Fan Appreciation Day at Stanford game

hookem.gif
to Imani.

Oh, hi ted!!
 
Great game to watch. Really sorry that the team did not pull it out. It was a fantastic first half. Horns had an 8pt lead with 17:13 left in the second when Stanford went on a run that ended at the 10:40 mark when a Nneka jumper made it 42-47 Stanford. Horns kept it close after that but could never regain the lead. In that stretch, the Horns missed five shots, including one layup, committed six fouls, and had seven TOs, including five in a row. Not a good stretch of play for the Horns. Stanford put it away in the last minute by hitting 7 of 12 FTs. In that span, they got four offensive rebounds from missed FTs leading to four made FTs. That will certainly be an area the Horns will be working on.

Another area: making layups with or without contact. Horns made four and missed five in the first half. They made one and missed on eight in the second half. Our posts missed a total of nine.

Now the good: even with all the missed layups, the really long stretch of poor play without scoring in the second half, the Horns were close to winning this game. Their dominance in rebounding was all game as they outrebounded the Cardinal 28-17 at the half and ended up with a 55-40 edge. They did a good job of converting their FTs, going 18-24 (75%).

They played good defense, actually holding Stanford to lower shooting percentages from the field and from BTA in the second half than they shot in the first half: first: FGs 35.3%; 3s 28.6%, second half: FGs 29%, 3s 22.2%. Horns, however, also did worse in the second half, going 17.2% in the second from the field compared to 34.4% and hitting 12.5% from BTA in the second after making 37.5% in the first. The shots were there, just not falling. There is a lot for the Horns to work on. But there is also a lot to understand how far they have come from last season.

It was a very entertaining game. And very encouraging to watch. Horns play another top 25 team in A&M next week so improvement will be easy to gauge.
 
It's simple. The guards regressed and shot like they did last year. Whether that will prove to be an exception or the rule, we shall see in the next few weeks. There were some sloppy turnovers that hurt; and the paint players blew some easy ones; but what always kills this team in the end is the terrible shooting from the guard position. It's heartening we kept it close; though I honestly don't think Stanford is really the sixth best team in America this year. Onward and upward. The Horns do look better, so in a way I feel more optimistic. But this box score looks like one from last season.
 
Horns were competitive, even with the 2nd half performance. It would have been the same script from last season had the Horns been blown out of the water. I'm sure there are more positives than negatives with today's loss.

hookem.gif
 
Hmmm...

attendance at the game today:
Attendance: 3,909
Turnstile: 2,145

W esp against top teams and those numbers should go up...
 
The game was much better than I expected it to be, though having watched Stanford get smashed by 30 points against CT, and then here yesterday, if they are actually the 6th best team in the country this is a down year for WCBB.

I think TX could do much better this year. The defense is good enough to win more games against a weaker Big 12, and was pretty salty indeed against Stanford. And the rebounding was terrific. The half-court offense looked slightly better in some aspects than last year, slightly worse in others and generally depressingly similar: Davenport and Henderson WILL penetrate, the bigs are better at setting screens, but almost no ball reversal and then the same poor spacing. Why does Aston hate a baseline drive, a backdoor cut, a pick 'n roll?

I feel sorry for the guards on this team. There are actually some good shooters: obviously Fussell, but both Manzionyte and Henderson have shown that they can nail a jump shot or a 3 if they are open. The plan on offense is to get the ball into the post as quickly as possible. There is still no plan B. If you can't get the ball into the post, try anyway and give up a turnover or chuck up a shot. This is what poor spacing, predictable ball movement and no cutting or other movement without the ball will do every time. If there is no real attempt to get your guards in position to make good shots, even great shooters will struggle. Same old, same old and some of us have been screaming about this since the UCLA game last year.

The team did indeed come out ready to play and imposed their will and style of play on Stanford, but then at the half VanDerveer made adjustments as smart and experienced coaches do. It was clear that the rebounding battle was going to be won by TX, so how do you create extra possessions - turn TX over which is easy to do and if VanDerveer had actually watched some more tape, she would not have needed a whole half to work this out. And that's exactly what Stanford proceeded to do, and a Stanford player said as much in the post game interview - come off screens, get in the passing lanes and steal or deflect the ball. 7 assists, 20 turnovers and 16 for 61 from the floor against a good but not great defensive team tells a very familiar story about Aston's coaching on offense or lack thereof. Also and again no counter adjustment from Aston when Stanford started their big second half push.

That said, even with the depressing Johnny one-note offense, this was a winnable game. Imani missed way too many chippies. Some of the turnovers were simply carelessness. TX's defense is good enough to not finish in the bottom of the Big 12, the lack of smarts on offense will matter less against teams which TX can out size and out athlete, which will hopefully be many, but when there is not a significant size and talent differential in TX's favor, the lack of variety on offense will continue to be a huge obstacle to success.
 
We knew it was coming. Yet another treefan post that states just a tad of the obvious (too many missed shots, careless TOs), and then offers (misrepresents) just about everything else.

The team did better than you expected, but Stanford isn't actually the 6th best team in the country, no way the game would have been that close otherwise. After all they got 'smashed' by UCONN by 30. Except that it was 19, the same number by which they outscored #14 Penn State, and just two more than they defeated pre-season #6 and current #8 Maryland by. Based on those numbers I guess every team in the top 25 is ranked higher than they ought to be this year . And let's not mention that the average Huskie margin of victory over five unranked opponents is 50.

And nice of you to say the team could be better this year, albeit against "a weaker Big 12." Because God knows that's the only way it's going to happen. But it could happen. And the sky could fall, and people who post detailed analyses of games could actually watch the contests they're writing about.

And what else? The team was ready to play but once VanDerveer made the obvious adjustments (as any "smart and experienced coach" would do), it was all over but the crying. And the adjustment wouldn't have even been necessary had she actually bothered to prepare, or watch tape before the game. But no need for that; easy enough to wait until real time, and figure it out on the fly. Much better test to let the Horns get off to a roaring start and pull it out in the second half.

And you feel sorry for the guards (who wouldn't, poor things), and the team was predictable, and their play "depressingly similar". Oh, and no spacing, no cutting, no movement without the ball, no 'smarts' on offense, and no attempts at getting in position.

Except of course there was plenty of all of that. There was a great deal of ball movement, and the team actually suffered because they got away from trying to get the ball inside (the exact opposite of what you stated happened. But no surprise there; you know that better than anyone). Spacing was fine also, and guards were in position to make shots all game long. Go back and watch what happened during the dry spell, when the Cardinal went on their run, and the problem is obvious. Too many missed shots, plain and simple. Good looks but no conversions. There were also some careless errors but the real issue was our inability to make baskets, and those are the only observations in your analysis that bear any semblance to what actually transpired during the game. In fact, as another poster pointed out (and despite the cold spell) we actually held Stanford to a lower shooting percentage in the second half than we did in the first, when we were clearly the best team on the floor. Sloppy play notwithstanding, we would have won this game had we converted just 3-4 more baskets down the stretch. That's a problem, and something that has to get much better going forward.

This contest is remarkably easy to analyze. The Horns played great basketball for a good portion of the game. Our coaches did a great job, and we came close to defeating one of the top teams in the country. More importantly, they looked like they belonged on the same floor with the Cardinal. But the game was winnable, no getting around that, and careless play/TOs, and inability to score at crucial points gave it away. Otherwise we looked better in almost every area than we did last year, and instead of the game getting out of hand when Stanford went on a run, we actually got it back together and played them close the rest of the way. That's something we couldn't do, and that wouldn't have happened last year. The test for this team moving ahead will be to keep doing all of the good things we've seen thus far, including in the Cardinal contest, and improve in those few areas that ended up costing us a game we should have won vs. a top 10 opponent. We need some of those signature wins against ranked teams the selection committee likes so much, and more importantly, that will help us continue to build confidence. I hope that comes sooner rather than later, but we'll learn soon enough if we're ready to pull it off just yet. We certainly need to be ready by the time Big 12 play rolls around, but winning some big games now would help on that front as well.
 
overseas,

Do you actually watch the games? You might think there is no problem with the schemes or lack thereof on offense, but the numbers show a team that is struggling hugely on offense.

The bottom line for the first game against good competition:

7 assists, 20 turnovers, 26% shooting percentage.

If this were an anomaly, fine, but this was consistently the case last season against teams TX could not out-talent.

You want to believe this regular stat line is the sign of a well-coached offense. Go ahead. The first step in dealing with a problem is acknowledging it.

Those rose-colored spectacles looked really convincing on you last season. Glad to see that you have kept them.

Keep spinning.
 
Nice try but your post is there for all to see. Your so-called "bottom line" has nothing to do with what I called you on. It's no secret the missed shots cost us the game; I don't think there's anyone who hasn't commented on that. And we're talking about uncontested shots. Shots we should have made. That has to improve and no one is going to spare their criticism if it doesn't.

But it's like you to talk about spin when you're the only one guilty of that. Fabrication is a better description. Shooting isn't what your post was about, nor did you intend to even discuss what actually happened during the game. In fact most of your comments were directed towards those who weren't there.

What you could have said was the team shot 26%, and would have won the game had the percentage even been a few points higher. 30% and we win comfortably. And since were talking about percentages you could have also pointed out that we held the #6 ranked team to 32%, matched them from BTA, shot 75% to their 60% from the FT line, and outrebounded them by 15. It was a close game even with the unacceptable cold spell.

Instead we got that the team is better but not really because Stanford got destroyed by UCONN by 30 so obviously they're not that good after all. Except it was 19 and the same margin the Huskies beat two other top-ranked opponents by. And 30 + less than they've average against everyone else. You knew all of that but why not make it 30? It suits your purpose and no one is going to care enough to challenge you (sorry to disappoint you on that one). And then it was Stanford's 'smart' coach (yeah, we get what you're trying to do there too) who didn't even have to watch film before the game, and made the easy adjustment on the fly to derail the Horns short-lived momentum. And then was a host of other things that had absolutely nothing to do with the game at all, and none of which you cared to reiterate once you were called on it. Or more accurately, most of your 'observations' are the exact opposite of what actually transpired.

If you want to comment on games then save the 'faint praise', don't make things up, and actually watch the contest before giving your opinion. Or better yet just be honest about your intentions.
 
I am starting to think you are a mildly paranoid reader.

I have no hidden intentions. I have been clear since the UCLA game last year that I think the coaching on offense SUCKS and that there is almost never an in game adjustment. I have been nothing if not consistent about that.

A few direct questions?

Do you actually watch the games? because you claim there are lots of backdoor cutting, movement without the ball, baseline drives. There aren't.

Why do you think our guards shoot so badly? Are they just bad players or are they not being put in position to take and make good shots?

Why has Texas under Aston averaged around 20 turnovers a game? Why are assists against decent competition mostly only in the single digits?

The team hustles like hell. Rebounding stats are a good indication of that.

I think the biggest problem this team has is inept coaching on offense, particularly guard play.

7 assists, 20 turnovers and 26% from the floor. Those of us who ACTUALLY watch the games saw similar all last season and again against Stanford.

Until I see progress, I will damn with faint praise all I want.

P.S. The 30 against UConn was a typo, I meant to type 20 - kill me. You don't like my rhetorical style. Fine. I don't like yours either. And for the record, I do think VanDerVeer is a much smarter coach than Aston. Her record proves it, plus the adjustments she made on defense at the half were a factor in the flurry of Texas turnovers. I was surprised that she took so long to make them.

I hope the problems in the half court offense get addressed, so far I am not optimistic.
 
Seeing that pathetic second half performance confirms I'll be staying away from the Erwin Center another few months. Aston lost control of the game...
brickwall.gif
 
We lost the game because players missed too many open shots. There was movement, spacing was fine, and guards were in position. Failing to convert open looks is a very different scenario than the one you presented, and the reasons you gave for the poor shooting. Had we converted even a few more of those uncontested shots we would have won the game. And almost everyone has commented on our shooting woes, and few will spare their criticism if we don't start taking advantage of those uncontested looks.

The 30 pt reference was no mistake. You've done the same thing previously, and were called on it when you posted inaccurate stats and information. This isn't the result of a typo, or because you read scores, or stat lines incorrectly. It happens because you have an agenda, and aren't interested in discussing what actually transpired during the game. In this case you wanted to make the point that Stanford was "smashed" by UCONN, and a 19 point loss doesn't quite qualify. Nor does it work when your premise is Stanford isn't worthy of their ranking (hence why we were able to play them close), given that this is the same margin the Huskies beat two other top ranked programs by. And 30 + points less than their average vs. all other opponents. The same goes for the silly comment about VanDerveer not having to watch tape because she's a 'smart' coach.

There isn't anyone who saw this game that doesn't think this team is much improved over last season. Yes we shot 26% but Stanford wasn't much better at 32%. We didn't have many assists but won the rebound battle by 15. We matched them from BTA, shot 15% better from the FT line, and played strong and kept it close after letting Stanford back in the game. But all of those improvements over last season won't matter if we don't start making more baskets, in particular when players have the open shot. The difference is most of us hope the team continues to improve, and manages a few upsets of higher ranked teams along the way. And we know if they don't you'll be here to state a fraction of the obvious, and much more that has nothing to do with the actual game.
 
Keep spinning honey! The results are entirely eloquent. TX hired a dud. Who in the Big 12 is more inept coach on offense than Aston?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top