[2006alum]

I know some on this forum believe coaches are infallible but there's a difference between talent gap and coaching deficiencies. I don't think NC State's talent level is 20+ points better this year.

I hope that either Paye quickly recognizes the strategic and tactical errors she made or that we don't wait multiple seasons to be content with mediocrity. But based on past experiences I don't think either option will come to fruition anytime soon.

That's why I wished we would have considered a broader search after Tara's retirement rather than just anoint Paye as the successor because of her ties to the program.

Nobody has said coaches are infallible.  In fact, at least I’ve been pretty explicit (in this very thread) that “Coaches are imperfect and some coaches are better than others. They clearly make mistakes and are prone to biases.” [look it up, it’s on page 2 of this thread].

However, I also note that “even a bad coach is more knowledgeable about the game of basketball, has more information about the team and the players, has spent more time reviewing film and thinking about stuff like playing time and is certainly more motivated to get it right (after all, their employment is dependent on it) than even the most knowledgeable of fan message board warriors is.”

I wonder, who on this message board, if given complete coaching responsibilities for Stanford women’s basketball, would do better than Kate Paye (and, if so, what are you doing on this message board, rather than out there coaching)?  I mean, most people here probably wouldn’t even be able to diagram a basketball play correctly, let alone implement one against a team on the edge of the top-25 (Massey rates them 28).  It’s not that Kate Paye is perfect; far from it.  But it would be nice if posters exhibited a modicum of humility instead of acting like fixing this team would be straightforward if only the coach did [whatever the poster thinks should be done].

BC

Speaking as someone who I don't think has been on the leading edge of KP skeptics, my concern is simply that I don't see an offense that (a) works; (b) suits our personnel; or © performs at the level of talent that we have. And worse, I'm not (generally) seeing the kinds of in-game or over-the-season changes to address them. I don't agree with all the criticisms of KP but games like today worry me that we're not really seeing a program that's on the kind of trajectory I think we had all hoped.

My counter-arguments to myself are: (a) we had solid wins against Oregon and Washington that suggest real progress; (b) NC State is the hardest away game we'll have because the venue is just really a pressure cooker for away teams; © "new ACC" teams are generally lousy on the road on the opposite coast, not just Stanford; and (d) we lacked Clardy, who is exactly the kind of player who was necessary to stay competitive with NC State's guards. 

Mostly, I am just a little anxious because it's easy to tell a story that last season was a one off because the ACC was new, the Tara transition was never going to be seamless, and we had inadequate personnel. But none of those things are as true now, so if this season turns out not much better than last, is the only real difference just that we have one super-star frosh and our one Top 10 recruit is finally starting to player closer to one?

(As an aside, the one thing I will give credit to this coaching staff for is player development - I really think Agara, Clardy, and Ogden are noticeably and substantially better season over season.)

[2006alum]

I know some on this forum believe coaches are infallible but there's a difference between talent gap and coaching deficiencies. I don't think NC State's talent level is 20+ points better this year.

I hope that either Paye quickly recognizes the strategic and tactical errors she made or that we don't wait multiple seasons to be content with mediocrity. But based on past experiences I don't think either option will come to fruition anytime soon.

That's why I wished we would have considered a broader search after Tara's retirement rather than just anoint Paye as the successor because of her ties to the program.

Nobody has said coaches are infallible.  In fact, at least I’ve been pretty explicit (in this very thread) that “Coaches are imperfect and some coaches are better than others. They clearly make mistakes and are prone to biases.” [look it up, it’s on page 2 of this thread].

However, I also note that “even a bad coach is more knowledgeable about the game of basketball, has more information about the team and the players, has spent more time reviewing film and thinking about stuff like playing time and is certainly more motivated to get it right (after all, their employment is dependent on it) than even the most knowledgeable of fan message board warriors is.”

I wonder, who on this message board, if given complete coaching responsibilities for Stanford women’s basketball, would do better than Kate Paye (and, if so, what are you doing on this message board, rather than out there coaching)?  I mean, most people here probably wouldn’t even be able to diagram a basketball play correctly, let alone implement one against a team on the edge of the top-25 (Massey rates them 28).  It’s not that Kate Paye is perfect; far from it.  But it would be nice if posters exhibited a modicum of humility instead of acting like fixing this team would be straightforward if only the coach did [whatever the poster thinks should be done].

BC

Speaking as someone who I don't think has been on the leading edge of KP skeptics, my concern is simply that I don't see an offense that (a) works; (b) suits our personnel; or © performs at the level of talent that we have. And worse, I'm not (generally) seeing the kinds of in-game or over-the-season changes to address them. I don't agree with all the criticisms of KP but games like today worry me that we're not really seeing a program that's on the kind of trajectory I think we had all hoped.

My counter-arguments to myself are: (a) we had solid wins against Oregon and Washington that suggest real progress; (b) NC State is the hardest away game we'll have because the venue is just really a pressure cooker for away teams; © "new ACC" teams are generally lousy on the road on the opposite coast, not just Stanford; and (d) we lacked Clardy, who is exactly the kind of player who was necessary to stay competitive with NC State's guards. 

Mostly, I am just a little anxious because it's easy to tell a story that last season was a one off because the ACC was new, the Tara transition was never going to be seamless, and we had inadequate personnel. But none of those things are as true now, so if this season turns out not much better than last, is the only real difference just that we have one super-star frosh and our one Top 10 recruit is finally starting to player closer to one?

(As an aside, the one thing I will give credit to this coaching staff for is player development - I really think Agara, Clardy, and Ogden are noticeably and substantially better season over season.)