WBB: Stanford 75 USC 66 - 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 75 USC 66 (/thread-4758.html)

---

WBB: Stanford 75 USC 66 - 81alum - 01-20-2013

Chiney had a monster second half, totaling 29 points (23 in the second half) and 16 rebounds, to put the University of Spoiled Children away.  But her success in the second half is deceptive in two ways. 

First, the offense was much more balanced overall in the first half than Chiney's 29 overall points suggest.  At almost the end of the first half Stanford had built a 13 point lead but Chiney had only 4 points.  Instead, the scoring was much more evenly distributed and Sara, Amber, and Joslyn had more than done their parts. 

Second, the game was close because of our defensive breakdowns in the second half.  Chiney's offensive game bailed us out--it was needed because our defense took a vacation.  We gave up 20 points in the first half and 46 in the second, with our opponents closing to an uncomfortable 5 point deficit with just under two minutes left.  We held SC in the first half to 33% shooting, but they heated up to 57% in the second half.  Finally, in the last two minutes, it took Chiney and Amber to each make a basket and some free throws to ice the game.  There were some tense moments in the second half as we saw our 19 point lead whittled away.

Sara started again today, and Tara said afterwords that she thought she had had a good game.  She had 13 points on 6/12 shooting.  She was 1/5 from three.  She took a lot of open threes that she missed, but she also had some drives to the basket that worked well, and the usual number of hustle plays and physical defense that sometimes worked and sometimes didn't.  For example, she took a great charge but it wasn't called a charge.  I'm beginning to think she has Jeanette's mentality--and what we need more of is mental toughness on this team.

Joslyn's three point shooting has certainly heated up.  She made 3/3 treys and 15 points overall.  (That puts her at 7/7 treys for this weekend!)  She also showed a little more willingness to score from under the basket, and made a couple and missed a couple from point blank, including a put back off of Chiney's miss.  But Joslyn deserves credit for 4 assists--the most on the team.

Amber has regained her form as a significant offensive threat.  She opened up with a made three and scored 13 on 6/9 shooting, something that Tara called out in the meeting after the game. 

Toni continues to be "our best perimeter defender" said Tara, but she is "saving her shots."  She also made a three early, which no doubt helped to open up the SC defense, but was just 1/8 overall.  Someone asked why she was icing her neck, and Tara said "I think she just does that to cool down."  Hmmm. 

As a team we had 14 assists, which is a whole lot better than we have been doing until recently.  We did have 13 turnovers.  SC pressed quite often and it did cause one turnover that I noticed, but we are becoming better at breaking the press and scored several easy baskets off of it--one with Sara streaking back door to receive a long pass.

Still, the game was probably won with rebounds.  We had 41 to their 25.  SC is certainly not Cal when it comes to rebounding.  For example, once Joslyn's miss was put back by Chiney, and once Chiney's miss was put back by Joslyn--it brought back memories of the Ogwumike sisters last year. 

The crowd (3800) was much more boisterous today.  There were hundreds of school children--mostly young girls who had been practicing their shrieking-- and it was deafening at times.  Beautiful national anthem sung by the Pennisula Women's Chorus.  The band was smallish and got started late, but seemed to be playing in key more than usual. 

Officiating was considerably better than we have had in some recent games.  There were, however, a few wrong calls and the crowd let them know about it.  Once they reversed themselves appropriately when it became clear that an out of bounds ball hit an SC player who was out of bounds on the floor before touching the floor.  Most importantly, they did not allow the professional wrestling that typified the two Cal games.  Tara commented after the game how much she appreciated this style of officiating---that the last several games had not been basketball but football/rugby/hockey.  When the officials allow the game to become that physical, she said, a player like Bonnie has no chance.  That is why players like Ruef and James have been so useful she noted--they have been in the weight room and have the physical ability to enter the wrestling pit.  I took her remarks to indicate that players like Bonnie and Erica Payne would need to put on some muscle if they want to be able to play consistently in such a physical game.

Before this weekend I said that this was a make-or-break time for the team.  Well, we won both games, are getting our three point shot back, have diversified our scoring, and have a new starter.  All these things are very positive signs and I think we squeak by with a "make" instead of a "break."

That said, it is still apparent that we have significant weaknesses.  USC pretty convincingly beat us in the second half of this game, and there is no reason why they should not be expected to play that well for both halves now that they have this experience.  If they had, they would have scored 92 points!  So the road trip to UCLA and USC will be a dangerous time for us--if our three point shooting goes stone cold again, or if Chiney gets into foul trouble, or if our defense collapses again--then things could fall apart in LA.  Coaching this team must be a bigger challenge for Tara than any other team she has had for quite some time.  We have stopped the bleeding and are beginning to heal.  Will there be enough time to improve sufficiently this year for another run at the final four?  We shall soon see.

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 75 Under Stanford Control 66 - CompSci87 - 01-20-2013

81alum, meet MT. That was him asking about Toni's ice.  ;)

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 75 Under Stanford Control 66 (+ abbreviations) - M T - 01-21-2013

(Sorry, I don't mean to be obscure.  Abbreviations I use are at the end of this post)

It seemed to me that Toni played with adequate energy today.  Since she seemed to have an off-day shooting, I'm glad the rest of the team was able to pick up their shooting.  Whether the shooting difficulties & ice pack were related, I don't know.
Sara had a mostly tough day from the field, but she had enough layups to make her stats look good.  But she had real problems stopping the 6'1" Viaoletame (#21) and had to switch to another player.
Amber had another great scoring game. 
Welcome back, Jos!  In the post-game interview on KZSU, she indicated that confidence makes a difference to her on her 3pt shot.  (I know that's common, but that's a shame.  It means she can go cold for any game.) Not only did she continue her 3pt streak, she was under the basket a lot more. 
What can be said about Chiney?  23 points and 9 rebounds in a half.  Another double-double  I think her defense may be equally as important.
Ruef had a decent defensive game, but again fouled out.  I think a couple of those were tough calls.


Stats of note:
1. ZERO points off the bench (first time this season). 15% of the game time was by bench players.
2.  4 of 5 starters got double figures.
3.  It is interesting that we get beat in the half where Chiney does so well at the offensive end.  But USC did very well at their offensive end, so I don't think it is due to an imbalance at our offensive end.
4.  Again, the other team got more FTA.  I can understand that with C.al.  It was surprising with UCLA (but was negated mostly by late fouls).  But I'm not sure what we're doing to get more fouls (resulting in foul shots) called on us than USC.  Colorado also had 7 more FTA than us; we see them this coming week.
5.  For the second game in a row, A = TO.  (Looking ahead, against Colorado our TO were much more than our assists.)
6.  Our 41% OR% was a little above average for us, but our 84% DR% was the highest of the season (allowing them only 5 OR).  To make a single number, I combine them, which indicates this was our 2nd best rebounding performance of the season.

Game flow:  Here are the scores at the 5 minute points (ie, every 1/8 of the game)

Half  Time  Score  5-min score
1st:  15:00  7-7    7-7
1st:  10:00  16-13  9-6
1st:  5:00  20-18  4-5
1st:  0:00  33-20  13-2
2nd:  15:00  45-29  12-9
2nd:  10:00  58-45  13-16
2nd:  5:00  64-53  6-8
2nd:  0:00  75-66  11-13

I don't like that battle of attrition, but our ladies fought back.  It might be interesting to look to see what was different, both as it dropped to a 5pt lead, and then second, as Stanford held them off (thank you, Chiney).  I certainly saw ref calls that seemed either poor or tighter than earlier, and then I saw at least one instance of players not setting picks as effectively because things were being called, and our players were in foul trouble.

It was suggested to split these numbers into offense & defense.  I did, and they do show some more detail.
FLOOR = statistics for while the player is playing.  BENCH = stats for while the player is on the bench.
Flr-Bnch = subtract stats while on the bench from stats while on the floor.
Min = minutes played
Opts = Points scored by Stanford while player is on offense  (Dpts = defense)
NetPts = Opts - Dpts
OP/g = Opts normalized for 40 minutes of playing time ("game")  (DP/g = Dpts * 40/min;  NetP/G = NetPts * 40/min)

Taylor wasn't in much over my cutoff of 5 minutes, but she rated the most effective (but probably not significantly better than the next), mainly by facilitating the offense (even though she didn't score!).
Toni, despite her low scoring, was next most effective.  When she was out, Stanford scored more, but USC scored even more.
(Bonnie's time in the game was below my cutoff)
Sara was next most effective, again with her defense helping hold the opponents down.
Because she played the whole game, Chiney's effectiveness equals the team as a whole.  The stats for her aren't meaningful (since she wasn't out of the game for any meaningful time).
Jos's time on the bench is below my cutoff, but it looks like the team won (barely) with Amber, Jos, and Mikaela on the floor, but did slightly better per minute when they were on the bench.
Our offense stagnated while Jasmine was in the game.  (These stats don't detect if a player's benefit is the resting of another player (etc) so that other player can be more effective when they come back in.)


==========
Here are some abbreviations that I may use that might not be obvious.
A: assists; TO: turnovers; FTA: Free throw attempts.  OR% = offensive rebounds/ (our offensive rebounds + their defensive rebounds).  FBP: fast break points.  PIP: Points in the paint. PoT=Points off Turnovers  2nd=2nd chance points.  2PT% = 2 point shooting % (NOT field goal %)  "Unforced errors" = our TO minus their steals (they rarely are completely unforced).

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 75 Under Stanford Control 66 - Yellowlab - 01-21-2013

I am also happy to see Sara getting meaningful minutes and making the most of them.  She was the hostess at our table for last year's award's banquet, and I was impressed by her poise.  Of course, almost all of the players have impressed me when I've had the chance to interact with them.  Let's just say that I was not as cool around adult strangers when I was in college.

I agree that Sara brings a certain toughness to the team, which has certainly been needed.  Tara's football/rugby/hockey remark alluded to by 81alum summed up my feelings re: the recent refs.  She also mentioned that they have to set the right tone early.  Nobody wants to see tick-tac fouls getting called, but you can't allow the grabbing, holding and slapping either. 

They now have another player, along with Ruef, who will literally push back.  Tara indicated that she hoped to be able to give Tess some playing time down the road too.  She will be needed.  Still, it is a shame when a player such as Bonnie cannot stay on the floor. 

We're still a bit worried about Toni, because she just doesn't look quite right.  Still, as wbbfan says, we're just more comfortable with her out there.

It was great to have four players in double figures, but it was disconcerting to have no points off the bench.  I have to say that USC was better than I anticipated.  Their freshman point guard was very, very quick.  I expect the games down in LA will be tough ones.  Tara noted that Colorado crushed Arizona, and she really talked up Utah as well.  The PAC-12 is now a darned good conference.  I wonder whether anyone on the east coast (besides Garvin) has noticed.
 

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 75 Under Stanford Control 66 - CompSci87 - 01-21-2013

Bonnie was literally hooked and thrown to the floor at one point early in the SC game. Unfortunately the refs missed that one.

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 75 Under Stanford Control 66 - Yellowlab - 01-21-2013

I am happy, of course, that Tinkle seems to be becoming more confident taking shots beyond the arc, but I remain frustrated by her inability to finish at the rim.  My theory is that tries to put the ball straight in, which requires a very soft touch, which makes her soft.  Why doesn't she go off glass?  She can be much more aggressive.  The margin of error is so much higher, it's hard to believe she doesn't take advantage of it. 

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 75 Under Stanford Control 66 - 81alum - 01-21-2013

(01-20-2013, 10:29 PM)CompSci87 link Wrote:81alum, meet MT. That was him asking about Toni's ice.  ;)

Nice!  Sadly, I was hanging in the back and could not see the people asking the questions.  We'll just have to arrange another rendezvous.

---

Re: WBB: Stanford 75 Under Stanford Control 66 - M T - 01-22-2013

(01-21-2013, 05:10 PM)wbbfan2 link Wrote:I am happy, of course, that Tinkle seems to be becoming more confident taking shots beyond the arc, but I remain frustrated by her inability to finish at the rim.  My theory is that tries to put the ball straight in, which requires a very soft touch, which makes her soft.  Why doesn't she go off glass?  She can be much more aggressive.  The margin of error is so much higher, it's hard to believe she doesn't take advantage of it.

While I agree that not using the backboard is odd and perhaps counter-productive, Jos's two-point shooting percentage is 74/130 = 56.9%.  (Chiney's is 160/273 = 58.6%.)  Still, the extra margin of error is more important the more aggressive the defense is.  It isn't like her body is not being knocked around as she shots.  (I still can't believe they didn't call a foul with 3:56 left when the defender walked through where Jos was standing.)

(I couldn't cheer for either team to win, but UConn beat Duke by 30 points today.)

---