[winflop]

Bracket posted. We play the Weenies on Wednesday with the winner playing Colorado on Thursday.

I guess if they win on Wednesday and lose on Thursday they could make the Not Important Tournament, but if they lose to the Weenies that might be the end of the season entirely.

https://pac-12.com/article/2021/03/07/br...-york-life

[winflop]

Bracket posted. We play the Weenies on Wednesday with the winner playing Colorado on Thursday.

I guess if they win on Wednesday and lose on Thursday they could make the Not Important Tournament, but if they lose to the Weenies that might be the end of the season entirely.

https://pac-12.com/article/2021/03/07/br...-york-life

[burger]

We lost a tiebreaker with OSU for the #5 seed and bye.  We had the same conference and non-conference record as them, but they were 1-1 against OU (the #1 team in the P-12) and we were 0-2. 

How did a mediocre team like OSU beat OU?  OU had just finished a two week off period because of covid protocols, and they were still missing starting players Duarte and Figueroa.  Those two guys combined for 36 points against us in the first game and 37 points in the second game.  I'm pretty sure we could've beaten the Ducks without those two.

Way to go, Pac-12.  If you play 30ish games over a season, you should be able to find a better tiebreaker than what happened in 2 of those games.

[burger]

We lost a tiebreaker with OSU for the #5 seed and bye.  We had the same conference and non-conference record as them, but they were 1-1 against OU (the #1 team in the P-12) and we were 0-2. 

How did a mediocre team like OSU beat OU?  OU had just finished a two week off period because of covid protocols, and they were still missing starting players Duarte and Figueroa.  Those two guys combined for 36 points against us in the first game and 37 points in the second game.  I'm pretty sure we could've beaten the Ducks without those two.

Way to go, Pac-12.  If you play 30ish games over a season, you should be able to find a better tiebreaker than what happened in 2 of those games.

[Phogge]

How many scholarship players will Stanford trot out? If Cal wins I think coachie is toast.

[Phogge]

How many scholarship players will Stanford trot out? If Cal wins I think coachie is toast.

[martyup]

If we get eliminated by either Cal or CO, I wonder if Tara will recruit some of the men's team to help with practice.  Practicing against the men would certainly help with their speed.  

PS: Leave DD out of it.

[martyup]

If we get eliminated by either Cal or CO, I wonder if Tara will recruit some of the men's team to help with practice.  Practicing against the men would certainly help with their speed.  

PS: Leave DD out of it.

[BostonCard]

We lost a tiebreaker with OSU for the #5 seed and bye.  We had the same conference and non-conference record as them, but they were 1-1 against OU (the #1 team in the P-12) and we were 0-2. 

How did a mediocre team like OSU beat OU?  OU had just finished a two week off period because of covid protocols, and they were still missing starting players Duarte and Figueroa.  Those two guys combined for 36 points against us in the first game and 37 points in the second game.  I'm pretty sure we could've beaten the Ducks without those two.

Way to go, Pac-12.  If you play 30ish games over a season, you should be able to find a better tiebreaker than what happened in 2 of those games.

It should never have come to the tiebreaker.

BC

[BostonCard]

We lost a tiebreaker with OSU for the #5 seed and bye.  We had the same conference and non-conference record as them, but they were 1-1 against OU (the #1 team in the P-12) and we were 0-2. 

How did a mediocre team like OSU beat OU?  OU had just finished a two week off period because of covid protocols, and they were still missing starting players Duarte and Figueroa.  Those two guys combined for 36 points against us in the first game and 37 points in the second game.  I'm pretty sure we could've beaten the Ducks without those two.

Way to go, Pac-12.  If you play 30ish games over a season, you should be able to find a better tiebreaker than what happened in 2 of those games.

It should never have come to the tiebreaker.

BC

[burger]

We lost a tiebreaker with OSU for the #5 seed and bye.  We had the same conference and non-conference record as them, but they were 1-1 against OU (the #1 team in the P-12) and we were 0-2. 

How did a mediocre team like OSU beat OU?  OU had just finished a two week off period because of covid protocols, and they were still missing starting players Duarte and Figueroa.  Those two guys combined for 36 points against us in the first game and 37 points in the second game.  I'm pretty sure we could've beaten the Ducks without those two.

Way to go, Pac-12.  If you play 30ish games over a season, you should be able to find a better tiebreaker than what happened in 2 of those games.

It should never have come to the tiebreaker.

BC

Agreed.  Assuming Davis, Wills, and Da Silva are still out, we would surely lose a rematch with OSU.  Heck, we'll probably get killed by Cal on Wednesday.

So, I'm not complaining about our seeding--it's just a silly system.

[burger]

We lost a tiebreaker with OSU for the #5 seed and bye.  We had the same conference and non-conference record as them, but they were 1-1 against OU (the #1 team in the P-12) and we were 0-2. 

How did a mediocre team like OSU beat OU?  OU had just finished a two week off period because of covid protocols, and they were still missing starting players Duarte and Figueroa.  Those two guys combined for 36 points against us in the first game and 37 points in the second game.  I'm pretty sure we could've beaten the Ducks without those two.

Way to go, Pac-12.  If you play 30ish games over a season, you should be able to find a better tiebreaker than what happened in 2 of those games.

It should never have come to the tiebreaker.

BC

Agreed.  Assuming Davis, Wills, and Da Silva are still out, we would surely lose a rematch with OSU.  Heck, we'll probably get killed by Cal on Wednesday.

So, I'm not complaining about our seeding--it's just a silly system.

[winflop]

We lost a tiebreaker with OSU for the #5 seed and bye.  We had the same conference and non-conference record as them, but they were 1-1 against OU (the #1 team in the P-12) and we were 0-2. 

How did a mediocre team like OSU beat OU?  OU had just finished a two week off period because of covid protocols, and they were still missing starting players Duarte and Figueroa.  Those two guys combined for 36 points against us in the first game and 37 points in the second game.  I'm pretty sure we could've beaten the Ducks without those two.

Way to go, Pac-12.  If you play 30ish games over a season, you should be able to find a better tiebreaker than what happened in 2 of those games.

It should never have come to the tiebreaker.

BC

Agreed.  Assuming Davis, Wills, and Da Silva are still out, we would surely lose a rematch with OSU.  Heck, we'll probably get killed by Cal on Wednesday.

So, I'm not complaining about our seeding--it's just a silly system.

The Weenies are really bad. Even without Davis/Wills/da Silva we will win. But Colorado will take us to the woodshed

[winflop]

We lost a tiebreaker with OSU for the #5 seed and bye.  We had the same conference and non-conference record as them, but they were 1-1 against OU (the #1 team in the P-12) and we were 0-2. 

How did a mediocre team like OSU beat OU?  OU had just finished a two week off period because of covid protocols, and they were still missing starting players Duarte and Figueroa.  Those two guys combined for 36 points against us in the first game and 37 points in the second game.  I'm pretty sure we could've beaten the Ducks without those two.

Way to go, Pac-12.  If you play 30ish games over a season, you should be able to find a better tiebreaker than what happened in 2 of those games.

It should never have come to the tiebreaker.

BC

Agreed.  Assuming Davis, Wills, and Da Silva are still out, we would surely lose a rematch with OSU.  Heck, we'll probably get killed by Cal on Wednesday.

So, I'm not complaining about our seeding--it's just a silly system.

The Weenies are really bad. Even without Davis/Wills/da Silva we will win. But Colorado will take us to the woodshed

[Papa John]

<snip>
So, I'm not complaining about our seeding--it's just a silly system.

How would you fix it? I don't mean that as any sort of pejorative, I'm just not sure how to do better.

I've stated elsewhere that the first tiebreaker should be games above .500, so that a 1-0 team is not ranked higher than a 17-1 team. In reality, Oregon and USC both finished 10 games over .500, but Oregon was seeded #1 because they played two fewer games and therefore had a higher winning percentage. But in the only game they managed to play, USC defeated Oregon. So I think USC has a bonafide complaint--on the other hand, it's USC, so I don't care that much.

In this case, Stanford and OSU have identical 10-10 conference records and were 1-1 head-to-head. Oregon State split against USC and Stanford was 0-2, so OSU still comes out ahead even if USC had been ranked first in the conference.

[Papa John]

<snip>
So, I'm not complaining about our seeding--it's just a silly system.

How would you fix it? I don't mean that as any sort of pejorative, I'm just not sure how to do better.

I've stated elsewhere that the first tiebreaker should be games above .500, so that a 1-0 team is not ranked higher than a 17-1 team. In reality, Oregon and USC both finished 10 games over .500, but Oregon was seeded #1 because they played two fewer games and therefore had a higher winning percentage. But in the only game they managed to play, USC defeated Oregon. So I think USC has a bonafide complaint--on the other hand, it's USC, so I don't care that much.

In this case, Stanford and OSU have identical 10-10 conference records and were 1-1 head-to-head. Oregon State split against USC and Stanford was 0-2, so OSU still comes out ahead even if USC had been ranked first in the conference.

[AlbanyCardinal]

"The Weenies are really bad. Even without Davis/Wills/da Silva we will win. But Colorado will take us to the woodshed."

I see no reason to think Stanford can beat anybody right now, especially with key players on the bench (for whatever reason) and the team's morale at an all-time low (for whatever reasons). If Stanford's without ODS and the internal storm's as bad as we're hearing, I'd honestly pick cal.

[AlbanyCardinal]

"The Weenies are really bad. Even without Davis/Wills/da Silva we will win. But Colorado will take us to the woodshed."

I see no reason to think Stanford can beat anybody right now, especially with key players on the bench (for whatever reason) and the team's morale at an all-time low (for whatever reasons). If Stanford's without ODS and the internal storm's as bad as we're hearing, I'd honestly pick cal.

[burger]

<snip>
So, I'm not complaining about our seeding--it's just a silly system.

How would you fix it? I don't mean that as any sort of pejorative, I'm just not sure how to do better.

I've stated elsewhere that the first tiebreaker should be games above .500, so that a 1-0 team is not ranked higher than a 17-1 team. In reality, Oregon and USC both finished 10 games over .500, but Oregon was seeded #1 because they played two fewer games and therefore had a higher winning percentage. But in the only game they managed to play, USC defeated Oregon. So I think USC has a bonafide complaint--on the other hand, it's USC, so I don't care that much.

In this case, Stanford and OSU have identical 10-10 conference records and were 1-1 head-to-head. Oregon State split against USC and Stanford was 0-2, so OSU still comes out ahead even if USC had been ranked first in the conference.

I just checked the Big 10, Big 12, SEC, and ACC, and they all use the exact same method.  In fact, most of them use the same wording in their rules, suggesting that they're all copying the same crappy template.

No pro sports use your record against a single opponent as a tiebreaker.   They use conference, division, record vs. playoff teams, etc.  There are just too many vagaries in sports to let postseason seeds hinge on the outcome of a single game or two (see, for instance, OU-OSU and Covid this year).  You can reduce the variance due to a single game by just using a bigger pool of games.  How about record vs. the top 4 teams in the conference to start and then keep adding teams (5th, 6th, etc.) to break any ties.

---

"The Weenies are really bad. Even without Davis/Wills/da Silva we will win. But Colorado will take us to the woodshed."

I see no reason to think Stanford can beat anybody right now, especially with key players on the bench (for whatever reason) and the team's morale at an all-time low (for whatever reasons). If Stanford's without ODS and the internal storm's as bad as we're hearing, I'd honestly pick cal.

Ditto.  I think Bradley is going to go off, and we won't have the offense to keep up. 

If Oscar, Wills, and Davis all play, then we should be favored.  That seems unlikely at this point, though.

[burger]

<snip>
So, I'm not complaining about our seeding--it's just a silly system.

How would you fix it? I don't mean that as any sort of pejorative, I'm just not sure how to do better.

I've stated elsewhere that the first tiebreaker should be games above .500, so that a 1-0 team is not ranked higher than a 17-1 team. In reality, Oregon and USC both finished 10 games over .500, but Oregon was seeded #1 because they played two fewer games and therefore had a higher winning percentage. But in the only game they managed to play, USC defeated Oregon. So I think USC has a bonafide complaint--on the other hand, it's USC, so I don't care that much.

In this case, Stanford and OSU have identical 10-10 conference records and were 1-1 head-to-head. Oregon State split against USC and Stanford was 0-2, so OSU still comes out ahead even if USC had been ranked first in the conference.

I just checked the Big 10, Big 12, SEC, and ACC, and they all use the exact same method.  In fact, most of them use the same wording in their rules, suggesting that they're all copying the same crappy template.

No pro sports use your record against a single opponent as a tiebreaker.   They use conference, division, record vs. playoff teams, etc.  There are just too many vagaries in sports to let postseason seeds hinge on the outcome of a single game or two (see, for instance, OU-OSU and Covid this year).  You can reduce the variance due to a single game by just using a bigger pool of games.  How about record vs. the top 4 teams in the conference to start and then keep adding teams (5th, 6th, etc.) to break any ties.

---

"The Weenies are really bad. Even without Davis/Wills/da Silva we will win. But Colorado will take us to the woodshed."

I see no reason to think Stanford can beat anybody right now, especially with key players on the bench (for whatever reason) and the team's morale at an all-time low (for whatever reasons). If Stanford's without ODS and the internal storm's as bad as we're hearing, I'd honestly pick cal.

Ditto.  I think Bradley is going to go off, and we won't have the offense to keep up. 

If Oscar, Wills, and Davis all play, then we should be favored.  That seems unlikely at this point, though.

[old spanish trail]

[quote="martyup" pid='309722' dateline='1615227375']

If we get eliminated by either Cal or CO, I wonder if Tara will recruit some of the men's team to help with practice.  Practicing against the men would certainly help with their speed.  



PS: Leave DD out of it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Without having access to Rivals, I just want to throw out that Davis was totally exemplary last year while supporting Terry, which in the beginning was a little rocky. He also injured his balky ankle twice while picking up Haase floor burns diving for a loose ball. In the last game he played, Davis did nothing on the court that I observed that would support the claim being made that it is all about him. What exactly happened? Did he call out Haase? Did he object to a strategy? On the court, did he refuse to follow direction?

I don't get it.

[old spanish trail]

[quote="martyup" pid='309722' dateline='1615227375']

If we get eliminated by either Cal or CO, I wonder if Tara will recruit some of the men's team to help with practice.  Practicing against the men would certainly help with their speed.  



PS: Leave DD out of it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Without having access to Rivals, I just want to throw out that Davis was totally exemplary last year while supporting Terry, which in the beginning was a little rocky. He also injured his balky ankle twice while picking up Haase floor burns diving for a loose ball. In the last game he played, Davis did nothing on the court that I observed that would support the claim being made that it is all about him. What exactly happened? Did he call out Haase? Did he object to a strategy? On the court, did he refuse to follow direction?

I don't get it.

[VB Card]

[quote="martyup" pid='309722' dateline='1615227375']

If we get eliminated by either Cal or CO, I wonder if Tara will recruit some of the men's team to help with practice.  Practicing against the men would certainly help with their speed.  



PS: Leave DD out of it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Without having access to Rivals, I just want to throw out that Davis was totally exemplary last year while supporting Terry, which in the beginning was a little rocky. He also injured his balky ankle twice while picking up Haase floor burns diving for a loose ball. In the last game he played, Davis did nothing on the court that I observed that would support the claim being made that it is all about him. What exactly happened? Did he call out Haase? Did he object to a strategy? On the court, did he refuse to follow direction?

I don't get it.

 

I have no issue with Daejon's play on the court, I think he's one of the hardest playing guys on the team and has been good in his career at Stanford.  But it is also important to note that this is not the first time he has been suspended/benched by Haase. I do not know what he did this time, but whatever it was made Haase bench one of his best players in a must-win game.

[VB Card]

[quote="martyup" pid='309722' dateline='1615227375']

If we get eliminated by either Cal or CO, I wonder if Tara will recruit some of the men's team to help with practice.  Practicing against the men would certainly help with their speed.  



PS: Leave DD out of it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Without having access to Rivals, I just want to throw out that Davis was totally exemplary last year while supporting Terry, which in the beginning was a little rocky. He also injured his balky ankle twice while picking up Haase floor burns diving for a loose ball. In the last game he played, Davis did nothing on the court that I observed that would support the claim being made that it is all about him. What exactly happened? Did he call out Haase? Did he object to a strategy? On the court, did he refuse to follow direction?

I don't get it.

 

I have no issue with Daejon's play on the court, I think he's one of the hardest playing guys on the team and has been good in his career at Stanford.  But it is also important to note that this is not the first time he has been suspended/benched by Haase. I do not know what he did this time, but whatever it was made Haase bench one of his best players in a must-win game.

[AlbanyCardinal]

"I have no issue with Daejon's play on the court, I think he's one of the hardest playing guys on the team and has been good in his career at Stanford.  But it is also important to note that this is not the first time he has been suspended/benched by Haase. I do not know what he did this time, but whatever it was made Haase bench one of his best players in a must-win game."

Fair enough. I don't know anything about it, so I'll reserve my judgment -- as big a fan as I've been of DD -- until I get the scoop. If Haase had valid reasons for doing so, I'll be fine with it. But then why did he bench ZW in crunch time at WSU? When the team desperately needed a fresh body out there, ZW twiddled his thumbs for 36 minutes out of 55 (and through most of the second half and all three OTs). It all doesn't add up to me. My hunch is that even after the dust has cleared, I'll be much less of a fan of coach Haase, but who knows. Stranger things have happened, like losing to cal twice last season or losing games against middling teams when up by double digits in the second half.

[AlbanyCardinal]

"I have no issue with Daejon's play on the court, I think he's one of the hardest playing guys on the team and has been good in his career at Stanford.  But it is also important to note that this is not the first time he has been suspended/benched by Haase. I do not know what he did this time, but whatever it was made Haase bench one of his best players in a must-win game."

Fair enough. I don't know anything about it, so I'll reserve my judgment -- as big a fan as I've been of DD -- until I get the scoop. If Haase had valid reasons for doing so, I'll be fine with it. But then why did he bench ZW in crunch time at WSU? When the team desperately needed a fresh body out there, ZW twiddled his thumbs for 36 minutes out of 55 (and through most of the second half and all three OTs). It all doesn't add up to me. My hunch is that even after the dust has cleared, I'll be much less of a fan of coach Haase, but who knows. Stranger things have happened, like losing to cal twice last season or losing games against middling teams when up by double digits in the second half.

[winflop]

I have no issue with Daejon's play on the court, I think he's one of the hardest playing guys on the team and has been good in his career at Stanford.  But it is also important to note that this is not the first time he has been suspended/benched by Haase. I do not know what he did this time, but whatever it was made Haase bench one of his best players in a must-win game.

My issue is that if that's what Haase is doing, then he should just come out and say that. Stop couching it as "team cohesion" or something else. If they guys are breaking team rules then don't mince words about it.

[winflop]

I have no issue with Daejon's play on the court, I think he's one of the hardest playing guys on the team and has been good in his career at Stanford.  But it is also important to note that this is not the first time he has been suspended/benched by Haase. I do not know what he did this time, but whatever it was made Haase bench one of his best players in a must-win game.

My issue is that if that's what Haase is doing, then he should just come out and say that. Stop couching it as "team cohesion" or something else. If they guys are breaking team rules then don't mince words about it.

[BostonCard]

I have no issue with Daejon's play on the court, I think he's one of the hardest playing guys on the team and has been good in his career at Stanford.  But it is also important to note that this is not the first time he has been suspended/benched by Haase. I do not know what he did this time, but whatever it was made Haase bench one of his best players in a must-win game.

My issue is that if that's what Haase is doing, then he should just come out and say that. Stop couching it as "team cohesion" or something else. If they guys are breaking team rules then don't mince words about it.

It's a fine line; you don't want to air team's dirty laundry or throw a player under the bus, especially if you want to salvage a relationship.  I give the coach wide lattitute on how to deal with specific situations, but however they do so, I also hold them accountable for the end results.

BC

[BostonCard]

I have no issue with Daejon's play on the court, I think he's one of the hardest playing guys on the team and has been good in his career at Stanford.  But it is also important to note that this is not the first time he has been suspended/benched by Haase. I do not know what he did this time, but whatever it was made Haase bench one of his best players in a must-win game.

My issue is that if that's what Haase is doing, then he should just come out and say that. Stop couching it as "team cohesion" or something else. If they guys are breaking team rules then don't mince words about it.

It's a fine line; you don't want to air team's dirty laundry or throw a player under the bus, especially if you want to salvage a relationship.  I give the coach wide lattitute on how to deal with specific situations, but however they do so, I also hold them accountable for the end results.

BC

[Treebound]

If he doesn't play DD or Wills in this next game then he should say why at this point.  My hope is that "team cohesion" was used to try and leave the door open for those two players to come back in and contribute.    Going out with a strong performance and ideally 2-3 wins would be good for everyone.    Really hoping that Oscar gets to play this week and finish with some solid games.   I too, am tired of the late season swoons by Haase, so let's see what he does to clean up this mess.    If they lose to UCB, that's just not an option...

[Treebound]

If he doesn't play DD or Wills in this next game then he should say why at this point.  My hope is that "team cohesion" was used to try and leave the door open for those two players to come back in and contribute.    Going out with a strong performance and ideally 2-3 wins would be good for everyone.    Really hoping that Oscar gets to play this week and finish with some solid games.   I too, am tired of the late season swoons by Haase, so let's see what he does to clean up this mess.    If they lose to UCB, that's just not an option...

[winflop]

I have no issue with Daejon's play on the court, I think he's one of the hardest playing guys on the team and has been good in his career at Stanford.  But it is also important to note that this is not the first time he has been suspended/benched by Haase. I do not know what he did this time, but whatever it was made Haase bench one of his best players in a must-win game.

My issue is that if that's what Haase is doing, then he should just come out and say that. Stop couching it as "team cohesion" or something else. If they guys are breaking team rules then don't mince words about it.

It's a fine line; you don't want to air team's dirty laundry or throw a player under the bus, especially if you want to salvage a relationship.  I give the coach wide lattitute on how to deal with specific situations, but however they do so, I also hold them accountable for the end results.

BC

I could see treading a little more lightly with Williams since he's a freshman and is dealing with a heavy heart, but Davis & Wills have been in the program for multiple years. I don't think it's throwing them under the bus or airing dirty laundry to say with clarity that they aren't living up to the standards of the program, they know that, and they also know how to earn their way back into the lineup.

[winflop]

I have no issue with Daejon's play on the court, I think he's one of the hardest playing guys on the team and has been good in his career at Stanford.  But it is also important to note that this is not the first time he has been suspended/benched by Haase. I do not know what he did this time, but whatever it was made Haase bench one of his best players in a must-win game.

My issue is that if that's what Haase is doing, then he should just come out and say that. Stop couching it as "team cohesion" or something else. If they guys are breaking team rules then don't mince words about it.

It's a fine line; you don't want to air team's dirty laundry or throw a player under the bus, especially if you want to salvage a relationship.  I give the coach wide lattitute on how to deal with specific situations, but however they do so, I also hold them accountable for the end results.

BC

I could see treading a little more lightly with Williams since he's a freshman and is dealing with a heavy heart, but Davis & Wills have been in the program for multiple years. I don't think it's throwing them under the bus or airing dirty laundry to say with clarity that they aren't living up to the standards of the program, they know that, and they also know how to earn their way back into the lineup.