|
|
Post by bobbk on Apr 15, 2019 8:33:34 GMT -5
Gates is listed on a Stanford web site as a incoming grad student.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldunc on Apr 15, 2019 8:59:14 GMT -5
I have no idea what's in Hambly's head- not sure he will either until practices start- but I'd guess he'd be very happy to have some experience at middle beyond Campbell's one year.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2019 10:05:05 GMT -5
Actually, I believe Formico's spot could possibly be up in the air. Because Fitzmorris being as versatile as she is, she is prepping for a professional career as an opposite, and when she was a middle, she cooked up very good serves. Her playing sometime in the backcourt would not only give her good passing reps but also, she's another attacking option for Gray. They can possibly do what Hambly did with Lutz, bring her into the backcourt for a serve receive before her position moves to the front and gives Gray an attacking option. But with Fitz, she could just serve and leave way for Formico.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShaneM2005 on Apr 15, 2019 10:21:44 GMT -5
Has anyone gotten tickets for the tourney at Penn State 9/13-9/15 yet?
|
|
|
|
Post by stanfordvb on Apr 15, 2019 10:25:54 GMT -5
Actually, I believe Formico's spot could possibly be up in the air. Because Fitzmorris being as versatile as she is, she is prepping for a professional career as an opposite, and when she was a middle, she cooked up very good serves. Her playing sometime in the backcourt would not only give her good passing reps but also, she's another attacking option for Gray. They can possibly do what Hambly did with Lutz, bring her into the backcourt for a serve receive before her position moves to the front and gives Gray an attacking option. But with Fitz, she could just serve and leave way for Formico. I agree with is. Especially because fitz is much more well rounded player than lutz she would be more capable of playing defense and making plays in the back than lutz was. I suggested the option of fitz staying in as when she served freshman year she played great defense and in club she played 6 rotations as well as in the UA match where she played very well in the back court. However when I suggested this I was (figuratively) murdered. |
|
|
|
Post by ShaneM2005 on Apr 15, 2019 10:28:35 GMT -5
Actually, I believe Formico's spot could possibly be up in the air. Because Fitzmorris being as versatile as she is, she is prepping for a professional career as an opposite, and when she was a middle, she cooked up very good serves. Her playing sometime in the backcourt would not only give her good passing reps but also, she's another attacking option for Gray. They can possibly do what Hambly did with Lutz, bring her into the backcourt for a serve receive before her position moves to the front and gives Gray an attacking option. But with Fitz, she could just serve and leave way for Formico. I agree with is. Especially because fitz is much more well rounded player than lutz she would be more capable of playing defense and making plays in the back than lutz was. I suggested the option of fitz staying in as when she served freshman year she played great defense and in club she played 6 rotations as well as in the UA match where she played very well in the back court. However when I suggested this I was (figuratively) murdered. I see it both ways. Obviously Fitz is more capable than Lutz in this area. However, is it actually needed offensively? |
|
|
|
Post by Disc808 on Apr 15, 2019 10:53:56 GMT -5
I agree with is. Especially because fitz is much more well rounded player than lutz she would be more capable of playing defense and making plays in the back than lutz was. I suggested the option of fitz staying in as when she served freshman year she played great defense and in club she played 6 rotations as well as in the UA match where she played very well in the back court. However when I suggested this I was (figuratively) murdered. I see it both ways. Obviously Fitz is more capable than Lutz in this area. However, is it actually needed offensively? Fitz shouldn’t play 6 rotations, Formico is a good passer. Additionally, Plummer is already a good bail out hitter. When it comes to serving though, Fitz is more consistent than Formico but Formico’s serve is tougher |
|
|
|
Post by stanfordvb on Apr 15, 2019 11:46:27 GMT -5
I agree with is. Especially because fitz is much more well rounded player than lutz she would be more capable of playing defense and making plays in the back than lutz was. I suggested the option of fitz staying in as when she served freshman year she played great defense and in club she played 6 rotations as well as in the UA match where she played very well in the back court. However when I suggested this I was (figuratively) murdered. I see it both ways. Obviously Fitz is more capable than Lutz in this area. However, is it actually needed offensively? She may not be needed. If alade was still playing I would say have fitz in the back while alade is up front so there is still an option behind. Now that Campbell and gates are both probably better at slides than they are in front I don’t think it would be as important. But MANY posters in this thread continuously soectulate as if it is “needed”. If Kipp is “needed”, if McClure is “needed”, and so on... it’s not about who is needed to make fans happy that they’re favorite players on the court. I assume the “needed” stands for “needed to win the nc” there are players that may not be needed that will play next year because they make the team BETTER. if fitz in the back weighs out formico in the back in terms of positives / negatives. Than fitz should be. And vice versa. Stanford should not do the bare minimum just to get the win. And they won’t. Posters on here seem to think it’s reasonable. |
|
|
|
Post by Cruz'n on Apr 15, 2019 12:10:35 GMT -5
Formico's spot is not up in the air.
Pure poppycock.
|
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Apr 15, 2019 12:18:27 GMT -5
Actually, I believe Formico's spot could possibly be up in the air. Because Fitzmorris being as versatile as she is, she is prepping for a professional career as an opposite, and when she was a middle, she cooked up very good serves. Her playing sometime in the backcourt would not only give her good passing reps but also, she's another attacking option for Gray. They can possibly do what Hambly did with Lutz, bring her into the backcourt for a serve receive before her position moves to the front and gives Gray an attacking option. But with Fitz, she could just serve and leave way for Formico. I agree with is. Especially because fitz is much more well rounded player than lutz she would be more capable of playing defense and making plays in the back than lutz was. I suggested the option of fitz staying in as when she served freshman year she played great defense and in club she played 6 rotations as well as in the UA match where she played very well in the back court. However when I suggested this I was (figuratively) murdered. You know you're not allowed to have an opinion unless it matches theirs. |
|
|
|
Post by Fight On! on Apr 15, 2019 12:45:57 GMT -5
I’m curious why people are on the Kipp protectionism train. Why does she HAVE to play? It’s not even a given that Kipp will come in and actually provide more efficient production than McClure. Stanford lost one match last year, and just about every other team loses a significant piece of their team. Are you really suggesting reinventing the wheel just to placate a freshmen? Kipp *MIGHT* make them better, but that’s already a high freakin bar. They are ALREADY better than everyone else. I have stated that I believe kipp should play but I just want to clear up that I’m not that she HAS too play. I even said that she could get to college and not perform well... I don’t think that’s ill happen but you never know. I think with our withoutbkipp Stanford is the best team next year for sure. I would say redshirt kipp and have no problem but I r,ever reading a long time ago on here that st afford doesn’t really redshirt players often and even when they do the players don’t play all 4 eligibility years. I think it said something like that. So if redshirting is not going to happen then it wouldn’t be unreasonable for her to play. The only way kipp should play is if it makes stanford better. Even if Stanford can be the best without kipp playing which they can, if she is going to make them a harder team to beat than she should be playing. If McClure playing all the way around gives Stanford its best possible team, than she should be playing. Period. I would love for kipp to redshirt and play 4 years after that but who knows what’s gonna happen. Speculation is fun but I can’t wait for August to see what they’re going to do It’s not like they have to declare a redshirt purposefully. If she doesn’t happen to play during the season, she retains her for years of eligibility after. |
|
|
|
Post by stanfordvb on Apr 15, 2019 12:52:10 GMT -5
I have stated that I believe kipp should play but I just want to clear up that I’m not that she HAS too play. I even said that she could get to college and not perform well... I don’t think that’s ill happen but you never know. I think with our withoutbkipp Stanford is the best team next year for sure. I would say redshirt kipp and have no problem but I r,ever reading a long time ago on here that st afford doesn’t really redshirt players often and even when they do the players don’t play all 4 eligibility years. I think it said something like that. So if redshirting is not going to happen then it wouldn’t be unreasonable for her to play. The only way kipp should play is if it makes stanford better. Even if Stanford can be the best without kipp playing which they can, if she is going to make them a harder team to beat than she should be playing. If McClure playing all the way around gives Stanford its best possible team, than she should be playing. Period. I would love for kipp to redshirt and play 4 years after that but who knows what’s gonna happen. Speculation is fun but I can’t wait for August to see what they’re going to do It’s not like they have to declare a redshirt purposefully. If she doesn’t happen to play during the season, she retains her for years of eligibility after. I know that. What I’m saying is that I heard that players who don’t play a year often won’t play all 4 years left. Specifically at Stanford. |
|
|
|
Post by stanfordvb on Apr 15, 2019 12:52:50 GMT -5
I agree with is. Especially because fitz is much more well rounded player than lutz she would be more capable of playing defense and making plays in the back than lutz was. I suggested the option of fitz staying in as when she served freshman year she played great defense and in club she played 6 rotations as well as in the UA match where she played very well in the back court. However when I suggested this I was (figuratively) murdered. You know you're not allowed to have an opinion unless it matches theirs. I’ve learned that. Speculation is punishable by death ! |
|
|
|
Post by SakiBomb25 on Apr 15, 2019 15:31:03 GMT -5
It’s not like they have to declare a redshirt purposefully. If she doesn’t happen to play during the season, she retains her for years of eligibility after. I know that. What I’m saying is that I heard that players who don’t play a year often won’t play all 4 years left. Specifically at Stanford. What starters have left early in the past to play elsewhere for her fifth year? |
|
|
|
Post by Disc808 on Apr 15, 2019 16:42:16 GMT -5
I know that. What I’m saying is that I heard that players who don’t play a year often won’t play all 4 years left. Specifically at Stanford. What starters have left early in the past to play elsewhere for her fifth year? I may be wrong, but I believe the "specifically at Stanford part" means stanfordvb is saying that, at Stanford, it's typical for 5th years not to stay for their fifth year (examples include Bowen & Vanjak). Perhaps you interpreted that part to mean players transfer after the four years |
|
