Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 87
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Summit County, Colo.

    Any intel on Stanford?

    Johnny Dawkins visits Boulder next week and I may try to catch the game.

    What's his team like, and how's the sentiment around the program this year? Can I expect the same intensity on defense as the team exhibited last year?

    They're 10-7, #60 Pomeroy and #64 Sagarin. Not terribly high, but the Pac-10 seems as wide open as usual these days, at least beyond Arizona.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Walnut Creek, California
    Pretty mediocre. 10-7, season; 1-3 conference.

    http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...nford-cardinal

    Missing one player, junior Anthony Brown, a 6-6 guard, out for the season due to leg injury. Alums are starting to growl at JD.

  3. #3

    It's Ugly

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim3k View Post
    Pretty mediocre. 10-7, season; 1-3 conference.

    http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...nford-cardinal

    Missing one player, junior Anthony Brown, a 6-6 guard, out for the season due to leg injury. Alums are starting to growl at JD.
    Growl is an understatement. Most Stanford fans, including myself, believe he's a good person. He's just not a quality head coach. Recruiting prowess is suspect. But mainly there is a lack of fire on the team starting at the top. His substitution pattern, the lack of player development and defensive scheming have all been exposed. And since we don't attract top talent like Duke, you need to play even harder (and I know your guys play hard...not intending to put your team down at all!).

    Fan support has quickly waned for the program over JD's 5 years. The team went from making the tournament for 13 of 14 years to no appearances in 4 years under JD. And this year could, and should, be his last.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Atlanta
    Quote Originally Posted by stanfan View Post
    Growl is an understatement. Most Stanford fans, including myself, believe he's a good person. He's just not a quality head coach. Recruiting prowess is suspect. But mainly there is a lack of fire on the team starting at the top. His substitution pattern, the lack of player development and defensive scheming have all been exposed. And since we don't attract top talent like Duke, you need to play even harder (and I know your guys play hard...not intending to put your team down at all!).

    Fan support has quickly waned for the program over JD's 5 years. The team went from making the tournament for 13 of 14 years to no appearances in 4 years under JD. And this year could, and should, be his last.
    It saddens me that he hasn't lived up to expectations at Standford- on a personal level, a fan level, and from a "hey-wouldn't-it-be-cool-if-he-became-an-amazing-successor-to-Coach-K" sort of way .

    Hopefully he turns it around in time, and if not, finds great success elsewhere... I'm sure there will be plenty of openings at season's end.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Summit County, Colo.
    Disappointing news, but helpful.

    Would it be fair to say his future at Stanford depends on making the NCAA tournament this year?

  6. #6

    My guess

    is that this is JD's last year at Stanford.

    SoCal

  7. #7
    Wow... does he then come back to Duke... ala Coach Capel? [I was REALLY pulling for JD to make it big at Stanford... and it being his "last" stop as a head coach]

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by hurleyfor3 View Post
    Disappointing news, but helpful.

    Would it be fair to say his future at Stanford depends on making the NCAA tournament this year?
    Fans say yes, but there's a new AD Bernard Muir and people don't know how he'll react. JD is signed through 2015/6 which may give him another lifeline.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by Lunchab1es View Post
    It saddens me that he hasn't lived up to expectations at Standford- on a personal level, a fan level, and from a "hey-wouldn't-it-be-cool-if-he-became-an-amazing-successor-to-Coach-K" sort of way .

    Hopefully he turns it around in time, and if not, finds great success elsewhere... I'm sure there will be plenty of openings at season's end.
    JD's experience is exactly why I don't want any assistant coach moving down the bench to K's seat without first proving themselves as a head coach. I will always love JD as a player and as an assistant as Duke, but unfortunately he has removed himself as a replacement option in my mind. I still wish him the best and hope he can turn the year into a positive direction for Stanford; I have a feeling this season is his last there.
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim3k View Post
    Pretty mediocre. 10-7, season; 1-3 conference.

    http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...nford-cardinal

    Missing one player, junior Anthony Brown, a 6-6 guard, out for the season due to leg injury. Alums are starting to growl at JD.
    They can't be mediocre. The local press counted State's win over them as "signature" and comparable to our IOC wins.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Toledo
    Quote Originally Posted by CameronBornAndBred View Post
    JD's experience is exactly why I don't want any assistant coach moving down the bench to K's seat without first proving themselves as a head coach. I will always love JD as a player and as an assistant as Duke, but unfortunately he has removed himself as a replacement option in my mind. I still wish him the best and hope he can turn the year into a positive direction for Stanford; I have a feeling this season is his last there.
    Agreed. At this point, barring a miraculous career turnaround, there is no way that Johnny Dawkins will ever coach at Duke again, unless it is as an assistant. And I hardly believe Johnny would ever return in that fashion after the disappointing run in Palo Alto.

    Another poster hit it on the head. There is a lack of fire within that program, starting with the man sitting in the first seat on the bench. I don't doubt Johnny's desire to win for one second -- his career as a player at Duke should tell you all there is to know about the passion that man has for the game of basketball -- but he just doesn't seem to have that "it factor" about him, that I-know-I-am-good-and-this-is-how-we're-going-to-beat-you persona that I think all the really good head coaches do. Even Brad Stevens, who is as mild-mannered as they come, exudes an air of great confidence and fervency amidst all that stoicism. The fire within is plainly evident. And that certainly rubs off on the players and the Butler program as a whole.

    The atmosphere at Stanford, which has only won 31 of its 76 Pac 12 games under Dawkins, is dead. I'm beginning to think that Johnny Dawkins just doesn't have any emotions. It's hard to get your team ready to play when you are that tranquil. It really is.

  12. #12
    Stanford is playing Cal right now on FoxSPS (Saturday's game actually).
    Funny, they had Harvard vs. Memphis on directly prior to the Stanford vs. Cal. Former Duke players and assistants and now head coaches at other schools in back-to-back time slots.
    Tommy's Harvard squad gave Memphis all they could handle, in Memphis (a couple of days ago apparently, but they were showing it now). Dawkins' team beat the Golden Bears by 10 at home.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Walnut Creek, California
    While I understand, and to some extent sympathize with, the Stanford alums and fans, I think some perspective is in order. On Saturday they beat arch-rival Cal 69-59 at home. Since Mike Montgomery arrived at Cal at the same time Dawkins arrived at Stanford, 2008, it may be worthwhile to compare their records. It is true that Monty has fared somewhat better than Johnny. Overall Monty has been 88-47 and 10-7 so far this year. Dawkins is 75-59 and 11-7 so far this year. Monty has done better in the post-season with three NCAA appearances and one NIT. Dawkins has not made the NCAA tournament, but outright won the NIT last year. He has a third tier post-season tournament as well.

    Not all that much to write home about. But this season, disappointing to Stanford fans, actually has been an improvement. Sagarin today currently ranks Stanford 56th while Cal is 72nd. (I don't have access to KenPom, so don't know what he has to say.)

    No one is calling for Monty's head--of course he has an impressive 30 year career behind him. Still, it is worth observing that Dawkins's four-plus years are not all that different from Monty's four-plus years at Cal.

    The main point is that both these schools are muddling along in the middle of the pack. If no one wants Monty ousted, why does anyone want Dawkins gone? Dawkins is actually moving his team up; they seem to be slowly getting better. My feeling is that this is not a coaching issue so much as it is a slow growth thing with both coaches. Montgomery has had a slightly better time of it over the four years. Dawkins is getting there at about the same rate.

    Certainly we at Duke shouldn't be jumping on the Stanford alum bandwagon or smacking Dawkins from afar. We know better than they that patience generally works out. If Butters hadn't been patient with that young coach from Army and had bent before the alumni storm, where would Duke be now? And if Michigan had been patient with Amaker (after putting his program in handcuffs and firing him instead of uncuffing him) they would have been fine with him there as well. Beilein did quite well with Amaker's recruits. (IMO, Michigan's choice of Beilein turned out far better than they could have hoped.) I kinda wonder if Oklahoma should have given Capel a little more time.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    boston, ma
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim3k View Post
    While I understand, and to some extent sympathize with, the Stanford alums and fans, I think some perspective is in order. On Saturday they beat arch-rival Cal 69-59 at home. Since Mike Montgomery arrived at Cal at the same time Dawkins arrived at Stanford, 2008, it may be worthwhile to compare their records. It is true that Monty has fared somewhat better than Johnny. Overall Monty has been 88-47 and 10-7 so far this year. Dawkins is 75-59 and 11-7 so far this year. Monty has done better in the post-season with three NCAA appearances and one NIT. Dawkins has not made the NCAA tournament, but outright won the NIT last year. He has a third tier post-season tournament as well.

    Not all that much to write home about. But this season, disappointing to Stanford fans, actually has been an improvement. Sagarin today currently ranks Stanford 56th while Cal is 72nd. (I don't have access to KenPom, so don't know what he has to say.)

    No one is calling for Monty's head--of course he has an impressive 30 year career behind him. Still, it is worth observing that Dawkins's four-plus years are not all that different from Monty's four-plus years at Cal.

    The main point is that both these schools are muddling along in the middle of the pack. If no one wants Monty ousted, why does anyone want Dawkins gone? Dawkins is actually moving his team up; they seem to be slowly getting better. My feeling is that this is not a coaching issue so much as it is a slow growth thing with both coaches. Montgomery has had a slightly better time of it over the four years. Dawkins is getting there at about the same rate.

    Certainly we at Duke shouldn't be jumping on the Stanford alum bandwagon or smacking Dawkins from afar. We know better than they that patience generally works out. If Butters hadn't been patient with that young coach from Army and had bent before the alumni storm, where would Duke be now? And if Michigan had been patient with Amaker (after putting his program in handcuffs and firing him instead of uncuffing him) they would have been fine with him there as well. Beilein did quite well with Amaker's recruits. (IMO, Michigan's choice of Beilein turned out far better than they could have hoped.) I kinda wonder if Oklahoma should have given Capel a little more time.
    Stanford has a much more storied basketball history than Cal.
    Stanford was coming off 13 NCAA tournament appearances out of 14 years prior to Dawkins. Dawkins is 0 for 4 and may be going on 5 if they miss out this year, which at 11-7 and 2-3 in the down PAC-12 may happen again.
    K made the tournament in his 4th year, in a very tough ACC at that time. The PAC-12 has been pretty down in basketball the last few years.
    I don't think saying this year is a make-or-break year is unfair to Johnny D.

    Dawkins' experience at Stanford should be cause for hesitation for those pushing Collins or Wojo to take over the reins at Duke w/o head coaching experience. Nothing simulates the experience of being the head man in charge. If we're limiting the head coaching search to Duke family, then it's pretty much either Capel or Brey for now.

    Hopefully Brad Stevens will give us a serious listen when the time comes.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New York
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim3k View Post
    While I understand, and to some extent sympathize with, the Stanford alums and fans, I think some perspective is in order. On Saturday they beat arch-rival Cal 69-59 at home. Since Mike Montgomery arrived at Cal at the same time Dawkins arrived at Stanford, 2008, it may be worthwhile to compare their records. It is true that Monty has fared somewhat better than Johnny. Overall Monty has been 88-47 and 10-7 so far this year. Dawkins is 75-59 and 11-7 so far this year. Monty has done better in the post-season with three NCAA appearances and one NIT. Dawkins has not made the NCAA tournament, but outright won the NIT last year. He has a third tier post-season tournament as well.

    Not all that much to write home about. But this season, disappointing to Stanford fans, actually has been an improvement. Sagarin today currently ranks Stanford 56th while Cal is 72nd. (I don't have access to KenPom, so don't know what he has to say.)

    No one is calling for Monty's head--of course he has an impressive 30 year career behind him. Still, it is worth observing that Dawkins's four-plus years are not all that different from Monty's four-plus years at Cal.

    The main point is that both these schools are muddling along in the middle of the pack. If no one wants Monty ousted, why does anyone want Dawkins gone? Dawkins is actually moving his team up; they seem to be slowly getting better. My feeling is that this is not a coaching issue so much as it is a slow growth thing with both coaches. Montgomery has had a slightly better time of it over the four years. Dawkins is getting there at about the same rate.

    Certainly we at Duke shouldn't be jumping on the Stanford alum bandwagon or smacking Dawkins from afar. We know better than they that patience generally works out. If Butters hadn't been patient with that young coach from Army and had bent before the alumni storm, where would Duke be now? And if Michigan had been patient with Amaker (after putting his program in handcuffs and firing him instead of uncuffing him) they would have been fine with him there as well. Beilein did quite well with Amaker's recruits. (IMO, Michigan's choice of Beilein turned out far better than they could have hoped.) I kinda wonder if Oklahoma should have given Capel a little more time.
    Unfortunately, I think you're burying the lede here. Cal has gone to the tournament 3 of the past 4 years. Stanford has missed it every season under Dawkins. I promise you that if the tournament appearance rate were flipped, so would the job security situation. Montgomery would be the one hearing footsteps, and Dawkins would be hailed a success. Overall W-L would matter very little.

    I would also ask you--and I mean this seriously, not in a snide way, because I would love to see JD succeed--if patience is in too short supply, how many seasons of mediocre performance should Dawkins be accorded? Because this year is his fifth, and half a decade is a pretty long time in the wilderness for a historically successful program. Speaking only for myself if I were a Stanford fan, I would want to hear a compelling explanation for why past results do not guarantee future performance.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Walnut Creek, California
    Quote Originally Posted by Des Esseintes View Post
    Unfortunately, I think you're burying the lede here.
    Of course. That's the point about trying for some perspective. I'm not trying to bury JD; I'm hoping his recruits will help him create the JD brand. That takes some time. Firing a coach too quickly happens all the time and foundations don't get laid.

    Quote Originally Posted by Des Esseintes View Post
    I would also ask you--and I mean this seriously, not in a snide way, because I would love to see JD succeed--if patience is in too short supply, how many seasons of mediocre performance should Dawkins be accorded? Because this year is his fifth, and half a decade is a pretty long time in the wilderness for a historically successful program. Speaking only for myself if I were a Stanford fan, I would want to hear a compelling explanation for why past results do not guarantee future performance.
    Clearly everyone's mileage varies here and there is no answer that will satisfy everyone. I'm just pointing out that Monty is having only moderate success even though he has established the Monty brand. Dawkins had none to start with; his recruiting foot was in a hole to start with. First, Trent Johnson left the cupboard a bit bare for JD when he ran off to LSU (and opened up Duke's acquisition of Miles Plumlee, a Stanford recruit). No one on the West Coast really knew Dawkins; he had to acquire assistance in gaining connections to the high school coaches throughout the country. He's also under some admissions limitations that Cal doesn't impose. So it's slow going.

    As for Stanford being a storied team, Monty's 18 year tenure is a big part of that. So it's a bit unfair to hold his replacement, a first year HC, to Monty's standards. Heck, Monty isn't meeting those standards yet himself, now that he's across the Bay at Cal. People don't doubt Montgomery will succeed, so he's safe. I guess I'm just saying that Dawkins should be allowed most of his contract term. He's got a contract extension that runs through the 2015-16 season. Bowlsby probably understands this dynamic better than anyone. He seems to be like Butters and has the necessary patience. All things considered, JD should get a couple of more years and we should be supporting that, not joining the lynch mob.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    The issue for Johnny, as I see it, is that the fans don't see any signs of real progress in the program. It largely comes down to recruiting. Look, I know that Stanford has some serious recruiting challenges (similar to those faced by Duke and Notre Dame), but Dawkins is still coming up short in terms of bringing the right kind of talent to the Cardinal.

    I looked back a few years and Johnny hasn't brought in any recruits who were among the top ten at their position. He seems to land maybe one or two top 100-150 kind of kids, but he has had real trouble breaking in with top 50 kind of talent and he hasn't gotten anyone who was close to being a Mickie Dee.

    If the fans could see hope on the horizon -- a top 50 recruit coming in next year -- then it would certainly buy JD more time. But, as it is now, it is easy for them to look at how they have done over the past few years and see no sign that things are going to change any time soon.

    -Jason "Stanford is traditionally a school that lands at least some elite recruits... Johnny has really not shown himself to be a good recruiter thus far" Evans
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim3k View Post
    As for Stanford being a storied team, Monty's 18 year tenure is a big part of that.
    Just to elaborate on this point, I have a t-shirt commemorating Stanford's return to the tournament in 1989 -- at the time, they hadn't been since 1942 (and they won it that time). So, this "storied" program has only ever been to the post-season in the last 25 years, except for the 1942 blip/championship. Just a note on the culture of recency in sports...

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Lewisville, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    The issue for Johnny, as I see it, is that the fans don't see any signs of real progress in the program. It largely comes down to recruiting. Look, I know that Stanford has some serious recruiting challenges (similar to those faced by Duke and Notre Dame), but Dawkins is still coming up short in terms of bringing the right kind of talent to the Cardinal.

    I looked back a few years and Johnny hasn't brought in any recruits who were among the top ten at their position. He seems to land maybe one or two top 100-150 kind of kids, but he has had real trouble breaking in with top 50 kind of talent and he hasn't gotten anyone who was close to being a Mickie Dee.

    If the fans could see hope on the horizon -- a top 50 recruit coming in next year -- then it would certainly buy JD more time. But, as it is now, it is easy for them to look at how they have done over the past few years and see no sign that things are going to change any time soon.

    -Jason "Stanford is traditionally a school that lands at least some elite recruits... Johnny has really not shown himself to be a good recruiter thus far" Evans
    Just to add another .02:

    Stanford's recruiting and overall success in virtually every other sport underlines any shortcomings in the men's hoops program. Look, for example, at the great recent sucess in football, where the challenge of filling up to 85 scholarships with talented student/athletes is even greater than finding 11 to 13 good student/athletes for basketball.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by roywhite View Post
    Just to add another .02:

    Stanford's recruiting and overall success in virtually every other sport underlines any shortcomings in the men's hoops program. Look, for example, at the great recent sucess in football, where the challenge of filling up to 85 scholarships with talented student/athletes is even greater than finding 11 to 13 good student/athletes for basketball.
    I was just thinking the same thing. As FDA so often points out, Stanford crushes us in football recruiting, so there is a certain amount of irony to say they have understandable trouble in recruiting in the basketball world. That is probably a reason that they hired JD in the first place, he was a great recruiter here at Duke...the very school that can't keep up with Stanford on the football side.
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

Similar Threads

  1. Lax Schedule Intel
    By burnspbesq in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-25-2012, 03:34 PM
  2. MBB: USC 70, Stanford 69
    By geraldsneighbor in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-30-2009, 01:14 PM
  3. Stanford vs Cal
    By dukelifer in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-18-2009, 01:01 AM
  4. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-28-2008, 11:00 PM
  5. Intel on Ed Davis, UNC commit
    By whereinthehellami in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 07-25-2007, 07:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •