Does UConn Need a Low-Post "Banger"? | The Boneyard

Does UConn Need a Low-Post "Banger"?

JoePgh

Cranky pants and wise acre
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
3,653
Reaction Score
21,270
I'm starting this thread to facilitate discussion of a point that has been made in numerous posts since 10 PM EDT last night. There are many examples of posters making this point, but I have selected this one from @LoboDays' comment in the "Enough About Bad Recruiting" thread:

"If UConn wants to get back to winning NC's, they need to bring in post players who can defend players like Boston and Brink, get their share of rebounds against them (especially limit their offensive rebounds) and have the ability to score underneath when guarded...."

There are several points to be made in response to this, in my opinion:
  1. First of all, Aliyah Boston is a very special case. She is currently the Wilt Chamberlain or Kareem Abdul Jabbar of WCBB. Just as no opponent was able really to match up with either of them, even in the NBA, no one in WCBB has really matched up with Boston. It would have been nice if Geno had brought her to Storrs, but he didn't, and there really is no one else he might have recruited (including Brink, Cunane, Nalyssa Smith, Tamari Key, or Elizabeth Kitley) who could have neutralized her.
  2. UConn (specifically Liv and Aaliyah Edwards) did fine against both Brink and Cunane, neutralizing them sufficiently that UConn was able to win the game with its other assets. Tara Vandeveer in her postgame remarks specifically mentioned how physically Liv played against Stanford, and the Indiana coach said the same thing in her postgame remarks. Some have said that Liv didn't develop in her time at UConn, but I don't think opposing coaches would have been saying those things after their teams faced her in her freshman or sophomore years.
  3. Really, Liv's only deficiency at this point is her scoring -- her lack of an array of post moves or (more importantly) a truly reliable 15-foot jump shot that she can take 8 to 10 times per game and hit 50%. I wonder whether pro teams will be willing to take a chance on her developing those skills at the pro level. If I were a WNBA GM, I think I would take that risk in the second round of the draft, but not in the first round.
  4. There is no issue with AE's appetite for physical play. She is big enough to make that work (bigger than Morgan Tuck or Asjah Jones), but she needs to play with a 5 who can open up space for her in the paint by making midrange jump shots, and she needs to develop her own midrange jump shot to pull opposing posts out of the paint to defend her.
"I don't want to see a 6-5 post player lead the team in assists. That is a negative stat in my opinion.... Against the best, that is a losing strategy."

I think this is an outdated view of the game -- that every team needs a Shaquille O'Neal to be truly successful. Have you watched the Boston Celtics play lately? They don't have a center that plays like that, and they are 33-11 in the NBA since mid-December.

I remember that when UConn's starting lineup included Stef Dolson and Kelly Faris, a lot of fans were asking why Stef played in the high post and seemed to like passing more than scoring. There was such a chorus of these comments that Meg Culmo posed that question to Geno on The Geno Auriemma Show, reading a listener's question.

I remember his response very clearly, although not verbatim. It was almost exactly this:

Playing your big in the low post only works if the other four players are all major scoring threats who have to be guarded. If we put Stef in the low post, the other team would just leave Kelly unguarded and double Stef. Kelly would get any shot she wanted, but we would then have to rely on her jump shooting to win the game. That's not where we want to be. We want to get shots for Stef, and that is much easier if she is in the high post.

What he didn't say in that response (but everyone understood) is: (a) Stef did have a reliable jump shot from 15 feet, so no opponent could afford to leave her unguarded there (a contrast with both Liv and AE); (b) Stef was a fine passer -- at least as good as Liv -- and could facilitate the offense from the high post, allowing the guards not just to get jump shots but also to get backdoor layups and 6-footers; and (c) Stef could take an ungainly opposing post off the dribble and get to the hoop for an and-one, which she did with some regularity.

In the Louisville game in December, Liv drove against Engstler twice in the first few minutes of the game and got 2 quick fouls on her, sending her to the bench for the rest of the first half. I wish we had seen that more often -- she probably could have done the same thing against Brink, but maybe not against Cunane. She certainly could not have done it against Boston.

I'm certainly not saying that if a gifted "banger" like Boston is available out of high school or in the transfer portal, Geno should pass her up. He shouldn't and he won't. But lesser players of that type are not necessarily a better option than players like Dorka and Amari. Imagine if by some miracle, UConn had Aneesha Morrow on the roster this year. She is a "banger" -- would she have turned the South Carolina game around? Would she have done better against Stanford or NC State than UConn's actual front court did? I don't think she would.

I will be interested to see the appetite of of Ice and Ayanna for physical play. My hunch is that they will be closer to the AE end of the physicality spectrum than to the Liv/Amari end. If that is true, then I think UConn's front court for 2022-23 is well situated even without any additional help from the transfer portal or elsewhere. Which doesn't mean that it will have an answer for Boston. The only answer for her is to limit her to some degree and have the rest of the Huskies defeat the rest of the Gamecocks by enough to make up for her advantage.
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Messages
1,064
Reaction Score
6,155
Definitely—-yes. The SC team we see today is just the beginning of what is to come in the Women’s game. Just like the men’s game, it will become a battle of the titans. Whoever wins that battle, cuts down the nets. It has become a more physical game. Teams with hopes of a NC, need to compete at that level.
 

victor64

retired Ohio teacher
Joined
Apr 9, 2016
Messages
890
Reaction Score
7,655
Boston is the main obstacle blocking UConn's chances of number 12 short term.
For whatever reason, playing zone did not seem to be a viable option.
Other than Edwards and maybe Patterson, I see no one currently that can handle Boston's physicality. DeBerry, Dorka and Gabriel seem to be a bad matchup.

Henderson killed UConn because Boston doesn't need the ball for the Gamecocks to be effective but she always needs attention..

But given all that, no they should not bring in a banger. Geno is picky about who he brings in. This should not change.

He has about 6 months to figure out how to handle the issue. Figuring out a zone that successfully defends the post area is my solution.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2016
Messages
12,833
Reaction Score
45,871
I'm starting this thread to facilitate discussion of a point that has been made in numerous posts since 10 PM EDT last night. There are many examples of posters making this point, but I have selected this one from @LoboDays' comment in the "Enough About Bad Recruiting" thread:

"If UConn wants to get back to winning NC's, they need to bring in post players who can defend players like Boston and Brink, get their share of rebounds against them (especially limit their offensive rebounds) and have the ability to score underneath when guarded...."

There are several points to be made in response to this, in my opinion:
  1. First of all, Aliyah Boston is a very special case. She is currently the Wilt Chamberlain or Kareem Abdul Jabbar of WCBB. Just as no opponent was able really to match up with either of them, even in the NBA, no one in WCBB has really matched up with Boston. It would have been nice if Geno had brought her to Storrs, but he didn't, and there really is no one else he might have recruited (including Brink, Cunane, Nalyssa Smith, Tamari Key, or Elizabeth Kitley) who could have neutralized her.
  2. UConn (specifically Liv and Aaliyah Edwards) did fine against both Brink and Cunane, neutralizing them sufficiently that UConn was able to win the game with its other assets. Tara Vandeveer in her postgame remarks specifically mentioned how physically Liv played against Stanford, and the Indiana coach said the same thing in her postgame remarks. Some have said that Liv didn't develop in her time at UConn, but I don't think opposing coaches would have been saying those things after their teams faced her in her freshman or sophomore years.
  3. Really, Liv's only deficiency at this point is her scoring -- her lack of an array of post moves or (more importantly) a truly reliable 15-foot jump shot that she can take 8 to 10 times per game and hit 50%. I wonder whether pro teams will be willing to take a chance on her developing those skills at the pro level. If I were a WNBA GM, I think I would take that risk in the second round of the draft, but not in the first round.
  4. There is no issue with AE's appetite for physical play. She is big enough to make that work (bigger than Morgan Tuck or Asjah Jones), but she needs to play with a 5 who can open up space for her in the paint by making midrange jump shots, and she needs to develop her own midrange jump shot to pull opposing posts out of the paint to defend her.
"I don't want to see a 6-5 post player lead the team in assists. That is a negative stat in my opinion.... Against the best, that is a losing strategy."

I think this is an outdated view of the game -- that every team needs a Shaquille O'Neal to be truly successful. Have you watched the Boston Celtics play lately? They don't have a center that plays like that, and they are 33-11 in the NBA since mid-December.

I remember that when UConn's starting lineup included Stef Dolson and Kelly Faris, a lot of fans were asking why Stef played in the high post and seemed to like passing more than scoring. There was such a chorus of these comments that Meg Culmo posed that question to Geno on The Geno Auriemma Show, reading a listener's question.

I remember his response very clearly, although not verbatim. It was almost exactly this:

Playing your big in the low post only works if the other four players are all major scoring threats who have to be guarded. If we put Stef in the low post, the other team would just leave Kelly unguarded and double Stef. Kelly would get any shot she wanted, but we would then have to rely on her jump shooting to win the game. That's not where we want to be. We want to get shots for Stef, and that is much easier if she is in the high post.

What he didn't say in that response (but everyone understood) is: (a) Stef did have a reliable jump shot from 15 feet, so no opponent could afford to leave her unguarded there (a contrast with both Liv and AE); (b) Stef was a fine passer -- at least as good as Liv -- and could facilitate the offense from the high post, allowing the guards not just to get jump shots but also to get backdoor layups and 6-footers; and (c) Stef could take an ungainly opposing post off the dribble and get to the hoop for an and-one, which she did with some regularity.

In the Louisville game in December, Liv drove against Engstler twice in the first few minutes of the game and got 2 quick fouls on her, sending her to the bench for the rest of the first half. I wish we had seen that more often -- she probably could have done the same thing against Brink, but maybe not against Cunane. She certainly could not have done it against Boston.

I'm certainly not saying that if a gifted "banger" like Boston is available out of high school or in the transfer portal, Geno should pass her up. He shouldn't and he won't. But lesser players of that type are not necessarily a better option than players like Dorka and Amari. Imagine if by some miracle, UConn had Aneesha Morrow on the roster this year. She is a "banger" -- would she have turned the South Carolina game around? Would she have done better against Stanford or NC State than UConn's actual front court did? I don't think she would.

I will be interested to see the appetite of of Ice and Ayanna for physical play. My hunch is that they will be closer to the AE end of the physicality spectrum than to the Liv/Amari end. If that is true, then I think UConn's front court for 2022-23 is well situated even without any additional help from the transfer portal or elsewhere. Which doesn't mean that it will have an answer for Boston. The only answer for her is to limit her to some degree and have the rest of the Huskies defeat the rest of the Gamecocks by enough to make up for her advantage.
Did UConn lose that game more because of Boston's play or because of Henderson who scored 26 points and the SC defense against the UConn guards............? If UConn was healthy and they could have freed Bueckers and Fudd to take uncontested threes who knows what would have happened......
 

Centerstream

Looking forward to next season
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
8,304
Reaction Score
31,970
Did UConn lose that game more because of Boston's play or because of Henderson who scored 26 points and the SC defense against the UConn guards............? If UConn was healthy and they could have freed Bueckers and Fudd to take uncontested threes who knows what would have happened......
Or because of the difference between team FTs? Look at the shooting stats and see that they were very close. I am not trying to say anything about the officiating but the difference between the scoring is the FTAs and FTMs.
Boston was held to 11 points and didn't reach double digits until the 4th quarter. I would guess that she was pretty well defended but made some FTs.
 
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
2,607
Reaction Score
11,540
Recruiting to stop one player who has one year left is not a winning strategy. Besides, Boston was contained fairly well in that game. Henderson is the one who beat us. One can certainly argue that containing Boston had a lot to do with that. I would like to see a rematch with Dorka available, Liv not injured, Azzi not sick and Evina not hobbling for a half. Having a Banger wouldn’t have helped all that much.
 

CocoHusky

1,000,001 BY points
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
17,208
Reaction Score
73,885
Couple of comments starting with the title of the post which is really a false straw man. By characterizing the need as a low post banger that sort of implies that this is the only need-banging in the low post. I would characterize the need this way: UCONN needs a skilled post player with the basketball skill level to be a part of the regular rotation or start with a bigger body than we currently have on the roster. I'm deliberately not specifying a height because if the player happens to be like Morgan Tuck at 6'2" I'd be over joyed! It is important to frame things this way because if I'm looking for just a banger then we could simply pack all that weight back on Piath and throw her down there in the post. It also would rule out a player like Dorka for filling the need but we both know that banging in the low post is not a Dorka strength.

Regarding your numbered points.
1) South Carolina lost two games this season so they can be beat and while Boston might be a generational talent we cannot concede defending her or attempting to slow her down. A bigger body will be useful in this regard.
2) Brink and Cunnane are entirely different body types that Boston-A bigger body will be useful in slowing them down also.
3) Firmly disagree with that first sentence but seeing as Liv is a few short weeks from graduation I spare her another detailed critique.
4) On the current roster AE is best equipped for banging but I agree she needs help.
 

Centerstream

Looking forward to next season
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
8,304
Reaction Score
31,970
We lost that game in the 1st half because we were destroyed by their offensive rebounds and very good defense on our guards. Neither our health or the refs or the phase of the moon had anything to do with it.
Or maybe it was the 15 made FTs in the second half vs. our 2 attempts.
 
Joined
Dec 3, 2012
Messages
739
Reaction Score
885
I'm starting this thread to facilitate discussion of a point that has been made in numerous posts since 10 PM EDT last night. There are many examples of posters making this point, but I have selected this one from @LoboDays' comment in the "Enough About Bad Recruiting" thread:

"If UConn wants to get back to winning NC's, they need to bring in post players who can defend players like Boston and Brink, get their share of rebounds against them (especially limit their offensive rebounds) and have the ability to score underneath when guarded...."

There are several points to be made in response to this, in my opinion:
  1. First of all, Aliyah Boston is a very special case. She is currently the Wilt Chamberlain or Kareem Abdul Jabbar of WCBB. Just as no opponent was able really to match up with either of them, even in the NBA, no one in WCBB has really matched up with Boston. It would have been nice if Geno had brought her to Storrs, but he didn't, and there really is no one else he might have recruited (including Brink, Cunane, Nalyssa Smith, Tamari Key, or Elizabeth Kitley) who could have neutralized her.
  2. UConn (specifically Liv and Aaliyah Edwards) did fine against both Brink and Cunane, neutralizing them sufficiently that UConn was able to win the game with its other assets. Tara Vandeveer in her postgame remarks specifically mentioned how physically Liv played against Stanford, and the Indiana coach said the same thing in her postgame remarks. Some have said that Liv didn't develop in her time at UConn, but I don't think opposing coaches would have been saying those things after their teams faced her in her freshman or sophomore years.
  3. Really, Liv's only deficiency at this point is her scoring -- her lack of an array of post moves or (more importantly) a truly reliable 15-foot jump shot that she can take 8 to 10 times per game and hit 50%. I wonder whether pro teams will be willing to take a chance on her developing those skills at the pro level. If I were a WNBA GM, I think I would take that risk in the second round of the draft, but not in the first round.
  4. There is no issue with AE's appetite for physical play. She is big enough to make that work (bigger than Morgan Tuck or Asjah Jones), but she needs to play with a 5 who can open up space for her in the paint by making midrange jump shots, and she needs to develop her own midrange jump shot to pull opposing posts out of the paint to defend her.
"I don't want to see a 6-5 post player lead the team in assists. That is a negative stat in my opinion.... Against the best, that is a losing strategy."

I think this is an outdated view of the game -- that every team needs a Shaquille O'Neal to be truly successful. Have you watched the Boston Celtics play lately? They don't have a center that plays like that, and they are 33-11 in the NBA since mid-December.

I remember that when UConn's starting lineup included Stef Dolson and Kelly Faris, a lot of fans were asking why Stef played in the high post and seemed to like passing more than scoring. There was such a chorus of these comments that Meg Culmo posed that question to Geno on The Geno Auriemma Show, reading a listener's question.

I remember his response very clearly, although not verbatim. It was almost exactly this:

Playing your big in the low post only works if the other four players are all major scoring threats who have to be guarded. If we put Stef in the low post, the other team would just leave Kelly unguarded and double Stef. Kelly would get any shot she wanted, but we would then have to rely on her jump shooting to win the game. That's not where we want to be. We want to get shots for Stef, and that is much easier if she is in the high post.

What he didn't say in that response (but everyone understood) is: (a) Stef did have a reliable jump shot from 15 feet, so no opponent could afford to leave her unguarded there (a contrast with both Liv and AE); (b) Stef was a fine passer -- at least as good as Liv -- and could facilitate the offense from the high post, allowing the guards not just to get jump shots but also to get backdoor layups and 6-footers; and (c) Stef could take an ungainly opposing post off the dribble and get to the hoop for an and-one, which she did with some regularity.

In the Louisville game in December, Liv drove against Engstler twice in the first few minutes of the game and got 2 quick fouls on her, sending her to the bench for the rest of the first half. I wish we had seen that more often -- she probably could have done the same thing against Brink, but maybe not against Cunane. She certainly could not have done it against Boston.

I'm certainly not saying that if a gifted "banger" like Boston is available out of high school or in the transfer portal, Geno should pass her up. He shouldn't and he won't. But lesser players of that type are not necessarily a better option than players like Dorka and Amari. Imagine if by some miracle, UConn had Aneesha Morrow on the roster this year. She is a "banger" -- would she have turned the South Carolina game around? Would she have done better against Stanford or NC State than UConn's actual front court did? I don't think she would.

I will be interested to see the appetite of of Ice and Ayanna for physical play. My hunch is that they will be closer to the AE end of the physicality spectrum than to the Liv/Amari end. If that is true, then I think UConn's front court for 2022-23 is well situated even without any additional help from the transfer portal or elsewhere. Which doesn't mean that it will have an answer for Boston. The only answer for her is to limit her to some degree and have the rest of the Huskies defeat the rest of the Gamecocks by enough to make up for her advantage.
Stef was not just a good passer but phenomenal passer, one of the best bigs. I personally think Stef was better than Liv. Just my opinion.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
437
Reaction Score
2,039
Short answer - yes
a BIG Yes! And, truthfully, we've needed one since Tina (Yes, we were tremendously successful with Stewie & crew, and Stef as well), but, we sure could use a Jamelle, only three or four inches taller, that has no fear, and can keep her opponent away from the basket!
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2013
Messages
4,327
Reaction Score
19,390
I'm starting this thread to facilitate discussion of a point that has been made in numerous posts since 10 PM EDT last night. There are many examples of posters making this point, but I have selected this one from @LoboDays' comment in the "Enough About Bad Recruiting" thread:

"If UConn wants to get back to winning NC's, they need to bring in post players who can defend players like Boston and Brink, get their share of rebounds against them (especially limit their offensive rebounds) and have the ability to score underneath when guarded...."

There are several points to be made in response to this, in my opinion:
  1. First of all, Aliyah Boston is a very special case. She is currently the Wilt Chamberlain or Kareem Abdul Jabbar of WCBB. Just as no opponent was able really to match up with either of them, even in the NBA, no one in WCBB has really matched up with Boston. It would have been nice if Geno had brought her to Storrs, but he didn't, and there really is no one else he might have recruited (including Brink, Cunane, Nalyssa Smith, Tamari Key, or Elizabeth Kitley) who could have neutralized her.
  2. UConn (specifically Liv and Aaliyah Edwards) did fine against both Brink and Cunane, neutralizing them sufficiently that UConn was able to win the game with its other assets. Tara Vandeveer in her postgame remarks specifically mentioned how physically Liv played against Stanford, and the Indiana coach said the same thing in her postgame remarks. Some have said that Liv didn't develop in her time at UConn, but I don't think opposing coaches would have been saying those things after their teams faced her in her freshman or sophomore years.
  3. Really, Liv's only deficiency at this point is her scoring -- her lack of an array of post moves or (more importantly) a truly reliable 15-foot jump shot that she can take 8 to 10 times per game and hit 50%. I wonder whether pro teams will be willing to take a chance on her developing those skills at the pro level. If I were a WNBA GM, I think I would take that risk in the second round of the draft, but not in the first round.
  4. There is no issue with AE's appetite for physical play. She is big enough to make that work (bigger than Morgan Tuck or Asjah Jones), but she needs to play with a 5 who can open up space for her in the paint by making midrange jump shots, and she needs to develop her own midrange jump shot to pull opposing posts out of the paint to defend her.
"I don't want to see a 6-5 post player lead the team in assists. That is a negative stat in my opinion.... Against the best, that is a losing strategy."

I think this is an outdated view of the game -- that every team needs a Shaquille O'Neal to be truly successful. Have you watched the Boston Celtics play lately? They don't have a center that plays like that, and they are 33-11 in the NBA since mid-December.

I remember that when UConn's starting lineup included Stef Dolson and Kelly Faris, a lot of fans were asking why Stef played in the high post and seemed to like passing more than scoring. There was such a chorus of these comments that Meg Culmo posed that question to Geno on The Geno Auriemma Show, reading a listener's question.

I remember his response very clearly, although not verbatim. It was almost exactly this:

Playing your big in the low post only works if the other four players are all major scoring threats who have to be guarded. If we put Stef in the low post, the other team would just leave Kelly unguarded and double Stef. Kelly would get any shot she wanted, but we would then have to rely on her jump shooting to win the game. That's not where we want to be. We want to get shots for Stef, and that is much easier if she is in the high post.

What he didn't say in that response (but everyone understood) is: (a) Stef did have a reliable jump shot from 15 feet, so no opponent could afford to leave her unguarded there (a contrast with both Liv and AE); (b) Stef was a fine passer -- at least as good as Liv -- and could facilitate the offense from the high post, allowing the guards not just to get jump shots but also to get backdoor layups and 6-footers; and (c) Stef could take an ungainly opposing post off the dribble and get to the hoop for an and-one, which she did with some regularity.

In the Louisville game in December, Liv drove against Engstler twice in the first few minutes of the game and got 2 quick fouls on her, sending her to the bench for the rest of the first half. I wish we had seen that more often -- she probably could have done the same thing against Brink, but maybe not against Cunane. She certainly could not have done it against Boston.

I'm certainly not saying that if a gifted "banger" like Boston is available out of high school or in the transfer portal, Geno should pass her up. He shouldn't and he won't. But lesser players of that type are not necessarily a better option than players like Dorka and Amari. Imagine if by some miracle, UConn had Aneesha Morrow on the roster this year. She is a "banger" -- would she have turned the South Carolina game around? Would she have done better against Stanford or NC State than UConn's actual front court did? I don't think she would.

I will be interested to see the appetite of of Ice and Ayanna for physical play. My hunch is that they will be closer to the AE end of the physicality spectrum than to the Liv/Amari end. If that is true, then I think UConn's front court for 2022-23 is well situated even without any additional help from the transfer portal or elsewhere. Which doesn't mean that it will have an answer for Boston. The only answer for her is to limit her to some degree and have the rest of the Huskies defeat the rest of the Gamecocks by enough to make up for her advantage.
You make a lot of good points here. You're right, there are no big posts coming down the road, either from the portal or in the next 2-3 classes out of HS with Boston's combination of size, strength, and motor. She's an outlier. So looking at what UConn DOES have for at least next year, I'm very optimistic that Brady is custom made for that Ono/Dolson high post position. Once she gets accustomed to the pace of UConn's system, she's a knock down shooter who will pull the opposing post out and open up things inside for Edwards. And they can be interchangeable for AE to pop out because Brady will be a better low post option than AE because of her hands and footwork. And yes, I'm in wait and see mode on DeBerry until I see if she puts in the work this summer to become an impact player, especially on defense. But no, IMO they won't have anyone ready for next season to handle Boston without a lot of help. Sorry I forgot to answer your question, YES they need another big banger if they can find one or if Juhasz can somehow turn into one.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
94
Reaction Score
606
Balance. Balance wins.

Defense. Shooting. Passing. Rebounding. Shot blocking. Setting good screens (btw, the screener has to stay still and it's the dribbler's responsibility to run their defender into the stationary screener - not often done well nowadays).

We were woefully deficient in a few categories and yes we need to shore those up. But always have five players that can check as many of the above boxes as well as possible.

We don't need to copy So. Carolina to beat So. Carolina.
 
Joined
Sep 11, 2013
Messages
811
Reaction Score
2,750
The box score does not lie:
Total rebounds SC 49 Uconn 24
Offensive rebounds SC 21 Uconn 1
Free throws made SC 17 Uconn 1 ?????

I am proud of our girls, they gutted it out right to the last game. They were suppose to lose to
North Carolina State, they did not, they were supposed to lose to Stanford, they did not. They
lost to South Carolina in the Finals. With all they went through, I am proud of this team. They competed
right to the last game. We got beat by the best team.
 

JoePgh

Cranky pants and wise acre
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
3,653
Reaction Score
21,270
Couple of comments starting with the title of the post which is really a false straw man. By characterizing the need as a low post banger that sort of implies that this is the only need-banging in the low post. I would characterize the need this way: UCONN needs a skilled post player with the basketball skill level to be a part of the regular rotation or start with a bigger body than we currently have on the roster. I'm deliberately not specifying a height because if the player happens to be like Morgan Tuck at 6'2" I'd be over joyed! It is important to frame things this way because if I'm looking for just a banger then we could simply pack all that weight back on Piath and throw her down there in the post. It also would rule out a player like Dorka for filling the need but we both know that banging in the low post is not a Dorka strength.

Regarding your numbered points.
1) South Carolina lost two games this season so they can be beat and while Boston might be a generational talent we cannot concede defending her or attempting to slow her down. A bigger body will be useful in this regard.
2) Brink and Cunnane are entirely different body types that Boston-A bigger body will be useful in slowing them down also.
3) Firmly disagree with that first sentence but seeing as Liv is a few short weeks from graduation I spare her another detailed critique.
4) On the current roster AE is best equipped for banging but I agree she needs help.
I can understand your point of view, and I appreciate your detailed response, but if you are looking for a player like Morgan Tuck, then what is your issue with Aaliyah Edwards? I think they are very similar, and that AE has a chance to be as good as Morgan by the time she graduates. For one thing, she is faster than Morgan and can defend on the perimeter better than Morgan. At this point, she doesn't have the rebounding and boxing-out skills that Tuck had, but she may develop them in the next two years.

Morgan was out with an injury in her sophomore year, so a direct comparison is difficult, but I suspect that if she had played, sophomore Morgan would not have been notably better than sophomore AE was in the second half of the season. If senior Morgan were playing in Sunday night's game instead of AE, it would not have changed the outcome of the game.
 
Joined
Sep 16, 2011
Messages
95
Reaction Score
162
Definitely—-yes. The SC team we see today is just the beginning of what is to come in the Women’s game. Just like the men’s game, it will become a battle of the titans. Whoever wins that battle, cuts down the nets. It has become a more physical game. Teams with hopes of a NC, need to compete at that level.
Agree. The direction of the game appears to be dominant front courts, height and strength.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
35,466
Reaction Score
31,348
Definitely—-yes. The SC team we see today is just the beginning of what is to come in the Women’s game. Just like the men’s game, it will become a battle of the titans. Whoever wins that battle, cuts down the nets. It has become a more physical game. Teams with hopes of a NC, need to compete at that level.
When they call all the fouls on the weaker, smaller team, then no one has a chance.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2013
Messages
4,327
Reaction Score
19,390
Boston is the main obstacle blocking UConn's chances of number 12 short term.
For whatever reason, playing zone did not seem to be a viable option.
Other than Edwards and maybe Patterson, I see no one currently that can handle Boston's physicality. DeBerry, Dorka and Gabriel seem to be a bad matchup.

Henderson killed UConn because Boston doesn't need the ball for the Gamecocks to be effective but she always needs attention..

But given all that, no they should not bring in a banger. Geno is picky about who he brings in. This should not change.

He has about 6 months to figure out how to handle the issue. Figuring out a zone that successfully defends the post area is my solution.
I too was kind of surprised GA didn't at least give a zone a try. Yes it's harder to box out when playing it, but they couldn't in man to man anyways.
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Messages
1,064
Reaction Score
6,155
Balance. Balance wins.

Defense. Shooting. Passing. Rebounding. Shot blocking. Setting good screens (btw, the screener has to stay still and it's the dribbler's responsibility to run their defender into the stationary screener - not often done well nowadays).

We were woefully deficient in a few categories and yes we need to shore those up. But always have five players that can check as many of the above boxes as well as possible.

We don't need to copy So. Carolina to beat So. Carolina.
SC has no weakness. That’s balance. I’d copy it.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2013
Messages
4,327
Reaction Score
19,390
Did UConn lose that game more because of Boston's play or because of Henderson who scored 26 points and the SC defense against the UConn guards............? If UConn was healthy and they could have freed Bueckers and Fudd to take uncontested threes who knows what would have happened......
The reason UConn couldn't free up PB and Fudd for 3s was because SC allowed their bigs to jump out on the high screens so they couldn't shoot over them. SC knew UConn had no inside offensive game and could sell out defensively. One example was the outside shot Fudd tried to take that Saxton jumped out to block.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2013
Messages
4,327
Reaction Score
19,390
Or because of the difference between team FTs? Look at the shooting stats and see that they were very close. I am not trying to say anything about the officiating but the difference between the scoring is the FTAs and FTMs.
Boston was held to 11 points and didn't reach double digits until the 4th quarter. I would guess that she was pretty well defended but made some FTs.
You don't go to the foul line much if you don't go to the rack much. You have to draw contact by taking it at them.
 

Online statistics

Members online
422
Guests online
2,905
Total visitors
3,327

Forum statistics

Threads
157,162
Messages
4,085,968
Members
9,982
Latest member
CJasmer


Top Bottom