[Farm93]

Well this is not exactly a big point of pride given the weakness in the conference, but...

Stanford was essentially 32nd in the AP Poll (seventh in the others receiving votes category).  Amazingly, there is not a single opponent left on the Stanford schedule that is ranked higher.

The conference is so weak that it is probably not out of the question that only 2 teams make it into the NCAA tournament from the Pac-12.  At least Stanford will be in a good position going into conference play.

[Farm93]

Well this is not exactly a big point of pride given the weakness in the conference, but...

Stanford was essentially 32nd in the AP Poll (seventh in the others receiving votes category).  Amazingly, there is not a single opponent left on the Stanford schedule that is ranked higher.

The conference is so weak that it is probably not out of the question that only 2 teams make it into the NCAA tournament from the Pac-12.  At least Stanford will be in a good position going into conference play.

[washingtonismoney]

In addition:

Kenpom.com: 18th
Sagarin Predictor: 16th
RPI: 28th

I believe kenpom.com is typically considered the best of the computer college basketball rankings.

EDIT: oh yeah, and all agree: first in the Pac-12.

[washingtonismoney]

In addition:

Kenpom.com: 18th
Sagarin Predictor: 16th
RPI: 28th

I believe kenpom.com is typically considered the best of the computer college basketball rankings.

EDIT: oh yeah, and all agree: first in the Pac-12.

[76lsjumb]

That can't be true.  Just ask Garvin.  Dawkins can't recruit or coach, and none of our players are really very good, especially the new guy.  ;)

Must be some other Stanford...

[76lsjumb]

That can't be true.  Just ask Garvin.  Dawkins can't recruit or coach, and none of our players are really very good, especially the new guy.  ;)

Must be some other Stanford...

[yvonne]

Wow! That loss to UConn really hurt us!

[yvonne]

Wow! That loss to UConn really hurt us!

[Farm93]

Hey, 76lsjumb, ask washingtonismoney where kenpom.com had us ranked this time last year. As I recall, it was just about this same spot. And we had something like an 80 percent chance of making the NCAA tournament. And then conference play started...

There really is reason for hope.  Last year all of the Frosh were just not ready, and there were too many of them on the floor at the same time.  This year, the guys are playing a lot better.  And then there is the Chasson factor.  It is amazing, but he really is a calming force for the team.

But no need to trust the computer formulas.  The experts that have seen the team play believe they are ready.  They are not Final Four material, but I would not be shocked to see them win at least one game in the NCAA tournament.  If you look across the Pac-12 every other team has major issues or a lot of bad losses.  Stanford only has one loss to a very good team and was in the game to the end, a true quality loss in the eyes of the selection committee.

[Farm93]

Hey, 76lsjumb, ask washingtonismoney where kenpom.com had us ranked this time last year. As I recall, it was just about this same spot. And we had something like an 80 percent chance of making the NCAA tournament. And then conference play started...

There really is reason for hope.  Last year all of the Frosh were just not ready, and there were too many of them on the floor at the same time.  This year, the guys are playing a lot better.  And then there is the Chasson factor.  It is amazing, but he really is a calming force for the team.

But no need to trust the computer formulas.  The experts that have seen the team play believe they are ready.  They are not Final Four material, but I would not be shocked to see them win at least one game in the NCAA tournament.  If you look across the Pac-12 every other team has major issues or a lot of bad losses.  Stanford only has one loss to a very good team and was in the game to the end, a true quality loss in the eyes of the selection committee.

[76lsjumb]

Garvin, I'm fully aware that I'm potentially setting myself up for a merciless beatdown several weeks from now, maybe sooner, in the event we wilt under the pressure of Butler and the early conference games -- after all, we open against UCLA and USC [albeit at home].  However, although I can't explain it [yet], this team [or, more accurately, the team this year, as opposed to last year] actually does seem to look like it has some clue what it is doing on offense, and it clearly does not rely on only one guy ..<cough, cough...Jeremy Green ...cough, cough> who, if he happens to be off that night, leaves everyone else in panic mode.  So, I've decided to go all in...and keep my fingers crossed that we'll keep hitting 29-34 at the free throw line... ::)

Also, in response to an observation you made in an earlier thread, I knew Dick DiBiaso, I had dinner with Dick DiBiaso in our dorm, and Johnny Dawkins is no Dick DiBiaso [meant in a good way].  Thus, I don't think it's accurate to say we've returned to the DiBiaso era [although I think John Revelli would fit in well with the bigs on this team], or, if we have, it's as much [or more] due to the ticket policy that has emptied the lower sections as it is to Dawkins.

[76lsjumb]

Garvin, I'm fully aware that I'm potentially setting myself up for a merciless beatdown several weeks from now, maybe sooner, in the event we wilt under the pressure of Butler and the early conference games -- after all, we open against UCLA and USC [albeit at home].  However, although I can't explain it [yet], this team [or, more accurately, the team this year, as opposed to last year] actually does seem to look like it has some clue what it is doing on offense, and it clearly does not rely on only one guy ..<cough, cough...Jeremy Green ...cough, cough> who, if he happens to be off that night, leaves everyone else in panic mode.  So, I've decided to go all in...and keep my fingers crossed that we'll keep hitting 29-34 at the free throw line... ::)

Also, in response to an observation you made in an earlier thread, I knew Dick DiBiaso, I had dinner with Dick DiBiaso in our dorm, and Johnny Dawkins is no Dick DiBiaso [meant in a good way].  Thus, I don't think it's accurate to say we've returned to the DiBiaso era [although I think John Revelli would fit in well with the bigs on this team], or, if we have, it's as much [or more] due to the ticket policy that has emptied the lower sections as it is to Dawkins.

[washingtonismoney]

Hey, 76lsjumb, ask washingtonismoney where kenpom.com had us ranked this time last year. As I recall, it was just about this same spot. And we had something like an 80 percent chance of making the NCAA tournament. And then conference play started...

I believe we were in the thirties or forties at this time last year. Because kenpom.com has gone to a freemium model, I can't verify (well, I could go digging through my old posts but I won't.) At any rate, a comparison of our early schedule reveals some difference between the two teams: this year, through nine games, Stanford's beaten two Big Six conference teams and lost to a top-5 opponent on basically their home court; last year, through nine games, the team was 6-3, had beaten one Big Six conference team while losing to Murray State, Tulsa, and Butler. In the tenth game we played Oklahoma State and lost by eleven; this year we beat them by fifteen, a twenty-six point swing (granted, part of this has to do with moving from OK State's home floor to a neutral site.)

Anyway, I do think it's a bit early to declare "Mission Accomplished." There are certainly many signs for optimism, but the team won't prove it until conference play. And even then--Stanford could wildly exceed expectations in conference play and still get shut out of the tournament due to the Pac-12 Implosion Quest.

[washingtonismoney]

Hey, 76lsjumb, ask washingtonismoney where kenpom.com had us ranked this time last year. As I recall, it was just about this same spot. And we had something like an 80 percent chance of making the NCAA tournament. And then conference play started...

I believe we were in the thirties or forties at this time last year. Because kenpom.com has gone to a freemium model, I can't verify (well, I could go digging through my old posts but I won't.) At any rate, a comparison of our early schedule reveals some difference between the two teams: this year, through nine games, Stanford's beaten two Big Six conference teams and lost to a top-5 opponent on basically their home court; last year, through nine games, the team was 6-3, had beaten one Big Six conference team while losing to Murray State, Tulsa, and Butler. In the tenth game we played Oklahoma State and lost by eleven; this year we beat them by fifteen, a twenty-six point swing (granted, part of this has to do with moving from OK State's home floor to a neutral site.)

Anyway, I do think it's a bit early to declare "Mission Accomplished." There are certainly many signs for optimism, but the team won't prove it until conference play. And even then--Stanford could wildly exceed expectations in conference play and still get shut out of the tournament due to the Pac-12 Implosion Quest.

[Farm93]

Well, as much as I want to declare that things are great because Stanford has only one loss, the reality is that things are probably going to be fine because the conference is terrible.

The school near Oakland and the school in Tucson are playing decent basketball.  The rest of the conference's teams would finish near or at the bottom of any other "major" conference.  So as long as Stanford is mediocre the record should be OK this year.

[Farm93]

Well, as much as I want to declare that things are great because Stanford has only one loss, the reality is that things are probably going to be fine because the conference is terrible.

The school near Oakland and the school in Tucson are playing decent basketball.  The rest of the conference's teams would finish near or at the bottom of any other "major" conference.  So as long as Stanford is mediocre the record should be OK this year.

[washingtonismoney]

The school near Oakland and the school in Tucson are playing decent basketball.  The rest of the conference's teams would finish near or at the bottom of any other "major" conference.  So as long as Stanford is mediocre the record should be OK this year.

School near Oakland lost to San Diego State and Missouri by 40.

[washingtonismoney]

The school near Oakland and the school in Tucson are playing decent basketball.  The rest of the conference's teams would finish near or at the bottom of any other "major" conference.  So as long as Stanford is mediocre the record should be OK this year.

School near Oakland lost to San Diego State and Missouri by 40.

[Kathy]

School near Oakland lost to San Diego State and Missouri by 40.

Always worth a smile  :) ;D 8)

[Kathy]

School near Oakland lost to San Diego State and Missouri by 40.

Always worth a smile  :) ;D 8)

[Farm93]

[quote author=Farm93 link=topic=5123.msg36931#msg36931 date=1323189629]
The school near Oakland and the school in Tucson are playing decent basketball.  The rest of the conference's teams would finish near or at the bottom of any other "major" conference.  So as long as Stanford is mediocre the record should be OK this year.

School near Oakland lost to San Diego State and Missouri by 40.
[/quote]

I know, I think a fan of the Big East or ACC could easily conclude that Stanford is the best team in the conference.  However, if one is afraid to accept that concept just yet, then one has to turn to that school with an usher/security guard as a mascot or UoA.  I think both programs have displayed more flaws than Stanford, but they are the only other programs in the conference playing anything close to quality "major" conference level hoops.

[Farm93]

[quote author=Farm93 link=topic=5123.msg36931#msg36931 date=1323189629]
The school near Oakland and the school in Tucson are playing decent basketball.  The rest of the conference's teams would finish near or at the bottom of any other "major" conference.  So as long as Stanford is mediocre the record should be OK this year.

School near Oakland lost to San Diego State and Missouri by 40.
[/quote]

I know, I think a fan of the Big East or ACC could easily conclude that Stanford is the best team in the conference.  However, if one is afraid to accept that concept just yet, then one has to turn to that school with an usher/security guard as a mascot or UoA.  I think both programs have displayed more flaws than Stanford, but they are the only other programs in the conference playing anything close to quality "major" conference level hoops.

[Spiny_Norman]

Farm93, I think we just need to accept that the Pac 12 is a mid-major in basketball.  It does not deserve any more consideration than the A10 or the Missouri Valley this season (and probably for the last several as well).

[Spiny_Norman]

Farm93, I think we just need to accept that the Pac 12 is a mid-major in basketball.  It does not deserve any more consideration than the A10 or the Missouri Valley this season (and probably for the last several as well).

[76lsjumb]

Garvin, I'm fully aware that I'm potentially setting myself up for a merciless beatdown several weeks from now...

Yup, 76lsjumb, you were. Five losses in six games. Now seventh-place team in the conference, and --even facing a terrible the University of South Central team Saturday -- I think we've got a good shot at sinking below the .500 mark by the end of the weekend.

Nothing to see here, just move along...
Oh, look,...a squirrel!
How about that hockey game last night...?!

Okay, I'll admit it...I've got nothin'. 

Actually, garvin, I'm surprised you waited this long.  I expected to see this thrown back at me after the Arizona debacle LAST weekend.  That was when I finally stopped giving Coach Dawkins the benefit of the doubt [ which, unlike, say, unemployment benefits under the current administration, is a benefit that does finally run out].  He seems like a nice guy, but...

When Duke runs the Duke offense, they come back from 10 points down with 2 minutes left to defeat UNC at UNC.  When Stanford runs the Duke offense [at least, I assume it's the Duke offense, since it doesn't appear to resemble any other offense...or, indeed, any organized offense at all], we go from 10 points down with 2 minutes left to lose by even more.

Oh well, as I also said somewhere earlier, at least baseball season starts in just a few days.  And, lest we get too dewy-eyed over what "might have been," it's woth noting that LSU [where Trent Johnson went so he could recurit the really good players]is not exactly topping the charts, either [at 13-10; 3-7] ... and remember that it was Johnson, not Dawkins, who decided to give Daveed Dildy, rather than Jeremy Lin, the scholarship.

[76lsjumb]

Garvin, I'm fully aware that I'm potentially setting myself up for a merciless beatdown several weeks from now...

Yup, 76lsjumb, you were. Five losses in six games. Now seventh-place team in the conference, and --even facing a terrible the University of South Central team Saturday -- I think we've got a good shot at sinking below the .500 mark by the end of the weekend.

Nothing to see here, just move along...
Oh, look,...a squirrel!
How about that hockey game last night...?!

Okay, I'll admit it...I've got nothin'. 

Actually, garvin, I'm surprised you waited this long.  I expected to see this thrown back at me after the Arizona debacle LAST weekend.  That was when I finally stopped giving Coach Dawkins the benefit of the doubt [ which, unlike, say, unemployment benefits under the current administration, is a benefit that does finally run out].  He seems like a nice guy, but...

When Duke runs the Duke offense, they come back from 10 points down with 2 minutes left to defeat UNC at UNC.  When Stanford runs the Duke offense [at least, I assume it's the Duke offense, since it doesn't appear to resemble any other offense...or, indeed, any organized offense at all], we go from 10 points down with 2 minutes left to lose by even more.

Oh well, as I also said somewhere earlier, at least baseball season starts in just a few days.  And, lest we get too dewy-eyed over what "might have been," it's woth noting that LSU [where Trent Johnson went so he could recurit the really good players]is not exactly topping the charts, either [at 13-10; 3-7] ... and remember that it was Johnson, not Dawkins, who decided to give Daveed Dildy, rather than Jeremy Lin, the scholarship.

[yvonne]

Are we in a Tedford situation here, since Dawkins was given a two year extension last year?

[yvonne]

Are we in a Tedford situation here, since Dawkins was given a two year extension last year?

[washingtonismoney]

Are we in a the UC system's highest paid employee situation here, since Dawkins was given a two year extension last year?

No. Dawkins was never successful in the first place.

[washingtonismoney]

Are we in a the UC system's highest paid employee situation here, since Dawkins was given a two year extension last year?

No. Dawkins was never successful in the first place.

[yvonne]

Ba-dump-bump.

What I meant was by extending his contract, have we made it too expensive to fire him?

[yvonne]

Ba-dump-bump.

What I meant was by extending his contract, have we made it too expensive to fire him?

[Farm93]

We need him to be hired away from us.  Is there an ACC or SEC program looking to be mini-Duke?

His W-L record this year is not bad.  Maybe some school will want him.  I think in the right situation Dawkins could be a great coach.  Playing in the Pac-12 with Stanford's recruiting philosophy is probably not the best fit.

Why, I bet he could coach any number of SEC or ACC teams to the Final Four, if given a chance.  Please!!

[Farm93]

We need him to be hired away from us.  Is there an ACC or SEC program looking to be mini-Duke?

His W-L record this year is not bad.  Maybe some school will want him.  I think in the right situation Dawkins could be a great coach.  Playing in the Pac-12 with Stanford's recruiting philosophy is probably not the best fit.

Why, I bet he could coach any number of SEC or ACC teams to the Final Four, if given a chance.  Please!!

[76lsjumb]

We need him to be hired away from us.  Is there an ACC or SEC program looking to be mini-Duke?

His W-L record this year is not bad.  Maybe some school will want him.  I think in the right situation Dawkins could be a great coach.  Playing in the Pac-12 with Stanford's recruiting philosophy is probably not the best fit.

Why, I bet he could coach any number of SEC or ACC teams to the Final Four, if given a chance.  Please!!

Come to think of it, some commentator [on ESPN, IIRC] at the beginning of the season speculated that LSU's coach might be on the hot seat this year if things didn't turn around.  I think a former Stanford coach would fit in quite well there...

More seriously, we really do appear to be in a bind... Unless he pulls a Coughlin and we go on to win the Pac-12 tournament, there's really no solid basis for speculating that this group of purportedly talented sophomores [plus Randle] is going to start achieving at a dramatically higher level under Dawkins, even with one [or two] more year(s) of experience. 

If we get a [good] new coach NEXT year, they have one year to do well under the "new coach replacing under-achieving old coach with good players" dynamic, followed by a second year in which they do "even better because they now have one more year developing under the new coach's system," which also results in some good recruiting to keep the whole thing going.  However, if he stays for one more year and things continue on as they have, there is probably no good recuriting and the new coach who comes in the following year only gets the "new coach 'bump'" dynamic for one season before they all graduate and, lacking any good recruits, things go south [again] the following season.

Barring a complete melt-down [okay, an even MORE complete melt-down], however, it's hard to see Bowlsby cutting Dawkins loose at the end of a season that started with extending his contract.  Forecast:  six more weeks of winter...

[76lsjumb]

We need him to be hired away from us.  Is there an ACC or SEC program looking to be mini-Duke?

His W-L record this year is not bad.  Maybe some school will want him.  I think in the right situation Dawkins could be a great coach.  Playing in the Pac-12 with Stanford's recruiting philosophy is probably not the best fit.

Why, I bet he could coach any number of SEC or ACC teams to the Final Four, if given a chance.  Please!!

Come to think of it, some commentator [on ESPN, IIRC] at the beginning of the season speculated that LSU's coach might be on the hot seat this year if things didn't turn around.  I think a former Stanford coach would fit in quite well there...

More seriously, we really do appear to be in a bind... Unless he pulls a Coughlin and we go on to win the Pac-12 tournament, there's really no solid basis for speculating that this group of purportedly talented sophomores [plus Randle] is going to start achieving at a dramatically higher level under Dawkins, even with one [or two] more year(s) of experience. 

If we get a [good] new coach NEXT year, they have one year to do well under the "new coach replacing under-achieving old coach with good players" dynamic, followed by a second year in which they do "even better because they now have one more year developing under the new coach's system," which also results in some good recruiting to keep the whole thing going.  However, if he stays for one more year and things continue on as they have, there is probably no good recuriting and the new coach who comes in the following year only gets the "new coach 'bump'" dynamic for one season before they all graduate and, lacking any good recruits, things go south [again] the following season.

Barring a complete melt-down [okay, an even MORE complete melt-down], however, it's hard to see Bowlsby cutting Dawkins loose at the end of a season that started with extending his contract.  Forecast:  six more weeks of winter...

[76lsjumb]

Everybody in the country passed on Lin, not just us, which is how he wound up at Harvard. Mike Montgomery passed on Emeka Okafor, too. It happens.

True, but "everybody in the country" didn't have Lin quite literally "across the street" from them, as Johnson did. And, it wasn't as if we were already stacked with can't-miss guard prospects at the time...

As for Okafor, my recollection, admittedly vague and possibly incorrect, was that we lost him because we didn't have the scholarships available when he committed to UConn because someone [a Collins twin?] took a long time to make up his mind whether he was staying for another year or leaving to go pro.

And, Montgomery, as I recall, was one of only 2 or 3 to offer Brevin Knight a scholarship, so he's got that going for him...

[76lsjumb]

Everybody in the country passed on Lin, not just us, which is how he wound up at Harvard. Mike Montgomery passed on Emeka Okafor, too. It happens.

True, but "everybody in the country" didn't have Lin quite literally "across the street" from them, as Johnson did. And, it wasn't as if we were already stacked with can't-miss guard prospects at the time...

As for Okafor, my recollection, admittedly vague and possibly incorrect, was that we lost him because we didn't have the scholarships available when he committed to UConn because someone [a Collins twin?] took a long time to make up his mind whether he was staying for another year or leaving to go pro.

And, Montgomery, as I recall, was one of only 2 or 3 to offer Brevin Knight a scholarship, so he's got that going for him...

[Nan3cy]

[quote author=garvin link=topic=5123.msg40556#msg40556 date=1328897506]
Everybody in the country passed on Lin, not just us, which is how he wound up at Harvard. Mike Montgomery passed on Emeka Okafor, too. It happens.

True, but "everybody in the country" didn't have Lin quite literally "across the street" from them, as Johnson did. And, it wasn't as if we were already stacked with can't-miss guard prospects at the time...

As for Okafor, my recollection, admittedly vague and possibly incorrect, was that we lost him because we didn't have the scholarships available when he committed to UConn because someone [a Collins twin?] took a long time to make up his mind whether he was staying for another year or leaving to go pro.

[/quote]

It was Jason Collins who hadn't decided whether to stay or go. He finally left with possibly two years of eligibility left (injury redshirt). If I remember correctly, Jason announced he was leaving pretty shortly after Okafor committed to UConn. What a bummer that was...

[Nan3cy]

[quote author=garvin link=topic=5123.msg40556#msg40556 date=1328897506]
Everybody in the country passed on Lin, not just us, which is how he wound up at Harvard. Mike Montgomery passed on Emeka Okafor, too. It happens.

True, but "everybody in the country" didn't have Lin quite literally "across the street" from them, as Johnson did. And, it wasn't as if we were already stacked with can't-miss guard prospects at the time...

As for Okafor, my recollection, admittedly vague and possibly incorrect, was that we lost him because we didn't have the scholarships available when he committed to UConn because someone [a Collins twin?] took a long time to make up his mind whether he was staying for another year or leaving to go pro.

[/quote]

It was Jason Collins who hadn't decided whether to stay or go. He finally left with possibly two years of eligibility left (injury redshirt). If I remember correctly, Jason announced he was leaving pretty shortly after Okafor committed to UConn. What a bummer that was...