Grading Kate Paye's Performance

Grading Kate Paye's Performance - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Grading Kate Paye's Performance (/thread-25440.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - Jskass - 04-05-2026

Let’s also keep in mind that Kneepkens and CLW might not have applied to grad programs at Stanford or might not have wanted to play for a new and unproven coach.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - 82lsju - 04-05-2026

(04-05-2026, 07:35 PM)Nurdyguy Wrote: Yeah. The restrictive Stanford admission timing windows and extra red tape getting athletes admitted into graduate programs suggest that the Stanford administration doesn't prioritize revenue sports success, or may view this difficulty as adding to Stanford's selectivity. They also don't seem willing to drop brobdingnagian NIL cash on key targets. Obviously, some transfers have navigated the gauntlet, but the proof is in the pudding that other schools were able to reload through the portal, while Stanford only gets dribs and drabs. Cori Close could get whoever she wanted in on short notice when she had urgent needs, and in fact she upgraded her team. David Shaw, Tara, and their successors couldn't. I'll know Stanford has fixed this when we start seeing high-impact transfers in. All the rest is excuses.

I would not plan on any of the grad schools changing their admissions processes to be more short term athlete admission friendly. The past-bacc program is the best chance for most grad transfers

Does anyone know if we have accepted any undergrad transfer (not grad transfers) in any sport who completed three years elsewhere and had not graduated from their previous institution? I'm thinking that sort of transfer might be a bridge to far for the undergrad admissions team who are generally looking for transfers with two years or less at their previous institution(s) who will graduate "on time" from Stanford, "on time" being three years for transfer as sophomores and two years for transfers as juniors.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - Card10Fan - 04-05-2026

(04-05-2026, 03:04 PM)stanford22 Wrote: I will no longer go to games. The team Kate coached was unwatchable most of the time, and I blame Kate for that. With so many top recruits, we should have been so much better. I have emailed the AD. Others should too.

I got a response from my email sent. They are being read by the higher ups. Hopefully WBB leadership change is coming soon.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - BillBradley - 04-05-2026

I was hoping Donahoe was paying attention to the womens hoops program from Jan-Mar. It was clear to many of us that KP had lost the team, and I thought there might be a chance that he saw the same thing. It's hard for people to fend off denial and maybe that's what was happening in the AD's office. I would have hoped that conversations were being had with the players, and plans were being made to move to a new coaching staff at the end of the season. If that had happened, perhaps a number of our players would be staying. In particular, it really saddens me that things were so bad that even our bench players are leaving. As they aren't able to command big NIL money, they are choosing to leave Stanford simply because they don't want to be part of this program any longer. Their transfer announcements pretty much summed up their feelings on the coaching staff. Rough, rough times for such a storied program.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - 81alum - 04-05-2026

My enthusiasm level plummeted after last season and was next to zero this season, so I can't say I am disappointed. That disappointed was already factored in.

Actually, my disappointment--the key turning point--had nothing to do with Kate Paye but came while Tara was still coaching. It was the loss to Ole Miss in March of 23. Tara still had a year of coaching, but I think the recipe for Stanford's decline was made plain by that game. Haly Jones, Kiki Iriafan, Cameron Brink, Hannah Jump, and yes even Lauren Betts--could not beat a team of older, more experienced transfer players. Tara kept going for another year but the formula for 40 years of success under Tara had exploded. College WBB was no longer going to be about recruiting high school students. It was no longer going to be about attracting players who who were motivated both by academic as well as athletic success. It was no longer going to be about developing players over four years. It was no longer going to be about team loyalty. It was no longer going to be about capitalizing on players who were simply smarter than the other side. All the things that made Tara great had vanished, and only Tara's reputation earned during that earlier era could be counted on.

College sports are now worse that professional sports. All the disadvantages of the pros but no longer any of the charm of tradition, loyalty, and continuity. The things that made college sports beautiful to the fans have been vandalized.

I complete my retirement in a month and had been looking forward to having more time to devote to my passions like Stanford athletics. That dream is gone. I won't be renewing my season tickets and I doubt I will go to any games, probably won't bother to watch on TV even. I just don't care enough to do so. Too many better alternatives.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - chimera - 04-06-2026

(04-05-2026, 11:52 PM)81alum Wrote: My enthusiasm level plummeted after last season and was next to zero this season, so I can't say I am disappointed. That disappointed was already factored in.

Actually, my disappointment--the key turning point--had nothing to do with Kate Paye but came while Tara was still coaching. It was the loss to Ole Miss in March of 23. Tara still had a year of coaching, but I think the recipe for Stanford's decline was made plain by that game. Haly Jones, Kiki Iriafan, Cameron Brink, Hannah Jump, and yes even Lauren Betts--could not beat a team of older, more experienced transfer players. Tara kept going for another year but the formula for 40 years of success under Tara had exploded. College WBB was no longer going to be about recruiting high school students. It was no longer going to be about attracting players who who were motivated both by academic as well as athletic success. It was no longer going to be about developing players over four years. It was no longer going to be about team loyalty. It was no longer going to be about capitalizing on players who were simply smarter than the other side. All the things that made Tara great had vanished, and only Tara's reputation earned during that earlier era could be counted on.

College sports are now worse that professional sports. All the disadvantages of the pros but no longer any of the charm of tradition, loyalty, and continuity. The things that made college sports beautiful to the fans have been vandalized.

I complete my retirement in a month and had been looking forward to having more time to devote to my passions like Stanford athletics. That dream is gone. I won't be renewing my season tickets and I doubt I will go to any games, probably won't bother to watch on TV even. I just don't care enough to do so. Too many better alternatives.

I hear you. I too hate this new era of pro college sports. I don't know what to hope for. If Stanford does like the rest and dumps admissions requirements so they can pay big money to portal in whoever they want, would I want to see teams full of mercenaries that change drastically every year? If they don't and stink, do I want to see that? No good options.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - KenCard - 04-06-2026

(04-05-2026, 09:09 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:
(04-05-2026, 03:04 PM)stanford22 Wrote: I will no longer go to games. The team Kate coached was unwatchable most of the time, and I blame Kate for that. With so many top recruits, we should have been so much better. I have emailed the AD. Others should too.

I got a response from my email sent. They are being read by the higher ups. Hopefully WBB leadership change is coming soon.

I believe some focus upon the root causes for Stanford transfers (as opposed to the national issues of NIL, one-year transfers, rule violations and such) is still of value, at least for those of us whose interest remains at some level. Heck, the first time I was exposed to Stanford Women's Basketball was in the 1966-67 season when my friend and I were students there and would go early to watch the women play before the men's game. I also believe looking for the root causes may glean some detailed information valuable for future decisions.

I discovered the following while looking at what the five portal transfers (at this writing) have in common.
Of the five, four have at least one thing in common -- they all have been in the program one or two years, only under the current (as of this writing) coaching staff. (The fifth, Agara, is to me a special case in that she expects to graduate before next season.) This fact falls in line with the well-voiced opinion, with which I have agreed for quite some time, that it's best for Coach Paye to go.

A more interesting example is that all five transfers are 6' 2" or 6'3". Bizarre maybe, but not particularly useful in itself. What could be useful is how this fact translates into position played. By my count we have no guards transferring, one 3 (Amborn), and the rest posts. (I'm not completely sure about Peterson's position because, as far as I can tell, she has never played when a game was in doubt.) This fact leads to some questions. Which assistant coach(es) primarily teach the guards? Which primarily teach the posts? Are the assistant coach(es) who teach the guards better than those who teach the posts? If so, why? Is it because those assistants relate better to the players? If so, why? Is it because those assistants have more time to devote to teaching. If so, why? Etc.

So, if I were the AD, I'd like to learn as much as possible from those in the transfer portal to help learn in some depth about all the coaches and other common reasons for transferring beyond just that.

Does any of these ideas relate to our use of the Princeton offense? Or not?

So if we

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - 81alum - 04-06-2026

(04-06-2026, 09:09 AM)chimera Wrote: I hear you. I too hate this new era of pro college sports. I don't know what to hope for. If Stanford does like the rest and dumps admissions requirements so they can pay big money to portal in whoever they want, would I want to see teams full of mercenaries that change drastically every year? If they don't and stink, do I want to see that? No good options.

No, there are not. The third option is to abandon my interest in college sports, and while that is not a "good" option it seems to be happening spontaneously.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - rogpodge - 04-06-2026

(04-06-2026, 10:39 AM)81alum Wrote:
(04-06-2026, 09:09 AM)chimera Wrote: I hear you. I too hate this new era of pro college sports. I don't know what to hope for. If Stanford does like the rest and dumps admissions requirements so they can pay big money to portal in whoever they want, would I want to see teams full of mercenaries that change drastically every year? If they don't and stink, do I want to see that? No good options.
No, there are not. The third option is to abandon my interest in college sports, and while that is not a "good" option it seems to be happening spontaneously.

https://x.com/i/status/2041177416912032137

Tennessee basically only has an incoming commit. Everyone else has either graduated or entered the portal.

https://www.fanrunradio.com/sports/jaida-civil-enters-transfer-portal-leaving-lady-vols-with-no-players-on-roster

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - JohnR34231 - 04-06-2026

I wonder if there is any chance of talking Lara into staying. Maxime entered the portal and we talked him out of it.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - jonnyss - 04-06-2026

can someone please repost john donahoe's email address? thanks.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - petersalas - 04-06-2026

Gosh, I hope so. And checking the portal entries has taken over my actual work cause of the anxiety and hope we don’t see anyone else entering their names.

(04-06-2026, 12:06 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote: I wonder if there is any chance of talking Lara into staying. Maxime entered the portal and we talked him out of it.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - JohnR34231 - 04-06-2026

(04-06-2026, 12:16 PM)petersalas Wrote: Gosh, I hope so. And checking the portal entries has taken over my actual work cause of the anxiety and hope we don’t see anyone else entering their names.

(04-06-2026, 12:06 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote: I wonder if there is any chance of talking Lara into staying. Maxime entered the portal and we talked him out of it.

Well I can understand why Nunu left because she will have her degree. MAS, Harper and Carly because they weren't getting enough playing time. Lara is a little more difficult. She was a starter and a self proclaimed academic nerd.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - jacket3ree - 04-06-2026

Some general observations from a WBB casual. The last game I watched in person was last year (Tech lost in Palo Alto) and the time before that, Olympia Scott may have been on the floor.

1. I get the frustration, and like I said I am a casual, so who am I to say much of anything, but two years of not being elite and everyone bails?

2. I get those who root for the names on the back as much as the name on the front, but if the "mercenary era" is just too much, root for the name on the front and don't worry so much about the sausage making. Stanford could survive a rotating cast of players in any number of sports. The education of NARPs wouldn't suffer. Maybe their recreational experience would be better.

3. Stanford could still be a high school program ('get old and stay old') if it could retain players. The fact that it can't retain players is what is alarming. The erosion started under VanDerveer (Betts would have been handy to retain, for just one example) and in addition to the fact that one can retire when one wants to retire, she might have seen the tipping of leverage from coach to player to be more than she wanted to deal with on an ongoing basis, so it was really time to exit stage left or right. Granted, that would be tough with a flailing program but it is still an option.

4. She didn't exit stage left or right. Her name is on the court, she still has an office in the building, and she's at all the coach introductions, teaching a class, etc. She seems to be like Wooden was for the 35 years after he retired. A constant presence and reminder that you aren't her and your program isn't what hers once was. I wonder if that is distracting or overwhelming Paye? I was in Paye's shoes once and it can be a thing.

5. I read 81Alumn's example of when they lost to Ole Miss in 2023. I think they just lost. This wasn't Bambi going against Godzilla (best existential short film ever, btw). Jones was a senior, Iriafin was a sophomore, Brink was a junior, Jump was a senior, and yes Betts was a freshman, but all-World, I thought? Stanford's roster tally was 4 seniors, 2 juniors, 4 soph/RS frosh, and 4 frosh. Basically half the team were upperclassmen with national title experience. Add two junior transfers and it would be large and perfectly balanced roster. Ole Miss on the other hand had six transfers (2 graduate, 3 senior, and 1 soph) and 2 seniors, 3 juniors, and a frosh. Obviously worried more about today than tomorrow and I guess it paid off for them, but this wasn't some insurmountable task. Stanford just lost.

6.

7. I doubt they fire Paye so quickly with VanDeveer still having an office and probably a say. I haven't tracked the coach-in-waiting score card, and for every Scheyer there is a Jimbo. (Jimbo won plenty, just not enough.) Definitely trying to continue the legacy but as people have said, the signs were there. UVA just dumped their coach after an unexpected Sweet 16 run and wholesale player mutinies, which are super easy these days, will do that to a coach. If that happens it should happen soon or does this become a Troy Taylor deal and VanDeveer takes one for the team of intramural-level players next fall while they do a search. I don't think they've done a search since getting VanDeveer out of Columbus. I know nothing about the Nike guy and if he is a real AD or more of a corporate manager.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - StanUSwagU - 04-06-2026

(04-06-2026, 12:46 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: Some general observations from a WBB casual. The last game I watched in person was last year (Tech lost in Palo Alto) and the time before that, Olympia Scott may have been on the floor.

1. I get the frustration, and like I said I am a casual, so who am I to say much of anything, but two years of not being elite and everyone bails?

2. I get those who root for the names on the back as much as the name on the front, but if the "mercenary era" is just too much, root for the name on the front and don't worry so much about the sausage making. Stanford could survive a rotating cast of players in any number of sports. The education of NARPs wouldn't suffer. Maybe their recreational experience would be better.

3. Stanford could still be a high school program ('get old and stay old') if it could retain players. The fact that it can't retain players is what is alarming. The erosion started under VanDerveer (Betts would have been handy to retain, for just one example) and in addition to the fact that one can retire when one wants to retire, she might have seen the tipping of leverage from coach to player to be more than she wanted to deal with on an ongoing basis, so it was really time to exit stage left or right. Granted, that would be tough with a flailing program but it is still an option.

4. She didn't exit stage left or right. Her name is on the court, she still has an office in the building, and she's at all the coach introductions, teaching a class, etc. She seems to be like Wooden was for the 35 years after he retired. A constant presence and reminder that you aren't her and your program isn't what hers once was. I wonder if that is distracting or overwhelming Paye? I was in Paye's shoes once and it can be a thing.

5. I read 81Alumn's example of when they lost to Ole Miss in 2023. I think they just lost. This wasn't Bambi going against Godzilla (best existential short film ever, btw). Jones was a senior, Iriafin was a sophomore, Brink was a junior, Jump was a senior, and yes Betts was a freshman, but all-World, I thought? Stanford's roster tally was 4 seniors, 2 juniors, 4 soph/RS frosh, and 4 frosh. Basically half the team were upperclassmen with national title experience. Add two junior transfers and it would be large and perfectly balanced roster. Ole Miss on the other hand had six transfers (2 graduate, 3 senior, and 1 soph) and 2 seniors, 3 juniors, and a frosh. Obviously worried more about today than tomorrow and I guess it paid off for them, but this wasn't some insurmountable task. Stanford just lost.

6.

7. I doubt they fire Paye so quickly with VanDeveer still having an office and probably a say. I haven't tracked the coach in waiting scope card honestly. Definitely trying to continue the legacy but as people have said, the signs were there. UVA just dumped their coach after an unexpected Sweet 16 run and wholesale player mutinies, which are super easy these days, will do that to a coach. If that happens it should happen soon or does this become a Troy Taylor deal and VanDeveer takes one for the team of intramural-level players next fall while they do a search. I don't think they've done a search since getting VanDeveer out of Columbus. I know nothing about the Nike guy and if he is a real AD or more of a corporate manager.

*********
Hi Jacket3ree,

1. Hope all is well.

2. Great insightful post by you, as always.

3. Was wondering what your 6th bullet point was, it didnt seem to post.

76lsjumb - 76lsjumb - 04-06-2026

(04-06-2026, 12:06 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote: I wonder if there is any chance of talking Lara into staying. Maxime entered the portal and we talked him out of it.

That “we” is doing a lot of heavy lifting. We had two players enter the portal that year: Maxime and IriaFEN. Kyle Smith talked Maxime out of it. Kate Paye… did not (talk Kiki out of it).

If similar results are pursued this year, I sure hope “we” talk Okorie into not leaving, regardless of what Lara decides to do.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - 82lsju - 04-06-2026

(04-06-2026, 12:46 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: 4. She didn't exit stage left or right. Her name is on the court, she still has an office in the building, and she's at all the coach introductions, teaching a class, etc. She seems to be like Wooden was for the 35 years after he retired. A constant presence and reminder that you aren't her and your program isn't what hers once was. I wonder if that is distracting or overwhelming Paye? I was in Paye's shoes once and it can be a thing.

my observation is that it is usually better to be the person after the successor to a "legend" than to be the successor....

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - stopandpop - 04-06-2026

(04-05-2026, 11:52 PM)81alum Wrote: My enthusiasm level plummeted after last season and was next to zero this season, so I can't say I am disappointed. That disappointed was already factored in.

Actually, my disappointment--the key turning point--had nothing to do with Kate Paye but came while Tara was still coaching. It was the loss to Ole Miss in March of 23. Tara still had a year of coaching, but I think the recipe for Stanford's decline was made plain by that game. Haly Jones, Kiki Iriafan, Cameron Brink, Hannah Jump, and yes even Lauren Betts--could not beat a team of older, more experienced transfer players. Tara kept going for another year but the formula for 40 years of success under Tara had exploded. College WBB was no longer going to be about recruiting high school students. It was no longer going to be about attracting players who who were motivated both by academic as well as athletic success. It was no longer going to be about developing players over four years. It was no longer going to be about team loyalty. It was no longer going to be about capitalizing on players who were simply smarter than the other side. All the things that made Tara great had vanished, and only Tara's reputation earned during that earlier era could be counted on.

College sports are now worse that professional sports. All the disadvantages of the pros but no longer any of the charm of tradition, loyalty, and continuity. The things that made college sports beautiful to the fans have been vandalized.

I complete my retirement in a month and had been looking forward to having more time to devote to my passions like Stanford athletics. That dream is gone. I won't be renewing my season tickets and I doubt I will go to any games, probably won't bother to watch on TV even. I just don't care enough to do so. Too many better alternatives.

If I recall that game correctly, another possible factor was the unexpected physicality of Mississippi SEC basketball. Stanford did not seem ready for that physicality. In the years since, officials rewarding physicality and indirectly punishing finesse teams like Stanford, seems to have only grown.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - crackpot - 04-06-2026

(04-06-2026, 01:42 PM)stopandpop Wrote: If I recall that game correctly, another possible factor was the unexpected physicality of Mississippi SEC basketball. Stanford did not seem ready for that physicality. In the years since, officials rewarding physicality and indirectly punishing finesse teams like Stanford, seems to have only grown.

And as Betts and Jones discussed, rather, laughed about it on Jones's podcast, they just didn't care.

It was the toughest year of Tara's coaching career. It was why she immediately brought in a consultant from KBS who worked with the coaches and players prior to them going away for the summer and throughout the season.

RE: Grading Kate Paye's Performance - liveoak - 04-06-2026

(04-05-2026, 11:52 PM)81alum Wrote: My enthusiasm level plummeted after last season and was next to zero this season, so I can't say I am disappointed. That disappointed was already factored in.

Actually, my disappointment--the key turning point--had nothing to do with Kate Paye but came while Tara was still coaching. It was the loss to Ole Miss in March of 23. Tara still had a year of coaching, but I think the recipe for Stanford's decline was made plain by that game. Haly Jones, Kiki Iriafan, Cameron Brink, Hannah Jump, and yes even Lauren Betts--could not beat a team of older, more experienced transfer players. Tara kept going for another year but the formula for 40 years of success under Tara had exploded. College WBB was no longer going to be about recruiting high school students. It was no longer going to be about attracting players who who were motivated both by academic as well as athletic success. It was no longer going to be about developing players over four years. It was no longer going to be about team loyalty. It was no longer going to be about capitalizing on players who were simply smarter than the other side. All the things that made Tara great had vanished, and only Tara's reputation earned during that earlier era could be counted on.

College sports are now worse that professional sports. All the disadvantages of the pros but no longer any of the charm of tradition, loyalty, and continuity. The things that made college sports beautiful to the fans have been vandalized.

I complete my retirement in a month and had been looking forward to having more time to devote to my passions like Stanford athletics. That dream is gone. I won't be renewing my season tickets and I doubt I will go to any games, probably won't bother to watch on TV even. I just don't care enough to do so. Too many better alternatives.

About the loss to Ole Miss, 81alum's point is well taken. We have seen (and felt) firsthand the effects of senior and grad transfers on the ACC. I would suggest three added reasons why we lost to Ole Miss.

1) Jacketree is spot on with this - Ole Miss was a very physical team and we weren't ready for it. Pac-12 teams weren't that physical and our refs didn't allow it - so I think we were shocked by it and never recovered.

2) We had been found out in the Pac-12 finals. To beat Stanford, UCLA clogged the middle, cut off passes to Brink, put a quick player on Jump so she couldn't get open and kept Haley from driving to the hoop. This stifled our offense since we didn't have a consistent three-shooter to loosen up the defense. This was one of the reasons why we all hoped that Haley would develop her three shooting...which never happened. If she could have shot 30-odd% from three, she would have been unguardable.

3) Finally, I believe that the issues that caused Betts to transfer had also caused turmoil inside the team. This contributed, IMO, to the defeat. Even if we had won, I think we would have not gone far in the tournament. Ole Miss played like a team (even one made of transfers) and we did not.

And yes, I hate the idea of whole-scale transfers and not developing players. I do think the best teams will be built with recruits that develop in our program...but getting a key player or two as a transfer will be an ongoing part of the game.

I do think that Stanford could admit a WBB transfer or two per season without danger to its academic reputation - if we find transfer with strong academics, and they are out there. But I do strongly believe that Stanford should continue to build its athletic programs by high-school recruiting and use transfers to fill a key spot on the roster.