tough to get for various reasons. Brust seems to be a good player with range to his shot but not that penetrating PG that can score, distribute and defend other quick PGs. More of a combo guard.

I continue to think there may be additional turnover within the program, but my thoughts are mostly in frontcourt turnover not in the backcourt. You can never have enough shooters but it looks a little crowded to me in the backcourt and finding time for all these guys will be difficult and there still will be a need for that penetrating, scoring, distributing and defending PG the program lacks and Brust will not address.
Reply With Quote
  (#35) Old
SFBearz SFBearz is online now
Real Bear
 
Posts: 2,182
Join Date: Oct 2008
04-18-2010, 10:13 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by tsubamoto2001 View Post
You can't tell stuff like that off a highlight video, but I don't think Franklin is much of a point from seeing him live on numerous occasions. Can't comment on Brust since I haven't seen him, but Monty obviously feels he can help.
Franklin is more of a point than Brust though. It's not just videos that show this- there are years of scouting reports, esp from reliable folks in Illinois.
Reply With Quote
  (#36) Old
59bear 59bear is offline
True Blue Golden Bear
 
59bear's Avatar
 
Posts: 9,236
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bainbridge Island, WA
04-18-2010, 10:36 AM

Can you have too many shooters? Classic point guards (pass first shooters who make others better) are nearly as rare in the college game as classic centers and most college teams make do with someone who is more truly a combo than a true point. I agree that we'd rather have a classic PG or C but if we can't get one, someone who can put the ball in the hoop is a reasonable fallback.


Access is better than ownership!
Reply With Quote
  (#37) Old
tsubamoto2001 tsubamoto2001 is online now
Loyal Bear
 
Posts: 3,210
Join Date: Jul 2008
04-18-2010, 10:38 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6956bear View Post
You hit on my biggest fear. That Brust is the best they can land. The staff may know they face a real uphill batlle in landing their top targets at PG for next season. Turner, Bell, Johnson and Carson will all be tough to get for various reasons. Brust seems to be a good player with range to his shot but not that penetrating PG that can score, distribute and defend other quick PGs. More of a combo guard.

I continue to think there may be additional turnover within the program, but my thoughts are mostly in frontcourt turnover not in the backcourt. You can never have enough shooters but it looks a little crowded to me in the backcourt and finding time for all these guys will be difficult and there still will be a need for that penetrating, scoring, distributing and defending PG the program lacks and Brust will not address.
I think you shouldn't be so scared. Cal has a lot of options...and momentum from last season. We are in a lot of guys' top 5 right now and new players are emerging. Collin Woods from out of Arizona is a guy that is showing well over at the Pump Spring Tournament in Denver this weekend. Turner has us on high on his list, as does Bell.
Reply With Quote
  (#38) Old
Civil Bear Civil Bear is online now
Golden Bear
 
Civil Bear's Avatar
 
Posts: 7,324
Join Date: Jul 2008
04-18-2010, 10:58 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by 6956bear View Post
...it looks a little crowded to me in the backcourt...
Right now Cal has Smith, Jorge, and Franklin in the backcourt. Possibly Crabbe too, but at 6'6" he will likely need to guard other 3's now. We need more guards.
Reply With Quote
  (#39) Old
Wookids Wookids is offline
Real Bear
 
Posts: 1,852
Join Date: Jul 2008
04-18-2010, 11:38 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by 59bear View Post
Can you have too many shooters? Classic point guards (pass first shooters who make others better) are nearly as rare in the college game as classic centers and most college teams make do with someone who is more truly a combo than a true point. I agree that we'd rather have a classic PG or C but if we can't get one, someone who can put the ball in the hoop is a reasonable fallback.
I tend to think more long term, and since I see this coming season as a rebuilding year unless at least a couple of our freshman our special enough to step up and lead the team. Thus for class balance and potential recruits we could get for 2011, I'd lean towards no more 2010's unless they're truly elite.

That being said, Brust sounds like he'd help our program. At 1 - 3 spots we have Randle, Theo, PC, Nikola & DJ exiting, and Franklin, Crabbe & Rossi coming in (5 out, 3 in).

As Jorge will play, and we're short on scorers, it'll make it difficult for Smith to get a lot of minutes unless somehow he really steps up his game. Thus I'm hoping the freshman come in game ready enough to where we see bulk of 1 - 3 minutes going to Jorge, Franklin, Crabbe & Rossi. But per what I'm expecting from the newcomers, ball handling & passing appears weak to me, particularly when either Jorge or Franklin go to the bench (no true point guard and Crabbe & Rossi who I've never seen reports suggesting ball handling / passing is their strength).

Thus with another combo guard in Brust, where between Jorge, Franklin & Brust, we can keep 2 decent ball handlers / passers on the court to share the load when needed / most of the time, and between Franklin, Brust, Rossi & Crabbe we can keep 2 shooters out there (3 when Jorge rests), seems like Monty would have a better balance of options / flexibility to be help our level of success this upcoming season.

And just in general, I like shooters, particularly when they also can also improve team's passing and ball handling.
Reply With Quote
  (#40) Old
SFBearz SFBearz is online now
Real Bear
 
Posts: 2,182
Join Date: Oct 2008
04-18-2010, 12:30 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by tsubamoto2001 View Post
I think you shouldn't be so scared. Cal has a lot of options...and momentum from last season. We are in a lot of guys' top 5 right now and new players are emerging. Collin Woods from out of Arizona is a guy that is showing well over at the Pump Spring Tournament in Denver this weekend. Turner has us on high on his list, as does Bell.
I would probably offer Woods as other pac-10 schools are now discovering him and setting up visits and he definitely is a point guard like Turner whereas Bell is more of a combo guard (not that Cal should pass on him).
Reply With Quote
  (#41) Old
calumnus calumnus is online now
True Blue Golden Bear
 
Posts: 12,122
Join Date: Jul 2008
04-18-2010, 12:47 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by balky98 View Post
If we had a more consistent rebounding post presence, last year's team would have gone a lot farther. We should have that presence this coming year with the return of Kamp and hopefully a slimmer, more active MSF and addition of Solomon.
I think you continue to undervalue Boykin's contribution to last year's team. Last year's team was 2nd in the Pac-10 in offensive rebounding, 4th in defensive rebounding and 3rd in rebounding margin. Boykin once again lead the team and was among the Pac-10 leaders in rebounding. Now, rebounding could have been better for sure, but I see no evidence that a return of Kamp with a slimmer MSF will improve our rebounding over last year since neither has shown themselves to be particularly good rebounders up until now. Solomon we will have to wait and see about, but I'm not sure how much he will play as freshman. Maybe if Max and Bak improve....
Reply With Quote
  (#42) Old
calumnus calumnus is online now
True Blue Golden Bear
 
Posts: 12,122
Join Date: Jul 2008
04-18-2010, 12:50 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wookids View Post
I tend to think more long term, and since I see this coming season as a rebuilding year unless at least a couple of our freshman our special enough to step up and lead the team. Thus for class balance and potential recruits we could get for 2011, I'd lean towards no more 2010's unless they're truly elite.

That being said, Brust sounds like he'd help our program. At 1 - 3 spots we have Randle, Theo, PC, Nikola & DJ exiting, and Franklin, Crabbe & Rossi coming in (5 out, 3 in).

As Jorge will play, and we're short on scorers, it'll make it difficult for Smith to get a lot of minutes unless somehow he really steps up his game. Thus I'm hoping the freshman come in game ready enough to where we see bulk of 1 - 3 minutes going to Jorge, Franklin, Crabbe & Rossi. But per what I'm expecting from the newcomers, ball handling & passing appears weak to me, particularly when either Jorge or Franklin go to the bench (no true point guard and Crabbe & Rossi who I've never seen reports suggesting ball handling / passing is their strength).

Thus with another combo guard in Brust, where between Jorge, Franklin & Brust, we can keep 2 decent ball handlers / passers on the court to share the load when needed / most of the time, and between Franklin, Brust, Rossi & Crabbe we can keep 2 shooters out there (3 when Jorge rests), seems like Monty would have a better balance of options / flexibility to be help our level of success this upcoming season.

And just in general, I like shooters, particularly when they also can also improve team's passing and ball handling.
Yeah, I liked his video. I'd still rather we saved a scholie for next year's class, but if he signs with Cal I will be happy.
Reply With Quote
  (#43) Old
Mike Zillion
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
04-18-2010, 04:28 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by 59bear View Post
Can you have too many shooters? Classic point guards (pass first shooters who make others better) are nearly as rare in the college game as classic centers and most college teams make do with someone who is more truly a combo than a true point. I agree that we'd rather have a classic PG or C but if we can't get one, someone who can put the ball in the hoop is a reasonable fallback.
Well, someone's got to protect the rim and rebound the ball.

I guess having one more guy like that is better than having someone who can't play at all (like a few guys I could think of), but if you have all these guys playing the same position in the same class, some of them are going to be playing that position for someone else in two years.
Reply With Quote
  (#44) Old
89Bear 89Bear is offline
Loyal Bear
 
Posts: 4,332
Join Date: Jul 2008
04-19-2010, 09:09 AM

Does anyone have a feel for what Thurman might be?

Can he realistically have a somewhat meaningful role next year?
Reply With Quote
  (#45) Old
6bear6 6bear6 is offline
Golden Bear
 
6bear6's Avatar
 
Posts: 5,826
Join Date: Jul 2008
04-19-2010, 10:18 AM

Someone said we needed a "slasher" and I saw some good slashing moves to the rim in the video. Also, seems like he gets real good height on his jumper. He's way up there. This kid can leap.

My only caveat is that all the films originate in his home gym. Everyone seems comfortable at home. Let's hope he's just as accurate on the road.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com
Ad Management by RedTyger