[Spiny_Norman]

Did anyone attend the Men's BBall exhibition game last night vs. UNC-Pembroke?  The team won 86-71, but there are several troubling items in the box score:

Pembroke had more points in the paint and almost out-rebounded Stanford.
Stanford jacked up 30 3-pointers.  Only made 6.  Were those shots attempted late in the shot clock because the offense could not create a better shot against a D-II school?

Would be interested to read some observations from those who saw the game.

[Spiny_Norman]

Did anyone attend the Men's BBall exhibition game last night vs. UNC-Pembroke?  The team won 86-71, but there are several troubling items in the box score:

Pembroke had more points in the paint and almost out-rebounded Stanford.
Stanford jacked up 30 3-pointers.  Only made 6.  Were those shots attempted late in the shot clock because the offense could not create a better shot against a D-II school?

Would be interested to read some observations from those who saw the game.

[Spiny_Norman]

Did anyone attend the Men's BBall exhibition game last night vs. UNC-Pembroke?  The team won 86-71, but there are several troubling items in the box score:

Pembroke had more points in the paint and almost out-rebounded Stanford.
Stanford jacked up 30 3-pointers.  Only made 6.  Were those shots attempted late in the shot clock because the offense could not create a better shot against a D-II school?

Would be interested to read some observations from those who saw the game.

[Spiny_Norman]

Did anyone attend the Men's BBall exhibition game last night vs. UNC-Pembroke?  The team won 86-71, but there are several troubling items in the box score:

Pembroke had more points in the paint and almost out-rebounded Stanford.
Stanford jacked up 30 3-pointers.  Only made 6.  Were those shots attempted late in the shot clock because the offense could not create a better shot against a D-II school?

Would be interested to read some observations from those who saw the game.

[StannyBoy]

I wouldn't worry about an exhibition game, I can't imagine they played that hard. It wasn't even considered a pre-season game. Powell didn't play and they started Gage at center and he's a spot up 3 point shooter. The team should be pretty good this year.

[StannyBoy]

I wouldn't worry about an exhibition game, I can't imagine they played that hard. It wasn't even considered a pre-season game. Powell didn't play and they started Gage at center and he's a spot up 3 point shooter. The team should be pretty good this year.

[StannyBoy]

I wouldn't worry about an exhibition game, I can't imagine they played that hard. It wasn't even considered a pre-season game. Powell didn't play and they started Gage at center and he's a spot up 3 point shooter. The team should be pretty good this year.

[StannyBoy]

I wouldn't worry about an exhibition game, I can't imagine they played that hard. It wasn't even considered a pre-season game. Powell didn't play and they started Gage at center and he's a spot up 3 point shooter. The team should be pretty good this year.

[BrevinsBest]

I was one of the 50 fans in attendance. My understanding is that Powell is a bit dinged up but that he's been playing at a pretty high level. I've heard that before, so I'll believe it when I see it.

I was completely unimpressed with Stanford's play, but I've pretty much felt that way since Dawkins took over. It seems like there is such little movement on offense and there are even fewer designed plays. Stanford's shooting was off the mark all afternoon. Inside, outside, wherever, shots were not falling. This could be expected as it's their first competition in awhile, but I came out of Maples with a bad feeling. While I think it's great that Madsen has joined that staff and that he can bring some real motivation to the team, there is a lack of size. We have a bunch of 6' 9" 6' 10" guys on the team, but nobody seems to be comfortable under the rim.

2 quick thoughts: Chason Randle is a superb playmaker and needs to touch the ball every possession. It was great to see Andy Brown and his 5 ACLs get some extended playing time.

Anyway, this team will obviously improve, but after watching Dawkins "develop" talent the last few seasons, I'm not expecting much. 

[BrevinsBest]

I was one of the 50 fans in attendance. My understanding is that Powell is a bit dinged up but that he's been playing at a pretty high level. I've heard that before, so I'll believe it when I see it.

I was completely unimpressed with Stanford's play, but I've pretty much felt that way since Dawkins took over. It seems like there is such little movement on offense and there are even fewer designed plays. Stanford's shooting was off the mark all afternoon. Inside, outside, wherever, shots were not falling. This could be expected as it's their first competition in awhile, but I came out of Maples with a bad feeling. While I think it's great that Madsen has joined that staff and that he can bring some real motivation to the team, there is a lack of size. We have a bunch of 6' 9" 6' 10" guys on the team, but nobody seems to be comfortable under the rim.

2 quick thoughts: Chason Randle is a superb playmaker and needs to touch the ball every possession. It was great to see Andy Brown and his 5 ACLs get some extended playing time.

Anyway, this team will obviously improve, but after watching Dawkins "develop" talent the last few seasons, I'm not expecting much. 

[BrevinsBest]

I was one of the 50 fans in attendance. My understanding is that Powell is a bit dinged up but that he's been playing at a pretty high level. I've heard that before, so I'll believe it when I see it.

I was completely unimpressed with Stanford's play, but I've pretty much felt that way since Dawkins took over. It seems like there is such little movement on offense and there are even fewer designed plays. Stanford's shooting was off the mark all afternoon. Inside, outside, wherever, shots were not falling. This could be expected as it's their first competition in awhile, but I came out of Maples with a bad feeling. While I think it's great that Madsen has joined that staff and that he can bring some real motivation to the team, there is a lack of size. We have a bunch of 6' 9" 6' 10" guys on the team, but nobody seems to be comfortable under the rim.

2 quick thoughts: Chason Randle is a superb playmaker and needs to touch the ball every possession. It was great to see Andy Brown and his 5 ACLs get some extended playing time.

Anyway, this team will obviously improve, but after watching Dawkins "develop" talent the last few seasons, I'm not expecting much. 

[BrevinsBest]

I was one of the 50 fans in attendance. My understanding is that Powell is a bit dinged up but that he's been playing at a pretty high level. I've heard that before, so I'll believe it when I see it.

I was completely unimpressed with Stanford's play, but I've pretty much felt that way since Dawkins took over. It seems like there is such little movement on offense and there are even fewer designed plays. Stanford's shooting was off the mark all afternoon. Inside, outside, wherever, shots were not falling. This could be expected as it's their first competition in awhile, but I came out of Maples with a bad feeling. While I think it's great that Madsen has joined that staff and that he can bring some real motivation to the team, there is a lack of size. We have a bunch of 6' 9" 6' 10" guys on the team, but nobody seems to be comfortable under the rim.

2 quick thoughts: Chason Randle is a superb playmaker and needs to touch the ball every possession. It was great to see Andy Brown and his 5 ACLs get some extended playing time.

Anyway, this team will obviously improve, but after watching Dawkins "develop" talent the last few seasons, I'm not expecting much. 

[slide]

I watched the game via Pac12 network.  it was not a pretty win, but it was a win.  the negatives were FT shooting, 3 pt shooting and bigs getting lost on post picks.  the positives were Huestis, Randle, handling fullish-court pressure and team depth especially the bigs (and we played without a starting big -- Powell -- and another in the top 4 big rotation -- Nastic). 

to earlier question, a lot of our 3s were early in the shot clock and within the flow of the offense.  most were very clean looks, but the shots were missed.  on the side of this coin, we shot pretty well from 2.

FT shooting aside, I thought Huestis looked much improved over his good play late last season.  he got good position down low, dug out a few poor entry passes, and finished well at times.  he needs to improve his FT shooting though as he'll get to the line often this year.  Verhoeven and Rosco Allen also surprised me.  both were bigger than I expected and both ran the court well.  Verhoeven was also very active on the offensive glass.  he and Huestis will make people work and our depth should wear teams down.

[slide]

I watched the game via Pac12 network.  it was not a pretty win, but it was a win.  the negatives were FT shooting, 3 pt shooting and bigs getting lost on post picks.  the positives were Huestis, Randle, handling fullish-court pressure and team depth especially the bigs (and we played without a starting big -- Powell -- and another in the top 4 big rotation -- Nastic). 

to earlier question, a lot of our 3s were early in the shot clock and within the flow of the offense.  most were very clean looks, but the shots were missed.  on the side of this coin, we shot pretty well from 2.

FT shooting aside, I thought Huestis looked much improved over his good play late last season.  he got good position down low, dug out a few poor entry passes, and finished well at times.  he needs to improve his FT shooting though as he'll get to the line often this year.  Verhoeven and Rosco Allen also surprised me.  both were bigger than I expected and both ran the court well.  Verhoeven was also very active on the offensive glass.  he and Huestis will make people work and our depth should wear teams down.

[slide]

I watched the game via Pac12 network.  it was not a pretty win, but it was a win.  the negatives were FT shooting, 3 pt shooting and bigs getting lost on post picks.  the positives were Huestis, Randle, handling fullish-court pressure and team depth especially the bigs (and we played without a starting big -- Powell -- and another in the top 4 big rotation -- Nastic). 

to earlier question, a lot of our 3s were early in the shot clock and within the flow of the offense.  most were very clean looks, but the shots were missed.  on the side of this coin, we shot pretty well from 2.

FT shooting aside, I thought Huestis looked much improved over his good play late last season.  he got good position down low, dug out a few poor entry passes, and finished well at times.  he needs to improve his FT shooting though as he'll get to the line often this year.  Verhoeven and Rosco Allen also surprised me.  both were bigger than I expected and both ran the court well.  Verhoeven was also very active on the offensive glass.  he and Huestis will make people work and our depth should wear teams down.

[slide]

I watched the game via Pac12 network.  it was not a pretty win, but it was a win.  the negatives were FT shooting, 3 pt shooting and bigs getting lost on post picks.  the positives were Huestis, Randle, handling fullish-court pressure and team depth especially the bigs (and we played without a starting big -- Powell -- and another in the top 4 big rotation -- Nastic). 

to earlier question, a lot of our 3s were early in the shot clock and within the flow of the offense.  most were very clean looks, but the shots were missed.  on the side of this coin, we shot pretty well from 2.

FT shooting aside, I thought Huestis looked much improved over his good play late last season.  he got good position down low, dug out a few poor entry passes, and finished well at times.  he needs to improve his FT shooting though as he'll get to the line often this year.  Verhoeven and Rosco Allen also surprised me.  both were bigger than I expected and both ran the court well.  Verhoeven was also very active on the offensive glass.  he and Huestis will make people work and our depth should wear teams down.