- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 2,992
- Reaction Score
- 8,458
Now that my computer is back online, I can report out on Stanford-ASU, won by ASU at home by one point. First off, this turned into a very entertaining game. Stanford led until the last 6 minutes or so, after which it was ASU slightly in the lead, but never able to put it away. Stanford had many chances in the last 1:30, but could not solve ASU's swarming defense, which tells you something about Stanford, because ASU is generally a lousy defensive team.
Anyway, what the teams were like: For most of the game, ASU could defend nothing, and if it were not for the fact that Stanford could not shoot worth a damn, ASU would have been killed. As it was, Stanford led by maybe 8 at the half and pushed the lead to 10 before ASU staged an inspiring comeback.
About that ASU defense. Those more into the Xs and Os of basketball could probably tell me what I was watching, but I saw a man-to-man defense that simply did not work. ASU's players get beaten on the dribble. Many times another player would come over to help and the original defender would back off. Then the helper would back off, too, leaving the shooter with an open shot. Stanford got at least four baskets in this way. Same thing happened with OSU a week ago.I don't know what this defense is called, except ineffectual.
ASU's defensive success comes off the quickness of some of its guards, in the form of steals. Otherwise tjey are not defensively sound. In this game, the offense (until the end) was supplied by Quinn Dornstauder, a Canadian girl who is 6'4 or so and thin as a rail. In this game, Stanford, lacking height, could no little with her, or maybe could not believe she would take shot after shot and make most of them.
ASU's athletic guards are small and have the annoying habit of trying to force the ball into the tall trees, where it is rejected. When they shoot from a bit of distance, they have some success, but they spent a lot of time testing a fairly short Stanford front line and often losing the battle.
About Stanford. This is not a team that is anything like past years' teams. Except to say, like everyone else, I cannot believe these guys beat UConn, I will leave the UConn game alone. First off, I sure hope Katie Lou is the best of the Samuelsons, because based on this game, at least, the other two are nothing very special. Neither was anyone else, for that matter, including the usually-excellent Amber Orrange, who did not have a good game. Stanford was often disorganized, but would occasionally run some plays, like the pick-and-roll, to perfection. But they would do it once and it would never work again, or they wouldn't run it. Not clear what was going through their coaches' minds, because ASU's defense was there, waiting to be exploited.
Anyway, what the teams were like: For most of the game, ASU could defend nothing, and if it were not for the fact that Stanford could not shoot worth a damn, ASU would have been killed. As it was, Stanford led by maybe 8 at the half and pushed the lead to 10 before ASU staged an inspiring comeback.
About that ASU defense. Those more into the Xs and Os of basketball could probably tell me what I was watching, but I saw a man-to-man defense that simply did not work. ASU's players get beaten on the dribble. Many times another player would come over to help and the original defender would back off. Then the helper would back off, too, leaving the shooter with an open shot. Stanford got at least four baskets in this way. Same thing happened with OSU a week ago.I don't know what this defense is called, except ineffectual.
ASU's defensive success comes off the quickness of some of its guards, in the form of steals. Otherwise tjey are not defensively sound. In this game, the offense (until the end) was supplied by Quinn Dornstauder, a Canadian girl who is 6'4 or so and thin as a rail. In this game, Stanford, lacking height, could no little with her, or maybe could not believe she would take shot after shot and make most of them.
ASU's athletic guards are small and have the annoying habit of trying to force the ball into the tall trees, where it is rejected. When they shoot from a bit of distance, they have some success, but they spent a lot of time testing a fairly short Stanford front line and often losing the battle.
About Stanford. This is not a team that is anything like past years' teams. Except to say, like everyone else, I cannot believe these guys beat UConn, I will leave the UConn game alone. First off, I sure hope Katie Lou is the best of the Samuelsons, because based on this game, at least, the other two are nothing very special. Neither was anyone else, for that matter, including the usually-excellent Amber Orrange, who did not have a good game. Stanford was often disorganized, but would occasionally run some plays, like the pick-and-roll, to perfection. But they would do it once and it would never work again, or they wouldn't run it. Not clear what was going through their coaches' minds, because ASU's defense was there, waiting to be exploited.
