Stanford's Incoming Class

[mudcat]

Based on comments on this board, the common opinion seems to be that Stanford is due to fall in the rankings due to poor recruiting, despite Tara's coaching ability. But when I look at the incoming class for this fall, all three are rated as five star by ESPN and they are rated highly by other services. The 2015 cupboard seems rather bare, but there's still time to get some folks. Now the present class are all freshmen, so it could be difficult if they had to depend on them, but I still see Stanford as being in the 8-12 range nationally. Any thoughts? (Particularly from the Stanford fans on this board who may have more knowledge of the situation than I do).

 

[tomcat]

An only slightly related thought, which I would have shared earlier if I'd thought of it. Back a couple of weeks ago, someone posted a really interesting list of schools and (what I believe was) the average ranking of their recruits. Stanford was not 3rd or 4th or 5th, but somewhere more around 10th. It occurred to me that it's a very impressive accomplishment for Tara and her staff to take players at that level and bring them up to the point where their team was consistently #3, 4 or 5 for a number of years. Sort f the anti-Duke, which tends to get more top recruits and generally underproduces.

I think this is an apt comparison because both are prestige universities (top 10 in the most recent rankings, for what they are worth) that can use their academic standing as a recruiting tool in similar ways.

 

[doggydaddy]

An only slightly related thought, which I would have shared earlier if I'd thought of it. Back a couple of weeks ago, someone posted a really interesting list of schools and (what I believe was) the average ranking of their recruits. Stanford was not 3rd or 4th or 5th, but somewhere more around 10th. It occurred to me that it's a very impressive accomplishment for Tara and her staff to take players at that level and bring them up to the point where their team was consistently #3, 4 or 5 for a number of years. Sort f the anti-Duke, which tends to get more top recruits and generally underproduces.

I think this is an apt comparison because both are prestige universities (top 10 in the most recent rankings, for what they are worth) that can use their academic standing as a recruiting tool in similar ways.

Boy, did I see THAT coming...

 

[tomcat]

Touche.

 

[Gate81]

polar opposites?

 

[winlots]

polar opposites?

GATE: wish you wouldn't say things like that; I can't bear it.

 

[UcMiami]

Stanford is certainly not going to fall off the map and I haven't heard anyone say that, but Chiney was a huge part of their success last year (and was a huge success as a rookie in the WNBA.) I think #10 is probably a good estimate of where they are likely to be ranked by the end of the year. They have good talent and a very good coach, but they have run out of 'O sisters' to lead them. And they are likely to face stiffer competition in the Pac so they will likely have a few more losses so their ranking will suffer some.

 

[Fightin Choke]

Based on comments on this board, the common opinion seems to be that Stanford is due to fall in the rankings due to poor recruiting, despite Tara's coaching ability. But when I look at the incoming class for this fall, all three are rated as five star by ESPN and they are rated highly by other services. The 2015 cupboard seems rather bare, but there's still time to get some folks. Now the present class are all freshmen, so it could be difficult if they had to depend on them, but I still see Stanford as being in the 8-12 range nationally. Any thoughts? (Particularly from the Stanford fans on this board who may have more knowledge of the situation than I do).

First off, I have great respect for Tara as a coach, and believe her team will certainly be top 20 and have a good chance to be top 10. But I have to disagree with your assessment of her class of 2014 ranking. Hoopgurlz lost all perspective when Olsen took the reins from Hansen (who left to create Prospects Nation) as the number of 5-star recruits has been ludicrous under him. Last year (2014), there were 52 players rated as 5 stars, and this year there are again 52 players. Thus the 5-star accolade has lost all meaning. For a sense of perspective, in 2013 (under the old regime), there were 19 5-star recruits, and there were only 17 in 2012 and 11 in 2011. Call it grade inflation, but Olsen has amplified the effect to humorous levels.

Secondly, the only service that has Stanford's 2014 class ranked so highly is Hoopgurlz (18th, 25th, 30th). Prospects Nation ranks the 3-person class 50th, 60th, and out of the top 150. BlueStar ranks them 27th, 77th, and 127th. I don't have the rankings from ASGR, but I'll bet vowelguy can supply the composite 2014 class ranking for Stanford.

 

[MilfordHusky]

As the Voice of Reason, I take a middle ground.

I dont see anyone on the Stanford roster who is at the level of C. Ogwumike, N. Ogwumike, Pedersen, Appel, Wiggins, or possibly even Pohlen. But they have talent and good coaching. I think they drop from the top 5, but 8-12 may be a good guess. They may not dominate the conference and may be an NCAA tourney 3 or 4 seed. They will not drop out of the rankings, but the days of being a 1 seed may be gone for at least a while.

If you have never been on campus, go see it. Between the academics and the gorgeous setting, the university sells itself.

 

[ucbart]

I think Amber Orrange and Lili Thompson are a great back court, probably one of the best in the nation. Their front court is going to be a bit of a weakness for them. However, basketball is a guards game and Tara is one of the top 4 coaches in America, so I expect Stanford to be a really good club this year.

 

[Wbbfan1]

Stanford lost out on the 2015 recruit that could have kept them in the Top 4-5 Ranking. Katie Lou at Stanford would have been a difference maker in her freshmen year. To show the difference level in talent between Stanford and UConn, Katie Lou may not start at the beginning of the season for UConn. She might start but there's no guarantee because of the players UConn has returning or have recruited.

 

[Vowelguy]

Stanford's frosh had consensus rankings of #24 (Rooks), #42 (McPhee), #108 (Johnson)

I calculated it as the 14th best class.

 

[ochoopsfan]

The hardest question for me regarding Stanford is how do you replace the 1229 points that Ogwumike and Ruef scored last year(Chiney 967 and Ruef 262). Then you have to look to the 791 rebounds they have to replace(Ogwumike 446 and Ruef 345).
I dont see where they replace those numbers. when it came to crunch time in the 2 biggest games for Stanford in the NCAA tournament, the game vs North Carolina to get them into the final four and the game vs UConn in the FF, Stanford basically used their starters for the entire game. Nobody off the bench had more than 8 minutes of playtime vs NC and nobody of the bench had more than 7 minutes of play time vs UConn.

So who does Tara have the confidence in to replace them.

Some have mentioned Erica McCall as a PF to replace some of Ogwumikes minutes and stats. In those two important games I mentioned McCall played 7 minutes with 4 points and 5 rebounds vs UConn and 3 minutes with 0 points and 1 rebound vs North Carolina.
Taylor Greenfield is listed as a Forward but I see her much more as a wing. I am not sure if I have ever seen her as SF or a PF.
In those same two games in the Tournament Greenfield played 8 minutes vs NC and scored 0 points with 1 rebound, and vs UConn she played 7 minutes with 0 points and 2 rebounds.
Karlie Samuelson - in those same games she played 6 minutes with 0 points and 0 rebounds vs UConn and vs NC she played 2 minutes with 0 points and 1 rebound. To be fair, I believe Karlie was playing on a bad foot or ankle.

Nobody else on Stanford played more than 1 minute in either game.

So the best players on Stanford this year are Orrange and Thompson, both are true guards. The Samuelson sisters, Bonnie and Karlie, who are either wings or guards, McCall as a PF and Taylor Greenfield as a Wing or SF. These are the 6 remaining players who Tara gave "real" play time to that return. I dont think its enough, certainly not in the paint. Someone might pick up the slack from the new freshman or off the bench players that didnt get minutes last year, but who.

 

[MarieYLee]

They should be fine this year (Top 8-15 team). I think Orrange is quite underrated, and Thompson looked very good in the tournament last year. Thompson was not rated by any of the recruiting services but certainly played like a Top 15 recruit. I believe Kailee Johnson started in the beginning of last year, then got injured, so she's another big that can potentially contribute this year. A lot will rest on the development of Johnson/McCall. I am curious to see Taylor Rooks play. I think she can be really good.

It's next year that they should worry, especially after Orrange graduates, and they don't really bring in any top talent.

2015 could have been a potentially great recruiting haul had they landed KLS and Lambert (who looked like a favorite to verbal to Stanford). I know they have Anna Wilson in 2016, who is a good PG, but she's more of a true pass-first PG. I think Stanford needs a recruit who can score...

 

[UConnCat]

I like Orange and Thompson a lot but there will be more pressure on them by defenses which won't need to help on Chiney in the lane. McCall has a great body and terrific athleticism and I'll be curious to see how her skills develop.

 

[Waquoit]

Didn't they have like 20 players on the roster last year? Who wants to walk into that logjam?

 

[Vowelguy]

Surprised so many think they'll be around #10.
Their nonconference schedule is UConn, Texas, UNC, and @Tennessee. I think they lose all 4.

And their time at the top of the PAC is getting short. It depends on whether the young teams are strong enough yet or will need another year.

 

[ochoopsfan]

Surprised so many think they'll be around #10.
Their nonconference schedule is UConn, Texas, UNC, and @Tennessee. I think they lose all 4.

And their time at the top of the PAC is getting short. It depends on whether the young teams are strong enough yet or will need another year.

Oregon State is the Best team in the Pac 12 as of right now. What happens with UCLA or Cal or UW or UO or Stanford is unknown as of now.

 

[Vowelguy]

Didn't they have like 20 players on the roster last year? Who wants to walk into that logjam?

I think they had 16. But they've had a lot of injuries and some underperformers. There is ample playing time available for quality players.

They also have 4 seniors, and 2 redshirt juniors who could decide to not come back (each averaged 5 mins/1 pt per game last year).

 

[tennparker3]

Johnson, their lowest rate recruit, may be their best. She is out of Wyoming and didn't get a ton of exposure. I saw her play three times and I feel like she could have been top 20 or 30 at least.

They have Anna Wilson as well for 2016 and that could help them land some solid frontcourt players.

Erica McCall and Kailee Johnson will be very good for them imo. Both are former McDonald's AA's and for good reason. McCall has all the ability in the world to become as good as the Ogwumikes and Johnson has great versatility.

Stanford will continue to hold strong.

side note: they will have two Kailee Johnsons on their roster for the next three years. Can't wait for the announcers confusion from that.

 

[Vowelguy]

Erica McCall and Kailee Johnson will be very good for them imo. .

Confused by McCall. Supposed to be really good but she was non-existent this past year. Not sure what to expect.

 

[Gate81]

McCall was Chiney's understudy.

 

[Fightin Choke]

Surprised so many think they'll be around #10.
Their nonconference schedule is UConn, Texas, UNC, and @Tennessee. I think they lose all 4.

And their time at the top of the PAC is getting short. It depends on whether the young teams are strong enough yet or will need another year.

My reasons for thinking the Cardinal stay near top 10 are two-fold: First, I believe that Tara is one of the best coaches out there. I believe they have a smaller pool of eligible players from which to recruit, but Tara does pretty well selling the Stanford experience and her team's sustained level of success. I know that she hasn't won any NC for a while, but neither have most other programs, and UConn can only take about 3 players per class, leaving plenty of talent for the rest. The second factor is that Stanford's recruiting classes are actually pretty good if you compare them to other programs. While I didn't initially think the 2014 class comprised of composite #24, #42, and #108 is very good, it actually ranked 14th (see VG's post above). Is Tara's coaching enough to raise them up 4-6 slots? I definitely think so. So if their recruiting classes are near the top 10-15 the past 4 years, there is no reason Stanford shouldn't rank in the top 10 this season.

 

[EricLA]

I'm not sure where Stanford ends up but I do agree that recruiting has taken a dip. ND and Louisville (and of course UCONN) seem to be recruiting consistently the best the past few years. Probably the next level down is South Carolina, UCLA, Duke, Tennessee, and Texas.

Actually in hindsight, I'd have to put L'ville in the 2nd tier as they only got one boffo class from 2015, prior to that it was average. Looking at the teams with the # of consensus top 10 kids in the past 4 years...

UCONN - 6
Duke - 6
Texas - 5
ND - 3
Tenn - 3
UCLA - 2
South Carolina - 2

And there are a bunch who have only 1 obviously as there are a grand total of 40 top 10 kids in 4 years and I only accounted for 27...

 

[Vowelguy]

My reasons for thinking the Cardinal stay near top 10 are two-fold: First, I believe that Tara is one of the best coaches out there. I believe they have a smaller pool of eligible players from .......... While I didn't initially think the 2014 class comprised of composite #24, #42, and #108 is very good, it actually ranked 14th (see VG's post above). Is Tara's coaching enough to raise them up 4-6 slots? I definitely think so. So if their recruiting classes are near the top 10-15 the past 4 years, there is no reason Stanford shouldn't rank in the top 10 this season.

You're responding to my post by quoting "VG"? I don't know who that dude is but he sure sounds brilliant. And stunningly handsome.