[SamuelMcF]

On P12N. Found a stream: http://newsgratification.com/espnu.html

[SamuelMcF]

On P12N. Found a stream: http://newsgratification.com/espnu.html

[Ratmandoo]

On P12N. Found a stream: http://newsgratification.com/espnu.html

The game is on espnU.

[Ratmandoo]

On P12N. Found a stream: http://newsgratification.com/espnu.html

The game is on espnU.

[BigEasyCard]

Cardinal lead 36 to 29 at half.  

50% three-point shooting, no offensive rebounds.

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

Cardinal lead 36 to 29 at half.  

50% three-point shooting, no offensive rebounds.

Geaux Cardinal!

[needle]

On P12N. Found a stream: http://newsgratification.com/espnu.html

The game is on espnU.

Stanford up 36-29 at half. The defense is solid but some Really Bad stretches of offense have kept the Cougs in this one, as the junk shots and turnovers have led to some easy Coug scores.

[needle]

On P12N. Found a stream: http://newsgratification.com/espnu.html

The game is on espnU.

Stanford up 36-29 at half. The defense is solid but some Really Bad stretches of offense have kept the Cougs in this one, as the junk shots and turnovers have led to some easy Coug scores.

[SamuelMcF]

Honestly, with this team, the first half doesn't really even matter anymore. Any lead/deficit is liable to be either blown or overcome, as we've seen throughout the season.

Bummer that Wills sat after his second foul. He was on the Cougs' Elleby, who had something like their last 8 points to end the half without Wills draped on him.

[SamuelMcF]

Honestly, with this team, the first half doesn't really even matter anymore. Any lead/deficit is liable to be either blown or overcome, as we've seen throughout the season.

Bummer that Wills sat after his second foul. He was on the Cougs' Elleby, who had something like their last 8 points to end the half without Wills draped on him.

[burger]

Someone in the first row of students behind the ESPN announcers is wearing a "Fire Larry Scott" t-shirt.  High quality trolling.

[burger]

Someone in the first row of students behind the ESPN announcers is wearing a "Fire Larry Scott" t-shirt.  High quality trolling.

[SamuelMcF]

Wills picked up his third way too quickly.

Kisunas didn't play well in the 1H, so coach went to Keefe when Da Silva sat. Keefe did nothing, which was better than Kisunas' actively detrimental play.

[SamuelMcF]

Wills picked up his third way too quickly.

Kisunas didn't play well in the 1H, so coach went to Keefe when Da Silva sat. Keefe did nothing, which was better than Kisunas' actively detrimental play.

[winflop]

Wazzu cut it to 4 but Stanford has built it back up to 12 with 8 to go.

[winflop]

Wazzu cut it to 4 but Stanford has built it back up to 12 with 8 to go.

[SamuelMcF]

Gosh, I really want to nitpick...but we won by 18 on the road.

[SamuelMcF]

Gosh, I really want to nitpick...but we won by 18 on the road.

[BobK]

Now 18-9 and 7-7 in league play.

[BobK]

Now 18-9 and 7-7 in league play.

[JJJ]

Watched it on DVR. Count me in on the bandwagon for this team. Love’em and don’t quite understand the lack of love. Lunardi says our sweep still keeps us out??? Well, we’ll show them with our performance going forward!

[JJJ]

Watched it on DVR. Count me in on the bandwagon for this team. Love’em and don’t quite understand the lack of love. Lunardi says our sweep still keeps us out??? Well, we’ll show them with our performance going forward!

[bl82]

Kisunas didn't play well in the 1H, so coach went to Keefe when Da Silva sat. Keefe did nothing, which was better than Kisunas' actively detrimental play.

If Kisunas and Keefe aren't taking 500 foul line jumpers every day, then something is wrong. If these guys can't shoot or at least drive and can only hand off the ball on the perimeter, they might as well sit.

[bl82]

Kisunas didn't play well in the 1H, so coach went to Keefe when Da Silva sat. Keefe did nothing, which was better than Kisunas' actively detrimental play.

If Kisunas and Keefe aren't taking 500 foul line jumpers every day, then something is wrong. If these guys can't shoot or at least drive and can only hand off the ball on the perimeter, they might as well sit.

[SamuelMcF]

Kisunas didn't play well in the 1H, so coach went to Keefe when Da Silva sat. Keefe did nothing, which was better than Kisunas' actively detrimental play.

If Kisunas and Keefe aren't taking 500 foul line jumpers every day, then something is wrong.  If these guys can't shoot or at least drive and can only hand off the ball on the perimeter, they might as well sit.

I’m sure coach agrees with you and wishes Oscar could go the full 40 every game. But he’s an undersized post getting knocked around. No chance. He needs breathers.

[SamuelMcF]

Kisunas didn't play well in the 1H, so coach went to Keefe when Da Silva sat. Keefe did nothing, which was better than Kisunas' actively detrimental play.

If Kisunas and Keefe aren't taking 500 foul line jumpers every day, then something is wrong.  If these guys can't shoot or at least drive and can only hand off the ball on the perimeter, they might as well sit.

I’m sure coach agrees with you and wishes Oscar could go the full 40 every game. But he’s an undersized post getting knocked around. No chance. He needs breathers.

[burger]

I saw somewhere that we were +30 with DaSilva on the floor yesterday.  Since we won by 18, you can imagine what the +/- for the other bigs was.

BTW, does anyone know where you can find +/- for individual players in games?  I know where to get box plus minus (which is a calculated statistic), but I'd love to see actual +/- for our guys.

[burger]

I saw somewhere that we were +30 with DaSilva on the floor yesterday.  Since we won by 18, you can imagine what the +/- for the other bigs was.

BTW, does anyone know where you can find +/- for individual players in games?  I know where to get box plus minus (which is a calculated statistic), but I'd love to see actual +/- for our guys.

[SamuelMcF]

I saw somewhere that we were +30 with DaSilva on the floor yesterday.  Since we won by 18, you can imagine what the +/- for the other bigs was.

BTW, does anyone know where you can find +/- for individual players in games?  I know where to get box plus minus (which is a calculated statistic), but I'd love to see actual +/- for our guys.

Kisunas -8 (never came back after his 4 awful minutes in 1H), Keefe 0. 

I don't know where to find actual +/- on a per-game basis after the fact, but if you go to https://gostanford.com/sports/mens-basketball/schedule and click "Live Stats" during the game, it will take you to a page that keeps track of it.

---

Surprising stat:

This was Stanford's SECOND EVER road sweep in the Pac-12 era. Wow.

[SamuelMcF]

I saw somewhere that we were +30 with DaSilva on the floor yesterday.  Since we won by 18, you can imagine what the +/- for the other bigs was.

BTW, does anyone know where you can find +/- for individual players in games?  I know where to get box plus minus (which is a calculated statistic), but I'd love to see actual +/- for our guys.

Kisunas -8 (never came back after his 4 awful minutes in 1H), Keefe 0. 

I don't know where to find actual +/- on a per-game basis after the fact, but if you go to https://gostanford.com/sports/mens-basketball/schedule and click "Live Stats" during the game, it will take you to a page that keeps track of it.

---

Surprising stat:

This was Stanford's SECOND EVER road sweep in the Pac-12 era. Wow.

[burger]

Thanks, @SamuelMcF, but I found the real thing at hoop-explorer.com.  This is my new favorite site on the internet :)

And it is exactly what I expected (and feared):


With the starting 5 on the court (Jones, Terry, Da Silva, Davis, Wills) we are +23.8 points per 100 possessions, which is outstanding.  All other lineups, including up to 4 starters, are +9.6 per 100 possessions.  So, subbing out a single starter makes us far worse. 

Individual net ratings per 100 possessions by player:

Davis: +15.3 on, +2.2 off, difference +13.1
Da Silva: +17.7 on, +2.9 off, difference +14.8
Wills: +17.1 on, +3.1 off, difference +14.0
Terry: +13.9 on, +8.6 off, difference +5.3 (?!)
Jones: +15.6 on, +5.1 off, difference +10.5
White: +6.3 on, +16.2 off, difference -9.9 (did not expect that)
Kisunas: +9.2 on, +14.1 off, difference -4.9
Delaire: +7.5 on, +16.3 off, difference -8.8
Keefe: +11.4 on, +13.1 off, difference -2.7

These are not adjusted for teammate effects, so take with extra salt.  If I get more time later, I will break this down by offense and defense.  If you hit the lineup analyzer button, you can see the performance of all the commonly used 5 person groupings.

[burger]

Thanks, @SamuelMcF, but I found the real thing at hoop-explorer.com.  This is my new favorite site on the internet :)

And it is exactly what I expected (and feared):


With the starting 5 on the court (Jones, Terry, Da Silva, Davis, Wills) we are +23.8 points per 100 possessions, which is outstanding.  All other lineups, including up to 4 starters, are +9.6 per 100 possessions.  So, subbing out a single starter makes us far worse. 

Individual net ratings per 100 possessions by player:

Davis: +15.3 on, +2.2 off, difference +13.1
Da Silva: +17.7 on, +2.9 off, difference +14.8
Wills: +17.1 on, +3.1 off, difference +14.0
Terry: +13.9 on, +8.6 off, difference +5.3 (?!)
Jones: +15.6 on, +5.1 off, difference +10.5
White: +6.3 on, +16.2 off, difference -9.9 (did not expect that)
Kisunas: +9.2 on, +14.1 off, difference -4.9
Delaire: +7.5 on, +16.3 off, difference -8.8
Keefe: +11.4 on, +13.1 off, difference -2.7

These are not adjusted for teammate effects, so take with extra salt.  If I get more time later, I will break this down by offense and defense.  If you hit the lineup analyzer button, you can see the performance of all the commonly used 5 person groupings.

[teejers1]

Thanks, @SamuelMcF, but I found the real thing at hoop-explorer.com.  This is my new favorite site on the internet :)

And it is exactly what I expected (and feared):


With the starting 5 on the court (Jones, Terry, Da Silva, Davis, Wills) we are +23.8 points per 100 possessions, which is outstanding.  All other lineups, including up to 4 starters, are +9.6 per 100 possessions.  So, subbing out a single starter makes us far worse. 

Individual net ratings per 100 possessions by player:

Davis: +15.3 on, +2.2 off, difference +13.1
Da Silva: +17.7 on, +2.9 off, difference +14.8
Wills: +17.1 on, +3.1 off, difference +14.0
Terry: +13.9 on, +8.6 off, difference +5.3 (?!)
Jones: +15.6 on, +5.1 off, difference +10.5
White: +6.3 on, +16.2 off, difference -9.9 (did not expect that)
Kisunas: +9.2 on, +14.1 off, difference -4.9
Delaire: +7.5 on, +16.3 off, difference -8.8
Keefe: +11.4 on, +13.1 off, difference -2.7

These are not adjusted for teammate effects, so take with extra salt.  If I get more time later, I will break this down by offense and defense.  If you hit the lineup analyzer button, you can see the performance of all the commonly used 5 person groupings.

These numbers are useful, but not terribly enlightening.  So many factors go into plus/minus (most notably, who else is on the floor).  If multiple subs are in for starters, then that crew, by definition, likely will do less well.  OTOH, if you could control for just one sub and rotate with each sub a 4-person group of starters, then you might get more useful data.  

I don't like to second-guess subbing by coaches because so many factors go into it (foul trouble, match-ups, fatigue of particular player on particular day, how well they practiced, etc.).  But I do have one criticism of Haase:  he should eschew having both Da Silva and Terry on the bench at the same time.  When both are on the bench, Stanford is lacking scorers, and the Cardinal seems to hit a lull.

Speaking of lulls, there were two big ones last night - scoring droughts (no baskets) of 5 minutes or so - one in each half.  The biggest buckets, imo, were the threes that broke those droughts:  one by White (1H); and one by Jones (?, 2H).  Stanford regained separation shortly thereafter.

[teejers1]

Thanks, @SamuelMcF, but I found the real thing at hoop-explorer.com.  This is my new favorite site on the internet :)

And it is exactly what I expected (and feared):


With the starting 5 on the court (Jones, Terry, Da Silva, Davis, Wills) we are +23.8 points per 100 possessions, which is outstanding.  All other lineups, including up to 4 starters, are +9.6 per 100 possessions.  So, subbing out a single starter makes us far worse. 

Individual net ratings per 100 possessions by player:

Davis: +15.3 on, +2.2 off, difference +13.1
Da Silva: +17.7 on, +2.9 off, difference +14.8
Wills: +17.1 on, +3.1 off, difference +14.0
Terry: +13.9 on, +8.6 off, difference +5.3 (?!)
Jones: +15.6 on, +5.1 off, difference +10.5
White: +6.3 on, +16.2 off, difference -9.9 (did not expect that)
Kisunas: +9.2 on, +14.1 off, difference -4.9
Delaire: +7.5 on, +16.3 off, difference -8.8
Keefe: +11.4 on, +13.1 off, difference -2.7

These are not adjusted for teammate effects, so take with extra salt.  If I get more time later, I will break this down by offense and defense.  If you hit the lineup analyzer button, you can see the performance of all the commonly used 5 person groupings.

These numbers are useful, but not terribly enlightening.  So many factors go into plus/minus (most notably, who else is on the floor).  If multiple subs are in for starters, then that crew, by definition, likely will do less well.  OTOH, if you could control for just one sub and rotate with each sub a 4-person group of starters, then you might get more useful data.  

I don't like to second-guess subbing by coaches because so many factors go into it (foul trouble, match-ups, fatigue of particular player on particular day, how well they practiced, etc.).  But I do have one criticism of Haase:  he should eschew having both Da Silva and Terry on the bench at the same time.  When both are on the bench, Stanford is lacking scorers, and the Cardinal seems to hit a lull.

Speaking of lulls, there were two big ones last night - scoring droughts (no baskets) of 5 minutes or so - one in each half.  The biggest buckets, imo, were the threes that broke those droughts:  one by White (1H); and one by Jones (?, 2H).  Stanford regained separation shortly thereafter.

[burger]

These numbers are useful, but not terribly enlightening.  So many factors go into plus/minus (most notably, who else is on the floor).  If multiple subs are in for starters, then that crew, by definition, likely will do less well.  OTOH, if you could control for just one sub and rotate with each sub a 4-person group of starters, then you might get more useful data.  



I don't like to second-guess subbing by coaches because so many factors go into it (foul trouble, match-ups, fatigue of particular player on particular day, how well they practiced, etc.).  But I do have one criticism of Haase:  he should eschew having both Da Silva and Terry on the bench at the same time.  When both are on the bench, Stanford is lacking scorers, and the Cardinal seems to hit a lull.

I think you missed this point above: "With the starting 5 on the court (Jones, Terry, Da Silva, Davis, Wills) we are +23.8 points per 100 possessions, which is outstanding.  All other lineups, including up to 4 starters, are +9.6 per 100 possessions.  So, subbing out a single starter makes us far worse."  There may be some 4-person combos that are better than other, but on average the team takes a big step down with any bench guy in.  We need more depth--hopefully that's coming next year.

I'm not second guessing Haase's decisions at all.  In fact, I think he's done as well as anyone could expect with this roster.  We just don't have great options off the bench right now.

[burger]

These numbers are useful, but not terribly enlightening.  So many factors go into plus/minus (most notably, who else is on the floor).  If multiple subs are in for starters, then that crew, by definition, likely will do less well.  OTOH, if you could control for just one sub and rotate with each sub a 4-person group of starters, then you might get more useful data.  



I don't like to second-guess subbing by coaches because so many factors go into it (foul trouble, match-ups, fatigue of particular player on particular day, how well they practiced, etc.).  But I do have one criticism of Haase:  he should eschew having both Da Silva and Terry on the bench at the same time.  When both are on the bench, Stanford is lacking scorers, and the Cardinal seems to hit a lull.

I think you missed this point above: "With the starting 5 on the court (Jones, Terry, Da Silva, Davis, Wills) we are +23.8 points per 100 possessions, which is outstanding.  All other lineups, including up to 4 starters, are +9.6 per 100 possessions.  So, subbing out a single starter makes us far worse."  There may be some 4-person combos that are better than other, but on average the team takes a big step down with any bench guy in.  We need more depth--hopefully that's coming next year.

I'm not second guessing Haase's decisions at all.  In fact, I think he's done as well as anyone could expect with this roster.  We just don't have great options off the bench right now.

[teejers1]

These numbers are useful, but not terribly enlightening.  So many factors go into plus/minus (most notably, who else is on the floor).  If multiple subs are in for starters, then that crew, by definition, likely will do less well.  OTOH, if you could control for just one sub and rotate with each sub a 4-person group of starters, then you might get more useful data.  



I don't like to second-guess subbing by coaches because so many factors go into it (foul trouble, match-ups, fatigue of particular player on particular day, how well they practiced, etc.).  But I do have one criticism of Haase:  he should eschew having both Da Silva and Terry on the bench at the same time.  When both are on the bench, Stanford is lacking scorers, and the Cardinal seems to hit a lull.

I think you missed this point above: "With the starting 5 on the court (Jones, Terry, Da Silva, Davis, Wills) we are +23.8 points per 100 possessions, which is outstanding.  All other lineups, including up to 4 starters, are +9.6 per 100 possessions.  So, subbing out a single starter makes us far worse."  There may be some 4-person combos that are better than other, but on average the team takes a big step down with any bench guy in.  We need more depth--hopefully that's coming next year.

Is +9.6 bad?  (I thought that was pretty good).

[teejers1]

These numbers are useful, but not terribly enlightening.  So many factors go into plus/minus (most notably, who else is on the floor).  If multiple subs are in for starters, then that crew, by definition, likely will do less well.  OTOH, if you could control for just one sub and rotate with each sub a 4-person group of starters, then you might get more useful data.  



I don't like to second-guess subbing by coaches because so many factors go into it (foul trouble, match-ups, fatigue of particular player on particular day, how well they practiced, etc.).  But I do have one criticism of Haase:  he should eschew having both Da Silva and Terry on the bench at the same time.  When both are on the bench, Stanford is lacking scorers, and the Cardinal seems to hit a lull.

I think you missed this point above: "With the starting 5 on the court (Jones, Terry, Da Silva, Davis, Wills) we are +23.8 points per 100 possessions, which is outstanding.  All other lineups, including up to 4 starters, are +9.6 per 100 possessions.  So, subbing out a single starter makes us far worse."  There may be some 4-person combos that are better than other, but on average the team takes a big step down with any bench guy in.  We need more depth--hopefully that's coming next year.

Is +9.6 bad?  (I thought that was pretty good).

[burger]

Is +9.6 bad?  (I thought that was pretty good).

I'll put it this way: if we played the way our starters (as a unit) do for 40 minutes a game, we'd be 2nd in Division I on Ken Pomeroy's rankings.  If we averaged the +9.6 overall, we'd be around 50th in Division I, with NIT as our likely ceiling.

So, +9.6 isn't bad, but it's not Tourney quality.

[burger]

Is +9.6 bad?  (I thought that was pretty good).

I'll put it this way: if we played the way our starters (as a unit) do for 40 minutes a game, we'd be 2nd in Division I on Ken Pomeroy's rankings.  If we averaged the +9.6 overall, we'd be around 50th in Division I, with NIT as our likely ceiling.

So, +9.6 isn't bad, but it's not Tourney quality.