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

[hoophuskee]

I don't agree. How many times have we heard it takes one basket to get a player going? With Walker vs the elite teams she couldn't get going in part because her guards really couldn't get easy baskets for her and others. How many times do we hear to get players in rhythm you need to go "inside-out?" "Inside-out" doesn't only refer to low post play. You need a guard that can penetrate inside and make plays for others. With UCONN they didn't have a guard vs the elite teams that could get easy baskets for the others. We could do this back-and-forht all day. But Walker shot poorly because in part her guards couldn't get her in groove. Which is why you have 8 assist games. The guards were never a threat to doi damage in the lane in halfcourt sets vs the elites. .

As for the defense, I didn't say "Exclusion." I said the following: "IMO Geno is more into offense rather than worry how he is going to defend another team. Not saying he doesn't care about it."
That's not "exclusion."

He wants to see offense which is why the Baylor vs UCONN game in 2011-2012 which Geno and Kim's philosophies completely differ. And starting Danger over Stevens just reinforces that. As for this year-- sure the defense improved. But what has UCONN doen better than anyone else over the last 20 years? Not only titles but getting to the FF. UCONN doesn't allow significantly lesser teams to take them down during the season, and NCAA's you got to be a FF/terrific team. The floor of UCONN in Tourney play is off-the-charts. Last year early on Memphis hung tough. Memphis. Memphis. With Seton Hall a 6pt game after 3 qtrs. In Mid Feb it was a 5 pt game after 3 quarters vs USF. At the end of reg season the floor of UCONN was significantly higher. That's incredibly important. Geno was pumped because his team had established a high enough floor that the much lesser talented teams had little shot to take him down. But for a team like Oregon- he couldn't press in the manner you speak vs them. He would have to win differently. And that would have been by shooting well. Danger had something to prove. CWill have had something to prove. The NCAA offered a new beginning for both. And in the E8 game they would've been underdogs. Beware of the sleeping dog.

As far as your mention of Lobo. That's my point -- they didn't have a Lobo so they shouldn't pretend that they have one by playing big at the PF just to "match up." On the flip side, its not a mistake to optimize your chances of winning by playing your best players rather than forcing yourself to play to another team's strength and style.

 

[hoophuskee]

And when you speak of Stewie and Tuck -- there was a ton of concern regarding their size/strength once Dolson left. I can recall fear on here if Stewie could hang for a season because of "all the banging she would take." Or the fear that Tuck would get swallowed by the opposing bigs. In their jr year leading up to Duke and then SCarolina there was a lot of fear that they would get manhandled because of their size uCONN along with "could Tuck score on the inside and defend well enough against these type of big teams." And we know who Stewie said should have been the FF MVP in 14-15 and that was MoJeff. They don't beat ND without MoJeff. And Rebecca isn't beating Tenn without a great guard in Rizzotti etc. There is just too much fear regarding size. OFC it is important to some extent. There is a reason why UCONN was 36-0 with a 5'11 center and why in that year the team that won played smaller too.

Whether Evina, Anna, CWill and Paige can play together at the same time or not, what I am most thrilled about is potentially watching supreme fastbtreak basketball from a team that potentially can force even the elite teams to adapt to their pace of play. The lethality of great perimeter play that can open up the lane is something I look forward to see how well UCONN can do vs the elite teams. That's the potential strength of this team. Play to your strength if Evina can be near as good defensively as Walker. Unless ofc if Edwards or Griff are really really good.

 

[BBallF]

And when you speak of Stewie and Tuck -- there was a ton of concern regarding their size/strength once Dolson left. I can recall fear on here if Stewie could hang for a season because of "all the banging she would take." Or the fear that Tuck would get swallowed by the opposing bigs. In their jr year leading up to Duke and then SCarolina there was a lot of fear that they would get manhandled because of their size uCONN along with "could Tuck score on the inside and defend well enough against these type of big teams." And we know who Stewie said should have been the FF MVP in 14-15 and that was MoJeff. They don't beat ND without MoJeff. And Rebecca isn't beating Tenn without a great guard in Rizzotti etc. There is just too much fear regarding size. OFC it is important to some extent. There is a reason why UCONN was 36-0 with a 5'11 center and why in that year the team that won played smaller too.

Whether Evina, Anna, CWill and Paige can play together at the same time or not, what I am most thrilled about is potentially watching supreme fastbtreak basketball from a team that potentially can force even the elite teams to adapt to their pace of play. The lethality of great perimeter play that can open up the lane is something I look forward to see how well UCONN can do vs the elite teams. That's the potential strength of this team. Play to your strength if Evina can be near as good defensively as Walker. Unless ofc if Edwards or Griff are really really good.

I think it is totally inaccurate to place a large share of the blame for the three BIG losses at Crystal's feet. She had 16 against Baylor, 19 against Oregon and 25 against SC. If MoJeff was there instead or Rizzotti they still lose those games. Meg just never stepped up like a true UCONN AA like DT, Maya, Lobo, or even Cash Your position is "There is too much fear regarding size. OFC it is important to some extent." Some extent? When the bigs are good, like on the BIG 3 we lost to, it is not important to some extent, it becomes a crucial if not decisive factor. To win the last game of the season, you need size and power. You can't not include Stewie in that because despite her body type she was so good, so long, so smart as a defender that she changed the mold of an inside or post player in women's basketball. The post players who followed her to the NC, from SC first and then 2 years later Baylor were different in body type with more of the weight, girth and almost total inside game but that is because there is and may only ever be one Stewie just like one DT, one Maya and hopefully one Paige. Let's continue this during the season to see what Geno does and whether he leans more to your approach or mine and what is successful. If you see Evina at the 4 I will tip my hat to you. BTW, I was at the Seton Hall game. That game was close for a long time because the Pirate guards had a "lights out" shooting night to match our guard oriented offense. Aubrey turned the game around with her strength, defense and floor game and scored off of steals and put backs. It was more to my point than yours but our debate really goes to the core of women's basketball because it determines recruiting, offenses, defenses, and game adjustments. I just think that this year's recruits and next are showing a return to size and power as well as great guards. I think Geno has the right amount of "fear" about size after the last 3 years and went out and fixed it.

 

[JonathanXIV]

Paragraphs people.

 

[diggerfoot]

To win the last game of the season, you need size and power.

Out of the three championships with Taurasi, one featured a 6'2" center and a 6'2" PF, the other two featured a 6'3" center and 5'11" PF, with a 6'2" post coming off the bench. The two championships with Moore featured a 6'4" center and 6'0" PF, with a large 6'2" and a small 6'0" post coming off the bench. They beat teams (Tennessee, Stanford) with greater size and power.

The ideal line-up has athletic size at every position, but our five "middle" championships reveal there is at least one factor more "crucial" than size.

 

[HopJim]

Out of the three championships with Taurasi, one featured a 6'2" center and a 6'2" PF, the other two featured a 6'3" center and 5'11" PF, with a 6'2" post coming off the bench. The two championships with Moore featured a 6'4" center and 6'0" PF, with a large 6'2" and a small 6'0" post coming off the bench. They beat teams (Tennessee, Stanford) with greater size and power.

The ideal line-up has athletic size at every position, but our five "middle" championships reveal there is at least one factor more "crucial" than size.

Agree with comments but would add one other point regarding "size" that is rarely mentioned. Most championships have seen a point guard who could dominate on defense (ex. MoJeff). Loved Crystal but she faced constant switches where she was caught down low against bigs 6-8"+ taller or outside against taller and stronger shooting guards. We didn't see this as too much of an issue in most games but against Top 5 teams it was exposed.

 

[CL82]

I agree Griggs. Aubrey needs to hit mid-range jumpers and be more in control of her play. Controlled aggression.

As opposed to her normal aggressive control?

Pretty much every kid who comes through the program, particularly the talented ones, makes a big jump in their sophomore year. I’m inclined to believe the same will be true of Aubrey. She’s a smart kid who plays hard every second she’s out on the court.

 

[DEpup]

I have been really enjoying the guard and defense discussion along with easy guard buckets.... I have to say the MoJeff and Nurse back court duo doesn't get enough credit. I know they aren't DT and Bird but who is.... However, if you want to talk lock down defending and getting buckets when needed to give the great UConn bigs of those years room to maneuver, it's hard to come up with a better example of guard play.

 

[BBallF]

Out of the three championships with Taurasi, one featured a 6'2" center and a 6'2" PF, the other two featured a 6'3" center and 5'11" PF, with a 6'2" post coming off the bench. The two championships with Moore featured a 6'4" center and 6'0" PF, with a large 6'2" and a small 6'0" post coming off the bench. They beat teams (Tennessee, Stanford) with greater size and power.

The ideal line-up has athletic size at every position, but our five "middle" championships reveal there is at least one factor more "crucial" than size.

Yes, the factor is called the GOAT and a close second to her. When you are talking about the DT and Maya NC games you are talking about 2 of the greatest women players ever who won because of themselves. The last two DT NC games were won because of DT and what she did to uplift other players ( "We have Diana and they don't") and the Stanford game was Maya taking over an NC championship game probably like never before. We didn't have a DT or Maya type of player since Stewie and that's where the size and power became important because the transcendent player was not around to counteract their influence. BTW, the 2002 team was pretty tough and big underneath with Jessica, Swin, Ashja and Tamika. 3 of them were 6'2" and one was 6'3". The entire starting front line was drafted in the top 10 or so. I rewatched that game recently and they were completely dominating underneath. That team actually proves the point and throw in a very physical sophomore guard by the name of Diana at 6'0". If you watched "The Last Dance", you would remember that even the Jordan title teams had power and size underneath. You have to have a full team on the floor, without a weakness underneath. That's why Geno recruited a full team with each position covered for this year. We haven't had that since the Stewie years. No matter how you slice it, the last 4 teams were smaller and not very physical underneath. The talent got us to the . The lack of size and power ended the rides. Is there any doubt that if we had had an athletic 6'3"- 6'4" power forward who could rebound and defend and score underneath, those teams would have been different? Instead of 4 in a row, we might have been at 7.

 

[hoophuskee]

I think it is totally inaccurate to place a large share of the blame for the three BIG losses at Crystal's feet. She had 16 against Baylor, 19 against Oregon and 25 against SC. If MoJeff was there instead or Rizzotti they still lose those games. Meg just never stepped up like a true UCONN AA like DT, Maya, Lobo, or even Cash Your position is "There is too much fear regarding size. OFC it is important to some extent." Some extent? When the bigs are good, like on the BIG 3 we lost to, it is not important to some extent, it becomes a crucial if not decisive factor. To win the last game of the season, you need size and power. You can't not include Stewie in that because despite her body type she was so good, so long, so smart as a defender that she changed the mold of an inside or post player in women's basketball. The post players who followed her to the NC, from SC first and then 2 years later Baylor were different in body type with more of the weight, girth and almost total inside game but that is because there is and may only ever be one Stewie just like one DT, one Maya and hopefully one Paige. Let's continue this during the season to see what Geno does and whether he leans more to your approach or mine and what is successful. If you see Evina at the 4 I will tip my hat to you. BTW, I was at the Seton Hall game. That game was close for a long time because the Pirate guards had a "lights out" shooting night to match our guard oriented offense. Aubrey turned the game around with her strength, defense and floor game and scored off of steals and put backs. It was more to my point than yours but our debate really goes to the core of women's basketball because it determines recruiting, offenses, defenses, and game adjustments. I just think that this year's recruits and next are showing a return to size and power as well as great guards. I think Geno has the right amount of "fear" about size after the last 3 years and went out and fixed it.

*****First off I'd like to ask you a series of questions that all relate to what I'm talking about with Evina: Assume for example Evina (and Paige and Anna) are much better players than Edwards or Griff. "What do you do when your team doesn't have the necessary prerequisite of size and power? Do you still throw the bigger player out there anyways while the much better player sits? My point is UCONN had one chance to win it all last year and that was playing small with Walker at the PF. And to win it means the perimeter had to be terrific - and to have a chance win it all you have to ensure you beat the lesser teams. In 99-00 for example the team won OVERALL by its strength on the perimeter while the front court just had to hold its own vs the elite. When you play small it means your best are perimeter players-- therefore the perimeter has to "significantly win" vs the opposing team’s perimeter. For example you quote Danger's "pts scored" but you disregard her lack of assists and her defense. Cooper got 27. Harris had 19 with 11 assists along with no turnovers. Danger’s lack of assists along with her not so hot defense is not good enough also. Sure she performed better than Walker. But not good enough. It’s not about “blame.”

Now look at 94-95 - Rebecca's team seeing how you referenced her OFC she is far superior as PF vs Walker. But compare others from her team to this past year's team as well. I would take every one of the top 5 players from 95 position vs position vs this past year’s team. The point is -- the chance that UCONN was winning a title was very slim last year. UCONN would have had to get through those 3 teams. So the idea should be "Win what you can," while diminishing the possibility you get picked off by lesser teams before the Final Four. So how would you build that team if Walker wasn't the PF? You'd start the frosh Griff and think that would be enough? When you don't have the horses to play big- you leave yourself susceptible of getting picked off easier rather than go with the superior talent. If you try to start to coach/manage too much by position rather than talent, most times that is not going to end well.

As far my mentioning Evina - I've offered her as a PF as another possibility. It seems you've have turned this into completely "my philosophy against yours." But read back into my "long novel" replies. I said I'm okay going with Aubrey or Edwards if they are good enough on offense. This is assuming their defense is fine. ****But to start our discussion you asked me "Why go with Evina?" That relates to my 1st questions above. If Griff and Edwards are good - I'm fine with them starting. If Evina is quite a bit worse at defending inside than Walker then I'm fine with her not playing PF. All I did was offer an alternative. I have said I haven't seen Evina enough to know what she is. And I haven't seen Edwards enough to know how good she is. I do believe however that Evina has a ceiling this year to become a 1st team A/A. Paige has a ceiling to become an A/A and so does CWill. But if Edwards or Griff is good then that's fine too. This size can offset the offense. - As long as they are pretty good ofc.

 

[hoophuskee]

With Walker vs the elite teams she couldn't get going in part because her guards really couldn't get easy baskets for her and others.

You're either implying/ suggesting that Walker didn't play well because of other team's size. Absolutely that is a part of it. But she also didn't play well because of her teammates - and most important the guard play had to dominate --and didn't. In regards to your point on Danger I said "part of the blame" was on the guards. Not "All the blame." The quotes I have below the line. So I haven't put all the blame at Dangers feet. And you're talking about “points scored." What about assists and defense?

****Secondly, Danger guarded Cooper and she got 27. Then vs SCarolina Harris had 19 with 11 assists and no turnovers. In addition I had clearly said "guards." Not just pg. SO CWill too. ****Also I'd like to ask-- if you are great rebounding team up-front and you have to win by great rebounding up-front and you lose in the E8 while having poor rebounding- who is "mostly to blame?" Is it the up-front players or the guards? It's the up-front players. In this past season UCONN's strength was their perimeter. In order to win they need to be terrific. If they aren't then it's on all the perimeter including Walker.
--------------------------
My previous comments below I made -- I said in part. This was intended to mean Walker is at fault too. That's why I said in part.

"With Walker vs the elite teams she couldn't get going in part because her guards really couldn't get easy baskets for her and others."

You're either implying/ suggesting that Walker didn't play well because of other team's size. Absolutely that is a part of it. But she also didn't play well because of her teammates - and most important the guard play had to dominate --and didn't.
-------------------------------------------------

The objective to a certain extent should be "to win as much as you can with the talent you have." Not to try to "plug and play positions" at the expense of not playing your best players. If Edwards and Griff are not good offensively then unless they are super-terrific defending the post and overall super defense then UCONN isn't going to win a title playing that way.

 

[diggerfoot]

While we both agree that the ideal roster has athletic size at every position, and it sounds like we agree that there is at least one factor that is more important than that, it just seems like you are trying hard to still make size and power paramount. Let me ask you three questions.

1. Did you realize that a taller Tennessee team outrebounded that "dominant" 2002 frontcourt in the semifinal, even though we won the game handily?

2. Did you realize that we held a Stanford squad with the 6'5" Appel, 6'4" Pedersen, and 6'2" N. Ogwumike to just 20 points in the first half and 27 points in the second? Though the 6'4" Charles had much to do with that, in the end it was team defense that included our 6'0" PF. With just a "good" defensive effort, say only allowing a Stanford team of future pros with superior size and power 60 points, we still lose despite what Moore does on offense. It took superlative team defense, granted with one superstar in Charles, to hold a bunch of future pros with much superior size and power to only 47 points.

3. If it takes something like a GOAT when size and power is lacking, does that mean Sophie Young is on a par with DT, etc. when Baylor won in 2005 with no one over 6'2"?

 

[BBallF]

While we both agree that the ideal roster has athletic size at every position, and it sounds like we agree that there is at least one factor that is more important than that, it just seems like you are trying hard to still make size and power paramount. Let me ask you three questions.

1. Did you realize that a taller Tennessee team outrebounded that "dominant" 2002 frontcourt in the semifinal, even though we won the game handily?

2. Did you realize that we held a Stanford squad with the 6'5" Appel, 6'4" Pedersen, and 6'2" N. Ogwumike to just 20 points in the first half and 27 points in the second? Though the 6'4" Charles had much to do with that, in the end it was team defense that included our 6'0" PF. With just a "good" defensive effort, say only allowing a Stanford team of future pros with superior size and power 60 points, we still lose despite what Moore does on offense. It took superlative team defense, granted with one superstar in Charles, to hold a bunch of future pros with much superior size and power to only 47 points.

3. If it takes something like a GOAT when size and power is lacking, does that mean Sophie Young is on a par with DT, etc. when Baylor won in 2005 with no one over 6'2"?

I don't think size and power are paramount. I think they become paramount when you don't have it as a team, unless you have a DT, a Maya or a Stewie. As to 1.- So what? The total number in a blow out means very little. In the game itself, the quartet of UCONN forwards killed them with put backs, defense, lay ups, speed. As to 2.- It was a horribly played game in which we were ice cold too. Maya took the game over and won it. My theory is not that size always wins, it's that the absence of size against the premier elite bigger teams has been trouble with a capital T in the last 3 and against the top 3 last year. As to 3.- No. There is only one GOAT by definition and she ain't even close. Go back and watch the 3 games this year they lost and the last 3 Semifinals games like I did and if you honestly think the lack of size wasn't an issue then we just disagree and Geno was wasting his time recently with recruiting bigs and athletic power players.

 

[BBallF]

With Walker vs the elite teams she couldn't get going in part because her guards really couldn't get easy baskets for her and others.

You're either implying/ suggesting that Walker didn't play well because of other team's size. Absolutely that is a part of it. But she also didn't play well because of her teammates - and most important the guard play had to dominate --and didn't. In regards to your point on Danger I said "part of the blame" was on the guards. Not "All the blame." The quotes I have below the line. So I haven't put all the blame at Dangers feet. And you're talking about “points scored." What about assists and defense?

****Secondly, Danger guarded Cooper and she got 27. Then vs SCarolina Harris had 19 with 11 assists and no turnovers. In addition I had clearly said "guards." Not just pg. SO CWill too. ****Also I'd like to ask-- if you are great rebounding team up-front and you have to win by great rebounding up-front and you lose in the E8 while having poor rebounding- who is "mostly to blame?" Is it the up-front players or the guards? It's the up-front players. In this past season UCONN's strength was their perimeter. In order to win they need to be terrific. If they aren't then it's on all the perimeter including Walker.
--------------------------
My previous comments below I made -- I said in part. This was intended to mean Walker is at fault too. That's why I said in part.

"With Walker vs the elite teams she couldn't get going in part because her guards really couldn't get easy baskets for her and others."

You're either implying/ suggesting that Walker didn't play well because of other team's size. Absolutely that is a part of it. But she also didn't play well because of her teammates - and most important the guard play had to dominate --and didn't.
-------------------------------------------------

The objective to a certain extent should be "to win as much as you can with the talent you have." Not to try to "plug and play positions" at the expense of not playing your best players. If Edwards and Griff are not good offensively then unless they are super-terrific defending the post and overall super defense then UCONN isn't going to win a title playing that way.

I think you are now saying what I said all along. You play your best players and he did that this year and the last 3 years as well. I am not saying he was wrong or had the wrong players out there( Kyla basically was waiting for Anna when she started). I am saying he had no choice but that it was still deficient and the deficiency was size and power and he knew it and to a certain extent toughness too because I don't think Meg really was. They were difficult to watch for us until he uptempoed the defense. As for Meg in the BIG games, she was the top player on the team, became first team AA and a big disappointment in them. Imagine Maya or DT as a junior playing like that against Tennessee? No way. In the Elite 8 or FF this year, it may have been the same result as the last three years. Not because of the guards but because when your game is all perimeter and not inside, when you don't shoot well against players as good as you, you lose because the other team is going to score more than you underneath, have more possessions through rebounds, limit you on put backs etc. You don't plug in players to new positions unless you have to and we had to last year. This year, there are choices.

 

[eebmg]

Is the BY minimum word count increased?

 

[hoophuskee]

I think you are now saying what I said all along. You play your best players and he did that this year and the last 3 years as well. I am not saying he was wrong or had the wrong players out there( Kyla basically was waiting for Anna when she started). I am saying he had no choice but that it was still deficient and the deficiency was size and power and he knew it and to a certain extent toughness too because I don't think Meg really was. They were difficult to watch for us until he uptempoed the defense. As for Meg in the BIG games, she was the top player on the team, became first team AA and a big disappointment in them. Imagine Maya or DT as a junior playing like that against Tennessee? No way. In the Elite 8 or FF this year, it may have been the same result as the last three years. Not because of the guards but because when your game is all perimeter and not inside, when you don't shoot well against players as good as you, you lose because the other team is going to score more than you underneath, have more possessions through rebounds, limit you on put backs etc. You don't plug in players to new positions unless you have to and we had to last year. This year, there are choices.

Huh? When we 1st started posting you asked me why I would put a player like Evina "out of position." If you agreed with Geno by putting Walker out of position then why did you ask me why I would put Evina out of position? Its the same reason. I've stated several times how I've questioned how good Griff and Edwards could be. -- Because i don't know. Same as Evina as I've said I don't know what she is.

And I never suggested ever that Walker was Maya or near it. I don't understand what you think I've supposedly changed in terms of my opinion. I posted to you 4 potential options early on and the 4th option was

"4th Option: Edwards or Griff are legit-- doesn't matter who SF is-- Paige being a superior PG to anyone on the team-- she starts."

And yes we can disagree about why we lost. We lost not only because of size but because of guard play-- and Walker plays like a guard - her too. You quoted Walker's shooting stats in the 3 losses (as a negative)-- and Danger's points in the losses (as a positive). Why not also look at Danger and Nurse's points and assists in their Final Four losses?

Anyhow, UCONN had to play small last year -- and I put up as possibility that this team might have to play small too.

 

[diggerfoot]

You missed the points I was trying to make with the three questions, but perhaps they were too obtuse. Let me outline it this way. The way you've made your points a great player like DT is the best thing to have, with size and power in second place. My priority would go as follows.

1. Good players, but not necessarily a GOAT, which is why Baylor could win with a small roster and Young their best player.
2. Team basketball, or finesse over power, which is why the 2002 team could beat taller teams even when outrebounded (or, once again, why Baylor could win in 2005). Or why we could beat Stanford, as much as you would like to make it only about Moore.
3. Size and power.

As for last year's UConn team, they were missing both #2 and #3. The evidence of #2 lacking is their worst A/T ratio in years. In my view if they had better size and power, but still did not play with the teamwork of many UConn teams in the past, they still lose. Maybe they also lose if they played much better as a team and lacked size and power, we'll never know. But I believe the teamwork counts for more than size and power, whereas you have yet to mention that as a factor.

Any fan would want to have all three: good players; good teamwork/finesse/beautiful basketball, good size. If you can only have two I will choose the first two.

 

[BBallF]

Huh? When we 1st started posting you asked me why I would put a player like Evina "out of position." If you agreed with Geno by putting Walker out of position then why did you ask me why I would put Evina out of position? Its the same reason. I've stated several times how I've questioned how good Griff and Edwards could be. -- Because i don't know. Same as Evina as I've said I don't know what she is.

And I never suggested ever that Walker was Maya or near it. I don't understand what you think I've supposedly changed in terms of my opinion. I posted to you 4 potential options early on and the 4th option was

"4th Option: Edwards or Griff are legit-- doesn't matter who SF is-- Paige being a superior PG to anyone on the team-- she starts."

And yes we can disagree about why we lost. We lost not only because of size but because of guard play-- and Walker plays like a guard - her too. You quoted Walker's shooting stats in the 3 losses (as a negative)-- and Danger's points in the losses (as a positive). Why not also look at Danger and Nurse's points and assists in their Final Four losses?

Anyhow, UCONN had to play small last year -- and I put up as possibility that this team might have to play small too.

He put Walker out of position because he had to and Walker could rebound. She averaged close to a double-double last year. Evina is a natural guard, not PF. That was the point. He has been putting players out of position for 4 years because he had to. Next year and the years after he won't have to. Taking a guard like Evina and making her a power forward is a large leap and has a large downside, giving up size and power underneath which Meg did last year which hurt us in the BIG games and would have been something we had to overcome in the NCAA. I don't see why any of this is controversial. He has a gap at PF for next year and he has had that gap for 4 years. I think it will be Griff to fill it with Edwards coming in because I think she will be a different player by next season. I don't think he is going to put Evina there.

 

[BBallF]

You missed the points I was trying to make with the three questions, but perhaps they were too obtuse. Let me outline it this way. The way you've made your points a great player like DT is the best thing to have, with size and power in second place. My priority would go as follows.

1. Good players, but not necessarily a GOAT, which is why Baylor could win with a small roster and Young their best player.
2. Team basketball, or finesse over power, which is why the 2002 team could beat taller teams even when outrebounded (or, once again, why Baylor could win in 2005). Or why we could beat Stanford, as much as you would like to make it only about Moore.
3. Size and power.

As for last year's UConn team, they were missing both #2 and #3. The evidence of #2 lacking is their worst A/T ratio in years. In my view if they had better size and power, but still did not play with the teamwork of many UConn teams in the past, they still lose. Maybe they also lose if they played much better as a team and lacked size and power, we'll never know. But I believe the teamwork counts for more than size and power, whereas you have yet to mention that as a factor.

Any fan would want to have all three: good players; good teamwork/finesse/beautiful basketball, good size. If you can only have two I will choose the first two.

I understood all of your points. Good players are not winning NCs, great ones are and Sophia Young had 2000 points 1000 boards 300 assists and 300 steals in her career and was AA. Take all 11 of the UCONN NCs. We had DT for 3 of them, Maya for 2 of them and Stewie for 4 of them. In 1995 we had the nation's best player in Lobo. In 2000 we had a team that seemingly supports your first point with Ralph, Svetlana, Cash, etc. That was the one year there wasn't a greatest of all time contender. However, it was a big, tough team with Schumacher at 6'5", Jones at 6'3", and Cash and Williams and a 2 guard who was 6'2' in Svetlana. So there was no GOAT contender( Bird was a sophomore) but it was a great team and great teams can win the NC but not anymore without a strong inside game if the other team has one and you don't. That is the lesson of the last 4 years; size, power and depth. No one has downplayed team basketball, that is the hallmark of UCONN's success but go ahead and play team basketball with your smaller finesse team and give up 4-5 inches and 20 - 30 pounds underneath at the Center and PF positions and I will take the bigger team, as long as the talent is reasonably similar, every time. I make that qualification because when you have a transcendent player, like DT, anything can happen and she can take the game over. Size and power are acute when you don't have it just like speed , three point shooting and defense are if you don't have them. My point was and is that UCONN did not have size and power for 4 years and when you get to the FF, your weaknesses become magnified and that is what happened. That is also why I don't think Evina or Anna plays the 4, unless it is against a smaller team. The women's game has changed. The players are bigger and better. This year Geno doesn't have to play anyone out of position and my prediction is that he won't unless he is purposely bringing someone along like he did with Anna by starting Kylie.

 

[hoophuskee]

He put Walker out of position because he had to and Walker could rebound. She averaged close to a double-double last year. Evina is a natural guard, not PF. That was the point. He has been putting players out of position for 4 years because he had to. Next year and the years after he won't have to. Taking a guard like Evina and making her a power forward is a large leap and has a large downside, giving up size and power underneath which Meg did last year which hurt us in the BIG games and would have been something we had to overcome in the NCAA. I don't see why any of this is controversial. He has a gap at PF for next year and he has had that gap for 4 years. I think it will be Griff to fill it with Edwards coming in because I think she will be a different player by next season. I don't think he is going to put Evina there.

No worries. I enjoyed teh discussions back-and-forth.

But it still doesn't answer the question "Why did you ask me if I would use Evina as a PF." You knew that I was questioning how good Griff and Edwards are, right? In my 1st reply to you I made comments 1,2 and 3. My 2nd reply are for below numbers 4, 5 and 6. I said from the start if Aubrey or Edwards are good enough offensively then I'm fine with it. I said I haven't seen much of Evina as well. The underlined highlights some of my points.

-------------------------------------------------

1--- "To further that- imo we don't know what Evina is. For example you see her as a 1/2, I see her as a 3 hopeful she can be a 4, ---and as a backup 1 and a 2."

2--- "4th Option: Edwards or Griff are legit-- doesn't matter who SF is-- Paige being a superior PG to anyone on the team-- she starts."

3--- "There is only 1 player that can prevent Paige from not starting and that's Evina. The poster UConnCat sent me a post on this thread with quotes from Geno that even he had no idea what Evina is."

4-- "There are more players that can rebound other that PF's. Danger gave UCONN really no rebounding help. Potentially you have 4 better rebounders. As I've said in the past Anna or Evina don't have to be as good of rebounder as Walker. Just be close -- whatever "close is.""

5--- "And again I don't entirely agree when you say you play Meg because "you play your best players" then disregard potentially Evina at pf and Paige at PG. Your defense of that statement is that "Edwards and Griff" are good enough. Well if Aubrey can't shoot then imo she isn't good enough. Show me Aubrey can shoot then ofc I'm more inclined to have her start. If you have a player that can't score, can't pass very well then unless you have a superstar like a DT or Maya etc - that one player will drag down your offense. And as far as Edwards-- I don't know what she is yet. If you are confident in them-- great. I hope you are right. I'm just open to questioning how good they are."

6-- As far as Evina-- I don't think she was a very good pg. She looks extremely awkward playing it. IMO she was playing out of position at PG for Tennessee or similar to UCONN with Walker they were forced to play Evina (or promised her) there. But again I only saw a little bit of her. I need to see more of Evina before I declare her a good pg which you think she is. If she is-- great. Until i see it-- I think she is more of a SF. SO if Edwards or Aubrey is legit PF on both sides offense and defense- then after I'm looking for Paige to be the PG whether it be week 1 or 3 or 5- and then have Anna or Evina off the bench. As UconnCat pointed out on this thread - direct quote from Geno-- he doesn't know what Aubrey is either. The limited time I saw her- I don't see a natural pg.
---------------------------------------------------------

So from my comments I don't see what you think has changed from my initial position nor do understand why you asked me the question why would I play Evina at PF? Even Geno is questioning what she is. You read the quotes UconnCat provided by Geno regarding Evina on this thread, right? So I've offered Evina as a "hopeful possibility/alternative" because I'm questioning how good Griff and Edwards are. ***No offense to you and please don't take it this way*** but if Geno doesn't know what she is and while I'm acknowledging I haven't seen much of Evina but don't love her pg play - wouldn't it stand to reason I'm questioning anyone that wants her to start at pg? I want to make it a point I am "questioning" not saying anyone is "wrong." I've acknowledged I haven't seen Evina enough. I even acknowledged that Evina could be the pg right from the start per number 3 above (though I prefer Paige whether it be week 1 or 3 or 5 etc and then move Evina to another spot. I anticipate Paige will be that good unless UCONN is dominant. Then it won't matter who starts.). So I'm open/ have been open to a lot.


**********In regards to our back-and-forths - I'm done. *************** Though it doesn't mean later on we might not go back-and-forth again. Thanks for the civil discussion.

 

[hoophuskee]

That is the lesson of the last 4 years; size, power and depth.

There has also been a lesson you need better guard play. The stats of Danger and Nurse lack or production in Final Fours show that. --- - yes two years ago and last year UCONN was too small but their guard play did not produce either. It is both.

Okay now I'm done.

 

[BBallF]

There has also been a lesson you need better guard play. The stats of Danger and Nurse lack or production in Final Fours show that. --- - yes two years ago and last year UCONN was too small but their guard play did not produce either. It is both.

Okay now I'm done.

Okay. Let's leave it where it is and resume the conversation if something on point happens over the summer or next season if we have one.

 

[diggerfoot]

I understood all of your points.

Here are the two possibilities.

A. Young is in the same league as Taurasi, Stewart, Moore, ie, what we have been calling GOATs. Being in the same league as them, that explains why Baylor could win with an undersized squad. This bolsters your contention that without size and power you need a GOAT.

B. Young is not in the same league as Taurasi, et al. She is a great player (the fact that I used the word "good" is just semantics), but not a GOAT. If she is not, that refutes your contention that without a GOAT you must have size and power.

A or B. By simple logic it can't be both. Which one do you choose? You can spare another long description of UConn teams, as an ardent fan I am quite aware of their make-ups. Just choose A or B. Is Young in the same league as Taurasi or not?

 

[BBallF]

Here are the two possibilities.

A. Young is in the same league as Taurasi, Stewart, Moore, ie, what we have been calling GOATs. Being in the same league as them, that explains why Baylor could win with an undersized squad. This bolsters your contention that without size and power you need a GOAT.

B. Young is not in the same league as Taurasi, et al. She is a great player (the fact that I used the word "good" is just semantics), but not a GOAT. If she is not, that refutes your contention that without a GOAT you must have size and power.

A or B. By simple logic it can't be both. Which one do you choose? You can spare another long description of UConn teams, as an ardent fan I am quite aware of their make-ups. Just choose A or B. Is Young in the same league as Taurasi or not?

You know she is not even close. You can argue that she played like it in the NCAA in 2005 however. Because a team won a NC 15 years ago that was undersized does not prove that the current formula to win doesn't include power and size. C'mon, you have to rebound and defend the paint and box out and when you have a 5'10" player defending an equally talented player that is 3 inches taller and 20 pounds heavier it can change a game. We went all through this analyzing the last 7 NC teams starting with Baylor in 2019 and going backwards. We could go back further. Like 6'5" and 6'7" underneath in 1995? The point is that if you have a deficiency when compared to another team, you try to neutralize that deficiency. Sometimes you can't. Sometimes with the great player you can. Are you saying that DT and Maya didn't win those NCs for us? Just think of those teams without them. We have been undersized for 4 years. If you don't think that is a salient fact for this team then why did Geno go out and recruit the players he did for the next class and the one after that? Why not just get 5 guards? When you have a perimeter team, if your outside shooting goes cold, or the defense shuts you down, you don't have anything to fall back on. We saw that this year and I promise you that Geno is not going to have a recruiting gap like that again. So this year he has 6'5" and 6'2"( Edwards actually plays bigger than that) coming in and the year after he has 6'4" "Ice" coming in. Power and size to go along with the Paige show.

 

[CocoHusky]

Out of the three championships with Taurasi, one featured a 6'2" center and a 6'2" PF, the other two featured a 6'3" center and 5'11" PF, with a 6'2" post coming off the bench. The two championships with Moore featured a 6'4" center and 6'0" PF, with a large 6'2" and a small 6'0" post coming off the bench. They beat teams (Tennessee, Stanford) with greater size and power.

The ideal line-up has athletic size at every position, but our five "middle" championships reveal there is at least one factor more "crucial" than size.

Taurasi, Moore, & Stewie are generational players who can disguise many flaws of a team including lack of size, & bulk in the post. Although Gabby, Napheesa, and Megan were terrific AA type post players they ultimately could not.