The CardBoard
WBB: Stanford 61 Arizona 46 - 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: Stanford 61 Arizona 46 (/thread-15358.html)

Pages: 1 2

Re: WBB: Stanford 61 Arizona 46 - 81alum - 01-06-2018

Well, from what Tempie said, teams do tend to play zone when they know the Princeton is coming.  But it can be an advantage to us, too, to know what is coming from the defense.  Our zone killing offense is much more than just shooting threes--for the 2-3 zone it means parking a high post around the free throw line who can shoot or pass and we have been doing a MUCH better job of doing that (with Fingall especially and Smith too) than the last couple of years when we were even more vulnerable to zone defenses.  But has anyone noticed how we have been getting more o-boards than expected and have been winning the rebounding game?  It is difficult to box out and rebound well in a zone defense, so teams have to make that sacrifice if they opt to go zone against us.

If ASU plays zone on Sunday, however, then we will need to check Revelations to see if this really is the end-time.  Rather, I predict we win or lose not on the basis of whether we shoot threes but on whether we make layups.  At least, that is what Tara has always said about defeating CTT defenses in the past.  If so, it could provide opportunities for our slashers like McPhee, Carrington, and even Sniezek. 

Re: WBB: Stanford 61 Arizona 46 - JJJ - 01-06-2018

(01-06-2018, 12:50 PM)81alum link Wrote:Well, from what Tempie said, teams do tend to play zone when they know the Princeton is coming.  But it can be an advantage to us, too, to know what is coming from the defense.  Our zone killing offense is much more than just shooting threes--for the 2-3 zone it means parking a high post around the free throw line who can shoot or pass and we have been doing a MUCH better job of doing that (with Fingall especially and Smith too) than the last couple of years when we were even more vulnerable to zone defenses.  But has anyone noticed how we have been getting more o-boards than expected and have been winning the rebounding game?  It is difficult to box out and rebound well in a zone defense, so teams have to make that sacrifice if they opt to go zone against us.

If ASU plays zone on Sunday, however, then we will need to check Revelations to see if this really is the end-time.  Rather, I predict we win or lose not on the basis of whether we shoot threes but on whether we make layups.  At least, that is what Tara has always said about defeating CTT defenses in the past.  If so, it could provide opportunities for our slashers like McPhee, Carrington, and even Sniezek.
I agree that Fingall and Smith have been very effective at the elbow, and we no longer just pass around the perimeter of a zone. I was also amazed at the O-boards we're getting (but also amazed at how many point-blank shots we were missing). So maybe the coaches feel better about our chances against a zone defense now, compared to before?

Re: WBB: Stanford 61 Arizona 46 - 2006alum - 01-06-2018

Yeah, I was really impressed by our O-boards performance, but as JJJ said, part of that comes from a lot of misses. If we were shooting more like 50% there'd be a dozen fewer missed shots to scoop up. I swear there were at least 3 times we had a miss, o-board, miss, o-board, miss sequence all within about 5 seconds and all right under the basket. And at least two other times where the third shot finally fell. But I do think our high-low post combos of Smith, Johnson, Fingall and Dodson are the best we've looked in the paint since the Ogwumike days.

Re: WBB: Stanford 61 Arizona 46 - M T - 01-07-2018

(01-06-2018, 02:29 PM)2006alum link Wrote:Yeah, I was really impressed by our O-boards performance, but as JJJ said, part of that comes from a lot of misses.

I don't know why anyone looks at total rebounds or even total O or D rebounds as those are subject to shooting percentages.  In the AZ game, we got a dominating 58% of our chances (25/43) for an offensive rebound, and a respectable 65% of our chances (26/40) for a defensive rebound.  Improve the shooting percentage and the raw numbers go down, but the rebounding percentage will stay similar.  HOWEVER, I saw our players (both big & small) getting blocked out much more effectively than we were blocking them out.  We need to improve on that.

(01-05-2018, 09:17 PM)2006alum link Wrote:Marta's ball-handling was solid as always, with 5 assists, 3 steals, and only 2 turnovers (one of which I think was Romano's fault when she misread the play and moved in just as Sniezek passed to her).
I would make that  3 or 4 assists, 2 steals, and 3 turnovers.

Marta has improved her ball handler defense (but is lacking when they go to the basket) and reduced her mistakes.  She's improved some on her refusal to shoot. She's doing well on blocks after her opponent is in front of her.  But look again at 8:52 in the second.  Marta gets credited for a steal when  one opponent knocks the ball out of her teammate's hands. Marta comes up with it, but that was a unforced turnover, not a steal.  Then seconds later, Marta is dribbling the ball, and an opponent knocks the ball away from her.  Dijonai comes up with the ball and scores, which was (mis)scored as an assist for Marta.  If you question the turnover you mentioned, then scroll ahead to 6:52 when Marta does a slow bounce pass that gets knocked away by a defender and Brittany fouls the defender in the scramble for the loose ball.  The TO was charged to Brittany, when IMO, it was a shared TO.  Then at 5:17, Marta gets credit for an assist, when her pass was first touched by the defender, but Alanna wins the scramble and scores.  It is unfortunate that Marta is credited with a TO for that pass you mention at 0:56, but someone had to be, and she's the one that threw it across the court to an open area when she has no eye contact with the recipient (there is a player in the way).

As for defense, watch Marta at 8:51 in the 3rd, and then 8:01.  I would call her play poor at 6:35 in the 3rd (not giving Alanna a place to pass to after putting her in a pickle), and the inbound play at 6:11 (not passing to first open player), and the slow walk on a fast break at 7:26 in the 4th, and a failure to block out at 5:42, the inbound turnover at 5:11, and the failure to try to steal the ball back immediately upon coming inbounds.

I'm happy about how the team is doing, even Marta.  But I wouldn't call her play solid.