The CardBoard
WBB: Stanford 69 Oregon 42 - 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 69 Oregon 42 (/thread-11641.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

Re: WBB: Stanford 69 Oregon 42 - BostonCard - 02-29-2016

The band was at the Pac-12 football championship, which, though not far, was still off campus.  So shouldn't the Pac-12 WBB championship be considered "post-season"?

BC

Re: WBB: Stanford 69 Oregon 42 - M T - 02-29-2016

(02-29-2016, 10:51 AM)FarmDad.01 link Wrote:Since only five players can start, the main question heading into the postseason is two small guards or one. If Tara goes with two, expect McPhee on the bench for the opening tip.

Some 30-game stats:

Min/game -- Thompson, 31. Roberson, 24. McPhee, 17.
Pts/game -- Thompson, 14.4. Roberson, 6.2. McPhee, 6.8.
Reb (total) -- Thompson, 102. Roberson, 67. McPhee, 95.
FTA (total) -- Thompson, 99. Roberson, 37. McPhee, 72.

The last two lines suggest a productive aggressiveness, for a non-big, that in recent years I feel only Toni Kokenis has matched. Which is why I think McPhee should start, probably at the 3 with Samuelson at the 2.

I don't see a downside if Thompson and Roberson stay fresher by sharing the 1.

I'll point out those stats are only looking under the streetlight at the offensive end, and only part of that end. 
Clearly McPhee is out-rebounding Thompson and getting more FTA per playing minute.  But Thompson has many more assists per 40 minutes than McPhee, but also a few more TO per 40 minutes.  None of those measures anything about the defensive end.

If you use the conference games as a proxy for "What are you doing for me now?", Lili has played 509 minutes and scored 198 pts, for 15.6 pts/40 minutes.  Brittany has played 326 minutes and scored 140 points, for 17.2 pts/40 minutes.  (Erica is at 18.8/40 min; Karlie is 11.9/40min).  (Again, this reflects only a portion of the offensive end of the game.)


But that isn't the point.  The point is the team seemed to perform much better without Thompson than they have with her.  The former is a small sample.  The latter is a large sample.    If the game started with Thompson on the bench, it wouldn't be because Thompson was benched, in a pejorative sense;  it would be because Stanford did very well with the other lineup.

I have to say I wondered if a way to have approached the problems Stanford had with the single outstanding player (Chiney) was to put her on the bench to make the other players step up.  Usually that would take some time for the players to figure out their roles.  In this case, Bird stepped right up and started shooting like she's never shot before.  Indeed, everyone was shooting better.  (As one article pointed out, against OSU, Bird had the worst shooting percentage among the starters.)  The defense played super tight with very good switching.  The passes were generally sharper.

Maybe the change of line-up had nothing to do with the improved performance.  Maybe something else changed in their preparation.  Maybe it was the loss of Lili's grandfather and the season-ending injury to Alleyne that made them play like there is no next quarter.  Maybe it was a self-fulfilling dose of confidence.

But the line-up change was the most obvious thing I saw.    If the Oregon schools said they'd like a do-over so we could add Lili into our line-up, I'd decline.

I do think when we see Lili out on the court, she's a talented basketball player, perhaps the most talented on the team.  I don't think the coach's responsibility is to play the most talented players, but to get the best results out of the team each year.

While we use statistics to try to model the players and the game, the players aren't statistics.  Starting the game with Lili on the bench will affect the players, perhaps dramatically.  I actually don't think Tara will do that (but if she did, I wouldn't second guess her).    I'll bet she's using the play of last weekend to instil confidence, and maybe to knock some heads with the idea that maybe they really weren't playing as hard as they thought they were.

On the other hand, I hope she's also positioning the team to be more flexible, and to make it tougher for the other coaches to "Tara" the best player(s) on her team.  (Have I coined a new term?  Nah, I bet someone else has used it before.)


Do you think it has ever happened before, that the ESPNw player of the week had the worst shooting percentage of the starters on her team for one of the games of the week?


Re: WBB: Stanford 69 Oregon 42 - JJJ - 02-29-2016

(02-29-2016, 01:57 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:The band was at the Pac-12 football championship, which, though not far, was still off campus.  So shouldn't the Pac-12 WBB championship be considered "post-season"?

BC

That was my logic for inquiring, but the answer was "no." If we host the NCAA, the band will obviously be there. Should we advance, hopefully the powers that be will allow the band to travel. :(

Re: WBB: Stanford 69 Oregon 42 - FarmDad.01 - 02-29-2016

The first half of the season, the Cardinal offense was waffle around the perimeter until the shot clock was down to ~10. In short, stagnant.

But in its last 10 games, Stanford is 9-1. The OT loss to ASU wasn't helped by a defensive lapse in the waning seconds; the only other close contest was Battle of the Bay II (60-55).

Somehow the team figured out ways to unclog the middle. Was it Samuelson starting to pump fake, then drive for a mid-range jumper? Was it McPhee, and sometimes Smith, willing to attack the hoop off the dribble? Was it McCall finally willing to trust her perimeter shot?

What most impressed me about the weekend's Oregon games was the speed and sureness of the passing, the high number of assisted baskets. Something has definitely changed in addition to confidence. When Thompson resumes the court, she'll no longer need to dribble right, dribble left, looking looking looking. I'm quite optimistic about Seattle.

Re: WBB: Stanford 69 Oregon 42 - CompSci87 - 02-29-2016

One impression I had was a lot more movement by the players without the ball. One of my seatmates who is very knowledgeable spotted a certain type of pass off the pick and roll she hadn't seen us use before. Of course Bird is shooting the jumper more and more and hitting it at a great rate. I recall the announcers for the Oregon game pointing out the offense mixing it up and doing different things each time down the floor. Etc. Overall, I think a lot of the offensive improvement is down to the coaches adding more to the offense over the course of the season as the players become ready for it, as well as players improving their skills and gaining confidence.

Re: WBB: Stanford 69 Oregon 42 - 81alum - 02-29-2016

(02-29-2016, 09:14 PM)CompSci87 link Wrote:One impression I had was a lot more movement by the players without the ball. One of my seatmates who is very knowledgeable spotted a certain type of pass off the pick and roll she hadn't seen us use before.
Did you mean the little bounce passes?  The number of those has exploded over the last few games.  But there have also been a lot more passes to the screener breaking for the basket.  Last year the pick and roll was more the pick and curl.  The guards kept the ball nearly every time.  Now they distribute a lot more after the pick, and more often than not it is with a bounce pass to get the ball in through the paint.  That really started in earnest on our road trip to Utah and Colorado and has continued at home last weekend.

Edit:  I went looking for some highlights of our games to point this out and I couldn't find any....highlights.  As I thought about it I realized that I haven't seen those little weekly highlight reels for a few years now--probably since the Pac-12 network came in.  It used to be that someone put together a few minutes of highlights from each game and posted them on Stanford WBB youtube channel.  They also showed them on the Maples screen prior to the next home game.  Now, where do we go for highlights of the games?  I'm also irritated that the Pac 12 network doesn't keep the old games available the way ESPN does on a replay service.  So while all the games are televised, our access to replays seem worse than before we got the Pac 12 network.  What passes for highlights on the Pac 12 network is just a game summary and sometimes an interview.

Re: WBB: Stanford 69 Oregon 42 - M T - 03-01-2016

It would seem that the PAC-12 conference/network  (which is running things now?  It is getting confusing) could give permission to the schools to put the full games up either on their sites or on Youtube.  Maybe the FB team might make some money ("Buy the 2015-16 Rose Bowl season ...") but other sports likely wouldn't.  Looking further backwards, I was thinking it would be fun to watch some of the games from the '90 and '92 WBB season, as part of the 1K WBB celebration.  Or watch an old Janet Evans swim, or Pablo Morales.

I do have all or almost all of this year's Stanford WBB games on TiVo and most of last year's (but I lost the one game I went back to look at).  Actually, I went back and watched the Stanford@UCLA first half tonight, and took notes.  Karlie did one of her passes where she starts to drive and does a no-look pass to someone else back on the 3pt line.  It's a similar bounce pass to the pick & roll, but no pick involved.

Will we beat UCLA if we play them again?  I think so.  Still, we were only down 14 at the half and could have made it up.