WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - Printable Version

WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - 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 63 SMU 67 (/thread-25376.html)

Pages: 1 2

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - 81alum - 01-02-2025

It is a new era in WBB

After her first two years at Stanford, Tara had one 18-12 season, which has been the low point in all those decades. I am seriously wondering if we can get there this year.

Tara also made the NCAA tournament every single year after those initial two years. I am seriously wondering if we can get there this year.

I thought the team showed some fight. After the disastrous start, the passing got crisper in the second quarter. But we cannot survive a game in which Demetre, Heal, and Harriel go 4-23. Those are our shooters, and they didn't shoot well. And we don't do enough other good things to survive a poor shooting night.

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - Card10Fan - 01-02-2025

(01-02-2025, 08:23 PM)81alum Wrote: It is a new era in WBB

After her first two years at Stanford, Tara had one 18-12 season, which has been the low point in all those decades. I am seriously wondering if we can get there this year.

Tara also made the NCAA tournament every single year after those initial two years. I am seriously wondering if we can get there this year.

I thought the team showed some fight. After the disastrous start, the passing got crisper in the second quarter. But we cannot survive a game in which Demetre, Heal, and Harriel go 4-23. Those are our shooters, and they didn't shoot well. And we don't do enough other good things to survive a poor shooting night.

Kind of wondering the same thing. SMU is not good especially in comparison to the rest of the ACC competition. Although a long ways to go, we are gonna be on the outside of the NCAA tourney this year I'm afraid. We aren't getting better. We look significantly worse now than we did against LSU a month ago! I'm not seeing how this team's coming together to make a run. I just don't see it at least as of right now. We already have 5 loses (0-2 in the ACC) and didn't play an overly challenging non-conference schedule.

I really thought Ogden was gonna be a major contributor this year. We are not deep. She's really doesn't have that much competition for minutes and she's still not impressing when she's on the court. Major disappointment for how highly ranked she was coming out of high school. She hasn't played like a high level recruit.

Mudhead - Mudhead - 01-02-2025

(01-02-2025, 08:23 PM)81alum Wrote: It is a new era in WBB

After her first two years at Stanford, Tara had one 18-12 season, which has been the low point in all those decades. I am seriously wondering if we can get there this year.

Tara also made the NCAA tournament every single year after those initial two years. I am seriously wondering if we can get there this year.

I thought the team showed some fight. After the disastrous start, the passing got crisper in the second quarter. But we cannot survive a game in which Demetre, Heal, and Harriel go 4-23. Those are our shooters, and they didn't shoot well. And we don't do enough other good things to survive a poor shooting night.

I attended the game . Have been a season ticket holder for about 15 years so I follow the team. (We have two grown sons who live in Menlo and San Francisco with two daughters in law and five of our grandkids between them, so the tickets get used) my wife and I Watch almost every game on .tv and usually see four or five live as part of our grandkid spoiling trips every year.

Not only that, but I coached fourth, fifth and sixth grade YMCA basketball, so I am fully qualified to evaluate college players and their coaches! This is the first time I have been embarrassed by a .stanford women’s basketball team. Embarrassed.

Very little effort until five minutes left in the game. No blocking out, very little defense and losing every 50/50 ball up until then. Poor Tess Heal tries but she is a child among women’s when she tries to drive to,the basket. Plus missing three bunnies.

I do not know what the problem is. we were outhustled and outplayed by a slightly above average team with much less talent then Stanford has. Maybe they were all sick with the flu. Or badly hung over. I would prefer to believe either of those excuses than what I saw… a group of women who simply did not care.

I’m not
interested in assessing blame. I’m will simply say if this is the level of effort and skill that this team has , we should fire every coach and encourage every single player to enter the portal. Maybe give them Some NIL money if they leave. We should start over.

It was that bad . No way to sugarcoat it. Just have to try and forget about it. Like a bad pimple.

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - SkiBum80 - 01-02-2025

This team showed more promise earlier in season.
It’s become like a bad version of Dickens Christmas Carol where the ghost Haase of Stanford Teams past has come back to haunt us.
Causing lots of sloppy play, turnovers, and generally losing to a team not as talented but playing harder & better than us.

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - crackpot - 01-02-2025

This team is way too talented to play like this. Ill-prepared mentally. Switched to zone way too late. And questionable end-of-game decisions. Sheesh.

76lsjumb - 76lsjumb - 01-02-2025

Years ago when it became clear that Stanford was going to follow the Tennessee Summitt to Warlick coaching transition, I was apprehensive for the future of the program, concerned that we were following the same path.
From what I’ve seen to date, however, I now think I would be thrilled if we managed to follow that trajectory…

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - BillBradley - 01-02-2025

Rough game! Thought we'd start the NY off with a W, but nope. As others have posted, the ladies did not come to play.

I think we have enough talent to beat teams like SMU, finish in the upper half of the ACC and make the tourney. But the coaching staff and team need to figure some things out pronto. It looked to me like the players weren't together in this one. A few times I even caught players barking at each other. Say what you want about the last two year's teams and not having enough "joy", but everyone knew who the lead dogs were on those teams. This team really lacks leadership. Demetre is the obvious choice, but she was nowhere to be found in this game and I don't think she commands the respect needed to be a leader. Nunu is our best player, but she's a soph so tall order for her to assume a leadership position. Bosgana just seems too goofy and inconsistent, bouncing between great plays and silly, costly mistakes all the while giggling. Someone needs to take the reigns and refuse the sloppy play and poor effort. C'mon Brooke - it's got to be you.

How on earth did we allow those 2 guards to drop 41 points on us? They are nowhere close to the elite level guards of the ol' Pac-12. Oh how we miss the rim protection from Cam.

Heal was 0-6 in attacking trips. The result was either a turnover or a missed shot (basically a turnover). IMO, she should only attack when she has a clear physical advantage, which from this point on won't be very often.

And wow, I've posted this before, but we are so slow. We absolutely have to defend, own the glass, and control the ball, because we're not going to be scoring 75+ on many teams.

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - 81alum - 01-02-2025

One thing I have noticed is that "young" teams--and this team is the most inexperienced team Stanford has started in decades--are prone to go on emotional roller coasters. Losses can shake confidence, and lack of confidence can lead to losses. There can be a downhill snowball effect.

It is imperative that we win and soon to break out of this trend. But being imperative just makes it harder to do so.

Clemson is a significantly better team than SMU. Then coming in to Maples are Florida State and North Carolina State--both top 25 teams. It is easy to see an epic losing streak in the making.

In the era of easy transfers, it is critical to have success every year, or else good players may transfer out and highly ranked recruits may change their minds. We cannot chalk this up to "rebuilding" when all our competition is "reloading." For example, you could say that SMU's 7 transfers outplayed our 2 transfers.

Did I mention that it is imperative that we beat Clemson on Sunday? On the one hand it seems like just another nondescript game in the middle of a disappointing season. But for the reasons just stated, it has now become our most important game of the year.

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - M T - 01-02-2025

I forgot the timing of this game and had to depend upon the Sling auto-record. But that missed almost all of the first quarter. The game I saw had Stanford outscore SMU by 7 points. Not quite the 10 points they were favored, but still..... And do remember, Stanford was on their floor, 2 hours off our time.

Basically, I saw the last 3 quarters, so I'll consider those stats. Score (Stanford) 50-43. Stanford shot better than SMU FG% 43.2% vs 38.3%; 3PT% 41.7% vs 23.1%. We did slightly better than SMU on rebounds (33.3% OR, 69.7% DR) and slightly better on assists (13 vs 10). We had 11 TO to their 10; 3 Blocks to their 4. 5/9 FT vs their 4/9.

A game is four quarters, and I hope to watch the first quarter to see how we fell behind. Yep, Stanford lost, but Stanford was within 1 in the last minute. The ladies fought hard to the very end.

As 81alum noted, this is an inexperienced team and a young team. I don't recall Stanford having a waterbug-type player as Shay (forgive me for using her first name). She certainly played quite well against their quick guards. I do expect she has improved enough to warrant more time on the court.

Frankly, the "Fire the Coaches" attitude after this loss seems petulant and childish. Inexcusable is the "Get rid of the players" thought. That's not what I think of when I think of "fans".   Just because the players are now getting paid shouldn't mean "fans" should feel free to dump such abuse on them.

I believe that all the Stanford players are STUDENT-athletes.    I am sure they are studying as hard as they can and working hard at continuing to improve their skills & teamwork. I hope all those with eligibility will be with Stanford next year. These ladies are the Stanford team.

I saw some really good inbound plays, and a really good last second score. Even Agara's late missed 3-pointer was a well-drawn-up play that was executed properly, but the shot missed.

Regarding Agara's missed FTs. They were way short. I have my theory about why, but I'd bet she'll get coached on how to do better in the upcoming games, even if she is arm-tired at the end.

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - JohnR34231 - 01-03-2025

After so many years of excellence, I think fans are having a hard time with the realization that we are a very average team this year (and that might even be a little generous; we'll see how the rest of the season goes).
As far as our next game goes, Clemson just beat a team (Cal) by double digits that we lost to by double digits. So while comparative scores aren't always terribly meaningful, I'd say we are in for a very tough outing.
A little early to give up, but the last few games haven't been very encouraging.

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - fullmetal - 01-03-2025

I was also at the game, but now with the miracle that is the ACC Digital Network, we can all see the game:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbgCgOv7lzs

It felt like many of the guards driving in were hoping for a foul call. Some of those drives really deserved whistles, but they were not often blown. The ages-old desperation three game yielded the same result in the third quarter. Some of those were decent looks too. It's D1 basketball: your best looks are always going to be uncomfortable, so get used to it.

SMU's Jones is a grad student who easily created her own shot and seemingly couldn't miss up until the very end. Robertson was talented as well, and SMU had two bigs inside who got away with second-degree murder in the paint (in my opinion). I didn't realize Stanford was a 12-pt favorite (really?), not without equally effective guard play.

At some point in the third quarter, SMU had more offensive rebounds than Stanford had defensive rebounds. Never a good sign (but okay, SMU had two very effective bigs). And I gotta say, the team's ability to anticipate rebound timing was just not there tonight. It was as if their basketball instincts were turned off until the last few minutes of brilliance. Against faster or more athletic opponents, they'll need to rely on instincts and anticipation to stay ahead of the defense. For most of the game, there was too much wait-and-see on offense, not enough chemistry. I think I saw Heal motion quite visibly for someone to cut to the basket at one point, after which a bounce pass resulted in a layup. That kind of situation shouldn't require a big hand wave. The players need to be thinking on the same wavelength and seeing the same chessboard.

Those last few minutes were amazing though. Stanford took SMU out of their comfort zone and had SMU players jawing at each other to assign blame for turnovers and blown opportunities. A whole first quarter of Stanford brilliance might have knocked SMU out right away. Instead, it was SMU who nearly knocked out Stanford early on.

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - TonyLima - 01-04-2025

Reviewing the game while editing, I could not believe how much the SMU coach worked the refs during the last 2 minutes of clock time.

76lsjumb - 76lsjumb - 01-04-2025

(01-04-2025, 03:59 PM)TonyLima Wrote: Reviewing the game while editing, I could not believe how much the SMU coach worked the refs during the last 2 minutes of clock time.

Could you believe how uninvolved the Stanford coach was during the first several minutes of the game as the team was getting trounced?

RE: 76lsjumb - TonyLima - 01-04-2025

(01-04-2025, 04:27 PM)76lsjumb Wrote:
(01-04-2025, 03:59 PM)TonyLima Wrote: Reviewing the game while editing, I could not believe how much the SMU coach worked the refs during the last 2 minutes of clock time.

Could you believe how uninvolved the Stanford coach was during the first several minutes of the game as the team was getting trounced?

Kate need to hire a firebrand assistant. Her job is to get ejected from about 1/4 of the games.

RE: 76lsjumb - paloalto - 01-04-2025

(01-04-2025, 07:37 PM)TonyLima Wrote:
(01-04-2025, 04:27 PM)76lsjumb Wrote:
(01-04-2025, 03:59 PM)TonyLima Wrote: Reviewing the game while editing, I could not believe how much the SMU coach worked the refs during the last 2 minutes of clock time.

Could you believe how uninvolved the Stanford coach was during the first several minutes of the game as the team was getting trounced?

Kate need to hire a firebrand assistant. Her job is to get ejected from about 1/4 of the games.

Is an assistant coach allowed to engage with a referee about game activity?

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - BobK - 01-04-2025

Yes as we saw in the SMU game with Steding
Kate’s job is to be ejected ? Huh

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - Card10Fan - 01-04-2025

I will say I can’t believe with 6 coaches on the bench plus our support staff, not a single person was aware or noticed we were in the bonus in the second quarter and thought to mention it to the officials. We missed out on two free points in what ending up being a 1 point game in the final minute.

How does not a single coach track fouls? That is inexcusable in my opinion. I know it’s not the coaches job per se and is the responsibility of the scorers table but come on coaches, someone should be paying attention! I noticed it immediately watching the game on tv from home and was wondering why no one was saying anything.

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - fullmetal - 01-04-2025

I'd like to see those refs and stats keepers canned and banned from collegiate games for that mistake. Inexcusable.

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - TonyLima - 01-05-2025

(01-04-2025, 07:53 PM)BobK Wrote: Yes as we saw in the SMU game with Steding
Kate’s job is to be ejected ? Huh

No. Kate’s job is hire an assistant who will be ejected.

RE: WBB: Stanford 63 SMU 67 - MV72018 - 01-05-2025

(01-04-2025, 07:53 PM)BobK Wrote: Yes as we saw in the SMU game with Steding
Kate’s job is to be ejected ? Huh

I have literally no clue what this post is supposed to mean.