The CardBoard
WBB: Stanford 90 UCSB 34 - 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 90 UCSB 34 (/thread-8536.html)


WBB: Stanford 90 UCSB 34 - 81alum - 12-28-2014

Overview:
This was a feel-good romp in which all 15 players played at least 5 minutes and 12 scored.  Bri Roberson and Brittany McPhee are emerging as increasingly important bench players.

Before and after the game:
Before the game Kate talked to the fans and after the game Tara talked at Maples, bringing Jasmine Camp out to answer a few questions first.  A lot is emerging from these talks.

The new offense comes in two flavors--the two post version, typified by having Kaylee start at 5 and Bird start at 4, and the "stretch 4" version, typified by having Kaylee start at 5 and Bonnie start at 4.  The problem with the conventional version is that the other teams would simply park posts in the paint; the "stretch 4" forces the other team to bring someone out to defend our 4 player (Bonnie) at the perimeter, thus "stretching" their defense out and creating room.

Our posts are developing, but Kate pointed out that they are all developing "back-to-the-basket" moves.  Tara pointed out that Amy is working with the posts regularly to teach those moves, but none of the posts have mastered them.  When Chiney was a freshman she--like Kaylee--was a superb rebounder but had just one move, and she had to develop it and other moves to become a major scoring threat beyond just putting back O boards.  For now, most of our posts can score off of offensive rebounds when they are facing the basket and off of feeds while they break for the basket.  But receiving a pass with their back to the basket and then turning and finishing a scoring move is not there yet and hopefully will come in time.

Given the developmental nature of our post offense, the stretch 4 makes a lot more sense offensively.  It means playing 3 guards (Amber, Lili, and Karlie started), a "stretch" player (Bonnie or Greenfield) and a single true post (Kaylee, McCall, or Kailee.)  The danger which neither of the coaches talked about was defense.  It is a small lineup and it will probably not fare well against teams that play 2-3 really big and tall players.

Kate was very cautious with her answers and clearly did not want to talk about the Tennessee games, although she did, and stated that we played the most difficult schedule in the country.  Later Tara said she liked to find out her team's weaknesses early when there is time to do something about them--that we could be 10-0 and know nothing about our team.  A question was put to Kate about Lili's recent performance and she simply elaborated what has been in the press:  she has been "pressing."  She now gets every team's best defense and the coaches have been working with her to begin games by being more of a distributor than a scorer.

Tara was more forthright when asked what she had learned.  "We'll never play Chattanooga again" she said, confirming my feeling that this was a serious scheduling mistake.

Jasmine indicated she was currently applying to grad school in Business, but that Stanford Biz does not take freshly minted undergraduates.  She also indicated that the coaches were encouraging her to think about coaching.  Tara indicated that both Alex and Jasmine could potentially have 5th years, but if Jasmine is applying to Biz Schools elsewhere then there has to be a real chance that she will graduate and move on next year, opening another scholarship slot that we had not counted on.  I imagine neither she nor Tara know how that will turn out yet.

Flow of the game
UCSB has had a proud basketball tradition, but they are 0-10 at the moment.  The game was tense for the first three minutes, when UCSB scored first and we missed our first three shots.  After that, there was no flow to the game--we simply dominated and we increased the lead steadily until the end of the game.  The second and third strings kept increasing the lead even more effectively than the starters.  The one moment of concern came early when Bonnie tumbled and limped off the court.  They tended to her left knee, she went to the locker room and came back.  But she came back into the game seemingly no worse for the wear and started draining treys.

Performances
Many people played well against this winless opponent, and scoring was spread around in a very balanced way.

The two most important revelations to me were the play of Bri Roberson and Brittany McPhee.

Bri was 5/7 for 11 points in 18 minutes of play, in addition to her frenetic defense.  At this stage, considering offense and defense, I think Bri is the equal of Amber or Lili and her stats consistently show it.  When Amber graduates I imagine Bri will get a lot more time.

Brittany McPhee started slowly this year since she missed 7 weeks of training camp with an injury.  But as she learns the system and gets more minutes she gets better and better and impresses.  Today she was 3/8 and 4/4 on free throws.  What I liked was her energy.  She made many "hustle" plays.  Two of her FGs--maybe all three--came off of offensive rebounds.  When a shot would go up she would break for the basket and more often than not be in exactly the right place to put the miss away.  It was shocking almost how she would come out of nowhere to do it.  Those free throws came because she generated them for herself--by driving to the basket and getting fouled.  Then on defense she was better!  She had 3 blocks!  She had 3 steals!  With 5 rebounds and 10 points in 22 minutes, she is making a case for her to continue to see a lot of floor time.

Kaylee was 3/4 with a couple of free throws for 8 points and 4 rebounds in 15 minutes.  The only one she missed was a nifty back-to-the-basket move where she pivoted right, then left, then put it up, but it did not go down.  It is the first time I have seen her try that move--it looked like something she has been working on.

Erica McCall had a good game.  She was 4/4 with 12 rebounds in 18 minutes.  She missed two free throws or she would have had a double/double.

Kailee had only 9 minutes in the game and had 1 basket and no rebounds.  The 1 post offense does not leave a lot of time to go around. 

Bonnie continued her torrid shooting with 3/5 from three point range.  One of her shots in the first half was fully 4 feet behind the arc.  She probably read what I said about Karlie's range being better and decided to shut me up.  <gulp>  Sorry, Bonnie, I won't make that mistake again!

Taylor Greenfield took more shots than anyone--11, and made four of them.  She did well when she first came in for Bonnie when she hurt her knee, but not so well later on in the game. 

Karlie was 3/4 from three point range.  She is benefiting from us having a three guard offense and is getting more playing time than a year ago. 

Lili was 5/8 and led the scoring with 12 points.  Amber was just 1/4, but both Lili and Amber had 4 assists.  This is vastly different from early in the year when the two of them tried to score every possession and rarely passed for an assist. 

A feel-good moment came when Jasmine Camp came into the game and hit two treys.  It has been a long time since we have seen her play, and the crowd roared at her first basket.

Looking forward:
It will be interesting to see how the "stretch 4" performs next week against Utah and Colorado--or whether we go back to a 2-post offense in league play.  Next year's incoming class includes a true center (Coffee) who Kate described as "not as wide" as Tess but "bigger."  And then there will be a face-the-basket stretch-4 type type international player in Alanna Smith, so depending on how those two players develop our offense may tilt one way or the other.

This year, however, every weak is a new experiment.  Tara said flat out we would see something new in the offense next weekend.  Personally, I'd be happy with the same old 90 points we just scored.



Re: WBB: Stanford 90 UCSB 34 - BobK - 12-28-2014

Great report as usual. Thanks

We have 3 scholies for next year.  Camp, Green and Picknell.  The count doesn't matter whether Camp returns or not. 
Wilson has one of the three.

Now if you think Stanford will add an April signing well I sure hope not. 

Re: WBB: Stanford 90 UCSB 34 - TheFarm07 - 12-28-2014

Thanks for the detailed analysis.

I am curious, why is the Chattanooga game considered a big mistake now?  Because they were better than expected and we wanted an easy victory before playing Tennessee?

Re: WBB: Stanford 90 UCSB 34 - chimera - 12-28-2014

(12-28-2014, 06:30 PM)TheFarm07 link Wrote:Thanks for the detailed analysis.

I am curious, why is the Chattanooga game considered a big mistake now?  Because they were better than expected and we wanted an easy victory before playing Tennessee?

I think Tara was half kidding about Chattanooga.  I think they knew from past seasons that the Mocs are tough at home. 

To me, several things were clear.  First, UCSB is terrible, the worst team we will play.  I think I may have said that before about some team, but I take it back - UCSB is terrible in every way a team can be.  That said, we played well.  McPhee!!!!!  I agree with the post above - she was fabulous.  She hustled after loose balls, rebounds, etc. and made a ton of great plays.  Had two or three great blocks too.  She just did it all, all the little things and aggressive on offense in a good way.  Rebounded in traffic.  Hit some nice shots.  She showed they need to play her more.  With experience she could be a contributor. 

Bird also had a good, confidence building game.  UCSB has a 6'4" center whose name is familiar, a senior, and it was a fight to get some rebounds.  Bird rebounded well, moved well, passed well. 

With all the defensive attention she gets, Lili is now looking to facilitate more and it showed.  She made some nice passes.  I could tell Lili was aiming to pass when she drove more than she had been.  She took smart shots and hit most of them.  She had a nice overall game without trying too hard.

Kaylee did well, as she has been.  Both Samuelsons did their thing very well.  Roberson had a few too many TOs and tried too hard to make things happen out of nothing a few times but did a lot well, hit some shots, was a big pest on defense.  I don't think she is up there with Amber and Lili yet.  She is gaining confidence.  The key will be to keep up the energy without getting out of control or trying to do too much. 

Jasmine Camp hit a couple of late threes, which the crowd loved. 

Anyway, it was a fun game.  We did what we should do against an overmatched opponent.  Even without scoring from Amber, we scored 90.  Can't say beating a team like UCSB means a ton.  However considering the recent struggles, this was a nice game to have before conference plays start.

Re: WBB: Stanford 90 UCSB 34 - 81alum - 12-28-2014

(12-28-2014, 07:07 PM)chimera link Wrote:I think Tara was half kidding about Chattanooga.  I think they knew from past seasons that the Mocs are tough at home.
Yes, but only half kidding.  On the other hand, losing both these games is nothing new.

I went back to look at who we scheduled before playing Tennessee in past years.

In 2012 it was South Carolina--not exactly a pushover.  We barely escaped with a win before going on to defeat Tennessee.
In 2010 it was DePaul.  That was a similarly disastrous trip--we lost to DePaul and to Tennessee.  Those, however, were our only two losses before falling to A&M in the semifinals.
In 2008 it was also South Carolina.  That year it was more of a warm-up since South Carolina was just beginning its rebuilding.
In 2006 we went first to Tennessee and then on to Georgia--we lost both games.  Georgia was ranked 8th at the time.
In 2004 we went to Missouri first and won before going to Tennessee and losing.

It seems to me that when Tara has an experienced team she has used this trip to expose them to high level competition and even hardship.  It probably helps her to learn her team's weaknesses early, and it probably helps keep her team from becoming too complacent.  The difference is that when we go on that trip we don't usually have a team that is starting three underclassmen and a new offense.  We may need confidence-building and success as much as we need to have our weaknesses exposed.  In any case, going forward--I'd just as soon not have our weaknesses exposed any more!


Re: WBB: Stanford 90 UCSB 34 - 81alum - 12-28-2014

(12-28-2014, 06:28 PM)BobK link Wrote:Great report as usual. Thanks

We have 3 scholies for next year.  Camp, Green and Picknell.  The count doesn't matter whether Camp returns or not. 
Wilson has one of the three.

Now if you think Stanford will add an April signing well I sure hope not.
But if Camp goes to Business school elsewhere, then we would have a scholarship available for Katie Lou when she decommits from UConn  ;)  Seriously, the only difference it would make would be to support a walk for a single year.

Re: WBB: Stanford 90 UCSB 34 - Jskass - 12-29-2014

I like the KLS comment but probably only happens once she gets there and if not getting playing time. Just think no snow in CA....

Re: WBB: Stanford 90 UCSB 34 - Yellowlab - 12-30-2014

I was walking toward the exit after Tara's talk and waited for a man to get out of his row ahead of me.  I thought to myself "that guy looks a lot like Garvin"  and then though "Naah, can't be."  I'm guessing it was!