Stanford-Oregon: Cardinal Destroys Ducks 77-55 on Thursday Night
Stanford destroyed the Oregon Ducks 77-55 in front of 6,902 fans at Maples Pavilion on Thursday night.
Oregon's offense was horrid in the first half, and the Cardinal had a 40-18 lead at halftime.
Stanford played without their starting point guard, Mitch Johnson, who was out due to a calf injury. They did not miss Johnson as his replacement, Kenny Brown, got Stanford off to a great start by going 3-4 on three-pointers early on.
Drew Schiller also manned the point guard spot and had five points and four assists.
Josh Owens was very ineffective once again and had three fouls in the first half, which limited his playing time. He ended up with four points and two rebounds in 14 minutes.
Lawrence Hill, who led Stanford with 25 points in their last game against Cal, had only nine points and only took three shots in the first half. He did lead the Cardinal in assists with six.
Landry Fields led Stanford at halftime with 11 points on 5-7 shooting. The highest scorer in the game was Anthony Goods, who had 20 points.
The game was basically over after the first half ended. The second half was lethargic as Stanford tried to control the clock and their offense was very tentative.
Stanford was able to get their reserves playing time in the second half, as players like Jack Trotter, Da'Veed Dildy, Jarrett Mann, and Elliot Bullock all got to see action.
Stanford had a 25-point lead at one time in the game.
Oregon never got their offense going until the second half, but by then it was too late. They scored 37 points in the second half as Tajuan Porter led the Ducks with 14 points. Kamyron Brown added 11 points and three steals.
Their big freshman center, Michael Dunigan, only took three shots and had only five points in 14 minutes.
With the win, Stanford is now 3-3 in the Pac-10. Their next game is Saturday night against Oregon State. Oregon will head over to Berkeley Saturday to play the Cal Bears.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?