Evina Finishes Rehab Thread morphed into another Who Starts Next Year Thread

[winlots]

No offense intended here; I have a ton of respect for the wisdom I see displayed consistently on the BY. I DO have trouble understanding all the concern about whether someone is a "3" or a "4" etc etc.
Played on some mighty good championship teams and we never even thought about who was a what: we just played basketball together and won. Granted, am old school. But open to being enlightened by others here.

 

[Carnac]

I would think that it is very important to get Piath up to speed and have her playing meaningful minutes by the end of the season. Shes big and needs work however you dont find girls like her often and imo the sooner she is able to compete on the college level the farther UConn will go.

I think players with experience start next season so I would think if healthy and if up to speed, Ono CW Anna and Griff and Westbrook will start. Paige Edwards Mir and Nina will see alot of time. Those 4 are very talented and without any pressure they can play and learn the system. Are they ready to start. I dont think so not on UConn will all their talent. If some one gets hurt then Geno will start them.

It is very important to get these freshman experienced, confident and developed. Starting one of them means you live with their mistakes and they could be overwhelmed. Dont forget we are playing in the Big East which is a tuffer conference then the AAC.

Ono will be very dominate this season and much improved. Anna showed up how good she is becoming towards the end of last season. She has tremendous potential and great fundementals. CW will bounce back she has too much talent. Westbrook is really really good. It will take her some time to learn the UConn system and after sitting out a season it may take her some time to get back up to speed from where she was. She's gonna be really good on this team with the players surrounding her. Griff with a consistent outside shot is going to be special. Perhaps a 1st team AA and POY.

Piath is big strong and has great potential and wants to become a star. At UConn they will do everything they can to get her up to speed. Shes a difference maker underneath. Remember one thing this season....inch by inch its a sinch...yard by yard its very hard.

Those 5 are my projected starters too. Others may disagree, and that's OK. We like who we like.

 

[donalddoowop]

After watching Westbrook her first two years at Tennessee, I believe she will be a better shooting guard than a point guard. I read on VolNation when she was a sophomore that she did not want to play point guard. She knows how to score.

 

[DEpup]

After watching Westbrook her first two years at Tennessee, I believe she will be a better shooting guard than a point guard. I read on VolNation when she was a sophomore that she did not want to play point guard. She knows how to score.

Maybe she didn't want to play PG with that motley crew....

 

[Biff]

Maybe she didn't want to play PG with that motley crew....

Heck who would? These guys couldn't rebound worth a damn.

 

[hoophuskee]

No offense intended here; I have a ton of respect for the wisdom I see displayed consistently on the BY. I DO have trouble understanding all the concern about whether someone is a "3" or a "4" etc etc.
Played on some mighty good championship teams and we never even thought about who was a what: we just played basketball together and won. Granted, am old school. But open to being enlightened by others here.

Never mind defense but offense-
This past year Meg Walker was the PF.
Then look at someone like Morgan Tuck who was the PF. Look at her sr year vs Meg Walker's jr.
Meg Walker 35% of her shot attempts were from 3. As for her 2 pt attempts she shot 49%.
Morg Tuck 25% of her shot attempts were from 3. As for her 2 pt attempts she shot 58%.

Meg Walker was forced - because she was so small- to take a lot of 3's. How many elite teams have their PF taking so many 3's? Unless you have Maya Moore. By taking so many 3's from their PF it's clear they were playing a different style vs what Morgan Tuck was doing (i/e scoring more from 2 - probably much more scoring in the paint.)

Would you agree there is a big difference between the 2?
---------------
Odd I would think "old school" would be more likely to see separation between a PF and a SF.

 

[hoophuskee]

1--- I have always been in favor of playing a style in which the other team has to match up to you rather than being forced to match up with the other team. That's why I'm usually in favor of playing the best players . . . if you can.

2--- I think Evina looks awkward as a PG. Though I have only seen her just a little. And I don't like her as a PG or SG as much because I don't think she has the lateral quickness to keep quicker guards out of the paint. In addition how many minutes in big games does CWilliams get - because she is the current "SG." And Paige is going to play 25-30.

3--- I like her best at SF but I like Anna a lot at SF too. I would love love love to play both but regardless who starts - Paige imo is the clear hands down pg that deserves 25 + minutes a game and 30 - 35 in big games.

4--- With the above said I can't see Edwards getting many minutes at SF at all. Because I haven't even accounted for Griff, Mir or Muhl to take positions 1, or 2 or 3. I can't wait to see Edwards. Again haven't been able to see her much just like Evina but I'd think right off the bat that the combo of Paige, Evina, CWill, and Anna are better than Edwards at the 1-3 positions. The top 3 fundamentals of offensive basketball are "Shoot, pass, dribble." I would guess the 4 I mentioned are better than Edwards at the SF when it comes to this.

And I would think Griff is a better perimeter defender if that is needed - and this excludes Mir and Muhl whatever they bring. I just don't see Edwards as a SF. - Though I can't wait to see. so many new players and options.

5--- Paige has got to see big minutes in big games. I realize she might not start but you have to play your best -- and she will be one of the 5 best - at least. I don';t buy any of this "you have to break her in slowly" stuff. -- And just because she doesn't start doesn't mean she is being broken in slowly.

 

[SVCBeercats]

3--- I like her best at SF ...

I think she prefers IFOCOM, in front of camera or mirror.

 

[jabstep]

My guess for the starting lineup and approximate minutes per game:

PG Westbrook (27) Bueckers (25)

SG Williams (26) Muhl (13)

SF Makurat (27) McLean (7)

PF Griffin (23) Edwards (19)

C ONO (27) Gabriel (6)

Geno must figure he finally has the numbers to press and make it a full court game. We saw glimpses of them getting out into the open court at the end of last season when they were playing their best basketball.

To play that way, you need to be able to defend, rebound, and get out in transition. Geno will start his best defensive team. Anna rebounds well for a three and is terrific in the open court with her ball handling, passing, and shooting the three in transition. Aubrey is made for that style of play. ONO is a given. CW showed signs of playing downhill at the end of last season, taking it strong to the hoop, and is an excellent rebounder for her position. I have great expectations for Evina, and thrilled that her rehab is over.

Offense should not be a problem for this team no matter what the alignment. With all the great passers, I just hope someone takes it upon herself to shoot the ball. It will be fun to watch the magic unfold.

This alignment provides adequate size at all positions and puts them in their natural positions out of the gate.

The Freshmen will need to adapt to the faster tempo and the need to play intense defense. That will hold them back a bit initially, especially if the season gets off to a disjointed start. Ultimately they will be able to go smaller with Bueckers and bigger with Edwards. My expectations for the other Freshmen are more muted but I would not be shocked if Nika earned more minutes with her passing or Mir with her defense. Gabriel is more of a long term project but there will be times when we need a big to mix it up inside.

Not to disagree with you but we should consider outside shooting in your starting 5. The best 3 point shooters on the team I think would be Paige and Anna. This past year without a lot of size we depended on the 3 point shot. When CW was in a shooting funk they would play off of her and she wouldn't drive to the hoop as much. It made us easier to defend. We don't have much size or rebounding unless Aubrey or Edwards starts. We need a big jump from Liv. I think the offense will struggle early in the year until they figure it out. I think the defense-first with a fast break offense will work the best. We have the troops do it this year.

 

[tchalla1]

I think she prefers IFOCOM, in front of camera or mirror.

Non sequitur..... what are you making reference to?

 

[Carnac]

After watching Westbrook her first two years at Tennessee, I believe she will be a better shooting guard than a point guard. I read on VolNation when she was a sophomore that she did not want to play point guard. She knows how to score.

Don, allow me to ask you and everyone else a question. What criteria did/do you use when selecting the 5 starters for the upcoming season? There are folks here that think Anna should not start. Some that think Paige will start day/game 1. Still others think that Griffin should come off the bench, and Edwards should start. Every poster here has their own personal starting 5. Some of us have the same 5.

I find it interesting that so many knowledgeable UConn fans see these players differently. Going by some of the comments I’m reading, It’s obvious that we’re not using the same set of metrics when assessing our players. I look at the starting 5 some propose, and wonder what are they thinking.

Not suggesting they’re wrong in their assessment, but guessing that they are placing more emphasis and assumptions in other areas than I am. Like assuming some of the freshmen are going to step in and start day 1, and make the necessary adjustments in 3 weeks of practice. It’s a HUGE step up to elite level basketball from high school. One that is usually not made overnight. Again, pardon me, but I’m from Missouri.

They have not had one practice together to evaluate what the freshmen can do at this level against older experienced “elite“ players. They have to prove they can perform at a high level and make plays consistently before any thought can be given to make them a starter.

Could Geno be right when he said that boneyarders don’t have a clue? Of course I beg to differ. We have some very astute fans here that have keen insight and judgement. I think winlots and a few others share my concerns.

 

[winlots]

Never mind defense but offense-
This past year Meg Walker was the PF.
Then look at someone like Morgan Tuck who was the PF. Look at her sr year vs Meg Walker's jr.
Meg Walker 35% of her shot attempts were from 3. As for her 2 pt attempts she shot 49%.
Morg Tuck 25% of her shot attempts were from 3. As for her 2 pt attempts she shot 58%.

Meg Walker was forced - because she was so small- to take a lot of 3's. How many elite teams have their PF taking so many 3's? Unless you have Maya Moore. By taking so many 3's from their PF it's clear they were playing a different style vs what Morgan Tuck was doing (i/e scoring more from 2 - probably much more scoring in the paint.)

Would you agree there is a big difference between the 2?
---------------
Odd I would think "old school" would be more likely to see separation between a PF and a SF.

'HOOPHUSKEE: not my first "odd." Kinda thrive on it. As noted originally, once the ball it thrown up by the ref, I just like getting after it as a team, with no concern in the world about"position numbers." Basketball is a game name which says it all: get BALL, and put in BASKET

 

[UConnCat]

2--- I think Evina looks awkward as a PG. Though I have only seen her just a little. And I don't like her as a PG or SG as much because I don't think she has the lateral quickness to keep quicker guards out of the paint. In addition how many minutes in big games does CWilliams get - because she is the current "SG." And Paige is going to play 25-30.

Here's Geno's thoughts on Evina before the start of last season and before her waiver was denied:

"I don't know where her biggest strengths lie. I don't know whether Evina wants to be, or sees herself, as a playmaker and then a scorer, or a scorer and then a playmaker. She works hard, I know that. Defensively, I don't know where she fits in. Right now we're going to wait and see."

I look forward to hearing Geno's thoughts on where he sees Evina playing. Maybe he's still not certain. Like you, I'm not a fan of Evina playing primarily at the point.

 

[JonathanXIV]

Never mind defense but offense-
This past year Meg Walker was the PF.
Then look at someone like Morgan Tuck who was the PF. Look at her sr year vs Meg Walker's jr.
Meg Walker 35% of her shot attempts were from 3. As for her 2 pt attempts she shot 49%.
Morg Tuck 25% of her shot attempts were from 3. As for her 2 pt attempts she shot 58%.

Meg Walker was forced - because she was so small- to take a lot of 3's. How many elite teams have their PF taking so many 3's? Unless you have Maya Moore. By taking so many 3's from their PF it's clear they were playing a different style vs what Morgan Tuck was doing (i/e scoring more from 2 - probably much more scoring in the paint.)

Would you agree there is a big difference between the 2?
---------------
Odd I would think "old school" would be more likely to see separation between a PF and a SF.

Disagree that Megan was "forced" to take a lot of 3's due to her height. She took that many 3's because she was effective at them and because the game has changed to emphasis the 3 point shot. Her size has little to do with it.

 

[Ozimoto]

I don't get into the starting line up discussions because I am not a basketball savant. I played the game (not particularly well) enough to know that you can look at individual player skill sets and put the "best five" on the court based on statistics and individual skills but if they don't play well together, they will be bested by a group of five who may not be as impressive but who work together.

Because I am not privy to what goes on in practice and the personal interactions of the players, I can't do more than make a WAG as to who will start. Since I don't like being wrong, I just don't engage.

 

[BobbyJ]

I don't get into the starting line up discussions because I am not a basketball savant. I played the game (not particularly well) enough to know that you can look at individual player skill sets and put the "best five" on the court based on statistics and individual skills but if they don't play well together, they will be bested by a group of five who may not be as impressive but who work together.

Because I am not privy to what goes on in practice and the personal interactions of the players, I can't do more than make a WAG as to who will start. Since I don't like being wrong, I just don't engage.

Please stop interjecting common sense into this discussion.

 

[dogged1]

I don't get into the starting line up discussions because I am not a basketball savant. I played the game (not particularly well) enough to know that you can look at individual player skill sets and put the "best five" on the court based on statistics and individual skills but if they don't play well together, they will be bested by a group of five who may not be as impressive but who work together.

Because I am not privy to what goes on in practice and the personal interactions of the players, I can't do more than make a WAG as to who will start. Since I don't like being wrong, I just don't engage.

You'r not alone in that boat.

 

[Carnac]

Chasing rebounds from the perimeter is different than fighting for rebounds in the post. If Auriemma wanted her to fight for rebounds in the post she has the physical tools for accomplishing that. Makurat would have trouble beating Dangerfield in chasing a rebound; Dangerfield would have trouble fighting Makurat for a rebound in the post. Last year Makurat would have had to mainly chase rebounds, not box out and fight for them.

Not making predictions about who will start or how they would be used, outside of pointing out that Makurat is the most physically suited for the four out Westbrook, Bueckers or Williams.

On edit: Once again, not predicting Makurat will be used this way, but imagine our transition offense if Makurat became responsible for defensive rebounding. You would have Dolson/Walton-esque outlet passes to Bueckers or Westbrook, who then would find one of many great athletes running the floor.

I agree with these observations, as do the others below that have given it a like. I understand and accept the fact that people see things/players differently. It’s like a bang bang play in the paint as a player is driving to the basket, and a ref blows their whistle. Some see a blocking foul while others see a charge. Everyone sees the same play, but they see it differently. I think the same can be said about player assessment. I find the different opinions of Anna interesting.

 

[dogged1]

Posts derail but c’mon, people. There is a current and active thread about next year’s starting lineup already.

Let’s try this again...

CONGRATULATIONS EVINA FOR FINISHING REHAB! IT HAS BEEN A LONG YEAR HAVING TWO KNEE SURGERIES AND WE’RE ALL EXCITED THAT YOU’RE FINALLY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF IT!

Well you tried @Argonaut. Just so you don't feel too bad:
Conrats Evina. Well done. Looking forward to seeing you healthy and on the court as a Husky this year.

 

[JoePgh]

Disagree that Megan was "forced" to take a lot of 3's due to her height. She took that many 3's because she was effective at them and because the game has changed to emphasis the 3 point shot. Her size has little to do with it.

I agree with you that Megan took 3's because that was one of her major strengths and Geno wanted her to use that asset. Her inside play is where she was "forced" to play a role that she wasn't necessarily the best at. She never had the physical strength that Morgan had and still has. Morgan is only an inch or so taller than Meg, but her arm strength is probably double that of Megan. Morgan also has the lower body strength to hold a position under the boards that Megan would have trouble doing.

I find it interesting that when the 5 and 4 for UConn were Stewie and Morgan, no one ever said that the team lacked rebounding ability or size, and no one ever said (as Kara Lawson did about the Gabby / Pheesa / Lou combo the next year) that "UConn's front court can be pushed around." Stewie and Morgan (6-4 and a generous 6-2) were not really much bigger than Olivia and Megan (6-5 and a generous 6-1), but Morgan in particular was never going to be pushed around, and was usually going to pull down the rebound when she and an opponent both went up for it.

From what I have seen, Aaliyah Edwards may share the "can't push me" genes, and is therefore a candidate to be the 4 at UConn, possibly starting in the coming year.

 

[Alydar]

Disagree that Megan was "forced" to take a lot of 3's due to her height. She took that many 3's because she was effective at them and because the game has changed to emphasis the 3 point shot. Her size has little to do with it.

Agree. Her size had little to do with it. Was Stewart "too small to play the 5" because she took so many 3 's compared to Dolson?
I also agree with whomever said that way too much attention is given to slotting players into a position. What about how a player fits with the other 4 players on the court? Who do you start, a player with a couple of years playing experience who knows the system and has played excellently with the other 4 players for 2 years? Or a freshman pg who is probably the most talented player on the roster but who is just learning the system and her team mates' skills and abilities. UConn's system at both ends of the court require precise movement and timing which requires untold hours/years of practice to perfect.
It isn't necessarily the best player who starts, it's the best 5 players together.

And having said that I truly believe that Bueckers will be the starting and finishing pg at some point of her freshman season. Not because of her transcendent ball skills but because of her ability to instantly see 2 or 3 seconds ahead of everyone else on the court.

Bueckers knows... and she knows she knows.

 

[donalddoowop]

Don, allow me to ask you and everyone else a question. What criteria did/do you use when selecting the 5 starters for the upcoming season? There are folks here that think Anna should not start. Some that think Paige will start day/game 1. Still others think that Griffin should come off the bench, and Edwards should start. Every poster here has their own personal starting 5. Some of us have the same 5.

I find it interesting that so many knowledgeable UConn fans see these players differently. Going by some of the comments I’m reading, It’s obvious that we’re not using the same set of metrics when assessing our players. I look at the starting 5 some propose, and wonder what are they thinking.

Not suggesting they’re wrong in their assessment, but guessing that they are placing more emphasis and assumptions in other areas than I am. Like assuming some of the freshmen are going to step in and start day 1, and make the necessary adjustments in 3 weeks of practice. It’s a HUGE step up to elite level basketball from high school. One that is usually not made overnight. Again, pardon me, but I’m from Missouri.

They have not had one practice together to evaluate what the freshmen can do at this level against older experienced “elite“ players. They have to prove they can perform at a high level and make plays consistently before any thought can be given to make them a starter.

Could Geno be right when he said that boneyarders don’t have a clue? Of course I beg to differ. We have some very astute fans here that have keen insight and judgement. I think winlots and a few others share my concerns.

I don't really like to think much about who will start because I don't know what is happening at practice. Also, I don't know what players have improved or who has improved. Maybe Geno is right.

 

[Rb335]

PG- Westbrook. Starts at pg but shifts when Paige enters. (25-30 mpg)

SG- Williams- the most experienced returner. This is her spot and she’ll get 30-35 mpg.

SF- Makurat. She fits the KML/KLS stretch the floor wing prototype. I wouldn’t be surprised to see her average 17+ ppg and see 30 mpg. She’s the player I’m most excited about for the upcoming season.

PF- Griffin. Experience wins out to start the season. Hopefully she has expanded her offensive game. 20-22 mpg

C- Nelson-Ododa- she is our only experienced player with size. She is going to be so important to the success of the team. 30-35 mpg.

First off the bench should be Paige. The good news is our starting 1-3 can all be interchangeable at those positions... so when Paige is in, Paige is the PG. likely 25mpg as a freshman.

Edwards could be our surprise player. She could realistically start but I think her services will be used from the bench. She is most needed as a 4 this year so that is where I expect to see her.

that gives us a rotation of 7. I’m not so sure where the remaining 3 freshman fit in. In a crowded backcourt, it will be fun to see Nika compete for minutes. Paith could provide huge minutes as a breather for Ono, but I don’t think she’s college ready. Mir is a big question mark to me. She could find herself playing a ton, or stuck fighting for time on the court.

it will be interesting with so many new faces

 

[hoophuskee]

Agree. Her size had little to do with it. Was Stewart "too small to play the 5" because she took so many 3 's compared to Dolson?
I also agree with whomever said that way too much attention is given to slotting players into a position. . . . .
It isn't necessarily the best player who starts, it's the best 5 players together.

And having said that I truly believe that Bueckers will be the starting and finishing pg at some point of her freshman season. Not because of her transcendent ball skills but because of her ability to instantly see 2 or 3 seconds ahead of everyone else on the court.

Bueckers knows... and she knows she knows.

In regards to the bold-- I disagree with you jonathan and anyone else that doesn't think her game was forced. OFC it wasn't forced vs the worse teams but vs the elite teams-- absolutely. And it had everything to do with size. Why do you think teams that were big and elite in part had so much success vs UCONN these past couple of years? And what do the better big sized elite teams usually do pretty well defensively? They defend the paint. It's not all about Walker and her game. It's also about the opposition and how they want to defend. When they go "big" they are "challenging" the small Meg Walkers to beat them from the perimeter while they ensure Meg Walker will get very few inside baskets, They force Meg Walker into being a one-dimensional offensive player. It's okay to be one-dimensional but some one-dimensional players are invincible to stop. Other aren't. Which is why in part Meg Walker went 8th in the draft and not 1st, 2nd or 3rd etc. Though 8th is very good.

As far as you bringing up Stewart? I say this in fun-- What? What? Are you saying you can't recognize the difference between Stewart's inside game vs Walker's? I'm sure you do - so scratch that question and I just got to ask why are you comparing Stewart to Dolson as if it has anything to do with my post about Walker being "forced?" What does that have a thing to do with my comment about Walker? You realize Stewart could score inside vs anyone, right? You realize Walker can't, right? I just don't understand how you're analogy of Stewart vs Dolson makes any sense vs Walker. Stewart could score anytime vs anyone inside and out as she got increasingly older. Walker couldn't. Why couldn't Walker score inside vs the elite teams much? Because she was too small. So yeah size has everything to do with it. It's not just about height though. Size also means bulk. Walker had none. . Am I missing something here? Because I don't know why you and joanathan and others don't agree. And please don't take my post as being "hostile." It isn't. The other stuff on your posts and overall with Paige I'm with you on. Big time.


In terms if the italics I agree with you. It is also fun to project who would play best with one another. Which combination of 5 is best. That's why I'm so excited about this upcoming year. With 6 new players -- so many possibilities.

As far as the underlined, I'm with ya 100%. Paige is going to be tremendous though I won't be as specific as you are. At worst she'll be an Honorable Mention A/A. As a freshman pg at UCONN, we are going to see something that we've never seen before. She is part of that 5 you spoke of. And others will make her better too.

 

[hoophuskee]

Don, allow me to ask you and everyone else a question. What criteria did/do you use when selecting the 5 starters for the upcoming season? There are folks here that think Anna should not start. Some that think Paige will start day/game 1. Still others think that Griffin should come off the bench, and Edwards should start. Every poster here has their own personal starting 5. Some of us have the same 5.

I find it interesting that so many knowledgeable UConn fans see these players differently. Going by some of the comments I’m reading, It’s obvious that we’re not using the same set of metrics when assessing our players. I look at the starting 5 some propose, and wonder what are they thinking.

Not suggesting they’re wrong in their assessment, but guessing that they are placing more emphasis and assumptions in other areas than I am. Like assuming some of the freshmen are going to step in and start day 1, and make the necessary adjustments in 3 weeks of practice. It’s a HUGE step up to elite level basketball from high school. One that is usually not made overnight. Again, pardon me, but I’m from Missouri.

Just wondering which freshman are you "wondering" why a poster chose her to start?

Secondly, in 18-19 did you expect Coombs or Bent to start over CWill?

In 15-16, you were expecting Gabby to start over Katie Lou as the season progressed?