WBB: Stanford 67 -- Washington 72 - 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 67 -- Washington 72 (/thread-24012.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 67 -- Washington 72 (/thread-24012.html)
RE: WBB: Stanford 67 -- Washington 72 - CompSci87 - 02-06-2023
(02-06-2023, 12:33 PM)2006alum Wrote: No one is talking out of their butt. I know this was a really tough loss, but let's keep it civil, please.
I'm certain treetop11 meant to reassure chimera she was NOT talking out of her butt, seeing he went on to agree with her. She said that about herself to start with.
RE: WBB: Stanford 67 -- Washington 72 - MV72018 - 02-06-2023
(02-06-2023, 06:35 PM)chimera Wrote: This is all getting much too serious. Bantering on a message board should be part of the fun of being a fan. I was over being unhappy or upset with the loss about 10 minutes after it was over. I happen to enjoy trying to put together the puzzle so I try things out here, but in no way do I think my ramblings are all that meaningful or informed. The only things that bother me are when posters go out of their way to say unkind things about players or coaches (although given that they are highly paid adults, the coaches can certainly take whatever anyone here dishes out) and unwarranted certainty, when posters claim that they know better and anyone who doesn't see it that way is wrong and not objective. I don't find most of this thread to be troubling. It is typical for a message board. If we all stop critiquing what would we have to talk about? Endless cheerleading is not fun. We have to be able to discuss what we perceive to be flaws? Just don't be a jerk about it, is all I can say.
IMO, what you said makes perfectly good sense.
RE: WBB: Stanford 67 -- Washington 72 - cardfan1996 - 02-06-2023
Of course I believe with certainty my own opinions. I tend not to form opinions without a great deal of certainty. But at the end of the day, it’s my opinion and I really do not care if you disagree. I actually enjoy being shown a different perspective even if I don’t agree with it. I don’t have much use for responses that I should fall in line on some worship BS. That is just weird behavior to me.
Also no one is ever really random. I mean, maybe, some people are. You know what? At the end of the day, this is just a venting session for me.
In terms of Nivar or Lepolo, I simply value Nivar’s skillset over Lepolo. And at the end of the day, this team will lose a lot more games with Lepolo as point guard and could easily lose in the 2nd round of the tourney - pick one. Washington is not even a guaranteed WNIT team at this point so Stanford will play a lot better teams in the 2nd round than Cal, Oregon State and Washington. I don’t know if after seeing Nivar run the offense from here on out, it will end the way I want it to but I know the current starting lineup is not good enough. Simply on the basis of that, I would like the staff to pivot and see if someone else can emerge as a reliable alternative. A February surprise. You need 3 reliable scorers. Haley is inefficient as a 2nd scorer if you ask her to do too much. Hannah is very up and down. It’s really just Brink and the Brinkettes right now. Stanford needs other options.
Also Rebounding and creating turnovers are what drives winning for me: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bHD14l_Z4ho
RE: WBB: Stanford 67 -- Washington 72 - BostonCard - 02-07-2023
On average, Stanford has a 45.7 to 31.6 rebounding margin +14.1, which is third in the nation behind LSU and South Carolina.
We are near the bottom (345/350) of the nation in turnovers forced per game (11.7). Our turnover margin is negative (-1.44).
BC
RE: WBB: Stanford 67 -- Washington 72 - jonnyss - 02-07-2023
(02-07-2023, 08:34 AM)BostonCard Wrote: On average, Stanford has a 45.7 to 31.6 rebounding margin +14.1, which is third in the nation behind LSU and South Carolina.
We are near the bottom (345/350) of the nation in turnovers forced per game (11.7). Our turnover margin is negative (-1.44).
BC
it's my sense that we play a relatively loose defense that allows us to go for rebounds, but doesn't produce a lot of turnovers.
RE: WBB: Stanford 67 -- Washington 72 - cardfan1996 - 02-07-2023
(02-07-2023, 08:34 AM)BostonCard Wrote: On average, Stanford has a 45.7 to 31.6 rebounding margin +14.1, which is third in the nation behind LSU and South Carolina.
We are near the bottom (345/350) of the nation in turnovers forced per game (11.7). Our turnover margin is negative (-1.44).
BC
Now do after Kiki was taken out of the starting lineup. We had a big advantage when she was a starter. I doubt your numbers hold true in the 4? Games since.
RE: WBB: Stanford 67 -- Washington 72 - BostonCard - 02-07-2023
Feel free to comb the boxscores: https://gostanford.com/sports/womens-basketball/schedule
I think you will find that there is a lot of game-to-game variability, but given that we've had four games and were out-rebounded in at least one of them (maybe also Oregon?), I highly doubt that our average will be anywhere near our overall average.
BC
RE: WBB: Stanford 67 -- Washington 72 - cardfan1996 - 02-09-2023
2nd quarter, 1:20
Watch Agnes and Lepolo this entire sequence. It sums up how much of a liability on the floor together they are. And yes, Agnes double dribbles because she can’t dribble but it wasn’t called.
Other observations in the 2nd quarter
Cam went out in foul trouble (Kiki comes in) - lead shrunk from 11 to 7
Inexplicably, Tara then brings Lepolo back in for Brooke, a floor spacer, lead shrinks some more mostly due to bad defense by Haley and Lepolo going under screens on good shooters per usual.
Inexplicably Tara then subs In Ashten for Kiki. I am a big fan of Ashten but Kiki was actually having a productive game
Lead shrinks some more but we are still up by 3 pts. And are hanging on even though Lepolo’s presence has cut the offensive spacing on the floor in half. Still No big deal.
Inexplicably Tara then subs back in Agnes for Nivar. I guess she must have thought a tie game or deficit for the #2 in the country was more exciting for TV. So now we have the same Agnes-Lepolo combo (essentially non-shooters and disregarded players by the defense) that led to the 3 minute drought to start the game.
At this point, I am just blinking my eyes at the TV rapidly.
Lepolo’s turnovers, her going under screens, probably some ridiculous perimeter defense and turnovers by Haley since there is zero spacing now on the floor and now we in a deficit at halftime after being up 11 Pts.
But that’s not all.
I then see Betts waiting to come in (though she never gets a chance) and she is undoubtedly coming in for Ashten. Not Lepolo, Agnes or Haley who is predictably resting on defense because she has played the entire half, but Ashten, the only other shooter on the floor other than Hannah.
Sorry, this doesn’t make sense to me not in bball terms or in a generic decision tree type of way.
I am afraid to check - did Agnes and Lepolo start the 3rd too?
RE: WBB: Stanford 67 -- Washington 72 - M T - 02-09-2023
Inexplicably, you guess at motivations for the coach that I expect even you know aren't the case. One can consider to what purpose you guess at these motivations. Maybe you should reflect upon your own motivations for voicing such a statement.
There is no double dribble by Emma-Nnopu in that last 1:20 of Q2 in the Washington game. (There was an uncalled travel on UW at 0:52 when Prechtel blocked the shot attempt.) I didn't see that Emma-Nnopu or Lepolo did particularly poorly (nor did they do well). Emma-Nnopu tried to drive unsuccessfully as others tried to set up an elevator for Jump. Jones seemed to be standing around. We had no low post (Prechtel was almost always out high), but that must be by design. Lepolo's drive to the basket started with 7 seconds left on the shot clock. I suspect she was intending to dump the ball to Emma-Nnopu who was on the low block, but Emma-Nnopu went away from the basket presumably to take her defender away, but instead Lepolo was under the basket with 3 seconds on the clock, with 3 defenders around her. Jones had not moved and was not where she was a safe outlet for a quick shot. There wasn't enough time to dribble out and then pass to someone. She tried a shot, but it was blocked by one of the 3 defenders.
RE: WBB: Stanford 67 -- Washington 72 - cardfan1996 - 02-09-2023
“Inexplicably” means in a way that cannot be explained or accounted for.
My one statement that Tara wanted a more exciting game was obviously a joke.
I don’t know her motives. I didn’t understand any of her coaching moves in the first half as it relates to Lepolo or Agnes except she was willing to take them out when the deficit grew (so on some level she must know they are the reason it’s difficult to score since they both sit in some critical moments) and put them back in when Stanford was up a little or the deficit was still manageable.