4th Quarter scoring

[Monte]

Geno knows we may need to milk the clock in a tournament game. Since we get so few chances to have the starters involved in the fourth quarter, it made sense to work on this skill and mindset. While the strategy preserved the win against SC, I suspect there will considerable emphasis on refining the end game protocol in the weeks ahead.

Don't forget also, that Dawn is one of Geno's coaches on the Olympic team. They have been good friends for YEARS!

 

[BigBird]

Hard to understand some of the complaining about the final margin. We led by 17 with a minute left. I haven't done the math, but I think the Huskies averaged a 15+ lead for the fourth quarter and that or more for the half. On the road. Against a good opponent. SC was crushed on their home floor, which even their media admitted.

 

[hoophuskee]

People, all I was saying was continue to play as they had been, substitute Chong, Eckmark, & Butler in, and continue the game plan. No frantic change, just do what they were doing!
By slowing down and SoCar came back to outscore UCONN in the 4th period by I think, 10 points, Dawn Staley and her staff could turn the game in a positive light, "hey girls UCONN was beating you up and you had the guts and the fortitude to come back, not hang your heads, and OUTPLAY THEM in the 4th period! Just think when we play them again in the FF if you can start that game like you finished this game you can beat them!" "How sweet to beat them there and ruin their season!"
In an interview that morning Dawn said if I had my choice I'd rather beat them at the FF then tonight!
If UCONN continued what got them the 21 point lead and won by 35 to 40, which they were capable of doing, going into their next game at the FF, If UCONN were to get up by 10+ early the coaches & players would be thinking, "here they come, they'll run us into the ground like the last time !"
Teams & coaches have long memories, and they might not voice it, but I promise you that past blowout will be on their minds, and effect their play! Leaving a little doubt in SoCar is a good thing.
And yes DaddyChoc I was a HS wrestling coach, but no matter what sport, you want to make an impression on your opponent. Don't you think ND back with Diggins, didn't get in UCONN's heads and effect the way the Huskies played? Come on, they ruled us mentally for 5 games at least! Then UCONN turned it around and now they drive ND crazy!

Its okay we can agree to disagree.

1-- By substituting in so many players - you won't be able to play the same way. Bring in Butler or Ekmark you lose speed and quickness. Bring in Chong to MJ you lose quickness and athleticism. Bring in Chong take out Nurse you lose size and toughness from the guard position. The team needed both size and toughness.

2-- When you say - Dawn Staley and her staff could turn the game in a positive light, . . . In an interview that morning Dawn said if I had my choice I'd rather beat them at the FF then tonight! -- My reply is that UCONN's turn of their light is much brighter. UCONN can turn on their superior bright light- they won, Dawn didn't. And as for Dawn's comment that she would rather win in FF- well that's great but we also know she would rather win both. We know now that there is only one coach that can do that. And that's the brightest light of them all.

3-- When you say - If UCONN continued what got them the 21 point lead and won by 35 to 40, which they were capable of doing, going into their next game at the FF, If UCONN were to get up by 10+ early the coaches & players would be thinking, "here they come, they'll run us into the ground like the last time !" -- My reply IF UCONN continued on their pace and started missing along with giving USC more opportunities to score and more opportunities for the incompetent refs to make more calls and having our starts get worn down or having our subs play awful (There is a chance with the subs you suggest that quickly the momentum could have changed unlike the slow burn that had resulted) in the hostile environment with lousy refs- we could have lost. Now the thinking for he next game game from UCONN would be "when are they going to come after us again? When will it start to happen again?" WHy take that risk? It is much worse to lose than do what we did vs a team we may never see again or only see once. This isn't a best of 7 or we will see them 4 times in a year.

4-- When you say - but no matter what sport, you want to make an impression on your opponent. My reply - the best impression to make is to beat them!!

5-- Years ago Lakers vs Celts - Magic vs Bird, Tommy Heinsohn proclaimed "the Celts will win the series now. They have figured a way to beat them." He went on to explain when the series I think was 2-2 that the Celts put DJ on Magic stop worrying about him getting into foul trouble and had Bird play in the post more against Cooper. There was a "reason" why the series turned. A sound basketball reason. In this case the 2nd game vs USC- UCONN what did USC learn in this game? That Coates can't dominate the game like some people thought previously? They did NOTHING different, and if they play UCONN again, they won't see the slow down until they are down by 20 in the 4th again. Everything you say about belief imo is overstated. I easily found three games of when a team gets blown out only to come back and win the next time, thus there are many more from many teams that this has resulted. Why ignore that? Anyhow I don't think this game carries over to the next game. That stuff is media driven just like "the formula to beat UCONN is Coates which we were told after the Maryland game.". There are times in sports you can't explain- like Hockey this amateur USA team beating the mighty Russians. Well- what happened the game before vs the Russians when that USA team got their doors blown in by the same team? How did that game "carry over?"

 

[Woof 101]

Did Geno call off the dogs during fourth quarters of both the Notre Dame game and this game in respect to MM and DS?

And what an intelligent move to make when we need to keep every decent out of conference opponent possible. Any black balls at this time would destroy the program. This conference would not sustain UCONN recruiting as we know it.

Why not put in Saniya, Ekmark, and Butler? We're gonna need those guys big time next year, and it could have been good minutes for them.

Geno used who he thought could make a possible contribution but also rewarded the top five with minutes they get robbed from in most our conference games. Please present cred for out coaching a 10 time NC coach. Trust Geno or find another team, just say'n. I could list the reasons for the three you mention but it would sound like I don't like them and I do. Their day will come...

Slowing the game down to the extent the Huskies did got them out of their rhythm and they were less effective. I'm not suggesting pushing the ball like crazy but I think SC sensed the change and was able to get "more comfortable" thus the disparity in scoring to UConn's disadvantage.

No bashing Buzzyboy but my comment here goes out to all that think like you do. I see where you think we should have buried them in their house. This also from your other posts on the topic.
Simply not the right thing to do for all the right reasons!
Women's basketball needs every positive it can generate at this time. A number one trouncing a number two only sets the game back another step. The game is not developed enough at this time and Geno obviously understands this. A shame so many fans simply don't get it.

 

[HuskyNan]

Geno has a show?

2015-2016 The Geno Auriemma Show schedule, SNY

 

[JordyG]

You mean in the Oklahoma game in 01-02?

Not quite

 

[hoophuskee]

Not quite

Then I don't understand the relevance of your prior comment when you said
"When the lead hit single digits I started screaming at the screen."

This thread is talking about 4th qtr scoring. Were you under the impression that the lead went under 10 in the 4th quarter?

 

[OldAlum]

I think the 4th quarter was also a learning/teaching opportunity. There may be times when UConn has to slow things down and use the clock - injuries, foul trouble, whatever. I believe that Geno would like them to have this other "gear". Ideally they could methodically move the ball, use the shot clock, and score near the end of it! Hopefully, trying this in this game gave them some practice and some insights on how to proceed next time.

 

[CocoHusky]

I think the 4th quarter was also a learning/teaching opportunity. There may be times when UConn has to slow things down and use the clock - injuries, foul trouble, whatever. I believe that Geno would like them to have this other "gear". Ideally they could methodically move the ball, use the shot clock, and score near the end of it! Hopefully, trying this in this game gave them some practice and some insights on how to proceed next time.

The entire game was a learning opportunity to do what you are suggesting not just the 4th quarter. Like many others I still don't get these comments about the MOV and specifically the 4th quarter. No disrespect to South Carolina but here is what I saw: There was never a single point in the game where UCONN was prevented from calling a set or play to get a shot from a designated spot on the floor, by a designated player, at any designated time in the shot clock. There was no rush, no denial, and very few contested UCONN shots. On the defensive side of the ball it was exactly the opposite, South Carolina was denied every essential sweet spot on the floor and their offense was continuously disrupted. I just don't understand how anyone is equating any part of this game to a letup in intensity that might cost UCONN in future meeting against a different of same opponent because this years performance was more dominating than last year.

 

[JoePgh]

I don't think Geno was thinking about keeping future good opponents on the schedule, the future of women's basketball, or anything else except maximizing his team's chances of winning the game. He didn't go to bench players who had been sitting for 35 minutes of game time because of the high probability that they would make mistakes that would put the game at risk. He didn't maintain the pace of the first three quarters because: (a) fatigue for his starters was a real concern; and (b) even good players are more mistake-prone when they play fast and take risks. It's necessary to do that to get a lead, but when you have a lead in the range of 15 points, and your sole concern is to win the game (even if only by 2, 3, or 5), the rational strategy is to milk the clock and keep the ball out of the opponent's hands.

It is the same reason that very pass-oriented, offensively skilled NFL teams will go to a "three yards in a cloud of dust" offense when they are up by multiple touchdowns in the fourth quarter. Even a Brady or a Manning (never mind a second-string QB) can throw an interception or two and suddenly the lead is gone. If you can keep the ball on the ground and run out the clock, that is the best way to win the game. If it's 3rd-and-7 and you have to pass, you try a short possession pass with a near-zero chance of being intercepted, and if it is incomplete, you punt.

Geno was doing the exact same thing.

 

[OldAlum]

I was not intending to imply that I had any real concerns about the outcome of this game. However SC did outscore UConn in the 4th, and it appeared to me that UConn was playing at a slower, more deliberate pace. Being outscored was not a big issue with the nice cushion, however I suspect that Geno would like them to be nearly as efficient playing at this pace as they are at a faster pace.

 

[Sonny44]

Because the faster you play the faster your lead can evaporate if you don't get the calls. Why invite yet another bad charge, traveling or push off call being aggressive if you don't need to? They have control of the game so slow the tempo down so the other team can't score fast if somebody gets hot. If they can't score fast they're not going to catch you. It's sound basketball stategy. I don't understand this obsession about jacking up the score when you don't need to.

Nah, that strategy is for timid teams and coaches, afraid to lose. It's not about jacking up the score; it's about playing your game no matter what. Keep doing what got you there. Fear of failure seldom leads to optimum performance. Geno (usually) plays to a standard, not a score. Everyone knows that. He just got a little, shall we say conservative, in this one instance. But if he did want to tone it down a little he could have played his reserves a little more.

 

[Monte]

2015-2016 The Geno Auriemma Show schedule, SNY

Thanks

 

[bleeckerhusky]

Nah, that strategy is for timid teams and coaches, afraid to lose. It's not about jacking up the score; it's about playing your game no matter what. Keep doing what got you there. Fear of failure seldom leads to optimum performance. Geno (usually) plays to a standard, not a score. Everyone knows that. He just got a little, shall we say conservative, in this one instance. But if he did want to tone it down a little he could have played his reserves a little more.

I agree. It's very unusual, and against Geno's philosophy, not to play aggressively for the entire game. Possible reasons for the slower approach that have been posited are: 1) not over tax the tired starters, 2) not embarrass Dawn Staley, 3) experiment with a slower style of play in case it's needed in the future, 4) not risk losing the game. It's unfortunate that no interviewer seems to have asked Geno about his approach to the fourth quarter, which started with a 21 point advantage and never dropped below 15. Whatever he was thinking, and you can be sure that he was, an alternative approach could have been to run up the score to 30 or so with the starters and give some of the players on the bench a little big-game experience.

 

[Duncan Idaho]

UConn was up 20 with 4:00 left.

 

[CocoHusky]

I agree. It's very unusual, and against Geno's philosophy, not to play aggressively for the entire game. Possible reasons for the slower approach that have been posited are: 1) not over tax the tired starters, 2) not embarrass Dawn Staley, 3) experiment with a slower style of play in case it's needed in the future, 4) not risk losing the game. It's unfortunate that no interviewer seems to have asked Geno about his approach to the fourth quarter, which started with a 21 point advantage and never dropped below 15. Whatever he was thinking, and you can be sure that he was, an alternative approach could have been to run up the score to 30 or so with the starters and give some of the players on the bench a little big-game experience.

Is it really a big game experience anymore when the lead is 30 Points? This was UCONN's worst shooting game of the season 42%. In the 3 quarter alone UCONN missed 4 layups (1 Moriah, 1 Morgan, 2 Gabby) and missed two other shots right at the basket yet finished the quarter with a 21 point lead. Our players are super but human so I guess I'll go with your #1 but I still don't see the need for the 4th quarter to play out any differently than it did.

 

[j66kicker]

Nah, that strategy is for timid teams and coaches, afraid to lose. It's not about jacking up the score; it's about playing your game no matter what. Keep doing what got you there. Fear of failure seldom leads to optimum performance. Geno (usually) plays to a standard, not a score. Everyone knows that. He just got a little, shall we say conservative, in this one instance. But if he did want to tone it down a little he could have played his reserves a little more.

I think if he put in the reserves they would want to come off the bench and play hard (as they have been coached). He didn't really want to play hard, so why not milk the clock with the starters, who are more reliable to control the ball, not give up turnovers, keep it in the hands of the best foul shooters, etc.?

 

[carpe diem]

Did Geno call off the dogs during fourth quarters of both the Notre Dame game and this game in respect to MM and DS?

Who knows for sure but the players and coaches. However, there is nothing to suggest in his philosophy, strategy, pre and post game comments, his show, his former and current players comments, and what we know about his personality, that he would let up the pressure to not embarrass the opposing coach. If he "lets up" it is part of his strategy, for whatever reason makes sense given the game situation and future game situations. It just is not in his DNA to do that because it is in exact contrast to what he is all about - perfection.

 

[hoophuskee]

Nah, that strategy is for timid teams and coaches, afraid to lose. It's not about jacking up the score; it's about playing your game no matter what. Keep doing what got you there. Fear of failure seldom leads to optimum performance. Geno (usually) plays to a standard, not a score. Everyone knows that. He just got a little, shall we say conservative, in this one instance. But if he did want to tone it down a little he could have played his reserves a little more.

Nah I don't agree at all.

It has nothing to do with being scared. It has to do with ensuring that you are going to win.

Playing your game no matter what" is for coaches that eventually lose their job. Playing to win is the best formula. I'd rather see my team win more than anything else. Sure once in a while - if the coach needs to make a point. But in this case- the seniors are playing for an undefeated season. You can't blow it for them because you want to imprint your ego and style over winning vs a top 2/3 team.

Geno does usually play to a standard not to a score but it doesn't mean he does it all the time which imo is the trap many fans/media might fall into believing. When he plays for example Baylor, do people really think he is going to play the standard way of "inside-out?" When they played at Baylor - I recall Geno said at halftime that the team that figures out a way to score is going to win. That's not playing "to a standard."

A coach trying to win - and when his team wins by over 10 points in which the lead never gets below 10 in the 2nd half playing the number two in the country is NOT too conservative.

Jim Calhoun once was asked why he didn't play a German center - a guy that was real big- more minutes. He said to paraphrase "I can have the kids share minutes and concentrate more on each player sharing minutes or .... I can coach to the best of my ability for the team to win. Which do you want?" In this case - sure Geno could have played his reserves. And he could have lost . . . The way he coached in the 4th quarter, he had no chance to lose. The opposing team never came close despite horrid officiating.

 

[Geno-ista]

I'm with Big Bird and a few others above- we controlled the entire game. We dominated most of the game. I think it's absurd that Geno tried not to run up the score for any of the reasons outlined above. Why the change from last year's 25 pt game? When we got a big lead, and So Car was having a difficult time scoring, he figured this was the safest path to victory. SC low % shooting and less future possessions ensured victory. Morgan isn't 100%. Butler is not ready for that game yet. If everyone has problems with this game and the "way we won", you may want to consider a "sabbatical" next season!