WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - 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 49 Duke 74 (/thread-25409.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: Stanford 49 Duke 74 (/thread-25409.html)
RE: WBB: Stanford @ Duke, Sunday 10am; preview and game thread - BillBradley - 01-19-2025
I think this game should have been much closer. We could have stuck with them longer, maybe to around a 10-15 point game in the end. While this team is most definitely down on talent, it's also down on leadership, confidence and competitive drive. Not a good formula. I'd like to see more fight. Duke is good, but they aren't So Carolina. Demetre and Bosgana were just absent today. A combined 5 points and 4 boards from 2 seniors in 47 minutes. They are way better than that and need to set a better on court example. Nunu didn't have her best stuff, but at least she kept fighting.
RE: WBB: Stanford @ Duke, Sunday 10am; preview and game thread - BobK - 01-19-2025
I saw in person Demetre play 3 games after her soph year. I had her top 10 in her class. Right she was very mature for her age and didn’t get quicker.
Olson who used to do the espn rankings sees hundred and hundreds of games each year
Hansen on PN sees hundreds of players.
I think you are wrong Bill
However agree on the difference of nothing between someone ranked 40 vs 50
RE: WBB: Stanford @ Duke, Sunday 10am; preview and game thread - MV72018 - 01-19-2025
(01-19-2025, 02:24 PM)BillBradley Wrote: I think this game should have been much closer. We could have stuck with them longer, maybe to around a 10-15 point game in the end. While this team is most definitely down on talent, it's also down on leadership, confidence and competitive drive. Not a good formula. I'd like to see more fight. Duke is good, but they aren't So Carolina. Demetre and Bosgana were just absent today. A combined 5 points and 4 boards from 2 seniors in 47 minutes. They are way better than that and need to set a better on court example. Nunu didn't have her best stuff, but at least she kept fighting.
Agree. In my book, extended failure to fight should be debited to the coach's account. No excuse for that. Does KP read the riot act to players for not hustling and pull them to get the message across, or is she too "nice" to do that? By the way, our starters were 12 for 44 for the game! Duke's were 21 for 45! Yikes.
RE: WBB: Stanford @ Duke, Sunday 10am; preview and game thread - Card10Fan - 01-19-2025
(01-19-2025, 02:25 PM)BobK Wrote: I saw in person Demetre play 3 games after her soph year. I had her top 10 in her class. Right she was very mature for her age and didn’t get quicker.
Olson who used to do the espn rankings sees hundred and hundreds of games each year
Hansen on PN sees hundreds of players.
I think you are wrong Bill
However agree on the difference of nothing between someone ranked 40 vs 50
I agree on this. Olson used to attend tons of HS games and really did a great job evaluating talent even on the West coast. I think the rankings are still useful and somewhat foretelling. Haley Jones, Cameron Brink, Kiki Iriafen were all high ESPN ranked kids and turned out to be great college players.
I will say we’ve had a few maybe underachievers (based on high expectations) and maybe a few of these kids would have lived up to their rankings in different programs. Jenna Brown was really highly rated out of HS and had a very subpar college career. Demetre has underachieved her ranking as a top 10 player and I would say the same of Ogden thus far but I still feel her potential is still quite high as a sophomore.
RE: WBB: Stanford @ Duke, Sunday 10am; preview and game thread - 81alum - 01-19-2025
(01-19-2025, 03:11 PM)Card10Fan Wrote: I will say we’ve had a few maybe underachievers (based on high expectations) and maybe a few of these kids would have lived up to their rankings in different programs. Jenna Brown was really highly rated out of HS and had a very subpar college career. Demetre has underachieved her ranking as a top 10 player and I would say the same of Ogden thus far but I still feel her potential is still quite high as a sophomore.Remember that Iriafen did not show her best stuff until her junior year. There were a few hints her sophomore year. So I agree that there is hope for a much more confident Ogden. The coaches have said as much at chalk talks.
(01-19-2025, 03:06 PM)MV72018 Wrote: Agree. In my book, extended failure to fight should be debited to the coach's account. No excuse for that. Does KP read the riot act to players for not hustling and pull them to get the message across, or is she too "nice" to do that? By the way, our starters were 12 for 44 for the game! Duke's were 21 for 45! Yikes.I obviously don't know what Kate says to the players, but my experience interacting with her is that she is NOT a touchy-feely "nice" person but quite business-like, even harsh at times. As was Tara. I'm sure she doesn't sugar-coat anything to the players.
On the other hand, it goes without saying that you don't coach Stanford players the same way you might coach other players. The high level of academic achievement tends to go with a certain personality type, and as Bill Walsh indicated you can't motivate that kind of player by lots of displays of coaching emotion. People have over the years criticized Tara and other coaches for not showing more emotion during games, which just goes to show they don't really understand this point. But I am sure that the players do suffer when they watch their mistakes dissected in the film meetings by Kate's razor-sharp mind.
RE: WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - old spanish trail - 01-19-2025
Hate to be harsh, but a couple of our players looked like high schoolers today..uncertain, intimidated, and kind of weak. Yes to more Ogden, who totally showed she belonged, and Umeh, who did several nice things, and didn't look overwhelmed. Did Harriel make this trip?
RE: WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - 81alum - 01-19-2025
(01-19-2025, 04:05 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: Hate to be harsh, but a couple of our players looked like high schoolers today..uncertain, intimidated, and kind of weak. Yes to more Ogden, who totally showed she belonged, and Umeh, who did several nice things, and didn't look overwhelmed. Did Harriel make this trip?I've wondered a lot about Harriel lately. Haven't seen her for a while--and she used to be our best three point shooter and a pretty good defender.
I think Shay Ijiwoye showed fire and effort today.
RE: WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - JTM - 01-19-2025
Where's the team that beat Gonzaga?
Where's the team that came within an inbounds play of beating LSU?
RE: WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - old spanish trail - 01-19-2025
(01-19-2025, 04:11 PM)81alum Wrote:(01-19-2025, 04:05 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: Hate to be harsh, but a couple of our players looked like high schoolers today..uncertain, intimidated, and kind of weak. Yes to more Ogden, who totally showed she belonged, and Umeh, who did several nice things, and didn't look overwhelmed. Did Harriel make this trip?I've wondered a lot about Harriel lately. Haven't seen her for a while--and she used to be our best three point shooter and a pretty good defender.
I think Shay Ijiwoye showed fire and effort today.
Yes, she's only 5-6, but she's not intimidated....sometimes to a fault, but good for her.
RE: WBB: Stanford @ Duke, Sunday 10am; preview and game thread - BillBradley - 01-19-2025
(01-19-2025, 03:11 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:OK, well, maybe I was wrong on the scouts not seeing the girls play. That was my excuse for them. Now I really don't understand how they can be so off so often. I'm not talking about Haley Jones or Cameron Brink. Those are gimme's. A lot of times it comes down to athleticism at the D1 level. To project someone as a Top-10 player, they can't be so heavy footed like Brooke (unless they are massive like Betts). Aside from the defensive challenges, on offense all Brooke can do is catch and shoot or fade away. In high school she never attacked. This was known.(01-19-2025, 02:25 PM)BobK Wrote: I saw in person Demetre play 3 games after her soph year. I had her top 10 in her class. Right she was very mature for her age and didn’t get quicker.
Olson who used to do the espn rankings sees hundred and hundreds of games each year
Hansen on PN sees hundreds of players.
I think you are wrong Bill
However agree on the difference of nothing between someone ranked 40 vs 50
I agree on this. Olson used to attend tons of HS games and really did a great job evaluating talent even on the West coast. I think the rankings are still useful and somewhat foretelling. Haley Jones, Cameron Brink, Kiki Iriafen were all high ESPN ranked kids and turned out to be great college players.
I will say we’ve had a few maybe underachievers (based on high expectations) and maybe a few of these kids would have lived up to their rankings in different programs. Jenna Brown was really highly rated out of HS and had a very subpar college career. Demetre has underachieved her ranking as a top 10 player and I would say the same of Ogden thus far but I still feel her potential is still quite high as a sophomore.
Here's a highlight tape of her in high school. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLmMzpxGMTs Count how many times she dribbles the ball more than once. She's just very limited. There's no better catch and shoot player than Hannah Jump, and she was ranked #50 or something like that.
I'm not saying Stanford shouldn't have recruited her. She can definitely play. I'm just saying, how on earth if someone has watched her play live multiple times that they can't SEE her limitations. And then she comes in as this monster recruit and everyone's disappointed. It's just bad.
RE: WBB: Stanford @ Duke, Sunday 10am; preview and game thread - Card10Fan - 01-19-2025
(01-19-2025, 05:57 PM)BillBradley Wrote:(01-19-2025, 03:11 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:OK, well, maybe I was wrong on the scouts not seeing the girls play. That was my excuse for them. Now I really don't understand how they can be so off so often. I'm not talking about Haley Jones or Cameron Brink. Those are gimme's. A lot of times it comes down to athleticism at the D1 level. To project someone as a Top-10 player, they can't be so heavy footed like Brooke (unless they are massive like Betts). Aside from the defensive challenges, on offense all Brooke can do is catch and shoot or fade away. In high school she never attacked. This was known.(01-19-2025, 02:25 PM)BobK Wrote: I saw in person Demetre play 3 games after her soph year. I had her top 10 in her class. Right she was very mature for her age and didn’t get quicker.
Olson who used to do the espn rankings sees hundred and hundreds of games each year
Hansen on PN sees hundreds of players.
I think you are wrong Bill
However agree on the difference of nothing between someone ranked 40 vs 50
I agree on this. Olson used to attend tons of HS games and really did a great job evaluating talent even on the West coast. I think the rankings are still useful and somewhat foretelling. Haley Jones, Cameron Brink, Kiki Iriafen were all high ESPN ranked kids and turned out to be great college players.
I will say we’ve had a few maybe underachievers (based on high expectations) and maybe a few of these kids would have lived up to their rankings in different programs. Jenna Brown was really highly rated out of HS and had a very subpar college career. Demetre has underachieved her ranking as a top 10 player and I would say the same of Ogden thus far but I still feel her potential is still quite high as a sophomore.
Here's a highlight tape of her in high school. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLmMzpxGMTs Count how many times she dribbles the ball more than once. She's just very limited. There's no better catch and shoot player than Hannah Jump, and she was ranked #50 or something like that.
I'm not saying Stanford shouldn't have recruited her. She can definitely play. I'm just saying, how on earth if someone has watched her play live multiple times that they can't SEE her limitations. And then she comes in as this monster recruit and everyone's disappointed. It's just bad.
I get what you are saying. When Demetre actually committed to Stanford (she was an early commit), ESPN had her as the #4 recruit in the nation. That is kind of crazy to think of.
https://247sports.com/college/stanford/longformarticle/meet-21-stanford-commit-brooke-demetre-134309639/amp/
RE: WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - paloalto - 01-19-2025
According to Stanford bio she was, "A five-star talent, rated the No. 11 player in the Class of 2021 by ESPN HoopGurl". She was also Gatorade California player of the year. So many "experts" were ranking her very high.
Does the fact she played at Mater Dei in Santa Ana and got a lot of visibility as a prep player factor into her ranking.
Also, in WVB when a player announces her commitment to Stanford her ranking in many lists often magically goes up much higher.
RE: WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - BillBradley - 01-19-2025
(01-19-2025, 06:21 PM)paloalto Wrote: According to Stanford bio she was, "A five-star talent, rated the No. 11 player in the Class of 2021 by ESPN HoopGurl". She was also Gatorade California player of the year. So many "experts" were ranking her very high.Pretty sure the Gatorade Player of the Year award goes to the best high school player in the state. And I don't doubt she was that. But you can't base your projection of how good someone is going to be in college on their high school career. You need to look at how the overall skillset and athleticism will translate to the D1 game. Similar to Drew Timme coming out of Gonzaga. Concensus first team All American college player who will probably never sniff the NBA court because of his athleticism. And no NBA scout claimed he was a lottery pick.
Does the fact she played at Mater Dei in Santa Ana and got a lot of visibility as a prep player factor into her ranking.
Also, in WVB when a player announces her commitment to Stanford her ranking in many lists often magically goes up much higher.
RE: WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - CompSci87 - 01-19-2025
I like to remind myself that recruits didn't ask to be ranked where they were, and moreover our coaching staff makes their own evaluation and doesn't care what the services ranked a player (the coaching staff has said that explicitly). So the real harm in someone being over ranked is just fan disappointment. It doesn't make the player a bust, etc.
RE: WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - 81alum - 01-19-2025
(01-19-2025, 07:52 PM)BillBradley Wrote:(01-19-2025, 06:21 PM)paloalto Wrote: According to Stanford bio she was, "A five-star talent, rated the No. 11 player in the Class of 2021 by ESPN HoopGurl". She was also Gatorade California player of the year. So many "experts" were ranking her very high.Pretty sure the Gatorade Player of the Year award goes to the best high school player in the state. And I don't doubt she was that. But you can't base your projection of how good someone is going to be in college on their high school career. You need to look at how the overall skillset and athleticism will translate to the D1 game. Similar to Drew Timme coming out of Gonzaga. Concensus first team All American college player who will probably never sniff the NBA court because of his athleticism. And no NBA scout claimed he was a lottery pick.
Does the fact she played at Mater Dei in Santa Ana and got a lot of visibility as a prep player factor into her ranking.
Also, in WVB when a player announces her commitment to Stanford her ranking in many lists often magically goes up much higher.
I think Demetre is a truly gifted player who is playing out of position. She is one of the best pure three point shooters we have seen--given her height and her release, potentially better than Jump, Karlie, Ki, etc. The closest to her we have had before was Bonnie Samuelson, and she was not as strong. Demetre is as accurate and as quick to release as any of them, and a lot taller than all of them but Bonnie. But she has no business being a mainstay in the paint. And why is she in the paint? Because Betts and Iriafen are not in our paint--but in somebody else's paint.
Demetre is a true team player who is ruining her numbers and suffering through a disappointing season by trying to fill in for our transfer exodus. A more selfish player might have followed others out the door....err....the portal.
RE: WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - old spanish trail - 01-20-2025
(01-19-2025, 10:21 PM)81alum Wrote:(01-19-2025, 07:52 PM)BillBradley Wrote:(01-19-2025, 06:21 PM)paloalto Wrote: According to Stanford bio she was, "A five-star talent, rated the No. 11 player in the Class of 2021 by ESPN HoopGurl". She was also Gatorade California player of the year. So many "experts" were ranking her very high.Pretty sure the Gatorade Player of the Year award goes to the best high school player in the state. And I don't doubt she was that. But you can't base your projection of how good someone is going to be in college on their high school career. You need to look at how the overall skillset and athleticism will translate to the D1 game. Similar to Drew Timme coming out of Gonzaga. Concensus first team All American college player who will probably never sniff the NBA court because of his athleticism. And no NBA scout claimed he was a lottery pick.
Does the fact she played at Mater Dei in Santa Ana and got a lot of visibility as a prep player factor into her ranking.
Also, in WVB when a player announces her commitment to Stanford her ranking in many lists often magically goes up much higher.
I think Demetre is a truly gifted player who is playing out of position. She is one of the best pure three point shooters we have seen--given her height and her release, potentially better than Jump, Karlie, Ki, etc. The closest to her we have had before was Bonnie Samuelson, and she was not as strong. Demetre is as accurate and as quick to release as any of them, and a lot taller than all of them but Bonnie. But she has no business being a mainstay in the paint. And why is she in the paint? Because Betts and Iriafan are not in our paint--but in somebody else's paint.
Demetre is a true team player who is ruining her numbers and suffering through a disappointing season by trying to fill in for our transfer exodus. A more selfish player might have followed others out the door....err....the portal.
Good point, 81.
RE: WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - M T - 01-20-2025
I had to watch the game in replay...
Anyone besides me impressed with how the team played against such an elite defense? Our defense was not so good though.
Congrats to Agara for getting a double-double. Previous double-doubles by Duke opponents in regulation have been a player on each of Maryland, So. Dakota St, So. Carolina, and So. Florida.
Someone above mentioned inbounds plays... What did you think of that today?
I felt Stanford had better ball control against the "elite defense" than I expected. And, as the announcers noted, Stanford adjusted at the half, which to me is a reflection of good coaching and players that can adjust mid-game. Too bad that didn't happen mid 2nd quarter.
Stanford had 20 turnovers. Duke's average forced turnovers is 21.3. 3 of Stanford's turnovers were in garbage time (Papadaki & Green were in the game, so everyone was playing with players they don't normally play with.)
Stanford did shoot 44.4% from 3pt. We just couldn't get enough open shots.
Rebounds: We got 27.5% of OR chances and 70.6% of DR chances (sum of 98.1, a slight disadvantage)
Some thought Heal had a poor day, but she wisely played the correct 9 minutes as she was the only player with a positive +/-. If only the entire team had played that way... Ogden was close with a +/- of 0 for her 25 minutes.
I was impressed that Paye got everyone (I think) on the court at the end. It is easy to do that when you're up by 25, but more challenging to do it when you're down by 21. (Stanford was down 21 when the rarely used players got on the floor. Stanford had 12 players in the stat sheet; Duke had 10.)
As for our players that didn't produce as much as they usually do, we should remember that Stanford historically has shut down the top players of many teams, even great players on great teams. I presume that's what Lawson's game plan was.
81alum, you continue to be astute in your analysis. And +1 for CompSci87's point.
RE: WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - TheFarm07 - 01-20-2025
Would we be in a better position if NIL doesn't exist? Yes, but blaming NIL solely doesn't fully explain the step back we've taken.
Iriafen graduated with her degree, would she have found a grad program here? Perhaps, but you never know. Undeniably, the $$ helped made the decision easier, but if you were in her shoes, and seen where our two programs were headed, what would you choose? Here, you would have been the heads & shoulders best player, but the team, with the graduation of Brink and no headlining freshman coming in, would have been much liked the 2012-13 version that had Chiney leading the way to a Sweet 16 upset loss to Georgia. Nothing more, nothing less: a decent team with limited upside and in no way, shape or form, competing to cut down the nets in early April.
At USC, you have a chance at contending for a national title playing alongside JuJu Watkins, one of the best players in the country, in multiple nationally televised games against top tier opponents, providing an opportunity to challenge yourself in tough situations and potentially raising your WNBA stock. It sucks but I don't blame her. I would have taken it myself, particularly, with a Stanford degree already under my belt.
With Betts, wasn't she unhappy with her situation here? It was shocking to me (and I feel like others here on the CardBoard, but I don't want to be too presumptuous), the limited amount of playing time she got her sole season here, even with Brink and Iriafen ahead of her. She barely got into games, even in garbage time and she was the #1 ranked recruit coming out of HS. Her results at UCLA since then underscored that it was not that she didn't live up to the lofty expectations, even if she didn't amaze right out of the gates her freshman year. Again, the lure of $$ certainly did not hurt, but I felt like the general feeling was that she was dissatisfied here, whether it was because of her lack of on-court minutes or something else.
And don't forget, even with Brink and Iriafen, we suffered two very frustrating losses the last couple of Marchs, to Ole' Miss in 2023 and NC State in 2024, largely due to those two teams' plethora of athletic, speedy guards that we could not defend.
While we've done very well recruiting top-tier forwards and posts in the last fifteen years from Appel to the Ogwumike sisters to Alanna Smith to Haley Jones and to Brink and Iriafen and Lauren Betts (transfer notwithstanding), our only high-profile get/success from the guard spot during this period has been Kiana Williams. And before anybody says anything, I see the Hull twins, even though they eventually played at the 1 and 2, after Williams and Wilson, as more of 2 and 3s and not the super agile playmakers on offense I am alluding to.
Think about the names at the guard position that have passed on us during this period: Skylar Diggins, Charisma Osborne, Azzi Fudd, Hannah Hidalgo, JuJu Watkins, Olivia Miles, among others. I was compelled to write this post, when I saw an ESPN article about the Blakes siblings hitting game-winners over favored opponents this weekend. Mikayla Blakes was on our radar too and instead she chose Vanderbilt, a program without our pedigree.
And furthermore, while they haven't exactly worked out at their new schools, two guards in waiting that had a chance to step into more prominent roles their following year, decided to transfer elsewhere: Jana Van Gytenbeek and Indya Nivar.
Then, think about what has given us fits during this era. I still have nightmares over the Texas A&M national semis loss where Melanie Murphy fouled out late guarding the Aggies' guards, knowing it was over.
If I could identify our top weakness, even from our highly successful, Final Four teams over the decade and a half, most of the time, it would have been an elite scoring threat from the 1 or 2 with the agility/quickness to take defenders off the dribble and protect against it on the other end of the court.
With all that being said, Hailee Swain was a tremendous get for us. Securing Lara Somfai was another critical add. But it shouldn't stop there.
With what the season is turning out to be and a serious danger that this might be the first time in almost 40 years, that we won't make the NCAA tournament, Kate Paye's most important tasks this offseason might be to convince an elite '26 recruit or two, such as a Woliczko or an Abii or a Crittendon, that this season is an aberration and that with their help, we can restore the program to among the consistent best.
RE: WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - 81alum - 01-20-2025
(01-20-2025, 06:33 AM)TheFarm07 Wrote: With what the season is turning out to be and a serious danger that this might be the first time in almost 40 years, that we won't make the NCAA tournament, Kate Paye's most important tasks this offseason might be to convince an elite '26 recruit or two, such as a Woliczko or an Abii or a Crittendon, that this season is an aberration and that with their help, we can restore the program to among the consistent best.I agree with your analysis here. To me, we are playing not only to make it into the tournament but to convince recruits that the program is still going to be elite. A win or two over more highly ranked teams this season would help solve both problems. We could start by knocking off Cal this week.
RE: WBB: Stanford 49 Duke 74 - JohnR34231 - 01-20-2025
(01-20-2025, 07:45 AM)81alum Wrote:(01-20-2025, 06:33 AM)TheFarm07 Wrote: With what the season is turning out to be and a serious danger that this might be the first time in almost 40 years, that we won't make the NCAA tournament, Kate Paye's most important tasks this offseason might be to convince an elite '26 recruit or two, such as a Woliczko or an Abii or a Crittendon, that this season is an aberration and that with their help, we can restore the program to among the consistent best.I agree with your analysis here. To me, we are playing not only to make it into the tournament but to convince recruits that the program is still going to be elite. A win or two over more highly ranked teams this season would help solve both problems. We could start by knocking off Cal this week.
I'm thinking (or at least hoping) Woliczko's ACL injury might convince her that basketball isn't forever and that an elite education is a priority. Obviously, that will be in Stanford's favor. I found it interesting that Stanford is closer to her home than Mitty is. Hopefully that will also be a plus.