The CardBoard
WBB: Stanford 77 WSU 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 77 WSU 69 (/thread-6715.html)


WBB: Stanford 77 WSU 69 - 81alum - 02-07-2014

Overview

WSU gave us a serious scare, pulling into the lead with only 9 minutes left and keeping it close all the way.  In the first half, they stayed close with defense.  In the second, they stayed close with offensive production from their two penetrating guards.  A serious flaw in our defense was exposed tonight, and we were somewhat lucky to come out with a win.  This might be the closest that WSU has ever come to beating Stanford in the 50+ game series.

Stanford 28 WSU 24 at the half:

WSU is playing a 3-2 matchup zone and frustrating our ability to pass the ball inside to Chiney, who still has 12 points on 6/8 shooting.  Those points have come on O boards, jumpshots, and press breaks more than her usual layups from in close.  Much more troubling are the 11 turnovers we have in the first half--often on passes to Chiney that don't make it through the zone.  That plus mediocre three point shooting from everyone besides Greenfield has depressed our first half offensive output.  We have taken 30 shots, WSU has taken 32.

Second Half

The second half of the game was as if two different teams came back from the locker rooms.  Stanford solved the WSU zone fairly well and was able to pass the ball inside to Chiney in a way that they could not in the first half.  I really don't know what changed so radically to make that possible, but Chiney wound up scoring twice as many points in the second half as in the first, and her shots were much easier ones.

But WSU embarrassed our defense in the second half.  Their guards Presley and Galdeira drove to the basket, picked up fouls, and they were aided by Sage Romber who hit 4 treys.  We did not seem to have anyone who could stay with them, and even switched to zone for a spell to try to cut off their driving lanes.  It did not help that the refs were reluctant to call charges and consistently favored the offensive player--even when the defender was set.  (Oh--except for Chiney on the baseline who was called for a charge when her defender was shuffling!)

WSU took the lead 55-54 with 9 minutes left in the game.  The game really looked seriously in doubt, as our offense was relapsing to a Chiney-only offense and our defense was being cut to ribbons on the dribble drives.  What really saved us were free throws--we did not take a single free throw in the first half, and the second half did not start out well on that score either.  But finally we got some calls and made 10 in a row at one point.

From the 9:00 mark when we trailed, Karlie and Taylor each made a trey, Amber made a jumper, Chiney made a layup, and we made 11 free throws.  That proved to be enough.

Performances

Chiney looked limited in the first half and UNlimited in the second.  She wound up with 36 points and 17 rebounds, and was 6/6 on free throws down the stretch.

Amber chipped in 11 on 4/10 shooting, but it looked like hard work.  Taylor Greenfield and Karlie Samuelson were vital, each hitting 3/4 treys, or the game would have gone the other way.  All in all, it certainly seemed like a poor offensive performance, except that the scoreboard shows us with nearly 80 points.  Rather, I would be much more worried about the defensive lapses, which were eerily similar to what we allowed Brittany Boyd to do to us.

Clearly Tara also was deeply concerned about the WSU guards driving--and tried zone and then put Chiney on a guard to try and limit the damage.  Amber picked up 3 fouls early, and Lili and Karlie did not seem to be able to handle WSU's dynamic duo.  It could be that our "scouting report defense" can somewhat limit one guard but cannot shut down two easily. 

We dramatically reduced our turnovers in the second half--but did not assist well, winding up with only 12 assists to go with 14 turnovers for the game.  Mikaela was held to 4 and Lili to 2. 

Parting Thoughts:

We must work on ways to shut down guards who can penetrate from a standing start at the perimeter.  This may simply be a factor of Lili and Karlie being frosh and not yet experienced enough to handle that level of defense, but last year it was often Sara who was our shut down defender--remember her play against Michigan?-- and Tara barely played her tonight.  I am now fairly certain that there must be something amiss. 

Re: WBB: Stanford 77 WSU 69 - WAcard - 02-07-2014

It's called terrible reffing, there was total inconsistency in the calls, Chineys was not a charge and Ambers was not a block. The weakest part of our D was not the perimeter as we were being called so you have to channel, it was our weakside help that was not there to cut it off as they were not going to kick very well just go for the hoop. That will be shored up by next game. Sara James cannot play as she fouls, look at her minutes and she picked up 2 fouls, 1 running back on D!!!!

It was 1 of those games that you needed to grind out as when you cannot read the refs you have to play really smart.

As an add on, I liked the double on Lia as she is not going to pass I just thought it was  too far away from the basket, let her get in the arc and then double. We also need to run more zone as we clearly are not used to it and it will help us down the road, the 3s in the corner were due to Chiney over playing on the wing, she needs to hedge but not commit and stay on the low side so the guard moves over and then she can also cover the corner. I would love to see a 3 2 match up zone, they are difficult for any team to figure out and we have the length to take a step off and still alter the shot but be able to double the driver.

Re: WBB: Stanford 77 WSU 69 - 81alum - 02-07-2014

(02-07-2014, 09:25 PM)WAcard link Wrote:It's called terrible reffing, there was total inconsistency in the calls, Chineys was not a charge and Ambers was not a block. The weakest part of our D was not the perimeter as we were being called so you have to channel, it was our weakside help that was not there to cut it off as they were not going to kick very well just go for the hoop. That will be shored up by next game. Sara James cannot play as she fouls, look at her minutes and she picked up 2 fouls, 1 running back on D!!!!

It was 1 of those games that you needed to grind out as when you cannot read the refs you have to play really smart.

As an add on, I liked the double on Lia as she is not going to pass I just thought it was  too far away from the basket, let her get in the arc and then double.
Good observations.  As you suggest, shifting over to cut off a driving guard after they get past the perimeter player only works if the refs are willing to call charge.  We probably should have done the same at the other end, and Amber and Lili in particular should have driven more to the basket than they did. 

Yes, that "charge" on Chiney was silly.  Ros said the "block" on Amber was a 50/50 call, but I think she was just trying to prove she is not hopelessly pro-Stanford in the broadcast.  When I see that the defender has two feet planted for half a second and that the offensive player just runs straight into her--well, that is a charge in my book.  Kind of hard to defend at all if you are not allowed to get in the way!

Re: WBB: Stanford 77 WSU 69 - WAcard - 02-07-2014

The other thing I think we seem to take for granted is that Chiney gets fouled a lot and the refs don't call them, they call us for the same fouls that Chiney has to endure every game. Just look at the disparity in the calls WSU was in the bonus and it seemed to take forever for us to get there, if we get the same calls, WSU wouldn't have been in the game.

Re: WBB: Stanford 77 WSU 69 - M T - 02-08-2014

Not our best game, but I think WSU had a lot to do with that.  Chiney is so impressive.

It looked to me like their roster-listed-6'4" player was a couple of inches taller than Chiney.  She did win the tip.

I've been biting my tongue all season on just how bad the traveling calls have been all season in all the games I've seen (not just PAC-12).  Missing calls when they should be calls, making calls when they shouldn't.  But, come on, refs, since when did the triple jump become part of basketball?  No way can an official claim they can't see the ball handler skip in toward the goal?  Left, left, right.  There was one point where they were showing highlights of Galdeira, which included two drives that included three-foot skips with her foot.  (At the 1:30 point in the broadcast, with 7:50 left in the game: 1st highlight: Right, Right, Left -- this was the block foul called on Amber at 13:27 in the 2nd; last highlight: Left, Left, Right from 2nd 9:41)  Another example is at 8:08 left in the 1st (R, R, L).

Good athletes can make these violations look natural, but that doesn't mean they get to play by different rules.  One of the officials should have spotted one of those travels and called it. 

I didn't appreciate the soccer tackle of Amber by Galdeira being called a foul on Amber (1st 16:22).  But what I noticed is that this seemed to be the start of a period in which Amber didn't play very hard. A lot of walking around, and reaching and watching.  Tara took her out at 13:44 and Amber was better when she came back in.  Ros later commented about this lack of energy.


The officials in this game were  Penny Davis, Cheryl Flores, Michelle Russl.  These aren't novices.  One has refereed for 18 years, one for at least 10, each of those with WNBA & NBA (development or summer league play).  One is based in the Washington state area, one in the bay area.
(If you want to get to know these officials by face, I believe it is Cheryl Flores at the 1:00 mark (start of 2nd half) in the broadcast, and I'm guessing it is Michelle Russi at the 1:31 mark)

I ran across an interesting site:
http://www.wbbstate.com/officials/michelle-russi/13
Anybody here a member of that site?
Another interesting page on WNBA refs & some of their tendencies
http://www.swishappeal.com/2013/7/20/4541716/2013-wnba-referee-data-what-weve-got-so-far


Re: WBB: Stanford 77 WSU 69 - Griffins78 - 02-08-2014

(02-08-2014, 06:08 AM)MT link Wrote:I didn't appreciate the soccer tackle of Amber by Galdeira being called a foul on Amber (1st 16:22).  But what I noticed is that this seemed to be the start of a period in which Amber didn't play very hard. A lot of walking around, and reaching and watching.  Tara took her out at 13:44 and Amber was better when she came back in.  Ros later commented about this lack of energy.
i agree. I have never seen anyone do that in basketball. I replayed that over and over. The WSU player did a soccer style flop (the same kind of overly dramatic flop later in the game when the WSU player flings herself backwards under the legs of Reuf as shes coming in for the rebound and then grabs Reufs leg to protect herself and Reuf hits the floor and is down in pain). So against Amber, the WSU player flings her head backwards and flops while kicking her legs out in the other direction to trip Amber. Kinda like an OL leg whip.

Re: WBB: Stanford 77 WSU 69 - 81alum - 02-08-2014

Tara quote from AP:

Quote:As for Ogwumike, VanDerveer was effusive.
"She is a competitor and she puts the team on her back," VanDerveer said. "Chiney is so awesome."
"But some of the others were not on their game," she said. "We have to evaluate where we are as a team."

Does that last point sound like Tara might change the starters or substantially shift play time?  If so, what sort of changes should we anticipate?  Who in particular do you suppose Tara meant by "some of the others"? 

Now I'm curious if she shakes it up for Washington...