Commentary on Dolson's Screens

[diggerfoot]

There were at least two occasions last night when Notre Dame players plowed into a Dolson screen hard enough to jolt her and even cause a little hurt. A couple things about this strike me as noteworthy.

The first is that with most screens, and particularly a Dolson screen, it's usually the unsuspecting opponent that gets a jolt, not the prepared screener. Notre Dame players had to at least sense the screen was coming and were prepared to "give more than they got."

Second, on the few occasions when a screener is bowled over usually a foul is called on the defense. We've seen it happened a few times over the course of the year. Had Dolson allowed the hard jolts she received to bowl her over on those two particular plays I doubt any observer would have called them flops, the jolts were that hard. Yet Dolson simply took a lickin' and remained as upright as she could instead.

Here's my point from all this. We bemoan how other teams focus on flopping. I'm fine with other teams doing this because: 1) it's a legitimate strategy that helps some teams in some ways; and 2) I don't think it helps a team that aspires to be championship quality. The screens were supposed to free a teammate to score and, if I recall correctly, that happened both times. Even if a foul drawn is more of a sure thing it detracts from the intended mission, the intended focus of the offensive set. Put another way, if Dolson was a player trained to gain advantages by such things as flopping she would not be as well-trained to run "perfect" offensive sets.

 

[UConnCat]

And she didn't even move on those screens, at least not until after she was hit by the defender.

Stefanie was superb last night. I think Geno is right in saying that may have been her best collegiate game.

 

[John Glass]

flopping is a legitimate strategy ?

screeners should expect some contact, and if they do it right they will hold their position... if the defender hits the screener hard enough to move them it is foul.... acting should not be part of the game.

 

[DaddyChoc]

sadly its all over now... let them find something new to bitch about

 

[ThisJustIn]

flopping is a legitimate strategy ?

screeners should expect some contact, and if they do it right they will hold their position... if the defender hits the screener hard enough to move them it is foul.... acting should not be part of the game.

One could argue nything that gives you an edge is "legit." If you don't think UConn players "act" you're not paying close enough attention to what happens when they drive and throw up the ball to get an "in the act of shooting" call or try and call out the physical play of an opposition player. It's what players do. It's what coaches do - know the rule and then figure out a way around it. It's also why there are officials who are trying to call fouls -- and why it's so hard to be an official. They have to figure out the diff between legit displacement and faux displacement.

But, ultimately, I'd agree with the poster who suggests flopping doesn't prepare you for Championships. It sets you up to "miss" -- just like anticipating contact going to the basket v. relishing it.

As for Stef. She was my player of the game, to be honest.

 

[UcMiami]

There were also a few truly blind side screens that Stef set as well where the defender was left stunned on the floor so it was not all one sided in the application of punishment.
But good post.

 

[Icebear]

A clean legitimate screen can leave an opponent on the floor.

 

[robert]

i saw some floppings of ND players last night and thanks to the referees they did not buy them...UCONN basketball play the way basketball is to be played.... thats the reason at the end of the season UCONN prevails...