12-15-2021, 10:25 PM
WBB: Stanford 68 vs UC Davis 42
(12-15-2021, 10:23 PM)CompSci87 Wrote:Yup, and Lacie wears a pony tail and Lexie a bun. But I think the shoe-thing is cooler ;) The black shoes look sharp on a point guard!(12-15-2021, 07:39 PM)81alum Wrote: Just noticed a sure fire way to tell Lexie and Lacie apart before they take off their warm ups so we can see their numbers. Lacie wears black shoes and Lexie wears white.
I just use the fact that Lexie has gone blonde while Lacie's hair is quite dark.
(12-15-2021, 10:23 PM)CompSci87 Wrote:Yup, and Lacie wears a pony tail and Lexie a bun. But I think the shoe-thing is cooler ;) The black shoes look sharp on a point guard!(12-15-2021, 07:39 PM)81alum Wrote: Just noticed a sure fire way to tell Lexie and Lacie apart before they take off their warm ups so we can see their numbers. Lacie wears black shoes and Lexie wears white.
I just use the fact that Lexie has gone blonde while Lacie's hair is quite dark.
12-15-2021, 10:37 PM
I wasn't able to watch the live stream of the UC Davis game. Great to see the ladies got the win without me though. Does anyone know how I can watch the game? Does the P12 site show completed games for some period of time?
I wasn't able to watch the live stream of the UC Davis game. Great to see the ladies got the win without me though. Does anyone know how I can watch the game? Does the P12 site show completed games for some period of time?
(12-15-2021, 10:37 PM)BillBradley Wrote: I wasn't able to watch the live stream of the UC Davis game. Great to see the ladies got the win without me though. Does anyone know how I can watch the game? Does the P12 site show completed games for some period of time?
No, they don't. I captured the stream of this game (no audio, though, for some unknown reason) and am posting it to YouTube. So far no one has asked me to take down posted captures of Stanford live streams, so hopefully it will stay up.
The video will appear here after uploading and YouTube's format conversion are complete. It may show up in SD first, with HD coming later.
https://youtu.be/4zRVax6ZEqs
(This post was last modified: 12-15-2021, 11:21 PM by CompSci87.)
(12-15-2021, 10:37 PM)BillBradley Wrote: I wasn't able to watch the live stream of the UC Davis game. Great to see the ladies got the win without me though. Does anyone know how I can watch the game? Does the P12 site show completed games for some period of time?
No, they don't. I captured the stream of this game (no audio, though, for some unknown reason) and am posting it to YouTube. So far no one has asked me to take down posted captures of Stanford live streams, so hopefully it will stay up.
The video will appear here after uploading and YouTube's format conversion are complete. It may show up in SD first, with HD coming later.
https://youtu.be/4zRVax6ZEqs
12-15-2021, 11:26 PM
I’ve been looking at the 3-point percentages in the team stats and have a theory. There hasn’t been a lot of discussion here about the women moving to the men’s 3-point line, but I wonder if some players just don’t quite have the range for the new 3-point line and we’re seeing that play out. It seems fairly obvious that Jump and Prechtel have already demonstrated that they can hit the deep 3 although Prechtel has had limited shots thus far. Lexie’s % from 3 has been great. Wilson, Jones, and Lacie haven’t had much success, and Brink has only three attempts this season. Perhaps the change is having more impact than we realized. Anyway, this could also explain part of the shift back to Jump starting and playing big minutes. She’s a genuine sharpshooter and the only one who really stretches the defense. I like that she’s taking more shots and scoring more.
I’ve been looking at the 3-point percentages in the team stats and have a theory. There hasn’t been a lot of discussion here about the women moving to the men’s 3-point line, but I wonder if some players just don’t quite have the range for the new 3-point line and we’re seeing that play out. It seems fairly obvious that Jump and Prechtel have already demonstrated that they can hit the deep 3 although Prechtel has had limited shots thus far. Lexie’s % from 3 has been great. Wilson, Jones, and Lacie haven’t had much success, and Brink has only three attempts this season. Perhaps the change is having more impact than we realized. Anyway, this could also explain part of the shift back to Jump starting and playing big minutes. She’s a genuine sharpshooter and the only one who really stretches the defense. I like that she’s taking more shots and scoring more.
12-15-2021, 11:27 PM
(12-15-2021, 11:21 PM)CompSci87 Wrote:Great, thank you!(12-15-2021, 10:37 PM)BillBradley Wrote: I wasn't able to watch the live stream of the UC Davis game. Great to see the ladies got the win without me though. Does anyone know how I can watch the game? Does the P12 site show completed games for some period of time?
No, they don't. I captured the stream of this game (no audio, though, for some unknown reason) and am posting it to YouTube. So far no one has asked me to take down posted captures of Stanford live streams, so hopefully it will stay up.
The video will appear here after uploading and YouTube's format conversion are complete. It may show up in SD first, with HD coming later.
https://youtu.be/4zRVax6ZEqs
(12-15-2021, 11:21 PM)CompSci87 Wrote:Great, thank you!(12-15-2021, 10:37 PM)BillBradley Wrote: I wasn't able to watch the live stream of the UC Davis game. Great to see the ladies got the win without me though. Does anyone know how I can watch the game? Does the P12 site show completed games for some period of time?
No, they don't. I captured the stream of this game (no audio, though, for some unknown reason) and am posting it to YouTube. So far no one has asked me to take down posted captures of Stanford live streams, so hopefully it will stay up.
The video will appear here after uploading and YouTube's format conversion are complete. It may show up in SD first, with HD coming later.
https://youtu.be/4zRVax6ZEqs
12-16-2021, 08:32 AM
This was the least physical game in recent memory. Few fouls, only one held ball IIRC, no pressing. Fun to watch, in that respect, but not what we will see from Tennessee or South Carolina.
Lacie looked comfortable at the point (but Davis did not press). The job is obviously hers now. Lexie and Lacie each had four steals. They play extremely well together (headline news!).
UC Davis did a good job preventing Haley Jones from getting good looks but she went right ahead and hoisted up her shot anyway. So she went 4 for 15. I question her judgment sometimes — well, a lot of the time. Brink had an off night but still had a double double. I guess that’s good news/bad news. Her free throw shooting is atrocious, which is hard to explain.
Jump started and played most of the game. Had 17 points and 6 rebounds, I think. Played good D, too. Belibi was 4 for 4, all muscle shots under the basket. Prechtel played very little, which I think is sad.
We had one bad stretch in the third quarter after going up 42 to 21. Jerome and Iriafen subbed in, and UC Davis went on a nice run — 9 to 2, I think. Jerome and Iriafen got pulled, and that was the end of the run.
Finally, there was no band and no dollies, understandably because Stanford is on break; so we got a triple dose of bad, earsplitting music on a bad PA system. God help us! That the music itself is bad is just my opinion. That the PA system is abysmally bad is just a fact. Voices just sound like quack, quack, quack. That the music is played at earsplitting volume is also a fact. Is there anyone in the arena who actually likes this?
Lacie looked comfortable at the point (but Davis did not press). The job is obviously hers now. Lexie and Lacie each had four steals. They play extremely well together (headline news!).
UC Davis did a good job preventing Haley Jones from getting good looks but she went right ahead and hoisted up her shot anyway. So she went 4 for 15. I question her judgment sometimes — well, a lot of the time. Brink had an off night but still had a double double. I guess that’s good news/bad news. Her free throw shooting is atrocious, which is hard to explain.
Jump started and played most of the game. Had 17 points and 6 rebounds, I think. Played good D, too. Belibi was 4 for 4, all muscle shots under the basket. Prechtel played very little, which I think is sad.
We had one bad stretch in the third quarter after going up 42 to 21. Jerome and Iriafen subbed in, and UC Davis went on a nice run — 9 to 2, I think. Jerome and Iriafen got pulled, and that was the end of the run.
Finally, there was no band and no dollies, understandably because Stanford is on break; so we got a triple dose of bad, earsplitting music on a bad PA system. God help us! That the music itself is bad is just my opinion. That the PA system is abysmally bad is just a fact. Voices just sound like quack, quack, quack. That the music is played at earsplitting volume is also a fact. Is there anyone in the arena who actually likes this?
This was the least physical game in recent memory. Few fouls, only one held ball IIRC, no pressing. Fun to watch, in that respect, but not what we will see from Tennessee or South Carolina.
Lacie looked comfortable at the point (but Davis did not press). The job is obviously hers now. Lexie and Lacie each had four steals. They play extremely well together (headline news!).
UC Davis did a good job preventing Haley Jones from getting good looks but she went right ahead and hoisted up her shot anyway. So she went 4 for 15. I question her judgment sometimes — well, a lot of the time. Brink had an off night but still had a double double. I guess that’s good news/bad news. Her free throw shooting is atrocious, which is hard to explain.
Jump started and played most of the game. Had 17 points and 6 rebounds, I think. Played good D, too. Belibi was 4 for 4, all muscle shots under the basket. Prechtel played very little, which I think is sad.
We had one bad stretch in the third quarter after going up 42 to 21. Jerome and Iriafen subbed in, and UC Davis went on a nice run — 9 to 2, I think. Jerome and Iriafen got pulled, and that was the end of the run.
Finally, there was no band and no dollies, understandably because Stanford is on break; so we got a triple dose of bad, earsplitting music on a bad PA system. God help us! That the music itself is bad is just my opinion. That the PA system is abysmally bad is just a fact. Voices just sound like quack, quack, quack. That the music is played at earsplitting volume is also a fact. Is there anyone in the arena who actually likes this?
Lacie looked comfortable at the point (but Davis did not press). The job is obviously hers now. Lexie and Lacie each had four steals. They play extremely well together (headline news!).
UC Davis did a good job preventing Haley Jones from getting good looks but she went right ahead and hoisted up her shot anyway. So she went 4 for 15. I question her judgment sometimes — well, a lot of the time. Brink had an off night but still had a double double. I guess that’s good news/bad news. Her free throw shooting is atrocious, which is hard to explain.
Jump started and played most of the game. Had 17 points and 6 rebounds, I think. Played good D, too. Belibi was 4 for 4, all muscle shots under the basket. Prechtel played very little, which I think is sad.
We had one bad stretch in the third quarter after going up 42 to 21. Jerome and Iriafen subbed in, and UC Davis went on a nice run — 9 to 2, I think. Jerome and Iriafen got pulled, and that was the end of the run.
Finally, there was no band and no dollies, understandably because Stanford is on break; so we got a triple dose of bad, earsplitting music on a bad PA system. God help us! That the music itself is bad is just my opinion. That the PA system is abysmally bad is just a fact. Voices just sound like quack, quack, quack. That the music is played at earsplitting volume is also a fact. Is there anyone in the arena who actually likes this?
12-16-2021, 09:59 AM
Great to see Jump develop into an all-around player. Obviously the defense is there to complement her more-versatile shooting. I'm with Triangle that the longer 3-point line is having an effect. Wonder if it stands out in national stats?
For bench-watchers, it seemed like Harriel was suited up (as contrasted with VanGytenbeek and Brown), so it seems unlikely she's redshirting?
Tough to evaluate subs when you're up 17 to start the 4th and all starters are in.
For bench-watchers, it seemed like Harriel was suited up (as contrasted with VanGytenbeek and Brown), so it seems unlikely she's redshirting?
Tough to evaluate subs when you're up 17 to start the 4th and all starters are in.
Great to see Jump develop into an all-around player. Obviously the defense is there to complement her more-versatile shooting. I'm with Triangle that the longer 3-point line is having an effect. Wonder if it stands out in national stats?
For bench-watchers, it seemed like Harriel was suited up (as contrasted with VanGytenbeek and Brown), so it seems unlikely she's redshirting?
Tough to evaluate subs when you're up 17 to start the 4th and all starters are in.
For bench-watchers, it seemed like Harriel was suited up (as contrasted with VanGytenbeek and Brown), so it seems unlikely she's redshirting?
Tough to evaluate subs when you're up 17 to start the 4th and all starters are in.
(12-15-2021, 10:25 PM)CompSci87 Wrote:(12-15-2021, 08:40 PM)martyup Wrote: If you are a cardboarder at the game, stand up and wave your hands. We can see most of the crowd on the screen now.
Hee hee ... I wasn't reading the Cardboard while at the game this time.
At halftime they left the camera pointing towards the benches from opposite side of the court. I big section of the bleachers behind the benches were in view for the entire halftime break.
At the next home game someone should bring a sign that reads "Hello Cardboard.org!" It might just increase our membership.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
(12-15-2021, 10:25 PM)CompSci87 Wrote:(12-15-2021, 08:40 PM)martyup Wrote: If you are a cardboarder at the game, stand up and wave your hands. We can see most of the crowd on the screen now.
Hee hee ... I wasn't reading the Cardboard while at the game this time.
At halftime they left the camera pointing towards the benches from opposite side of the court. I big section of the bleachers behind the benches were in view for the entire halftime break.
At the next home game someone should bring a sign that reads "Hello Cardboard.org!" It might just increase our membership.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
12-16-2021, 11:16 AM
(12-16-2021, 10:25 AM)BobK Wrote: Some of us meet at half time on the inside concourse south end behind about Section 7. Please join us on Jan 7
That sounds fun. However, some of us live thousands of miles from Palo Alto and can only watch on TV. I'm jealous.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
(12-16-2021, 10:25 AM)BobK Wrote: Some of us meet at half time on the inside concourse south end behind about Section 7. Please join us on Jan 7
That sounds fun. However, some of us live thousands of miles from Palo Alto and can only watch on TV. I'm jealous.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
Finally caught (part of) a game after what seems like nearly every game lately being either catch-it-or-miss-it streaming or on some obscure platform.
I agree with others that visually, our play was rather uninspiring. That said, as 81Alum noted and Ki remarked last year, they know our system as well as we do, so I'm not surprised both they and we were kept in check on offense.
I was trolling around our team's stats page a few interesting (and a few surprising) things stuck out:
-Would anyone have guessed at the start of this season that Hannah Jump would be half a point out from our second highest scoring player on average? With this last game, she passed Lexie, and is just behind Jones.
-For all that folks (including me) who rag Jones for her sloppy tendencies that produce turnovers, and who praise Lacie for being a relatively competent PG, their stats are uncannily similar: 29A/19TO for Jones, and 27A/18TO for Lacie. And interestingly, Jump has the best A/TO ratio on the team, with 2.4/1.
-I also would not have guessed that Belibi would be a mere 2ish points behind Jones in points per game on average. Or that Lacie would be averaging more rebounds per game than Belibi is!
-Perhaps not surprising, but the twins almost have as many steals combined (39) as the whole rest of the team (44). Also interesting that Demetre has as many steals as Wilson in about half the minutes.
-By far the most glaring statistics, to probably no one's surprise, are our teamwide FT% (.580, WTF!!!) and AST/TO ratio (literally 1/1, with 135 assists and 135 turnovers). There is no better way to give away free points than to miss free throws and turnover the ball. The number of unforced errors on both fronts is just kind of dismaying, especially for a team that otherwise seems to have a solid handle on the fundamentals.
Last, it's just speculation, but if I had to guess, I suspect Jones is not back to 100% with with whatever has been ailing her, and I suspect Van Gytenbeek has similarly been impaired by illness/injury, and that, more than being in Tara's doghouse, is the reason why she hasn't seen the court much in the last month. Tara is notoriously tightlipped about injuries so I suspect there may be more to these stories than just a bad playing streak and a one-way trip to the doghouse.
I agree with others that visually, our play was rather uninspiring. That said, as 81Alum noted and Ki remarked last year, they know our system as well as we do, so I'm not surprised both they and we were kept in check on offense.
I was trolling around our team's stats page a few interesting (and a few surprising) things stuck out:
-Would anyone have guessed at the start of this season that Hannah Jump would be half a point out from our second highest scoring player on average? With this last game, she passed Lexie, and is just behind Jones.
-For all that folks (including me) who rag Jones for her sloppy tendencies that produce turnovers, and who praise Lacie for being a relatively competent PG, their stats are uncannily similar: 29A/19TO for Jones, and 27A/18TO for Lacie. And interestingly, Jump has the best A/TO ratio on the team, with 2.4/1.
-I also would not have guessed that Belibi would be a mere 2ish points behind Jones in points per game on average. Or that Lacie would be averaging more rebounds per game than Belibi is!
-Perhaps not surprising, but the twins almost have as many steals combined (39) as the whole rest of the team (44). Also interesting that Demetre has as many steals as Wilson in about half the minutes.
-By far the most glaring statistics, to probably no one's surprise, are our teamwide FT% (.580, WTF!!!) and AST/TO ratio (literally 1/1, with 135 assists and 135 turnovers). There is no better way to give away free points than to miss free throws and turnover the ball. The number of unforced errors on both fronts is just kind of dismaying, especially for a team that otherwise seems to have a solid handle on the fundamentals.
Last, it's just speculation, but if I had to guess, I suspect Jones is not back to 100% with with whatever has been ailing her, and I suspect Van Gytenbeek has similarly been impaired by illness/injury, and that, more than being in Tara's doghouse, is the reason why she hasn't seen the court much in the last month. Tara is notoriously tightlipped about injuries so I suspect there may be more to these stories than just a bad playing streak and a one-way trip to the doghouse.
Finally caught (part of) a game after what seems like nearly every game lately being either catch-it-or-miss-it streaming or on some obscure platform.
I agree with others that visually, our play was rather uninspiring. That said, as 81Alum noted and Ki remarked last year, they know our system as well as we do, so I'm not surprised both they and we were kept in check on offense.
I was trolling around our team's stats page a few interesting (and a few surprising) things stuck out:
-Would anyone have guessed at the start of this season that Hannah Jump would be half a point out from our second highest scoring player on average? With this last game, she passed Lexie, and is just behind Jones.
-For all that folks (including me) who rag Jones for her sloppy tendencies that produce turnovers, and who praise Lacie for being a relatively competent PG, their stats are uncannily similar: 29A/19TO for Jones, and 27A/18TO for Lacie. And interestingly, Jump has the best A/TO ratio on the team, with 2.4/1.
-I also would not have guessed that Belibi would be a mere 2ish points behind Jones in points per game on average. Or that Lacie would be averaging more rebounds per game than Belibi is!
-Perhaps not surprising, but the twins almost have as many steals combined (39) as the whole rest of the team (44). Also interesting that Demetre has as many steals as Wilson in about half the minutes.
-By far the most glaring statistics, to probably no one's surprise, are our teamwide FT% (.580, WTF!!!) and AST/TO ratio (literally 1/1, with 135 assists and 135 turnovers). There is no better way to give away free points than to miss free throws and turnover the ball. The number of unforced errors on both fronts is just kind of dismaying, especially for a team that otherwise seems to have a solid handle on the fundamentals.
Last, it's just speculation, but if I had to guess, I suspect Jones is not back to 100% with with whatever has been ailing her, and I suspect Van Gytenbeek has similarly been impaired by illness/injury, and that, more than being in Tara's doghouse, is the reason why she hasn't seen the court much in the last month. Tara is notoriously tightlipped about injuries so I suspect there may be more to these stories than just a bad playing streak and a one-way trip to the doghouse.
I agree with others that visually, our play was rather uninspiring. That said, as 81Alum noted and Ki remarked last year, they know our system as well as we do, so I'm not surprised both they and we were kept in check on offense.
I was trolling around our team's stats page a few interesting (and a few surprising) things stuck out:
-Would anyone have guessed at the start of this season that Hannah Jump would be half a point out from our second highest scoring player on average? With this last game, she passed Lexie, and is just behind Jones.
-For all that folks (including me) who rag Jones for her sloppy tendencies that produce turnovers, and who praise Lacie for being a relatively competent PG, their stats are uncannily similar: 29A/19TO for Jones, and 27A/18TO for Lacie. And interestingly, Jump has the best A/TO ratio on the team, with 2.4/1.
-I also would not have guessed that Belibi would be a mere 2ish points behind Jones in points per game on average. Or that Lacie would be averaging more rebounds per game than Belibi is!
-Perhaps not surprising, but the twins almost have as many steals combined (39) as the whole rest of the team (44). Also interesting that Demetre has as many steals as Wilson in about half the minutes.
-By far the most glaring statistics, to probably no one's surprise, are our teamwide FT% (.580, WTF!!!) and AST/TO ratio (literally 1/1, with 135 assists and 135 turnovers). There is no better way to give away free points than to miss free throws and turnover the ball. The number of unforced errors on both fronts is just kind of dismaying, especially for a team that otherwise seems to have a solid handle on the fundamentals.
Last, it's just speculation, but if I had to guess, I suspect Jones is not back to 100% with with whatever has been ailing her, and I suspect Van Gytenbeek has similarly been impaired by illness/injury, and that, more than being in Tara's doghouse, is the reason why she hasn't seen the court much in the last month. Tara is notoriously tightlipped about injuries so I suspect there may be more to these stories than just a bad playing streak and a one-way trip to the doghouse.
(12-16-2021, 12:50 PM)2006alum Wrote: Finally caught (part of) a game after what seems like nearly every game lately being either catch-it-or-miss-it streaming or on some obscure platform.
I agree with others that visually, our play was rather uninspiring. That said, as 81Alum noted and Ki remarked last year, they know our system as well as we do, so I'm not surprised both they and we were kept in check on offense.
I was trolling around our team's stats page a few interesting (and a few surprising) things stuck out:
-Would anyone have guessed at the start of this season that Hannah Jump would be half a point out from our second highest scoring player on average? With this last game, she passed Lexie, and is just behind Jones.
-For all that folks (including me) who rag Jones for her sloppy tendencies that produce turnovers, and who praise Lacie for being a relatively competent PG, their stats are uncannily similar: 29A/19TO for Jones, and 27A/18TO for Lacie. And interestingly, Jump has the best A/TO ratio on the team, with 2.4/1.
-I also would not have guessed that Belibi would be a mere 2ish points behind Jones in points per game on average. Or that Lacie would be averaging more rebounds per game than Belibi is!
-Perhaps not surprising, but the twins almost have as many steals combined (39) as the whole rest of the team (44). Also interesting that Demetre has as many steals as Wilson in about half the minutes.
-By far the most glaring statistics, to probably no one's surprise, are our teamwide FT% (.580, WTF!!!) and AST/TO ratio (literally 1/1, with 135 assists and 135 turnovers). There is no better way to give away free points than to miss free throws and turnover the ball. The number of unforced errors on both fronts is just kind of dismaying, especially for a team that otherwise seems to have a solid handle on the fundamentals.
Last, it's just speculation, but if I had to guess, I suspect Jones is not back to 100% with with whatever has been ailing her, and I suspect Van Gytenbeek has similarly been impaired by illness/injury, and that, more than being in Tara's doghouse, is the reason why she hasn't seen the court much in the last month. Tara is notoriously tightlipped about injuries so I suspect there may be more to these stories than just a bad playing streak and a one-way trip to the doghouse.
The score was 16-11 for what seemed like an eternity last night. Some of that good D; some just missed shots.
Jump is playing well, but 37 minutes? Never coming out till garbage time at very end? She had 12 points at the half; and 12 points until well into Q4 - she picked up 5 points very late on a great, unselfish feed from Lexie in transition and a made 3. I was smh that she played as much as she did when everybody else sat for extended minutes.
I like UCD's pluckiness; unfortunately, it sheds very little light on how Stanford will fare against the type of teams that gave them trouble last year and likely will again this year - i.e., teams with elite/uber-quick guard play. Until we see what happens against such opponents, it's impossible to declare that Stanford is "fine" when it comes to PG position and the ability of all our guards (including Jump) to defend in such games.
What I think can be confirmed is the following: Stanford has a very talented roster for the most part - and certainly with respect to more recent recruits - every single one of them can play, if given the chance. I mean, look at Lacie and Jump this year. They are playing well because they are playing a lot and know they won't get yanked for one mistake. Lexie has always had that luxury (and has played incredibly well overall over the years). You have to play with confidence, and except in the rarest of circumstances, confidence comes with PT. This isn't to advocate that one player should be playing over another; but rather, to caution against concluding that certain bench players "aren't good enough" or "can't really play at this level" based on spotty minutes. They all can play - I mean we know Anna Wilson can play at a championship level, and she is not seeing the court nearly as much this year (same is true for NW player, who barely played last night). And I think most here would be pleasantly surprised at the productivity of Belibi, Prechtel, and just about everybody else if they played 20 minutes/game for 10 straight games.
It's just the nature of playing sports - at any level, really. And it explains why I am more focused on ramifications of miniscule minutes for very good players on Stanford's bench. It's a tough job as a coach, but also one of the most important ones.
I mean, did Jump really need to play 37 minutes last night in a game that was never in doubt? At the expense of getting bench players more PT to build confidence? (And btw, I agree with others that Jump's improved game merits more PT than she received last season).
One add: Barring foul trouble - and Brink demonstrated (again) last night that fouls can come in bunches with her - Brink should get a double-double rolling out of bed. And she is way too good a shooter for the FT % to stay where it is. Personally, I think she gets a bit too amped in games (getting tied up with the defender was one manifestation of that, imo). Just relax and play - her skills are quite unique.
(12-16-2021, 12:50 PM)2006alum Wrote: Finally caught (part of) a game after what seems like nearly every game lately being either catch-it-or-miss-it streaming or on some obscure platform.
I agree with others that visually, our play was rather uninspiring. That said, as 81Alum noted and Ki remarked last year, they know our system as well as we do, so I'm not surprised both they and we were kept in check on offense.
I was trolling around our team's stats page a few interesting (and a few surprising) things stuck out:
-Would anyone have guessed at the start of this season that Hannah Jump would be half a point out from our second highest scoring player on average? With this last game, she passed Lexie, and is just behind Jones.
-For all that folks (including me) who rag Jones for her sloppy tendencies that produce turnovers, and who praise Lacie for being a relatively competent PG, their stats are uncannily similar: 29A/19TO for Jones, and 27A/18TO for Lacie. And interestingly, Jump has the best A/TO ratio on the team, with 2.4/1.
-I also would not have guessed that Belibi would be a mere 2ish points behind Jones in points per game on average. Or that Lacie would be averaging more rebounds per game than Belibi is!
-Perhaps not surprising, but the twins almost have as many steals combined (39) as the whole rest of the team (44). Also interesting that Demetre has as many steals as Wilson in about half the minutes.
-By far the most glaring statistics, to probably no one's surprise, are our teamwide FT% (.580, WTF!!!) and AST/TO ratio (literally 1/1, with 135 assists and 135 turnovers). There is no better way to give away free points than to miss free throws and turnover the ball. The number of unforced errors on both fronts is just kind of dismaying, especially for a team that otherwise seems to have a solid handle on the fundamentals.
Last, it's just speculation, but if I had to guess, I suspect Jones is not back to 100% with with whatever has been ailing her, and I suspect Van Gytenbeek has similarly been impaired by illness/injury, and that, more than being in Tara's doghouse, is the reason why she hasn't seen the court much in the last month. Tara is notoriously tightlipped about injuries so I suspect there may be more to these stories than just a bad playing streak and a one-way trip to the doghouse.
The score was 16-11 for what seemed like an eternity last night. Some of that good D; some just missed shots.
Jump is playing well, but 37 minutes? Never coming out till garbage time at very end? She had 12 points at the half; and 12 points until well into Q4 - she picked up 5 points very late on a great, unselfish feed from Lexie in transition and a made 3. I was smh that she played as much as she did when everybody else sat for extended minutes.
I like UCD's pluckiness; unfortunately, it sheds very little light on how Stanford will fare against the type of teams that gave them trouble last year and likely will again this year - i.e., teams with elite/uber-quick guard play. Until we see what happens against such opponents, it's impossible to declare that Stanford is "fine" when it comes to PG position and the ability of all our guards (including Jump) to defend in such games.
What I think can be confirmed is the following: Stanford has a very talented roster for the most part - and certainly with respect to more recent recruits - every single one of them can play, if given the chance. I mean, look at Lacie and Jump this year. They are playing well because they are playing a lot and know they won't get yanked for one mistake. Lexie has always had that luxury (and has played incredibly well overall over the years). You have to play with confidence, and except in the rarest of circumstances, confidence comes with PT. This isn't to advocate that one player should be playing over another; but rather, to caution against concluding that certain bench players "aren't good enough" or "can't really play at this level" based on spotty minutes. They all can play - I mean we know Anna Wilson can play at a championship level, and she is not seeing the court nearly as much this year (same is true for NW player, who barely played last night). And I think most here would be pleasantly surprised at the productivity of Belibi, Prechtel, and just about everybody else if they played 20 minutes/game for 10 straight games.
It's just the nature of playing sports - at any level, really. And it explains why I am more focused on ramifications of miniscule minutes for very good players on Stanford's bench. It's a tough job as a coach, but also one of the most important ones.
I mean, did Jump really need to play 37 minutes last night in a game that was never in doubt? At the expense of getting bench players more PT to build confidence? (And btw, I agree with others that Jump's improved game merits more PT than she received last season).
One add: Barring foul trouble - and Brink demonstrated (again) last night that fouls can come in bunches with her - Brink should get a double-double rolling out of bed. And she is way too good a shooter for the FT % to stay where it is. Personally, I think she gets a bit too amped in games (getting tied up with the defender was one manifestation of that, imo). Just relax and play - her skills are quite unique.
12-16-2021, 02:13 PM
Given the earplug one at least one of Jana’s ears … concussion or protocol
A friend saw that
A friend saw that
12-16-2021, 02:49 PM
@Teejers, re:
"What I think can be confirmed is the following: Stanford has a very talented roster for the most part - and certainly with respect to more recent recruits - every single one of them can play, if given the chance. I mean, look at Lacie and Jump this year. They are playing well because they are playing a lot and know they won't get yanked for one mistake. Lexie has always had that luxury (and has played incredibly well overall over the years). You have to play with confidence, and except in the rarest of circumstances, confidence comes with PT. This isn't to advocate that one player should be playing over another; but rather, to caution against concluding that certain bench players "aren't good enough" or "can't really play at this level" based on spotty minutes. They all can play - I mean we know Anna Wilson can play at a championship level, and she is not seeing the court nearly as much this year (same is true for NW player, who barely played last night). And I think most here would be pleasantly surprised at the productivity of Belibi, Prechtel, and just about everybody else if they played 20 minutes/game for 10 straight games. It's just the nature of playing sports - at any level, really. And it explains why I am more focused on ramifications of miniscule minutes for very good players on Stanford's bench. It's a tough job as a coach, but also one of the most important ones."
Generally, I appreciate the post and I do understand what you're saying, but I think you're way oversimplifying. 2 rebuttles:
1) I agree that all our players are talented, but I totally disagree that "every one of them can play if given the chance". I think it's more accurate to say "every one of them can fill a role...if needed." The parts are not interchangeable. I think (hope) everyone on the team realizes and recognizes that 1) some players are better than others and that's OK and 2) PT will vary depending on the circumstance. That's not a convenient coaching line - it's the truth (at least I think it is).
Great example...You bring up Anna "playing at a championship level". Well, that was with Kiana on the court who carried the scoring burden. Anna was the best backcourt choice in that combination of players. But this year, what she brings to the table is not nearly as highly valued, so her minutes are dropping. It doesn't mean the coaches aren't high on Anna anymore. She's still the same player offering the same great things. Other examples...Kiki could start on some P12 teams. But on THIS team, we have Brink, Belibi, and Prechtel as returning posts. Kiki is great at certain things, but she really struggles in a lot of areas. She could play 10+ minutes a game this season and not get to the level where the other players are. It's not intended to be hurtful and I'm certainly not saying she can't play at this level. But she's way down in the depth chart, so I think it's a stretch to say "she can play if given the chance". Sure she could play, just not as good! And what's more, I don't even think there's an issue there. Kiki knows this, because she gets her ass kicked around in practice everyday. And Anna knows what she brings to the table and I really don't think she's bent out of shape. Same with Jana. I get the feeling everyone is feeling sorry for her. She's doesn't offer what this team needs, I bet she knows it, and I also bet she knows she could start next year if she keeps working hard because the parts are going to change a lot.
2) I may be off, but I think you are lobbying for a different subbing approach, maybe against cupcake teams, in order to develop our bench. You call out - did Jump really need to play 37 minutes? Of course not - there's lots of options to spread the PT around. But I would say that these are important games for our starters to gel. Hannah has only been starting for a few games now. Invariably, if you try to get 12+ players reasonable playing time, you'll end up with tons of combinations on the court. So what's more valuable - getting the deep bench some small amount of minutes each or letting Jump play a lot with Jones and the Hulls on the perimeter and letting her get more experience feeding Brink and Belibi? There is a give and take going on here, with a player that is becoming a MAJOR piece of this team being able to compete with other great teams. Hanna getting into a rhythm and getting more confident/comfortable could be way more important to this season than sprinkling some of her minutes across a few of the deep bench.
"What I think can be confirmed is the following: Stanford has a very talented roster for the most part - and certainly with respect to more recent recruits - every single one of them can play, if given the chance. I mean, look at Lacie and Jump this year. They are playing well because they are playing a lot and know they won't get yanked for one mistake. Lexie has always had that luxury (and has played incredibly well overall over the years). You have to play with confidence, and except in the rarest of circumstances, confidence comes with PT. This isn't to advocate that one player should be playing over another; but rather, to caution against concluding that certain bench players "aren't good enough" or "can't really play at this level" based on spotty minutes. They all can play - I mean we know Anna Wilson can play at a championship level, and she is not seeing the court nearly as much this year (same is true for NW player, who barely played last night). And I think most here would be pleasantly surprised at the productivity of Belibi, Prechtel, and just about everybody else if they played 20 minutes/game for 10 straight games. It's just the nature of playing sports - at any level, really. And it explains why I am more focused on ramifications of miniscule minutes for very good players on Stanford's bench. It's a tough job as a coach, but also one of the most important ones."
Generally, I appreciate the post and I do understand what you're saying, but I think you're way oversimplifying. 2 rebuttles:
1) I agree that all our players are talented, but I totally disagree that "every one of them can play if given the chance". I think it's more accurate to say "every one of them can fill a role...if needed." The parts are not interchangeable. I think (hope) everyone on the team realizes and recognizes that 1) some players are better than others and that's OK and 2) PT will vary depending on the circumstance. That's not a convenient coaching line - it's the truth (at least I think it is).
Great example...You bring up Anna "playing at a championship level". Well, that was with Kiana on the court who carried the scoring burden. Anna was the best backcourt choice in that combination of players. But this year, what she brings to the table is not nearly as highly valued, so her minutes are dropping. It doesn't mean the coaches aren't high on Anna anymore. She's still the same player offering the same great things. Other examples...Kiki could start on some P12 teams. But on THIS team, we have Brink, Belibi, and Prechtel as returning posts. Kiki is great at certain things, but she really struggles in a lot of areas. She could play 10+ minutes a game this season and not get to the level where the other players are. It's not intended to be hurtful and I'm certainly not saying she can't play at this level. But she's way down in the depth chart, so I think it's a stretch to say "she can play if given the chance". Sure she could play, just not as good! And what's more, I don't even think there's an issue there. Kiki knows this, because she gets her ass kicked around in practice everyday. And Anna knows what she brings to the table and I really don't think she's bent out of shape. Same with Jana. I get the feeling everyone is feeling sorry for her. She's doesn't offer what this team needs, I bet she knows it, and I also bet she knows she could start next year if she keeps working hard because the parts are going to change a lot.
2) I may be off, but I think you are lobbying for a different subbing approach, maybe against cupcake teams, in order to develop our bench. You call out - did Jump really need to play 37 minutes? Of course not - there's lots of options to spread the PT around. But I would say that these are important games for our starters to gel. Hannah has only been starting for a few games now. Invariably, if you try to get 12+ players reasonable playing time, you'll end up with tons of combinations on the court. So what's more valuable - getting the deep bench some small amount of minutes each or letting Jump play a lot with Jones and the Hulls on the perimeter and letting her get more experience feeding Brink and Belibi? There is a give and take going on here, with a player that is becoming a MAJOR piece of this team being able to compete with other great teams. Hanna getting into a rhythm and getting more confident/comfortable could be way more important to this season than sprinkling some of her minutes across a few of the deep bench.
@Teejers, re:
"What I think can be confirmed is the following: Stanford has a very talented roster for the most part - and certainly with respect to more recent recruits - every single one of them can play, if given the chance. I mean, look at Lacie and Jump this year. They are playing well because they are playing a lot and know they won't get yanked for one mistake. Lexie has always had that luxury (and has played incredibly well overall over the years). You have to play with confidence, and except in the rarest of circumstances, confidence comes with PT. This isn't to advocate that one player should be playing over another; but rather, to caution against concluding that certain bench players "aren't good enough" or "can't really play at this level" based on spotty minutes. They all can play - I mean we know Anna Wilson can play at a championship level, and she is not seeing the court nearly as much this year (same is true for NW player, who barely played last night). And I think most here would be pleasantly surprised at the productivity of Belibi, Prechtel, and just about everybody else if they played 20 minutes/game for 10 straight games. It's just the nature of playing sports - at any level, really. And it explains why I am more focused on ramifications of miniscule minutes for very good players on Stanford's bench. It's a tough job as a coach, but also one of the most important ones."
Generally, I appreciate the post and I do understand what you're saying, but I think you're way oversimplifying. 2 rebuttles:
1) I agree that all our players are talented, but I totally disagree that "every one of them can play if given the chance". I think it's more accurate to say "every one of them can fill a role...if needed." The parts are not interchangeable. I think (hope) everyone on the team realizes and recognizes that 1) some players are better than others and that's OK and 2) PT will vary depending on the circumstance. That's not a convenient coaching line - it's the truth (at least I think it is).
Great example...You bring up Anna "playing at a championship level". Well, that was with Kiana on the court who carried the scoring burden. Anna was the best backcourt choice in that combination of players. But this year, what she brings to the table is not nearly as highly valued, so her minutes are dropping. It doesn't mean the coaches aren't high on Anna anymore. She's still the same player offering the same great things. Other examples...Kiki could start on some P12 teams. But on THIS team, we have Brink, Belibi, and Prechtel as returning posts. Kiki is great at certain things, but she really struggles in a lot of areas. She could play 10+ minutes a game this season and not get to the level where the other players are. It's not intended to be hurtful and I'm certainly not saying she can't play at this level. But she's way down in the depth chart, so I think it's a stretch to say "she can play if given the chance". Sure she could play, just not as good! And what's more, I don't even think there's an issue there. Kiki knows this, because she gets her ass kicked around in practice everyday. And Anna knows what she brings to the table and I really don't think she's bent out of shape. Same with Jana. I get the feeling everyone is feeling sorry for her. She's doesn't offer what this team needs, I bet she knows it, and I also bet she knows she could start next year if she keeps working hard because the parts are going to change a lot.
2) I may be off, but I think you are lobbying for a different subbing approach, maybe against cupcake teams, in order to develop our bench. You call out - did Jump really need to play 37 minutes? Of course not - there's lots of options to spread the PT around. But I would say that these are important games for our starters to gel. Hannah has only been starting for a few games now. Invariably, if you try to get 12+ players reasonable playing time, you'll end up with tons of combinations on the court. So what's more valuable - getting the deep bench some small amount of minutes each or letting Jump play a lot with Jones and the Hulls on the perimeter and letting her get more experience feeding Brink and Belibi? There is a give and take going on here, with a player that is becoming a MAJOR piece of this team being able to compete with other great teams. Hanna getting into a rhythm and getting more confident/comfortable could be way more important to this season than sprinkling some of her minutes across a few of the deep bench.
"What I think can be confirmed is the following: Stanford has a very talented roster for the most part - and certainly with respect to more recent recruits - every single one of them can play, if given the chance. I mean, look at Lacie and Jump this year. They are playing well because they are playing a lot and know they won't get yanked for one mistake. Lexie has always had that luxury (and has played incredibly well overall over the years). You have to play with confidence, and except in the rarest of circumstances, confidence comes with PT. This isn't to advocate that one player should be playing over another; but rather, to caution against concluding that certain bench players "aren't good enough" or "can't really play at this level" based on spotty minutes. They all can play - I mean we know Anna Wilson can play at a championship level, and she is not seeing the court nearly as much this year (same is true for NW player, who barely played last night). And I think most here would be pleasantly surprised at the productivity of Belibi, Prechtel, and just about everybody else if they played 20 minutes/game for 10 straight games. It's just the nature of playing sports - at any level, really. And it explains why I am more focused on ramifications of miniscule minutes for very good players on Stanford's bench. It's a tough job as a coach, but also one of the most important ones."
Generally, I appreciate the post and I do understand what you're saying, but I think you're way oversimplifying. 2 rebuttles:
1) I agree that all our players are talented, but I totally disagree that "every one of them can play if given the chance". I think it's more accurate to say "every one of them can fill a role...if needed." The parts are not interchangeable. I think (hope) everyone on the team realizes and recognizes that 1) some players are better than others and that's OK and 2) PT will vary depending on the circumstance. That's not a convenient coaching line - it's the truth (at least I think it is).
Great example...You bring up Anna "playing at a championship level". Well, that was with Kiana on the court who carried the scoring burden. Anna was the best backcourt choice in that combination of players. But this year, what she brings to the table is not nearly as highly valued, so her minutes are dropping. It doesn't mean the coaches aren't high on Anna anymore. She's still the same player offering the same great things. Other examples...Kiki could start on some P12 teams. But on THIS team, we have Brink, Belibi, and Prechtel as returning posts. Kiki is great at certain things, but she really struggles in a lot of areas. She could play 10+ minutes a game this season and not get to the level where the other players are. It's not intended to be hurtful and I'm certainly not saying she can't play at this level. But she's way down in the depth chart, so I think it's a stretch to say "she can play if given the chance". Sure she could play, just not as good! And what's more, I don't even think there's an issue there. Kiki knows this, because she gets her ass kicked around in practice everyday. And Anna knows what she brings to the table and I really don't think she's bent out of shape. Same with Jana. I get the feeling everyone is feeling sorry for her. She's doesn't offer what this team needs, I bet she knows it, and I also bet she knows she could start next year if she keeps working hard because the parts are going to change a lot.
2) I may be off, but I think you are lobbying for a different subbing approach, maybe against cupcake teams, in order to develop our bench. You call out - did Jump really need to play 37 minutes? Of course not - there's lots of options to spread the PT around. But I would say that these are important games for our starters to gel. Hannah has only been starting for a few games now. Invariably, if you try to get 12+ players reasonable playing time, you'll end up with tons of combinations on the court. So what's more valuable - getting the deep bench some small amount of minutes each or letting Jump play a lot with Jones and the Hulls on the perimeter and letting her get more experience feeding Brink and Belibi? There is a give and take going on here, with a player that is becoming a MAJOR piece of this team being able to compete with other great teams. Hanna getting into a rhythm and getting more confident/comfortable could be way more important to this season than sprinkling some of her minutes across a few of the deep bench.
12-16-2021, 04:26 PM
(12-16-2021, 02:49 PM)BillBradley Wrote: @Teejers, re:
"What I think can be confirmed is the following: Stanford has a very talented roster for the most part - and certainly with respect to more recent recruits - every single one of them can play, if given the chance. I mean, look at Lacie and Jump this year. They are playing well because they are playing a lot and know they won't get yanked for one mistake. Lexie has always had that luxury (and has played incredibly well overall over the years). You have to play with confidence, and except in the rarest of circumstances, confidence comes with PT. This isn't to advocate that one player should be playing over another; but rather, to caution against concluding that certain bench players "aren't good enough" or "can't really play at this level" based on spotty minutes. They all can play - I mean we know Anna Wilson can play at a championship level, and she is not seeing the court nearly as much this year (same is true for NW player, who barely played last night). And I think most here would be pleasantly surprised at the productivity of Belibi, Prechtel, and just about everybody else if they played 20 minutes/game for 10 straight games. It's just the nature of playing sports - at any level, really. And it explains why I am more focused on ramifications of miniscule minutes for very good players on Stanford's bench. It's a tough job as a coach, but also one of the most important ones."
Generally, I appreciate the post and I do understand what you're saying, but I think you're way oversimplifying. 2 rebuttles:
1) I agree that all our players are talented, but I totally disagree that "every one of them can play if given the chance". I think it's more accurate to say "every one of them can fill a role...if needed." The parts are not interchangeable. I think (hope) everyone on the team realizes and recognizes that 1) some players are better than others and that's OK and 2) PT will vary depending on the circumstance. That's not a convenient coaching line - it's the truth (at least I think it is).
Great example...You bring up Anna "playing at a championship level". Well, that was with Kiana on the court who carried the scoring burden. Anna was the best backcourt choice in that combination of players. But this year, what she brings to the table is not nearly as highly valued, so her minutes are dropping. It doesn't mean the coaches aren't high on Anna anymore. She's still the same player offering the same great things. Other examples...Kiki could start on some P12 teams. But on THIS team, we have Brink, Belibi, and Prechtel as returning posts. Kiki is great at certain things, but she really struggles in a lot of areas. She could play 10+ minutes a game this season and not get to the level where the other players are. It's not intended to be hurtful and I'm certainly not saying she can't play at this level. But she's way down in the depth chart, so I think it's a stretch to say "she can play if given the chance". Sure she could play, just not as good! And what's more, I don't even think there's an issue there. Kiki knows this, because she gets her ass kicked around in practice everyday. And Anna knows what she brings to the table and I really don't think she's bent out of shape. Same with Jana. I get the feeling everyone is feeling sorry for her. She's doesn't offer what this team needs, I bet she knows it, and I also bet she knows she could start next year if she keeps working hard because the parts are going to change a lot.
2) I may be off, but I think you are lobbying for a different subbing approach, maybe against cupcake teams, in order to develop our bench. You call out - did Jump really need to play 37 minutes? Of course not - there's lots of options to spread the PT around. But I would say that these are important games for our starters to gel. Hannah has only been starting for a few games now. Invariably, if you try to get 12+ players reasonable playing time, you'll end up with tons of combinations on the court. So what's more valuable - getting the deep bench some small amount of minutes each or letting Jump play a lot with Jones and the Hulls on the perimeter and letting her get more experience feeding Brink and Belibi? There is a give and take going on here, with a player that is becoming a MAJOR piece of this team being able to compete with other great teams. Hanna getting into a rhythm and getting more confident/comfortable could be way more important to this season than sprinkling some of her minutes across a few of the deep bench.
I'm not saying everyone should be playing 10-20 minutes/game. And I've played on plenty of teams and know that practices reveal who the superior players are (though in some sports you can have "gamers" vs. practice players, not sure how applicable that is to hoops). And it's clear already that Brink, Lexie, and Jones deserve starter minutes (and I'm willing to put Jump in there, certainly for now). But I AM saying people here would be surprised how effective bench players would be when guaranteed that amount of time and being confident and empowered.
And I am also saying that Jump did not need to play (and should not have played) 37 minutes last night. The outcome was never in doubt. And Jump had more than ample time to "gel" with the other "key players" in 27 minutes, or even 30 minutes. I know people in these parts are adamantly opposed to even questioning a decision by Tara, but c'mon now, let's not leave common sense at the door.
The flipside to your argument is that it's easy to envision scenario where you ask players to "step up bigtime" in crucial games without having provided them the game experience to do so when/if called. It's not hard to imagine a scenario where Anna's and Emma's D are needed against guards. Well guess what? They can't just be one-dimensional out there - you want them to at least have the confidence to take (and make) open shots. Tough to expect that with scrap PT. And similar demands could be made of others due to foul trouble and/or Covid, for crying out loud.
And although it goes without saying, I feel like I have to say this because I'm the only one who ever dares to question some things we see on the court: Tara is (and has been) a great coach for Stanford University, and the school is lucky to have her. And I want her to keep winning as much as possible to keep Geno in the rear-view mirror forever.
(12-16-2021, 02:49 PM)BillBradley Wrote: @Teejers, re:
"What I think can be confirmed is the following: Stanford has a very talented roster for the most part - and certainly with respect to more recent recruits - every single one of them can play, if given the chance. I mean, look at Lacie and Jump this year. They are playing well because they are playing a lot and know they won't get yanked for one mistake. Lexie has always had that luxury (and has played incredibly well overall over the years). You have to play with confidence, and except in the rarest of circumstances, confidence comes with PT. This isn't to advocate that one player should be playing over another; but rather, to caution against concluding that certain bench players "aren't good enough" or "can't really play at this level" based on spotty minutes. They all can play - I mean we know Anna Wilson can play at a championship level, and she is not seeing the court nearly as much this year (same is true for NW player, who barely played last night). And I think most here would be pleasantly surprised at the productivity of Belibi, Prechtel, and just about everybody else if they played 20 minutes/game for 10 straight games. It's just the nature of playing sports - at any level, really. And it explains why I am more focused on ramifications of miniscule minutes for very good players on Stanford's bench. It's a tough job as a coach, but also one of the most important ones."
Generally, I appreciate the post and I do understand what you're saying, but I think you're way oversimplifying. 2 rebuttles:
1) I agree that all our players are talented, but I totally disagree that "every one of them can play if given the chance". I think it's more accurate to say "every one of them can fill a role...if needed." The parts are not interchangeable. I think (hope) everyone on the team realizes and recognizes that 1) some players are better than others and that's OK and 2) PT will vary depending on the circumstance. That's not a convenient coaching line - it's the truth (at least I think it is).
Great example...You bring up Anna "playing at a championship level". Well, that was with Kiana on the court who carried the scoring burden. Anna was the best backcourt choice in that combination of players. But this year, what she brings to the table is not nearly as highly valued, so her minutes are dropping. It doesn't mean the coaches aren't high on Anna anymore. She's still the same player offering the same great things. Other examples...Kiki could start on some P12 teams. But on THIS team, we have Brink, Belibi, and Prechtel as returning posts. Kiki is great at certain things, but she really struggles in a lot of areas. She could play 10+ minutes a game this season and not get to the level where the other players are. It's not intended to be hurtful and I'm certainly not saying she can't play at this level. But she's way down in the depth chart, so I think it's a stretch to say "she can play if given the chance". Sure she could play, just not as good! And what's more, I don't even think there's an issue there. Kiki knows this, because she gets her ass kicked around in practice everyday. And Anna knows what she brings to the table and I really don't think she's bent out of shape. Same with Jana. I get the feeling everyone is feeling sorry for her. She's doesn't offer what this team needs, I bet she knows it, and I also bet she knows she could start next year if she keeps working hard because the parts are going to change a lot.
2) I may be off, but I think you are lobbying for a different subbing approach, maybe against cupcake teams, in order to develop our bench. You call out - did Jump really need to play 37 minutes? Of course not - there's lots of options to spread the PT around. But I would say that these are important games for our starters to gel. Hannah has only been starting for a few games now. Invariably, if you try to get 12+ players reasonable playing time, you'll end up with tons of combinations on the court. So what's more valuable - getting the deep bench some small amount of minutes each or letting Jump play a lot with Jones and the Hulls on the perimeter and letting her get more experience feeding Brink and Belibi? There is a give and take going on here, with a player that is becoming a MAJOR piece of this team being able to compete with other great teams. Hanna getting into a rhythm and getting more confident/comfortable could be way more important to this season than sprinkling some of her minutes across a few of the deep bench.
I'm not saying everyone should be playing 10-20 minutes/game. And I've played on plenty of teams and know that practices reveal who the superior players are (though in some sports you can have "gamers" vs. practice players, not sure how applicable that is to hoops). And it's clear already that Brink, Lexie, and Jones deserve starter minutes (and I'm willing to put Jump in there, certainly for now). But I AM saying people here would be surprised how effective bench players would be when guaranteed that amount of time and being confident and empowered.
And I am also saying that Jump did not need to play (and should not have played) 37 minutes last night. The outcome was never in doubt. And Jump had more than ample time to "gel" with the other "key players" in 27 minutes, or even 30 minutes. I know people in these parts are adamantly opposed to even questioning a decision by Tara, but c'mon now, let's not leave common sense at the door.
The flipside to your argument is that it's easy to envision scenario where you ask players to "step up bigtime" in crucial games without having provided them the game experience to do so when/if called. It's not hard to imagine a scenario where Anna's and Emma's D are needed against guards. Well guess what? They can't just be one-dimensional out there - you want them to at least have the confidence to take (and make) open shots. Tough to expect that with scrap PT. And similar demands could be made of others due to foul trouble and/or Covid, for crying out loud.
And although it goes without saying, I feel like I have to say this because I'm the only one who ever dares to question some things we see on the court: Tara is (and has been) a great coach for Stanford University, and the school is lucky to have her. And I want her to keep winning as much as possible to keep Geno in the rear-view mirror forever.
12-16-2021, 05:14 PM
(12-16-2021, 02:49 PM)BillBradley Wrote: @Teejers, re:
"What I think can be confirmed is the following: Stanford has a very talented roster for the most part - and certainly with respect to more recent recruits - every single one of them can play, if given the chance. I mean, look at Lacie and Jump this year. They are playing well because they are playing a lot and know they won't get yanked for one mistake. Lexie has always had that luxury (and has played incredibly well overall over the years). You have to play with confidence, and except in the rarest of circumstances, confidence comes with PT. This isn't to advocate that one player should be playing over another; but rather, to caution against concluding that certain bench players "aren't good enough" or "can't really play at this level" based on spotty minutes. They all can play - I mean we know Anna Wilson can play at a championship level, and she is not seeing the court nearly as much this year (same is true for NW player, who barely played last night). And I think most here would be pleasantly surprised at the productivity of Belibi, Prechtel, and just about everybody else if they played 20 minutes/game for 10 straight games. It's just the nature of playing sports - at any level, really. And it explains why I am more focused on ramifications of miniscule minutes for very good players on Stanford's bench. It's a tough job as a coach, but also one of the most important ones."
Generally, I appreciate the post and I do understand what you're saying, but I think you're way oversimplifying. 2 rebuttles:
1) I agree that all our players are talented, but I totally disagree that "every one of them can play if given the chance". I think it's more accurate to say "every one of them can fill a role...if needed." The parts are not interchangeable. I think (hope) everyone on the team realizes and recognizes that 1) some players are better than others and that's OK and 2) PT will vary depending on the circumstance. That's not a convenient coaching line - it's the truth (at least I think it is).
Great example...You bring up Anna "playing at a championship level". Well, that was with Kiana on the court who carried the scoring burden. Anna was the best backcourt choice in that combination of players. But this year, what she brings to the table is not nearly as highly valued, so her minutes are dropping. It doesn't mean the coaches aren't high on Anna anymore. She's still the same player offering the same great things. Other examples...Kiki could start on some P12 teams. But on THIS team, we have Brink, Belibi, and Prechtel as returning posts. Kiki is great at certain things, but she really struggles in a lot of areas. She could play 10+ minutes a game this season and not get to the level where the other players are. It's not intended to be hurtful and I'm certainly not saying she can't play at this level. But she's way down in the depth chart, so I think it's a stretch to say "she can play if given the chance". Sure she could play, just not as good! And what's more, I don't even think there's an issue there. Kiki knows this, because she gets her ass kicked around in practice everyday. And Anna knows what she brings to the table and I really don't think she's bent out of shape. Same with Jana. I get the feeling everyone is feeling sorry for her. She's doesn't offer what this team needs, I bet she knows it, and I also bet she knows she could start next year if she keeps working hard because the parts are going to change a lot.
2) I may be off, but I think you are lobbying for a different subbing approach, maybe against cupcake teams, in order to develop our bench. You call out - did Jump really need to play 37 minutes? Of course not - there's lots of options to spread the PT around. But I would say that these are important games for our starters to gel. Hannah has only been starting for a few games now. Invariably, if you try to get 12+ players reasonable playing time, you'll end up with tons of combinations on the court. So what's more valuable - getting the deep bench some small amount of minutes each or letting Jump play a lot with Jones and the Hulls on the perimeter and letting her get more experience feeding Brink and Belibi? There is a give and take going on here, with a player that is becoming a MAJOR piece of this team being able to compete with other great teams. Hanna getting into a rhythm and getting more confident/comfortable could be way more important to this season than sprinkling some of her minutes across a few of the deep bench.
Totally agree with Bradley. Re Jump, she played when we needed shooting last year and was first off the bench often, and she didn't disappoint. But she generally didn't play d vs the opponent's best back court. Davis had a pretty quick and effective guard and Hannah defended her even while no doubt a bit tired. That's what the team will need if she's to play alot.
(12-16-2021, 02:49 PM)BillBradley Wrote: @Teejers, re:
"What I think can be confirmed is the following: Stanford has a very talented roster for the most part - and certainly with respect to more recent recruits - every single one of them can play, if given the chance. I mean, look at Lacie and Jump this year. They are playing well because they are playing a lot and know they won't get yanked for one mistake. Lexie has always had that luxury (and has played incredibly well overall over the years). You have to play with confidence, and except in the rarest of circumstances, confidence comes with PT. This isn't to advocate that one player should be playing over another; but rather, to caution against concluding that certain bench players "aren't good enough" or "can't really play at this level" based on spotty minutes. They all can play - I mean we know Anna Wilson can play at a championship level, and she is not seeing the court nearly as much this year (same is true for NW player, who barely played last night). And I think most here would be pleasantly surprised at the productivity of Belibi, Prechtel, and just about everybody else if they played 20 minutes/game for 10 straight games. It's just the nature of playing sports - at any level, really. And it explains why I am more focused on ramifications of miniscule minutes for very good players on Stanford's bench. It's a tough job as a coach, but also one of the most important ones."
Generally, I appreciate the post and I do understand what you're saying, but I think you're way oversimplifying. 2 rebuttles:
1) I agree that all our players are talented, but I totally disagree that "every one of them can play if given the chance". I think it's more accurate to say "every one of them can fill a role...if needed." The parts are not interchangeable. I think (hope) everyone on the team realizes and recognizes that 1) some players are better than others and that's OK and 2) PT will vary depending on the circumstance. That's not a convenient coaching line - it's the truth (at least I think it is).
Great example...You bring up Anna "playing at a championship level". Well, that was with Kiana on the court who carried the scoring burden. Anna was the best backcourt choice in that combination of players. But this year, what she brings to the table is not nearly as highly valued, so her minutes are dropping. It doesn't mean the coaches aren't high on Anna anymore. She's still the same player offering the same great things. Other examples...Kiki could start on some P12 teams. But on THIS team, we have Brink, Belibi, and Prechtel as returning posts. Kiki is great at certain things, but she really struggles in a lot of areas. She could play 10+ minutes a game this season and not get to the level where the other players are. It's not intended to be hurtful and I'm certainly not saying she can't play at this level. But she's way down in the depth chart, so I think it's a stretch to say "she can play if given the chance". Sure she could play, just not as good! And what's more, I don't even think there's an issue there. Kiki knows this, because she gets her ass kicked around in practice everyday. And Anna knows what she brings to the table and I really don't think she's bent out of shape. Same with Jana. I get the feeling everyone is feeling sorry for her. She's doesn't offer what this team needs, I bet she knows it, and I also bet she knows she could start next year if she keeps working hard because the parts are going to change a lot.
2) I may be off, but I think you are lobbying for a different subbing approach, maybe against cupcake teams, in order to develop our bench. You call out - did Jump really need to play 37 minutes? Of course not - there's lots of options to spread the PT around. But I would say that these are important games for our starters to gel. Hannah has only been starting for a few games now. Invariably, if you try to get 12+ players reasonable playing time, you'll end up with tons of combinations on the court. So what's more valuable - getting the deep bench some small amount of minutes each or letting Jump play a lot with Jones and the Hulls on the perimeter and letting her get more experience feeding Brink and Belibi? There is a give and take going on here, with a player that is becoming a MAJOR piece of this team being able to compete with other great teams. Hanna getting into a rhythm and getting more confident/comfortable could be way more important to this season than sprinkling some of her minutes across a few of the deep bench.
Totally agree with Bradley. Re Jump, she played when we needed shooting last year and was first off the bench often, and she didn't disappoint. But she generally didn't play d vs the opponent's best back court. Davis had a pretty quick and effective guard and Hannah defended her even while no doubt a bit tired. That's what the team will need if she's to play alot.
(12-16-2021, 05:14 PM)old spanish trail Wrote:(12-16-2021, 02:49 PM)BillBradley Wrote: @Teejers, re:
"What I think can be confirmed is the following: Stanford has a very talented roster for the most part - and certainly with respect to more recent recruits - every single one of them can play, if given the chance. I mean, look at Lacie and Jump this year. They are playing well because they are playing a lot and know they won't get yanked for one mistake. Lexie has always had that luxury (and has played incredibly well overall over the years). You have to play with confidence, and except in the rarest of circumstances, confidence comes with PT. This isn't to advocate that one player should be playing over another; but rather, to caution against concluding that certain bench players "aren't good enough" or "can't really play at this level" based on spotty minutes. They all can play - I mean we know Anna Wilson can play at a championship level, and she is not seeing the court nearly as much this year (same is true for NW player, who barely played last night). And I think most here would be pleasantly surprised at the productivity of Belibi, Prechtel, and just about everybody else if they played 20 minutes/game for 10 straight games. It's just the nature of playing sports - at any level, really. And it explains why I am more focused on ramifications of miniscule minutes for very good players on Stanford's bench. It's a tough job as a coach, but also one of the most important ones."
Generally, I appreciate the post and I do understand what you're saying, but I think you're way oversimplifying. 2 rebuttles:
1) I agree that all our players are talented, but I totally disagree that "every one of them can play if given the chance". I think it's more accurate to say "every one of them can fill a role...if needed." The parts are not interchangeable. I think (hope) everyone on the team realizes and recognizes that 1) some players are better than others and that's OK and 2) PT will vary depending on the circumstance. That's not a convenient coaching line - it's the truth (at least I think it is).
Great example...You bring up Anna "playing at a championship level". Well, that was with Kiana on the court who carried the scoring burden. Anna was the best backcourt choice in that combination of players. But this year, what she brings to the table is not nearly as highly valued, so her minutes are dropping. It doesn't mean the coaches aren't high on Anna anymore. She's still the same player offering the same great things. Other examples...Kiki could start on some P12 teams. But on THIS team, we have Brink, Belibi, and Prechtel as returning posts. Kiki is great at certain things, but she really struggles in a lot of areas. She could play 10+ minutes a game this season and not get to the level where the other players are. It's not intended to be hurtful and I'm certainly not saying she can't play at this level. But she's way down in the depth chart, so I think it's a stretch to say "she can play if given the chance". Sure she could play, just not as good! And what's more, I don't even think there's an issue there. Kiki knows this, because she gets her ass kicked around in practice everyday. And Anna knows what she brings to the table and I really don't think she's bent out of shape. Same with Jana. I get the feeling everyone is feeling sorry for her. She's doesn't offer what this team needs, I bet she knows it, and I also bet she knows she could start next year if she keeps working hard because the parts are going to change a lot.
2) I may be off, but I think you are lobbying for a different subbing approach, maybe against cupcake teams, in order to develop our bench. You call out - did Jump really need to play 37 minutes? Of course not - there's lots of options to spread the PT around. But I would say that these are important games for our starters to gel. Hannah has only been starting for a few games now. Invariably, if you try to get 12+ players reasonable playing time, you'll end up with tons of combinations on the court. So what's more valuable - getting the deep bench some small amount of minutes each or letting Jump play a lot with Jones and the Hulls on the perimeter and letting her get more experience feeding Brink and Belibi? There is a give and take going on here, with a player that is becoming a MAJOR piece of this team being able to compete with other great teams. Hanna getting into a rhythm and getting more confident/comfortable could be way more important to this season than sprinkling some of her minutes across a few of the deep bench.
Totally agree with Bradley. Re Jump, she played when we needed shooting last year and was first off the bench often, and she didn't disappoint. But she generally didn't play d vs the opponent's best back court. Davis had a pretty quick and effective guard and Hannah defended her even while no doubt a bit tired. That's what the team will need if she's to play alot.
Good points. I only watched the first half of the feed, but I am pleased that Jump has improved so much and especially on D. I love the energy that the twins and Haley bring to the game. I'm not too concerned with Lexie and Haley's stats as they just seem to produce. And I think Lacie is doing just fine at PG.
I do think post play is still a work in progress. Brink is raw, but wow what an upside. Belibi -- well, she is what she is -- great when facing the basket and not that great with back to the basket. Prechtel just seems to be a wing trapped in a post's body.
Emma-Nnopu's athleticism just leaps right out of the screen. I'd like to see more of her. Demetre had one nice pass toward the end of the first half. I'm sure she will contribute if she can consistently crack the rotation.
Of course all these observations are based on one half against a physically smaller team. (Although #11 for Davis held her own against our posts, given the size disadvantage).
FWIW it seems to me that our offense doesn't always fit the rotation we have on the court, especially when it comes to our posts. But maybe that's because there seem to be way more possibilities when Brink is in there.
I'm glad the twins are getting so much PT together. There does seem to be a noticeable dropoff after Jump/Hulls/Haley/Brink and I'm sure Tara is trying to sort out the next few spots. (Do we still have 17 on the roster?)
(12-16-2021, 05:14 PM)old spanish trail Wrote:(12-16-2021, 02:49 PM)BillBradley Wrote: @Teejers, re:
"What I think can be confirmed is the following: Stanford has a very talented roster for the most part - and certainly with respect to more recent recruits - every single one of them can play, if given the chance. I mean, look at Lacie and Jump this year. They are playing well because they are playing a lot and know they won't get yanked for one mistake. Lexie has always had that luxury (and has played incredibly well overall over the years). You have to play with confidence, and except in the rarest of circumstances, confidence comes with PT. This isn't to advocate that one player should be playing over another; but rather, to caution against concluding that certain bench players "aren't good enough" or "can't really play at this level" based on spotty minutes. They all can play - I mean we know Anna Wilson can play at a championship level, and she is not seeing the court nearly as much this year (same is true for NW player, who barely played last night). And I think most here would be pleasantly surprised at the productivity of Belibi, Prechtel, and just about everybody else if they played 20 minutes/game for 10 straight games. It's just the nature of playing sports - at any level, really. And it explains why I am more focused on ramifications of miniscule minutes for very good players on Stanford's bench. It's a tough job as a coach, but also one of the most important ones."
Generally, I appreciate the post and I do understand what you're saying, but I think you're way oversimplifying. 2 rebuttles:
1) I agree that all our players are talented, but I totally disagree that "every one of them can play if given the chance". I think it's more accurate to say "every one of them can fill a role...if needed." The parts are not interchangeable. I think (hope) everyone on the team realizes and recognizes that 1) some players are better than others and that's OK and 2) PT will vary depending on the circumstance. That's not a convenient coaching line - it's the truth (at least I think it is).
Great example...You bring up Anna "playing at a championship level". Well, that was with Kiana on the court who carried the scoring burden. Anna was the best backcourt choice in that combination of players. But this year, what she brings to the table is not nearly as highly valued, so her minutes are dropping. It doesn't mean the coaches aren't high on Anna anymore. She's still the same player offering the same great things. Other examples...Kiki could start on some P12 teams. But on THIS team, we have Brink, Belibi, and Prechtel as returning posts. Kiki is great at certain things, but she really struggles in a lot of areas. She could play 10+ minutes a game this season and not get to the level where the other players are. It's not intended to be hurtful and I'm certainly not saying she can't play at this level. But she's way down in the depth chart, so I think it's a stretch to say "she can play if given the chance". Sure she could play, just not as good! And what's more, I don't even think there's an issue there. Kiki knows this, because she gets her ass kicked around in practice everyday. And Anna knows what she brings to the table and I really don't think she's bent out of shape. Same with Jana. I get the feeling everyone is feeling sorry for her. She's doesn't offer what this team needs, I bet she knows it, and I also bet she knows she could start next year if she keeps working hard because the parts are going to change a lot.
2) I may be off, but I think you are lobbying for a different subbing approach, maybe against cupcake teams, in order to develop our bench. You call out - did Jump really need to play 37 minutes? Of course not - there's lots of options to spread the PT around. But I would say that these are important games for our starters to gel. Hannah has only been starting for a few games now. Invariably, if you try to get 12+ players reasonable playing time, you'll end up with tons of combinations on the court. So what's more valuable - getting the deep bench some small amount of minutes each or letting Jump play a lot with Jones and the Hulls on the perimeter and letting her get more experience feeding Brink and Belibi? There is a give and take going on here, with a player that is becoming a MAJOR piece of this team being able to compete with other great teams. Hanna getting into a rhythm and getting more confident/comfortable could be way more important to this season than sprinkling some of her minutes across a few of the deep bench.
Totally agree with Bradley. Re Jump, she played when we needed shooting last year and was first off the bench often, and she didn't disappoint. But she generally didn't play d vs the opponent's best back court. Davis had a pretty quick and effective guard and Hannah defended her even while no doubt a bit tired. That's what the team will need if she's to play alot.
Good points. I only watched the first half of the feed, but I am pleased that Jump has improved so much and especially on D. I love the energy that the twins and Haley bring to the game. I'm not too concerned with Lexie and Haley's stats as they just seem to produce. And I think Lacie is doing just fine at PG.
I do think post play is still a work in progress. Brink is raw, but wow what an upside. Belibi -- well, she is what she is -- great when facing the basket and not that great with back to the basket. Prechtel just seems to be a wing trapped in a post's body.
Emma-Nnopu's athleticism just leaps right out of the screen. I'd like to see more of her. Demetre had one nice pass toward the end of the first half. I'm sure she will contribute if she can consistently crack the rotation.
Of course all these observations are based on one half against a physically smaller team. (Although #11 for Davis held her own against our posts, given the size disadvantage).
FWIW it seems to me that our offense doesn't always fit the rotation we have on the court, especially when it comes to our posts. But maybe that's because there seem to be way more possibilities when Brink is in there.
I'm glad the twins are getting so much PT together. There does seem to be a noticeable dropoff after Jump/Hulls/Haley/Brink and I'm sure Tara is trying to sort out the next few spots. (Do we still have 17 on the roster?)
12-16-2021, 06:06 PM
it's been my sense that, this season, tara has played a different starter for (almost) the entire game several times in games that are not close. hannah is not the first. seems to me a rehearsal strategy or practice for big games.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »