The CardBoard
Final Exam - 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: Final Exam (/thread-3380.html)


Final Exam - 76lsjumb - 06-10-2012

Which of these two Stanford teams out-performed the other this season, all things considered -- the men's basketball team or the baseball team?  Extra credit:  Who was the better coach this season -- Dawkins or Marquess?


Re: Final Exam - OutsiderFan - 06-11-2012

(06-11-2012, 07:12 AM)garvin link Wrote:But Marquess got his team into his sport's Sweet 16. Dawkins didn't even make the tournament.

This is true.  It's also true that Stanford Baseball far under-performed its expectations, and Stanford Men's Basketball over-performed.  Obviously an NIT title means the team didn't get to the same level as Stanford Baseball (NCAA tournament).  That still seems like a more meaningful achievement than winning a regional against fairly weak competition, and getting absolutely blitzed by a team who's level the Baseball team was suppose to be on, at least going into the season.

It's an interesting question on who did a better job because Dawkins could fairly be criticized for underperforming his talent during the season, but he certainly got his charges going in the NIT.  Marquess underperformed his talent, and they really seemed to shrink from the moment in Tallahassee.  Compare that to how Stony Brook played at LSU, for example. 

Marquess had the #1 ranked recruiting class in the country last year, right?  Though Dawkins has had talent, he's not had that level of elite talent in his sport.  Therefore, I say Dawkins had the better year, all things considered.



Re: Final Exam - Kathy - 06-11-2012

1. Baseball
2. Marquess


Re: Final Exam - sheriand - 06-11-2012

I didn't follow men's basketball, so am unqualified to comment on that.  But I agree with Outsider's assessment of the baseball team and season.  We started out so very strong, and while there were ups and downs during the season, when we needed to win at the end (to improve our odds of hosting the super-regional), we lost two to Cal at Sunken.    We played okay, but not great, in the regional at home and imploded in Tallahassee.  We fell far short of our potential.  Toward the end of the season I was starting to think maybe Rusty Filter was a positive since Mark Appel was doing so well and AJ Vanegas seemed to be settling in as the closer.  But it was a dismal ending on the pitching front too.  Maybe I'm still too far lost in depression and will feel better about the season and the coaches when I get a little perspective, but right now it feels like a dismal failure to this fan.

Re: Final Exam - fullmetal - 06-11-2012

Which team earned Director's Cup points (or was closest to earning Director's Cup points)?

I'm still inclined to give Appel the benefit of the doubt w.r.t. finals and weather, although Marquess shouldn't have left him in for that long.  One decision with poor results there versus an entire conference play's worth of mediocre results for men's basketball...I think Marquess still performed better overall than Dawkins.  But we all know which team peaked at the end of the season.

Re: Final Exam - Farm93 - 06-11-2012

Now that the academic sports year is over for Stanford this type of subject will probably dominate the board.  :'(

Stanford Basketball earned 0 NACDA Points and had no chance to get the NCAA Team Title once the bracket was announced.  The team probably met expectations, but they were relatively low because most in the media now expect JD teams to be mediocre.

Stanford Baseball earned 50 NACDA points.  Though, it was darn close to not getting added to the men's top 10 tally for Stanford.  Baseball had very high expectations and did not meet those expectations.  And yet, the expectations were high in part because people know Marquess can get decent talent to the CWS.  So his own past experience raised the bar a bit.

Not sure either was great, but Stanford Baseball had a chance to bring home the NCAA Team Title in baseball.

So in terms of NCAA Team Title chances and NACDA cup points baseball had a better year.

Also since we are at it, I think it is odd that a 6th place finish in Women's Track and Field is more valuable than a second place finish in swimming & diving in my beloved Capital One Cup.  In London, I think we will discover they are closer to Olympic equals here in the USA and that a second place finisher in Olympic Swimming will be celebrated more than a 6th place finisher in any track event.

Just saying....

Re: Final Exam - fullmetal - 06-11-2012

I think you speak for all of us with that Capitol One Cup remark.  I would go even further and say it's the most useless measure of intercollegiate athletic achievement since those "Lexus Gauntlets."

Re: Final Exam - stan01 - 06-12-2012

From the title, I thought you were going to talk about the baseball team having to take finals on Friday night right after the brutal loss to FSU.  Then again, wasn't the basketball team during finals as well?  Think it doesn't make a difference?  Toby Gerhart once pulled an all nighter before an important football game (that we won).  Tangent over.

Re: Final Exam - fullmetal - 06-12-2012

From David Lombardi at Scout.com: Where Stanford's CWS hopes died