[81alum]

.


I have mixed feelings about the 2023-2024 season. CONCERNS 1) Tara really has only 10 players who will contribute and 2 benchwarmers.  Green and Papadaki rarely saw minutes as freshmen because they lack the talent, quickness and athleticism for the college game.  2) The team will not have a guard who can score.  3) Opponents will clog the paint and push Brink to the outside.  Her mid-range and 3-point shooting will improve, but her offensive rebounding and scoring down low (the bread and butter of her game), will be taken away because there will be no meaningful offense to support her. 4) The team will have no one coming off the bench to spell Brink or Iriafen.  The 6'2 Agara is raw and not nearly tall enough to contend with some of the non-conference opponents Stanford will face and certainly several PAC-12 opponents. 5) Contrary to the SF Chronicle story, Demetre is not a rising junior.  She remains a limited player who does not provide consistent offense. 



HOPE- 1) A healthy Harriel will come in at guard and prove to be a creator and an effective shooter. 2) The freshman Ogden will have an immediate impact and provide another source of scoring at the wing; 3) Iriafen will have developed her midrange game, combined with her strong offensive moves in the paint.  4) Brink will reduce her fouling and (somehow) elevate her elite game to a whole other level..

I generally agree with this analysis, with a couple of differences.  "Rising junior" is a technical term which simply means she is going to be a junior next year ( the "rising" year, as opposed to last year,)  not that she is "rising" in the basketball ranks.  But we will be relying more heavily on her.  Hopefully her defense improves.  But putting her in the opposite corner to Jump on offense could open up the floor.

I too hope for Harriel to see time and improvement.  Papadaki has a nice shot, there is some chance that she improves enough to play more.  Green is not bad on defense.  Not counting on a lot from them but one or both could surprise us.

I am hoping to see Bosgana have a break out year on both ends of the court.  She was very young by age when she arrived--with a couple of years of maturity under her belt I hope she can prove herself a regular in the rotation.

We are going to see a LOT more of the freshmen next year than is usual.  With a 12 person roster I am positive that Ogden is going to get a lot of opportunity to prove herself.  But Agara and Clardy will be called upon more than is usual for freshmen.  

The hope for Iriafen and Brink both to improve their midrange shot is real.  This is not a pipe dream--they both have shown that skill, it is a matter of consistency and that could be corrected over the summer.  Will they?

One factor not much discussed is how Jump might improve or change for next year.  She is coming back rather than going pro, presumably because she knows she has things to work on and improve.  Chief among these is making her own shot.  She improved in this way last year--but not enough.

Then, finally, the X-factor.  How much will Lepolo improve?  It is objectively true that she is ahead of where some other accomplished point guards were after their freshman year--such as Amber Orrange.  But did Lepolo get there by peaking super early, or is she going to be one of those players who makes great strides from freshman to sophomore years?  The answer to that question could determine--as much as any other single factor--how well we do next year.

One of my biggest concerns is not point guard play, or offense, or even having players who are athletic enough to defend.  The place I am most concerned is rebounding.  There were signs of weakness last year, and one of our best rebounders (Jones) is gone.  Brink can't do it all, and if she tries she will foul out.  Iriafen needs to become a rebounding monster, and perhaps one of the freshmen will show themselves capable.

At this point, I would not be surprised if we wound up 4th in the Pac 12.  I could see us doing better than that if the puzzle pieces come together well.  And Tara may be able to solve the puzzle better next year than she was able to last year--less of that constant concern about rotating so many players to try (and fail) to keep everyone happy.  It looks more straightforward to me, which may help the team to build cohesion and focus.  That is the hope.

But UCLA, USC, and Utah all look like strong teams for next year.  And some of the other conference teams--like Washington and even Arizona State--will improve.  It will be a brutal conference. 

I certainly won't go into the season expecting that we will contend for a natty, as I did a year ago.  How much of that is my new found realism, and how much of it is simply a psychological defense mechanism, will only be apparent after seeing us play.

[81alum]

.


I have mixed feelings about the 2023-2024 season. CONCERNS 1) Tara really has only 10 players who will contribute and 2 benchwarmers.  Green and Papadaki rarely saw minutes as freshmen because they lack the talent, quickness and athleticism for the college game.  2) The team will not have a guard who can score.  3) Opponents will clog the paint and push Brink to the outside.  Her mid-range and 3-point shooting will improve, but her offensive rebounding and scoring down low (the bread and butter of her game), will be taken away because there will be no meaningful offense to support her. 4) The team will have no one coming off the bench to spell Brink or Iriafen.  The 6'2 Agara is raw and not nearly tall enough to contend with some of the non-conference opponents Stanford will face and certainly several PAC-12 opponents. 5) Contrary to the SF Chronicle story, Demetre is not a rising junior.  She remains a limited player who does not provide consistent offense. 



HOPE- 1) A healthy Harriel will come in at guard and prove to be a creator and an effective shooter. 2) The freshman Ogden will have an immediate impact and provide another source of scoring at the wing; 3) Iriafen will have developed her midrange game, combined with her strong offensive moves in the paint.  4) Brink will reduce her fouling and (somehow) elevate her elite game to a whole other level..

I generally agree with this analysis, with a couple of differences.  "Rising junior" is a technical term which simply means she is going to be a junior next year ( the "rising" year, as opposed to last year,)  not that she is "rising" in the basketball ranks.  But we will be relying more heavily on her.  Hopefully her defense improves.  But putting her in the opposite corner to Jump on offense could open up the floor.

I too hope for Harriel to see time and improvement.  Papadaki has a nice shot, there is some chance that she improves enough to play more.  Green is not bad on defense.  Not counting on a lot from them but one or both could surprise us.

I am hoping to see Bosgana have a break out year on both ends of the court.  She was very young by age when she arrived--with a couple of years of maturity under her belt I hope she can prove herself a regular in the rotation.

We are going to see a LOT more of the freshmen next year than is usual.  With a 12 person roster I am positive that Ogden is going to get a lot of opportunity to prove herself.  But Agara and Clardy will be called upon more than is usual for freshmen.  

The hope for Iriafen and Brink both to improve their midrange shot is real.  This is not a pipe dream--they both have shown that skill, it is a matter of consistency and that could be corrected over the summer.  Will they?

One factor not much discussed is how Jump might improve or change for next year.  She is coming back rather than going pro, presumably because she knows she has things to work on and improve.  Chief among these is making her own shot.  She improved in this way last year--but not enough.

Then, finally, the X-factor.  How much will Lepolo improve?  It is objectively true that she is ahead of where some other accomplished point guards were after their freshman year--such as Amber Orrange.  But did Lepolo get there by peaking super early, or is she going to be one of those players who makes great strides from freshman to sophomore years?  The answer to that question could determine--as much as any other single factor--how well we do next year.

One of my biggest concerns is not point guard play, or offense, or even having players who are athletic enough to defend.  The place I am most concerned is rebounding.  There were signs of weakness last year, and one of our best rebounders (Jones) is gone.  Brink can't do it all, and if she tries she will foul out.  Iriafen needs to become a rebounding monster, and perhaps one of the freshmen will show themselves capable.

At this point, I would not be surprised if we wound up 4th in the Pac 12.  I could see us doing better than that if the puzzle pieces come together well.  And Tara may be able to solve the puzzle better next year than she was able to last year--less of that constant concern about rotating so many players to try (and fail) to keep everyone happy.  It looks more straightforward to me, which may help the team to build cohesion and focus.  That is the hope.

But UCLA, USC, and Utah all look like strong teams for next year.  And some of the other conference teams--like Washington and even Arizona State--will improve.  It will be a brutal conference. 

I certainly won't go into the season expecting that we will contend for a natty, as I did a year ago.  How much of that is my new found realism, and how much of it is simply a psychological defense mechanism, will only be apparent after seeing us play.