WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60

WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 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 84 -- Arizona 60 (/thread-24017.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

RE: WBB: Stanford @ Arizona Thursday 6:30 ESPN - stopandpop - 02-10-2023

(02-10-2023, 08:51 AM)81alum Wrote:
(02-10-2023, 07:50 AM)joemontes Wrote:
(02-09-2023, 09:12 PM)81alum Wrote: When we see Brink and Betts playing together, we are seeing next year.
Why wait for next year?

I htink that this is going to be a very potent 4-5 punch for the rest of this season.
Very similar to the 6'5 BOSTON/6'7 CARDOSO post tandem for South Carolina.

I truly believe this is part of what the doctor ordered.
Certainly it worked wonders against Arizona. But it was not only Brink/Betts. Belibi/Iriafen did the high/low game, and so did Prectel/Iriafen. Demetre had 3 assists. It seems as if Tara decided to get all of our many bigs involved in pushing high/low, and it really worked.

I've wondered all year why we were not doing more of this. I still wonder why it took so long. But it does seem to be a way of beating the paint-packers that doesn't involve bombing away from three point range.

There is another factor that I think is quite important in opening up our offense--and that is simply that Jones is now consistently hitting her mid range. She was 8/11 against Arizona, and 3/13 against USC.

In what (now) seems several lifetimes ago, I watched John Wooden employ the high/low for many of his championship teams. Of course he had the athletes with skill-sets to do this so effectively. Last night, we showed that we have the athletes with skill sets to do this as well. Sure hope it continues because that is one of our tickets to the Final Four.

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - martyup - 02-10-2023

It was so great to see Betts receive a pass in the post, keep the ball high in the air, get mobbed by 3 AZ defenders, and pass to an open teammate. When she keeps the ball high it opens up so many possibilities.

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - CompSci87 - 02-10-2023

(02-10-2023, 01:24 PM)martyup Wrote: Boy, this game makes you wonder why Betts didn't see the court against UW. I'm thinking Cam's cold/flu hit more on the team. That could explain why they played with such low energy against UW, which shows up in the rebounding. Maybe Betts was really not feeling well during the UW game and Tara didn't play her because of it.

FWIW: Betts was at the scorer's table very late in the first half of UW, waiting to come in, but there was no break in the action before halftime and so she didn't enter the game.

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - old spanish trail - 02-10-2023

(02-10-2023, 12:51 PM)TheWildJacko Wrote:
(02-10-2023, 12:10 PM)cardfan1996 Wrote:
(02-09-2023, 10:04 PM)martyup Wrote: That effort and outcome should shut down the whinging.

"We wanted to be aggressive, we wanted to play fast, that's how we want to play," Stanford coach Tara VanDerVeer said. "I think we can even do better. And I think I've been holding us back, honestly, I really do."

If and only if Tara follows through and optimizes her enormously talented roster that should never lose to USC or Washington. Even after the Arizona game, I felt Adia was too hard on her team after this beat down. Those losses to USC and Washington made PAC-12 teams think that Stanford is beatable. And they shouldn’t think that. I always thought Part of StanfordWBB’s psychological advantage in the PAC-10 now 12 was that 90% of the seasons (probably higher) PAC-10/12 teams didn’t realistically believe they could win and as a consequence, that made it easier for Stanford to win. Adia said even post game, Stanford is beatable. No Stanford is not beatable by the PAC-10/12 if as Tara said, she doesn’t hold her roster back based on who or who does not make her feel comfortable. You must give talent experience. Nivar would be a lot more polished now if this investment had started in November. So, too, Bosgana.

I pretty strongly disagree with this take. I mean, yes, we have a ton of talent and experience. Yes, we have a hall of fame coach. But:

A) We're not the only team with talent, intelligence and experience.
B) We're not the only team with an intelligent coach that excels at getting the most out of their talent.
C) It's pretty dismissive of other teams/coaches/players/the entire league to suggest that we should always win as long as our coach uses our players in the "correct" way.
D) There are a ton of other factors that go into a game on any given day—fatigue, mental state, injuries/illness, reffing, luck, dozens or even hundreds of split-second, in-game decisions—that make other teams beating us not at all implausible.

Do you really believe the rest of the Pac-12 is that weak?

Even NBA super-teams that should by all rights crush the opposition end up losing to hotter teams (see, unfortunately, the 2015-16 Warriors, 73-9 in the regular season, blowing a 3-1 lead to the 57-25 Cavs in the Finals).

Yes, Jacko

Spike - Spike - 02-10-2023

We were at the game and LOVED it.
Best part was late in the game when Betts was subbed out and Cam rushed out and threw her arms around Lauren. Lauren had a brobdingnagian smile on her face and seemed so happy.
P. S. Tucson is a great place for a desert visit in February. Great food, inexpensive, colorful, and did I say warm?

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - BobK - 02-10-2023

Great post Jacko

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - freddot5 - 02-10-2023

Thanks to all previous commenters for a great thread. My own additional observations regarding this game as well as the last month or so. Haley is the best natural rebounder on this team and needs to roam. She was handling the ball a lot in both the USC and Washington games and that affected both her rebounding and her mid range capability. I noticed that Hannah has had kinesiology tape on her right bicep the last two games for sure, but need to check past recordings for others. Yesterday it was one color but against Washington, two colors were visible. I am assuming that she has some type of ailment and for a precision shooter, having any slight distraction in muscle memory will cause problems. Possibly, there was an issue even before the tape and a solution back to earlier productivity might take time. The energy level last night was significantly higher than on Sunday, especially good for a short recovery. Wonder if they had a Spa Day like UConn. https://www.courant.com/sports/uconn-womens-basketball/hc-sp-uconn-women-georgetown-preview-how-to-watch-injuries-fatigue-20230210-vu65sykwdvcx3dxtqwlimm2nae-story.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Don%27t%20Miss&utm_content=5581676065242&lctg=61017468

Haven't been to a game in the desert for a number of years, but Tucson is a fun city with lots of good family run restaurants. Unfortunately, not all near McHale. Looking forward to a successful conclusion of the regular and postseason. Planning to be in Seattle for the regional.

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - triangle2 - 02-10-2023

I've been of the opinion for a while now that some coaches see bad loses as motivators because the coach gets to say very directly to the team that they didn't execute, or play hard enough, or pay attention to the scout, etc. I always thought that after a loss, Mike Montgomery seemed to be actually talking to the team when he would make his characteristically blunt post-game comments.

I've never thought that it's a realistic goal to win every game even if your goal is to win the last one.

Not to say that anyone wants to lose, but there really are different kinds of losses. For instance:

(1) You had no chance. It's 1973. Stanford (men) lose to UCLA at Maples 82-67 against Bill Walton, Jamaal Wilkes et al. Cumulative reaction in the locker room after the game is probably something like "wow they're good. I mean, really good." UCLA yawns and goes undefeated. Two of Stanford's losses to the unfairly stacked UMass teams in the tournament probably fall into this category.

(2) Your effort was lacking. It's January 17, 2020, and Stanford (women) lose to Colorado on the road, breaking a season-long winning streak. Kiana Williams goes 3-12 with no assists, Brink fouls out (thanks Chuck), and Stanford shoots 5-22 from 3. Hollingshed lights them up (32 pts including 4 three-pointers and 10 boards). Coach Tara says (actual quote): "We did not defend Hollingshed worth a darn...She had her way with whoever was guarding her." She also says: "I hold this really bothers people and gets under their skin and they decide we want to play basketball at a different level...It was really disappointing to me."

(3) Maybe your effort was there but you didn't execute. It's January 21, 2020 - Stanford (women) lose to UCLA in Santa Cruz. Coach Tara (actual quotes): "It was ridiculous some of the mistakes we had. They outhustled us and they were scrappier." Reaction: Brink goes into the starting lineup. In the February 5 rematch vs Colorado, Brink has 6 blocks, 8 boards, and 13 points. Hollingshed has 16 points, 6 rebounds, no 3's, and she fouls out. And we all know what happened for the rest of the season.

I'm sure we could come up with several other categories (e.g. we just lost two of our best players to season ending injuries...).

I put the South Carolina loss into the category of "on this night, they were better than we were but we didn't really play well." I put the USC loss into the category of "we aren't able to execute the new offense against a motivated, pressing team," and I was glad to see that the USC loss prompted some reflection and changes from the coaches. I suspect the Washington loss was a combo of a smart defensive scheme and the team not being ready to execute at a high level. What I saw from the Arizona game is a team that decided top to bottom to say "we don't like losing" and "it's time to go." It's hard to keep motivated to play at your very best over an entire season, but losing is sometimes a better motivator than winning. Brink says she hates losing more than winning.

Was I the only one who thought that the refs were on another planet for this game? One of the offensive foul calls against Brink was terrible, and Scofield called a turnover with about 5 minutes to go in the 2nd quarter that I still can't figure out even after replaying it about 50 times.

Hieronymus - Hieronymus - 02-10-2023

(02-10-2023, 07:09 PM)triangle2 Wrote: I've been of the opinion for a while now that some coaches see bad loses as motivators because the coach gets to say very directly to the team that they didn't execute, or play hard enough, or pay attention to the scout, etc. I always thought that after a loss, Mike Montgomery seemed to be actually talking to the team when he would make his characteristically blunt post-game comments.

I've never thought that it's a realistic goal to win every game even if your goal is to win the last one.

Not to say that anyone wants to lose, but there really are different kinds of losses. For instance:

(1) You had no chance. It's 1973. Stanford (men) lose to UCLA at Maples 82-67 against Bill Walton, Jamaal Wilkes et al. Cumulative reaction in the locker room after the game is probably something like "wow they're good. I mean, really good." UCLA yawns and goes undefeated. Two of Stanford's losses to the unfairly stacked UMass teams in the tournament probably fall into this category.

(2) Your effort was lacking. It's January 17, 2020, and Stanford (women) lose to Colorado on the road, breaking a season-long winning streak. Kiana Williams goes 3-12 with no assists, Brink fouls out (thanks Chuck), and Stanford shoots 5-22 from 3. Hollingshed lights them up (32 pts including 4 three-pointers and 10 boards). Coach Tara says (actual quote): "We did not defend Hollingshed worth a darn...She had her way with whoever was guarding her." She also says: "I hold this really bothers people and gets under their skin and they decide we want to play basketball at a different level...It was really disappointing to me."

(3) Maybe your effort was there but you didn't execute. It's January 21, 2020 - Stanford (women) lose to UCLA in Santa Cruz. Coach Tara (actual quotes): "It was ridiculous some of the mistakes we had. They outhustled us and they were scrappier." Reaction: Brink goes into the starting lineup. In the February 5 rematch vs Colorado, Brink has 6 blocks, 8 boards, and 13 points. Hollingshed has 16 points, 6 rebounds, no 3's, and she fouls out. And we all know what happened for the rest of the season.

I'm sure we could come up with several other categories (e.g. we just lost two of our best players to season ending injuries...).

I put the South Carolina loss into the category of "on this night, they were better than we were but we didn't really play well." I put the USC loss into the category of "we aren't able to execute the new offense against a motivated, pressing team," and I was glad to see that the USC loss prompted some reflection and changes from the coaches. I suspect the Washington loss was a combo of a smart defensive scheme and the team not being ready to execute at a high level. What I saw from the Arizona game is a team that decided top to bottom to say "we don't like losing" and "it's time to go." It's hard to keep motivated to play at your very best over an entire season, but losing is sometimes a better motivator than winning. Brink says she hates losing more than winning.

Was I the only one who thought that the refs were on another planet for this game? One of the offensive foul calls against Brink was terrible, and Scofield called a turnover with about 5 minutes to go in the 2nd quarter that I still can't figure out even after replaying it about 50 times.

Yes the officiating was terrible, but it’s all about the degree of terrible. We are all so used to terrible, we mostly don’t comment on it until it’s much worse then what we saw against UA.

RE: Hieronymus - 81alum - 02-10-2023

(02-10-2023, 10:04 PM)Hieronymus Wrote: Yes the officiating was terrible, but it’s all about the degree of terrible. We are all so used to terrible, we mostly don’t comment on it until it’s much worse then what we saw against UA.

Exactly. We all assume incompetence. What we hope for is incompetence that affects both sides equally. "Even-handed" incompetence is the zenith of Pac-12 officiating and everything else is downhill.

RE: Spike - Card10Fan - 02-10-2023

(02-10-2023, 04:47 PM)Spike Wrote: We were at the game and LOVED it.
Best part was late in the game when Betts was subbed out and Cam rushed out and threw her arms around Lauren. Lauren had a of immense proportions smile on her face and seemed so happy.
P. S. Tucson is a great place for a desert visit in February. Great food, inexpensive, colorful, and did I say warm?

Already thinking about going back next year. Would have stayed for the ASU game but Thur-Sunday is not ideal and with the Super Bowl in the Phoenix metro area, Sunday is going to be a zoo. Winning just makes everything more enjoyable. I loved the game. Was totally worth the trip just to see our spectacular performance.

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - TonyLima - 02-11-2023

(02-10-2023, 07:09 PM)triangle2 Wrote: I've been of the opinion for a while now that some coaches see bad loses as motivators because the coach gets to say very directly to the team that they didn't execute, or play hard enough, or pay attention to the scout, etc. I always thought that after a loss, Mike Montgomery seemed to be actually talking to the team when he would make his characteristically blunt post-game comments.

I've never thought that it's a realistic goal to win every game even if your goal is to win the last one.

Not to say that anyone wants to lose, but there really are different kinds of losses. For instance:

(1) You had no chance. It's 1973. Stanford (men) lose to UCLA at Maples 82-67 against Bill Walton, Jamaal Wilkes et al. Cumulative reaction in the locker room after the game is probably something like "wow they're good. I mean, really good." UCLA yawns and goes undefeated. Two of Stanford's losses to the unfairly stacked UMass teams in the tournament probably fall into this category.

(2) Your effort was lacking. It's January 17, 2020, and Stanford (women) lose to Colorado on the road, breaking a season-long winning streak. Kiana Williams goes 3-12 with no assists, Brink fouls out (thanks Chuck), and Stanford shoots 5-22 from 3. Hollingshed lights them up (32 pts including 4 three-pointers and 10 boards). Coach Tara says (actual quote): "We did not defend Hollingshed worth a darn...She had her way with whoever was guarding her." She also says: "I hold this really bothers people and gets under their skin and they decide we want to play basketball at a different level...It was really disappointing to me."

(3) Maybe your effort was there but you didn't execute. It's January 21, 2020 - Stanford (women) lose to UCLA in Santa Cruz. Coach Tara (actual quotes): "It was ridiculous some of the mistakes we had. They outhustled us and they were scrappier." Reaction: Brink goes into the starting lineup. In the February 5 rematch vs Colorado, Brink has 6 blocks, 8 boards, and 13 points. Hollingshed has 16 points, 6 rebounds, no 3's, and she fouls out. And we all know what happened for the rest of the season.

I'm sure we could come up with several other categories (e.g. we just lost two of our best players to season ending injuries...).

I put the South Carolina loss into the category of "on this night, they were better than we were but we didn't really play well." I put the USC loss into the category of "we aren't able to execute the new offense against a motivated, pressing team," and I was glad to see that the USC loss prompted some reflection and changes from the coaches. I suspect the Washington loss was a combo of a smart defensive scheme and the team not being ready to execute at a high level. What I saw from the Arizona game is a team that decided top to bottom to say "we don't like losing" and "it's time to go." It's hard to keep motivated to play at your very best over an entire season, but losing is sometimes a better motivator than winning. Brink says she hates losing more than winning.

Was I the only one who thought that the refs were on another planet for this game? One of the offensive foul calls against Brink was terrible, and Scofield called a turnover with about 5 minutes to go in the 2nd quarter that I still can't figure out even after replaying it about 50 times.

Washington loss was mostly an otherworldy performance from Elle Ladine. When you run into something like that, best to shrug it off and get ready for the next game

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - old spanish trail - 02-11-2023

Yep, Tony. The scout payed her little attention and she made the most of it. Plus, we were under the weather, etc. and probably not worried enuf about the game. It happens in competitive sports. If you played, you are familiar with this situation.

RE: Spike - DaBears17 - 02-11-2023

We did the desert trip Nicole Powell's sophomore through senior seasons and really enjoyed it. Then we had a kid and haven't made the trip since. She starts college in the fall, so likely will make the trip starting again next season.

(02-10-2023, 10:56 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:
(02-10-2023, 04:47 PM)Spike Wrote: We were at the game and LOVED it.
Best part was late in the game when Betts was subbed out and Cam rushed out and threw her arms around Lauren. Lauren had a of immense proportions smile on her face and seemed so happy.
P. S. Tucson is a great place for a desert visit in February. Great food, inexpensive, colorful, and did I say warm?

Already thinking about going back next year. Would have stayed for the ASU game but Thur-Sunday is not ideal and with the Super Bowl in the Phoenix metro area, Sunday is going to be a zoo. Winning just makes everything more enjoyable. I loved the game. Was totally worth the trip just to see our spectacular performance.

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - cardfan1996 - 02-11-2023

(02-10-2023, 12:51 PM)TheWildJacko Wrote:
(02-10-2023, 12:10 PM)cardfan1996 Wrote:
(02-09-2023, 10:04 PM)martyup Wrote: That effort and outcome should shut down the whinging.

"We wanted to be aggressive, we wanted to play fast, that's how we want to play," Stanford coach Tara VanDerVeer said. "I think we can even do better. And I think I've been holding us back, honestly, I really do."

If and only if Tara follows through and optimizes her enormously talented roster that should never lose to USC or Washington. Even after the Arizona game, I felt Adia was too hard on her team after this beat down. Those losses to USC and Washington made PAC-12 teams think that Stanford is beatable. And they shouldn’t think that. I always thought Part of StanfordWBB’s psychological advantage in the PAC-10 now 12 was that 90% of the seasons (probably higher) PAC-10/12 teams didn’t realistically believe they could win and as a consequence, that made it easier for Stanford to win. Adia said even post game, Stanford is beatable. No Stanford is not beatable by the PAC-10/12 if as Tara said, she doesn’t hold her roster back based on who or who does not make her feel comfortable. You must give talent experience. Nivar would be a lot more polished now if this investment had started in November. So, too, Bosgana.

I pretty strongly disagree with this take. I mean, yes, we have a ton of talent and experience. Yes, we have a hall of fame coach. But:

A) We're not the only team with talent, intelligence and experience.
B) We're not the only team with an intelligent coach that excels at getting the most out of their talent.
C) It's pretty dismissive of other teams/coaches/players/the entire league to suggest that we should always win as long as our coach uses our players in the "correct" way.
D) There are a ton of other factors that go into a game on any given day—fatigue, mental state, injuries/illness, reffing, luck, dozens or even hundreds of split-second, in-game decisions—that make other teams beating us not at all implausible.

Do you really believe the rest of the Pac-12 is that weak?

Even NBA super-teams that should by all rights crush the opposition end up losing to hotter teams (see, unfortunately, the 2015-16 Warriors, 73-9 in the regular season, blowing a 3-1 lead to the 57-25 Cavs in the Finals).

Not only do I think the rest of the PAC-12 is weak, the NCAA Top-16 reveal suggest they believe our league is weak too. Apart from Utah’s beat down of Oklahoma (and I don’t know where Okie is ranked now), the PAC-12 scheduling (including our own) and signature wins out of conference were weaker than it’s been in recent memory.

And Stanford should have never lost to S.Carolina. Don’t even get me started talking about that game. Up 4 with like under 50 seconds. Literally all you have to do is guard the 3-pt line and make them make 2s and they decided “Nah, do or die scouting report defense.” Like what? They can’t beat you with 2s.

(02-10-2023, 07:09 PM)triangle2 Wrote: I've been of the opinion for a while now that some coaches see bad loses as motivators because the coach gets to say very directly to the team that they didn't execute, or play hard enough, or pay attention to the scout, etc. I always thought that after a loss, Mike Montgomery seemed to be actually talking to the team when he would make his characteristically blunt post-game comments.

I've never thought that it's a realistic goal to win every game even if your goal is to win the last one.

Not to say that anyone wants to lose, but there really are different kinds of losses. For instance:

(1) You had no chance. It's 1973. Stanford (men) lose to UCLA at Maples 82-67 against Bill Walton, Jamaal Wilkes et al. Cumulative reaction in the locker room after the game is probably something like "wow they're good. I mean, really good." UCLA yawns and goes undefeated. Two of Stanford's losses to the unfairly stacked UMass teams in the tournament probably fall into this category.

(2) Your effort was lacking. It's January 17, 2020, and Stanford (women) lose to Colorado on the road, breaking a season-long winning streak. Kiana Williams goes 3-12 with no assists, Brink fouls out (thanks Chuck), and Stanford shoots 5-22 from 3. Hollingshed lights them up (32 pts including 4 three-pointers and 10 boards). Coach Tara says (actual quote): "We did not defend Hollingshed worth a darn...She had her way with whoever was guarding her." She also says: "I hold this really bothers people and gets under their skin and they decide we want to play basketball at a different level...It was really disappointing to me."

(3) Maybe your effort was there but you didn't execute. It's January 21, 2020 - Stanford (women) lose to UCLA in Santa Cruz. Coach Tara (actual quotes): "It was ridiculous some of the mistakes we had. They outhustled us and they were scrappier." Reaction: Brink goes into the starting lineup. In the February 5 rematch vs Colorado, Brink has 6 blocks, 8 boards, and 13 points. Hollingshed has 16 points, 6 rebounds, no 3's, and she fouls out. And we all know what happened for the rest of the season.

I'm sure we could come up with several other categories (e.g. we just lost two of our best players to season ending injuries...).

I put the South Carolina loss into the category of "on this night, they were better than we were but we didn't really play well." I put the USC loss into the category of "we aren't able to execute the new offense against a motivated, pressing team," and I was glad to see that the USC loss prompted some reflection and changes from the coaches. I suspect the Washington loss was a combo of a smart defensive scheme and the team not being ready to execute at a high level. What I saw from the Arizona game is a team that decided top to bottom to say "we don't like losing" and "it's time to go." It's hard to keep motivated to play at your very best over an entire season, but losing is sometimes a better motivator than winning. Brink says she hates losing more than winning.

Was I the only one who thought that the refs were on another planet for this game? One of the offensive foul calls against Brink was terrible, and Scofield called a turnover with about 5 minutes to go in the 2nd quarter that I still can't figure out even after replaying it about 50 times.

I put the S. Carolina game in the “do the coaches know how math and probability works” bucket.

I put the USC lost in the “the scout is the scout since Cal and it’s clear you haven’t made adjustments and are still not simulating practices to the scout.”

I put the Washington lost in the “you decided to change the way you have been playing PnR defense and off-ball defense all year for THIS road trip? And you haven’t adjusted last year’s Washington scout on how you defend off-ball screens when they nearly beat you then?”

With 2 All-Americans and 8 McDonalds All-Americans on your roster, what other Pac-12 team comes close to Stanford on paper?

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - TheWildJacko - 02-11-2023

If all you think about is how we look on paper, then you are viewing the game in 2 dimensions and not seeing the whole picture.

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - BostonCard - 02-11-2023

South Carolina and UConn, for two.

BC

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - BosCard - 02-11-2023

(02-11-2023, 09:28 AM)cardfan1996 Wrote:
(02-10-2023, 12:51 PM)TheWildJacko Wrote:
(02-10-2023, 12:10 PM)cardfan1996 Wrote:
(02-09-2023, 10:04 PM)martyup Wrote: That effort and outcome should shut down the whinging.

"We wanted to be aggressive, we wanted to play fast, that's how we want to play," Stanford coach Tara VanDerVeer said. "I think we can even do better. And I think I've been holding us back, honestly, I really do."

If and only if Tara follows through and optimizes her enormously talented roster that should never lose to USC or Washington. Even after the Arizona game, I felt Adia was too hard on her team after this beat down. Those losses to USC and Washington made PAC-12 teams think that Stanford is beatable. And they shouldn’t think that. I always thought Part of StanfordWBB’s psychological advantage in the PAC-10 now 12 was that 90% of the seasons (probably higher) PAC-10/12 teams didn’t realistically believe they could win and as a consequence, that made it easier for Stanford to win. Adia said even post game, Stanford is beatable. No Stanford is not beatable by the PAC-10/12 if as Tara said, she doesn’t hold her roster back based on who or who does not make her feel comfortable. You must give talent experience. Nivar would be a lot more polished now if this investment had started in November. So, too, Bosgana.

I pretty strongly disagree with this take. I mean, yes, we have a ton of talent and experience. Yes, we have a hall of fame coach. But:

A) We're not the only team with talent, intelligence and experience.
B) We're not the only team with an intelligent coach that excels at getting the most out of their talent.
C) It's pretty dismissive of other teams/coaches/players/the entire league to suggest that we should always win as long as our coach uses our players in the "correct" way.
D) There are a ton of other factors that go into a game on any given day—fatigue, mental state, injuries/illness, reffing, luck, dozens or even hundreds of split-second, in-game decisions—that make other teams beating us not at all implausible.

Do you really believe the rest of the Pac-12 is that weak?

Even NBA super-teams that should by all rights crush the opposition end up losing to hotter teams (see, unfortunately, the 2015-16 Warriors, 73-9 in the regular season, blowing a 3-1 lead to the 57-25 Cavs in the Finals).

Not only do I think the rest of the PAC-12 is weak, the NCAA Top-16 reveal suggest they believe our league is weak too. Apart from Utah’s beat down of Oklahoma (and I don’t know where Okie is ranked now), the PAC-12 scheduling (including our own) and signature wins out of conference were weaker than it’s been in recent memory.

And Stanford should have never lost to S.Carolina. Don’t even get me started talking about that game. Up 4 with like under 50 seconds. Literally all you have to do is guard the 3-pt line and make them make 2s and they decided “Nah, do or die scouting report defense.” Like what? They can’t beat you with 2s.

(02-10-2023, 07:09 PM)triangle2 Wrote: I've been of the opinion for a while now that some coaches see bad loses as motivators because the coach gets to say very directly to the team that they didn't execute, or play hard enough, or pay attention to the scout, etc. I always thought that after a loss, Mike Montgomery seemed to be actually talking to the team when he would make his characteristically blunt post-game comments.

I've never thought that it's a realistic goal to win every game even if your goal is to win the last one.

Not to say that anyone wants to lose, but there really are different kinds of losses. For instance:

(1) You had no chance. It's 1973. Stanford (men) lose to UCLA at Maples 82-67 against Bill Walton, Jamaal Wilkes et al. Cumulative reaction in the locker room after the game is probably something like "wow they're good. I mean, really good." UCLA yawns and goes undefeated. Two of Stanford's losses to the unfairly stacked UMass teams in the tournament probably fall into this category.

(2) Your effort was lacking. It's January 17, 2020, and Stanford (women) lose to Colorado on the road, breaking a season-long winning streak. Kiana Williams goes 3-12 with no assists, Brink fouls out (thanks Chuck), and Stanford shoots 5-22 from 3. Hollingshed lights them up (32 pts including 4 three-pointers and 10 boards). Coach Tara says (actual quote): "We did not defend Hollingshed worth a darn...She had her way with whoever was guarding her." She also says: "I hold this really bothers people and gets under their skin and they decide we want to play basketball at a different level...It was really disappointing to me."

(3) Maybe your effort was there but you didn't execute. It's January 21, 2020 - Stanford (women) lose to UCLA in Santa Cruz. Coach Tara (actual quotes): "It was ridiculous some of the mistakes we had. They outhustled us and they were scrappier." Reaction: Brink goes into the starting lineup. In the February 5 rematch vs Colorado, Brink has 6 blocks, 8 boards, and 13 points. Hollingshed has 16 points, 6 rebounds, no 3's, and she fouls out. And we all know what happened for the rest of the season.

I'm sure we could come up with several other categories (e.g. we just lost two of our best players to season ending injuries...).

I put the South Carolina loss into the category of "on this night, they were better than we were but we didn't really play well." I put the USC loss into the category of "we aren't able to execute the new offense against a motivated, pressing team," and I was glad to see that the USC loss prompted some reflection and changes from the coaches. I suspect the Washington loss was a combo of a smart defensive scheme and the team not being ready to execute at a high level. What I saw from the Arizona game is a team that decided top to bottom to say "we don't like losing" and "it's time to go." It's hard to keep motivated to play at your very best over an entire season, but losing is sometimes a better motivator than winning. Brink says she hates losing more than winning.

Was I the only one who thought that the refs were on another planet for this game? One of the offensive foul calls against Brink was terrible, and Scofield called a turnover with about 5 minutes to go in the 2nd quarter that I still can't figure out even after replaying it about 50 times.

I put the S. Carolina game in the “do the coaches know how math and probability works” bucket.

I put the USC lost in the “the scout is the scout since Cal and it’s clear you haven’t made adjustments and are still not simulating practices to the scout.”

I put the Washington lost in the “you decided to change the way you have been playing PnR defense and off-ball defense all year for THIS road trip? And you haven’t adjusted last year’s Washington scout on how you defend off-ball screens when they nearly beat you then?”

With 2 All-Americans and 8 McDonalds All-Americans on your roster, what other Pac-12 team comes close to Stanford on paper?

Yes we have more talent overall and I think certainly could have been undefeated in the PAC-12. But the other teams have talent too. UCLA has 4 McDonald’s All Americans. Arizona, Oregon and USC have 3. And McDonalds All American status isn’t the be all and end all of talent. UConn only has one McDonalds All American starting right now.

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - crackpot - 02-11-2023

Trying to figure out what the heck that call was with 5:16 to go in the second quarter. Play-by-Play indicates a turnover by Hannah. If I'm understanding the ref's signal, it was for being out-of-bounds at the baseline, which she was. But she didn't have the ball (it was being passed near the top of the key). Any idea, or just the ref hallucinating?

RE: WBB: Stanford 84 -- Arizona 60 - 81alum - 02-11-2023

(02-11-2023, 02:01 PM)crackpot Wrote: Trying to figure out what the heck that call was with 5:16 to go in the second quarter. Play-by-Play indicates a turnover by Hannah. If I'm understanding the ref's signal, it was for being out-of-bounds at the baseline, which she was. But she didn't have the ball (it was being passed near the top of the key). Any idea, or just the ref hallucinating?

Yes, that was odd. I don't know the rules. Reminds me of football when a player can't go out of bounds and them come back in to catch the ball. It's as if they called that on Jump.