A Question on Plum and Washington

[ThisJustIn]

I'm impressed with the general willingness to ignore this current UConn team's fragility. This is in no way taking away from their ridiculously amazing run and the toughness they've shown this season. BUT, as the NCAA's looms, Geno's worries (and mine) are still the same: Injury, fouls... and we suffer on the defensive end. I have realistic expectations of "handling" teams. Shorthanded Florida State and feisty Tulane proved it can happen. My fingers are crossed it won't happen until 2017-18, but wouldn't be surprised if rematches with top teams produce different results.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Ok, let's start with this one. As a younger player, Plum's defense was poor. Matador-like. She had no interest in playing it. As with every part of her game, her defense has improved dramatically this season. She's much more athletic. She works harder at it, and can stay in front of people. She also rebounds, and hits the floor. She hustles and puts out tremendous effort for nearly 40 minutes a game.

Your last sentence is ridiculous in many ways. Plum has scored over 50 once in her career. She's never given up 35-40 to an opponent. But if she did happen to score 50 in a game and give up 40, that's plus 10, isn't it?

Thanks for calling BS on that nonsense.

 

[hoophuskee]

This is really for the PAC 12ers among us I suspect. When I first heard that Kelsey had scored 57 points against Utah to eclipse Jackie Stiles record it sorta shocked me. When I heard the rest of the team scored 27 it sorta shocked me too. When you have a singular talent on your team you certainly want to cultivate it and make it a centerpiece of your game. However, that score got me thinking about whether such talents can cut against you at crunch time if you have overemphasized the one talent within you offense. One game, one score, says nothing about this. I don't know the 4 year or even 1 year history of Washington in any depth and have no opinion, but would like to hear anyone who has a position.

I do recall that Geno said our Huskies had a tendency to stand around waiting for Maya to do IT. Probably the same for Diane's teams. Some say the Stanford loss had something of that involving Breanna.

Any thoughts?

IMO you can't look at one game to draw a conclusion. From what I understand she has been a fine passer all year. There are some games the great scorer just needs to score.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

IMO you can't look at one game to draw a conclusion. From what I understand she has been a fine passer all year. There are some games the great scorer just needs to score.

I agree and started this thread saying I don't know enough to express an opinion. Her disproportionate, to say the least, scoring in a tight game against an inferior opponent raised the question for me. Seeing as how we had hours until our game, I brought the question to the floor.

 

[1-of-the-6]

Thanks for calling BS on that nonsense.

Thanks. The truth is, during Plum's first three seasons, I probably saw her play only 6-8 times, total. (I didn't have the Pac-12 Network.) When I heard the hoopla begin during her freshman year I watched and thought she was pretty much a fraud. She was Kelsey Plump. Took a lot of shots, not a lot went in. She didn't finish that well. She was Ernie No D, if you remember that old reference. Probably she was better than I'm describing her and I caught some bad games.

She improved a bit each year, but even as Washington made it to the Final Four last year, she stumbled badly against Syracuse. Lots of turnovers, and I think the pressure, both physically and mentally, got to her.

She's a new player this season. More athletic, more mature, smarter. Better finisher by far, better shooter from deep and mid-range. She apparently really put in some work during the off-season and it's really paid off.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Well I would give Plum more credit as a freshman, but she is dramatically improved this year, absolutely.

 

[Plebe]

Arizona St. and Colorado (bottom of the conference) both beat Kentucky.

And Cal beat Oklahoma.

I've grown weary of commenters who turn their nose up at the Pac-12 because Washington lost to Notre Dame at South Bend and UCLA lost to Baylor at Waco and to South Carolina at Columbia.

 

[LO TRADER]

I think OSU & Stanford are the 1A & 1B in the PAC-12. UCLA (and OSU) are the only teams that have beaten every other team in the PAC-12. The PAC-12 is stronger this year vs last year, meaning at the top, and 1-12. I would not want OSU or Stanford in my bracket. Someone pointed out in an earlier post that both play hard the entire game (relentless like UCONN). In my opinion, what has separated OSU, thus far, is their post defense and rebounding. The sports press tends to focus on Sydney Wiese (who is special), but OSU's rebounding, and post defense has been spectacular. I'm watching UCONN game now, and UCONN actually looks human (instead of super human). I'm sure that will change over the course of the game, but it gives us basketball fans hope that the NCAA Tournament is a little more wide open than in the past.

 

[nwhoopfan]

And Cal beat Oklahoma.

I've grown weary of commenters who turn their nose up at the Pac-12 because Washington lost to Notre Dame at South Bend and UCLA lost to Baylor at Waco and to South Carolina at Columbia.

I think Stanford and UCLA have both gotten some good home and home series over the years, but for the most part teams don't come out West to play Pac 12 teams.

 

[Plebe]

As far as the 57 point game, it should be noted that Osahor scored 14 but barely played in the 2nd half due to foul trouble and fouled out either end of 3rd quarter or beginning of 4th quarter. The other Huskies just weren't hitting shots. Once Osahor was out, it was up to Plum to carry the team, and she did.

UW this year has been MUCH better than last year up to this point. They went on a magical run in the Tourney last year, one they aren't likely to repeat, but I strongly contest calling them mediocre. They finished tied for 2nd w/ Stanford in the conference, no small feat. They certainly miss a third dependable scorer that they had last year in Talia Walton, a versatile combo forward type. I would actually say she was the second best player last year behind Plum. Nobody has replaced her contributions per se. But last year they got almost NOTHING from players other than Plum, Walton and Osahor and they had literally no bench at all. This year they have more depth and more role players that are capable of scoring and contributing. In pretty much all of their losses those role players have not produced. UW is certainly at risk of being knocked out early if those role players are off, but they could definitely win 2 or 3 games in the Tourney this year. We'll see.

Nwhoopfan's description of UW is exactly right. Last year's UW team was 3 players and that's it. Plum was a legit AA, and Walton and Osahor were major contributors. But they really didn't impress anyone until the postseason. Their only quality wins in the regular season were over UCLA and South Dakota. But then they came alive in the Pac-12 tournament, beating Stanford and then losing by 2 points to Oregon St. That was enough to earn a #7 seed in the NCAAs and set the stage for their magical Final 4 run. Syracuse and Oregon State were surprises as well, but neither was as surprising as Washington.

The graduation of Walton hurts, but both Plum and Osahor have more than compensated with greater fitness and huge all-around improvements. Osahor went from being a good rebounder last year to a Courtney Paris-like rebounder this year. She is also healthier and fitter, and her mobility is much better than last year. Plum has completely transformed her physique and her diet and has added even more versatility to her game. Washington's supporting cast and depth are better than last year's, although still inconsistent. Does that mean they're expected to make it back to the Final Four? No, of course not. But they should be a #3 seed and will have a very good chance at an Elite 8.

 

[1-of-the-6]

I think OSU & Stanford are the 1A & 1B in the PAC-12. UCLA (and OSU) are the only teams that have beaten every other team in the PAC-12. The PAC-12 is stronger this year vs last year, meaning at the top, and 1-12. I would not want OSU or Stanford in my bracket. Someone pointed out in an earlier post that both play hard the entire game (relentless like UCONN). In my opinion, what has separated OSU, thus far, is their post defense and rebounding. The sports press tends to focus on Sydney Wiese (who is special), but OSU's rebounding, and post defense has been spectacular. I'm watching UCONN game now, and UCONN actually looks human (instead of super human). I'm sure that will change over the course of the game, but it gives us basketball fans hope that the NCAA Tournament is a little more wide open than in the past.

OSU can looked challenged offensively, but there's no doubt that they can guard you. Gulich had that great block last night. I'd like to see her look at the basket more. She can make those mid-range jumpers, and when she does, other things open up.

 

[nwhoopfan]

OSU can looked challenged offensively, but there's no doubt that they can guard you. Gulich had that great block last night. I'd like to see her look at the basket more. She can make those mid-range jumpers, and when she does, other things open up.

Gulic has been in a bit of a slump down the stretch. Most of the year she's made the loss of Hamblin from last year a non-issue. Not quite the same shot blocking threat, but scoring and rebounding is pretty close.

 

[JordyG]

"The hard truth is Washington is a mediocre team propped up by a hugely talented Plum." - is a pretty harsh assessment of a program that has been impactful in its conference the last few years. Some would argue the teams Taurasi anchored in the post TASS years were not dis-similar. Would you have called those teams mediocre? And I have followed your posts on this board, sir. Most are critical and insightful, but you have also stated that what the PAC 12 did last year, getting 2 teams in the FF, was an "anomaly"; that the PAC12 teams usually perform below their seeds, except for Stanford. That sounds a little like a bias to me. I don't have "west coast blinders", I just happen to love competitive conference races that aren't dominated by one program year after year, as was once the case with the PAC12 and Stanford. I appreciate the balance in the better teams in that conference now and hope its a trend that stays. Happy to see Texas re-emerge in the Big 12, Miss St in the SEC, Duke and Fla St in the ACC. Its a lot more fun to follow WBB when there is such competitive balance. BTW - not a 'new poster', just an infrequent one.

It's generally acknowledge that that Taurasi team WAS a mediocre team propped up by Taurasi. The difference was that Taurasi is and was a transcendental player, both offense, defense and as a passer and leader. Plum is not.

 

[Plebe]

It's generally acknowledge that that Taurasi team WAS a mediocre team propped up by Taurasi. The difference was that Taurasi is and was a transcendental player, both offense, defense and as a passer and leader. Plum is not.

Wow, so if Plum isn't as good as the player considered by many to be the GOAT, then poo-poo on her.
There can be no doubt that Taurasi's supporting cast was collectively better than Plum's is, even with Osahor there.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Yeah, I think the season that Plum has had this year, I'd call her transcendent.

 

[1-of-the-6]

It's generally acknowledge that that Taurasi team WAS a mediocre team propped up by Taurasi. The difference was that Taurasi is and was a transcendental player, both offense, defense and as a passer and leader. Plum is not.

Has anyone on here compared Plum to Taurasi? 4,075 likes for trolling? That's more impressive than anyone's basketball stats.

 

[JordyG]

Has anyone on here compared Plum to Taurasi? 4,075 likes for trolling? That's more impressive than anyone's basketball stats.

So as I've said from the start, one dimensional, mediocre teams rarely win championships. The rarity is having a transcendental player leading your team. I don't really see where anything you've argued against my point holds any water. Except the point of course in circling the wagons for your team.

 

[Plebe]

So as I've said from the start, one dimensional, mediocre teams rarely win championships. The rarity is having a transcendental player leading your team.

How good would Baylor have been without Griner in 2012?
Or without Sophia Young in 2005?
How good would Tennessee have been without Parker in '07 and '08? Or without Holdsclaw in '96 and '97?
How good would Texas Tech have been without Swoopes when they won?

 

[j66kicker]

I would add UCLA! If the Bruins are hitting their shots they are dangerous.

I saw UCLA play in person the other day (vs ASU). Not in the same class - athleticism or team play/discipline. IMO UConn would carve them up early and never look back.

 

[nwhoopfan]

I think quite a few deep, balanced teams haven't won championships either. Only one team wins each year, and since UConn and Tennessee have won the majority of them in the last 25 years or so...that's just a really limited way to define greatness for a player, in a team sport.

 

[j66kicker]

Against Oregon, Plum had 15 at the half, 27 after 3 and scored 7 quick points to start the 4th. They weren't stopping her AT ALL. Then she went cold, missed her last 7 shots. That is really uncharacteristic for her, I'd venture a guess that's the first time all season it's happened to her.

Bad timing - when it counted.

 

[Plebe]

I think quite a few deep, balanced teams haven't won championships either. Only one team wins each year, and since UConn and Tennessee have won the majority of them in the last 25 years or so...that's just a really limited way to define greatness for a player, in a team sport.

16 of the past 22, to be exact.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Bad timing - when it counted.

In ONE game, out of a 31 game schedule so far. She hasn't had a bad game all season. Tell me how me other players that can be said of.

 

[j66kicker]

In ONE game, out of a 31 game schedule so far. She hasn't had a bad game all season. Tell me how me other players that can be said of.

She's a great player, but she went totally cold at the end of the game that really counted - more than any other game so far this year. Not exactly "clutch."

 

[nwhoopfan]

She's a great player, but she went totally cold at the end of the game that really counted - more than any other game so far this year. Not exactly "clutch."

Wow. Don't know what to tell you. That really wasn't the one game that counted more than any other so far this year.

 

[j66kicker]

Wow. Don't know what to tell you. That really wasn't the one game that counted more than any other so far this year.

Well it was the game that knocked them out of their conference tourney. Whatever - I'm looking forward to watching Plum play in the NCAA's

 

[RockyMTblue2]

Ok, let's start with this one. As a younger player, Plum's defense was poor. Matador-like. She had no interest in playing it. As with every part of her game, her defense has improved dramatically this season. She's much more athletic. She works harder at it, and can stay in front of people. She also rebounds, and hits the floor. She hustles and puts out tremendous effort for nearly 40 minutes a game.

Your last sentence is ridiculous in many ways. Plum has scored over 50 once in her career. She's never given up 35-40 to an opponent. But if she did happen to score 50 in a game and give up 40, that's plus 10, isn't it?

Lemme see now... add the 1 and carry the 2 .. uh oh, run out of fingers and toes on this one. Guess I'll wait and see.

 

[triaddukefan]

Some husky on husky violence in here

 

[triaddukefan]

 

[Plebe]

So who's the mama husky in this allegory?