And how much fun is this? We’re but a few days deep and now hours into a tip off marathon where I was watching hoops deep into the night and now once again peripherally at Tucson International. We have just begun and I’m making irrational snap judgments like Carrie Mathison (i.e. Gabe York:Russ Smith::Russ Smith:Gabe York; POY trophy as the Ty Wallace Cup; Joseph Young receiving an additional year’s eligibility; lodging in Arlington; instituting a coach swap where Johnny Dawkins and Craig Robinson just switch teams – like Dawk moves to Corvallis for the year and Rob to Palo Alto just to see why the hell not; replacing WSU with Coppin State). In reality, we know very little about the teams we’ve seen play but our expectations are being teased, not tempered.
To the point at which I’d like to elaborate on the Stanford Cardinal.
Against much of my better judgment (what’s that?) I’ve ignored those trying to temper my expectations of Dawkins’ squad. I’ve thought so highly of Dwight Powell and Chasson Randle for so long now that I foresaw no way in which a team led by those two could sustain back-to-back disappointing seasons. Their talents, after all, were supplemented by Josh Huestis, Aaron Bright, and a deep cast of formidable role players. They returned oodles of experience (80% of their minutes played) and isn’t experience one thing you can’t teach? The crux of the matter, however, might not be about what you can’t teach so much as whether you can teach at all.
This comes to the forefront as Stanford – a perennial top-100 defensive unit under Dawkins – yielded 112 points at home to the WCC’s Brigham Young Cougars. That’s 1.26 points per possession. Matt Carlino just scored agai — Tyler Haws, too. Oh sure the Cards dropped 100+ themselves but who damn cares? This is a major violation of early optimism. We were promised a “different way of thinking” by Coach Dawkins and crew. To which I ask: What are you guys thinking?
Watching the latter parts of that BYU thing, Seth Greenberg yelled on and on about how Stanford had many nice pieces – the same toys I’ve mentioned above. He’d then, inevitably, arrive at his caveat (of which I paraphrase), “But Stanford has really got to find its identity. What kind of team are they going to be?” Indeed what the hell type of team are they going to be because they could be so good. Or can they?
@pachoopsab when your done drooling over beating HS team, turn to ESPN2/Stanford – i’m really beginning to think they just suck
— JG (@jgisland) November 12, 2013
This was one man’s proposal to which I can’t completely disagree. A 19-15 (9-9) season is being fixed by thinking differently?
It might be time for me to start thinking differently about Stanford.
2 thoughts on “Gross Conclusions and 1.26 Points Per Cougar Possession”
Their “solution” to being carved up by an admittedly hot-shooting BYU team on the defensive end, was to rush down and jack up threes in a vain attempt to “keep up”. It smacked of panic, lack of leadership, and general cluelessness, all of which you would expect from an inexperienced team……oh wait, never mind ,this is the most experienced team in the conference! All I could think of watching them is that everything the Stanford football team IS, THEY are NOT!
That’s a really solid analogy or anti-analogy between FB and hoops. That was a remarkably undisciplined basketball game.