WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech (/thread-26071.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech (/thread-26071.html)
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - JohnR34231 - 02-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 12:48 PM)Card10Fan Wrote: This is essentially a must win game for NCAA tourney reasons and we look like unengaged and out of sorts against a very bad GA Tech team. And now Somfai down injured. Oh well I guess there's always next year unless our key players all transfer out after the season. We should NOT be this bad even with Nunu and Talana out.
I'm ready to turn by attention to Stanford softball which to me seems more promising.
A very discouraging game in what is turning into a very discouraging season.
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - BillBradley - 02-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 12:48 PM)Card10Fan Wrote: This is essentially a must win game for NCAA tourney reasons and we look like unengaged and out of sorts against a very bad GA Tech team. And now Somfai down injured. Oh well I guess there's always next year unless our key players all transfer out after the season. We should NOT be this bad even with Nunu and Talana out.Yep, can't help but agree. Turning a game into a perimeter shooting contest when that's not your strength - just a head scratcher. Ga Tech doing what every team should do against us: completely sag off our players who can't shoot and watch us swing it around the perimeter. Can we please:
I'm ready to turn by attention to Stanford softball which to me seems more promising.
1) Go inside
2) Get up on them and force them to actually work for some shots vs. giving them wide open 3's. A 25% 3 point shooter is way better than that when left WIDE OPEN. I also wouldn't mind have them score over our 6' 5" rim protector
3) Perhaps let others try to hit some shots? When it gets like this, I feel like you have to get Amborn in the game. Loved Alex's 3 at the end of the half. She is still so underutilized. So frustrating.
Sure hope Lara's OK.
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - TheFarm07 - 02-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 12:55 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(02-08-2026, 12:48 PM)Card10Fan Wrote: This is essentially a must win game for NCAA tourney reasons and we look like unengaged and out of sorts against a very bad GA Tech team. And now Somfai down injured. Oh well I guess there's always next year unless our key players all transfer out after the season. We should NOT be this bad even with Nunu and Talana out.
I'm ready to turn by attention to Stanford softball which to me seems more promising.
A very discouraging game in what is turning into a very discouraging season.
After not missing the tourney in three decades, missing 2 in a row is a brobdingnagian step backwards. We can blame a HC transition, new conference, NIL, etc., but to not qualify for the NCAA tournament 2 years in a row - with the talent we have saddles the program with big question marks going forward
We have a month left of the regular season so things can pick up but it doesn't look good. Regardless, a major introspective review needs to be had during the offseason
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - 2006alum - 02-08-2026
Well, by process of elimination, Alex is surely going to get plenty of playing time now, right?
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - mbdude - 02-08-2026
with this coaching staff can't be sure if anything!
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - Card10Fan - 02-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 01:19 PM)mbdude Wrote: with this coaching staff can't be sure if anything!
Yup. While not as talented as some teams of the past and 3 freshman playing a lot, THIS ROSTER HAS 10 players that were ESPN TOP 100. We are not talentless.
2 years of missing the NCAA tourney would be devastating. Irrelevancy in college athletics especially in today's era can happen very quickly and that means recruiting falls off, fan support, games on national tv, on and on. This program that was elite for decades is just not anywhere close right now.
Recruits have to know this as well. It's a lot easier to maintain winning standards than try to rebuild after falling off a cliff. If we miss NCAA again, we are falling fast.
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - JohnR34231 - 02-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 01:27 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:(02-08-2026, 01:19 PM)mbdude Wrote: with this coaching staff can't be sure if anything!
Yup. While not as talented as some teams of the past and 3 freshman playing a lot, THIS ROSTER HAS 10 players that were ESPN TOP 100. We are not talentless.
2 years of missing the NCAA tourney would be devastating. Irrelevancy in college athletics especially in today's era can happen very quickly and that means recruiting falls off, fan support, games on national tv, on and on. This program that was elite for decades is just not anywhere close right now.
Recruits have to know this as well. It's a lot easier to maintain winning standards than try to rebuild after falling off a cliff. If we miss NCAA again, we are falling fast.
Well, this year we struck out on every elite recruit we tried to get. So the falling has already happened.
Is this the most embarrassing women's basketball game in history? Lose by 22 points to a 10-14 team? Maybe not but it is close.
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - jonnyss - 02-08-2026
again, i wish we would sub, down by 20 with 2 minutes left.
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - mbdude - 02-08-2026
3 players made 3s
alex. courtney. Lara
6 for 30 overall
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - BillBradley - 02-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 01:36 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote:Losing by 22 in an important game where we were 8.5 point favorites against the number 98 team in the NET. Can't remember much worse than that. And the -8.5 takes into account the injuries to Nunu and Lepolo, being on the road, ACC refs, etc.(02-08-2026, 01:27 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:(02-08-2026, 01:19 PM)mbdude Wrote: with this coaching staff can't be sure if anything!
Yup. While not as talented as some teams of the past and 3 freshman playing a lot, THIS ROSTER HAS 10 players that were ESPN TOP 100. We are not talentless.
2 years of missing the NCAA tourney would be devastating. Irrelevancy in college athletics especially in today's era can happen very quickly and that means recruiting falls off, fan support, games on national tv, on and on. This program that was elite for decades is just not anywhere close right now.
Recruits have to know this as well. It's a lot easier to maintain winning standards than try to rebuild after falling off a cliff. If we miss NCAA again, we are falling fast.
Well, this year we struck out on every elite recruit we tried to get. So the falling has already happened.
Is this the most embarrassing women's basketball game in history? Lose by 22 points to a 10-14 team? Maybe not but it is close.
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - Nobadeer - 02-08-2026
That's two straight East Coast trips where the second/Sunday game was a colossal stinker - at Syracuse on Jan. 18 (the game with so many missed layups and putbacks, after trouncing BC by 25 points a few days earlier); and today (after the fantastic win at Pitt on Thursday).
Is this team somehow feeling more pronounced jet lag effects after a few days on Eastern time, than it is at the outset of these road trips?
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - mbdude - 02-08-2026
Paye in the presser will let us know why we lost
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - TonyLima - 02-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 03:15 PM)Nobadeer Wrote: That's two straight East Coast trips where the second/Sunday game was a colossal stinker - at Syracuse on Jan. 18 (the game with so many missed layups and putbacks, after trouncing BC by 25 points a few days earlier); and today (after the fantastic win at Pitt on Thursday).That can and does happen.
Is this team somehow feeling more pronounced jet lag effects after a few days on Eastern time, than it is at the outset of these road trips?
Any word on Lara? Did she play in the 2nd half? (Yes, I turned tge game off.)
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - Goose - 02-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 03:15 PM)Nobadeer Wrote: Is this team somehow feeling more pronounced jet lag effects after a few days on Eastern time, than it is at the outset of these road trips?In my case this is the "third day crash" for trips to the east coast. I am fine the first two days, even if I am not sleeping much, because I can run on adrenaline. On day 3 however I inevitably feel tired and want to make an early night of it, no matter how well I did or didn't sleep the two nights before. After day 3, I am fully on east coast time and adjusted. I know several other people that have similar parameters.
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - Hieronymus - 02-08-2026
Calamitous loss. That almost certainly puts them out of the tournament as of today. Not sure an Agara return can salvage the season at this point. No analysis today - they did nothing well and got destroyed by a very mediocre team.
Somfai and Eschmeyer were alright, but that was it.
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - stopandpop - 02-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 02:13 PM)BillBradley Wrote:(02-08-2026, 01:36 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote:Losing by 22 in an important game where we were 8.5 point favorites against the number 98 team in the NET. Can't remember much worse than that. And the -8.5 takes into account the injuries to Nunu and Lepolo, being on the road, ACC refs, etc.(02-08-2026, 01:27 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:(02-08-2026, 01:19 PM)mbdude Wrote: with this coaching staff can't be sure if anything!
Yup. While not as talented as some teams of the past and 3 freshman playing a lot, THIS ROSTER HAS 10 players that were ESPN TOP 100. We are not talentless.
2 years of missing the NCAA tourney would be devastating. Irrelevancy in college athletics especially in today's era can happen very quickly and that means recruiting falls off, fan support, games on national tv, on and on. This program that was elite for decades is just not anywhere close right now.
Recruits have to know this as well. It's a lot easier to maintain winning standards than try to rebuild after falling off a cliff. If we miss NCAA again, we are falling fast.
Well, this year we struck out on every elite recruit we tried to get. So the falling has already happened.
Is this the most embarrassing women's basketball game in history? Lose by 22 points to a 10-14 team? Maybe not but it is close.
After sitting next to Tara for all those years, I remain amazed about Coach Paye's inability or unwillingness to make even the slightest adjustments in an offense that is so easily defended. Tara's playbook against all sorts of defenses was extensive and she was a master of making adjustments at halftime. Kate saw it all and yet her playbook is so limited.
My concerns (relying so heavily on the 3-ball) after the easy win over Pitt unfortunately came true; 6 of 30 (20%) today against G. Tech, a team that Cal defeated because Cal plays a more balanced offense. During the course of the game watching the Yellow Jackets defense pack the paint and cut off the driving lanes, I was reminded how Tara (when faced with similar defenses), would have Brooke Demetre flash into the key, get a quick pass, turn and hit those smooth, effortless jump shots. I mention Demetre, who lacked the athleticism and shot making ability of Kiki or Brink, and yet she became a thorn in the side of the opposition. I could easily see Somfai, Eschmeyer or even Ogden doing this, but it's not happening.
Others have already mentioned how under-utilized Eschmeyer is. Unlike Somfai, Eschmeyer posts well, but the passes rarely come her way and when they do, the passes come late. What I would love to see are passes to Alex while Somfai breaks to the basket. This was often one of Tara's plays to disrupt the defense, using Brink in the low post with Kiki barreling to the hoop and getting the pass from Cam for the easy layup. I understand that Stanford has no Brink or Kiki, but with some creativity, the offense becomes less predictable.
Similarly, when Tech repeatedly scored with dribble penetration (and building up their lead), I was surprised that Coach Paye didn't go to a zone and make Tech score in other ways.
A final comment about the 3-ball. As long as Stanford keeps shooting them with such inconsistency, why not bring in Carly Amborn (in my opinion), the best pure 3-point shooter on the team, but Amborn continues to sit. That 4-second appearance in the last moments of the Pitt game was an insult to Amborn.
Here's another prediction that I hope I'm dead wrong. I don't see Stanford getting into the NCAA Tournament, even as a bubble team. That would be two years in a row. No one can questiion Coach Paye's enthusiasm for her team as well as her long-time loyalty and dedication to the program. But the talent on this team is simply not being used effectively. She needs to go and replaced with someone with a great track record from the outside (with her or his own staff), who can lead the resurgence of Stanford women's basketball.
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - BostonCard - 02-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 01:04 PM)BillBradley Wrote: Yep, can't help but agree. Turning a game into a perimeter shooting contest when that's not your strength - just a head scratcher. Ga Tech doing what every team should do against us: completely sag off our players who can't shoot and watch us swing it around the perimeter. Can we please:
1) Go inside
2) Get up on them and force them to actually work for some shots vs. giving them wide open 3's. A 25% 3 point shooter is way better than that when left WIDE OPEN. I also wouldn't mind have them score over our 6' 5" rim protector
3) Perhaps let others try to hit some shots? When it gets like this, I feel like you have to get Amborn in the game. Loved Alex's 3 at the end of the half. She is still so underutilized. So frustrating.
Sure hope Lara's OK.
This analysis is internally inconsistent and is not supported by the facts of the game.
On the season, Stanford is a 29.8% three point shooting team (200th in the country), so it makes sense for GA Tech to sag off our players and pack the inside. But you know who is an even worse three point shooting team than Stanford? Georgia Tech on the season is a 26.5% three point shooting team. So employing the same strategy against them that they employed against us makes sense, and turning the game into a perimeter shooting contest is not that crazy, when, on the season, you are the better three point shooting team. Yes, sagging off means that they will have some open three point shots, which, to their credit, they made (although their game average of 32% was only 1 - 2 made threes higher than what they do for the season; they didn't exactly "go off" on us). The key, though is that Georgia Tech made 57% of their two point shots (21/37), and 30% of their three point shots, so their effective field goal percentage was actually higher from 2 than 3. Defending the three more aggressively might have helped lower their three point percentage a tad, but it wasn't the problem; the problem was we weren't defending the two very well, regardless of strategy. AS for our human rim protector, she had one block in 25 minutes. Given Tech's two point field goal percentage, they were not much bothered by her. In fact, Georgia Tech had the same number of blocks (4) as we did.
Yeah, in retrospect, our effective field goal percentage from the two was 43%, which wound up being better than our three point eFG% (30%), which would support that a mix with more twos would have been more efficient. But that has the benefit of hindsight; given Tech's strategy of sagging off it makes sense to shoot the three. You just have to make those shots; a you point out, a 29.8% three point shooting team should be better than that when left open... but sometimes the shots simply don't fall.
As to letting other try to hit shots, I agree that it might have made sense to throw Amborn in, if for no other reason than to hit a couple of threes to soften the defense. But the three point shooting was pretty well distributed otherwise; all five starters had at least 4 three point shots. I know you liked Alex' three at the end of the half, but it was the only one she made (out of 4 shots). Plus, if she is on the periphery shooting threes, who do you "go inside" to? The problem for us is that our guards went a combined 0/12 from three, and our best three point shooter today (Somfai) was also our most productive player inside. Alas, she can't be both places at once.
There's a lot of frustration, and for good reason. Whatever we are doing is clearly not working. But an analysis that basically is "this is not working, so we should be doing 'not this'" is a logical fallacy.
BC
(02-08-2026, 03:23 PM)TonyLima Wrote: [quote="Nobadeer" pid='445469' dateline='1770588900']
Any word on Lara? Did she play in the 2nd half? (Yes, I turned tge game off.)
Unless the box score is wrong, she got 35 minutes, so she was in most of the second half.
BC
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - TonyLima - 02-08-2026
BostonCard dateline='[url=tel:1770592522' Wrote: 1770592522[/url]']Ah. TYVM.
BillBradley dateline='[url=tel:1770581082' Wrote: 1770581082[/url]']
Yep, can't help but agree. Turning a game into a perimeter shooting contest when that's not your strength - just a head scratcher. Ga Tech doing what every team should do against us: completely sag off our players who can't shoot and watch us swing it around the perimeter. Can we please:
1) Go inside
2) Get up on them and force them to actually work for some shots vs. giving them wide open 3's. A 25% 3 point shooter is way better than that when left WIDE OPEN. I also wouldn't mind have them score over our 6' 5" rim protector
3) Perhaps let others try to hit some shots? When it gets like this, I feel like you have to get Amborn in the game. Loved Alex's 3 at the end of the half. She is still so underutilized. So frustrating.
Sure hope Lara's OK.
This analysis is internally inconsistent and is not supported by the facts of the game.
On the season, Stanford is a 29.8% three point shooting team (200th in the country), so it makes sense for GA Tech to sag off our players and pack the inside. But you know who is an even worse three point shooting team than Stanford? Georgia Tech on the season is a 26.5% three point shooting team. So employing the same strategy against them that they employed against us makes sense, and turning the game into a perimeter shooting contest is not that crazy, when, on the season, you are the better three point shooting team. Yes, sagging off means that they will have some open three point shots, which, to their credit, they made (although their game average of 32% was only 1 - 2 made threes higher than what they do for the season; they didn't exactly "go off" on us). The key, though is that Georgia Tech made 57% of their two point shots (21/37), and 30% of their three point shots, so their effective field goal percentage was actually higher from 2 than 3. Defending the three more aggressively might have helped lower their three point percentage a tad, but it wasn't the problem; the problem was we weren't defending the two very well, regardless of strategy. AS for our human rim protector, she had one block in 25 minutes. Given Tech's two point field goal percentage, they were not much bothered by her. In fact, Georgia Tech had the same number of blocks (4) as we did.
Yeah, in retrospect, our effective field goal percentage from the two was 43%, which wound up being better than our three point eFG% (30%), which would support that a mix with more twos would have been more efficient. But that has the benefit of hindsight; given Tech's strategy of sagging off it makes sense to shoot the three. You just have to make those shots; a you point out, a 29.8% three point shooting team should be better than that when left open... but sometimes the shots simply don't fall.
As to letting other try to hit shots, I agree that it might have made sense to throw Amborn in, if for no other reason than to hit a couple of threes to soften the defense. But the three point shooting was pretty well distributed otherwise; all five starters had at least 4 three point shots. I know you liked Alex' three at the end of the half, but it was the only one she made (out of 4 shots). Plus, if she is on the periphery shooting threes, who do you "go inside" to? The problem for us is that our guards went a combined 0/12 from three, and our best three point shooter today (Somfai) was also our most productive player inside. Alas, she can't be both places at once.
There's a lot of frustration, and for good reason. Whatever we are doing is clearly not working. But an analysis that basically is "this is not working, so we should be doing 'not this'" is a logical fallacy.
BC
TonyLima dateline='[url=tel:1770589382' Wrote: 1770589382[/url]']
[quote="Nobadeer" pid='445469' dateline='1770588900']
Any word on Lara? Did she play in the 2nd half? (Yes, I turned tge game off.)
Unless the box score is wrong, she got 35 minutes, so she was in most of the second half.
BC
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - Hieronymus - 02-08-2026
The exchange 3’s strategy in theory made sense but:
- the quality of GT’s was much higher than ours. We had many that were contested and deep into the shot clock, while they were almost always wide open.. If the plan is to exchange threes, you need yours to be at least of comparable quality. Not that fiasco.
- you can spin the GT outside shooting as you want. On one hand as BC points out it was only about 2 makes above average. But you can also say they shot 20-25% above their average.
- Regardless the defense didn’t work. GT had a bunch of open threes, hit more than normal and again as BC noted we still didn’t defend against 2’s very well. So a full fail. Maybe more zone? Not sure.
- the bigger failure obviously was offense - 52 points won’t win many games. Hoisting bad threes isn’t an offense, and weak rebounding in this game couldn’t cover that up. They have needed big advantages on the offensive glass to win against decent teams this year, and it didn’t happen today.
RE: WBB: Stanford v. Georgia Tech - BillBradley - 02-08-2026
(02-08-2026, 04:14 PM)stopandpop Wrote:Agree w/all your points about the team and Coach Paye. It's a big underachievement for this team to be sitting in 12th place of the ACC. That said, I don't think our tourney hopes are shot quite yet. If we win out, we'll be 11-7 in conference, probably around 8th place. Then if we can win a few games of the ACC tourney and get to 24 wins, that would probably be enough. Seems pretty unlikely after today's fiasco. But it's an easy schedule and if we can get Nunu back, it could happen. If, if, if...(02-08-2026, 02:13 PM)BillBradley Wrote:(02-08-2026, 01:36 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote:Losing by 22 in an important game where we were 8.5 point favorites against the number 98 team in the NET. Can't remember much worse than that. And the -8.5 takes into account the injuries to Nunu and Lepolo, being on the road, ACC refs, etc.(02-08-2026, 01:27 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:(02-08-2026, 01:19 PM)mbdude Wrote: with this coaching staff can't be sure if anything!
Yup. While not as talented as some teams of the past and 3 freshman playing a lot, THIS ROSTER HAS 10 players that were ESPN TOP 100. We are not talentless.
2 years of missing the NCAA tourney would be devastating. Irrelevancy in college athletics especially in today's era can happen very quickly and that means recruiting falls off, fan support, games on national tv, on and on. This program that was elite for decades is just not anywhere close right now.
Recruits have to know this as well. It's a lot easier to maintain winning standards than try to rebuild after falling off a cliff. If we miss NCAA again, we are falling fast.
Well, this year we struck out on every elite recruit we tried to get. So the falling has already happened.
Is this the most embarrassing women's basketball game in history? Lose by 22 points to a 10-14 team? Maybe not but it is close.
After sitting next to Tara for all those years, I remain amazed about Coach Paye's inability or unwillingness to make even the slightest adjustments in an offense that is so easily defended. Tara's playbook against all sorts of defenses was extensive and she was a master of making adjustments at halftime. Kate saw it all and yet her playbook is so limited.
My concerns (relying so heavily on the 3-ball) after the easy win over Pitt unfortunately came true; 6 of 30 (20%) today against G. Tech, a team that Cal defeated because Cal plays a more balanced offense. During the course of the game watching the Yellow Jackets defense pack the paint and cut off the driving lanes, I was reminded how Tara (when faced with similar defenses), would have Brooke Demetre flash into the key, get a quick pass, turn and hit those smooth, effortless jump shots. I mention Demetre, who lacked the athleticism and shot making ability of Kiki or Brink, and yet she became a thorn in the side of the opposition. I could easily see Somfai, Eschmeyer or even Ogden doing this, but it's not happening.
Others have already mentioned how under-utilized Eschmeyer is. Unlike Somfai, Eschmeyer posts well, but the passes rarely come her way and when they do, the passes come late. What I would love to see are passes to Alex while Somfai breaks to the basket. This was often one of Tara's plays to disrupt the defense, using Brink in the low post with Kiki barreling to the hoop and getting the pass from Cam for the easy layup. I understand that Stanford has no Brink or Kiki, but with some creativity, the offense becomes less predictable.
Similarly, when Tech repeatedly scored with dribble penetration (and building up their lead), I was surprised that Coach Paye didn't go to a zone and make Tech score in other ways.
A final comment about the 3-ball. As long as Stanford keeps shooting them with such inconsistency, why not bring in Carly Amborn (in my opinion), the best pure 3-point shooter on the team, but Amborn continues to sit. That 4-second appearance in the last moments of the Pitt game was an insult to Amborn.
Here's another prediction that I hope I'm dead wrong. I don't see Stanford getting into the NCAA Tournament, even as a bubble team. That would be two years in a row. No one can questiion Coach Paye's enthusiasm for her team as well as her long-time loyalty and dedication to the program. But the talent on this team is simply not being used effectively. She needs to go and replaced with someone with a great track record from the outside (with her or his own staff), who can lead the resurgence of Stanford women's basketball.