WBB: Stanford 68 vs UC Davis 42 - 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 68 vs UC Davis 42 (/thread-22728.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 68 vs UC Davis 42 (/thread-22728.html)
RE: WBB: Stanford 68 vs UC Davis 42 - treetop11 - 12-18-2021
(12-16-2021, 05:51 PM)qwerty49 Wrote:(12-16-2021, 05:14 PM)old spanish trail Wrote:(12-16-2021, 02:49 PM)BillBradley Wrote: @Teejers, re:
There was little or no size advantage for us over Davis. The starter guarding Brink was only an inch shorter and her sub was 2 inches taller. And except for one 5'9" the other starters were Hull sized. If anything our girls are longer. Still the Davis girls were tall enough to block/bother our shots.
"What I think can be confirmed is the following: Stanford has a very talented roster for the most part - and certainly with respect to more recent recruits - every single one of them can play, if given the chance. I mean, look at Lacie and Jump this year. They are playing well because they are playing a lot and know they won't get yanked for one mistake. Lexie has always had that luxury (and has played incredibly well overall over the years). You have to play with confidence, and except in the rarest of circumstances, confidence comes with PT. This isn't to advocate that one player should be playing over another; but rather, to caution against concluding that certain bench players "aren't good enough" or "can't really play at this level" based on spotty minutes. They all can play - I mean we know Anna Wilson can play at a championship level, and she is not seeing the court nearly as much this year (same is true for NW player, who barely played last night). And I think most here would be pleasantly surprised at the productivity of Belibi, Prechtel, and just about everybody else if they played 20 minutes/game for 10 straight games. It's just the nature of playing sports - at any level, really. And it explains why I am more focused on ramifications of miniscule minutes for very good players on Stanford's bench. It's a tough job as a coach, but also one of the most important ones."
Generally, I appreciate the post and I do understand what you're saying, but I think you're way oversimplifying. 2 rebuttles:
1) I agree that all our players are talented, but I totally disagree that "every one of them can play if given the chance". I think it's more accurate to say "every one of them can fill a role...if needed." The parts are not interchangeable. I think (hope) everyone on the team realizes and recognizes that 1) some players are better than others and that's OK and 2) PT will vary depending on the circumstance. That's not a convenient coaching line - it's the truth (at least I think it is).
Great example...You bring up Anna "playing at a championship level". Well, that was with Kiana on the court who carried the scoring burden. Anna was the best backcourt choice in that combination of players. But this year, what she brings to the table is not nearly as highly valued, so her minutes are dropping. It doesn't mean the coaches aren't high on Anna anymore. She's still the same player offering the same great things. Other examples...Kiki could start on some P12 teams. But on THIS team, we have Brink, Belibi, and Prechtel as returning posts. Kiki is great at certain things, but she really struggles in a lot of areas. She could play 10+ minutes a game this season and not get to the level where the other players are. It's not intended to be hurtful and I'm certainly not saying she can't play at this level. But she's way down in the depth chart, so I think it's a stretch to say "she can play if given the chance". Sure she could play, just not as good! And what's more, I don't even think there's an issue there. Kiki knows this, because she gets her ass kicked around in practice everyday. And Anna knows what she brings to the table and I really don't think she's bent out of shape. Same with Jana. I get the feeling everyone is feeling sorry for her. She's doesn't offer what this team needs, I bet she knows it, and I also bet she knows she could start next year if she keeps working hard because the parts are going to change a lot.
2) I may be off, but I think you are lobbying for a different subbing approach, maybe against cupcake teams, in order to develop our bench. You call out - did Jump really need to play 37 minutes? Of course not - there's lots of options to spread the PT around. But I would say that these are important games for our starters to gel. Hannah has only been starting for a few games now. Invariably, if you try to get 12+ players reasonable playing time, you'll end up with tons of combinations on the court. So what's more valuable - getting the deep bench some small amount of minutes each or letting Jump play a lot with Jones and the Hulls on the perimeter and letting her get more experience feeding Brink and Belibi? There is a give and take going on here, with a player that is becoming a MAJOR piece of this team being able to compete with other great teams. Hanna getting into a rhythm and getting more confident/comfortable could be way more important to this season than sprinkling some of her minutes across a few of the deep bench.
Totally agree with Bradley. Re Jump, she played when we needed shooting last year and was first off the bench often, and she didn't disappoint. But she generally didn't play d vs the opponent's best back court. Davis had a pretty quick and effective guard and Hannah defended her even while no doubt a bit tired. That's what the team will need if she's to play alot.
Good points. I only watched the first half of the feed, but I am pleased that Jump has improved so much and especially on D. I love the energy that the twins and Haley bring to the game. I'm not too concerned with Lexie and Haley's stats as they just seem to produce. And I think Lacie is doing just fine at PG.
I do think post play is still a work in progress. Brink is raw, but wow what an upside. Belibi -- well, she is what she is -- great when facing the basket and not that great with back to the basket. Prechtel just seems to be a wing trapped in a post's body.
Emma-Nnopu's athleticism just leaps right out of the screen. I'd like to see more of her. Demetre had one nice pass toward the end of the first half. I'm sure she will contribute if she can consistently crack the rotation.
Of course all these observations are based on one half against a physically smaller team. (Although #11 for Davis held her own against our posts, given the size disadvantage).
FWIW it seems to me that our offense doesn't always fit the rotation we have on the court, especially when it comes to our posts. But maybe that's because there seem to be way more possibilities when Brink is in there.
I'm glad the twins are getting so much PT together. There does seem to be a noticeable dropoff after Jump/Hulls/Haley/Brink and I'm sure Tara is trying to sort out the next few spots. (Do we still have 17 on the roster?)