Number one reason for the 5 losses

[azfan]

And those championship teams always had that. 2015 Stewie, Tuck, Stokes, then Collier replaced Stokes as the 3rd interior defender.
It isn' a coincidence that since then Uconn hasn't had multiple great interior defenders, and hasn't won a championship.

Absolutely.

 

[azfan]

I agree but don't you find it interesting that UConn shot poorly against those four highly ranked teams plus a solid Notre Dame team? I'm too lazy right now to do the analysis but perhaps those team's defenses had some impact on the overall shooting even if some of the shots were uncontested..........the most successful UConn teams could score inside when they weren't shooting well outside........other than Aaliyah UConn has no inside game at the moment......those "easy" baskets really can be difference makers....

On point. I would add it's not just for the moment though it's for the rest of the season. Also looking into next year with Aaliyah gone that moment may stretch into years...

 

[Charliebball]

On point. I would add it's not just for the moment though it's for the rest of the season. Also looking into next year with Aaliyah gone that moment may stretch into years...

I'm hopeful that Jana and Ayanna's return will help along with some improved inside play from Ice..........a potential experienced transfer might also be in the cards if the right player is available and if there is a scholarship to offer....

 

[Vancat]

Ball has to go in the basket!

 

[ctkaiser]

First I want to mention that other posters and pundits have said what I am going to say. The number one reason for the losses is "Open Looks - Shooting Woes." Let's start with the SC game. Check the stats - the game was close in 4 major areas. Turnovers were even at 13 each. Offensive rebounding was SC 14 to UConn 13. Fouls were SC 15 to UConn 11. Shots were dead even at 71 each. That's close so far. UConn played hard and aggressive the entire game.
Even Geno talked about all the open looks. UConn worked the play to get good looks. They shot 36% overall and 30% 3 pt. SC shot 46% and 36%. One TV pundit said -- making shots in practice is not the same as making shots in the game--even open looks.

Some quick stats on the other losses. **Take note - other posters here have said--why do other teams shoot so well against us. Well, it shows in the stats. Listed will be overall and 3 pt %.
NC State - 52% and 38% UConn 46% and 31%
UCLA - 45% and a crazy 48% 3 pt. UConn - 33% (are you kidding me) and 39%
Notre Dame - 55% and 41% UConn 43% and a horrible 28%

So far every game UConn is well below their shooting %. Again, the open looks and even lay ups are there. That's 4 out of 5 games.
Texas was the only game that the shooting % were flipped. UConn shot better. However, the loss came from UConn 21 turnovers to 9 for Texas. Also, offensive rebounds was 16 to 5 for Texas.

Anyway, it does not matter if you have 5 starters over 6'2" or taller if a 5"6' guard can score 30 --like HH on Notre Dame. Or the Texas guard.

Of course, it is obvious --- you have to put the ball in the basket. The open looks are there.
Can that be fixed for the playoffs? Maybe.

Wasn't Notre Dame where Aaliyah took 0 shots in the 4th quarter? Every time Geno says Paige has to shoot more I say so does Aaliyah.

 

[BBallF]

Will not makes to the second weekend of the dance. Aaliyah has no help in the paint.

Totally agree as to Aa;iyah but I think we get to the Sweet 16 like last year. Beyond that it is possible to get to the Elite 8 but we will probably have to beat a #2 ranked team to do so and is therefore unlikely. In these intense, pressure games, the youth shows up in negative ways usually and it is really difficult to play against an opponent who could be as much as 4 years older than you. It's a lot to ask. Even if our players are older by experience, their bodies aren't.

 

[baggerbob]

Totally agree as to Aa;iyah but I think we get to the Sweet 16 like last year. Beyond that it is possible to get to the Elite 8 but we will probably have to beat a #2 ranked team to do so and is therefore unlikely. In these intense, pressure games, the youth shows up in negative ways usually and it is really difficult to play against an opponent who could be as much as 4 years older than you. It's a lot to ask. Even if our players are older by experience, their bodies aren't.

By the way, Dolson, Stewie, and Tuck could all score on the blocks, and pass, the same with Collier.
Made it easier for KML, Bria, Mo to hit outside shots.
Those teams were balanced.
Have to add Nurse, and Katie Lou.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

Wasn't Notre Dame where Aaliyah took 0 shots in the 4th quarter? Every time Geno says Paige has to shoot more I say so does Aaliyah.

She has to get the ball more. Against SC, the #1 team, Shade took 19 shots...6 more than Edwards the Senior. That has to change.

 

[Jim R]

I agree but don't you find it interesting that UConn shot poorly against those four highly ranked teams plus a solid Notre Dame team? I'm too lazy right now to do the analysis but perhaps those team's defenses had some impact on the overall shooting even if some of the shots were uncontested..........the most successful UConn teams could score inside when they weren't shooting well outside........other than Aaliyah UConn has no inside game at the moment......those "easy" baskets really can be difference makers....

While Phillycoach did an excellent job of providing some important stats of the “why” we lost those games, and the importance of shot making, Charlieball’s “other“ factors can’t be ignored, especially the importance of having an inside game (yes, that means more than just Aaliyah). And, one thing Phillycoach neglected to mention, in each of those losing contests we were out-rebounded. Do I wish Geno employed a match up zone against taller or quicker teams at times? Sure, packing the paint work pretty well for Iowa last year against S.C. And, yes, in a match up zone, you can do that, and limit a hot shooter like Pao Pao. While our young team deserves loads of credit for its efforts this year, until we have a bit more balance, we’ll have to hope our shot accuracy is through the roof.

 

[Kat]

I think that it all comes down to how many blue-chip players each team can put on the floor. I think South Carolina has 8 McDonalds All Americans on its team. UConn had 4. I'd guess that this played out in the other games, too. Injuries have taken 3 MAAs off of the roster for the Huskies. It's not an excuse, just a fact.

 

[BBallF]

She has to get the ball more. Against SC, the #1 team, Shade took 19 shots...6 more than Edwards the Senior. That has to change.

Especially since Aaliyah was the best inside player in the game.

 

[hoophuskee]

Don't agree with the OP at all or any other reason other than "injuries." That's the reason why they have as many losses as they do. It isn't just one injury with UConn - it is five. Five. Fudd had outplayed or at least played even to Clark last year when she was healthy. Ducharme for a time took over the number 1 option even though UCONN had CWill, Evina, Aaliyah, and Liv.

The size issue would have been minimized a bit all year if Patterson and El Alfy were also on the team. I'll just speak for Patterson; she was not the freak athlete that we saw in her frosh year vs what I saw from those High School games in which she looked like a freakish gazelle.

The combination of offense and defense has been enormously compromised. This combination of losses because of injury is why there are 5 losses.

Good luck to our team tonight!

 

[hoophuskee]

And those championship teams always had that. 2015 Stewie, Tuck, Stokes, then Collier replaced Stokes as the 3rd interior defender.
It isn' a coincidence that since then Uconn hasn't had multiple great interior defenders, and hasn't won a championship.

You know when Stewie first came aboard, there were a lot of posters on here that didn't want Stewi playing inside in fear the opposing teams would bang her too much. The infatuation with size remains extremely over-exaggerated.

UCONN built it's team around two potential "generational guards", and their next highest recruits were Ducharme and Patterson. - Well they all have bene significantly hurt.

If size was the end-all-be-all then can anyone explain what happened South Carolina vs a not very athletic Iowa? And why the next team they played in the title game - their top inside player was 6'3? If height is some important why do these recent examples get dismissed?

Bottom-line is - that 0215 team - you forgot to mention -- Stokes was never replaced by Collier because they weren't in the same classes. If you really want to mention Stokes senior year, then you also have to look at other players on the team named Moriah Jefferson and Kaleena Mosqueda Lewis It appears you are glossing over them. That 2015 team had 4 first team all-American caliber players on it. That team's success was much more than just "size."

Instead, in UCONNs title years, many of those years they had multiple 1st team All-Americans. It didn't matter big or small. Other than DT's run, they had always lots of a/a's.


Got this just in time.

 

[Jim R]

You know when Stewie first came aboard, there were a lot of posters on here that didn't want Stewi playing inside in fear the opposing teams would bang her too much. The infatuation with size remains extremely over-exaggerated.

UCONN built it's team around two potential "generational guards", and their next highest recruits were Ducharme and Patterson. - Well they all have bene significantly hurt.

If size was the end-all-be-all then can anyone explain what happened South Carolina vs a not very athletic Iowa? And why the next team they played in the title game - their top inside player was 6'3? If height is some important why do these recent examples get dismissed?

Bottom-line is - that 0215 team - you forgot to mention -- Stokes was never replaced by Collier because they weren't in the same classes. If you really want to mention Stokes senior year, then you also have to look at other players on the team named Moriah Jefferson and Kaleena Mosqueda Lewis It appears you are glossing over them. That 2015 team had 4 first team all-American caliber players on it. That team's success was much more than just "size."

Instead, in UCONNs title years, many of those years they had multiple 1st team All-Americans. It didn't matter big or small. Other than DT's run, they had always lots of a/a's.


Got this just in time.

Did you watch the IOWA - SC game? If so, you may have noticed that IOWA employed a sagging match up zone most of the game...that greatly limited the effectiveness of the pass into the post. Simply put, and most knowledgeable basketball observers admitted, Staley was simply outcoached by Lisa Bluder. Carolina depended on their inside game and it wasn't there against IOWA. And, Staley didn't adjust her game plan. But, Staley learned from it, hence the addition of Pao Pao during the off season - a dependable shooter from the outside. As far as the next game, LSU simply had better athletes, and shot the lights out from long range - it happens.
No, am not sure anyone said that size was the end-all-be all...but, when you're playing a game where the goal is 10 feet high, and second chances depend, to a great extent, on getting rebounds from missed shots...it sure does help. And, simply, would you rather shoot over an opponent that is 6"2" or 6'5". It is really pretty simple. Again without it -size- it simply makes winning that much tougher. While I'm a big believer in Pete Carrill's maxim that "The strong take from the weak, but the smart take from the strong", and believe UCONN historically has been one of the smartest teams in WCBB, other coaches have raised their game, and having some of the strong or tall, can make a smart team hard to beat!