My version of UCONN vs. Stanford analysis

[EricLA]

Doggydaddy is really good at this and I'm sure he'll do a more comprehensive one, but I have some time to kill this AM so I thought I'd give it a whirl...

First, over the last 2 games, even tho Sara James has been a starter, she logged a grand total of 14 minutes and 0 points, playing only 3 in the close win over UNC. Vs. UNC. Almost all of her minutes went to Bonnie Samuelson and their box score looked like UCONN with only 6 players logging over 30 minutes for the game and no one else logging over 8 (Greenfield got the most minutes in the last 2 games for Stanford). So for analysis purposes, I'm comparing using Samuelson as the starter...

Jefferson vs. Orrange - it's sometimes hard to tell on Stanford who their PG is (at least for me) as Thompson and Orrange run things a lot for them, but Orrange has averaged almost 5 assists/game to Thompson's 2.7. Orrange is a strong guard but at 5'7", she's really not taller than Mo. And her numbers are very similar - 10.1 PPG, 3.6 RPG, 4.7 APG vs. Mo's 10.1, 3.2, and 5.2. But there's no doubt who the undisputed floor general is for UCONN... Orrange may be stronger, but no one is quicker than Mo. Both can play the full 40 minutes. Both are great leaders, but Mo's in such a zone at the moment, I'd give her the nod over any other PG not named Simms. Slight advantage UCONN

Hartley vs. Thompson - Thompson is a really solid player for Stanford. A freshman from Texas, Thompson has been terrific for them. Vs. UNC in the elite 8, she drew the assignment of guarding the bigger and stronger Deshields and did a bang-up job. Hartley has been erratic the past 2 games, disappearing offensively in the first half against both BYU and aTm. But Hartley is an AA for a reason and even when not scoring, she impacts the games defensively, and you never know when she might catch fire. I still question Hartley's decision making at times (launching an ill-advised 3 or driving to the hoop at times not quite in control), but as a senior she's just all around better than Thompson. Advantage UCONN

KML vs. Samuelson - KML is simply in a zone. She deserved the MOP in the regionals and if she continues to play the way she has recently, is certainly showing why she was an AA candidate the entire year when not injured or sick. Bonnie reminds me a bit of Strother, but not as good IMHO. 6'3" and a bit gangly, she certainly is an excellent 3 point threat knocking down 6-13 in her last 2 games. However, KML was the MOP and is playing like the best player on UCONN at the moment. Samuelson can go off on 3's at any moment and get her team right back into a game, but... Advantage UCONN

Dolson vs. Ruef - I was almost tempted to switch Ruef with Ogwumike for the purposes of this, because I know Dolson has guarded Ogwumike in the past, and quite successfully... But Ruef is more like Dolson in that she does a lot of things that don't show up in the box score and actually was named the MOP of the regionals for Stanford. And at 6'3", when Stanford is playing man, it's more likely she will be guarding Stef. Ruef averages about 7 PPG, 9.5 RPG and 3.1 APG. Dolson is at 12.4, 9.1 and 3.4. Similar numbers, and they do similar things for their teams. But... Stef is an AA and is playing like it. Even tho I think Ruef is really good, Stef is at least slightly better in all aspects. Advantage UCONN

Stewie vs. Ogwumike - Regardless of whether they guard each other, ESPN and the "experts" will hype this match-up as the clash of the titans. Both are 1st team AA's, the leading scorers and the undisputed best players on their respective teams. But Stewie is only a sophomore while Ogwumike is a senior. Both are freakish athletes. Ogwumike is better around the basket and stronger, but Stewie is longer and a much better 3 point threat (don't think Ogwumike has attempted more than just a few this year). It's easy to watch these 2 players and appreciate just how good they are. Even though Stewie "struggled" in her last 2 games, she has almost a week to reinvigorate and be ready for the final four. For what they bring to their respective teams, gotta call this one a wash. Even.

Benches - Stokes, Chong, and Banks vs. James, McCall, Greenfield, and Samuelson (Karlie). UCONN seriously probably only plays Stokes, but in this game, I could see Banks or Chong getting some minutes. I realize fans have been disappointed in the puzzling regression of Banks and Chong over the past month or two, and I think especially Banks just tries too hard out there and probably feels like her UCONN hoops career is starting to slip thru her fingers. But both can contribute in a game like this and in the first meeting in game #2 of the season, Chong played 17 minutes and Banks played 8. Stanford didn't have Greenfield for that game and if the past 2 games are any indication, she and McCall are the most likely to see any time on the floor at all vs. UCONN. I want to be fair, but I actually have to give a slight edge to UCONN on this because of how phenomenally Kiah is playing on the defensive end. She's actually a game changer when she goes in, and I can't say the same for Stanford's bench. Slight edge UCONN

Coaches - Not much to say really, but I will anyway. 2 legends in the game. I think Tara has every bit as good a basketball mind as Geno. She's managed to do more with less AA talent than probably any other coach out there. She usually manages to negate any other teams' athletic advantage over her Stanford teams with terrific game plans and seems to make many more in-game adjustments than most coaches. Obviously I think Geno is the best in the game, but it's really hard to say he's "better" than Tara. Even

Bottom line, on paper, this is a game UCONN should win by 20 points or so, but UCONN has simply not put together 40 minutes of complete basketball in the NCAA's yet, and BYU and aTm both exposed kinks in UCONN's armor. IF Stewie and Bria come out like a house on fire, this could get ugly very quickly and UCONN may never look back. But I think ultimately it will be closer...

UCONN 74
Stanford 58

 

[meyers7]

Nice job.

but Stewie is longer and a much better 3 point threat (don't think Ogwumike has attempted more than just a few this year).

3 for 11

UCONN 74
Stanford 58

16 point win? I'll take it.

 

[doggydaddy]

Thanks Eric. I can go take a nap now.

 

[huskeynut]

Excellent synopsis Eric.

Win and advance to #9

 

[semper]

Really fine. Thanks!!

 

[ochoopsfan]

I think this is the Key Point, Eric addressed, for UConn in the FF Game(s)

Bottom line, on paper, this is a game UCONN should win by 20 points or so, but UCONN has simply not put together 40 minutes of complete basketball in the NCAA's yet, and BYU and aTm both exposed kinks in UCONN's armor.

Only scored 70 and 69 points vs BYU and TAM, which is low for this team and its players. I hope Nashville has some Starbucks for the girls to stop at.

 

[Wink96]

I don't post often,but you always do such an excellent job I had to post a ***** star rateing.

 

[HGN]

Thanks......Not bad Eric, not bad at all.

 

[baggerbob]

The strength of this team, as it has been all year, is the best defense in the country. Even when UConn isn't shooting well, they will still win, because they can suffocate another team's offense. UConn's length, and quickness can't be duplicated, by other teams. UConn gets blocks, and steals, which leads to fast break opportunities, and fuel UConn runs.

 

[Tonyc]

These teams know each other. BYU slowed the game down and UConn shot the ball poorly and still won. I was never concerned about the game. I expect UConn to try to slow Chiney and Oorange down. That will be enough. When Geno brings in Stokes along with Stef and Stewart. Stanford is going to have a very tuff time. The question will be how will Stanford guard UConn one on one. I think they pack it in, darning UConn to make treys and guard KML one on one. Bria and Stewart will have to make some plays. UConn is much quicker, and has the experience and height that UNC lacked. UConn by 15+ and if UConn get hot I agree it gets ugly fast.

Remember our opponents will not live at the foul line because UConn doesnt foul and doesnt make many turnovers. Defense is UConns name and you can believe the focus on defense will be at another level. I really thought UConn would face LVille again. Now it looks like MD however you cant count ND out. They are a very well coached team. Kinda funny after ready JPM remarks about being in UConns bracket which to me was a downer for her team. Then you listen to Brenda and she instills belief into her team. Makes you realize why MD is headed to Nashville and Duke isnt?

 

[j66kicker]

Doggydaddy is really good at this and I'm sure he'll do a more comprehensive one, but I have some time to kill this AM so I thought I'd give it a whirl...

First, over the last 2 games, even tho Sara James has been a starter, she logged a grand total of 14 minutes and 0 points, playing only 3 in the close win over UNC. Vs. UNC. Almost all of her minutes went to Bonnie Samuelson and their box score looked like UCONN with only 6 players logging over 30 minutes for the game and no one else logging over 8 (Greenfield got the most minutes in the last 2 games for Stanford). So for analysis purposes, I'm comparing using Samuelson as the starter...

Jefferson vs. Orrange - it's sometimes hard to tell on Stanford who their PG is (at least for me) as Thompson and Orrange run things a lot for them, but Orrange has averaged almost 5 assists/game to Thompson's 2.7. Orrange is a strong guard but at 5'7", she's really not taller than Mo. And her numbers are very similar - 10.1 PPG, 3.6 RPG, 4.7 APG vs. Mo's 10.1, 3.2, and 5.2. But there's no doubt who the undisputed floor general is for UCONN... Orrange may be stronger, but no one is quicker than Mo. Both can play the full 40 minutes. Both are great leaders, but Mo's in such a zone at the moment, I'd give her the nod over any other PG not named Simms. Slight advantage UCONN

Hartley vs. Thompson - Thompson is a really solid player for Stanford. A freshman from Texas, Thompson has been terrific for them. Vs. UNC in the elite 8, she drew the assignment of guarding the bigger and stronger Deshields and did a bang-up job. Hartley has been erratic the past 2 games, disappearing offensively in the first half against both BYU and aTm. But Hartley is an AA for a reason and even when not scoring, she impacts the games defensively, and you never know when she might catch fire. I still question Hartley's decision making at times (launching an ill-advised 3 or driving to the hoop at times not quite in control), but as a senior she's just all around better than Thompson. Advantage UCONN

KML vs. Samuelson - KML is simply in a zone. She deserved the MOP in the regionals and if she continues to play the way she has recently, is certainly showing why she was an AA candidate the entire year when not injured or sick. Bonnie reminds me a bit of Strother, but not as good IMHO. 6'3" and a bit gangly, she certainly is an excellent 3 point threat knocking down 6-13 in her last 2 games. However, KML was the MOP and is playing like the best player on UCONN at the moment. Samuelson can go off on 3's at any moment and get her team right back into a game, but... Advantage UCONN

Dolson vs. Ruef - I was almost tempted to switch Ruef with Ogwumike for the purposes of this, because I know Dolson has guarded Ogwumike in the past, and quite successfully... But Ruef is more like Dolson in that she does a lot of things that don't show up in the box score and actually was named the MOP of the regionals for Stanford. And at 6'3", when Stanford is playing man, it's more likely she will be guarding Stef. Ruef averages about 7 PPG, 9.5 RPG and 3.1 APG. Dolson is at 12.4, 9.1 and 3.4. Similar numbers, and they do similar things for their teams. But... Stef is an AA and is playing like it. Even tho I think Ruef is really good, Stef is at least slightly better in all aspects. Advantage UCONN

Stewie vs. Ogwumike - Regardless of whether they guard each other, ESPN and the "experts" will hype this match-up as the clash of the titans. Both are 1st team AA's, the leading scorers and the undisputed best players on their respective teams. But Stewie is only a sophomore while Ogwumike is a senior. Both are freakish athletes. Ogwumike is better around the basket and stronger, but Stewie is longer and a much better 3 point threat (don't think Ogwumike has attempted more than just a few this year). It's easy to watch these 2 players and appreciate just how good they are. Even though Stewie "struggled" in her last 2 games, she has almost a week to reinvigorate and be ready for the final four. For what they bring to their respective teams, gotta call this one a wash. Even.

Benches - Stokes, Chong, and Banks vs. James, McCall, Greenfield, and Samuelson (Karlie). UCONN seriously probably only plays Stokes, but in this game, I could see Banks or Chong getting some minutes. I realize fans have been disappointed in the puzzling regression of Banks and Chong over the past month or two, and I think especially Banks just tries too hard out there and probably feels like her UCONN hoops career is starting to slip thru her fingers. But both can contribute in a game like this and in the first meeting in game #2 of the season, Chong played 17 minutes and Banks played 8. Stanford didn't have Greenfield for that game and if the past 2 games are any indication, she and McCall are the most likely to see any time on the floor at all vs. UCONN. I want to be fair, but I actually have to give a slight edge to UCONN on this because of how phenomenally Kiah is playing on the defensive end. She's actually a game changer when she goes in, and I can't say the same for Stanford's bench. Slight edge UCONN

Coaches - Not much to say really, but I will anyway. 2 legends in the game. I think Tara has every bit as good a basketball mind as Geno. She's managed to do more with less AA talent than probably any other coach out there. She usually manages to negate any other teams' athletic advantage over her Stanford teams with terrific game plans and seems to make many more in-game adjustments than most coaches. Obviously I think Geno is the best in the game, but it's really hard to say he's "better" than Tara. Even

Bottom line, on paper, this is a game UCONN should win by 20 points or so, but UCONN has simply not put together 40 minutes of complete basketball in the NCAA's yet, and BYU and aTm both exposed kinks in UCONN's armor. IF Stewie and Bria come out like a house on fire, this could get ugly very quickly and UCONN may never look back. But I think ultimately it will be closer...

UCONN 74
Stanford 58

Great job Eric. Agree with most, but think Chinney will present Stewie with some challenges based on her experience, strength and athleticism. And also I have no problem saying Geno is "better" than Tara. Tara is a really really good coach, and actually one of the few I fear, as she historically makes great adjustments to the previous time she's played us. She has 2 NC's but none since '92 even though Stanford is a huge recruiting draw. I think it could well be closer than your 16, but I give Geno the edge on coaching.

 

[winlots]

ERIC: you're good....as usual. (I'll take Stewart, and I'll take our coach, though)

 

[UcMiami]

The one point I would make on Ruef is that she is a legitimate three point threat - Stef takes a few and can nail them but really needs to step in three feet to be effective. That requires someone to guard Ruef at the three point line and that is a distance away from the basket Stef does not really like to be. It will be interesting to see how Uconn plays it defensively.

 

[MilfordHusky]

When we bring Kiah in, we have 3 players we can throw at Chiney. This is payback for when Chiney and Nneka guarded Maya. We appear to have too much size, athleticism, and experience to let Chiney dominate.

Despite Kiah's contribution, I think I'd give Stanford the edge on their bench.

Despite our short bench, I want to pressure the Cardinal for 94' as much as possible. We have a big speed advantage.

To me, the key player is Kaleena. She won't be denied. She was great in the tourney last year and has continued her stellar play. This is why she left sunny So. Cal.--to shine on the big stage.

 

[doggydaddy]

Eric, Dolson and Stokes will cover Chiney. Stewart rarely was assigned to Chiney in the earlier game.

 

[cardfan]

Great job Eric. Agree with most, but think Chinney will present Stewie with some challenges based on her experience, strength and athleticism. And also I have no problem saying Geno is "better" than Tara. Tara is a really really good coach, and actually one of the few I fear, as she historically makes great adjustments to the previous time she's played us. She has 2 NC's but none since '92 even though Stanford is a huge recruiting draw. I think it could well be closer than your 16, but I give Geno the edge on coaching.

you're kidding right? while Stanford is a great draw, only 7% who apply are accepted. Stanford is only allowed to recruit that same percentage, e.g. if Nike has a camp of 100 top h.s players, Stanford can only actively recruit 7 of them. Go to the bootleg (free page) to read how the recruiting works at Stanford. Tara does way more with less, year in and year out. She should get COY this year.

 

[alexrgct]

I don't know and Stanford won't tell me how the school accepts people. But I'm skeptical it's only 7% of elite athletic applicants. At top schools, the application of a kid with solid grades and standardized test scores who would be a strong candidate to make a team is taken very seriously. This is true even of schools like the Ivies that don't give athletic scholarships at all. If 7% are accepted, a great deal of the 93% that aren't would do fine at a school like Stanford. But if the application reflects both athletic and academic aptitude, so much the better for them.

 

[cardfan]

I don't know and Stanford won't tell me how the school accepts people. But I'm skeptical it's only 7% of elite athletic applicants. At top schools, the application of a kid with solid grades and standardized test scores who would be a strong candidate to make a team is taken very seriously. This is true even of schools like the Ivies that don't give athletic scholarships at all. If 7% are accepted, a great deal of the 93% that aren't would do fine at a school like Stanford. But if the application reflects both athletic and academic aptitude, so much the better for them.

the 7% is for all applicants. My point was Stanford's pool is much, much smaller to recruit student/athletes.

 

[UConnCat]

The one point I would make on Ruef is that she is a legitimate three point threat - Stef takes a few and can nail them but really needs to step in three feet to be effective. That requires someone to guard Ruef at the three point line and that is a distance away from the basket Stef does not really like to be. It will be interesting to see how Uconn plays it defensively.

Ruef has made 5 threes for the season, and that includes the 3 she made Monday night. She has made 5 of 18, or 28%. I don't consider her to be much of a threat. Stef won't guard her; Stewie will. She was wide open Monday night because UNC was doubling Chiney off her. I don't think UConn will do that. I want Ruef to be guarded so that her post entry passes to Chiney are contested; I doubt Geno will worry too much about her 3-point shooting.

 

[j66kicker]

you're kidding right? while Stanford is a great draw, only 7% who apply are accepted. Stanford is only allowed to recruit that same percentage, e.g. if Nike has a camp of 100 top h.s players, Stanford can only actively recruit 7 of them. Go to the bootleg (free page) to read how the recruiting works at Stanford. Tara does way more with less, year in and year out. She should get COY this year.

I'll take your word for all that, although she seems to be able to come up with really good talent year after year. She is a very good coach - she just isn't the best coach.

 

[sawxfan23]

you're kidding right? while Stanford is a great draw, only 7% who apply are accepted. Stanford is only allowed to recruit that same percentage, e.g. if Nike has a camp of 100 top h.s players, Stanford can only actively recruit 7 of them. Go to the bootleg (free page) to read how the recruiting works at Stanford. Tara does way more with less, year in and year out. She should get COY this year.

You're kidding right? Every Division 1 school in the country has lower admittance standards for scholarship atheletes. Trust me Stanford recruits and admits a lot higher percentage than what you are stating,

 

[Ozzie Nelson]

You're kidding right? Every Division 1 school in the country has lower admittance standards for scholarship atheletes. Trust me Stanford recruits and admits a lot higher percentage than what you are stating,

Ivies(D I) have no athletic scholarships, and all athletes have to meet a admittance index.

 

[UcMiami]

Ivies(D I) have no athletic scholarships, and all athletes have to meet a admittance index.

But Ivies and I suspect Stanford follows their pattern use a three tier admittance criteria - 1. Standardized testing, 2. Academic record, 3. Extracurricular activities. If you don't meet the minimum standard on 1 & 2, you do not have a chance, and that standard is set pretty high - top 10 - 15% or so. If you are in the top 2% or something you get accepted immediately. After that, they work down and the third criteria comes into play - and it is not just were they part of student government in HS or volunteer for , but did they do something exceptional in their lives like live in China for 4 years and speak mandarin, or win a robot competition, or make money working as a magician (one of my roommates, and he was GOOD!) The result is everyone ends up with a high standard of academic capacity and those at the bottom of that high academic capacity have done something else exceptional. That is the gray area for athletics (and legacy students), but unlike pretty much every other athletic scholarship school, Stanford does maintain that high minimum threshold for athletes. I believe Duke and a few others used to as well, but somewhere along the line they started letting it slide and I think it is pretty nonexistent at this point.
I admire what Stanford does athletically because they have maintained that criteria and it does limit who their coaches can recruit, though less so in women's athletics because there is a scholastic achievement gap in favor of women. And it also helps give Stanford a cache with a family like the Ogwumikes.

 

[magic]

I still believe Dolson and Stokes will spend most of their time guarding Chiney. It allows for Stewie to break out in transition.

 

[cardfan]

I'll take your word for all that, although she seems to be able to come up with really good talent year after year. She is a very good coach - she just isn't the best coach.

there's no really best coach, imho. There are a handful of exceptional ones, and Tara belongs in that group. 900+ wins, 12 F4s, 2NC, 1 US Gold Medal. Most of this accomplished at a school with limited pool of athletes due to admissions. She does more with less every year. Should Stanford have won more NCs? Absolutely, like in 1997 and 2011, but other years were really bad luck with injuries (yes I know every team has them), but Stanford has at least 12 ACL injuries to key players, which impacted their teams more because they were not very deep in talent, again due to small pool. Stanford has landed 2 number 1 h.s players in 29 yrs. (Both O sisters). UConn has about 10. I for one would love to see Geno coach at Stanford just to see if he could recruit and top players.

But Ivies and I suspect Stanford follows their pattern use a three tier admittance criteria - 1. Standardized testing, 2. Academic record, 3. Extracurricular activities. If you don't meet the minimum standard on 1 & 2, you do not have a chance, and that standard is set pretty high - top 10 - 15% or so. If you are in the top 2% or something you get accepted immediately. After that, they work down and the third criteria comes into play - and it is not just were they part of student government in HS or volunteer for , but did they do something exceptional in their lives like live in China for 4 years and speak mandarin, or win a robot competition, or make money working as a magician (one of my roommates, and he was GOOD!) The result is everyone ends up with a high standard of academic capacity and those at the bottom of that high academic capacity have done something else exceptional. That is the gray area for athletics (and legacy students), but unlike pretty much every other athletic scholarship school, Stanford does maintain that high minimum threshold for athletes. I believe Duke and a few others used to as well, but somewhere along the line they started letting it slide and I think it is pretty nonexistent at this point.
I admire what Stanford does athletically because they have maintained that criteria and it does limit who their coaches can recruit, though less so in women's athletics because there is a scholastic achievement gap in favor of women. And it also helps give Stanford a cache with a family like the Ogwumikes.

And Samuelsons.