WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - 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 75 -- Arizona 69 (/thread-22902.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 75 -- Arizona 69 (/thread-22902.html)
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - treetop11 - 01-31-2022
(01-30-2022, 08:08 PM)M T Wrote:(01-30-2022, 06:54 PM)Card10Fan Wrote: Antonelli who called today's game was at the Bahamas tourney so I trust her inside information.
Do you mean the announcers that apparently only see PAC-12 games when they have to call them? The ones going off 2-month old information?
The ones that went on about Stanford's poor FT%? The ones that didn't realize Stanford had hit 74.4% of their FTA over the last 10 games (131 of 176)?
By the way, going into the game, the season FT% (67.8) for Stanford was better than South Carolina, Texas, Tennessee, and UConn, and nipping at the Tar Heels (67.9%) (those are 6 of the top 10). 74.4% would lead every team ranked in the top 10.
Hats off to Iowa (85.5%) and Iowa State (81.3%) for having a much higher FT% than any of the other top-25 (77.0% was the best of the other 23 of whatever top-25 I grabbed -- it still bounces around a lot). I wonder why it is that those are from the same state?
Brink has been exceptional at the line in the last few games looking much like she did as a frosh. She seems to be more focused now and concentrating better at the line.
First, I'm surprised by a number of people saying that they were impressed with Reese like it was a revelation. She's been touted as All P12 and one of the leading scorers. I've seen a few AZ games this year and she was unstoppable. I thought we actually contained her except for leaving her open on 3 pointers. Mid range and down low, she didn't do much and normally she kills opposition from those areas. She also didn't rebound as well as normal. Credit Cm and Fran.
Second, I'll bet it has really started to sink in with our players that no matter if you start or on the bench or you get lots or little minutes, you never know when it's your time to shine and contribute mightily. Tara has been brilliant handling the depth of this team and we have seen often that players are ready and step up when called on. Like last year, I think these young women really get the fact that it's about the team and not individuals. They should seem humble toward one another and unselfish.
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - M T - 01-31-2022
Before this game, both teams were noted for their defense. But when you face the top teams, your defense numbers will likely fall off.
I don't think anyone has pointed out here that AZ shot a good 45.9% from the field and 46.7% from 3PT, and an ok 66.7% from the FT line.
Really good offensive stats, unless you run into a 51.9%, 47.4%, 71.4% performance.
This game was worthy of a NC championship match-up.
As for the late calls against the team playing Arizona, I'll note that as a result of those calls, the fouls on the two teams were the same (14 each) if you exclude the five intentional ASU fouls called between 0:30 and 0:20 left in the game. I'm sure Coach Barnes appreciated that after her comments about homerism. One theory could be that the refs (you know who) decided Stanford had already won and called fouls against Stanford just to even things up so the stats would prove (wink, wink) they called a fair game. I'm not saying I believe that. It would be hard to distinguish it from the well-known calling a tighter game against the team running away with a game late in the game.
Maybe Missy had more confidence that Arizona wouldn't come back to win than I did.
(Yes, I know I set that up on a tee for you.)
(01-31-2022, 12:29 AM)treetop11 Wrote: Second, I'll bet it has really started to sink in with our players that no matter if you start or on the bench or you get lots or little minutes, you never know when it's your time to shine and contribute mightily. Tara has been brilliant handling the depth of this team and we have seen often that players are ready and step up when called on. Like last year, I think these young women really get the fact that it's about the team and not individuals. They should seem humble toward one another and unselfish.
I hope that isn't lost on high school stars that are thinking about where they'd like to play.
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - CompSci87 - 01-31-2022
Tara has mentioned that she's a big Warriors and Steve Kerr fan. She loves to learn and take ideas she can use from everywhere she can. One thing this team shares with the Dubs is the strength in numbers philosophy. Kerr keeps everyone involved and excited by giving everyone meaningful minutes at least occasionally, when there's something they can contribute. We've seen a lot of that with Tara managing the tremendous depth she has now.
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - magnus - 01-31-2022
(01-30-2022, 04:28 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: Question: Is Arizona better without McDonald? They have more shooters now and all of them have improved.
Over a season, yes. But McDonald can take over a game or a series of games like she did last year.
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - BosCard - 01-31-2022
(01-31-2022, 01:34 AM)CompSci87 Wrote: Tara has mentioned that she's a big Warriors and Steve Kerr fan. She loves to learn and take ideas she can use from everywhere she can. One thing this team shares with the Dubs is the strength in numbers philosophy. Kerr keeps everyone involved and excited by giving everyone meaningful minutes at least occasionally, when there's something they can contribute. We've seen a lot of that with Tara managing the tremendous depth she has now.
Check out the shot charts for this game. Most of our shots are threes or in the paint. This is what a lot of NBA teams try to do. Arizona took a lot of mid-range jumpers. To their credit they made them which kept the game close. But we have the better strategy. And I’m not saying that Arizona doesn’t understand this. It’s just that we have the personnel to score close against good defense (Brink and Belibi) whereas AZ’s posts like Reese and Ware had to settle for long jumpers.
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - 81alum - 01-31-2022
(01-30-2022, 08:32 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:I watched the broadcast on ESPN replay last night after posting and I agree that the ESPN crew did much better with this game than in the past. Certainly not perfect and not up to Mary Murphy standards, but far better than ESPN has usually done. I sit right behind the broadcasters and can read their notes over their shoulders sometimes. Pretty cool to see their prep work. You can hear a few of my shouts in the crowd noise if you listen carefully.(01-30-2022, 08:08 PM)M T Wrote:(01-30-2022, 06:54 PM)Card10Fan Wrote: Antonelli who called today's game was at the Bahamas tourney so I trust her inside information.
Do you mean the announcers that apparently only see PAC-12 games when they have to call them? The ones going off 2-month old information?
The ones that went on about Stanford's poor FT%? The ones that didn't realize Stanford had hit 74.4% of their FTA over the last 10 games (131 of 176)?
By the way, going into the game, the season FT% (67.8) for Stanford was better than South Carolina, Texas, Tennessee, and UConn, and nipping at the Tar Heels (67.9%) (those are 6 of the top 10). 74.4% would lead every team ranked in the top 10.
Hats off to Iowa (85.5%) and Iowa State (81.3%) for having a much higher FT% than any of the other top-25 (77.0% was the best of the other 23 of whatever top-25 I grabbed -- it still bounces around a lot). I wonder why it is that those are from the same state?
Just stop. The ESPN crew did just fine today and was plenty complimentary of our team and program. I recall a game I listened to on Stanford live stream this season where our OWN announcer repeatedly called Tara, coach Heidi Vanderveer and never once pronounced Fran’s last name correctly. The ESPN crew not memorizing our stats from the past 10 games is a nonissue. Maybe it would help if we were on ESPN more but that’s the Pac12s fault with their media deals.
This time the broadcasters arrived early and attended practice sessions for both teams for a day or two before the game. This helped them be much more knowledgeable. The disastrous broadcast that turned me off was when they flew in for Tara's record setter last year against Pacific. Naturally they talked about Tara and setting the record--but that was all they talked about. Ten points would go by before they bothered to notice that a game was going on. IIRC, since people were not sure too far in advance what game it would be that Tara broke the record, that broadcast was a last-minute affair, and the announcers had clearly done no prep work about the players or teams involved. Still, it was nice of them to be at a nothing-game just to report on Tara's accomplishment--even if they did embarrass themselves as sports analysts.
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - biketoc - 01-31-2022
Quote:This time the broadcasters arrived early and attended practice sessions for both teams for a day or two before the game. This helped them be much more knowledgeable.
Debbie was at Friday night's game vs ASU.
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - 81alum - 01-31-2022
(01-30-2022, 08:57 PM)BillBradley Wrote: Cam and Jana join Tara in the post-game presser:Just watched the presser. A couple of impressions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVm04ELt4pw
1) I have seldom seen Tara gush before, but her praise of JVG was really strong. She also mentioned that she had been playing the other guards too much and I take that to mean that as the season grinds along she would like to distribute the minutes a bit further--probably to avoid what happened to Williams last year who seemed exhausted by the end. She also noted how much improvement there has been with our guard play and point guard play since the fall, and that fans now should see the difference over those earlier losses.
2) JVG was absolutely ferocious in the game, but was so modest and soft spoken in the presser. Quite a contrast! Getting so much attention and going to a press conference is clearly a new experience for her, and it was heart warming to see her dealing with it!
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - teejers1 - 01-31-2022
(01-31-2022, 09:38 AM)81alum Wrote:(01-30-2022, 08:57 PM)BillBradley Wrote: Cam and Jana join Tara in the post-game presser:Just watched the presser. A couple of impressions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVm04ELt4pw
1) I have seldom seen Tara gush before, but her praise of JVG was really strong. She also mentioned that she had been playing the other guards too much and I take that to mean that as the season grinds along she would like to distribute the minutes a bit further--probably to avoid what happened to Williams last year who seemed exhausted by the end. She also noted how much improvement there has been with our guard play and point guard play since the fall, and that fans now should see the difference over those earlier losses.
2) JVG was absolutely ferocious in the game, but was so modest and soft spoken in the presser. Quite a contrast! Getting so much attention and going to a press conference is clearly a new experience for her, and it was heart warming to see her dealing with it!
PT breeds confidence ==> better play on the court. You can pretty much take that formula to the bank.
JVG the last couple games is just the latest data point on that. I'd argue Anna Wilson's play over last handful of games is another. And of course, Jump for this entire season (or was it last when Tara inserted her into starting lineup?) is another data point.
The Stanford roster is comprised of elite recruits. The top 10 players would be starters at almost all other universities. They would perform well, if given starter minutes, in most games. This isn't a critique of coach's PT decisions, or a knock on the decision to have a Starting 5 earned in practice (which I assume is the case). Rather, it's just to state the point that each young woman on this team is a player - it shouldn't surprise us when they play well after being given extended PT.
Or put it this way: don't we all think Iriafen, Demetre, Bosgana, Emma-Nopu, etc. (pick your young player whom we have yet to see get a lot of minutes) would all be at least competent players, if given starters' minutes? I certainly do. I think they'd be more than that - they'd all be good (though maybe not excellent . . . yet).
Having said that, you can be sure that whenever JVG plays going forward, opponents will mark her further and further out. If she plays 3-5 minutes a game, it probably is easier to stay on that mark and limit/take away her shots (not to mention that fewer minutes ==> fewer opportunities to shoot generally). But playing 20+ minutes? Well, it's hard to guard someone everywhere all game long. Same obviously holds for Jump. What Jump has done (that JVG still needs to do) is develop another shot, besides the catch and shoot trey. [I'm partial to a baseline floater, even though it's a hard shot to make, because it's easier to get that off when the defender is rushing out to cover the trey and may be off balance for a moment on the drive - but whatever it is, JVG needs another shot in her arsenal. I expect to see it developed in the coming seasons].
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - Grad Fan - 01-31-2022
It is also interesting that all this JVG talk is being spawn by her lights out shooting, when she actually was much more of a pass first guard in high school if I remember correctly - so in that way if it develops, will give us a different look than Jump.
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - bl82 - 01-31-2022
(01-31-2022, 12:09 PM)Grad Fan Wrote: It is also interesting that all this JVG talk is being spawn by her lights out shooting, when she actually was much more of a pass first guard in high school if I remember correctly - so in that way if it develops, will give us a different look than Jump.
Jana was definitely a distributor in HS, but she was also a scorer and a strong 3-point shooter. While not a Wilson/Hull type of defender, she is getting better and better at moving her feet, staying in front of whoever she is guarding, and fighting through screens. She also jumped the passing lanes on two occasions that I recall, which is consistent with her high steals numbers from HS too.
https://www.maxpreps.com/athlete/jana-van-gytenbeek/spzMM7DnEeaAdqA2nzwY6g/girls-basketball/stats.htm
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - BillBradley - 01-31-2022
(01-31-2022, 11:30 AM)teejers1 Wrote:Well said. For sure, our bench would start at many other programs and do just fine. Our players are all very, very talented.(01-31-2022, 09:38 AM)81alum Wrote:(01-30-2022, 08:57 PM)BillBradley Wrote: Cam and Jana join Tara in the post-game presser:Just watched the presser. A couple of impressions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVm04ELt4pw
1) I have seldom seen Tara gush before, but her praise of JVG was really strong. She also mentioned that she had been playing the other guards too much and I take that to mean that as the season grinds along she would like to distribute the minutes a bit further--probably to avoid what happened to Williams last year who seemed exhausted by the end. She also noted how much improvement there has been with our guard play and point guard play since the fall, and that fans now should see the difference over those earlier losses.
2) JVG was absolutely ferocious in the game, but was so modest and soft spoken in the presser. Quite a contrast! Getting so much attention and going to a press conference is clearly a new experience for her, and it was heart warming to see her dealing with it!
PT breeds confidence ==> better play on the court. You can pretty much take that formula to the bank.
JVG the last couple games is just the latest data point on that. I'd argue Anna Wilson's play over last handful of games is another. And of course, Jump for this entire season (or was it last when Tara inserted her into starting lineup?) is another data point.
The Stanford roster is comprised of elite recruits. The top 10 players would be starters at almost all other universities. They would perform well, if given starter minutes, in most games. This isn't a critique of coach's PT decisions, or a knock on the decision to have a Starting 5 earned in practice (which I assume is the case). Rather, it's just to state the point that each young woman on this team is a player - it shouldn't surprise us when they play well after being given extended PT.
Or put it this way: don't we all think Iriafen, Demetre, Bosgana, Emma-Nopu, etc. (pick your young player whom we have yet to see get a lot of minutes) would all be at least competent players, if given starters' minutes? I certainly do. I think they'd be more than that - they'd all be good (though maybe not excellent . . . yet).
Having said that, you can be sure that whenever JVG plays going forward, opponents will mark her further and further out. If she plays 3-5 minutes a game, it probably is easier to stay on that mark and limit/take away her shots (not to mention that fewer minutes ==> fewer opportunities to shoot generally). But playing 20+ minutes? Well, it's hard to guard someone everywhere all game long. Same obviously holds for Jump. What Jump has done (that JVG still needs to do) is develop another shot, besides the catch and shoot trey. [I'm partial to a baseline floater, even though it's a hard shot to make, because it's easier to get that off when the defender is rushing out to cover the trey and may be off balance for a moment on the drive - but whatever it is, JVG needs another shot in her arsenal. I expect to see it developed in the coming seasons].
I do think there's some nuance here that's worth mentioning though. I think coaches/players/parents/fans should recognize that there are many instances where players are NOT ready to compete and don't deserve to play, and shouldn't take it personally. We get a lot of "why isn't so and so playing? She needs to be developed..." type of comments on this board. The best coaches are the ones who are constantly evaluating vs. those who evaluate players early, lock in on a rotation, and then never look back. There are plenty of those types of coaches, and I can't stand it. If a player at a particular college is not playing and is also being ignored, they need to get the heck out of there. Tara, and Steve Kerr keep all their players engaged through the entire season, which is why they rank up there as favorites of mine and their players testify about how much they love playing for them. It's also why I think that if a player isn't playing much for Tara, there's a good reason for it.
Even highly rated or highly talented players sometimes don't have the physical, emotional, or mental maturity to compete at the level of the other players, usually veterans, on the team. And yes, they could do just fine at other schools. But I don't think it's always the case that PT breeds confidence when so much is at stake (on a national championship caliber team). I think PT breeds confidence when the player contributes, and you have to be careful because if the player isn't ready or isn't playing well for some reason it can go the other way. In Jana's case, she did have injury to deal with (physical) early on, which has been mentioned multiple times. Also, my sense is that she was recruited as a point guard, but hasn't been excelling at that position in practice. I don't know this to be true, but if Tara had played her at PG early on in the Bahamas or against Gonzaga, Portland, etc., she might have failed miserably and sometimes there's no coming back from that. Hence the decision to go with Lacie/Anna who neither have the ball handling capabilities that you would find in a classic point guard but excel in other areas. But instead of tossing her aside, Tara looks to have found a valuable role for Jana as a shooting guard. Jana has mentioned twice that she knows Tara has confidence in her shooting. How marvelous is that - to basically take a player who hasn't been playing much at her recruited position, stick with her, move her to a different position, and then beat a Top 10 team with her. Just so great.
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - 2006alum - 01-31-2022
High-level thoughts:
-Was really impressed with Arizona. I've had questions for a while because they've faced few top teams since Louisville. But they were hitting clean jumpers from all over and while not the highest percentage shots, if they go in, it's really hard to defend them. They were also really physical on defense, though I feel like Missy uncharacteristically swallowed her whistle a bit on defenders (maybe due to Barnes's criticism after the Oregon game she also called). But we contained Cate Reese and no one else was able to give them enough offense.
-JVG! Wow! I didn't realize that she's really more of a substitute for Jump than for Lacie/Wilson/Kiana. We definitely need to get her in the mix more, but I understand why Tara hasn't so far: where do you play her? As of now, Jump still has more physicality on defense, almost half a foot more reach (6'0" vs. 5'7ish"), and more shot variety. Totally agree with Teej that JVG needs to add floaters and maybe stop and pop or step-back into her arsenal, because I don't see her ever getting to the rim very effectively - neither fast enough nor physical enough, in addition to her height. (Also, her having been out for a while with a concussion definitely helps explain her absence from so many games this season where you'd ordinarily think she'd have been subbed in.)
-Jones had a bad game, but all credit to Yeaney, who was really, really effective at limiting her. It was clear to me that after Jones burned them in the NCAA title game, their scout plan was to take her out of the game, and they were really effective at it.
-We need to keep working on our inbounding. We look like a top 25 team in almost every area but some of our inbounding this season feels like a HS JV squad. I'm actually more sanguine than most here about Jones's turnovers that result from overly ambitious entry passes, because they often work and when they do, they're great at juicing our offense. But the inbounding turnovers are just inexplicable unforced errors.
-No minutes from Kiki, which was a little surprising to me after the ASU game. It seems like she's settling in as the sub for Brink because the games she has played the most (Tennessee, WSU, ASU) are the ones Brink has played in the least. Whereas Belibi and Prechtel seem to rotate both in sub for Brink but also with her. Interesting to see how Tara thinks about her chess pieces.
(01-30-2022, 06:03 PM)Card10Fan Wrote: How would those at the game describe the crowd? Looked large on TV but only listed at 3,400. With the free bobblehead giveaway, thought it might be more. We have a tremendous team and are the defending champs, wish we could get more people to attend games. Granted, I understand the Covid concerns. Attendance should still be higher IMO.
That was me. Turned down a free ticket because I didn't think it'd be enjoyable wearing an N95 for two hours straight while trying to cheer, and given numbers just didn't want to chance it. Was bummed to miss it - seemed like a great game, and not nearly as crowded as I was expecting (friend who bought the tickets said it was almost sold out).
(01-30-2022, 06:36 PM)treetop11 Wrote: The refs were awful. Let 'em play is one thing, but there were several times that our players got shoved/smacked, a couple of times knocking our player down, and no call. I'm disregarding the number of times our players got hacked shooting, but you can't allow pushing and knock downs, players can get hurt. And most of the fouls called us were very ticky-tack and a couple were phantom. The refs just wanted to keep the game close so as not to diminish a top P12 team.
Yes, usually with Missy she is predictable, but this game was all over the place. I felt like Wilson, in particular, was getting abused, as was Jones on a few of her layup attempts, but then totally bizarre tacky calls with no contact. To the point where the ESPN2 game crew literally dissected one no-call talking about how the ball handler has to be allowed freedom of movement and how Wilson was repeatedly being denied it in ways that should be called a foul. I suspect the PAC-12 network discourages announcers from criticizing the refs but there was sure a lot more griping from the ESPN2 crew than I can recall from 95% of games I watch on TV.
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - teejers1 - 01-31-2022
(01-31-2022, 12:27 PM)2006alum Wrote: -No minutes from Kiki, which was a little surprising to me after the ASU game. It seems like she's settling in as the sub for Brink because the games she has played the most (Tennessee, WSU, ASU) are the ones Brink has played in the least. Whereas Belibi and Prechtel seem to rotate both in sub for Brink but also with her. Interesting to see how Tara thinks about her chess pieces.
FWLIW, Kiki was at the scorer's table at end of 1H (with less than a minute to go). However, there was no stoppage, so she did not get into the game. Still, your surprise point holds.
One other point: AZ had scouted Stanford's O pretty well (no surprise, the same is true for Cardinal coaching staff). But where I noticed it in particular is when Ashten took her one shot. She sets a screen near 3 point line and then steps out to receive and shoot. While Prechtel is stepping out, the coaches are waving arms and yelling at defender to step out on Prechtel. It was particularly noticeable because all Prechtel was standing shooting right in front of AZ bench. Prechtel missed and was soon subbed back out. [Again, hard to play with confidence on such a short leash - just an observation].
One final point: Tara called one offensive play that was particularly beautiful, imo. It was the one "over the top" pass from left side three line to Brink under the hoop for an easy bucket. What was beautiful about that was the set up that cleared away any help defense. IIRC, the formation started with ballhandler above top of the arc, and the other 4 players lined up in a "box" formation that you often see in in-bounds plays underneath. While the ball handler dribbles to left side at arc, JVG (in low post right) sprints the left corner and the right high post player fills at top of the arc. That left no one behind/below to help on over the top pass. Brink sealed her defender and then once nice pass made, it was just catch and lay-in.
Really well conceived and executed play.
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - BobK - 01-31-2022
Recruiting news. Amanda Muse and pretty sure it was Lepolo with her that went into the locker room post game. Also present was Harper Peterson. Peterson is just a soph
See our list
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - bl82 - 01-31-2022
(01-31-2022, 01:48 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(01-31-2022, 12:27 PM)2006alum Wrote: -No minutes from Kiki, which was a little surprising to me after the ASU game. It seems like she's settling in as the sub for Brink because the games she has played the most (Tennessee, WSU, ASU) are the ones Brink has played in the least. Whereas Belibi and Prechtel seem to rotate both in sub for Brink but also with her. Interesting to see how Tara thinks about her chess pieces.
FWLIW, Kiki was at the scorer's table at end of 1H (with less than a minute to go). However, there was no stoppage, so she did not get into the game. Still, your surprise point holds.
One other point: AZ had scouted Stanford's O pretty well (no surprise, the same is true for Cardinal coaching staff). But where I noticed it in particular is when Ashten took her one shot. She sets a screen near 3 point line and then steps out to receive and shoot. While Prechtel is stepping out, the coaches are waving arms and yelling at defender to step out on Prechtel. It was particularly noticeable because all Prechtel was standing shooting right in front of AZ bench. Prechtel missed and was soon subbed back out. [Again, hard to play with confidence on such a short leash - just an observation].
One final point: Tara called one offensive play that was particularly beautiful, imo. It was the one "over the top" pass from left side three line to Brink under the hoop for an easy bucket. What was beautiful about that was the set up that cleared away any help defense. IIRC, the formation started with ballhandler above top of the arc, and the other 4 players lined up in a "box" formation that you often see in in-bounds plays underneath. While the ball handler dribbles to left side at arc, JVG (in low post right) sprints the left corner and the right high post player fills at top of the arc. That left no one behind/below to help on over the top pass. Brink sealed her defender and then once nice pass made, it was just catch and lay-in.
Really well conceived and executed play.
That was a great play and the replay confirmed how JVG pulled Ware with her into the corner (also a matchup we will take any day), leaving the low post wide open. Just as JVG was headed to the corner, Cam, at the high post, pivoted toward the basket, put her butt on the defender and threw her hand up for the ball. It was a perfect lob and Cam had the ball in the basket before Ware could get back near the hoop and contest the shot. If JVG had not already nailed a bunch of threes, I think Ware might have let her go and hedged her bet with Cam.
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - BobK - 01-31-2022
Recruiting news. Amanda Muse and pretty sure it was Lepolo with her that went into the locker room post game. Also present was Harper Peterson. Peterson is just a soph
See our list
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - UltimateCard - 01-31-2022
(01-31-2022, 12:27 PM)2006alum Wrote:(01-30-2022, 06:36 PM)treetop11 Wrote: The refs were awful. Let 'em play is one thing, but there were several times that our players got shoved/smacked, a couple of times knocking our player down, and no call. I'm disregarding the number of times our players got hacked shooting, but you can't allow pushing and knock downs, players can get hurt. And most of the fouls called us were very ticky-tack and a couple were phantom. The refs just wanted to keep the game close so as not to diminish a top P12 team.
Yes, usually with Missy she is predictable, but this game was all over the place. I felt like Wilson, in particular, was getting abused, as was Jones on a few of her layup attempts, but then totally bizarre tacky calls with no contact. To the point where the ESPN2 game crew literally dissected one no-call talking about how the ball handler has to be allowed freedom of movement and how Wilson was repeatedly being denied it in ways that should be called a foul. I suspect the PAC-12 network discourages announcers from criticizing the refs but there was sure a lot more griping from the ESPN2 crew than I can recall from 95% of games I watch on TV.
Here's Anna getting abused at the 1:40 mark of this highlights video but notice that Haley got away with "happy feet" at the 1:38 mark, right in front of Missy! Given Cam's 3, no whistle was no problem!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvRP5avEi9g
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - jonnyss - 01-31-2022
(01-31-2022, 12:27 PM)2006alum Wrote: -We need to keep working on our inbounding. We look like a top 25 team in almost every area but some of our inbounding this season feels like a HS JV squad. I'm actually more sanguine than most here about Jones's turnovers that result from overly ambitious entry passes, because they often work and when they do, they're great at juicing our offense. But the inbounding turnovers are just inexplicable unforced errors.
ros gold-onwude is usually enthusiastic about stanford. one exception came several years ago when she commented, shaking her head side to side, something like, "always the same old, predictable box formation on the inbounds pass. tara never tries anything different."
RE: WBB: Stanford 75 -- Arizona 69 - UltimateCard - 01-31-2022
(01-31-2022, 12:08 AM)Jskass Wrote: Still would like to have a flopping rule. Appeared that when Yeaney was 'fouled' she got up laughing. Oscar nomination on the fall.
(01-31-2022, 12:27 PM)2006alum Wrote: -Jones had a bad game, but all credit to Yeaney, who was really, really effective at limiting her. It was clear to me that after Jones burned them in the NCAA title game, their scout plan was to take her out of the game, and they were really effective at it.
I have this happy habit of searching the news after a big win, and found a story in the Tucson paper that sheds some light on these two points. Apparently, Yeaney and Cam are friends from Portland area and had a laugh about the hard screen. Also Coach Barnes gave Thomas credit for shutting down Haley, not Yeaney.
https://tucson.com/sports/arizonawildcats/basketball/stanford-remains-a-tough-obstacle-on-wildcats-climb-to-the-top/article_a0733fec-8123-11ec-b329-8fcce8b62e3e.html