- Joined
- Apr 1, 2013
- Messages
- 7,403
- Reaction Score
- 20,038
Wrong again, another failed gotcha. My statements are wholly consistent. The "starting five" and the "team" are not the same thing. Stating that a player would be an asset to a team though not a starter is not the same a saying the player would be detriment. You are being either dishonest or obtuse to make that leap.
I had a feeling that "holding back" might ruffle some. After the Baylor game, the talk was how UConn would have to attack bigger teams with quickness because they don't have the height in past years. It was a revelation. You put Tuck in there, the team's pace would slow and I'm not sure her added height is enough to make up the difference. And who sits? Collier? She just went 12-14 from the floor, she's a better low post scorer than Tuck. Gabby? You are going to sit the most dynamic player in the country? KLS' shooting is a must and you need two ball handlers. That leaves Tuck as a great 6th man. Her team play was always one of her assets.
How about all of us that feel you are completely wrong-- it's oaky we think that, right? A difference of opinion. SO in our view you are completely wrong -- and when you say -- Stating that a player would be an asset to a team though not a starter is not the same a saying the player would be detriment.
We think Tuck would no doubt start. If you took a poll - don't you think most posters would predict Tuck would start. Thus in your scenario you are EXACTLY implying she would be a detriment for those of who believe (KNOW) that she would start. So if she did- realizing that a poster such as yourself feels she would be a detriment as a starter-- can you see why you are getting the type of replies you are getting? You're implying that "my team" in which I would start Tuck would "hold back" the others is just sooooo wrong. We don;'t agree that you don't think a lineup of Nurse, Lou, Gabby, Tuck and Collier wouldn't thrive. Not to mention but I will Tuck only played 25-.5 and 26.8 minutes per game.
And then you infleixible comment of that YOU happen to prefer starting two gaurds-- therby implying Chong over Tuck to fit your team because you are so inflexible in your views that YOU MUST have "2 guards?"
Gabby handles the ball like a guard, lou shoots the ball like a guard and Collier has wing skills in which she is more-or-less often pinned to play the paint. You don't think Geno could run a great offense with the five I just mentioned? We tend to see seniors improve - and now we would havehad Tuck as a 5th year senior to boot and she wouldn't have also improved especially since Collier and Gabby and Lou and Chong all showed you EALRY in the season they improved? Chong WAS HURT a lot last year.
We hear players get a soph jump. We got super recruits in Lou and Collier yet Tuck who is a terrific passer for a post and such a threat in the box and such a terrific defender wouldn't have helped them improve? We ehar how players "wear down" instead of having both so much inside in the paint -- wouldn't it make sense to have Tuck handle some inside players so players like Collier don't wear down and ofc have Collier also work on her perimeter game? Can you imagine what Collier will be as she plays more on the perimeter instead look what happened vs Baylor. She got smothered a bit. And more than likely Gabby isn't getting only 25 minutes vs Baylor.
As for "quickness." Isn't Tuck quicker than any of the Baylor posts?
Last edited:
at the level of entropy of this thread.
( I was trying to avoid this.)