[BillBradley]

Treetop, I do think Cam has been focused to the low block. I won't take the time to go and count, but over and over again the team is trying to get her the ball down low. Yes, she does start at the high post sometimes and the ball is passed to her there, but that really is more for when she turns to do dribble hand off action or to pass down low to another big. The majority of her opportunities are coming from the low block. I was so glad she did take a handful of midrange high post shots vs UCLA and made them - we haven't seen that much over the past month. I think it's yet another weapon in her arsenal. But the uber point I'm making is that earlier in the season Cam was often found on the PERIMETER (not the high post), facing the basket, with the ball in her hands and had freedom to shoot, attack, kick, etc. I can't remember the last time Cam was passed the ball on the wing, and that's because we've changed and she doesn't go there anymore. As examples of what I'm talking about, look at the plays on this clip, at 0:00, 0:19, 1:29. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_pF7p8To7s. Where did that Cam go? Where did that team go? I really liked that team...

Cam is a multi-faceted talent who is being reduced to more of a role like a "thicker" player would have (play back to the basket on the low block, roam the high post and set a lot of screens). Again, maybe Tara is right and when we get out of conference teams will really struggle against our bigs down low. I'll tell you this though - when we dominated Tennessee, Creighton, Gonzaga, and were drilling South Carolina for a large chunk of that game, Cam was all over the place. Attacking, shooting 3's, etc. That team was way more offensively effective than this team, and Haley didn't even shoot well. That team could win the Natty. This one...I don't think any of us like what we're seeing. 

Last point, the lineup I like has made appearances throughout the season and has performed well oftentimes. I'm not talking about a lineup "close to" that lineup, I'm talking about that actual lineup. And that lineup, I'm pretty sure, was never on the court together vs. UCLA in the 4th quarter. Regardless, it's more than just the bodies. They have to be configured differently in order to gain the advantages. I really think playing 4 out and letting Cam OR Haley (putting Cam on perimeter) go to work and then have great options to pass out of double teams would pay big dividends. This would also allow Prechtel, one of our biggest weapons, to see some court time.

[BillBradley]

Treetop, I do think Cam has been focused to the low block. I won't take the time to go and count, but over and over again the team is trying to get her the ball down low. Yes, she does start at the high post sometimes and the ball is passed to her there, but that really is more for when she turns to do dribble hand off action or to pass down low to another big. The majority of her opportunities are coming from the low block. I was so glad she did take a handful of midrange high post shots vs UCLA and made them - we haven't seen that much over the past month. I think it's yet another weapon in her arsenal. But the uber point I'm making is that earlier in the season Cam was often found on the PERIMETER (not the high post), facing the basket, with the ball in her hands and had freedom to shoot, attack, kick, etc. I can't remember the last time Cam was passed the ball on the wing, and that's because we've changed and she doesn't go there anymore. As examples of what I'm talking about, look at the plays on this clip, at 0:00, 0:19, 1:29. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_pF7p8To7s. Where did that Cam go? Where did that team go? I really liked that team...

Cam is a multi-faceted talent who is being reduced to more of a role like a "thicker" player would have (play back to the basket on the low block, roam the high post and set a lot of screens). Again, maybe Tara is right and when we get out of conference teams will really struggle against our bigs down low. I'll tell you this though - when we dominated Tennessee, Creighton, Gonzaga, and were drilling South Carolina for a large chunk of that game, Cam was all over the place. Attacking, shooting 3's, etc. That team was way more offensively effective than this team, and Haley didn't even shoot well. That team could win the Natty. This one...I don't think any of us like what we're seeing. 

Last point, the lineup I like has made appearances throughout the season and has performed well oftentimes. I'm not talking about a lineup "close to" that lineup, I'm talking about that actual lineup. And that lineup, I'm pretty sure, was never on the court together vs. UCLA in the 4th quarter. Regardless, it's more than just the bodies. They have to be configured differently in order to gain the advantages. I really think playing 4 out and letting Cam OR Haley (putting Cam on perimeter) go to work and then have great options to pass out of double teams would pay big dividends. This would also allow Prechtel, one of our biggest weapons, to see some court time.

[pefloresjr]

I've been pretty busy lately so I am often reading posts a little late.  One of the things that has struck me about many of the "negative" posts recently is that they are very similar to football posts when the offense is struggling and everyone's perceived savior is the backup quarterback.  It's mostly based on the hope/wish that we were playing better and the assumption that the person not playing as much would save us.  One example here is the call for Ashton to play a lot more.  That is simply not supported by her play on the court.  I think she is great and can hit the three but her post offense and defense has generally not been up to the level of the other post options.  That is a big cost of playing her.  Simply putting her on the perimeter would not, and has not, had the amazing improving effect on our offense that some hope for because opposing defenses have not needed to change their base defense to cover her shooting.  

It's fine to complain about playing time for Jones but watching every game, she is more often missing shots in the first half of games than in the second.  She generally seems to shoot better in the second half.  Jones' shooting percentage this year is a problem, and it may be related to her playing too much time, but it could also be any number of other factors.  Jones is a very calming and savvy basketball presence for the team and Tara has great confidence having her lead our team in most important games.  I don't think Tara is wrong about this.  Even though I sometimes get frustrated with Jones' mistakes, she makes a lot more positive plays than mistakes.  

Like others, I get really frustrated and upset with the team when they play a terrible fourth quarter like last night.  (They played a good game through 3 quarters and I kind of felt like we would win even when UCLA was coming back.  Maybe the team fell into the same trap.)  When I'm mad like that, I just stay away from the board so that I don't say foolish things and sound like an idiot.  In that mood, it's easy to make comments that are overly critical of our team/coaches and to take offense at others' posts.  I encourage everyone to take a step back.  The culture here has long been one of being highly respectful and supportive of our coaches, student athletes, and other posters.  That doesn't meant we can't be critical but it does mean we should read the room before spouting off in frustration and anger.  (I'm sometimes fail at this.)

This year's team is a challenge.  I absolutely love the way they support each other and the way many players have improved over the year.  I am disappointed that we haven't seen the team improve to the unstoppable force that I dream of them being.  I've been saying to my wife for most of the conference that 3-5 losses were likely.  I also feel like this team could actually find a way to win it all or even lose in the second round, they are that tough to predict.  Either way, I really love the great things this team has done and hope we at least make it to the Final Four.  

Cheers,
Pete F.

[pefloresjr]

I've been pretty busy lately so I am often reading posts a little late.  One of the things that has struck me about many of the "negative" posts recently is that they are very similar to football posts when the offense is struggling and everyone's perceived savior is the backup quarterback.  It's mostly based on the hope/wish that we were playing better and the assumption that the person not playing as much would save us.  One example here is the call for Ashton to play a lot more.  That is simply not supported by her play on the court.  I think she is great and can hit the three but her post offense and defense has generally not been up to the level of the other post options.  That is a big cost of playing her.  Simply putting her on the perimeter would not, and has not, had the amazing improving effect on our offense that some hope for because opposing defenses have not needed to change their base defense to cover her shooting.  

It's fine to complain about playing time for Jones but watching every game, she is more often missing shots in the first half of games than in the second.  She generally seems to shoot better in the second half.  Jones' shooting percentage this year is a problem, and it may be related to her playing too much time, but it could also be any number of other factors.  Jones is a very calming and savvy basketball presence for the team and Tara has great confidence having her lead our team in most important games.  I don't think Tara is wrong about this.  Even though I sometimes get frustrated with Jones' mistakes, she makes a lot more positive plays than mistakes.  

Like others, I get really frustrated and upset with the team when they play a terrible fourth quarter like last night.  (They played a good game through 3 quarters and I kind of felt like we would win even when UCLA was coming back.  Maybe the team fell into the same trap.)  When I'm mad like that, I just stay away from the board so that I don't say foolish things and sound like an idiot.  In that mood, it's easy to make comments that are overly critical of our team/coaches and to take offense at others' posts.  I encourage everyone to take a step back.  The culture here has long been one of being highly respectful and supportive of our coaches, student athletes, and other posters.  That doesn't meant we can't be critical but it does mean we should read the room before spouting off in frustration and anger.  (I'm sometimes fail at this.)

This year's team is a challenge.  I absolutely love the way they support each other and the way many players have improved over the year.  I am disappointed that we haven't seen the team improve to the unstoppable force that I dream of them being.  I've been saying to my wife for most of the conference that 3-5 losses were likely.  I also feel like this team could actually find a way to win it all or even lose in the second round, they are that tough to predict.  Either way, I really love the great things this team has done and hope we at least make it to the Final Four.  

Cheers,
Pete F.

[qwerty49]

Indeed, one hosted and run by others, with its own norms and practices. If a number of longtime posters around here are asking that you cool the tone a bit, nothing wrong with fitting in.

And from our usernames, I'm younger than you (and most folks around here), but squarely in the 81 etc. camp that incisive analysis need not include divisive language.

And yet it was a “longtime poster” who started the name-calling and then implied that to apologize would be “PC”.  Gee, it’s a good thing that wasn’t “divisive language.”

Sorry mods, it looks like some “good ol boy” favoritism is showing.

Look, everyone is frustrated because this team hasn’t played up to its very high potential yet. There are some excellent observations and points on this thread. There are also some axes to grind. I think we’re smart enough to take the good with the bad.

[qwerty49]

Indeed, one hosted and run by others, with its own norms and practices. If a number of longtime posters around here are asking that you cool the tone a bit, nothing wrong with fitting in.

And from our usernames, I'm younger than you (and most folks around here), but squarely in the 81 etc. camp that incisive analysis need not include divisive language.

And yet it was a “longtime poster” who started the name-calling and then implied that to apologize would be “PC”.  Gee, it’s a good thing that wasn’t “divisive language.”

Sorry mods, it looks like some “good ol boy” favoritism is showing.

Look, everyone is frustrated because this team hasn’t played up to its very high potential yet. There are some excellent observations and points on this thread. There are also some axes to grind. I think we’re smart enough to take the good with the bad.

[2006alum]

Indeed, one hosted and run by others, with its own norms and practices. If a number of longtime posters around here are asking that you cool the tone a bit, nothing wrong with fitting in.

And from our usernames, I'm younger than you (and most folks around here), but squarely in the 81 etc. camp that incisive analysis need not include divisive language.

And yet it was a “longtime poster” who started the name-calling and then implied that to apologize would be “PC”.  Gee, it’s a good thing that wasn’t “divisive language.”

Sorry mods, it looks like some “good ol boy” favoritism is showing.

Look, everyone is frustrated because this team hasn’t played up to its very high potential yet. There are some excellent observations and points on this thread. There are also some axes to grind. I think we’re smart enough to take the good with the bad.

Just as an FYI, we don't always make public whether we reach out to posters for violating board rules, nor what happens when we do. So please don't assume we play favorites just because we don't publicly admonish people. Our only goal here is to keep things civil and, as much as possible, amiable, and that is equally true for the newest member as the most veteran. Thanks.

[2006alum]

Indeed, one hosted and run by others, with its own norms and practices. If a number of longtime posters around here are asking that you cool the tone a bit, nothing wrong with fitting in.

And from our usernames, I'm younger than you (and most folks around here), but squarely in the 81 etc. camp that incisive analysis need not include divisive language.

And yet it was a “longtime poster” who started the name-calling and then implied that to apologize would be “PC”.  Gee, it’s a good thing that wasn’t “divisive language.”

Sorry mods, it looks like some “good ol boy” favoritism is showing.

Look, everyone is frustrated because this team hasn’t played up to its very high potential yet. There are some excellent observations and points on this thread. There are also some axes to grind. I think we’re smart enough to take the good with the bad.

Just as an FYI, we don't always make public whether we reach out to posters for violating board rules, nor what happens when we do. So please don't assume we play favorites just because we don't publicly admonish people. Our only goal here is to keep things civil and, as much as possible, amiable, and that is equally true for the newest member as the most veteran. Thanks.

[jonnyss]

stanford scoring by quarter: 17, 18, 15, 15

ucla scoring by quarter 8, 14, 18, 29.

looks to me like our offense was fairly consistent. like many others, i tend to wonder what we could have done better on offense, but ucla's comeback was a product of our defense against their offense.

gianna kneepkens played out of her mind for utah against us.

kiki rice played out of her mind for ucla against us.

i didn't see much that we were doing wrong in defending rice. maybe playing with no point guard for a while was a mistake. but rice was on fire whoever we threw at her. maybe we have a target on our backs, and many teams/players simply have their best game against us. just as there was not much that louisville did wrong in defending ashten in the elite 8: 16 points in the second half on 6/6 shooting including three 3's.

[jonnyss]

stanford scoring by quarter: 17, 18, 15, 15

ucla scoring by quarter 8, 14, 18, 29.

looks to me like our offense was fairly consistent. like many others, i tend to wonder what we could have done better on offense, but ucla's comeback was a product of our defense against their offense.

gianna kneepkens played out of her mind for utah against us.

kiki rice played out of her mind for ucla against us.

i didn't see much that we were doing wrong in defending rice. maybe playing with no point guard for a while was a mistake. but rice was on fire whoever we threw at her. maybe we have a target on our backs, and many teams/players simply have their best game against us. just as there was not much that louisville did wrong in defending ashten in the elite 8: 16 points in the second half on 6/6 shooting including three 3's.

[chimera]

Treetop, I do think Cam has been focused to the low block. I won't take the time to go and count, but over and over again the team is trying to get her the ball down low. Yes, she does start at the high post sometimes and the ball is passed to her there, but that really is more for when she turns to do dribble hand off action or to pass down low to another big. The majority of her opportunities are coming from the low block. I was so glad she did take a handful of midrange high post shots vs UCLA and made them - we haven't seen that much over the past month. I think it's yet another weapon in her arsenal. But the uber point I'm making is that earlier in the season Cam was often found on the PERIMETER (not the high post), facing the basket, with the ball in her hands and had freedom to shoot, attack, kick, etc. I can't remember the last time Cam was passed the ball on the wing, and that's because we've changed and she doesn't go there anymore. As examples of what I'm talking about, look at the plays on this clip, at 0:00, 0:19, 1:29. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_pF7p8To7s. Where did that Cam go? Where did that team go? I really liked that team...

Cam is a multi-faceted talent who is being reduced to more of a role like a "thicker" player would have (play back to the basket on the low block, roam the high post and set a lot of screens). Again, maybe Tara is right and when we get out of conference teams will really struggle against our bigs down low. I'll tell you this though - when we dominated Tennessee, Creighton, Gonzaga, and were drilling South Carolina for a large chunk of that game, Cam was all over the place. Attacking, shooting 3's, etc. That team was way more offensively effective than this team, and Haley didn't even shoot well. That team could win the Natty. This one...I don't think any of us like what we're seeing. 

Last point, the lineup I like has made appearances throughout the season and has performed well oftentimes. I'm not talking about a lineup "close to" that lineup, I'm talking about that actual lineup. And that lineup, I'm pretty sure, was never on the court together vs. UCLA in the 4th quarter. Regardless, it's more than just the bodies. They have to be configured differently in order to gain the advantages. I really think playing 4 out and letting Cam OR Haley (putting Cam on perimeter) go to work and then have great options to pass out of double teams would pay big dividends. This would also allow Prechtel, one of our biggest weapons, to see some court time.

Those were highlights so they will show the offense at its best, but I do agree I miss that Stanford offense.  I will be honest here and say my biggest disappointment this season and I think a key reason the offense has been more of a struggle than we expected is that our two star players have not been close to what they have done shooting threes.  

Brink wasn't a great three point shooter before this season but she was competent and made some key ones.  She has not taken threes as much or made as many, and has been used way more on the low block than earlier this season.  If she was back to hitting a three or two now and again not only do we get more threes made from non-Jump players but she pulls defenders out to open things up for Betts or Iriafen, or Jones to cut to the basket.  Brink is not a one dimensional player, but that's how she has mostly been used after January.

The bigger problem is Jones has no three ball this season at all, no longer even looks to take them.  Without a three, Jones is still a star and a tough guard, but she is much more guardable when teams can play off her and cut off her driving lanes, make her passing harder as they lurk in passing lanes.  If Jones had a decent three she would be unguardable, the whole offense would look different, and her pro prospects would be improved.  

My biggest wish for the season was for someone to take over the point and be good enough at it so that Jones did not have to play there too much, and we got that.  Even if you don't think Lepolo is an ideal answer at the point, she is certainly a competent point guard who can cope with pressing teams.  My second biggest wish, and it was a very close second, maybe even first, was that Jones got her three point shooting to 30% or better and could average hitting two or three a game maybe.  I felt that would be a key given who else we had coming back and that it would open up the offense for her and by extension the whole team, because she is such a big part of the offense.

That a three would be a massive help for Jones in the pros is obvious.  Doubtful she is a 4 at the next level.  She will be a 3, and they usually can shoot threes.  I was hoping we would see her taking threes a lot in the early easier games and build on that, whether they went in or not, just work it.  I don't know why she hasn't been able to shoot threes even as well as past seasons.  I am not blaming her.  Gotta assume she has tried her best and is trying her best.  But that lack to me is one key reason the offense has been a struggle.  Everything looks a lot different if opposing defenses have to be out on her.  She is just one player but she is a key player, the straw that stirs the drink, if you will, for Stanford.  

That more open offense got stopped in its tracks when teams just said nah, we can just sit in and wait for you to miss outside shots, good luck driving or passing into double and triple teamed posts.  I think the offense went the wrong way.  Pounding the ball in to Brink doesn't make life easier for Jones.  Where are her driving lanes?  Where are anyone's driving lanes?  We bemoan the lack of driving perimeter players, but with teams packed in, where can they go?  Right now the offense seems to be try to get Jump a shot or hit Brink down low, and it is just too tough to do either of those things well against some defenses.  We need to open things up for other players.  Don't ask me how.  With all the changes in line-ups and schemes this season I am not really clear on how capable let's say Nivar would be if we tried to find her driving lanes more, or how Demetre would do if we got her those sweet mid-range shots she has shown she can hit well.  Emma-Nnopu and Lepolo have shown they can hit threes.  Maybe run plays for them every now and again, just to mix things up, make the defense think and work harder to anticipate what the offense will do?  I think I am running on so I will stop here.  Talking out my butt again but I am serious about this.

[chimera]

Treetop, I do think Cam has been focused to the low block. I won't take the time to go and count, but over and over again the team is trying to get her the ball down low. Yes, she does start at the high post sometimes and the ball is passed to her there, but that really is more for when she turns to do dribble hand off action or to pass down low to another big. The majority of her opportunities are coming from the low block. I was so glad she did take a handful of midrange high post shots vs UCLA and made them - we haven't seen that much over the past month. I think it's yet another weapon in her arsenal. But the uber point I'm making is that earlier in the season Cam was often found on the PERIMETER (not the high post), facing the basket, with the ball in her hands and had freedom to shoot, attack, kick, etc. I can't remember the last time Cam was passed the ball on the wing, and that's because we've changed and she doesn't go there anymore. As examples of what I'm talking about, look at the plays on this clip, at 0:00, 0:19, 1:29. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_pF7p8To7s. Where did that Cam go? Where did that team go? I really liked that team...

Cam is a multi-faceted talent who is being reduced to more of a role like a "thicker" player would have (play back to the basket on the low block, roam the high post and set a lot of screens). Again, maybe Tara is right and when we get out of conference teams will really struggle against our bigs down low. I'll tell you this though - when we dominated Tennessee, Creighton, Gonzaga, and were drilling South Carolina for a large chunk of that game, Cam was all over the place. Attacking, shooting 3's, etc. That team was way more offensively effective than this team, and Haley didn't even shoot well. That team could win the Natty. This one...I don't think any of us like what we're seeing. 

Last point, the lineup I like has made appearances throughout the season and has performed well oftentimes. I'm not talking about a lineup "close to" that lineup, I'm talking about that actual lineup. And that lineup, I'm pretty sure, was never on the court together vs. UCLA in the 4th quarter. Regardless, it's more than just the bodies. They have to be configured differently in order to gain the advantages. I really think playing 4 out and letting Cam OR Haley (putting Cam on perimeter) go to work and then have great options to pass out of double teams would pay big dividends. This would also allow Prechtel, one of our biggest weapons, to see some court time.

Those were highlights so they will show the offense at its best, but I do agree I miss that Stanford offense.  I will be honest here and say my biggest disappointment this season and I think a key reason the offense has been more of a struggle than we expected is that our two star players have not been close to what they have done shooting threes.  

Brink wasn't a great three point shooter before this season but she was competent and made some key ones.  She has not taken threes as much or made as many, and has been used way more on the low block than earlier this season.  If she was back to hitting a three or two now and again not only do we get more threes made from non-Jump players but she pulls defenders out to open things up for Betts or Iriafen, or Jones to cut to the basket.  Brink is not a one dimensional player, but that's how she has mostly been used after January.

The bigger problem is Jones has no three ball this season at all, no longer even looks to take them.  Without a three, Jones is still a star and a tough guard, but she is much more guardable when teams can play off her and cut off her driving lanes, make her passing harder as they lurk in passing lanes.  If Jones had a decent three she would be unguardable, the whole offense would look different, and her pro prospects would be improved.  

My biggest wish for the season was for someone to take over the point and be good enough at it so that Jones did not have to play there too much, and we got that.  Even if you don't think Lepolo is an ideal answer at the point, she is certainly a competent point guard who can cope with pressing teams.  My second biggest wish, and it was a very close second, maybe even first, was that Jones got her three point shooting to 30% or better and could average hitting two or three a game maybe.  I felt that would be a key given who else we had coming back and that it would open up the offense for her and by extension the whole team, because she is such a big part of the offense.

That a three would be a massive help for Jones in the pros is obvious.  Doubtful she is a 4 at the next level.  She will be a 3, and they usually can shoot threes.  I was hoping we would see her taking threes a lot in the early easier games and build on that, whether they went in or not, just work it.  I don't know why she hasn't been able to shoot threes even as well as past seasons.  I am not blaming her.  Gotta assume she has tried her best and is trying her best.  But that lack to me is one key reason the offense has been a struggle.  Everything looks a lot different if opposing defenses have to be out on her.  She is just one player but she is a key player, the straw that stirs the drink, if you will, for Stanford.  

That more open offense got stopped in its tracks when teams just said nah, we can just sit in and wait for you to miss outside shots, good luck driving or passing into double and triple teamed posts.  I think the offense went the wrong way.  Pounding the ball in to Brink doesn't make life easier for Jones.  Where are her driving lanes?  Where are anyone's driving lanes?  We bemoan the lack of driving perimeter players, but with teams packed in, where can they go?  Right now the offense seems to be try to get Jump a shot or hit Brink down low, and it is just too tough to do either of those things well against some defenses.  We need to open things up for other players.  Don't ask me how.  With all the changes in line-ups and schemes this season I am not really clear on how capable let's say Nivar would be if we tried to find her driving lanes more, or how Demetre would do if we got her those sweet mid-range shots she has shown she can hit well.  Emma-Nnopu and Lepolo have shown they can hit threes.  Maybe run plays for them every now and again, just to mix things up, make the defense think and work harder to anticipate what the offense will do?  I think I am running on so I will stop here.  Talking out my butt again but I am serious about this.

[81alum]

stanford scoring by quarter: 17, 18, 15, 15

ucla scoring by quarter 8, 14, 18, 29.

looks to me like our offense was fairly consistent. like many others, i tend to wonder what we could have done better on offense, but ucla's comeback was a product of our defense against their offense.

gianna kneepkens played out of her mind for utah against us.

kiki rice played out of her mind for ucla against us.

i didn't see much that we were doing wrong in defending rice. maybe playing with no point guard for a while was a mistake. but rice was on fire whoever we threw at her. maybe we have a target on our backs, and many teams/players simply have their best game against us. just as there was not much that louisville did wrong in defending ashten in the elite 8: 16 points in the second half on 6/6 shooting including three 3's.

I agree with you that it was our defense in the 4th quarter that let us down.  That uncharacteristic quarter has to be accounted for, whether because of our own defensive lapses or simply other-worldly play by Rice and company.  It is interesting that UCLA scored more points in each quarter than it had in the previous.  They seemed to be figuring out our defense gradually and then they just "solved" it in the end.

Of course, our offense was consistently pretty pedestrian, too.  Cori Close is a underrated defensive coach--I've thought that ever since she held Chiney to 3 points and no baskets in a tournament game.  But only a very good defensive team can expect to win a lot of games by scoring 65 points.

My personal rule of thumb is our offense is doing well if it scores 20 points a quarter, and the defense is doing well if it holds the opposition to 15 points or less a quarter.  Entirely arbitrary, I know, but since conference play began our defense has often met my mark and our offense seldom has.  Massey has us as the nation's #3 defensive team and the #11 offensive team, although I imagine that second rating would be worse if accounting only for conference play.

Still, our offensive woes are no longer a surprise to us.  Giving up 29 points in a quarter was a big surprise.  It would be worth getting to the bottom of how it happened.

[81alum]

stanford scoring by quarter: 17, 18, 15, 15

ucla scoring by quarter 8, 14, 18, 29.

looks to me like our offense was fairly consistent. like many others, i tend to wonder what we could have done better on offense, but ucla's comeback was a product of our defense against their offense.

gianna kneepkens played out of her mind for utah against us.

kiki rice played out of her mind for ucla against us.

i didn't see much that we were doing wrong in defending rice. maybe playing with no point guard for a while was a mistake. but rice was on fire whoever we threw at her. maybe we have a target on our backs, and many teams/players simply have their best game against us. just as there was not much that louisville did wrong in defending ashten in the elite 8: 16 points in the second half on 6/6 shooting including three 3's.

I agree with you that it was our defense in the 4th quarter that let us down.  That uncharacteristic quarter has to be accounted for, whether because of our own defensive lapses or simply other-worldly play by Rice and company.  It is interesting that UCLA scored more points in each quarter than it had in the previous.  They seemed to be figuring out our defense gradually and then they just "solved" it in the end.

Of course, our offense was consistently pretty pedestrian, too.  Cori Close is a underrated defensive coach--I've thought that ever since she held Chiney to 3 points and no baskets in a tournament game.  But only a very good defensive team can expect to win a lot of games by scoring 65 points.

My personal rule of thumb is our offense is doing well if it scores 20 points a quarter, and the defense is doing well if it holds the opposition to 15 points or less a quarter.  Entirely arbitrary, I know, but since conference play began our defense has often met my mark and our offense seldom has.  Massey has us as the nation's #3 defensive team and the #11 offensive team, although I imagine that second rating would be worse if accounting only for conference play.

Still, our offensive woes are no longer a surprise to us.  Giving up 29 points in a quarter was a big surprise.  It would be worth getting to the bottom of how it happened.

[BillBradley]

Those were highlights so they will show the offense at its best, but I do agree I miss that Stanford offense.  I will be honest here and say my biggest disappointment this season and I think a key reason the offense has been more of a struggle than we expected is that our two star players have not been close to what they have done shooting threes.  

Brink wasn't a great three point shooter before this season but she was competent and made some key ones.  She has not taken threes as much or made as many, and has been used way more on the low block than earlier this season.  If she was back to hitting a three or two now and again not only do we get more threes made from non-Jump players but she pulls defenders out to open things up for Betts or Iriafen, or Jones to cut to the basket.  Brink is not a one dimensional player, but that's how she has mostly been used after January.

The bigger problem is Jones has no three ball this season at all, no longer even looks to take them.  Without a three, Jones is still a star and a tough guard, but she is much more guardable when teams can play off her and cut off her driving lanes, make her passing harder as they lurk in passing lanes.  If Jones had a decent three she would be unguardable, the whole offense would look different, and her pro prospects would be improved.  

My biggest wish for the season was for someone to take over the point and be good enough at it so that Jones did not have to play there too much, and we got that.  Even if you don't think Lepolo is an ideal answer at the point, she is certainly a competent point guard who can cope with pressing teams.  My second biggest wish, and it was a very close second, maybe even first, was that Jones got her three point shooting to 30% or better and could average hitting two or three a game maybe.  I felt that would be a key given who else we had coming back and that it would open up the offense for her and by extension the whole team, because she is such a big part of the offense.

That a three would be a massive help for Jones in the pros is obvious.  Doubtful she is a 4 at the next level.  She will be a 3, and they usually can shoot threes.  I was hoping we would see her taking threes a lot in the early easier games and build on that, whether they went in or not, just work it.  I don't know why she hasn't been able to shoot threes even as well as past seasons.  I am not blaming her.  Gotta assume she has tried her best and is trying her best.  But that lack to me is one key reason the offense has been a struggle.  Everything looks a lot different if opposing defenses have to be out on her.  She is just one player but she is a key player, the straw that stirs the drink, if you will, for Stanford.  

That more open offense got stopped in its tracks when teams just said nah, we can just sit in and wait for you to miss outside shots, good luck driving or passing into double and triple teamed posts.  I think the offense went the wrong way.  Pounding the ball in to Brink doesn't make life easier for Jones.  Where are her driving lanes?  Where are anyone's driving lanes?  We bemoan the lack of driving perimeter players, but with teams packed in, where can they go?  Right now the offense seems to be try to get Jump a shot or hit Brink down low, and it is just too tough to do either of those things well against some defenses.  We need to open things up for other players.  Don't ask me how.  With all the changes in line-ups and schemes this season I am not really clear on how capable let's say Nivar would be if we tried to find her driving lanes more, or how Demetre would do if we got her those sweet mid-range shots she has shown she can hit well.  Emma-Nnopu and Lepolo have shown they can hit threes.  Maybe run plays for them every now and again, just to mix things up, make the defense think and work harder to anticipate what the offense will do?  I think I am running on so I will stop here.  Talking out my butt again but I am serious about this.

Spot on. It's too bunched up. I don't think it's rocket science to create more space though. It starts with removing a player from the lane and spreading out more. But that creates a big personnel problem for Tara, because you can't play Belibi, Kiki, or Betts on the perimeter. So those three would end up sharing the minutes from when Cam needs a rest or gets in foul trouble. If you buy into the point that Haley needs rest, maybe there's another 10 minutes there to go to another big. But I think we've ended up in a place where Tara is trying to find a role for too many people, and it's leading to these big, slow, bunched up lineups that also have trouble defending the perimeter and stopping dribble penetration.

[BillBradley]

Those were highlights so they will show the offense at its best, but I do agree I miss that Stanford offense.  I will be honest here and say my biggest disappointment this season and I think a key reason the offense has been more of a struggle than we expected is that our two star players have not been close to what they have done shooting threes.  

Brink wasn't a great three point shooter before this season but she was competent and made some key ones.  She has not taken threes as much or made as many, and has been used way more on the low block than earlier this season.  If she was back to hitting a three or two now and again not only do we get more threes made from non-Jump players but she pulls defenders out to open things up for Betts or Iriafen, or Jones to cut to the basket.  Brink is not a one dimensional player, but that's how she has mostly been used after January.

The bigger problem is Jones has no three ball this season at all, no longer even looks to take them.  Without a three, Jones is still a star and a tough guard, but she is much more guardable when teams can play off her and cut off her driving lanes, make her passing harder as they lurk in passing lanes.  If Jones had a decent three she would be unguardable, the whole offense would look different, and her pro prospects would be improved.  

My biggest wish for the season was for someone to take over the point and be good enough at it so that Jones did not have to play there too much, and we got that.  Even if you don't think Lepolo is an ideal answer at the point, she is certainly a competent point guard who can cope with pressing teams.  My second biggest wish, and it was a very close second, maybe even first, was that Jones got her three point shooting to 30% or better and could average hitting two or three a game maybe.  I felt that would be a key given who else we had coming back and that it would open up the offense for her and by extension the whole team, because she is such a big part of the offense.

That a three would be a massive help for Jones in the pros is obvious.  Doubtful she is a 4 at the next level.  She will be a 3, and they usually can shoot threes.  I was hoping we would see her taking threes a lot in the early easier games and build on that, whether they went in or not, just work it.  I don't know why she hasn't been able to shoot threes even as well as past seasons.  I am not blaming her.  Gotta assume she has tried her best and is trying her best.  But that lack to me is one key reason the offense has been a struggle.  Everything looks a lot different if opposing defenses have to be out on her.  She is just one player but she is a key player, the straw that stirs the drink, if you will, for Stanford.  

That more open offense got stopped in its tracks when teams just said nah, we can just sit in and wait for you to miss outside shots, good luck driving or passing into double and triple teamed posts.  I think the offense went the wrong way.  Pounding the ball in to Brink doesn't make life easier for Jones.  Where are her driving lanes?  Where are anyone's driving lanes?  We bemoan the lack of driving perimeter players, but with teams packed in, where can they go?  Right now the offense seems to be try to get Jump a shot or hit Brink down low, and it is just too tough to do either of those things well against some defenses.  We need to open things up for other players.  Don't ask me how.  With all the changes in line-ups and schemes this season I am not really clear on how capable let's say Nivar would be if we tried to find her driving lanes more, or how Demetre would do if we got her those sweet mid-range shots she has shown she can hit well.  Emma-Nnopu and Lepolo have shown they can hit threes.  Maybe run plays for them every now and again, just to mix things up, make the defense think and work harder to anticipate what the offense will do?  I think I am running on so I will stop here.  Talking out my butt again but I am serious about this.

Spot on. It's too bunched up. I don't think it's rocket science to create more space though. It starts with removing a player from the lane and spreading out more. But that creates a big personnel problem for Tara, because you can't play Belibi, Kiki, or Betts on the perimeter. So those three would end up sharing the minutes from when Cam needs a rest or gets in foul trouble. If you buy into the point that Haley needs rest, maybe there's another 10 minutes there to go to another big. But I think we've ended up in a place where Tara is trying to find a role for too many people, and it's leading to these big, slow, bunched up lineups that also have trouble defending the perimeter and stopping dribble penetration.

[BostonCard]

It’s partly because we have more high skilled posts than we do high skilled wings, and I think as others have noted on this thread, we lack wings who can penetrate and finish.  I think Demetre or Bosgana might be able to develop the skills, but they don’t have them right now.  So, our resulting line-ups are an attempt to hide or minimize our weaknesses, which creates their own vulnerabilities.

Our three point field goal defense is 30.6% which is adequate.

BC

[BostonCard]

It’s partly because we have more high skilled posts than we do high skilled wings, and I think as others have noted on this thread, we lack wings who can penetrate and finish.  I think Demetre or Bosgana might be able to develop the skills, but they don’t have them right now.  So, our resulting line-ups are an attempt to hide or minimize our weaknesses, which creates their own vulnerabilities.

Our three point field goal defense is 30.6% which is adequate.

BC

[lsmant]

Although I have never posted on this forum I read every post available for WBB and WVB. A of immense proportions thank you to two folks in particular, 81alum and chimera. It has often been my privilege and good luck to hear their discussions at chalk talks. Their posts here are factual and thoughtful and carefully written. I learn from them before and after every game. I share their thoughts and concerns. Last night I could not watch the game to the bitter end. I thought I was done with basketball for the season. Their fair and balanced assessments, along with several others, have enabled me to remember why I have supported this team for decades. Thank you! I am now going to watch the game without sound or commercials or commentary.

You are much too kind.  Next time you see us yacking before a chalk talk, feel free to join in.

Thank you. I actually do on occasion.

---

Although I have never posted on this forum I read every post available for WBB and WVB. A of immense proportions thank you to two folks in particular, 81alum and chimera. It has often been my privilege and good luck to hear their discussions at chalk talks. Their posts here are factual and thoughtful and carefully written. I learn from them before and after every game. I share their thoughts and concerns. Last night I could not watch the game to the bitter end. I thought I was done with basketball for the season. Their fair and balanced assessments, along with several others, have enabled me to remember why I have supported this team for decades. Thank you! I am now going to watch the game without sound or commercials or commentary.

You are much too kind.  Next time you see us yacking before a chalk talk, feel free to join in.

I second that.  I treasure those face-to-face talks before the game and during halftime.

Thank you. I have joined in a few times.

[lsmant]

Although I have never posted on this forum I read every post available for WBB and WVB. A of immense proportions thank you to two folks in particular, 81alum and chimera. It has often been my privilege and good luck to hear their discussions at chalk talks. Their posts here are factual and thoughtful and carefully written. I learn from them before and after every game. I share their thoughts and concerns. Last night I could not watch the game to the bitter end. I thought I was done with basketball for the season. Their fair and balanced assessments, along with several others, have enabled me to remember why I have supported this team for decades. Thank you! I am now going to watch the game without sound or commercials or commentary.

You are much too kind.  Next time you see us yacking before a chalk talk, feel free to join in.

Thank you. I actually do on occasion.

---

Although I have never posted on this forum I read every post available for WBB and WVB. A of immense proportions thank you to two folks in particular, 81alum and chimera. It has often been my privilege and good luck to hear their discussions at chalk talks. Their posts here are factual and thoughtful and carefully written. I learn from them before and after every game. I share their thoughts and concerns. Last night I could not watch the game to the bitter end. I thought I was done with basketball for the season. Their fair and balanced assessments, along with several others, have enabled me to remember why I have supported this team for decades. Thank you! I am now going to watch the game without sound or commercials or commentary.

You are much too kind.  Next time you see us yacking before a chalk talk, feel free to join in.

I second that.  I treasure those face-to-face talks before the game and during halftime.

Thank you. I have joined in a few times.

[RuralFan]

It’s partly because we have more high skilled posts than we do high skilled wings, and I think as others have noted on this thread, we lack wings who can penetrate and finish.  I think Demetre or Bosgana might be able to develop the skills, but they don’t have them right now.  So, our resulting line-ups are an attempt to hide or minimize our weaknesses, which creates their own vulnerabilities.

Our three point field goal defense is 30.6% which is adequate.

BC

I think most agree that our mid-range game is our offensive Achilles heel.  I just can't believe that we don't have players that can fill this void.  If Demetre or Bosgana didn't have these shots at the start of the season, why don't they have them now?  Do we even know who is capable of penetrating and finishing, other than Jones?  It's just not part of the offense.

This is so frustrating.  I've got to stop throwing things at the TV.  Fortunately my aim is so bad that the TV is fine.

[RuralFan]

It’s partly because we have more high skilled posts than we do high skilled wings, and I think as others have noted on this thread, we lack wings who can penetrate and finish.  I think Demetre or Bosgana might be able to develop the skills, but they don’t have them right now.  So, our resulting line-ups are an attempt to hide or minimize our weaknesses, which creates their own vulnerabilities.

Our three point field goal defense is 30.6% which is adequate.

BC

I think most agree that our mid-range game is our offensive Achilles heel.  I just can't believe that we don't have players that can fill this void.  If Demetre or Bosgana didn't have these shots at the start of the season, why don't they have them now?  Do we even know who is capable of penetrating and finishing, other than Jones?  It's just not part of the offense.

This is so frustrating.  I've got to stop throwing things at the TV.  Fortunately my aim is so bad that the TV is fine.

[Softball Fan]

It looks to me like Brink revamped her foul shooting technique; different wrist motion and higher arc.  If that's true it would be interesting to find out who she worked with or if she experimented on her own.

[Softball Fan]

It looks to me like Brink revamped her foul shooting technique; different wrist motion and higher arc.  If that's true it would be interesting to find out who she worked with or if she experimented on her own.

[stopandpop]

I deliberately stayed away from posting anything during the Tournament and especially after the loss to UCLA.  I've been trying (unsuccessfully) to wrap my head around, not only our losses, but all the way-too-close wins the team has had in the season.

My frustration (like many of you), has centered around the shortcomings of our lineup and our offense.  I've had nothing to contribute to the discussion because all of you have stated what our problems seemed to be a lot more eloquently than me.  Something has been missing from this team from the beginning, but I was not able to put my finger on it all these months.

Yesterday I had a thought.  I was thinking back to our National Championship team of 2020-2021 and everything they went through to get to the Final Four and played 3 spectacular games against elite opponents to win it all.  And then a lightbulb went on.

May I humbly suggest another reason (besides lineups and offensive woes), why this team, so loaded with talent, has not played to their potential?  Our championship team was HUNGRY and this team (for reasons I don't know why), is NOT.

[stopandpop]

I deliberately stayed away from posting anything during the Tournament and especially after the loss to UCLA.  I've been trying (unsuccessfully) to wrap my head around, not only our losses, but all the way-too-close wins the team has had in the season.

My frustration (like many of you), has centered around the shortcomings of our lineup and our offense.  I've had nothing to contribute to the discussion because all of you have stated what our problems seemed to be a lot more eloquently than me.  Something has been missing from this team from the beginning, but I was not able to put my finger on it all these months.

Yesterday I had a thought.  I was thinking back to our National Championship team of 2020-2021 and everything they went through to get to the Final Four and played 3 spectacular games against elite opponents to win it all.  And then a lightbulb went on.

May I humbly suggest another reason (besides lineups and offensive woes), why this team, so loaded with talent, has not played to their potential?  Our championship team was HUNGRY and this team (for reasons I don't know why), is NOT.

[CompSci87]

Although I have never posted on this forum I read every post available for WBB and WVB. A of immense proportions thank you to two folks in particular, 81alum and chimera. It has often been my privilege and good luck to hear their discussions at chalk talks. Their posts here are factual and thoughtful and carefully written. I learn from them before and after every game. I share their thoughts and concerns. Last night I could not watch the game to the bitter end. I thought I was done with basketball for the season. Their fair and balanced assessments, along with several others, have enabled me to remember why I have supported this team for decades. Thank you! I am now going to watch the game without sound or commercials or commentary.

You are much too kind.  Next time you see us yacking before a chalk talk, feel free to join in.

Also look for the Cardboard contingent in the concourse outside section 7 at halftime.

[CompSci87]

Although I have never posted on this forum I read every post available for WBB and WVB. A of immense proportions thank you to two folks in particular, 81alum and chimera. It has often been my privilege and good luck to hear their discussions at chalk talks. Their posts here are factual and thoughtful and carefully written. I learn from them before and after every game. I share their thoughts and concerns. Last night I could not watch the game to the bitter end. I thought I was done with basketball for the season. Their fair and balanced assessments, along with several others, have enabled me to remember why I have supported this team for decades. Thank you! I am now going to watch the game without sound or commercials or commentary.

You are much too kind.  Next time you see us yacking before a chalk talk, feel free to join in.

Also look for the Cardboard contingent in the concourse outside section 7 at halftime.

[Card10Fan]

May I humbly suggest another reason (besides lineups and offensive woes), why this team, so loaded with talent, has not played to their potential?  Our championship team was HUNGRY and this team (for reasons I don't know why), is NOT.

I do agree with this sentiment. Heck, in the UCLA postgame; Haley  quoted along the lines of ''we just didn't match their energy in the second half.''
If you can't muster the energy in March to play all out a win or go home game; winning is not gonna happen. We've lacked energy in the game's we've lost this year. 
I also think the Hulls, Anna Wilson, Kianna, played so hungry every game that some of that is contagious and made up for players that were less inclined. 

Many on the roster are National Champions forever so maybe there isn't anything to prove hence the less hungry team. But, for many winning at the top is so satisfying, that you want to get back there and do it again and also know how much hard work goes into getting there in the first place.

We probably need a psychiatrist / psycholgoist to get in the minds of college kids.  I don't think any of us can truly understand what's going through their minds sometimes. Being a student athlete is hard.

[Card10Fan]

May I humbly suggest another reason (besides lineups and offensive woes), why this team, so loaded with talent, has not played to their potential?  Our championship team was HUNGRY and this team (for reasons I don't know why), is NOT.

I do agree with this sentiment. Heck, in the UCLA postgame; Haley  quoted along the lines of ''we just didn't match their energy in the second half.''
If you can't muster the energy in March to play all out a win or go home game; winning is not gonna happen. We've lacked energy in the game's we've lost this year. 
I also think the Hulls, Anna Wilson, Kianna, played so hungry every game that some of that is contagious and made up for players that were less inclined. 

Many on the roster are National Champions forever so maybe there isn't anything to prove hence the less hungry team. But, for many winning at the top is so satisfying, that you want to get back there and do it again and also know how much hard work goes into getting there in the first place.

We probably need a psychiatrist / psycholgoist to get in the minds of college kids.  I don't think any of us can truly understand what's going through their minds sometimes. Being a student athlete is hard.

[81alum]

I think Tara explained it without saying it outright.  The team was just tired, maybe physically but surly emotionally.  Six out of eight of our last games were away, three of those 8 games were on a compressed timeline for TV purposes, and of course the most difficult road trip of the season was saved for last.  And 5/8 of those teams were ranked.  Yet how deflating would it be to run that mega-gauntlet and win 6/8 and then be remembered for the one you lost after sleeping on airport benches?  It had to be a tough mental hill to climb.

In contrast, UCLA had six of eight of its last games at home, and the only game it had "early" was its regular season game against WSU, which it lost.  And its schedule at the end did not compare with our schedule at the end.  It also only had to play Colorado and Utah once, and it lost both those games away.

I know we played almost a whole season "away" during COVID and obviously we dealt with it and flourished.  Somehow this seems different--a unique challenge.  There is a reason Tara is giving the team 3 days off, despite the obvious need to fix significant problems.   I would not be surprised to see a much rejuvenated team back at Maples for the first two rounds.  If they take care of business there, who knows what could happen in Seattle?  I will be there at Maples cheering my head off, trying to inject some fan enthusiasm into our team's spirits.

[81alum]

I think Tara explained it without saying it outright.  The team was just tired, maybe physically but surly emotionally.  Six out of eight of our last games were away, three of those 8 games were on a compressed timeline for TV purposes, and of course the most difficult road trip of the season was saved for last.  And 5/8 of those teams were ranked.  Yet how deflating would it be to run that mega-gauntlet and win 6/8 and then be remembered for the one you lost after sleeping on airport benches?  It had to be a tough mental hill to climb.

In contrast, UCLA had six of eight of its last games at home, and the only game it had "early" was its regular season game against WSU, which it lost.  And its schedule at the end did not compare with our schedule at the end.  It also only had to play Colorado and Utah once, and it lost both those games away.

I know we played almost a whole season "away" during COVID and obviously we dealt with it and flourished.  Somehow this seems different--a unique challenge.  There is a reason Tara is giving the team 3 days off, despite the obvious need to fix significant problems.   I would not be surprised to see a much rejuvenated team back at Maples for the first two rounds.  If they take care of business there, who knows what could happen in Seattle?  I will be there at Maples cheering my head off, trying to inject some fan enthusiasm into our team's spirits.

[ljw63]

One thing I like to do in evaluating a team is to ask “which player would be the hardest to replace?”. My first answer is Brink who I think is one of the two best players in the country. But, on reflection, we have more good alternatives to Brink than any other player – Betts, Iriafen, Prechtel, even Belibi if we are up against a smaller team. I think the hardest to replace right now would be Jones. She seems to be having a down year compared to her Soph and Jr years, but she does things for us no one else can.
We are going to have to be a much different team next year because we have no one who can step in and do what she does. The third hardest to replace may be Jump. Perhaps the best 3 point shooter in the country WHEN she gets room. The problem is her shot is relatively easy to defend. She is a better than average defender but does not help us much in any other category if she is defended tightly. From that point, everyone is kind of a specialist with at least one strength but also at least one weakness. Demetre, Bosgana, Iriafen, Emma-Nnopu, Lepolo, Nivar, and possibly Harriel could all enhance their strengths and minimize their weaknesses next year but right now they are specialists. My sense is that Betts, Demetre, Bosgana, Lepolo and Nivar (all with 2 or 3 yeas remaining) will be the most likely to emerge as very talented players with minor weaknesses. I think Harriel might as well but she seems to be out of favor with Tara (perhaps for good reason if she does not show well in practice). Betts needs to learn positioning a little better and get stronger but she will be a force for years to come. Demetre needs to learn to take mid-range shots which was her strength in high school. Bosgana needs to think pass before shooting and needs to drive more, Lepolo needs to shoot 3s more and learn to drive like Curry at Cal and Rice at UCLA. Nivar needs to shoot 3s much better and drive more. Harriel needs to get a lot more playing time and learn to drive. I think her 3 point shot might be OK if she played more. She was a prolific scorer in high school but she seems tentative now.


After watching WSU take down UCLA today, I think our conference could easily send 3 teams to the final 8 and 2 to the final 4. It would be great if we were one of those 2 but I would not be surprised to see us eliminated in the round of 8.


One final thought. If we had signed Kiki Rice or Olivia Miles we might be undefeated. They do a lot of things we, as a team, do not do.

[ljw63]

One thing I like to do in evaluating a team is to ask “which player would be the hardest to replace?”. My first answer is Brink who I think is one of the two best players in the country. But, on reflection, we have more good alternatives to Brink than any other player – Betts, Iriafen, Prechtel, even Belibi if we are up against a smaller team. I think the hardest to replace right now would be Jones. She seems to be having a down year compared to her Soph and Jr years, but she does things for us no one else can.
We are going to have to be a much different team next year because we have no one who can step in and do what she does. The third hardest to replace may be Jump. Perhaps the best 3 point shooter in the country WHEN she gets room. The problem is her shot is relatively easy to defend. She is a better than average defender but does not help us much in any other category if she is defended tightly. From that point, everyone is kind of a specialist with at least one strength but also at least one weakness. Demetre, Bosgana, Iriafen, Emma-Nnopu, Lepolo, Nivar, and possibly Harriel could all enhance their strengths and minimize their weaknesses next year but right now they are specialists. My sense is that Betts, Demetre, Bosgana, Lepolo and Nivar (all with 2 or 3 yeas remaining) will be the most likely to emerge as very talented players with minor weaknesses. I think Harriel might as well but she seems to be out of favor with Tara (perhaps for good reason if she does not show well in practice). Betts needs to learn positioning a little better and get stronger but she will be a force for years to come. Demetre needs to learn to take mid-range shots which was her strength in high school. Bosgana needs to think pass before shooting and needs to drive more, Lepolo needs to shoot 3s more and learn to drive like Curry at Cal and Rice at UCLA. Nivar needs to shoot 3s much better and drive more. Harriel needs to get a lot more playing time and learn to drive. I think her 3 point shot might be OK if she played more. She was a prolific scorer in high school but she seems tentative now.


After watching WSU take down UCLA today, I think our conference could easily send 3 teams to the final 8 and 2 to the final 4. It would be great if we were one of those 2 but I would not be surprised to see us eliminated in the round of 8.


One final thought. If we had signed Kiki Rice or Olivia Miles we might be undefeated. They do a lot of things we, as a team, do not do.

[76lsjumb]

I think Tara explained it without saying it outright.  The team was just tired, maybe physically but surly emotionally.  Six out of eight of our last games were away, three of those 8 games were on a compressed timeline for TV purposes, and of course the most difficult road trip of the season was saved for last.  And 5/8 of those teams were ranked.  Yet how deflating would it be to run that mega-gauntlet and win 6/8 and then be remembered for the one you lost after sleeping on airport benches?  It had to be a tough mental hill to climb.

In contrast, UCLA had six of eight of its last games at home, and the only game it had "early" was its regular season game against WSU, which it lost.  And its schedule at the end did not compare with our schedule at the end.  It also only had to play Colorado and Utah once, and it lost both those games away.

I know we played almost a whole season "away" during COVID and obviously we dealt with it and flourished.  Somehow this seems different--a unique challenge.  There is a reason Tara is giving the team 3 days off, despite the obvious need to fix significant problems.   I would not be surprised to see a much rejuvenated team back at Maples for the first two rounds.  If they take care of business there, who knows what could happen in Seattle?  I will be there at Maples cheering my head off, trying to inject some fan enthusiasm into our team's spirits.

With all due respect, that sounds more like an excuse than an explanation. I’d be more inclined to credit it if we hadn’t tanked multiple games earlier in the season in similar fashion. We have had a problem with focus and intensity throughout this season. Watching today’s Iowa game, it looked to me like they were playing with much more intensity when they had a 30+ lead than we do when it’s a close game. I’m worried that our team’s mental approach reflects that of our coaching staff… and that our coaching staff has lost intensity as well.

I hope I’m wrong, and I’ll be at Maples cheering as loudly as anyone, but it will take a 20 point lead with 5 minutes left in the fourth quarter for me to feel comfortable in any game from here on out.

[76lsjumb]

I think Tara explained it without saying it outright.  The team was just tired, maybe physically but surly emotionally.  Six out of eight of our last games were away, three of those 8 games were on a compressed timeline for TV purposes, and of course the most difficult road trip of the season was saved for last.  And 5/8 of those teams were ranked.  Yet how deflating would it be to run that mega-gauntlet and win 6/8 and then be remembered for the one you lost after sleeping on airport benches?  It had to be a tough mental hill to climb.

In contrast, UCLA had six of eight of its last games at home, and the only game it had "early" was its regular season game against WSU, which it lost.  And its schedule at the end did not compare with our schedule at the end.  It also only had to play Colorado and Utah once, and it lost both those games away.

I know we played almost a whole season "away" during COVID and obviously we dealt with it and flourished.  Somehow this seems different--a unique challenge.  There is a reason Tara is giving the team 3 days off, despite the obvious need to fix significant problems.   I would not be surprised to see a much rejuvenated team back at Maples for the first two rounds.  If they take care of business there, who knows what could happen in Seattle?  I will be there at Maples cheering my head off, trying to inject some fan enthusiasm into our team's spirits.

With all due respect, that sounds more like an excuse than an explanation. I’d be more inclined to credit it if we hadn’t tanked multiple games earlier in the season in similar fashion. We have had a problem with focus and intensity throughout this season. Watching today’s Iowa game, it looked to me like they were playing with much more intensity when they had a 30+ lead than we do when it’s a close game. I’m worried that our team’s mental approach reflects that of our coaching staff… and that our coaching staff has lost intensity as well.

I hope I’m wrong, and I’ll be at Maples cheering as loudly as anyone, but it will take a 20 point lead with 5 minutes left in the fourth quarter for me to feel comfortable in any game from here on out.

[cardcrimson]

We probably need a psychiatrist / psycholgoist to get in the minds of college kids.  

Losing is a disease, as contagious as polio. Losing is a disease as contagious as syphilis. Losing is a disease as contagious as bubonic plague, attacking one, but infecting all. Ah, but curable.

[cardcrimson]

We probably need a psychiatrist / psycholgoist to get in the minds of college kids.  

Losing is a disease, as contagious as polio. Losing is a disease as contagious as syphilis. Losing is a disease as contagious as bubonic plague, attacking one, but infecting all. Ah, but curable.

[TheFarm07]

I think Tara explained it without saying it outright.  The team was just tired, maybe physically but surly emotionally.  Six out of eight of our last games were away, three of those 8 games were on a compressed timeline for TV purposes, and of course the most difficult road trip of the season was saved for last.  And 5/8 of those teams were ranked.  Yet how deflating would it be to run that mega-gauntlet and win 6/8 and then be remembered for the one you lost after sleeping on airport benches?  It had to be a tough mental hill to climb.

In contrast, UCLA had six of eight of its last games at home, and the only game it had "early" was its regular season game against WSU, which it lost.  And its schedule at the end did not compare with our schedule at the end.  It also only had to play Colorado and Utah once, and it lost both those games away.

I know we played almost a whole season "away" during COVID and obviously we dealt with it and flourished.  Somehow this seems different--a unique challenge.  There is a reason Tara is giving the team 3 days off, despite the obvious need to fix significant problems.   I would not be surprised to see a much rejuvenated team back at Maples for the first two rounds.  If they take care of business there, who knows what could happen in Seattle?  I will be there at Maples cheering my head off, trying to inject some fan enthusiasm into our team's spirits.

With all due respect, that sounds more like an excuse than an explanation. I’d be more inclined to credit it if we hadn’t tanked multiple games earlier in the season in similar fashion. We have had a problem with focus and intensity throughout this season. Watching today’s Iowa game, it looked to me like they were playing with much more intensity when they had a 30+ lead than we do when it’s a close game. I’m worried that our team’s mental approach reflects that of our coaching staff… and that our coaching staff has lost intensity as well.

I hope I’m wrong, and I’ll be at Maples cheering as loudly as anyone, but it will take a 20 point lead with 5 minutes left in the fourth quarter for me to feel comfortable in any game from here on out.

I agree and I don't think it's a problem isolated to this season. Some years we've been able to minimize it more than other times, but didn't Tara say once something to the effect of no longer wanting to be "the nice team from Stanford," I've might have gotten the exact phrasing wrong, but it illustrates the point that perhaps as a program, we lack the killer edge more than we would like. It might take more than one Brink with the ultra-competitive spirit to get us through it, like when we also had the Hull twins adding to that fire.

One of the commentators were remarking about Tara's comment about splitting the regular season title with Utah that we didn't like sharing, but it seemed like as posters here have commented, that perhaps we didn't mind it as much as we should have.

I know Geno is not especially liked on this forum for a variety of reason, but during their dominant streak in the 2010s, he had a comment about sending a message with the blowouts early on in the tournament and his program has won more championships than any other in women's college basketball, including four in a row in the Stewart era. I didn't see any letdown or lack of motivation from Stewart, Jefferson, etc. during their run after they won a couple.

---

One final thought. If we had signed Kiki Rice or Olivia Miles we might be undefeated. They do a lot of things we, as a team, do not do.

I totally agree with this sentiment, especially if we had managed to get Miles on the Farm. She had been having an all-American type of season for N.D. before going down with an injury. She would have added that much needed offensive threat from the guard position, while she's not hitting the three very well (only 22.8%), she is scoring at an overall 46% clip, meaning that she's landing more than half her shots inside the arc (53.8%) plus she's averaging nearly 7 assists a game.

We could have gotten another elite scoring guard with JuJu Watkins next year but that was another big loss there

[TheFarm07]

I think Tara explained it without saying it outright.  The team was just tired, maybe physically but surly emotionally.  Six out of eight of our last games were away, three of those 8 games were on a compressed timeline for TV purposes, and of course the most difficult road trip of the season was saved for last.  And 5/8 of those teams were ranked.  Yet how deflating would it be to run that mega-gauntlet and win 6/8 and then be remembered for the one you lost after sleeping on airport benches?  It had to be a tough mental hill to climb.

In contrast, UCLA had six of eight of its last games at home, and the only game it had "early" was its regular season game against WSU, which it lost.  And its schedule at the end did not compare with our schedule at the end.  It also only had to play Colorado and Utah once, and it lost both those games away.

I know we played almost a whole season "away" during COVID and obviously we dealt with it and flourished.  Somehow this seems different--a unique challenge.  There is a reason Tara is giving the team 3 days off, despite the obvious need to fix significant problems.   I would not be surprised to see a much rejuvenated team back at Maples for the first two rounds.  If they take care of business there, who knows what could happen in Seattle?  I will be there at Maples cheering my head off, trying to inject some fan enthusiasm into our team's spirits.

With all due respect, that sounds more like an excuse than an explanation. I’d be more inclined to credit it if we hadn’t tanked multiple games earlier in the season in similar fashion. We have had a problem with focus and intensity throughout this season. Watching today’s Iowa game, it looked to me like they were playing with much more intensity when they had a 30+ lead than we do when it’s a close game. I’m worried that our team’s mental approach reflects that of our coaching staff… and that our coaching staff has lost intensity as well.

I hope I’m wrong, and I’ll be at Maples cheering as loudly as anyone, but it will take a 20 point lead with 5 minutes left in the fourth quarter for me to feel comfortable in any game from here on out.

I agree and I don't think it's a problem isolated to this season. Some years we've been able to minimize it more than other times, but didn't Tara say once something to the effect of no longer wanting to be "the nice team from Stanford," I've might have gotten the exact phrasing wrong, but it illustrates the point that perhaps as a program, we lack the killer edge more than we would like. It might take more than one Brink with the ultra-competitive spirit to get us through it, like when we also had the Hull twins adding to that fire.

One of the commentators were remarking about Tara's comment about splitting the regular season title with Utah that we didn't like sharing, but it seemed like as posters here have commented, that perhaps we didn't mind it as much as we should have.

I know Geno is not especially liked on this forum for a variety of reason, but during their dominant streak in the 2010s, he had a comment about sending a message with the blowouts early on in the tournament and his program has won more championships than any other in women's college basketball, including four in a row in the Stewart era. I didn't see any letdown or lack of motivation from Stewart, Jefferson, etc. during their run after they won a couple.

---

One final thought. If we had signed Kiki Rice or Olivia Miles we might be undefeated. They do a lot of things we, as a team, do not do.

I totally agree with this sentiment, especially if we had managed to get Miles on the Farm. She had been having an all-American type of season for N.D. before going down with an injury. She would have added that much needed offensive threat from the guard position, while she's not hitting the three very well (only 22.8%), she is scoring at an overall 46% clip, meaning that she's landing more than half her shots inside the arc (53.8%) plus she's averaging nearly 7 assists a game.

We could have gotten another elite scoring guard with JuJu Watkins next year but that was another big loss there