I Need More Nika

[Bigboote]

One thing I noticed in the game against Arkansas: when Nika was in, for the most part, she wasn't guarding Arky's guard who was bringing up the ball. I think her intensity in that situation is one of the best things she brings to the team. Azzi was on the guard bring the ball up some of the time, and she just didn't have Nika's intensity.

I'm assuming that was an experiment, have no idea whether it will happen again. I also assume Geno gave Azzi this job because he thinks she'll be really good at it in time. She brings way more offense than Nika, of course, but I'm not sure Nika's intensity is something that can be taught.

I'm a Nika fan, and I think there's room on the floor for someone who brings excellent defense, good passing, and limited scoring. I agree that she didn't show that edge in the first game, and I hope she's put in the gnat position in the next game.

 

[CocoHusky]

A game where Muhl shot 0-3 supports this idea. It was also a game where every single starter shot over 50%, pretty darn impressive, and the best shooter percentage and volume wise would otherwise have been the best facilitator.

Muhl having the best assists per 40 stat out of all the guards, with zero turnovers, is based on much less minutes than the starters and could be discounted because of that, but that is not an intangible stat. Does anyone doubt that Muhl would have been OK facilitating an offense, and racking up the assists, when everyone you are playing with is shooting over 50%?

We agree with the strategy and value of getting the newcomers in there. Perhaps when developed the newcomers will be more valuable than Muhl’s tangibles and intangibles, but she indeed has some solid tangibles.

In addition to each starter shooting over 50% in this game the 5 starters also put up 17 of the teams 20 assists. Despite her intangibles, from an efficiency stand point it doesn't make sense to give Nika more minutes because then you are substituting a worse shooter which brings the efficiency (assist opportunities) for all the other players down. The defense is also not going to take very long to figure out that the best bet is to help off Nika who is not making any shot unto Paige who was making every shot possible.
This is the flip side of the argument that has always been presented to justify Aubrey not getting more minutes -she boggs down the offense. With Nika getting more minutes the other team's defensive efficiency automatically goes up because she will be replacing a UCONN player with a higher FG%. Nika was a 38% shooter last year and was 0 for 3 in this game. More playing time for Nika is not justified until she starts hitting more shots especially the wide open shots.

 

[diggerfoot]

In addition to each starter shooting over 50% in this game the 5 starters also put up 17 of the teams 20 assists. Despite her intangibles, from an efficiency stand point it doesn't make sense to give Nika more minutes because then you are substituting a worse shooter which brings the efficiency (assist opportunities) for all the other players down. The defense is also not going to take very long to figure out that the best bet is to help off Nika who is not making any shot unto Paige who was making every shot possible.
This is the flip side of the argument that has always been presented to justify Aubrey not getting more minutes -she boggs down the offense. With Nika getting more minutes the other team's defensive efficiency automatically goes up because she will be replacing a UCONN player with a higher FG%. Nika was a 38% shooter last year and was 0 for 3 in this game. More playing time for Nika is not justified until she starts hitting more shots especially the wide open shots.

? I don’t understand your point, at least as it is supposed to be a response to mine.

The thrust of my argument is that Muhl is caught in the middle. I repeatedly called the starting five impressive, but they are not going to be played for 200 minutes, or at least they should not be. Muhl’s offensive stats warrants her as a good sub for a team that could use her facilitation more than her sharpshooting. This is only one game again, but extrapolating to the norm based on her assists and turnovers of last year is a lot closer than extrapolating her 0-fer number. She is the second best facilitator on the team, based on this game and last year’s norm, while the best facilitator was the volume shooter for this game.

But even though Muhl’s value might warrant her being first sub in and most minutes, she instead became fourth sub in and second most minutes because the newcomers must be played to be developed. Your counter to my point only makes sense if you thought the newcomers already brought more value as subs for starters you are not going to play for 200 minutes, or if you thought the starters should play 200 minutes, or you thought I was claiming Muhl should be a starter.

If you thought Fudd played a better game than Muhl we saw different things out there, perhaps making way too much out of one 0-3 game and making it sound like the norm. After all Fudd with her 3-7 is nit far off from Muhl’s norm for last year. But the strategy behind why Fudd got 5 more minutes was the anticipation that with development she will be a more valuable sub, not that she was the most valuable sub for this game.

If the game was tighter from the start, given their performances, Muhl likely would have received more minutes, because she was clearly performing better than the other subs for this one game. The only time the game was uncomfortable was when the other subs besides Muhl was brought in, so development was more important than current value for relieving starters that you are not going to play for 200 minutes.

 

[CocoHusky]

? I don’t understand your point, at least as it is supposed to be a response to mine.

The thrust of my argument is that Muhl is caught in the middle. I repeatedly called the starting five impressive, but they are not going to be played for 200 minutes, or at least they should not be. Muhl’s offensive stats warrants her as a good sub for a team that could use her facilitation more than her sharpshooting. This is only one game again, but extrapolating to the norm based on her assists and turnovers of last year is a lot closer than extrapolating her 0-fer number. She is the second best facilitator on the team, based on this game and last year’s norm, while the best facilitator was the volume shooter for this game.

But even though Muhl’s value might warrant her being first sub in and most minutes, she instead became fourth sub in and second most minutes because the newcomers must be played to be developed. Your counter to my point only makes sense if you thought the newcomers already brought more value as subs for starters you are not going to play for 200 minutes, or if you thought the starters should play 200 minutes, or you thought I was claiming Muhl should be a starter.

If you thought Fudd played a better game than Muhl we saw different things out there, perhaps making way too much out of one 0-3 game and making it sound like the norm. After all Fudd with her 3-7 is nit far off from Muhl’s norm for last year. But the strategy behind why Fudd got 5 more minutes was the anticipation that with development she will be a more valuable sub, not that she was the most valuable sub for this game.

If the game was tighter from the start, given their performances, Muhl likely would have received more minutes, because she was clearly performing better than the other subs for this one game. The only time the game was uncomfortable was when the other subs besides Muhl was brought in, so development was more important than current value for relieving starters that you are not going to play for 200 minutes.

Yes that was precisely my point- As guard subs Azzi and (Caroline?) would be better options because they are better shooters & remaining starters on the floor are already good enough facilitators.
Think of it a calculus problem where you have to simultaneously optimize two of 5 variables (facilitating and shooting) in an equation. With Azzi in the game that means Paige or Evina becomes you main facilitator that is major upside because Paige or Evina are both better facilitators than Nika and Azzi is a better shooter. With Nika in the game she must be the facilitator and your shooting goes down drastically. Of course the equation will not be fully optimized until Nika becomes a better shooter and Azzi becomes a better defender.

 

[eebmg]

Yes that was precisely my point- As guard subs Azzi and (Caroline?) would be better options because they are better shooters & remaining starters on the floor are already good enough facilitators.
Think of it a calculus problem where you have to simultaneously optimize two of 5 variables (facilitating and shooting) in an equation. With Azzi in the game that means Paige or Evina becomes you main facilitator that is major upside because Paige or Evina are both better facilitators than Nika and Azzi is a better shooter. With Nika in the game she must be the facilitator and your shooting goes down drastically. Of course the equation will not be fully optimized until Nika becomes a better shooter and Azzi becomes a better defender.

Are we going Analytics?

without Autumn or Molly?

 

[hoophuskee]

Nika has to show that she can hit shots. She showed that last year once she got her feet wet and prior to late season injuries, she hit 37.3% from 3. That's a pretty good %. She "showed" she could do it for a top elite team. Ducharme on the other hand we're being "told" she can hit shots. We were told last year Saylor was a shooter. We'll see in CD's frosh year if she can hit outside shots. Lot of time for her to show - just like Nika had time last year so will CD. Just like Nika showed it last year CD has ot shwo it this year. And Nika has to show her shooting this year as well.

And the better the bigs play along with Evina maybe showing she has an improved shot will squeeze Nika. There needs to be a falter of the big 3 and/or Evina for Nika to get in there for quite a few minutes unless her shot is terrific.

This doesn't have to be "either/or as well. If Nika is hitting and CD is hitting then there is going to be a lot of blowouts. Add in if at leasy two bigs play well enough for each game.

 

[Inthepaint]

Catch-22
Nika has shown that the more she plays, the better she shoots and the more she sets an aggressive defensive tone for the squad.
But, if she can't get the minutes without making her shots, it's going to be tough to have her out there.
I think that once Geno has a couple of games to assess the talent, he will want Nika out on the floor to jazz up the intensity and make things miserable for the other folks. The better the other team's offense is, the more critical it will be to keep them from getting too comfortable.
He's already pretty grumpy about the lack of intensity and focus.
Although defensive pressure doesn't always show up in the stats (steals, points off turnovers) it certainly isn't intangible.
I love the way Nika approaches the game. To quote something I heard from one of the ESPN analysts last year : "She's a pest".
There was play from a the 1995 regular season game against Tennessee. Jennifer Rizzoti went after a ball headed out of bounds and wound up sliding under a bench. When her teammates came over to help her out and up, Jennifer kind of waved them off impatiently as if to say "Don't worry about me, let's play!" If you aren't actually seeing it as it happens, that will never appear anywhere. But the effect it had on everybody else was TANGIBLE.
Before I get jumped on, no, I'm not comparing Nika to Jennifer. I am saying that Nika somehow seems to get everybody else on the warpath.
Which makes her "3"s sting even more when they start to go in.

 

[Urshurak]

I'm still not old on her to be honest. She is a good pick pocket at times, but really inconsistent. Her shot against Arkansas wasn't off, it was MILES away, some being over two feet from even hitting the rim. Pretty bad shooting.

It's only one game though. Let's wait a few games and give them a chance to settle in. Took Paige a quarter, but rest of team may take 2 or 3 games.

 

[Longtime fan]

I was in the camp that Nika's playing time was going to decrease dramatically. Now that the time is here, I don't like it one bit. She has an energy and chip on her shoulder that is infectious. Even is she isn't scoring, her intangibles make having her playing so worth it. Nika played 13 minutes the other night while Paige played 40 and Evina played 38. I'd love to see Paige average 35 or so and Evina the same. That would give Nika a shot at playing a little over 20 a night. I cannot stress enough how big a shift this is for me. I thought Nika was going to be expendable with the incoming freshmen and I could not have been more wrong.

I think it is pre-mature to draw any conclusions at this time. Nika is well regarded by Geno and the staff. She looked a bit out of control against Arkansas and threw up some bricks. The team defense was not working, so her energy kind of got lost in that mess. But time will even things out. I started to gain confidence in her offense late last season. But it was scary bad against the Hogs.

 

[diggerfoot]

Yes that was precisely my point- As guard subs Azzi and (Caroline?) would be better options because they are better shooters & remaining starters on the floor are already good enough facilitators.
Think of it a calculus problem where you have to simultaneously optimize two of 5 variables (facilitating and shooting) in an equation. With Azzi in the game that means Paige or Evina becomes you main facilitator that is major upside because Paige or Evina are both better facilitators than Nika and Azzi is a better shooter. With Nika in the game she must be the facilitator and your shooting goes down drastically. Of course the equation will not be fully optimized until Nika becomes a better shooter and Azzi becomes a better defender.

The difference between Westbrook and Muhl as facilitators is close, but that is beside the point. The comparison is between Fudd and Muhl in terms of who deserves more minutes in terms of a sub potentially and kinetically. Potentially is not the issue, as I have asserted that the reason Fudd received more minutes is because of her potential that needs to be developed; I assume you have no problem with that assertion.

Kinetically, Muhl is more valuable to the smoother running of the offense and defense than Fudd right now. You seem to be making a case that because Fudd shot better alone makes her more valuable. Shall we go through examples of very good and championship teams in which not everyone shot over 40%? To assert that having just one sub 40% shooter in the line up automatically lowers offensive efficiency makes for a good theory, but not one born out by evidence. You can have one sub 40% shooter and an efficient offense. On the other hand, you cannot have an efficient offense if even one player has not yet fully grasped the system, which is where we appear to be Fudd. And her defensive problems were even worse.

I do not have a problem with Fudd getting more minutes because of her potential. Her potential may even be realized by the next game. But to consistently degrade Muhl’s relative value in the present after the game we just watched might reflect more bias than sound calculus.

 

[jchusky]

I'm still not old on her to be honest. She is a good pick pocket at times, but really inconsistent. Her shot against Arkansas wasn't off, it was MILES away, some being over two feet from even hitting the rim. Pretty bad shooting.

It's only one game though. Let's wait a few games and give them a chance to settle in. Took Paige a quarter, but rest of team may take 2 or 3 games.

totally agree, the shooting she had was of a freshman or worse. Don't think other teams are going to start to realize that if she can't hit shots they will give her open looks. As bad as the 0-3 from 3 was, the ft's 0-2. For a guard that just can't happen, guards are suppose to be 80% + ft shooters. One lineup I do not need to see this season is involving her and Dorka at the same time. Other teams will be licking their chops to send 2/5 on the floor to the ftl ine.

 

[CocoHusky]

The difference between Westbrook and Muhl as facilitators is close, but that is beside the point. The comparison is between Fudd and Muhl in terms of who deserves more minutes in terms of a sub potentially and kinetically. Potentially is not the issue, as I have asserted that the reason Fudd received more minutes is because of her potential that needs to be developed; I assume you have no problem with that assertion.
Kinetically, Muhl is more valuable to the smoother running of the offense and defense than Fudd right now. You seem to be making a case that because Fudd shot better alone makes her more valuable. Shall we go through examples of very good and championship teams in which not everyone shot over 40%? To assert that having just one sub 40% shooter in the line up automatically lowers offensive efficiency makes for a good theory, but not one born out by evidence. You can have one sub 40% shooter and an efficient offense. On the other hand, you cannot have an efficient offense if even one player has not yet fully grasped the system, which is where we appear to be Fudd. And her defensive problems were even worse. I do not have a problem with Fudd getting more minutes because of her potential. Her potential may even be realized by the next game. But to consistently degrade Muhl’s relative value in the present after the game we just watched reflects more bias than sound calculus.

Actually we have ample evidence that just one sub 40% shooter can have a dramatic effect on offensive efficiency and the way opposing defense play in Freshman and 1/2 of Sophomore season Moriah Jefferson, Freshman Kelly Faris and Mikayla Coombs two full season at UCONN. Jefferson because she was a facilitator and a defensive dynamo like some are incorrectly asserting Nika to be, is perhaps the best example. Freshman Jefferson shot 42% overall and 27% from deep. Despite that she became a starter as a sophomore and her shooting woes continued until Christmas of that season. This caused defense to deliberately sag of Jefferson and why wouldn't they when the alternatives were Stewie, KML, and Bria Hartley, & Dolson. If you go back and check the BY archives there were many calls for freshman Saniya Chong to replace Jefferson in the starting line up much the same way I'm advocating for Azzi ahead of Nika now. Stanford was the only team to execute that strategy ( sag off Jefferson) successfully (beat UCONN) but many other teams tried it. Coombs is the next best example. UCONN desperately needed a 3 guard to be part of the rotation to go along with Crystal and Kia Nurse then Crystal and Christyn. Coombs was not up to the task sooting less than 30% and that resulted in Kia, Crystal and Christyn all averaging well over 30 minutes per game across those two season.
Also in the immortal words of that great Philadelphian Rasheed Wallace-the ball don't lie. That is significant because when you put a weak shooter on the floor it actually remarkable how many times the ball ends up in that non-shooters hands especially when the shot clock is pressing.
BTW I agree with you about Azzi defensive struggles but I see no evidence that she has not fully grasped the UCONN "offensive" system. Quite the opposite-Azzi seems to always in the right positions to start the sets, knows that she needs to space the floor in transition by sprinting to a corner and her movements are decisive=exactly the opposite of what she is doing on the defensive end of the floor.

 

[diggerfoot]

Actually we have ample evidence that just one sub 40% shooter can have a dramatic effect on offensive efficiency and the way opposing defense play in Freshman and 1/2 of Sophomore season Moriah Jefferson, Freshman Kelly Faris and Mikayla Coombs two full season at UCONN. Jefferson because she was a facilitator and a defensive dynamo like some are incorrectly asserting Nika to be, is perhaps the best example. Freshman Jefferson shot 42% overall and 27% from deep. Despite that she became a starter as a sophomore and her shooting woes continued until Christmas of that season. This caused defense to deliberately sag of Jefferson and why wouldn't they when the alternatives were Stewie, KML, and Bria Hartley, & Dolson. If you go back and check the BY archives there were many calls for freshman Saniya Chong to replace Jefferson in the starting line up much the same way I'm advocating for Azzi ahead of Nika now. Stanford was the only team to execute that strategy ( sag off Jefferson) successfully (beat UCONN) but many other teams tried it. Coombs is the next best example. UCONN desperately needed a 3 guard to be part of the rotation to go along with Crystal and Kia Nurse then Crystal and Christyn. Coombs was not up to the task sooting less than 30% and that resulted in Kia, Crystal and Christyn all averaging well over 30 minutes per game across those two season.
Also in the immortal words of that great Philadelphian Rasheed Wallace-the ball don't lie. That is significant because when you put a weak shooter on the floor it actually remarkable how many times the ball ends up in that non-shooters hands especially when the shot clock is pressing.
BTW I agree with you about Azzi defensive struggles but I see no evidence that she has not fully grasped the UCONN "offensive" system. Quite the opposite-Azzi seems to always in the right positions to start the sets, knows that she needs to space the floor in transition by sprinting to a corner and her movements are decisive=exactly the opposite of what she is doing on the defensive end of the floor.

I repeatedly posted how impressive the starting five is. I repeatedly expressed my support for Auriemma developing a 9 player rotation. In addressing someone’s concerns about Muhl’s minutes I offered this as the context. She is caught in the middle. She is not going to get starter’s minutes because the current starting five is fantastic, while other minutes are going towards developing the potential of players. I consoled that Muhl’s current value is worth more than the minutes she is getting, and would have received if the game was tight. Thus is partly evidenced by the fact that though she was the fourth sub in she got the second most sub minutes, partly evidenced by the Arkansas run that cut the lead to four fell more on the shoulders of the newcomer subs, partly evidenced that she had 2assists and zero turnovers, while Fudd had zero assists over 19 minutes, on a team where all the starters were shooting over 50%, and one turnover. I am positive if we calculated +/- for the players Muhl’s would be higher than Fudd’s.

So to challenge what my posts have been all about, you would have to establish that Fudd got the most minutes precisely because she was bringing more value to the team for that game and not because she is a tremendous talent whose potential needs to be developed for our best future. The only hint of such a challenge was pointing out Fudd shot better. Otherwise you have consistently shifted the focus away from comparative worth of subs for that one game to comparisons to other starters, hypotheticals about offensive efficiency, ignoring the defensive comparison until this last post, and past anecdotal situations that do not apply to this context. By the way, we went undefeated Jefferson’s sophomore year and maintained a high offensive efficiency rating throughout, somehow I’m never moved by what the posts of what disgruntled BYers say but, regardless, this situational anecdote of Jefferson is but another deflection away from the true focus if you wish to challenge the assertion I have constantly and unmistakably reiterated.

You know I hold your analytical capabilities in the highest esteem. I have said so. So when you keep missing the point of my consolation as to why Muhl did not get the sub minutes her comparative performance for that one game would otherwise deserve, I have to assume it’s for other reasons than you are incapable of fathoming the point I made and what that requires for you to challenge. Your various deflections away from that, all designed to place Muhl in a lesser light, must have other motivations behind it.

 

[Bald Husky]

Nika has to start, Nika has to start, Nika has to start. Should I say it again? The strength of our team is our perimeter players. When Nika started LY the offense, including Paige, did not suffer at all. Instead the intensity and defense improved. There can be ONO, and three very good players that can at times shoot the lights out, but all they need is the right person to get them the ball. Nika did that very well until she was injured in the NCAAs, so why change that. Our post scoring isn't doing any better than LY in MHO, so lets start from scratch and go back to what already has proven to work. Nika has shown that she can shoot, but that was occurring in the context of a game that she was already involved in, and not coming in cold from the bench. She has shown that she is a very good passer, her defense, and grit is what we really need out there along with our talented scorers. What do we have to lose, start her and sub from there. If we need more offense she will be subbed by Azzi or Caroline. To start a game I think Nika gives us a more balanced starting line up, and the bench can provide relief if adjustments are needed.

 

[CocoHusky]

Nika has to start, Nika has to start, Nika has to start. Should I say it again?

 

[hoophuskee]

Fudd vs Muhl +/-.

I did a manual check so it could be off. Fudd was -4 and Muhl was -5.

For me, I predicted that Nika would start - though I don't think it matters one bit who starts. Nika's minutes though imo hinge a lot upon her ability to shoot if if if the other players live up to their expectations/projections. Too many other potential terrific players that offer a lot as well.

 

[#12in21]

Actually we have ample evidence that just one sub 40% shooter can have a dramatic effect on offensive efficiency and the way opposing defense play in Freshman and 1/2 of Sophomore season Moriah Jefferson, Freshman Kelly Faris and Mikayla Coombs two full season at UCONN. Jefferson because she was a facilitator and a defensive dynamo like some are incorrectly asserting Nika to be, is perhaps the best example. Freshman Jefferson shot 42% overall and 27% from deep. Despite that she became a starter as a sophomore and her shooting woes continued until Christmas of that season. This caused defense to deliberately sag of Jefferson and why wouldn't they when the alternatives were Stewie, KML, and Bria Hartley, & Dolson. If you go back and check the BY archives there were many calls for freshman Saniya Chong to replace Jefferson in the starting line up much the same way I'm advocating for Azzi ahead of Nika now. Stanford was the only team to execute that strategy ( sag off Jefferson) successfully (beat UCONN) but many other teams tried it. Coombs is the next best example. UCONN desperately needed a 3 guard to be part of the rotation to go along with Crystal and Kia Nurse then Crystal and Christyn. Coombs was not up to the task sooting less than 30% and that resulted in Kia, Crystal and Christyn all averaging well over 30 minutes per game across those two season.
Also in the immortal words of that great Philadelphian Rasheed Wallace-the ball don't lie. That is significant because when you put a weak shooter on the floor it actually remarkable how many times the ball ends up in that non-shooters hands especially when the shot clock is pressing.
BTW I agree with you about Azzi defensive struggles but I see no evidence that she has not fully grasped the UCONN "offensive" system. Quite the opposite-Azzi seems to always in the right positions to start the sets, knows that she needs to space the floor in transition by sprinting to a corner and her movements are decisive=exactly the opposite of what she is doing on the defensive end of the floor.

I mentioned these stats in an earlier post, this is how Nika finished out last season: Nika's stats for the 15 games she started (finishing out last season) all showed improvement. Over that period she shot 44% FG, 37.5% 3pt and per 40 minutes, averaged 8.63 points, 4.41 rebounds, 4.51 assists and 3.16 steals. So perhaps the assumption that she will be a sub-40% shooter this season, based on her 0-fer first game isn't the best predictor.

I am curious, not being facetious here, do you see any value of Nika Mühl for our team? Last season your posts in her regard questioned, at best, whether she should be in the starting lineup. This season you appear to be arguing that she is/should be the last guard in, perhaps even beyond that in now a 13 player roster. I know in previous posts you mentioned that you have been, at some point or another, critical of every UCONN player, but I honestly don't recall such a consistent negative focus on one player.

 

[Zarathustra]

Sine Qua Non

Nika is Mirabile Visu!

 

[CocoHusky]

I am curious, not being facetious here, do you see any value of Nika Mühl for our team? Last season your posts in her regard questioned, at best, whether she should be in the starting lineup. This season you appear to be arguing that she is/should be the last guard in, perhaps even beyond that in now a 13 player roster. I know in previous posts you mentioned that you have been, at some point or another, critical of every UCONN player, but I honestly don't recall such a consistent negative focus on one player.

Nika is only a sophomore if you are going to look for consistent negative focus on one player from me you would have to look at my post regarding ONO and Aubrey. What you call consistent negative focus I would call the need to improve. In this regard I have been very specific with Nika as I have been with every other player. Somehow my calls for improvement for Nika hits differently for some BY posters. What I have specifically said of Nika is exactly the same things I said of KLS: Nika needs to improve her defensive techniques (feet and hands). I have also said she needs to improve her shooting -both from long distance and from close in. The majority of the games Nika started last year were in conference games and in the first two rounds of the NCAA tournament. Let me be perfect blunt here: Nika numbers (even the ones you are shamefully trying to projecting to 40MPG and limiting to 15 games) are not good enough especially when you have an alternatives named Azzi Fudd for her minutes and Aaliyah Edwards for the starting position.

And speaking of Azzi and Aaliyah did you happen to read any of my post regarding the need for both of them to improve?

 

[RedStickHusky]

Nika is Mirabile Visu!

Oculus aspicientis.