Posts: 5,067
Threads: 207
Joined: Dec 1969
I don't know what Jskass saw, but I was sitting behind Stanford's 2nd half offensive end . Each player was active. No one was just occupying space. As best I could tell, they seemed to be executing as coached. No one was dropping their shoulders and jogging down the court (she's now graduated). In transition, everyone hustled. On offense, the three point shooters were moving around trying to get enough room for a pass to come in. The guards were moving the ball around, but rarely able to get the ball to anyone in a position to score. The guards occasionally would try to drive to the basket, often resulting in their getting stripped of the ball. The interior players were working to get position, but the passing lanes were closed. On defense, our guards were definitely harassing the ball handler.
A couple of differences I believe exist between Karlie and her sister Bonnie. Bonnie had more range on her shot. She'd hit from 8 or 10 feet out from the 3pt line. Karlie's got a good 3pt shot, but she seems to not shoot from so far back. She was often on the baseline, but the defense would be out on her so she couldn't get enough separation for a shot. I think Bonnie could get a shot off a bit quicker, but that could be an incorrect impression.
On offense, we worked the ball around with a minimal amount of dribbling. But we rarely got a good shot off. Instead, when the clock got low, we took a choice of a questionable pass in, a hazardous drive, a dangerous skip pass, or a challenged 3 point shot.
I stand with my judgement that the coaches had not properly prepared the team well against a zone defense. We have noted for a couple of years about the tendency of Stanford to pass the ball around the perimeter when the defense is in a zone, and struggling to find an opening. The ball moved more quickly, but there was still the problem of getting the ball in.
Jskass, you may want to reread 81alum's post, or go listen to the audio yourself. I think you are taking Tara's statement out of context. She was talking about what she told the players BEFORE the game. In response to a question, she hummed and hawed and finally said "Coming in, we really talked about it, you can't just show up. You gotta be really aggressive." She certainly did not directly indicate any player or the entire team did not show up. She did say a number of things about their play, specifically about rebounding and turnovers.  If you have some particular players that you think were flat, or particular sequences that were flat, point them out to us (or at least me as I don't recall them).  (I'll note that Tara brought Bri & Lili to the press conference, and also responded to a question about McCall that she played with heart. I presume this means she valued their effort in the game.)
Regarding the O-boards, I'll note that McCall played all of the third quarter when SCU out-rebounded us 6 to 5 under our defensive boards and 5 to 3 under their defensive boards. Erika got no rebounds that quarter. Overall the rebounding numbers weren't as bad as I expected based on Tara's comments: We got 29/52 (55.8%) under our defensive boards while SCU got 20/36 (55.6%). Both of those numbers are lower than a typical game, but they're approximately equal. (Note: The SCU box score has an error in totals for the 2nd & 3rd quarters. These 3rd quarter numbers are based on the sum of the numbers for each player.)
I haven't/can't analyze it, but it seemed the majority of our turnovers were in the half court game, not during transition. I don't think we can blame them on a move to a faster game.
Eventually, foul troubles hurt us, specifically on Bri and Karlie. The press was effective in getting turnovers, but it couldn't be utilized effectively late.
