WBB: the NCAA tournament - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: WBB: the NCAA tournament (/thread-24103.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: WBB: the NCAA tournament (/thread-24103.html)
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - petersalas - 03-27-2023
I completely agree! My point wasn’t to agree that people should make assumptions about players, but more so to say it wasn’t fair to trash the program and make statements that can harm a coach or program in a very ugly way.
(03-27-2023, 03:33 PM)chimera Wrote: Carrington is a pro athlete in the WNBA. I agree that it is not fair to post assumptions about why a player transferred or how it has gone for her. I don't think trashing your former program is a great look either. Every program has players who are not happy with some aspect of the program. I mean, we have 9 zillion transfers, which says it all.
Stanford has had much fewer than other programs, which I am glad is the case. I'm not sure how I would feel if a big chunk of the team I rooted for transferred out every season and another batch transferred in. Kinda hard to get attached to players when you know many of them won't stick around. If I was a UA fan, for example, I would be cautious about being emotionally attached to the team. A lot of the fun of college sports for me has been watching players on our team and other teams develop, watching teams adjust as players improve and stars graduated after four years, all that stuff. Musical chairs is not very appealing to me.
The transfers and NIL bring college sports perilously close to pro sports but without the contracts and rules that restrict where pro players can go. I've been watching more and more of the WNBA. The league is light years better than it was in the early days. The level of basketball is much higher than college. Hate missed bunnies? Much fewer of those in the pros. If college basketball is just going to be quasi pro basketball but with insane player movement, I might as well just go ahead and watch the pros. The basketball is higher quality and player movement makes sense in that fans can follow their team, the roster, the salary cap, trades, etc., and enjoy that aspect rather than an unregulated mess like college transfers are now.
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - BostonCard - 03-27-2023
Back to the topic at hand... Looks like South Carolina will be cruising to the final four; they are up 60-45 on Maryland as the third quarter is winding down. Boston and Cooke each have 18 points.
BC
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - 76lsjumb - 03-27-2023
Wow. SC probably would have won anyway, but this group of refs certainly seem intent on making sure there is no doubt whatsoever.
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - Jskass - 03-27-2023
Nearly empty arena in Seattle pre-game as clearly all the Iowa fans are absent so smattering of theOSU, Hokies, locals and us Stanford fans still wishing our team had been here but frankly convinced that Clark is indeed POY with unmatched skills.
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - BillBradley - 03-27-2023
(03-27-2023, 10:11 AM)BillBradley Wrote: I also really roll my eyes whenever I read a post about player safety, the refs better get control or someone's gonna get hurt, etc. when it comes to physical play. No one ever says that about a men's game where players are constantly being helped off the court. What would people think if the women's players and coaches whined about the game being "dangerous" at press conferences? "Oh, it's just the sissy women". These players are athletes and competitors and basketball is a contact sport. They aren't scared. They aren't whining. So why do some folks feel like they need to be protected?
(03-27-2023, 10:39 AM)Leftcoast Wrote: I think it's possible you missed men's basketball as played in the 90s. That type of bully ball was rejected by many players and led to the rule changes that ALLOWED for Steph and the more free-wheeling basketball we see now. Far from allowing laissez-faire officiating, the sport ruling bodies stepped in hard to preserve the beauty of the game. In fact, a lot of players/coaches think the NBA in particular may have cracked down TOO hard on defense.Hah! My wife only wishes you were correct. I doubt there's anyone on this board who watched more basketball in the 90's than yours truly :>
I don't think we support women's advancement in sport by allowing the modern equivalent of the Pat Riley coached 90s Heat.
Sure, the rule changes helped make the men's game more open, but I don't understand what that has to do with anything I posted.
We all see things differently, and that's OK. But from my perspective, the defenses that Stanford saw this year were "physical" and "packed in", but they were not "bully ball". That term has been thrown around on this board, but I don't agree at all that's what we're seeing in the evolution of the women's sport. I'd really appreciate if someone could show me some clips of what they mean by "bully ball". There aren't players getting clotheslined out there for goodness sake. Colorado is the team that comes up in this discussion a lot. That intimidating lineup of Jaylynn Sherod, Frieda Forman, Kyndall Wetta, Quay Miller, and Aaronette Vonleh. Really?
"Physical", in my book, is part of the game, and can be used strategically to take away advantages from other teams. And while it can be very frustrating to all of us to see our players not be able to overcome it, I don't think it's ruining the sport to see physical, packed in defenses. It's an age old strategy. I just wish we would have made more layups through the contact and we would have easily advanced in the tourney.
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - WBB fan - 03-27-2023
Such a shame about an empty arena. OSU and VT deserve to have a good crowd. I suspect that a lot of UConn folks had tickets and left after the loss. We had all-session tickets -- great seats -- but canceled plans to go to Seattle after Stanford lost. We did manage to sell all our tickets for all the sessions, but those for tonight went only after significantly reducing the price.
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - old spanish trail - 03-27-2023
Iowa v SC could be a really interesting game. Clark is an amazing shooter. Van Lith was pretty good also. Fwiw, I think Clark and Van Lith both whine to the refs way too much. I can't think of any of our players whining much at all, if ever. Good for them.
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - WBB fan - 03-27-2023
I suspect the TV people are salivating over an Iowa vs SC game -- will be promoted as Clark vs Boston show, the top two POY candidates, etc. As for me, I'm looking forward to seeing how it plays out, could be really good -- and probably better than the championship game. But who knows!
triangle2 - triangle2 - 03-27-2023
(03-27-2023, 06:05 PM)BillBradley Wrote:(03-27-2023, 10:11 AM)BillBradley Wrote: I also really roll my eyes whenever I read a post about player safety, the refs better get control or someone's gonna get hurt, etc. when it comes to physical play. No one ever says that about a men's game where players are constantly being helped off the court. What would people think if the women's players and coaches whined about the game being "dangerous" at press conferences? "Oh, it's just the sissy women". These players are athletes and competitors and basketball is a contact sport. They aren't scared. They aren't whining. So why do some folks feel like they need to be protected?(03-27-2023, 10:39 AM)Leftcoast Wrote: I think it's possible you missed men's basketball as played in the 90s. That type of bully ball was rejected by many players and led to the rule changes that ALLOWED for Steph and the more free-wheeling basketball we see now. Far from allowing laissez-faire officiating, the sport ruling bodies stepped in hard to preserve the beauty of the game. In fact, a lot of players/coaches think the NBA in particular may have cracked down TOO hard on defense.Hah! My wife only wishes you were correct. I doubt there's anyone on this board who watched more basketball in the 90's than yours truly :>
I don't think we support women's advancement in sport by allowing the modern equivalent of the Pat Riley coached 90s Heat.
Sure, the rule changes helped make the men's game more open, but I don't understand what that has to do with anything I posted.
We all see things differently, and that's OK. But from my perspective, the defenses that Stanford saw this year were "physical" and "packed in", but they were not "bully ball". That term has been thrown around on this board, but I don't agree at all that's what we're seeing in the evolution of the women's sport. I'd really appreciate if someone could show me some clips of what they mean by "bully ball". There aren't players getting clotheslined out there for goodness sake. Colorado is the team that comes up in this discussion a lot. That intimidating lineup of Jaylynn Sherod, Frieda Forman, Kyndall Wetta, Quay Miller, and Aaronette Vonleh. Really?
"Physical", in my book, is part of the game, and can be used strategically to take away advantages from other teams. And while it can be very frustrating to all of us to see our players not be able to overcome it, I don't think it's ruining the sport to see physical, packed in defenses. It's an age old strategy. I just wish we would have made more layups through the contact and we would have easily advanced in the tourney.
Exhibit A: Hollingshed vs. Brink last year in the Pac-12 tournament. And, since we’re on the Colorado topic, Wetta did pick up a post-game technical this season for tossing the ball at an opposing player after the game had ended.
If you watched a lot of 90’s ball, then you remember the old ASU swiping hands to the face defense that Charli Turner-Thorne implemented with success until…the technique was essentially banned. There was a fair amount of aggressive 1v1 defending, particularly by guards on top.
I see something different now. The inside play has gotten considerably more physical, the post players are bigger/taller, and the wings are also bigger but with the same skill sets that the smaller wings used to have. We also have a return of the swiping guards, but instead of hands to the face, there is a lot of chopping at the ball, arm grabbing, and bodying up. I don’t like the way the game is heading, because teams are essentially challenging the referees to make the calls, and we all know that the average quality of a college women’s ref is honestly bad. So, teams are operating on the assumption that they’ll get away with a lot of physical play and so, you end up with teams that just play very roughly.
If you want to look at teams that play consistently over the line, Colorado is a fair example in the conference. They lost Hollingshed inside, but Sherrod is a grabber/swiper who seems to be constantly daring the refs to blow the whistle. Outside of the conference, Texas is a repeat offender. If you saw last years Texas games, there was a fair amount of bully ball going on, including several instances of a Texas post player throwing a Stanford player to the floor (Lauren Ebo was a prime offender). That team has the added demerit for also playing unfairly on the offensive end. Schaefer teaches the posts to bring the off elbow high and swing it into the body of the defender when the post player is trying to turn. Taylor Jones (transferred to Texas from Oregon State) has also adopted the same high elbow technique.
RE: triangle2 - BillBradley - 03-27-2023
(03-27-2023, 06:41 PM)triangle2 Wrote:Perfect, thanks t2. This is at the heart of the discussion. The Hollingshead/Brink scuffle was a heated event that happened after the play was over. Poor sportsmanship for sure. And it was Cam who threw the ball back in her face (which I loved) :> But I'm not looking for examples of bad sportsmanship or technicals or that sort of thing. Sportsmanship is a different thing altogether.(03-27-2023, 06:05 PM)BillBradley Wrote:(03-27-2023, 10:11 AM)BillBradley Wrote: I also really roll my eyes whenever I read a post about player safety, the refs better get control or someone's gonna get hurt, etc. when it comes to physical play. No one ever says that about a men's game where players are constantly being helped off the court. What would people think if the women's players and coaches whined about the game being "dangerous" at press conferences? "Oh, it's just the sissy women". These players are athletes and competitors and basketball is a contact sport. They aren't scared. They aren't whining. So why do some folks feel like they need to be protected?(03-27-2023, 10:39 AM)Leftcoast Wrote: I think it's possible you missed men's basketball as played in the 90s. That type of bully ball was rejected by many players and led to the rule changes that ALLOWED for Steph and the more free-wheeling basketball we see now. Far from allowing laissez-faire officiating, the sport ruling bodies stepped in hard to preserve the beauty of the game. In fact, a lot of players/coaches think the NBA in particular may have cracked down TOO hard on defense.Hah! My wife only wishes you were correct. I doubt there's anyone on this board who watched more basketball in the 90's than yours truly :>
I don't think we support women's advancement in sport by allowing the modern equivalent of the Pat Riley coached 90s Heat.
Sure, the rule changes helped make the men's game more open, but I don't understand what that has to do with anything I posted.
We all see things differently, and that's OK. But from my perspective, the defenses that Stanford saw this year were "physical" and "packed in", but they were not "bully ball". That term has been thrown around on this board, but I don't agree at all that's what we're seeing in the evolution of the women's sport. I'd really appreciate if someone could show me some clips of what they mean by "bully ball". There aren't players getting clotheslined out there for goodness sake. Colorado is the team that comes up in this discussion a lot. That intimidating lineup of Jaylynn Sherod, Frieda Forman, Kyndall Wetta, Quay Miller, and Aaronette Vonleh. Really?
"Physical", in my book, is part of the game, and can be used strategically to take away advantages from other teams. And while it can be very frustrating to all of us to see our players not be able to overcome it, I don't think it's ruining the sport to see physical, packed in defenses. It's an age old strategy. I just wish we would have made more layups through the contact and we would have easily advanced in the tourney.
Exhibit A: Hollingshed vs. Brink last year in the Pac-12 tournament. And, since we’re on the Colorado topic, Wetta did pick up a post-game technical this season for tossing the ball at an opposing player after the game had ended.
If you watched a lot of 90’s ball, then you remember the old ASU swiping hands to the face defense that Charli Turner-Thorne implemented with success until…the technique was essentially banned. There was a fair amount of aggressive 1v1 defending, particularly by guards on top.
I see something different now. The inside play has gotten considerably more physical, the post players are bigger/taller, and the wings are also bigger but with the same skill sets that the smaller wings used to have. We also have a return of the swiping guards, but instead of hands to the face, there is a lot of chopping at the ball, arm grabbing, and bodying up. I don’t like the way the game is heading, because teams are essentially challenging the referees to make the calls, and we all know that the average quality of a college women’s ref is honestly bad. So, teams are operating on the assumption that they’ll get away with a lot of physical play and so, you end up with teams that just play very roughly.
If you want to look at teams that play consistently over the line, Colorado is a fair example in the conference. They lost Hollingshed inside, but Sherrod is a grabber/swiper who seems to be constantly daring the refs to blow the whistle. Outside of the conference, Texas is a repeat offender. If you saw last years Texas games, there was a fair amount of bully ball going on, including several instances of a Texas post player throwing a Stanford player to the floor (Lauren Ebo was a prime offender). That team has the added demerit for also playing unfairly on the offensive end. Schaefer teaches the posts to bring the off elbow high and swing it into the body of the defender when the post player is trying to turn. Taylor Jones (transferred to Texas from Oregon State) has also adopted the same high elbow technique.
Wrt examples of rough play that you provided, I honestly don't see them or understand what you mean. I don't really recall "several instances of a Texas player throwing a post player to the floor". You say Sherrod is a grabber/swiper? What do you mean by that? She swipes at the ball? How is that being too rough? I just clicked through a bunch of the Colorado/Stanford game from Feb (it's on YouTube). It doesn't take long - love how easy it is to watch things on YouTube. Can you go to the video and pick out a few plays that are examples of what you're seeing as bully-ball? I sincerely am trying to understand.
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - martyup - 03-27-2023
I am really enjoying watching tOSU vs VT. Some great offense in this game, especially from the guards. Amore is fantastic for VT, as is Sheldon for tOSU. Both teams play clean basketball, without a lot of flops and whining to the refs. Both coaches are cool and calm and respectful to the refs, even when they disagree with a call.
I sure hope the winner of this game wipes the floor with LSU. I really believe that a coach sets the example of how to interact with refs. Teams with coaches that are constantly screaming at the refs usually have players that complain about every call. LSU is the worst in WBB in this respect.
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - chimera - 03-27-2023
The question to me is what do you want to reward when a game is officiated? What is a basketball move that takes skill vs stuff like grabbing and pushing. Grabbing, pushing, hacking and the like are not really skills that should be rewarded. Not only does physical play look ugly and hurt the fan experience, it takes skill out of the equation. Moving your feet well on defense is a skill that should be rewarded. Cleanly blocking a shot without fouling is a skill that should be rewarded. Pushing a post out of position so that you can get a rebound is not. A player who boxes out well and is in position for a rebound should not be stymied by being shoved. Shoving is not a skill. Repeatedly swatting at a dribbling player's arms and hoping the refs let it go or riding that player with the body as she tries to dribble and move (which impedes freedom of movement and is not supposed to be allowed) are not "skills" that should be rewarded.
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - WBB fan - 03-27-2023
Totally agree with previous post, enjoying the skill level in this game. I'm liking VT a lot, think they are going to prevail tonight -- and hope they wipe the floor with LSU, one of my least favorite teams in the country for a long list of reasons.
Sometime last fall, at the beginning of the season. someone on this board commented that he/she was really intrigued by the possibilities of VT, thought they had a lot of potential and might be seriously underrated at that point. I don't remember who it was, but that person, how prescient! Should we ask that really smart Crdboarder to stand up and take a bow?
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - chimera - 03-27-2023
I've enjoyed VaTech as well. I hadn't seen much of them until now. Looks like they will win, which is fine by me. South Carolina vs Iowa should be fun too. Not sure if Iowa has the size and depth to deal with SC but it will be interesting to see them try and to see if SC can contain Clark. I don't dislike SC. I just feel like they are such a heavy favorite I want to see underdogs beat them.
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - SkiBum80 - 03-27-2023
(03-27-2023, 08:02 PM)martyup Wrote: I am really enjoying watching tOSU vs VT. Some great offense in this game, especially from the guards. Amore is fantastic for VT, as is Sheldon for tOSU. Both teams play clean basketball, without a lot of flops and whining to the refs. Both coaches are cool and calm and respectful to the refs, even when they disagree with a call.Agree
I sure hope the winner of this game wipes the floor with LSU. I really believe that a coach sets the example of how to interact with refs. Teams with coaches that are constantly screaming at the refs usually have players that complain about every call. LSU is the worst in WBB in this respect.
Georgia Amoore so impressive
That’s exactly the kind of guard/player we needed this season and didn’t have
I dunno if incoming Ogden et al will meet the need, hope so
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - 76lsjumb - 03-27-2023
(03-27-2023, 08:02 PM)martyup Wrote: I am really enjoying watching tOSU vs VT. Some great offense in this game, especially from the guards. Amore is fantastic for VT, as is Sheldon for tOSU. Both teams play clean basketball, without a lot of flops and whining to the refs. Both coaches are cool and calm and respectful to the refs, even when they disagree with a call.
I sure hope the winner of this game wipes the floor with LSU. I really believe that a coach sets the example of how to interact with refs. Teams with coaches that are constantly screaming at the refs usually have players that complain about every call. LSU is the worst in WBB in this respect.
Beg to differ. Dawn Staley is every bit as bad, if not a little worse, in whining to the refs, than Mulkey, although both take a back seat to Coach Yo.
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - PVTree - 03-27-2023
Wondering if this would be a first:
Has there ever been a black, male head coach win the WBB NCAA Division 1 championship? I can't think of one at the moment.
The VaTech head coach could be breaking ground.
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - crackpot - 03-28-2023
(03-27-2023, 10:06 PM)PVTree Wrote: Wondering if this would be a first:
Has there ever been a black, male head coach win the WBB NCAA Division 1 championship? I can't think of one at the moment.
The VaTech head coach could be breaking ground.
I don't think so. He is currently the ONLY Black male coach of a Power 5 school. Should be able to read this: https://wapo.st/3TU0CHZ
RE: WBB: the NCAA tournament - BostonCard - 03-28-2023
(03-27-2023, 06:31 PM)old spanish trail Wrote: Iowa v SC could be a really interesting game. Clark is an amazing shooter. Van Lith was pretty good also. Fwiw, I think Clark and Van Lith both whine to the refs way too much. I can't think of any of our players whining much at all, if ever. Good for them.
Ref barking aside, Clark reminds me a lot of Kate Starbird. Similar size and build, and a very similar fluid motions. Clark, of course, plays PG, but I think Starbird probably could have played PG had she not been playing alongside Jamila Wideman.
BC
triangle2 - triangle2 - 03-28-2023
(03-27-2023, 07:03 PM)BillBradley Wrote:(03-27-2023, 06:41 PM)triangle2 Wrote:Perfect, thanks t2. This is at the heart of the discussion. The Hollingshead/Brink scuffle was a heated event that happened after the play was over. Poor sportsmanship for sure. And it was Cam who threw the ball back in her face (which I loved) :> But I'm not looking for examples of bad sportsmanship or technicals or that sort of thing. Sportsmanship is a different thing altogether.(03-27-2023, 06:05 PM)BillBradley Wrote: We all see things differently, and that's OK. But from my perspective, the defenses that Stanford saw this year were "physical" and "packed in", but they were not "bully ball". That term has been thrown around on this board, but I don't agree at all that's what we're seeing in the evolution of the women's sport. I'd really appreciate if someone could show me some clips of what they mean by "bully ball". There aren't players getting clotheslined out there for goodness sake. Colorado is the team that comes up in this discussion a lot. That intimidating lineup of Jaylynn Sherod, Frieda Forman, Kyndall Wetta, Quay Miller, and Aaronette Vonleh. Really?
"Physical", in my book, is part of the game, and can be used strategically to take away advantages from other teams. And while it can be very frustrating to all of us to see our players not be able to overcome it, I don't think it's ruining the sport to see physical, packed in defenses. It's an age old strategy. I just wish we would have made more layups through the contact and we would have easily advanced in the tourney.
Exhibit A: Hollingshed vs. Brink last year in the Pac-12 tournament. And, since we’re on the Colorado topic, Wetta did pick up a post-game technical this season for tossing the ball at an opposing player after the game had ended.
If you watched a lot of 90’s ball, then you remember the old ASU swiping hands to the face defense that Charli Turner-Thorne implemented with success until…the technique was essentially banned. There was a fair amount of aggressive 1v1 defending, particularly by guards on top.
I see something different now. The inside play has gotten considerably more physical, the post players are bigger/taller, and the wings are also bigger but with the same skill sets that the smaller wings used to have. We also have a return of the swiping guards, but instead of hands to the face, there is a lot of chopping at the ball, arm grabbing, and bodying up. I don’t like the way the game is heading, because teams are essentially challenging the referees to make the calls, and we all know that the average quality of a college women’s ref is honestly bad. So, teams are operating on the assumption that they’ll get away with a lot of physical play and so, you end up with teams that just play very roughly.
If you want to look at teams that play consistently over the line, Colorado is a fair example in the conference. They lost Hollingshed inside, but Sherrod is a grabber/swiper who seems to be constantly daring the refs to blow the whistle. Outside of the conference, Texas is a repeat offender. If you saw last years Texas games, there was a fair amount of bully ball going on, including several instances of a Texas post player throwing a Stanford player to the floor (Lauren Ebo was a prime offender). That team has the added demerit for also playing unfairly on the offensive end. Schaefer teaches the posts to bring the off elbow high and swing it into the body of the defender when the post player is trying to turn. Taylor Jones (transferred to Texas from Oregon State) has also adopted the same high elbow technique.
Wrt examples of rough play that you provided, I honestly don't see them or understand what you mean. I don't really recall "several instances of a Texas player throwing a post player to the floor". You say Sherrod is a grabber/swiper? What do you mean by that? She swipes at the ball? How is that being too rough? I just clicked through a bunch of the Colorado/Stanford game from Feb (it's on YouTube). It doesn't take long - love how easy it is to watch things on YouTube. Can you go to the video and pick out a few plays that are examples of what you're seeing as bully-ball? I sincerely am trying to understand.
I’m not sure I would entirely agree with you on Hollingshed v. Brink. Hollingshed’s hand shoving into Brink’s face after Brink stole the ball, plus her shoving away Lacie - both of those actions were within the scope of play. What got recreational was the fact that Hollingshed refused to disengage and Brink retaliated.
You asked for examples. From memory, a game to watch is the first Texas v. Stanford game in November 2021. I haven’t managed to rewatch that recently. But, I can start a list of the things that I think are worth you reviewing here:
Texas v. Stanford in the 2022 NCAA Tournament:
1. Ebo on offense with 7:45 to go in Q2. Ebo turns shoulder into Belibi on offense. Probably a venal sin but illustrates the physicality.
2. At 3:19 in the 2nd, Ebo clotheslines Lacie - no foul called.
3. At 1:36 in the 3rd, Ebo does the high elbow turn into Brink’s body - there are much more vivid examples of this move in the November game IIRC. Brink blocks Ebo!!
4. At 1:26 in the 3rd, Ebo retaliates on defense, shoves Brink to the floor.
It is also noteworthy that Brink picked up a foul in this game for shoving a Texas player out of the way in the key.
The Sherrod problem (using her as an example - I have nothing against her specifically) is that defenders are being allowed to use their arms to reach into the formerly protected space between the offensive player’s dribble hand and her body. As many recall from ancient memories of our own AAU ball days, that used to be a fairly automatic defensive foul. In the modern era, refs allow a considerable amount of reaching; now, the problem is that calling the foul becomes a judgment call where you never know if the refs are going to protect you. Perhaps this is why I’m seeing a resurgence of smaller, quick PGs with great ball skills. My perspective is that if the refs allow the reaching, then they need to make the call if the defender hits the offensive player’s arm/hand, if the defender’s horizontal arm extends (pushing off), or if more than de minimus physical contact occurs when the defender encroaches into the offensive player’s space.
Re-watching the Texas tournament game was helpful. You can see the difference between the Stanford lineup with the Hulls, and without. Lexie in particular could beat the close defender both by back cutting and by slashing to the basket. The 22-23 team simply lacked a slasher, and that really limited the team’s ability to beat Texas/Colorado style defense.
One wonders if some of the defensive slugfests in the tournament this year will result in some ‘points of emphasis’ for next season. I am guessing that the powers that be would rather see a free flowing high scoring game instead of some of the Elite 8 games where the teams struggle to get to over 50 points.
The coaching staff has to decide how to address the physicality. Brink gives as good as she gets, but this also results in her fouling out and sitting on the bench. The coaches have made these kind of changes before. In general over time, Stanford’s wings have gotten longer, and the guards have gotten more physical. (See e.g. the era of Jamilla Wideman and Milena Flores vs. Amber Orrange, Lepolo, etc.). I’m guessing that the staff has to look for more athleticism in the guard spots and more on-ball defensive tenacity without sacrificing offensive skills.