Do some UConn players get the short end of the statistical stick?

[HuskylnSC]

I have felt for some time that some UConn players get the short end of statistics in that when the teams had more depth then recent years the UConn stars played fewer minutes in a season. Thereby not allowing them to put up total numbers in comparison to other players. I decided to compare the latest greatest player, Sabrina, with Stewie on a production by minute basis over their 4 year career. I'm sure there are holes in my logic and I welcome comments. so here goes;
Points/min Reb/min Asst/min Blk/min
Sabrina .51 .22 .22 .00 (27 total over 4 years)
Stewie .64 .28 .10 .10

If Stewie had played 836 more minutes to match the total playing time of Sabrina she would have these totals

Points 2,566 Rebounds 1,125 Assists 400 Blocks 400

I got my source data from Yahoo sports as the NCAA and UConn sites were giving me difficulty to access.

 

[MJL243]

Here are the official NCAA stats for Stewie and Sabrina:

Even just comparing raw numbers (without adjusting for minutes played), Stewie had more points, rebounds, steals, blocks, and fewer turnovers. Sabrina only had more assists, (and of course more double and triple doubles). Sabrina is a unique talent and one of the all-time greats, but in the most important category Stewie leads 4 to 0.

 

[UcMiami]

Because Uconn plays the way Geno coaches, very few Uconn players end up near the top of any personal per game records in NCAA record books, while Uconn as a team frequently performs near the top of the team records. Most of the five players on the floor at any given time are expected to pass well so year after year Uconn is high on assists per game, same for scoring. Rebounding are a bit more specialized but still emphasized to all players. Blocks are sort of a separate category as they are more related to an individuals style and physical makeup and not a team's playing style. While Uconn players tend not to play as many minutes as 'star' players on other teams - the distribution among players is I think more of a determining factor. Even on short bench teams at Uconn the numbers tend not to stand out as much.

But what Sabrina did stands out as unique - no other player in NCAA history on any team in any style and either gender has ever been a triple double machine like she was. The women's record was 6 for a season and 9 for a career and the men's career record is 12 - Sabrina has 8 in a season twice and ended four years with 26. Don't care how many minutes she played that is out of category.

 

[oldude]

I have felt for some time that some UConn players get the short end of statistics in that when the teams had more depth then recent years the UConn stars played fewer minutes in a season. Thereby not allowing them to put up total numbers in comparison to other players. I decided to compare the latest greatest player, Sabrina, with Stewie on a production by minute basis over their 4 year career. I'm sure there are holes in my logic and I welcome comments. so here goes;
Points/min Reb/min Asst/min Blk/min
Sabrina .51 .22 .22 .00 (27 total over 4 years)
Stewie .64 .28 .10 .10

If Stewie had played 836 more minutes to match the total playing time of Sabrina she would have these totals

Points 2,566 Rebounds 1,125 Assists 400 Blocks 400

I got my source data from Yahoo sports as the NCAA and UConn sites were giving me difficulty to access.

Yes, Stewie played fewer mpg than Ionescu and she came up short in a number of statistical categories, except for the one that really matters the most:

Stewie - 4 championships
Ionescu - 0 championships

 

[ConnMotors]

Playing at UConn can be difficult on any players stats numbers. The team is usually well rounded with key subs on the bench. I believe its all about timing and need. And, this goes back to the teams starting in 1995. Will Lobo get the scoring record. How about Kara. If Geno let any of those players score at will they would have outscored Bascom. I never liked the stats; PPG or RPG Points and Rebounds Per Game and so on. They are just false numbers. It should go by Points Per Minutes Played. Bet you would see a huge difference in stats.

 

[oldhusky]

It's not just playing time, it is also who you are playing with. Many potential uconn recruits have to decide what is more important to them. They could be the first option and leading scorer on a mediocre team or say the fourth or fifth option on a great team. For many the difference is even more stark than that, because the higher level of competition may make the choice between starting somewhere else or getting bench minutes here, or being reduced to irrelevant minutes at the end of a blowout game.

In my opinion there are many players who will accept reduced playing time with a nationally ranked program because of their extra attention in the media and on TV. They have even seen some uconn players have success in the WNBA while being bench players their senior year.

Having said that Geno frequently risks losing people to the transfer process by relying on sometimes only 6 or 7 players. On many of the best and deepest teams of the past the bench was on average extending the lead rather than losing it. The last few years that was not true. As long as you can get top 10 talent consistently it probably doesn't matter, but we also need recruits in the range of top 20 or top 30 and based on recent history they have to seriously consider the possibility they may be irrelevant at uconn if Geno is not willing to go deeper with the bench.

A few years back we had a potential numbers crunch after Megan's recruiting class. If memory serves me right posters were rightly trying to figure out how to keep 14 players happy with playing time. I remember in my pecking order at that time Kyla and Molly were number 13 and 14. That didn't bother me for those two because unlike most uconn recruits I believe they were brought in to be good end of the bench practice players who would only get mop up minutes. I think that was the expectation of the players and coaches.

The other recruits, however, expected much more with several leaving and Kyla and Molly moved up to 6 and 7 on this year's squad, being used more than the role they were recruited for. Our starters were frequently playing 35 minutes a game, more in games that were close.

This next season we have a roster with many new players that are expecting minutes. My hope is they show enough to convince Geno they are playable. If that happens there is a possibility that uconn could resume pressing defenses and more of a fast breaking offense. Starters minutes could be reduced from a half court offense, and stay out of foul trouble energy saving defense, to a high intensity 25 minutes of full court presses and get out and go offense, with the bench playing a similar style for 15 minutes.

We have had some deep teams that could wear out the other teams starters and also overwhelm their bench players with superior talent. I think this new group has the potential to make that style possible again, and give 5-10 importance and significance that increases significantly the chance of retaining them for 4 years.

 

[hoophuskee]

I

We have had some deep teams that could wear out the other teams starters and also overwhelm their bench players with superior talent. I think this new group has the potential to make that style possible again, and give 5-10 importance and significance that increases significantly the chance of retaining them for 4 years.

I'm not arguing specifically when you say a "deep bench" but what what do you consider the minimum number of a "deep bench?"

And an unrelated question what do you think as a counter to a deep bench an argument that they haven't had a Lobo (which I happen to agree with) - super elite player the past 5 years? To be more specific- In the last 5 years we haven't seen a superstar like like Lobo, Bird, DT, Tina, Maya, and Stewart. Frankly I think MoJeff was a superstar but that's besides the point.

What do you think for those that say if Stevens stayed or if Collier didn't de-commit (while getting Olivia) that or had gotten Boston that would've resulted in a certain dominance? Or are those 1 players the difference between a short bench and a deep bench?

IMO not winning it all- which is the only real complaint to have (because the team has still been extremely successful) it's been a combo of different issues the last 5 years. UCONN being a bit too short up front (one year for sure they weren't), not have an elite superstar like mentioned above, and bad luck (buzzer beaters) in which you aren't accustomed to playing close games (which could be the fault of a crappy conference). In the last 5 years how often has our crappy conference helped prepare UCONN? Though maybe now in the Big East we'll get the 20-30 ranked player to stay.

 

[UConn2SF]

They can have statistical sticks, UConn players care about National Championsticks.

 

[oldhusky]

I'm not arguing specifically when you say a "deep bench" but what what do you consider the minimum number of a "deep bench?"

And an unrelated question what do you think as a counter to a deep bench an argument that they haven't had a Lobo (which I happen to agree with) - super elite player the past 5 years? To be more specific- In the last 5 years we haven't seen a superstar like like Lobo, Bird, DT, Tina, Maya, and Stewart. Frankly I think MoJeff was a superstar but that's besides the point.

What do you think for those that say if Stevens stayed or if Collier didn't de-commit (while getting Olivia) that or had gotten Boston that would've resulted in a certain dominance? Or are those 1 players the difference between a short bench and a deep bench?

IMO not winning it all- which is the only real complaint to have (because the team has still been extremely successful) it's been a combo of different issues the last 5 years. UCONN being a bit too short up front (one year for sure they weren't), not have an elite superstar like mentioned above, and bad luck (buzzer beaters) in which you aren't accustomed to playing close games (which could be the fault of a crappy conference). In the last 5 years how often has our crappy conference helped prepare UCONN? Though maybe now in the Big East we'll get the 20-30 ranked player to stay.

I would call a deep bench a minimum of 8 but probably 9 players you are glad to use, all of which on average are better than the players they will face during the season. That is a high standard but we have had that in the past.

I agree with you that if several things had gone a different way (Stevens, Collier etc) the bench could have been very good. My main worry is a top 20-30 player who doesn't get any significant regular minutes as a freshman, will not stay even if they could have helped the program in subsequent years.

 

[hoophuskee]

I would call a deep bench a minimum of 8 but probably 9 players you are glad to use, all of which on average are better than the players they will face during the season. That is a high standard but we have had that in the past.

I agree with you that if several things had gone a different way (Stevens, Collier etc) the bench could have been very good. My main worry is a top 20-30 player who doesn't get any significant regular minutes as a freshman, will not stay even if they could have helped the program in subsequent years.

We've also not had 9 player benches in the past too. And have had 7 or maybe fewer and still been super great though it's hard to define a good bench player sometimes.

Anyhow if given a choice I'll take the number 1 recruits and less of a bench.

 

[Alydar]

I'll take 2 or 3 subs over a full bench if they are of the Stokes variety. We will have a deep bench but our rotation will be 7-8 by January. Why? Because that's what Geno likes.

 

[SVCBeercats]

I have felt for some time that some UConn players get the short end of statistics in that when the teams had more depth then recent years the UConn stars played fewer minutes in a season.

No, they do not. Sabrina zero national championships. Stewie 4 national championships. Etc., etc., etc.

 

[CocoHusky]

UCONN players do not get the short end of the of the statistical stick. The interpretation and recitation of the stats as definite proof is however high comedy. Did we really, for example, have to recite the number of championship and the per minute numbers when comparing Sabrina to Stewie. Surely we didn't have to start a thread asking if Sabrina is the GOAT when she was not even the best player to play in that conference.

 

[DefenseBB]

UCONN players do not get the short end of the of the statistical stick. The interpretation and recitation of the stats as definite proof is however high comedy. Did we really, for example, have to recite the number of championship and the per minute numbers when comparing Sabrina to Stewie. Surely we didn't have to start a thread asking if Sabrina is the GOAT when she was not even the best player to play in that conference.

Umm, who, in your estimation is the best player to ever play in that conference-Lisa Leslie, Cheryl Miller, Jen Azzi?

 

[CocoHusky]

Umm, who, in your estimation is the best player to ever play in that conference-Lisa Leslie, Cheryl Miller, Jen Azzi?

The incomparable Cheryl Miller!- My first WBB crush.
These players have had arguably similar Pac 12 statistical career to Sabrina: Candice Wiggins, Kelsey Plum, Lisa Leslie and Chiney Ogwumike. The incomparable Cheryl Miller. separates herself from this group in that she actually won Championships-as in plural. You can't have a GOAT WBB conversation without including Cherly Miller but you can have a pretty damn good one excluding Sabrina.

 

[DefenseBB]

Cheryl seems to get the short-end of the stick on the who GOAT thing as I agree with you. The ESPN article on 50 years of Woman #1 recruits has Lisa Leslie as #1 (I completely disagree), I put Azzi on their as she too won multiple championships and as many as 6...if you want to count a "half name" should she choose UConn...

 

[Steelerone]

While the ladies comprising our teams at any given time may come in on the short end of the stick as far as most numbers are concerned our players will have to be satisfied with the ultimate statistic - games won. Also, regardless of their point total, rebound total or assist total, Uconn has the highest number of players drafted by the WNBA. We must be doing something right.