03-27-2014, 06:27 PM
Okay, now let's have a crazy finish and win this one with a buzzer beater.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
Stanford vs. Dayton Game Thread
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
03-27-2014, 06:29 PM
(03-27-2014, 06:27 PM)martyup link Wrote:Okay, now let's have a crazy finish and win this one with a buzzer beater.
Not today.
(03-27-2014, 06:27 PM)martyup link Wrote:Okay, now let's have a crazy finish and win this one with a buzzer beater.
Not today.
03-27-2014, 06:38 PM
Was it worth a week of excitement to keep Dawkins around another year? I mean this tournament helped us in the directors cup, but it's going to be hard to watch next year.Â
03-27-2014, 06:39 PM
(03-27-2014, 06:31 PM)martyup link Wrote:I know. Just wishing.
Sigh. But hey, fine season and the tournament exceeded expectations.
(03-27-2014, 06:31 PM)martyup link Wrote:I know. Just wishing.
Sigh. But hey, fine season and the tournament exceeded expectations.
03-27-2014, 06:43 PM
(03-27-2014, 06:38 PM)Treefence link Wrote:Was it worth a week of excitement to keep Dawkins around another year? I mean this tournament helped us in the directors cup, but it's going to be hard to watch next year.Another year? Two at least.
03-27-2014, 06:46 PM
(03-27-2014, 06:38 PM)Treefence link Wrote:Was it worth a week of excitement to keep Dawkins around another year? I mean this tournament helped us in the directors cup, but it's going to be hard to watch next year.
I think that is a cynical way of looking at things. Although I am not convinced that this marks a turning point with Dawkins, I am hopeful that his coaching will continue to improve. Although we will miss Huestis and Powell, next year, we will have three seniors in Randall, Brown, and Nastic. That's not a bad core to build around. Hopefully we will be more healthy, and we are bringing in an impressive freshman class. I will continue to have high expectations for Stanford basketball.
BC
(03-27-2014, 06:38 PM)Treefence link Wrote:Was it worth a week of excitement to keep Dawkins around another year? I mean this tournament helped us in the directors cup, but it's going to be hard to watch next year.
I think that is a cynical way of looking at things. Although I am not convinced that this marks a turning point with Dawkins, I am hopeful that his coaching will continue to improve. Although we will miss Huestis and Powell, next year, we will have three seniors in Randall, Brown, and Nastic. That's not a bad core to build around. Hopefully we will be more healthy, and we are bringing in an impressive freshman class. I will continue to have high expectations for Stanford basketball.
BC
03-27-2014, 06:48 PM
I've got to hand it to the Dayton Flyers. They played their hearts out and beat us. I wish them luck next round.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
03-27-2014, 06:50 PM
(03-27-2014, 06:45 PM)needle link Wrote:What's up with Elmore hyping Dawkins?
Nastic and Randle and ??? next year.
Why I hate CBS: "Have no fear. Dawkins has this team pointed in the right direction..."
Tonight looked EXACTLY like we've looked all season, actually the past two or three seasons. And we'll likely look next season.
We'll win a couple of good games; we'll lose a couple of stinkers. You won't be able to predict which games are going to be which. And we'll end up in the middle of the conference. That's not pointed in any direction.
(03-27-2014, 06:45 PM)needle link Wrote:What's up with Elmore hyping Dawkins?
Nastic and Randle and ??? next year.
Why I hate CBS: "Have no fear. Dawkins has this team pointed in the right direction..."
Tonight looked EXACTLY like we've looked all season, actually the past two or three seasons. And we'll likely look next season.
We'll win a couple of good games; we'll lose a couple of stinkers. You won't be able to predict which games are going to be which. And we'll end up in the middle of the conference. That's not pointed in any direction.
03-27-2014, 06:53 PM
(03-27-2014, 06:50 PM)76lsjumb link Wrote:Why I hate CBS: "Have no fear. Dawkins has this team pointed in the right direction..."
Right now they are pointed in the direction of the bus. That's not the right direction tonight.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
(03-27-2014, 06:50 PM)76lsjumb link Wrote:Why I hate CBS: "Have no fear. Dawkins has this team pointed in the right direction..."
Right now they are pointed in the direction of the bus. That's not the right direction tonight.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
03-27-2014, 06:54 PM
Perhaps what Muir needs to say is that "we expect to be playing into April..."
03-27-2014, 06:59 PM
If you consider all the deficiencies, a 10 pt loss is pretty reasonable. Not that there are any moral victories, losing to an 11 seed as a 10 seed, but all things considered, it was pretty close.
If you consider all the deficiencies, a 10 pt loss is pretty reasonable. Not that there are any moral victories, losing to an 11 seed as a 10 seed, but all things considered, it was pretty close.
03-27-2014, 07:03 PM
(03-27-2014, 06:59 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:If you consider all the deficiencies, a 10 pt loss is pretty reasonable. Not that there are any moral victories, losing to an 11 seed as a 10 seed, but all things considered, it was pretty close.
True. But, we had a couple of pretty good losses this season.
And that's got to be one of the saddest sentences I've written in a while...
(03-27-2014, 06:59 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:If you consider all the deficiencies, a 10 pt loss is pretty reasonable. Not that there are any moral victories, losing to an 11 seed as a 10 seed, but all things considered, it was pretty close.
True. But, we had a couple of pretty good losses this season.
And that's got to be one of the saddest sentences I've written in a while...
03-27-2014, 08:00 PM
Wait, really? I saw coaching deficiencies as central to that game.
One typical coaching error that hurt Dawkins especially today: coaches love to withdraw players in foul trouble. In general, that should be discouraged: all you're doing is voluntarily fouling people out (in exchange for certainty that you'll get a player for late, yet high-leverage minutes). But given Stanford's struggles to do much of anything when Nastic was absent, and given the large leads, Dawkins should have been electroshocked whenever he withdrew him in the second half, when it was beyond obvious Nastic was the best player on the floor and Dayton had little answers for him.
It took Dawkins far too long to recognize the zone stunk.
Then there are the persistent mental errors by players. I thought an early handoff play that ended in a turnover exemplified it well. On a handoff play you're facing the prospective ballhandler. So you should be able to tell that your toss will end in a turnover but *fllooooopppp* failure anyway.
The depressing frequency with which Nastic (or, to lesser extent, Powell) would establish quality post position and be passed over was, well, depressing. And it was depressing it took so long to figure out that Nastic and Powell would be lethal in the low post in the first place: Dayton is an awfully small team.
So, yeah, maybe Stanford loses with more competent coaching, but I would've liked to run it back with a merely average coach.
One typical coaching error that hurt Dawkins especially today: coaches love to withdraw players in foul trouble. In general, that should be discouraged: all you're doing is voluntarily fouling people out (in exchange for certainty that you'll get a player for late, yet high-leverage minutes). But given Stanford's struggles to do much of anything when Nastic was absent, and given the large leads, Dawkins should have been electroshocked whenever he withdrew him in the second half, when it was beyond obvious Nastic was the best player on the floor and Dayton had little answers for him.
It took Dawkins far too long to recognize the zone stunk.
Then there are the persistent mental errors by players. I thought an early handoff play that ended in a turnover exemplified it well. On a handoff play you're facing the prospective ballhandler. So you should be able to tell that your toss will end in a turnover but *fllooooopppp* failure anyway.
The depressing frequency with which Nastic (or, to lesser extent, Powell) would establish quality post position and be passed over was, well, depressing. And it was depressing it took so long to figure out that Nastic and Powell would be lethal in the low post in the first place: Dayton is an awfully small team.
So, yeah, maybe Stanford loses with more competent coaching, but I would've liked to run it back with a merely average coach.
Wait, really? I saw coaching deficiencies as central to that game.
One typical coaching error that hurt Dawkins especially today: coaches love to withdraw players in foul trouble. In general, that should be discouraged: all you're doing is voluntarily fouling people out (in exchange for certainty that you'll get a player for late, yet high-leverage minutes). But given Stanford's struggles to do much of anything when Nastic was absent, and given the large leads, Dawkins should have been electroshocked whenever he withdrew him in the second half, when it was beyond obvious Nastic was the best player on the floor and Dayton had little answers for him.
It took Dawkins far too long to recognize the zone stunk.
Then there are the persistent mental errors by players. I thought an early handoff play that ended in a turnover exemplified it well. On a handoff play you're facing the prospective ballhandler. So you should be able to tell that your toss will end in a turnover but *fllooooopppp* failure anyway.
The depressing frequency with which Nastic (or, to lesser extent, Powell) would establish quality post position and be passed over was, well, depressing. And it was depressing it took so long to figure out that Nastic and Powell would be lethal in the low post in the first place: Dayton is an awfully small team.
So, yeah, maybe Stanford loses with more competent coaching, but I would've liked to run it back with a merely average coach.
One typical coaching error that hurt Dawkins especially today: coaches love to withdraw players in foul trouble. In general, that should be discouraged: all you're doing is voluntarily fouling people out (in exchange for certainty that you'll get a player for late, yet high-leverage minutes). But given Stanford's struggles to do much of anything when Nastic was absent, and given the large leads, Dawkins should have been electroshocked whenever he withdrew him in the second half, when it was beyond obvious Nastic was the best player on the floor and Dayton had little answers for him.
It took Dawkins far too long to recognize the zone stunk.
Then there are the persistent mental errors by players. I thought an early handoff play that ended in a turnover exemplified it well. On a handoff play you're facing the prospective ballhandler. So you should be able to tell that your toss will end in a turnover but *fllooooopppp* failure anyway.
The depressing frequency with which Nastic (or, to lesser extent, Powell) would establish quality post position and be passed over was, well, depressing. And it was depressing it took so long to figure out that Nastic and Powell would be lethal in the low post in the first place: Dayton is an awfully small team.
So, yeah, maybe Stanford loses with more competent coaching, but I would've liked to run it back with a merely average coach.
03-27-2014, 08:15 PM
(03-27-2014, 08:00 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Wait, really? I saw coaching deficiencies as central to that game.
One typical coaching error that hurt Dawkins especially today: coaches love to withdraw players in foul trouble. In general, that should be discouraged: all you're doing is voluntarily fouling people out (in exchange for certainty that you'll get a player for late, yet high-leverage minutes).
It's typical because there is such a thing as fatigue. If you saw Nastic's last two fouls, you would have noticed they were fatigue driven.Â
Were there not such a thing as fatigue that make fouls more likely, yes, you should not withdraw players in foul trouble.
Dayton was a deeper, faster team and they exposed us. Had Gage been able to hit some 3s our bench might have kept it closer. Had he an inside game, same thing.
(03-27-2014, 08:00 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Wait, really? I saw coaching deficiencies as central to that game.
One typical coaching error that hurt Dawkins especially today: coaches love to withdraw players in foul trouble. In general, that should be discouraged: all you're doing is voluntarily fouling people out (in exchange for certainty that you'll get a player for late, yet high-leverage minutes).
It's typical because there is such a thing as fatigue. If you saw Nastic's last two fouls, you would have noticed they were fatigue driven.Â
Were there not such a thing as fatigue that make fouls more likely, yes, you should not withdraw players in foul trouble.
Dayton was a deeper, faster team and they exposed us. Had Gage been able to hit some 3s our bench might have kept it closer. Had he an inside game, same thing.
03-27-2014, 08:23 PM
I hope the team gets some level of love on campus next week. I also hope that getting to the second week really helps the team build for better things in 2014-2015.
Then my final wish, hopefully this tournament appearance will help JD become a more creative, dynamic and innovative coach.
Then my final wish, hopefully this tournament appearance will help JD become a more creative, dynamic and innovative coach.
I hope the team gets some level of love on campus next week. I also hope that getting to the second week really helps the team build for better things in 2014-2015.
Then my final wish, hopefully this tournament appearance will help JD become a more creative, dynamic and innovative coach.
Then my final wish, hopefully this tournament appearance will help JD become a more creative, dynamic and innovative coach.
03-27-2014, 08:29 PM
(03-27-2014, 08:15 PM)oman link Wrote:It's typical because there is such a thing as fatigue. If you saw Nastic's last two fouls, you would have noticed they were fatigue driven.Â
Were there not such a thing as fatigue that make fouls more likely, yes, you should not withdraw players in foul trouble.
It may be typical because of fatigue, but coaches end up playing these players fewer minutes than they usually do -- hence the voluntary foul-out. Nastic played 20 minutes. It's hard for me to believe he was fatigued. Making poor decisions? Sure. Fatigued? Doubt it. If he were, that's a massive indictment of the conditioning staff; I find it hard to believe a D-I player can't play more than 20 minutes without injury playing a role. (Which, to be fair, might play a role if the staff were keeping it secret.)
(03-27-2014, 08:15 PM)oman link Wrote:It's typical because there is such a thing as fatigue. If you saw Nastic's last two fouls, you would have noticed they were fatigue driven.Â
Were there not such a thing as fatigue that make fouls more likely, yes, you should not withdraw players in foul trouble.
It may be typical because of fatigue, but coaches end up playing these players fewer minutes than they usually do -- hence the voluntary foul-out. Nastic played 20 minutes. It's hard for me to believe he was fatigued. Making poor decisions? Sure. Fatigued? Doubt it. If he were, that's a massive indictment of the conditioning staff; I find it hard to believe a D-I player can't play more than 20 minutes without injury playing a role. (Which, to be fair, might play a role if the staff were keeping it secret.)
03-27-2014, 08:41 PM
That was truly painful to watch. The team had no recognizable offense outside of "pass it around the outside and occasionally dump it into the post and if the defense doesn't give you a shot, then chuck up the best shot you can get." I'm watching some of the other games and it's amazing the difference watching a team with a coherent offensive concept. We are in dire need of a point guard.
If we had hit our 3-pointer at our season rate of 36%, we would have made 3 more shots and been right in it at the end. But the shooting was off and we couldn't adjust.
It's looking like decent odds there will be zero Pac12 teams in the EE.
If we had hit our 3-pointer at our season rate of 36%, we would have made 3 more shots and been right in it at the end. But the shooting was off and we couldn't adjust.
It's looking like decent odds there will be zero Pac12 teams in the EE.
That was truly painful to watch. The team had no recognizable offense outside of "pass it around the outside and occasionally dump it into the post and if the defense doesn't give you a shot, then chuck up the best shot you can get." I'm watching some of the other games and it's amazing the difference watching a team with a coherent offensive concept. We are in dire need of a point guard.
If we had hit our 3-pointer at our season rate of 36%, we would have made 3 more shots and been right in it at the end. But the shooting was off and we couldn't adjust.
It's looking like decent odds there will be zero Pac12 teams in the EE.
If we had hit our 3-pointer at our season rate of 36%, we would have made 3 more shots and been right in it at the end. But the shooting was off and we couldn't adjust.
It's looking like decent odds there will be zero Pac12 teams in the EE.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »