WBB: Stanford 80 Oregon 68 as Lexie hits 33 - 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 80 Oregon 68 as Lexie hits 33 (/thread-22813.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 80 Oregon 68 as Lexie hits 33 (/thread-22813.html)
RE: WBB: Stanford vs. Oregon Friday 7pm - TonyLima - 01-08-2022
(01-08-2022, 05:14 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(01-08-2022, 12:58 PM)TonyLima Wrote: CA regs are among the most restrictive in the country. Santa Clara County is, if anything, even tougher. The spike in cases is due to omicron which is no worse than th common cold. Insanity.
While I agree it is time to turn the corner on how to deal with the virus, 1500 Americans died due to COVID yesterday (per The NY Times tracker). Common colds don’t kill people like that. Even the flu causes about 1/10 as many deaths in a typical flu season. Omicron does appear to be less severe than precious strains, and especially for people who are young, healthy, and vaccinated (for example, our student athletes) the risk is low enough that it is understandable that they may want to get on in life. I would caution, however, against completely dismissing its danger, especially for the unvaccinated and those with risk factors.
BC
In the spirit of keeping this place focused on sports, I suggest we agree to disagree and get back to the real issues.
RE: WBB: Stanford 80 Oregon 68 as Lexie hits 33 - 81alum - 01-08-2022
Overall, I found the Graves presser to be respectful and fair. He seems upbeat about the future of his team--the three who scored 56 for them were playing together for the first time this season. I think he is correct to be upbeat and worry about playing them again.
He did make one observation that makes me want to watch the game again, hinting at a Stanford strategy that discombobulated Oregon. He noted that Stanford "blew up our screens" by pushing the screeners out of the position, "and if they are not going to call that" it will be a difficult night.
Oregon is very much a screen oriented team, and I already noted that their screeners moved and hip checked a lot, and did not get called for it. The refs were letting a lot go on screens.
But I was not watching what we did to the Oregon screeners. Is "blowing up screens" by pushing screeners out of position a deliberate strategy? Is it illegal? How much pushing can you do to someone who does not have the ball?
RE: WBB: Stanford 80 Oregon 68 as Lexie hits 33 - BillBradley - 01-09-2022
Yes 81, defenders guarding screeners can be way more physical against the screeners before the screen is set. For instance, let's say the ball is on the wing and there is a big on each block. The big nearest the ball goes to set a screen for the other big to then cut and receive an entry pass on the strong side block. The player defending the screener can push or hinder the screener from setting the screen where they want. Especially if you get your feet there first, the position is yours, so the refs let players fight for the position. In this example, the defender can force the screen to happen lower toward the baseline, which allows the teammate defender a lot more room over top to defend the cutter to the block. Refs typically allow A LOT of that type of physicality and it renders screens way less effective.
Same goes for ball screens on the perimeter. If the opposing player is running over to set the ball screen, the player defending the screener can fight for that same position and force it to happen a few feet higher than where they want it. You aren't allowed to blatantly shove the screener out of the way with your hands, but the refs will allow bumping and arm-bar type of contact as players battle for the spot.
Another thought on this screening subject - it seems as though our standard defensive scheme is to go over the top of all ball screens and dribble handoffs on the perimeter. Our bigs switch (or at least help) if our guard defenders get caught up on the screen, but it's not ideal and we are vulnerable to pick and roll action from time to time. So our guards have to be really quick and show great effort to go over those screens and still stay in position. I've noticed a big improvement this season in Hannah Jump's defense in this area. She used to get caught all the time on screens and she is soooo much better now. Probably one of the reasons Tara has the confidence to keep her in the game.
RE: WBB: Stanford 80 Oregon 68 as Lexie hits 33 - BosCard - 01-09-2022
(01-09-2022, 12:55 AM)BillBradley Wrote: Yes 81, defenders guarding screeners can be way more physical against the screeners before the screen is set. For instance, let's say the ball is on the wing and there is a big on each block. The big nearest the ball goes to set a screen for the other big to then cut and receive an entry pass on the strong side block. The player defending the screener can push or hinder the screener from setting the screen where they want. Especially if you get your feet there first, the position is yours, so the refs let players fight for the position. In this example, the defender can force the screen to happen lower toward the baseline, which allows the teammate defender a lot more room over top to defend the cutter to the block. Refs typically allow A LOT of that type of physicality and it renders screens way less effective.
Same goes for ball screens on the perimeter. If the opposing player is running over to set the ball screen, the player defending the screener can fight for that same position and force it to happen a few feet higher than where they want it. You aren't allowed to blatantly shove the screener out of the way with your hands, but the refs will allow bumping and arm-bar type of contact as players battle for the spot.
Another thought on this screening subject - it seems as though our standard defensive scheme is to go over the top of all ball screens and dribble handoffs on the perimeter. Our bigs switch (or at least help) if our guard defenders get caught up on the screen, but it's not ideal and we are vulnerable to pick and roll action from time to time. So our guards have to be really quick and show great effort to go over those screens and still stay in position. I've noticed a big improvement this season in Hannah Jump's defense in this area. She used to get caught all the time on screens and she is soooo much better now. Probably one of the reasons Tara has the confidence to keep her in the game.
Both Hulls and Wilson are great at fighting over the top of screens. Really great. Occasionally the Hulls get pushed around because of their higher center of gravity but Wilson doesn’t. Part of the reason all three get so much playing time from Tara.
But all 3 are graduating next year. And I don’t think Tara wants Jones chasing guards/wings on the perimeter when she is a pretty good high post defender and great rebounder. So who is going to join Jump on the perimeter next year? Given Tara’s focus on defense I think Emma-Nnopu will get a lot of playing time.
RE: WBB: Stanford 80 Oregon 68 as Lexie hits 33 - bl82 - 01-09-2022
Great comments and analysis about fighting over the top of screens. It will be interesting to see how much Agnes’ offense has developed by next year. Also, don’t count out Bosgana. I’m not sure how quick Bosgana is, but she has to see her path toward more PT. Once she develops more of a work the offense, pass-first mentality, Bosgana has the potential to be another one of those positionless players, I think. Finally, there is always the possibility that Indya Nivar surprises from the day she lands on campus as a fresh. That said, you have to thing Agnes has the inside track.
RE: WBB: Stanford 80 Oregon 68 as Lexie hits 33 - 81alum - 01-09-2022
(01-09-2022, 01:18 PM)bl82 Wrote: Great comments and analysis about fighting over the top of screens. It will be interesting to see how much Agnes’ offense has developed by next year. Also, don’t count out Bosgana. I’m not sure how quick Bosgana is, but she has to see her path toward more PT. Once she develops more of a work the offense, pass-first mentality, Bosgana has the potential to be another one of those positionless players, I think. Finally, there is always the possibility that Indya Nivar surprises from the day she lands on campus as a fresh. That said, you have to thing Agnes has the inside track.Generally agree, but we don't know whether Brown will return and in what kind of condition, and how Harriel is developing. So add those two to the mix you just mentioned. Not to mention the possibility of having Lacie back another year--based on nothing but speculation, of course.
RE: WBB: Stanford 80 Oregon 68 as Lexie hits 33 - old spanish trail - 01-09-2022
(01-09-2022, 01:18 PM)bl82 Wrote: Great comments and analysis about fighting over the top of screens. It will be interesting to see how much Agnes’ offense has developed by next year. Also, don’t count out Bosgana. I’m not sure how quick Bosgana is, but she has to see her path toward more PT. Once she develops more of a work the offense, pass-first mentality, Bosgana has the potential to be another one of those positionless players, I think. Finally, there is always the possibility that Indya Nivar surprises from the day she lands on campus as a fresh. That said, you have to thing Agnes has the inside track.
I agree re Bosgana; and I think she has quicks.