WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - 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 67 Oregon State 60 (/thread-2753.html)

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - Viking_Guy - 01-08-2012

Nope, that must have been on the alum side.  My comment was something like, "Okay, here comes our zone offense.  Let's toss it around the perimeter for 20 seconds..." at which point we had turned the ball over.

But I agreed with the sentiment.

The other thing OSU did really well - play very physically with the Ogwumikes without getting called for many fouls.  Part of that was officiating, but they also crashed the boards really hard with 3-4 people.  And the center of their zone just collapsed on Nneka - a whole lot of shoving down low when she had the ball that wasn't called.

VG

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - Viking_Guy - 01-08-2012

Nope, that must have been on the alum side.  My comment was something like, "Okay, here comes our zone offense.  Let's toss it around the perimeter for 20 seconds..." at which point we had turned the ball over.

But I agreed with the sentiment.

The other thing OSU did really well - play very physically with the Ogwumikes without getting called for many fouls.  Part of that was officiating, but they also crashed the boards really hard with 3-4 people.  And the center of their zone just collapsed on Nneka - a whole lot of shoving down low when she had the ball that wasn't called.

VG

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - Viking_Guy - 01-08-2012

Nope, that must have been on the alum side.  My comment was something like, "Okay, here comes our zone offense.  Let's toss it around the perimeter for 20 seconds..." at which point we had turned the ball over.

But I agreed with the sentiment.

The other thing OSU did really well - play very physically with the Ogwumikes without getting called for many fouls.  Part of that was officiating, but they also crashed the boards really hard with 3-4 people.  And the center of their zone just collapsed on Nneka - a whole lot of shoving down low when she had the ball that wasn't called.

VG

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - Viking_Guy - 01-08-2012

Nope, that must have been on the alum side.  My comment was something like, "Okay, here comes our zone offense.  Let's toss it around the perimeter for 20 seconds..." at which point we had turned the ball over.

But I agreed with the sentiment.

The other thing OSU did really well - play very physically with the Ogwumikes without getting called for many fouls.  Part of that was officiating, but they also crashed the boards really hard with 3-4 people.  And the center of their zone just collapsed on Nneka - a whole lot of shoving down low when she had the ball that wasn't called.

VG

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - Yellowlab - 01-08-2012

(01-08-2012, 11:52 AM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:Nope, that must have been on the alum side.  My comment was something like, "Okay, here comes our zone offense.  Let's toss it around the perimeter for 20 seconds..." at which point we had turned the ball over.

But I agreed with the sentiment.

The other thing OSU did really well - play very physically with the Ogwumikes without getting called for many fouls.  Part of that was officiating, but they also crashed the boards really hard with 3-4 people.  And the center of their zone just collapsed on Nneka - a whole lot of shoving down low when she had the ball that wasn't called.

VG

After the game, Tara replied to a question about the refs by putting her hand over the mike saying, "Those were the good ones." :D

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - Yellowlab - 01-08-2012

(01-08-2012, 11:52 AM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:Nope, that must have been on the alum side.  My comment was something like, "Okay, here comes our zone offense.  Let's toss it around the perimeter for 20 seconds..." at which point we had turned the ball over.

But I agreed with the sentiment.

The other thing OSU did really well - play very physically with the Ogwumikes without getting called for many fouls.  Part of that was officiating, but they also crashed the boards really hard with 3-4 people.  And the center of their zone just collapsed on Nneka - a whole lot of shoving down low when she had the ball that wasn't called.

VG

After the game, Tara replied to a question about the refs by putting her hand over the mike saying, "Those were the good ones." :D

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - Yellowlab - 01-08-2012

(01-08-2012, 11:52 AM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:Nope, that must have been on the alum side.  My comment was something like, "Okay, here comes our zone offense.  Let's toss it around the perimeter for 20 seconds..." at which point we had turned the ball over.

But I agreed with the sentiment.

The other thing OSU did really well - play very physically with the Ogwumikes without getting called for many fouls.  Part of that was officiating, but they also crashed the boards really hard with 3-4 people.  And the center of their zone just collapsed on Nneka - a whole lot of shoving down low when she had the ball that wasn't called.

VG

After the game, Tara replied to a question about the refs by putting her hand over the mike saying, "Those were the good ones." :D

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - Yellowlab - 01-08-2012

(01-08-2012, 11:52 AM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:Nope, that must have been on the alum side.  My comment was something like, "Okay, here comes our zone offense.  Let's toss it around the perimeter for 20 seconds..." at which point we had turned the ball over.

But I agreed with the sentiment.

The other thing OSU did really well - play very physically with the Ogwumikes without getting called for many fouls.  Part of that was officiating, but they also crashed the boards really hard with 3-4 people.  And the center of their zone just collapsed on Nneka - a whole lot of shoving down low when she had the ball that wasn't called.

VG

After the game, Tara replied to a question about the refs by putting her hand over the mike saying, "Those were the good ones." :D

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - Viking_Guy - 01-08-2012

WBB2-

And the sad thing is, she was right.  It actually was a fairly equitably called game, and there weren't too many egregious mistakes (a couple of tipped balls out of bounds that were really too fast to call).  They just chose to call the game fairly loosely, which favored OSU's defense. Even so the Beavers' starting post fouled out fairly early; that's how physical it was.

Two other general observations:  officials tend to let smaller players get away with a lot when they are defending in the post, and OSU started 4 guards and 1 forward in their zone, giving them good recovery speed and, as long as the guards dropping down could get away with it, sufficient banging pressure on the posts, especially on Chiney, who has to learn a couple of post moves that don't involve bringing the ball down where they can swat at it.  That's actually one of Nneka's big improvements over her career - her spinning jumper that never puts the ball on the floor.

The other thing?  I think sometimes Stanford gets caught in the "keeping the game fair" trap when it comes to the number of fouls called.  Actually, I feel somewhat the same way about the women's soccer team.  They don't play extremely physically, they don't often commit blatant fouls, and officials will look up at the scoreboard and check how many fouls have been called on each team.  When OSU had been called for 5 to Stanford's 1 midway through the second half, I thought there would be a borderline foul call relatively soon, and Toni was called on a reach.  Foul totals from last night: Stanford 8, OSU 16.  Which is on the face of it fairly uneven, but is nowhere near the differential that might have been called had the post defense by the Beavers been called a bit more tightly.

Speaking of that, the other thing I forgot to mention that was a positive sign: the defense did at least recognize that bringing the ball up the court was not OSU's strong point; I saw more ball pressure from Toni and Lindy than I've seen in a long time.  It kept generating the first-half turnovers that kept Stanford in the game when they were shooting 30% or so to OSU's 65%.  Also saw a little bit of 1-2-1-1 pressure with Chiney up top.  However, if the pressure didn't work, the defense was even more discombobulated than when they sagged off a bit.

VG

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - Viking_Guy - 01-08-2012

WBB2-

And the sad thing is, she was right.  It actually was a fairly equitably called game, and there weren't too many egregious mistakes (a couple of tipped balls out of bounds that were really too fast to call).  They just chose to call the game fairly loosely, which favored OSU's defense. Even so the Beavers' starting post fouled out fairly early; that's how physical it was.

Two other general observations:  officials tend to let smaller players get away with a lot when they are defending in the post, and OSU started 4 guards and 1 forward in their zone, giving them good recovery speed and, as long as the guards dropping down could get away with it, sufficient banging pressure on the posts, especially on Chiney, who has to learn a couple of post moves that don't involve bringing the ball down where they can swat at it.  That's actually one of Nneka's big improvements over her career - her spinning jumper that never puts the ball on the floor.

The other thing?  I think sometimes Stanford gets caught in the "keeping the game fair" trap when it comes to the number of fouls called.  Actually, I feel somewhat the same way about the women's soccer team.  They don't play extremely physically, they don't often commit blatant fouls, and officials will look up at the scoreboard and check how many fouls have been called on each team.  When OSU had been called for 5 to Stanford's 1 midway through the second half, I thought there would be a borderline foul call relatively soon, and Toni was called on a reach.  Foul totals from last night: Stanford 8, OSU 16.  Which is on the face of it fairly uneven, but is nowhere near the differential that might have been called had the post defense by the Beavers been called a bit more tightly.

Speaking of that, the other thing I forgot to mention that was a positive sign: the defense did at least recognize that bringing the ball up the court was not OSU's strong point; I saw more ball pressure from Toni and Lindy than I've seen in a long time.  It kept generating the first-half turnovers that kept Stanford in the game when they were shooting 30% or so to OSU's 65%.  Also saw a little bit of 1-2-1-1 pressure with Chiney up top.  However, if the pressure didn't work, the defense was even more discombobulated than when they sagged off a bit.

VG

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - Viking_Guy - 01-08-2012

WBB2-

And the sad thing is, she was right.  It actually was a fairly equitably called game, and there weren't too many egregious mistakes (a couple of tipped balls out of bounds that were really too fast to call).  They just chose to call the game fairly loosely, which favored OSU's defense. Even so the Beavers' starting post fouled out fairly early; that's how physical it was.

Two other general observations:  officials tend to let smaller players get away with a lot when they are defending in the post, and OSU started 4 guards and 1 forward in their zone, giving them good recovery speed and, as long as the guards dropping down could get away with it, sufficient banging pressure on the posts, especially on Chiney, who has to learn a couple of post moves that don't involve bringing the ball down where they can swat at it.  That's actually one of Nneka's big improvements over her career - her spinning jumper that never puts the ball on the floor.

The other thing?  I think sometimes Stanford gets caught in the "keeping the game fair" trap when it comes to the number of fouls called.  Actually, I feel somewhat the same way about the women's soccer team.  They don't play extremely physically, they don't often commit blatant fouls, and officials will look up at the scoreboard and check how many fouls have been called on each team.  When OSU had been called for 5 to Stanford's 1 midway through the second half, I thought there would be a borderline foul call relatively soon, and Toni was called on a reach.  Foul totals from last night: Stanford 8, OSU 16.  Which is on the face of it fairly uneven, but is nowhere near the differential that might have been called had the post defense by the Beavers been called a bit more tightly.

Speaking of that, the other thing I forgot to mention that was a positive sign: the defense did at least recognize that bringing the ball up the court was not OSU's strong point; I saw more ball pressure from Toni and Lindy than I've seen in a long time.  It kept generating the first-half turnovers that kept Stanford in the game when they were shooting 30% or so to OSU's 65%.  Also saw a little bit of 1-2-1-1 pressure with Chiney up top.  However, if the pressure didn't work, the defense was even more discombobulated than when they sagged off a bit.

VG

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - Viking_Guy - 01-08-2012

WBB2-

And the sad thing is, she was right.  It actually was a fairly equitably called game, and there weren't too many egregious mistakes (a couple of tipped balls out of bounds that were really too fast to call).  They just chose to call the game fairly loosely, which favored OSU's defense. Even so the Beavers' starting post fouled out fairly early; that's how physical it was.

Two other general observations:  officials tend to let smaller players get away with a lot when they are defending in the post, and OSU started 4 guards and 1 forward in their zone, giving them good recovery speed and, as long as the guards dropping down could get away with it, sufficient banging pressure on the posts, especially on Chiney, who has to learn a couple of post moves that don't involve bringing the ball down where they can swat at it.  That's actually one of Nneka's big improvements over her career - her spinning jumper that never puts the ball on the floor.

The other thing?  I think sometimes Stanford gets caught in the "keeping the game fair" trap when it comes to the number of fouls called.  Actually, I feel somewhat the same way about the women's soccer team.  They don't play extremely physically, they don't often commit blatant fouls, and officials will look up at the scoreboard and check how many fouls have been called on each team.  When OSU had been called for 5 to Stanford's 1 midway through the second half, I thought there would be a borderline foul call relatively soon, and Toni was called on a reach.  Foul totals from last night: Stanford 8, OSU 16.  Which is on the face of it fairly uneven, but is nowhere near the differential that might have been called had the post defense by the Beavers been called a bit more tightly.

Speaking of that, the other thing I forgot to mention that was a positive sign: the defense did at least recognize that bringing the ball up the court was not OSU's strong point; I saw more ball pressure from Toni and Lindy than I've seen in a long time.  It kept generating the first-half turnovers that kept Stanford in the game when they were shooting 30% or so to OSU's 65%.  Also saw a little bit of 1-2-1-1 pressure with Chiney up top.  However, if the pressure didn't work, the defense was even more discombobulated than when they sagged off a bit.

VG

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - westcard - 01-08-2012

I have to say I was shocked at how bad this game was, very little in the way of offensive adjustments were made, also amazed that Lindy played so many minutes with very poor defense and considering she has had very little in the way of offensive production. There was no penetration which would have forced their defense to commit to give an open 3 or a better shot for Nnekka etc for a one on one opportunity instead of 1 on 2 or 3. You state Jos gave us a better look but she was also beat defensively when taken to the hoop. Agree that the passing between Lindy and Toni just wasted clock time and did nothing offensively and hurt the paint players by not moving the defense and yet they played most of the game, I get Toni is the better defensive player but do not get playing Lindy along side her.

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - westcard - 01-08-2012

I have to say I was shocked at how bad this game was, very little in the way of offensive adjustments were made, also amazed that Lindy played so many minutes with very poor defense and considering she has had very little in the way of offensive production. There was no penetration which would have forced their defense to commit to give an open 3 or a better shot for Nnekka etc for a one on one opportunity instead of 1 on 2 or 3. You state Jos gave us a better look but she was also beat defensively when taken to the hoop. Agree that the passing between Lindy and Toni just wasted clock time and did nothing offensively and hurt the paint players by not moving the defense and yet they played most of the game, I get Toni is the better defensive player but do not get playing Lindy along side her.

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - westcard - 01-08-2012

I have to say I was shocked at how bad this game was, very little in the way of offensive adjustments were made, also amazed that Lindy played so many minutes with very poor defense and considering she has had very little in the way of offensive production. There was no penetration which would have forced their defense to commit to give an open 3 or a better shot for Nnekka etc for a one on one opportunity instead of 1 on 2 or 3. You state Jos gave us a better look but she was also beat defensively when taken to the hoop. Agree that the passing between Lindy and Toni just wasted clock time and did nothing offensively and hurt the paint players by not moving the defense and yet they played most of the game, I get Toni is the better defensive player but do not get playing Lindy along side her.

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 67 Oregon State 60 - westcard - 01-08-2012

I have to say I was shocked at how bad this game was, very little in the way of offensive adjustments were made, also amazed that Lindy played so many minutes with very poor defense and considering she has had very little in the way of offensive production. There was no penetration which would have forced their defense to commit to give an open 3 or a better shot for Nnekka etc for a one on one opportunity instead of 1 on 2 or 3. You state Jos gave us a better look but she was also beat defensively when taken to the hoop. Agree that the passing between Lindy and Toni just wasted clock time and did nothing offensively and hurt the paint players by not moving the defense and yet they played most of the game, I get Toni is the better defensive player but do not get playing Lindy along side her.

---

Rebounding - M T - 01-08-2012

(01-07-2012, 09:45 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:... in the first half, OSU hung with Stanford on the boards in large part because of the rotation help from the bigs; in the second half, a more condensed defense helped Stanford outboard the Beavers something like 20-10.

Rebound count is always distorted by shooting percentage.  That's what made it seem Oregon stayed with Stanford in rebounds.

Actually, in the first half, Stanford got 32% of the chances for O rebounds and 89% of the chances for D rebounds (to OSU's 11% and 68%). That's good rebounding even for Stanford, better than last year's averages.  For an equal number of misses at each end, Stanford would have gotten 50% more rebounds. 

The second half was truly impressive:  72% on the offensive end and 75% on the defensive end.  For the game, that's 51% on the offensive end and 79%.  Last year our averages were 42% and 70% (PAC-10: 42% and 72%).

Stanford
1st:  7 OR, 8 DR
2nd:  15 OR, 15 DR
Oregon State
1st: 1 OR, 15 DR
2nd: 5 OR, 6 DR

---

Rebounding - M T - 01-08-2012

(01-07-2012, 09:45 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:... in the first half, OSU hung with Stanford on the boards in large part because of the rotation help from the bigs; in the second half, a more condensed defense helped Stanford outboard the Beavers something like 20-10.

Rebound count is always distorted by shooting percentage.  That's what made it seem Oregon stayed with Stanford in rebounds.

Actually, in the first half, Stanford got 32% of the chances for O rebounds and 89% of the chances for D rebounds (to OSU's 11% and 68%). That's good rebounding even for Stanford, better than last year's averages.  For an equal number of misses at each end, Stanford would have gotten 50% more rebounds. 

The second half was truly impressive:  72% on the offensive end and 75% on the defensive end.  For the game, that's 51% on the offensive end and 79%.  Last year our averages were 42% and 70% (PAC-10: 42% and 72%).

Stanford
1st:  7 OR, 8 DR
2nd:  15 OR, 15 DR
Oregon State
1st: 1 OR, 15 DR
2nd: 5 OR, 6 DR

---

Rebounding - M T - 01-08-2012

(01-07-2012, 09:45 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:... in the first half, OSU hung with Stanford on the boards in large part because of the rotation help from the bigs; in the second half, a more condensed defense helped Stanford outboard the Beavers something like 20-10.

Rebound count is always distorted by shooting percentage.  That's what made it seem Oregon stayed with Stanford in rebounds.

Actually, in the first half, Stanford got 32% of the chances for O rebounds and 89% of the chances for D rebounds (to OSU's 11% and 68%). That's good rebounding even for Stanford, better than last year's averages.  For an equal number of misses at each end, Stanford would have gotten 50% more rebounds. 

The second half was truly impressive:  72% on the offensive end and 75% on the defensive end.  For the game, that's 51% on the offensive end and 79%.  Last year our averages were 42% and 70% (PAC-10: 42% and 72%).

Stanford
1st:  7 OR, 8 DR
2nd:  15 OR, 15 DR
Oregon State
1st: 1 OR, 15 DR
2nd: 5 OR, 6 DR

---

Rebounding - M T - 01-08-2012

(01-07-2012, 09:45 PM)Viking_Guy link Wrote:... in the first half, OSU hung with Stanford on the boards in large part because of the rotation help from the bigs; in the second half, a more condensed defense helped Stanford outboard the Beavers something like 20-10.

Rebound count is always distorted by shooting percentage.  That's what made it seem Oregon stayed with Stanford in rebounds.

Actually, in the first half, Stanford got 32% of the chances for O rebounds and 89% of the chances for D rebounds (to OSU's 11% and 68%). That's good rebounding even for Stanford, better than last year's averages.  For an equal number of misses at each end, Stanford would have gotten 50% more rebounds. 

The second half was truly impressive:  72% on the offensive end and 75% on the defensive end.  For the game, that's 51% on the offensive end and 79%.  Last year our averages were 42% and 70% (PAC-10: 42% and 72%).

Stanford
1st:  7 OR, 8 DR
2nd:  15 OR, 15 DR
Oregon State
1st: 1 OR, 15 DR
2nd: 5 OR, 6 DR

---