RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

13 Gonzaga @ 4 Stanford 3/17 5:30 PM ET

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - Game Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Who wins
Gonzaga
33%
 33%  [ 2 ]
Stanford
66%
 66%  [ 4 ]
Total Votes : 6

Author Message
calbearman76



Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 3124
Location: Carson City


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/18 10:55 pm    ::: 13 Gonzaga @ 4 Stanford 3/17 5:30 PM ET Reply Reply with quote

First Round - Lexington Region




Last edited by calbearman76 on 03/17/18 8:37 pm; edited 4 times in total
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 23310



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/15/18 6:09 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I have to say I'm a little worried about this matchup. Gonzaga is down this year but still..and if they win, the matchup with Mizzou as well. The Trees can beat a lot of teams, but they can also lose to anybody (see WIU). And then Mizzou is the type of over-physical team that gives them problems.

ok, back to nail-biting.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
SO ...I lost a bet with Rock about how many wins Chicago would get this year. My punishment - T. Young as my avatar. Well it could be worse!
calbearman76



Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 3124
Location: Carson City


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/15/18 11:25 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

When I saw Gonzaga in Las Vegas on Thanksgiving they weren't ready to play a team like Stanford. I'm not sure how much Gonzaga improved and how much their competition got easier, but I don't believe this is a particularly good Zags team. As for Missouri, I think you can beat them, but just to be safe I'd root for FGCU to spring the upset. I saw them beat DePaul and then they stunk up the joint the next day against Ohio State.


Nixtreefan



Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 2145



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/16/18 12:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

When I saw the draw, it made me think of the Georgia loss.


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 23310



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 4:48 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ok, lots of fun upsets today but no more for the rest of the day!



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
SO ...I lost a bet with Rock about how many wins Chicago would get this year. My punishment - T. Young as my avatar. Well it could be worse!
willtalk



Joined: 13 Apr 2012
Posts: 535
Location: NorCal


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 5:36 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Basketball is also about Match Ups and the Zags seem to match up well with Stanford. I mean we all know what BullDogs usually do to Tree's.


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 23310



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 5:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

we may not be very good compared to other years, but we are better than we were at the beginning of the year. And I think our awkwardness could make us get overlooked by some teams.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
SO ...I lost a bet with Rock about how many wins Chicago would get this year. My punishment - T. Young as my avatar. Well it could be worse!
StevenHW



Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 10306
Location: Sacramento, California


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 6:05 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Who is that Gonzaga player with the blue hair top?



_________________
"The more I see of the moneyed classes, the more I understand the guillotine." -- George Bernard Shaw
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 23310



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 6:08 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

StevenHW wrote:
Who is that Gonzaga player with the blue hair top?

zykira rice



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
SO ...I lost a bet with Rock about how many wins Chicago would get this year. My punishment - T. Young as my avatar. Well it could be worse!
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 23310



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 7:01 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Dan regretting Williams is just a Freshman. Very Happy



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
SO ...I lost a bet with Rock about how many wins Chicago would get this year. My punishment - T. Young as my avatar. Well it could be worse!
CompSci87



Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Posts: 678
Location: Palo Alto, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 7:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
Dan regretting Williams is just a Freshman. :D

Regretting?


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 23310



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 7:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CompSci87 wrote:
myrtle wrote:
Dan regretting Williams is just a Freshman. Very Happy

Regretting?


sounds like he'd like to draft her now.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
SO ...I lost a bet with Rock about how many wins Chicago would get this year. My punishment - T. Young as my avatar. Well it could be worse!
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 23310



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 7:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

and we survive having Michael Price as a ref.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
SO ...I lost a bet with Rock about how many wins Chicago would get this year. My punishment - T. Young as my avatar. Well it could be worse!
CompSci87



Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Posts: 678
Location: Palo Alto, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 7:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
and we survive having Michael Price as a ref.

Price was better this time than his co-star with the shaved head.

I suppose we get Melissa Barlow on Monday.


calbearman76



Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 3124
Location: Carson City


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 8:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
we may not be very good compared to other years, but we are better than we were at the beginning of the year. And I think our awkwardness could make us get overlooked by some teams.


I've watched this team since the first game on. The set of injuries during the non-conference season along with trying to work in new faces and set a starting lineup made for difficult times, but there was never appoint that I thought they were any worse than a top 5 team in the Pac 12. Once they had McPhee in the rotation there was no question they were top 4. The team is very good, not great. I wish they were a 3 seed instead of a 4, but I believe they will play well against Louisville (assuming they get past FGCU) and could pull the upset.


patsweetpat



Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2068
Location: Culver City, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 8:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

calbearman76 wrote:
myrtle wrote:
we may not be very good compared to other years, but we are better than we were at the beginning of the year. And I think our awkwardness could make us get overlooked by some teams.


I've watched this team since the first game on. The set of injuries during the non-conference season along with trying to work in new faces and set a starting lineup made for difficult times, but there was never appoint that I thought they were any worse than a top 5 team in the Pac 12. Once they had McPhee in the rotation there was no question they were top 4. The team is very good, not great. I wish they were a 3 seed instead of a 4, but I believe they will play well against Louisville (assuming they get past FGCU) and could pull the upset.


I don't understand how a team containing 5 McDonald's All-Americans can be perceived as a motley squad of under-talented, nobody-wanted-'em scrappers that somehow found a way to win. But that seems to be the generally-accepted story of Stanford this year.

Stanford's talented! And good! Which shouldn't be a surprise, because they're talented!


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 23310



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 8:55 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

patsweetpat wrote:


I don't understand how a team containing 5 McDonald's All-Americans can be perceived as a motley squad of under-talented, nobody-wanted-'em scrappers that somehow found a way to win. But that seems to be the generally-accepted story of Stanford this year.



maybe because they're (the McDonald's) mostly Freshmen and Sophs who don't actually play much. And certainly didn't play much early in the year.

I think starters Johnson, Smith, McPhee, and Sniezak all fit in the motley squad category...



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
SO ...I lost a bet with Rock about how many wins Chicago would get this year. My punishment - T. Young as my avatar. Well it could be worse!
RavenDog



Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 5837



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 9:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
patsweetpat wrote:


I don't understand how a team containing 5 McDonald's All-Americans can be perceived as a motley squad of under-talented, nobody-wanted-'em scrappers that somehow found a way to win. But that seems to be the generally-accepted story of Stanford this year.



maybe because they're (the McDonald's) mostly Freshmen and Sophs who don't actually play much. And certainly didn't play much early in the year.

I think starters Johnson, Smith, McPhee, and Sniezak all fit in the motley squad category...


Plus a remarkable coaching job by VanDerveer.


patsweetpat



Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2068
Location: Culver City, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 11:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
I think starters Johnson, Smith, McPhee, and Sniezak all fit in the motley squad category...


*McPhee was Hoopgurlz's 25th-ranked player in 2014 (5 stars)
*Johnson was Hoopgurlz's 30th-ranked player in 2014 (5 stars)
*Smith was PN's 5th-ranked international player in 2014 (5 stars)
*Sniezak was Hoopgurlz's 38th-ranked player in 2015 (5 stars)

Not one of those players was ranked lower than UCLA's Mo Billings coming out of high school! These are very good players! Stanford has the above very good players *PLUS* 5 McDonald's All-Americans!

Stanford is a very talented team that, for some reason, is not perceived as a very talented team.


PRballer



Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 2078



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 11:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

You just can’t count out Stanford in March. Never the same team you saw in November. Or January.

Tara is a rare and special coach, truly one of the best ever.


patsweetpat



Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2068
Location: Culver City, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/17/18 11:46 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PRballer wrote:
Tara is a rare and special coach, truly one of the best ever.


No question. She's great.


insidewinder



Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 197



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/18/18 12:54 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

patsweetpat wrote:
myrtle wrote:
I think starters Johnson, Smith, McPhee, and Sniezak all fit in the motley squad category...


*McPhee was Hoopgurlz's 25th-ranked player in 2014 (5 stars)
*Johnson was Hoopgurlz's 30th-ranked player in 2014 (5 stars)
*Smith was PN's 5th-ranked international player in 2014 (5 stars)
*Sniezak was Hoopgurlz's 38th-ranked player in 2015 (5 stars)

Not one of those players was ranked lower than UCLA's Mo Billings coming out of high school! These are very good players! Stanford has the above very good players *PLUS* 5 McDonald's All-Americans!

Stanford is a very talented team that, for some reason, is not perceived as a very talented team.


Wait, so Billings is the only UCLA that counts? Billings was ProspectNation #16 and a Burger player, so.... Jordin Canada was #4. LaJahna Drummer was #10. Actually, I still don't see a Stanford player on that list yet and I already hit Kelli Hayes at #42. Where does she go to school? Oh wait, I see them, there is McPhee at #50. Kaylee Johnson is not even in there top 150, which seems wrong, but whatever.

HoopGurlz has Jordin Canada #4, so consensus, a lovely thing. At #8, we have (drumroll please) Drummer! At #26, we have Kelli Hayes.

So of the upperclassmen, not counting transfers, and looking at the combined rankings as a general guide, Stanford had 0 top 10 players and the next best is #25. UCLA had 2 top 10 players, the next at #16 (or if you average her #16 and #38, then call her #27), then #26 (or #42 if you like the other rankings),. Really, after the top 10 or 20 players ranked, is there much difference between #28 and 40, for instance?

Anyway, if you want to use recruiting rankings as a measure of talent, UCLA pulled in substantially more of it in in the junior and senior classes. UCLA has two players in the top 10 of some ranking or other. On their whole roster, all 4 classes, Stanford has 1, Williams. And we could move on to the 2015 class, where HoopGurlz has Kennedy Burke at #15 while Sniezek is #38.

Is Stanford talented? Of course, more than most teams. Just not nearly as talented as a few years ago with the Ogwumikes or back when they had Appel, Wiggins, etc. And not as talented as UCLA, not in experienced talent by far. I'm not really sure why you downgrade the talent UCLA has. They have a lot. That's a good thing!


patsweetpat



Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2068
Location: Culver City, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/18/18 9:48 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

insidewinder wrote:
Wait, so Billings is the only UCLA that counts? Billings was ProspectNation #16 and a Burger player, so...


Actually, you're incorrect, Billings was *not* a Burger player. And I'm still not sure why none of the five (FIVE) Stanford Burger players count just because they're not juniors or seniors... particularly in a conference in which the POY is neither a junior nor a senior.

In any event, my point was *not* that Stanford has more talent than UCLA (I *do* think it's indeed a debatable question, but I'm not currently debating it). My point was that the four Stanford (UPPERCLASSMAN!) starters who were each cited upthread as a "motley squad" were all rated (by Hoopgurlz) as being at least as talented as Mo Billings, whom we universally agree to be a very talented player. And if Stanford's four (UPPERCLASSMAN!) starters were all rated by Hoopgurlz as high as Mo Billings, *AND* Stanford can fill out the rest of its rotation with 5 McDonald's All-Americans, then Stanford has a talented team!

That's all I'm saying! That's the entirety of it!


insidewinder



Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 197



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/18/18 10:39 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

patsweetpat wrote:
insidewinder wrote:
Wait, so Billings is the only UCLA that counts? Billings was ProspectNation #16 and a Burger player, so...


Actually, you're incorrect, Billings was *not* a Burger player. And I'm still not sure why none of the five (FIVE) Stanford Burger players count just because they're not juniors or seniors... particularly in a conference in which the POY is neither a junior nor a senior.

In any event, my point was *not* that Stanford has more talent than UCLA (I *do* think it's indeed a debatable question, but I'm not currently debating it). My point was that the four Stanford (UPPERCLASSMAN!) starters who were each cited upthread as a "motley squad" were all rated (by Hoopgurlz) as being at least as talented as Mo Billings, whom we universally agree to be a very talented player. And if Stanford's four (UPPERCLASSMAN!) starters were all rated by Hoopgurlz as high as Mo Billings, *AND* Stanford can fill out the rest of its rotation with 5 McDonald's All-Americans, then Stanford has a talented team!

That's all I'm saying! That's the entirety of it!


My bad on Billings and the Burger game. Ranked higher or lower than Billings on one of several possible ranking services, indeed on that ranks her low side, seems an odd way to make a point about Stanford players. I guess I will leave it at that.


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 23310



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/18/18 11:21 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Pat, you're the one that first called them a motley squad, albeit you were using it in the negative. But I kind of like it so now I'm gonna call them the motley crew.

Part of it is the eye test. Each of those 4 starters have some good points, and each of them have some shortcomings. Would they start on other teams? Would they have developed as much as they have on other teams? Maybe, maybe not. But I can tell you that without the godsend Freshman gift that is K. Williams, we would a)not be hosting and b) not have much chance at going to the second weekend. Having a bunch of McD's on the bench wouldn't make much difference.

And, as you well know, being named a Burger kid is an indicator that you played really well in HS (and someplace where you got attn.) but there ain't no guarantees that will translate into success at the next level. I have hopes for both Sophs Carrington and Fingall - and they will play a lot more in their junior and senior years, but they have a long way to go to become top players in college. Wilson, perhaps just because of injury, perhaps not, will likely continue to be a deep bench player.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
SO ...I lost a bet with Rock about how many wins Chicago would get this year. My punishment - T. Young as my avatar. Well it could be worse!
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - Game Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin