Final Four Team?

[Cornell Lt]

I think we've seen what this team is capable of and that doesn't lend any confidence that they are a FF team. Too many deficiencies to over come.

 

[packwrap]

Pretty rosters stocked with kids that had high HS rankings given to them by some guy at a website mean nothing if they don't win big games or NCs against tough, physical competition. They just look good on paper. It takes kids with legit talent that can make shots and plays under real pressure to do that. We'll find out in about 3 months if UConn has enough of those type players.

The definition of 'talent' on a college roster is the quality of high school recruits brought in. The guys on the websites are generally pretty good at identifying the talent. During recruiting season, I have yet to hear a fan recommend Geno to take an secret unranked recruit with potential over a #5 ranked national star.

Of course there are kids not in the top 100 who went unnoticed. Morrow and Siegrist examples. Also there are kids who develop in college.

When UConn and TN were the only dominant teams, they were the only schools bringing in recruiting classes loaded with this kind of talent.

Recently, only South Carolina, Stanford, ND and UConn are consistently getting top recruiting classes.

Now in the new age of parity, teams like USC, LSU & UCLA can load up in the portal, and have also been able to land better hs players.

Recruiting does not win a game. The players have to deliver on the court. Over time though the team that recruits better will overwelmingly win more games.

 

[Zonepress]

The key is the phrase is "right now". It's still December. A lot of development still ahead of the Huskies. The continued progress of the Ice and Jana should give us different pathways to the FF and competing for an NC. Barring injuries, the horizon is bright.

Agreed but while it would be nice to see Jana and
Ice continue to improve imho It’s Azzi and Aubrey
Playing at their best that takes the team to another
Level

 

[packwrap]

DrummerDee, are you re-defining adjectives? Tina started all but four games, had a 12.7 average - the second highest on a team that went 32-4. She also grabbed over 8 rebounds per game, was 8th in the nation in field goal percentage, and top 30 in blocked shots. My memory is getting faulty, but I recall Geno thinking she was one of the best freshmen in the country. I think he would disagree with you.

Tina was also Big East rookie of the year her Freshman year. And that's the old good Big East.

There are some myths that circulate on the board.
Charles only got good as a jr.

Stewie was inconsistent until NCAAs as a freshman.

are 2 of them.

They emerged as national level stars at those points, but were not awful before that.

 

[BobbyJ]

The definition of 'talent' on a college roster is the quality of high school recruits brought in. The guys on the websites are generally pretty good at identifying the talent. During recruiting season, I have yet to hear a fan recommend Geno to take an secret unranked recruit with potential over a #5 ranked national star.

Of course there are kids not in the top 100 who went unnoticed. Morrow and Siegrist examples. Also there are kids who develop in college.

When UConn and TN were the only dominant teams, they were the only schools bringing in recruiting classes loaded with this kind of talent.

Recently, only South Carolina, Stanford, ND and UConn are consistently getting top recruiting classes.

Now in the new age of parity, teams like USC, LSU & UCLA can load up in the portal, and have also been able to land better hs players.

Recruiting does not win a game. The players have to deliver on the court. Over time though the team that recruits better will overwelmingly win more games.

This was the point of my post. A lot of people can identify the most talented kids, that's fairly simple. The difficult part for coaches is projecting which of them has the instincts, mental discipline, etc. to handle pressure and produce in the clutch. Obviously a lot of them never have it. There's only so many of them and even the best coaches are guessing sometimes. But many fans use the individual HS ranking number to start predicting NCs, AA, and POY stuff before the kid ever faces older, more experienced, and physically tougher competition than they can handle. Those fans get all excited and believe it when a website tells them that their favorite school has the top ranked recruiting class and it just sets them up for disappointment when it doesn't pan out. Then they come on their fan forum and rip kids for not being stars and winning NCs when they never had what it takes to do it in the first place. I prefer to be shown by results over time who the best recruits and recruiting classes are.

 

[packwrap]

This was the point of my post. A lot of people can identify the most talented kids, that's fairly simple. The difficult part for coaches is projecting which of them has the instincts, mental discipline, etc. to handle pressure and produce in the clutch. Obviously a lot of them never have it. There's only so many of them and even the best coaches are guessing sometimes. But many fans use the individual HS ranking number to start predicting NCs, AA, and POY stuff before the kid ever faces older, more experienced, and physically tougher competition than they can handle. Those fans get all excited and believe it when a website tells them that their favorite school has the top ranked recruiting class and it just sets them up for disappointment when it doesn't pan out. Then they come on their fan forum and rip kids for not being stars and winning NCs when they never had what it takes to do it in the first place. I prefer to be shown by results over time who the best recruits and recruiting classes are.

...other than all-america teams and the WNBA draft, there really is not another ranking of talent 'over time' once they have started playing in college.

At the WNBA level 'talent' becomes where were you drafted? Again the actual WNBA ability turns out to not match the draft.

It's easy 'over time' to identify talent, and hard 'before' they play.

Key is UConn is still bringing in the best high school talent, and looks to be still in next 2 classes. So lack of talent not a problem. It's getting them healthy on the court, and then playing well in big games.

Notice also that the teams with the best recruiting classes, or best transfers are the powers. USC with the current #1 ranked recruiting class and last years #1 recruit moved from middle of the PAC12 to final four contender over 1-2 seasons.

Iowa rode a #4 recruit to 2 championship games.

At ND Hidalgo, Miles, Citron and Koval are all # top 15 recruits.

LSU and UCLA are getting an even mix of top transfers and recruits.

It's never a surprise or a mystery, which teams are good before they play.

 

[Rb335]

It depends on how you view USC. Are they a final four contender? If yes, Uconn absolutely is. If you don’t, you probably don’t think Uconn is.

This team since game one has appeared to be as reliant on the 3. As such, we may fall victim to a bad shooting night from the perimeter. But we also could catch fire and win it all.

I think we’ll see this team reach the final four if a few things happen. Defensive improvement, specifically guarding the perimeter. We remain healthy, Azzi brings a scoring punch and Aubrey a defensive athleticism that the team is missing. And role players outside of Paige, Azzi and Sarah are confident knocking down the looks they get.

I believe at full strength both ND and South Carolina match if not exceed us in on paper talent. But we’re right there.

 

[Huskyfan63]

I think we've seen what this team is capable of and that doesn't lend any confidence that they are a FF team. Too many deficiencies to over come.

This team would be undefeated if they didn't happen to convert 3-pointers at a lower rate than normal in the two losses, and the other two teams (ND and USC) didn't drastically outperform their season averages from behind the arc at the same time.

Imagine if the team shot anywhere close to the way they did against Iowa State, in the ND and USC games?

ND from three: 55.6% in the UConn game, 37.7% season average without the UConn game
USC from three: 56.3% in the UConn game, 31.7% season average without the UConn game
UConn from three in the ND game: 18.8%, 37.0% average without the ND game
UConn from three in the USC game: 26%, 36.9% average without the USC game

In both games, the Huskies shot comparably to both ND and USC from inside the arc - so the disparity from three stands out. If either ND or USC shot their season averages from three in the UConn games, UConn wins both. This is a FF capable team, that maybe has to get the big game "jitters" out their system a little more by March.

 

[Bone Dog]

Imagine if the team shot anywhere close to the way they did against Iowa State, in the ND and USC games?

Although I like to think we could have overcome the problem with Azzi on the court, mostly when teams shoot poorly it’s because of something the other team is doing.

 

[hoophuskee]

You are correct
What I tried to point out is there
are a numerous teams of teams that have”talent” equal or perhaps better than that of
UConn and that it’s inaccurate to blindly say
“We have the best talent”

Imho this team is talented enough to win
A championship but.will have to be healthy
Play their A game and hope for favorable
Matchups

A healthy Fudd and Griffin would mean a lot to this UCONN team.

 

[Huskyfan63]

Although I like to think we could have overcome the problem with Azzi on the court, mostly when teams shoot poorly it’s because of something the other team is doing.

Sometimes, sure, but certainly not a majority. There were plenty of open threes, same spots as other games, defenders in the same places. Just plain missed. All it takes is 3-4 more on your side, 3-4 missed on the other side, or some combination of both.

 

[packwrap]

It depends on how you view USC. Are they a final four contender? If yes, Uconn absolutely is. If you don’t, you probably don’t think Uconn is.

It's generally accepted at the moment by fans, media and polls that there are 7 teams above the rest of the field.

ND, SC, U$C, UCLA, TX, LSU & UConn.

Assuming those 7 do actually make the elite 8, they are final four contenders...needing to win 1 game to get there.

All of these teams will lose again between now and March, but I can't imagine someone rising above this group.

If these are not the final 4 contenders, who do you have in mind?

 

[Zarathustra]

The definition of 'talent' on a college roster is the quality of high school recruits brought in. The guys on the websites are generally pretty good at identifying the talent. During recruiting season, I have yet to hear a fan recommend Geno to take an secret unranked recruit with potential over a #5 ranked national star.

Of course there are kids not in the top 100 who went unnoticed. Morrow and Siegrist examples. Also there are kids who develop in college.

When UConn and TN were the only dominant teams, they were the only schools bringing in recruiting classes loaded with this kind of talent.

Recently, only South Carolina, Stanford, ND and UConn are consistently getting top recruiting classes.

Now in the new age of parity, teams like USC, LSU & UCLA can load up in the portal, and have also been able to land better hs players.

Recruiting does not win a game. The players have to deliver on the court. Over time though the team that recruits better will overwelmingly win more games.

I agree about the portal, of course, but then there is also the
turnover of Head Coaches! Some programs continue to flourish,
some need a few years to, Hopefully, fine the right person.

 

[boontonbomber]

Skeets- - - -Azzi does have to prove she can stay in the lineup, healthy, and if so she'll score major points!
Aubrey was a main piece in UConn's arsenal both offensively and defensively!
Offensively she was a main part of our transition game and athletically would beat opponent's down court!
Defensively she was the head of the spear to steal the ball and energize UConn! She played bigger than her 6'1" frame!
She would come in off the bench and change the entire game in UConn's favor!
Don't underestimate her!

Absolutely, Coach. Aubrey would be the difference maker.

 

[cwaduke]

Without much better post play , other than Sarah, we are not a final four team; despite very good guard play.

 

[Bald Husky]

What's with all this roster nonsense? You don't win games because the 12th kid at the end of the bench is really good. You win games because the 5 kids you put on the court are better than the other 5 kids. That is just a subset of the "roster".

Absolutely right, so if Azzi comes back strong, our starting line-up will be 3 former #1 recruits, an Ivy league player of the year, and a #5 recruit. If these guys can get their s---t together, there is no reason that these players cannot carry us to the FF. Our bench is very good, so I can't see why we don't dominate everyone we play. Thats what it looks like on paper, so maybe they need some kind of mental or motivational intervention. They have the skill, just have to go out and do what they are capable of doing.