[ColoradoTree]

Thanks ColoradoTree! I guess women's tennis joined women's volleyball and women's soccer as having (for the programs' lofty standards), pretty bad years in this COVID-afflicted year. I guess we've been spoiled about the success and consistency of all of these programs when not being seeded, hosting and losing before the Rd of 16 counts as our worst season for the women's tennis team.

It seems that in the last part of your analysis looking ahead to next year, that (correct me if I am making too big of an assumption), that the "problem" Lele will have of slotting in Houghton or Choy will mean that the incredible depth we enjoyed during our NCAA title runs these last few years is back (in a good way) and we would be a favorite to get back to our high standards and make another deep run next season?

Absolutely. I expect us to have a championship-caliber team next season--e.g., a top 5 type team that should absolutely be good enough for a deep NCAA run. 

Now, losing Gordon will certainly be painful (if she doesn't come back). But Blake is progressing nicely and could be a plausible #1. Part of it is that two and three years ago, when we had Arbuthnott at 4 and Shin at 5, they played the best tennis of their college careers. They've both regressed since then, and it's coincided with Arbuthnott climbing in our lineup rather than falling. Both of those players will now be gone and replaced by (I am presuming) more reliable players. 

The way I think of it is that we've had a clear-cut #1 for the last four years in Gordon, even though she hasn't been a dominant force like some past #1s we've had. But whereas we used to have a couple of #2s (Lord and Lampl) and #3s (Arbuthnott, Shin), last year we had a couple of #3s (Blake, Arbuthnott), a #5 (Choy), and a bunch of sixes. I'm optimistic that Blake and Choy seem to be getting better and better, and I hope that with a full year of relatively normal preparation, we see even better versions of Geller and Houghton, too. 

But the main reason for my optimism is the freshmen that are coming in. While we always get a couple of blue chip players, we rarely get two of this caliber. By looking at the Tennis Recruiting Network "top" ranking (meaning, the highest that player climbed in a particular year), here's how our past several classes shook out each year of high school (Fr/So/Jr/Sr):

2020: Can't say for Ana Geller since she's international, but Houghton was 43/20/3/2.
2019: Blake (8/8/7/6) and Mossmer (4/3/12/9)
2018: Choy (8/4/6/10) and Madurawe (39/47/12/6)
2017: Gordon (3/4/3/1) and Shin (33/14/8/8)
2016: Can't say for Arbuthnott, but Higuchi was (2/3/3/4)
2015: Lampl (15/14/6/7), Lord (7/7/4/2), and Yee (2/1/1/7)

(You want to talk about disappointments, if you'd have told me Yee could only occasionally crack the singles lineup in her time here, I'd have been blown away.)

Next year's freshmen? Connie Ma (1/1/1/1), Alexandra Yepifanova (3/2/1/1), and Valencia Xu (4/3/3/8). Gordon's the only recent recruit who even comes close to that level, and she played #1 from the jump (I remain of the view that Lord would've started at #1 that year if she'd been healthy, but that's neither here nor there). You don't often see a player be the no-doubt best player of her class each year of high school. Think of some of the great players we've had in the past decade-plus: Nicole Gibbs (5/1/2/1); Kristie Ahn (5/1/1/5); Hilary Barte (7/7/1/1). Krista Hardebeck had a great career but not quite at the level her lofty recruiting rankings might have suggested: 3/1/1/1. Anyway, no guarantees in how a player develops, but not only will Ma and Yepifanova play right away, it wouldn't shock me if they both played in the top 3 and both had success right away. 

So, with all of that said, I think our lineup next year is more like those championship teams--a really good player at #1 but not someone who is going to crush folks week in and week out, but a lineup where we feel really good about getting four wins out of the 2-6 spots. Here's one thought:

1. Blake
2. Ma
3. Yepifanova
4. Geller
5. Choy
6. Houghton

And if Gordon comes back?

1. Gordon
2. Ma
3. Blake
4. Yepifanova
5. Geller
6. Choy

That lineup is nasty.

---

One thing that I think will be really helpful for Stanford's NCAA prospects next season is the improvement of the Pac-12. Cal is back where they should be. UCLA is excellent and will remain so for the foreseeable future (though I like our chances next year with them losing Hart, Wolff, Altick, and Goulak, and I like our incoming freshmen better than theirs, though they have some good ones). USC has a ton of talent that might be rounding into form. ASU and Oregon are both dangerous (Oregon's three best players were true freshmen this year, so they're not going away, either). Even Arizona--a conference doormat for years--showed real strides this year. 

That overall improvement isn't just good for our rankings (more valuable wins and less-damaging losses), but for our development and improvement as a team over the course of the season. Winning the conference will be very hard, but that's all to the good when it comes to what matters. 

P.S. We don't have UTR data going back years, but the UTRs for Ma and Yepifanova are well ahead of everyone else in the senior class.

[ColoradoTree]

Thanks ColoradoTree! I guess women's tennis joined women's volleyball and women's soccer as having (for the programs' lofty standards), pretty bad years in this COVID-afflicted year. I guess we've been spoiled about the success and consistency of all of these programs when not being seeded, hosting and losing before the Rd of 16 counts as our worst season for the women's tennis team.

It seems that in the last part of your analysis looking ahead to next year, that (correct me if I am making too big of an assumption), that the "problem" Lele will have of slotting in Houghton or Choy will mean that the incredible depth we enjoyed during our NCAA title runs these last few years is back (in a good way) and we would be a favorite to get back to our high standards and make another deep run next season?

Absolutely. I expect us to have a championship-caliber team next season--e.g., a top 5 type team that should absolutely be good enough for a deep NCAA run. 

Now, losing Gordon will certainly be painful (if she doesn't come back). But Blake is progressing nicely and could be a plausible #1. Part of it is that two and three years ago, when we had Arbuthnott at 4 and Shin at 5, they played the best tennis of their college careers. They've both regressed since then, and it's coincided with Arbuthnott climbing in our lineup rather than falling. Both of those players will now be gone and replaced by (I am presuming) more reliable players. 

The way I think of it is that we've had a clear-cut #1 for the last four years in Gordon, even though she hasn't been a dominant force like some past #1s we've had. But whereas we used to have a couple of #2s (Lord and Lampl) and #3s (Arbuthnott, Shin), last year we had a couple of #3s (Blake, Arbuthnott), a #5 (Choy), and a bunch of sixes. I'm optimistic that Blake and Choy seem to be getting better and better, and I hope that with a full year of relatively normal preparation, we see even better versions of Geller and Houghton, too. 

But the main reason for my optimism is the freshmen that are coming in. While we always get a couple of blue chip players, we rarely get two of this caliber. By looking at the Tennis Recruiting Network "top" ranking (meaning, the highest that player climbed in a particular year), here's how our past several classes shook out each year of high school (Fr/So/Jr/Sr):

2020: Can't say for Ana Geller since she's international, but Houghton was 43/20/3/2.
2019: Blake (8/8/7/6) and Mossmer (4/3/12/9)
2018: Choy (8/4/6/10) and Madurawe (39/47/12/6)
2017: Gordon (3/4/3/1) and Shin (33/14/8/8)
2016: Can't say for Arbuthnott, but Higuchi was (2/3/3/4)
2015: Lampl (15/14/6/7), Lord (7/7/4/2), and Yee (2/1/1/7)

(You want to talk about disappointments, if you'd have told me Yee could only occasionally crack the singles lineup in her time here, I'd have been blown away.)

Next year's freshmen? Connie Ma (1/1/1/1), Alexandra Yepifanova (3/2/1/1), and Valencia Xu (4/3/3/8). Gordon's the only recent recruit who even comes close to that level, and she played #1 from the jump (I remain of the view that Lord would've started at #1 that year if she'd been healthy, but that's neither here nor there). You don't often see a player be the no-doubt best player of her class each year of high school. Think of some of the great players we've had in the past decade-plus: Nicole Gibbs (5/1/2/1); Kristie Ahn (5/1/1/5); Hilary Barte (7/7/1/1). Krista Hardebeck had a great career but not quite at the level her lofty recruiting rankings might have suggested: 3/1/1/1. Anyway, no guarantees in how a player develops, but not only will Ma and Yepifanova play right away, it wouldn't shock me if they both played in the top 3 and both had success right away. 

So, with all of that said, I think our lineup next year is more like those championship teams--a really good player at #1 but not someone who is going to crush folks week in and week out, but a lineup where we feel really good about getting four wins out of the 2-6 spots. Here's one thought:

1. Blake
2. Ma
3. Yepifanova
4. Geller
5. Choy
6. Houghton

And if Gordon comes back?

1. Gordon
2. Ma
3. Blake
4. Yepifanova
5. Geller
6. Choy

That lineup is nasty.

---

One thing that I think will be really helpful for Stanford's NCAA prospects next season is the improvement of the Pac-12. Cal is back where they should be. UCLA is excellent and will remain so for the foreseeable future (though I like our chances next year with them losing Hart, Wolff, Altick, and Goulak, and I like our incoming freshmen better than theirs, though they have some good ones). USC has a ton of talent that might be rounding into form. ASU and Oregon are both dangerous (Oregon's three best players were true freshmen this year, so they're not going away, either). Even Arizona--a conference doormat for years--showed real strides this year. 

That overall improvement isn't just good for our rankings (more valuable wins and less-damaging losses), but for our development and improvement as a team over the course of the season. Winning the conference will be very hard, but that's all to the good when it comes to what matters. 

P.S. We don't have UTR data going back years, but the UTRs for Ma and Yepifanova are well ahead of everyone else in the senior class.