The CardBoard
Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 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: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament (/thread-6851.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - CompSci87 - 03-13-2014

(03-13-2014, 10:46 AM)garvin link Wrote:
Quote:“We want to be playing for a [conference] championship,” Muir said. “We think we have the caliber of kids who can do that. And we want to play in the NCAA (tournament). The goal has always been and will not change: We want to play well into March on the grand stage of March Madness.”

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2013/03/16/dawkins-given-one-more-chance/

Though that falls well short of saying the team must be in the tournament or else, it seems pretty clear he saw the tournament as a goal.

"Well into March" sounds like the goal is more than going out in the first round of NCAA play. But the quote doesn't say one and done this year will get Dawkins fired either. So who knows.

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - 76lsjumb - 03-13-2014

(03-13-2014, 02:11 PM)garvin link Wrote:Maybe. But do you want to lay a bet on whether, if the team makes the NCAA tournament, Dawkins gets fired? It would give you a chance to win back all the money you would have lost if you'd bet with me about Dawkins' future performance back in the days when you were, let's say, insanely deluded.

Actually, my fear is that you're right.  That is what has made this season so agonizing, given the way it has unfolded.  Your earlier sentiment -- "But I don't see how anybody, anytime, can root against players with a block S on their chests" -- is one that I share uneqivocally.  Thus, the agony.

With every rudderless offensive possession, every head-scratching substitution, and every blown lead against seemingly less-talented opposition, I find myself rooting for a defensive stop, followed by a Randle 3, just to get that lead back and win this thing... all the while realizing that doing so greatly increases the chances that such scenarios will continue for yet another season [or more].

As for my earlier position, I don't think it was an insane delusion to insist that Dawkins be given at least a couple of seasons to prove he could do a good job as a head coach, even if he ultimately [or at least so far] has not done so.

On the other hand, I'm pretty sure I'm going to win Warren Buffett's Bracket Challenge this year, so there's that...

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - BobK - 03-13-2014

The AD is full of people who have watched our decline.  Former BBer Earl Koberlien being one up close.  Or Muir can turn around and ask John A his thoughts.  Said tongue in cheek as you can bet they have talked.    My strong guess is lack a attendance by general fans, students and even those who are season ticket holders will be straw. 

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - Leftcoast - 03-13-2014

Jon Wilner on Dawkins:

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2014/03/13/stanford-basketball-dawkins-decision-looms-for-ad-bernard-muir/#more-35280

Some excerpts:

*  Wilner believes this is a tough call with Dawkins neither winning or losing enough to make the choice clear either way.

*  He believes, like Garvin, that Muir is looking for reasons to keep Dawkins.

*  The column catches the fan discomfort with the program.  Yeah, I think columnists read fan boards these days.

*  He closes with a zinger that hurts because it is so true.

Quote:As was the case last season, I believe Muir is looking for reasons to bring Dawkins back.

And if that happens, if there is a Year 7, then Dawkins could pass along a note of appreciation to the two men who have made it happen: Muir, and David Shaw.

Football school.

It didn't use to be.






Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - StanFan88 - 03-13-2014

(03-13-2014, 07:02 AM)FarmBoy link Wrote:Count me as a pessimist who will not be disappointed if we get into the NCAA. I am hopeful that Muir is smart enough to recognize that we've underachieved and make a change at the top, even if we do make the tournament. I guess that will smack of lack of trustworthiness after publicly saying things that would lead one to believe that NCAA = Dawkins stays, no NCAA = Dawkins is gone. But he has to see that the team could be so much better than it is. Still, I stayed up until 2AM EST to watch them scratch out a win against one of the worst teams in the league. I root for our boys no matter the circumstances. But I'm still hoping for a change.

Actually Muir never said that Dawkins would stay if they made NCAAs, only implied very strongly that he would go if they didn't.  I think he's going to hear very loudly from the fan base that even with a bid a change is needed.  6th place and another season of losing more close games than they won tells me that Dawkins is a mediocre coach and since when does Stanford stand for mediocrity - in ANYTHING?  Maples will be cavernously quiet next season if Dawkins stays.

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - 76lsjumb - 03-13-2014

Cal goes down, 59-56.  With Utah exiting earlier by a large margin, that leaves six Pac-12 candidates.  If we don't stink up the joint tonight, and barring too many bizarre conference tourney results elsewhere, we probably squeak in...

Looking forward to that Thursday 10:00 am [west coast time] opener in Buffalo...  ::)

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - BostonCard - 03-13-2014

I will admit to a little schadenfreude at Cal probably being on the wrong side of the NCAA bubble at this point, especially if there are any upsets in the conference tournaments.  I will always be thankful to Monty for the incredible run he took us on, but I can't say I wouldn't be happy if he wasn't quite as successful on the other side of the Bay. (sorry about the triple negative there).

As for our own team, it is looking increasingly like we will make it to the tournament, which is something to be celebrated, full stop.  As long as Dawkins is our coach, I will hope that he proves me wrong and that he continues to win.  I hope that Muir has the wisdom to make the right decision, no matter how we do in this year.  If I were Muir, I'd probably let Dawkins go, barring a big run to end the season (like making the finals or winning the P12 tournament and making it into the elite eight or further in the tournament), but if Muir keeps Dawkins on, I will hope that he is successful next year.

BC
 

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - BostonCard - 03-13-2014

UCLA blew by Oregon, which means so far in 7 games the favorites have won each and every one (Cal was nominally seeded higher than Colorado, but let's face it, nobody thought Cal was the better team).  If the pattern holds, ASU will beat us, but there has to be an upset at some point, so why not us (Dawkins pessimists, don't answer).

BC

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - StanFan88 - 03-13-2014

(03-13-2014, 09:59 AM)garvin link Wrote:ps: Don't kid yourselves. If he makes the tournament, Dawkins is certainly coming back. Muir said he wanted to see the team in the NCAAs. Moving the line further back will make potential applicants skittish.

Don't forget that Muir also said that he expects the team to compete for a conference title.  If you had an employee who was OK at one half of his job and an absolute failure at the other half, would you keep him or fire him?  If you keep him, what does that say about you?  That's the frame of reference I will have when looking at Muir and Dawkins.

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - Card Fan in OR - 03-13-2014

Am I missing something here (no commentary, either)? Our guys look pretty good to me tonight: Good defense, really good rebounding, decent offense, and a 13 point lead with 12 minutes to go.

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - BostonCard - 03-13-2014

Stunned silence?

65-49 after a 14-4 run with 5:21 to go in the game.  Randall with a brobdingnagian 3, Randall with a steal and Brown with the stuff.  Who kidnapped our team and replaced them with a group that can play as a team?

BC

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - jeboody - 03-13-2014

Missed the game, came home and expected a L, so I was pleasantly surprised - shocked, even - at the 21pt victory.

This game plus our other solid victories just makes it more frustrating because they are proof of how well this team could play.

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - czaja - 03-13-2014

Well, that was a pleasant surprise.  That was easily the most aggressive I've seen the team in a long time.  I wish we had seen a lot more of that during the season, but better than never, I suppose.  Hopefully they have some gas left in the tank for UCLA.

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - StanFan88 - 03-13-2014

That was hands down the best half I have seen Stanford play in the last six years.  If they can sustain it tomorrow they have a good chance to beat UCLA.  But that's always been the question mark - consistency.

They showed tonight what they are capable of doing.  Gotta bring it again tomorrow.

Book it - BostonCard - 03-13-2014

79 - 58 on a day when pretty much everything went right for Stanford in the second half but the final three from ASU.  It is hard to believe that this is the same team that has looked so pedestrian at times.  This is the sort of thing that makes me super frustrated when we underperform, because I'm convinced we can actually be a good team.  This is the sort of game that I was hoping we'd see more of this year.

The upside, of course, is that we actually have a chance to beat UCLA tomorrow and Arizona (or Colorado) on Saturday.  But for the lack of depth and the fact that we'd be playing four games in four days, I'd say we actually have a pretty good chance of at least making it to the finals.  And depending on our seed, we could make a tournament run.  Of course, with this team's inconsistency, we could fall on our faces tomorrow, and then lay an egg in the first round of the tournament.

But at least we'll be making the tournament, barring an inexplicable decision by the committee.  Now it's just a question of seeding.

BC

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - stanfan95118 - 03-13-2014

Powell seemed more composed than normal; made some nice plays. Brown played well also, though he continues to miss some shots at the rim that he should put down.

I thought they also executed the triangle fairly well and took decent shots

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - BostonCard - 03-13-2014

(03-13-2014, 10:45 PM)garvin link Wrote:A very impressive Stanford showing versus a pretty lackluster one by ASU; they shot just 40 percent from the field, including a lot of open looks that went astray, while we hit 55 percent -- 44 percent from the arc. Dwight Powell had his best gamehalf in a while, going six for eight from the field.

The downside: Chasson Randle, Josh Huestis and Powell all played 30 minutes or more for the second straight night. I'm not sure how much is left in the tank for UCLA tomorrow.

There, I fixed it for you.  I think he was scoreless in the first half with a pair of fouls, but showed a little bit of everything in the second, including a three just after the announcers were talking about what a poor three point shooter he was, to put us up 72-51 to pretty much seal the victory. 

BC

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - burger - 03-13-2014

Game ball to Dwight Powell.  Or, at the very least, he gets the award for Most Improved Player Since the Regular Season.  6-8 shooting tonight, 6-10 last night, 3-3 on 3 pointers so far in the P12 Tournament, and only 3 turnovers in that span.  Where was this guy during conference play?

Hopefully we have one more good effort in us.  I don't think we can beat Arizona, but we already got UCLA once this year. 

(And since it's against site rules to finish a MBB post without criticizing Dawkins: Damn you Dawkins for making me stay up until 2 am again tomorrow!!!)

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - scorecard - 03-13-2014

Call us Kreskin because we are bending some ASU forks this year.  We extinguished their hopes in football TWICE, rained on their parade in the Pac-12 basketball tournament, AND exorcised Casey Tucker from their own backyard.  University of Sparky must hate us. 

Re: Not sure why I am, but Pac-12 tournament - Viking_Guy - 03-14-2014

Nice game for most, nice half for Powell - the two fouls he committed in the first 7 minutes had the potential to make him a goat.  Especially because they were both SO dumb - jumping into a shooter coming off a pick and a couple of minutes later trying to slap the ball away from ASU's center as he held the ball well out of Powell's reach.

Biggest thing was (1) keeping Carson out of the lane, dropping off him outside and draping a longer defender (Brown or Huestis, most often) over him to deny him easy looks, and (2) scrambling and helping, which was helped by the Sun Devils missing a lot of shots early.

That said, what the heck was Bachynski doing sitting on the bench most of the second half?  He'd missed some easy shots, sure, but he'd also pretty much gotten our top three inside players in foul trouble.  I think the ASU guards were too used to him being back there late in the game; lots of overplaying on the perimeter led to some really easy drives inside in his absence.  And on offense, he was drawing a lot of attention, even if he was being single covered; early on, Brown got burned on backdoor cuts twice as he was watching to see if he had to help on Bachynski in the high post.  That attention led to a lot of the scrambling that got good looks in the first half.

And given that Bachynski was sitting, WHY WASN'T POWELL CAMPED IN THE POST?  He had Gilling on him, who he has at least 3 inches on and a big speed/power advantage.  Instead, he was camping out at the three point line, while Huestis was trying to set up inside.  The late run (and ASU folding the tent with about 5 minutes left) disguised it, but there was a stretch midway through the second half when ASU's tallest player on the floor was maybe 6'7" or 6'8", and we were hoisting up contested outside jumpers.

In any case, happy that the good guys win.  Hope they can play a complete game tomorrow - they can't have their normal 3-4 minute lapses against UCLA.

VG