WBB: Ohio State 85 Stanford 64

WBB: Ohio State 85 Stanford 64 - 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: Ohio State 85 Stanford 64 (/thread-14816.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Re: WBB: Stanford vs. Ohio State Friday 3pm pacific - qwerty49 - 11-10-2017

Once we are forced into a half court game we are in trouble.

When we were able to run, we held our own.

Ouch, Carrington just had one of the worst minutes in basketball history - gave up a bad turnover, played matador D on a layup, bricked a 3, got stuffed on a short jumper.

Re: WBB: Stanford vs. Ohio State Friday 3pm pacific - 81alum - 11-10-2017

Sniezek has 5 assists but 5 turnovers, and is 0/3.Â Her best stat is 8 rebounds--the shortest player has the most rebounds.

There is ample opportunity for Williams to become a starting point guard, if she can cut down on the high risk passes and score some points.

Announcers indicates second chance points:Â OTOSU 28 Stanford 2.Â That is the story.

Re: WBB: Ohio State 85 Stanford 64 - 2006alum - 11-10-2017

Wasn't able to watch, but the box score reveals the ugly truths y'all have been posting. McPhee basically carried the entire team - the only player to score in double figures. The O boards stat is horrid - 2 for McPhee, 3 for Dodson, and 9 total. Meanwhile, they had 28 offensive rebounds; that's 19 more o-boards than we had and only 4 fewer than our defensive rebounds. That means they got second chances on approximately 50% of their missed shots and we got them on 20% of ours. Was anyone defending around the basket? Or, like, anywhere in the halfcourt? Was the entire team waiting for the fast break? It's actually bizarre that our point guard has no shot but was our leading rebounder. I'm actually not sure how Sniezek ends up with that many rebounds unless they're from long missed treys that rebound far back into the backcourt?

OTOH, for freshmen in their first college games, Jerome (8 pts, 3/3 FG, 2/2 3PT, 2 REB, 1 BLK, 1 TO, 1 PF and Dodson (7 pts, 3/6 FG, 7 REB, 2 BLK, 4 PF) had solid stat lines. If they keep it up, it seems like a lineup of Sniezek, McPhee, Jerome, Smith, and Dodson might have more success. Despite playing most of the team and apparently employing a heavy rotation, those 5 generated 35 of our 41 rebounds. The one other encouraging thing is that Fingall went 2-3 from 3 points. That's nice to see, because it does give her some versatility. But if the tradeoff is 0 rebounds, she won't function very effectively as a big.

It's weird that Tara is so stoked about this team, because man, this is one of the worst stat lines I've seen in quite a while. The only reason this wasn't a UCLA, Arizona State or Arizona type game was McPhee. And she's our senior...

Re: WBB: Ohio State 85 Stanford 64 - 81alum - 11-10-2017

I edited the game write-up at the top of the thread.Â Will keep tweaking when I get access to a better boxscore.

Re: WBB: Stanford vs. Ohio State Friday 3pm pacific - mbdude - 11-10-2017

(11-10-2017, 05:42 PM)qwerty49 link Wrote:Once we are forced into a half court game we are in trouble.

When we were able to run, we held our own.

Ouch, Carrington just had one of the worst minutes in basketball history - gave up a bad turnover, played matador D on a layup, bricked a 3, got stuffed on a short jumper.

Â Â

Carrington, instead of taking the easy,Â appears to make a shot (layup) tougher than it really is. Sniezek for all the talk about her shooting well didn't attempt an outside shot. Alanna missed shots she normally makes, hopefully that gets cleaned up. Didn't see much from Williams and Wilson except they looked lost. Williams going to find it tougher to get little floater.

As to the rebounding on our defensive end we got pushed around, didn't block out, and didn't get off the ground. Gonna be worse against a bigger. quicker UConn

As 2006 said it's hard to where Tara's enthusiasm about this team comes from after 2 games -Â maybe meant to convince her team and herself about their capabilities but there is a lot of work to do

Re: WBB: Stanford vs. Ohio State Friday 3pm pacific - mbdude - 11-10-2017

(11-10-2017, 05:42 PM)qwerty49 link Wrote:Once we are forced into a half court game we are in trouble.

When we were able to run, we held our own.

Ouch, Carrington just had one of the worst minutes in basketball history - gave up a bad turnover, played matador D on a layup, bricked a 3, got stuffed on a short jumper.

Re: WBB: Ohio State 85 Stanford 64 - 2006alum - 11-10-2017

(11-10-2017, 06:36 PM)81alum link Wrote:I edited the game write-up at the top of the thread.Â Will keep tweaking when I get access to a better boxscore.

As always, many thanks for the recap and the live updates, 81!

Re: WBB: Ohio State 85 Stanford 64 - 2006alum - 11-10-2017

(11-10-2017, 06:36 PM)81alum link Wrote:I edited the game write-up at the top of the thread.Â Will keep tweaking when I get access to a better boxscore.

As always, many thanks for the recap and the live updates, 81!

Re: WBB: Ohio State 85 Stanford 64 - 81alum - 11-10-2017

As bad as it was, it was at least informative.Â If you look at minutes played against this elite opponent I think we get a pretty clear idea of where Tara Vanderveer thinks the talent is going:

1. McPhee 34 will start all year
2. Sniezek 33 because there is no alternative, but I don't think her job is secure if Williams develops.
3. Dodson 26 got more minutes than Smith even, maybe would have had more except for her 4 fouls.Â A starter in all but name.
4. Smith 24 was actually not as effective overall as freshman Dodson playing her first college game.Â I think Smith is better than this and is secure.
5. Carrington 23 did better rebounding than many, but did not have the offense I expected after Italy.Â But is in the top five at the moment.

Could that wind up being the starting lineup?Â Possibly.

6. Jerome 17 I see playing the same role as Bonnie and Karlie when they were freshmen/sophomores--coming in for a change of pace to hit jumpers.
7. Fingall 11 was touted as one of Stanford's big 2, but it looks already as if Dodson has surpassed her.
8. Wilson 8 why not more?Â Was this a TOSU thing or will she be getting more minutes?
9. Williams 8 is best used as a point guard, and I think we have a great need for her but it takes longer for PGs to be ready to play.
10. Johnson 6 was this just because of foul trouble or was it more basic than that?Â She is a terrific rebounder and we needed rebounding!
11. Romano 3 what could she have done in 3 minutes to keep her off the floor for the rest of the game?Â Was there an injury we don't know about?

Re: WBB: Ohio State 85 Stanford 64 - 81alum - 11-10-2017

You can see McPhee's amazing buzzer beater, and some other nice highlights, on the Stanford WBB facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/StanfordWBB/

Re: WBB: Ohio State 85 Stanford 64 - TheFarm07 - 11-11-2017

Ugh, I thought we had a chance to pull the upset down just 3 after 1 quarter and down 6 at half.

Giving up 28 offensive rebounds to an elite team is atrocious. You can't simply give Ohio State that many second chance opportunities. It's hard enough to stop Mitchell, Mavunga, etc. on one possession, but when you are given them two or three attempts to score on every trip down to that end of the court, that never turns out well. Where was our rebounding? Mavunga who had half of those o-boards seemed like she was just picking off every loose ball that came down.

We actually shot better from them from a shooting percentage standpoint, but they had 19 more opportunities than we did, so they ended up with 5 more made shots.

Offensively, we can't just have McPhee take so many shots; we can't be dependent on just one single player whether it's Brit now or Chiney a few years ago.

What happened to Alanna? 3/11 shooting for 8 pts was way too quiet from her.

On the finding the silver lining on a grey cloud side, it was nice to see the young players get significant minutes. I didn't watch the game, but I hope they acquitted themselves decently well (as much as you can when the second half collapsed).

Dodson getting 26 minutes in her collegiate game against a top opponent bodes well for Tara's confidence in her. Before too long, we might see her as a full-time starter, especially if Kaylee's production is not as expected

Re: WBB: Ohio State 85 Stanford 64 - 81alum - 11-11-2017

(11-11-2017, 07:53 AM)TheFarm07 link Wrote:Giving up 28 offensive rebounds to an elite team is atrocious. You can't simply give Ohio State that many second chance opportunities. It's hard enough to stop Mitchell, Mavunga, etc. on one possession, but when you are given them two or three attempts to score on every trip down to that end of the court, that never turns out well. Where was our rebounding? Mavunga who had half of those o-boards seemed like she was just picking off every loose ball that came down.

Completely agree.Â

On the one hand, our lack of offensive rebounding seems to have partly been scheme--we were sending people back on defense the moment we released the shot, so we had few players around to do the offensive rebounding.Â While Vanderveer can't have been happy with so few O-boards, it wasn't entirely on our players.Â We had 9 offensive rebounds to TOSU's 36 defensive rebounds, meaning that when we shot the ball, we had only a 20% chance of getting a miss back to try again.

But our lack of defensive rebounding was truly atrocious.Â TOSU had 28 offensive rebounds and we had 32 defensive rebounds.Â When TOSU missed a shot they had a 47% chance of getting it back to try again.Â Was this also partly a result of scheme?Â Were we releasing players for a potential fast break as soon as the TOSU shots were going up?Â I'm not sure.

But the results were appalling.Â But not surprising after the UCSD exhibition.Â Â UCSD had 20 offensive rebounds and we had 26 defensive rebounds.Â When UCSD missed a shot they had a 43% chance of getting a second chance.

We have a very serious problem with defensive rebounds.Â Here are the players with the most defensive rebounds over the two games:
Sniezek 11
Dodson 10
Carrington 7
Smith 7

Sniezek is a result of scheme--since as the player who starts the offense you don't send ahead on a break.Â Smith has never been a great rebounder.Â Carrington does very well for a guard.Â Dodson is going to get a lot of time so long as she rebounds.

The biggest mystery to me is Kaylee Johnson.Â From the time she was a freshman, rebounding was her strongest skill.Â While her offense could not replace Chiney's offense, Kaylee did replace Chiney's rebounding instantly when she joined the team.Â What has happened to her rebounding?Â Of course, she is not getting much time to show whether she is still capable.Â She picked up three fouls in 6 minutes so it seems as if she could simply not defend without fouling.Â Will be very interesting to see if she gets a game soon in which she can make a major contribution.

Re: WBB: Ohio State 85 Stanford 64 - 81alum - 11-11-2017

(11-11-2017, 07:53 AM)TheFarm07 link Wrote:Giving up 28 offensive rebounds to an elite team is atrocious. You can't simply give Ohio State that many second chance opportunities. It's hard enough to stop Mitchell, Mavunga, etc. on one possession, but when you are given them two or three attempts to score on every trip down to that end of the court, that never turns out well. Where was our rebounding? Mavunga who had half of those o-boards seemed like she was just picking off every loose ball that came down.