Thursday night, the Stanford men's basketball team. It was a great win for Stanford as they continue to show flashes of brilliance and beating Cal is always great. It was also nice to show off the Stanford Axe and the Rose Bowl Championship trophy as well. For a minute, it even sounded like Stanford had a home-court advantage. This is all great for a Stanford fan but unfortunately, there can't be success without some lingering skepticism.
beat Cal 77-71 at Maples Pavilion
Johnny Dawkins' teams generally start out well - in fact, under Dawkins, Stanford has not had a below .500 record through the first 16 games in any of his 8 seasons on the Farm.
Stanford's worst run through 16 games under Dawkins was the 09-10 year as they started off 8-8 and still 2-2 in conference play. And of those 8 seasons, only one year did Stanford head into their 17th game with a conference record below .500. And Dawkins' strong starts hold up against even the best Stanford teams - the only year where Stanford had a better run through 16 games was the famous 2003-2004 year where Stanford won its first 26 games.
But even with these strong starts, Dawkins' teams tend to fade down the stretch. So it would seem that the problem exists somewhere in that midway point of the season. Does Stanford drift to the middle of the back because they don't have a Shannon Turley making the players stronger in the offseason? Does Stanford ultimately fail to compete for conference crowns because they just can't compete with the athletes of Arizona and UCLA? Is Stanford just a mediocre team and that is what mediocre teams do?
After game 16, the team locks down and not in a good way. Since Dawkins began coaching at Stanford, the second half of the season has been dreadful. Stanford has gone 43-55 overall, with two of the wins coming out of conference, and going 3-11 against ranked teams with only one of those wins being on the road and that was in 2009. As we look forward to the next 13 games, Stanford has a rough schedule.
Now, let's try and think positive yet realistic to get a good grasp of what Stanford needs to do to get back to the NCAA tournament. I think Stanford can play Arizona close at home but I do not expect a win however beating Arizona St. can keep Stanford above .500 in conference. I also think that the road trip to Colorado and Utah will be split as well but Stanford will beat Colorado and lose to Utah.
The next 3 games could very well determine if Stanford will be playing with the big boys or bullying the little kids again in March. Stanford will play at Cal and then get Oregon St. and Oregon at home. Stanford needs to win 2 of 3 but that loss cannot be to Oregon St. Stanford needs to beat as many of the good teams as well but losing to Oregon won't kill them as much as a loss to Oregon St. at home. Stanford can split in Washington to make the USC/UCLA series important to watch.
Both LA teams are currently in Joe Lunardi's Bracketology on ESPN and have a good chance to both be ranked when they come to Stanford. If Stanford can just split that series, it gives them breathing room to not have to beat Arizona in the desert and hopefully go into the conference tourney with a 17-12 record and hopefully on the bubble. A few wins in the conference tourney should be enough to crack the NCAA Tournament.
Personally, I will say though that if Stanford has another down 2nd half - regardless if they beat a top school - Johnny Dawkins should be gone. It's been 8 years for Coach Dawkins, and if he can't do it now, it's time to look for someone who can. Going around the merry-go round a few times is fun but eventually, it gets tiring.
Comments
Is Stanford just a mediocre team and that is what mediocre teams do?
Yes. And the below .500 record in the second half of the season is largely due to tougher competition because the second half is all conference & tournament play compared to the parade of mostly creampuffs in November & December.
Can we please just get a new head coach already? We know what Johnny Dawkins is and "mediocre" says it all.
By winflop on 01.18.16 6:04am
Dawkins has improved
We’ve improved on defense and substantially improved at the line. The team doesn’t have as many lapses of basketball intelligence as it used to, and they’ve finally learned the art of in-game adjustments.
However, everyone else in the league improved. With Colorado and Utah added, the conference in most years has gotten much deeper as opposed to new teams diluting talent. The injury bug also tends to hit Stanford’s key players (seniors in particular) at the most inopportune times. Recruiting also has been absolutely atrocious in some years.
These are all things that should have been worked out in the first three years of his tenure, but they’ve been persistent. At this point, failure to get to the tournament should be cause for dismissal. That’s also why so many of us were upset with the contract extension he got, which was followed up by one of the worst seasons of basketball since the Pac-10 was formed on the Farm.
Lest we forget, every time people start grumbling and calling for his head, Dawkins goes out and does something unexpected like win two NIT tournaments or get to the Sweet 16 by beating Kansas.
By RedOscar on 01.18.16 6:12pm
I see no improvement - look at the record
The team limped into the tournament, getting blown out by UCLA after almost losing to WSU who was one of the two worst teams in the conference that season
That week was by far the best week that any Dawkins team has ever played, but that’s all it was – ONE GREAT WEEK
Dawkins’ hallmark is inconsistency – he’s never had a conference winning streak longer than 3 games. This season the team hasn’t beaten even two decent teams in a row, and I doubt you will see a 3-game conference streak this season.
Once again the team is on the bubble, and heading into the harder part of its schedule. I see another season within one or two games of .500 and another NIT bid. That’s not good enough, and Muir needs to grow a pair and move on from mediocrity.
I hope I’m dead wrong, but to date I haven’t seen anything this year that looks materially different from the last five-plus. I hope Dawkins does better, but it needs to be somewhere else. Muir has decimated the fan base by keeping him around for this long. Did the Cal game even come close to selling out? No.
By winflop on 01.21.16 5:49am
Who gave Dawkins the extension?
Was it Muir or Bowlsby? That probably is the only reason why Muir hasn’t let him go yet. It feels like an albatross on the program and the department. Other programs within the department have had their coaching staffs sacked for being good, but not competing for championships.
Look at Women’s Golf — it was a good team, but didn’t compete for top spots. The staff was replaced and within three years won conference and national championships. Granted, we don’t know the contracts of the previous staff, but Stanford can’t say they haven’t replaced coaches for being just good.
By RedOscar on 01.21.16 10:31am