The CardBoard
WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - 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 66 -- Oregon 62 (/thread-22975.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - Maple Leaf - 02-20-2022

(02-20-2022, 11:16 PM)Phogge Wrote:  Didn’t Lottich go crazy against OSU one night when Stanford was way behind late?

Whenever somebody comes from way back I think of Billy Casper and Reuben Mayes.

Chris Hernandez did it against the ducks in the duck pond, IIRC in Monty's last year.  Hernandez dived for a lose ball which went out-abounds to the ducks, Hernandez ended up at the feet of a couple of duck students who were jacked up and yelling in his face, when Hernandez got up the look on his face was one we are going to beat these guys, which Stanford did.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - TheWildJacko - 02-20-2022

(02-20-2022, 11:31 PM)Maple Leaf Wrote:  
(02-20-2022, 11:16 PM)Phogge Wrote:  Didn’t Lottich go crazy against OSU one night when Stanford was way behind late?

Whenever somebody comes from way back I think of Billy Casper and Reuben Mayes.

Chris Hernandez did it against the ducks in the duck pond, IIRC in Monty's last year.  Hernandez dived for a lose ball which went out-abounds to the ducks, Hernandez ended up at the feet of a couple of duck students who were jacked up and yelling in his face, when Hernandez got up the look on his face was one we are going to beat these guys, which Stanford did.

Lottich scored 15 including the game-winning shot at the buzzer in a comeback victory against WSU that same year.

RE: WBB: Stanford @ Oregon Sun 1pm - CompSci87 - 02-21-2022

(02-20-2022, 06:19 PM)Madera86 Wrote:  
(02-20-2022, 04:48 PM)CompSci87 Wrote:  
(02-20-2022, 04:11 PM)Madera86 Wrote:  Haley Jones was remarkably composed in the post-game interview. Like there was never a doubt in her mind.

Where did you catch the interview? The ESPN app or web stream, or ...? ESPN2 went right to prerecorded programming.

On the audio feed from gostanford. It was on the court/sideline.

Thanks to RuralFan for pointing out that we can replay the audio feeds on Gostanford.com! The Oregon game is here, including Haley's interview at the end: https://gostanford.com/watch/?Archive=3543&type=Archive

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - 81alum - 02-21-2022

Highlights:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7WH_tGoY4w&t=170s

The FBC has a Tara presser up but unfortunately it is from the first Oregon game.  I can't find a press conference from yesterday.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - mbdude - 02-21-2022

Stanford Women's Basketball on Instagram: “Game on the line, nothing new for @haley.jonesss ??? ⁣⁣ #GoStanford”

another view of Haley's shot

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - crackpot - 02-21-2022

My dumb question of the day.

Oregon misses and they're fighting for the rebound and it (at least to the refs) goes off of Cam. There is one second left on the shot clock. Oregon is then inbounding with 20 seconds on the shot clock. Shouldn't it have been left at one? If they would claim Cam had possession, it would have been switched to 30.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - BobK - 02-21-2022

I thought the same as you. Thought it a miss by the refs.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - bl82 - 02-21-2022

Regarding Haley’s three-point play at the end, did anyone else see the slight hesitation pump where it looks as if she is going to pass to Kiki…but then realizes Sabally is stepping in front of the pass so she shoots over Sabally instead? If that is true, it makes the shot that much more amazing.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - martyup - 02-21-2022

Incredible shot.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - TheWildJacko - 02-21-2022

One thing to note about Cam’s performance: even though she did not have her best game, she did provide one of the most crucial baskets of the matchup, the effortless bucket in the paint to tie it at 60. If she’s not there to make that shot, it’s a whole different story.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - Spiny_Norman - 02-21-2022

(02-21-2022, 10:06 AM)martyup Wrote:  Incredible shot.

And she did not travel. This replay (at about the 24-25 second mark) shows that as she fell back, Jones's right foot landed initially on the Oregon player's shoe, then slid off onto the court where it remained in place as she shot the ball. 

[twitter]https://twitter.com/espnW/status/1495536530605154309[/twitter]

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - TonyLima - 02-21-2022

(02-21-2022, 10:36 AM)TheWildJacko Wrote:  One thing to note about Cam’s performance: even though she did not have her best game, she did provide one of the most crucial baskets of the matchup, the effortless bucket in the paint to tie it at 60. If she’s not there to make that shot, it’s a whole different story.

Kiki would have made that shot and a few more.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - BobK - 02-21-2022

However Tony Brink made it
And it was big

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - martyup - 02-21-2022

(02-21-2022, 10:41 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:  
(02-21-2022, 10:06 AM)martyup Wrote:  Incredible shot.

And she did not travel. This replay (at about the 24-25 second mark) shows that as she fell back, Jones's right foot landed initially on the Oregon player's shoe, then slid off onto the court where it remained in place as she shot the ball. 

[twitter]https://twitter.com/espnW/status/1495536530605154309[/twitter]

How did Sabally fail to block that shot?  She just stood there and watched the ball go up and in the basket.  She put her hands up too late.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - jonnyss - 02-21-2022

(02-21-2022, 02:48 PM)martyup Wrote:  How did Sabally fail to block that shot?  She just stood there and watched the ball go up and in the basket.  She put her hands up too late.

4 factors occur to me:

sabally was guarding kiki; pinto was guarding haley. kiki created room for haley by pushing her defender, sabally, away from the play. (they were battling forcefully. kiki could easily have been called for a moving screen; sabally could have been called for impeding kiki.). i doubt sabally could have gotten close enough to haley to help without leaving kiki. but had she left kiki to double haley, haley would have passed to kiki for the easy bucket. we saw haley/kiki connect on that high/low several times.

i would guess that, like the rest of us, sabally didn't expect haley to shoot, after the whistle, as she was falling down. players tend to relax after a whistle.

the legs of the fallen primary defender, pinto, were in the way of sabally stepping forward to get close enough to block. stepping on pinto might well have injured one of them or both.

lastly, sabally had 4 fouls at that point; stepping towards a driving haley risked a fifth.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - jonnyss - 02-21-2022

(02-21-2022, 09:55 AM)crackpot Wrote:  My dumb question of the day.

Oregon misses and they're fighting for the rebound and it (at least to the refs) goes off of Cam. There is one second left on the shot clock. Oregon is then inbounding with 20 seconds on the shot clock. Shouldn't it have been left at one? If they would claim Cam had possession, it would have been switched to 30.

my guess is that the refs called it an offensive rebound. starting in 2019-20, o rebounds (and defensive fouls and kicked balls) re-set the clock to 20 (if it was below 20); d rebounds set the clock at 30.

link

or are you saying the ball never hit the rim? in that case the clock should stay at 1.

see also:  link which describes resetting to 20 seconds after a throw-in by the offense. this link is for NCAA men, but i suspect the same applies for the women.

RE: WBB: Stanford @ Oregon Sun 1pm - teejers1 - 02-21-2022

(02-20-2022, 04:22 PM)paloalto Wrote:  I don't expect anyone to agree with this.  I thought Stanford was the beneficiary of many questionable calls.

Both of Haley's "and ones" late were bad calls.  The first was not a foul at all; the second was not a foul on the shot.  Those were pretty critical calls that went Stanford's way.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Oregon 62 - Spike - 02-21-2022

If Haley had blown that final possession, we all would have said oh shit she did it again. 
Instead, she is a total hero. 
Life’s like that sometimes.

RE: WBB: Stanford @ Oregon Sun 1pm - pefloresjr - 02-21-2022

(02-21-2022, 04:25 PM)teejers1 Wrote:  
(02-20-2022, 04:22 PM)paloalto Wrote:  I don't expect anyone to agree with this.  I thought Stanford was the beneficiary of many questionable calls.

Both of Haley's "and ones" late were bad calls.  The first was not a foul at all; the second was not a foul on the shot.  Those were pretty critical calls that went Stanford's way.

I guess if you're going to be wrong, you might as well double down.  The defender on the final play literally threw herself from the side into Haley's path and flopped on the ground trying to get a call even though she had been beaten to the path to the rim by Haley.  Before the contact, the defenders entire right leg and hip were behind Haley.  In no know part of the multi-verse had she established a defensive position to merit a charge.  Also, she was going up for the shot but had to significantly alter when the defender threw herself into Haley's path.  It ended up taking a long time because she fell backwards, but the offensive player gets to finish their shot even if it is altered.  The one before that had much less obvious contact but the defender there ran her body into Haley's as she was going up for the layup.  Those are both fouls.  The way the team played for a lot of the game, I thought we didn't deserve to win.  The way Haley played in the fourth quarter was spectacular and she and the team deserved it in every way.  It was not dependent on the officiating.  

Cheers,
Pete F.

RE: WBB: Stanford @ Oregon Sun 1pm - teejers1 - 02-21-2022

(02-21-2022, 04:53 PM)pefloresjr Wrote:  
(02-21-2022, 04:25 PM)teejers1 Wrote:  
(02-20-2022, 04:22 PM)paloalto Wrote:  I don't expect anyone to agree with this.  I thought Stanford was the beneficiary of many questionable calls.

Both of Haley's "and ones" late were bad calls.  The first was not a foul at all; the second was not a foul on the shot.  Those were pretty critical calls that went Stanford's way.

I guess if you're going to be wrong, you might as well double down.  The defender on the final play literally threw herself from the side into Haley's path and flopped on the ground trying to get a call even though she had been beaten to the path to the rim by Haley.  Before the contact, the defenders entire right leg and hip were behind Haley.  In no know part of the multi-verse had she established a defensive position to merit a charge.  Also, she was going up for the shot but had to significantly alter when the defender threw herself into Haley's path.  It ended up taking a long time because she fell backwards, but the offensive player gets to finish their shot even if it is altered.  The one before that had much less obvious contact but the defender there ran her body into Haley's as she was going up for the layup.  Those are both fouls.  The way the team played for a lot of the game, I thought we didn't deserve to win.  The way Haley played in the fourth quarter was spectacular and she and the team deserved it in every way.  It was not dependent on the officiating.  

Cheers,
Pete F.

Haley was in the midst of a spin move.  Yeah, she shoots a lot when she makes that move, but she could just have easily have passed.  And in the moment, she stopped, heard the whistle, and then threw up the shot (she is a smart player).  But it's just as possible that she was going to pass there.

If you know the shot is going up and can tell that from the flow of the play - that's one thing.  But don't reward people for throwing up stuff after a whistle when you can literally "see" their mind process ("Hey, there's a whistle, might as well throw it up there").  But hey, maybe you liked James Harden's patented move of getting fouled by defender who has arms forward and then jacking up three, which he never would have even tried to do, but for hearing the whistle.  Me?  I prefer the NBA crackdown on that move.

BTW, I never said the game result was "dependent on the officiating."  Those are your words.  The first "and one" was bad foul call was worth one point; the second and-one . . . we'll never know.  Maybe it was worth 3 points, or maybe it was worth nothing because we don't know what Stanford would have done on the possession.  Plus, I have no doubt that there were calls that went Oregon's way, too.