2016-17 Post Play Worries?

[mudcat]

There have been many questions (and worries) raised on this forum regarding UCONN's lack of size next year. However, despite our losses in the post, I think we still match up pretty well with most of the leading contenders in WCBB, with one exception (Baylor). Stanford will also be pretty much perimeter oriented, even though McCall is impressive. SC has lost much of their interior depth, and although their two post players are very talented, they also have no replacements or substitutes. Notre Dame will also have to rely heavily on perimeter players on both offense and defense. Louisville will have size and talent but both will be young, especially the size. TX and MD will have both size and talent, but will have to take big steps to be competitive with UCONN. Baylor is the one team with the talented size, coaching, and perimeter scoring that could make them really, really difficult to guard, and the team I expect to be on top of the rankings for most of the year. What say ye?

 

[tony yusef]

I'm not concerned in the least about lack of size for this team next year, this is a guards game. I'm more concerned about how do you replace Mo Jeff. This team needs Dangerfield to hit the ground running. The size issue is overstated, what the Huskies have is length, KLS, Collier are long, Gabby has great hops which allows her to play above her listed 5'11 frame. The incoming freshman Irwin is a 6'2 banger, and then there is 6'5 Natalie Butler. If she continues the natural progression that so many others like her have in this program then the lack of post presence is non issue.

 

[tony yusef]

I'm not concerned in the least about lack of size for this team next year, this is a guards game. I'm more concerned about how do you replace Mo Jeff. This team needs Dangerfield to hit the ground running. The size issue is overstated, what the Huskies have is length, KLS, Collier are long, Gabby has great hops which allows her to play above her listed 5'11 frame. The incoming freshman Irwin is a 6'2 banger, and then there is 6'5 Natalie Butler. If she continues the natural progression that so many others like her have in this program then the lack of post presence is non issue.

 

[SCGamecock]

UCONN will be fine. It was never Breanna's or Tuck's height that necessarily made them dangerous... it was Breanna's length and quickness and Tuck's footwork and intelligence on the court. Couple that with both being great offensive and defensive players.

UCONN still has plenty of it all. Post players are good to have and make great weapons but WCBB is a guards game. SC has two elite posts but I'm most looking forward to better guard play this season, hopefully.

 

[Tonyc]

UConn has a lot of question marks next season mainly because they are not bringing back a nucleus like they have for the past few years. Im not really concerned about UConn next season because they play great defense. If you have any questions about that just look at Syracuse this season. They made it to the final game with their defense. They were ranked preseason something like 23 in the polls. When they played defense they got to the Finals. UConn has a lot of talent, good ball handlers, good rebounders and 5 scorers, but most important they have a good defense that is very quick. Yeah UConn may like a big underneath if Butler doesn't come through but I think she will. She can rebound and score and like many players on this roster she will be a work in process. With that said we saw ND LVille SC and Baylor all not make the FF this season All those teams lost good players except Lville who brings back a most of their roster.

We cant replace Stewie MoJeff or Tuck. Lets accept that. Dangerfield is not going to be Mojeff. Irwin is not going to be Tuck. Lets see what happens. This will be a different team from the past few years. We have the talent but we may lack a little in experience, leadership on the floor and chemistry, just like most other top teams. What we do have is quickness, ball handlers, rebounding, and defense. I posted some time ago who the top teams lose and they lose a lot.

Its fun to talk about the future and what to expect that's what fans do and that's part of being a fan, but we wont know anything until the fall. What Im waiting for is to see who verbals. Megan Walker, and a couple of bigs and I expect the bigs. So Im waiting for the fall to see where we are.

 

[tony yusef]

I'm not concerned in the least about lack of size for this team next year, this is a guards game. I'm more concerned about how do you replace Mo Jeff. This team needs Dangerfield to hit the ground running. The size issue is overstated, what the Huskies have is length, KLS, Collier are long, Gabby has great hops which allows her to play above her listed 5'11 frame. The incoming freshman Irwin is a 6'2 banger, and then there is 6'5 Natalie Butler. If she continues the natural progression that so many others like her have in this program then the lack of post presence is non issue.

 

[Charliebball]

I'm not concerned in the least about lack of size for this team next year, this is a guards game. I'm more concerned about how do you replace Mo Jeff. This team needs Dangerfield to hit the ground running. The size issue is overstated, what the Huskies have is length, KLS, Collier are long, Gabby has great hops which allows her to play above her listed 5'11 frame. The incoming freshman Irwin is a 6'2 banger, and then there is 6'5 Natalie Butler. If she continues the natural progression that so many others like her have in this program then the lack of post presence is non issue.

I respectfully disagree with your premise regarding length...........................next year's team has lost unbelievable length albeit in one player.................did you notice what happened defensively as soon as Stewart left the court last season?...................her shot blocking ability single handedly disrupted entire offenses...................as I stated on another thread, my very unscientific estimate was that her defense alone saved the team a minimum of 10 points a game and I think I am conservative with that estimate......................also add to that the loss of a lock down defender in Mo............. yes the team is well schooled defensively, as good as it gets but I think you're going to see a much different team defensively on the court next season................

 

[connboy77]

UCONN will be fine. It was never Breanna's or Tuck's height that necessarily made them dangerous... it was Breanna's length and quickness and Tuck's footwork and intelligence on the court. Couple that with both being great offensive and defensive players.

UCONN still has plenty of it all. Post players are good to have and make great weapons but WCBB is a guards game. SC has two elite posts but I'm most looking forward to better guard play this season, hopefully.

Who will be SC'S point guard next year?

 

[Charliebball]

Who will be SC'S point guard next year?

I'll let our SC friends give you the details but I believe they have a couple of transfers one of whom can play the point plus a new recruit.................I assume Cuevas will start but I'll deffer to those in the know on that..........................

 

[Fairfield Fan]

I'm not concerned in the least about lack of size for this team next year, this is a guards game. I'm more concerned about how do you replace Mo Jeff. This team needs Dangerfield to hit the ground running. The size issue is overstated, what the Huskies have is length, KLS, Collier are long, Gabby has great hops which allows her to play above her listed 5'11 frame. The incoming freshman Irwin is a 6'2 banger, and then there is 6'5 Natalie Butler. If she continues the natural progression that so many others like her have in this program then the lack of post presence is non issue.

I'm more concerned with the fragile physical state of several athletes on the team. Gabby Williams has had serious knee problems; Napheesa Collier will take half a year recuperating from surgery on a labrum tear that was bigger than the surgeons expected; and Saniya Chong is trying to heal from a painful and chronic IT band condition. We're not that deep.

Fingers crossed.

 

[BroadwayVa]

I'm not concerned in the least about lack of size for this team next year, this is a guards game. I'm more concerned about how do you replace Mo Jeff. This team needs Dangerfield to hit the ground running. The size issue is overstated, what the Huskies have is length, KLS, Collier are long, Gabby has great hops which allows her to play above her listed 5'11 frame. The incoming freshman Irwin is a 6'2 banger, and then there is 6'5 Natalie Butler. If she continues the natural progression that so many others like her have in this program then the lack of post presence is non issue.

You thought it so good you repeated it 3 times.
I often do it twice---when I catch it I delete it--but not always.

How ev VAR ! Uconn has had much success with Bigs being on the team. Most recently Steff and Kiah. Then Stewie and Kiah. Kiah with her mobility and hand/eye co-ordination in key games (Tx and ND) was a perfect back stop--Remember she was NOT 6'5' she was 6'3.
Syracuse had success this year because they surprised a lot of teams who were unprepared for the speed, defense and except for playing Uconn had good success with the 3.

 

[SCGamecock]

Who will be SC'S point guard next year?

Cuevas.

 

[connboy77]

Cuevas.

Thanks!

 

[hoophuskee]

I respectfully disagree with your premise regarding length.......next year's team has lost unbelievable length albeit in one player.......did you notice what happened defensively as soon as Stewart left the court last season?....her shot blocking ability single handedly disrupted entire offenses....as I stated on another thread, my very unscientific estimate was that her defense alone saved the team a minimum of 10 points a game and I think I am conservative with that estimate.......also add to that the loss of a lock down defender in Mo... yes the team is well schooled defensively, as good as it gets but I think you're going to see a much different team defensively on the court next season......

I just think that just because we don't have one of the greatest shot blockers ever doesn't mean we are going to be overwhelmed vs every team with size. I'm not disagreeing with you - as I think Stewie is most irreplaceable because she was GOAT. But our offensive and defensive execution will clearly not be as good. But this team - the 15-16 team was among the greatest ever. So overall from perimeter (because of MoJeff) ot paint (Stewie and Tuck) - we won't be as good. It doesn't mean that we will be bad all season.

SO as related to the OP's question it comes down to what degree do we "worry?" To be amongst the best ever? heck yeah I would be "worried" if we were comparing this 2016-2017 team to the 2015-2016. Am I worried about being a title contender? Sure--as should EVERY team. About being a top ten team? Nope. We're good enough to not have to worry that we're amongst the top ten teams who have a shot to be a serious contender. Washington and Syracuse got to finals. If they can, then so can we next year.

 

[Baroloboy]

You thought it so good you repeated it 3 times.
I often do it twice---when I catch it I delete it--but not always.

How ev VAR ! Uconn has had much success with Bigs being on the team. Most recently Steff and Kiah. Then Stewie and Kiah. Kiah with her mobility and hand/eye co-ordination in key games (Tx and ND) was a perfect back stop--Remember she was NOT 6'5' she was 6'3.
Syracuse had success this year because they surprised a lot of teams who were unprepared for the speed, defense and except for playing Uconn had good success with the 3.

Syracuse got to the finals because of their speed and defense? Speed maybe. But defense? True, the "experts" promoting the FF and NC games were hyping Syracuse's defense. But the Orange gave up 60.1 ppg last season to clock in 92nd in team defense for Div. I.During the dance they did worse giving up 65ppg. Even excluding the 82 point thumping we gave them in the NC game they gave up 62.6ppg. But what about that smothering full court press that disrputes the opponents game plan? In the first half of the game UCONN went through their press like a knife through butter on the way to a 50 to 23 point lead with only 4 or 5 turnovers.

 

[BroadwayVa]

Syracuse got to the finals because of their speed and defense? Speed maybe. But defense? True, the "experts" promoting the FF and NC games were hyping Syracuse's defense. But the Orange gave up 60.1 ppg last season to clock in 92nd in team defense for Div. I.During the dance they did worse giving up 65ppg. Even excluding the 82 point thumping we gave them in the NC game they gave up 62.6ppg. But what about that smothering full court press that disrputes the opponents game plan? In the first half of the game UCONN went through their press like a knife through butter on the way to a 50 to 23 point lead with only 4 or 5 turnovers.[/QUOT

When you are comparing Uconn of the 15/16 season to any other team you are comparing apples to lemons. In truth in advertising one should not use the exception to prove the majority. Ask your self--what is Uconn noted for year in and year out?? Ask yourself what was Uconn noted for in wining margins??
Now ask yourself is it fair to use the exception to prove the norm??? Now ask yourself WHY?

 

[hoophuskee]

Syracuse got to the finals because of their speed and defense? Speed maybe. But defense? True, the "experts" promoting the FF and NC games were hyping Syracuse's defense. But the Orange gave up 60.1 ppg last season to clock in 92nd in team defense for Div. I.During the dance they did worse giving up 65ppg. Even excluding the 82 point thumping we gave them in the NC game they gave up 62.6ppg. But what about that smothering full court press that disrputes the opponents game plan? In the first half of the game UCONN went through their press like a knife through butter on the way to a 50 to 23 point lead with only 4 or 5 turnovers.

I thought their defense was really good. You can't use UCONN as a barometer. Who stopped UCONN? Points allowed is not a true measure of defense also. It's pace of the game. Their defense caused turnovers allowing team to play at fast pace. Which also allowed their depth to come into play.

 

[Charliebball]

I just think that just because we don't have one of the greatest shot blockers ever doesn't mean we are going to be overwhelmed vs every team with size. I'm not disagreeing with you - as I think Stewie is most irreplaceable because she was GOAT. But our offensive and defensive execution will clearly not be as good. But this team - the 15-16 team was among the greatest ever. So overall from perimeter (because of MoJeff) ot paint (Stewie and Tuck) - we won't be as good. It doesn't mean that we will be bad all season.

Of course the downside to Stewart's greatness wass that eventually her UConn years would end..........regarding her defense, I'm not necessarily just talking about teams with a lot of size......................Stewart probably shut down 80-90% of all dribble drives in the half court, so it didn't really matter if anybody else got beat, she was right there denying the layup...............that's powerful stuff that you just can't recreate......................

 

[Sonny44]

Defense, yes. But a big part of that is blocks and rebounds. We have a lot of those to replace. Second and third chance points can be very demoralizing to a team.

 

[RSHERMVIKES]

I feel that Natalie Butler, Gabby, Collier, Irwin, KLS, as bigs and Chong, Nurse, Bent, KLS (when at SG), on the perimeter will improve this off season and with our great coaching staff will bring out the usual SMOTHERING UCONN defense!
IMHO the girls will want to prove they weren't destroyed by the graduation of the 3, so they'll work their butts off to show they can still play UCONN BB!
As long as UCONN can play THEIR defense they will be IN every game, even vs Baylor's impressive size.
We still, even with the loss of the great 3, will have a whole bunch of scorers left to battle any team out there that might be a threat!
Injuries and/or illnesses are the problem!

 

[bballnut90]

Of course the downside to Stewart's greatness wass that eventually her UConn years would end.....regarding her defense, I'm not necessarily just talking about teams with a lot of size.......Stewart probably shut down 80-90% of all dribble drives in the half court, so it didn't really matter if anybody else got beat, she was right there denying the layup.....that's powerful stuff that you just can't recreate.......

This is the biggest hole to replace defensively. Since UCONN started their dominating streak, one key factor is they've had a big shot blocking post player in the lineup. First it was Charles, then Dolson, then Stewart (and Stokes for a good part of it too). Stewart had a Griner like effect defensively this year and no one was confident taking it to the hole against her. If they were confident, usually they'd get stuffed, or once in a while they'd make a tough shot. The only teams to compete with UCONN this year had very good shooting nights from the perimeter. Perimeter shooting is what kept opposing teams in games with the Huskies. Opposing teams didn't bother trying to pack the ball inside or go up against Stewart. Next year UCONN doesn't have the same luxury inside, so they'll need to come up with different looks defensively to keep teams from getting inside. Next year will require a lot more work from Geno.

 

[hoophuskee]

Of course the downside to Stewart's greatness wass that eventually her UConn years would end.....regarding her defense, I'm not necessarily just talking about teams with a lot of size.......Stewart probably shut down 80-90% of all dribble drives in the half court, so it didn't really matter if anybody else got beat, she was right there denying the layup.....that's powerful stuff that you just can't recreate.......

The same applies with quick penetrating guards as what I said previously.

I'm not disagreeing with you - as I think Stewie is most irreplaceable because she was GOAT. But our offensive and defensive execution will clearly not be as good. But this team - the 15-16 team was among the greatest ever. So overall from perimeter (because of MoJeff ) to paint ((Stewie (intimidating penetration) and Tuck)) - we won't be as good. It doesn't mean that we will be bad all season.

SO as related to the OP's question it comes down to what degree do we "worry?" To be amongst the best ever? heck yeah I would be "worried" if we were comparing this 2016-2017 team to the 2015-2016. Am I worried about being a title contender? Sure--as should EVERY team. About being a top ten team? Nope. We're good enough to not have to worry that we're amongst the top ten teams who have a shot to be a serious contender. Washington and Syracuse got to finals. If they can, then so can we next year.

I will say this-- the more I think about it -- the injuries to KLS and NC - WILL more than likely impact how much better they will be prepared to start the season. They were two players I expected would have a huge soph jump. They're actually crucial to why I believe we would be as good as we were to start the season. Like many I look at KLS as being a tremendous player. I thought she could become among the nation's top ten. And my expectation of Collier was extremely high this upcoming year. By the end of the year they may be that but early in the year we may lose more games than I thought hurting our seeding. My expectation next year is just wait and see. I have no idea how KLS and NC will come out of the gate. My expectation was that they would be terrific out of the gate. OFC we would lose - they wouldn't be immune to bad games but now moreso. So rather than worry - I'll just wait and see. All I need is a little push and I can be like all the eternal worriers on this board!!!!!!!!!!! I'm just a nudge away from being a full-fledge member!!!

 

[Charliebball]

The same applies with quick penetrating guards as what I said previously.

I will say this-- the more I think about it -- the injuries to KLS and NC - WILL more than likely impact how much better they will be prepared to start the season. They were two players I expected would have a huge soph jump. They're actually crucial to why I believe we would be as good as we were to start the season. Like many I look at KLS as being a tremendous player. I thought she could become among the nation's top ten. And my expectation of Collier was extremely high this upcoming year. By the end of the year they may be that but early in the year we may lose more games than I thought hurting our seeding. My expectation next year is just wait and see. I have no idea how KLS and NC will come out of the gate. My expectation was that they would be terrific out of the gate. OFC we would lose - they wouldn't be immune to bad games but now moreso. So rather than worry - I'll just wait and see. All I need is a little push and I can be like all the eternal worriers on this board!!!!!!!!!!! I'm just a nudge away from being a full-fledge member!!!

I agree with your thoughts on the two youngsters..............this off season was to be vital for their continued growth.............at this point I'll take two healthy kids and worry about the growth later................We would welcome you to the small but noisy group of doom and gloomers...................look at it this way, you will be really happy when it turns out you're pessimism is completely unwarranted.......................or even better, when you're right you can say told you so!!

 

[Blueconn]

Geno has kept the program at or near the front of the pack without dominant post-players on multiple occasions. The 2002 team is the ultimate example of how to win (!) without an experienced, talented, traditional center.

But the 2003 National Champions are an equally fascinating example : not only did they lack overall size, but they'd graduated Bird at point and the rest of TASS. Of course, we still had Diana and no one else did. But one great player never guarantees ultimate team triumph; a lesson we learned in 2011.

The 2003 team had three "tall" players. At 6'2" we had Strother and Crockett. Both freshmen. Sophomore Jessica Moore was the legitimate center at 6'3". Quite a change from the prior 7-8 years when 6'4" Lobo, 6'7" Wolters, and 6'5" Schumacher were patrolling the lane.

But this group (post-TASS) came together, and in the next two seasons, always with Moore as the only player taller than 6'2", went 68-5, had a 31 game win streak, and won consecutive NCs. And with Conlon ("she may be short, but she's slow") at point.

One of Geno's greatest coaching periods. We have every reason to hope another is about to commence.

 

[CocoHusky]

Geno has kept the program at or near the front of the pack without dominant post-players on multiple occasions. The 2002 team is the ultimate example of how to win (!) without an experienced, talented, traditional center.

But the 2003 National Champions are an equally fascinating example : not only did they lack overall size, but they'd graduated Bird at point and the rest of TASS. Of course, we still had Diana and no one else did. But one great player never guarantees ultimate team triumph; a lesson we learned in 2011.

The 2003 team had three "tall" players. At 6'2" we had Strother and Crockett. Both freshmen. Sophomore Jessica Moore was the legitimate center at 6'3". Quite a change from the prior 7-8 years when 6'4" Lobo, 6'7" Wolters, and 6'5" Schumacher were patrolling the lane.

But this group (post-TASS) came together, and in the next two seasons, always with Moore as the only player taller than 6'2", went 68-5, had a 31 game win streak, and won consecutive NCs. And with Conlon ("she may be short, but she's slow") at point.

One of Geno's greatest coaching periods. We have every reason to hope another is about to commence.

If we had someone of Jessica Moore's ability and size to man the post I would probably agree with you. If we had someone of Diana's ilk I would definitely agree with you. Since we have neither I hope you are correct.