The CardBoard
WBB: Stanford 86 USF 66 - 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: Stanford 86 USF 66 (/thread-15096.html)

Pages: 1 2

Re: WBB: Stanford 86 USF 66 - 81alum - 11-29-2017

What a tale of two halves.

First half:  USF 28 Stanford 24
Second half: Stanford 62 USF 38

Re: WBB: Stanford 86 USF 66 - CompSci87 - 11-29-2017

Without checking stats, it felt like most of it was getting the 3-point shooting going. Williams, Romano, Smith, and Carrington were all hitting.

Re: WBB: Stanford 86 USF 66 - 81alum - 11-29-2017

Write up done at the top.

Re: WBB: Stanford 86 USF 66 - UltimateCard - 11-29-2017

AP story says 11 3-pointers is a Stanford record for a half. What a turnaround from the first half! I arrived at Memorial Gym just as the second quarter started (after dropping off my kid at his piano lesson), and witnessed brick after brick from both teams. Ugggggggggg-ly!!! In the third quarter, we had better ball movement around the perimeter to open shooters and the shots started falling. But USF was making back door cuts and getting enough lay-ins, even getting easy drives to the basket after Stanford makes, to stay within reach early in the 4th. Our relentless long-range hits and their fatigue finally took their toll, and we pulled away for the win. Good to see a lot of Cardinal red in the crowd. Tara and Molly had a prolonged exchange in the post-game handshake line. Hard to believe it's been 24 years since the "Good golly, Miss Molly" Sports Illustrated cover!

Re: WBB: Stanford 86 USF 66 - CompSci87 - 11-29-2017

Giving up those open layups off made baskets was shocking. Tara will have plenty to say to the team about that. You can't always hit 3s, but you can always run back on defense.

Re: WBB: Stanford 86 USF 66 - TheFarm07 - 11-29-2017

Even though I am pleased that we rallied and won the game by a comfortable margin, I am still concerned about the team.

Offensively, I don't think it's a good thing to rely on the 3-pointer so much. 31 of our 71 FG attempts (43.7%) were from long-range. When they go in, like they did in the second half, it's a beautiful thing and we will beat nearly everyone with that type of shooting success. On the flip side, however, when they don't go in, as we bricked shot after shot in the first half, we can lose to nearly anyone, including a mediocre SF team. It's just too volatile for my taste. I would like us to have other options when we have a cold night. We were fortunate that SF lost its first quarter shooting magic and we narrowed the lead going into the half. More accomplished teams would have sustained or even built the lead. We kept waiting for our shots to go in, without trying something different. Tonight, it did, but what about other nights? Are we that confident about our long range shooting that we would resist trying something else?

(11-29-2017, 11:01 PM)CompSci87 link Wrote:Giving up those open layups off made baskets was shocking. Tara will have plenty to say to the team about that. You can't always hit 3s, but you can always run back on defense.

Defensively, I also agree that we left SF too many easy baskets and good looks; that definitely needs to be improved upon, especially against the likes of Baylor on Sunday, who is going to make us pay much more than tonight if we don't play better defense.

If we are not going to contest offensive rebounds because we are running back to play defense, we better get down the court to defend or we might as well battle more for o-boards.

Re: WBB: Stanford 86 USF 66 - CompSci87 - 11-29-2017

I wouldn't fault the team for shooting a lot of 3s tonight even though in the first half they weren't falling. USF was sagging inside and doubling the post, so kicking it out for 3 was the thing to do.

Also (though this is just an impression), I feel like the team was working more effectively to get better looks in the 2nd half.

Re: WBB: Stanford 86 USF 66 - Jskass - 11-30-2017

yes, was great to see the 2nd half turnaround. I looked up at the clock with about 3 minutes left in the 2nd quarter and we had only scored 15 in total (3 that quarter)! Wish Maya Dodson had more time -- she was very effective late in the game (2/2 for 4 points in about 45 seconds, including a nice assist from Fingall off a steal). She also earlier almost had a beautiful layup but the pass was just a tad too deep for her. An Ogwumike in the making...glad to see Kiana get more time and succeed too, and that Carrington learned from a way-too-aggressive charge down the court when she should have passed, and on the next fast break passed it for a score instead of another foul!

Re: WBB: Stanford 86 USF 66 - BosCard - 11-30-2017

My first in-person game this year and you really do get an experience that is different from watching on TV.  My favorite moment was late in the 4th quarter when Maya went way way up for either a pass or offensive rebound.  It really seemed like she was high enough to dunk it.  So fun to see that in person.  Other nice takeaways (other than making 3 point shots!!!), 1) Really nice to see Kiana hit her floater/runner in the lane.  She has attempted it several time so it's a regular shot for her but I don't recall seeing one go in.  We really haven't had a guard with that shot in a long long time.  It's a very versatile weapon because if you don't have that shot then defenders know you are going to drive for a layup and you become easier to defend (like Sniezek is when she drives). And 2) Someone said that Alexa's mid-range jumper is very pretty and I agree.  It just looks solid and like it's going in all the time.  Hope to see more of that from her and see her develop a full offensive arsenal.  Plus I agree she is a really good defender with nice speed and length.

Re: WBB: Stanford 86 USF 66 - mbdude - 11-30-2017

My takeaway on the 3 point attempts was that Alanna's catch and release was pretty quick, almost a catch and shoot which is nice to see.; unlike Kiana and Alexa.