The CardBoard
WBB: Stanford 58 USC 67 - 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 58 USC 67 (/thread-24751.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

RE: WBB: Stanford 58 USC 67 - BillBradley - 02-03-2024

Maybe it would be interesting to give USC some of their own medicine if we play them next. Use up all the fouls from Bosgana, Nunu, Ogden, and Harriel on Juju. How about we hammer her just like their posts hammer Cam and Kiki? Knock her down a few times just like they knock down Cam and see how she likes it. I don't think physical play is reserved only for bigger players. It would certainly disrupt her rhythm. I'd like to see how confidently she shoots the ball after she's been mauled all game. She gets every call and went to the line 19 times anyway, what's a few more? :>

RE: WBB: Stanford 58 USC 67 - jonnyss - 02-03-2024

i hope it's ok to copy this from TOS. it's just so great...

from gary 1221 in reply to "putting lepolo on juju is like pitting the christians against the lions"...i don't think that was such a bad matchup. mccaffrey got nearly 150 yards and 2 td's against detroit...

RE: WBB: Stanford 58 USC 67 - crackpot - 02-03-2024

(02-03-2024, 05:31 PM)jonnyss Wrote:  i hope it's ok to copy this from TOS. it's just so great...

from gary 1221 in reply to "putting lepolo on juju is like pitting the christians against the lions"...i don't think that was such a bad matchup. mccaffrey got nearly 150 yards and 2 td's against detroit...

First time I smiled all day. Thank you!

RE: WBB: Stanford 58 USC 67 - liveoak - 02-04-2024

A few comments about the game:

RE: WBB: Stanford 58 USC 67 - Baez87 - 02-04-2024

(02-04-2024, 12:15 AM)liveoak Wrote:  A few comments about the game:
  • I think Tara played Lepolo on Watkins to keep her from driving to the basket and force her to shoot from long-range. I watch a lot of the other Pac-12 games...and Watkins gets a lot of her points (and 3-point plays) by driving to the basket and getting fouled. She has had games where she misses from outside. I suspect Tara thought that making Watkins shoot from outside was less dangerous that having her drive at our defense. Some times you get the bear...and some times the bear gets you.
  • Brink (4 for 14) and Iriafen (6 for 18) had bad shooting nights and they were surely getting mauled inside. I also noticed that in the second quarter, USC put Watkins on Lepolo. I think that Watkins' defensive pressure on Lepolo caused some problems getting the ball into Brink/Iriafen.
  • 81Alum noted that Tara said that Stanford lost because their offense didn't play well - even with Watkins scoring 51 points - and I agree with both of them. I believe that if we had normal offensive efficiency, we would have won that game.
  • I believe that Cam said in the press conference that she didn't feel 100% last night - did anyone else hear that? The entire team looked slow last night.
  • I'm not impressed with USC's offensive coaching. They basically give the ball to a supremely talented person - JuJu Watkins - and let her attempt to win the game herself. If she is off, then they likely lose. I think Tara could do better if she were coaching the USC players.
  • As a recruiting note, Tara implied that Watkins wanted to stay in LA to play in front of her parents. I think that playing close to home is large factor in recruiting and may be one significant reason why we don't get as many out of area recruits. I think this was an issue as well with Sonia Citron from Notre Dame.
Thank you and 81Alum for your insightful analyses. We are privileged to have these talented players and coaches dedicate their years to SWBB. Let’s celebrate them! We are part of a very select fan base that gets to be in the running for national championships year after year!

RE: WBB: Stanford 58 USC 67 - BobK - 02-04-2024

Excellent post Live oak. Thank you

RE: WBB: Stanford 58 USC 67 - MV72018 - 02-04-2024

(02-03-2024, 03:13 AM)M T Wrote:  
(02-03-2024, 01:28 AM)CompSci87 Wrote:  That's a thought, might have been worth trying. Stanford did double Juju at times, but not high and early as teams do to Steph. The later doubles didn't seem effective. I remember one time when Juju was trapped along the baseline and it looked like we might turn her over, but she got the ball to a big for an open layup.
I thought the double teams on Watkins were effective, but I believe they were all inside the 3pt line.  IMO, none of our defenders defended her closely at the 3pt line, not close enough to stop the pop 3-pointer.  I thought the double teams contributed to her relatively weak 4th quarter.

Do I recall someone here complaining how few points the rest of the starters got besides Brink & Iriafen in an earlier game?  Three of USC's starters totaled 2 points, while their bench contributed a total of 2 points.

One of the things I hate about a loss is the negative comments by the same small set of posters.  I think such comments are totally undeserved.  I remind people that you can choose to ignore posters.

I saw the point at which one poster says that Brink said she was tired (it was right after she asked to be taken out).  I can't say I could read the lips to say that, but perhaps.  She didn't play like she was tired.  Her shots were typically short, but she played 37 of 40 minutes, had 19 points, 15 rebounds, 8 blocks, 3 assists, 4 TO, 3 fouls, while having 3 posts foul out on her.   Yeah, I too wish she'd had 40 points, but that's a good night.  I saw Brink playing to avoid fouls much of the game -- a good sign.

To me, Watkins won the game for USC with exceptional shooting.  Our players did not lose it by playing badly.  The refs did not totally give away the game.

If I were the coach, I would have started fouling with about 90 seconds left.  Preferably off-ball fouls.  USC held the ball too long during that time.

BobK said he was waiting to see this:

The refs were Kevin Bacon, Tiffany Bird, and Michol Murray (Box score misspells her name).

Q1 6:55 Brink saves a blocked shot by USC from going out of bounds. No one gets control of the ball before she touches it while she is out of bounds. The refs apparently overruled the shot clock operator and ruled that a Stanford possession, reseting the clock to 30 seconds.  USC gets the ball under their basket with 30 seconds on the shot clock.

The question is, did Stanford have ball control after the shot but before the out of bounds?  The only possible call would be Brink's trying to save the ball from going out of bounds (Brink should not have done that, but that's a different matter). The only rule that might apply is "4.8.2 A team shall be in control when (b) While a live ball is being passed between teammates".  Since Brink's trying to save the ball did not go to a teammate (it went straight to a USC player, that rule clearly doesn't apply. The rule that does apply is 4.8.4 "There shall be no comtrol during: © A try for goal after the ball is in flight; (d) The period that follows any of those acts (a-c) while the ball is being batted in an attempt to secure control."  There was no rule that caused control to change, so the clock should not have been reset.

Q1 3:57 Brink could have been called for a foul.

Q1 3:13 Look at Watkins foot work in her spin.  After her dribble, she has both feet down, and then takes a hop on her right foot (travel #1), pivots around to the left using her right foot as a pivot, puts her left foot down and  then pivots on the left foot, putting her right foot down again (travel #2).  This is covered in the NCAA WBB 2024 Rules Points of Emphasis "The only legal way a player may hold the ball while taking two steps is to end the dribble with neither foot in contact with the playing court and then land on one foot followed by the other foot; the first foot to land on the playing court is the pivot foot"

Q1 2:16 (Q1 0:37, Q2 9:09, Q2 8:50, ...) Unfortunately, a typical problem we had against Watkins.  She comes down the court to the foul line and stops & pops.  Harriel gives her about 7 feet spacing and can't recover to stop the shot.  We should have bene playing her tighter. But what if she gets by the defender?  Brink is between Watkins and the basket.

Q1 1:15 Brink should have been charged with a foul (with a review for an intentional foul).

Q2 5:46 Another travel. Player ends the dribble with her left foot down at the top of the key, right foot in the air to land about the FT line.  Her left foot lands again to power her up for the shot.  That's a travel.

Q2 4:55 Iriafen gets a rebound and goes up for a shot. Akunwafo grabs her arm as she's going up. The shot misses and Iriafen doesn't bother going for a rebound as she expected a foul called.

Q2 3:16 The ref called a double dribble on Jump.  Jump had ended her dribble, but when the ball got free, it was not a dribble (and so not a second dribble).  Had she dribbled it, it would have been a double dribble.
9.7.1 "A dribble is ball movement caused by a player in control who bats, pushes or taps the ball to the playing court once or several times."
Losing the ball and having it touch the floor is not sufficient for a double dribble to be called.  After she lost the ball, Jump touched it (which is not a double dribble) to tap it to another player.  There was no second dribble.

Q2 1:41 Big shove knocks Iriafen about 2 feet during the rebound.

(Despite my setting 3 recordings for the 3 programs listed during the two-hour slot, Sling didn't give me a recording that worked even for the full first hour.  Maybe it was a blessing.)

For anyone that recorded the full game, I think you'll see that at the very end of the game when Bacon calls the ball as rolling out of bounds, it never went out of bounds.  The exterior of the ball was over the out-of-bounds, but the ball never touched out-of-bounds (I had a very good angle, better than Bacon).  It felt like a fitting mis-call to end the game.

Re your "To me, Watkins won the game for USC with exceptional shooting.  Our players did not lose it by playing badly."
How unproductive do we have to be on O before you acknowledge that our O play was a major contributing factor in this loss. Tara even acknowledged this, although she denied that we played poor D, which, when it came to defending JuJu, I respectfully disagree. It appears that some Cardinal fans here are chalking up this loss to JuJu having a great night, not to any lack on Stanford's part, whether on O or D. I strongly disagree. 57 points on O and giving up a 50 burger to one player on the other team without taking steps to get the ball out of her hand. As with defending Curry when he's hot, the right strategy is to get the ball out of his hand. Look at last night's Laker win over the Knicks. Why did the Lakers win and break the Knicks 9-game winning streak? Because unlike the teams the Knicks defeated during their streak, the Laker's implemented their coach's strategy of getting the ball out of Jalen Brunson's hands. Two Laker defenders went after Brunson as soon as he crossed the midcourt line and that forced him to pass the ball, often to Josh Hart who is not a good shooter.

RE: WBB: Stanford 58 USC 67 - Sam Leopold - 02-04-2024

(02-04-2024, 12:57 PM)MV72018 Wrote:  As with defending Curry when he's hot, the right strategy is to get the ball out of his hand. Look at last night's Laker win over the Knicks. Why did the Lakers win and break the Knicks 9-game winning streak? Because unlike the teams the Knicks defeated during their streak, the Laker's implemented their coach's strategy of getting the ball out of Jalen Brunson's hands. Two Laker defenders went after Brunson as soon as he crossed the midcourt line and that forced him to pass the ball, often to Josh Hart who is not a good shooter.

On the other hand, last night Steph Curry tossed in 60 points against the Atlanta Hawks while the Warriors lost in OT.

Of course, the obvious rebuttal is that the Warriors can't defend for $#%& this year.  That, however, is a separate issue....