WBB 2023-2024 Season - 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 2023-2024 Season (/thread-24288.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 2023-2024 Season (/thread-24288.html)
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - BosCard - 04-18-2023
(04-18-2023, 01:15 PM)stopandpop Wrote:(04-18-2023, 10:01 AM)WBB fan Wrote: For what it's worth, and probably not much, Charlie Creme now has his first 2023-24 Bracketology projection. He has Utah as a #1 and the aq from the Pac 12, UCLA a #2 seed. Stanford is now a #4, going to an Albany NY regional.
https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/30423107/ncaa-women-bracketology-2024-women-college-basketball-projections
The current roster (with no transfers or additional freshmen coming in) does not bode well for the Cardinal, unless there is significant development from Lepolo, Harriel, Bosgana, Demetre & Iriafen. Even with that, there will be no reinforcements at the post. Does Tara plan on playing Brink 35+ minutes a game even if she commits fewer fouls? I don't think so. Same with Kiki. Stanford will be vulnerable when those two are on the bench; especially against teams with good size in the post.
I think Stanford's #4 seeding is in fact a bit generous.
I have faith in a healthy Cameron Brink (remember she was sick during the Ole Miss and Washington losses). I actually think she should be in consideration for the list of Stanford all-time greats (but it depends on what she does her senior year). Her ability to change a game on both the defensive and offensive sides and her extreme competitive nature is what sets her apart.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - old spanish trail - 04-18-2023
I agree Brink is awesome, but her ultimate Stanford ceiling will depend on the development of Iriafen and Demetre.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - stopandpop - 04-18-2023
(04-18-2023, 02:21 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: I agree Brink is awesome, but her ultimate Stanford ceiling will depend on the development of Iriafen and Demetre.
Yes, but also honing her mid-range and 3-point shooting. THAT would set her apart.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - old spanish trail - 04-18-2023
(04-18-2023, 03:13 PM)stopandpop Wrote:(04-18-2023, 02:21 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: I agree Brink is awesome, but her ultimate Stanford ceiling will depend on the development of Iriafen and Demetre.
Yes, but also honing her mid-range and 3-point shooting. THAT would set her apart.
For sure. Both.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - spike5882 - 04-18-2023
I am actually excited to see a Cameron Brink led team next year. We obviously lost three great seniors who will be missed. But I think Brink has a fire that she brings to the table. If she can use that to inspire the team, I am excited. I think we could see a really different team, that has to work hard for everything, and has a lot of spirit. I think there is potential, and the cupboards are not bare at all. It is just going to be a very, very different team. And I look forward to it.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - cardfan1996 - 04-18-2023
Brink can’t do it alone. The problem this year were the guards and especially the point guard. If Stanford does not upgrade the point guard position through the portal, Stanford will be lucky to get a 4 seed. The point guard was unable to do a lot of things this year but most notably, pass the ball into the post with or without pressure and help out securing defensive rebounds.
If they secure any one of two high level guards currently in the portal, I’d actually like our chances to win the PAC-12 again even with limited post depth. We probably don’t get further than Elite 8 unless Hannah develops the ability to make plays off the dribble, or the newcomers are more advanced.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - spike5882 - 04-19-2023
(04-18-2023, 07:53 PM)cardfan1996 Wrote: Brink can’t do it alone. The problem this year were the guards and especially the point guard. If Stanford does not upgrade the point guard position through the portal, Stanford will be lucky to get a 4 seed. The point guard was unable to do a lot of things this year but most notably, pass the ball into the post with or without pressure and help out securing defensive rebounds.
If they secure any one of two high level guards currently in the portal, I’d actually like our chances to win the PAC-12 again even with limited post depth. We probably don’t get further than Elite 8 unless Hannah develops the ability to make plays off the dribble, or the newcomers are more advanced.
True, but also our backcourt was extremely young. In addition, we threw Haley Jones in there at moments, which is really not her position. I think there is a good chance we see development in this area.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - cardfan1996 - 04-19-2023
(04-19-2023, 06:26 AM)spike5882 Wrote:(04-18-2023, 07:53 PM)cardfan1996 Wrote: Brink can’t do it alone. The problem this year were the guards and especially the point guard. If Stanford does not upgrade the point guard position through the portal, Stanford will be lucky to get a 4 seed. The point guard was unable to do a lot of things this year but most notably, pass the ball into the post with or without pressure and help out securing defensive rebounds.
If they secure any one of two high level guards currently in the portal, I’d actually like our chances to win the PAC-12 again even with limited post depth. We probably don’t get further than Elite 8 unless Hannah develops the ability to make plays off the dribble, or the newcomers are more advanced.
True, but also our backcourt was extremely young. In addition, we threw Haley Jones in there at moments, which is really not her position. I think there is a good chance we see development in this area.
Sure development is key and hopefully our guards have trainers during the off-season that will help them develop the type of skills they will need to succeed. Might I suggest anyone other than their current trainers. Branch out and use trainers other good players use.
But,
Stanford still needs to upgrade the point guard position with someone close to an All-American honorable mention status to be competitive next year and give Brink the positive exposure she deserves. Nobody will guard Lepolo as long as Brink is in the post and even if they guard her on the perimeter (like Ole Miss did), she won’t be able to do much even with a year under her belt. It is what it is. Also, the offense will need to be a lot better and more advanced. It is time to hire consultants for the summer who specialize in just this. Having 70 year old Tara retreat to her cabin during the summer and emerge with some nonsensical offensive scheme won’t get the job done next year. Hopefully they know better and will do better this year. Plus they’ve used consultants (or just other coaches) before for Princeton offense so it won’t be the first time
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - Maple Leaf - 04-20-2023
(04-20-2023, 12:24 PM)stopandpop Wrote: Britney Anderson to Illinois
Britney Anderson Announced as Illinois Women’s Basketball Assistant Coach - University of Illinois Athletics (fightingillini.com)
University of Washington WBB just recruited 6'4 Annika Soltau from Germany. Apparently, some overseas bigs are still out there. Will Stanford attempt to recruit one considering there is no post help on the bench? Fascinating.
annika soltau on Twitter: "100% committed? I’m excited and blessed to announce my commitment to the University of Washington! This is only the beginning of an exciting chapter of my life. Go dawgs!? https://t.co/bfh2KyZBBO" / Twitter
Stanford has in the past recruited bigs from outside the USA.
Alanna Smith - Women's Basketball - Stanford University Athletics (gostanford.com)
Alyssa Jerome - Women's Basketball - Stanford University Athletics (gostanford.com)
Academics plays such an important factor who can be recruited.
WBB 2023-2024 Season - stopandpop - 04-21-2023
Does anyone know when the portal time period ends?
Does anyone think that Tara may be looking for one or more recruits from overseas (a shooting guard? a post?), OR, do you think she's going to settle with the players currently on the roster with no additions?
I'm having a hard time believing that the 2023-2024 team (as it currently is), has the talent and depth to compete with & defeat the likes of Utah, UCLA, USC and others. My biggest worry is the lack of depth at the post.
Stating the obvious; Tara knows the team's strengths and weaknesses. I wonder if she sees this (there will be no reinforcements), as a new coaching challenge and that might be motivating her?
Like the rest of you, very curious to see how all of this plays out.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - 81alum - 04-21-2023
(04-21-2023, 05:05 PM)stopandpop Wrote: OR, do you think she's going to settle with the players currently on the roster with no additions?What Tara wants and whether she is willing to "settle" is completely immaterial. What counts is what Admissions will permit. I think there may be a few bleak years while Stanford figures out whether it can adjust, and by then Tara will certainly be gone. Next year could be a good one, with Brink and Jump coming back. Maybe they won't be enough, and we would have to get lucky with a transfer or a near miraculous improvement in other players to have a reasonably good season. But my gut tells me this may be Tara's last.
In short, she would gladly take players right now who could contribute--and I am positive she knows who they are. But it took Stanford decades to figure out how to recruit and develop freshmen to its athletic teams while staying true to its academic mission. I don't think Stanford will have figured out to work the NIL/ transfer revolving door in time for next year. Maybe one player from an Ivy will arrive, but surely no one else. I anticipate Tara will go out during this unholy transition, and whether Stanford continues to dwell at the top or sinks to mediocrity in WBB has yet to be determined. Honestly, I expect the latter, hope for the former. Those several posters who long for the end of the Tara era may be rudely surprised to learn that she is the only reason we have been competitive for this long. It is her name that has drawn as much talent to Stanford as we have received, and no one else will be able to replicate that for a long time, if ever. Not with Stanford's unique challenges.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - Card10Fan - 04-21-2023
(04-21-2023, 05:05 PM)stopandpop Wrote: Does anyone know when the portal time period ends?
Does anyone think that Tara may be looking for one or more recruits from overseas (a shooting guard? a post?), OR, do you think she's going to settle with the players currently on the roster with no additions?
I'm having a hard time believing that the 2023-2024 team (as it currently is), has the talent and depth to compete with & defeat the likes of Utah, UCLA, USC and others. My biggest worry is the lack of depth at the post.
Stating the obvious; Tara knows the team's strengths and weaknesses. I wonder if she sees this (there will be no reinforcements), as a new coaching challenge and that might be motivating her?
Like the rest of you, very curious to see how all of this plays out.
Why are you creating a whole new thread? There is already a 2023-2024 season one that’s been created weeks ago.
(04-21-2023, 05:33 PM)81alum Wrote:(04-21-2023, 05:05 PM)stopandpop Wrote: OR, do you think she's going to settle with the players currently on the roster with no additions?What Tara wants and whether she is willing to "settle" is completely immaterial. What counts is what Admissions will permit. I think there may be a few bleak years while Stanford figures out whether it can adjust, and by then Tara will certainly be gone. Next year could be a good one, with Brink and Jump coming back. Maybe they won't be enough, and we would have to get lucky with a transfer or a near miraculous improvement in other players to have a reasonably good season. But my gut tells me this may be Tara's last.
In short, she would gladly take players right now who could contribute--and I am positive she knows who they are. But it took Stanford decades to figure out how to recruit and develop freshmen to its athletic teams while staying true to its academic mission. I don't think Stanford will have figured out to work the NIL/ transfer revolving door in time for next year. Maybe one player from an Ivy will arrive, but surely no one else. I anticipate Tara will go out during this unholy transition, and whether Stanford continues to dwell at the top or sinks to mediocrity in WBB has yet to be determined. Honestly, I expect the latter, hope for the former. Those several posters who long for the end of the Tara era may be rudely surprised to learn that she is the only reason we have been competitive for this long. It is her name that has drawn as much talent to Stanford as we have received, and no one else will be able to replicate that for a long time, if ever. Not with Stanford's unique challenges.
These are all good points. I too could see next season being Tara’s last. I also could see our team doing well next year and being in contention for an Elite 8 / Final 4.
Coach Vanderveer is indeed what put Stanford WBB on the map. There are only 5 active coaches who have won a National Title. (Geno, Dawn, Mulkey, Freese, and Tara). Tara has won three. That’s an elite list. She’s an elite coach. End of story.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - bl82 - 04-21-2023
Bump to put this above a new thread by the same name…
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - stopandpop - 04-22-2023
(04-21-2023, 05:33 PM)81alum Wrote:(04-21-2023, 05:05 PM)stopandpop Wrote: OR, do you think she's going to settle with the players currently on the roster with no additions?What Tara wants and whether she is willing to "settle" is completely immaterial. What counts is what Admissions will permit. I think there may be a few bleak years while Stanford figures out whether it can adjust, and by then Tara will certainly be gone. Next year could be a good one, with Brink and Jump coming back. Maybe they won't be enough, and we would have to get lucky with a transfer or a near miraculous improvement in other players to have a reasonably good season. But my gut tells me this may be Tara's last.
In short, she would gladly take players right now who could contribute--and I am positive she knows who they are. But it took Stanford decades to figure out how to recruit and develop freshmen to its athletic teams while staying true to its academic mission. I don't think Stanford will have figured out to work the NIL/ transfer revolving door in time for next year. Maybe one player from an Ivy will arrive, but surely no one else. I anticipate Tara will go out during this unholy transition, and whether Stanford continues to dwell at the top or sinks to mediocrity in WBB has yet to be determined. Honestly, I expect the latter, hope for the former. Those several posters who long for the end of the Tara era may be rudely surprised to learn that she is the only reason we have been competitive for this long. It is her name that has drawn as much talent to Stanford as we have received, and no one else will be able to replicate that for a long time, if ever. Not with Stanford's unique challenges.
For someone like myself who is not close to the University and its workings (as you are), I found your comments very enlightening; that the root cause of Stanford not using the portal is not because of Tara's reluctance, but rather Stanford's Admissions restrictions. There has been a lot of debate about the portal. I only wish you would have posted your comments ("What Tara wants and whether she is willing to 'settle' is completely immaterial. What counts is what Admissions will permit.") much earlier because that shifts the conversation (and blame) away from Tara, who is doing the best job she can. I appreciate these insights.
From my perspective, your Admissions Department and the University have been slow to see the impact of the portal and have not been nimble in adjusting, or perhaps (pardon my ignorance), they may not want to adjust.
Brink and Jump coming back will not be enough unless there are key reinforcements at guard and post and that (as you and Bob K have articulated) is unlikely. I feel very sad for Brink, a consensus All-American with elite skills and who wants to win so badly. There simply will not be sufficient firepower to support her.
I am curious to know 1) How exactly does Stanford's academic mission conflict with WBB's use of the portal? and 2) Is there an inherent conflict between Stanford WBB striving to become/remain a championship caliber team and Stanford's academic mission?
By the way, my question was not answered: When does the portal season end? Thank you.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - 81alum - 04-22-2023
(04-22-2023, 01:54 PM)stopandpop Wrote: I am curious to know 1) How exactly does Stanford's academic mission conflict with WBB's use of the portal? and 2) Is there an inherent conflict between Stanford WBB striving to become/remain a championship caliber team and Stanford's academic mission?That was a thoughtful post! I've been debating putting myself on a Cardboard time out for a few months given how discouraged I am about the current situation, but you deserve an answer as best I can give one.
There is no mystery, really. Stanford believes strongly in a four year experience for ALL its undergraduates. Nearly all the elite universities do--this distinguishes the Ivies, Stanford, Caltech, Chicago, MIT and the like from the top land grant universities like Cal, Michigan, etc. The elites believe (rightly or wrongly) that they should have four years to educated a student, and when that student graduates, then that student will reflect four years of influence. They also believe (correctly, and selfishly) that students who spend four years at a university will feel a stronger bond to their alma mater and contribute more in the long run.
As a result of the four year model, all the elites tend to operate on a "replacement rate" transfer concept. Only as many transfers are admitted as are necessary to replace those undergraduates who depart. And very, very few Stanford undergraduates depart without a degree. That means that there are very, very few slots available for transfer students. The elites take enormous bragging rites in graduation percentages and thus every transfer out is a disaster from their point-of-view. They compete with each other for the highest 4 year graduation rates, and are routinely 30 points higher than state universities.
Stanford's retention rate is so high that they only have room for 20-30 transfers in for the entire university every year. When 3 students from WBB transfer out, it is a debacle from the enrollment management perspective, since one small sports team just created 10% of the negative statistics for the university.
None of these factors are problems for big state universities, or privates (like USC) that do not claim to have elite academic standards. Those universities were founded on the philosophy that a high percentage of their students would be transfers. In some states 50% of the students at such universities are CC transfers. There have been some states that have even tried for 100%--segregating freshman/sophomore years to the community colleges and reserving junior/senior years for the big universities. That has not worked out well for a variety of reasons, but when that was attempted the sports teams were among the few parts of such universities that actually maintained the four year experience. They wanted their student-athletes for four years of development and training, even if the rest of the campus was primarily a 2 year campus.
Now, enter the new reality of unlimited transfers for athletes. Which kind of university is going to be most impacted? Those non-elites that have always had large volumes of transfer students, or the elites that have attempted to have as few as possible? Obviously the elites will suffer while the non-elites can just take it in stride.
To complicate things further, most of the elites gave up on Div I athletics (Chicago, MIT, Caltech) or gave up on athletic scholarships (the Ivies) long ago. There was really only one university in the world that was trying to compete at the highest level of Div I while maintaining its status as an elite university: Stanford. Notre Dame, Northwestern, Duke, Rice, etc would all have liked to be like Stanford--but none of them were ever really academic elite institutions like Stanford and the Ivies.
And so the changes in transfer rules (and NIL I would argue on a whole different front) were uniquely bad for one university in the nation: Stanford. If someone wanted to design rules changes that would hurt Stanford and not hurt our competitors, this is what they might come up with.
Now, fans of Stanford sports will ask a number of plausible questions. For example: why can't Stanford just expand the number of transfer students it admits--at least for the purposes of sports? To this there are a few answers:
1) In order to maintain its elite academic status, Stanford wants to limit the size of its undergraduate student body. This improves the student/faculty ratio, promotes a sense of undergraduate community, and helps Stanford maintain its prestige as the most selective university in the world. Adding more students through transfer--who may have lower GPAs, test scores, or other stats associated with them--does not serve the academic reputation of the university well.
2) Stanford is unique among the elites in how willing it has been to support athletics. Many of you can't see this, because you have a tendency to compare Stanford to its competitors in athletics and not to its peers academically. The concept that a university would "privilege" a student-athlete above other students is anathema to Stanford and all the elites--they are equal to other students--at best. If Stanford were going to start allowing large number of athletes to transfer in, then I think faculty and administration would insist on similar priorities for other kinds of students who are not athletes. There are all kinds of students who get off to a slow start in high school but are outstanding during their first 2 years in college who might be candidates for transfer. So why should Stanford say all 25 or so of its transfer slots should go to athletes alone? Believe me, there would be plenty of others who would be extremely competitive--but once you go down that path you lose control of the smaller study body with a four year memory you are attempting to create.
So, opening Stanford up broadly to athletic transfers will result in one of two things: 1) expanding the size of the Stanford student body beyond what the university has determined is optimal for its elite status, or 2) privileging athletes above other equally talented students, resulting in resentment and inequality.
Neither of these two things are serious problems at most of our competitors. Hence, I think the rules changes we have seen in the last couple of years are uniquely bad for Stanford alone, and will inevitably lead to our further decline in the money sports and possibly other sports too. I hope to be wrong. But hence my depression, sadness, and even some short-tempered posts.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - old spanish trail - 04-22-2023
Excellent post 81. I agree with every point except I'm not sad yet. Ever hopeful.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - Spiny_Norman - 04-22-2023
(04-22-2023, 01:54 PM)stopandpop Wrote: When does the portal season end?
It's easy enough to look up. In the 2022-23 school year, the men’s and women’s basketball portals are open March 13-May 11. This is a 60-day window beginning the day after championships selections are made.
One exception - I believe that grad transfers can declare their intent and initiate a transfer at any time.
You also asked 1) How exactly does Stanford's academic mission conflict with WBB's use of the portal? and 2) Is there an inherent conflict between Stanford WBB striving to become/remain a championship caliber team and Stanford's academic mission?
While you or I or other Stanford sports fans may see no inherent conflict, the powers that be (specifically the president and the provost) may not. Athletics is not central to the academic mission in their world. The president is a world-renowned neuroscientist who comes mainly from the world of academia (though he did spend 8 years at Genentech leading their research). His most recent position before Stanford was president of Rockefeller University in New York, a school with only graduate programs and no sports teams. There is nothing in his background to indicate that he has any interest in sports. The Athletics Department falls under the Provost. She has something like 31 different schools, departments and missions that report to her. Athletics is one of the 31. She has seemed at best indifferent to Athletics.
Personally I don't think that most Stanford's leaders (including the Faculty Senate which is a very influential body) are hostile to Athletics per se. Intercollegiate athletics has been recognized as complementary to the academic mission of the University almost since the beginning. I think most University leaders enjoyed the favorable coverage of Stanford's football success from 2010-2015 for example. But I do think there is pushback to the increasing professionalization and monetization of the athletes (edit to add that 81's post above is a much more articulate description of this pushback). It will get worse as the courts give athletes employee status and bargaining rights.
Stanford's athletic director is not a strong or forceful voice. So fans should recognize that there may not be a leader on campus to advocate for and help push through the changes needed in Admissions and related areas to be competitive in an unlimited-transfer and NIL world.
On the other hand, changes might be happening just unknown to the general public. Change at Stanford happens verrrrrrrrrrrrrrry slowly, often after months and months of study, discussion and decision-making. It's a very bureaucratic organization.
Edit - I'll also add that fans should not think that changing University practices to adapt to a new world of college athletics is a clear or simple decision for the University even if it seems clear to them. I hope that 81's post and input from others helps fans understand the difficult decision that Stanford is confronting. None of us can predict what they might do. It might be anywhere along the spectrum of "change to match the practices of other schools" to "do nothing" to "withdraw completely from the world of D1 athletics and scholarship athletes."
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - qwerty49 - 04-22-2023
Thanks for the excellent posts, 81 and Spiny.
As a alum and chump-change-level donor, I'm most frustrated by the lack of transparency on two counts:
1. What exactly is the Administration's stance/position/opinion/feeling about these (NIL and transfer) issues; and
2. What exactly is the process for addressing the possibility of changing/modifying/amending #1?
I'd be surprised if the Daily (for example) doesn't already have a standing request to interview either MTL or PD to shed some light; I'm not holding my breath for Stanford to grant such an interview.
I wouldn't be surprised if there is NO answer/stance/policy at the moment for either question.
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - BobK - 04-22-2023
First of all I can think of about 8 transfers at Stanford in sports I follow
And there have been others recently. But for the many sports 8 isn’t much.
I do know , fact , Tara is trying to add a player or two but it’s hard to get thru admissions. Stop my friend if you don’t care for the admissions policy don’t be a Stanford fan. They go together.
I thought the portal period was to enter the portal and that to commit can open any time not time limited
Just a fyi comment Betts was with five now current WBB players at the sports whatever it was called today around the spring football scrimmage Glad for her still in school
RE: WBB 2023-2024 Season - Softball Fan - 04-22-2023
Excellent post 81alum. I'm in agreement. Leland and Jane Stanford gave a number of speeches about their vision for the university. They emphasized the importance of undergraduates spending all four years at Stanford to maximize the Stanford experience and education. That policy seems to still hold true.
I just read an article that the cost of a four year Stanford undergrad education for 21/22 was $315,000. For five years it approaches $400k. That includes tuition, campus housing, food, books, and incidentals. Do student athletes appreciate the value of a full Stanford athletic scholarship? My guess is most do. For athletes (other than football and maybe MBB) many NIL deals are trivial compared to the worth of the scholarship.