[crackpot]

This is a beating by the wolves. Discouraging to lose by so much. I thought the game would be competitive not a mismatch.

This is the team that is supposedly having a down year and we lost to them by 2 last season?

[crackpot]

This is a beating by the wolves. Discouraging to lose by so much. I thought the game would be competitive not a mismatch.

This is the team that is supposedly having a down year and we lost to them by 2 last season?

[SkiBum80]

Somfai shooting and missing a lot of long range 3s. She's shooting ~ 20% on 3's so far this season. But is that part of the LSJU offensive strategy? I don't remember Appel or the Ogwumikes doing that as freshmen.

As for Eschmeyer, this game's pace has seemed a bit fast for her.

I’ve said before & will say again, if Somfai taking more than 1 or 2 threes a game, then the offense is way off track. IMO of course.

[SkiBum80]

Somfai shooting and missing a lot of long range 3s. She's shooting ~ 20% on 3's so far this season. But is that part of the LSJU offensive strategy? I don't remember Appel or the Ogwumikes doing that as freshmen.

As for Eschmeyer, this game's pace has seemed a bit fast for her.

I’ve said before & will say again, if Somfai taking more than 1 or 2 threes a game, then the offense is way off track. IMO of course.

[crackpot]

Somfai shooting and missing a lot of long range 3s. She's shooting ~ 20% on 3's so far this season. But is that part of the LSJU offensive strategy? I don't remember Appel or the Ogwumikes doing that as freshmen.

As for Eschmeyer, this game's pace has seemed a bit fast for her.

I’ve said before & will say again, if Somfai taking more than 1 or 2 threes a game, then the offense is way off track. IMO of course.

Yup. Much nicer when we have the Agara & Somfai show underneath the basket. We saw a hint of that in Q1, then, boom, no more paint for you.

I just can't get over the unforced errors, though. 

Also, quote of the game: "The guards for Stanford are going to dribble too many." - Peck.

[crackpot]

Somfai shooting and missing a lot of long range 3s. She's shooting ~ 20% on 3's so far this season. But is that part of the LSJU offensive strategy? I don't remember Appel or the Ogwumikes doing that as freshmen.

As for Eschmeyer, this game's pace has seemed a bit fast for her.

I’ve said before & will say again, if Somfai taking more than 1 or 2 threes a game, then the offense is way off track. IMO of course.

Yup. Much nicer when we have the Agara & Somfai show underneath the basket. We saw a hint of that in Q1, then, boom, no more paint for you.

I just can't get over the unforced errors, though. 

Also, quote of the game: "The guards for Stanford are going to dribble too many." - Peck.

[RuralFan]

Stanford climbs onto a plane and flies about three thousand miles.  In return the ACC pays them 30 cents on the dollar, provides officials that favor the home team, and crushes the Stanford teams.  What a deal.

[RuralFan]

Stanford climbs onto a plane and flies about three thousand miles.  In return the ACC pays them 30 cents on the dollar, provides officials that favor the home team, and crushes the Stanford teams.  What a deal.

[JohnR34231]

Stanford climbs onto a plane and flies about three thousand miles.  In return the ACC pays them 30 cents on the dollar, provides officials that favor the home team, and crushes the Stanford teams.  What a deal.

Well we agreed to it, so.......
At any rate an incredibly bad performance.

[JohnR34231]

Stanford climbs onto a plane and flies about three thousand miles.  In return the ACC pays them 30 cents on the dollar, provides officials that favor the home team, and crushes the Stanford teams.  What a deal.

Well we agreed to it, so.......
At any rate an incredibly bad performance.

[M T]

eschmeyer gets in and pulled after less than 1 minute. not  cool by paye

Why do some few people here not realize that when a player makes errors, they get replaced for a while.  It doesn't matter whether your name is Ogden, Eschmeyer, or Agara.  Thankfully the starters avoid errors for more than a minute or so of playing time.
Q1
02:01 Turnover By STAN #40 Ogden, Courtney
02:01 Substitution OUT: STAN #40 Ogden, Courtney
02:01 Substitution IN: STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra
...
00:23 Personal Foul On STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra
00:23 Turnover By STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra
00:23 Substitution OUT: STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra
...
Q3
02:30 Personal Foul On STAN #3 Agara, Nunu
02:30 Substitution OUT: STAN #3 Agara, Nunu
02:30 Substitution IN: STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra
...
01:42 Personal Foul On STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra
01:42 Substitution OUT: STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra

[M T]

eschmeyer gets in and pulled after less than 1 minute. not  cool by paye

Why do some few people here not realize that when a player makes errors, they get replaced for a while.  It doesn't matter whether your name is Ogden, Eschmeyer, or Agara.  Thankfully the starters avoid errors for more than a minute or so of playing time.
Q1
02:01 Turnover By STAN #40 Ogden, Courtney
02:01 Substitution OUT: STAN #40 Ogden, Courtney
02:01 Substitution IN: STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra
...
00:23 Personal Foul On STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra
00:23 Turnover By STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra
00:23 Substitution OUT: STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra
...
Q3
02:30 Personal Foul On STAN #3 Agara, Nunu
02:30 Substitution OUT: STAN #3 Agara, Nunu
02:30 Substitution IN: STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra
...
01:42 Personal Foul On STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra
01:42 Substitution OUT: STAN #4 Eschmeyer, Alexandra

[MV72018]

Impressively poor performance. Gives some indication of how far from being truly good or excellent we are, and raises very serious questions about KP’s coaching skill.

[MV72018]

Impressively poor performance. Gives some indication of how far from being truly good or excellent we are, and raises very serious questions about KP’s coaching skill.

[stopandpop]

eschmeyer gets in and pulled after less than 1 minute. not  cool by paye

Eschmeyer certainly has some liabilities defensively, but during this game, Lepolo, Swain and MAS made multiple defensive AND offensive mistakes and they remained in the game.  Perfect example of the 'short leash' on Eschmeyer and a longer or no leash on others.

[stopandpop]

eschmeyer gets in and pulled after less than 1 minute. not  cool by paye

Eschmeyer certainly has some liabilities defensively, but during this game, Lepolo, Swain and MAS made multiple defensive AND offensive mistakes and they remained in the game.  Perfect example of the 'short leash' on Eschmeyer and a longer or no leash on others.

[MV72018]

Look at Lepolo’s line for the game — 0 points in 33 min, 2 TOs, 3 PFs, 1 reb, and 0 assists — and then tell me with a straight face that she should be our #1 or even #2 PG. Por favor!

Then look at Somfai: 2 for 13 from the field with 1 for 7 from deep. Why in heck does Paye have her on the perimeter?! I have serious questions about Paye’s strategic sense. On O, she should be put where she has a competitive advantage through her height and bulk. Then design some plays for her to get the ball within 5-7 feet from the hoop, from a PG who can actually make good entry passes. 

That was a very depressing loss.

[MV72018]

Look at Lepolo’s line for the game — 0 points in 33 min, 2 TOs, 3 PFs, 1 reb, and 0 assists — and then tell me with a straight face that she should be our #1 or even #2 PG. Por favor!

Then look at Somfai: 2 for 13 from the field with 1 for 7 from deep. Why in heck does Paye have her on the perimeter?! I have serious questions about Paye’s strategic sense. On O, she should be put where she has a competitive advantage through her height and bulk. Then design some plays for her to get the ball within 5-7 feet from the hoop, from a PG who can actually make good entry passes. 

That was a very depressing loss.

[stanford22]

Look at Lepolo’s line for the game — 0 points in 33 min, 2 TOs, 3 PFs, 1 reb, and 0 assists — and then tell me with a straight face that she should be our #1 or even #2 PG. Por favor!

 She shouldn’t.  Anyone can keep dribbling.   She does not see the open player, and instead, dribbles around the perimeter.  Other teams don’t need to guard her because she doesn’t even try to shoot.   And she has a hard time staying with her player. These ladies need more energy on the court too.

[stanford22]

Look at Lepolo’s line for the game — 0 points in 33 min, 2 TOs, 3 PFs, 1 reb, and 0 assists — and then tell me with a straight face that she should be our #1 or even #2 PG. Por favor!

 She shouldn’t.  Anyone can keep dribbling.   She does not see the open player, and instead, dribbles around the perimeter.  Other teams don’t need to guard her because she doesn’t even try to shoot.   And she has a hard time staying with her player. These ladies need more energy on the court too.

[MV72018]

Look at Lepolo’s line for the game — 0 points in 33 min, 2 TOs, 3 PFs, 1 reb, and 0 assists — and then tell me with a straight face that she should be our #1 or even #2 PG. Por favor!

 She shouldn’t.  Anyone can keep dribbling.   She does not see the open player, and instead, dribbles around the perimeter.  Other teams don’t need to guard her because she doesn’t even try to shoot.   And she has a hard time staying with her player. These ladies need more energy on the court too.

All true.

[MV72018]

Look at Lepolo’s line for the game — 0 points in 33 min, 2 TOs, 3 PFs, 1 reb, and 0 assists — and then tell me with a straight face that she should be our #1 or even #2 PG. Por favor!

 She shouldn’t.  Anyone can keep dribbling.   She does not see the open player, and instead, dribbles around the perimeter.  Other teams don’t need to guard her because she doesn’t even try to shoot.   And she has a hard time staying with her player. These ladies need more energy on the court too.

All true.

[SkiBum80]

Stanford climbs onto a plane and flies about three thousand miles.  In return the ACC pays them 30 cents on the dollar, provides officials that favor the home team, and crushes the Stanford teams.  What a deal.

Yes it sucks.
Only thing to suck worse would have been the alternative.
And I suggest sending multiple "thanks" for this situation to USC/UCLA.
Who care about as much about it as a dog after raiding the Thanksgiving turkey left unattended on the dining table.

[SkiBum80]

Stanford climbs onto a plane and flies about three thousand miles.  In return the ACC pays them 30 cents on the dollar, provides officials that favor the home team, and crushes the Stanford teams.  What a deal.

Yes it sucks.
Only thing to suck worse would have been the alternative.
And I suggest sending multiple "thanks" for this situation to USC/UCLA.
Who care about as much about it as a dog after raiding the Thanksgiving turkey left unattended on the dining table.

[Nobadeer]

LSJU shot just 4 of 23 on threes. 

That's still better than LSJU MBB did against ND the other night at Maples (4 of 30). But Hannah Jump and the Samuelsons aren't walking through that door. Hoping Clardy returns soon.

[Nobadeer]

LSJU shot just 4 of 23 on threes. 

That's still better than LSJU MBB did against ND the other night at Maples (4 of 30). But Hannah Jump and the Samuelsons aren't walking through that door. Hoping Clardy returns soon.

[stopandpop]

A few observations from a fan.

Watching this game unfold, it almost appeared that Wes Moore's team knew more about Stanford's offense than Stanford.  It is simply not the kind of offense that can be successful in the ACC.  When the offense broke down beginning in the 2nd. quarter, Ogden, Agara and Swain tried courageously going one-on-one to the basket, only to lose it, get the ball stolen, or rejected.  

I was struck by Coach Paye's decision not to make any adjustments when it was clear the offense couldn't generate points.  After being an Associate Head Coach and watching Hall of Famer, Tara Vanderveer make game-changing adjustments, one would think Coach Paye would have had more tools in her tool-box to use, but I'm wondering if that tool-box is empty.

Other than grabbing a ton of rebounds, Somfai, a critical part of Stanford's offense, was basically rendered ineffective.  Of all the players, especially the starters, this style of offense hurts Somfai and her skill set the most.  On the other hand, you saw how easily NC State was consistently able to get the ball into their 'Bigs' (or anyone else) at will and Stanford could not stop them.

I don't know where "Cautious Kate" and the team go from here, but it will not get easier.

[stopandpop]

A few observations from a fan.

Watching this game unfold, it almost appeared that Wes Moore's team knew more about Stanford's offense than Stanford.  It is simply not the kind of offense that can be successful in the ACC.  When the offense broke down beginning in the 2nd. quarter, Ogden, Agara and Swain tried courageously going one-on-one to the basket, only to lose it, get the ball stolen, or rejected.  

I was struck by Coach Paye's decision not to make any adjustments when it was clear the offense couldn't generate points.  After being an Associate Head Coach and watching Hall of Famer, Tara Vanderveer make game-changing adjustments, one would think Coach Paye would have had more tools in her tool-box to use, but I'm wondering if that tool-box is empty.

Other than grabbing a ton of rebounds, Somfai, a critical part of Stanford's offense, was basically rendered ineffective.  Of all the players, especially the starters, this style of offense hurts Somfai and her skill set the most.  On the other hand, you saw how easily NC State was consistently able to get the ball into their 'Bigs' (or anyone else) at will and Stanford could not stop them.

I don't know where "Cautious Kate" and the team go from here, but it will not get easier.

[TheFarm07]

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

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

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

[TheFarm07]

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

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

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

[MV72018]

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

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

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

I posted effectively that when the KP choice was announced, asking why we think she is the best candidate we could get. I hope the same doesn't turn out to be true for the men's football coach, which also seems not to have been the outcome of a bona fide search. Pseudo-searches and no searches rarely turn out wonderfully. Funny thing is, such searches wouldn't be accepted when it comes to faculty searches at Stanford. But it seems to be acceptable for major-sport coaching openings at Stanford. It would have taken some guts to reject Tara's wish to unilaterally designate an heir apparent, but it might have been better to do so for the long term best interests of the team.

[MV72018]

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

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

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

I posted effectively that when the KP choice was announced, asking why we think she is the best candidate we could get. I hope the same doesn't turn out to be true for the men's football coach, which also seems not to have been the outcome of a bona fide search. Pseudo-searches and no searches rarely turn out wonderfully. Funny thing is, such searches wouldn't be accepted when it comes to faculty searches at Stanford. But it seems to be acceptable for major-sport coaching openings at Stanford. It would have taken some guts to reject Tara's wish to unilaterally designate an heir apparent, but it might have been better to do so for the long term best interests of the team.

[stanford22]

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

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

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

I posted effectively that when the KP choice was announced, asking why we think she is the best candidate we could get. I hope the same doesn't turn out to be true for the men's football coach, which also seems not to have been the outcome of a bona fide search. Pseudo-searches and no searches rarely turn out wonderfully. Funny thing is, such searches wouldn't be accepted when it comes to faculty searches at Stanford. But it seems to be acceptable for major-sport coaching openings at Stanford. It would have taken some guts to reject Tara's wish to unilaterally designate an heir apparent, but it might have been better to do so for the long term best interests of the team.

I’m watching Washington vs Michigan and you see so much movement.   Girls cutting to the basket for layups or driving to the basket and kicking out to a shooter.  The only pure shooter we have is Amborn.  I’d rather see us play freshmans so they get more experience than play people that that don’t affect winning.

[stanford22]

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

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

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

I posted effectively that when the KP choice was announced, asking why we think she is the best candidate we could get. I hope the same doesn't turn out to be true for the men's football coach, which also seems not to have been the outcome of a bona fide search. Pseudo-searches and no searches rarely turn out wonderfully. Funny thing is, such searches wouldn't be accepted when it comes to faculty searches at Stanford. But it seems to be acceptable for major-sport coaching openings at Stanford. It would have taken some guts to reject Tara's wish to unilaterally designate an heir apparent, but it might have been better to do so for the long term best interests of the team.

I’m watching Washington vs Michigan and you see so much movement.   Girls cutting to the basket for layups or driving to the basket and kicking out to a shooter.  The only pure shooter we have is Amborn.  I’d rather see us play freshmans so they get more experience than play people that that don’t affect winning.

[TheFarm07]

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

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

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

I posted effectively that when the KP choice was announced, asking why we think she is the best candidate we could get. I hope the same doesn't turn out to be true for the men's football coach, which also seems not to have been the outcome of a bona fide search. Pseudo-searches and no searches rarely turn out wonderfully. Funny thing is, such searches wouldn't be accepted when it comes to faculty searches at Stanford. But it seems to be acceptable for major-sport coaching openings at Stanford. It would have taken some guts to reject Tara's wish to unilaterally designate an heir apparent, but it might have been better to do so for the long term best interests of the team.

I’m watching Washington vs Michigan and you see so much movement.   Girls cutting to the basket for layups or driving to the basket and kicking out to a shooter.  The only pure shooter we have is Amborn.  I’d rather see us play freshmans so they get more experience than play people that that don’t affect winning.

It won't matter too much who we put out on the court if our strategy doesn't upgrade; we won't be competitive even with decent teams like NC State if we don't adapt and not just aimlessly pass around the perimeter or drive into a couple of defenders waiting in the paint.

[TheFarm07]

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

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

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

I posted effectively that when the KP choice was announced, asking why we think she is the best candidate we could get. I hope the same doesn't turn out to be true for the men's football coach, which also seems not to have been the outcome of a bona fide search. Pseudo-searches and no searches rarely turn out wonderfully. Funny thing is, such searches wouldn't be accepted when it comes to faculty searches at Stanford. But it seems to be acceptable for major-sport coaching openings at Stanford. It would have taken some guts to reject Tara's wish to unilaterally designate an heir apparent, but it might have been better to do so for the long term best interests of the team.

I’m watching Washington vs Michigan and you see so much movement.   Girls cutting to the basket for layups or driving to the basket and kicking out to a shooter.  The only pure shooter we have is Amborn.  I’d rather see us play freshmans so they get more experience than play people that that don’t affect winning.

It won't matter too much who we put out on the court if our strategy doesn't upgrade; we won't be competitive even with decent teams like NC State if we don't adapt and not just aimlessly pass around the perimeter or drive into a couple of defenders waiting in the paint.

[BostonCard]

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

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

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

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

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

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

BC

[BostonCard]

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

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

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

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

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

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

BC

[2006alum]

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

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

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

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

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

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

BC

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

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

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

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

[2006alum]

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

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

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

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

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

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

BC

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

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

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

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