WBB 2022-2023 season - 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: WBB 2022-2023 season (/thread-23227.html)
+- 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: WBB 2022-2023 season (/thread-23227.html)
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - WBB fan - 10-20-2022
(10-20-2022, 09:10 AM)TheFarm07 Wrote: Charlie Creme believes that our non-conference schedule is not as strong as it should be:
"The nonconference schedule doesn't meet the program standard this year. South Carolina and Tennessee are the only top-10 caliber teams Stanford will play all season, and the Cardinal don't play a single nonconference game after Dec. 20."
https://www.espn.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/34830047/women-college-basketball-nonconference-schedule-winners-losers
I agree that this season's schedule is not as strong as it was last year, but given our uncertainty at PG and in the backcourt, that might not be a completely bad thing.
I'll also take this opportunity to point out that there are some top-tier programs that we never seem to schedule during the regular season (at least as long as I've been a fan): Notre Dame, Maryland, Kentucky, Louisville, among others.
Yea, we've met them a few times in the NCAA Tournament recently, but it's interesting that we haven't had them in our non-conference schedule.
Stanford played Maryland, then ranked #2, last year on Nov 27 (a W) -- also played Indiana, then ranked #4, on Nov 25 -- both in the Bahamas tournament. But the others you mention, no we haven't played them. It could be that they don't want to play us, or that we don't want to play them. Scheduling takes both schools to agree to a game.
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - dcnav - 10-20-2022
I think there are quite a few teams that don't want to make the long trip out West to play a really top team. Coach is pretty willing to take on any of these teams willing to do a home and home. I said earlier that it seems like the preseason is relatively weak. But in addition to the two big ones, there is Creighton and Gonzaga which are both supposed to be top 30. After that though you have to dig deep for any teams over 100. I agree that with the guard situation unknown (at least by us) it seems appropriate to have a slightly weaker noncon sched.
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - TheFarm07 - 10-20-2022
(10-20-2022, 09:58 AM)WBB fan Wrote:(10-20-2022, 09:10 AM)TheFarm07 Wrote: Charlie Creme believes that our non-conference schedule is not as strong as it should be:
"The nonconference schedule doesn't meet the program standard this year. South Carolina and Tennessee are the only top-10 caliber teams Stanford will play all season, and the Cardinal don't play a single nonconference game after Dec. 20."
https://www.espn.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/34830047/women-college-basketball-nonconference-schedule-winners-losers
I agree that this season's schedule is not as strong as it was last year, but given our uncertainty at PG and in the backcourt, that might not be a completely bad thing.
I'll also take this opportunity to point out that there are some top-tier programs that we never seem to schedule during the regular season (at least as long as I've been a fan): Notre Dame, Maryland, Kentucky, Louisville, among others.
Yea, we've met them a few times in the NCAA Tournament recently, but it's interesting that we haven't had them in our non-conference schedule.
Stanford played Maryland, then ranked #2, last year on Nov 27 (a W) -- also played Indiana, then ranked #4, on Nov 25 -- both in the Bahamas tournament. But the others you mention, no we haven't played them. It could be that they don't want to play us, or that we don't want to play them. Scheduling takes both schools to agree to a game.
Yes, but did we enter the tournament to specifically play Maryland or did it happen that they were also entered? I guess my point from my previous post is purposely scheduling certain teams rather than coincidentally have them in the same field at one of these pre-season tournaments.
On a related note, I am always curious about the process on how schools choose which of these tropical-ish (for the most part) November/early December tournaments to participate in. For those tournaments, do teams sign up knowing precisely which schools they are going to play? Or are they just signing up hoping for a good field?
For example, this year we are by far the best team playing FGCU, Grambling State and Hawaii at the Rainbow Wahine Showdown, which is a much weaker field than last year where we faced Indiana, South Florida and Maryland in the Bahamas, a significantly tougher task.
Do coaches try to rotate locations so that players get to go to different locales every season?
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - BobK - 10-20-2022
Come play at Stanford we will be playing in Hawaii. Gee good recruiting tool
If you go to various functions chalk talks etc coaches are often asked why not play so and so and many times the answer is they don’t want to play us
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - 81alum - 10-20-2022
(10-20-2022, 10:45 AM)BobK Wrote: Come play at Stanford we will be playing in Hawaii. Gee good recruiting toolIs it in part a weak pay-out from gate receipts? Quite a number of other WBB programs get much better attendance than we do now. Plus I would guess that travel to Palo Alto is much more expensive than travel to lower cost areas, in terms of hotel, meals, etc. So perhaps it is a financial decision?
If you go to various functions chalk talks etc coaches are often asked why not play so and so and many times the answer is they don’t want to play us
Average attendance (2019):
1. South Carolina 11,000
2. Iowa State 9,900
3. Louisville 9,700
4. UConn 9,500
8. Oregon 8000
12. Gonzaga 5600
15. Oregon State 5500
37. Cal 3200
38. Stanford 3000
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - M T - 10-20-2022
I'd think a probable loss on their record is much more important (incl. for financial reasons) than the actual cost of the trip.
Stanford needs potential opponent coaches who want their teams honed against a team like Stanford, even if it is a loss. With this year's musical chairs, maybe most coaches couldn't figure out their own teams, much less who would be good to play, when it was time to schedule.
Stanford would benefit from other strong teams in the area.
I would have to think Stanford doesn't sit by the phone waiting for someone to call for a date. I'm sure they were actively trying to schedule better teams. That's who Tara is. As I said, I suspect most coaches said "We're not sure we'll be ready in preseason to take on a top-4 team. Thanks, but no thanks."
As for the pre-season tourneys, I'm sure they try to land a top team early and then to fill in who else they can, within their budgets. I expect those budgets continue to be tight.
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - stopandpop - 10-20-2022
With just days to go before we get to see the Open Practice, I'm curious to know who you think SHOULD be in the starting five and who you think WILL be the starting five. For what it's worth, here are mine.
SHOULD BE: - Jzaniya or Indya would potentially give us quickness, ball-handling and another scoring threat from the perimeter. I love Kiki's emerging post game.
Cam (power forward)
Kiki (post)
Haley (point guard/wing)
Hannah (guard)
Jzaniya or Indya (guard)
WILL BE: Brooke gives us another player of size with a great soft shooting touch from multiple spots.
Cam (power forward)
Kiki (post)
Brooke (forward/wing)
Hannah (guard)
Haley (point guard/wing)
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - BobK - 10-20-2022
Brink
Fran
Brooke
Jump
Jones
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - 81alum - 10-20-2022
(10-20-2022, 12:13 PM)BobK Wrote: BrinkI think Bob is right about who will start. Tara has a very strong preference for maximizing experience at first and letting the less experienced players play themselves into more and more minutes. I'm not 100% sure about Demetre, though, vs Prechtel or one of the frosh, but she is probably more likely than anyone else at this point.
Fran
Brooke
Jump
Jones
The other factor is to keep in mind that starting means a lot less on a Tara coached team than it does on most other teams. This is not a Geno team that plays the starters for as close to 40 minutes as their endurance will allow. Remember Sara James who routinely started and played about 7 minutes per game by the end of her career? Tara has many times started people who have experience and can help set the tone, but then replaces them liberally during the game with less experienced players who may be healthier or have more talent than the starter. A better question to ask is "who will get the most minutes?"
As for who should start, how the heck would we know? Until we actually see the players play, it really is not possible to have an opinion about how much the sophomores have improved or how refined the freshmen and Harriel already are.
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - BosCard - 10-20-2022
I
(10-20-2022, 12:13 PM)BobK Wrote: Brink
Fran
Brooke
Jump
Jones
I agree with Bob although I think Tara might go with Emma Nnopu instead of Demetre. Much better defender but would have spacing problems on the offensive end unless Emma Nnopu has improved her 3 point shot or slashing ability.
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - UltimateCard - 10-20-2022
(10-20-2022, 10:02 AM)dcnav Wrote: I think there are quite a few teams that don't want to make the long trip out West to play a really top team. Coach is pretty willing to take on any of these teams willing to do a home and home. I said earlier that it seems like the preseason is relatively weak. But in addition to the two big ones, there is Creighton and Gonzaga which are both supposed to be top 30. After that though you have to dig deep for any teams over 100. I agree that with the guard situation unknown (at least by us) it seems appropriate to have a slightly weaker noncon sched.
On our travel side, Tara used to schedule away games in regions within easy reach for each player’s family at least once during their time at Stanford. The pandemic no doubt scuttled that. If it’s still a goal, that would make it tough to always have top teams on the schedule.
Spike - Spike - 10-20-2022
Can someone research career three point percentages for Agnes and Brooke? I’m guessing agnes’ is higher than we think and Brooke’s lower.
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - bl82 - 10-20-2022
Part of the problem with a starting lineup is matching overall talent with positions, both offensively and defensively, particularly when so much of our top talent is at least 6-3 or can dunk.
Three are no brainers:
Brink
Jones
Jump
I’d argue that the next two have a lot of positional overlap and perhaps the starter will be the one who has improved their all-around game the most in the offseason, particularly vis-a-vis positional versatility, specifically on the perimeter:
Belibi (more seniority)
Iriafen (more upside)
You could probably toss two more into the group above because of a high skills similarity, but I think they are less effective on the interior and offer more of a three-point/perimeter threat on offense — but with issues around defensive quickness on the perimeter:
Demetre
Prechtel
The big question mark for me will be someone who can defend a quick PG and/or an athletic SG — and this is where I think our fifth starter is likely to come from. Emma-Nopu has shown great defensive skills, but her offense has been limited and she does not have the offensive PG skills to be the PG when Jones, for whatever reason, does not fill that role. Someone who has strong PG skills on both sides of the ball is the ideal candidate, but I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect any of the frosh to fill that role before the second half of the season. For that reason, I see the candidates as:
Nivar
Emma-Nopu
Harriel
Lepolo
Bosgana
Papadaki
Green
If any of the group above can also prove to be a consistent three-point shooter against PAC-12 defenders, then they also move way up the rotation and perhaps into a starting role.
Last and definitely not least is someone who has the potential to start from day one and rewrite much of the Stanford record book: Lauren Betts. I expect her to be at least a spot starter as a frosh and if she develops quickly, someone who we can’t help bit keep on the floor as much as possible. For now I’ll put her in the group with Belibi and Iriafen, but she may turn out to be a one-of-a-kind player. If she proves herself against South Carolina, watch out.
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - TheFarm07 - 10-20-2022
The issue is that we are incredibly deep in the frontcourt whether with superstars (Jones, Brink), proven veterans (Belibi, Prechtel), underclassmen who have shown potential (Iriafen) or a top prospect (Betts), while our backcourt besides Jump has question marks as they are either freshmen or haven't proven themselves yet.
This is where missing out on an Olivia Miles or Sonia Citron from recruiting a couple years back or even Kiki Rice as an elite freshman recruit really hurts. Hopefully, Hannah Hidalgo and/or Juju Watkins can help alleviate this issue next season if no one really emerges this time around.
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - chimera - 10-20-2022
If Brink is really going to be primarily a 4, that means Iriafen starts at the 5, does it not? I know Brink can play 5 on D and 4 on O but I thought the idea for Brink at the 4 was twofold - to allow her to expand her game and scoring and to make room for Iriafen at the 5, not to mention Betts. I realize this means Belibi doesn't start. You could make a good case for a Brink/Belibi 4/5 or 5/4 but that would put Brink inside more, not a real switch to the 4. We simply have so much talent inside that the choices are all good, really.
We have heard Jones at the 1 and for now I will take that as true on O and D. I've not been sold on that because I want Jones to play off the ball and score, but then again, she is a great passer if she keeps the TOs down, and there are great point guards who are on the taller side that have many of her attributes. The key is can she shoot threes, keep turnovers down, and be a prime scorer while also running the offense? Oh yeah, she will have to defend smaller, quicker players - no where to hide if we play a lot of bigs and she is on the perimeter. That's a lot for her, but if she can do all that, she could be quite dynamic as a pg. She needs to shoot threes to be a great WNBA player so getting that going helps the team and her both. I imagine at the next level she is a 3. Need to shoot threes to play there and defend well in space.
That just leaves the 3 and 2 spots, and Jump is going to start, probably at the 2, but I could see her at the 3 if the coaches think her defense is not quite what they want with her and Jones as the two guards. If it is Jump at the 3, then I'd say we see someone new at the other guard spot, someone who can handle and help Jones run the point and bring the ball up, and most importantly defend well on the perimeter. Who that might be I do not know. If Jump is at the 2, the candidates for the 3 are too many to name, really, and I have no idea who would get that role. We speculate Demetre because she has a nice shot from mid-range and three or Emma-Nnopu because she defends well and can make threes, but nobody is an obvious choice without more info (for us fans).
I am not stating a preferred line-up. I don't even have one yet, not until I see the team play a game or two...or three or four. The sophs aside from Iriafen are mysteries to me, as are the frosh. There are a lot of permutations that could work and maybe we get varied line-ups depending on the opponent with a bigger line-up against bigger teams or teams with tall but not super quick guards vs a smaller line-up for teams that play three guards or are small and quick outside? Should be interesting.
Last thought is who is the backup pg if Jones plays point? I have no idea.
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - stopandpop - 10-20-2022
(10-20-2022, 05:01 PM)chimera Wrote: If Brink is really going to be primarily a 4, that means Iriafen starts at the 5, does it not? I know Brink can play 5 on D and 4 on O but I thought the idea for Brink at the 4 was twofold - to allow her to expand her game and scoring and to make room for Iriafen at the 5, not to mention Betts. I realize this means Belibi doesn't start. You could make a good case for a Brink/Belibi 4/5 or 5/4 but that would put Brink inside more, not a real switch to the 4. We simply have so much talent inside that the choices are all good, really.
We have heard Jones at the 1 and for now I will take that as true on O and D. I've not been sold on that because I want Jones to play off the ball and score, but then again, she is a great passer if she keeps the TOs down, and there are great point guards who are on the taller side that have many of her attributes. The key is can she shoot threes, keep turnovers down, and be a prime scorer while also running the offense? Oh yeah, she will have to defend smaller, quicker players - no where to hide if we play a lot of bigs and she is on the perimeter. That's a lot for her, but if she can do all that, she could be quite dynamic as a pg. She needs to shoot threes to be a great WNBA player so getting that going helps the team and her both. I imagine at the next level she is a 3. Need to shoot threes to play there and defend well in space.
That just leaves the 3 and 2 spots, and Jump is going to start, probably at the 2, but I could see her at the 3 if the coaches think her defense is not quite what they want with her and Jones as the two guards. If it is Jump at the 3, then I'd say we see someone new at the other guard spot, someone who can handle and help Jones run the point and bring the ball up, and most importantly defend well on the perimeter. Who that might be I do not know. If Jump is at the 2, the candidates for the 3 are too many to name, really, and I have no idea who would get that role. We speculate Demetre because she has a nice shot from mid-range and three or Emma-Nnopu because she defends well and can make threes, but nobody is an obvious choice without more info (for us fans).
I am not stating a preferred line-up. I don't even have one yet, not until I see the team play a game or two...or three or four. The sophs aside from Iriafen are mysteries to me, as are the frosh. There are a lot of permutations that could work and maybe we get varied line-ups depending on the opponent with a bigger line-up against bigger teams or teams with tall but not super quick guards vs a smaller line-up for teams that play three guards or are small and quick outside? Should be interesting.
Last thought is who is the backup pg if Jones plays point? I have no idea.
Seems we're in agreement about Brink and Iriafen and the questions you raise are good ones. Yes, this sure will be interesting.
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - TheFarm07 - 10-20-2022
Perhaps a reason from a softer non-conference schedule this year is to allow Tara to try out different lineups and permutations and see what works and who steps up.
It will be exciting nonetheless. I hope we can start next month with one (or even two) big recruiting commitments and then jumpstart the new season. Can't wait for bball to start again!
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - stopandpop - 10-20-2022
(10-20-2022, 06:06 PM)TheFarm07 Wrote: Perhaps a reason from a softer non-conference schedule this year is to allow Tara to try out different lineups and permutations and see what works and who steps up.
It will be exciting nonetheless. I hope we can start next month with one (or even two) big recruiting commitments and then jumpstart the new season. Can't wait for bball to start again!
I concur about the reason for the non-conference schedule. Interestingly, ESPN has a story about Stanford's non-conference schedule. I tried to post the link but couldn't.
RE: Spike - jonnyss - 10-20-2022
(10-20-2022, 03:35 PM)Spike Wrote: Can someone research career three point percentages for Agnes and Brooke? I’m guessing agnes’ is higher than we think and Brooke’s lower.
agnes was 2/8 sophomore year and 1/4 freshman year for a consistent 25%. brooke was 8/24 or 33% in her only year.
link
link
fwiw haley was .353 sophomore year (helped by strong tournament shooting from distance) and .244 junior year. (same links)
RE: WBB 2022-2023 season - WBB fan - 10-21-2022
(10-20-2022, 06:40 PM)stopandpop Wrote:(10-20-2022, 06:06 PM)TheFarm07 Wrote: Perhaps a reason from a softer non-conference schedule this year is to allow Tara to try out different lineups and permutations and see what works and who steps up.
It will be exciting nonetheless. I hope we can start next month with one (or even two) big recruiting commitments and then jumpstart the new season. Can't wait for bball to start again!
I concur about the reason for the non-conference schedule. Interestingly, ESPN has a story about Stanford's non-conference schedule. I tried to post the link but couldn't.
Link was posted in an earlier post today