Dawn Staley Post Game Comments

[Mulder]

 

[jumpstart]

She gave the answer as to why Cooper is no longer there.....discipline...."the players are not going to run the program, I am". If that isn't a Geno type statement, I don't know what is. Dawn has been mentored by Geno as a coach so no surprise there.

 

[Jim R]

She gave the answer as to why Cooper is no longer there.....discipline...."the players are not going to run the program, I am". If that isn't a Geno type statement, I don't know what is. Dawn has been mentored by Geno as a coach so no surprise there.

Not surprising....as I mentioned years ago, one of the best steps she took, to improve her coaching acumen, was to land the assistants job on the National team. This year's young team, executes much better, on both sides of the ball, than any of her past teams....just coincidence? Not a chance.

 

[Huskie02]

Not surprising....as I mentioned years ago, one of the best steps she took, to improve her coaching acumen, was to land the assistants job on the National team. This year's young team, executes much better, on both sides of the ball, than any of her past teams....just coincidence? Not a chance.

Hats off to Dawn! She is a gifted coach and the second coming of Geno. She studied him, worked with him, and learned from him ( she also picked his pocket with Boston). She has turned the South Carolina program around. I was amazed at how confident and poised her 3 freshmen played. They completely destroyed us.

 

[oldude]

We sometimes lose sight of the fact that coaches learn too, and sometimes they get better at their craft. Dawn fielded some really good teams against the Huskies that came up short. In part, those losses had to do with UConn’s talent, but they also were a reflection that Dawn was not ready to go up against Geno.

Dawn has always been a strong defensive coach, but her offense generally relied on pounding the ball inside. In last season’s game at the XL Center I saw a completely different SC team. They gave UConn a scare in the first half by spreading the floor and pushing the tempo hard.

This year, SC’s offense is even better. They do a lot of the same little things that Oregon does: pick and roll, penetrate and kick out, etc. I was really impressed with the simple little play they ran on multiple occasions to back screen Liv, freeing up Boston for a wide open 10’ shot from the base line that she made time after time.

The fact that SC is executing their offense so well is even more impressive when you consider that they start 3 freshmen. Of course, it all comes together under the direction of 4-yr starter Ty Harris at pg. Until last night, I had thought that Ionescu was the prohibitive favorite for NPOY. IMO, it’s now a horse race between Harris and Ionescu.

 

[hoopsfan22]

I think Oregon and South Carolina are the new up and coming programs. Dynamic young(ish) head coaches at big schools that kids want to play hard for. Gonna be tough for coaches like Geno, Muffet, and Tara in the twilights of their coaching careers competing with them for recruits that's for sure.

 

[DefenseBB]

I think Oregon and South Carolina are the new up and coming programs. Dynamic young(ish) head coaches at big schools that kids want to play hard for. Gonna be tough for coaches like Geno, Muffet, and Tara in the twilights of their coaching careers competing with them for recruits that's for sure.

Just so you know, Kelly is 57 and Dawn will be 50 in May. Kim Mulkey is also 57.
“Youngish” is not a term I would have used. For that matter, Scott Rueck is 50, Cori Close is 48.
It takes time and lots of it to build a resume and a program.

 

[TheFarmFan]

I think Oregon and South Carolina are the new up and coming programs. Dynamic young(ish) head coaches at big schools that kids want to play hard for. Gonna be tough for coaches like Geno, Muffet, and Tara in the twilights of their coaching careers competing with them for recruits that's for sure.

Eh, Bueckers is a one-women recruiting machine. UConn isn't going anywhere. The only question mark for Geno is age and retirement - I don't think there will be any shortage of top recruits who want to play for him until he calls it quits.

Tara has that same problem, but I think the Stanford degree means she's a near-lock for a certain kind of recruit. Given how small the Stanford admissibility pool of top WCBB recruits is, she was and is always playing a slightly different recruiting game than most other coaches.

MM is the one I have the most question marks about. There are other top female coaches if one is the type who wants a female coach role model (ahem). Right now, the cupboard is really, really bare. And I sense that MM has projected a pretty negative attitude lately that I don't think gels super well with 15-year-olds today. I will be very curious to see how well she can recruit over the next few seasons, esp. since she's not far behind Tara and Geno in terms of retirement rumors.

 

[Jim R]

Just so you know, Kelly is 57 and Dawn will be 50 in May. Kim Mulkey is also 57.
“Youngish” is not a term I would have used. For that matter, Scott Rueck is 50, Cori Close is 48.
It takes time and lots of it to build a resume and a program.

"Gonna be tough for coaches like Geno, Muffet, and Tara in the twilights of their coaching careers competing with them for recruits that's for sure." While nothing lasts forever, it might be prudent to resist the temptation to report UCONN's decline prematurely....I'd bet we get two more championships before any of those aforementioned programs/coaches. As far as recruits, believe that horse left the barn years ago. Yes, we still compete, and get, more than our fair share of the best, but as the quality of WCBB has improved during the past decade, to include the coaching, and so have the choices for recruits.
While the sensitive subject of our lack of inside presence (yes, height), and its cost, has been mentioned more than a few times, there's no doubt its been magnified in this year's losses. Next year, it'll be a different story n many ways. Having said all that, in the meantime, while there is no doubting Geno & crews coaching chops, it would nice, if, from time to time, after a big loss, instead of getting irritated at the press, and his team, he'd put his big boy pants on, and simply say he was out coached, and the other team was better prepared. It happens to all of us. After all, while his team may not have played up to expectations, its the coaches job, and ultimately, his job to make sure they are ready. The glory is his when they win, and, in the same manner, the criticism should be his when they lose....and he should embrace it.
Lastly, we've got more games to play and improve, and the WCBB championship to go after - let's go get them!

 

[hoopsfan22]

Just so you know, Kelly is 57 and Dawn will be 50 in May. Kim Mulkey is also 57.
“Youngish” is not a term I would have used. For that matter, Scott Rueck is 50, Cori Close is 48.
It takes time and lots of it to build a resume and a program.

Had no idea he was that old. I knew Staley was almost 50. Guess that kinda wrecks my premise, but I do think Staley has something special going at South Carolina. Wouldn't be shocked to see them add a few more national titles to the trophy case over the next decade. Geno, Muffet, and Tara will all most likely be gone in the next 5-10 years.

 

[eebmg]

Just so you know, Kelly is 57 and Dawn will be 50 in May. Kim Mulkey is also 57.
“Youngish” is not a term I would have used. For that matter, Scott Rueck is 50, Cori Close is 48.
It takes time and lots of it to build a resume and a program.

Dawn is the National Team Coach and Graves plays in the PAC12.

Pretty good advantages in comparison to Mulkey who is in Big12

 

[jonson]

The fact that SC is executing their offense so well is even more impressive when you consider that they start 3 freshmen. Of course, it all comes together under the direction of 4-yr starter Ty Harris at pg.

I have a comment--probably more a question--about this. I perhaps should add as a preamble that I know full well that Geno is the best WBB coach of all time, and I am (at best) an interested observer with very limited basketball knowledge. Anyway:

Posters here continually point to the complexity of the UCONN offense as a major reason why recruits more often than not take a year to learn and become proficient in Geno's system. I agree, However, that is obviously not true of SC and, in fact, of a great many teams across the US: in the Pac 12, for example, Oregon State has two freshmen bigs who have played a major role in that team's success, Stanford's Haley Jones was on her way to a very successful freshman season until she got hurt, and less obviously (but closer to home) Jaz Shelley has been an important contributor at Oregon (e.g. the game Sunday). Part of this may be talent and/or personality, but I don't think that's the whole, or even most, of the story. (UCONN, like SC, also has a senior point guard.)

So here's my question: why doesn't Geno simplify his offense given the players he currently has, and has had, for the past few years? Although they may not be Maya or Stewie they are really talented, but, from my perspective, that talent seems to get stifled somewhat, and they too often appear to play mechanically, because they spend so much time thinking about what to do next or maybe even worrying about being pulled if they make a mistake. Again, I realize that Geno has higher standards than anyone else in WBB and his success is obviously unparalleled, but perhaps--given the players he has to work with now and maybe even down the road--some simplification of the offense might be beneficial.

 

[hoopsfan22]

I have a comment--probably more a question--about this. I perhaps should add as a preamble that I know full well that Geno is the best WBB coach of all time, and I am (at best) an interested observer with very limited basketball knowledge. Anyway:

Posters here continually point to the complexity of the UCONN offense as a major reason why recruits more often than not take a year to learn and become proficient in Geno's system. I agree, However, that is obviously not true of SC and, in fact, of a great many teams across the US: in the Pac 12, for example, Oregon State has two freshmen bigs who have played a major role in that team's success, Stanford's Haley Jones was on her way to a very successful freshman season until she got hurt, and less obviously (but closer to home) Jaz Shelley has been an important contributor at Oregon (e.g. the game Sunday). Part of this may be talent and/or personality, but I don't think that's the whole, or even most, of the story. (UCONN, like SC, also has a senior point guard.)

So here's my question: why doesn't Geno simplify his offense given the players he currently has, and has had, for the past few years? Although they may not be Maya or Stewie they are really talented, but, from my perspective, that talent seems to get stifled somewhat, and they too often appear to play mechanically, because they spend so much time thinking about what to do next or maybe even worrying about being pulled if they make a mistake. Again, I realize that Geno has higher standards than anyone else in WBB and his success is obviously unparalleled, but perhaps--given the players he has to work with now and maybe even down the road--some simplification of the offense might be beneficial.

The thing that's frustrating is the system is getting the players open looks, they are just not knocking them down. It doesn't seem to matter whether we're talking layups, jump shots, or free throws. The players still need to be capable of putting the ball in the hoop, and in big games that seems to be the biggest problem. In the three big games I think we lost by 17, 18, and 18. That's a deficit of about 5 points per quarter. Make a couple more free throws and another bunny per quarter in those games and maybe we're having a different discussion.

 

[jumpstart]

I have a comment--probably more a question--about this. I perhaps should add as a preamble that I know full well that Geno is the best WBB coach of all time, and I am (at best) an interested observer with very limited basketball knowledge. Anyway:

Posters here continually point to the complexity of the UCONN offense as a major reason why recruits more often than not take a year to learn and become proficient in Geno's system. I agree, However, that is obviously not true of SC and, in fact, of a great many teams across the US: in the Pac 12, for example, Oregon State has two freshmen bigs who have played a major role in that team's success, Stanford's Haley Jones was on her way to a very successful freshman season until she got hurt, and less obviously (but closer to home) Jaz Shelley has been an important contributor at Oregon (e.g. the game Sunday). Part of this may be talent and/or personality, but I don't think that's the whole, or even most, of the story. (UCONN, like SC, also has a senior point guard.)

So here's my question: why doesn't Geno simplify his offense given the players he currently has, and has had, for the past few years? Although they may not be Maya or Stewie they are really talented, but, from my perspective, that talent seems to get stifled somewhat, and they too often appear to play mechanically, because they spend so much time thinking about what to do next or maybe even worrying about being pulled if they make a mistake. Again, I realize that Geno has higher standards than anyone else in WBB and his success is obviously unparalleled, but perhaps--given the players he has to work with now and maybe even down the road--some simplification of the offense might be beneficial.

Because it has produced 11 national championship titles......just a guess mind you...lol...

 

[Wilderness]

I have a comment--probably more a question--about this. I perhaps should add as a preamble that I know full well that Geno is the best WBB coach of all time, and I am (at best) an interested observer with very limited basketball knowledge. Anyway:

Posters here continually point to the complexity of the UCONN offense as a major reason why recruits more often than not take a year to learn and become proficient in Geno's system. I agree, However, that is obviously not true of SC and, in fact, of a great many teams across the US: in the Pac 12, for example, Oregon State has two freshmen bigs who have played a major role in that team's success, Stanford's Haley Jones was on her way to a very successful freshman season until she got hurt, and less obviously (but closer to home) Jaz Shelley has been an important contributor at Oregon (e.g. the game Sunday). Part of this may be talent and/or personality, but I don't think that's the whole, or even most, of the story. (UCONN, like SC, also has a senior point guard.)

So here's my question: why doesn't Geno simplify his offense given the players he currently has, and has had, for the past few years? Although they may not be Maya or Stewie they are really talented, but, from my perspective, that talent seems to get stifled somewhat, and they too often appear to play mechanically, because they spend so much time thinking about what to do next or maybe even worrying about being pulled if they make a mistake. Again, I realize that Geno has higher standards than anyone else in WBB and his success is obviously unparalleled, but perhaps--given the players he has to work with now and maybe even down the road--some simplification of the offense might be beneficial.

. The point you make about freshmen frequently playing meaningful roles for other elite teams is one that puzzles me also. Why not us? Thanks for your post, jonson.
Wilderness

 

[Ralph]

I am puzzled by everyone saying we will cure our shortage of bigs next year. Piath Gabrielle has been called a work in progress who has great upside, but will likely take at least two years to get there. So the only new big likely to make a big impact next year next year is Edwards, and at 6 - 2 she is only one inch taller than Meg. And Meg has been rebounding well for us.

 

[oldude]

I am puzzled by everyone saying we will cure our shortage of bigs next year. Piath Gabrielle has been called a work in progress who has great upside, but will likely take at least two years to get there. So the only new big likely to make a big impact next year next year is Edwards, and at 6 - 2 she is only one inch taller than Meg. And Meg has been rebounding well for us.

If she is just able to learn to rebound and defend the paint at the college level, I wouldn’t discount Piath’s ability to provide 5-10 mpg by the 2nd half of the season. Aaliyah is listed at 6’3”, but whatever her actual height, she demonstrated an impressive ability to mix it up with the best Bigs in the world while playing for the Canadian National Team against the U.S. team. Finally, if Mir is the 2nd coming of Gabby Williams, UConn will have another individual who plays far bigger than her 5’11” height.

 

[ReadR00ster]

It's not really a matter of rebounding as much as defense and offense and winning the foul trouble battle vs other teams with good bigs. Even just a solid post player to spell ONO would be a big help.

 

[ABCDFE]

The blanket statement that we need bigs is not correct. We need players who play "big" and more importantly, we need athletic players that are aggressive both defensively and offensively. What we lack now is elite skill at either shooting, post, or creating mid-range (maybe CW can get there...). Outside of Crystal (who has to work so hard to create and then guard the top guard on the other team), we do not have anyone showing elite offensive or defensive skill. Liv can be that dominant defensive player, but she has a penchant for fouling and doesn't guard outside the paint well, yet.

I've been thinking, what is this team missing to make them elite. My opinion would be an elite shooter (someone the other team has to shut down) like a KLS, KML etc., a consistent post presence that can get us easy buckets, and a lock down defender (MoJeff, Nurse, Faris). That post presence doesn't have to be 6'5" tall. We've seen Gabby, Pheesa, and Tuck at be very adept at getting to the basket for layups. You will say, "wow that's a lot". Yes it is a lot, and that's why we are who we are.

 

[DeeHusky]

This is just a down year or a year where we I don’t expect a championship. Gene is in no way done. There are a lot of recruits on the way in the next two years. Paige is almost like assurance that Fudd is on the way imo. Stanford is not going anywhere. Cameron Brink, Haley Jones, the Hulls, Belibi, Pretchel and more will keep them in the running. Notre Dame is the questionable program. I think of a lot of their recruiting was on the shoulders of Skylar Diggins success/residue and Niele Ivey. Now she has to do it on her own so idk about the Irish right now

 

[uconnfan68]

Eh, Bueckers is a one-women recruiting machine. UConn isn't going anywhere. The only question mark for Geno is age and retirement - I don't think there will be any shortage of top recruits who want to play for him until he calls it quits.

Tara has that same problem, but I think the Stanford degree means she's a near-lock for a certain kind of recruit. Given how small the Stanford admissibility pool of top WCBB recruits is, she was and is always playing a slightly different recruiting game than most other coaches.

MM is the one I have the most question marks about. There are other top female coaches if one is the type who wants a female coach role model (ahem). Right now, the cupboard is really, really bare. And I sense that MM has projected a pretty negative attitude lately that I don't think gels super well with 15-year-olds today. I will be very curious to see how well she can recruit over the next few seasons, esp. since she's not far behind Tara and Geno in terms of retirement rumors.

You don't think ND played the academic card just like Stanford? They may not be equal, but that doesn't stop ND from saying it.

 

[bluedevil]

Buecker is a one woman recruitng machine? Who has committed to UCONN because of her? Anybody?

 

[DefenseBB]

I have a comment--probably more a question--about this. I perhaps should add as a preamble that I know full well that Geno is the best WBB coach of all time, and I am (at best) an interested observer with very limited basketball knowledge. Anyway:

Posters here continually point to the complexity of the UCONN offense as a major reason why recruits more often than not take a year to learn and become proficient in Geno's system. I agree, However, that is obviously not true of SC and, in fact, of a great many teams across the US: in the Pac 12, for example, Oregon State has two freshmen bigs who have played a major role in that team's success, Stanford's Haley Jones was on her way to a very successful freshman season until she got hurt, and less obviously (but closer to home) Jaz Shelley has been an important contributor at Oregon (e.g. the game Sunday.

Let’s parse your full inquiry here for a second. Let’s address SC and their offense first as they have a very, very good offense predicated on transition basketball with 2 players in the same roles they had last year. Add in one of the most talented offensive “big” I have seen in a very long time as a freshman and you have a pretty impressive squad of newcomers THAT NO ONE ELSE CAN CLAIM EVER.
Now as far as your example of OSU, they do not and have not had great offense over the years. Scott is a HEAVY defensively minded coach, who works the clock down and keep this score in the 50’s type of coach. So while your freshman post deserves FOY in the PAC12, because you have a stagnant offense, you lost 2 games for sure this year. And that’s with 4 experienced players.
Stanford likewise will never be accused of a heavy offense and is really only working in Jones (as a starter before she was hurt) and now Prechtel, who has been very very good lately. But again this team also has struggled offensively against good teams having far too many close games.
Just look a Notre Dame, another team considered an elite offensive program And how they struggled mightily this year with all newcomers.
Working in 2 or more new players into a complicated system can be a challenge but by the end of the year it has almost always worked.
You know the adage, coach up to your best players not down to your least skilled/inexperienced players.
Offense is the premium skill and Geno/CD will never compromise those expectations considering their success. 20-3 in a Down year and a nice group of players we have enjoyed watching evolve. As a case in point Kitja Laksa was FOY during KLS and Pheesa’s freshman year yet the next year they were Co-POY and All-Americans. Trust the process my West Coast Colleague, trust the process...

 

[HopJim]

The blanket statement that we need bigs is not correct. We need players who play "big" and more importantly, we need athletic players that are aggressive both defensively and offensively. What we lack now is elite skill at either shooting, post, or creating mid-range (maybe CW can get there...). Outside of Crystal (who has to work so hard to create and then guard the top guard on the other team), we do not have anyone showing elite offensive or defensive skill. Liv can be that dominant defensive player, but she has a penchant for fouling and doesn't guard outside the paint well, yet.

I've been thinking, what is this team missing to make them elite. My opinion would be an elite shooter (someone the other team has to shut down) like a KLS, KML etc., a consistent post presence that can get us easy buckets, and a lock down defender (MoJeff, Nurse, Faris). That post presence doesn't have to be 6'5" tall. We've seen Gabby, Pheesa, and Tuck at be very adept at getting to the basket for layups. You will say, "wow that's a lot". Yes it is a lot, and that's why we are who we are.

All good points and agree that UConn will need all of these assets to compete at the top level. Teams like SC are relatively young and will be getting better. Still looking forward to the future, but realistically it will take 2+ years before we have the players you reference with the experience to be #1. I will continue to watch every game until then.

 

[diggerfoot]

Again, I realize that Geno has higher standards than anyone else in WBB and his success is obviously unparalleled, but perhaps--given the players he has to work with now and maybe even down the road--some simplification of the offense might be beneficial.

You ask a fair question, but I think there are some false assumptions that even BYers hold behind it. Auriemma often has said he simplified either defense or offense as he felt the team needed, but that is in terms of plays. Where the burden lies in Auriemma's system is the responsibility he places on players to read and react, to figure things out during real time action. He once told Bird that if anything goes wrong, ANYTHING, it was her fault.

So Auriemma could have very few plays, but if players do not read and react well even a very few will seem poorly executed. Consequently, there have been freshman that have fit in well right from the start, some of them even starting. Makurat this year is obviously a player who gets it out there. In recent years both Samuelson and KML got significant play as freshmen. Both came here from Mater Dei; I do not think that is a coincidence. I have never seen a Mater Dei game in my life, but I will bet a large pizza their coach is superb at teaching the game.

Go back a little further and another player who got significant time as a freshman, despite a physical limitation at the start, was Dolson. She just happened to be an extremely smart player who could read and react well from the start. She in essence became our point center.

In recent years he has talked about the athleticism and/or skill of recruits like Griffin, Walker or Williams. But his comments for both Bueckers and Muhl are that they are "basketball players." In other words, they just "get it" and should fit into his read and react, the player is fully responsible, style of play. Every year we have top level athleticism and skill; next year we will have at least three players that really "get it," and I think we will be bad for basketball again.