WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25

WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - 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 102 -- Vanguard 25 (/thread-23643.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - BostonCard - 11-03-2022

Hard to draw many conclusions from such an overmatched game, but the performance at least didn’t raise any red flags. It was good to see everyone contribute, and while Tara is very good about going to her bench, we won’t go 15 deep as the competition ramps up.

BC

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - mbdude - 11-03-2022

I felt Emma did well on defense but wasn't overwhelming (discounting Vanguard, but not a D1 team), she did get beat a few times. I feel Lepoli or Nivar could do as well and provide an offense presence. I t will be interesting to see where Demetre fits in, and appears to be wrinkles to work out with Cam at 3.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - jonnyss - 11-03-2022

(11-02-2022, 10:21 PM)chimera Wrote: Everyone who played did some good things and nobody looked lost or out of place. We have a deep team that is very fun to watch. It was worth the drive even with an overmatched opponent. I'm not sure if we've seen so many really good passes out of so many different players in one game in a while, even in an exhibition.

this was the best performance from the 3rd string players i've ever seen at stanford.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - 81alum - 11-03-2022

(11-03-2022, 07:53 AM)jonnyss Wrote:
(11-02-2022, 10:21 PM)chimera Wrote: Everyone who played did some good things and nobody looked lost or out of place. We have a deep team that is very fun to watch. It was worth the drive even with an overmatched opponent. I'm not sure if we've seen so many really good passes out of so many different players in one game in a while, even in an exhibition.

this was the best performance from the 3rd string players i've ever seen at stanford.

Indeed yes, if we even know what the third string is. That third quarter we shot 59% and outscored Vanguard 30-2. I think in the second half Vanguard was tired and demoralized and was not able to compete as well as they did in the first quarter. We were not only taller and stronger and bigger, we had more players. Our third string had a lot to play for--to distinguish themselves, and the Vanguard players did not--watching their faces it was clear they were going through the motions in the second half--unable even to get off bad shots due to our height and defense. They launched 52 shots, 7 of them blocked and 9 that went in. That can't be a lot of fun after the thrill of playing Stanford wears off.

Vanguard did not play their best player, Melissa Akullu--their only player over 6' tall. I don't know why, but it must have taken a toll on their plans and whatever limited ability they had to match up with us.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - bl82 - 11-03-2022

(11-02-2022, 10:19 PM)CompSci87 Wrote: I almost forgot to capture the stream, but I was reading the Cardboard while waiting for my burger at Gott's just before the game, and bl82's post reminded me. I was able to log into my home machine from my phone and started the capture successfully!

The video is uploading to YouTube now and will be here when it's finished. YouTube makes a standard def version available first, so if it looks blurry, wait a while and the high def version should be there.

https://youtu.be/ufYgzPFhMwc

Thanks so much for doing this, CompSci87. I guess I need to experiment on my equipment and see what I can do on my own.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - CompSci87 - 11-03-2022

In case this helps any:

I use a modified version of youtube-dl to capture Pac-12 streams. See https://github.com/TimothyPMann/youtube-dl (pac-12 branch ... Oops, that is out of date, have to push the latest up to GitHub when I have time). I tried to contribute my changes upstream but they were ignored after the initial review.

I use a program called avidemux to cut out commercials and other breaks.

TonyLima has some other capture method that you could ask him about.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - cardfan1996 - 11-03-2022

Devil’s advocate here

Caveat: Only saw the first quarter and a half (apparently Stanford looked much better in the 2nd half)

1. Very disappointed by crowd size. Who is responsible for community outreach and making sure the stands don’t look like that on national TV? The pictures during the red/white scrimmage were equally discouraging. I’d be more than a little upset with the marketing efforts if I was Tara but I haven’t seen any quotes from her complaining about the issue.

2. Not a big fan of Haley at the point. She had a real shot to overtake Boston as the #1 pick in next year’s draft but I think we can all agree not as a point guard. I hope this ill-advised decision doesn’t cost her the opportunity to make history since it’s been awhile since the Ogwumikes went #1. Also Stanford relies on Haley too much as a scorer to tiring her out seems ill-advised too.

3. Historically (last 20+ years? 30 years?) when Stanford has struggled, it has almost always been because their point guard spot or guard spots in general were not very good. Therefore, I was very surprised that Tara rolled out only 1 guard in her starting lineup that can handle the ball. Wouldn’t you want at a minimum 2 or championship year 3 ballhandlers in the starting lineup?

4. Unlike most here, not that impressed with the new Freshman point guard, especially if between her and Agnes, they are mostly going to put up donuts on the perimeter (in other words, “0” points). She reminds me of a much shorter Marta. I think Stanford historically is much more effective with a scoring point guard who can hold her own defensively (Kiana, Orange). Vanguard is not even Division III maybe and their guards had no problem driving around her or more problematic, inverting her, at least in the first quarter and a half that I saw. I can’t imagine she will be effective against Division I guards on offense or defense. If I was the opposing coach, my entire offense would switch to inverting her, much like Vanguard did when she came in. I didn’t see some her better passing in the 2nd half. In the part I saw, she whipped the ball in before her post established position and sealed their defender. In transition, she made a very dangerous pass to Brink when defenders were under Brink’s legs.

5. If you are trying to replace the 40% 3pt shooting of the Hulls as well as their generational defensive talent, then Agnes is probably not the answer on offense or defense, which leads me to bigger issue . . .

6. You must be able to surround Cam and Haley with good perimeter shooters so they can have room to operate (SPACING); otherwise, they will get doubled and tripled and multiple defenders will collapse in their driving lanes creating situations where they can turn over the ball or turn their ankles or . . well, you get the point. No really good opposing coach (or even mediocre one) will guard Agnes or the freshman point guard on the perimeter. Let me put it another way - Stanford is known for its “scouting report” defense where they completely disregard players like Agnes and the Freshman point guard the entire game forcing opposing coaches to either lose the game or make changes. Do you think Stanford would guard its own perimeter if the starting backcourt included Agnes and the Freshman?

7. Kiki didn’t look as good as I’d hope and was earlier reported. That could be nerves or lack of spacing. Regression to the mean - neither Cam nor Haley are going to provide spacing for Kiki to be effective as most teams will be happy that they are hanging out at the 3-pt line and not terrorizing them on the interior.

I think there are better shooters and ballhandlers to choose from, and I am perplexed why Tara went the direction she did as certainly her own history should serve as a reminder. The players chosen to surround Brink and Haley should compliment their skillset. Hannah does. Hannah is the only other starter yesterday that provides spacing on offense for Brink and Haley.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - OCcardinal - 11-03-2022

[Image: i-9nR99SH-XL.jpg]

A few observations on the stat sheet:
Points: Not surprised to see Jump at the top. But really pleased to see Bosgana and Betts up there. Betts especially (Tara said she was sick last week and had a minor eye injury coming into the came so she wasn't sure how much we would see her yesterday.) Betts was also hitting jumpers, not just layups. Demetre had 9 points, but should have had more. (Her 3 point shooting was off.)
eFG% (effective field goal %): Harriel took two shots (both 3s) and made both of them, thus 150% eFG%! An auspicious start to her Stanford career.
FT: The team didn't get to the line much but a good sign that Brink and Jones hit 7 of 8 FTs.
REB: Raise your hand, who had Bosgana as the #1 rebounder for this game? Brink still got lots of rebounds (still playing close to the basket on most possessions).
PF: Zero for Brink!
TO: 3 TO for Jones, but she was gambling a lot on aggressive passing. No problem with that, especially in an exhibition.
MIN: Not surprising to see Jump with the most minutes. But a great sign to see Lepolo tied with her. Seems to be a viable backup to Jones at the 1. Belibi only played 8 minutes (presumably due to her hand injury), but was still productive.
+/-: Bosgana and Lepolo with the highest +/- of anyone on the team. Great for Lepolo as it shows she adds value even without scoring.
EFF (PTS + REB + AST + STL + BLK - Missed Shots - TO): Brink is normally the top on this stat but there were 5 players who beat her on a per minutes basis last night. Prechtel was not a surprise (especially with the height difference), but I was surprised to see Bosgana all over the stat sheet. And Harriel, wow! I'm really curious to see what both can do against better competition moving forward. Also a great sign for Betts to demonstrate Brink-like efficiency in her very first outing.
Net Points: Not surprising to see Jones, Brink and Jump up there, but again, wow, Bosgana with 13.5 net points in only 16 minutes! A little disappointing to see Emma-Nnopu with negative net points though. She'll have better games.
Fouls Drawn: It may be cut off in the graphic, but the team leaders in fouls drawn were Jones (4.2), Brink (3.2) and Betts (2.1) Vanguard did a pretty good job of keeping the fouls down so those are good numbers. It suggests that the Vanguard defenders didn't have any good options to stop those 3.
Stops: Team leaders in defensive stops were Bosgana (8) and Harriel (6). So good defense from those two as well. Both performed much above my expectations. Man this team is deep!

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - AxeMan89 - 11-03-2022

Cardfan,

I got to the game late so both missed what you saw and saw what you missed. Lepolo's distribution skills in the second half seemed premium to me. She pushed the pace with a good handle and the passes were on target. I get your point that we need scorers and spacers. She only took 2 shots and I'd hope she can capitalize on open look opportunities in the next few games to keep others honest.

Nivar also seemed aggressive defensively and I'm excited to see what she can do. Based on how little she was used last year, I don't really know how to evaluate Bosgana, but she potentially provides some of the needed outside offensive threat while holding her own on D.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - jonnyss - 11-03-2022

thanks, oc - great table!

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - 81alum - 11-03-2022

(11-03-2022, 01:11 PM)cardfan1996 Wrote: Devil’s advocate here
Caveat: Only saw the first quarter and a half (apparently Stanford looked much better in the 2nd half)
1. Very disappointed by crowd size. ...
2. Not a big fan of Haley at the point. ...
3. ... I was very surprised that Tara rolled out only 1 guard in her starting lineup that can handle the ball. Wouldn’t you want at a minimum 2 or championship year 3 ballhandlers in the starting lineup?
4. Unlike most here, not that impressed with the new Freshman point guard, especially if between her and Agnes, they are mostly going to put up donuts on the perimeter (in other words, “0” points). She reminds me of a much shorter Marta...
5. If you are trying to replace the 40% 3pt shooting of the Hulls as well as their generational defensive talent, then Agnes is probably not the answer on offense or defense, which leads me to bigger issue . . .
6. ... Do you think Stanford would guard its own perimeter if the starting backcourt included Agnes and the Freshman?
7. Kiki didn’t look as good as I’d hope and was earlier reported. ...

All points worthy of discussion. Here is my take on each of your points.

1. I have been concerned about shrinking crowd size for years and have explained my theory about it. There was a brobdingnagian and passionate fan based created after Title IX and the initial two national championships, but they have been aging out. If you attend a lot of games you will see exactly what I mean--the average age of fans in the stands is probably past 70. As a 63 year old I am usually the youngest fan in my vicinity. This has become worse over the years as we get older and younger fans do not come on board. Many here will also say Stanford shot itself in the foot with the undermining of the Fast Break Club by rolling WBB support into generic Buck Cardinal Club support. Weekend games are always somewhat better. Last night was 2300 attendance--except for all those season ticket holders who did not show up but who "count." We have fallen way behind Arizona and Oregon in Pac 12 attendance numbers, so yes, this is a problem.

2. I think we all agree that Haley is not going to score as much if she has to run point. She is turnover-prone too and she knows it. In a post-game interview last year she described herself as "high risk - high reward" and Tara agreed, gently ribbing her a little. All that may be well and good, but what if we have someone who is "low risk - high reward." Hard to argue with 6 assists to 0 turnovers by Lepolo, as opposed to 1 assist to 3 turnovers by Jones. I have to believe that Jones will move to a more natural position as Lepolo, Nivar, and Harriel gain enough experience and confidence to run point.

3. Tara will vary the lineup depending on what she thinks is necessary. Our team strength are our bigs, so she clearly was trying to get as many of them experience as possible. Since Jump was our best offensive weapon but is not a regular ball handler, that really only leaves room for a single ball handling specialist on the floor at a time. Also keep in mind that in the Princeton one would normally expect assists to come from multiple players, not just from a point guard. Vanguard never pressed as we brought the ball up the court so why put two ball handlers on the floor?

4. I think you may be underestimating Lepolo, and we may see Nivar and Harriel also developing ball-handling point guard skills. Lepolo in the open practice and in the shootaround before the game was draining treys repeatedly and she has a great floater in the lane. We all remember Sniezek and I agree we need a point guard that prevents defenses from sagging off. Tara did say that Lepolo is the best freshman point guard that we have had in a long time, and Tara is not one of those coaches who over-hypes every player. In fact, Tara is famous for being especially picky and hard on her point guards. The fact that Lepolo got more time than anyone else not named Jump is a vote of confidence in her. Now, as for her 0 points--I was a bit disappointed but more in the number of shots than in the number of makes--she was 0/2, and I agree that that won't cut it in the long run. We need her to be just a little bit more selfish. As for the Sniezek comparison--I never saw Sniezek make the kinds of shots that Lepolo regularly makes in practice, and so I remain hopeful. I did not have the same concerns about Lepolo becoming inverted--I think we were running a switch-heavy defense that is a bit different than anything I have seen our of a Tara team before, and several players were constantly shuffling between defenders, creating odd positioning. In any case, Lepolo picked up only 1 foul, and had 2 steals in her very first college game. Only time will tell--but Tara has an eagle eye for defense, and defense is something that can be taught and dramatically improved.

5. Emma-Nnopu has also shown much improvement on offense over prior seasons, but it did not show well last night. Her one basket was on a great O-Board and put-back in which she positioned herself well, but she missed a couple of jumpers. I agree that I would like to see her improved offense actually manifest itself in a game. When we play tougher teams that take away one or two of our stars, she may be thrust more into that role and we shall see. But of course there was no urgency to her offense last night

6. Again, this point was addressed above. This is the first start for Lepolo or Emma-Nnopu and it is much too early to know whether their three point shooting will become threatening enough for our offense. They regularly drain treys in practice. But they have competition from Nivar and Harriel and Bosgana now, and it could be that one of those three becomes a superior offensive threat and wins more playing time. Let's see what patterns emerge as we wend our way through a few easy games. Then the acid test comes in three weeks. Neither you nor I nor (probably) Tara knows for sure which of those four is going to do the best over the coming games, which is the point of scheduling some easy contests.

7. I agree that Iriafan did not look as good during the game as she looked during the open practice, which is very very odd. Keep in mind that the level of competition in the open practice was a heckuva lot better than in last night's game, and Iriafan just could not miss when she was playing against players equally tall and athletic, but was short arming it last night against shorter, less talented players. Worth keeping an eye on, but Tara did say the previous night that the two new starters were nervous. I think they played much better against their teammates than against inferior competition, and hopefully they will play more up to their full abilities as they gain experience in their new roles.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - cardfan1996 - 11-03-2022

1. Who is in charge of marketing? Lack of fans in the marketable age range (18-49) might affect NIL prospects long term (maybe not). It’s too early too tell but I bet if Tara was vocal, it would get fixed. They would have to fix it.

Only time will tell with any of my in-game observations are correct:

1) Leopolo will not grow 3-4 inches so she will be inverted which will distort our defense. It would be coaching malpractice for the opposing coach not to invert her every offensive play while she is in the lineup. That is the easiest scoring opportunity against Stanford trees. You just lift them above the free throw line and take them out of the equation on defense. Will be especially effective against slashing 4s and 5s and stretch 4s and 5s because Stanford will have to double and leave open shooters/slashers.

2) It hardly matters to me what people look like in practice if it never translates against real competition. Obviously Tara has long disagreed with me. See Taylor Greenfield.

3) As a result of 2), if you have to convince a player to shoot when they are open in a real game (insert Allen Iverson video re: practice), I’ve never seen any “reluctant shooter” at any level, male or female, in the history of basketball become prolific or even a reliable double digit scorer. I could be wrong and please feel free to cite an example.

4) That being said, shooting is very technical. And at least last year, Agnes’ release was always technically flawed (not enough of a sample size) and the trajectory at times was way off (like side of the backboard off). In the comfort of practices and against her Stanford sisters, I am sure she feels more relaxed and can hit her shots. But what I desire is an assassin. The Hulls were cold-blooded assassins. Hannah is a cold-blooded assassin. You need assassins around Haley and Brink so that they can be their best All-American self.

Good discussion.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - 81alum - 11-03-2022

(11-03-2022, 02:59 PM)cardfan1996 Wrote: Obviously Tara has long disagreed with me. See Taylor Greenfield.

Cardfan, I wonder if we all know you by another name, since you sound like an experienced fan, but this is supposedly one of your first posts?

Also, could you say more specifically what you mean by inverting a player. I thought I knew what an inverted offense was, but I'm not sure I understand your use of the term in the same way.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - IM in OC - 11-03-2022

(11-02-2022, 09:46 PM)Langdude Wrote: Vanguard is a Pentecostal school, but it appears that the Holy Spirit does not play favorites. Holy cow what a mismatch. Of course Vanguard knows that, and wants its players to get better by scheduling elite competition. Meanwhile, we were able to play a lot of different rotations.

I am geeked to see the (sort of) beginning of the Iriafen era.

-m.

Just a quick note on Vanguard. They are nomads this season. Their home court, aka The Pit, has been torn down for a new arena that is in process of being built. I am not sure where they practice, but will be playing their home games at Orange Coast College, a JUCO, less than a mile away. Russ Davis, their coach, as someone mentioned in a prior post, also coaches Cal Swish, the AAU team, that Pohlen and both Samuelson sisters, Bonnie and Karlie played for. In the past Vanguard has also played exhibition games at UConn. I believe he once said that the money the team makes for playing at UConn covers about 75% of the teams budget for the year. They havent gone to UCOnn in a few years as Russ Davis was recovering from cancer. I believe it is in full remission now.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - Softball Fan - 11-03-2022

I wonder how much Vanguard got out of this game. They were often throwing up threes out of desperation and hoping something good would happen. Many of those shots didn't come close to the basket. Against conference teams they are not going to have the strategy of constantly jacking up desperate three point shots. I understand the idea of playing better competition but when the opponents are sometimes 6 to 8 inches taller it doesn't simulate what they will see in conference.

In contrast the game helped Stanford prior to playing games that count. It gets new players into the routine of what happens in a real game situation. All the players got playing time to show what they can do.

I liked how Bosgana mixed it up under the basket and was aggressive going for the ball.

Jump doesn't need to get her feet set to launch a three point shot. She can shoot accurately at long range without fully being in balance which few players can do consistently.

Prior to watching this I had doubts Betts would get much playing time this season because there are so many strong, experienced post players. But I can see if the team can pass to her with her hands up high she can turn around, keep her hands high, and shoot accurately. That may work against teams with shorter post players.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - cardfan1996 - 11-03-2022

I followed Stanford basketball since ‘96 (since I graduated). Don’t really post much and forgot my username on this board (because it literally has been years). I usually am just a reader here (but post occasionally on Twitter) . The Hulls on the perimeter helped me never truly worry about StanfordWBB. I am more uneasy this year.

Inversion = Opposing guards who normally stay on the perimeter but now will take Lepolo to the post area, seal her and get easy buckets at the rim. In theory. Think of big guards like Pohlen, Carrington, Hulls posting up smaller defenders with varying success.

[Edited: Forgot to mention Prechtel is a stone cold assassin. Both Prechtel and Haley do not feel pressure or they seen to perform better with pressure. I wish she started.]

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - OCcardinal - 11-03-2022

Given how well some of our new guards played last night, I was curious how Kiana Williams did in her first exhibition BB game. On November 4, 2017, Stanford defeated (then) Division II UC Santa Barbara 60-46 in their first exhibition game of the season. Kiana scored 2 points on 1 for 6 shooting (0-2 from 3), had 2 turnovers and no rebounds or assists in 14 minutes. She did have a block and a steal though. So her efficiency rating was -3.

The next season Stanford defeated Vanguard 87-36 in their exhibition. Kiana played better (but not Harriel-level good): 9 points in 17 minutes (3 of 8 shooting, 3 of 7 from 3), 2 rebounds, 1 assist, 1 turnover, 0 steals, and an efficiency rating of 6.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - 81alum - 11-03-2022

(11-03-2022, 04:24 PM)cardfan1996 Wrote: Both Prechtel and Haley do not feel pressure or they seen to perform better with pressure.]

That is the truth. Haley seems a bit lackadaisical against lesser opponents, but becomes much more intense against the fiercest competition.

And Prechtel has had her very best moments under pressure, whether it was her saving our national championship run in the second half against Louisville, or making that incredible layup with 1 second left in regulation to force overtime at home against Colorado.

Emma-Nnopu, however, is intense. Sitting at courtside I see the eyes of the competitors. EN's eyes emit laser beams.

(11-03-2022, 05:00 PM)OCcardinal Wrote: Given how well some of our new guards played last night, I was curious how Kiana Williams did in her first exhibition BB game. On November 4, 2017, Stanford defeated (then) Division II UC Santa Barbara 60-46 in their first exhibition game of the season. Kiana scored 2 points on 1 for 6 shooting (0-2 from 3), had 2 turnovers and no rebounds or assists in 14 minutes. She did have a block and a steal though. So her efficiency rating was -3.

The next season Stanford defeated Vanguard 87-36 in their exhibition. Kiana played better (but not Harriel-level good): 9 points in 17 minutes (3 of 8 shooting, 3 of 7 from 3), 2 rebounds, 1 assist, 1 turnover, 0 steals, and an efficiency rating of 6.

Thanks! That is great for a sense of perspective. The adjustment from high school/club basketball to college is not linear, it is like jumping off a cliff. Very few kids can make that transition smoothly. Lepolo seems remarkable to me for doing as well as she is, and all of the other frosh seem on track for this stage of their careers.

I seem to remember Nneka and Chiney taking at least half a year to round into form.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - chimera - 11-03-2022

I don't get the concern about Lepolo being constantly "inverted." She is 5'7", not a tall guard, but there are many guards her height around. Kiana Williams was listed at 5'8" at Stanford. I ever noticed her getting "inverted" much. I also think that this was just an exhibition with constant multiple subs, nothing too definitive about how things might go when the real games start. I highly doubt the team plays defense with the same schemes as against Vanguard for other teams. It will take a while for a rotation to emerge.

RE: WBB: Stanford 102 -- Vanguard 25 - WBB fan - 11-03-2022

(11-03-2022, 05:18 PM)81alum Wrote:
(11-03-2022, 04:24 PM)cardfan1996 Wrote: Both Prechtel and Haley do not feel pressure or they seen to perform better with pressure.]
That is the truth. Haley seems a bit lackadaisical against lesser opponents, but becomes much more intense against the fiercest competition.

And Prechtel has had her very best moments under pressure, whether it was her saving our national championship run in the second half against Louisville, or making that incredible layup with 1 second left in regulation to force overtime at home against Colorado.

Emma-Nnopu, however, is intense. Sitting at courtside I see the eyes of the competitors. EN's eyes emit laser beams.

(11-03-2022, 05:00 PM)OCcardinal Wrote: Given how well some of our new guards played last night, I was curious how Kiana Williams did in her first exhibition BB game. On November 4, 2017, Stanford defeated (then) Division II UC Santa Barbara 60-46 in their first exhibition game of the season. Kiana scored 2 points on 1 for 6 shooting (0-2 from 3), had 2 turnovers and no rebounds or assists in 14 minutes. She did have a block and a steal though. So her efficiency rating was -3.

The next season Stanford defeated Vanguard 87-36 in their exhibition. Kiana played better (but not Harriel-level good): 9 points in 17 minutes (3 of 8 shooting, 3 of 7 from 3), 2 rebounds, 1 assist, 1 turnover, 0 steals, and an efficiency rating of 6.
Thanks! That is great for a sense of perspective. The adjustment from high school/club basketball to college is not linear, it is like jumping off a cliff. Very few kids can make that transition smoothly. Lepolo seems remarkable to me for doing as well as she is, and all of the other frosh seem on track for this stage of their careers.

I seem to remember Nneka and Chiney taking at least half a year to round into form.

Yes, Nneka and Chiney did take a while, but Chiney not as long. Remember, she was a key element as a Frosh in the Dec 2010 defeat of U Conn (even though she did foul out). But for perspective on what's possible, there's a lot of relevant history. Most recently, Lexie Hull started the very 1st game of her freshman year. Soon after, was injured, so she missed a lot of games later in the season. Going back a bit, don't forget Wiggins. If I remember correctly, she scored something like 24 points in her very first game. And then there was Nicole Powell, who had a triple double right at the start of her frosh year. And Kayla Pederson, of whom Tara said, she never was a freshman. And Kate Starbird and Wideman, both of whom started early in the season as Frosh, as did Rachael Hemmer. And Kristen Folkl was hugely effective the very first time she stepped on the court. Val Whiting didn't start her entire Frosh year, but she was still national Freshman of the year. Didn't start because she was playing behind Trisha Stevens. Could probably come up with more but these are all off the top of my head.