Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="diggerfoot, post: 3300829, member: 1673"] I will make this my last post on the subject. It's because you are such a knowledgeable poster that I made my disingenuous comment. For WBB as a whole you are more knowledgeable than I am. I suspected you knew better. I retracted that comment but, after a night's sleep, I do not. Part of the evidence you are so knowledgeable is that I have seen you consider the context of numbers over and over again. You even did so in this debate. Yet your argument is fortified only considering numbers out of context. I suspect you know better. Let us start with Taurasi herself. Bird once claimed she was the best player on the team even as a freshman (as an aside, don't you think that just might possible cause unintentional chemistry problems?). She certainly seemed to be the best player in the Regionals that year, but she did not even make FOY for the Big East. That was Brunson, a good player, but no Taurasi. Were people fools to make Brunson FOY? No, because context matters. Taurasi was not in the context where she could overshadow a player like Brunson until late in the season. UConn played it's worst against Notre Dame in Notre Dame, with Abrosimova, and in the final half of the season without her. In between they played Notre Dame than they had with Abrosimova, including the first half of the FF game. They played that first half well even with minimum help from Taurasi, who had shown in the Regionals she was the best player on the team, at least by Bird's estimation. My oh my, how could they have played that well in the first half without the "luxury" of a supporting cast like Stewart had her freshman year? When Stewart stepped on the court for the Final Four there was only one of her teammates that had been in a championship game. Faris did play a role in that game as a freshman, but you could hardly consider Stewart's cast as battle tested. Taurasi stepped on the court for the Final Four with everyone of her fellow starters having already won a championship game, two of them as starters in that game. They played like it in the first half against Notre Dame, but then frankly relied on Taurasi too much in the second half, or at least Taurasi tried to take more on than she should have. Notre Dame was a problem for UConn in 2001, but not the "elephant in the head" problem they had become for UConn in 2013. Yet here comes Stewart of having the "luxury" of only one experienced championship player as teammates instead of five who all played significant roles against a Tennessee team with champions themselves in Catchings and Randall. I guess you must see such an overwhelming advantage in previous championship experience as a handicap. Unlike with Taurasi in 2001, UConn absolutely needed Stewart in 2013 in order to win. Taurasi went on to pull off perhaps a greater feat in 2003 than what Stewart did in 2013, but no way, for whatever reason, did Taurasi rise to the occasion as a freshman in the Final Four as Stewart did. The greater championship experience and future college, pro and Olympic stardom of her teammates was in actuality a greater "luxury" than what Stewart had for her freshman year. Stats used to be a big part of one of my jobs. I know the importance of numbers; I know the importance of context for those numbers. I know, for example, that neither Chong nor Faris are better distributors than Bird by virtue of their A/T numbers, but rather they played in the context of a perimeter oriented offense rather than the post oriented offense presented to Bird. You know the importance of context behind numbers in many of your arguments, it is "laughable" that you do not do so for this .... or disingenuous. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,430

Messages: 4,396,017

Members: 10,209

Latest member: gemini*trvl