The CardBoard
WBB: Stanford 66 -- Louisville 84 - 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 66 -- Louisville 84 (/thread-26046.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

RE: WBB: Stanford vs Louisville (ESPN now) - M T - 01-30-2026

BTW, those "scrubs" or "3rd[sic] string" players had fresh legs for the last 2+ minutes and included Yep, they were 4 freshmen and a sophomore.
But then Stanford started 3 freshmen and two juniors (with 25+ minutes from a sophomore and 20+ minutes from a junior).
Stanford only played 7 players.


P.S. How is the PxP so messed up as to have this substitution at 2:28 in Q4: "Substitution: Laura Ziegler for Shay Ijiwoye"?

Also, considering the NCAA rules about how much time an athlete can practice for their team & its coaches, consider this extra time in June and July
https://kysports.co/2024/07/louisville-wbb-istanbulluoglu-coach-walz-to-join-u20-turkish-national-team-for-eurobasket/
Is this a new future for NCAA teams: hireenroll foreign players and send coaches to coach them on their national teams?

RE: WBB: Stanford vs Louisville (ESPN now) - petersalas - 01-30-2026

And if Louisville could have scored at the end, they would have. With time running down, Jeff was yelling at his players to score. I didn’t really like that.

RE: WBB: Stanford vs Louisville (ESPN now) - crackpot - 01-30-2026

(01-29-2026, 10:25 PM)M T Wrote:  Uh, why isn’t anyone commenting on how the Stanford overmatched and undermanned team held the second half even against the #6 team. 

I thought Stanford did a really good job through much of the 3rd quarter in being more aggressive and having better defense.  An 18 point deficit became a 10 point deficit until a late run by the #6 team.  Even in the 4th, Stanford forced the other team to call a timeout and change their tactics to be even more grabby 

And, late in the game when there was no prayer, the Stanford players gave it their all, although it was against players that matched them more equally in experience and skill. 

I have to admit that at the beginning of the year, I was not very hopeful that Ijiwoye would be that useful. But I was wrong. She really fights out there. I saw her boxing out much larger bigs and pushing them backwards.  She sneaks in for rebounds and hustles back when her player gets free.  She doesn’t ball hog like some of the other players.  She still makes mistakes, but she is clearly a positive factor for the team.

Yup. Figuring we'd be without our two starters, I was completely expecting we'd lost this by 40-50 points. Even the turnovers didn't seem to be the goofy turnovers that we've typically seen in the last few games. Shay had a career game, and our freshmen got plenty of PT.  And Ogden and Clardy went at it. Though the unbelievably awful refs made a difference, probably not enough to get us a win, but my drive home was one of hopefulness for our immediate and next-season future.

RE: WBB: Stanford vs Louisville (ESPN now) - crackpot - 01-30-2026

(01-30-2026, 08:34 AM)petersalas Wrote:  And if Louisville could have scored at the end, they would have. With time running down, Jeff was yelling at his players to score. I didn’t really like that.

He's such an a*#*hat.

And how many coaches could drop an F-bomb on the refs and not get T-ed up?

Meanwhile, probably my best (thus far) Paye coaching moment was when some Louisville player got called for her first foul (and might have been the first time all night we went to the free throw line?) and when Betty Ann announces it and says, "...her first" and Paye turns to the ref and shouts, "First called all night, Saif!"

How did ND's entire starting lineup nearly foul out against Cal?

RE: WBB: Stanford vs Louisville (ESPN now) - 76lsjumb - 01-30-2026

(01-29-2026, 10:25 PM)M T Wrote:  And, late in the game when there was no prayer, the Stanford players gave it their all, although it was against players that matched them more equally in experience and skill. 

I was intrigued by the assertion that Louisville's team at the end of the game matched Stanford's "more equally in experience and skill."  We must have different concepts of "experience." Our team at the end [consisting of 3 juniors, 1 soph, and 1 freshman] had a combined minutes played total [for this season] of 2351 minutes, while Louisville's team [consisting of 3 freshmen, 1 soph, and 1 junior] at the end had a combined total of 954 minutes.  You might be right about skill [and those are, indeed, impressive high school recruiting rankings you cited], although it's depressing to think that Louisville's extended bench is more skilled than three of our starters.  However, arguing that they were in any sense "equally matched" to our players at the end in terms of experience seems very questionable to me.

RE: WBB: Stanford vs Louisville (ESPN now) - stopandpop - 01-30-2026

(01-30-2026, 04:47 PM)76lsjumb Wrote:  
(01-29-2026, 10:25 PM)M T Wrote:  And, late in the game when there was no prayer, the Stanford players gave it their all, although it was against players that matched them more equally in experience and skill. 

I was intrigued by the assertion that Louisville's team at the end of the game matched Stanford's "more equally in experience and skill."  We must have different concepts of "experience." Our team at the end [consisting of 3 juniors, 1 soph, and 1 freshman] had a combined minutes played total [for this season] of 2351 minutes, while Louisville's team [consisting of 3 freshmen, 1 soph, and 1 junior] at the end had a combined total of 954 minutes.  You might be right about skill [and those are, indeed, impressive high school recruiting rankings you cited], although it's depressing to think that Louisville's extended bench is more skilled than three of our starters.  However, arguing that they were in any sense "equally matched" to our players at the end in terms of experience seems very questionable to me.


This game could have been significantly more competitive if coach Paye and her staff would teach the team how to set strong screens even with the current offense.  A player like Somfai needs space to drive the ball from the high post.  She can't do that without strong screens; same with Eschmeyer.  Ogden has to work so hard for her points (and she gets them), but imagine how more potent she would become if her teammates knew how to screen effectively.  That is one way to attack quick, athletic teams like Louisville.  There are so many teams in the country, including mid-majors, with less talent that have more productive offenses than Stanford because their screening is rock solid.  I do not understand why the coaches are not teaching this.

I agree with other posters that Stanford's players refused to quit and played their hearts out until the last second of the game and it's admirable that (despite the restrictive offense), the team played Louisville even in the 2nd. half.  But the problem of not being competitive with Louisville is on the coach's shoulders.

At her first press conference as the new head coach, Kate Paye said "We want to compete for national championships."  Disclosure:  I am not a Stanford alum like most of you, but I became a fan of your women's team because of Tara's brilliance and how her teams played (and won), year after year.  I would like to believe that your Athletic Director still believes in coach Paye's mission, but I don't know.  From my perspective (which may be a bit different, but not necessarily any better), Kate Paye- a wonderful person, dedicated and hard-working- cannot get that done.  If your AD wants to get the program back to that elite level, he must recruit a highly successful Power Four coach from the outside who wants the job, who understands the challenges facing her/him and has the experience/skills to bring a winning culture to the program.  

Even as an outsider, it's painful to watch how the team's level of performance has fallen so low- which I will argue is not the fault of the players who are following the instructions of their coaches and doing their best within that structure.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Louisville 84 - BostonCard - 01-30-2026

Do we really think that the coaches are not spending time in practice going over how to screen and practicing plays off screens?  That seems… unlikely.  Fair enough that the screens are not as effective as they could be and that is frustrating as a fan, but from public comments, practice time is very finite and scheduled to the minute.  Thus, spending more time on screening necessarily means spending less time on something else.

BC

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Louisville 84 - Card10Fan - 01-30-2026

A very telling stat.  Assist to turnovers the past 8 games

NC State - 5 assists  -  21 turnovers
NC - 17 assists   -  22 turnovers
Wake - 12 assists -  14 turnovers
Duke - 12 assists   -  19 turnovers
BC - 14 assists   - 11 turnovers
Syracuse - 13 assists  -  22 turnovers
Cal - 8 assists  -  17 turnovers
Louisville - 6 assists   - 22 turnovers

The only game with a net positive assist/turn ratio is against BC who is 4-19 on the season. How can something be practiced over and over and still be this bad game after game?  Almost every postgame press conference it's mentioned how taking care of the ball is a top high priority and worked on in practice. This will likely be the lowest assist total in a season for a Stanford team in 35 years even worse than last year.  

I miss the Tara teams of crisp ball movement, passing, and TEAMWORK. Sharing the ball to get a great shot and unselfishness.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Louisville 84 - Hieronymus - 01-31-2026

Stanford on the 9 line in the latest Bracketology which matches their current net ranking of 36. It’s not as big of a slip as I expected, but the margin for error continues to shrink.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Louisville 84 - MV72018 - 01-31-2026

(01-30-2026, 09:32 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:  A very telling stat.  Assist to turnovers the past 8 games

NC State - 5 assists  -  21 turnovers
NC - 17 assists   -  22 turnovers
Wake - 12 assists -  14 turnovers
Duke - 12 assists   -  19 turnovers
BC - 14 assists   - 11 turnovers
Syracuse - 13 assists  -  22 turnovers
Cal - 8 assists  -  17 turnovers
Louisville - 6 assists   - 22 turnovers

The only game with a net positive assist/turn ratio is against BC who is 4-19 on the season. How can something be practiced over and over and still be this bad game after game?  Almost every postgame press conference it's mentioned how taking care of the ball is a top high priority and worked on in practice. This will likely be the lowest assist total in a season for a Stanford team in 35 years even worse than last year.  

I miss the Tara teams of crisp ball movement, passing, and TEAMWORK. Sharing the ball to get a great shot and unselfishness.

Those are BRUTAL A/TO stats. 

I don't remember Tara's teams in her last few years being culpable of crisp ball movement. We had some great bigs, to be sure, but unless I've repressed it, I can't summon up recollections of clever, crisp, decisive, crafty, or highly skilled ball movement as one of our competitive advantages.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Louisville 84 - Nobadeer - 01-31-2026

Me neither. 

Tara was blessed with ~ 15 years of All American frontcourt players - Appel, the Ogwumikes, Pedersen, McCall, A Smith, Iriafen, Brink. The only passing required was an entry pass into the post, much like Mitch Johnson did for MBB to the Lopez twins! I think there was even one year where LSJU WBB had Appel, and at least one Ogwumike, and Pedersen, all at once! 

The sad part is none of those AA frontcourt players ever won the NCAA title. Blame it on Geno.

triangle2 - triangle2 - 01-31-2026

(01-30-2026, 08:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  Do we really think that the coaches are not spending time in practice going over how to screen and practicing plays off screens?  That seems… unlikely.  Fair enough that the screens are not as effective as they could be and that is frustrating as a fan, but from public comments, practice time is very finite and scheduled to the minute.  Thus, spending more time on screening necessarily means spending less time on something else.

BC

We’re using ghost or slip screens a lot more at the elbow. They sometimes look like missed screens but the intent is to make the defender think she’s being screened but the supposed screener slips inside instead. Where the screen should look solid is when we set a down screen, or a stagger, or run horns, etc, although a slip screen also works if you’re running horns.. Draymond sets slip screens with Curry all the time.

I suspect the current popularity of the slip is the it reduces the likelihood that you’re picking up an offensive foul, which has been a big problem for us in recent seasons.

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Louisville 84 - BostonCard - 01-31-2026

(01-31-2026, 06:00 PM)Nobadeer Wrote:  Me neither. 

Tara was blessed with ~ 15 years of All American frontcourt players - Appel, the Ogwumikes, Pedersen, McCall, A Smith, Iriafen, Brink. The only passing required was an entry pass into the post, much like Mitch Johnson did for MBB to the Lopez twins! I think there was even one year where LSJU WBB had Appel, and at least one Ogwumike, and Pedersen, all at once! 

The sad part is none of those AA frontcourt players ever won the NCAA title. Blame it on Geno.

Brink won a national title her freshman year (2021).  But yeah, we had a lot of talent that never won a championship.

On passing in Tara’s teams, I think when people think of phenomenal passing, they think of the point guard who drives, draws the defense, and passes it to a wide open player or makes some no-look, behind the back dazzling pass to a big for an easy bucket.  Despite all our talent up front, we’ve had fewer guards like that.  Nonetheless, with the Princeton, we have seen a lot of nice passes to players making backdoor cuts for easy lay-ups.  Those have to be precisely timed and right on the money.  We’ve also had nice entry passes (fewer this year) to posts establishing position.  Those too have to be precise.  We’ve had plenty of great passes to a screening Hannah Jump (as an example) hitting a catch-and-shoot three.  Again, those have to be pinpoint or the defender is able to recover.  We’ve also had good passing between posts.  So, while Tara’s teams have had less flash on their passing, I do think they did a good job getting players open and getting the ball to them.

BC

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Louisville 84 - jonnyss - 01-31-2026

(01-31-2026, 06:00 PM)Nobadeer Wrote:  Me neither. 

Tara was blessed with ~ 15 years of All American frontcourt players - Appel, the Ogwumikes, Pedersen, McCall, A Smith, Iriafen, Brink. The only passing required was an entry pass into the post, much like Mitch Johnson did for MBB to the Lopez twins! I think there was even one year where LSJU WBB had Appel, and at least one Ogwumike, and Pedersen, all at once! 

The sad part is none of those AA frontcourt players ever won the NCAA title. Blame it on Geno.

not entirely geno. the 2010-11 team had both ogwumikes and kayla pederson. but was short at point guard when starting pg jj hones got kicked off the team for driving her rehab golf cart while intoxicated. jeanette pohlen moved over to point, backed up by melanie murphy, but then sprained her ankle in the ncaa's and played hobbled.  we lost to texas a&m by one point in the semis. terrible reffing as well. kayla would get the ball and drive on danielle adams, and adams would fly 10' back in a dramatic flop. offensive foul. happened 2 or 3 x iirc. when adams would drive on kayla, defensive foul!

RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Louisville 84 - petersalas - 01-31-2026

I remember this so vividly… but I think it was more Chiney that was getting called. She even fouled out. 


(01-31-2026, 06:31 PM)jonnyss Wrote:  
(01-31-2026, 06:00 PM)Nobadeer Wrote:  Me neither. 

Tara was blessed with ~ 15 years of All American frontcourt players - Appel, the Ogwumikes, Pedersen, McCall, A Smith, Iriafen, Brink. The only passing required was an entry pass into the post, much like Mitch Johnson did for MBB to the Lopez twins! I think there was even one year where LSJU WBB had Appel, and at least one Ogwumike, and Pedersen, all at once! 

The sad part is none of those AA frontcourt players ever won the NCAA title. Blame it on Geno.

not entirely geno. the 2010-11 team had both ogwumikes and kayla pederson. but was short at point guard when starting pg jj hones got kicked off the team for driving her rehab golf cart while intoxicated. jeanette pohlen moved over to point, backed up by melanie murphy, but then sprained her ankle in the ncaa's and played hobbled.  we lost to texas a&m by one point in the semis. terrible reffing as well. kayla would get the ball and drive on danielle adams, and adams would fly 10' back in a dramatic flop. offensive foul. happened 2 or 3 x iirc. when adams would drive on kayla, defensive foul!


RE: WBB: Stanford 66 -- Louisville 84 - stopandpop - 01-31-2026

(01-30-2026, 08:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  Do we really think that the coaches are not spending time in practice going over how to screen and practicing plays off screens?  That seems… unlikely.  Fair enough that the screens are not as effective as they could be and that is frustrating as a fan, but from public comments, practice time is very finite and scheduled to the minute.  Thus, spending more time on screening necessarily means spending less time on something else.

BC


Whether the team practices it or not, the screens are weak and that hinders generating better offense and better outcomes.

triangle2 - triangle2 - 01-31-2026

(01-31-2026, 08:49 PM)stopandpop Wrote:  
(01-30-2026, 08:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  Do we really think that the coaches are not spending time in practice going over how to screen and practicing plays off screens?  That seems… unlikely.  Fair enough that the screens are not as effective as they could be and that is frustrating as a fan, but from public comments, practice time is very finite and scheduled to the minute.  Thus, spending more time on screening necessarily means spending less time on something else.

BC


Whether the team practices it or not, the screens are weak and that hinders generating better offense and better outcomes.

See my comment above. I think you may not always be seeing what we’re running. If you’re ghost/slip screening, you’re not intending to actually set a hard screen because you’re doing a timing slip or a roll into the lane; alternatively, you’re getting the defender to anticipate a screen that’s not actually happening so that the defender is starting to think “am I supposed to go under or over the top”, but instead the player with the ball is about to blow by while you’re making up your mind. Or, you’re setting the screen in name only because you’re trying to roll off very quickly to get in the lane. Quicker guards (Shay, or Clardy) can use slips effectively.

We’re talking in big generalities here. I don’t doubt that as a team, we could be screening better, and some of the younger players are still green and making mistakes. Somfai leans and she’s picked up some avoidable offensive fouls for that, and Eschmeyer has not always gotten set when she’s setting a traditional screen. Remember that modern-era screens (really, imported from the NBA) come in a lot of different looks and some of them are screens in name only by design.

FWIW, Stevenson sets the best traditional screen. She can really wipe someone out.

Warriors ghost screening

RE: triangle2 - stopandpop - 02-01-2026

(01-31-2026, 09:44 PM)triangle2 Wrote:  
(01-31-2026, 08:49 PM)stopandpop Wrote:  
(01-30-2026, 08:11 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  Do we really think that the coaches are not spending time in practice going over how to screen and practicing plays off screens?  That seems… unlikely.  Fair enough that the screens are not as effective as they could be and that is frustrating as a fan, but from public comments, practice time is very finite and scheduled to the minute.  Thus, spending more time on screening necessarily means spending less time on something else.

BC


Whether the team practices it or not, the screens are weak and that hinders generating better offense and better outcomes.

See my comment above. I think you may not always be seeing what we’re running. If you’re ghost/slip screening, you’re not intending to actually set a hard screen because you’re doing a timing slip or a roll into the lane; alternatively, you’re getting the defender to anticipate a screen that’s not actually happening so that the defender is starting to think “am I supposed to go under or over the top”, but instead the player with the ball is about to blow by while you’re making up your mind. Or, you’re setting the screen in name only because you’re trying to roll off very quickly to get in the lane. Quicker guards (Shay, or Clardy) can use slips effectively.

We’re talking in big generalities here. I don’t doubt that as a team, we could be screening better, and some of the younger players are still green and making mistakes. Somfai leans and she’s picked up some avoidable offensive fouls for that, and Eschmeyer has not always gotten set when she’s setting a traditional screen. Remember that modern-era screens (really, imported from the NBA) come in a lot of different looks and some of them are screens in name only by design.

FWIW, Stevenson sets the best traditional screen. She can really wipe someone out.

Warriors ghost screening


I do see what Stanford is running and it's not working effectively.  In a past life I used to scout.