Concern about hubris

[RockyMTblue2]

As fans we have to be able to be analytical about our heroines, otherwise our praise is hollow. But it is some fans who have taken the loss the wrong way, some like jilted lovers - though few, BUT everyone is free to voice their opinion AND live with the consequences. A bit preachy I suspect, but every once and awhile the preacher's kid comes out in me in a different way.

 

[JoePgh]

I agree with those who say that the combination of lack of size and lack of depth was a bigger problem last year than either one of those limitations were individually. And it provides a useful point of comparison with this year.

Now that Azura is available (but unfortunately Natalie has departed), UConn has a more skilled truly big player than it had last year, but still it only has one such player. So the "lack of size" problem is still with us in comparison to other teams like South Carolina, Mississippi State, Texas, and Baylor.

But what should be gone is "lack of depth". Now in the 6-0 to 6-2 height range we have not just Napheesa but also Batouly Camara and Megan Walker, and hopefully a much-improved Kyla Irwin. And we have some basis to hope that KLS can play in the manner suggested by her height, at least on defense. Napheesa getting in foul trouble should not be a game-changing occurrence as it was last year.

I don't think that the Mississippi State game would have been a loss if we had had the kind of depth in the front court last year that we will have this year.

 

[RSHERMVIKES]

I said in the past that concerning the MissSt loss was where the 2016-2017 UCONN team overachieved all season, certainly, but they constantly were reaching back for some EXTRA in all the big games they had on the schedule. When it came time to"reach back" in the semi's, they were out of gas both mentally and physically! All their superior efforts each took it's toll on the main strength of the team. Kia, Pheesa, Gabby, Saniya, KLS, and Crystal Dangerfield were spent and they had nothing to reach back for in that game! The real shame of it all is it happened in the FF semi's not in December or January so they could recover and make a come-back!
The UCONN WBB team of 2016-2017 was heroic all season and hit the so-called wall vs MissSt! They'll learn from it and be better for it this season and in future seasons!

 

[oldude]

After reading the OP and all the subsequent posts disagreeing with it, I am going to support UC82, not because I agree with a single point in his OP (Bags is spot on), but rather because here at the BY there has always been, and will always be a relentless drive to seek perfection from the greatest program in the history of college sports.

Only a UConn WBB fan would question the toughness of an undersized, inexperienced team with no depth that went 36-1 against the toughest schedule in the country, losing in OT in the national semis.

God help us if we ever descend into basketball purgatory, like some of the folks on VolNation, where an 8 loss season, 3 players jumping ship or being shown the door and a decade of underachievement become grounds for optimism.

 

[hjoerring]

Spot on Coco. He is a KLS basher always has been.

There was a reason Geno played KLS the minutes he did and a reason she ended up playing as she did her freshman year. The fact that KLS is a scorer not just a shooter shows that rhetoric does not make it fact.

"He is a KLS basher ... " Save me.Yet, you are entitled to your own yardstick for reaching such a concl. I on the other hand have followed KLS beginning with the 3 X 3 FIFA and was astounded at her poor defensive play. Yes, she is far along than those days, but she is more of a liability than most are willing to say here. That she played a lot her Fr year and last year is quite beside the point; so would have Crystal had Chong not shown that she was up to the task. I'm of course guilty for rendering critical analyses that in the eyes of a few are understood as 'criticism.'

 

[CocoHusky]

I agree with those who say that the combination of lack of size and lack of depth was a bigger problem last year than either one of those limitations were individually. And it provides a useful point of comparison with this year.
Now that Azura is available (but unfortunately Natalie has departed), UConn has a more skilled truly big player than it had last year, but still it only has one such player. So the "lack of size" problem is still with us in comparison to other teams like South Carolina, Mississippi State, Texas, and Baylor.
But what should be gone is "lack of depth". Now in the 6-0 to 6-2 height range we have not just Napheesa but also Batouly Camara and Megan Walker, and hopefully a much-improved Kyla Irwin. And we have some basis to hope that KLS can play in the manner suggested by her height, at least on defense. Napheesa getting in foul trouble should not be a game-changing occurrence as it was last year.
I don't think that the Mississippi State game would have been a loss if we had had the kind of depth in the front court last year that we will have this year.

@JoePgh agree on all points of comparison with a few embellishments. I think the team will still miss Natalie this year because of here sheer bulk, height & and physically in the paint. Natalie was better physically equipped to take the grinding in the paint that either Azura, Gabby, or Napheesa. Camara and Walker may be in the same height range but Camara is a true post defender because of the way she is built. Camara did her best work as a Freshmen against Wilson and Coates of South Carolina. The lack of depth last year was not limited to the UCONN front court. Last year UCONN had Natalie and Crystal, that was it. This year UCONN cold have Camara and Irwin subbing for starters at the PF & C positions. Dangerfield, Coombs, AEH & Bent subbing for starters at the PG/SG Guard. Walker & Gordon subbing for starters at the SG/Wing/SF position. Even if only 1 sub works out in each category, that going to be a lot of fire power!

 

[connie]

But in considering the entire team as an entity with significant liabilities listed above, rather than by the fact that UConn ended up with 3 all-Americans, the team vastly over-achieved.

Agreed, as to "the entire team", but not as to the starting five.

1. Leadership. "Leadership" is not an easy thing to measure. But in some respects, we know it when we see it. Comparing the 15-16 to 16-17 starting five . . . I'd say that Gabby was every bit as much a leader as Stewie the previous year (Stewie had more swagger; Gabby, more demonstrable passion). I'd say the same may be true when comparing Phees and Morgan (indeed, they are rather similar in temperament). Kia 16-17 was certainly no worse a leader than Kia 15-16, and in truth was better. KLS was, without question, far more developed a leader in 16-17 than 15-16. That leaves Moriah vs. Saniya. I'll give the tip to Moriah. But that said, as the season wore on, Saniya exhibited solid leadership skills. You could see the difference on the floor when she would come back into the game for Crystal. All considered, I would be reluctant to insist that the 15-16 team had "more" or "better" leadership than the 16-17 starting five.

2. Size. The starting five in 15-16 had Stewie. 16-17 squad had Gabby, who was six inches shorter with nowhere near the wingspan. Remarkably, Gabby had more O-Rebounds than Stewie in the same number of games, with Stewie holding a total rebounding edge 309 vs. 323. This is impressive, especially given the fact that (see below) 16-17 Phees far out rebounded 15-16 Morgan. (In other words, one reason why Stewie may have grabbed as many RBs as she did is because other Huskies on the floor did not.) Of course, Stewie had nearly 2 1/2 times as many blocks. And no statistic can quite capture the effect of Stewie in the low post. She was a terror! Stats can only tell us so much.

As for the rest, in my opinion the "size" advantage goes to the 16-17 squad. Saniya was bigger than Moriah, and had more rebounds and only one less blocked shot, with significantly less playing time.

Phees is listed as an inch shorter than Morgan (but she actually looks taller to me); but Phees is every bit as "big", with comparable footwork and quickness, better mobility, and greater durability. Phees far exceeded Morgan in O-Reb, D-Reb, and total rebounds. Indeed, Phees had 336 total rounds on the season--almost twice as many as Morgan (though Morgan played significantly fewer minutes due to injury). Phees also had 77 blocks, as against Morgan's 10. Advantage Phees.

15-16 KLS and Kia are each equal in size to 15-16 KLS and Kia (actually, KLS may have muscled up a bit more). Statistically, each had similar RB and Blks stats as compared to the year before.

3. Bench. No question that 15-16 had a bench (Saniya, Phees, Gabby, Butler); 16-17 did not (Crystal, Butler). But that says little about the starting five (though I concede that a strong bench may mean that the starting fives overall stats may suffer due to the luxury of less playing time).

To be continued, perhaps in a new thread.

 

[CocoHusky]

"He is a KLS basher ... " Save me.Yet, you are entitled to your own yardstick for reaching such a concl. I on the other hand have followed KLS beginning with the 3 X 3 FIFA and was astounded at her poor defensive play. Yes, she is far along than those days, but she is more of a liability than most are willing to say here. That she played a lot her Fr year and last year is quite beside the point; so would have Crystal had Chong not shown that she was up to the task. I'm of course guilty for rendering critical analyses that in the eyes of a few are understood as 'criticism.'

Some of her have been observing KLS longer than when she began 3 X 3 FIBA. Hopefully you can understand how the use of the word "liability" can be seem as "bashing". Sophomore KLS was a + defender (opposite of liability). But don't let actual stats get in the way of forming your opinion.

 

[hjoerring]

After reading the OP and all the subsequent posts disagreeing with it, I am going to support UC82, not because I agree with a single point in his OP (Bags is spot on), but rather because here at the BY there has always been, and will always be a relentless drive to seek perfection from the greatest program in the history of college sports.

Only a UConn WBB fan would question the toughness of an undersized, inexperienced team with no depth that went 36-1 against the toughest schedule in the country, losing in OT in the national semis.

God help us if we ever descend into basketball purgatory, like some of the folks on VolNation, where an 8 loss season, 3 players jumping ship or being shown the door and a decade of underachievement become grounds for optimism.

While I am not in disagreement with you- you can really complain about a 36-1 ending, I would like to take the OP and squeeze it for what it might give. F. ex., Geno had- on a number of occasions- commented on what he took to be the un-readiness of the team for the big ones. We can continue to celebrate the 36-1 (and we should) but, we could also moved on and say that Miss. played a fine defensive game plan that interrupted us, and we were consistently unable to solve the puzzle and take them out of their game plan. And of course their is the incitement among many here to say that 'if only we had won ...' Well, SC was not, in the Tourney the same team we played earlier in the year.

 

[CocoHusky]

F. ex., Geno had- on a number of occasions- commented on what he took to be the un-readiness of the team for the big ones.

This ladies and gentlemen is something we call:

 

[bags27]

Agreed, as to "the entire team", but not as to the starting five.

1. Leadership. "Leadership" is not an easy thing to measure. But in some respects, we know it when we see it. Comparing the 15-16 to 16-17 starting five . . . I'd say that Gabby was every bit as much a leader as Stewie the previous year (Stewie had more swagger; Gabby, more demonstrable passion). I'd say the same may be true when comparing Phees and Morgan (indeed, they are rather similar in temperament). Kia 16-17 was certainly no worse a leader than Kia 15-16, and in truth was better. KLS was, without question, far more developed a leader in 16-17 than 15-16. That leaves Moriah vs. Saniya. I'll give the tip to Moriah. But that said, as the season wore on, Saniya exhibited solid leadership skills. You could see the difference on the floor when she would come back into the game for Crystal. All considered, I would be reluctant to insist that the 15-16 team had "more" or "better" leadership than the 16-17 starting five.

2. Size. The starting five in 15-16 had Stewie. 16-17 squad had Gabby, who was six inches shorter with nowhere near the wingspan. Remarkably, Gabby had more O-Rebounds than Stewie in the same number of games, with Stewie holding a total rebounding edge 309 vs. 323. This is impressive, especially given the fact that (see below) 16-17 Phees far out rebounded 15-16 Morgan. (In other words, one reason why Stewie may have grabbed as many RBs as she did is because other Huskies on the floor did not.) Of course, Stewie had nearly 2 1/2 times as many blocks. And no statistic can quite capture the effect of Stewie in the low post. She was a terror! Stats can only tell us so much.

As for the rest, in my opinion the "size" advantage goes to the 16-17 squad. Saniya was bigger than Moriah, and had more rebounds and only one less blocked shot, with significantly less playing time.

Phees is listed as an inch shorter than Morgan (but she actually looks taller to me); but Phees is every bit as "big", with comparable footwork and quickness, better mobility, and greater durability. Phees far exceeded Morgan in O-Reb, D-Reb, and total rebounds. Indeed, Phees had 336 total rounds on the season--almost twice as many as Morgan (though Morgan played significantly fewer minutes due to injury). Phees also had 77 blocks, as against Morgan's 10. Advantage Phees.

15-16 KLS and Kia are each equal in size to 15-16 KLS and Kia (actually, KLS may have muscled up a bit more). Statistically, each had similar RB and Blks stats as compared to the year before.

3. Bench. No question that 15-16 had a bench (Saniya, Phees, Gabby, Butler); 16-17 did not (Crystal, Butler). But that says little about the starting five (though I concede that a strong bench may mean that the starting fives overall stats may suffer due to the luxury of less playing time).

To be continued, perhaps in a new thread.

Terrific, Connie, and more thoughtful and detailed than I have world and time to ponder and to respond to right now.
But just this: there can't be any doubt that this team vastly exceeded Geno's own expectations. He expected trouble from the very beginning, in November predicting (IIRC) a number of early losses.

 

[huskyd]

I am concerned about our team for this year.

In my judgment, the loss to Mississippi State exposed a clear weakness in this team. I am not referring to our lack of depth or our lack of height last year, both of which seem to be remedied.

I am referring to a kind of attitude, something I think Geno saw very clearly. The team last year didn't seem tough enough to me. There was no Kelly Faris, no Maya, no Caroline, no JenR, no Jamelle, no D, etc. No player to demand that everyone be held accountable. Probably the closest last year was Gabby, the only player who brought even her B game to the MS game. (Everyone else I rate C or D.)

It sure looked like last year's team was not ready for the huge, bright lights of the Final Four, the lights under which Stewie (and Maya, etc.) shined their brightest.

Geno threatened to bench players this year if they don't play excellent defense, e.g., Lou and Pheesa. Defense this year won't be optional, like last year, when he couldn't sub out non-excellent defense. I sure hope he does bench players this year, just like he did with Stewie and Tuck when they were juniors. (When did Morgan become Tuck, by the way?)

Many people, myself included, got really excited last year as we continued to win.

This year, nothing this team does before the Final Four will convince me they are ready for the biggest and brightest lights. They have to prove they can play their A game under such circumstances. We shall see.

I suspect my post will not be all that popular. Popularity doesn't win national championships. I missed the hats, T shirts, and the parade last year. I like being spoiled.

Thoughts?

Hey, let's do a vocab check here: "hubris" does not refer to toughness; it refers to over-confidence (the bad kind, tantamount to arrogance). In this sense, hubris is the opposite of toughness. I don't think anyone sitting here last November thought that UConn would do what it did. Geno spent the better part of the season warning the team that a loss was inevitable. Some of us predicted that the Huskies could lose up to 8 games last season. As many of you have already pointed out, toughness was more than evident. Perhaps the team might have ramped up its attacking ferocity if there weren't the constant danger of fouling out with a very thin bench and w/out adequate replacements. This year I believe we'll see a much more aggressive team because its depth affords it the chance to take more risks. How many arms does Kia have to rip off to qualify as "tough"?

 

[Ozzie Nelson]

This ladies and gentlemen is something we call:
View attachment 24498

Like a read herring.

 

[eebmg]

I agree with those who say that the combination of lack of size and lack of depth was a bigger problem last year than either one of those limitations were individually. And it provides a useful point of comparison with this year.

Now that Azura is available (but unfortunately Natalie has departed), UConn has a more skilled truly big player than it had last year, but still it only has one such player. So the "lack of size" problem is still with us in comparison to other teams like South Carolina, Mississippi State, Texas, and Baylor.

But what should be gone is "lack of depth". Now in the 6-0 to 6-2 height range we have not just Napheesa but also Batouly Camara and Megan Walker, and hopefully a much-improved Kyla Irwin. And we have some basis to hope that KLS can play in the manner suggested by her height, at least on defense. Napheesa getting in foul trouble should not be a game-changing occurrence as it was last year.

I don't think that the Mississippi State game would have been a loss if we had had the kind of depth in the front court last year that we will have this year.

In comparing and analyzing both factors (depth, size), I have no doubt that depth was (and is) by far the biggest issue. Given sufficient depth, you can play individual players harder and have them defend with less fear of fouling out. This allows the coaching staff to develop more flexible defensive strategies to defend the most elite bigs. By varying the defenses and the personnel, you can disrupt any player. Not to mention our ability to bring big's out of the paint to guard our flexible bigs.

Having Azura, Batouly Camara, Megan Walker, KLS, Naphesa, Gabby and as you say a much-improved Kyla Irwin, we can exhaust just about any combination of post players.

DEPTH, DEPTH, DEPTH


If I had to identify a weakness, I would say our guard play is not as deep as we would like with Kia and Crystal Dangerfield our only proven (and even Crystal Dangerfield has questions) true guards. We have great potential in our freshman (and hopefully Molly puts it together) but it is a weakness. I can imagine that we will play alot of 1 guard sets.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

I don't think that the Mississippi State game would have been a loss if we had had the kind of depth in the front court last year that we will have this year.

I think Gabby would agree. How hard was it for Batouly and Z to sit there; how painful for Natalie?

 

[Tenspro2002]

Well, you're certainly right about one thing, when you say "I suspect my post will not be all that popular."

I don't buy the hubris stuff and I don't even buy Geno's rant about "kids today." Last year's team completely over-achieved. They were heroic. They played their hearts out, they were tougher than nails, spilled their guts, left everything on the court, and made every other sports platitude I can think of very real. One of my favorite sports seasons ever. I love that team. To take one example, what they did at South Bend was jaw-dropping (at least, after the game Geno's jaw was on the floor). They covered themselves with glory and were a hair's breadth away from winning everything.

They were exceptional up to that Final Four game, over-achieved, showed toughness in big games, the whole bit.

But you have to admit that in that FF game, they did look like the magnitude of the stage got to them. Collier was awful, Lou and Nurse were very passive. Gabby was basically the only one who showed up, alongside maybe Chong who was solid up until the final sequence.

That was the shocking thing. A team that was tough all year suddenly wilted under the bright lights. I wouldn't go so far as the OP to label it a "concern", though I appreciate their perspective, but it's certainly something they will have to rectify and overcome in this year's Tournament.

 

[bags27]

They were exceptional up to that Final Four game, over-achieved, showed toughness in big games, the whole bit.

But you have to admit that in that FF game, they did look like the magnitude of the stage got to them. Collier was awful, Lou and Nurse were very passive. Gabby was basically the only one who showed up, alongside maybe Chong who was solid up until the final sequence.

That was the shocking thing. A team that was tough all year suddenly wilted under the bright lights. I wouldn't go so far as the OP to label it a "concern", though I appreciate their perspective, but it's certainly something they will have to rectify and overcome in this year's Tournament.

well, UConn was in close games earlier in the season; heck, they watched the winning shot bounce off the rim in their very first game, against FSU. Let's say that UConn holds the ball a little longer in the semis and makes a buzzer shot, goes on to win the championship. The narrative is entirely different: all we would be talking about is that they were undefeated. My point: they played a couple of close games that could have gone either way. They just didn't win that one.

 

[Ozzie Nelson]

The Boneyard was once described by a late poster as having a number of old men with the need to critique teenage women playing college basketball.

I miss Bill.