Bear Down Wildcats

Posted: **Wed Sep 11, 2019 11:32 am**

Not sure I would expect Max to assist at that rate, but he will likely have every opportunity to hit those 3's.

looked up some stats:
Most 3pt attempts by a CSM (AZ) squad was 10'/11' 745. Kyle fogg took 141 and jamelle horne 101.

Don't think this team will get to 700 attempts or Hazzard gets 100 makes, but I think there is a good chance he gets 100 3PTA.

Posted: **Wed Sep 11, 2019 12:54 pm**

With the 3 pt line pushed out again this season, I don't think that's going to be a big part of anyone's offense.

Steve Kerr's 57% record will never be broken.

Posted: **Wed Sep 11, 2019 1:17 pm**

good point. that had slipped my mind.

Posted: **Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:01 pm**

baycat93 wrote:Not sure I would expect Max to assist at that rate, but he will likely have every opportunity to hit those 3's.

looked up some stats:
Most 3pt attempts by a CSM (AZ) squad was 10'/11' 745. Kyle fogg took 141 and jamelle horne 101.

Don't think this team will get to 700 attempts or Hazzard gets 100 makes, but I think there is a good chance he gets 100 3PTA.

100 makes is too many for his likely usage and Miller's history, you're right. I got excited. But if we're using him correctly he should be getting 150 attempts - that's what he got coming off the bench as a junior with 22min/g at UCI and his 3PAr has increased since and should stay above 60% (since he's so good at it and we have a clear need for three point shooting). I said the same thing about PJC - given that he has to play for us, he should be taking 6 3PAs a game since that was his clear strength. I don't think Hazzard will have the same reluctance to shoot as PJC.

Regarding 700 3PAs: last year's team took 699 3PAs despite only hitting them at a 33% clip. UVA took over 800. Texas Tech 760. Oregon 840. Purdue took a 1000 and Auburn took 1200 for god's sake. We'd really better get with the program.

I think Hazzard will get 70 assists easily. That's only 2 a game. If he's not getting 70 assists (behind Nico) - who is?

Posted: **Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:17 pm**

YoDeFoe wrote:
baycat93 wrote:Not sure I would expect Max to assist at that rate, but he will likely have every opportunity to hit those 3's.

looked up some stats:
Most 3pt attempts by a CSM (AZ) squad was 10'/11' 745. Kyle fogg took 141 and jamelle horne 101.

Don't think this team will get to 700 attempts or Hazzard gets 100 makes, but I think there is a good chance he gets 100 3PTA.
100 makes is too many for his usage and Miller's history, you're right. I got excited. But if we're using him correctly he should be getting 150 attempts - that's what he got coming off the bench as a junior with 22min/g at UCI and his 3PAr has increased since and should stay above 60% (since he's so good at it and we have a clear need for three point shooting). I said the same thing about PJC - given that he has to play for us, he should be taking 6 3PAs a game since that was his clear strength. I don't think Hazzard will have the same reluctance to shoot as PJC.

Regarding 700 3PAs: last year's team took 699 3PAs despite only hitting them at a 33% clip. UVA took over 800. Texas Tech 760. Oregon 840. Purdue took a 1000 and Auburn took 1200 for god's sake. We'd really better get with the program.

-Official website has 658 3PA's and merkin makes a great point about the distance change this year. We have not been close 700 since 11'/12'.

I think Hazzard will get 70 assists easily. That's only 2 a game. If he's not getting 70 assists (behind Nico) - who is?

-Not saying they will average 2/game but I think Green and Gettings will be distributing the ball off the wing and post a lot when we have to suffer through Nico on the bench

Posted: **Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:21 pm**

Hazzard shot 3 pointers last season at 39% for a Big West team.

For reference, look what happened to TJ when he went from an A10 team to a PAC-12 team in terms of 3 point shooting, with a redshirt year to practice against Arizona players.

With a longer 3 point line, against much better competition, I would be more than pleased if Hazzard shot 35%.

Posted: **Wed Sep 11, 2019 3:48 pm**

Merkin wrote:Hazzard shot 3 pointers last season at 39% for a Big West team.

For reference, look what happened to TJ when he went from an A10 team to a PAC-12 team in terms of 3 point shooting, with a redshirt year to practice against Arizona players.

With a longer 3 point line, against much better competition, I would be more than pleased if Hazzard shot 35%.

I don't think players are threatened by the three point line change - players made the same % of threes in 2008 after the last time they moved the line back. The usage rate dropped for a spell until the start of the three point revolution (which I think is a turning point that won't see significant regression). I get the step up in competition, but with Hazzard's quick release and a move from a primary scoring role to a tertiary (or less) role I like his chances to keep up his efficiency. Four good looks a game isn't a big ask for a guy getting 20 min/g (with 465 college attempts under his belt). Coleman, by way of example, fairly well matched his previous efficiency from the Southern conference despite being a worse three point shooter asked to do more on a far worse Arizona squad. If we're wondering why TJ's didn't translate, I'd point to his sub-100 attempts per season and his low and slow shot release (which required a significant rework in the NBA).

The attempts last season was 699 btw. Arizona basketball, Sports Reference, the Pac-12 and ESPN all agree on that number. The average team took 740. The Pac-12 averaged 725 nad the top half of the league took 780 on average. And we took 725 attempts in 12-13 btw (Lyons took 200, Hill 150, NJ 100, and Jarrett/Mayes/York combined for another 150).

Posted: **Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:13 pm**

YDF, my bad. AZ official does not include post season.

Posted: **Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:40 pm**

baycat93 wrote:YDF, my bad. AZ official does not include post season.

No worries dude

Posted: **Wed Sep 11, 2019 6:37 pm**

YoDeFoe wrote: I don't think players are threatened by the three point line change - players made the same % of threes in 2008 after the last time they moved the line back. The usage rate dropped for a spell until the start of the three point revolution (which I think is a turning point that won't see significant regression). I get the step up in competition, but with Hazzard's quick release and a move from a primary scoring role to a tertiary (or less) role I like his chances to keep up his efficiency. Four good looks a game isn't a big ask for a guy getting 20 min/g (with 465 college attempts under his belt). Coleman, by way of example, fairly well matched his previous efficiency from the Southern conference despite being a worse three point shooter asked to do more on a far worse Arizona squad. If we're wondering why TJ's didn't translate, I'd point to his sub-100 attempts per season and his low and slow shot release (which required a significant rework in the NBA).

The attempts last season was 699 btw. Arizona basketball, Sports Reference, the Pac-12 and ESPN all agree on that number. The average team took 740. The Pac-12 averaged 725 nad the top half of the league took 780 on average. And we took 725 attempts in 12-13 btw (Lyons took 200, Hill 150, NJ 100, and Jarrett/Mayes/York combined for another 150).

Thanks YDF, always appreciate your knowledge!

Posted: **Wed Sep 11, 2019 9:52 pm**

Oh I’m just out here making somewhat educated guesses, taking chances. Who knows what will happen, Merkin. I’ve so often over estimated a player’s growth or potential impact that I’ve lost the fear of being a fool.

The change in conference is a real concern - I’m glad you brought it up. UCI was a tourney team but the Big West is trash. Equally, the Ivy and Cornell basketball is trash. How Stone and Max step up or whether they struggle to show up is a huge concern.

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:00 am**

I think you are all too focused on the single issue of 3 point shooting. I mean if the conference disparity were such an issue, shouldn’t TJ been overwhelmed in all facets of his game? He was a terrific floor general and defender who was one broken foot of a teammate away from a Final Four or better. Conversely we’ve had other transfers who have stunk it up (calling Mark Tollefson). So we’ll just have to wait and see how it plays out with the new guys.

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:15 am**

ByJoveByJingle wrote:I think you are all too focused on the single issue of 3 point shooting. I mean if the conference disparity were such an issue, shouldn’t TJ been overwhelmed in all facets of his game? He was a terrific floor general and defender who was one broken foot of a teammate away from a Final Four or better. Conversely we’ve had other transfers who have stunk it up (calling Mark Tollefson). So we’ll just have to wait and see how it plays out with the new guys.

I wouldn’t chose Tollefson as a “bad transfer” candidate. He played his role well as backup forward - super efficient, took care of the ball, hit the offensive glass, played good D. He didn’t change the world but those were good minutes he gave us.

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2019 8:54 am**

YoDeFoe wrote:
ByJoveByJingle wrote:I think you are all too focused on the single issue of 3 point shooting. I mean if the conference disparity were such an issue, shouldn’t TJ been overwhelmed in all facets of his game? He was a terrific floor general and defender who was one broken foot of a teammate away from a Final Four or better. Conversely we’ve had other transfers who have stunk it up (calling Mark Tollefson). So we’ll just have to wait and see how it plays out with the new guys.
I wouldn’t chose Tollefson as a “bad transfer” candidate. He played his role well as backup forward - super efficient, took care of the ball, hit the offensive glass, played good D. He didn’t change the world but those were good minutes he gave us.

Ehh, 16.7 isn't a super efficient PER. Tollefsen was a forgettable guy on a forgettable team. That team never sticks in my mind, despite Zeus and York as seniors.

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:13 am**

Spaceman Spiff wrote:That team never sticks in my mind, despite Zeus and York as seniors.

Two players that never lived up to their potential. If memory serves, Zeus was the #2 ranked center in his class. Gabe York was a 4 star SG that had some great offers, but only thing he ended up being good at was dribbling the ball off his foot in end of game pressure situations.

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:18 am**

Merkin wrote:
Spaceman Spiff wrote:That team never sticks in my mind, despite Zeus and York as seniors.
Two players that never lived up to their potential. If memory serves, Zeus was the #2 ranked center in his class. Gabe York was a 4 star SG that had some great offers, but only thing he ended up being good at was dribbling the ball off his foot in end of game pressure situations.

Zeus was underrated during his time here. The things he excelled at were things like hedge and recover and running the floor, which just don't translate to people noticing them. They matter, though.

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:20 am**

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
Merkin wrote:
Spaceman Spiff wrote:That team never sticks in my mind, despite Zeus and York as seniors.
Two players that never lived up to their potential. If memory serves, Zeus was the #2 ranked center in his class. Gabe York was a 4 star SG that had some great offers, but only thing he ended up being good at was dribbling the ball off his foot in end of game pressure situations.
Zeus was underrated during his time here. The things he excelled at were things like hedge and recover and running the floor, which just don't translate to people noticing them. They matter, though.

Oh I agree, like has been said, Zeus made the other players better, and was always in the spot he was supposed to be at. Smart player, just not that athletic (although much more so that Deuce) and had alligator arms.

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:29 am**

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
YoDeFoe wrote:
ByJoveByJingle wrote:I think you are all too focused on the single issue of 3 point shooting. I mean if the conference disparity were such an issue, shouldn’t TJ been overwhelmed in all facets of his game? He was a terrific floor general and defender who was one broken foot of a teammate away from a Final Four or better. Conversely we’ve had other transfers who have stunk it up (calling Mark Tollefson). So we’ll just have to wait and see how it plays out with the new guys.
I wouldn’t chose Tollefson as a “bad transfer” candidate. He played his role well as backup forward - super efficient, took care of the ball, hit the offensive glass, played good D. He didn’t change the world but those were good minutes he gave us.
Ehh, 16.7 isn't a super efficient PER. Tollefsen was a forgettable guy on a forgettable team. That team never sticks in my mind, despite Zeus and York as seniors.

A forgettable team for sure (though I remember exactly where I was when we got waxed by Wichita State... and I took a standby flight and an uber from San Diego to get to the UCLA game after my flight from DEN->LAX got canceled... and the following loss to USC in 4OT with Trier breaking his hand in was memorable).

Anyways. Tollefson had a 132 ORtg, .61% TS, a .170 WS/40, and a 9.7 BPM. Those are fairly absurd numbers (highest ORtg of a Miller rotation player, TS on par with Dusan, top ten BPM among Miller players). Never turned the ball over (lowest among Miller rotation players and a 2.2 A:TO) and shot 40% from three in conference. His relatively limited defensive rebounding depressed his PER but that's due to playing along side Zeus and Ryan Anderson (both great defensive rebounders).

Basically was a nice guy who did his job very efficiently and rarely made mistakes, gladly accepting his role and delivering on it quietly. Tolly was a model grad transfer in my eyes.

If we get those kind of numbers out of Stone Gettings we should be thrilled. We'll need more usage (and thereby a bigger impact) out of Hazzard though, due to our limited ball handling and three point shooting on this roster.

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2019 11:26 am**

This year's full schedule is out!

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:00 pm**

TheBlackLodge wrote:This year's full schedule is out!

Didn’t realize we only play one true Away game prior to the conference schedule.

That’s less than ideal.

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:26 pm**

Chicat wrote:
TheBlackLodge wrote:This year's full schedule is out!
Didn’t realize we only play one true Away game prior to the conference schedule.

That’s less than ideal.

Fine by me. Get this team on steady ground, figure shit out at home, beat a good Baylor team in Waco and then let's take the show on the road.

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:00 pm**

Chicat wrote:
TheBlackLodge wrote:This year's full schedule is out!
Didn’t realize we only play one true Away game prior to the conference schedule.

That’s less than ideal.

We are the SEC of basketball.

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:09 pm**

azgreg wrote:
Chicat wrote:
TheBlackLodge wrote:This year's full schedule is out!
Didn’t realize we only play one true Away game prior to the conference schedule.

That’s less than ideal.
We are the SEC of basketball.

Nope. We are Duke

Posted: **Sat Sep 14, 2019 7:56 am**

https://tucson.com/sports/arizonawildca ... c47c2.html" target="_blank

Colorado?

Posted: **Sat Sep 14, 2019 11:28 am**

Beachcat97 wrote:https://tucson.com/sports/arizonawildca ... c47c2.html

Colorado?

Tad Boyle couldn't coach his way out of a wet paper bag...any sports writer thinking Colorado is going to make it to the Sweet 16 is in serious denial of history and reality...ie: a crackhead.

Posted: **Sat Sep 14, 2019 1:10 pm**

New Mexico State is going to be a tough game.

Posted: **Sun Sep 15, 2019 8:47 pm**

Irish27 wrote:New Mexico State is going to be a tough game.

Yep. And with each passing the season, the OOC schedule is getting more and more important. Drop too many of these, and you're basically chasing the bubble all season long.

Posted: **Mon Sep 16, 2019 7:24 am**

Beachcat97 wrote:
Irish27 wrote:New Mexico State is going to be a tough game.
Yep. And with each passing the season, the OOC schedule is getting more and more important. Drop too many of these, and you're basically chasing the bubble all season long.

Well, that's because the Pac 12 remains consistently bad. If we played in a half decent league where conference play helped our rankings instead of hurting them, things might be different.

Posted: **Mon Sep 16, 2019 8:29 am**

Spaceman Spiff wrote:Well, that's because the Pac 12 remains consistently bad. If we played in a half decent league where conference play helped our rankings instead of hurting them, things might be different.

Mos def. That’s a big “if,” Spiff, and it doesn’t seem all that likely to happen soon. UW and Oregon are in a good spot. Gonna have to wait and see on UCLA and Stanford. I’m not drinking the Colorado kool-aid; just not a fan of Boyle. And I don’t see Hurley lasting at ASU. We’re a top heavy league with very few high quality opponents, a stark contrast to the ACC, Big 10 and SEC. So for 2019-20, our OOC schedule remains huge. These games in November and December will be a huge factor in our seeding in March.

Posted: **Mon Sep 16, 2019 8:53 am**

Beachcat97 wrote:
Spaceman Spiff wrote:Well, that's because the Pac 12 remains consistently bad. If we played in a half decent league where conference play helped our rankings instead of hurting them, things might be different.
Mos def. That’s a big “if,” Spiff, and it doesn’t seem all that likely to happen soon. UW and Oregon are in a good spot. Gonna have to wait and see on UCLA and Stanford. I’m not drinking the Colorado kool-aid; just not a fan of Boyle. And I don’t see Hurley lasting at ASU. We’re a top heavy league with very few high quality opponents, a stark contrast to the ACC, Big 10 and SEC. So for 2019-20, our OOC schedule remains huge. These games in November and December will be a huge factor in our seeding in March.

I think of the Pac's overall health like this.

Teams with long term solutions at coach: Arizona, Oregon, Washington.

TBD: UCLA, WSU, Cal.

Is it the coach with the ceiling or the school: ASU, Colorado, USC, Utah, OSU.

They have a coach, which is generally better than none: Stanford.

We'll see how the new hires at UCLA, WSU and Cal go. Those midlevel capped out schools provide us a lot of the current mediocrity we see.

Posted: **Mon Sep 16, 2019 10:06 am**

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
TBD: UCLA, WSU, Cal.

If someone had told me in 2009 that Tony Bennett would be the next Pac coach to win a national title (even though not with a Pac team), I'd probably have been surprised.

Posted: **Mon Sep 16, 2019 10:52 am**

For fuck sake. This team as is now (adjust as needed for injuries or suspensions etc) is not chasing the fucking bubble

Posted: **Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:54 pm**

https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... 20-season/" target="_blank

This is a fun read. Look at item #7, kind of makes you smile

Posted: **Mon Sep 16, 2019 4:23 pm**

azcat49 wrote:https://www.cbssports.com/college-baske ... 20-season/

This is a fun read. Look at item #7, kind of makes you smile

love it haha

Posted: **Mon Sep 16, 2019 7:33 pm**

Fuck Andy Katz...he's always down on Cats...I can't take any sports analyst serious anymore...has them at #9...besides having USC/Colorado as a #8...Washington as #6...its like he's looking purely at last year.

Posted: **Tue Sep 17, 2019 8:01 am**

A 9 seed, with this roster, would be one of the more shocking outcomes of the Miller era.

Posted: **Tue Sep 17, 2019 8:43 am**

USC above Arizona is an impossibly stupid projection. There’s nothing that Andy Enfield loves more than a three or four game losing streak to make sure his season is an abject failure.

Posted: **Tue Sep 17, 2019 10:14 am**

YoDeFoe wrote:USC above Arizona is an impossibly stupid projection. There’s nothing that Andy Enfield loves more than a three or four game losing streak to make sure his season is an abject failure.

^^^This^^^

How the fuck do you give USC more traction than UA? It's like he didn't even check the roster...

I am so tired of sports punks being down on UA basketball...it is more of a powerhouse in the West than the majority of programs out here and no one ever gives it credit...

Oregon is always good, Dana always gets his team together at the right time...UCLA is a dumpster fire and has been for a while, ASU will always be the little brother to UofA and as long as Hurley is coach they will be just hype with all fist pumps and failure...Washington is coming around...Oregon State will peter out once Tinkle Jr. is gone...Cal and Stanford have completely lost their way...Colorado will only be as good as 5 year average players can get with a bad coach, and then it will be back into obscurity...Utah will have a down year but their coach is one of the better coaches in the pac...and USC??? Really?

Fuck Katz.

Posted: **Tue Sep 17, 2019 10:31 am**

I hate falling back on this so often, but this is clearly some Geographical bias. Does not help that it is so early and all he has to go on is his memory of last season. I expect all of the PAC12 schools to outplay those seeding

I don't think Katz is garbage, but in his new role I really have only seen him do stories on eastern/mid western schools. From memory not even sure he has ventured south. Especially since the end of last season. I would imagine he will become more educated on schools as the season gets underway.

Posted: **Tue Sep 17, 2019 1:06 pm**

YoDeFoe wrote:USC above Arizona is an impossibly stupid projection. There’s nothing that Andy Enfield loves more than a three or four game losing streak to make sure his season is an abject failure.

And then follows it up with a recruiting class that is way beyond his capabilities to coach.

Posted: **Tue Sep 17, 2019 1:16 pm**

ChooChooCat wrote:
YoDeFoe wrote:USC above Arizona is an impossibly stupid projection. There’s nothing that Andy Enfield loves more than a three or four game losing streak to make sure his season is an abject failure.
And then follows it up with a recruiting class that is way beyond his capabilities to coach.

USC tends to get a respectable number of high-level players, regardless of who the coach is. If they ever make a homerun hire, look out.

Posted: **Tue Sep 17, 2019 1:59 pm**

Wasn’t Enfield hired because he was the king of pace? Or maybe I am misremembering where he came from.

Posted: **Tue Sep 17, 2019 2:26 pm**

I thought he was hired because Florida Gulf Coast was Dunk City and because of that gap between his teeth meant even you, Alfred, can have a hot wife.

Posted: **Tue Sep 17, 2019 4:25 pm**

Beachcat97 wrote:
ChooChooCat wrote:
YoDeFoe wrote:USC above Arizona is an impossibly stupid projection. There’s nothing that Andy Enfield loves more than a three or four game losing streak to make sure his season is an abject failure.
And then follows it up with a recruiting class that is way beyond his capabilities to coach.
USC tends to get a respectable number of high-level players, regardless of who the coach is. If they ever make a homerun hire, look out.

Kevin O'Neill begs to differ.

Posted: **Tue Sep 17, 2019 4:44 pm**

ChooChooCat wrote:
Beachcat97 wrote:
ChooChooCat wrote:
YoDeFoe wrote:USC above Arizona is an impossibly stupid projection. There’s nothing that Andy Enfield loves more than a three or four game losing streak to make sure his season is an abject failure.
And then follows it up with a recruiting class that is way beyond his capabilities to coach.
USC tends to get a respectable number of high-level players, regardless of who the coach is. If they ever make a homerun hire, look out.
Kevin O'Neill begs to differ.

USC hired Majerus, and then he changed his mind. That might've been the golden era of USC hoops, and it was snatched away. RIP, Rick.

Posted: **Tue Sep 17, 2019 5:06 pm**

ByJoveByJingle wrote:Wasn’t Enfield hired because he was the king of pace? Or maybe I am misremembering where he came from.

I think he was mainly a basketball coach and infrequently involved in salsa production.

Just being a jerk, don't mind me.

Posted: **Tue Sep 17, 2019 5:31 pm**

Beachcat97 wrote:A 9 seed, with this roster, would be one of the more shocking outcomes of the Miller era.

Losing to Wisconsin again wouldn't be.

Posted: **Tue Sep 17, 2019 6:40 pm**

Captain Obvious wrote:
Beachcat97 wrote:A 9 seed, with this roster, would be one of the more shocking outcomes of the Miller era.
Losing to Wisconsin again wouldn't be.

I bet if we just increased our salsa production we wouldn’t have that problem.

Posted: **Wed Sep 18, 2019 6:44 am**

ChooChooCat wrote:
Beachcat97 wrote:USC tends to get a respectable number of high-level players, regardless of who the coach is. If they ever make a homerun hire, look out.
Kevin O'Neill begs to differ.

I know this was a shot at his recruiting, but I'm going to pretend this refers to him being a homerun hire who flopped because it amuses me more.

Posted: **Wed Sep 18, 2019 10:06 am**

tricat wrote:
ChooChooCat wrote:
Beachcat97 wrote:USC tends to get a respectable number of high-level players, regardless of who the coach is. If they ever make a homerun hire, look out.
Kevin O'Neill begs to differ.
I know this was a shot at his recruiting, but I'm going to pretend this refers to him being a homerun hire who flopped because it amuses me more.

Majerus was their homerun hire. Maybe after they grow tired of Enfield, they'll follow the trend of hiring former players to coach. Scalabrine? Taj Gibson?

Bear Down Wildcats

The 2019-2020 Season Thread

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20

Re: Next year...2019-20