WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - Printable Version

WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - 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 72 UCLA 59 (/thread-23955.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - martyup - 01-13-2023

The Pac-12 only has one team with a losing record overall. Tough conference.

Why the heck isn't Colorado ranked? They are 14-3 and just beat two ranked teams (UT and AZ).

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - Card10Fan - 01-13-2023

(01-13-2023, 11:10 PM)BostonCard Wrote: We beat a top-10 team on the road by double digits and people are upset about how we played.

BC

The victory was very much in question until the end. The aspirations and goals of this team are much higher than beating UCLA on the road. This was not a stellar performance. I was sitting behind the bench and Tara was hot and upset with the team (more so than normal) all game. A win is a win but I’d prefer to see a complete performance from start to finish.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - CompSci87 - 01-13-2023

(01-13-2023, 11:05 PM)martyup Wrote: Do they have the flop rule in womens basketball? If so, they aren't calling it.

They don't have the rule in NCAA WBB. UCLA had some doozies.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - MV72018 - 01-13-2023

(01-13-2023, 11:10 PM)BostonCard Wrote: We beat a top-10 team on the road by double digits and people are upset about how we played.

BC

Some people only care about whether we win, and criticize others who, with an eye on future opponents, also care about how we win, as a good indicator of where we need to improve to make the FF.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - Softball Fan - 01-13-2023

(01-13-2023, 11:30 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:
(01-13-2023, 11:10 PM)BostonCard Wrote: We beat a top-10 team on the road by double digits and people are upset about how we played.

BC

The victory was very much in question until the end. The aspirations and goals of this team are much higher than beating UCLA on the road. This was not a stellar performance. I was sitting behind the bench and Tara was hot and upset with the team (more so than normal) all game. A win is a win but I’d prefer to see a complete performance from start to finish.

In the latter part of the third quarter Stanford's strategy looked like: Let's not work any plays. Let's chuck up threes and hope they go in. Of course things changed diametrically the start of the fourth quarter.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - 81alum - 01-13-2023

I had a full analysis of the game and accidentally deleted it before hitting "post reply." Sigh.

In any case, I am elated by this win. However, we should remember that we did not play especially well for three quarters, and had a simply outstanding fourth quarter. Wouldn't it be nice to capture what we did in the 4th and do it in every quarter?

So what was the difference in that final quarter?

Brink's 6 fourth quarter blocks were of enormous consequence, but I think the quarter hinged on the first two shots.

The first was a made three by Lepolo. The second shot was a made three by Emma-Nnopu. Both came after Brink blocks. But UCLA had stayed in the game on the strength of better than expected three point shooting, and finally we began to make threes. The players UCLA had decided not to defend were now punishing them, and this opened up the interior. The game was completely changed by Brink's blocks leading to those two treys.

While Brink deserves every accolade, I also think Lepolo deserves some love too. She had 6 assists to 3 turnovers, made 2/3 treys, made 2/2 free throws, and was a critical element in our defense on the speedy little UCLA guards.

Iriafen was excellent in the first half, although we did not see her as much in the second. Nine points was a lot in this defensive game, and she was efficient.

Emma Nnopu was fabulous on defense, but I think she startled people with her offense. 2/3 field goals, and 4/4 free throws--she looked like she just couldn't miss. If she can repeat that performance regularly, she should be a starter. And all that in the fourth quarter.

Jones was both the good Jones and the bad Jones. She had a poor shooting percentage--because during the first three quarters she was forced to take all the off-balance end-of-the-shot-clock shots that no one else would take. And some of her high-risk passes were way-too-high-risk passes, leading to turnovers. On the other hand, she did have 16 points, 12 rebounds, and 6 assists, and it is pretty hard to dismiss that kind of output.

As a team, we played disciplined, solid basketball for the most part. We had only 13 turnovers to UCLA's 12, even though they are great turnover artists. We had 14 O-boards to their 11 O-boards, even though that is their specialty. Fouls were even at 14 apiece. None of our players got to 4 fouls. In short, there was a lot to like about this game, except for our offensive performance in the first half.

For example, as sluggish as our offense was at times, UCLA's offense failed to score more than 17 points in any quarter, and were held to an appalling 33% for the game--they actually took three more shots that we did, although it did not matter. Also, ultimately, by the end, three point shooting wound up about even.

In conclusion, this was a fabulous win that should teach our team a lot about perseverance, rebounding and defense. I do think Jones has been a bit off for too many quarters of too many games, and would like to see her get her shooter's touch. It remains a weakness that she cannot hit a trey (0/4 today). But the team as a whole hit enough threes--eventually--to re-balance the offense and get us the win.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - M T - 01-13-2023

Too bad Steph wasn't there tonight. He would have been proud.

Fantastic game by Brink. She's got the ability to do this any night, but teams choose not to give it to her. Apparently UCLA felt like they had to score inside.

Iriafen had a poor night, +/- of -9. Emma-nnopu had +/-1 of +11. For the season (before tonight), the were both 0.58 per minute played.
81alum wrote: "Iriafen was excellent in the first half". Respectfully, I disagree. She scored 6 but her defense let multiple 3s to be scored. Her +/- was -5 for the 1st half.

Kinda a flat first half. Tara's half time did light a fire under them, but it was choked for air when Brink was pulled for a third foul. When she came back in, Stanford lit up the first half of Q4.

I'm all smiles.

Re Colorado: ESPN is probably ruling there's a cap on the number of ranked teams in the PAC-12. They don't carry many PAC-12 games, so losing rankings of their teams to those in the PAC-12 just isn't good business.

Stanford hit 9/22 2pts (41%) and 4/12 3pts (33%) in the first half.
Stanford hit 12/27 2pts (44%) and 3/10 3pts (30%) in the second half.
If hitting 3s makes Stanford balanced, it would seem they were more balanced in the first half.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - BostonCard - 01-14-2023

Stanford hit 60 points with just under 7 minutes to go in the game. We could have gone scoreless from that point on and still won. Per ESPN our win probability hit 95% with seven and a half minutes to go and 99% with five minutes to go.

This was a close game through three quarters and then we pulled away and in the end won comfortably. I’m not going to claim we played a perfect, dominant game, but let’s not catastrophise. UCLA is a good team; they are the type of team we should expect to play in the sweet sixteen or elite eight, and a thirteen point win, even if they managed to keep it close for three quarters counts should make us generally happy.

Of course we have things we should clean up. Good teams (and UCLA is a good one) will bring that out. But now, for a moment, let’s put ourselves in the shoes of the bruins, who, I’m sure might be a tiny bit unhappy at the fact that they failed to score any points through eight minutes in the fourth quarter.

BC

RE: WBB: Stanford @ UCLA Friday 8pm - M T - 01-14-2023

(01-13-2023, 10:08 PM)crackpot Wrote:
(01-13-2023, 09:59 PM)M T Wrote: Anyone else watching on Sling and having it hang (forever) sometimes? I haven't seen that before, but it has happened at least 5 times in this game. I restarted my browser, but it continues.

YES. Going insane. $50/month for the privilege.

Maybe it wasn't just my system then. For comparison, I was running Sling in Safari on a Mac (using AT&T for ISP). I was recording the game, and was (mostly) watching the recording as I started late. Much of the time, I was close to the live broadcast. It got so bad at the end of halftime that I switched to running it in Firefox (which used to not work at all) and that only hung once.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - Spiny_Norman - 01-14-2023

After many desultory trips to Pauley to watch the men lose (only 1 win there since 2008), it was great to be there in person and leave happy tonight. Nice to coincidentally sit behind Ratmandoo. We realized we were both Cardboarders and started chatting during the 4th quarter so we'll take credit for helping to change the mojo.

Game highlights.
[twitter]https://twitter.com/GoStanford/status/1614151316049383425[/twitter]

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - M T - 01-14-2023

(01-13-2023, 11:04 PM)martyup Wrote:
(01-13-2023, 11:00 PM)Leftcoast Wrote: 7 blocks and I think the scorer missed a couple in the first half.

Can they go back and adjust the stats?

I don't think so. Otherwise we wouldn't see stats that sometimes have 4 or 6 players in the game.
About 5 years ago, I heard from a staff member ("video coordinator" or something like that) that said Stanford tried to correct things (wrong shooter, etc.) but that didn't happen. At that time, Stanford was getting their own stats.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - Ratmandoo - 01-14-2023

(01-14-2023, 12:25 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: After many desultory trips to Pauley to watch the men lose (only 1 win there since 2008), it was great to be there in person and leave happy tonight. Nice to coincidentally sit behind Ratmandoo. We realized we were both Cardboarders and started chatting during the 4th quarter so we'll take credit for helping to change the mojo.

I think we were both commenting on the refs and I said something like these refs are bad and Missy isn't even working this game. I believe Spiny's response was, "If you're talking about Missy, you must read the Cardboard". Guilty

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - treetop11 - 01-14-2023

Posting my comments before reading all others so apologies for any duplication.

Brink and Nnopu saved our bacon in Q4. Brink's blocks totally changed the game. Ucla kept trying to score in the paint and were totally frustrated and looked like HS kids going agst. college players. Seeing the blocks and how dominant Brink was, I thought to myself that she will force Ucla to stay out of the paint and jack up bad shots from 3 and sure enough it happened. Tara and coaches sure pulled the right lever inserting Nnopu into the game to start the 4th. She gave us defense AND offense!

Thought officiating was weak. For first 3 quarters, they really favored Ucla. For a good part of first half, they let both teams play, then started whistling Stanford excessively. Only watching on tv, I couldn't really tell if we deserved all those fouls, but will assume we did. What I didn't like is that Ucla looked to be getting away woth similar fouls. In the 4th, they were much more even-handed and I think a reason that we came on strong.

Our 3 pt shooting still was off. About half the time, our players just shot poorly, the other half was due to rushing our shots and not be squared up. Tara mentioned the rushing at half, but it was obvious even to me. OTOH, Lepolo's two threes were really key and came at critical times.

Here's something that I would like to see with our Offense: Get the ball to Jump in the corner and encourage her to drive more especially along the baseline. Hannah isn't a great driver by any means, but she is good at avoiding tuenovers i.e. she doesn't try to do too much on her drives, she either finds an opening or passes the ball. When she drives, have Haley set a screen on Lepolo's defender and have Lepolo move to Jump's vacant spot in the corner. If Jump is clear for either a mid range shot or takes it all the way to the hoop, fine. But if her defender sticks on her, have Jump pass out to Lepolo in the corner for a 3 pt. shot. Haley should do a pick and roll and give Lepolo the option to pass to her if she doesn't want to take the 3 pt shot or somehow a defender covers her. Brink and Kiki should move to the basket, one strong side, other weak side to get the O rebound if either Jump, Lepolo, or Jones takes the shot and misses. I think this action woud not only be a good way to score given what D's are doing to us now, but but force opponents to move away from the strategy they are using and get opposing defenders on Jump ton not guard her so closely, giving her more free space to shoot threes. Could also use Demetre, Nivar, Bosgana, or even Prechtel sliding down into Jump's vacated corner position instead of Lepolo.

Interesting tha Demetre who is known for her shooting and offense has been basically silent on O, but has become a really good defender.

Finally, I think our poor 3 pt shooting (and not so great FT shooting) lately is due to some of our players being tired, particularly Jones, Jump, and Brink. Haley and Hannah have logged a lot of minutes and their legs are probably not fresh. Jones shots have frequently been short. Even her 3 point attempts for which she has always been weak have been worse than before. She also is not blazing up and down the court as much. Jump has been uncharacteristically missing more threes than earlier even on open looks. Brink hasn't played as many minutes as those two, but she has been playing more (due to lesser fouls) and more importantly she has been playing extremely hard and intensely. She's had to exert lots of energy the past few games due to them being close, playing with as much intensity as we would see in postseason. Surprisingly, Lepolo seems the least tired despite having as many or close to as Jones and Jump. But still we can't wear her down as she is vital for the late season and post season.

Would like to see more of Bosgana, Demetre, Nivar, Nnopu, and Harriel getting minutes at guard and wing to keep Jones and Jump fresher. Also like to see more of Fran and Ashten to give Brink more rest. We should at least use the bench more for games agst. our weaker P12 foes.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - qwerty49 - 01-14-2023

There was so much standing around the first half when Haley had the ball that I was beginning t think it was some kind of strategy. Jump in particular was glued in the corner and getting beat around the perimeter trying to defend the UCLA guards. But Tara called the back door to Jump to open the 2nd half and that set the tone for the rest of the game.

Other than being a fast-twitch athlete, I don't see that much in Kiki Rice. Am I the only one who is happy we now have Lepolo instead?

The danger of a win like this is that we tend to forget it was pretty much a result of the Cam-and-Agnes show in the 4th Q, as opposed to the strong and balanced team effort on both O and D that we would need to go deep into the Final Four.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - 81alum - 01-14-2023

One thing that has not been mentioned enough is how effective our own defense was even though the matchups appeared to be less than ideal. Kiki Rice and Londynn Jones were held to 3/14 between the two of them. They scored 8 points in our game. They had 28 points in their last game. And apart from Lepolo, most of the defending on them had to be done by larger, slower Stanford players. Despite that, they did not get loose on drives to the basket very much, and of course Brink's blocks were waiting for them in the fourth quarter if they did. We held an explosive offense to 33% shooting.

In addition, while the criticism of our offense during the first three quarters is mostly justified, we consistently did better than during the Cal game, and this is reflected in scoring 72 points vs the 60 we scored at Cal. The offense improved--except really in the dreadful 2nd quarter.

In any case, it is important to have no let down heading to USC, which came within a point of beating UCLA last week.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - jonnyss - 01-14-2023

in the half-time interview, cori close was asked, "what do you need to do different in the 2nd half?" she answered, "drive to the basket." oops!

i, too, didn't see much from kiki rice. i wonder if she regrets going to ucla. imo tara would get much more out of her.

i have to go back to candice wiggins or jayne appel to think of anything comparable to cam's dominance in the 4th quarter.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - 81alum - 01-14-2023

(01-14-2023, 02:04 AM)treetop11 Wrote: Finally, I think our poor 3 pt shooting (and not so great FT shooting) lately is due to some of our players being tired, particularly Jones, Jump, and Brink.

I think you are on to something. I've noticed that many of our misses, including missed free throws, were just a bit short. Early in the season most of the misses were a bit long.

I also wonder if the fact that this was the first week back in classes had any impact on rest.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - WBB fan - 01-14-2023

(01-14-2023, 09:40 AM)jonnyss Wrote: in the half-time interview, cori close was asked, "what do you need to do different in the 2nd half?" she answered, "drive to the basket." oops!

i, too, didn't see much from kiki rice. i wonder if she regrets going to ucla. imo tara would get much more out of her.

i have to go back to candice wiggins or jayne appel to think of anything comparable to cam's dominance in the 4th quarter.

Close also said something about how important it was to rebound well, if I recall correctly. At that point (halftime), rebounds were nearly even. One thing not mentioned about the 2nd half, Stanford totally dominated the boards. By the end of the game, we outrebounded them 48-31, close to our season average margin of 18+. Cam was part of that, but so were several others. IMO, it was a key element in the win.

BTW, Jayne Appel is still around, saw her at the Cal game as we were leaving after that close win. I wonder if she ever shows up to talk to the current Stanford players.

RE: WBB: Stanford 72 UCLA 59 - 81alum - 01-14-2023

(01-14-2023, 02:50 AM)qwerty49 Wrote: The danger of a win like this is that we tend to forget it was pretty much a result of the Cam-and-Agnes show in the 4th Q, as opposed to the strong and balanced team effort on both O and D that we would need to go deep into the Final Four.

It is true that Brink, Emma-Nnopu, and I would argue Lepolo bailed us out in the 4th after a lackluster offense through three. But it is a hallmark of this team that different players carry the team in different games--depending on match ups and opposing defenses. The team can be balanced over a series of games even if it is not particularly balanced in any one game. We are a long way, for example, from Chiney's senior year in which every game depended on her performance, or as Tara called it "Chiney and the Chinettes."

None of that excuses, however, the fact that it took us 3/4 of the game to adjust and figure out how to play UCLA.

Spike - Spike - 01-14-2023

I was really disappointed when Rice chose UCLA.
I’m over it.