2013-14 AAC WBB Preseason Poll

[Icebear]

One's performance should always take into account the strength of one's adversary, which is the point diggerfoot is making. If UConn's offense had to face UConn's defense, neither would produce great stats.

It is irrational to try to say what if UCONN players had to play UCONN because once that player was not on UCONN it would no longer be the same team. It is how one performs against the best one plays in the biggest games plain and simple.

 

[DavidinNaples]

It is irrational to try to say what if UCONN players had to play UCONN because once that player was not on UCONN it would no longer be the same team. It is how one performs against the best one plays in the biggest games plain and simple.

 

[Fightin Choke]

It is irrational to try to say what if UCONN players had to play UCONN because once that player was not on UCONN it would no longer be the same team. It is how one performs against the best one plays in the biggest games plain and simple.

It's not irrational at all, but rather theoretical. In fact, it's what statistians attempt to do all the time. At the team level, it's the rationale for strength of schedule (SOS). If a player compiles gaudy stats against inferior competition, that's less impressive than compiling slightly less impressive numbers against more challenging competition.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

It is irrational to try to say what if UCONN players had to play UCONN because once that player was not on UCONN it would no longer be the same team. It is how one performs against the best one plays in the biggest games plain and simple.

I think he is implying violating physics and being in 2 places at once. Or cloned. Or a doppel-ganger. Or some such.

On that hypothetical stage, he is 100% correct in my opinion. Of course, while the offensive stats would lag, so would the defensive stats, because UConn doesn't face offenses as explosive as itself. Yikes, I'm getting a headache (and the image of 2 Connecticut teams to this RU fan is only part of it).

 

[ed4ourgirls]

For comparison, here's the final Sagarin ranking from last year:

1. UConn
10. Louisville
29. USF
54. Rutgers
104. SMU
121. UCF
130. Cincinnati
135. Temple
150. Memphis
173. Houston

Of course, last year is not this year, but with the exception of Houston, the teams
after Rutgers all look to be competitive with one another. Should be a lot of
close exciting games among those five.

I'm hoping Jamelle can get her program over the hump, post a winning record,
and get and invite to the WNIT.

 

[semper]

This is depressing....gonna be a lot of boring games.

 

[diggerfoot]

Hmmm. So my UConn playing UConn hypothetical was taken literally. OK then, here's a more logical approach. If out of all the allegedly great players only one had a subpar game against UConn, or 2, or 3, etc, while the others played up to the competition in their greatness, then it would be logical to conclude that those few "great players" who came up short were not so great after all.

If out of all the allegedly great players ALL had a subpar game against UConn, or all but 1 or 2, then it would be logical to conclude that some of the others still might be great after all, but UConn's team defense is so good that it's useless as a measuring stick for comparison. When not only Diggins and Thomas, but also Lucas only shoots well in the last minutes, Ogwumike is turned into a volume shooter as a post player and Griner is shut down for a half ... subpar games for all of them ... perhaps, just perhaps, performance against UConn no longer becomes a good measuring stick for comparison. Some may not be great, but the measure would be subpar performances in other big games besides UConn.

What percentage of great players having subpar performances would you need to conclude which scenario best fits UConn? That is the point at where people can disagree, but the logic I've presented for making that distinction is sound. It seems to me that the number of players who have played "up to the competition" when that competition is UConn is better measured over a decade than a year, and never involves the opponents "best" player that draws our focus. Our defense has been that good.

 

[Icebear]

Digger, the question to ask if one wants honest comparison is who had their best relative performance against UCONN. Not relative to their own norm which one expects to drop but relative to other players who played UCONN and their drop offs, as well.

Alyssa Thomas was so taken out of her game she simply started distrusting her game. TV coverage noted continually she stopped taking shots available to her including pulling up on breakaways. In other words, she folded.

Diggins performed better by having sub par %s but still finding other ways to impact the games by making clutch shots at opportune moments or important distribution to others.

 

[meyers7]

This is depressing....gonna be a lot of boring games.

Depends on what you consider boring or exciting. My more sadistic side enjoys seeing UCONN dismantle teams. So I don't find those games boring at all.

 

[Icebear]

Depends on what you consider boring or exciting. My more sadistic side enjoys seeing UCONN dismantle teams. So I don't find those games boring at all.

The AAC season may be rather like Monty Python's dismantling of the Black Knight. Limbs scattered everywhere.

 

[diggerfoot]

Digger, the question to ask if one wants honest comparison is who had their best relative performance against UCONN. Not relative to their own norm which one expects to drop but relative to other players who played UCONN and their drop offs, as well.

Alyssa Thomas was so taken out of her game she simply started distrusting her game. TV coverage noted continually she stopped taking shots available to her including pulling up on breakaways. In other words, she folded.

Diggins performed better by having sub par %s but still finding other ways to impact the games by making clutch shots at opportune moments or important distribution to others.

I think you propose a reasonable criteria, though I would suggest the person who folded the most against us was Gray from Duke. She's a point guard that did not want to go near the ball by the end of the game. Is she yet a great player? Time will tell.

 

[Phil]

It is irrational to try to say what if UCONN players had to play UCONN because once that player was not on UCONN it would no longer be the same team. It is how one performs against the best one plays in the biggest games plain and simple.

Oh please. You don't know how to take the team through a kinked wormhole, and return so that the exact same team, with the exact same coaching staff can play against each other?

 

[Icebear]

Never figured that one out.

Although I have taken many a bear down a rabbit hole and many a harp seal out of a ice hole.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

Depends on what you consider boring or exciting. My more sadistic side enjoys seeing UCONN dismantle teams. So I don't find those games boring at all.

I like to think that those other teams are having a learning experience. A number of other coaches have said as much, though a time or two in the last couple of years coaches have said it was bad for their teams.

 

[meyers7]

I like to think that those other teams are having a learning experience. A number of other coaches have said as much, though a time or two in the last couple of years coaches have said it was bad for their teams.

I think there will be quite a few "learning experiences" this year.

 

[Kibitzer]

The results of the poll suggest that the coaches are aware of the talents of Kaleena and Breanna but they appear to be unfamiliar with Morgan. I am sure she looks forward to acquainting them with her skills. It will be a revelation.

 

[willtalk]

digger...no offense taken. However, to be "All Conference" you should be good, if not great, in "big" games. For example, Inga Orekova, from USF, played Rutgers, Notre Dame, Texas Tech and California in her last four games, NCAA tourny included. She shot 18-52 or 34%. She is a volume shooter (240 3's) and had much better games against lesser opponents, not in "big" games. She had 73 turnovers vs 85 assists for the season, hardly spectacular...(My daughter goes to USF so I follow them)... FYI, Bria Hartley shot 37% in her last 4 games, Stewie shot 57% in her last 4 games, all in the NCAA tourny. Go Huskies..!!

First let me say that my post is purely directed at the rational used not the objective as to who is a better player or deserves recognition. For a player like Inge those stats would make sense. She is the focus of the offense for USF and as such she would also be the focus of the opposing teams defense. In the NCAA's the teams generally have a higher level of individual player talent than your non tournament teams, so she would be facing their top defenders along with the most defensive focus from those teams. For example individual players on teams that played Uconn usually had to contend with facing Faris. If you play a multitalented team like Uconn you are forced to pick your poison and can not really game plan to take out a certain individual player or players. Rather you would have to settle for an in game adjustment to cool down a hot player. Most basketball players have both hot and cold shooting streaks though out the season. Sometimes a player hits one or the other during a big game or the NCAA's and it has less to do with being clutch or choking. Timing is not given the importance in WCBB that it deserves. Team balance and depth can mitigate cold streaks and other variables that are responsible for inconsistency. That is why I believed Uconn was a much better team than Baylor and was more apt to survive the gauntlet of better teams in the playoffs. The limited number of games played in WCBB and the one and done format of the playoffs gives statistics less credibility in regard to who is clutch and who is not.

As far as voting for the conference preseason All Star teams, there might possibly have been a degree of political PR involved. The AAC's public image is that it except for Ucon ( starting next year) the conference is very weak. So voting for a more balanced and multi-team represented All Star team would be good PR to counter that image. Putting more than three Huskys on the team would just publicly reinforce that negative image.

 

[willtalk]

I think you propose a reasonable criteria, though I would suggest the person who folded the most against us was Gray from Duke. She's a point guard that did not want to go near the ball by the end of the game. Is she yet a great player? Time will tell.

That was purely the result of a game plan geared toward finding an alternative to running the offense through Chelsea. During the NCAA's Stanford focused on cutting off the passing lanes and pretty much took Duke out off their offense. It was the key to stopping Duke. They also expected Uconn to put Faris on Chelsea and pretty much do the same so they decided to run the offense through Jones. So they began to phase Jones into being able to run the offense in case the defense focused on Chelsea. While it failed in the game against Uconn ,the process begun, payed long term dividends when Chelsea went out with a season ending injury and Jones didn't have to come in cold.

This phasing in of a freshman, along with the reentry of the previously injured players into the rotation, was not a smooth transition and really affected the chemistry of the team. There was a lot of questioning as to why Chelsea wasn't allowed to run the team at the point for the entire game. McCalley takes a lot of criticism, especially on the Duke board, in regards to her coaching ability, however this was a good move on her part. It had a short term negative affect but payed of long term when Chelsea was out for the season and Jones was ready to take over. Everyone knows how good a coach Geno so few if any question his abilities, but I remember some on this board were critical of him in that he didn't give his younger bench enough experience so that when injuries hit they weren't game ready. Now McCallry is obviously not in the same level as Geno but this just was one instance where she made an excellent long term decision for which she was never given credit for by her many critics.

 

[willtalk]

Never figured that one out.

Although I have taken many a bear down a rabbit hole and many a harp seal out of a ice hole.

"Ice" do you ever read the comic strip " Pearls before Swine" ? They are doing a series bit on penguins on floating ice who are being systematically being eaten by a Polar bear. The humor lies in their moronic attempts to avoid the inevitable.

 

[Icebear]

I have never seen it. I'll have to look for it. Thanks.

 

[DavidinNaples]

First let me say that my post is purely directed at the rational used not the objective as to who is a better player or deserves recognition. For a player like Inge those stats would make sense. She is the focus of the offense for USF and as such she would also be the focus of the opposing teams defense. In the NCAA's the teams generally have a higher level of individual player talent than your non tournament teams, so she would be facing their top defenders along with the most defensive focus from those teams. For example individual players on teams that played Uconn usually had to contend with facing Faris. If you play a multitalented team like Uconn you are forced to pick your poison and can not really game plan to take out a certain individual player or players. Rather you would have to settle for an in game adjustment to cool down a hot player. Most basketball players have both hot and cold shooting streaks though out the season. Sometimes a player hits one or the other during a big game or the NCAA's and it has less to do with being clutch or choking. Timing is not given the importance in WCBB that it deserves. Team balance and depth can mitigate cold streaks and other variables that are responsible for inconsistency. That is why I believed Uconn was a much better team than Baylor and was more apt to survive the gauntlet of better teams in the playoffs. The limited number of games played in WCBB and the one and done format of the playoffs gives statistics less credibility in regard to who is clutch and who is not.

As far as voting for the conference preseason All Star teams, there might possibly have been a degree of political PR involved. The AAC's public image is that it except for Ucon ( starting next year) the conference is very weak. So voting for a more balanced and multi-team represented All Star team would be good PR to counter that image. Putting more than three Huskys on the team would just publicly reinforce that negative image.

Will....your guess at possible politics is most likely spot on...I also agree "best players" usually face the other teams best defender. Inge was not, however, the focus of the offense. The Smith twins, who graduated, averaged 16.3 and 13.7 pts per game. Inge averaged 12.7 / game. The game plan last year was stop the Smiths. Inge is a 6'2" wing who stays at the 3 pt arc waiting for team mates to find her. When they do, she shoots a trey. 60% of her shots were 3's. She did not lead the team in any statistics, except minutes played. Don't get me wrong, she is a good player. She may even earn this pre-season honor. Go Huskies..!!

 

[diggerfoot]

That was purely the result of a game plan geared toward finding an alternative to running the offense through Chelsea. During the NCAA's Stanford focused on cutting off the passing lanes and pretty much took Duke out off their offense. It was the key to stopping Duke. They also expected Uconn to put Faris on Chelsea and pretty much do the same so they decided to run the offense through Jones. So they began to phase Jones into being able to run the offense in case the defense focused on Chelsea. While it failed in the game against Uconn ,the process begun, payed long term dividends when Chelsea went out with a season ending injury and Jones didn't have to come in cold.

This phasing in of a freshman, along with the reentry of the previously injured players into the rotation, was not a smooth transition and really affected the chemistry of the team. There was a lot of questioning as to why Chelsea wasn't allowed to run the team at the point for the entire game. McCalley takes a lot of criticism, especially on the Duke board, in regards to her coaching ability, however this was a good move on her part. It had a short term negative affect but payed of long term when Chelsea was out for the season and Jones was ready to take over. Everyone knows how good a coach Geno so few if any question his abilities, but I remember some on this board were critical of him in that he didn't give his younger bench enough experience so that when injuries hit they weren't game ready. Now McCallry is obviously not in the same level as Geno but this just was one instance where she made an excellent long term decision for which she was never given credit for by her many critics.

Hmm. Well this makes half sense to me. The other half to me was what I saw, and that was a difference in actions by Gray as the game went on. In the first half it looked like she was trying to make things happen but failing, whether the offense was being run through Jones or not. The second half she looked like she gave up on trying to make anything happen, whether the offense was run through Jones or not. Let me ask you point blank: did you not detect any change in Gray's actions as the game progressed?

 

[Geno-ista]

The AAC season may be rather like Monty Python's dismantling of the Black Knight. Limbs scattered everywhere.

It's just "a flesh wound" was one of the classic comments and movies of all time!