Championship indicators?

[Wally East]

FI'm trying to put together a list of preseason indicators that point to a championship. Things that I have come up with include:

• Returning NPOY -- Stewie heading into her junior or senior seasons
• 1 or more legitimate NPOY candidates -- Stewie heading into sophomore year or Napheesa, Gabby, and KLS heading into next year
• 1 or more returning All-Americans -- I'm not sure if there's a big difference between this and the one above, but would anyone have thought that Mo had a realistic chance to win a NPOY award
• #1-rated HS player(s), whether incoming or former.

Are there any other things you think should be included?

In doing a look-back, I am going to use:

• NPOY
• Future NPOY -- players who would be named NPOY in future seasons
• All-Americans
• Future All-Americans -- players would be named All-Americans in later seasons
• #1-rated HS player(s)

Again, anything else you believe should be included?

I will probably do simple yes/no and also one that's weighted.

List of #1-ranked HS players that went to UConn (please let me know if I have forgotten any)

Nykesha
Shea
Tamika Williams
D
Ann Strother
Tina
Maya
KML
Stewie
KLS
Megan Walker

 

[CocoHusky]

I think you should include a DPOY caliber type player. This is an often overlooked category because mostly everyone is enamored with offense. The UCONN roster has seldom been without a player that is capable of cooling down or limiting "the" hot player.

 

[rford53]

FI'm trying to put together a list of preseason indicators that point to a championship. Things that I have come up with include:

• Returning NPOY -- Stewie heading into her junior or senior seasons
• 1 or more legitimate NPOY candidates -- Stewie heading into sophomore year or Napheesa, Gabby, and KLS heading into next year
• 1 or more returning All-Americans -- I'm not sure if there's a big difference between this and the one above, but would anyone have thought that Mo had a realistic chance to win a NPOY award
• #1-rated HS player(s), whether incoming or former.

Are there any other things you think should be included?

In doing a look-back, I am going to use:

• NPOY
• Future NPOY -- players who would be named NPOY in future seasons
• All-Americans
• Future All-Americans -- players would be named All-Americans in later seasons
• #1-rated HS player(s)

Again, anything else you believe should be included?

I will probably do simple yes/no and also one that's weighted.

List of #1-ranked HS players that went to UConn (please let me know if I have forgotten any)

Nykesha
Shea
Tamika Williams
D
Ann Strother
Tina
Maya
KML
Stewie
KLS
Megan Walker

Rebecca, Sue

 

[CL82]

Well, although it's not typically relevant for UConn, I think having a good team that had a particularly painful defeat the prior season is a good indicator. I'd be willing to bet that this year's team is going to keep the Mississippi State loss in the forefront of their minds whenever they're tired or the season gets to feel like a grind.

 

[UcMiami]

Rebecca, Sue

Sue was rated in the teens or twenties coming out I believe. Not sure about Rebecca as ratings for women weren't all that significant in 91.

Wally - it is an interesting exercise made more so by it being so Uconn-centric with 11 in 22 NCs.

FF/NC runner up seems like a legit indicator
Lieberman winner?
I like the inclusion of DPOY mentioned above.
Graduated starters?
Graduated NPOY?
Graduated AAs?

The other indicators you are using look at strength of team returning, the three above look at adjustments required. (With the exception of 2003 graduating multiple AAs/NPOY is probably a killer - even co-NPOY Charles had an effect on Uconn)

And while you are doing this, I wouldn't limit it to NC since that is somewhat 'lucky' - I would also try it as indicator of FF participation - it expands the number of Yes results and also takes into account the competitive field.

I also think you add in subjectivity when naming NPOY/AA candidates and you might want to limit it to actual returning AA/NPOY/Lieberman unless you use named 'finalists'/second/third team AA awards to determine 'potential'.

 

[Wally East]

Looking at what was lost from the previous year is definitely worth including.

DPOY is a great idea, too. Agreed about limiting the subjectivity about potential candidates.

I was going to do this for all of the UConn teams from 1994 forward and then start to look at other teams.

Thanks!

 

[j66kicker]

FI'm trying to put together a list of preseason indicators that point to a championship. Things that I have come up with include:

• Returning NPOY -- Stewie heading into her junior or senior seasons
• 1 or more legitimate NPOY candidates -- Stewie heading into sophomore year or Napheesa, Gabby, and KLS heading into next year
• 1 or more returning All-Americans -- I'm not sure if there's a big difference between this and the one above, but would anyone have thought that Mo had a realistic chance to win a NPOY award
• #1-rated HS player(s), whether incoming or former.

Are there any other things you think should be included?

In doing a look-back, I am going to use:

• NPOY
• Future NPOY -- players who would be named NPOY in future seasons
• All-Americans
• Future All-Americans -- players would be named All-Americans in later seasons
• #1-rated HS player(s)

Again, anything else you believe should be included?

I will probably do simple yes/no and also one that's weighted.

List of #1-ranked HS players that went to UConn (please let me know if I have forgotten any)

Nykesha
Shea
Tamika Williams
D
Ann Strother
Tina
Maya
KML
Stewie
KLS
Megan Walker

I would add some indicators for this coming season:

1) 4 Returning starters from FF team that was undefeated in the regular season and beat the eventual national champion convincingly.

I could stop there because I really think that pretty much makes it a done deal, but just in case there's any doubt...

2) Returning starters are 3 AA's including the DPOY, plus an Olympic (Canadian) combo guard.

3) Roster includes the 2016 #1 H.S. point guard, who played a lot of minutes last year and played well, but may not be good enough to start.

4) Roster additions include an experienced AA-caliber 6'6" transfer becoming eligible, and the #1 recruiting class with the #1 recruit.

 

[McFly]

Having a coach named Geno.

 

[oldude]

Geno and UConn won several championships when they didn't necessarily have the best talent. I would suggest 2013 was such a year, when Baylor may have had a more talented team.

But when Geno has the most talent, he wins it all. So that's my indicator. UConn will win its 12th championship this coming season, because they are loaded with talent.

 

[YellwJcket999]

Go to one of these schools:

• UCONN (15 of last 17 times at least to the Final Four) Especially This School!
  
• Notre Dame
• Stanford
• South Carolina (as of Staley's recent runs)
• Baylor
• Maryland
• Tennessee
  
• Texas/A&M

 

[MilfordHusky]

When Geno says the team has a chance to be special, he doesn't just mean national championship-type good. He means undefeated and record-setting good. He has said that the returning 4 starters plus Azura makes this group special. By New Years, we'll have a strong sense of the newbies. Will Batouly, Meg, Mikayla, or whoever get major minutes?

 

[mhshuskies]

Having a coach named Geno.

AGREE, all the rest is of minor importance if you don't have Geno!!!

 

[Wally East]

AGREE, all the rest is of minor importance if you don't have Geno!!!

Okay, I can make this part of the spreadsheet but I am betting there are other factors that have a higher correlation to UConn winning a title than Geno being the coach, even if you only start counting at 1995 or 2000. For example, I am guessing that having a NPOY has a higher correlation. Yes, Geno recruited and coached her but he recruits and coaches everyone.

 

[VAUConnFan]

Gotta have the ballplayers.

1. Which makes the recent accomplishments of programs like Mississippi State, Syracuse, and Louisville all the more impressive - getting to the national championship game without a first team all American.
Which was the last program to win it all without a first team all American?
2. The three years during which UConn did not have a first team all American were the last three years during which they did not reach the final four.
3. Only two programs have had three first team all Americans in the same season. UConn is obviously one having done it multiple times. Which is the other?
Note: This past season is the first time UConn did not win the national champion when they had three first team all Americans. And they did not miss by very much.
4. I fully agree with the OP that having a NPOY has the higher correlation for ultimate success. UConn has never won the national championship without a current or eventual NPOY on the roster. UConn has never been to a final four without at least one first team all American.

 

[VAUConnFan]

Go to one of these schools:

• UConn (15 of last 17 times at least to the Final Four) Especially This School!
  
• Notre Dame
• Stanford
• South Carolina (as of Staley's recent runs)
• Baylor
• Maryland
• Tennessee
  
• Texas/A&M

If Texas A&M is on this list, then the list has to include Louisville.

 

[VAUConnFan]

Geno and UConn won several championships when they didn't necessarily have the best talent. I would suggest 2013 was such a year, when Baylor may have had a more talented team.

But when Geno has the most talent, he wins it all. So that's my indicator. UConn will win its 12th championship this coming season, because they are loaded with talent.

1. I am not sure Baylor was more talented than UConn in 2013. Baylor definitely had the most dominant player in addition to the following year's Wade Trophy winner. Still, UConn had Dolson, Faris, Hartley, Jefferson, Mosqueda-Lewis, Stewart, Stokes, and Tuck. In a single elimination game, I would be loathe to pick against them.
2. One can only assume you are also referring to the championships UConn won in 2003 and 2004. Who was more talented than UConn during those years? Plus, UConn had one of the ten best WBB players of all time(not enough thought to break it down farther. Obviously, there is an argument for GOAT).

 

[oldude]

1. I am not sure Baylor was more talented than UConn in 2013. Baylor definitely had the most dominant player in addition to the following year's Wade Trophy winner. Still, UConn had Dolson, Faris, Hartley, Jefferson, Mosqueda-Lewis, Stewart, Stokes, and Tuck. In a single elimination game, I would be loathe to pick against them.
2. One can only assume you are also referring to the championships UConn won in 2003 and 2004. Who was more talented than UConn during those years? Plus, UConn had one of the ten best WBB players of all time(not enough thought to break it down farther. Obviously, there is an argument for GOAT).

Certainly that team had talent, but the freshman class was not yet the dominant force they would eventually become. Mo was not a major factor as a freshman. Tuck was a solid reserve. Stewie was inconsistent until the NCAA tournament when she was fantastic.

With that said, my point was that when Geno has the talent, he wins the championship.

 

[CocoHusky]

If Texas A&M is on this list, then the list has to include Louisville.

Why?

 

[msf22b]

Certainly that team had talent, but the freshman class was not yet the dominant force they would eventually become. Mo was not a major factor as a freshman. Tuck was a solid reserve. Stewie was inconsistent until the NCAA tournament when she was fantastic.

With that said, my point was that when Geno has the talent, he wins the championship.

Tuck (at times) ND overtime game, was the best player UConn put on the floor.

 

[MilfordHusky]

Did Stanford have Appel, Ogwumike, and Pohlen on the AA team in the same year? Or was it the Meeks at Tennessee?

 

[winlots]

WALLY: interesting and fun. I'd add "luck" for sure. And no significant injuries.

On luck: had done a paper on a theory of psychotherapy which was based on the experiences of a death camp survivor whose school of thought arose directly from the techniques he developed to enable him to survive. Decades later, I had the opportunity to meet in person with another survivor, run the highlights of the theory by her, and ask her opinion.

With no hesitation, she said, "You also need LUCK!! You can have all the will power in the world but without luck, you would not survive the camps I was in. Often they would assemble us and shoot some of us in a totally random fashion. You got thru those ordeals by luck alone."

 

[UcMiami]

WALLY: interesting and fun. I'd add "luck" for sure. And no significant injuries.

On luck: had done a paper on a theory of psychotherapy which was based on the experiences of a death camp survivor whose school of thought arose directly from the techniques he developed to enable him to survive. Decades later, I had the opportunity to meet in person with another survivor, run the highlights of the theory by her, and ask her opinion.

With no hesitation, she said, "You also need LUCK!! You can have all the will power in the world but without luck, you would not survive the camps I was in. Often they would assemble us and shoot some of us in a totally random fashion. You got thru those ordeals by luck alone."

I am a big proponent of 'luck' when it comes to team sports championships. While women's basketball being 'young' with a small number of elite teams is less prone to surprise results it is not immune, other more mature sports display a coefficient of luck on pretty much a yearly basis. All the planning and coaching and in game adjustments you want to do are important, but the championships at the end of a season can be traced back to coin flip moments either in the championship game itself or in the lead-up to that game. This is especially true of single elimination tournament championships with the NFL probably leading the way - having 30 +/- primary players on each team, by far the most of any team sport probably increases the 'luck' coefficient.

We as fans like to think it is the brilliance of the players and coaches and again for women's basketball that is more often the case - but an injury, an off night, or an opponent's otherworldly individual or team performance can easily derail a championship. No one could have predicted that obscenity that was the Stanford Uconn first half of basketball in the NC game for example or the Baylor collapse against Louisville or the A&M NC and you cannot truly explain those results without identifying fate or 'chance' or 'luck' as playing a part.

 

[Wally East]

WALLY: interesting and fun. I'd add "luck" for sure. And no significant injuries.

On luck: had done a paper on a theory of psychotherapy which was based on the experiences of a death camp survivor whose school of thought arose directly from the techniques he developed to enable him to survive. Decades later, I had the opportunity to meet in person with another survivor, run the highlights of the theory by her, and ask her opinion.

With no hesitation, she said, "You also need LUCK!! You can have all the will power in the world but without luck, you would not survive the camps I was in. Often they would assemble us and shoot some of us in a totally random fashion. You got thru those ordeals by luck alone."

Luck is definitely huge. 2013 is a great example of that. Playing Louisville for the title was loads easier than playing Baylor. I'm just not sure how to quantify it Especially in a "one loss sends you home" format, luck is important.

Adding significant season-ending injuries is a good idea.

I did an 8th grade English paper about Holocaust survivors and talked to a couple that met after they both survived Auschwitz. I brought a tape recorder when I interviewed them, so I paid attention but didn't take notes or anything. I didn't realize that it needed an external mic until later when I went back to listen to the tape. One of my biggest regrets of my life.

 

[Buzzyboy]

FI'm trying to put together a list of preseason indicators that point to a championship. Things that I have come up with include:

• Returning NPOY -- Stewie heading into her junior or senior seasons
• 1 or more legitimate NPOY candidates -- Stewie heading into sophomore year or Napheesa, Gabby, and KLS heading into next year
• 1 or more returning All-Americans -- I'm not sure if there's a big difference between this and the one above, but would anyone have thought that Mo had a realistic chance to win a NPOY award
• #1-rated HS player(s), whether incoming or former.

Are there any other things you think should be included?

In doing a look-back, I am going to use:

• NPOY
• Future NPOY -- players who would be named NPOY in future seasons
• All-Americans
• Future All-Americans -- players would be named All-Americans in later seasons
• #1-rated HS player(s)

Again, anything else you believe should be included?

I will probably do simple yes/no and also one that's weighted.

List of #1-ranked HS players that went to UConn (please let me know if I have forgotten any)

Nykesha
Shea
Tamika Williams
D
Ann Strother
Tina
Maya
KML
Stewie
KLS
Megan Walker

Coaching staff, might be a big factor. What Geno and the staff did with mediocre talent in the past and taking into account the returning All-Americans this year???? Top 5 or better recruiting class topped off by most people's number one pick?

 

[Buzzyboy]

I am a big proponent of 'luck' when it comes to team sports championships. While women's basketball being 'young' with a small number of elite teams is less prone to surprise results it is not immune, other more mature sports display a coefficient of luck on pretty much a yearly basis. All the planning and coaching and in game adjustments you want to do are important, but the championships at the end of a season can be traced back to coin flip moments either in the championship game itself or in the lead-up to that game. This is especially true of single elimination tournament championships with the NFL probably leading the way - having 30 +/- primary players on each team, by far the most of any team sport probably increases the 'luck' coefficient.

We as fans like to think it is the brilliance of the players and coaches and again for women's basketball that is more often the case - but an injury, an off night, or an opponent's otherworldly individual or team performance can easily derail a championship. No one could have predicted that obscenity that was the Stanford UConn first half of basketball in the NC game for example or the Baylor collapse against Louisville or the A&M NC and you cannot truly explain those results without identifying fate or 'chance' or 'luck' as playing a part.

I remember that loss against Notre Dame in overtime where at the end of regulation (or was it a first overtime) one of their players hoisted up a three point shot that hit the rim, bounced straight up a couple of feet and fell back into the basket to tie the game as time ran out and gave them the opportunity to beat us. Happens frequently but that LUCKY shot situation happens a bunch. Just a matter of inches or less.