WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - 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 56 Texas 61 (/thread-22558.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 56 Texas 61 (/thread-22558.html)
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - 81alum - 11-14-2021
Two questions about the game.
1) In the first quarter, I noticed that we drove at the basket every chance we could. Wilson got a layup, Brink and Jones were fouled and went to the line, we also turned it over trying to drive in. But it was my impression that this driving at the basket stopped later in the game. Did it? Was this a change in strategy or a change in Texas defense? Did we give up because it wasn't working well? Did Texas tighten up its lane defense when we started missing all those treys?
2) Rori Harmon, or the second coming of Aari McDonald, was practicing her stop and pops before the game. She would drive sideways, suddenly stop, take a step back and 90 degrees, and then connect from 8-10 feet. She did this over and over in practice. I guess any 5'6" guard needs this in her arsenal to create openings against taller defenders. In the game, she also used the move to great effect. I noticed that Wilson could not defend her easily...could not recover fast enough from the "stop" to prevent the "pop." Later, Tara put larger players on her and their greater length seemed to work better. Question: why was Emma-Nnopu not used? Her defense would seemingly have been better, and her offense might well have been too, today.
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - chimera - 11-14-2021
This may sound odd but I think there may be almost too many choices for the coaches with 17 players, all of whom have qualities that make them attractive to put in the game, and most of whom have proven what they can do in games. A wonderful problem but I think a problem. Why not Emma-Nnopu? I don't know but they had to try the "old hands" at defense first - Wilson, Hulls, and given everything else going on maybe they had no appetite until very late to try someone new. I just think in this game so early in the season they wanted to stick with players who were in the rotation last year, the more experienced group. I don't think that is unreasonable given the uncertainty at point guard right now.
The schedule is a bit rough for developing the younger players. We have a lot of games against top 25 teams and/or teams that made the tournament last year and are favored to do so again this year.
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - CompSci87 - 11-14-2021
Lots of spot on comments, especially Chimera's.
I got the impression that Texas wanted Haley to bring the ball up. If Anna or others tried, Texas was in their grill. When Haley got it they backed off to token pressure. This may have been a strategy to make it tough for Haley to get open by moving without the ball, forcing her to be a dribbler instead.
I really didn't like seeing Lexie at point for stretches, trying to do something positive while dribbling against a shorter guard hounding her. That's one thing Lacie is better at.
I seem to remember we were recruiting Rory Harmon at one time. At least she was on Bob's list. She seemed clearly Texas's best offensive player.
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - Softball Fan - 11-15-2021
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-women/article/2021-11-12/womens-basketball-rankings-texas-upset-over-defending-champs-stanford-shuffles?utm_campaign=trending
4. Stanford (3) - The defending national champs continued their momentum taking down Morgan State in its home opener, but got stunned by No. 25 Texas, 61-56. That's due to Texas' non-stop defensive pressure and Aaliyah Matharu's clutch shooting. A win would've been a cherry on top on the day Stanford received its championship rings, but it's still early in the season. We thought Stanford was deep in its championship year, but now 17 players make up this roster to create more endless combos. However, no Kiana Williams, so the question is: Who will be the floor general? We got two looks of Haley Jones and Anna Wilson at the point.
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - stanford22 - 11-15-2021
(11-15-2021, 08:18 AM)paloalto Wrote: https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-women/article/2021-11-12/womens-basketball-rankings-texas-upset-over-defending-champs-stanford-shuffles?utm_campaign=trending
4. Stanford (3) - The defending national champs continued their momentum taking down Morgan State in its home opener, but got stunned by No. 25 Texas, 61-56. That's due to Texas' non-stop defensive pressure and Aaliyah Matharu's clutch shooting. A win would've been a cherry on top on the day Stanford received its championship rings, but it's still early in the season. We thought Stanford was deep in its championship year, but now 17 players make up this roster to create more endless combos. However, no Kiana Williams, so the question is: Who will be the floor general? We got two looks of Haley Jones and Anna Wilson at the point.
Michelle Voepel dropped them down in her rankings to 10. Spoke about the point guard situation as well.
Baez87 - Baez87 - 11-15-2021
It’s hard to even want to chew on this game again. My preference is just to relegate it to a dark place in my mind as a memory best forgotten. We were out fought, out shot, and out coached. Could our team have done better? Could our team have won this game because they were the better team? Did they need to get embarrassed before a national audience to shake them from their perch as reining national champions and return as a team hungry for their next opponent?
Hindsight is always easy. Nice players from Stanford get beaten up by a hungry, scrappy team from Texas. Sounds familiar? Looks familiar, too. I sat in Conseco Fieldhouse In Indianapolis a few years ago and watched our team get outfought in the last quarter by Texas A&M. Vic Schaefer coached the defense in that game just like he coached this one. He also knows how and when to test the refs—in the fourth quarter.
So what went wrong? All the thing that others have already noted above. I can only add that, since we were outscored by ten in the last quarter, we must have lost our edge and conceded the game because our team ran out of gas.
This season has been fun watching fifteen players contribute in the games and scrimmage that led up to this game. By contrast, it was painful watching just six or seven players get banged around in this one. Maybe it would have dampened the development of our younger player if they had played in such a physical game, or maybe they would have risen to the challenge. Most coaches probably would have gone with the veterans as Tara did. Sometimes, though, when things get tough a whole new approach seems warranted, and sometimes it backfires.
I was impressed with the team's determination in the waning minutes. They almost came back; they had just dug too big of a hole for themselves and couldn’t prevent the sharpshooters from Texas from getting free and scoring.
I just hope that our team can recoup and hit the road against the tough opponents who are coming up. Some of those opponents will be encouraged by what appears to be a vulnerable team in Stanford. But great teams rise up against adversity, and I will be cheering for this one to do just that in in Nassau. We have plenty of star-power to win every game we play. So, why not choose this time to rise!
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - WBB fan - 11-15-2021
I have just checked into this thread -- too painful to do it earlier, and then read the last post. It's the only one I need to read, says it all. This game just got away from the team, the players, the coaches, etc. I do think the officiating was awful, so many fouls not called in a game that was really, really physical. Texas plays as tough and close as the refs will let them, and then pushes it a bit more to see if they can get away with it, and they did. I think Stanford just got rattled. But it was really painful to see open shots not going in -- and we had some for 3, just bounced off. The only one who seemed to be able to do anything was Lexie, and she was missing as well. Bottom line, serious need to regroup and move onward. This team is too good to play a game like this.
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - magnus - 11-15-2021
(11-14-2021, 10:54 PM)CompSci87 Wrote: I got the impression that Texas wanted Haley to bring the ball up. If Anna or others tried, Texas was in their grill. When Haley got it they backed off to token pressure. This may have been a strategy to make it tough for Haley to get open by moving without the ball, forcing her to be a dribbler instead.
Interesting, I thought it was just that whoever was guarding Haley was too big/slow to press, whereas the ones guarding our guards were quick.
I only watched the first 3 quarters, but our defense looked really good during that time. It'll keep us in most, if not all, our games this year while our offense figures things out.
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - mbdude - 11-15-2021
(9) Stanford Women’s Basketball on Twitter: "Celebrating the special things we've done. #GoStanford https://t.co/SJAfmvMO3l" / Twitter
they did get their rings though
RE: WBB: Stanford vs. Texas 12pm Sunday - IM in OC - 11-15-2021
(11-14-2021, 02:59 PM)martyup Wrote: So the recipe to beat Stanford is thug ball.
Speaking of "thug ball", a little off topic from the game. This is what happened to Karlie Samuelson in Sundays FIBA Eurobasket qualifier game for GB vs Estonia.
Karlie missed the 2nd half, due to concussion protocol. I do not know her current status. The player who did this dirty play, #21 Johanna Teder for Estonia, also plays on Washington State Univ. The FIBA refs never reviewed the play and went to the dressing room for half time.
https://twitter.com/Motherjones38/status/1459941151012634625
RE: WBB: Stanford vs. Texas 12pm Sunday - crackpot - 11-15-2021
(11-15-2021, 12:42 PM)IM in OC Wrote:(11-14-2021, 02:59 PM)martyup Wrote: So the recipe to beat Stanford is thug ball.
Speaking of "thug ball", a little off topic from the game. This is what happened to Karlie Samuelson in Sundays FIBA Eurobasket qualifier game for GB vs Estonia.
Karlie missed the 2nd half, due to concussion protocol. I do not know her current status. The player who did this dirty play, #21 Johanna Teder for Estonia, also plays on Washington State Univ. The FIBA refs never reviewed the play and went to the dressing room for half time.
https://twitter.com/Motherjones38/status/1459941151012634625
Thanks, saw that yesterday morning and couldn't stop thinking about it, esp. during the game. Is this where the NCAA is headed? Certainly seems so.
RE: WBB: Stanford vs. Texas 12pm Sunday - Maple Leaf - 11-15-2021
(11-15-2021, 12:47 PM)crackpot Wrote:(11-15-2021, 12:42 PM)IM in OC Wrote:(11-14-2021, 02:59 PM)martyup Wrote: So the recipe to beat Stanford is thug ball.
Speaking of "thug ball", a little off topic from the game. This is what happened to Karlie Samuelson in Sundays FIBA Eurobasket qualifier game for GB vs Estonia.
Karlie missed the 2nd half, due to concussion protocol. I do not know her current status. The player who did this dirty play, #21 Johanna Teder for Estonia, also plays on Washington State Univ. The FIBA refs never reviewed the play and went to the dressing room for half time.
https://twitter.com/Motherjones38/status/1459941151012634625
Thanks, saw that yesterday morning and couldn't stop thinking about it, esp. during the game. Is this where the NCAA is headed? Certainly seems so.
Well if star players at UConn get hammered and end up missing games/championships there may be a change, and the same for South Carolina. Teams with elite talent do not want to see their star players become targets, neither does women's basketball since it will take away from the quality of the game.
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - jk1926 - 11-15-2021
(11-15-2021, 11:28 AM)WBB fan Wrote: This game just got away from the team, the players, the coaches, etc. I do think the officiating was awful, so many fouls not called in a game that was really, really physical. Texas plays as tough and close as the refs will let them, and then pushes it a bit more to see if they can get away with it, and they did. I think Stanford just got rattled. But it was really painful to see open shots not going in -- and we had some for 3, just bounced off. The only one who seemed to be able to do anything was Lexie, and she was missing as well. Bottom line, serious need to regroup and move onward. This team is too good to play a game like this.
1. Only the second game of the season. Coach Tara and her staff will make the adjustments to correct the problems that appeared yesterday. It takes time but by season’s end Stanford will become the formidable team everyone expects and make a deep run in the tournament. The coaching staff too good and team too talented for that not to happen.
2. As frustrating as yesterday’s game was to Stanford faithful (Full disclosure - UCLA grad here but I back the PAC, especially against non-conference opponents) the outcome will serve as a sobering reminder that the staff can and no doubt will use to keep the team from getting complacent or believing it is invincible. The loss will really help down the road.
3. The Card were in it until the end. A couple of made 3’s instead of misses and Stanford wins. It would shock everyone if the team shoots 3-pt shots as poorly in future games. Shot 2-19 from 3 in first 3 quarters. Doesn’t it seem too many? Once the Texas lead got to three possessions late in the game it made sense to shoot the threes (made 2 for 8 in 4Q). As noted here the team would have been better served relying on its size advantage to score more inside. It didn’t do it consistently yesterday but I’d bet my bottom dollar it will learn how quickly.
4. The players have a lot of opportunities in the next five weeks to redeem themselves against quality opponents starting Sunday at Gonzaga. Then Indiana, South Florida, Maryland, Tennessee topped off by South Carolina. The Card can win them all and I believe (er hope?) they will.
5. Some here and on other fan boards lament the “loose” officiating as contributing to the loss (and previous losses). As long as the refs call games consistently (i.e. the same both ways) it’s up to the staff and team to make the necessary adjustments. Blaming the refs for a loss, a bad call or whatever seems like excuse making.
For good reason Stanford bears the torch for the conference and, barring injury to key players, I believe the Card will make the final four again this year. I look forward to those big non-conference games (Shame the Thanksgiving games are on Flo-Hoops). Will be there when the Cardinal visit Pauley Feb 3.
BTW: As the school goes by “Cardinal” vis-a-vis “Cardinals” is it “Card” or “Cards” or neither?
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - BillBradley - 11-15-2021
re: physical play - I would much rather have the game be too physical vs. too ticky-tack. If the refs get sent too far in the other direction, we end up with a game with too many calls, too many free throws, players fouling out, arguments, replay reviews, etc. Ideally it's somewhere in the middle, but I lean way toward letting the players play. Yes, it benefited Texas yesterday. So be it. Our team knows if they want to repeat as national champion they'll need to overcome that type of play. I don't think they are complaining about that.
re: MT's question "So, what was so good about Lacie that her +/- was 19 in 25 minutes? She only made 2 points herself and missed 5 3FGA shots. I didn't check, but I'd guess she wasn't in when Texas made their four 3PT shots. Maybe her defense was stopping that?"
There's a lot there. She did get in foul trouble at the end so maybe wasn't on the court for their 3 point shots. And yes, she excels in areas like defense, deflections, etc. that don't show up in the box score. But maybe it's less about what she specifically did and more about what her being on the court enabled others to do. The fact that Texas outscored us by 24 in the 15 minutes when she wasn't in the game probably means that others were not playing well when she wasn't in the game. I think the reason for that has to do with the positions and roles of the other players and what it does to their effectiveness. For instance, the more Haley and Lexie have to handle the ball, the less they get to play at their natural wing spots. They are out of position when the offense is initiated. Maybe the most interesting one here is Anna. I view Anna purely as a role player. She excelled last year as Robin to Kiana's Batman and they made a great complimentary back court. She wasn't asked to do much offensively other than shoot it when she was wide open and to her credit she made the other teams pay last year by shooting it so well from 3. She also could relax some on offense and focus on defense, her specialty. But it looked to me like Anna wasn't herself against Texas on either side of the court. I would guess that without Lacie on the court, it put even more pressure on Anna to be something she's not - a ball handler and a scorer. Anna might end up playing less this year because we need another offensive threat on the court without Kiana there to create. It will be really interesting to see what combinations Tara tries and it could take quite awhile to find the answer.
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - gailtate - 11-15-2021
I'm a casual observer of WBB but I've closely followed TV's career since she arrived ('85) when my wife and I shared a table with her at a booster gathering. The complaints about "Thug Ball" following the Texas game is a whiny-loser look. Gotta wonder what the whiners would have said about the rough stuff had our women stuffed the Longhorns rather than be the stuff-ees. BTW, I would imagine the in-your-face and on-your-back we saw the other night will make regular appearances this year. Coach, I want to think, will find a way to power through it. So should the ref-bashers.
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - crackpot - 11-15-2021
(11-15-2021, 03:17 PM)gailtate Wrote: I'm a casual observer of WBB but I've closely followed TV's career since she arrived ('85) when my wife and I shared a table with her at a booster gathering. The complaints about "Thug Ball" following the Texas game is a whiny-loser look. Gotta wonder what the whiners would have said about the rough stuff had our women stuffed the Longhorns rather than be the stuff-ees. BTW, I would imagine the in-your-face and on-your-back we saw the other night will make regular appearances this year. Coach, I want to think, will find a way to power through it. So should the ref-bashers.
Stanford doesn't play that game. NCAA men and W/NBA don't play that game. I want to watch basketball.
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - gailtate - 11-15-2021
(11-15-2021, 03:37 PM)crackpot Wrote:(11-15-2021, 03:17 PM)gailtate Wrote: I'm a casual observer of WBB but I've closely followed TV's career since she arrived ('85) when my wife and I shared a table with her at a booster gathering. The complaints about "Thug Ball" following the Texas game is a whiny-loser look. Gotta wonder what the whiners would have said about the rough stuff had our women stuffed the Longhorns rather than be the stuff-ees. BTW, I would imagine the in-your-face and on-your-back we saw the other night will make regular appearances this year. Coach, I want to think, will find a way to power through it. So should the ref-bashers.
Stanford doesn't play that game. NCAA men and W/NBA don't play that game. I want to watch basketball.
All due respect, you'll be watching whatever is permitted by the officials on the floor. If the CBOA wants to nip this, they can and will. If they don't it won't go away just because some fans don't approve.
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - crackpot - 11-15-2021
(11-15-2021, 04:21 PM)gailtate Wrote:(11-15-2021, 03:37 PM)crackpot Wrote:(11-15-2021, 03:17 PM)gailtate Wrote: I'm a casual observer of WBB but I've closely followed TV's career since she arrived ('85) when my wife and I shared a table with her at a booster gathering. The complaints about "Thug Ball" following the Texas game is a whiny-loser look. Gotta wonder what the whiners would have said about the rough stuff had our women stuffed the Longhorns rather than be the stuff-ees. BTW, I would imagine the in-your-face and on-your-back we saw the other night will make regular appearances this year. Coach, I want to think, will find a way to power through it. So should the ref-bashers.
Stanford doesn't play that game. NCAA men and W/NBA don't play that game. I want to watch basketball.
All due respect, you'll be watching whatever is permitted by the officials on the floor. If the CBOA wants to nip this, they can and will. If they don't it won't go away just because some fans don't approve.
Precisely. So I need to think long and hard as to how I want to spend my money. And I think we've all seen that the NCAA (and most programs, too) give not one whit as to whether or not seats are sold. I will greatly miss beautiful college basketball, but I have no doubt it won't miss me or my money.
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - chimera - 11-15-2021
(11-15-2021, 02:05 PM)BillBradley Wrote: re: physical play - I would much rather have the game be too physical vs. too ticky-tack. If the refs get sent too far in the other direction, we end up with a game with too many calls, too many free throws, players fouling out, arguments, replay reviews, etc. Ideally it's somewhere in the middle, but I lean way toward letting the players play. Yes, it benefited Texas yesterday. So be it. Our team knows if they want to repeat as national champion they'll need to overcome that type of play. I don't think they are complaining about that.
re: MT's question "So, what was so good about Lacie that her +/- was 19 in 25 minutes? She only made 2 points herself and missed 5 3FGA shots. I didn't check, but I'd guess she wasn't in when Texas made their four 3PT shots. Maybe her defense was stopping that?"
There's a lot there. She did get in foul trouble at the end so maybe wasn't on the court for their 3 point shots. And yes, she excels in areas like defense, deflections, etc. that don't show up in the box score. But maybe it's less about what she specifically did and more about what her being on the court enabled others to do. The fact that Texas outscored us by 24 in the 15 minutes when she wasn't in the game probably means that others were not playing well when she wasn't in the game. I think the reason for that has to do with the positions and roles of the other players and what it does to their effectiveness. For instance, the more Haley and Lexie have to handle the ball, the less they get to play at their natural wing spots. They are out of position when the offense is initiated. Maybe the most interesting one here is Anna. I view Anna purely as a role player. She excelled last year as Robin to Kiana's Batman and they made a great complimentary back court. She wasn't asked to do much offensively other than shoot it when she was wide open and to her credit she made the other teams pay last year by shooting it so well from 3. She also could relax some on offense and focus on defense, her specialty. But it looked to me like Anna wasn't herself against Texas on either side of the court. I would guess that without Lacie on the court, it put even more pressure on Anna to be something she's not - a ball handler and a scorer. Anna might end up playing less this year because we need another offensive threat on the court without Kiana there to create. It will be really interesting to see what combinations Tara tries and it could take quite awhile to find the answer.
I've been pondering similar thoughts about Wilson and about why things went well when Lacie was in. I know +/- can be misleading. That said, I do believe in this case there is something to it, for the reasons you lay out. I don't think pg by committee is necessarily bad. I do think it is not great when the committee consists of players who are out of their usual and more natural positions. Jones can bring the ball up, but much better if she only does so when she gets a rebound and goes, not when she is trying to run the offense. She can score and create much better when she gets the ball in the flow of the offense, not when she herself is the initiator. Same for Lexie who did score well in this game, and did not bring the ball up all that much, but really shouldn't need to be handling the ball as much as she did far from the basket trying to work the offense into shape. The team stood around too much, and maybe that was early game lack of offensive flow, or maybe it was also somewhat due to people trying to initiate the offense who are not really suited to doing that.
I do think we need more from Wilson as a 6th year player. No doubt she is more comfortable in the role she had last year. She is a capable shooter and decent driver, however, and came in as a point guard, I believe. My hope for her before this season was that she would work hard on her offense and other pg skills and take over the position early on. Maybe that will yet happen. My other hope was for Van Gytenbeek to emerge as our pg, either starter or backup to Wilson. I retain some hope that it was just her relative lack of experience vs a high pressure team like Texas that kept her on the bench and that she will be groomed for more playing time as the season goes on.
To my mind it is much better to leave all the other players at their natural positions and take whatever we can get from our true point guards, which would be Wilson and Van Gytenbeek mostly, with some help from Hamilton (she was not Northwestern's primary pg for most of her career I believe and it is hard for someone to come in as a new player, learn our system quickly and run the team anyway) and Lacie, who at least played the position some before college. Jones and Lexie should be doing what they did last year basically, as far as helping with ball handling. Unless they feel Van Gytenbeek and Wilson are not up to the job now and won't be in the future (gulp!), the simplest and hopefully best long term solution is to let Wilson and Van Gytenbeek run the point, live with their mistakes, even if it costs a game or two early on., and let them learn. I mean what they chose already resulted in a loss, so...
RE: WBB: Stanford 56 Texas 61 - qwerty49 - 11-15-2021
(11-15-2021, 05:42 PM)chimera Wrote: I've been pondering similar thoughts about Wilson and about why things went well when Lacie was in. I know +/- can be misleading. That said, I do believe in this case there is something to it, for the reasons you lay out. I don't think pg by committee is necessarily bad. I do think it is not great when the committee consists of players who are out of their usual and more natural positions. Jones can bring the ball up, but much better if she only does so when she gets a rebound and goes, not when she is trying to run the offense. She can score and create much better when she gets the ball in the flow of the offense, not when she herself is the initiator. Same for Lexie who did score well in this game, and did not bring the ball up all that much, but really shouldn't need to be handling the ball as much as she did far from the basket trying to work the offense into shape. The team stood around too much, and maybe that was early game lack of offensive flow, or maybe it was also somewhat due to people trying to initiate the offense who are not really suited to doing that.
I do think we need more from Wilson as a 6th year player. No doubt she is more comfortable in the role she had last year. She is a capable shooter and decent driver, however, and came in as a point guard, I believe. My hope for her before this season was that she would work hard on her offense and other pg skills and take over the position early on. Maybe that will yet happen. My other hope was for Van Gytenbeek to emerge as our pg, either starter or backup to Wilson. I retain some hope that it was just her relative lack of experience vs a high pressure team like Texas that kept her on the bench and that she will be groomed for more playing time as the season goes on.
To my mind it is much better to leave all the other players at their natural positions and take whatever we can get from our true point guards, which would be Wilson and Van Gytenbeek mostly, with some help from Hamilton (she was not Northwestern's primary pg for most of her career I believe and it is hard for someone to come in as a new player, learn our system quickly and run the team anyway) and Lacie, who at least played the position some before college. Jones and Lexie should be doing what they did last year basically, as far as helping with ball handling. Unless they feel Van Gytenbeek and Wilson are not up to the job now and won't be in the future (gulp!), the simplest and hopefully best long term solution is to let Wilson and Van Gytenbeek run the point, live with their mistakes, even if it costs a game or two early on., and let them learn. I mean what they chose already resulted in a loss, so...
Excellent points, chimera. I almost think you answered your own question. If staff was that comfortable with Wilson and VanG running the show, I don't think they would be looking for a Nicole Powell type of mismatch by having Jones or a Hull bring the ball up court. And Brown is another question mark.
But it's only game 2, as others have noted, so I guess we see what happens in the next few months. It's obvious that with 17 players on the roster that playing time will be hard to find for everyone.