Warren Grimes
Over on the Cardboard, a couple of posters wrote of the
“ugly” way Stanford took down Arizona in last season's NCAA final. Arizona, too, was said to have played
ugly.
I understand the word choice. In terms of offensive flow, both teams were
decidedly subpar. A final score of 54 to
53 does not suggest high potency offense.
Stanford had 21 turnovers – probably a season high. In the regional final, Stanford scored 30
points in one quarter, more than they averaged in an entire half against
Arizona.
As for Arizona’s offense, Aari McDonald, a superstar who was
critical for that team’s success, shot an unimpressive 24% (5 for 21). McDonald was particularly unproductive inside
the arc (1 for 12).
OK, so I get it.
Offense for both teams was downright miserable. But the Final Four was really about
defense. In the three end games, none of
the four teams reached the 70-point threshold.
Arizona got 69 points against UConn in the semifinal, but that was as
good as it got. Each of the final four
teams was an offensive powerhouse, but it was defense that dominated.
From a defensive perspective, the championship game was not
ugly. The defenses were strategic,
refined, and intense. Take Arizona. Speaking before the game, coach Adia Barnes
conceded Stanford’s superiority in rebounding and interior play. But, Barnes said, “We are quicker.”
Indeed they were.
Arizona had 12 steals, contributing substantially to Stanford’s 21
turnovers. Stanford had superior size,
better rebounding, and a higher shooting percentage (42%), but could do no
better than 54 points and the one point victory.
Stanford’s defense was equally impressive, holding Arizona
to the 28.3% field goal percentage (and superstar Aari McDonald to an even
lower percentage). Stanford out
rebounded the Wildcats 47 to 29. The
game’s last two offensive possessions, in many ways, typified the game. Stanford had a full 30-second offensive
possession, was able to run time off the clock by retaining possession, but
could not get a shot off. The ball
rolled harmlessly off at the mid-court as the shot clock expired. Arizona, in turn, had a final possession of 6
seconds and got the ball to Aari McDonald.
But the Arizona star, gang-defended, could do no better than an awkward
three point heave as time expired.
To the very end, it was defense that shone in the Final
Four.
Returning everyone except Kiana Williams, and bolstering its
ranks with four exceptional freshmen and a heralded transfer, Stanford should
continue to play intensive defense this coming season. But Adia Barnes’ defensive strategy has
provided future opponents a clue as to how to defend Stanford. How will Stanford deal with the aggressive
quickness that Arizona demonstrated in the end game? Most teams won’t be able to duplicate
Arizona’s effort, but many may try.
A strong and quick point guard with ball-handling skills could
be part of the answer. But who will that
be? Aside from starter Anna Wilson, there
are two returning veterans (Jenna Brown and Jana Van Gytenbeek) and two new
guards (graduate transfer Jordan Hamilton and freshman Jzaniya Harriel) who might
be the answer. For Stanford fans, it
should be intriguing to see who can best demonstrate needed point guard skills.
Stanford could end up rotating the
point guard position, depending on an opponent’s defensive presence. Or maybe two of these players will be in the
game at the same time.
This list of 5 guards, each of whom might be a point guard, still
leaves open possible variations at the two and three positions. Quickness and strength at the two and three
positions will also be critical. Aside
from starters Haley Jones and Lexi Hull, there is Lacie Hull, Hannah Jump,
Agnes Ema-Nnopu, and freshmen Brooke Demetre and Elena Bosgana who could play
these positions. All of these players
are relatively tall, ranging from 5’11” Ema-Nnopu (she is an amazing rebounder)
to Brooke Demetre’s 6’3”.
Stanford will return a bunch of post players. Versatile Haley Jones can play the four, but look
at the other options, including Cameron Brink, post season marvel Ashten
Prechtel, dunking expert Fran Belibi, and solid Canadian journeyman Alyssa
Jerome. Now add the very athletic freshman
Kiki Iriafen.
Wow, this team has “deep depth.”
I’ve borrowed Yogi Berra’s words to describe past Stanford teams. Last season’s team had unusual depth – 11 players saw action in the championship game. This season, the words fit better than ever.
The roster is 17 deep because three players
are opting for the extra “covid” year. Each
of these 17 players could start for most other Division IA programs. If this was Charlie Turner Thorne’s team, she
could run her five-player platoon system with three platoons and two extra substitutes
in case of injury. Not expecting that
from Coach VanDerveer, but who knows.
This year, depth is not a strength of some other premier
Stanford athletic programs. The football
team and the women’s volleyball team are struggling because of a lack of
depth. Even the women’s soccer team
could use an injection of additional quality players. Too bad WBB cannot lend some quality
athletes.
To fully grasp the depth of this season’s WBB team, consider
these two fantasy games.
I. Organize three five-member squads for an intra-squad
scrimmage, with each squad getting its shot against the other two. Squad #1 should be the team’s five starters;
Squad #2 should be made up of other veteran players (there should be 7 or 8 to
choose from, depending on who the starters are); Squad #3 would be the five
newcomers, four freshman and a transfer (if one or more of these players became
starters, adjustments would be necessary).
Squad #1 would presumably consist of the four returning
starters from the championship game (Brink, Jones, Lexie Hull, and Wilson) plus
(you fill in the blank). The fifth
starter might be a veteran, might be a newcomer, might be a point guard, might
be a ball-handling player in slots two-five, etc. The team has flexibility because Haley Jones
and Lexi Hull are versatile players.
Squad #2 (non-starting veterans) would have some high octane
veteran players, presumably including Ashten Prechtel, Fran Belibi, Alyssa Jerome,
and Lacie Hull. Sophomores Van Gytenbeek
or Emma-Nnopu could be added, as could senior Jenna Brown. That’s a squad most Pac-12 coaches would love
to have.
Squad #3 would be the newcomers -- four highly touted
freshmen plus transfer Jordan Hamilton. Last
year, Hamilton was a key player for a gifted Northwestern team that gave
Louisville a scare in the second round of the tournament. It’s not preposterous to suggest that, as the
freshmen develop, this squad could be a match for squad #1 by season’s end.
II. Assume a make-believe scenario in which Stanford is
allowed to field two separate WBB teams (in this fantasy world, it’s now the
Pac 13). Coach VanDerveer would pick
five players for team A, after which Coach Paye would pick five for team
B. They would then alternate picks until
the 17 player list was exhausted. One team
would have 9 players; the other 8. A bit
short on depth, but both of these teams would have as much or more depth as
UCLA had last season. Team B could well
end up with players like Prechtel and Belibi, plus three or more of the
exciting newcomers. Could Stanford field two top ten teams? Could the two Stanford teams finish one and
two in the conference?
You decide.
Nothing is guaranteed,
But --
this season should be lots and lots of fun.
