Lindy Larocque verbals to Stanford

[BrooklynSaints]

First 2008 recruit. I hear she is a shooter. I don't see Lindy on the Hoopgurl list. Have we seen Lindy and do you see her making the top 100 list.

Also I'm hearing 5'8" is generous. How tall is Lindy?

[scoutnwhoops]

Lindy is a very good shooter with lots of range and knows how to come off picks and shoot. She fits their style well. Not sure about the 5-8 either.

[SakiBomb25]

Lindy is a very good shooter with lots of range and knows how to come off picks and shoot. She fits their style well. Not sure about the 5-8 either.

Scout, how would you compare La Rocque's shooting stroke/mechanics with Krista Rappahahn's? Obviously Rappahahn had the advantage in size, but if La Rocque will be able to develop that shooting stroke like Rappahahn did her senior year, I'll be very, very pleased with this pick-up by Stanford. And I don't care so much for height as long as she can shoot the ball - Susan King Borchardt was only about 5-7 and she was our best on-ball defender during her years on The Farm. Hopefully she plays good defense as well...

[scoutnwhoops]

that will be her role, to a T. She's not as big as KR but she's probably a little quicker though. against average hs kids she looks like she can handle and defend pretty well but against the more athletic teams you an see the areas she is weaker on. but thy could hide KR on D they can work with Lindy. nice ki too!

[lion4life]

Monica Deangelis is the best pure shooter in the 08 class...already verbaled to LMU.
Has made 324 3's in her first 3 years of high school. On pace to break the Ca. state record.
Plays for Cal Swish Black.

[CHARLESI]

This is a good pickup for Stanford whose shooting is known to go cold in the crunch time
of post season. Lindy can hit the long three and will be a good spot substitute player.
But Stanford better recruit players like Wiggins/Powell in order to get back to the Final Four. Are they going after any of those type players?

[BrooklynSaints]

This is a good pickup for Stanford whose shooting is known to go cold in the crunch time
of post season. Lindy can hit the long three and will be a good spot substitute player.
But Stanford better recruit players like Wiggins/Powell in order to get back to the Final Four. Are they going after any of those type players?

Well Stanford is looking at Nneka. There is limits to the type of players Stanford can recruits. They only recruit girls who are top students. That list is very small. I'm surprised Stanford is able to stay competitive since they have such high standards.

Also Rutgers made the final 4 last year. Are the players that Rutgers has, superior to Stanford's players?

[CHARLESI]

I would say Rutgers has the better players since they went to the final game. I bet most
of Rutgers players could get into Stanford. The idea that Stanford has players that are
way more smarter then other schools is an urban myth. Girls players in general are good
at academics. Besides, Stanford just won another Sears Cup, so the "academics limits
recruiting" isn't an acceptible excuse on the Farm for losing. Whether Stanford remains
competitive nationally depends on getting the same type of players Rutgers gets. Other
top Pac 10 schools such as Cal, USC, UCLA , ASU and Washington are going after those
type of players.

[ClayKallam]

Admissions to Stanford are on a completely different level than admissions to other colleges -- even elite private colleges. It is not an urban myth, or any other kind of myth, about the tremendous difficulty Stanford coaches in all sports have in getting athletes admitted.

There are no exceptions, or at least there weren't under the recently departed admissions' director. It is no accident that in the reign of that admissions' director that Stanford athletics declined across the board.

There is no claim here that kids who go to other schools aren't as smart as those who go to Stanford -- the claim is that the transcript and extracurricular demands set by Stanford's admissions' department are so high that it takes a dedicated student who is focused on developing a tremendous application to get into Stanford.

But, in short: Stanford's pool of potential recruits is very, very small, much smaller than any other school in a BCS conference -- including Duke and Northwestern. That is no myth, just fact.

[CHARLESI]

Stanford only accepts 12% of all applicants. You really think all Stanford Athletes are
just in that 12% pool and don't get special consideration for their athletic ability. Come
on now. You can believe what you want but you don't win Sears Cups every year on that
basis. You don't think smart kids go to Notre Dame, Duke, Texas and other top schools.
You shouldn't put Stanford on some cloud of their own. :)

[NYTraveller]

Believe whatever you want to but I can tell you from firsthand experience in dealing with Stanford admissions that yes, every one of their athletes is in that small percentage of acceptances. They will not even begin recruiting a player in the normal way colleges approach athletes unless it is clear the player can achieve acceptance in the normal way that any Stanford applicant must follow. I cannot say if they value interscholastic athletics at a higher value than other extracurricular activities which might lead to an athlete's acceptance where a non-athlete with similar grades would not get in, but I can tell you with 100% certainty that if a player does not have very, very high academic credentials, thay will not get in. I agree with Clay - from what I have seen, Stanford's process thins the available recruiting base more than any of the other major D1 schools with outstanding academic reps.

[BrooklynSaints]

Stanford only accepts 12% of all applicants. You really think all Stanford Athletes are
just in that 12% pool and don't get special consideration for their athletic ability. Come
on now. You can believe what you want but you don't win Sears Cups every year on that
basis. You don't think smart kids go to Notre Dame, Duke, Texas and other top schools.
You shouldn't put Stanford on some cloud of their own. :)

I think you are looking at things a little backward.

Forgetting about sports, there are applicants to Stanford who have higher GPAs and higher SAT scores and for some reasons they just don't get in. Only admissions can answer why that is. I would say the same is true for most schools. Colleges are looking for well-rounded students and for diversity. This is in addition to good grades and SATs

Athletes do get preferential treatment from admissions at Stanford. However Stanford has minimum requirements. This minimum requirement is closely aligned with the student body as a whole. As a result a good number of students are not recruited because they fall short of the minimum. In other words if you don't have a 90 average over 4 years in high school and high SAT scores I would forget about applying to Stanford.

Other schools follow the minimum sliding scale GPA/SAT score approved by the NCAA. If a student meets this minimum and is a qualifier according to the NCAA Clearinghouse than schools like Duke, Texas, Notre Dame will admit them. Stanford has its own standards. It's is really a good thing. I'm just surprised it works.

No one ever said that smart students do not exist all over the country. Smart students are in every school. For Rutgers, I'm quite sure that Brittney Ray could have got into Stanford. Ray was always an excellent student.

It's funny how when a school puts academics first and basketball second that people view this as being in a cloud.

Note: Stanford plays Rutgers this year, so we will see who is better. I really think that both schools are very close in talent. This could be a very good game.

[CHARLESI]

The fact is you or I do not know what that minimum at Stanford is and what other factors they take into consideration for admission. Just leaves that little leeway to get sons
and daughters of rich connected alumni in and good athletes. Just like Stanford has
Mickey Mouse courses some athletes and those who ski everyweek end in Tahoe take just like other schools. Not everyone is a super serious student at Stanford, believe me
or go ahead and put them on another cloud above the rest of all the schools. I think
Stanford could go after a lot more athletes that go to Duke, Rutgers and other top
academic schools--they chose not to go after them because of their style of play, not
bad academics.:)

[BrooklynSaints]

The fact is you or I do not know what that minimum at Stanford is and what other factors they take into consideration for admission. Just leaves that little leeway to get sons
and daughters of rich connected alumni in and good athletes. Just like Stanford has
Mickey Mouse courses some athletes and those who ski everyweek end in Tahoe take just like other schools. Not everyone is a super serious student at Stanford, believe me
or go ahead and put them on another cloud above the rest of all the schools. I think
Stanford could go after a lot more athletes that go to Duke, Rutgers and other top
academic schools--they chose not to go after them because of their style of play, not
bad academics.:)

Well I do know the minimum. I'm just not sure about the weight of other factors are.

We are talking reality on this board. It is not my purpose to put down other schools. This is the standard that Stanford lives by. You can agree or disagree with the standard but it is what it is.

What is this style of play your saying that a player has to have for Stanford to recruit them?

[CHARLESI]

I would say Stanford over the years puts a premium on good outside shooters and maybe
the good fundamental post players over speed and defensive ability. Not many slasher type players. Of course, Wiggins and Powell being the exceptions. That is why LoRocque is a good fit for them. I not saying Stanford doesn't have high academics, it does, but if the coach wanted to have a team like Duke or North Carolina-they could
recruit one with high academics. That's why Stanford can win in all sports, except football,
where they haven't hired the right coach after Willingham left. What players do you
think they need to get back to the final four-I count only three scholarships left.

[BrooklynSaints]

I would say Stanford over the years puts a premium on good outside shooters and maybe
the good fundamental post players over speed and defensive ability. Not many slasher type players. Of course, Wiggins and Powell being the exceptions. That is why LoRocque is a good fit for them. I not saying Stanford doesn't have high academics, it does, but if the coach wanted to have a team like Duke or North Carolina-they could
recruit one with high academics. That's why Stanford can win in all sports, except football,
where they haven't hired the right coach after Willingham left. What players do you
think they need to get back to the final four-I count only three scholarships left.

Well I did not see much shooting from Stanford last year.

Pierce, Wiggins, Murphy & Harrison are slashers. Both Pierce and Harrison can dunk the basketball.

Stanford has 1 post player Appel.

Final Four:

Stanford has the talent to make it to the final four now. Stanford has 7 McDonald All Americans on the team. How many McDs do you need to make it to the final four?

[chimera]

The fact is you or I do not know what that minimum at Stanford is and what other factors they take into consideration for admission. Just leaves that little leeway to get sons
and daughters of rich connected alumni in and good athletes.:)

You state that you do not know, but several others posting in this thread do have a good idea what the standards are. That is what they are trying to tell you politely. Others of us also know enough to know that your assumptions are not correct.

[Bobbk]

But you are not only extremely naive, but now 4 poeple who have first hand knowledge have responded to you.

We all look forward to the Rutgers - Stanford game. It's in NJ so hope it's on TV.

[BrooklynSaints]

But you are not only extremely naive, but now 4 poeple who have first hand knowledge have responded to you.

We all look forward to the Rutgers - Stanford game. It's in NJ so hope it's on TV.

I'll be at the Rutgers vs. Stanford game. Finally a game I can drive to. It should be a good one. Should be some good matchups.

Appel vs. Vaughn
Wiggins vs. Ajavon
Pierce vs. Prince
Pederson vs. Carson
Pohlen vs. Rushdan

[ClayKallam]

One point about Stanford: It is very hard to get in, but once you're in, they do everything to keep you in. A student at Cal, for example, is much more in a sink-or-swim mode than a student at Stanford, and there are those who believe that once at Stanford, life isn't that much harder for Stanford students than anywhere else, and in fact, may be somewhat easier.

But there are no exceptions for athletes at Stanford, in any sport. Duke has two or three for basketball alone, and two or three is really all you need.

[udy11]

Any commit news come out of the Stanford Elite camp?

[SakiBomb25]

Any commit news come out of the Stanford Elite camp?

Well anyone of note who attended the Stanford Elite Camp?