The CardBoard
WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - 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: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit (/thread-25497.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - TheFarm07 - 03-05-2025

In my mind, Kate has three priorities this offseason (in no particular order):


RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - PalmTree - 03-05-2025

(03-05-2025, 07:56 PM)GK3 Wrote:  
(03-05-2025, 07:04 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:  I’m feeling no postseason. Let’s just put a pin on this difficult, transitional season and move on.  If the team collectively wants to keep playing so be it. Accepting a bit to a tournament just to play another game and likely involving more travel…meh.

I have to ask, how would those who know more than I which is probably everyone, rate the reasons for years debacle.

1.  Lack of talent?
2.  Coaching?
3.  Recruiting failures?
4.  Nil?

I presume Kate is Tara's hand picked successor.  From what I have read, Tara was definitely not pro NIL or the Portal; did we even try and compete for those players we lost?  Smith has proven that the Portal can work for Stanford.  Looking at the roster it doesn't look like we have any transfers.  Is the incoming talent enough to turn the program around next year? Being the third ranked class nationally I would assume the answer is yes.  Great to have a class like this, but maybe not so great when you have to start competing in terms of NIL payments after next season.  I would expect that next year we will have a much better team, if we don't then one has to start wondering about coaching and team chemistry.
I don't like the current college sports landscape, but it is what it is.  It is a system that really doesn't work unless you are all in, at least if you want to compete for championships.

I think all 4 issues you noted contributed + the travel issues.  I might also edit talent to more specifically include quickness/athleticism.  Who is/was Smith?  Also we did have 2 transfers - Heal (Santa Clara, 8.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg) and Stevenson (Purdue, 4.5 ppg, 3.3 rpg). Just a bad, bad year overall - let's just forget  any postseason and move on

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - Nobadeer - 03-05-2025

LSJU M BB shot just 23% in the first half tonight at Notre Dame. What is it with our players and ACC road games?! Sleepwalking again and again.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - MV72018 - 03-05-2025

The scoring totals for our starters were hilariously poor. Not an inspiring finale to a mediocre season.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - Hieronymus - 03-05-2025

(03-05-2025, 08:21 PM)PalmTree Wrote:  
(03-05-2025, 07:56 PM)GK3 Wrote:  
(03-05-2025, 07:04 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:  I’m feeling no postseason. Let’s just put a pin on this difficult, transitional season and move on.  If the team collectively wants to keep playing so be it. Accepting a bit to a tournament just to play another game and likely involving more travel…meh.

I have to ask, how would those who know more than I which is probably everyone, rate the reasons for years debacle.

1.  Lack of talent?
2.  Coaching?
3.  Recruiting failures?
4.  Nil?

I presume Kate is Tara's hand picked successor.  From what I have read, Tara was definitely not pro NIL or the Portal; did we even try and compete for those players we lost?  Smith has proven that the Portal can work for Stanford.  Looking at the roster it doesn't look like we have any transfers.  Is the incoming talent enough to turn the program around next year? Being the third ranked class nationally I would assume the answer is yes.  Great to have a class like this, but maybe not so great when you have to start competing in terms of NIL payments after next season.  I would expect that next year we will have a much better team, if we don't then one has to start wondering about coaching and team chemistry.
I don't like the current college sports landscape, but it is what it is.  It is a system that really doesn't work unless you are all in, at least if you want to compete for championships.

I think all 4 issues you noted contributed + the travel issues.  I might also edit talent to more specifically include quickness/athleticism.  Who is/was Smith?  Also we did have 2 transfers - Heal (Santa Clara, 8.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg) and Stevenson (Purdue, 4.5 ppg, 3.3 rpg). Just a bad, bad year overall - let's just forget  any postseason and move on

1. travel definitely mattered.
2. severe lack of talent, especially overall athleticism. 4 key players struggled or were eliminated by quicker teams - Bosgana, Demetre, Heal and Stevenson.
-2A. Only 2 players with any ability to make something happen on offense against better defenses - Nunu and Ogden.
-2B. Porous perimeter and transition defense - screens, drives, three point defense - none of it was good.
-2C. Like of size on the roster impacted both offense and defense.
3. Maybe an offense that was too complicated for the times.
-3B. Way too many turnovers in key games, many self-inflicted and not a result of heavy pressure.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - PVTree - 03-05-2025

(03-05-2025, 08:21 PM)PalmTree Wrote:  
(03-05-2025, 07:56 PM)GK3 Wrote:  
(03-05-2025, 07:04 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:  I’m feeling no postseason. Let’s just put a pin on this difficult, transitional season and move on.  If the team collectively wants to keep playing so be it. Accepting a bit to a tournament just to play another game and likely involving more travel…meh.

I have to ask, how would those who know more than I which is probably everyone, rate the reasons for years debacle.

1.  Lack of talent?
2.  Coaching?
3.  Recruiting failures?
4.  Nil?

I presume Kate is Tara's hand picked successor.  From what I have read, Tara was definitely not pro NIL or the Portal; did we even try and compete for those players we lost?  Smith has proven that the Portal can work for Stanford.  Looking at the roster it doesn't look like we have any transfers.  Is the incoming talent enough to turn the program around next year? Being the third ranked class nationally I would assume the answer is yes.  Great to have a class like this, but maybe not so great when you have to start competing in terms of NIL payments after next season.  I would expect that next year we will have a much better team, if we don't then one has to start wondering about coaching and team chemistry.
I don't like the current college sports landscape, but it is what it is.  It is a system that really doesn't work unless you are all in, at least if you want to compete for championships.

I think all 4 issues you noted contributed + the travel issues.  I might also edit talent to more specifically include quickness/athleticism.  Who is/was Smith?  Also we did have 2 transfers - Heal (Santa Clara, 8.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg) and Stevenson (Purdue, 4.5 ppg, 3.3 rpg). Just a bad, bad year overall - let's just forget  any postseason and move on

Kyle Smith - MBB coach.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - JohnR34231 - 03-06-2025

Yeah, missed the game, but when I saw the final score I was a little shocked. We lose by double digits to a team we thought we had an excellent chance of beating.
Pretty dismal season overall. Hope for better next year, but it may be a building one.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - TheWildJacko - 03-06-2025

Is no one considering injuries as a factor?


That would decimate any team, but one also going through a coaching change as well as a league change that forces cross-country travel for 50% of conference games? The odds were never in our favor.

This team has plenty of talent but they never had a chance to gel.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - BillBradley - 03-06-2025

I think teams can have solid seasons without winning conferences, being ranked, advancing into March Madness, etc. For each individual fan, it depends on the level of expectation going into the season and what happens during the season. Lots of factors have come into play as many have posted. The question is, "given your initial expectations, the final results, and all that did happen, how do you rate the team and coach?".  I don't think the question should be "What are the list of factors that explain the final outcome?". Too me, that assumes the players and coach performed to the best of their abililties, but they just couldn't overcome the injuries, travel, etc.

For me, I give the team a C-. I've posted this many times before, and I stand by it. As an athlete, there are things that are out of your control. But the one thing you can always control is your effort. We've seen the team play hard both at home and on the road, but they just weren't consistent. How do I measure effort? With my own eyes and some of the stat sheet. Yesterday's offensive effort was pitiful. The cuts weren't sharp, the screens weren't set well, and the players (as others have posted) seemed to just want the foul call on their drives. Defensively, I won't go into all the effort problems but they are countless. And as 81 has mentioned, Demetre's line: 2 shot attempts and 0 rebounds in 21 minutes. That is an effort problem. 

Is the poor effort excusable? Sure. Sometimes things can get brutal and players will give up. Can't handle the lack of talent, the losing, don't like the coach's decisions, too much travel, <insert other factors here>. But as we all know from academics, excuses don't get you good grades. The team gets a C- from me.

For KP and staff...I'll give them a break in year one so they get an incomplete grade. But I will go on record that if I had to predict now, based on what I've seen, I don't think things bode well for the program. She's a little too robotic for me. Everything seems rehearsed. I didn't see much in game creativity. And...good coaches, regardless if you like them or not, get their teams to play hard.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - Spiny_Norman - 03-06-2025

What would you say has been (to date) the season highlight for this team?

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - 81alum - 03-06-2025

(03-06-2025, 11:14 AM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:  What would you say has been (to date) the season highlight for this team?
The highlight was Defeating a highly regarded Florida State team at Maples.  Superb all around effort and good atmosphere.

Runner-up was taking LSU to overtime on their home court.  Hard to say it was a highlight though since we lost.  But it seemed as if we could play with anyone.

I'll go on record and say that while Kate Paye had some better and some worse games this year as a coach, I actually think she did well given what she had to work with.  Namely:

1) There was not enough time to install a radically different offense after all the roster changes became apparent.  She was stuck with last year's offense and then deprived of the people who could make it work. 

2) Injuries kept the roster in constant flux.  Losing Lepolo doomed the Princeton--although it should go in any case.  Harriel should have been an important perimeter bomber--she did shoot 43% from three this year--but she played limited minutes down the stretch when we needed her.  Just as the team began to come together we lost Agara, who is still not back to her old self. 

3) Travel did not by itself cost us any game.  But before we criticize the "lack of effort" we need to consider how much of that perception is due to the steady grind of that crushing travel schedule.  Next year may not be much better--all the schools we travel to next year are the ones we did NOT travel to this year--more new situations and new routines.  Perhaps our non-freshmen will be find it more routine, but it was not routine for anyone this year.  Does no one remember the road trip to Colorado and Utah that Tara cited as the most difficult weekend in conference play?  Try moving that trip a couple thousand miles further east, and try doing it every trip.  And then note that Miami and Georgia Tech did not play a single game outside the Atlantic time zone all year until they came to Maples--except for a tournament in Hawaii in November.  And they did not perform up to their expectations either when they had to do for one week what we had to do for half our weeks.

4) We may indeed have had a deficit of talent, but whatever effect that had, it was greatly compounded with the deficit of experience.  As I documented earlier in the year, this was the least experienced Stanford WBB team I could find since records were kept.  Even one of our seniors was a first year starter.  To compound the problem, most of the ACC teams we played were loaded with transfers and grad transfers.  It was often the case that the players we put on the floor had started less than half the number of games that the players on the opposing team had started.  Sure, if we were greatly more talented than the other team we could overcome that.  But we weren't.  The lack of experience is most evident in inconsistency and emotional ups and downs that translate into uneven play.  Which we saw in spades.

The Project.  Kate has to find ways to overcome all these issues next year.  If she comes back with the Princeton I will be surprised and disappointed.  She needs to construct a new offense around Hailee Swain--one that will allow her to become the second coming of Juju, and rapidly.  An offense that can successfully start one or more freshmen.  The travel situation, for whatever we did to mitigate it--it was obviously not enough.  She needs to continue to develop Ogden, Ijiwoye, and Agara.  One idea that no one has mentioned--if Tess Heal could somehow improve her defense and quicken her three point release, she would be a real force to be reckoned with.  She shot 50% of her treys this year in volume.  I don't think even Candice or Jennifer managed to do that.  Can our coaches help her come along further?

So lots and lots for the coaches to consider and to do.  I'll be much more confident about making my own judgments after next year.  I do not expect us to return to final four form immediately, but we need to become a consistent, winning team with steadily improving players, become competitive with elite teams, make it to the NCAAs and win a couple, make noise toward the top of the ACC.  That would be a successful transition next year.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - Hieronymus - 03-06-2025

(03-06-2025, 10:13 AM)TheWildJacko Wrote:  Is no one considering injuries as a factor?

  • We lose our 3 best players to graduation/transfer.
  • We lose our starting PG to injury a few games into the season.
  • We lose Harriel, one of our main backup PGs, to injury/illness for most of the middle/back half of the season.
  • We lose our current leading scorer & rebounder, and pretty much our only true post threat, to injury for most of the back end of the season.

That would decimate any team, but one also going through a coaching change as well as a league change that forces cross-country travel for 50% of conference games? The odds were never in our favor.

This team has plenty of talent but they never had a chance to gel.

Depends on the argument you are making.

On one hand, neither Lepolo or Harriel move the needle much on most of the key team issues - turnovers but that is really it. Neither would have made this a top 25 team, or would have salvaged any of the 10+ point losses.  And they mostly won while Nunu was hurt.

On the other hand though, you could argue that Lepolo maybe swings things the good way in say 2 of the closer losses - pick from LSU, SMU, Kal2, Clemson1, UNC - and that 2 more wins maybe makes the tournament. Fair.

I am still though much more in the “on one hand camp.”

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - 81alum - 03-06-2025

(03-06-2025, 02:06 PM)Hieronymus Wrote:  On one hand, neither Lepolo or Harriel move the needle much on most of the key team issues - turnovers but that is really it.
Without Lepolo, we could not adequately run the Princeton.  It is unreasonable to ask a first year player to run the most sophisticated offense in the game.  Now, we all wish we didn't get stuck with it, but that was our only offense.  So losing Lepolo loses the offense, in great measure.

Harriel was our best three point shooter who could also defend somewhat well.  Losing her lost the perimeter battle in quite a few games.  Tess Heal hit a remarkable 50% of her shots, but she could not be played for extended minutes against certain guards, like Loyal McQueen last night.  Harriel was not a perfect defender, but she could do more than Heal could do defending those speedy guards that are all over the ACC.  Exactly the games we lost.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - BobK - 03-06-2025

In the previous 6 games post ND we averaged 78 ppg. How is that bad?
To me we just don’t have the players to play good defense.
However I’m thrilled how well Clardy and Ogden improved. Especially on offense

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - qwerty49 - 03-06-2025

(03-05-2025, 09:49 PM)Hieronymus Wrote:  
(03-05-2025, 08:21 PM)PalmTree Wrote:  
(03-05-2025, 07:56 PM)GK3 Wrote:  
(03-05-2025, 07:04 PM)Card10Fan Wrote:  I’m feeling no postseason. Let’s just put a pin on this difficult, transitional season and move on.  If the team collectively wants to keep playing so be it. Accepting a bit to a tournament just to play another game and likely involving more travel…meh.

I have to ask, how would those who know more than I which is probably everyone, rate the reasons for years debacle.

1.  Lack of talent?
2.  Coaching?
3.  Recruiting failures?
4.  Nil?

I presume Kate is Tara's hand picked successor.  From what I have read, Tara was definitely not pro NIL or the Portal; did we even try and compete for those players we lost?  Smith has proven that the Portal can work for Stanford.  Looking at the roster it doesn't look like we have any transfers.  Is the incoming talent enough to turn the program around next year? Being the third ranked class nationally I would assume the answer is yes.  Great to have a class like this, but maybe not so great when you have to start competing in terms of NIL payments after next season.  I would expect that next year we will have a much better team, if we don't then one has to start wondering about coaching and team chemistry.
I don't like the current college sports landscape, but it is what it is.  It is a system that really doesn't work unless you are all in, at least if you want to compete for championships.

I think all 4 issues you noted contributed + the travel issues.  I might also edit talent to more specifically include quickness/athleticism.  Who is/was Smith?  Also we did have 2 transfers - Heal (Santa Clara, 8.1 ppg, 2.0 rpg) and Stevenson (Purdue, 4.5 ppg, 3.3 rpg). Just a bad, bad year overall - let's just forget  any postseason and move on

1. travel definitely mattered.
2. severe lack of talent, especially overall athleticism. 4 key players struggled or were eliminated by quicker teams - Bosgana, Demetre, Heal and Stevenson.
-2A. Only 2 players with any ability to make something happen on offense against better defenses - Nunu and Ogden.
-2B. Porous perimeter and transition defense - screens, drives, three point defense - none of it was good.
-2C. Like of size on the roster impacted both offense and defense.
3. Maybe an offense that was too complicated for the times.
-3B. Way too many turnovers in key games, many self-inflicted and not a result of heavy pressure.

Your point #2 is the biggest one IMO. All 4 of them were just a step too slow to compete against most of the athletes we faced.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - Nobadeer - 03-06-2025

At least the CardBoard cares about WBB! This game thread is up to 75 comments. 

In contrast, LSJU MBB also played an ACC road game last night at ND, albeit a regular season game. Like WBB's debacle vs. Clemson, the MBB team also shot atrociously, played badly, and lost the game - but is the subject of only 15 CardBoard comments, despite having won 19 games so far, among the best W/L seasons in the past decade.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - amytmueller - 03-06-2025

We've been spoiled for so many years by having outstanding talent. Every year, we had at least two talented, experienced players to lead the team.  E.g. guards - Lexie, Kiana or forwards - Cameron, Kiki, Haley.  Lots of others going back. If they were guarded 1:1, they could make moves and score, or pass out if they were double-teamed. They didn't just wait for an open shot.

Unfortunately, we had a young and inexperienced team this year.  We were slow and passive on offense.  The announcers echoed exactly what I've been seeing -- we pass the ball a lot, but just catch it and hold it.  Then, look for someone open.  When we play slow defenses, we can find an open 3 or a back door play.  But when we play quick, suffocating defenses, we are smothered, back on our heels, and struggle to get anyone open.

The good news is that our younger players got a lot of playing time and gained experience this year.  I think Chloe had a breakout year.  Courtney came on strong later in the year. We saw that she has the physical skills to make plays, she just lacked the confidence earlier on. Shay is our quickest player.  Too many turnovers, but she will learn. I keep forgetting that Nunu is just a sophomore, she was strong from the start, but lost a little of her aggressiveness to the basket, I think.  Kennedy showed a lot of promise in the few minutes she played, especially for a freshman.  Tess and Mary Ashley will be a good supporting cast.

We have a top recruiting class coming in.  Young and inexperienced, but hopefully with more speed and talent.  It will be a daunting task for Kate and staff to (hopefully) install a new offense and bring everyone up to speed, but I'm looking forward to seeing what they can do.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - TheWildJacko - 03-06-2025

(03-06-2025, 03:59 PM)81alum Wrote:  
(03-06-2025, 02:06 PM)Hieronymus Wrote:  On one hand, neither Lepolo or Harriel move the needle much on most of the key team issues - turnovers but that is really it.
Without Lepolo, we could not adequately run the Princeton.  It is unreasonable to ask a first year player to run the most sophisticated offense in the game.  Now, we all wish we didn't get stuck with it, but that was our only offense.  So losing Lepolo loses the offense, in great measure.

Harriel was our best three point shooter who could also defend somewhat well.  Losing her lost the perimeter battle in quite a few games.  Tess Heal hit a remarkable 50% of her shots, but she could not be played for extended minutes against certain guards, like Loyal McQueen last night.  Harriel was not a perfect defender, but she could do more than Heal could do defending those speedy guards that are all over the ACC.  Exactly the games we lost.

100% agree with both of these points.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - CompSci87 - 03-06-2025

I happened to see that Clemson took Louisville to overtime today and only lost by 2.

RE: WBB: ACC Tournament thread; Stanford 46 Clemson 63 exit - old spanish trail - 03-06-2025

(03-06-2025, 10:19 PM)CompSci87 Wrote:  I happened to see that Clemson took Louisville to overtime today and only lost by 2.

I think Louisville was without Curry, the Cal transfer who is their best player.