The CardBoard
WBB: Stanford 72 U SC 65 - 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 72 U SC 65 (/thread-15333.html)

Pages: 1 2

WBB: Stanford 72 U SC 65 - 81alum - 12-31-2017

Preliminary:
While our win over an excellent UCLA team certainly buoyed the spirits and showed that our talent really can be harnessed, it will all be for naught if we don't follow up with a win over USC this afternoon.  Sagarin has us back at 26, UCLA falls to 15, and USC is at 38.  USC is at 10-2 with losses only to 19 A&M and Friday to 20 Ca l.  Other than their two losses they have not played anyone very good--their strength of schedule is 120 and their only win over a major conference is Purdue. 

The same five players have started all 12 of their games and each gets more than 30 minutes--so possibly we can try exhausting them by the end of the game.  6'2" forward senior Kristen Simon is their leading scorer at 19 points and 9 rebounds a game, but the next three starters also all average in the mid teens--so it is not easy to focus too much on any single player.  Little sophomore Minyon Moore is their assist leader and second leading scorer at 15ppg, but she doesn't take or make many treys, so I presume she is a slasher who needs to be kept out of the paint.  Another small guard Aliyah Mazyck is their best three point threat at 34%, and  UConn transfer Sadie Edwards is their 4th, but she makes a whopping 47% of her baskets and 32% of her treys.  She must get to the rim a lot. 

So they play 4 guards and a forward and will put great pressure on our guards.  I imagine we will try clogging the paint again since it worked well against Canada, and perhaps we could see some smaller lineups.  Maybe Carrington and McPhee out there at the same time, for a change? 

Overview:

SC outplayed us in the first quarter, but we gradually figured out how to defend them and edged them each of the next three quarters for a too-close-for-comfort win.  McPhee was outstanding in so many different ways today, not only with 21 points but with 8 rebounds, 3 assists, and 2 blocks.  And after Sadie Edwards repeatedly torched us in the early going, it was McPhee who was assigned to guard her and keep her under control.  She would have scored more except--despite being tripped, shoved to the ground, bumped on every shot, and hacked, the refs never called an and-one for her--a particularly egregious job of officiating that had the crowd booing lustily.

Flow of the game:

Smith, McPhee, Sniezek, and Williams each got over 30 minutes, so they seem to be jelling as the core of the first team.  Dodson started and seemed to play well, but got only 7 minutes, with most of the rest of the time being split between Johnson and Fingall.  Carrington relieved McPhee for 10 minutes, and Wilson helped relieve the small guards. 

Tempie warned us that SC was very athletic, played a lot like Ohio State, and was a much more competitive team under returning head coach Mark Trahk.  They were all of that in the first quarter, getting out to a 20-8 lead.  After a brilliant Dodson layup--fed by Sniezek, we simply could not get to the rim at all and hung in only by making a couple of treys--Williams was productive in this quarter or we would have been buried.  Meanwhile, the SC offense was quite effective at punishing double-teams.  They would work the ball in close and wait for the double to come over to block the player, then would often pass behind the double to an open player for an easy layup.  It worked repeatedly and I began to understand how guard Sadie Edwards could be hitting such a high percentage of shots.  I thought it was brilliant, actually, since it punished what Tara does best--doubling down on hot players.  Our offense was not working well and our defense worked intermittently, and we were down 20-15 after a quarter.

The second quarter actually showed off the Princeton to good effect.  Smith passed to Sniezek on a back door cut for an easy layup on one possession, and then Sniezek make a perfect trey after receiving a cross-court pass from Carrington on the next.  Just like that Sniezek became an offensive threat and all the motion began to pay off.  We reached the half down 34-33, a half that seemed excessively physical and with few fouls being called even when obvious.

The third quarter started well with Smith and McPhee making treys, but we still weren't making many points at the rim.  Free throws and a trey by Fingall gave us twenty points for the quarter, and meanwhile McPhee was guarding Sadie Edwards and doing a better job of keeping her under control that we did early.  We finished the 3rd up 53-50, and the tension was thick.

The fourth went better.  McPhee got a layp and then another trey, and while the lead varied between 3 and 9 we kept ahead until SC started pressing and we beat the press with McPhee layups at the other end.  We "beat" SC by 4 points in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th quarters all--chiefly because our defense on Edwards got sorted out and because we started sinking some treys.  Then end, however, was sloppy, when we missed every other free throw, and committed a last minute turnover--we kept the SC hopes alive longer than they should have lasted.

Performances:

We shot 45%, and 50% in the second half.  SC was held to 32%.  Just like UCLA, we needed that, because SC took 62 shots and we took only 55.  This seems to be a pattern for us.

McPhee of course was outstanding--see the overall description.  It was clear that keeping her away from the rim was a focal point of the SC scouting report, but she got enough help from others to loosen the defense eventually.  But consider her defense too and then you can appreciate how important a player she is for all facets of the game.  Also note that she had 5 offensive rebounds.  She has become the real team leader on the floor.

As for our turnovers, we were no better than the last few games.  We had 18 of them, 10 coming on steals.  No progress.  As for free throw shooting--a marginal improvement as we got up to 70%.  SC shot 83%.  And the final of the "big three" areas we needed to improve--getting back on defense?  We gave up only 4 fast break points so that seems to be improving. 

Sniezek was our rebound leader--and not for the first time.  She needed 2 more points (she had 8 ) to earn a double-double--she had 10 rebounds.  She also delivered 6 assists to 1 turnover. 

Williams had a good game--starting like last time and scoring 13 on 4/9 shooting, to go with 2 assists, 2 steals, and no turnovers.

Smith was the other double digit scorer with 13 points also on 4/9 shooting, to go with 6 rebounds.  Unfortunately, she was also our turnover leader with 6, although I did not notice them at the time. 

Fingall did not duplicate her stellar performances against Tennessee and UCL A, but she played 17 useful minutes and scored 6 including a trey, and added 3 rebounds, 2 assists, and 2 blocks.

Conclusion:

The team would have fallen apart and lost this game without McPhee.  Carrington is still showing rust.  Wilson is settling in as a 30 minute starter.  Dodson is not integrating into the team as quickly as we might like to see.  Those are the main take-aways.  Still, it is a win against a team with 10 wins, and there is enough progress to continue to be hopeful.

Now we get to see if we can take our newfound winning ways on the road to Arizona and hostile Arizona State, which is doing quite well. 






WBB: Stanford 72 U SC 65 - 81alum - 12-31-2017

Preliminary:
While our win over an excellent UCLA team certainly buoyed the spirits and showed that our talent really can be harnessed, it will all be for naught if we don't follow up with a win over USC this afternoon.  Sagarin has us back at 26, UCLA falls to 15, and USC is at 38.  USC is at 10-2 with losses only to 19 A&M and Friday to 20 Ca l.  Other than their two losses they have not played anyone very good--their strength of schedule is 120 and their only win over a major conference is Purdue. 

The same five players have started all 12 of their games and each gets more than 30 minutes--so possibly we can try exhausting them by the end of the game.  6'2" forward senior Kristen Simon is their leading scorer at 19 points and 9 rebounds a game, but the next three starters also all average in the mid teens--so it is not easy to focus too much on any single player.  Little sophomore Minyon Moore is their assist leader and second leading scorer at 15ppg, but she doesn't take or make many treys, so I presume she is a slasher who needs to be kept out of the paint.  Another small guard Aliyah Mazyck is their best three point threat at 34%, and  UConn transfer Sadie Edwards is their 4th, but she makes a whopping 47% of her baskets and 32% of her treys.  She must get to the rim a lot. 

So they play 4 guards and a forward and will put great pressure on our guards.  I imagine we will try clogging the paint again since it worked well against Canada, and perhaps we could see some smaller lineups.  Maybe Carrington and McPhee out there at the same time, for a change? 

Overview:

SC outplayed us in the first quarter, but we gradually figured out how to defend them and edged them each of the next three quarters for a too-close-for-comfort win.  McPhee was outstanding in so many different ways today, not only with 21 points but with 8 rebounds, 3 assists, and 2 blocks.  And after Sadie Edwards repeatedly torched us in the early going, it was McPhee who was assigned to guard her and keep her under control.  She would have scored more except--despite being tripped, shoved to the ground, bumped on every shot, and hacked, the refs never called an and-one for her--a particularly egregious job of officiating that had the crowd booing lustily.

Flow of the game:

Smith, McPhee, Sniezek, and Williams each got over 30 minutes, so they seem to be jelling as the core of the first team.  Dodson started and seemed to play well, but got only 7 minutes, with most of the rest of the time being split between Johnson and Fingall.  Carrington relieved McPhee for 10 minutes, and Wilson helped relieve the small guards. 

Tempie warned us that SC was very athletic, played a lot like Ohio State, and was a much more competitive team under returning head coach Mark Trahk.  They were all of that in the first quarter, getting out to a 20-8 lead.  After a brilliant Dodson layup--fed by Sniezek, we simply could not get to the rim at all and hung in only by making a couple of treys--Williams was productive in this quarter or we would have been buried.  Meanwhile, the SC offense was quite effective at punishing double-teams.  They would work the ball in close and wait for the double to come over to block the player, then would often pass behind the double to an open player for an easy layup.  It worked repeatedly and I began to understand how guard Sadie Edwards could be hitting such a high percentage of shots.  I thought it was brilliant, actually, since it punished what Tara does best--doubling down on hot players.  Our offense was not working well and our defense worked intermittently, and we were down 20-15 after a quarter.

The second quarter actually showed off the Princeton to good effect.  Smith passed to Sniezek on a back door cut for an easy layup on one possession, and then Sniezek make a perfect trey after receiving a cross-court pass from Carrington on the next.  Just like that Sniezek became an offensive threat and all the motion began to pay off.  We reached the half down 34-33, a half that seemed excessively physical and with few fouls being called even when obvious.

The third quarter started well with Smith and McPhee making treys, but we still weren't making many points at the rim.  Free throws and a trey by Fingall gave us twenty points for the quarter, and meanwhile McPhee was guarding Sadie Edwards and doing a better job of keeping her under control that we did early.  We finished the 3rd up 53-50, and the tension was thick.

The fourth went better.  McPhee got a layp and then another trey, and while the lead varied between 3 and 9 we kept ahead until SC started pressing and we beat the press with McPhee layups at the other end.  We "beat" SC by 4 points in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th quarters all--chiefly because our defense on Edwards got sorted out and because we started sinking some treys.  Then end, however, was sloppy, when we missed every other free throw, and committed a last minute turnover--we kept the SC hopes alive longer than they should have lasted.

Performances:

We shot 45%, and 50% in the second half.  SC was held to 32%.  Just like UCLA, we needed that, because SC took 62 shots and we took only 55.  This seems to be a pattern for us.

McPhee of course was outstanding--see the overall description.  It was clear that keeping her away from the rim was a focal point of the SC scouting report, but she got enough help from others to loosen the defense eventually.  But consider her defense too and then you can appreciate how important a player she is for all facets of the game.  Also note that she had 5 offensive rebounds.  She has become the real team leader on the floor.

As for our turnovers, we were no better than the last few games.  We had 18 of them, 10 coming on steals.  No progress.  As for free throw shooting--a marginal improvement as we got up to 70%.  SC shot 83%.  And the final of the "big three" areas we needed to improve--getting back on defense?  We gave up only 4 fast break points so that seems to be improving. 

Sniezek was our rebound leader--and not for the first time.  She needed 2 more points (she had 8 ) to earn a double-double--she had 10 rebounds.  She also delivered 6 assists to 1 turnover. 

Williams had a good game--starting like last time and scoring 13 on 4/9 shooting, to go with 2 assists, 2 steals, and no turnovers.

Smith was the other double digit scorer with 13 points also on 4/9 shooting, to go with 6 rebounds.  Unfortunately, she was also our turnover leader with 6, although I did not notice them at the time. 

Fingall did not duplicate her stellar performances against Tennessee and UCL A, but she played 17 useful minutes and scored 6 including a trey, and added 3 rebounds, 2 assists, and 2 blocks.

Conclusion:

The team would have fallen apart and lost this game without McPhee.  Carrington is still showing rust.  Wilson is settling in as a 30 minute starter.  Dodson is not integrating into the team as quickly as we might like to see.  Those are the main take-aways.  Still, it is a win against a team with 10 wins, and there is enough progress to continue to be hopeful.

Now we get to see if we can take our newfound winning ways on the road to Arizona and hostile Arizona State, which is doing quite well. 






Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - mbdude - 12-31-2017

and most likely we will see a zone defense

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - mbdude - 12-31-2017

and most likely we will see a zone defense

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - BobK - 12-31-2017

Jordan Adams with several ACLs and a Masters is a very heady player.  Minyon a great driver

After 8 years of poor coaching Mark is back and already recruiting well

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - BobK - 12-31-2017

Jordan Adams with several ACLs and a Masters is a very heady player.  Minyon a great driver

After 8 years of poor coaching Mark is back and already recruiting well

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - TheFarm07 - 12-31-2017

(12-31-2017, 10:22 AM)mbdude link Wrote:and most likely we will see a zone defense

It seems like we see a zone defense every game or at least most games, it feels like. If we can't implement our Princeton offense against a zone, was it worth it to change to such a system? Is it worth all the turnovers and the offensive struggles, if we can't use our main offensive schemes most of the time? It feels like, IMHO, that the time and effort would have been better spent in another fashion if our opponent can just use the zone and negate all the preparation and time we took to learn a new complicated and difficult to master strategy.

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - TheFarm07 - 12-31-2017

(12-31-2017, 10:22 AM)mbdude link Wrote:and most likely we will see a zone defense

It seems like we see a zone defense every game or at least most games, it feels like. If we can't implement our Princeton offense against a zone, was it worth it to change to such a system? Is it worth all the turnovers and the offensive struggles, if we can't use our main offensive schemes most of the time? It feels like, IMHO, that the time and effort would have been better spent in another fashion if our opponent can just use the zone and negate all the preparation and time we took to learn a new complicated and difficult to master strategy.

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - CompSci87 - 12-31-2017

Is there any offensive scheme that works well against both man and zone?

We beat UCLA's 2-3 zone with a big who can get in the circle and reliably hit the free throw line jumper, and who's also a good passer (namely Fingall). That reminded me of Ruef, and makes me optimistic that we'll be able to deal with zone going forward.

Another interesting thing recently was Stanford playing a little zone themselves. Tara doesn't like to play zone, which is fine, but I've always wondered if part of our team's vulnerability to zone is that they don't play it themselves. I'm sure the scout team shows them zone in practice, but maybe playing it yourself still gives a better feel for how it works and how to beat it. ...Or maybe I'm all wet.  :-X

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - CompSci87 - 12-31-2017

Is there any offensive scheme that works well against both man and zone?

We beat UCLA's 2-3 zone with a big who can get in the circle and reliably hit the free throw line jumper, and who's also a good passer (namely Fingall). That reminded me of Ruef, and makes me optimistic that we'll be able to deal with zone going forward.

Another interesting thing recently was Stanford playing a little zone themselves. Tara doesn't like to play zone, which is fine, but I've always wondered if part of our team's vulnerability to zone is that they don't play it themselves. I'm sure the scout team shows them zone in practice, but maybe playing it yourself still gives a better feel for how it works and how to beat it. ...Or maybe I'm all wet.  :-X

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - TheFarm07 - 12-31-2017

(12-31-2017, 11:03 AM)CompSci87 link Wrote:Is there any offensive scheme that works well against both man and zone?

What does UConn use?  :)

But seriously, has there been any other recent examples of a big shift in offensive schemes from a major coach or program, like Tara has done? We talked about her moving on from the triangle after Chiney graduated, but other programs have had superstar players come and gone and whether they reload instantly (like UConn) or whether it takes a couple years, their next star player isn't a carbon copy of their last one (i.e. Breanna Stewart's strengths/weaknesses weren't the same as Maya Moore's).

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - TheFarm07 - 12-31-2017

(12-31-2017, 11:03 AM)CompSci87 link Wrote:Is there any offensive scheme that works well against both man and zone?

What does UConn use?  :)

But seriously, has there been any other recent examples of a big shift in offensive schemes from a major coach or program, like Tara has done? We talked about her moving on from the triangle after Chiney graduated, but other programs have had superstar players come and gone and whether they reload instantly (like UConn) or whether it takes a couple years, their next star player isn't a carbon copy of their last one (i.e. Breanna Stewart's strengths/weaknesses weren't the same as Maya Moore's).

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - qwerty49 - 12-31-2017

We know that passing and shooting will beat the zone, but it’s just a matter of which twin shows up -

“Good” Stanford gets the midrange shot (from Fingall, Orrange, etc) which opens everything up.

“Bad” Stanford dribbles and passes endlessly around the top of the arc until someone throws up a 3 or turns it over.

If Tara gets this team into the post-season it would rank as one of her greatest coaching achievements IMHO. It would be nice to get everyone healthy and take a run at it.  I think we need some on-court leadership to develop as well.


Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - qwerty49 - 12-31-2017

We know that passing and shooting will beat the zone, but it’s just a matter of which twin shows up -

“Good” Stanford gets the midrange shot (from Fingall, Orrange, etc) which opens everything up.

“Bad” Stanford dribbles and passes endlessly around the top of the arc until someone throws up a 3 or turns it over.

If Tara gets this team into the post-season it would rank as one of her greatest coaching achievements IMHO. It would be nice to get everyone healthy and take a run at it.  I think we need some on-court leadership to develop as well.


Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - 81alum - 12-31-2017

Tara has always adjusted her offense to the personnel she has had.  This is the fourth major offense at least--the pre-triangle offense was much more run and gun, though I am not sure what it was called.  The triangle lasted as long as she had dominant post players.  Then there was the pick and roll that was designed to feature Lili and Amber.  And now the Princeton, which is designed around a team which is not burdened with big, slow (or dominant) posts. 

I get the sense that Tara is also responding to changes in the game that favor face ups and movement over back-to-the-basket post play.  She may just be tired of all the sumo wrestling defense in the paint and is eager to spread the floor and turn it into a game of movement. 

It also used to be exceedingly rare for major teams to play zone.  I think we see a lot of it because we were viewed as being vulnerable to it.  But given that we seem to be learning how to take care of business against the zone, we may actually get to see more of the Princeton at work.

Apparently, the Princeton can be used against the zone, according to the high authority of the internet.  But we don't seem to do that.  The Princeton takes a minimum of about 15 seconds to run and so the full court press can hamper the time required to run it.  It has a sequence of about 5 decisions to be made.  Think of it as basketball's version of the read-option offense in football only more complex and a little slower, and you will get the idea.   

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - JJJ - 12-31-2017

Turnovers continue to plague us... :'(

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - JJJ - 12-31-2017

It could've been a lot worse than 20-15 after 1Q.
Kiana Williams hit a couple of 3s and two FT. I'm going to call her "the assassin" because she can be deadly from anywhere.
Nice to see offense from that position.

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - 2006alum - 12-31-2017

Given what 81 said about USC having a short bench and playing its starters 30+ mins a game, I'm hopeful that if we can keep it within 10 by halftime, our deeper bench can rally in the second half.

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - JJJ - 12-31-2017

We actually took a lead a couple of times, but we head to the locker room down 34-33.
Sniezek with a lay-up and a trey!
Looking forward to the write-up.
It's a ballgame!

Re: WBB: U SC at Stanford 1:00pm - FarmDad.01 - 12-31-2017

Kianna really impresses. And Marta with as many points as Britt??