WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - 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 73 -- Colorado 62 (/thread-24056.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 73 -- Colorado 62 (/thread-24056.html)
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - OCcardinal - 02-23-2023
Some positives from this game:
- No one got hurt (to my knowledge)
- We clinched the Pac 12 regular season title
- We clinched the 1st seed in the Pac 12 Tournament
- We gave Colorado only their second home loss of the season (they beat Utah by 10 points there)
- We earned our 2nd best win of the season per the NET ratings (only the Utah win at home is rated higher)
- Tara trusted Betts to play the most minutes of the season (at altitude): 29!
- We won a VERY close game with Brink having fouled out and Betts taking us home
- Haley and Fran refused to lose this game. That's how you win tournaments!
- Tara is now 11 total wins ahead of Geno
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - Spiny_Norman - 02-23-2023
Survive and advance. It was a surprise that Colorado, the team that lives and trains at elevation, ran out of gas in the 2nd OT. Stanford had to dig deep to win this one. Playing 2 OTs only 3 days after a tough, tough game vs. UCLA. Stanford did not practice Tuesday so they only had one practice and a pre-game walkthrough before playing Colorado. I hope that there is enough gas in the tank for Utah. Another quick turnaround.
Did anyone else notice what looked like athletic tape on Hannah's upper arm under her t-shirt? It might go all the way up to her shoulder.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - WBB fan - 02-23-2023
That 1st quarter was beyond belief awful, but as I think about it, I'm convinced that arriving latish yesterday and then not having a shootaround today before the game had something to do with it. Basically, the 1st quarter was warm up time for the Card while Colorado was already warmed up.
Just finished re-watching the 2nd OT -- really impressive. Stanford seemed to find a 2nd wind while Colorado was gassed.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - martyup - 02-23-2023
Hannah wears that kinesiology tape all the time. After tonight, I hope she continues wearing that tape.
RE: WBB: Stanford vs. Colorado Thursday 2pm - TheWildJacko - 02-23-2023
(02-23-2023, 08:35 PM)TonyLima Wrote:(02-23-2023, 06:32 PM)TheWildJacko Wrote:(02-23-2023, 06:10 PM)81alum Wrote: All in all, I will work hard to erase all memories of this ugly thing and instead dwell pleasantly on the fact that we just locked up at least a tie for winning the Pac 12.
Right after the game ended, I noticed I forgot to record it on Sling; my next immediate thought was, “Well I wasn’t going to be rewatching that one anyway!”
Shoot me a reminder Saturday and I’ll post the game. I can do it faster if anyone here wants to work on apportionment in the House of Representatives. This is about the vanishingly small movement to expand the house. I have some incredibly tedious work that I’ve been doing myself. Will happily outsource. You get paid my current hourly rate. If you don’t feel like paying me, I’ll settle for $0.00.
Wow—thanks for your work!
RE: WBB: Stanford vs. Colorado Thursday 2pm - 81alum - 02-24-2023
(02-23-2023, 07:27 PM)BostonCard Wrote:I probably should have said "throw out the stats when comparing this game to other games." What I was thinking when I wrote that is that we had once again laid an offensive egg, but the final score 73-62 made the score look respectable. But in reality, our offense through regulation (48 points) was as bad as it has been in some of our worst moments this season.
(02-23-2023, 06:10 PM)81alum Wrote: My impressions:
1) Ignore most of the stats. The stats in a double overtime are grossly deceptive. We dramatically improved in just about all categories in the two overtimes, or else we would despair looking at the stat sheet.
2) Brink's foul trouble reminds us just how crucial she is to the game--and not mainly on offense. The entire character of the game changes when she is not patrolling the paint.
1) Why would one do that? It's no more correct to ignore the overtime period as a fluke than it is to ignore the first quarter as an outlier (which it was, but it still happened). The game highlights the fact that in basketball there is a lot of game to game variability and even quarter to quarter variability. It's just the nature of the game, but one part of it is no more indicative than any other.
2) And yet we won it after Brink fouled out.
BC
With regard to Brink, during the game it was during the stretches that she was on the bench that we fared poorly--although it is true that a chunk of that 0-13 start happened with her on the floor, though not all of it. Fortunately, our dependence on her turned out not to be so strong in overtime, since when Brink fouled out a couple of minutes into the first overtime, Betts and Belibi really came through.
Highlights, such as they are
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlI15ij6ics
I don't think Tara did a presser, but here is JR Payne:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvzFB0rowms
Here is a youtube posting that appears to be most of the game, though I have not viewed it to see what may be missing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLaI7O076Fw
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - bbm233 - 02-24-2023
This team really misses the intensity of the Hull twins. Brink usually has it, but generally there's not a "go get the ball" mentality. I fear that in the tourney we'll get beat be a less talented team who wants it more.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - cardfan1996 - 02-24-2023
Unpopular opinion:
Playing any athlete 50 minutes without rest is unethical and bragging about it on social media is a bit nutty. Reminds me of that same social media person bragging about Appel playing with a stress fracture.
It’s a player safety issue and player safety is more important than wins and losses. It’s one of the MANY reasons I have no problems with NIL; it is long overdue.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - 81alum - 02-24-2023
One point that I have not mentioned is that Colorado was without Frida Formann, their best three point shooter. Obviously, in such a tight game, she could well have made a difference.
It looks like Arizona will probably be on our side of the Pac 12 bracket instead of Colorado, but we could still play Colorado again if they defeat Utah.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - JohnR34231 - 02-24-2023
(02-24-2023, 10:58 AM)bbm233 Wrote: This team really misses the intensity of the Hull twins. Brink usually has it, but generally there's not a "go get the ball" mentality. I fear that in the tourney we'll get beat be a less talented team who wants it more.
I recall reading about an interview with the Hull's mom. She said when they were babies she and their dad took them on a cross-state road trip. They spent the entire time in the car screaming and crying. When she got back she took them to the pediatrician and said "What gives?". He said not to worry about it because it just in all probability meant they were going to grow up to be very intense people.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - CompSci87 - 02-24-2023
My impression of Formann (for what it's worth) is that she's not as good a defender as the other main Colorado players. So they may have gained some on defense yesterday despite losing her offense.
Of course having one less top player makes things tougher in a double overtime game with so many minutes to go around.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - Maple Leaf - 02-24-2023
(02-24-2023, 11:11 AM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(02-24-2023, 10:58 AM)bbm233 Wrote: This team really misses the intensity of the Hull twins. Brink usually has it, but generally there's not a "go get the ball" mentality. I fear that in the tourney we'll get beat be a less talented team who wants it more.
I recall reading about an interview with the Hull's mom. She said when they were babies she and their dad took them on a cross-state road trip. They spent the entire time in the car screaming and crying. When she got back she took them to the pediatrician and said "What gives?". He said not to worry about it because it just in all probability meant they were going to grow up to be very intense people.
I had the privilege of growing up with 3 sets of identical twins and 3 sets of fraternal twins. All the sets of identical twins were very competitive and intense, and very nice and polite.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - 81alum - 02-24-2023
(02-24-2023, 11:17 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:In your own family? Or did you just coincidentally know 6 sets of twins? What an interesting experience!(02-24-2023, 11:11 AM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(02-24-2023, 10:58 AM)bbm233 Wrote: This team really misses the intensity of the Hull twins. Brink usually has it, but generally there's not a "go get the ball" mentality. I fear that in the tourney we'll get beat be a less talented team who wants it more.
I recall reading about an interview with the Hull's mom. She said when they were babies she and their dad took them on a cross-state road trip. They spent the entire time in the car screaming and crying. When she got back she took them to the pediatrician and said "What gives?". He said not to worry about it because it just in all probability meant they were going to grow up to be very intense people.
I had the privilege of growing up with 3 sets of identical twins and 3 sets of fraternal twins. All the sets of identical twins were very competitive and intense, and very nice and polite.
There have been so many twin studies, but it is pretty easy to understand both the competitiveness and the politeness, given that a twin by definition has to focus on more than herself.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - 76lsjumb - 02-24-2023
(02-24-2023, 11:01 AM)cardfan1996 Wrote: Unpopular opinion:
Playing any athlete 50 minutes without rest is unethical and bragging about it on social media is a bit nutty. Reminds me of that same social media person bragging about Appel playing with a stress fracture.
It’s a player safety issue and player safety is more important than wins and losses. It’s one of the MANY reasons I have no problems with NIL; it is long overdue.
So all marathons are unethical? Or, for that matter, soccer matches, or tennis matches, or …?
And, in any case, any game refereed by Missy is guaranteed to have several rest periods when she “goes to the monitor.”
Also, not sure that NIL is the answer to the problem you perceive, since I imagine that an athlete being able to point to incredible endurance probably does more to increase NIL value than the opposite…
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - crackpot - 02-24-2023
(02-24-2023, 11:01 AM)cardfan1996 Wrote: Unpopular opinion:
Playing any athlete 50 minutes without rest is unethical and bragging about it on social media is a bit nutty. Reminds me of that same social media person bragging about Appel playing with a stress fracture.
It’s a player safety issue and player safety is more important than wins and losses. It’s one of the MANY reasons I have no problems with NIL; it is long overdue.
Pretty sure our SID was learning fractions and the difference between a noun and a verb when Jayne was playing with a stress fracture. I get why she did it (with her parents' okay), but I still give the doc the evil eye when I run into her.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - treetop11 - 02-24-2023
(02-24-2023, 11:01 AM)cardfan1996 Wrote: Unpopular opinion:
Playing any athlete 50 minutes without rest is unethical and bragging about it on social media is a bit nutty. Reminds me of that same social media person bragging about Appel playing with a stress fracture.
It’s a player safety issue and player safety is more important than wins and losses. It’s one of the MANY reasons I have no problems with NIL; it is long overdue.
Nuts. Lots of rest during the game. These are highly conditioned athletes and though they can tire as the game goes on, they're fine - and Haley actually contradicts that since she played her best on OT. CU also had players just about the same PT.
Bigger effect IMO is the short turnaround and game this Saturday. I have to believe that we won't be as fresh and legs rested to do well. I'm expecting us to look slow and shoot poorly.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - 81alum - 02-24-2023
(02-24-2023, 01:55 PM)treetop11 Wrote: Bigger effect IMO is the short turnaround and game this Saturday. I have to believe that we won't be as fresh and legs rested to do well. I'm expecting us to look slow and shoot poorly.Agreeing with you, our worst games of the year have all come as the 2nd in a weekend, the loss at USC, the loss at Washington. It is not that our athletes get tired--although that might be a small part of it--but that there is so little time to install and practice the scouting report. Fortunately we have played Utah before, so hopefully the scouting report will not have radically changed. But this has been true for decades--our defense is always better on the 1st game than on the 2nd, given the nature of scouting report preparation. It is a problem in the NCAAs too. We may have played over our heads to defeat South Carolina, and then almost stumbled against a lesser foe in Arizona.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - cardfan1996 - 02-24-2023
(02-24-2023, 12:43 PM)crackpot Wrote:(02-24-2023, 11:01 AM)cardfan1996 Wrote: Unpopular opinion:
Playing any athlete 50 minutes without rest is unethical and bragging about it on social media is a bit nutty. Reminds me of that same social media person bragging about Appel playing with a stress fracture.
It’s a player safety issue and player safety is more important than wins and losses. It’s one of the MANY reasons I have no problems with NIL; it is long overdue.
Pretty sure our SID was learning fractions and the difference between a noun and a verb when Jayne was playing with a stress fracture. I get why she did it (with her parents' okay), but I still give the doc the evil eye when I run into her.
It was a “remember when Appel played on a broken foot. Good times” post that was ultimately deleted by the current SID who was often tone deaf last year (but that’s a different story).
(02-24-2023, 01:55 PM)treetop11 Wrote:(02-24-2023, 11:01 AM)cardfan1996 Wrote: Unpopular opinion:
Playing any athlete 50 minutes without rest is unethical and bragging about it on social media is a bit nutty. Reminds me of that same social media person bragging about Appel playing with a stress fracture.
It’s a player safety issue and player safety is more important than wins and losses. It’s one of the MANY reasons I have no problems with NIL; it is long overdue.
Nuts. Lots of rest during the game. These are highly conditioned athletes and though they can tire as the game goes on, they're fine - and Haley actually contradicts that since she played her best on OT. CU also had players just about the same PT.
Bigger effect IMO is the short turnaround and game this Saturday. I have to believe that we won't be as fresh and legs rested to do well. I'm expecting us to look slow and shoot poorly.
Derek Fisher overplayed Nneka during the season before he was fired and she ended up being hospitalized with exhaustion and developed other problems that lingered during the playoffs that year. If your body goes into a deficit, it has a cascading effect - none of it good. And Nneka is probably 20x the athlete Haley is as Nneka is otherworldly but human.
It is unethical, especially when you have Stanford’s depth. And especially when she played 39 minutes vs UCLA and generally never gets any rest in any game - except on defense I guess.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - Maple Leaf - 02-24-2023
(02-24-2023, 02:12 PM)81alum Wrote:(02-24-2023, 01:55 PM)treetop11 Wrote: Bigger effect IMO is the short turnaround and game this Saturday. I have to believe that we won't be as fresh and legs rested to do well. I'm expecting us to look slow and shoot poorly.Agreeing with you, our worst games of the year have all come as the 2nd in a weekend, the loss at USC, the loss at Washington. It is not that our athletes get tired--although that might be a small part of it--but that there is so little time to install and practice the scouting report. Fortunately we have played Utah before, so hopefully the scouting report will not have radically changed. But this has been true for decades--our defense is always better on the 1st game than on the 2nd, given the nature of scouting report preparation. It is a problem in the NCAAs too. We may have played over our heads to defeat South Carolina, and then almost stumbled against a lesser foe in Arizona.
The seniors and juniors on this team were part of that National Championship Team that prevailed in one pt wins over South Carolina and Arizona, in addition with having to practice and play games away from Maples due to COVID. They got a real gritty determination in part do to what they experienced that year which gives them an edge, this edge maybe enough to win on Saturday at Utah.
RE: WBB: Stanford 73 -- Colorado 62 - jonnyss - 02-24-2023
(02-24-2023, 12:43 PM)crackpot Wrote:(02-24-2023, 11:01 AM)cardfan1996 Wrote: Unpopular opinion:
Playing any athlete 50 minutes without rest is unethical and bragging about it on social media is a bit nutty. Reminds me of that same social media person bragging about Appel playing with a stress fracture.
It’s a player safety issue and player safety is more important than wins and losses. It’s one of the MANY reasons I have no problems with NIL; it is long overdue.
Pretty sure our SID was learning fractions and the difference between a noun and a verb when Jayne was playing with a stress fracture. I get why she did it (with her parents' okay), but I still give the doc the evil eye when I run into her.
are you sure it was with her parents' ok? i seem to remember sitting next to jayne's parents at a game and hearing them grumble.